LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — November 30, 1998, Page 10

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

If a congregation's suspension was overturned by a Dispute Resolution Panel, what is the status of that
congregation during the time for an appeal for reconsideration or during the reconsideration process?
If a pastor's suspension was overturned by a Dispute Resolution Panel, what is the status of that pastor
during the time for an appeal for reconsideration, or during the reconsideration process?
The Commission notes that throughout the Dispute Resolution Process of Chapter VIII of Synod's Bylaws,
decisions are binding only when they are finally resolved. Bylaw 8.09, c, 4, a, states that a final decision of
the Dispute Resolution Panel shall "be binding upon the parties to that dispute…,", but it also states that this
decision is "…subject to request for review." Bylaw 8.09, e, 1, is the exception, declaring that the final
decision of a Review Panel shall "be binding upon the parties to that dispute and not be subject to further
appeal."
Where, therefore, a decision of the Dispute Resolution Panel has been questioned and is being reconsidered
by a Review Panel, the decisions of the Dispute Resolution Panel regarding suspensions are not to be
considered binding. Suspended members continue to hold membership in the Synod under the conditions of
Suspended Status as delineated in Bylaw 2.25. Its paragraph b clarifies that "Suspended status shall
continue until membership is duly terminated or the formal proceedings are completed favorably to the
member. While on suspended status, the member shall continue to hold all rights under the Constitution and
Bylaws subject to the limitations set forth herein," namely as follows in paragraph c. Such suspended status
continues until the Review Panel reaches a final and binding decision.
19. Referral of Convention Overture 5-52 Regarding Concordia, St. Paul (98-2133)
The President of the Minnesota South District, in a letter received September 30, 1998, requested further
clarification regarding the 1998 Synod convention action that referred Overture 5-52 (1998 Convention
Workbook, p. 223) to his office (1998 Convention Proceedings, p.171). He posed two questions for the
Commission:
When the Synod referred the overture to me for action, did the Synod thereby determine in the
resolution of referral to sell Concordia University, St. Paul, if a subsequent determination finds that the
problems noted in the overture are not corrected during the coming triennium?
Or, assuming that problems noted in the overture are not resolved within the triennium, will the Synod
need to take specific action at one of the next synodical conventions to sell Concordia University, St.
Paul?
The Commission clarifies that referral by convention action places an item of convention business into the
care of that board, commission, or individual whose area of responsibility includes the matter at hand. Such
referral is not, however, to be regarded as agreement with the overture's concerns or an adoption of its
resolves. In answer to your first question, therefore, the Synod by its referral of Overture 5-52 did not
thereby, regardless of present or future circumstances, determine to sell Concordia University, St. Paul. The
Synod has given to you the responsibility for addressing the concerns that have been raised in keeping with
the responsibilities of your office (see reference to Bylaws 4.73 and 4.75 in Resolution A, 1998 Convention
Proceedings, p. 171).
In response to your second question, the referral of Overture 5-52 completes the Synod's response to this
overture. It will be necessary for these concerns to be raised again via report or overture if they are to be
addressed by a future convention.
20. Question Regarding Majority Vote for Synodical Elections (98-2134)