LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — June 13–14, 2014, Page 4

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

the member becomes subject to disciplinary action due both to the violation of the doctrinal position of
Synod and the offense against the other members of Synod created by such failure (Constitution Art. XIII
1). In such case it is incumbent upon the ecclesiastical supervisor of the member to exercise disciplinary
action against the member who fails to teach and act within Synod’s stated confessional position, whether
apart from or during the dissent process (Bylaws 2.14.4; 2.15.4; 2.16.4).
The dissent process only allows a person to bring forth a contrary view to the stated position of Synod
which the dissenter believes is supported by the Word of God (Bylaw 1.8.2). Those expressing dissent
“are expected as part of the life together within the fellowship of the Synod to honor and uphold the
resolutions of the Synod” (Bylaw 1.8.1) and “to honor and uphold publicly the [doctrinal] statement[s] as
the position of the Synod…” (Bylaw 1.6.2 [b] [10]). The CTCR and ultimately the Synod in convention
shall consider the dissent and shall render final judgment as to whether or not the doctrinal statement is in
accord with the Word of God. While the dissent is being considered by the CTCR or the Synod in
convention, “the consciences of others, as well as the collective will of the Synod, shall also be respected”
by the dissenter (Bylaw 1.8.2). The individual member does not have the freedom to decide what of
Synod’s stated confessional position is to be honored and upheld and what is not. Once the dissent
process has been concluded and if the stated confessional position of the Synod is not changed by the
Synod in convention, the member is bound to teach and practice in accord with the stated confessional
position of the Synod. If the member expressing dissent cannot or will not teach and practice according to
the confessional position of the Synod, the only recourse left to the member is to resign from the Synod.
Continuing to teach and practice in conflict with the position of Synod subjects the member to
ecclesiastical discipline and finally expulsion from Synod.
38. Review of Concordia Plan Services Bylaws (14-2701)
Upon review of bylaw changes submitted by Concordia Plan Services (CPS) in several letters and
emailed questions, the commission offers the following comments and recommendations, thanking CPS
for its cooperation and its efforts to honor the commission’s prior recommendations.
•
•

•
•

Under Article IV, paragraph A 1, “Appointment of the President,” the commission recommends
inserting mention of Synod Bylaws 3.7.1.5 and 3.6.1.5 which govern the process for filling the
position of chief executive.
Under Article IV, paragraph A 2, “Election or Appointment of Other Officers,” the commission
recommends here (and elsewhere as applicable) avoidance of the term “election.” While an
election process may be used during a meeting to make appointments, the process does not make
such appointments elections. Consistent use of “appointed” or “appointment” in reference to
officers will be helpful and consistent with the bylaws of the Synod (e.g., Article IV D).
Under IV B, “Vacancy,” the president should not be included in this bylaw, since he is to be
appointed according to Synod Bylaw 3.6.1.5.
Under Article XI, “Conflict of Interest,” see Synod Bylaw 1.5.2 for the Synod’s expectations for
its agencies’ conflict of interest policies.

39. Colloquy Committee for Commissioned Ministry Policy Manual Review (14-2710)
With a March 11, 2014 email, the First Vice-President of the Synod, who serves as chairman of the
Synod’s Colloquy Committee for Commissioned Ministry, submitted the committee’s newly developed
policy manual for review by the commission. After review of the document, the commission thanked the
committee for its cooperation, noting three matters to bring to the attention of the committee:

CCM Minutes – June 13–14, 2014 – Page 19