LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — January 10-11, 1992, Page 13

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

The Commission on Constitutional Matters reaffirms the preface to its "Opinion of the Commission on
Constitutional Matters Regarding Certain Issues Relating to the Interpretation of the Constitution and
Bylaws of the Synod in Matters of Adjudication and Appeals," (March 19, 1990) as well as the
Commission's response to questions posed by President Bohlmann to the Commission on January 23,
1990. The Commission on Constitutional Matters affirms its precise answers to Dr. Bohlmann's thirteen
questions to be correct responses to the specific questions that were asked.
The CCM further reiterates its position that their's is a limited role in the life of the Synod. Specifically
that their duties are precisely enumerated in Bylaw 3.533 which includes the interpretation of the
Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions as spelled out in 3.533,d and that they are the only body so
constituted for that purpose.
The CCM recognizes that specific answers to specific questions can be misunderstood or can be
inadequate to answer all general questions. The Commission always stands ready to assist however by
responding to specific questions regarding any of their opinions.
(Position of Commission on Appeals)
Both commissions welcomed the opportunity to deliberate with their brothers in Christ and are open to
further dialogue which they feel offers an opportunity for better understanding. When differences arise,
however, that are not resolved through dialogue, both commissions agree that the Synod in convention
assembled is the appropriate forum for resolution of such matters.
83. Conflict Resolution Task Force : The Commission on Constitutional Matters was asked to review the
proposal coming from the Task Force on Conflict Resolution which had been appointed by the President of
the Synod. A number of items were identified for consideration. Included among them were the following:
1.

The suggestion was made to ask corporate counsel for a phrase to invoke exclusiveness of the
remedy. It might include phrases which involved statutes in Missouri and similar ones in all other
jurisdictions.
2.

2.

It was suggested that Bylaw 2.23,c includes the phrase "For a period up to one (1) year at the
discretion of the district president.
Bylaw 6.47,f,5 should change the phrase, "two months" to "sixty days.”

2.

It was suggested that a two-page concise statement of what the proposed conflict resolution
procedure will do should be prepared.

2.

It is suggested that Thesis V be restated so that it makes reference to all cases, not the fact that
Matthew 18 is not limited to matters.

2.

In Thesis VIII, the question regarding formal and informal needs clarification. Further, the broad
and narrow reference to reconciliation in the preamble should be recognized. Also, is reconciliation
(one) of the church's foremost priorities or the foremost priority.

2.

A provision ought to be included to gather "pull" together all related matters into a single
proceeding. The multiplicity of matters involving one party may be handled by one panel. An
independent panel shall determine this.

2.

There should be some reference with regard to publicity. The present bylaw regarding this matter