# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_2019_S112 # Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration) of the President of the general Synod. In 1864 the duties of the President of the general Synod were described as supervision “over the individual districts as such,” without including the words from the 1854 Constitution, “over the pastoral conferences, and over the individual congregations of the district-Synods.” However, this was not intended as a diminishing of the supervision authority of the President of the general Synod, since the convention added an addendum to the Handbook stating, “The Synod declared that the synodical President is directed to serve as inspector of the district presidents, and that he therefore has the right and authority in cases where he is convinced that the district president has erred in his dealings [with the local congregation / member] to convince himself of the situation by a personal investigation at his discretion.” This wording remained in the Synod Handbooks from 1864 through at least 1899. Beyond this specific reference, the President of the general Synod had supervision of the districts of the Synod, which consisted of the individual members of the Synod and the congregations of that district. The process for removal from the Synod, by which decisions regarding termination of membership in the Synod were decided at conventions of the districts with a right to appeal to a convention of the Synod, remained in place through the major revision to the constitution that began in 1917 and concluded in 1924. However, due to the growth of the Synod, adjustments were occasionally made to the process. One example is that rather than a matter being debated on the floor of the convention, it was delegated to a special committee. After examining the matter, the committee would then bring a recommendation to the convention for ratification. While not changing the substance of the 1854 constitution, the 1924 constitution did significantly alter its structure, putting it into the format which is still current today. Gradually, the process of expulsion from the Synod began to grow in detail. Without explanation, the 1924 revised Constitution, bylaws, and regulations of the Synod, excluded the specific 1864 reference to the authority of the President of the Synod to conduct a personal investigation of a case when he was convinced that a district president had erred in his dealing with a local congregation or individual member of Synod. This was not intended to reduce the authority of the President of the Synod, because he still was given ecclesiastical supervision over the districts of the Synod, which consist of the 112 | PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2019 (67TH) LCMS CONVENTION congregations and individual members of the Synod in each district. Regularly, conventions of the Synod attempted to refine the process for removal. Both the 1932 and 1935 conventions struggled with the problem of properly dealing with the appeals from conventions of a district that were coming to the conventions of the Synod. The Committee on Constitutional Matters brought a recommendation to the 1938 convention of the Synod that appeals of a suspension should be handled by a permanent committee. The proposal was referred to the committee working on a revision of the Handbook. A new procedure was adopted at the 1944 convention: There was to be a Board of Appeals for each district and for the Synod. In the event that an individual member was charged with an offense and did not plead guilty, the district president was to present the case to the district board of appeals. If the district board of appeals found him guilty, the district president was to suspend him. The suspended member could appeal for a rehearing before the district board of appeals, and if the decision did not change, he could appeal to the district convention. A committee would be formed at the convention that was to review the matter, which was to determine if the board of appeals had made an error in procedure or if new evidence had been produced. Since the bylaws in the 1945 Handbook were somewhat unclear, subsequent conventions would regularly refine the process. One such adjustment limited the decision of the convention to determining if there was an error in procedure. While the specific circumstances which prompted the resolution are not identified, the 1956 convention determined that it was necessary to clarify Constitution Article XI B 1–3 regarding the authority of the President of the Synod, and adopted 1956 Resolution 6-11, specifically as a clarification of Const. Art. XI B 1–3, concerning the powers of the President, in the event that district officers fail to act, in cases involving ineligibility for service of pastors, professors, or teachers. The resolution added a bylaw (1956 Bylaw 5.23) authorizing the President of the Synod to take action in such a case. This was essentially similar to what had been put in place in 1864. Without explanation, the 1989 convention transferred this authority from the President to the Praesidium of the Synod. After 1956, the procedures remained basically unchanged for several conventions of the Synod until the 1965 convention, which eliminated all appeals of an expulsion from Synod to a convention of a district or Convention Essays