LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — November 30, 1998, Page 6

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

are in accordance with the Word of God and if they appear applicable as far as the condition of the
congregation is concerned." It should be noted, however, that Bylaw 2.39, c, also speaking of upholding the
resolutions of the Synod, does not distinguish between individual and congregational membership:
c. While retaining the right of brotherly dissent, members of the Synod are expected as part of
the life together within the synodical fellowship to honor and to uphold the resolutions of the
Synod. If such resolutions are of a doctrinal nature, dissent is to be expressed first within the
fellowship of peers, then brought to the attention of the Commission on Theology and Church
Relations before finding expression as an overture to the convention calling for revision or
recission. While the conscience of the dissenter shall be respected, the consciences of others, as
well as the collective will of the Synod, shall also be respected.
In answer to your question, then, Bylaw 2.39 in its entirety does not impart different status to the rules and
regulations of the Synod over the resolutions of the Synod. All are to be upheld by all members of the
Synod. Bylaw 2.39, b, does, as you state, place into the hands of the congregation the right to judge the
applicability of a resolution to its local condition. It also cautions a congregation to "not act arbitrarily, but
in accordance with the principles of Christian love and charity."
3. If an action to remove a member from the Synod is brought against a member for reasons other than
those defined under Article XIII, should the action be recognized by the Synod? If so why? If not, then
to whom would the member petition to have this illegal action stopped?
If an action to remove a member from the Synod were to be brought against a member for reasons other
than those defined under Article XIII, such action should not be recognized. As noted above, expulsion
from the Synod must be on the basis of causes given in Article XIII, 1, that is, acting "contrary to the
confession laid down in Article II and to the conditions of membership laid down in Article VI" or
persisting in "an offensive conduct." Note again, however, (as in Question 1 above) that Bylaw 2.21
provides some latitude in determining offensive conduct. Article XII, 8, speaks, for example, of "having
given offense by an ungodly life."
If an action is wrongfully taken against a member for reasons other than those defined under Article XIII,
the member has the recourse provided by Bylaw 2.27, c, 2, c. Upon receipt of written notification of
suspended status under Bylaw 2.25, "the member has 15 days from the date of receipt of the statement of
the case to advise the Secretary of the Synod that there is a desire to have the matter heard and resolved."
Can a member be removed from the Synod under Bylaw 2.27 without the due process defined under
section 2, c, 1, and 2, a? In other words, must the officer of the District prepare a written statement as
stated under section 2, paragraph c, 1 and must the officer of the District provide that written statement
to the suspended member as stated under section 2, paragraph c, 2, a?
The answer to this question is "no." A member cannot be removed from the Synod without due process.
Bylaw 2.27, c, 1 and 2 requires that "the District President shall
1. prepare a written statement of the matter in dispute which sets forth the alleged facts and
states that he is requesting expulsion of the member from the Synod in accord with Article XIII
of the Constitution.
2. provide the member with
a. a copy of the written statement of the case;
b. a written notification of the member's suspended status under Bylaw 2.25;
c. written notification that the member has 15 days from the date of receipt of the case to advise
the Secretary of the Synod….