# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_November 2 4 2012_S5
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

questions to the CCM that are requested by a party if the hearing panel determines that the
questions are not relevant to the issues before the panel?
Opinion: Every member may submit questions to the CCM under Bylaw 3.9.2.2 and an answer will be
provided in due course. However, such answers may not be issued before a pending hearing has been
concluded, will be of general application for future guidance, and may not be available in time to provide
any guidance to a pending panel. Because of the urgency and time limitations involved in a Bylaw section
2.14 matter, the Synod has provided a separate mechanism for the submission and resolution of questions
which may be important to the determination of such proceedings. Questions must be submitted through
the hearing panels themselves. A 30-day deadline is established in which a member may submit questions
to the panel as a matter of right, and all such questions must be processed by the panel as provided by
Bylaw 2.14.7.8 (k). The panel is allowed to determine the final language of the question, allowing the
panel to reconcile conflicting questions from the parties and allowing the panel to assure that issues it
believes will assist its consideration of the matter are clearly presented. A 30-day deadline is additionally
imposed on the CCM to issue its opinion, assuring that the matter is not unduly delayed.
The Bylaw Section 2.14 Standard Operating Procedures Manual (SOPM) simply quotes Bylaw 2.14.7.8
(k) which reads:
(k) If any part of the dispute involves a specific question of doctrine or doctrinal application, each party shall
have the right to an opinion from the Commission on Theology and Church Relations (CTCR). If it involves
questions of constitution or bylaw interpretation, each party shall have the right to an interpretation from the
Commission on Constitutional Matters (CCM).

In determining whether to submit a question to the CCM, the panel may therefore first determine if any
part of the dispute involves a question of interpretation of the Constitution or Bylaws. If the panel finds
that any part of the dispute involves such an issue, substantive or procedural, it must under this bylaw
submit or pass along a question fairly raising the questions presented to it by either party. If the panel
finds that the issue raised cannot possibly be relevant to the outcome of the proceeding, it may decline to
submit a question.
Question 3: If the scope of the Final Hearing Panel’s inquiry includes fairness throughout the entire
Bylaw section 2.14 process, including matters relating to the procedures of a special hearing
panel, what would be the consequence of noncompliance with the SOPM, or any other
perceived lack of fairness, at a previous stage in the process?
Opinion: As described above, a hearing panel must always assure fairness in a Bylaw section 2.14
process. A few examples of the Synod’s insistence on fairness, and even the avoidance of the appearance
of unfairness, may be helpful. Members of hearing panels and hearing facilitators must be chosen by a
witnessed blind draw as provided by Bylaws 2.14.2 (j) and 2.14.7.2 (c). As required in Bylaw 2.14.7.8:
•
•
•
•

All hearings are held privately, attended only by the persons involved and necessary witnesses.
The panel is required to assure that each party involved will be given an opportunity fully to
present its respective position.
Any member of the Synod, officer of a congregation, or officer of any organization owned or
controlled by the Synod is required, when called upon by the panel to do so, to testify or produce
records related to the matter.
No party to the matter or anyone on the party’s behalf is allowed to communicate either directly
or indirectly with the panel or any member of the panel without the full knowledge of the other
party to the matter.
312