Official Workbook PDF page source text

LCMS 2026 Convention Workbook: Reports and Overtures, PDF page 208

2026 Convention Workbook
173
OFFICER, BOARD, AND COMMISSION REPORTS
in the Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions of the Synod, 
since such a question pertains fundamentally not to the pre-
senting fact situation but to the interpretation and meaning 
of the Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions of the Synod, 
is outside of the authority of the dispute resolution process 
to arbitrate or adjudicate, as stated in the Bylaws. Author -
ity to interpret the Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions 
of the Synod is specifically given by the Bylaws only to 
the Synod’s Commission on Constitutional Matters (Bylaw 
3.9.2.2). Any dispute resolution process is subject in all 
its aspects to “Holy Scripture, the Lutheran Confessions, 
and the Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod” (Bylaw 
1.10.18). As to the Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod, 
opinions of this commission are finally dispositive of any 
questions as to their interpretation that arise during a dis-
pute resolution process (Bylaw 1.10.18 [h], [h][1]). While 
the question of whether a board of regents has the author -
ity described is thus finally resolved by this commission’s 
interpretation of the Constitution and Bylaws in the nega-
tive, this is not to foreclose the applicability of the dispute 
resolution process to disagreements or disputes, related to 
or arising out of this action, as may apply to the board of 
regents as a whole or to individual regents as “members of 
congregations of the Synod elected or appointed to posi-
tions with … an agency of the Synod” (Bylaw 1.10.2 [5]).
Any proposal to submit a dispute regarding matters of governance 
either to the Synod’s dispute resolution process or an external me-
diator is out of order.
The commission notes, as it did in Op. 23-3006, that the Synod’s 
dispute resolution process could be available to the various indi-
viduals involved in the dispute should they desire to seek personal 
reconciliation, and is the exclusive remedy (Bylaw 1.10.1.1):   
1.10.1.1 The Holy Scriptures (1 Cor. 6:1–7) urge Christians to 
settle their differences by laying them before the “members 
of the brotherhood.” Therefore, the Synod in the spirit of 1 
Corinthians 6 calls upon all parties to a disagreement, accu -
sation, controversy, or disciplinary action to rely exclusively 
and fully on the Synod’s system of reconciliation and con-
flict resolution. The use of the Synod’s conflict resolution 
procedures shall be the exclusive and final remedy for those 
who are in dispute. Fitness for ministry and other theologi -
cal matters must be determined within the church. Parties to 
disputes are urged, in matters of a doctrinal nature, to follow 
the procedures as outlined in Bylaw section 1.8.
The parties here would be required to use the 1.10 dispute resolu-
tion process, which includes both the formal component and the 
informal component. If the parties desire to use a mediator in that 
informal process, they would be required to use a Synod reconcil -
er (Bylaw 1.10.5) rather than an external mediator. Any use of an 
external process or mediator is precluded by Bylaw section 1.10.
Specific Ministry Pastor Supervision of 
Commissioned Ministers (23-3017)
Minutes of March 15–16, 2024
By an email of September 27, a district president requested an opin-
ion on the following questions regarding the permissibility of su-
pervision of commissioned ministers by a specific ministry pastor 
(SMP). Consonant with Bylaw 3.9.2.2 (b), the commission request-
ed, received, and reviewed input from the Council of Presidents and 
members of the Pastoral Formation Committee. Having concluded 
dressed while the Secretary was attending to convention business:
Question:  Noting Op. 
17-2869, does Bylaw 1.9.1 (and By-
law 3.9.3) permit material exempted from original 
doctrinal review under Bylaw 1.9.1.1 (g) or (b) to 
have its doctrinal review certification appealed, fol-
lowing publication, under the procedure of Bylaw 
3.9.3.2.2?
Opinion: Op. 17-2869 does not have as its subject matter the excep-
tions noted in Bylaw 1.9.1.1 (b) or (g), but does put forth the gen-
eral position that all matters can have their doctrinal statements re-
viewed: “The primary responsibility for doctrinal supervision and 
review lies with the President of the Synod” (1.9.2 [a]) and he ex-
ercises this responsibility for doctrinal review of all materials and 
publications of Synod and its agencies or auxiliaries either through 
those reviewers appointed under Bylaw 1.9.2 (a) or through those 
stipulated separately in 1.9.1.1 (c–f).
The exceptions noted in Bylaw 1.9.1.1 (b) or (g) are not subject to 
doctrinal review and are therefore not doctrinally certified. The first 
requirement of Bylaw 3.9.3.2.2 is that the publication challenged 
be doctrinally certified. Without the publication being first doctrin-
ally certified, the challenge procedure outlined in Bylaw 3.9.3.2.2 
is not available.
Therefore, any questions concerning the doctrinal content of those 
matters under Bylaw 1.9.1.1 (b) and (g) would normally be referred 
to the President of the Synod.
Proposed Amendments to Convention Resolutions 
(23-3012, cont.)
Minutes of July 27–August 3, 2023
The commission reviewed several proposed amendments to res-
olutions published in the First Edition of Today’ s Business, upon 
request either of their submitters or of floor committees to which 
they had been recommended. 
(H) Proposed Substitute for Res. 7-03, “To Work Toward Resolu-
tion with Concordia University Texas”
In its review of Substitute Resolution 7-03 (2023 Today’ s Business, 
3:395) the Commission on Constitutional Matters notes that while 
agencies and corporate Synod are eligible for the dispute resolu-
tion process, such a dispute cannot involve the interpretation and 
of the Constitution and Bylaws, since the Synod in convention has 
assigned this responsibility to the Commission on Constitutional 
Matters. As stated in Op. 23-3006:
Question 6: 
 Assuming a university of the Synod and its 
board of regents are eligible partie
s to the 
dispute resolution process set forth in Synod 
Bylaw section 1.10, does the dispute resolu-
tion process apply to a dispute between the 
Synod (or its President or Board of Direc-
tors) and a board of regents regarding that 
board of regents unilaterally amending or 
modifying its governance documents, and 
regarding whether the action of the board 
of regents is within the authority granted to 
it under the Constitution and Bylaws of the 
Synod?
Opinion:
 Essentially, 
no. The fundamental material 
question of whether a Synod university has the authority 
to unilaterally change its governance from that prescribed