LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2004, Page 297

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

ECCLESIASTICAL SUPERVISION AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION 297

8-12

To Require One Year of Public Discussion
When Addressing Theological Complaints

WHEREAS, The current Synod system of dealing with charges of
false doctrine seems to discourage or even prohibit public discus-
sion of the theological issues related to the charges; and _

WHEREAS, New theological issues or practices involving a new
application of theological principles deserve (indeed, require) ex-
tensive study and discussion within the Synod; and

WuerEAS, Different types of conflicts (relational, moral, eccle-
siastical, theological) require different types of evidence and meth-
ods for resolving them (e.g., ecclesiastical disputes require institu-
tional and procedural processes involving Bylaws); therefore be it

Resolved, That any charge of false doctrine or of public prac-
tice that betrays false doctrine be filed as a theological complaint
with the ecclesiastical supervisor of the person against whom the
charge is made; and be it further

Resolved, That when, in the informed judgment of the ecclesi-
astical supervisor, such theological complaints involve new theo-
logical issues or application of theological principles to new situa-
tions, the supervisor shall call for a one-year period of joint study
and reflection, during which public comment, debate, and discus-
sion of issues and principles related to such theological complaints
be invited; and be it further

Resolved, That the invitation for such public comment on and
discussion of specific theological complaints be issued through an
official publication of the Synod; and be it finally

Resolved, That if, after the one-year period of public discussion,
the issue has not been resolved, the complainant may request to ini-
tiate the process described in the present Bylaw 2.27.

Faculty
Concordia Seminary
St. Louis, MO

8-13

To Review Dispute Resolution Process

WHEREAS, While our present constitutional dispute resolution
method was very well intended, and has accomplished some bless-
ings within The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, it has in many
cases and areas been more of an impediment than a help. It seems
on occasion to take the simple Gospel intent of Scripture in our
dealings with each other and cover it with rules and regulations;
therefore be it

Resolved, That the English District memorialize the 2004
LCMS convention to request the Council of Presidents, in consul-
tation with those they deem necessary, to review and study our pres-
ent Chapter VIE, Synodical Dispute Resolution, and bring sug-
gested changes to the 2007 convention.

English District

8-14

To Revise Current Reconciliation Process

WHEREAS, The current reconciliation process of the LCMS has
demonstrated both strengths and weaknesses since its inception;
and

WHEREAS, A strength of the reconciliation procedure is that it
provides for both informal and formal meetings with a reconciler to
encourage disputing parties to sit down and talk face-to-face with
each other to try to resolve their differences (Bylaw 8.07); and

WHEREAS, An inherent weakness in the procedure has shown it-
self in the next step of the process where a Dispute Resolution
Panel is to review previous reconciliation attempts and issue rul-
ings on the unresolved case at hand; and

WHEREAS, This weakness involves the fact that this panel can
place people who have not received adequate theological training,

into positions where they are issuing rulings on complex theologi-
cal matters; and

WHEREAS, It would be an improvement to the current system if
there was a provision in the process at the point of the Dispute Res-
olution Panel, when a matter clearly involves difficult theological
matters for a special panel to be used in consultation with the regu-
lar panel; and that this special panel be made up of professors from
each Seminary and other well-trained theologians that are elected
by each Seminary faculty and placed into a pool for such a pur-
pose; therefore be it

Resolved, That the Iowa District East, in convention, petition
the Synod, in convention, to assign the task of creating such a the-
ological panel to an appropriate board or committee, that the nec-
essary changes be made to the Bylaws for the use of such a panel,
and that this panel be made available for special cases as soon as
possible.

Iowa District East

8-15

To Revise Bylaws re Dispute Resolution Panels

WHEREAS, The Task Force on Conflict Resolution authorized
by the 1998 convention of the Synod presented its report to the syn-
odical Board of Directors, which then presented overtures to the
2001 convention of the Synod with specific recommendations for
amendments in the Bylaws dealing with the Dispute Resolution
Process (7-68) and revisions in the Bylaws governing Dispute Res-
olution Panels (7-69); and

WHEREAS, Floor Committee 7 of the 2001 convention essen-
tially concurred with the proposed changes; and

WHEREAS, Resolutions 7-25 and 7-26 failed to be considered by
the 2001 convention; and

WHEREAS, The amendments suggested by the task force, ap-
proved by the synodical Board of Directors, and supported by the
floor committee are appropriate and needed; therefore be it

Resolved, That Overtures 7-68 and 7-69 (2001 convention) be
resubmitted to the 2004 convention of The Lutheran Church—Mis-
souri Synod.

Florida-Georgia District

7-68 To Amend Bylaws re Dispute Resolution Process
Rationale :

The Task Force on Conflict Resolution has recommended
several changes to the Bylaws governing the Synod’s Dispute
Resolution Process to address the following concerns:

© The value of providing to reconcilers the best training
available cannol be overstated and will be of utmost importance
to the ongoing success of the Dispute Resolution Process. The
Synod through its Board of Directors should assume responsi-
bility for the provision of adequate funding to provide for train-
ing and material needs.

¢ The Rules of Procedure and their addendum, the Stan-
dards of Review for Appeal Panels, provide essential detailed
guidance to participants in the Dispute Resolution Process. Until
now these rules have been developed and monitored by the
Task Force on Conflict Resolution and approved by the Board
of Directors and President of the Synod, as required by 1995
Res. 7-03B. Mention of these Rules of Procedure should be
made in the Bylaws of the Synod to provide necessary status. A
process should be included in the Bylaws to provide for moni-
toring and amendment.

e While the Task Force on Conflict Resolution has com-
pleted its task, the need for giving attention to the Dispute Res-
olution Process may arise again in the future. The Secretary of
the Synod, who already has the responsibility for the adminis-
tration of the process, should also be given the responsibility to
initiate the appointment of an ad hoc committee by the Presi-
dent of the Synod when it becomes necessary to address special
problems.

The following amendments to the Bylaws are proposed to
address these concerns.