# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1944_S918
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

APPEAL MATTERS 835

that it should urge all parties to make use of counselors, men able
to present their case properly, if they so desired. We did not wish
to imply that they should engage lawyers, but that they should
make use of the abilities of men who are able to present clearly
the objections that they felt they had to raise against a previous
decision of their case. For obvious reasons we insisted that such
counselors must be members of Synod.

Synod required that personal appearance and oral presentation
be not excluded. Also for such hearings we decided as a matter
of policy not to permit any ex parte hearings, but to insist that
both parties be present when any statement is made to the Board
and be given an opportunity to reply to any statements made.

Our experience during the past triennium has convinced us
that the adoption of these fundamental principles of procedure was
very wise.

When Synod passed the regulations for the Board of Appeals,
it included the provision that each District elect a Board of Ap-
peals. Naturally no District could elect its Board of Appeals before
1942, Synod’s presidium as well as Synod’s Board of Appeals felt
that it was very desirable and necessary that all District Boards
follow a fairly uniform procedure. Our Board, therefore, at the
suggestion of the presidium, prepared a guide for District Boards.
Before the Board acted finally, a copy of the proposed guide was
sent to the District Presidents, the professors of pastoral theology
at St. Louis and Springfield, and to other men of experience for
criticism. Criticisms which we received were carefully considered
by the entire Board.. Some of the criticisms which we received
were directed at the wording of some of Synod’s resolutions and
could not be considered in the preparation of the guide. This
guide was then presented at a meeting of the President and the
four Vice-Presidents of Synod. After it had received their ap-
proval, mimeographed copies were made available to all Districts
. by Synod’s office in St. Louis.

The results of these criticisms, discussions, and deliberations
are being presented to Synod in a separate memorial.

We are happy to report that the parties in the various cases
cheerfully followed the procedure outlined by the Board and will-
ingly placed at the Board’s disposal all documents that had a
bearing on the points at issue.

‘ Synod by resolution in 1941 referred to the Board of Appeals
. the appeal of St. Stephanus Congregation in Detroit from the de-

cision of a synodical committee recommending that the congrega-
tion known as St. Paul’s, consisting largely of members: who had
separated from St.Stephanus, be admitted to membership ‘in