# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2010_S266
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

266

OPINIONS OF COMMISSION ON CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS

pastor and the congregation, both being members of the Synod, are
committed to resolving that dispute according to the process provided
for in the Bylaws. While Bylaw 8.11 recognizes the congregation’s right
of self-government, which includes the discharge of a pastor, it also includes the expectation that the congregation will honor and act upon
the decision of a Dispute Resolution Panel, which is final only after all
opportunities for request for review have been exhausted.
Were a congregation to act upon a decision of a Dispute Resolution
Panel prior to the completion of the appeal process, and were an Appeal
Panel to grant reconsideration of that decision by a Review Panel, and
were the Review Panel to arrive at a different final decision, confusion
would result due to the congregation’s action on the basis of the earlier
decision. Congregations therefore are advised to place on hold matters
related to the underlying dispute and to defer any actions that might prevent the effective implementation of the final decision from the dispute
resolution process.

The purpose of advising that a congregation not replace the worker
pending a dispute resolution process decision is not to suggest that
the action of the congregation is incomplete or on hold. Rather, in our
walking together, it is simply a recognition that replacing the worker
before the dispute resolution process is complete may effectively
limit or prevent the congregation from meaningfully reviewing and,
if they choose to do so, revising the action disputed.
Question 2: When a reconciler prepares his written report in a dispute
case, does the administrator of the dispute resolution
process have the responsibility or authority to find fault
with and override the reconciler’s report other than to
make certain that the report contains “the actions of
the reconciler, the issues that were resolved, the issues
that remain unresolved, and whether reconciliation was
achieved” (Bylaw 1.10.6.5)?
Opinion: The role of the administrator of the dispute resolution
process is described in Bylaw 1.10.4 (a) as one who “…manages
the dispute resolution process but who does not take leadership,
declare judgments, advise, or become involved in the matter in dispute.” The administrator is not a fact-finder as to the underlying
dispute, but rather is charged to review the report of the reconciler
to determine that it complies with the procedural requirements of
the bylaw. This includes the requirement to assure that the report
contains the actions of the reconciler, the issues that were resolved,
the issues that remain unresolved, and whether reconciliation was
achieved. As Bylaw 1.10.6.5 further indicates, he is also to assure
that the report contains as an attachment to the report (a) the statement of the complainant as to informal reconciliation efforts, (b)
the statement of the matter in dispute, and (c) any reply by the respondent. The administrator is also charged with responsibility to
see to it that “[t]he report and the attachments shall be forwarded to
the parties to the dispute and the secretary of the Synod or district
as appropriate.”
Question 3: When a party to a dispute submits questions to the
Commission on Constitutional Matters during the prepanel stages of the dispute resolution process, do the
time limitation provisions of Bylaw 1.10.18.1 (h) apply?
Opinion: The timelines dictated by the dispute resolution process,
beginning with Bylaw 1.10.8, do not provide for or allow the process to be postponed by submission of a question to the Commission on Constitutional Matters or the Commission on Theology
and Church Relations prior to the formation of a Dispute Resolution Panel. Rather, should such questions be submitted through
the panel during the pendency of a Dispute Resolution Panel as
provided by Bylaw 1.10.18.1 (h), the time limitations then existing
at that stage of the proceedings do not apply until the requested
opinion is rendered. The bylaw reads, “When an opinion has been

requested, the time limitations will not apply until the opinion has
been received by the parties.”
Question 4: What is the status of the decision of the congregation
when its decision or a decision of the dispute resolution
process has been appealed?
Opinion: The status of the decision of the congregation is within its
authority to decide. Please see the answer to Question 1.
Question 5: What is the status of a minister of religion—ordained
or a minister of religion—commissioned who has been
removed from office when that decision and action of
the congregation is submitted to the dispute resolution
process pursuant to Bylaw section 1.10?
Opinion: As discussed above, the action of the congregation is
complete once taken by the congregation. A worker may continue
to hold membership in the Synod by application for candidate or
non-candidate status under Bylaws 2.11.2.2 or 2.11.2.3, unless otherwise qualifying as an active member by reason of another call or
other responsibilities as described in Bylaw 2.11.1.
Question 6: When must the face-to-face meeting required by Bylaw
1.10.5 take place in order to fulfill the requirements of
the dispute resolution process, and who represents the
congregation in that process?
Opinion: Since the purpose of the meeting is to resolve the dispute prior to submission to a formal dispute resolution process, the
face-to-face meeting can happen only after the action which is the
subject of the dispute has occurred. If the dispute is to a worker’s
dismissal, that meeting cannot occur until the dismissal has occurred. As described in Bylaw 1.10.5, it is the responsibility of the
district president to see to it that this meeting occurs before allowing the matter to proceed to appointment of a reconciler. Upon appointment, the reconciler is further required under Bylaw 1.10.6.2
to assure that such a meeting has occurred, and further determine
whether additional informal efforts should be made. Only when the
reconciler is satisfied that informal efforts did not resolve the matter may the reconciler direct the respondent to submit to the reconciler and the complainant a written reply to the statement of the
matter in dispute, and simultaneously move into a formal dispute
resolution process as described in Bylaw 1.10.6.3.
Where it is an action of a congregation which is subject to a dispute resolution process, the congregation itself is the respondent.
While it might be beneficial for face-to-face meetings with multiple
parties or constituencies within a congregation in an attempt to resolve
a conflict with the congregation, the process ultimately contemplates
that a single representative of the congregation represent it in the dispute resolution process, including the face-to-face meeting required.
As the Standard Operating Procedures Manual for the dispute resolution process indicates in Section V:
D. Parties to the Matter: If a party is a member of the Synod and
not an individual, it shall be represented by its chairman or a designated
member. If a party is a board or commission of the Synod or its districts,
it shall be represented by its chairman or designated member.

The Standard Operating Procedures Manual was prepared by
the Commission on Constitutional Matters in consultation with the
Council of Presidents and the Secretary of the Synod as mandated by
the Synod under Bylaw 1.10.18.1 (j). Thus, for the purposes of the
dispute resolution process, the congregation is to be represented by
the chairman of the congregation unless the congregation designates
another member of the congregation.
Question 7: May the Dispute Resolution Panel in its proceedings
consider issues raised by the parties pertaining to the
total process of dispute resolution?

2010 Convention Workbook

2010 Convention.indb 266

4/15/10 2:40 PM