LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — October 21-22, 2002, Page 24

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

Opinion: Any member of the Synod who does not abide by and follow in practice the CTCR documents
referred to in Resolution 3-07A is acting contrary to a study of the CTCR that the Synod has commended
to its members for continued use and guidance. All doctrinal resolutions and statements are to be honored
and upheld until such time as the Synod amends and repeals them.
Question 11 c: “If the answer to the above question is affirmative, must a District President, or the
Synodical President suspend a member who does not teach or practice in agreement with
the above-mentioned CTCR documents, if admonition has been futile and the member
persistently refuses to heed such admonition?”
Opinion: The Commission notes that even the use of A Statement of Scriptural and Confessional
Principles, adopted by the 1973 convention as a formal doctrinal statement, was to stop short of such use:
“A Statement is not to be used mechanically or legalistically to discipline members of the Synod, but it is
to be honored, upheld, and used fraternally and evangelically throughout the Synod in an effort to assist
the Synod in remaining faithful to its confessional position.”
92. Theological Review of Faculty Appointments (02-2305)
A pastor of the Synod serving as a member of the Board of Regents of a synodical school asked in a
September 17, 2002 letter for clarification of the review process for candidates for a professorship of
theology.
Question:

Does [the] theological review process conducted by the District President and selected board
members apply also to candidates for a professor of theology?”

Opinion: The answer is: No. Bylaw 6.23 a states that an initial appointment to theology faculties requires
the prior approval of the Board for Higher Education. Through the prior approval process the Board for
Higher Education establishes the standards to be met by candidates for appointment to theological faculty
positions. Those standards must take into consideration the confessional standard and the objectives of the
Synod as expressed in Articles II and III of the Synod’s Constitution.
93. Role of Conscience during Dissent Process (02-2306)
A pastor of the Synod in a September 17, 2002 letter to the chairman of the Commission, questioned how
the conscience of a pastor member of the Synod may be respected during the dissent process regarding a
matter that impacts the life of the congregation he serves.
Question:

“While [a member of the Synod] has begun the dissent process withing (sic) the fellowship of
peers and is proceeding according to the guidance of his district president, the question at
hand concerns how he ought to regard the promptings of his conscience while the dissent is in
process. There appear to be only three alternative courses of action: 1) The dissenter should
act contrary to his understanding of God’s will for the duration of the dissent process. 2) The
dissenter should be expelled from the synod and be denied the dissent process. 3) The
dissenter should act according to his conscience during the duration of the dissent process.”

Opinion: Bylaw 2.39 a requires that “the Constitution, Bylaws, and all other rules and regulations of the
Synod apply to all congregational and individual members of the Synod.” Bylaw 2.39 c requires that if
resolutions of the Synod are of a doctrinal nature, the process of dissent outlined therein is to be followed,
during which time the conscience of the dissenter as well as the consciences of others and the collective
will of the Synod shall be respected.

72