To Realign Adjudication Process with Walther’s Church and Ministry

Rationale The history of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod (LCMS) demonstrates that the ecclesiastical authority of adjudication in the Synod has drastically changed throughout the last 30 years.

• Judicial cases were decided by district or Synod conventions with ad hoc committees, which included laity, from 1847 to 1941.

• Judicial cases were decided by independent judicial boards of adjudication and appeal, the membership of which included laity, from 1941 to 1992.

• Judicial cases were decided by dispute resolution panels appointed by district board of directors from 1992 to 2004.

• Judicial cases have been decided by district presidents and reconcile rs since 2004. These changes and official opinions of the Commission on Constitutional Matters (CCM) have given district presidents ever growing authority in the adjudication process. Examples include:

• Prior to 1992 the process of restricting, suspending, and expelling required thorough investigation by a district president before proceeding in adjudication. Since 1992 the process of restricted status is treated as the investigation stage (see CCM Opinion 18-2871A, “Further Questions Regarding Restricted Status”).

• Prior to 1992 the process of adjudication required a district president to present the case before a board of adjudication and/or board of appeal. Since 1992 a case of restricted status or suspended status is not heard unless the accused makes an appeal for it to be heard.

• Since 2004, removal from restricted status has been solely the decision of district presidents. In 2001 Resolution 7-17A, the Synod affirmed and reaffirmed the decision of the 1851 convention recognizing the theses on church and ministry by Dr. C.F.W. Walther published in the book The Voice of Our Church on the Question of Church and Ministry as the official position of the LCMS.

• Thesis Xreads: “To the preaching office, according to divine right, belongs also the office to judge doctrine, but laymen also possess this right. Therefore, in the ecclesiastical courts and councils they are accorded both a seat and a vote together with the preachers.”

• It has been argued by many within the LCMS that the current adjudication process in the LCMSisnolonger in accord with this official position of the LCMS. Therefore be it

Resolved, That the convention declare the process of restricted status as punitive and no longer part of the investigative process;

and be it further

Resolved, That as such the convention declare that our present system of adjudication is in conflict with Thesis X of Walther’s Theses on the Church, thus invalidating CCM Opinion 18-2871A;

and be it further

Resolved, That the President of the Synod appoint a task force to revise the LCMS adjudication process so that our practice is aligned with our public teaching; and be it further

Resolved, That any recommendations for change focus on the following: including laypersons, ministers of religion—ordained, and ministers of religion—commissioned in deciding adjudicatory cases from start to finish; requiring thorough investigation before placing members of the Synod on restricted status; more clearly defining “offensive conduct” from a biblical perspective; and including laypersons in decisions to reinstate individual members into membership rather than such decisions being the sole prerogative of district presidents; and be it finally

Resolved, That the recommendations of the task force be completed in time for presentation and study at the immediately next cycle of district conventions.