# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2013_S83
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

SYNOD REPORTS
are “rightly called” may publicly preach and teach and administer
the Sacraments in the church. The Commission points out that the
understanding of being “rightly called” is dependent upon other confessional statements, such as those by Melanchthon in the Treatise on
the Power and the Primacy of the Pope (Tr).
After addressing the unitary character of the office and the equality in authority of pastors with bishops (Tr 60–65), Melanchthon turns
to the issue of obtaining pastors for the churches (Tr 66–78). Repeatedly he uses several terms in order to describe the process: the right of
calling (jus vocandi), the right of choosing (jus eligendi), and the right
of ordaining (jus ordinandi). At times he refers to all three together,
“call, elect, and ordain” (Tr 67), and at other times he simply uses two
expressions, “elect and ordain” (Tr 67, 70, 72). The terminology here
indicates that the entire church is involved in obtaining pastors, people
through election and pastors through ordination. Moreover, Melanchthon describes those who are called, elected, and ordained as competent
(tuchtige Personen, German text of Tr 72)—which presumes some form
of determination of their fitness.16

It is particularly important to emphasize that “the entire church”17
is involved in a right call. Our Synod has put this into practice by
establishing an orderly practice of training, certifying, ordaining, and
calling men into the pastoral office in a way that is recognized by the
entire Synod. For the most part, those who serve in the public ministry in the LCMS are prepared and certified by the Synod’s seminaries,
called (placed), and ordained by means of the cooperative work of
the Council of Presidents and congregations (or other entities), and
receive any later calls again by means of cooperation between district presidents and congregations/entities. However, because of a
combination of factors, including regional pastoral shortages, growing ethnic and linguistic diversity in the U.S., and growing numbers
of congregations that cannot support a pastor, other means of providing for public preaching and teaching of the Word and administration
of the Sacraments have developed in the LCMS, especially in recent
years (e.g., SMP, EIIT, district diaconal programs). Such programs
have sought to meet the vital need for the public administration of the
Word and the Sacraments while recognizing that our traditional seminary training is not able to meet that need completely. There have been
vigorous debates about pastoral preparation and about the validity,
necessity, and propriety of certain practices and programs seeking to
provide pastoral care in exceptional circumstances. Still, the very fact
that Synod deals with these issues in a Synod-wide process of debate
and decision-making illustrates that the LCMS is committed to maintain an orderly process of preparing ministers that all can affirm.18
As noted above in this response (see above), the circumstances
described in the request from the district president do not indicate
an emergency or exceptional circumstance. A congregation that is
served by a rostered pastor has chosen to delegate duties which only
the pastor (as the one who has been placed into the office of the public ministry) is to fulfill, namely, preaching and teaching the Gospel
and administering the Sacraments on behalf of the congregation to
groups within the congregation. This is the very essence of the work
of public ministry (AC VII, XIV) and not the work of the priesthood
of believers. By appointing individuals to carry out these responsibilities, the congregation has, in effect, appointed them to the office
of the public ministry apart from the confessional fellowship of the
Synod. In 1981, the CTCR affirmed the necessity that churches which
are bound together in a common confession not act unilaterally in
admitting individuals to the pastoral office.
We stress the fact that ordination is the declaration of the whole
confessional fellowship. In the end, a single congregation or an
agency representing larger segments of the church does issue the
call. Nevertheless, in a synod of congregations bound by a common
confession and loyalty, good order demands that admission into the

83

pastoral office or into its closely allied auxiliary offices is not the act
of a single congregation or agency.19
Adopted by the CTCR
December 18, 2010
3. Response to Request for an Opinion Regarding an LCMS
Institution Indicating Concurrence with a Statement of Faith of a
Non-LCMS Organization

The CTCR has received a request for advice regarding an LCMS
institution signing a statement of faith in its relation to a non-Synod
entity. Specifically, Concordia University Ann Arbor, in developing
certificate and A.A. programs in biblical studies, would like to seek
accreditation from the Association for Biblical Higher Education.
The ABHE requires “subscription” to its “Tenets of Faith.” It is the
opinion of the CTCR that indicating concurrence with such a statement is acceptable as long as the statement does not conflict with the
Scriptures or the Lutheran Confessions.
Adopted by the CTCR
February 19, 2011
4. Response to Request from Synod President for an Opinion on
Communion Participation (9/8/11)

In a letter of September 8, 2011, President Matthew Harrison
posed the following question to the LCMS CTCR: “I request that
the CTCR provide a clear, brief and forthright answer (‘No’ would
suffice) on whether or not it is proper for an LCMS clergyman to be
communing at an ELCA altar.”
In response to this question the CTCR refers President Harrison
to its opinion of February 12, 2010, where it stated the following:
The CTCR has addressed the matter of a Lutheran communing at the
altar of a church with which his or her church body is not in doctrinal
agreement. On page 25 of its 1983 report Theology and Practice of the
Lord’s Supper the CTCR asks: “Is it proper for a Lutheran to attend the
Lord’s Supper at the altars of churches not in doctrinal agreement with
the church body of which he/she is a member?” It responds:
In accordance with the confessional nature of participation in the
Lord’s Supper (cf. pp. 19–23), and in agreement with Lutheranism’s
historic position, it is inappropriate to attend the Lord’s Supper at nonLutheran altars. Since participation in Holy Communion, Scripturally
and confessionally understood, entails agreement in the Gospel and all
its articles, it would not be appropriate to attend the Lord’s Supper in a
church with which such agreement is not shared.

Adopted by the CTCR
September 16, 2011
5. Response to Request from Rocky Mountain District President
(9/8/11)

On September 8, 2011, President Randall Golter posed the following question to the CTCR: “In light of our Lutheran understanding
of the doctrine and practice of church fellowship and close communion, is it appropriate for a rostered LCMS pastor (active, emeritus,
candidate, or noncandidate) to commune regularly at the altar of a
congregation of a heterodox (ELCA) church body?”
In response to this question the CTCR refers President Golter to
its opinion of February 12, 2010, where it stated the following:
The CTCR has addressed the matter of a Lutheran communing at the
altar of a church with which his or her church body is not in doctrinal
agreement. On page 25 of its 1983 report Theology and Practice of the
Lord’s Supper the CTCR asks: “Is it proper for a Lutheran to attend the
Lord’s Supper at the altars of churches not in doctrinal agreement with
the church body of which he/she is a member?” It responds:
In accordance with the confessional nature of participation in the
Lord’s Supper (cf. pp. 19-23), and in agreement with Lutheranism’s
historic position, it is inappropriate to attend the Lord’s Supper at nonLutheran altars. Since participation in Holy Communion, Scripturally
and confessionally understood, entails agreement in the Gospel and all

2013 Convention Workbook