# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_June 6 7 2008_S3
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)



Under 2.1, paragraph 3: Synod Bylaw 3.3.5.3 makes it necessary for board members to be
familiar also with the Board of Directors’ policies for agencies of the Synod.



Under 2.5, paragraph 5: The use of “colloquy committees” as an example of standing committees
is not entirely accurate. The Colloquy Committee for the Commissioned Ministry is put in place
by the Bylaws of the Synod (Bylaw 3.8.3.5.1). While this committee may function as a standing
committee, Bylaw 1.5.3.4 indicates that standing committees are appointed by program boards,
commissions, and governing boards to provide professional and technical assistance.



Under 2.6, paragraph 16: The words “or commission” should be added after “governing board” to
allow for review of policies by the Commission on Constitutional Matters as required by Synod
Bylaw 3.9.2.2.4.



Under 3.3, the words “is delegated to” in paragraph 13 should be changed to read “is the
responsibility of” according to Bylaw 3.8.3.8.3, since such approval is not the responsibility of
the Board for University Education.



Under 3.4, paragraph 12: Bylaw 3.8.3.4 (c) specifically makes new programs and peer review the
responsibility of the BUE. If delegated to the executive director, policy should make clear that the
board retains final responsibility. Policy should also make clear that new church vocations require
not just recognition but the approval of the Synod in convention.



Under 3.4, paragraph 13: Bylaw 1.5.5 requires operation according to the human resources
policies of the Board of Directors, not the International Center. (Also paragraph 4 under 4.6)



The title for 4.11 would better read “Agencies” in place of “Entities,” given the definition of
“agency” by Bylaw 1.2.1 (a) (1).

Regarding the Campus Policy Manual:


Under 0.1, the paragraph entitled “Pastoral Education: Statement of Purpose” appears not to be
relevant and confuses the purpose of the Board for Pastoral Education with the Board for
University Education.



Under 0.4, the Bylaws do not allow veto power by another board. This paragraph would better
read: “…neither board will change the following sections of this manual without consultation
with the other board.”



Under 2.1, the Board for University Education does not have authority to create policy for all
LCMS institutions of higher education.



Under 6.3, paragraph 6, new church vocation programs that result in a new position on the
Synod’s roster require adoption, not ratification, by a convention of the Synod. The Synod’s
interest and final approval should also be reflected in paragraph 9 under 6.3 and paragraph 2
under 6.4.



Under 11.4, paragraph 1, it is not necessary for the Board for University Education to delegate
authority to boards of regents, since Bylaw 3.8.3.8.3 already grants them that authority.



Under 12.5, Bylaw 1.5.2 (c) does not limit the requirement that annual statements be signed by
“exempt” staff only. All staff are required by the bylaw to sign these statements.



Under 12.7, paragraphs 1 and 2, new Synod Bylaw 3.8.3.6.4 (i) (2) allows each institution’s board
to receive and manage its own funds. The BUE no longer has the responsibility to receive and
manage surplus college and university funds. See also 12.8.

26