Collection › LCMS Convention Workbook (St. Louis, Missouri) › 2010 · 64th Convention, Houston › Page 250
LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2010, Page 250
front matter 1
front matter 2
front matter 3
front matter 4
front matter 5
front matter 6
front matter 7
front matter 8
front matter 9
front matter 10
front matter 11
front matter 12
front matter 13
front matter 14
front matter 15
front matter 16
front matter 17
front matter 18
front matter 19
front matter 20
Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
Page 21
Page 22
Page 23
Page 24
Page 25
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
Page 33
Page 34
Page 35
Page 36
Page 37
Page 38
Page 39
Page 40
Page 41
Page 42
Page 43
Page 44
Page 45
Page 46
Page 47
Page 48
Page 49
Page 50
Page 51
Page 52
Page 53
Page 54
Page 55
Page 56
Page 57
Page 58
Page 59
Page 60
Page 61
Page 62
Page 63
Page 64
Page 65
Page 66
Page 67
Page 68
Page 69
Page 70
Page 71
Page 72
Page 73
Page 74
Page 75
Page 76
Page 77
Page 78
Page 79
Page 80
Page 81
Page 82
Page 83
Page 84
Page 85
Page 86
Page 87
Page 88
Page 89
Page 90
Page 91
Page 92
Page 93
Page 94
Page 95
Page 96
Page 97
Page 98
Page 99
Page 100
Page 101
Page 102
Page 103
Page 104
Page 105
Page 106
Page 107
Page 108
Page 109
Page 110
Page 111
Page 112
Page 113
Page 114
Page 115
Page 116
Page 117
Page 118
Page 119
Page 120
Page 121
Page 122
Page 123
Page 124
Page 125
Page 126
Page 127
Page 128
Page 129
Page 130
Page 131
Page 132
Page 133
Page 134
Page 135
Page 136
Page 137
Page 138
Page 139
Page 140
Page 141
Page 142
Page 143
Page 144
Page 145
Page 146
Page 147
Page 148
Page 149
Page 150
Page 151
Page 152
Page 153
Page 154
Page 155
Page 156
Page 157
Page 158
Page 159
Page 160
Page 161
Page 162
Page 163
Page 164
Page 165
Page 166
Page 167
Page 168
Page 169
Page 170
Page 171
Page 172
Page 173
Page 174
Page 175
Page 176
Page 177
Page 178
Page 179
Page 180
Page 181
Page 182
Page 183
Page 184
Page 185
Page 186
Page 187
Page 188
Page 189
Page 190
Page 191
Page 192
Page 193
Page 194
Page 195
Page 196
Page 197
Page 198
Page 199
Page 200
Page 201
Page 202
Page 203
Page 204
Page 205
Page 206
Page 207
Page 208
Page 209
Page 210
Page 211
Page 212
Page 213
Page 214
Page 215
Page 216
Page 217
Page 218
Page 219
Page 220
Page 221
Page 222
Page 223
Page 224
Page 225
Page 226
Page 227
Page 228
Page 229
Page 230
Page 231
Page 232
Page 233
Page 234
Page 235
Page 236
Page 237
Page 238
Page 239
Page 240
Page 241
Page 242
Page 243
Page 244
Page 245
Page 246
Page 247
Page 248
Page 249
Page 250
Page 251
Page 252
Page 253
Page 254
Page 255
Page 256
Page 257
Page 258
Page 259
Page 260
Page 261
Page 262
Page 263
Page 264
Page 265
Page 266
Page 267
Page 268
Page 269
Page 270
Page 271
Page 272
Page 273
Page 274
Page 275
Page 276
Page 277
Page 278
Page 279
Page 280
Page 281
Page 282
Page 283
Page 284
Page 285
Page 286
Page 287
Page 288
Page 289
Page 290
Page 291
Page 292
Page 293
Page 294
Page 295
Page 296
Page 297
Page 298
Page 299
Page 300
Page 301
Page 302
Page 303
Page 304
Page 305
Page 306
Page 307
Page 308
Page 309
Page 310
Page 311
Page 312
Page 313
Page 314
Page 315
Page 316
Page 317
Page 318
Page 319
Page 320
Page 321
Page 322
Page 323
Page 324
Page 325
Page 326
Page 327
Page 328
Page 329
Page 330
Page 331
Page 332
Page 333
Page 334
Scan: The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod
⤓ Download page image (full resolution)
Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected
250
OPINIONS OF COMMISSION ON CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS
(and supervision of necessity includes counsel and admonishment)
shall be the responsibility of the synodical or District President, as
the case may be. The President of the Synod and District Presidents
are officers of the Synod. Thus, the Synod, having designated to its
members the individuals who will provide to them supervision and
counsel, is itself responsible for the accuracy and content of such
supervision and counsel. Having promised supervision and counsel, the Synod is precluded from taking any action to terminate the
membership of its member who, when performing his/her official
duties, follows the advice and counsel of the ecclesiastical supervisor
designated by the Synod.
It would be inconsistent with the above constitutional provisions
to place the membership of an individual or congregation at risk
where that member relies on the ecclesiastical supervision and counsel of the person called and chosen for that role or function. If an act
is in fact contrary to Article XIII of the Constitution, the member who
acted cannot be charged since he or she acted according to the advice
of his or her ecclesiastical supervisor. It should be noted, however,
that when an ecclesiastical supervisor discovers error in his counsel, it
is incumbent upon that supervisor to correct or amend it. The member
should then be held to consider the corrected counsel. Failure to consider such amended admonition could form the basis for disciplinary
action as provided in Article XIII.
