# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_May 2 2022_S6
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

minister has himself indicated that he is unable to consider a call at this time. In such a case it cannot be the
decision of the district president whether or not to provide information, but the decision of the involved
pastor.
The Commission notes that a district president has responsibilities toward not just the calling congregation,
but all congregations under his care. Concern for a congregation presently being served, perhaps only for
a short time, by the pastor whose information has been requested, may weigh heavily in the advice the
district president gives the congregation that is considering extending the call. The district president may,
for instance, know that the congregation currently being served by the candidate may have had unusual
difficulties in filling a vacancy prior to the candidate and the candidate is relatively new in his position. In
such a situation, having the candidate accept a new call may lead to substantial harm to the other
congregation under the district president’s care. The commission does not find here substantial ground to
deny information on the pastor, though there is every reason to provide, with that information, advice and
counsel that will encourage the calling congregation to act in Christian love and due regard for the
congregation being served. There may even be reason for the district president to proceed with the pastor
concerned as described above, to seek his determination that he cannot, in care for his present congregation,
consider another call at this time, which might be conveyed to the calling congregation and suffice as
information. It is observed that simple denial of information in such a circumstance, as presently occurs
with some frequency in some districts of the Synod, almost as a matter of course, is not effective at
preventing the call of such pastors by other congregations, as the congregations are able, having sought
advice, to act despite its not being provided.
In summary, because the Synod is not advisory either to the district or to the district president who is an
officer of the district, the district president does not have the discretion to ignore a congregation’s request
for information. This was already indicated in CCM Op. 2069 (March 2, 1997). The opinion specifically
states that a district president does not have the authority “to edit a vacant congregation’s call list by refusing
to provide personal information on some individuals, even when that information is specifically requested
by the congregation.” Here the district president provides advice central to the congregation’s very purpose
in joining and maintaining membership in the Synod. In the administration of this duty, what he does must
“serve the interests of the Synod” (Const. Art. XII 12). In contrast, because the Synod as well as the district,
as “Synod itself performing the functions of the Synod” (Bylaw 4.1.1.1), is advisory to the congregation
(Const. Art. VII 1), the congregation does have the ability to ignore the advice given by the district
president, or to act in the absence of his advice, where it has been sought diligently but not provided,
although it might prove very foolish to have done so.
Question 1 (b): When a vacant congregation of the Synod is in the process of calling a pastor and requests
information on an ordained member of the Synod in good standing, whether a member of
its own district or of another district:
(b) If the individual ordained member of the Synod for whom information is requested is
from a different district than the congregation’s, does the district president of that other
district of which that ordained minister is a member have the authority under the
Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod to refuse to supply the requested information to
the district president of the district of which the congregation is a member, who will in
turn provide the information to the congregation requesting it?
Question 2:

If the answer is yes, the district president may refuse to provide information, what basis do
the Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod specify that would authorize this refusal?

Opinion (Questions 1[b] and 2, as regard potential calls from another district): Districts are not independent
entities but have been created by the Synod “in order more effectively to achieve its objectives and carry
on its activities” (Const. Art. XII 1–2, 12; Bylaws 4.1.1–4.1.1.2). Therefore, while a district president is the
ecclesiastical supervisor only of his own district, because districts as a whole are intended for the good of
the whole Synod, when a congregation requests information regarding an ordained minister who is a
CCM Minutes – May 2, 2022 – Page 110