# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_November 11 13 2011_S5
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

Question 2: What specifically precipitated the addition of the “exception clause” contained in Bylaw
1.10.3?
Opinion: The current version of Bylaw 1.10.3 was originally found in former Bylaw 8.02. While
amended by 2004 convention Res. 8-01A, the process in which the current dispute resolution process is
based was originally adopted by 1992 Res. 5-01B as a result of a task force effort to review and revise the
entire dispute resolution process of the Synod as it had previously existed. The exception clause was not
an addition but rather an integral part of an overall formulation of dispute resolution, recognizing the
limits of the authority of the church in a secular society.
The exception clause of 1.10.3 is certainly recognition of the reality that, due to the fallen nature of our
world, even within the church itself there will be conflicts which may fail to be resolved within the
church, and may ultimately need to be resolved outside the church, even within the secular courts. In our
society, our secular government has asserted exclusive jurisdiction over some types of issues, often
involving contract law, employment duties and responsibilities, environmental regulation, and similar
issues. While Christians may desire to have those issues resolved within the Christian community rather
than through the use of secular means involving either the courts or other processes, a Christian may not
have that choice. On the other hand, the Constitution of the United States recognizes that in certain issues
relating to theological matters, churches such as the LCMS may retain exclusive jurisdiction regarding
such issues, even to the exclusion of the secular courts. The Synod has historically chosen to do so, at
least to the extent provided in its Constitution and Bylaws.
As part of our living in the secular world, one of the issues which the Synod does not control is the issue
of ownership of property and contract rights. The Synod does not register deeds or titles to vehicles,
register mortgages or security interest, or otherwise become involved or have binding jurisdiction over
such issues.
Question 3: Is an entity/agency subject to participation in the Synod’s dispute resolution process whose
complete governing control is provided for by either Synod- or district-level appointment?
Opinion: The Synod’s dispute resolution process applies to an entity/agency created and controlled by
the Synod or one of its component parts, its districts. The letter of the congregation expresses its
understanding and desire, shared by the Synod itself, that all disputes, disagreements, and offenses which
arise among members of the body of Christ are a matter of grave concern for the whole church. That
concept is contained in the first sentence of the Preamble to the Synod’s dispute resolution process,
Bylaw 1.10.1, quoted above. While the Synod has expressed as a matter of policy its recognition that it is
desirable that all such conflicts be resolved within the body of Christ and consistent with the Holy
Scriptures, the Synod has also recognized in its bylaws that it has no authority to impose its dispute
resolution process on those who are not members of the Synod. As such, Bylaw 1.10.2 identifies the
scope of the dispute resolution process provided in Bylaw 1.10, to apply to “(1) members of the Synod,
(2) the Synod itself, (3) a district or an organization owned and controlled by the Synod, (4) persons
involved in excommunication, or (5) lay members of congregations of the Synod holding positions with
the Synod itself or with districts or other organizations owned and controlled by the Synod.”
Only those parties identified in Bylaw 1.10.1.2 are entitled or required to use the Synod’s dispute
resolution processes as an exclusive remedy to resolve a dispute. The third category listed, a district or an
organization owned and controlled by the Synod, requires further discussion. A district is “Synod” in that
place. An organization owned and controlled by a district is an organization owned and controlled by the
Synod itself. A prior iteration of this bylaw included a definition of “organizations owned and controlled
by the Synod” as including any board, commission, committee, or council of the Synod, Radio Station
199