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

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

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