# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_November 1 2001_S3
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

213. 2001 Convention Actions
The Commission reviewed the Secretary’s recommended changes to the Handbook to bring it into
harmony with 2001 convention resolutions and changes. The following additional changes were made:
§
§
§

The sixth resolve of Res. 2-02A will be added as a footnote to Bylaw 14.03;
A footnote will be added to the end of Chapter VII indicating that the chapter will be
removed from the Bylaws immediately prior to the 2004 convention of the Synod, as resolved
by Res. 7-13A;
Bylaw 3.961 a will be changed to read, “In the event of a tie for the final candidate position,
all names involved in the tie shall be listed as candidates,” this change to include a footnote
explaining that additional changes have been made beyond those specifically mandated by
convention Res. 8-02 to bring the entire section into harmony with the changes adopted by
the convention.

With these changes, the Commission gave its approval to the revisions to the Handbook. In the course of
its review of convention actions, the Commission also determined the following:
§

§

In Res. 7-09, in which the convention approved the Amended Articles of Concordia
Publishing House, the Commission noted that Art. VIII is confusing in its second line after
the word “Synod” and instructed the Secretary to bring this error to the attention of CPH via a
letter on the Commission’s behalf.
In view of Res. 7-22A, the Commission adopted a motion to amend the October 26, 2000,
minutes of the CCM to make note of this resolution at entry 177 (00-2212).

214. Question re Disciplinary Process of a Non-Member Faculty Member (01-2233)
In a September 28 letter the President of a university of the Synod, in preparation for his role as facilitator
of the actions described by Bylaw 6.47 a, asked the following questions regarding the final outcome of
the process described by Bylaw 6.47:
Question:

What if the complaint is brought under Bylaw 6.43 c 5 or 6, but the respondent (i.e.,
the accused faculty member) is not a member of the Synod (i.e., a rostered ordained
or commissioned minister of religion)? Does the matter end with the decision of the
Board of Regents? Or does the ecclesiastical disciplinary process of Bylaw 2.27 have
some role to play (and, if so, what is it, given that membership in the Synod is not at
issue)?

Response: Bylaw 6.23 c requires that, as with rostered members of the Synod, when laypersons are
employed in full-time teaching positions, “they shall pledge to perform their duties in harmony with the
Holy Scriptures as the inspired Word of God, the Lutheran Confessions, the Synod’s doctrinal statements,
and the policies of the Synod.” Accordingly, in a previous opinion (99-2142) the Commission ruled:
In the case of both categories of persons, doctrinal resolutions and statements “are to be honored
and upheld until such time as the Synod amends or repeals them” (Bylaw 1.09 b). If there is
disagreement, “dissent from doctrinal resolutions and statements shall be governed by Bylaw 2.39
c.”
In the same prior ruling the Commission also ruled:

147