# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_April 4 5 2008_S5
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

CTCR Response
The CTCR has previously provided “input” regarding this issue in its 1985 report Church
Discipline in the Christian Congregation. In response to the question “Does excommunication
have to be unanimous?” the CTCR says:
Our synodical fathers argued in the affirmative, pointing out that since such a verdict, reached
on the basis of a clear Word of God and representing God’s own judgment on the sinner,
must be accepted by every Christian and that any who might vote against such action be dealt
with (if necessary, excommunicated themselves) before the matter in question is resolved.
Although ideally all members will see the justice of what has been resolved (assuming that
the congregation has acted on the basis of the Word of God, and the lack of repentance on the
part of the one being dealt with is evident), we believe that excommunication may be carried
out without unanimous vote. Shall the ignorance and/or weakness of any dissenting member
invalidate either the verdict of the Lord through His church or their own eternal salvation? In
all such instances, of course, those not in agreement should be dealt with evangelically in the
hope of persuading them that the action of the congregation was truly Scriptural. And if it is
evident that a congregation is not sufficiently instructed, with the result that a considerable
number would at the time not be ready to favor excommunication in any case, the action
should be postponed until such instruction can have its good effect. (p. 22)
The CTCR does not believe that the position taken in the response quoted above (“that
excommunication may be carried out without unanimous vote”) contradicts the doctrinal position
of the Synod. As Walther himself maintained in defending an unconditional (quia) subscription to
the Lutheran Confessions, complete agreement with the doctrinal content of the Confessions does
not imply or necessitate complete agreement with every line of argumentation or every exegetical
interpretation employed in support of a specific doctrinal position.1 This principle also applies to
doctrinal statements and resolutions adopted by the Synod.
In Church and Ministry Walther sets forth the theological principle that “the minister must not
tyrannize the church. He has no authority to introduce new laws or arbitrarily to establish
adiaphora or ceremonies. He has no right to inflict and carry out excommunication without his
having first informed the whole congregation.”2 Walther goes on to share his view that, according
to Matthew 18:15–18, a verdict of excommunication is to be pronounced by the pastor “only
when the congregation has unanimously decided to excommunicate” the unrepentant sinner.3
However, Matthew 18:15–18 does not specifically address the issue of congregational
“unanimity” in matters of excommunication. Despite Walther’s personal views regarding this
matter,
A unanimous ballot does not appear to be a Biblical requirement, though it may
check impetuous action…Unanimity does not seem to be a Biblical requirement.
When evidence of sin and impenitence are indisputable, the congregation is not
bound to that traditional rubric.4
In its report on Church Discipline in the Christian Congregation, the CTCR also responds to the
question, “Is it proper for the congregation to delegate to the elders, to the church council, and/or
to the pastor the authority to excommunicate?” Whether it is wise to do this may well depend on
the circumstances, says the Commission, but “it is no doubt within the power of the congregation
to ask the Board of Elders and/or pastor to act in its behalf.” (p. 25) The CTCR notes in this
connection that “a kind of delegation has already taken place when the voters’ assembly, as is

17