Collection › LCMS Convention Workbook (St. Louis, Missouri) › 2023 · 68th Convention, Milwaukee › Page 175

LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2023, Page 175

front matter 1 front matter 2 front matter 3 front matter 4 front matter 5 front matter 6 front matter 7 front matter 8 front matter 9 front matter 10 front matter 11 front matter 12 front matter 13 front matter 14 front matter 15 front matter 16 front matter 17 front matter 18 front matter 19 front matter 20 front matter 21 front matter 22 front matter 23 front matter 24 front matter 25 front matter 26 front matter 27 front matter 28 front matter 29 front matter 30 front matter 31 front matter 32 front matter 33 front matter 34 Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Page 27 Page 28 Page 29 Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34 Page 35 Page 36 Page 37 Page 38 Page 39 Page 40 Page 41 Page 42 Page 43 Page 44 Page 45 Page 46 Page 47 Page 48 Page 49 Page 50 Page 51 Page 52 Page 53 Page 54 Page 55 Page 56 Page 57 Page 58 Page 59 Page 60 Page 61 Page 62 Page 63 Page 64 Page 65 Page 66 Page 67 Page 68 Page 69 Page 70 Page 71 Page 72 Page 73 Page 74 Page 75 Page 76 Page 77 Page 78 Page 79 Page 80 Page 81 Page 82 Page 83 Page 84 Page 85 Page 86 Page 87 Page 88 Page 89 Page 90 Page 91 Page 92 Page 93 Page 94 Page 95 Page 96 Page 97 Page 98 Page 99 Page 100 Page 101 Page 102 Page 103 Page 104 Page 105 Page 106 Page 107 Page 108 Page 109 Page 110 Page 111 Page 112 Page 113 Page 114 Page 115 Page 116 Page 117 Page 118 Page 119 Page 120 Page 121 Page 122 Page 123 Page 124 Page 125 Page 126 Page 127 Page 128 Page 129 Page 130 Page 131 Page 132 Page 133 Page 134 Page 135 Page 136 Page 137 Page 138 Page 139 Page 140 Page 141 Page 142 Page 143 Page 144 Page 145 Page 146 Page 147 Page 148 Page 149 Page 150 Page 151 Page 152 Page 153 Page 154 Page 155 Page 156 Page 157 Page 158 Page 159 Page 160 Page 161 Page 162 Page 163 Page 164 Page 165 Page 166 Page 167 Page 168 Page 169 Page 170 Page 171 Page 172 Page 173 Page 174 Page 175 Page 176 Page 177 Page 178 Page 179 Page 180 Page 181 Page 182 Page 183 Page 184 Page 185 Page 186 Page 187 Page 188 Page 189 Page 190 Page 191 Page 192 Page 193 Page 194 Page 195 Page 196 Page 197 Page 198 Page 199 Page 200 Page 201 Page 202 Page 203 Page 204 Page 205 Page 206 Page 207 Page 208 Page 209 Page 210 Page 211 Page 212 Page 213 Page 214 Page 215 Page 216 Page 217 Page 218 Page 219 Page 220 Page 221 Page 222 Page 223 Page 224 Page 225 Page 226 Page 227 Page 228 Page 229 Page 230 Page 231 Page 232 Page 233 Page 234 Page 235 Page 236 Page 237 Page 238 Page 239 Page 240 Page 241 Page 242 Page 243 Page 244 Page 245 Page 246 Page 247 Page 248 Page 249 Page 250 Page 251 Page 252 Page 253 Page 254 Page 255 Page 256 Page 257 Page 258 Page 259 Page 260 Page 261 Page 262 Page 263 Page 264 Page 265 Page 266 Page 267 Page 268 Page 269 Page 270 Page 271 Page 272 Page 273 Page 274 Page 275 Page 276 Page 277 Page 278 Page 279 Page 280 Page 281 Page 282 Page 283 Page 284 Page 285 Page 286 Page 287 Page 288 Page 289 Page 290 Page 291 Page 292 Page 293 Page 294 Page 295 Page 296 Page 297 Page 298 Page 299 Page 300 Page 301 Page 302 Page 303 Page 304 Page 305 Page 306 Page 307 Page 308 Page 309 Page 310 Page 311 Page 312 Page 313 Page 314 Page 315 Page 316 Page 317 Page 318 Page 319 Page 320 Page 321 Page 322 Page 323 Page 324 Page 325 Page 326 Page 327 Page 328 Page 329 Page 330 Page 331 Page 332 Page 333 Page 334 Page 335 Page 336 Page 337 Page 338 Page 339 Page 340 Page 341 Page 342 Page 343 Page 344 Page 345 Page 346 Page 347 Page 348 Page 349 Page 350 Page 351 Page 352 Page 353 Page 354 Page 355 Page 356 Page 357 Page 358 Page 359 Page 360 Page 361 Page 362 Page 363 Page 364 Page 365 Page 366 Page 367 Page 368 Page 369 Page 370 Page 371 Page 372 Page 373 Page 374 Page 375 Page 376 Page 377 Page 378 Page 379 Page 380 Page 381 Page 382 Page 383 Page 384 Page 385 Page 386 Page 387 Page 388 Page 389 Page 390 Page 391 Page 392 Page 393 Page 394 Page 395 Page 396 Page 397 Page 398 Page 399 Page 400 Page 401 Page 402 Page 403 Page 404 Page 405 Page 406 Page 407 Page 408 Page 409 Page 410 Page 411 Page 412 Page 413 Page 414 Page 415 Page 416 Page 417 Page 418 Page 419 Page 420 Page 421 Page 422 Page 423 Page 424 Page 425 Page 426 Page 427 Page 428 Page 429 Page 430 Page 431 Page 432 Page 433 Page 434 Page 435 Page 436 Page 437

