LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — October 22, 1995, Page 3

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

be appointed to a college or university Board of Regents by members of the Board of Regents under the
provisions of Bylaw 6.01, b, 3.
The majority of the Commission believes that it is clear that the Synod deliberately chose to limit the
positions which a single individual would be permitted to hold and the limitations are cited in Bylaw 3.75,
a.
Given these conditions, the majority of the Commission concluded that the same person may not serve on
both the Board of Regents and the Board for Higher Education even though that person serves in one
position by virtue of his office as a Vice-President and in the other as the President's representative. It also
concluded that any Vice-President other than the one sitting on the Board of Regents or, for that matter,
anyone the President of the Synod chooses may be appointed to serve as the President's representative on
the Board for Higher Education.
The Commission believes that bylaw clarification should be provided and recommended that Bylaw 3.75 be
referred to the Blue Ribbon Committee on Structure for consideration.
Walter Tesch requested that his negative vote be recorded for the minutes. (The Secretary stated that he was
abstaining from voting on the matter. However, as was pointed out, properly, the 1995 convention had
already dealt with that matter by stating that effective with the convention the Secretary was no longer to
serve as a voting member of the Commission.)
12. Congregational Constitution and Women's Positions (Am. 2017) : The Chairman of the District
Constitution Committee had written to the Commission on Constitutional Matters, requesting that it review
the Constitution of a congregation. The Secretary had responded to the request by indicating that the
guidelines for the Constitution and Bylaws of a congregation which had been prepared by the Commission
on Constitutional Matters were just that, guidelines, no more. As Constitution Article VII states, “. . . with
respect to the congregation's right of self-government, it [Synod] is but an advisory body." It further stated
that in keeping with that, it has never been required that a statement about offices which women may not
hold must be included in the Bylaws of the congregation. This opinion was provided by the Commission
many years ago. Nevertheless, when questions about this matter have been received by the Commission, it
has always responded by saying that whether or not the statement is included, congregations are expected to
honor and uphold the
resolutions of the Synod, including any resolutions referring to the issue of positions which women may
hold in the congregation.
The District Constitution Committee Chairman had expressed appreciation for the response, but asked that
the Commission as a whole provide its opinion.
After reviewing the matter, the Commission resolved to ratify the personal response provided by the
Secretary and asked that particular attention be given to the statement which read, "Nevertheless, when we
have received questions about this we have always responded by saying that, whether or not the statement is
included, congregations are expected to honor and uphold the resolutions of the Synod, including those
referring to this issue" [positions of women in the congregation].
13. District Vice-President Membership Requirement (Ag. 2018) : A letter had been received from a
district Vice-President requesting an opinion regarding his removal from office by the District President
because he was serving as the pastor of an independent congregation. It was his contention that Bylaw 4.52,
c, of the 1992 Handbook does not intend to forbid the pastor on the clergy roster serving an independent
congregation from holding the office of Vice-President of the District, and that Article 5. 11 supports that
argument since it specifically states that a Circuit Counselor may be chosen only from the "member