Where members of Synod have doctrinal disagreements and disputes, mechanisms are in place to allow for dialogue and discussion
and the adoption of doctrinal positions (Bylaws 1.09 and 2.39). Such
disagreements or disputes, however, are not intended to lead to the
bringing of charges under Bylaw 2.27 or the implementation of dispute resolution process under Chapter VIII of the Bylaws.
Question 2: May an ordained or commissioned minister or a member
congregation who has acted in a matter after receiving
the advice and authorization of his/her District President
be charged under bylaw 2.27 for such act, which could
result in removal from the roster of the Synod?
Opinion: The answer to this question, as already stated in the response to question 1, is “no.” The District President has ecclesiastical supervision of the ordained and commissioned ministers and
member congregations within his District as set forth in Article XII
7 and Bylaws 4.71, 4.73 and 4.75. When an ordained or commissioned minister or member congregation has acted in a manner that
is consistent with the counsel of the District President, the Synod is
precluded from taking any action to terminate the membership of
its member who, when performing his/her official duties, follows
the advice and counsel of the ecclesiastical supervisor designated
by the Synod.
Question 3: May any person, member or board of the Synod, by
invoking Bylaw 2.27 or Chapter VIII of the Constitution
and Bylaws of the Synod, be allowed to disrupt, hamper
or harass the synodical President who is responsible
to the Synod (Art. XI A) in carrying out his duties and
responsibilities for ecclesiastical supervision as stated
in synodical Constitution Article XI B 1-4 and Article
III 8, including advising a District President concerning
a doctrinal position of the Synod and/or a question of
administrative action, thus assuming only the rights and
duties conferred on him by the Synod’s Constitution,
Bylaws, and resolutions.
Opinion: The Commission notes that Bylaw 2.27 cannot be invoked in the case of the President of the Synod (see CCM Opinion
01-2240). Whereas there may be occasions when the use of Chapter VIII of the Bylaws may be appropriate (see Opinion 03-2325),
implementation of the dispute resolution process should never be
intended or allowed to disrupt, hamper, or harass the President as
he carries out the duties and responsibilities of his office, including those of ecclesiastical supervision. It is never appropriate to
assume rights and duties that have been conferred upon another by
the Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions of the Synod.
Question 4: If the answer to the previous question is “yes,” then
under what circumstances can a District President or
synodical President carry out their duties without being
harassed and hampered by the invoking of Bylaw 2.27
or Chapter VIII?
Opinion: In the case of the President of the Synod, see the answer to question 3 above. In the case of charges brought against
a District President, if he has been carrying out his responsibilities
and the charges clearly are not supportable, the investigating officer may act quickly to dismiss the matter. Should members of the
Synod abuse the Bylaws by bringing clearly unsupportable charges
or complaints, such conduct may itself give offense and should be
dealt with accordingly.
Question 5: May any person, member, or board of the Synod,
after invoking Bylaw 2.27 and receiving a perceived
“unfavorable” result, then invoke Chapter VIII against
a District President and/or the synodical President
although both were providing ecclesiastical supervision and seeing to it that the doctrinal position and the
resolutions of the Synod were being carried out before
Bylaw 2.27 was invoked in the first place?
Opinion: If an individual makes an allegation under Bylaw 2.27
against a member of the Synod, that allegation is given to the member’s ecclesiastical supervisor, either the President of the Synod or
the appropriate District President. If the ecclesiastical supervisor
declines to take any action, the party that has made the allegation
may appeal that decision to the Praesidium of the Synod. Should
the Praesidium also decline to take any action on the allegation,
in the words of Bylaw 2.27 b, that “shall terminate the matter.” In
other words, the matter is dead and there is no way that the complainant can invoke any of the provisions of Chapter VIII.
Question 6: If the synodical President or District President are carrying out ecclesiastical supervision according to the
Constitution and Article XI and Article III 8 or Article
XII and seeing to it that the resolutions of the Synod
are being carried out (honored and upheld), under what
constitutional provision may the President be recused
from any subsequent involvement?
Opinion: There is no such constitutional provision.
Question 7: When the Synod has clearly stated its position or when
an ecclesiastical supervisor has expressed his judgment
concerning an issue based on a resolution adopted by
the Synod, does a dissenter have the right to invoke
Bylaw 2.27 or Chapter VIII rather than 2.39 c, the stated
procedure for dissent referred to in Bylaw 1.09 d?
Opinion: Bylaw 2.27 is not the method provided by the Bylaws
to resolve disputes as to what the doctrines of the church should
be. Rather, it provides procedures for expulsion from the Synod
according to Article XIII of the Constitution. Where there is disagreement by the complainant about the doctrines of the church,
the action is one of a dissenter, which is governed by the provisions
of Bylaw 2.39 c.
Question 8: Is it a conflict of interest when a District President and/
or synodical President are carrying out their duties
of ecclesiastical supervision and seeing to it that the
2010 Convention Workbook
2010 Convention.indb 250
4/15/10 2:40 PM