# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2004_S187
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS 187

3-78

To Return CTCR Report Theology and Practice
of “the Divine Call” to CTCR for Revision

WuerEAS, The 1992 convention of The Lutheran Church—Mis-
souri Synod asked the Commission on Theology and Church Rela-
tions to prepare a study document on the theology and practice of
“the Divine Call” (Res. 3-09A); and

Whereas, This resolution specifically asked the CTCR to dis-
cuss “initial placement of candidates, dismissal from office, retire-
ment, the appropriateness of the term divine call for those serving
in elected and appointed offices, etc.”; and

WHEREAS, The CTCR in February 2003 issued the report The-
ology and Practice of “the Divine Call,” which provides a short
summary of the doctrine of the divine call as it has been understood
in the Lutheran church, along with a description of current Mis-
souri Synod practices relating to what are termed divine calls; and

WHEREAS, Two members of the CTCR issued a minority report
in April 2003, which shows how the current practice of accepting
temporary calls conflicts with the biblical teaching that divine calls
come from God and are to be terminated only for reasons that God
authorizes in His Word; and

. WHEREAS, The minority report also demonstrates the general
failure of the “practice” section of this CTCR Report to root our
practice in the biblical and confessional doctrine of the divine call;
and

WHEREAS, The CTCR report fails specifically to address “the
appropriateness of the term divine call for those serving in elected
and appointed offices”; for example, the “calls” to District and
Synod offices or to professorships, even though this was part of the
1992 request to the CTCR; and

Whereas, The CTCR report fails to address the implications of
the widespread practice in the Synod of issuing a “divine call” to
parochial school teachers, even though the CTCR report clearly
demonstrates that the term “divine call” historically refers only to
calls to the divinely established office of the ministry of teaching
the Gospel and administering the Sacraments, including the biblical
offices of apostle, evangelist, pastor, elder, or overseer; and

WHEREAS, The failure of our practice to be rooted in our theol-
ogy can lead and has led to abuses in the “call” practice, which de-
tract from our ability to proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ in all
its truth and purity; therefore be it

Resolved, That the Synod thank the CTCR for the work that it
has begun to do in order to help the members of the Synod under-
stand the historic, Lutheran, biblical doctrine of the “divine call”
and to be familiar with current practices surrounding calls into the
public ministry; and be it further

Resolved, That the Synod direct the CTCR to withdraw its 2003
report Theology and Practice of “the Divine Call” for further work,
including the correction of the errors that have been identified in
the minority opinion; and that the CTCR provide guidance in find-
ing alternative terminology to use for offices that are not of divine
origin, such as the office of parochial school teachers and appointed
and elected offices in the Synod, its Districts, and related agencies;
and be it finally

Resolved, That members of the Synod be encouraged to provide
input to the CTCR on this matter in the coming triennium, so that it
may produce a new report that better reflects the biblical doctrine
of the “divine call” in all our practices concerning the calling of
workers into service in Christ’s church.

Holy Cross, Golden, IL; Quincy Circuit Forum, Central
Illinois District

3-79

To Reject CTCR Document The Divine Call

Wuereas, The CTCR document titled The Divine Call, Febru-
ary 2003, was sent to all of the Synod’s congregations for their
study and consideration; and

WHEREAS, This CTCR document takes the theological position
that a “temporary call” is permissible: “It may well be the case that
the length of service, like location and salary, is also an issue that is
entrusted to the church to administer ‘by human right’ (de jure hu-
mano) ...” (p. 37); and

WHEREAS, The 2001 convention of The Lutheran Church—Mis-
souri Synod adopted and reaffirmed that Dr. C. F. W. Walther’s
book, Church and Ministry was, and is, the Synod’s official posi-
tion on the doctrine of the Church and the Ministry; and

WHEREAS, This official position of the LCMS stands in opposi-
tion to any and all “temporary calls” as contrary to Scriptures, con-
trary to the Lutheran Confessions, and contrary to the historic prac-
tice of the Holy Christian Church; and

WHEREAS, Dr. Walther (in his Church and Ministry, which is
the Synod’s official teaching) condemns any and all concepts of
the “temporary call” (“Kromayer: ‘The minister may not be en-
gaged by those who call him through a contract for certain years
or with the reservation to dismiss the freely called person. God
nowhere has granted or permitted those who call the right to make
such a contract.’” [Walther, Church and Ministry, p. 311]); there-
ore be it

Resolved, That The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod in its 2004
convention reject and condemn the CTCR Document The Divine
Call, February 2003, insofar as it concludes that a “temporary call”
is not false doctrine and contrary to Scripture and the Lutheran Con-
fessions, and therefore is contrary to the official position of our Synod
as it is found in Dr. Walther’s Church and Ministry.

Salem
Taylorsville, NC

3-80

To Reject Temporary Calls for Pastors

WHEREAS, The 60th regular convention of the LCMS adopted
Res. 3-17B, which affirms that “in the case of some pastoral va-
cancies, congregations may well benefit from a significant time for
healing, self-examination, or other needs” and that “these vacan-
cies are occasionally being served by pastors as intentional interim
ministries” and that “intentional interim ministries ought never to
be imposed on congregations” and finally that “an intentional in-
terim ministry ought never to be the kind of ‘temporary call’
against which [C. F. W.] Walther warns (Walther, Pastoral Theol-
ogy, pp. 26-29)”; and

WHEREAS, “The kind of ‘temporary call’ against which Walther
wams” is any and every call in which men in advance determine
and limit the duration of the service of the person called, for this is
interfering with the governance of God, who alone calls men into
the holy ministry and determines the duration of their service (ei-
ther by calling them elsewhere, deposing them, bringing death,
etc); thus Walther writes:

A congregation is not justified in extending such a call, and
a preacher is not authorized to accept such a call. It is an abuse.
(Pastoral Theology, p. 26)

No creature can dismiss God’s servant from God's office
unless it can be proven that God Himself has dismissed him
from office (Jer. 15:19; see Hos. 4:6) in which case the congre-
gation is not really dismissing the preacher but is only carrying
out God’s clear dismissal. (Ibid., pp. 26-27)

Such a call is not what God has ordained for the holy |
preaching office but something quite different that has nothing
to do with it. It is not an indirect call from God through the
church but rather a human contract. (Ibid., p. 27)

Every kind of temporary call is against the faithfulness and
constancy until death which God requires of preachers. (Ibid., p.
27); and

WHEREAS, Walther’s position is clarified in several of his letters:

My intended meaning was only that you should not, as is
often the case here, hire a pastor as an ordinary servant but rather
that you consider him a servant of Christ and of His holy church,
and that you would at least give him the verbal assurance that
you consider him a servant of Christ and have him carry out his