# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_March 7 1997_S8
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

WHEREAS, The Council of Presidents has stated that participation in ecumenical marriage ceremonies
should "not be as co-officiant, worship leader, or celebrant, but should be arranged in such a way that it
is not an official part of the worship service, nor a solemnizing or celebrating of the marriage" (1973
CW, p. 44); therefore be it
Resolved, That we affirm the validity of Article VI of the Constitution of the LCMS; and be it further
Resolved, That we expect our pastors and congregations to follow this article with respect to mixed
wedding ceremonies.
If this is true with regard to such services as wedding ceremonies, surely the same principles would apply to
joint congregation services.
In addition, in 1991 in a statement regarding Unionism and Separatism in a document entitled InterChristian Relationships: An Instrument for Study, the Commission on Theology and Church Relations
provided an "exegesis" of Article VI which is of great interest. A copy of that portion of the statement is
attached.
On the basis of these and similar statements made over the years, the Commission on Constitutional Matters
concludes that joint services with congregations which belong to a group with which the Synod is not in
church fellowship are prohibited. Since The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod is not in fellowship with the
ELCA, Article VI of the Constitution would forbid a congregation of The Lutheran Church—Missouri
Synod to hold a joint service with a congregation which holds membership in the ELCA.
95. District President Role in Call Process (Ag. 2069): A pastor had asked the Commission on
Constitutional Matters to provide an opinion with regard to certain questions pertaining to the role of the
District President in the congregational calling process. Responding to the request, the Commission issued
the following opinion:
On March 9, 1997, the Commission on Constitutional Matters considered the requests for opinions
contained in your letter of March 1, 1997. Your first question asks, "Exactly what is entailed in the
District President's responsibility to 'advise the congregations of his District as to the calling of pastors
and teachers' (Bylaw 4.73)?"
In response, the Commission states that it believes the bylaw is self-explanatory and that since the areas
in which a District President may advise the congregation in these circumstances vary from
congregation to congregation, it is difficult, if not impossible, to improve upon the clear meaning of the
words.
You have also asked, "Is the District President constitutionally empowered 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?"
In response to this question, the answer is no, except that he has a right to delete any information which
might subject the District President or the district to legal liability.
You also asked, "Can a congregation rightfully call an individual whose name does not appear on a call
list received from the District President?"