# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_September 3 4 2011_S24
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

II. “Dissent from doctrinal resolutions and statements is to be expressed first within the fellowship of peers and then brought
to the attention of the Commission on Theology and Church Relations before finding expression as an overture to the
convention calling for revision or recision. While the conscience of the dissenter shall be respected, the consciences of
others, as well as the collective will of the Synod, shall also be respected” (Bylaw 1.8.2).
The “dissent from doctrinal resolutions and statements” is first of all expressed within the “fellowship of peers.” A 1969
commission opinion on “dissenting groups” is helpful in understanding a partial background of the current bylaw:
The Synod has provided for forums in which such differences can be discussed and evaluated beyond the confines
of the local congregation. The pastors and teachers conferences; the circuit meetings; the synodical and district
board, commission, and committee meetings; the doctrinal supervision and appeals procedures; and above all the
conventions of the districts and of the Synod provide the proper channels through which the issues of opinion and
judgment are to be discussed and decided…If additional channels for discussion are needed the Synod can provide
for the same in its Bylaws through appropriate convention action.
In a report of the Commission on Theology and Church Relations, November, 1973, “Guiding Principles for the Use of ‘A
Statement of Scriptural and Confessional Principles’ with Special Reference to the Expression of Dissent,” the “fellowship
of peers” is explained this way:
The Synod’s established procedures for registering dissent with its doctrinal statements include the following: a.
“That we call upon those who teach publicly in the church (pastors, teachers, and professors) to test their findings
and opinions with their peer groups before presenting them to the church at large and to refrain in brotherly love
from disseminating doctrinal positions in such manner and in such situations as will cause confusion and offense
in the church” (1965 Resolution 2-08, Proceedings, p. 96). It is expected that pastors and teachers will discuss
their objections and concerns in their conferences, that professors will discuss such matters with their teaching and
administrative colleagues, and that staff members will discuss their objections with their boards and other staff
persons.
Then the dissent is brought to the attention of “the Commission on Theology and Church Relations” before finding
expression as “an overture to the convention.” This, together with the expression of dissent within the fellowship of peers,
gives the dissenter the privilege and responsibility to advise and persuade or convince the “fellowship of the Synod” on the
basis of the power of the Word of God and in an orderly harmonious way.
Brotherly and formal dissent should not be confused with the wholesome need to discuss differing viewpoints, to have frank
and open discussions, and to always examine and review all positions and resolutions of the Synod. A 1969 Commission
opinion (“Dissenting Groups”) stated:
In this opinion the Commission is not attempting to limit the right of individuals to speak their own minds. Before
and after the passage or rejection of synodical resolutions individuals must be free to express their concerns,
especially for their peers. Frank and open discussion, carried on in a spirit of Christian love and forbearance, must
be part of our life together in the Synod. It can be proper and salutary….It is within the context of the Synod—the
forums, channels, and procedures which the Synod itself establishes—that differing viewpoints need to be
discussed and an issue finally decided. Continuing dialogue beyond the point of decision must also be carried on
within the same synodically agreed upon framework and in deference to the majority will. (Emphasis added)
More recently, the Commission’s Opinion 03-2328 also addressed the subject:
As a part of life together in the Synod, members have the responsibility to continually examine and reexamine
their confession (symbols, doctrinal statements, and resolutions) to determine if they are faithful to the Holy
Scriptures. Members have a never-ending task of testing everything that the Synod believes, teaches, and practices
to see if they are in accordance with the Word of God. If there are issues that need to be readdressed or issues that
are considered by the members of the Synod that have not yet been addressed, any action is to be governed by the
procedures set forth in the Bylaws, particularly Bylaws 1.09 and 2.39 [now Bylaws 1.6, 1.7, and 1.8].
“The collective will of the Synod” (Bylaw 1.8.2) is established and expressed through the Synod in convention and not by
individuals or groups within or outside of the Synod, nor through the courts or unofficial publications, letters, meetings, and
conferences:

187