LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — April 17,1997, Page 2

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

response. A second response had now been prepared which included those constitutional and bylaw
references, as well as several other modifications. The response which the Commission now agreed to
provide is as follows:
After reviewing the questions "contained in your letter, the Commission has concluded that all except 8,
9, and 10 are within the province of the Commission on Theology and Church Relations and are outside
the purview of the Commission on Constitutional Matters. Questions 1-7 should be forwarded to the
Commission on Theology and Church Relations for response.
In question 8, you have asked, "Should a District President be 'charged' with public sin and violation of
Article VI, would he be charged in his own District as a District official, or would charges be sent to Synod
since he serves as a synodical official?"
In response, the Commission states that Article XI, B, indicates that the President has the supervision
regarding the doctrine and administration of "All District Presidents." A charge against a District
President may therefore be made to the President of the Synod whose authority is, however, limited by
the provisions of Article XI, B, 2 and 3 to advising, admonishing, reproving, and if admonition is not
heeded, reporting to the Synod.
A charge under Article VI may also be made within the district under the provisions of Bylaw 2.27,
Commencing an Action to Terminate Congregational or Individual membership. In this case, a charge
against a District President would be investigated by the First Vice-President of the district or the next
qualified district officer (Bylaw 2.27, a, 1). As stated in Bylaw 2.27, b, if the District President (in this
case the First Vice-President or next qualified district officer) declines to suspend the member, a written
complaint can be made to the Praesidium which will act as indicated, either proceed with suspension or
decline to do so, depending on the outcome of its investigation.
You also asked in question 9, "Would being in the process of reconciliation (Article VIII) suspend any
action that Synod in convention might choose to take against one practicing unionism?"
Since it is assumed that any action of the Synod would involve an overture in one form or another to the
Synod, the answer would most likely be "yes." Bylaw 3.19, c, states that "Overtures with reference to a
case in which a member has been suspended or expelled and which is at present in the process of or
subject to appeal, as well as overtures which, on the advice of legal counsel, may subject the Synod or
the corporate officers of the Synod to civil action for libel or slander, shall not be accepted for
convention consideration." Consequently, the convention cannot act while a matter is being dealt with
in the dispute process.
Finally, you asked in question 10, "Should it be necessary, what are the proper procedures for leveling
charges against a clergyman of the Synod? Is there, for lack of a better term, a standard format?"
There is no standard format. The proper procedures are those which are identified in Bylaw 2.27, that
is, forwarding charges to the District President. Bylaw 8.07, a, provides some guidance regarding
format when it refers to "a written statement of the matter of dispute" and "a written statement setting
forth, in detail, the efforts that have been made to achieve informal reconciliation."
109. Authority of the President (Ag. 2073): In a previous meeting the Commission had considered a
response to a request from the Board for Communication Services regarding the authority of the President
in relation to matters involving publications and the authority to direct that certain matters should not be
published. A proposed response had been considered, but was rejected as not having incorporated some
bylaws which also related to the issues. Another proposed response had been prepared and had been shared