# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_1998_S260 # Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration) 260 STRUCTURE, PLANNING, AND ADMINISTRATION or “others”(NIV), thereby changing the meaning of Jesus’ com- mand; and WHEREAS, Bylaw 8.07 e by the statement: “With the approval of the reconcilers, each party may, in the manner described in Matt. 18:16, bring one or two persons to the meeting”; first, grants the absolute right to the reconcilers to withhold approval; and second, in using the term may, defined in Bylaw 8.03 as “permissive,” are contrary to Matthew 18:16 which again is a command of Jesus: “But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be es- tablished.(KJV); and WHEREAS, The restriction on the congregation’s right of self- government as expressed in Bylaw 8.11 (1995 and 1992 Hand- books) as well as in former Bylaw 8.09 (1989 Handbook) are in violation of and contrary to both Constitution Art. VII and Bylaw 15.01 a, “not contrary to the Constitution”; and Wuereas, The denial of due process instituted by this radical change is contrary to Scripture and the Confessions; and WHEREAS, There are too many faults discernible in the current Bylaw to be corrected in a piecemeal approach, in part due to link- age to other Bylaws; therefore be it Resolved, That the current provisions of Bylaw VIII be re- pealed; and be it further Resolved, That Bylaw VIII be amended to restore the provisions of said Bylaw as found in the 1989 Handbook; and be it finally Resolved, That the restriction on the congregation’s right of self- government as expressed in former Bylaw 8.09 (1989 Handbook), being in violation of and contrary to both Constitution Art. VII and Bylaw 15.01 a, “not contrary to the Constitution” be not restored. Our Redeemer Peekskill, NY 7-65 To Return to Previous Structure for Adjudication and Reaffirm Absolute Authority of Commission on Appeals WHEREAS, The present “win-win” structure of our synodical ad- judication process does not establish right and wrong either ac- cording to the Bible or according to our synodical Constitution; and WHEREAS, In God’s Word we see clearly that there is a “right and wrong” (we were wrong and it took the blood of the Savior to make us one with God); and WHEREAS, We as a Synod need to not only give lip service to the justice of God, but to also live and lead according to His Word; and WHEREAS, It is in the best interest of Synod that such adjudica- tors be duly elected; therefore be it Resolved, That The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod return to the previous system for adjudication. St. John Waterbury, CT 7-66 To Return to Former System of Adjudication WHEREAS, The former system of adjudication and appeal served our Synod well for many years, dealing justly with complaints and disputes; and WHEREAS, That system had all the advantages of the present system, requiring informal settlement efforts before taking a matter to adjudication; and WHEREAS, The present system seeks a win-win resolution to dis- putes, when, in fact, there are many situations in which a win-win resolution is not possible or desirable, such as when a person in- sists that his false doctrine is acceptable and true, or when a deci- sion must be made to correct a wrong done by one party against another, or when an injustice by an official against a pastor or other member of the Synod, such as a congregation, must be corrected; therefore be it Resolved, That the present system of reconciliation be replaced with the former system of adjudication and appeal, and that the pres- ent chapter VIII of the Bylaws be replaced by chapter VIII of the 1986 Handbook of the Synod; and be it further Resolved, That this change take effect immediately upon the election of members of District commissions on adjudication in the District conventions of the year 2000; and be it further Resolved, That matters that would ordinarily be handled by the synodical Commission on Adjudication be handled by the District commission in which the case is located until the election of a syn- odical Commission on Adjudication; and be it further Resolved, That if a case involves litigants from two different Districts or if it is a case for synodical adjudication and the litigants are from different Districts, the commission hearing the case shall be made up of equal numbers of members from each of the two Districts until the election of synodical Commissions on Adjudica- tion and Appeal; and be it further Resolved, That, until the election of a synodical Commission on Appeals, the Commission on Appeals shall be made up of mem- bers of District Commissions on Adjudication chosen by a blind draw by the President of the Synod when cases for such commis- sion arise; and be it finally Resolved, That elections for a synodical Commission on Adju- dication and a Commission on Appeals be held at the 2001 synod- ical convention, and that those elected will take office immediately upon election. Grace Fairgrove, MI 7-67 To Return to Former Structure of Adjudication for Dispute Resolution WHEREAS, The current system of dispute resolution is a process adopted from secular and not biblical sources; and WHEREAS, Those who seek to use this process often find their cases being “reconciled” by people who have little or no theologi- cal or legal expertise; and WHEREAS, District Presidents are not bound by the Handbook to adhere to the ruling of the reconciler; and WHEREAS, The minutes of the reconciliation are not required and often are not kept; and WHEREAS, It is scripturally impossible to reconcile good and evil so that both parties in a dispute are perceived winners; and WHEREAS, Dispute resolution does not adhere to or take serious the doctrines of original sin, the two kingdoms, and the church mil- itant, etc.; and WHEREAS, The dispute resolution process has many injustices within the system and is weighted in favor of District Presidents and against those who are accused, restricted, or suspended by a District President; and WHEREAS, The ruling of the reconciler is often based on the ar- bitrary opinions of psychology and personal bias not tolerated in society at large; and WHEREAS, Decisions of the reconciler are not bound to specific citations from Scripture, the Lutheran Confessions, and the writ- ings of C. F. W. Walther on church and ministry adopted by the convention; and WHEREAS, The dispute resolution process has shown itself to be based more on the subjectivity of the reconciler rather than an ob- jective and printed basis for settling disputes; therefore be it Resolved, That the Synod return to the former structure of adju- dication prior to 1992; and be it further