LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — March 17, 2005, Page 8

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

the basis and authority for their positions? How can a congregation hold to a constitution that
is clearly now opposed to an official decision of the convention of the Synod (i.e., it forbids
what the Synod declares scriptural and right)? Is it enough to offer a “Sample Paragraph for
Congregational Constitutions” that now overturns what many of our churches have
confessed, failing to recognize that many of them will still hold to the opposing position and
reject this other position as contrary to Scripture?
Opinion: It should be noted that the introductory paragraph to the above questions contains several
inaccuracies. First, its partial quotation from the convention resolution’s second resolve misleads when it
applies a statement (“women on the basis of the clear teaching of Scripture”) to a later phrase in the
resolution (“may serve in humanly established offices in the church…”) when the statement was in fact
applied in the resolution to an earlier phrase (“may not serve in the office of pastor…”). Second, the
statement, “constitutions of many of our churches, once approved by the CCM,” is not accurate in that the
CCM does not approve the constitutions of congregations. Such approval is the responsibility of district
boards of directors with the assistance of district constitution committees. Finally, the paragraph
misidentifies Resolution 3-08A, referring to it as “8-01A.”
It should also be noted that the questions that have been asked appear to indicate a misunderstanding of
the convention action by assuming that the decision of the convention overturns the constitutions of those
congregations that do not make the changes allowed by the convention action. In fact, Resolution 3-08A
only permits and does not require congregations to allow women to serve in humanly established offices.
The questions asked do, however, raise an appropriate concern, i.e., whether the convention resolution is
in accordance with the Word of God. If a congregation or other member of the Synod believes that a
decision of the Synod is not in accordance with the Word of God, opportunity exists within the structure
of the Synod to express formal dissent to decisions of conventions. That process is described in Bylaw
1.8.2 (2004 Handbook) as follows:
Dissent from doctrinal resolutions and statements is to be expressed first within the
fellowship of peers and then brought to the attention of the Commission on Theology and
Church Relations before finding expression as an overture to the convention calling for
revision or recision. While the conscience of the dissenter shall be respected, the
consciences of others, as well as the collective will of the Synod, shall also be respected.
46. Interpretation of Convention Resolution 2-08A (05-2419)
In a February 15, 2005 letter, the pastors of the two circuits of a district of the Synod “express[ed] grave
concern regarding LCMS 2004 Resolution 2-08A, ‘To Commend Preaching and Teaching Creation.’”
After brief discussion, the Commission agreed that the executive director of the Commission on Theology
and Church Relations be contacted to discuss how the petitioners can be assisted and provided with a
helpful response to their concerns.
47. Explanation of the Term, “Own Personal Knowledge” (05-2420)
In a letter dated February 16, 2005, a pastor of the Synod asked a series of questions in his “on-going
quest to understand Resolution 8-01A as passed by [the] synodical convention in 2004.” His questions
pertained to the definition provided for the phrase “own personal knowledge” by Bylaw 2.14.2 (l) (2004
Handbook, p. 63).

20