# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2016_S422
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

422

ECCLESIASTICAL SUPERVISION AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION

Whereas, The Constitution of the Synod indicates: “The officers
of the Synod must assume only such rights as have been expressly
conferred upon them by the Synod” (Art. XI A 1); and
Whereas, The Constitution of the Synod defines the scope of the
ecclesiastical supervision of the President of the Synod as the officers
of the Synod, all such as are employed by the Synod, the individual
districts of the Synod, and all district presidents (Art. XI B 1); and
Whereas, The Constitution of the Synod defines the scope of the
ecclesiastical supervision of district presidents as the ordained and
commissioned ministers of their districts (Art. XII 7) and entrusts
them with the power to suspend ordained and commissioned members from membership in the Synod (Art. XII 8); and
Whereas, The Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod limit the
work of the vice-presidents of the Synod to the direction given by the
President of the Synod (Constitution Art. XI C; Bylaws 3.3.1.3 [h],
3.3.2, 3.3.2.3), indicating that the constitutional authority of ecclesiastical supervision is not given to the vice-presidents or the Praesidium
(President and vice-presidents of the Synod); and
Whereas, The Synod has viewed itself as primarily congregational in nature (Constitution Art. VII 1; Bylaw 1.3.3); and
Whereas, The CCM has affirmed the sole responsibility of the
district presidents for ecclesiastical supervision of members in their
respective districts (Opinions Ag. 1970; 13-2669); and
Whereas, The 2004 LCMS convention amended the Bylaws to
eliminate the possibility of an accuser appealing a complaint that
has been terminated by a district president to the Praesidium of the
Synod; and
Whereas, This amendment recognized the nonhierarchical nature
of the Synod and affirmed that complaints and accusations are best
handled locally by those most familiar with the circumstances and
individuals involved, in keeping with the constitutional authority
given only to the district presidents; and
Whereas, Permitting an appeal of an accusation or complaint
against a member of the Synod after a district president has terminated
the matter undermines the ecclesiastical supervision of the district
president, tends to centralize power for ecclesiastical supervision in
the Praesidium of the Synod, and requires the accused to defend himor herself twice (before the district president and the Praesidium of
the Synod), placing the accused in double jeopardy; and
Whereas, The necessity of the accused potentially having to
defend more than once costs an immense amount of time, energy,
emotion, and money—resources that are best expended upon ministry needs; and
Whereas, Misuse of an appeal by an accuser to the Praesidium
of the Synod at best might be described as mischief and at worst
described as harassment, defaming the good name of a member of
the Synod and bearing false witness; therefore be it
Resolved, That the 2016 LCMS convention be memorialized to
decline any overtures to amend the system of ecclesiastical supervision of the Synod, especially any overture to allow an appeal after a
district president has terminated a matter involving a member of the
Synod; and be it further
Resolved, That the 2016 LCMS convention reaffirm the method
of ecclesiastical supervision adopted in the Bylaw changes by the
2004 convention.
Trinity, Utica, MI; Immanuel, Grand Rapids, MI; Marco,
Marco Island, FL; King of Kings, Omaha, NE; Amazing
Grace, Oxford, FL; Gloria Dei, Houston, TX; Board of
Directors, Southeastern District; California-Nevada-Hawaii
District; Board of Directors, Michigan District; St. Luke,
Haslett, MI; Pacific Southwest District; St. John, Dublin,
2016 Convention Workbook

OH; Village, Bronxville, NY; First Trinity, Tonawanda,
NY; Salem, Tomball, TX; Salem, Buffalo, NY; Board of
Directors, Texas District; Messiah, Lincoln, NE; Prince
of Peace, Orlando FL; King of Kings, Round Rock, TX;
The Rock, Seward, NE; Trinity, Delray Beach, FL; Christ,
Mantua OH
12-21

To Reaffirm Commitment to Current System
of Ecclesiastical Supervision
Whereas, Bylaw 1.2.1 (i) defines: “Ecclesiastical supervision:
The responsibility, primarily of the President of the Synod and district presidents, to supervise on behalf of the Synod the doctrine,
life, and administration of its members, officers, and agencies. Such
supervision, subject to the provisions of the Synod’s Constitution,
Bylaws, and resolutions, includes visitation, evangelical encouragement and support, care, protection, counsel, advice, admonition, and,
when necessary, appropriate disciplinary measures to assure that the
Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions of the Synod are followed and
implemented. Thus, ecclesiastical supervision is also the presenting, interpreting, and applying of the collective will of the Synod’s
congregations. Ecclesiastical supervision does not include the responsibility to observe, monitor, control, or direct the day-to-day activities
of individual members of the Synod, whether in the conduct of their
work or in their private lives (cf. Bylaw 2.13.2). Further, those constitutional articles and bylaws pertaining to ecclesiastical supervision
shall determine the full definition of ecclesiastical supervision”; and
Whereas, Constitution Art. XI B 1 defines the scope of ecclesiastical supervision of the President of the Synod: “The President
has the supervision regarding the doctrine and the administration
of (a) All officers of the Synod; (b) All such as are employed by the
Synod; (c) The individual districts of the Synod; and (d) All district
presidents”; and
Whereas, Article XII 7, 8 defines the scope of ecclesiastical
supervision of the district presidents of the Synod. Article XII 7
states: “The district presidents shall, moreover, especially exercise
supervision over the doctrine, life, and administration of office of the
ordained and commissioned ministers of their district and acquaint
themselves with the religious conditions of the congregations of their
district. To this end they shall visit and, according as they deem it necessary, hold investigations in the congregations. Their assistants in this
work are the circuit visitors, who therefore shall regularly make their
reports to the district president.” According to Article XII 8, “district
presidents are empowered to suspend from membership ordained and
commissioned ministers for persistently adhering to false doctrine
or for having given offense by an ungodly life, in accordance with
such procedure as shall be set forth in the Bylaws of the Synod”; and
Whereas, The Synod’s CCM has affirmed the sole responsibility of the district presidents for ecclesiastical supervision of members
in their respective districts (CCM Opinions Ag. 1970; 13-2669); and
Whereas, The 2004 Synod convention affirmed the sole responsibility of the district president for ecclesiastical supervision when it
amended the Synod Bylaws so that an accuser cannot appeal a complaint terminated by a district president to the Praesidium of the Synod
(President and vice-presidents of the Synod); and
Whereas, This amendment testified to the Synod’s support for the
constitutional authority given to district presidents alone in the ecclesiastical supervision of a member of their district; and