LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — March 21–22, 2025, Page 19

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

“general policies set by Synod” (Bylaw 3.10.5). As such, a seminary board of regents must comply with
obligations imposed on the seminaries by applicable PFC Bylaws.
Bylaws 3.10.4.1–2 are limited to “new routes to ordination.” As the question does not involve “new routes
to ordination,” Bylaws 3.10.4.1–2 are not applicable. (Nonetheless, the commission notes that the PFC
could raise an objection to a modification of an existing route so extensive that it could be construed as
effectively “new,” in which case these provisions might be found to be applicable.) This leads to Bylaw
3.10.4.3 to determine if said Bylaw applies.
Bylaw 3.10.4.3 states: “The committee shall review, assess, coordinate, support and make suggestions for
improvement of all existing noncolloquy routes leading to ordination in the Synod, including seminary and
pre-seminary education programs.” Because the question refers to “seminary” and “existing noncolloquy
routes leading to ordination,” Bylaw 3.10.4.3 is applicable, the question remains to what degree Bylaw
3.10.4.3 is applicable to the question at hand.
The question before us refers to consent and authorization. For consent and authorization to be a duty and
responsibility of the PFC and a requirement to be satisfied by a seminary board of regents such a
requirement would need to be laid out either explicitly or implicitly as a prerequisite to fulfilling or
complying with either the Synod’s Constitution or Bylaws. Nothing in Bylaw 3.10.4.3 rises to that
standard.
Having answered that, as to the question asked, the seminary would not need to receive consent and
authorization from the PFC, it should be noted that the change or changes referred to do need to be submitted
to the PFC in order for the PFC to perform its duty to “review, assess, coordinate, support and make
suggestions for improvement to” the seminary’s proposed plan.
Question 2:

If a Concordia University System institution board of regents wishes to modify the
academic, admissions, or financial parameters, or the means or place of instruction, for any
existing pre-seminary education program of such institution, and such action would
otherwise comply with any applicable Synod Bylaw, Constitution, or resolution
requirements or restrictions on the authority of such board (e.g., Bylaw 3.6.6.1), do the
provisions of Bylaws 3.10.4–3.10.4.7 require such board to obtain the authorization or
consent of the PFC before the board takes such action?

Opinion:
Bylaw 3.10.4.3 renders pre-seminary education programs within the scope of the PFC’s
review, assessment, coordination, support, and suggestion of improvements. This work of the PFC is to be
accommodated by Synod universities offering pre-seminary programs, which, like the seminaries, are not
required to obtain PFC consent or authorization for such modifications.
108. Lutheran Church Extension Fund Real Estate Solutions (24-3042)
The commission continued discussion of this item, introduced as a new item and assigned for research and
drafting in its December meeting. Available meeting time having elapsed, the commission determined to
schedule a special internet conference meeting in hope of concluding it.
109. Plan for Next Meetings
The commission set plans for an internet conference meeting, 6:30-9pm on Monday, April 7, to conclude
Ag. 24-3042 and to advance other items as possible, and another for 6:30–9pm on Tuesday, May 6.
110. Meeting Review and Adjournment
The agenda being concluded, the commission adjourned with a benediction.
John W. Sias, Secretary

CCM Minutes – March 21–22, 2025 – Page 86