LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2004, Page 344

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

344 OPINIONS OF COMMISSION ON CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS

Question: “Does the Constitution of Synod give a definition for
the term ‘recuse’ or ‘recused’ or ‘recusal’? If a definition is not
contained within the constitution, then is it not logical to use that
most common understanding of the word mentioned above?”

Opinion: “Recuse” is an old legal term referring to the act of
refusing or rejecting a judge, challenging that a judge not try a case
on account of partiality. Whereas the Commission itself has on oc-
casion used the term in its rulings in general reference to disquali-
fication from a position or from involvement in a dispute case, nei-
ther the Constitution nor the Bylaws of the Synod use, nor do they
give a definition to, the term or its related forms. The term that is
used by the Bylaws of the Synod is the term “disqualified” (Bylaw
2.27 g) or “disqualification” (Bylaw 8.17). For this reason, refer-
ence to “the most common understanding” of the word is not perti-
nent or instructive, since the term has been imposed upon the dis-
pute resolution process of the Synod from outside its Constitution
and Bylaws.

Adopted Oct. 21-22, 2002

Application of 2001 Resolution 3-07A (02-2294)

In a July 30, 2002 letter to the chairman of the Commission, a
pastor questioned a particular interpretation of Resolution 3-07A
that had been circulated in the Synod. He asked whether he could
submit the following question to the Commission for a ruling. The
Commission grants that as an ordained minister and member of the
Synod he is entitled to submit his question.

Question: What does Resolution 3-07A mean and how should it
be applied in the church?

Opinion: The confessional position of the Synod, which every
member of the Synod accepts without reservation, is set forth in
Article II of the Constitution: “1. The Scriptures of the Old and the
New Testament as the written Word of God and the only rule and
norm of faith and of practice; 2. All the Symbolical Books of the
Evangelical Lutheran Church as a true and unadulterated statement
and exposition of the Word of God....” Conditions for acquiring
and holding membership in the Synod according to Article VI | in-
cludes “Acceptance of the confessional basis of Article II.” Arti-
cle VIII C of the Constitution states: “All matters of doctrine and
conscience shall be decided only by the Word of God. All other
matters are decided by a majority vote.”

For the guidance and use of the Synod, the Synod also recog-
nizes that doctrinal resolutions and statements of the Synod may
be adopted by conventions. Bylaw 1.09 a states: “The Synod, in
seeking to clarify its witness or to settle doctrinal controversy, so
that all who seek to participate in the relationships that exist within
and through the Synod may benefit and may act to benefit others,
shall have the right to adopt doctrinal resolutions and statements
which are in harmony with Scripture and the Lutheran Confes-
sions.”

Doctrinal resolutions may be adopted by the Synod for the in-
formation, counsel, and guidance of the membership. Pursuant to
Bylaw 1.09 b, such doctrinal resolutions “shall conform to the con-
fessional position of the Synod as set forth in Article II of its Con-
stitution,” are adopted in the same manner as other resolutions, and
“are to be honored and upheld until such time as the Synod amends
or repeals them.”

Doctrinal statements, as compared to resolutions, set forth in
greater detail the position of the Synod, particularly in controverted
matters. Doctrinal statements must be subjected to the more rigor-
ous procedure provided by Bylaw 1.09 c. That bylaw requires,
among other procedures, adoption by the Synod in convention and
ratification by a two-thirds majority vote of the Synod’s congrega-
tions. Bylaw 1.09 c 7 states that “such adopted and ratified doctri-
nal statements shall be regarded as the position of Synod” and, as
with doctrinal resolutions, are to “be honored and upheld...until
such time as the Synod amends or repeals them.”

