Collection › LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes (St. Louis, Missouri) › 2011 › Page 8
LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — September 3-4, 2011, Page 8
Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
Page 21
Page 22
Page 23
Page 24
Page 25
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
Page 33
Page 34
Page 35
Page 36
Page 37
Page 38
Page 39
Page 40
Page 41
Page 42
Page 43
Page 44
Page 45
Page 46
Page 47
Page 48
Page 49
Page 50
Page 51
Page 52
Page 53
Page 54
Page 55
Page 56
Page 57
Page 58
Page 59
Page 60
Page 61
Page 62
Page 63
Page 64
Page 65
Page 66
Source: The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod (files.lcms.org)
⤓ Download page image (full resolution)
Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected
Issue 1: Under the Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions of the Synod, must individual members or
congregational members of the Synod follow the dissent procedures of the Synod if they
disagree with or dissent from any of the Synod’s stated doctrinal resolutions or statements?
Opinion: A member of the Synod, individual or congregation, and any organization of members of the
Synod must follow the dissent procedures of the Synod. All members of the Synod commit to act in
accordance with the Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod. Article XIV of the Constitution states:
The Synod in convention may adopt bylaws that are consistent with and do not contradict the Constitution
of the Synod, which controls and supersedes such bylaws and all other rules and regulations of the Synod.
Bylaws, which may be adopted, revised, or eliminated by a simple majority vote of a national convention,
are binding regulations for the Synod and its conduct and governance.
Bylaw 1.3.4.1 states:
Members agree to uphold the confessional position of the Synod (Art. II) and to assist in carrying out the
objectives of the Synod (Art. III), which are the objectives of the members themselves. Thus, while
congregations of the Synod are self-governing (Art. VII), they, and also individual members, commit
themselves as members of the Synod to act in accordance with the Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod
under which they have agreed to live and work together and which the congregations alone have the
authority to adopt or amend through conventions.
Bylaw section 1.8 indicates how brotherly dissent from doctrinal resolutions and statements by members
of the Synod must be carried out. Bylaw 1.8.1 states:
While retaining the right of brotherly dissent, members of the Synod are expected as part of the life
together within the fellowship of the Synod to honor and uphold the resolutions of the Synod.
Bylaw 1.8.2 states:
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.
The 1973 report of the Commission on Theology and Church Relations, “Guiding Principles for the Use
of ‘A Statement of Scriptural and Confessional Principles, with Special Reference to the Expression of
Dissent,’” was developed to support this procedure. i
The Commission on Constitutional Matters has opined on “Proper Dissent and Dispute by Members of
the Synod” (05-2444) and refers the questioner and the Synod to that opinion. ii The Synod has given the
responsibility for determining under which bylaw to proceed to be that of the ecclesiastical supervision of
the district president and Synod President. The responsibility to determine whether or not members of the
Synod or any organization of members have indeed done what the questioner indicates in his question is
that of ecclesiastical supervision.
The questioner and the Synod are referred also to Question 3 of Opinion 05-2443:
171