LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — February 22, 2002, Page 2

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

dispute (Matthew 18:15). In the same manner, Bylaw 2.27 a 2 requires that the District President follow
the guidelines of Matthew 18:15-16 and may appoint a small committee to assist in reconciliation efforts.
Thus reconciliation is the stated goal of procedures under Bylaw 2.27 as well as Chapter VIII of the
Bylaws. Further, a District President who follows the mandates of Bylaw 2.27 a 2 is acting and thus does
“act after receipt of the written complaint” (Bylaw 2.27 b).
Question 3:

“Can a District President purposefully, for the good of the church, decide to not “act”
(Bylaw 2.27 b) on a complaint with the intention that, if the complainant wishes, the
complaint be forwarded to the Praesidium of Synod? If so, can a District President, prior to
the 90 day deadline (Bylaw 2.27 b), notify the complainant and/or the Praesidium of Synod
to expedite the matter?”

Opinion: A District President can “fail to act” for any reason he deems appropriate. The Bylaws are silent
on the issue. In a previous decision (Ag. 2097) dated May 22, 1998, the Commission stated the following
regarding the term “fails to act”:
The CCM interprets “fails to act” to mean that a District President takes no action within 90
days of receiving a complaint. Such inaction would mean no measures were initiated within
the 90 day period to ascertain the truth or falsity of the complaint allegations. The same
criteria would apply to the First Vice-President, or next qualified District officer under
Bylaw 2.27 a 1. The words “fails to act” clearly prevent a District President from stifling a
complaint through the refusal to act, i.e., by literally doing nothing. A complaint which is
ignored by a District President for 90 days triggers the “fail to act” language. In that
situation, an appeal to the Praesidium is the proper procedure anticipated in the bylaw.
The Bylaws do not provide for a waiver of the 90 day passage before the complainant may present the
written complaint to the Praesidium. Further, a District President has no authority to notify the Praesidium
that he will fail to act on a written complaint he has received. The complainant alone is the party who
must make the decision as to whether or not he will appeal to the Praesidium the decision of the District
President to decline to suspend the respondent or the failure of the District President to act within 90 days
after receipt of the written complaint.
4. Proposed Amendment to the Bylaws of the LCMS Foundation (02-2248)
Legal Counsel for The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod Foundation, in a letter dated January 15, 2002,
requested that amendments to the Foundation’s Bylaws, approved by the Board of Directors of the Synod
at its November 14-16, 2001 meeting, be approved by the Commission.
Synod Bylaw 3.603 b requires that the Board of Trustees of the LCMS Foundation consist of:
§
§
§
§
§

Two members elected by the Synod in convention, one ordained minister and one layperson
The chairman of the Board for District and Congregational Services or his representative
from that board
At least seven members appointed by the members, as provided in the Bylaws of the
Foundation
The Chief Financial Officer of the Synod as a nonvoting member
The President of the Synod or his representative

The Commission notes that the amendment to Article II, Section 1 of the Foundation’s Bylaws meets the
requirements of Synod Bylaw 3.603 b, including the requirement that seven members of the Board of
Trustees be appointed by the Members of the Foundation as provided in the Bylaws of the Foundation.

2