# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1983_S90
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

90 PRESIDENT’S REPORT

d. Exchange of information and viewpoints on
issues that divide Lutherans from each other
and/or from other Christians;

e. Prayer for greater doctrinal unity on the basis of
God’s Word and for the guidance of the Holy
Spirit to better understand and love each other;

f. Encouragement of appropriate cooperative efforts
(in externis).

V. Members of the Synod will make every effort to
honor and uphold the positions and policies of the
Synod (responsible commitment), to respect and trust
each other’s judgments in matters where the Synod has
no corporate position (responsible freedom), and to
strengthen and expand the solidarity and the confes-
sional witness of the Synod.

Possible Theses Discussion Questions

1. (Thesis I): Are our synodical procedures for adopt-
ing statements, expressing dissent, and seeking change
(e.g., Bylaws 1.03 c, 7-10; 1.19 e) adequate? Are they
effective? If not, what changes are needed?

2. (Thesis I): How can we achieve greater clarity and
consensus in determining which corporate decisions a
congregation may regard as inexpedient (ungeeignet)?
Does congregational autonomy in such cases extend to
a congregation’s pastors and teachers?

3. (Thesis II): Do we need to distinguish between
various forms of “joint worship”? If so, why and on
what basis?

4. (Thesis II): We have applied the same limitations
to the official participation of others in our services and,
ordinarily, to our official participation in the services of
others. What criteria should govern any exceptions to
this policy?

5. (Thesis II): Does the same principle apply to
individual laymen? Ifnot, why not? Have we adequately
prepared our laymen to make responsible decisions in
such matters?

6. (Thesis III): How do we measure the potential
witness value, for good or bad, of such events?

7. (Thesis IIT, d): Is it valid to assume that program
components may to some extent reflect the measure of
doctrinal consensus of the participants?

8. (Thesis ITI, f): Is this proviso consistent with the
authority presently granted to synodical officials?

9. (Thesis IV): Are there other valid reasons for such
inter-Lutheran events? Can we reasonably expect other
Lutherans, as well as our own members, to understand a
distinction between inter-Lutheran “events” and inter-
Lutheran “worship”? Granted that this distinction may
be somewhat artificial in certain respects, does it never-
theless make a valid point in terms of our witness by
symbolizing the priority we give to prior doctrinal
agreement?

10. (Thesis V): Is it proper to give such a high
priority to the impact of our actions on our own synodi-
cal fellowship?

Ralph A. Bohlmann
Feb. 21, 1983

Appendix

President’s Commission
on Synodical Higher Education

Responsibilities

The colleges and seminaries of the Synod are bein
adversely affected by the changing conditions of oj
times. Some of them are already facing serious enrol
ment and financial difficulties.

It is common knowledge that the pool of prospectiy
students nationwide will be shrinking during the 1980;
reflecting a declining birth rate two decades ago. Thi
situation presents a special problem for the privat
colleges because they must charge more than the state
supported institutions and are losing out in the compet
tion for available students. An additional factor ; d
concern, particularly for our synodical colleges an
seminaries, is that the number of church-work student
enrolled has leveled off or declined. These institution:
therefore find it necessary to expand their offerings i
general education in order to keep an adequate ond
ment.

Rising costs together with declining enrollme
place a heavy financial burden upon the synodi
colleges and seminaries. Several of them are alreg
incurring substantial operating deficits. Annual fw
raising campaigns by the institutions are necessary.
keep them viable, resulting in competition among th
and with the Synod for support by our constituency,

The commission has been appointed to undertak
comprehensive study of the synodical colleges a
seminaries, including the following directives: i

First, review of the mission and purpose of ‘t
schools, their past successes and weaknesses, th
current problems, and their potential for future servi
to the church. a

Second, analysis of the interrelationships of ‘
synodical colleges and seminaries, their past a8
“system,” and the possibilities for closer ties and joni
endeavors in the future as an integrated structure
synodical higher education. :

Third, evaluation of the nature and extent 0:
changes which the individual colleges and semin
of the Synod are undergoing, especially in the broat
ing of the general education and non-churc
programs on the college level and the increasing dep
ence of all the institutions on their own resources.
enrollment and financial support. “4

Fourth, submission of proposals for the restru
of the higher education system of the Synod, inclu

control of the colleges and seminaries; a rei
appraisal of the needs of the Synod for meet
higher education objectives; a corresponding 4
nation of the number and nature of the colleges.
seminaries required; and a consolidation of syn® ans
institutions in one form or another, eliminating &
which do not meet established criteria and streni
ing those which can best serve synodical purpos

To this end, the President’s Commission on»: