# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1944_S924
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

APPEAL MATTERS 341

With regard to paragraph 11 of section III, it is evident from
the records that “the divorce proceedings were not the basis for
the congregation’s final action,” but we do hold that any proposal
offering to bring this entire case to a full, final, God-pleasing, and
soul-serving solution must deal with those proceedings which
vitally affect the fellowship of faith.

D. We hold that the solution suggested by the Board of Appeals
is contrary to Scriptural and synodical procedure. We hold that
neither Scripture nor the law of love permit a congregation to
terminate such a case as this simply by striking a name from its
records. We hold that it is the congregation’s duty to reopen the
case at such time as the accused is ready to appear and co-operate
in a just hearing. .This the congregation has expressed its willing-
ness to do. If the accused is willing to “hear,” then he will present
himself before Trinity Church for such hearing.

We hold that other souls — the original complainants, the mem-
bers of Trinity Church, and still others — are involved in this un-
happy case. Concern for their spiritual welfare makes the adoption
of the Board of Appeals’ solution impossible. Moreover, if carried
out under synodical direction, it will prove detrimental to the
church at large and tend to break down.all discipline within the
Church. Concern for the accused’s soul demands either that he
be justified or that he be convicted of sin and led to repentance.
Such is Christ’s way. ‘

We hold that a conscience enlightened by God’s Word cannot
resort to the solution proposed in the Opinion.

To summarize, we contend that the Opinion of the Board of

Appeals ignores proper ecclesiastical procedure and order; that it —

is based on misinterpretation and misapplication of God’s Word;
that it employs a strange mode of procedure leading to a disregard
of essential facts; that it proposes a solution which violates con-
science. and is unacceptable to God and to His Church. Therefore

we respectfully petition Synod to withdraw the Decision of its -

Board of Appeals. Tue Encursn District

Martin WALKER, President

Huco G. Kuerner, First Vice-President
Bernarp H. Hemmeter, Second: Vice-President
Epwin L. Witson, Third Vice-President
Harowtp W. Romoser, Secretary

age

proves

sibecss

asi iin aie

3 et

Sen a