# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_January 11 2002_S1
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

MINUTES
COMMISSION ON CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS
January 11, 2002

228. Call to Order
Chairman Walter Tesch called the telephone conference call meeting to order and asked Albert Marcis to
open the meeting with prayer. All members of the Commission participated in the meeting.
229. Questions re Responsibilities of Vice-Presidents in Bylaw 2.27 Process (01-2242)
In a December 14, 2001 memo, the President of the Synod reviewed Handbook references pertaining to
the ecclesiastical supervision of District Presidents and asked specific questions relative to charges filed
by a complainant against a District President.
QUESTION 1: Since the President of the Synod is the ecclesiastical supervisor of all District
Presidents, in the event the President of the Synod "declines to suspend the
member or fails to act within 90 days after receipt of the written complaint... "
(Bylaw 2.27 b), are the charges against the District President thus concluded?
Response: (The Commission notes an apparent error in the Bylaws as printed in the 1998 edition of the
Handbook. The last sentence of Bylaw 2.27 g states as follows: "If disqualified for the reasons set forth in
section b (emphasis added), the next qualified officer of the Synod shall function in the place of the
President." It is apparent that the reference should be to section a 1 and the Commission proceeds on that
presumption in this opinion.).
The answer to the question is "no." Bylaw 2.27 g states that the President of the Synod shall proceed in
the same fashion as a District President if he receives a complaint relative to a District President. Bylaw
2.27 b provides that if a District President declines to suspend the accused member or fails to act within
90 days after receipt of a written complaint, the complainant may present the written complaint to the
Praesidium. Thus, since a complainant can appeal to the Praesidium the non-action or negative decision
of a District President under Bylaw 2.27 b, a complainant can likewise appeal to the Praesidium the
non-action or negative decision of the President of the Synod under Bylaw 2.27 g.
QUESTION 2: If your answer to question #1 is "No," I would assume your understanding would
be that the charges against the District President may then be submitted by the
complainant to the Praesidium of the Synod, who would consider these charges
without the participation of the President of the Synod (Bylaw 2.27 g). If that
understanding is accurate, my next question is this: Since both the Constitution
and Bylaws clearly state that the President of the Synod has ecclesiastical
supervision of all District Presidents and of all officers of the Synod, including the
Vice-Presidents, under what constitutional authority would the Synodical-Vice
Presidents be charged with the responsibility of determining the continuation of
the roster status of a District President under Bylaw 2.27?
Response: The President of the Synod has ecclesiastical supervision of District Presidents by reason of
Article XI B of the Constitution. However, ecclesiastical supervision does not include the responsibility
of determining the continuation of the roster status of a District President. That matter is covered by
Article XIII 2 which provides: "Expulsion shall be executed only after following such procedure as shall
be set forth in the Bylaws of the Synod. Bylaws 2.27 and 8.09 establish the steps to be followed to expel a