# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_April 17 1997_S1
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

106. Opening Prayer: The telephone conference of the Commission on Constitutional Matters was called
to order by Chairman Tesch and was opened with prayer led by Dr. Richard Schlecht at the request of the
Chairman.
107. Conflict of Interest (Ag. 2077): A request had been received from a pastor, stating that he was on
restricted status and that his ministry and that of the congregation was under investigation. He noted that he
had been threatened with suspension and possible expulsion from the clergy roster should the District
President find against him or his congregation. He stated that it was his conviction that the District
President was a party to the matter in dispute and that he was making an appeal to the Praesidium of the
Synod on this issue. His questions were the following:
According to Bylaw 2.27, paragraph 1, in the event of a challenge, the Praesidium shall determine
whether the District President has a conflict of interest or is a party to the matter in dispute. What does
the word "shall" mean in this case?
In Bylaw 8.03 we are given a definition in regard to dispute resolution. In that section we read, "shall
—as used in this chapter the word shall is a word of command that must always be given an imperative
or compulsory meaning." If the word "shall" in 2.27, paragraph 1, carries the same meaning as it does
8.03, does the District President have the authority to oversee and rule on an investigation when his
involvement in that investigation is being challenged?
If the District President has the authority to proceed with an investigation and rule on the matter prior to
the ruling of the Praesidium, is his ruling and any subsequent discipline automatically overturned
should the Praesidium rule that the District President is a party to the matter in dispute and/or has a
conflict of interest?
In responding to these questions, the Commission decided to reply as follows:
Your letter of March 31, 1997, requesting an opinion of the Commission on Constitutional Matters with
respect to a number of questions came before the Commission during its telephone conference on April
17, 1997. Before responding to the questions, the Commission wishes to make it clear that expulsion
from the clergy roster does not automatically occur "should the President find against me and my
congregation." Should the President decide to undertake an action to expel you or your congregation
from the Synod, he is required to follow the procedure outlined in Bylaw 2.27 and bring the matter
before a Dispute Resolution Panel which would hear the matter. Expulsion would only result if the
Panel should find against you. This is the procedure of the Synod for providing for due process.
The Commission, upon consideration of your questions, concludes that your appeal to the Praesidium
obligates them to consider and rule on it. It must ("shall") make a determination.
The fact that an appeal is being made by you to the Praesidium means that further action by the District
President is to be held in abeyance until a ruling has been made on the appeal. Should the Praesidium
conclude that there is a conflict of interest, the matter must be turned over to "the First Vice-President
or the next qualified officer" to function in the place of the District President (Bylaw 2.27, 1).
108. Unionism - Bringing Charges (Ag.. 2074): In its previous meeting the Commission had considered a
request for an opinion received from a pastor who had included ten questions in his request. In that meeting
the Commission had concluded that it could only respond to questions 8, 9, and 10 since the remaining
questions were outside of its purview and should be referred to the Commission on Theology and Church
Relations. A response had also been considered in that meeting, but it had been concluded that additional
references to the Constitution and Bylaws should be incorporated which were not included in the proposed