Official Workbook PDF page source text

LCMS 2026 Convention Workbook: Reports and Overtures, PDF page 545

• confirmation that if those charged with ecclesiastical 
supervision fail to carry out their duties and responsibilities, 
public rebuke may be pursued by any Christian, including if 
those charged with supervision fail to act with reasonable 
promptness (see LCMS CTCR, Public Rebuke of Public Sin 
[adopted 2006]); 
• provisions for laymen aggrieved by decisions of their 
congregational polity to seek enforcement of their 
congregation’s governing documents through their circuit 
visitor and/or district, provided that this shall not apply to 
matters of pastoral discretion (e.g., the minor ban); 
• the limitation of the time frame for adjudication of disputes 
to a total of not more than six months, and not more than one 
face-to-face meeting if a party would be significantly 
burdened by travel; and 
• a requirement that, when a congregational or individual 
member of the Synod is removed from membership for 
cause, the cause be publicly reported following the 
conclusion of the proceedings, provided that it can be done 
in a manner that does not disclose pe rsonal information of 
innocent parties (e.g., abuse victims); 
 and be it finally 
Resolved, That the task force shall submit a final overture to the 
2029 Synod convention to implement the above bylaw changes, 
after due consideration of comments received. 
St. Paul 
Brookfield, IL 
Ov. 10-16 
To Provide Scriptural Reforms  
to Dispute Resolution Process 
WHEREAS, Since 1941, the Synod has had four different 
adjudication systems: the Boards of Appeals (1941– 71), the 
Commissions on Adjudication and Appeals (1971–92), the Dispute 
Resolution System (1992 –2004), and the Dispute Resolution 
System and Hearing Panels (2004 –present) 
(s3.amazonaws.com/mychurchwebsite/c2001/martynoland-
shorthistoryofdisciplineanddisputeresolution.pdf); and 
W
HEREAS, The current dispute resolution process focuses 
excessively on the words of Matthew 18, as though that was the 
only scriptural passage dealing with conflict and doctrinal issues; it 
also implements undue secrecy. First Timothy 5:19 –20 (KJV) 
reminds us, “Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before 
two or three witnesses,” but, “them that sin rebuke before all, that 
others also may fear.” This means that false teaching must be 
publicly rebuked and not swept under the rug, lest others perish; and 
W
HEREAS, In a number of recent cases, it appeared that discipline 
moved rapidly only after a social media firestorm, which is hardly 
a salutary or edifying situation for the church; and  
W
HEREAS, a number of deficiencies could be addressed in our 
dispute resolution process. For example, laymen have no real rights 
or protections against malfeasance by those in control of their 
congregations; they are not members of the Synod so they cannot 
use dispute resolution, and they cannot go to civil court both for 
reasons scriptural and having to do with the First Amendment to the 
U.S. Constitution. The process cannot be completed in less than a 
year, and there is no requirement to comply with the mandate o f 1 
Timothy 5:19–20 to publicly rebuke what is determined to be false 
doctrine; and 
WHEREAS, It is appropriate that the Synod appoint a task force to 
present improvements to the 2029 Synod convention for adoption; 
therefore be it 
Resolved, That a task force be formed prior to December 31, 
2026, to consist of the Secretary of Synod or his designee, a member 
of the Commission on Handbook appointed by that commission, 
and three ordained ministers, a commissioned minister, and three 
laymen (at least one of whom shall be an attorney) appointed by the 
Praesidium. The task force shall submit, not later than June 30, 
2028, a proposal for review by the Synod that shall include without 
limitation the following: 
• confirmation that public teaching includes materials publicly 
shared on the internet, in public worship, or through other 
means whereby they are clearly not intended for private use 
only: “but where the sin is so public that the judge and 
everyone else are aware of it … you may also testify publicly 
against them” (LC I [Eighth Commandment] 284 
[Kolb/Wengert]); 
• confirmation that if those charged with ecclesiastical 
supervision fail to carry out their duties and responsibilities, 
public rebuke may be pursued by any Christian, including if 
those charged with supervision fail to act with reasonable 
promptness (see LCMS CTCR, Public Rebuke of Public Sin 
[adopted 2006]); 
• provisions for laymen aggrieved by decisions of their 
congregational polity to seek enforcement of their 
congregation’s governing documents through their circuit 
visitor and/or district, provided that this shall not apply to 
matters of pastoral discretion (e.g., the minor ban); 
• the limitation of the reconciliation provisions of Bylaws 
1.10.5–1.10.6 to a total of not more than 120 days and not 
more than one face-to-face meeting if either party would be 
significantly burdened by travel; and 
• a requirement that, when a member of the Synod is removed 
from membership for cause, the cause be publicly stated, 
provided that it can be done in a manner that does not 
disclose personal information of innocent parties (e.g., abuse 
victims). 
Circuit 24 (Sedalia) 
Missouri District 
Ov. 10-17 
To Amend Bylaw 1.10.2 to Render  
Dispute Resolution Non-Exclusive Remedy 
WHEREAS, Dispute resolution of the Synod is addressed in Bylaw 
section 1.10, and Bylaw 1.10.2 states, “It shall be the exclusive 
remedy to resolve such disputes that involve theological, doctrinal, 
or ecclesiastical issues …”; and  
W
HEREAS, This prohibits legal action by those who have suffered 
actual harm; and 
WHEREAS, Staff, c ongregations, districts and Synod can do 
anything without risk of legal consequences; and 
WHEREAS, D ispute Resolution Panel (DRP) reconcilers (see 
Bylaw 1.10.4 [e]), as normal sinful people subject to error, can and 
2026 Convention Workbook
510 ECCLESIASTICAL SUPER VISION AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION