LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2004, Page 330

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

330 OPINIONS OF COMMISSION ON CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS

Therefore discussions with the leaders of the congregation or the
congregation itself are not publicity. Rather, they are part of the
dispute resolution process.

2) Issue: A complaint against a member of the Synod may be
made by a non-member of the Synod. Such non-member is not bound
by the Bylaws of the Synod and thus such non-member is not bound
by the prohibition against publicity set forth in Bylaw 8.21 e.

Response: This is correct. This is, however, what the Bylaws
provide. If there is a problem it is with the provisions of the By-
laws and not with the opinion issued by the Commission. Non-
member complainants should be encouraged to respect the intent
and nature of the dispute resolution process that has been estab-
lished by the Synod and as outlined in the Preamble to Chapter VII
of the Bylaws. The Commission suggests that this matter also be
reviewed by the Commission on Structure.

3) Issue: The opinion of the Commission “gags” the President
of the Synod who, under Article XI of the Constitution of the
Synod, “shali have the power to advise, admonish and reprove”
(subsection B, paragraph 3). How can he do this if the CCM ruling
takes away his free speech?

Response: Article XIII 2 of the Constitution provides: “Expul-
sion shall be executed only after following such procedure as shall
be set forth in the Bylaws of the Synod.” As pointed out in its
Opinion 01-2243, the bylaw prohibition against publicity in a pro-
ceeding under Bylaw 2.25 f is applicable to the President of the
Synod since he is a party involved in the matter. Thus, the prohibi-
tion against the President of the Synod giving publicity to a matter
in dispute has its genesis in the Bylaws of the Synod and not in the
opinion of the Commission.

Properly understood, the opinion of the Commission does not
infringe upon the duties of the President that are set forth in the Con-
stitution and Bylaws of the Synod. There is no prohibition against
the President communicating with the members of the Synod as to
the underlying doctrinal topics that are involved in a disputed mat-
ter. The President cannot give publicity to the particular matter in
dispute. Some confusion appears to exist as to the Commission’s
use of the term “matter in dispute” to which the prohibition of pub-
licity applies. This phrase includes the details of the charges or alle-
gations made, the correspondence and other communication which
follow, the status of proceedings or deliberations, the President’s
actions pertaining thereto, and his opinion as to who is right or
wrong. The duty of the President of the Synod under Article XI B of
the Constitution is to supervise the doctrine and administration of
officers, employees, Districts, and District Presidents, to see to it
that they act in accordance with the Synod’s Constitution, to ad-
monish all who in any way depart from it, and, if such admonition is
not heeded, to report such cases to the Synod. This duty, as well as
the power to advise, admonish, and reprove, is tempered by the pro-
visions of Article XIII and the bylaws that flow from it.

Adopted April 15-17, 2002

Question re Withdrawal from
Dispute Resolution Process (01-2253)

Ina letter dated November 5, 2001, a Dispute Resolution Panel,
upon completion of a hearing and decision in a case involving the
suspension of a pastor who sought to resign from-the Synod prior to
the opening of the hearing in order to avoid the hearing process,
asked the Secretary of the Synod on its behalf to ask the Commis-
sion to respond to the following question:

Question: “Can a member of Synod withdraw from the dispute
resolution process prior to the commencement of the actual hearing
but after the hearing has been requested?”

Opinion: Bylaw 2.27 and Chapter VIII of the Bylaws are the ex-
clusive process provided by the Synod for addressing termination of
membership. Once the process has been initiated, the Synod and its
members are bound to follow the procedure that has been provided.
“No person, entity or agency to whom or to which the provisions of
this chapter are applicable because such person, entity or agency is a
member of the Synod may render the provisions of this chapter inap-
plicable by terminating that membership” (Bylaw 8.01).

2004 Convention Workbook

As part of that process, a member whose expulsion has been re-
quested according to Bylaw 2.27 c is given LS days to decide whether
to have the matter heard by a Dispute Resolution Panel or whether
not to contest such expulsion and thereby consent to termination of
membership (Bylaw 2.27 c 2 c). Once the choice is made to continue
the process by requesting a hearing before a panel, the Synod is duty-
bound to finish its process. Should the member of the Synod decide to
withdraw from the dispute resolution process at any time after the de-
cision to request a hearing has been made, the process must none-the-
less be continued to its conclusion.

Adopted April 15-17, 2002

Function of the Commission’s GUIDELINES
for Constitutions and Bylaws (02-2256)

A pastor of a congregation working on its Constitution and By-
laws in a February 13, 2002 letter asked several questions regarding
the Commission’s “GUIDELINES for the Constitution and Bylaws
of a Lutheran Congregation.” He noted that these guidelines are
used and interpreted differently across the Synod.

Question 1: “We would like your committee to issue an opinion
as to the function of the guidelines in producing a constitution and
by-laws. Is it their intent to be guidelines or is the essence of the
material to be used verbatim?”

Opinion: The Commission calls attention to its comments in the
Preface of said guidelines. Noting the desirability of uniformity and
also the wide divergences that exist among the congregations of
the Synod, the Commission states that what is included in its docu-
ment “should be regarded as guidelines.” Noting that Bylaw 2.03
requires that all constitutions and bylaws, including changes to ex-
isting constitutions and bylaws, be submitted to a District standing
constitution committee for examination and to the District’s Board
of Directors for approval, the Commission states that such com-
mittees, “in evaluating constitutions and bylaws that are submitted,
wil] judge them in light of the principles contained in this docu-
ment.” The Commission also describes its approach to the guide-
lines by explaining that “the following are subjects that should or-
dinarily be addressed” by a congregation. It is therefore not the
Commission’s intention that the material must be used verbatim.

Question 2: “Our mother church has in ‘3.0 Confessional Stan-
dard’ that the God’s Word (sic) is ‘without error’ in addition to the
usual verbiage. That wording, we feel from looking at our Synodi-
cal position, is not going beyond either the Scriptures or the
Synod’s position. It is without question the position of the Brief
Statement. Would such a modification be permissible in light of
the guidelines?”

Opinion: According to Bylaw 2.03, decisions regarding such
matters are the responsibility of District standing constitution com-
mittees, for which decisions such committees may wish to obtain
guidance from the Commission on Theology and Church Relations.

Question 3: “We also notice in the Membership area the state-
ment on communicant membership is quite open. Churches I have
been to in the past have defined this area to include regular use of
Word and Sacrament....Does this kind of concept exceed the posi-
tion of the church or are we able, through this document, to stand
very specifically for a position which we feel gives direction to our
people?”

Opinion: The Commission reiterates that decisions of this na-
ture are the responsibility of District standing constitution commit-
tees. It is the stated responsibility of these committees. not to need-
lessly restrict congregations but to “examine the constitution and
bylaws to ascertain that they are in harmony with Holy Scripture,
the Confessions, and the teachings and practices of the Synod”
(Bylaw 2.03 a).

Question 4: “How the guidelines are to be used is not seen uni-
formly across our Synod. Is this document, as would be implied
from the title, ‘guidelines’ in which we find our unity or are they to
be understood in a more rigid fashion where divergence from their
position would leave a church outside our fellowship?”

Opinion: As already stated, the Commission intends that its
document serve to provide guidelines to the congregations of the