# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2004_S359
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

OPINIONS OF COMMISSION ON CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS 359

sition of the Synod, there would be no reason for its separate adop-
tion by the individual member or congregation. If the “confessional
statement” appears to be contrary to a doctrinal position of the
Synod, the action of the member, whether individual or congrega-
tion, is governed by Bylaw 2.39 c. If the “confessional statement”
is intended.to address an issue that has not yet been addressed by
the adoption of a doctrinal resolution or a statement on part of the
Synod, the processes provided in the Constitution and Bylaws and
particularly Bylaw 1.09 govern the action.

Subscribing to or requiring a “confessional statement” in place
of or in addition to the confessional position of the Synod as set
forth in Article II of its Constitution as a condition for fellowship
with one another in the Synod is a violation of the covenant rela-
tionship in the Synod (Article VI 1; Bylaw 1.03). Members of the
Synod are expected to subscribe only to the Holy Scriptures and
the Lutheran Confessions.

The Synod requires that its member congregations accept the
Synod’s confessional standard. At the same time the congregation’s
own standard must not go beyond the Synod’s confessional standard.
The best procedure would be to adapt Article II of the Synod’s own
Constitution to the congregation’s constitution (CCM Opinion 98-2135,
Review of “Guidelines for Constitution and Bylaws of a Lutheran Con-
gregation”).

Requiring a doctrinal statement, doctrinal formulation, or state-
ment of belief in place of or in addition to the synodically adopted
(according to the Synod’s established procedures) doctrinal reso-
lutions and statements which are in harmony with Scripture and the
Lutheran Confessions (Bylaws 1.09 and 2.39) as a condition for
fellowship with one another is also a violation of the covenant re-
lationship in the Synod and destroys the “walking together” as a
Synod. Divergent confessional or doctrinal resolutions and state-
ments cannot coexist in the Synod without serious disturbance of
the members. “Refusal to comply with these provisions as well as
active promotion of non-compliance constitute divisive and un-
brotherly conduct which destroys the very concept of the Synod as
‘a walking together’” (CCM Goetjen Opinion, Minutes #554, June
12, 1967).

When congregations and ordained and commissioned ministers
join the Synod, they voluntarily enter a covenant relationship with
all other members. They agree to the reason for forming a synodi-
cal union, a “walking together” to prevent schism according to the
example of the apostolic church, Acts 15:1-31 (Constitution Pre-
amble, “Reason for the Forming of a Synodical Union”). They
agree together in their scriptural and confessional subscription (Ar-
ticle If; Bylaw 1.03), which members accept without reservation
and in the carrying out of the objectives of the Synod (Article IID.

The first object of the Synod under Scripture and the Lutheran
Confessions is to “conserve and promote the unity of the true faith
(Eph. 4:3-6; 1 Cor. 1:10)...and provide a united defense against
schism, sectarianism (Rom. 16:17), and heresy’’(Article III 1).

Committed to a common confession, member congregations
voluntarily ‘join with one another in the Synod to support one an-
other and to work together in carrying out their commonly adopted
objectives” (Bylaw 1.01). In joining the Synod,

.... members agree to uphold the confessional position of the Synod

(Art. ID) and to assist in carrying out the objectives of the Synod (Art. HD),

which are objectives of the members themselves. Thus, while congrega-

tions of the Synod are self-goveming (Art. VID), they, and also individual
members, commit themselves as members of the Synod to act in accor-
dance with the synodical Constitution and Bylaws under which they have
agreed to live and work together and which the congregations alone have
the authority to adopt or amend through conventions. (Bylaw 1.05 d)