In response to the question regarding the meaning and effect of
Resolution 3-07A, the Commission notes that “The Lutheran Under-
standing of Church Fellowship” is not simply a study document, as it
was used prior to the 2001 convention. As noted in its first two where-
ases, Resolution 3-03B of the 1998 convention called for a study of

2004 Convention Workbook

fellowship principles and practices on the nature of our church body
and our fellowship principles and practices, and Resolution 3-10C of
the 1998 convention called for all 2000 District conventions to utilize
the study to help build a “better understanding, general harmony, and
more consistent practice in our Synod.” The President of the Synod
and the Commission on Theology and Church Relations produced the
document “The Lutheran Understanding of Church Fellowship”
jointly. Following a period of study by District conventions, confer-
ences, and congregations, the Commission on Theology and Church
Relations in conjunction with the President of the Synod submitted a
report to the Synod on the synodical discussions, and Resolution
3-07A was submitted to the 2001 convention. Resolution 3-07A rec-
ognized that the document “The Lutheran Understanding of Church
Fellowship” “is in harmony with Scripture and the Lutheran Confes-
sions” and that “a majority affirmed The Lutheran Church—Missouri
Synod position on church fellowship that it set forth.” The resolution
also recognized that a majority “found it scriptural and confessional
and wanted The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod to maintain its
historic position.” Resolution 3-07A is a doctrinal resolution of the
Synod pursuant to the requirements of Bylaw 1.09 a and b. It was not
proposed or adopted as a doctrinal statement under Bylaw 1.09 c.

The final four resolves outline the convention-approved uses of
“The Lutheran Understanding of Church Fellowship,” and the pub-
lished response of the Commission on Theology and Church Rela-
tions. First, “Resolved, That we rejoice and give thanks to God for
the unity of doctrine and practice that this study has demonstrated.”
Second, “Resolved, That we commend this study and response for
continued use and guidance to build that unity where it is still lack-
ing.” Third, “Resolved, That the Synod reaffirm once again its po-
sition on joint worship and recommit ourselves to live according
to the instruction of the Lord’s apostle...(Eph. 4:1~3)...(Eph.
§:21)....” Fourth, “Resolved, That all action taken in this resolu-
tion shall be used to help carry out ‘The Great Commission’ and
shall not in any way detract or distract from the primary mission
of God’s kingdom here on earth....”

In adopting Resolution 3-07A, the 2001 synodical convention
not only commended “The Lutheran Understanding of Church Fel-
lowship” document (2001 Convention Workbook, pp. 375-87) for
use and guidance, but it also commended the “response” of the
Commission on Theology and Church Relations (“A Report on
Synodical Discussions” — 2001 Convention Workbook, pp. 48-51)
“for continued use and guidance.”

In carrying out their official responsibilities, ecclesiastical su-
pervisors of the Synod are expected, as with all synodical resolu-
tions, including doctrinal resolutions and statements of the Synod,
to heed Resolution 3-07A and see to it that it is “carried out” (Art.
XI B 4) and “implemented” (Bylaw 4.71 b). In carrying out their
official responsibilities, officers of the Synod are expected, as with
other doctrinal resolutions and statements of the Synod, to heed the
resolution and submit to it. All members of the Synod are to honor
and uphold Resolution 3-07A together with all other doctrinal res-
olutions and statements until such time as the Synod amends or re-
peals them (Bylaw 1.09 b and c). Those members who dissent are
expected to do so within the guidelines of Bylaw 2.39 c.

Regarding interpretation of the content of “The Lutheran Un-
derstanding of Church Fellowship” and the response, such ques-
tions should be directed to the Commission on Theology and
Church Relations.

Adopted Jan. 20-21, 2003

Consequences of Action Taken Upon Approval
of Ecclesiastical Supervisor (02-2296; 02-2320)

A Dispute Resolution Panel, in a letter dated December 20,
2002, forwarded the following question to the Commission from a
party to a dispute. The question is identical to a question submitted
by a Vice-President of a District in an August 16, 2002 letter.

Question: Do the Constitution and/or Bylaws of Synod allow or
contemplate the discipline of any pastor or contemplate the discipline
of any pastor of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod who has
taken an action with the full knowledge and approval of his superior,
where the superior’s approval is based upon the superior’s interpreta-