# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2016_S301 # Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration) X. TASK FORCE ON DISPUTE RESOLUTION REPORT Relations and/or the Commission on Constitutional Matters requested by the Dispute Resolution Panel or the President of the Synod. And be it further Resolved, That a new Bylaw 1.10.8.5 be added to the Bylaw 1.10 dispute resolution process that will provide for a final theological review of Review Panel decisions prior to their release, to be conducted by the President of the Synod as chief ecclesiastical officer charged with the responsibility for supervision of the doctrine taught and practiced in the Synod not specifically delegated to others by the Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod, as follows: Final Decision of Review Panel 1.10.8.5 The final decision of the Review Panel shall be submitted to the President of the Synod as chief ecclesiastical officer for a final theological review. The President shall bring matters of theological concern to the panel for further attention prior to release of the panel’s decision. 1.10.8.6 The final decision of the Review Panel shall (a) be binding upon the parties to the matter and not be subject to further appeal; (b) have no precedential value; (c) be carried out by the district president or the President of the Synod; and (d) be publicized as deemed appropriate under the circumstances by the district president or the President of the Synod. And be it finally Resolved, That a new Bylaw 2.14.9.1 be added to the Bylaw 2.14 suspension/expulsion process that will provide for a final theological review of Final Hearing Panel decisions prior to their release, to be conducted by the President of the Synod as chief ecclesiastical officer charged with the responsibility for supervision of the doctrine taught and practiced in the Synod not specifically delegated to others by the Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod, as follows: Decision of Final Hearing Panel 2.14.9.1 Upon completion of the hearing by the Final Hearing Panel, the panel shall deliberate and then submit its decision to the President of the Synod as chief ecclesiastical officer for a final theological review. The President shall bring any matters of theological concern to the panel for further attention prior to release of the panel’s decision. 2.14.9.2 After the final theological review by the President of the Synod, the Final Hearing Panel shall issue its written decision within 30 days, a copy of which shall be mailed to the accused, the district president that imposed the suspension, the accuser and his district president, the Secretary of the Synod, and the President of the Synod. The final decision of the Final Hearing Panel shall (a) be binding upon the parties to the matter and not be subject to further appeal; (b) have no precedential value; (c) be carried out by the district president or the President of the Synod; and (d) be publicized as deemed appropriate under the circumstances by the district president or the President of the Synod. —————— 301 D. To Replace Referral Panels by Restoring the Right of Accusers to Appeal District President Decisions to the President of Synod Rationale Membership in the Synod is and always has been a privilege that is either granted or terminated by the Synod. In the earliest period of its history, the Synod retained the authority to make decisions regarding membership to itself, to be made by its conventions. Over time, the Synod adopted bylaw processes for making such decisions. In the matter of expulsions from the Synod, such processes were to be fair and impartial. Initially, the President of the Synod as ecclesiastical supervisor assumed the authority to suspend members prior to their expulsion. Not long after, district presidents as the President’s agents were given the authority to suspend, with final decisions regarding expulsion to be made by a convention of the Synod or district. In time, Synod bylaw changes provided opportunity for appeals of suspensions to commissions and boards of the Synod or districts prior to expulsion. The 1992 convention of the Synod, which created the Synod’s dispute resolution process, retained district presidents’ authority to suspend but delegated the authority for final decisions regarding expulsion from membership to dispute resolution panels. When the 2004 convention created new processes solely for suspension and expulsion, panels of three district presidents were given responsibility for expulsion decisions. The 2010 convention replaced one of the three presidents on such panels with a lay reconciler. Of particular note as the removal from membership process evolved over nearly 170 years was the decision by the 1965 convention to empower the President of the Synod to act when a district president failed to act on an accusation brought against a member of the Synod. This presidential authorization to act was then given to the Praesidium of the Synod in 1989 and retained as part of the overhaul of the suspension/expulsion processes in 1992. The 2004 convention’s major overhaul of the process removed the right of an accuser to appeal to the Praesidium of the Synod when the district president declined to act. In its place, the accuser could now request that the matter be presented to a Referral Panel of three circuit visitors if the district president fails or refuses to act, this panel then making the decision regarding the suspension, thereby reducing the opportunity for a full and objective hearing and placing an ecclesiastical supervisory decision in the hands of circuit visitors which constitutionally only belongs to district presidents. The history of the suspension/expulsion process supports a return to past practice which existed from 1965 to 2004, leaving the responsibility for suspension in the hands of those charged with ecclesiastical supervision. When a district president fails or declines to act, this will allow an appeal by the accuser to the President of the Synod, who in consultation with the Praesidium of the Synod, will decide when an accusation warrants suspension and, if requested by the accused, a hearing before a panel. Proposed Actions Therefore be it Resolved, That changes be made to Bylaw section 2.14 (and incorporated as appropriate into Bylaw sections 2.15 and 2.17) to remove all reference to a Referral Panel and restore to the suspension/expulsion process an opportunity for an accuser, when a district president fails or declines to act on an accusation, to appeal to the President of the Synod: 2016 Convention Workbook