As such,

The Synod (emphasis added), in seeking to clarify its witness
or to settle doctrinal controversy, so that all who seek to participate
“in the relationships that exist within and through the Synod may
benefit and may act to benefit others, shall have the right to adopt
doctrinal resolutions and statements which are in harmony with
Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions. (Bylaw 1.09.a)
Since it is the duty of every member to “diligently and earnestly
(emphasis added) promote the purposes of the Synod by word and
deed” (Bylaw 2.35), and it is understood that the “Constitution, By-

laws and all other rules and regulations of the Synod apply to all con-
gregational and individual members of the Synod” (Bylaw 2.39 a),
the “members of the Synod are expected as part of the life together
within the synodical fellowship to honor and to uphold the resolutions
of the Synod” (Bylaw 2.39 c). This includes honoring and upholding
by the mercies of God those resolutions of the Synod that encourage
and allow for Christian liberty and pastoral and congregational free-
dom (e.g., 1969 Resolution 2-17 on women’s suffrage [Cf.. CCM
Opinion January 23, 1970]; 2001 Resolution 3-07A, “To Commend
‘The Lutheran Understanding of Church Fellowship’ and CTCR Re-
port on the Synodical Discussions” — V. “Response to Specific Con-
cerns, B. Cases of Discretion”).

In answering the questions asked, the Commission also calls at-
tention to Article VII of the Constitution:

In its relation to its members the Synod is not an ecclesiastical
government exercising legislative or coercive powers, and with re-
spect to the individual congregation’s right of self-government it
is but an advisory body. Accordingly, no resolution of the Synod
imposing anything upon the individual congregation is of binding
force if it is not in accordance with the Word of God or if it ap-
pears to be inexpedient as far as the condition of a congregation is
concerned.

As a part of life together in the Synod, members have the re-
sponsibility to continually examine and reexamine their confession
(symbols, doctrinal statements, and resolutions) to determine if
they are faithful to Holy Scriptures. Members have a never-ending
task of testing everything that the Synod believes, teaches, and
practices to see if they are in accordance with the Word of God. If
there are issues that need to be readdressed or issues that are con-
sidered by the members of the Synod that have not yet been ad-
dressed, any action is to be governed by the procedures set forth in
the Bylaws, particularly Bylaws 1.09 and 2.39.

An October 16, 1969 opinion of the Commission On Constitu-
tional Matters, “An Opinion Regarding Dissenting Groups and Ac-
tivities Within the Synod,” which addresses in general a related
question, also importantly includes:

Christians as well as non-Christians expect differences of opin-
ion and judgment to arise when people walk together. The Synod
has provided for forums in which such differences can be discussed
and evaluated beyond the confines of the local congregation. The
pastors and teachers conferences; the circuit meetings; the synodi-
cal and District board, commission, and committee meetings; the
doctrinal supervision and appeals procedures; and above all the
conventions of the Districts and of the Synod provide the proper
channels through which the issues of opinion and judgment are to
be discussed and decided. In the absence of a clear word of God
issues must be decided by the majority principle, applied in Chris-
tian love and with Christian restraint (Article VIII, C). When the
majority will has been determined, it must be respected. Otherwise
life together (synod) becomes all but impossible. Discussion may
indeed continue; but it needs to be carried on with full respect for
the majority will and within the forums established by the Synod
for the preservation of the synodical unity. If additional channels
for discussion are needed the Synod can provide for the same in its
Bylaws through appropriate convention action....

In this opinion the Commission is not attempting to limit the right of
individuals to speak their own minds. Before and after the passage or re-
jection of synodical resolutions individuals must be free to express their
concerns, especially to their peers. Frank and open discussion, carried
on in a spirit of Christian love and forbearance, must be part of our life
together in the Synod. It can be proper and salutary. However, in this
opinion the Commission is addressing itself to the organizing of groups,
to the calling of meetings, secret or open, to attempted manipulation of
existing groups, to circularizing activities, and to a wide scale of joint
actions, all of which by their very nature tend to polarize or fragment
the constituency of the Synod, and thus have the effect of disrupting the
synodical unity.

In Christian love, members who have joined together voluntar-
ily also have agreed to retain “the right of brotherly dissent” and
to respect the conscience of the dissenter when resolutions are of a
doctrinal nature (Bylaw 2.39 c). The members have agreed together
that the expression of dissent follows these synodically established

2004 Convention Workbook