# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2023_S129 # Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration) OFFICER, BOARD, AND COMMISSION REPORTS face-to-face relational culture, immediate access to professors and peers, and personal investment in the continued fostering of a Synod culture that extends far beyond limited years in direct seminary studies. 2. The PFC and seminaries affirm the proposition that “the most complete means of preparing a man for the general responsibilities of the pastoral office and a lifetime of service is the residential master of divinity route at the Synod’s seminaries” (2013 Res. 5-14A Task Force and 2016 Res. 6-03). And furthermore, “that residential seminary education is the preferred option for the preparation of men for pastoral ministry” (2019 Res. 6-02). 3. The PFC intends to pursue further study, evaluation, and where appropriate, action with respect to the formation of the Synod’s pastors. In the establishment of the Specific Ministry Pastor program, 2007 Res. 5-01B states, “[The] theological education [of an SMP] is formed within the context of their specific ministry and does not represent the breadth and depth of theology and ecclesiology that forms a basis for pastoral oversight beyond the local level.” Also, the SMP “is eligible to serve only in that specific ministry context for which he has been trained and may not be offered or accept a call for ministry for which he has not been certified as determined by his district president” (Bylaw 2.13.1). In view of these statements and in consideration of the wider scope of the universal church, the PFC intends to explore the following concepts: a. Means to assist congregations in overcoming the financial barriers that prohibit them from supporting pastoral candidates from within their congregation to complete a residential MDiv degree. b. Means to call associate MDiv pastors who are equipped with a “breadth and depth of theology and ecclesiology” (2007 Res. 5-01B). c. Benefits of preparing men not only for one limited place or context but also for a lifetime of ministry in which God may call them to new places and contexts. d. Ways to foster an appreciation for the formative benefits of a pastoral ministry student stepping away from a current local life context, studying at a residential seminary, heeding the call to go and serve, relocating when God extends a divine call, and serving within the wider context of church and Synod. e. Pros and cons of determining a minimum age requirement for the SMP program, while encouraging young men to pursue an MDiv, considering the many years that they might serve in the pastoral ministry without any restrictions. C.2.g. Recommendations 1. The PFC recommends that the Synod explore, develop, and implement means to encourage and assist men of every ethnicity toward residential formation through the MDiv program. 2. The PFC recommends that the Synod direct it to prepare a report to the 2026 Synod convention that evaluates and makes recommendations pertaining to non-LCMS seminary, district, and local congregational programs of ministerial formation that have surfaced within the LCMS in recent years. 129 This evaluation should also include a thorough assessment of the benefits of residential (in-person) pastoral formation over against nonresidential (distance learning) methods of training those who carry out the distinctive functions of the Office of the Holy Ministry. 3. The PFC recommends continuation of the guaranteed tuition support for the residential MDiv program offered by the seminaries that began in the 2018–2019 academic year. 4. The PFC recommends that the SMP route be understood and positioned as the “exception” and not become the “principal rule” with respect to the Synod’s available routes for the preparation and ordination of her pastors. The residential MDiv route should continue to be positioned and understood as the Synod’s strongly preferred route to ordination, supplying LCMS congregations with men who are rostered as general ministry pastors, men who are formally and thoroughly equipped under the MDiv route of in-depth foundational seminary formation in exegetical acumen with biblical languages, systematic theology and apologetics, historical knowledge, and extensive pastoral and practical training and experience from a consortium of approved expert faculty and theologians. The SMP route, with its less-rigorous program of pastoral formation, was conceived and accordingly designed and authorized by the Synod in convention to address exceptional, tightly defined individual contexts in which a called and ordained pastor is urgently needed in order to establish, maintain, and/or strengthen the church’s mission and ministry, while also allowing that in many instances it is not practically feasible for a congregation to call, install (with ordination in the case of candidates recently graduated from seminary), and adequately provide support (compensation, benefits, housing, etc.) for a general ministry pastor to carry out the duties of the Office of the Holy Ministry in certain circumstances. A closely related (even overlapping) causal factor driving the creation of the SMP route was the Synod’s desire to be responsive to dynamically emerging congregational mission opportunities in the U.S. Acknowledging all of the foregoing, the Synod, in view of its commitment to and appreciation of a thoroughgoing program of pastoral formation, intentionally specified that every SMP pastor, even while serving in such exceptional, tightly defined individual contexts, is to work under the permanent, direct supervision of a general ministry pastor and thus is never to carry out his duties in the pastoral office in an independent manner. Men who are formed, called, and ordained under the SMP route are to serve in exceptional, tightly defined contexts, but after a 16-year history of experience with the SMP program, the PFC is of the opinion that the Synod would now benefit greatly from far better clarity with respect to exactly what constitutes such contexts today. Generally speaking, such contexts should be thoughtfully identified and assessed by the congregation in careful consultation with the district (especially the district president). The determination to use the SMP route should not be a “choice made among route-to-ordination alternatives” by a man only desiring to serve somewhere, even in his local context, in the pastoral office. In creating the SMP route and acknowledging the role that distance learning would play in its implementation, the Synod’s objective was not simply to offer a nonresidential distance learning alternative to the residential MDiv route. Some argue that the SMP route offers significant “pluses” 2023 Convention Workbook