LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 1998, Page 261

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

STRUCTURE, PLANNING, AND ADMINISTRATION 261

- Resolved, That the Synod does not wish to maintain a system
prone to the weaknesses observed in the Sanhedrin when they tried
Christ and the apostles; and be it finally

Resolved, That there be a strict adherence to the mules of evi-
dence and law that all may perceive that the LCMS seeks and up-
holds truth and justice in all its disputes, thus leading to a God-
pleasing renunciation of sin that can only be resolved with repen-
tance and absolution in the church.

Grace
Paris, TX

7-68

To Return to Former Adjudication Process

WHEREAS, The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod in conven-
tion in 1992 abolished the process of adjudication and appeals and
in its place set up a process of reconciliation; and

WHEREAS, The reconciliation process won the support of the
delegates of the 1992 convention on the premises that it would
make the Synod’s dispute resolution procedures more biblical and
less litigious; and

WHEREAS, The first premise is suspect in that the complainant
and the respondent may not have legal counsel present during the
process, thus removing a safeguard meant to enable those who
might be wrongly accused to defend their innocence from blame
in keeping with the Eighth Commandment; and

WHEREAS, The first premise is also suspect in that though each
party is allowed one or two persons to the meeting “so that every
matter may be established by their testimony,” but then no formal
record of any of the meeting is allowed; and

WHEREAS, The first premise is further suspect in that the recon-
ciler is to seek to reconcile differences “on the basis of Christian
love and forgiveness” (Bylaw 8.07 e) but may not “judge” (Bylaw
8.03) the actions of either party, a judgment which is necessary to
bring about repentance which precedes forgiveness; and

WHEREAS, The second premise now appears suspect in that even
after six years of the reconciliation process the number of litiga-
tions in Synod seems to be increasing, giving testimony to the fact
that often a dispute does not have a “win/win” resolution; and

WHEREAS, The former system of adjudication and appeals
served our Synod well and was respected by the civil courts; there-
fore be it

Resolved, That The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod return
to the former adjudication and appeals process, directing the ap-
propriate synodical entities to make the necessary changes of By-
laws according to the Constitution.

Circuit 16 Forum
South Wisconsin District

7-69

To Attend to Conflicts of Interest in Dispute Resolution

WHEREAS, An overly legalistic reading of Bylaw 2.27 a 1 has
permitted a District President (ref. Stanford/Immanuel vs. Buelt-
mann CID) to investigate a matter to which the District President is
a party; and

WHEREAS, The statement “in the event the District President is
disqualified because he is a party to the matter in dispute, has a
conflict of interest, or is unable to act” occurs only on Bylaw 2.27,
which deals with termination of membership; and

WHEREAS, There is no provision such as the one stated above
for the disqualification of a District President in restricting and in-
vestigating a member, even when the District President is a party to
the matter in dispute, thus has a conflict of interest, and should not
investigate himself or matters which touch his conduct; and

WHEREAS, The old sinful nature still remains within every
Christian and is capable of many injustices; and

WHEREAS, The church is supposed to be an institution of justice
as well as mercy; therefore be it

Resolved, That the following paragraph be added to Bylaw 2.23
g: In the event that an investigation is required and the District
President is alleged to be party to the matter in dispute or has a
conflict of interest, the member who is restricted and who is being
investigated, may appeal to the Praesidium of Synod to remove the
District President from investigating the matter, and request the
appointment of the next highest District officer to conduct the in-
vestigation.

Bethany, Fort Wayne, IN; Grace, Paris, TX

7-70

To Provide for Disqualification
of District President When Party to Dispute
and Has Conflict of Interest

WHEREAS, An overly legalistic reading of Bylaw 2.27 a | has
permitted a District President (ref. Stanford/Immanuel vs. Buelt-
mann CID) to investigate a matter to which the District President
was a party; and

WHEREAS, The statement “in the event that District President is
disqualified because he is a party to the matter in dispute, has a
conflict of interest, or is unable to act,” occurs only on Bylaw 2.27
a 1, which deals with termination of membership; and

WHEREAS, There is no provision such as the one stated above
for the disqualification of a District President in restricting and in-
vestigating a member, even when the District President is a party to
the matter in dispute, thus has a conflict of interest, and should-not
investigate himself or matters which touch his conduct; and

WHEREAS, The old sinful nature still remains within every
Christian and is capable of many injustices; and

WHEREAS, The church is supposed to be an institution of justice
as well as mercy; therefore be it

Resolved, That the following paragraph be added to Bylaw 2.23:

g. In the event that an investigation is required and the District
President is alleged to be a party to the matter in dispute, has a
conflict of interest, the member who is restricted and who is being
or may be investigated, may appeal to the Praesidium of Synod to
remove the District President from investigating the matter, and
appoint the next highest District officer to conduct the investiga-
tion who does not have a conflict of interest.

Immanuel
Peoria, IL

7-71

To Place Burden of Proof on Accuser
Rather Than Accused

WHEREAS, The Holy Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions
command true justice and due process of the church; and

Wuereas, The present system of dispute resolution places the
burden of proof for innocence upon the member who stands ac-
cused by a District President; and

WHEREAS, The Office of District President has broad powers of
restriction, investigation, and suspension; and

WHEREAS, Under the present Bylaws, chapter II, membership,
and VIII, reconciliation, the District President serves as investigator
(in that he investigates the member), judge (in that based on the in-
formation he collected through his own investigation he has ab-
solute power to restrict and suspend), prosecutor (in that he brings
charges against the member in the present DRP, or the former ad-
judication system), and as chaplain (in that he is given the respon-
sibility to provide spiritual care for those he has investigated, re-
stricted, accused, and suspended); and

WHEREAS, In the case of a suspension the present dispute reso-
lution process is based upon an appellate (appeal) system, wherein,