LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — November 30, 1998, Page 5

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

WHEREAS, The Lutheran Church−Missouri Synod has a well-established policy on joint worship
services on the basis of the Holy Scriptures and the Lutheran Confessions (cf. Proceedings, 1941, p.
303); therefore be it
Resolved, That no joint worship services be held with those with whom we have not established pulpit
and altar fellowship; and be it further
Resolved, That where a problem of casuistry exists in the area of pulpit and altar fellowship, no
judgment be voiced against a pastor or congregation without personal, fraternal confrontation and
without ascertaining all the facts involved.
15. Questions Regarding Suspension Procedures (Article XIII, Bylaws 2.27 and 2.39) (98-2130)
In a letter received September 28, 1998 a pastor submitted a list of questions that he and his congregation
wish to have answered regarding suspension procedures. The Commission assumes that questions 1, 4, and
5 are in reference to Bylaw 2.27 and not Bylaw 2.29 as stated in the letter.
Can a member, individual or congregation, be removed from membership under Bylaw 2.27 for any
other reason than those defined under Article XIII? If so, then state the other reasons using the LCMS
doctrines as defined under Article II.
The Commission answers by pointing out that Bylaw 2.27, a, 1 and 2, describes the process to be used by a
District President to receive and investigate complaints or act on his own knowledge regarding "facts which
could lead to the expulsion of a member from the Synod under Article XIII of the Constitution." Paragraph
a, 1, requires that "the next qualified District officer act in the place of the District President" when the
District President is "a party to the matter in dispute, has a conflict of interest, or is unable to act."
Paragraph a, 2, allows that a small committee may be appointed to assist in reconciliation efforts.
Paragraph c. makes clear that "facts must form a basis for expulsion of the member under Article XIII of the
Constitution" and paragraph c, 1, reiterates the significance of Article XIII of the Constitution in the District
President's written statement of the matter in dispute. Bylaw 2.25, a, also makes reference to "expulsion
from the Synod under Article XIII of the Constitution." It is very evident, therefore, that any action leading
to expulsion from the Synod must be on the basis of Article XIII and for reasons given in paragraph 1,
Members who act contrary to the confession laid down in Article II and to the conditions of
membership laid down in Article VI or persist in an offensive conduct, shall, after previous
futile admonition, be expelled from the Synod.
The answer to the above question is therefore "no." It should be noted, however, that Bylaw 2.21 allows that
cause for termination of membership may include not only violations of conditions of membership but also
as is "otherwise appropriate under the Constitution or these Bylaws." The "offensive conduct" of Article
XIII may therefore be understood to include an array of misbehaviors, bearing in mind that "giving offense"
according to the Scriptures includes any serious matter which causes a fellow Christian to stumble in his or
her faith (2 Cor. 6:3; 1 Cor. 10:32).
2. Do Bylaws 2.39a and 2.39b clearly impart different status to the rules and regulations of the Synod
over the resolutions of the Synod. If so, then is the power to judge the applicability of the resolutions of
the Synod clearly in the hands of the congregation as Bylaw 2.39b states?
It is true that Bylaw 2.39, a, applies the Constitution, Bylaws, and all other rules and regulations of the
Synod "to all congregational and individual members of the Synod." It is also true that Bylaw 2.39, b,
"expects every member congregation to respect its resolutions and to consider them of binding force if they