# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_May 14 1990_S2
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

they shall adjudicate the matter and shall render a decision which, in order to promote finality, is final
and binding only on parties to that particular case. Decisions of Commissions on Adjudication and the
Commission on Appeals have no precedential force or value." The purpose of this statement was to
indicate that every controversy between specific parties must be concluded at some point.
In determining the meaning of the phrase, "Any provision to the contrary in the Bylaws
notwithstanding. (Cf. Bylaw 8.09)," the Commission observes that the historical development of the
Bylaws is instructive. There was a time, 1963 and prior, when decisions of Commissions on Appeals
on a specific case could be brought to a convention for final determination. After 1966 the Bylaws no
longer include provisions for this step. The final decision on a specific case is now that of the
Commission on Appeals. This is an authority which is given no other board or commission, including
the Commission on Constitutional Matters, whose decisions may be appealed to a convention of the
Synod. Such an appeal of decisions of the Commission on Constitutional Matters to the Convention is
proper because of the synod wide effect of these rulings in contrast to decisions of the Commission on
Appeals which are case specific. The provision in 8.69 applies in the specific to other bylaws which
might create the impression that the matter can be further appealed. Thus, for example, the Bylaws
state:
1.07

Relationships: Conventions, Officers, Boards, Commission, Staff

a. The delegate convention of the Synod is the legislative assembly which ultimately
establishes policies and provides program direction to carry on the Synod's work on behalf of
and in service to the member congregations, reserving to itself the right to give directions to
all officers, boards, and commissions of the Synod (including the Districts, seminaries and
colleges, and other component parts of the Synod). The delegate convention of each District
of the Synod receives reports and counsel from the national Synod, make recommendations
thereto, assists in implementing synodical decisions, and adopts or authorizes programs to
meet the unique needs of the District.
This bylaw seems to make the delegate convention the ultimate authority, able "to give directions to
all officers, boards, and commissions of the Synod." Notwithstanding Bylaws such as this, the
Commission on Appeals decision in a case between parties is binding on those parties. it should be
noted that the primary function of the Commission on Appeals is that of a fact finding body, a
function not readily performed by a convention. Consequently, the Synod has concluded that the
specific matter decided may not be taken to the delegate convention for review, reversal, amendment
or modification of the decision.
In your request, you asked the Commission on Constitutional Matters, "What is the official
interpretation of the aforementioned phrase (Any provision to the contrary in the Bylaws
notwithstanding. (Cf. Bylaw 8.09)] and under what circumstances will it be applicable?" The
foregoing observation does not conclude the matter as your question, in effect, presents the further
abstract question of whether Bylaw 8.69 may be read to permit the Commission on Appeals to act
perversely or arbitrarily in open contradiction of established doctrinal positions or constitutional
constructs. The answer is, "No." For example, to put the matter in its plainest terms, a determination
by the Commission on Appeals that denied the divinity of Jesus Christ clearly could not stand and no
bylaw provision or action of the Synod in convention could grant it that authority. This limitation
upon the authority of all officers, boards and commissions is inherent and is based upon the simple
proposition that those who accept office are duty bound to hold faithfully to our common confession
and the terms by which we have agreed to walk together. This then is not' a question of how authority
is to be allocated among the bodies of the Synod but rather of the inherent restriction on the authority