LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — December 8, 1997, Page 1

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

1. Because the Praesidium "shall proceed in the same fashion as hereafter required of the District
President," if they conclude that the facts form a basis for expulsion of the member, and because the
Praesidium is proceeding in the same fashion as the District President in undertaking to "thoroughly
investigate whether the allegations can be substantiated," would the Praesidium also be required to
"follow the guidelines of Matthew 18" in conducting their investigation?
2. Would it be a violation of "the guidelines of Matthew 18" and Bylaw 2.27, a, 2, for the Praesidium to
refuse to allow the accused to be present in the meeting where the charges were being brought
against him by the complainants to the appeal?
Discussion indicated that the bylaws were not totally clear, making it difficult to provide a response to the
questions. It was suggested that the Task Force on Conflict Resolution give consideration to proposing
wording which would clarify the matter.
After consideration of the issues, it was agreed that David Piehler would prepare a response which would be
shared with the other members of the Commission for reaction.
133. Pastor's Congregational Membership (Ag, 2091): A pastor who had been assigned to a committee
by a District President to deal with an issue relating to a pastor's congregational membership forwarded a
number of questions to the Commission on Constitutional Matters for consideration. The questions related
to the position of the pastor of the congregation who did not hold membership in the congregation and who
did not believe that it was necessary for him to hold membership in the congregation of which he was a
pastor as long as he held membership in a congregation in The Lutheran Church-Missouri—Synod as
required by Bylaw 2.15. The questions which had been submitted by the chairman of the investigating
committee were as follows:
1. Is it the understanding of Missouri Synod church polity, that I, the pastor of a congregation in a
district, am required to transfer my membership into the congregation that I am pastor of and to
sign its constitution?
2. Am I subject to the discipline of the congregation if I did not sign the constitution or transfer my
membership?
3. Am I a valid voting member at a district or synodical convention if I have not transferred my
membership and signed the constitution?
4. Who should enforce this ruling?
5. If I am the subject of charges brought by the congregation against me and I have not signed their
constitution nor transferred my membership, am I entitled to a defense against the charges or an
appeal against the ruling of an investigative team?
6. If I have not signed the constitution nor transferred my membership to the congregation to which I
have been duly called, am I subject to suspension?
7. If I belong to a district which has a CCM committee that is advising the congregations to no longer
require signing of the constitution, have I undermined the intent of the confessionalism involved in
the signing of the constitution?
8. Is the signing of the constitution a portion of the confessing we do to walk together?