LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — April 4–5, 2008, Page 9

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

place on hold matters related to the underlying dispute and to defer any actions that might prevent the
effective implementation of the final decision from the dispute resolution process.
The purpose of advising that a congregation not replace the worker pending a dispute resolution process
decision is not to suggest that the action of the congregation is incomplete or on hold. Rather, in our
walking together, it is simply a recognition that replacing the worker before the dispute resolution process
is complete may effectively limit or prevent the congregation from meaningfully reviewing and, if they
choose to do so, revising the action disputed.
Question 2:

When a reconciler prepares his written report in a dispute case, does the administrator of
the dispute resolution process have the responsibility or authority to find fault with and
override the reconciler’s report other than to make certain that the report contains “the
actions of the reconciler, the issues that were resolved, the issues that remain unresolved,
and whether reconciliation was achieved” (Bylaw 1.10.6.5)?

Opinion: The role of the administrator of the dispute resolution process is described in Bylaw 1.10.4 (a)
as one who “…manages the dispute resolution process but who does not take leadership, declare
judgments, advise, or become involved in the matter in dispute.” The administrator is not a fact-finder as
to the underlying dispute, but rather is charged to review the report of the reconciler to determine that it
complies with the procedural requirements of the bylaw. This includes the requirement to assure that the
report contains the actions of the reconciler, the issues that were resolved, the issues that remain
unresolved, and whether reconciliation was achieved. As Bylaw 1.10.6.5 further indicates, he is also to
assure that the report contains as an attachment to the report (a) the statement of the complainant as to
informal reconciliation efforts, (b) the statement of the matter in dispute, and (c) any reply by the
respondent. The administrator is also charged with responsibility to see to it that “[t]he report and the
attachments shall be forwarded to the parties to the dispute and the secretary of the Synod or district as
appropriate.”
Question 3:

When a party to a dispute submits questions to the Commission on Constitutional Matters
during the pre-panel stages of the dispute resolution process, do the time limitation
provisions of Bylaw 1.10.18.1 (h) apply?

Opinion: The timelines dictated by the dispute resolution process, beginning with Bylaw 1.10.8, do not
provide for or allow the process to be postponed by submission of a question to the Commission on
Constitutional Matters or the Commission on Theology and Church Relations prior to the formation of a
Dispute Resolution Panel. Rather, should such questions be submitted through the panel during the
pendency of a Dispute Resolution Panel as provided by Bylaw 1.10.18.1 (h), the time limitations then
existing at that stage of the proceedings do not apply until the requested opinion is rendered. The bylaw
reads, “When an opinion has been requested, the time limitations will not apply until the opinion has been
received by the parties.”
Question 4:

What is the status of the decision of the congregation when its decision or a decision of the
dispute resolution process has been appealed?

The status of the decision of the congregation is within its authority to decide. Please see the answer to
Question 1.
Question 5:

What is the status of a minister of religion—ordained or a minister of religion—
commissioned who has been removed from office when that decision and action of the
congregation is submitted to the dispute resolution process pursuant to Bylaw section 1.10?

21