LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — September 7, 2010, Page 5

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

such internal disputes in a God-pleasing manner. Attached to this opinion is a copy of 1983 convention
Resolution 5-10A and the commentary published by action of the convention regarding the resolution.
The two provisions of that resolution most applicable here are as follows:
Resolved, That the Synod acknowledges that under the definition and application of the word “hierarchical”
in civil law there are aspects in the relationships within the Synod between and among congregations (e.g.,
Article II, Confession; the calling of certified and endorsed pastors only; agreements to abide by adjudicatory
procedures and their final determinations) which under civil law may imply, express, or evidence what the
courts regard as hierarchical dimensions; and be it further
Resolved, That, believing that Scripture (1 Cor. 6) requires that we make every effort to avoid disputes or to
resolve them internally when they do arise, of the two constitutional methods for resolving church disputes by
the civil courts, the Synod favors the “neutral principles of law” method whenever it can be applied, and that
when neutral principles cannot be applied to resolve a particular controversy, the Synod declares that it is able
and willing to resolve disputes internally.

It is in this context that the authority of a district president to investigate internal congregational disputes
under Bylaw 4.4.6 quoted above must be understood. A congregation may in advance provide its own
chosen method of resolving internal disputes, thereby limiting the authority of the district president to that
of advice, admonishment, and, if necessary, discipline. But where it has chosen not to do so, its agreement
as a member of the Synod is that such dispute will be resolved using the Synod’s own processes,
especially as to disputes in the areas of Article II Confession, the calling of certified and endorsed pastors
only, and agreements to abide by adjudicatory procedures and their final determinations. The dispute
resolution processes of the Synod include that described in Bylaw 4.4.6 and the involvement of the
district president as provided in this bylaw. As part of his ecclesiastical supervision, he may study,
counsel, and advise how a dispute should be settled consistent with the Constitution, Bylaws, and
resolutions of the Synod, thereby settling the dispute or conflict by presenting, interpreting, and applying
the collective will of the Synod’s congregations.
In becoming a member of the Synod, a congregation also has a right to disagree with the advice and even
direction of its ecclesiastical supervisor and invoke the dispute resolution protections of Bylaw section
1.10. Insofar as the dispute resolution processes of the Synod are concerned, the highest adjudicatory
body in the Synod as to specific questions of doctrine and practice (short of the Synod itself in
convention) is the Commission on Theology and Church Relations. The highest adjudicatory body in the
Synod as to specific questions of interpretation of the Synod’s Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions
(short of the Synod itself in convention) is the Commission on Constitutional Matters, whose opinions are
binding on the question unless and until overturned by a convention of the Synod, as indicated by Bylaw
3.9.2.2 (c): “An opinion rendered by the commission shall be binding on the question decided unless and
until it is overruled by a convention of the Synod.” In challenging the actions of a district president
through the dispute resolution process under Bylaw 1.10, participants are given the right to request and
obtain from either or both of these bodies binding opinions on issues within their areas of responsibility.
Because of the importance of the church’s witness to the world by the way it resolves its disputes, the
results of this process are final and binding.
The Synod has not made the Commission on Constitutional Matters a trier of facts. Instead, the Synod has
provided alternative methods for addressing factual investigations necessary for the resolution of disputes
in the Synod or within congregations. Depending on the nature of the dispute, alternatives may include
dispute resolution and fact-finding under Bylaw sections 1.10 and 2.14–2.17, Bylaws 3.8.2.7.5–3.8.2.7.9
and 3.8.3.8.5–3.8.3.8.9, as well as those circumstances where the President of the Synod or a district
president, as in Bylaw 4.4.6, may have that responsibility and authority.

129