# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2016_S425
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

ECCLESIASTICAL SUPERVISION AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION
nion with the Reformed, evolution, and more, then the public confession of the Synod is meaningless. I am saying that if my Synod does
not change its inability to call such a person to repentance and remove
such a teacher where there is no repentance, then we are liars and our
confession is meaningless. I do not want to belong to such a synod,
much less lead it. I have no intention of walking away from my vocation.
I shall rather use it and, by the grace of God, use all the energy I have
to call this Synod to fidelity to correct this situation. (http://wmltblog.
org/2015/01/regarding-a-recent-decision-of-a-panel-not-to-proceedwith-charges-regarding-a-public-false-teacher-in-the-lcms); and

Whereas, Article III, Objectives, of the Constitution of the LCMS
says,
“The Synod, under Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions, shall—
1. Conserve and promote the unity of the true faith (Eph. 4:3−6; 1 Cor.
1:10), work through its official structure toward fellowship with
other Christian church bodies, and provide a united defense against
schism, sectarianism (Rom 16:17), and heresy”;

therefore be it
Resolved, That the Central Illinois District of the LCMS memorialize the 2016 Synod convention to direct the President of the Synod
to appoint a task force. This task force may be comprised of one professor from each seminary, two district presidents, one parish pastor,
one commissioned minister, and three laypersons (at least one of
whom shall be an attorney) to study this problem; and be it further
Resolved, That the task force formed by the 2016 Synod convention report back to the 2019 convention with recommended changes
to the dispute resolution procedures that allow for clear biblical and
confessional standards to deal in Christian love with those who openly
teach contrary to Article II of the LCMS Constitution.
Central Illinois District
12-27

To Allow for Review of Acquittals
Whereas, Bylaws 2.14 through 2.15 are ineffective at expelling
open and manifest heretics from the roster of the Synod; and
Whereas, This has caused great scandal for the church, its member congregations and their members, and the Synodical Union; and
Whereas, The Synod in convention is the supreme authority in
our union; therefore be it
Resolved, That the Montana District of The Lutheran Church—
Missouri Synod memorialize the 2016 Synod convention to amend
the Synod’s Constitution as follows:
PROPOSED WORDING
Article XIII Expulsion from the Synod
1. Members who act contrary to the confession laid down in Article II
and to the conditions of membership laid down in Article VI or persist in an offensive conduct, shall, after previous futile admonition,
be expelled from the Synod.
2. Expulsion shall be executed only after following such procedure as
shall be set forth in the Bylaws of the Synod.
3. After the procedure set forth in the Bylaws of Synod has been followed, the Praesidium of the Synod shall review those cases in
which one accused of the teaching of false doctrine was not expelled
from Synod. If they find legitimate cause for expulsion, the Praesidium of the Synod should bring the case before the Synod for adjudication at its next regular convention.
4. If the member expelled is a pastor or teacher in a congregation of the
Synod, such congregation, unless it has already done so, is held to
depose him from office and to deal with him in accordance with the
Word of God, notwithstanding an appeal. If it persistently refuses

425

to do so, the respective district is to deal with it. If all negotiations
and admonitions fail of their purpose, such congregation forfeits its
membership in the Synod.
5. Because of their expulsion those so expelled forfeit their membership and all share in the property of the Synod. The latter holds good
also with respect to those who for any reason themselves sever their
connection with the Synod.

Montana District
12-28

To Create a Commission on Doctrinal Fidelity
Whereas, Article II of the Constitution of the LCMS defines the
required confessional subscription of her members; and
Whereas, Article VI of the Constitution provides the Conditions
of Membership stating, among other things, that all who seek membership must accept the confessional basis of Article II and renounce
“unionism and syncretism of every description, such as:
a. Serving congregations of mixed confession, as such, by ministers of
the church;
b. Taking part in the services and sacramental rites of heterodox congregations or of congregations of mixed confession;
c. Participating in heterodox tract and missionary activities, … ” and
also submit to “[e]xclusive use of doctrinally pure agenda, hymnbooks, and catechisms in church and school”;

and
Whereas, These articles do not speak to the common sins of the
sheepfold, but to the pernicious teaching of false doctrine or unionistic support of heterodoxy by under-shepherds; and
Whereas, Holy Scripture teaches that we are to restore an erring brother (Gal. 6:1) so that we may agree with one another and live
in peace (2 Cor. 13:11). Scripture also reminds us to be watchful lest
we also be tempted (Gal. 6:1), and it clearly teaches that we are to
avoid and separate from those who, after being warned, continue to
teach false doctrine or cause division (Rom. 16:17; Titus 3:10); and
Whereas, Article XIII addresses the expulsion from the Synod
of those who act or teach contrary to Article II and who violate the
conditions of membership as provided in Article VI or persist in offensive conduct; and
Whereas, Bylaw section 2.14 addresses specific procedures for
expulsion from Synod of congregations and individuals; and
Whereas, Historical precedent has shown that Bylaw 2.14 is
routinely ignored regarding complaints against individuals and congregations who are accused of violating Article II and/or Article VI,
such complaints languishing without action by the appropriate ecclesiastical supervisor; and
Whereas, Inaction or bureaucratic delay in matters concerning
the open and public violation of Article II and Article VI standards
bring shame upon the LCMS by supporting the claim of heterodoxy
against her, create confusion within the church at large by placing
stumbling blocks before her members, question the validity of our
walking together as a Synod, cause dissension and schism within the
Synod, open doors for others to denigrate and blaspheme the Synod,
and most important, open the claim that we as a church body denigrate and blaspheme the Word of God; and
Whereas, Such bureaucratic delay is made even worse by the
present dispute resolution process, which adds to God’s Word by
requiring a face-to-face meeting between the accuser(s) and the
accused for public offenses. This requirement is contrary to the conduct of Christ who publicly rebuked the Pharisees in their absence
(Matt. 23) and to Luther’s understanding of the Eighth Commandment
2016 Convention Workbook