LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — January 15–16, 2021, Page 7

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

82. 2019 Res. 7-03 Draft Proposal to Revise Governance of the Concordia University System (202963)
The chairman of the 2019 Res. 7-03 Committee to Revise Governance of the Concordia University System
forwarded a complete but preliminary draft of its proposal, due to be shared with the Synod in February for
review in anticipation of the upcoming Synod convention. The commission reviewed the draft, which
involves extensive bylaw changes, for consistency with the Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod and with
the objectives of the noted resolution. While noting that much work remains to be done in crafting the
important ecclesiastical accreditation standards and that the degree to which the proposal will, if adopted,
be able to accomplish the aims delineated in 2019 Res. 7-03 will depend in large measure on the willing
and able performance of those involved, both in the Commission for University Education and in the boards
and administrations of affiliated colleges and universities—perhaps to an even greater degree than the
present system—the commission found the proposal as a whole to be in harmony with the Constitution and
Bylaws of the Synod and consistent with the aims of 2019 Res. 7-03.
The commission also noted a number of specific language suggestions, which it will convey to the
committee through the Secretary, and looks forward, with the Commission on Handbook, to helping to
further refine the proposal as it moves through the process toward the Synod convention.
83. District President Authority in a Congregational Controversy (20-2951)
By an email of Sept. 16, a member of the Synod posed the following opinion request to the commission
regarding the authority of a district president, under Constitution XII 7 and Bylaw 4.4.6, as the district
president assists congregations having internal disputes. The commission solicited and received input from
the Council of Presidents, consonant with Bylaw 3.9.2.2 (b), and initiated discussion of the item in its
October meeting. It now responds as follows:
Question 1:

When a district president intervenes in an intra-congregation dispute, as long as the dispute
does not involve the doctrine or polity of the LCMS, is his input binding or merely
advisory?

The district president, like the President of the Synod, “has and always shall have the power
Opinion:
to advise, admonish, and reprove. He shall conscientiously use all means at his command to promote and
maintain unity of doctrine and practice” (Const. Art. XI B 3) “within the boundaries of his district” (Const.
Art. XII 6). He shall “moreover, especially exercise supervision over the doctrine, life, and administration
of office of the ordained and commissioned ministers of [his] district and acquaint [himself] with the
religious conditions of the congregations of [his] district. To this end [he] shall visit and, according as [he]
deem[s] it necessary, hold investigations in the congregations.” (Const. Art. XII 7) In this work, he is to
“conserve and promote the unity of the true faith,” “strengthen congregations and their members in giving
bold witness,” and provide “evangelical supervision, counsel, and care,” and “protection for congregations,
pastors, teachers, and other church workers…” (Const. Art. III). To this end he shall “in his ministry of
ecclesiastical supervision visit the congregations of his district” (Bylaw 4.4.4) and “[e]ven without formal
request therefor, may through the proper channels arrange for an official visit or investigation when a
controversy arises in a congregation…of the district or when there is evidence of a continuing unresolved
problem in doctrine or practice” (Bylaw 4.4.6).
The question poses a false dichotomy in asking whether such input of the district president is “binding or
merely advisory.” When Const. Art. VII 1 states that “[i]n its relation to its members the Synod is not an
ecclesiastical government exercising legislative or coercive powers, and with respect to the individual
congregation’s right of self-government it is but an advisory body,” this is not to dismiss the advice,
admonition, and reproof of a district president as “merely advisory.” The duty of his office is to advise
authoritatively on the basis of the Word of God and the Lutheran Confessions—to include, as noted above,
the practical application of these to a pastor’s ministry and divine call and to any disputes that may arise in
a congregation.

CCM Minutes – January 15–16, 2021 – Page 63