LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — January 19-20, 1996, Page 5

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

In reviewing the entire matter, the Commission on Constitutional Matters concluded that the response
which it had previously provided was correct and that it saw no reason to change its opinion. This response
is to be provided to both the faculty and the pastor from the Northern Illinois District who had also
requested an opinion.
25. Transfer of Property to the Books of Concordia University System (Ag. 2024) : Dr. George
Wollenburg, President of the Montana District, had asked the Commission the following question, "Does
Bylaw 3.192 permit the transfer of the properties of the colleges and seminaries to the Concordia University
System?"
In its discussion, the Commission initially noted that in view of Bylaw 3.188 of the 1989 Handbook it
would appear that the transfer was permitted. In further consideration of the matter, the Commission
concluded that it was not in a position to provide a definitive response. Specifically, it noted that there
would need to be a definition of the meaning of the word "transfer." Basically the question is whether the
transfer is meant to refer to a legal transfer, to the transfer of effective control, or to the transfer of
properties for accounting purposes only. In view of this uncertainty, the Commission concluded that it was
not in a position to respond to the question as presented.
26. Change of Status of Board of Directors' Member (Ag. 2025) : The President of the Synod had
addressed a communication to the Commission on Constitutional Matters regarding the continuing services
of Mr. Dean Bell on the Board of Directors of The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod in view of the fact that
his status within the Synod was no longer that of a lay member, but rather that of a commissioned minister
of religion. It was noted that his change of status was due to no initiative or action on his part, but rather
was due to the action of delegates at the convention. The specific questions which were asked were:
1.

Is there a distinction to be made in status changes on the basis of the manner in which the change
occurs?

1.

Does it make a difference in terms of eligibility that one's status was changed by convention
action apart from any activity on the person's part, as opposed to a change in status occasioned by a
person's action on his own behalf?

1.

Is there no provision for a grand fathering sort of situation?

In reviewing the matter which had been called to its attention and for which an opinion had been requested,
the Commission first noted that there is no "grand-fathering" provision contained in the Bylaws. It further
noted that when on a previous occasion a man had moved from the status of commissioned minister to that
of ordained minister, he had been declared ineligible for continued service on the board to which he had
been elected. As was noted in the questions addressed to the Commission, the change in status on this
occasion was initiated by the member.
In reviewing the bylaws relating to membership on the Board of Directors, it was noted that the bylaw states
that the board "shall" consist of 13 voting members and clearly identifies the ratio of those members. In
view of this, the Commission concluded that the ratio of ordained ministers, commissioned ministers, and
lay members is an important factor and that in order for that ratio to be maintained, the status of those
elected to membership must remain what it was when elected. If the status changes, then one whose status
has changed becomes ineligible. The manner in which the status change is brought about is immaterial.
The Commission therefore concluded that if the status change approved by the convention delegates is also
approved by the congregations of the Synod, a member whose status changed as a result of this action from