# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_July 10 2017_S4
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

•

•

restate the clear teaching of Holy Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions (cf. also Bylaw
1.6.2 quoted in Appendix II). Similarly, since all congregations of the Synod, in becoming
members of the Synod, have subscribed to the Constitution of the Synod, the Article VII
phrase in question may not be applied by a member congregation to resolutions of the Synod
that are primarily explicit reaffirmations of other constitutional positions or provisions.
deals only with resolutions of the Synod “imposing anything upon the individual
congregation” (Article VII). The many resolutions of the Synod that deal with the
management and direction of the Synod and its component parts, as distinguished from
resolutions that are addressed to its member congregations (see above), are not included in
this provision. Moreover, taking the language of this phrase quite literally, it must be said
that very few resolutions of the Synod intend to “impose” anything upon its member
congregations, inasmuch as the Synod does not exercise “legislative or coercive powers”
(Article VII) in relation to its members and clearly recognizes the congregation’s right of
self-government; and
is limited to a congregation’s judgment that a resolution is unsuited or inapplicable to the
“condition of the congregation” (Bylaw 1.7.2). The Synod has not limited in any way what a
congregation might consider to be such a condition (whether it be a lack of resources, tension
within the congregation, or some other important factor).

If a congregation determines that a resolution of the Synod is unsuited or inapplicable as far as
the condition of the congregation is concerned, the congregation has also committed itself to “not
act arbitrarily, but in accordance with the principles of Christian love and charity” (Bylaw 1.7.2),
as well as to respect the collective will of the Synod as expressed in its resolutions (cf. Bylaws
1.7.2 and 1.8.2).
The commission also notes that Article VII states that no resolution of the Synod imposing
anything upon the individual congregation is of binding force “if it is not in accordance with the
Word of God.” Should a congregation reach this conclusion about any resolution of the Synod,
it should also realize that, by becoming a member of the Synod, it has bound itself (to the extent
the congregation wishes to carry out the right of brotherly dissent) to express and deal with its
dissent according to the provisions of the Bylaws of the Synod. (CCM Op. 09-2573)
Question 3:

In a decision to suspend a congregation for failure to depose a [pastor who has been
expelled from membership in the Synod], whose will has greater authority, a member
congregation or Synod through its representative?

Opinion: This question commingles two incomparable spheres of right, which must be distinguished in
giving an answer:
•

•

The first is the right of a congregation to call and be served by the pastor of its choosing. Here,
Synod and its representatives may advise but ultimately lack the “legislative or coercive power” to
make a congregation do what Synod thinks best, such as deposing an expelled pastor. Here the
congregation is “free” to act according to its will—but let its will, of course, be that of God in
heaven (no one has any rights over against God).
The other sphere is the right of Synod (i.e., the congregations acting together) to set and enforce
standards for Synod membership (Const. Art. II, VI, XIII; Bylaw 1.3.4). Here, conversely, the
individual congregation has no right or authority to force Synod as a whole to bow to its solitary
interpretation. Should such a congregation ignore Synod’s “negotiations and admonitions,”
Synod’s collective will, expressed in its Constitution (Art. XIII 3) and carried out by proper
authorities, is conclusive.

The above-cited 1969 Res. 5-23, entitled, “To Reiterate in Bylaws that Member Congregations Must Be
Served by Members of the Synod” (1969 Proceedings, pp. 119–20) dealt with a topic closely related to that
of Const. Art. XIII 3. (The bylaws it enacted stand in only slightly revised form as 2016 Bylaws 2.5.2 and

CCM Minutes – July 10, 2017 – Page 56