# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_August 28 1996_S3
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

efforts, not to informal efforts. This process as envisioned follows the pattern outlined in Matthew
18, where the two parties in an informal effort to resolve differences are to confront each other
face-to-face without the involvement of others. It does not allow for widening the dispute by
bringing others into it.
1.

Bylaw 8.21, f, is understood to apply to formal mediation and reconciliation efforts. It should be
noted that if the parties cannot resolve their differences informally, in keeping with the pattern of
Matthew 18, they are to try to resolve their differences with the help of a fellow Christian or several
Christians. This is accomplished under the dispute resolution process when the two parties meet
with a duly appointed reconciler. Once again, it is understood that those involved are the two
parties and the reconciler, although, with the approval of the reconciler each party may, in the
manner described in Matthew 18, bring one or two persons to the meeting "so that every matter
may be established by their testimony."
In Bylaw 8.21, f, the point at which assistance may be sought is at the time a matter is presented
for hearing by a Dispute Resolution Panel. This understanding is reflected in the Rules of
Procedure which were prepared at the direction of a 1995 synodical resolution and which were
approved by the President and Board of Directors. as provided in 1995 Resolution 7-03B.
3. Yes, as indicated above, it applies to a hearing before a Dispute Resolution Panel.

4. In view of what has been stated, Bylaw 8.21, f, would not apply to all phases of a mediation and
reconciliation effort, but only to that stage which involved the hearing before a Dispute Resolution
Panel.
63. Authority of Lutheran Church Extension Fund (Ag. 2044) : In a letter to the Commission, a District
President had posed the following questions:
2.

The Articles of Incorporation for the Lutheran Church Extension Fund (LCEF) make no
provision for loans to foreign partner churches of the LCMS. In view of this may LCEF make
such loans?

2.

If such loans are considered, is it mandatory for LCEF to consult with the President of the
Synod prior to making such a loan, since the Bylaws of the Synod designate the President of the
Synod as the Chief Ecumenical Officer of the Synod?

2.

If changes are made in the Articles of Incorporation or Bylaws of LCEF without reporting
such changes to the Synod, and without a review by the Commission on Constitutional Matters
(synodical Handbook, Bylaw 3.905), may LCEF operate with the amended Articles of
Incorporation or such bylaw amendments?

In response, the Commission offered the following opinion:
While it is true that Articles of Incorporation do not make provision for loans to partner
churches of the LCMS, neither do they forbid them. The objective of the LCEF as stated in
Bylaw 3.393 is the "financing of the acquisition of sites and the erection of facilities to aid
expansion for effective programs of ministry, witness, outreach, and service of The Lutheran
Church-Missouri Synod." It is quite possible that within that broad objective the witness and
outreach of The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod might be aided through the provision of
financing for certain sites or facilities of partner churches. In response to your first question
then, while expressing the caution that any loans which are made to partner churches must fall