# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2010_S268
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

268

OPINIONS OF COMMISSION ON CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS

interim period. If it proves successful, then a congregation may choose
to adopt that model as a more permanent structure for mission and ministry. Please note that it calls for the suspension of only certain bylaws,
not the entire set of bylaws.

Question 1: May a congregation of the Synod suspend or hold in
abeyance some of their bylaws, specifically those dealing with elections, officers, and governance structure, in
order to pursue a new vision for mission and ministry?
Opinion: The Commission on Constitutional Matters is allowed to
give opinions only regarding issues arising under the Constitution,
Bylaws, and resolutions of the Synod. The conditions for membership in the Synod are contained in Article VI of the Constitution
and Bylaws 2.2 through 2.4. Assuming the constitution and bylaws
of an individual congregation allow the suspension or holding in
abeyance of some of its bylaws, then so long as a congregation
does not seek to suspend or hold in abeyance those bylaws necessary for membership in the Synod, the Constitution and Bylaws of
the Synod do not prohibit such holding in abeyance or a temporary
suspension. Should the congregation determine to amend its bylaws
or constitution, however, the proposed constitution and/or bylaw
changes would need to be submitted for approval as required by
Bylaw 2.4.1 (a).
In the more likely situation where there is no provision in the existing governing documents allowing for such suspension or holding
in abeyance, no matter how well intended and no matter how “short
term” the suspension is intended to last, such action would result
effectively in an amendment of those governing documents. Bylaw
2.4.1 (a) requires such amendments to be submitted to the district
president, who in turn is required to refer the proposed amendments
to the district’s constitution committee for review and to provide a
recommendation to the district’s board of directors for final action
under Bylaw 2.4.1 (c).
This is not to say, should it determine that the proposed experimentation is to be encouraged, that the district could not adopt an
expedited procedure to facilitate a speedy review of such proposed
governance changes.
Question 2: If a congregation were to suspend or hold in abeyance
select bylaws, would this have a negative impact on its
501 (c) (3) status?
Opinion: The answer to this question is not dependent upon the
Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions of the Synod. Questions regarding this issue should be addressed to local legal counsel or the
Internal Revenue Service.
Question 3: If a congregation were to suspend or hold in abeyance
select bylaws, would this have a negative impact on its
membership in the Synod?
Opinion: As described above, so long as the congregation honors
the conditions of membership as set forth in Article VI of the Constitution of the Synod and the eligibility requirements of Bylaws
2.2 through 2.4, a congregation’s action to suspend or hold in abeyance select bylaws would not have a negative impact on a congregation’s membership in the Synod.
Question 4: Is it legal in the eyes of the state, which has granted nonprofit corporation status, for a congregation to suspend
or hold in abeyance select bylaws?
Opinion: This question is again a matter of state law and not an
issue under the Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions of the Synod.
Questions should be submitted to local legal counsel or the state
corporation governing body.
Adopted June 6–7, 2008

District President Authority during Appeal Process (08-2520)
In a letter dated June 11, 2008, a pastor member of the Synod
asked for an opinion from the commission regarding the authority of a
district president to restrict the activities of a pastor of a congregation
during Bylaw section 2.14 or 2.17 expulsion processes.
Question: When a district president suspends a pastor for allegations of sexual misconduct (or otherwise), after a proper
investigation of the situation(s), does the district president have the authority to restrict the activity of a parish
pastor in the congregation prior to completion of the full
appeal process?
Opinion: According to paragraph 8 of Article XII of the Constitution of the Synod, district presidents are empowered to suspend ordained and commissioned ministers from membership in the Synod
“for persistently adhering to false doctrine or for having given offense by an ungodly life.” The suspension must be in accordance
with procedures set forth in the Bylaws of the Synod.
When formal proceedings are commenced under the procedures
set forth in Bylaw sections 2.14–2.17, the accused member has suspended status (Bylaws 2.13.4; 2.14.6 [a]; et al.), which continues
until the formal proceedings are completed or until membership is
duly terminated. A suspended member continues to hold all rights
under the Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod except, according
to the provisions of Bylaw 2.13.4.2 (a–c): (a) the member is relieved
of duties as a member of the Synod; (b) the member is relieved of
any duties and responsibilities with the Synod, the district, or another
agency of the Synod; and (c) the member is ineligible to accept a call
to another position of service in the Synod.
Under the suspended status provision of the Bylaws, a district
president does not have the authority, either under Article XII or
Bylaw 2.13.4.1, to limit the activities of the pastor of a congregation
in that member congregation. Bylaw 2.13.4.3 states: “The member on
suspended status shall continue to be eligible to perform those duties
and responsibilities of any other position which such member held at
the time when placed on suspended status, including a position with
a member congregation.”
Under the provision, a district president must also advise the congregation being served by the suspended member to take appropriate
action so that the rights of both the member and the congregation are
preserved (Bylaw 2.13.4.3 [a] [3]).
Adopted Nov. 20–21, 2008
2004 Res. 3-05A “To Affirm Marriage as Union of One Man
and One Woman” (08-2524)
In a letter dated June 10, 2008, a district president asked the commission to interpret 2004 convention Res. 3-05A (“To Affirm Marriage as the Union of One Man and One Woman”) as it relates to the
California Supreme Court decision overturning the California ban on
same sex unions and as it relates to the implications for ecclesiastical
supervision as required by the Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod.
Questions: 1. Please share with me your interpretation of Resolution
3-05A, “To Affirm Marriage as Union of One Man
and One Woman” (2004 Proceedings, p. 130). What
is the authority of this resolution and its implications
for ecclesiastical supervision?
2. Given your definition and interpretation of Res.
3-05A, what do the Constitution and Bylaws of the
Synod describe as the remedies on the part of a district president if a pastor in the district should perform
a “marriage” for a same sex couple?

2010 Convention Workbook

2010 Convention.indb 268

4/15/10 2:40 PM