LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2023, Page 171

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

OFFICER, BOARD, AND COMMISSION REPORTS
This language was used in the Presidential Prospectus as well,
demonstrating the degree to which it had saturated the ethos of the
university. The Presidential Prospectus called for the next president
to have “a demonstrated record of promoting and achieving diversity in all of its myriad forms” and “demonstrated belief in and
commitment to equity and inclusion,” language and terminology
borrowed without qualification or theological nuance from secular
DEI initiatives that do not distinguish between cultural diversity
and diversity of gender identities. To contend, as some interviewees did, that diversity initiatives at CUWAA were merely aimed at
cultural diversity, while the document guiding the search for the
academic and spiritual head of the institution called for someone
who embraces diversity “in all its myriad forms,” is an untenable
argument.
These forces pushed CUWAA off course. If the university is focused on surviving, it is not focused on a thriving Lutheran identity.
The rapid addition of programs and the treatment of all departments
as equals diminished the influence of the Lutheran theological faculty. As one visitor observed, “If you are trying to have a Lutheran
school, [Lutheran] identity is not [going to come] out of the pharmacy school.” In other words, the pharmacy school and all others
must be thoroughly informed and shaped by our biblical and Lutheran substance.
Many interviewees pointed to a change in CUWAA’s branding
and marketing about five years ago that seemed to them a deliberate
attempt to downplay or obscure the university’s Lutheran identity.
Even administrators acknowledged that a genuine Lutheran identity was obscured or altogether missing from the website.
“Live Uncommon” was introduced in CUWAA’s promotional
materials and strategic marketing in 2018. Though “uncommon”
could be a way to talk about a distinctly Lutheran identity, in two
brochures for potential students no reference was made to CUWAA
being a Lutheran university.
Interviewees regularly defined Lutheran identity at CUWAA
in terms of teaching and preparing students for “lives of service.”
While “lives of service” can be understood within the Lutheran
doctrine of vocation, this is not the Gospel, nor is it what it means
to be Lutheran. Except for the theology faculty, too few faculty
members, staff, or administrators articulated anything approaching
“Christ crucified for sinners” as the heart of a Lutheran confession
of the faith.
This mission drift away from a distinctly Lutheran ethos is apparent in the five-year Strategic Plan for CUWAA titled Together
We Will, along with its Executive Summary. The Strategic Plan
and Executive Summary call for more growth, diversified income
streams (including seeking multimillion-dollar partnerships from
corporations), change and agility, additional online programming,
and an emphasis on post-traditional learners. Large corporations
are not driven by fidelity to confessional statements and would
likely base such partnerships on profitability metrics. What happens when adherence to scriptural truths is at odds with the bottom
line? Online-only degree programs may be valuable, and they bring
significant revenue to the university, yet these programs also limit
participation in the healthy spiritual life of the campus, preclude
chapel attendance, do not allow interactions with Lutheran faculty
outside the classroom, and keep its users away from face-to-face
interaction with students in church work programs. They also require more significant care in exposing students to Jesus and His
mission. Nothing in the Strategic Plan is distinctly Lutheran. In
fact, its aim to “increase market share within high potential Chris-

171

tian (non-Lutheran) markets” is a worthy goal, but also problematic without laser-like focus on biblical and Lutheran foundations.
The Strategic Plan aims to “strengthen our Christian ethos through
changing cultural norms,” but a generically Christian ethos is not a
distinctly Lutheran ethos.
The Executive Summary at least mentions the Lutheran identity
of the institution, seeking to be a “21st century Lutheran Christian
university,” but it ultimately reduces Lutheran identity to “uncommon lives of purpose, service, and leadership for the good of self
and society, all for the sake of Christ.” Vocation is a Lutheran category, to be sure, but not the Gospel heart of a Lutheran identity.
With the exception of the phrase “for the sake of Christ,” nearly
any secular university could embrace CUWAA’s mission to “develop students (mind, body, spirit) for uncommon lives of purpose,
service, and leadership.” And even with the phrase “for the sake
of Christ,” there’s nothing distinctly Lutheran about that mission.
The rest of the Executive Summary reads like the Strategic
Plan, emphasizing growth, new programs, online learning, vague
diversity and inclusivity goals, and new funding models. Despite
the commitment that “we will not sacrifice our brand identity of
Lutheran Christian higher education purpose to achieve increased
enrollment,” the perception of most interviewees indicates that this
is exactly what is happening—growth at the expense of a distinctly
Lutheran identity.
If CUWAA continues with the 2021–2026 strategic plan, all
indications point toward continued mission drift, obfuscation of a
clear Christocentric Lutheran identity, and an increased alienation
of Lutheran contributors and stakeholders.

Faculty Frustrations
It became apparent to the visitation team that many of the faculty of CUWAA are deeply frustrated. The theological faculty in particular feels marginalized. Two prominent members of the theology
department have left for other institutions; others may depart soon.
LCMS Lutherans in other departments have expressed similar concerns. Several of the faculty feel overworked and underpaid. Many
of them feel their concerns are unheeded by the administration. An
alarmingly high number of them answered “no” when asked if they
feel loved and supported by the administration.
Since the visitation, several faculty members have reached out
to the CUS BOD and members of the visitation team to voice their
concerns over new language in the updated faculty contracts, which
they feel makes them more disposable and susceptible to firing
without due process.
As a university in the CUS, CUWAA has enjoyed a strong theological and philosophy faculty. The science faculty is also strong
and faithful. But an alarming number of the faithful among the faculty are considering employment elsewhere.
Though the open letters published by a now-suspended faculty
member were not the cause of our visitation, those letters and the
administration’s handling of the situation were a source of deep
concern to almost everyone to whom we spoke during our visit.
Many faculty expressed empathy for their colleague. Though they
did not all agree with the way he aired his concerns, they understood that he felt his concerns were not being heard and addressed
by the administration for so long that he had no other recourse than
to make them public. Many interviewees shared his concerns, noting that there is validity to many of his concerns. One interviewee
called him “a canary in a coal mine.” The visitation team perceived
2023 Convention Workbook