Collection › LCMS Convention Proceedings (St. Louis, Missouri) › 2004 · 62nd Convention, St. Louis › Page 160
LCMS Convention Proceedings St. Louis, Missouri — 2004, Page 160
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 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 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 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 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 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 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
Scan: The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod
⤓ Download page image (full resolution)
Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected
8. Ecclesiastical Supervision and Dispute Resolution
Introduction
(This introduction to the business of Committee 8 was
provided by Dr. John Brunner, member of Committee 8 and
Chairman of the Task Force on Ecclesiastical Supervision
and Dispute Resolution. It is provided as helpful information and is not to be regarded as a part of the formal resolutions that were adopted by the convention.)
The 61st Regular Convention of The Lutheran Church—
Missouri Synod in 2001 gave the Council of Presidents the
responsibility to discuss, mutually study, and make recommendations concerning Bylaw 2.27 paragraph g which
deals with the removal of a District President from the roster of the Synod. Pursuant to that assignment, Council of
Presidents Chairman Arleigh Lutz appointed a committee
from the Council consisting of President James Keurulainen of the New England District, President Carl Krueger
of the SELC District, President George Wollenberg of the
Montana District, and myself as President of the Eastern
District to serve as convener.
Dr. Lutz’s appointment of me was either fiendishly
clever or downright retributive, since at one point in history I was his pastor and he was my ecclesiastical supervisor and at the time of the appointment I was still basically
a rookie DP with almost no Chapter II experience. Or perhaps, as I suspect, somewhere in the secret COP chairman’s manual is a directive to have all members of the
Council serve on a committee with Dr. Wollenberg at some
point in their career. And it was just my turn.
The charge from the chairman to this group included not
only a study of Bylaw 2.27 g but of all of Bylaw 2.27, including the potential misuse of it and what appeared to be
a blurring of the understanding of ecclesiastical supervision and identification of those to whom responsibility is
given for such supervision.
Specifically regarding paragraph g, the study group
raised the question whether the President of the Synod is
granted authority in the Constitution to suspend or expel
a District President or anyone else from the roster of Synod.
Based on this understanding the recommendation to the
Council was to delete paragraph g. The group also recommended replacing references to the “Praesidium” elsewhere
in Chapter II of the Bylaws with references to the President of Synod as the proper ecclesiastical supervisor, since
it was noted Vice-Presidents of the Synod are not given the
role of ecclesiastical supervision by the Constitution.
In general, current Bylaw 2.27 was thought to meet the
needs of the Synod as an outline for the ecclesiastical supervision of its members. The concern expressed by the
study group to the Council of Presidents and now reported
here, however, concerns access to the system for those with
legitimate needs to call into question the behavior or public
teaching of a member of Synod. The current provision for
the complaint of “any person” to set action in motion is
deemed to be clearly too broad. Limiting the process only
to those who are members of the Synod or of congregations
of the Synod, however, does not allow for access by those
Committee 8 Chairman Ronald Meyer
who do not happen to be members of the Synod or of a
member congregation but may have been victims of sexual
misconduct or other abusive behavior.
Those cases also call into question the extent to which
the provisions of Matthew 18 must be followed and when
they are applicable, since obviously someone in an abusive
situation should not be required to meet individually with
the alleged abuser. The recommendation to the Council was
that access to the process be limited to members of the
Synod or of a member congregation, with the exception of
cases of sexual misconduct or criminal behavior. The recommendation was also made that the District President of
the person bringing a complaint should be asked to play a
greater role in counseling that person at the initiation of
the process.
In a separate but related context, in March of 2003, the
Secretary of Synod, Dr. Raymond Hartwig, convened a
group to study and discuss the dispute resolution process
as outlined in Chapter VIII of the Bylaws. Included in the
conversation were members of the Board of Directors, the
Council of Presidents, the Commission on Structure, the
Commission on Constitutional Matters, and others. While
this group concluded that the dispute resolution process
continues to work well and meets the needs of the Synod, it
recommended that a group of specially trained facilitators
should be recruited and trained to expedite the dispute resolution process.
In May 2003 President Gerald Kieschnick appointed a
Blue Ribbon Task Force on Ecclesiastical Supervision and
Dispute Resolution in The Lutheran Church—Missouri
Synod to address and propose solutions for the concerns
161
2004 Convention Proceedings