Collection › LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes (St. Louis, Missouri) › 1995–1998 › Page 3
LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — January 19-20, 1996, Page 3
Source: LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters minutes, file copy
⤓ Download page image (full resolution)
Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected
Also in response to the first question, it was noted that in Bylaw 3.75 there is a conflict of interest if one
were to hold two offices of which one is directly responsible for the work done by the other.
24. Voting District President in Election of Seminary President (Am. 2022, 2022A) : In a letter
addressed to the Commission on Constitutional Matters by the faculty of Concordia Theological Seminary
in Fort Wayne an opinion had been requested regarding the identity of the voting District President in the
election of a seminary president. The letter was accompanied by a letter from the faculty secretary,
outlining his rationale for identifying the District President voting in the election of a seminary president as
being the President of the geographic district in which the seminary was located. A similar request for an
opinion on the matter had been received from a pastor in the Northern Illinois District.
In a personal letter to the faculty secretary, the Secretary of the Commission had pointed out that following
the 1992 convention, the Commission in responding to a similar question had concluded that since the
bylaw states that the Board of Regents is one of the electors, "(the District President not voting with the
board)" and then continues, "the President of the synodical District or his official representative with a
distinct vote," that the District President refereed to in both instances is that District President selected by
the Council of Presidents to serve as a member of the seminary Board of Regents. It is not the President of
the geographical district in which the seminary is located.
That opinion had already been forwarded to the present Board of Regents.
The faculty secretary had included seven items as rationale for the view that the President of the
geographical district should serve as the elector in the election of a seminary president. These were:
1.
Prior to 1992 everyone understood the "President of the synodical District" as meaning the
President of the synodical district in which any given institution of the Synod was located; such
was, indeed, clearly the one intended sense of the phrase, and such it still remains (sensus literalis
unus est).
1.
Subsequent, likewise, to the synodical convention of 1992 the phrase has been so understood in
connection with any presidential elections elsewhere (as in Concordia University in River Forest).
1.
Immediately following the alteration in the identity of the District President holding membership
in the Board of Regents-in the course of the synodical convention of 1992-the response to a
question addressed to the chairman of the committee which had introduced the overture concerned
shows that the committee had had no definite intention to alter simultaneously the identity of the
District President who would participate in the election of the president of a seminary.
1.
The Synod had a second opportunity to alter Bylaw 6.11, f, in its convention of July of this year
and yet took no action in this direction, even though the Board for Higher Education had submitted
an overture to the Synod requesting an alteration in the bylaws which would have identified one of
the electors as the District President sitting on the Board of Regents (regardless of his provenance).
1.
The only reason for including a district president among the electors of any synodical institution
of education is that he is responsible for the doctrinal supervision of the president and faculty of
said institution, so that, if the president of the geographical district be excluded from the election of
the president of a seminary, there is no reason to include the president of any district in the process.
1.
One of the points to be considered in the election of the President of a district containing an
educational institution of the Synod is that this man will thereby participate in any presidential
election occurring in such an institution, so that the members of the district concerned exercise,