LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2016, Page 423

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

ECCLESIASTICAL SUPERVISION AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION
Whereas, The district president is in closer proximity to the contexts of the situations he supervises; and
Whereas, The current structure of ecclesiastical supervision
protects a defendant from the double jeopardy of having to defend
himself/herself against an accuser before the district president and
then before the President of the Synod; therefore be it
Resolved, That the 2016 LCMS convention be memorialized to
decline any overtures to amend the system of ecclesiastical supervision of the Synod, especially any overture to allow an appeal after a
district president has terminated a matter involving a member of the
Synod; and be it further
Resolved, That the 2016 LCMS convention reaffirm its commitment to the current system of ecclesiastical supervision.
Board of Directors, Northwest District; Board of Directors,
Florida-Georgia District; Orlando West Circuit, FloridaGeorgia District; Board of Directors, New Jersey District
12-22

To Clarify Proper Use of Social Media
and Internet Postings by Church Leadership
during Expulsion Process
Whereas, LCMS Bylaw 2.14 provides a process for commencing and hearing an action regarding expulsion of congregations and
individuals from membership in the Synod, and this process is further
explained in the Standard Operating Procedures Manual associated
with Bylaw 2.14; and
Whereas, The Eighth Commandment and Matthew 18 provide
the foundation for Synod procedures established in the Bylaw 2.14
process, as explained in the SOPM (SOPM I F); and
Whereas, The SOPM provides that the reputation of the accused
and accuser are to be protected during the Bylaw 2.14 process (SOPM
I F; II G); and
Whereas, The SOPM provides that all parties and other participants in the Bylaw 2.14 process, including ecclesiastical supervisors,
agree to keep confidential all communications that take place during
the process, with certain limited exceptions (SOPM II P); and
Whereas, Bylaw 2.14 and its SOPM provide that those involved
in the expulsion process should avoid undue publicity (Bylaw 2.14.7.8
[g]; SOPM II P; I N); and
Whereas, Bylaw 2.14 and its SOPM define publicity as “any
information or action, whether written, oral, or visual, that brings
a person, cause, or an alleged accusation to public notice” (Bylaw
2.14.2 [p] and SOPM II C [p]); and
Whereas, Blogs and websites, including but not limited to
Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and similar social media and Internet
websites or applications, are by nature public platforms; and
Whereas, Comments, statements, or opinions made on blogs or
social media websites or applications by church leaders regarding
pending Bylaw 2.14 matters may unduly or inadvertently influence
or impact the reputation of the accuser and the accused and the confidentiality of the process, or create undue publicity, or otherwise
inappropriately affect the Bylaw 2.14 process; and
Whereas, Bylaw 2.14 and its SOPM provide that any member of
the Synod involved in the Bylaw 2.14 procedure who intentionally
and materially violates any of its requirements is subject to disciplinary measures, specifically noting that the violation of the prohibition
against publicity while a matter is still undecided or while an appeal
is contemplated or pending is a violation subject to disciplinary measures (Bylaw 2.14.10.2; SOPM II W); therefore be it

423

Resolved, That church leadership should refrain from blog, social
media, or Internet posts which contradict the provisions of Bylaw
2.14 and its SOPM regarding reputations, confidentiality, and publicity; and be it further
Resolved, That publicity as defined in Bylaw 2.14 (p) and the
SOPM should include the use of blogs and websites, including but
not limited to Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and similar social media
and Internet websites or applications; and be it further
Resolved, That blogs, social media, or Internet postings should not
be used by church leadership to comment on pending matters under
Bylaw 2.14 or SOPM Parts I and II; and be it further
Resolved, That any member of the Synod involved in a Bylaw 2.14
procedure, particularly while the matter is still undecided or while an
appeal is contemplated or pending, who intentionally and materially
violates the prohibition on blog, social media, or other Internet posts
is subject to ecclesiastical discipline; and be it further
Resolved, That church leadership may otherwise make blog, social
media, or Internet posts not in conflict with the Holy Scriptures; the
Lutheran Confessions; the Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions of
the Synod; and the SOPM; and be it finally
Resolved, That the Synod should create and establish a comprehensive social media and Internet policy for church leadership.
Board of Directors, Northwest District; Board of Directors,
Florida-Georgia District
12-23

To Support Proper Ecclesiastical Supervision
in Synod Districts
Whereas, In a recent case, charges of false doctrine against the
accused party, who is a professor of theology at a private Lutheran
university and a long-standing and vocal critic of the public doctrine
of the LCMS, were dismissed; and
Whereas, His ecclesiastical supervisor—that is, his district president—was responsible for this dismissal because he refused to initiate
formal proceedings but instead referred the case to a Referral Panel
(Bylaw 2.14.5) that dismissed it; and
Whereas, Serious doctrinal charges need to be heard by the
proper adjudicatory authorities; that is, in this case, the Hearing Panel
(Bylaw 2.15.7); and
Whereas, The most important work of a district president is to
see that the doctrine of the Synod, as described in Article II of its
Constitution, is upheld by all rostered church workers under his supervision; and
Whereas, A district is the Synod in that place, thus making a district president an officer of the Synod, who is thus accountable to the
national convention and its officers; and
Whereas, This recent action requires the President of the Synod
to report such cases to the Synod (Constitution Art. XI B 2), but neither the Constitution nor the Bylaws provide a specific means by
which it can be addressed and resolved other than by expulsion from
the Synod (Bylaw section 2.15); therefore be it
Resolved, When a district president fails to act according to the
Synod’s Constitution and Bylaws, and refuses to heed the admonishment of the President of the Synod to act according to the Synod’s
Constitution and Bylaws, that the President of the Synod will report
such cases to the Synod in its national convention, with all significant details in written documentation for the delegates, giving them
sufficient time to review the matter; and be it further
2016 Convention Workbook