# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_September 26 27 2014_S19
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

without divine calls? Accord to a CTCR report, Mörlin, with Walther’s approval, “rejects
the argument of those who insist that since they pay the pastor’s salary, they can hire and
fire him at will, thus treating ‘the call of the preacher as nothing other than a contract of the
kind made with a cow- or sow-herder’….On the basis of the divine nature of the call itself
Walther argued against the idea of a temporary call. The very idea that a divine call could be
issued for a set number of years was a contradiction in terms. Since God is the one who
issues the call, it is also God who terminates a person’s service in a particular location, and
this for one of two reasons. First, God issues another call to that person to serve elsewhere.
Second, God removes the individual altogether from the office due to the false teaching or
immoral life of the one who holds it” (Theology and Practice of “the Divine Call,” A Report
of the Commission on Theology and Church Relations of The Lutheran Church—Missouri
Synod).
Opinion: While this is an issue that is not addressed per se in the Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions of
the Synod, special considerations are involved when contracts issued to faculty include divine calls.
While the commission is responsible for reviewing such policies when developed, questions regarding the
divine nature of the call are best directed to the Commission on Theology and Church Relations or to the
Synod in convention.
Question 7: Given the determination by the CTCR that calls normally should not be temporary, when
universities issue contracts to commissioned or ordained ministers of religion, should those
contracts include an ending date?
Opinion: Commission on Theology and Church Relations reports do not determine the practice of the
Synod. The practice of the Synod is determined by its Constitution and Bylaws where, for example,
university presidents serve five-year renewable terms of office (Bylaw 3.10.5.5.1).
Question 8: Given the protection from termination of faculty employment in the 2013 LCMS Handbook,
is it legitimate for a university to state as its employment policy that junior faculty “may be
terminated during the contract period for cause, and at the end of the contract period without
disclosure of cause” (CUS Faculty Handbook, July 1, 2014, p. 42)?
Opinion: Each educational institution is required to “state policies and procedures related to faculty
appointments, employment contracts, contract renewal, contract termination,” etc. (Bylaw 3.10.5.6.1). It
is therefore legitimate for a university to state its employment policies.
Question 9: Given the protection from termination of faculty employment in the 2013 LCMS Handbook,
it is legitimate for a university to state as its employment policy that senior faculty “may be
terminated during the contract period only for cause. Senior faculty members who do not
meet the university’s expectations for teaching, scholarship, and/or service may be placed on
a Plan for Improvement (PFI); such faculty may have their contract roll-over stopped until
they are able to demonstrate that they meet university expectations commensurate with their
rank. Failure to meet the stated expectations in the plan shall normally result in dismissal
from the university” (CUW Faculty Handbook, July 1, 2014, pg. 42)? Notice that the
standard applied for termination “during the contract period” is only “for cause,” while the
standard for stopping the contract roll-over and eventually dismissing the senior faculty
member invokes language different from the LCMS Handbook definition of cause,
specifically “university expectations commensurate with their rank.”
Opinion: The current Bylaws of the Synod do not speak of distinctions between faculty members of
Concordia University System schools other than full-time and part-time faculty (Bylaw 3.10.5.6). But as
CCM Minutes – September 26–27, 2014 – Page 49