# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2016_S306
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

306

X. TASK FORCE ON DISPUTE RESOLUTION REPORT

Definition of Terms as Used in This Bylaw Section 1.10
1.10.4 In order to communicate effectively and avoid misunderstanding regarding their use in this dispute resolution process, it is critical that terms be fully defined:
…
(e) Defame: Telling lies about, betraying, or slandering another
person, or harming that person’s reputation, thereby causing
decreased respect, loss of confidence in, and/or injuring his/her
good name.
…

Informal Efforts toward Reconciliation; Consultation
…

…
(d) Defame: Telling lies about, betraying, or slandering another
person, or harming that person’s reputation, thereby causing
decreased respect, loss of confidence in, and/or injuring his/her
good name.
…
Consultation
2.14.3 When a member congregation or individual member of the
Synod is aware of information which could lead to the expulsion of a
member from the Synod under Article XIII of the Constitution, prior to
any formal written complaint or accusation, the member shall consult
with his/her respective district president….
…
(c) If Bylaw section 2.14 applies, the district president shall
ensure that the accuser has met face-to-face with the
accused in the manner described in Matthew 18:15. Even
if the alleged violation of Article XIII of the Constitution
is considered to be “public,” this provision of Matthew
18:15 shall be followed. The reputation of all parties is to
be protected as commanded in the Eighth Commandment.
Failure to do so shall be subject to the Bylaw section 1.10
dispute resolution process, or the expulsion processes of the
Synod (Bylaw sections 2.14–2.16).

1.10.5 Before any matter is submitted to the formal reconciliation
process, the parties involved in a dispute must meet together, faceto-face, in a good-faith attempt to settle their dispute in the manner
described in Matthew 18:15 and may involve the informal use of a reconciler….In regard to this consultation:
…
(e) The reputation of all parties to a dispute is to be protected
as commanded in the Eighth Commandment. Failure to do
so shall be regarded as a violation of the Synod’s standard
for ethical conduct that may be subject to this same dispute
resolution process, a removal from office process, or an
expulsion process of the Synod (Bylaw section 1.10, Bylaws
1.5.7–1.5.8; Bylaw sections 2.14–2.16). The goal throughout
is always one of reconciliation, of repentance and forgiveness,
even if the following proceedings are carried out.

Rules of Procedures
…
1.10.18.1 The following rules of procedure shall be followed:
…
(i) Any member participating in this bylaw procedure or any other
person knowledgeable of the procedure and those involved
in it who intentionally and materially violates any of the
requirements in this bylaw or is persistent in false accusations
is subject to the disciplinary measures as set forth in the
appropriate Bylaw sections 2.14–2.17 or Bylaws 1.5.7–1.5.8.
Any member of the Synod who has personal factual knowledge
of the violation shall inform the appropriate district president
as the ecclesiastical supervisor. Violations of the prohibitions
against defamation of another person’s character or reputation,
or engaging in publicity while a matter is still undecided or
while an appeal is contemplated or pending (Bylaw 1.10.18.1
[d] above) by any person involved or knowledgeable of the
procedure are specifically included as a violation subject to the
same disciplinary measures set forth in the Bylaws.

2.14 Expulsion of Congregations or Individuals
from Membership in the Synod
Preamble
2.14.1 Termination of membership in the Synod is a serious matter involving both the doctrine and life of those to whom it has been
granted. Such action should only be taken as a final step when it is clear
that those who are being terminated after previous futile admonition
have acted contrary to the confession laid down in Constitution Art. II
or the conditions of membership laid down in Constitution Art. VI or
have persisted in offensive conduct (Constitution Art. XIII 1), including
defamation of another person’s character or reputation….
…
Definition of Terms
2.14.2 The definitions of terms used in this bylaw are as follows:

2016 Convention Workbook

…
General Regulations
…
2.14.10.2 Any member participating in this bylaw procedure that
violates any of the requirements or procedures in this bylaw or is persistent in false accusations is subject to the same disciplinary measures
as set forth in this bylaw. Violations of the prohibitions against defamation of another person’s character or reputation, or engaging in publicity
while a matter is still undecided or while an appeal is contemplated or
pending (Bylaw 2.14.7.8 [g]) by any of the persons involved or knowledgeable of the procedure are specifically included as violations subject
to the same disciplinary measures set forth in this bylaw.

——————
G. To Clarify Definition of and Limits to Right of Brotherly
Dissent
Rationale
“The Lutheran Church has always affirmed the right and responsibility of expressing dissent from teachings and practices believed to
be at odds with God’s Word” (Commission on Theology and Church
Relations on p. 6 of its 2006 report, “CTCR Response to Expressions
of Dissent [2004–2006]”). Accordingly, the Synod has established
an agreed-upon procedure for dissent which respects both the dissenter and the Synod.
When, then, a member of the Synod in such forums as “blogs,
Facebook pages, and email pages publicly teaches and advocates that
a doctrinal position of the Synod as stated in a resolution of the Synod
is in error and does not use the Synod’s dissent procedures, he/she/it
may no longer be honoring and upholding the Constitution, Bylaws,
and resolutions of the Synod and could thereby be subject to a charge
of false doctrine” (CCM Opinion 13-2665).
Given the development and expanded use of such electronic
media by members of the Synod, often to call into question matters
of doctrine and practice, at times attempting to excuse such conduct
as conversation “within the fellowship of peers” (Bylaw 1.8.2), the
Synod will do well to expand its bylaw section on dissent with the