To Amend Bylaw Section 2.14 to Address How Public Sin Is Handled by Dispute Resolution Process

WHEREAS, Holy Scripture distinguishes between private sins that are first to be rebuked privately: “If your brother sins against you [εἰς σὲ (singular)], go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone [μόνου] …” (Matt. 18:15); and public sins that are to be rebuked publicly: “Those [elders] who are sinning rebuke in the presence of all [ἐνώπιον πάντων], that the rest also may fear” (1 Tim. 5:20 NKJV); and

WHEREAS, The practice of publicly rebuking a public sin is demonstrated and confirmed by the example of our Lord Jesus Christ in Holy Scripture: “But when [Jesus] turned around and looked at His disciples [τὸυς μαθητὰς (plural) αὐτοῦ], He rebuked Peter, saying, “Get behind Me, Satan! For you are not mindful of the things of God, but the things of men” (Mark 8:33 NKJV); and

WHEREAS, The practice of publicly rebuking a public sin is also demonstrated and confirmed by apostolic example in Holy Scripture: “When I [Paul] saw that they [Peter and the Jews] were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before all [ἐμπροσθεν πάντων], ‘If you, being a Jew, live in the manner of Gentiles and not as the Jews, why do you compel the Gentiles to live as Jews?’” (Gal. 2:14 NKJV); and

WHEREAS, This distinction between private sin and public sin is also maintained in the Lutheran Confessions in the explanation of the eighth commandment in Martin Luther’s Large Catechism: “All this has been said about secret sins [heim lichen Sünden]. But where the sin is quite public [öffentlich], so that the judge and everybody knows about it, you can without any sin shun the offender and let him go his own way, because he has brought himself into disgrace. You may also publicly testify [öffentlich … zeugen] about him. For when a matter is public [of fen bar] in the daylight, there can be no slandering or false judging or testifying. … Where the sin is public [öffentlich], the rebuke also must be public [soll auch billig öffentliche Strafe folgen], that everyone may learn to guard against it” (LC I [Eighth Commandment] 284); and

WHEREAS, This distinction has also been maintained in the personal writings of orthodox Lutheran theologians such as C.F.W. Walther, who writes: “If the sin of a congregational member is so manifest that the entire congregation knows about it and the entire congregation is therefore also offended by it, it is in principle not necessary to observe the stages of admonition given in Matthew 18, since in the case the congregation is precisely the person of whom the Lord says, ‘If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone’ (Matt. 18:15). We therefore read that even Paul, after Peter had caused a public offense known to all, did not first rebuke him in stages, but ‘publicly before everyone’ immediately (Gal. 2:13–14). Paul also writes explicitly about such acase: ‘Whoever sins,rebuke in the presence, sothat the others may also be afraid’ (1 Tim. 5:20).” (C.F.W. Walther, Walther’s Works: Pastoral Theology [Concordia Publishing House, 2017] 384); and

WHEREAS, Public sins not only require a public rebuke but also a public apology, as C.F.W. Walther writes: “A public fall into sin is also a sin against the entire congregation, just as according to Matthew 18:15 a non public one done only in the presence of individuals is a sin against them. Thus, as in the latter case, reconciliation through apology is likewise necessary in the first one—but [in this case] a public one.” (ibid., 389); and

WHEREAS, This distinction is not adequately maintained in the current dispute resolution process of the Synod, but all sins are treated as if they were private sins according to Bylaw 2.14.3 (c); and

WHEREAS, The failure to deal with a public sin through public church repentance gives the impression that the respective sin is tolerated in the Church of God, there by endangering souls who support and persist in such a sin; therefore be it

Resolved, That Bylaw 2.14.3 be amended as follows: PRESENT/PROPOSED WORDING Consultation 2.14.3 When a member congregation or individual member of the Synod is aware of information which could lead to the expulsion of a member from the Synod under Article XIII of the Constitution, prior to any formal written complaint or accusation the member shall consult with his or her respective district president to seek advice and also so that it can be determined whether this is the appropriate bylaw procedure (Bylaw section 2.14) or whether the matter falls under Bylaw sections 2.15, 2.16, 2.17, or 1.8; Bylaws 3.10.5.7.9 or 3.10.6.9.6; or dispute resolution under Bylaw section 1.10. In regard to this consultation: … (c) If Bylaw section 2.14 applies and the matter is a private dispute between two individuals, the district president shall ensure that the accuser has met face-to-face with the accused in the manner described in Matthew 18:15. Even if the alleged violation of Article XIII of the Constitution is considered to be “public,” this provision of Matthew 18:15 shall be followed. The reputation of all parties is to be protected as commanded in the Eighth Commandment. However, if the matter is a public sin that has caused scandal to an entire congregation, circuit, or district, then the respective district president shall commence action according to 1 Timothy 5:20 and Bylaw 2.14.4. In the case of such a public sin or scandal, the stages of admonition for private sin outlined in Matthew 18:15–16 shall not apply, as stated in the Lutheran Confessions (LC I [Eighth Commandment] 284). …

and be it further

Resolved, That Bylaw 2.14.4 be amended as follows: PRESENT/PROPOSED WORDING Commencing an Action 2.14.4 Under this bylaw (Bylaw section 2.14) the district president of the accused shall commence the following action when he becomes aware of information or allegations that could lead to expulsion of a member from the Synod under the provisions of Article XIII of the Constitution. The district president may become aware of such information by his own personal knowledge. Such information or allegations may also be conveyed to him in a formal written complaint or accusation made by a member of the Synod who has carried out the above provision (Bylaw 2.14.3). In commencing such action, the district president of the accused: … (b) Shall proceed in the manner described in Matthew 18:15–16 for private sins or 1 Timothy 5:20 for public sins as the required admonition in Article XIII of the Constitution, if applicable, continues to be carried out. …

and be it further

Resolved, That Bylaw 2.14.7.1 be amended as follows: PRESENT/PROPOSED WORDING Hearing Panel 2.14.7.1 At the time that the request for hearing is made, the suspending ecclesiastical supervisor shall forward to the Secretary of the Synod the statement of the matter and a written memorandum describing the manner in which there was compliance with the guidelines provided in Matthew 18:15–16 or 1 Timothy 5:20, “previous futile admonition” (Constitution Art. XIII 1), as well as all of the provisions of Bylaws 2.14.3–2.14.6.1.

and be it finally

Resolved, That Bylaw 2.14.10 be amended as follows: PRESENT/PROPOSED WORDING General Regulations 2.14.10 The district president of the accused/suspended member and the district president of the accuser shall take those steps necessary to attend to the spiritual needs of all those affected and shall continue efforts to resolve those matters which led to the commencement of the formal action against the accused member. (a) In the case of a public sin involving an ordained or commissioned minister who has promoted false doctrine or who has introduced a practice contrary to Holy Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions, and has there by scandalized a circuit, district, or Synod, the respective district president shall issue a public statement in cooperation with the President of Synod, Council of Presidents, and the Commission on Theology and Church Relations. The statement shall address how the false doctrine or practice is not to be tolerated in the Church of God and in the congregations of the Synod. Such statement shall be issued through regular mail and through digital communication (e-mail, the district newsletter, etc.). Mission of the Cross