# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_March 21 22 2025_S11
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

Question:

Does a rostered minister of the Synod who regards him/herself a journalist relinquish the
responsibilities outlined in the Bylaws and Constitution relative to Matthew 18?

Opinion:
That the “rostered minister” (individual member of the Synod) “regards him/herself as a
journalist” has no bearing on the member’s responsibilities under the Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod.
The Bylaws of the Synod mention duties of members relative to Matthew 18 in Bylaws 1.10.1–1.10.1.6, in
other passages dealing with disputes among Synod members and entities, and in Bylaw sections 2.14–17,
dealing with suspension and expulsion from the Synod. Certain of the provisions apply to those who have
entered (perhaps under obligation) into specific processes (cf. Op. 04-2401). Clearly, a member invoking,
for example, Bylaw section 2.14 to seek suspension and expulsion of another member must follow the
procedures there identified, including those involving Matthew 18, regardless of external factors such as
one’s journalistic pursuits.
The general preface to Bylaw section 1.10, comprising Bylaws 1.10.1–1.10.1.6, describe the expectations
the congregations have adopted for the Synod’s members “when[ever] disputes, disagreements, or offenses
arise among members of the body of Christ” (Bylaw 1.10.1), which reach members who have not
intentionally entered into a Bylaw section 1.10 process. It is the commission’s presumption that it is
primarily with regard to these generally-applicable provisions that the question is put, as no specific process
is mentioned as underway or incipient. Members of the Synod are expected to seek reconciliation of the
erring: “The words of Jesus in Matthew 18:15–20 provide the basis for church discipline for the local
congregation. The same passage also grants Christ’s guidance to all Christians in seeking to settle other
disputes, many of which fall outside the purview of church discipline involving the congregation. In either
case, the steps of Matthew 18 should be applied lovingly in both formal and informal settings…[C]onflict
resolution in the church is to lead to reconciliation, restoring the erring member in a spirit of gentleness
(Gal. 6:1). Its aim is to avoid the adversarial system practiced in society” (Bylaw 1.10.1.2). The Synod’s
expectation is that its members will seek to restore the erring, but do so gently and within the offices and
procedures the Synod has set forth for this purpose and following the scriptural admonition it has noted in
its bylaws. This expectation, too, applies to members, regardless of external factors such as one’s
journalistic pursuits.
The responsibilities outlined in the Bylaws and Constitution relative to Matthew 18 apply to members of
the Synod, regardless of one’s vocation. In Op. 04-2401, the commission has noted that “there is no
constitutional provision that allows any person, group, board, commission or other entity to assume the
responsibility of ecclesiastical supervision in the Synod that has been given to the President of the Synod
under Article XI B or the District President under article XII 7. This includes the formal or official
constitutional responsibility to admonish or reprove members of the Synod. No one is to interfere in the
work of another.”
The commission has further noted, in the same opinion, that “[i]f and when a pastor or any individual or
group does not assume the constitutional responsibility for ecclesiastical supervision in the Synod...” there
is nothing to “prohibit any Christian from rebuking a Christian brother so long as biblical” (Matthew 18)
“and confessional” (Large Catechism, Eighth Commandment) “principles are followed.”
Elsewhere, in Op. 05-2422, the commission has said that “[m]embers of the Synod walk together according
to the covenants that they have mutually agreed upon by such membership, as delineated in the Synod’s
Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions. One of those covenants is provided in Bylaw 2.14.3 (c), which details
how members of the Synod have agreed to respond, ‘even if the alleged violation of Article XIII of the
Constitution is considered to be “public.” In such case Matthew 18:15 is still followed.’”
Also in Op. 05-2422, the commission reasoned that “[i]f a false doctrine or practice is public, a pastor is
not prevented (while observing principles of Christian love) from informing his own congregation(s)
regarding true doctrine or practice when there is danger that the flock will be harmed by the falsehood...”

CCM Minutes – March 21–22, 2025 – Page 78