# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2001_S209
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

HIGHER EDUCATION 209

no time before or after the 2000 Iowa East District convention has
any pastor, member, congregation. official, or conference of the
Iowa East District ever identified to the President, any administra-
tor, or the Board of Regents of Concordia University, Portland, the
specific “doctrinal positions” of Concordia University, Portland,
faculty members that are supposed to be contrary to “the Synod's
positions”; and

WHEREAS, The actions of the Iowa East District relative to the
passing of Res. 3-06 are contrary to the law of love. the Scriptures
(Matt. 18: | Tim. 5:19), and to the Synod’s Constitution (Art. IIT,
sec. 9; Art. XII, sec. 2) and Bylaws (Bylaws 6.03, 6.12, 6.43, and
6.47), which set forth the proper procedure by which concerns
about the doctrinal teachings of Concordia faculty members are to
be received and adjudicated by the local Board of Regents (see also
the CCM opinion of 12-16-99); and

WHEREAS, Christians dishonor the name of God and sin against
the law of love when they do not follow the proper procedure for
handling grievances against one another in the church; and

WHEREAS, The Synod would depart from its scriptural path of
forbearance and love (Bylaws Section VIII, Preamble) if it were to
countenance the actions of the lowa East District relative to Res.
3-06; therefore be it

Resolved, That the Synod in convention assembled set aside
Res. 3-06 of the Iowa East District; and be it further

Resolved, That the Synod in convention assembled declare its
stern opposition to the procedure employed by the Iowa East Dis-
trict to pass Res. 3-06 and to submit it publicly to the Synod with-
out following Christian love and the proper Bylaw procedure; and
be it finally

Resolved, That the Synod in convention reaffirm the long-stand-
ing tradition by which each local Board of Regents has the author-
ity and responsibility “to investigate, hear and act on any complaint
arising out of Bylaw 6.43 ¢ |-6.”

Trinity
Portland, OR

To Require Evidence and Bylaw Response
to Allegations from Lowa District East

WHEREAS, At its June 23-24, 2000, convention, Iowa District
East adopted Overture 3-06, which alleges that “[m]embers of the
faculty of Concordia Portland have expressed doctrinal positions
contrary to that of the Synod’s positions,” and thus Iowa District
East has petitioned the Synod “to direct the President of the Synod
to formally investigate the doctrine and practice of Concordia Uni-
versity Portland”; and

WHEREAS, On October 1, 2000, the Board of Directors of Iowa
District East wrote to the Synod’s Commission on Constitutional
Matters “to clarify the fact that our resolution is not intended to ad-
dress just one individual, an issue to which 6.47 would apply, but
rather the resolution addresses the doctrine and practice of Con-
cordia, Portland as a whole.” The letter notes further: “We believe
our resolution, which does not name a specific individual, was in-
tended to address the whole institution including the Regents who
have shown a pattern of refusing to take steps to preserve the doc-
trinal integrity of the institution”; and

WHEREAS, Concordia University, Portland, on August 28, 2000,
petitioned the Synod’s Commission on Constitutional Matters to
“declare that Resolution 3-06 be declared null and void” for proce-
dural and factual errors. The Commission responded, “Bylaw 3.19,
a, 2 allows that a convention of a District may submit overtures to
a convention of the Synod. The Commission is neither able nor re-
sponsible to discern the relevance or advisability or truth of the
content of any overture submitted to a convention”; and

WHEREAS, The synodically rostered faculty members of Con-
cordia University, Portland. unconditionally

(a) hold to the doctrinal basis of the Synod as given in Art. Il of
the Synod’s Constitution and publicly confess that the actual and

explicit doctrinal articles of the various symbolical books of the
Evangelical Lutheran Church are “a true and unadulterated state-
ment and exposition” of the doctrinal content of the Holy Scrip-
tures;

(b) teach in accordance with this evangelical pattern of doctrine;

(c) hold to the principle of the supervision of doctrine and prac-
tice at this institution and to the proper procedures by which such
supervision is to occur at the institution, but which procedures the
Synod ensures that fairness and due process are observed so that
the integrity and reputation of the individual faculty member(s) and
the integrity and reputation of the Synod’s institutions are main-
tained; and

Wuereas, The synodically rostered faculty members of Con-
cordia University. Portland, deny allegations of “express[ing| doc-
trinal positions contrary to that of the Synod’s position”; and

Wuereas, The Board of Regents of Concordia University, Port-
land, takes seriously its synodical charge to oversee and supervise
all endeavors of the institution:

(a) to supervise and enforce synodical, accreditation, and local
bylaws, guidelines, and processes for the good and welfare of the
Synod and the faculty. staff, and students of Concordia University,
Portland:

(b) to adjudicate complaints, charges, and other issues that come
before the Board, guided by the Holy Scriptures and the Lutheran
Confessions and utilizing the process for adjudication printed in
the synodical Handbook; and

Wuereas, The Board of Regents of Concordia University, Port-
land, denies any allegation of laxity in its exercise of oversight or
supervision; and

Brief Background of the Issue

WHEREAS, The matter(s) of which the lowa East District com-
plains is still unspecified, it may begin with the following:

(a) an article appeared in the Spring 1996 issue of the periodi-
cal, Issues in Christian Education, co-authored by a Concordia
University, Portland, faculty member, that appeared to a pastor in
lowa District East to express views contrary to Synod doctrine;

(b) the pastor called the author twice to discuss the article, but
was apparently not satisfied and contacted the President of the
Synod concerning his dissatisfaction;

(c) the President of the Synod wrote the President of Concor-
dia University and the President of the Northwest District on Au-
gust 26. 1996, and requested that they gain assurance from the au-
thor that he honors and upholds the Holy Scriptures and the
Lutheran Confessions in his teaching and that he does not teach
contrary to these two foundations of faith in The Lutheran
Church—Missouri Synod;

(d) the two Presidents questioned the author, determined that he
honored and upheld the Holy Scripture and the Lutheran Confes-
sions in his teaching, and responded to the President of the Synod
with that finding in September 1996;

(e) the university. without the necessity for reference to the
Board of Regents, has acted and no further word has been heard on
the matter; and

WuHerEAS, In June 2000, Iowa District East adopted its Over-
ture 3-06, described above, without discussion with or notice to
Concordia University. Portland, about its concerns or questions;
and

Wuereas, By requests dated August 7, October 13, and No-
vember 23, 2000, Concordia University, Portland. sought clarifi-
cation of the issues of concern to Iowa District East and the mate-
rials that entity had relied upon as the basis for its concerns, to
which the only response to date has been an additional copy of
Overture 3-06; and

WHEREAS, By requests on December 7 (by telephone), Decem-
ber 8 (by e-mail), and by letter dated December 22, 2000. Concor-
dia University, Portland, has requested a face-to-face meeting with
representatives of Iowa District East in the spirit of “Christ’s min-
istry of reconciliation as one of the church's foremost priorities

2001 Convention Workbook