LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — June 23, 1998, Page 6

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

Subsequently, the campus pastor was allowed to present a defense of his behavior, but the Board sustained
its action of removing him from his campus position. Some months later the Board received another request
from 13 pastors, asking for informal reconciliation regarding other alleged improprieties relating to the
matter of the campus pastor. They had held a meeting with the Board of Directors but were dissatisfied with
its outcome and the District Secretary, now representing the 13 pastors, filed for dispute resolution.
In view of these conditions and actions, the Commission on Constitutional Matters was asked to respond to
the following questions:
1 Because of the unresolved reconciliation process and the continuing concern of the 13 pastors, the
campus ministry in question has been without a full-time, resident pastor for 16 months, which is
not healthy for the ministry in that place, which is the responsibility of the South Wisconsin
District. It is not proper, in fact, high time, for the South Wisconsin District Board of Directors to
issue a call to another campus pastor to serve at the university?
2. In light of the fact that two dispute resolution processes are unresolved and no action has been taken
by the reconciler since July, 1997, does the request of the group of 13 pastors have any standing?
The dispute, in truth, is between the campus pastor and the Board of Directors, not the 13 pastors. Is
the Board of Directors beholden to participate in a reconciliation process with the 13 pastors?
In responding to the request for an opinion, the Commission stated the following:
As you know, the responsibility of the Commission on Constitutional Matters is limited to those
functions identified in Bylaw 3.905. Section d in particular speaks to the questions you have placed
before the Commission when it calls upon the members to
d. interpret the Synod's Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions upon the written request of a
member (congregation, ordained or commissioned minister), official, board, commission, or
entity of the Synod. Such a request may be accompanied by a request for an appearance before
the commission.
In view of the above, the Commission has concluded that it is beyond its purview to determine whether
it is "proper, in fact, high time, for the South Wisconsin District Board of Directors to issue a call to
another campus pastor to serve at the university." Such a determination does not involve an
interpretation of the Synod's Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions but is rather a matter to be
determined under the dispute resolution process which can determine the status of the campus pastor
who has been removed from his position by action of the Board of Directors of the district.
If, as stated, the dispute is between the campus pastor who was dismissed from his position and the
Board of Directors of the district, the thirteen pastors who are supporting the dismissed campus pastor
are not a party to the case and thus have no standing in the matter. They may, however, be called by the
Resolution Panel at the request of the campus pastor.
180. Dispute Resolution Procedures (Ag. 2114, A): The First Vice-President of a district had requested an
opinion from the Commission on the following questions:
1. Would it be constitutionally correct for the First Vice-President to carry out the requested
investigation of the charges against the District President?
2. If the answer to Question #1 is in the affirmative, is the First Vice-President of the district obligated
to follow up on the charges?