LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — August 30, 1990, Page 6

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

5. 2.16 -- Would the Vice-Presidents in order of rank only "perform the duties of the President ... ”
or would then "assume the office of the President" in order of rank. Confusion on that point has
caused problems in some districts, e.g., English, Montana.
6. 2.56,q -- "Auziliaries" should be "auxiliaries.”
7. Section H -- Should not the title more appropriately be "District Boards" with 2.60 being
"General Duties and Powers" and 2.62 being "Specific Duties of Chairman of Boards?"
8. 2.70,a -- Does the LCEF Vice-President have three groups or individuals to whom he is
responsible? Is that wise? What if there is disagreement among the three?
9. 2.74,a -- Same questions?
10. 2.78,e -- Does not seem to be parallel with a-d. If parallel should probably simply read, "e.
Ordinarily be the Executive Assistant of the District."
11. 3.01,b -- Is the district really serious about using only teachers “ ... who have been admitted ....”
or is this meant to differentiate between called and contracted teachers?
44. New England District Bylaws (Ag. 1900) : A revised set of bylaws for the New England District had
been received,, shared with the Commission on Constitutional Matters and reviewed by the Secretary.
Based on that review, a response had been provided to the Secretary of the New England District, stating
that it appeared that there was nothing contrary to the Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod contained in
the proposed revised set of Bylaws. A number of suggestions, however, were also provided. After
reviewing the proposed bylaws, the Commission agreed with the response which had been provided
previously by the Secretary of the Commission to the Secretary of the New England District. That
response reads as follows:
1. I wonder if in 2.11 the word "may" should not be substituted for "shall." The use of "shall" seems
to imply that he must call special conventions when, in fact, such might never be called.
2. 1 think it would be helpful in 3.31 to cross reference 8.22,d. Until I reached that point in my
reading, I was frequently confused by reference to rank when the only reference to officers prior
to 3.31, 4.01,a and perhaps elsewhere was to the vice-presidents mentioned in 3.01, where they
were simply named but not ranked.
3. 4.03 -- Is it wise to have unlimited terms for all directors. The result could be no change in
membership except by death, resignation, movement out of the district or something similar.
4. 4 1 -- a typo in line 2. "At" should be "as."
5. In 5.12, are special meetings called by the chairman and a majority of its membership? By the
chairman or a majority of its membership? There is a difference since in the first case, the consent
of the chairman is required and if he does not consent, he could block the will of the majority. In
the second case, either a majority or the chairman by himself can call a special meeting. The
matter should be made clear.
6. 8.22,b -- It would probably be more correct to say, "The slate for each office ... nominations for
that office ... Or is the intention to, in effect, have the election take place prior to the convention
by nomination from the congregations with the convention only being concerned with the