LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — July 6-13, 1989, Page 6

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

faculty. The original request from President Cloeter was for the "appropriate procedure." He did
not, contrary to your suggestion, request an opinion regarding "jurisdictive procedure." Such a
request by President Cloeter is both appropriate and proper and is further' sanctioned in Chapter
VIII, specifically Bylaw 8.51 f.
The key point which you overlooked is that while the offense may have taken place while the
party was not a member of the faculty, the charge has been made while he is under the
jurisdiction of the Board of Regents. Please see Bylaw 6.45 b “ . . . the Board of Regents shall
also have responsibility to investigate charges of . . . false doctrine . . . “ It is obvious under the
specific bylaw cited in our original opinion, 6.45-6.51 as well as 8.05, that the proper procedure is
through the Board of Regents. Also please read specifically Bylaw 6.49 which details the
appellate process involving the district president and which could ultimately result in a
"jurisdictional" question per Bylaw 8.35.
The design of these bylaw procedures is to afford a prompt remedy but not permit "forum
shopping" by complainants.
The Commission on Constitutional Matters therefore declines to change its opinion.
The Commission will further note its concern over the tone of your request for reinterpretation,
and suggest you read again the admonitions of Bylaw 8.01 that "every effort shall be made to
effect reconciliation.”
156. Women Serving Communion (Ag. 1864) : The Commission had received a request from Christ
Lutheran Church, Coos Bay, Oregon, for an opinion on several questions relating to women functioning
as public servers at Holy Communion. The questions were occasioned by the fact that this had occurred at
a Communion service for the convention of the Northwest District. The questions as stated by the
congregation were as follows:
1. Is it a violation of the resolution of the Synod for women to assume the unique functions of
the public ministry and to administer Communion to men in the public assembly of the
church? Refer: 1969 Denver Proceedings 2-17, p. 88, "Resolved, Those statements of
Scripture which direct women to keep silent in the church and which prohibit them to teach
and to exercise authority over men, we understand to mean that women ought not to hold the
pastoral office or serve in any other capacity involving the distinctive functions of this
office," etc.
2. Has the Synod amended or changed the above resolution during any conventions since 1969?
3. Does the context of a district convention exempt the scriptural rule referred to in Denver
Resolution 2-17.
In response, the Commission decided to reply as follows:
1. The first half of the first question must be answered affirmatively. The second half should be
answered in the spirit of Bylaw 2.39 b: "The Synod expects every member congregation to
respect its resolutions and to consider them of binding force if they are in accordance with the
Word of God and if they, appear applicable as far as the condition of the congregation is
concerned. The Synod, being an advisory body, recognizes the right of the congregation to be
the judge of the applicability of the resolution to its local condition. However, in exercising
such judgment a congregation must not act arbitrarily, but in accordance with the principles