# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_November 20 21 2008_S4
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

and district president, he must as district president assure that he as accuser has complied with Bylaw
2.14.2 (e) and that a face-to-face meeting has occurred.
The face-to-face meeting required by Bylaw 2.14.2 (e) is to occur within 30 days or within such extension
as may be established by the involved ecclesiastical supervisors. Failure to conduct the face-to-face
meeting within that 30-day period, or such period as may be extended by the involved ecclesiastical
supervisor(s), would result in dismissal of the complaint.
If the matter is not yet a formal Bylaw section 2.14 action, the ecclesiastical supervisor is, in his
judgment, free to request such face-to-face or other meetings as he deems appropriate within the scope of
his ecclesiastical supervision.
Question 4: If such a matter which may result in the expulsion of a member of the Synod must comply
with the bylaw requirement that first a face-to-face meeting in person between the accuser
and the accused must take place in the manner described in Matthew 18:15 (Bylaw 2.14.2
[e]), and that “…the district president shall ensure that the accuser has met face-to-face with
the accused in the manner described in Matthew 18:15” (Bylaw 2.14.3 [c]), and it is also
necessary that the chairman of the Council of Presidents agree that there “…was compliance
with the guidelines provided in Matthew 18:15–16…” (Bylaw 2.14.7.1), then the manner
described in Matthew 18:15 must be clearly defined and understood in order for an
accusation to go forward. I am seeking the assurance provided by our Constitution and
Bylaws which ensure that such an action actually is completed in a manner described in
Matthew 18:15.
Opinion: See the answer to question 3.
61. Nebraska District Bylaw Change Proposal (08-2531)
With a letter dated September 9, 2008, the president of the Nebraska District, in accordance with Bylaw
3.9.2.2.4, submitted proposed 2009 district convention bylaw changes to the commission for review. The
commission found the proposed amendments to be in harmony with the Constitution, Bylaws, and
resolutions of the Synod.
62. Ohio District Bylaw Change Proposals (08-2532)
With a letter dated September 25, 2008, the secretary of the Ohio District, in accordance with Bylaw
3.9.2.2.4, submitted bylaw changes to be proposed to the district’s June 18–20, 2009 convention for
review by the commission. The commission found the proposed amendments to be in harmony with the
Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions of the Synod.
63. Minnesota North District Bylaw Change Proposals (08-2533)
With a letter dated October 2, 2008, the secretary of the Minnesota North District, in accordance with
Bylaw 3.9.2.2.4, submitted five overtures proposing changes to the district’s Bylaws for review by the
commission prior to their submission to the district’s 2009 convention. The commission found all
proposed amendments to be in harmony with the Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions of the Synod.
64. Final Hearing Panel Procedure (08-2534)
The secretary of a Final Hearing Panel, in accordance with Bylaw 2.14.7.7 (k) [“If any part of the dispute
involves ….questions of constitution or bylaw interpretation, each party shall have a right to an

42