# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2013_S298
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

298

OPINIONS OF COMMISSION ON CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS

District Church Extension Fund Use of Dispute
Resolution Process (11-2591)
A congregation of the Synod has been in dispute with one of
the seven district church extension funds that operate separate from
and independent of the Lutheran Church Extension Fund—Missouri
Synod. The Lutheran Church Extension Fund—Missouri Synod exists pursuant to Bylaws 3.6.4ff and is operated by its members and
board of directors. The separate district church extension funds are
subject to the supervision of the Board for Church Extension which
exists under Bylaws 3.10.6 and 3.10.6.1.
The congregation has requested that its district’s separately incorporated district church extension fund enter into a Bylaw section
1.10 dispute resolution process, which the church extension fund has
declined to do. As a result, the congregation submitted to the commission an extensive letter with multiple questions and sub-questions.
Among the questions and concerns expressed by the congregation are some issues and concerns outside the authority and responsibility of the commission to address, because they do not involve
interpretation of the Synod’s Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions.
These issues may more appropriately be raised with ecclesiastical
supervisors. The congregation is urged to submit such concerns to
its ecclesiastical supervisor, and as necessary through the Synod’s
process of ecclesiastical supervision.
Question 1: What are the meanings of the terms “exclusive” and
“exclusively” in the context of the preamble, purposes,
and exception clauses to the dispute resolution process
found in Bylaws 1.10.1–1.10.3?
Opinion: The terms “exclusive” or “exclusively” appear four times
in Bylaws 1.10.1–1.10.3 and are highlighted in the quotations
below. Bylaw 1.10.1.1 reads:
The Holy Scriptures (1 Cor. 6:1–7) urge Christians to settle their
differences by laying them before the “members of the brotherhood.”
Therefore, the Synod in the spirit of 1 Corinthians 6 calls upon all parties to a disagreement, accusation, controversy, or disciplinary action to
rely exclusively and fully on the Synod’s system of reconciliation and
conflict resolution. The use of the Synod’s conflict resolution procedures
shall be the exclusive and final remedy for those who are in dispute.
Fitness for ministry and other theological matters must be determined
within the church. Parties are urged, in matters of a doctrinal nature, to
follow the procedures as outline in Bylaw section 1.8 [emphasis added].

Bylaw 1.10.2, after listing those parties who are to participate in
the Synod’s dispute resolution process, continues as follows:
…It shall be the exclusive remedy to resolve such disputes that involve theological, doctrinal, or ecclesiastical issues except those covered under Bylaw sections 2.14–2.17 and except as provided in Bylaw
1.10.3. It is applicable whether the dispute involves only a difference
of opinion without personal animosity or is one that involves ill will
and sin that requires repentance and forgiveness. No person or agency
to whom or to which the provisions of this dispute resolution process
are applicable because such person or agency is a member of the Synod
may render these provisions inapplicable by terminating that membership [emphasis added].

Finally, the term appears in the exceptions paragraph, Bylaw
1.10.3, as follows:
This chapter provides evangelical procedures to remedy disputes
only and does not set forth procedures for expulsion from membership
(Constitution, Art. XIII and Bylaw sections 2.14–2.17); nor does it set
forth procedures for board of regents’ supervision of faculty and administration as specified in Bylaws 3.10.4.7.5–3.10.4.7.9 and 3.10.5.6.5–
3.10.5.6.9. While Christians are encouraged to seek to resolve all their
disputes without resorting to secular courts, this chapter does not provide an exclusive remedy for the following matters, unless such matters involve theological, doctrinal, or ecclesiastical issues, including

2013 Convention Workbook

those arising under the divine call of a member of the Synod [emphasis
added]:
(a) 	
Disputes concerning property rights (e.g., real estate agreements, mortgages, fraud, or embezzlement)
(b) 	Disputes arising under contractual arrangements of all kinds
(e.g., contracts for goods, services, or employment benefits)

As a public expression to all Christians, the Synod recognizes that
the biblical reconciliation of persons in conflict begins with God’s
truth that all Christians are sinners, that all Christians have been reconciled to God through the death and resurrection of Christ Jesus,
and that Christ’s ministry of reconciliation is one of the church’s
foremost priorities.
The first sentence of Bylaw 1.10.1 is based on the understanding
of Scripture that all members of the body of Christ who are parties to
a disagreement should rely on a God-pleasing system of reconciliation and conflict resolution without resort to the secular courts. The
first use of the word “exclusively” is a call by the Synod upon all of
its members to do so. The Synod implores its members, as well as the
lay members of member congregations of the Synod, to recognize
their responsibilities for conflict resolution as set forth in the Preamble, urging them to settle their differences by laying them before
the “members of the brotherhood,” using the guidance of Matthew
chapter 18 and recognizing that at the heart and center of Christian
conflict resolution is the grace of Jesus Christ. The next use of that
term in Bylaw 1.10.1 specifically declares the Synod’s process to be
the exclusive, which is to say the only, remedy for those members of
the Synod who are in dispute.
In Bylaw 1.10.2, the explanation of the purpose of the Synod’s
dispute resolution process, the Synod has declared with respect to the
specific participants named in that bylaw that the Synod’s process will
be the one and only remedy to resolve disputes among those named
where the issues involve theological, doctrinal, or ecclesiastical issues, and except for those covered by Bylaw sections 2.14–2.17 and
Bylaws 3.10.4.7.9, 3.10.5.6.9, and 1.10.3. The binding nature of this
exclusive remedy as to such issues is honored and recognized even in
the secular courts of the United States. At the same time, the Synod
is acknowledging that in areas other than theological, doctrinal, and
ecclesiastical, its authority can be limited by civil authority.
Finally, the exceptions paragraph (Bylaw 1.10.3) makes clear that
disputes involving property rights, including real estate agreements
and mortgages, insofar as such may be involved in the case at hand,
are not subject to the exclusive remedy of the dispute resolution process. In this respect, the phrase “this chapter does not provide an
exclusive remedy for the following matters” does not mean that the
dispute resolution process cannot be voluntarily used by the parties
defined in Bylaw 1.10.2 and does not preclude those parties from
voluntarily agreeing to engage in the dispute resolution process of
the Synod rather than resorting to other dispute resolution processes,
including the secular courts. Rather, the bylaw recognizes that in such
matters, the participants need not agree to participate in the Synod’s
process nor be involuntarily bound by that process. The language of
Bylaw 1.10.3 allows persons involved in disputes concerning property
rights or contractual arrangements not to subject themselves to the
binding processes of the Synod but rather to rely on other remedies
and forums.
Question 2: What specifically precipitated the addition of the “exception clause” contained in Bylaw 1.10.3?
Opinion: The current version of Bylaw 1.10.3 was originally found
in former Bylaw 8.02. While amended by 2004 convention Res.
8-01A, the process in which the current dispute resolution process
is based was originally adopted by 1992 Res. 5-01B as a result of
a task force effort to review and revise the entire dispute resolution