# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_1998_S261 # Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration) STRUCTURE, PLANNING, AND ADMINISTRATION 261 - Resolved, That the Synod does not wish to maintain a system prone to the weaknesses observed in the Sanhedrin when they tried Christ and the apostles; and be it finally Resolved, That there be a strict adherence to the mules of evi- dence and law that all may perceive that the LCMS seeks and up- holds truth and justice in all its disputes, thus leading to a God- pleasing renunciation of sin that can only be resolved with repen- tance and absolution in the church. Grace Paris, TX 7-68 To Return to Former Adjudication Process WHEREAS, The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod in conven- tion in 1992 abolished the process of adjudication and appeals and in its place set up a process of reconciliation; and WHEREAS, The reconciliation process won the support of the delegates of the 1992 convention on the premises that it would make the Synod’s dispute resolution procedures more biblical and less litigious; and WHEREAS, The first premise is suspect in that the complainant and the respondent may not have legal counsel present during the process, thus removing a safeguard meant to enable those who might be wrongly accused to defend their innocence from blame in keeping with the Eighth Commandment; and WHEREAS, The first premise is also suspect in that though each party is allowed one or two persons to the meeting “so that every matter may be established by their testimony,” but then no formal record of any of the meeting is allowed; and WHEREAS, The first premise is further suspect in that the recon- ciler is to seek to reconcile differences “on the basis of Christian love and forgiveness” (Bylaw 8.07 e) but may not “judge” (Bylaw 8.03) the actions of either party, a judgment which is necessary to bring about repentance which precedes forgiveness; and WHEREAS, The second premise now appears suspect in that even after six years of the reconciliation process the number of litiga- tions in Synod seems to be increasing, giving testimony to the fact that often a dispute does not have a “win/win” resolution; and WHEREAS, The former system of adjudication and appeals served our Synod well and was respected by the civil courts; there- fore be it Resolved, That The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod return to the former adjudication and appeals process, directing the ap- propriate synodical entities to make the necessary changes of By- laws according to the Constitution. Circuit 16 Forum South Wisconsin District 7-69 To Attend to Conflicts of Interest in Dispute Resolution WHEREAS, An overly legalistic reading of Bylaw 2.27 a 1 has permitted a District President (ref. Stanford/Immanuel vs. Buelt- mann CID) to investigate a matter to which the District President is a party; and WHEREAS, The statement “in the event the District President is disqualified because he is a party to the matter in dispute, has a conflict of interest, or is unable to act” occurs only on Bylaw 2.27, which deals with termination of membership; and WHEREAS, There is no provision such as the one stated above for the disqualification of a District President in restricting and in- vestigating a member, even when the District President is a party to the matter in dispute, thus has a conflict of interest, and should not investigate himself or matters which touch his conduct; and WHEREAS, The old sinful nature still remains within every Christian and is capable of many injustices; and WHEREAS, The church is supposed to be an institution of justice as well as mercy; therefore be it Resolved, That the following paragraph be added to Bylaw 2.23 g: In the event that an investigation is required and the District President is alleged to be party to the matter in dispute or has a conflict of interest, the member who is restricted and who is being investigated, may appeal to the Praesidium of Synod to remove the District President from investigating the matter, and request the appointment of the next highest District officer to conduct the in- vestigation. Bethany, Fort Wayne, IN; Grace, Paris, TX 7-70 To Provide for Disqualification of District President When Party to Dispute and Has Conflict of Interest WHEREAS, An overly legalistic reading of Bylaw 2.27 a | has permitted a District President (ref. Stanford/Immanuel vs. Buelt- mann CID) to investigate a matter to which the District President was a party; and WHEREAS, The statement “in the event that District President is disqualified because he is a party to the matter in dispute, has a conflict of interest, or is unable to act,” occurs only on Bylaw 2.27 a 1, which deals with termination of membership; and WHEREAS, There is no provision such as the one stated above for the disqualification of a District President in restricting and in- vestigating a member, even when the District President is a party to the matter in dispute, thus has a conflict of interest, and should-not investigate himself or matters which touch his conduct; and WHEREAS, The old sinful nature still remains within every Christian and is capable of many injustices; and WHEREAS, The church is supposed to be an institution of justice as well as mercy; therefore be it Resolved, That the following paragraph be added to Bylaw 2.23: g. In the event that an investigation is required and the District President is alleged to be a party to the matter in dispute, has a conflict of interest, the member who is restricted and who is being or may be investigated, may appeal to the Praesidium of Synod to remove the District President from investigating the matter, and appoint the next highest District officer to conduct the investiga- tion who does not have a conflict of interest. Immanuel Peoria, IL 7-71 To Place Burden of Proof on Accuser Rather Than Accused WHEREAS, The Holy Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions command true justice and due process of the church; and Wuereas, The present system of dispute resolution places the burden of proof for innocence upon the member who stands ac- cused by a District President; and WHEREAS, The Office of District President has broad powers of restriction, investigation, and suspension; and WHEREAS, Under the present Bylaws, chapter II, membership, and VIII, reconciliation, the District President serves as investigator (in that he investigates the member), judge (in that based on the in- formation he collected through his own investigation he has ab- solute power to restrict and suspend), prosecutor (in that he brings charges against the member in the present DRP, or the former ad- judication system), and as chaplain (in that he is given the respon- sibility to provide spiritual care for those he has investigated, re- stricted, accused, and suspended); and WHEREAS, In the case of a suspension the present dispute reso- lution process is based upon an appellate (appeal) system, wherein,