# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_March 22 2004_S2
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

synodical convention. Thus the Synod has reserved unto itself the right to review, revise, modify,
alter, or reject any opinion of the CCM and thereby address the issue involved.
Resolved, That, immediately upon such action being taken by the Commission on
Constitutional Matters, the two Board of Directors' resolutions adopted at its November, 2003
meeting concerning these CCM opinions will be similarly withdrawn so as to allow the issues
involved to be considered by the 2004 synodical convention.
Response: The two resolutions adopted at its November, 2003, meeting state that the Board of
Directors '"cannot agree with or accept" the eight opinions of the CCM and that those opinions
are "of no effect." These resolutions adopted by the Board of Directors are directly contrary to
Bylaw 3.183 d 2 which states that the Board of Directors "shall have the right to call up for
review, criticism, modification or revocation any action or policy of a program board,
commission, or council, except opinions of the Commission on Constitutional Matters." If the
CCM were to withdraw the questioned opinions, the promised withdrawal action by the Board of
Directors would be an empty gesture since the withdrawal of the opinions by the CCM makes
those opinions a nullity and thereby "of no effect." Further, the Board of Directors could then
claim to be acting in accord with the Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod since the constitution
and bylaw limitations upon the activities of the Board of Directors as determined in those
opinions would no longer exist.
Resolved, That the Board of Directors requests that the Commission on Constitutional
Matters consider the attached comments in connection with its reconsideration of its opinion.
Response: After several requests by the CCM, the Board of Directors has set forth a detailed
explanation of its concerns regarding the eight opinions. These concerns have been reviewed by the
CCM. However, the CCM cannot agree with the conclusions detailed in those explanations.
A common thread running through the comments of the Board of Directors is its assertion of greater
authority than that conferred currently by the Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod. It advocates that
its supervisory power over all the property and business affairs of the Synod allows it to determine
actions and authority which the Constitution and Bylaws presently give to other officers, boards and
commissions. Further, the effect of the Board's greater assertion of authority will necessarily be to
influence doctrinal matters through its control of finances. If the polity of the Synod is to be changed,
such change must come from the Synod in convention assembled and not by fiat of an officer or
board.
Commission on Constitutional Matters
255. Validity of Conference Call Meetings (03-2378)
In an e-mailed letter received December 29, 2003, a member of a board of regents of an educational
institution of the Synod asked questions regarding the validity of conference call meetings when held
under protest.
Question 1:

If one or more of the members of a board of regents object to a conference call
meeting before it is held and the chairman proceeds to hold the meeting anyway,
what is the validity of any decisions that are made at the conference call meeting
conducted under the protest?

Question 2:

If one or more of the members of a board of regents object to a conference call

179