LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2007, Page 271

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

SYNOD STRUCTURE AND GOVERANCE 271

WHEREAS, There is no biblical evidence that there was a prior
face-to-face meeting in any of the listed biblical examples of pub-
lic rebuke; and

WHEREAS, The Large Catechism states in its explanation of the
Eighth Commandment, “All of this refers to secret sins. But where
the sin is so public that the judge and everyone else are aware of it,
you can without sin shun and avoid those who have brought dis-
grace upon themselves, and you may also testify publicly against
them. For when something is exposed to the light of day, there can
be no question of slander or injustice or false witness. For example,
we now censure the pope and his teaching, which is publicly set
forth in books and shouted throughout the world. Where sin is pub-
lic, appropriate public punishment should follow so that everyone
may know how to guard against it” (Kolb-Wengert 1.284); and

WHEREAS, The 2004 LCMS convention passed Res. 8-01A,
which stated in part, “3. If Bylaw 2.26 applies, the district presi-
dent shall assure that the accuser has carried out the guidelines of
Matt. 18:15 face-to-face with the accused. Even if the alleged vio-
lation is considered to be ‘public,’ this provision of Matt. 18:15 is
to be followed. The reputation of all parties is to be protected as
commanded in the Eighth Commandment”; and

WHEREAS, To interpret Matt. 18:15 as a mandate for a face-to-
face meeting in the case of public sin is to speak beyond what the
text of Holy Scripture actually says; and

WHEREAS, The Synod may choose to require that prior to the
beginning of formal dispute resolution a face-to-face meeting be-
tween parties must take place in a case of public sin, but it is not
free to justify this requirement on the basis of Holy Scripture or the
Lutheran Confessions; and

WHEREAS, By the passage of Res. 8-01A and in its implementa-
tion as the new Bylaw sections 1.10 and 2.13—2.17 of the Synod’s
Constitution and Bylaws, the Synod has

1. erroneously added a mandatory face-to-face meeting with those
who have committed public sin thereby misinterpreting Matt.
18:15 and its application to public sin;

2. ignored the proper understanding and condemnation of public sin
as confessed by the Large Catechism’s explanation of the Eighth
Commandment;

3. deviated from its own scriptural and confessional subscription as
stated in Art. II of its Constitution;

therefore be it

Resolved, That the 2007 LCMS convention declare that the
Synod’s Res. 8-01A and Bylaws 1.10 and 2.13-2.17 are contrary to
the Word of God in their interpretation of Matt. 18:15 as related to
public sin; and be it further

Resolved, That the 2007 LCMS convention rescind Res. 8-01A
of the 2004 LCMS convention, along with the consequent Hana-
book revisions.

St. Paul
Brookfield, IL

8-28

To Rescind 2004 Res. 8-01A
and Include Laity on Panels

WHEREAS, LCMS 2004 Res. 8-01A effectively removed laity
from official decision-making in the process of “Expulsion of Con-
gregations or Individuals from Membership in the Synod”; and

WHEREAS, LCMS 2001 Res. 7-17A resolved “That the LCMS
in convention reaffirm the decision of the 1852 convention in rec-
ognizing C. F. W. Walther’s book, The Voice of Our Church on
the Question of Church and Ministry, as the official position of the
LCMS”; and

WHEREAS, Part Two, Thesis X, of Walther’s Church and Min-
istry states the following: “To the ministry of the Word, according
to divine right, belongs also the duty [Amt] to judge doctrine, but
laymen also possess this right. Therefore, in the ecclesiastical
courts (consistories) and councils they are accorded both a seat and
vote together with the clergy”; and

WHEREAS, Even the CTCR (Response to Expressions of Dis-
sent) agrees that the Synod has historically emphasized a balance of
laity and clergy on panels judging doctrine and has recently stated,
“Tt would also be in continuity with [C.F.W.] Walther’s position
that lay persons are accorded both a seat and a vote together with
clergy on ecclesiastical courts and councils”; therefore be it

Resolved, That 2004 Res. 8-01A be immediately rescinded; and
be it further

Resolved, That The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod revise
the applicable bylaws so that there be a balance of laity and clergy
on all panels judging doctrine.

Circuit 3 Forum
South Wisconsin District

8-29

To Determine a Proper Method of Church Discipline

WHEREAS, The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod adopted
Res. 8-01A at its convention in July 2004; and

Wrereas, Res. 8-01A involved a lengthy and complex set of
changes to the Synod’s Bylaws in regard to the discipline of pas-
tors, Synod officers, and other members of the Synod; and

WHEREAS, Res. 8-01A requires persons wishing to bring
charges to first gain the permission of the relevant district presi-
dent before proceeding with these charges (unless the charges are
against the district president); and

WHEREAS, Res. 8-01A requires a face-to-face meeting involv-
ing persons who bring charges and the person whom charges have
been brought against, even in instances where the charges involve
instances of publicly known sin, including the professing of false
doctrine; and

WHEREAS, The citation in Res. 8-01A to Matt. 18:15 seems to
overlook other scriptural passages such as Gal. 2:11ff and teach-
ings in the Lutheran Confessions that acknowledge the need to act
when there is sin so public that there can and should be public tes-
timony; and

WHEREAS, Res. 8-01A gives final authority to act in regard to
charges brought against a member of the Synod to the relevant dis-
trict president, thus making the district president in essence both
gatekeeper and final arbiter of any charges brought; and

WHEREAS, Laymembers of the Synod are basically removed
from the process of determining discipline for Synod members in
contravention to (separation from) the historical practice of The
Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod; therefore be it

Resolved, That The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod review
all bylaws adopted under Res. 8-01A and assign the matter of de-
termining a proper method of church discipline to the Synod’s
Commission on Structure or another duly constituted body of the
Synod; and be it further

Resolved, That whatever body is charged with writing bylaws in
regard to church discipline recognize that public sin can be prop-
erly addressed in a public forum (refer to CTCR statement on pub-
lic rebuke of public sin [May 26, 2006]); and be it finally

Resolved, That whatever body is charged with writing bylaws in
regard to church discipline recognize the value and necessity of in-
volvement by the laity and other persons apart from district presidents
in hearing and resolving charges.

South Wisconsin District

8-30

To Restore Former Adjudication Process

Wuereas, Prior to 1992, the Synod was blessed with a system
of dispute resolution that was deemed to be biblical and fair, and
that safeguarded the rights of individual members of the Synod, in
spite of the fact that the Synod did not always prevail in disputes
against individual members; and