Scan: The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod

⤓ Download page image (full resolution)

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

OFFICER, BOARD, AND COMMISSION REPORTS
Moreover, though the proposal anticipates five “problematic
possibilities” should the Synod in convention pass the current proposals of the 7-03 Task Force and should a school eventually lose
its ecclesiastical accreditation, all five could happen as a result of
CTX’s separation from the Synod. These are the five concerns:
•

The sudden loss of eligibility for participation in Concordia
Plans

•

The removal of the ability to call certified church workers

•

The discontinuation of LCMS accepted church worker programs

•

The loss of standing as an LCMS institution, causing a possible loss in financial support and harming the overall reputation of the institution

•

A confusion of leadership, mission, and direction as a thirdparty committee—a new model of ecclesiastical oversight in
the 7-03 recommendation—exerts outside influence that is
confusing in its execution (emphasis added)

Even the CTX BOR proposal admits that “CTX will not be able
to certify [church work] students” and will need to partner with
another LCMS institution that would certify students for church
work. Separation from the Synod would cost CTX its standing as
an LCMS institution. In order to avoid the proposed “new model
of ecclesiastical oversight” of the 7-03 recommendation, CTX
proposes its own new model of ecclesiastical oversight. This new
model is most certainly “confusing in its execution.”
The desire for separation from the Synod is not new, as even the
proposal mentions discussions in 1976 and 2003 about governance
independent from the Synod. Was 2019 Res. 7-03 really the impetus, or has the desire for independence been simmering for a while?
Before the 2019 Synod convention, which passed Res. 7-03,
ELCA emeritus professor Rev. Dr. Darrell Jodock presented at a
faculty development series at CTX in July 2018. Jodock has written extensively on the nature of Lutheran higher education, much
of which is available online. Jodock’s church affiliation and longterm professorate at an ELCA school (Gustavus Adolphus College)
reflect a public confession of a Lutheran identity not in concert with
what most LCMS Lutherans understand Lutheranism to be about.
In his presentation at CTX (which was available online, and
which one of the visitation team members listened to), Jodock argued for a Lutheran university as a “third path” between sectarian
religious institutions and non-sectarian institutions. This third path
is both “Lutheran and inclusive,” deeply rooted in religious tradition but also an understanding and welcoming way of diversity
and inclusivity. Jodock told the CTX faculty that the vocabulary
of a “Lutheran identity” does not work for other faith traditions.
Instead, he argued, we must talk about “Lutheran values” to which
everyone is more willing to subscribe. This is an insidious move
to eschew a confessional identity borne out of Scripture and the
Lutheran Confessions and to replace this identity with a set of “values” for how to see the world through the same critical eyes as,
some suppose, Luther had. Jodock rejected universities being tied
to church bodies, as such affiliation automatically subjects colleges
to religious authorities. Jodock reasoned that since Luther challenged ecclesiastical authority, so should Lutheran universities. Finally, in Jodock’s vision of a Lutheran university, Lutheran identity
is reduced to the area of vocation, which supposedly “enhances the
educational experience.”

175

This is a pauper’s Lutheran identity, lacking the essence of what
Lutherans believe and confess. But it sets the stage for CTX’s move
away from the Synod’s ecclesiastical authority.
The doctrine of vocation is not the fullness of a confessional Lutheran identity, rooted in Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions.
Instead, Jodock’s presentation on vocation functions as a Trojan
horse, in which is hidden an attempt to make the imagined renegade
ghost of Luther the Geist of a Lutheran university.
If Lutheran hospitals and social service agencies are the model
for separating from Synod governance, the natural question is, “Is
there any such institution still faithful to its confessional moorings?” Is there a hospital that bears the name “Lutheran” and does
not perform or prescribe abortions? Is there a Lutheran adoption
agency that has severed its ties with a church body that does not
place adoptees into same-sex households? For that matter, is there
any example of a university or college, founded by a traditionally
conservative church body, that after severing its ties with its mother
church body continued to remain faithful to that body’s public confession? The weight of historical evidence is stacked against CTX
remaining faithful to the doctrine and practice of the LCMS once
such a separation has occurred.
Other peculiar statements about CTX’s relationship to the
LCMS can be found in recent BOR agenda and minutes:
•

September 2019: “Need to determine if we are still independent of the LCMS. If we determine we’re not—need to
notify SACS-COC. We can say we are a multi governance
system.”

•

February 2020, discussing Res. 7-03: “We embarked on a
new structure this past July, having all departments other
than philanthropy report to Kristi Kirk. … You can have
great confidence that the leadership of Concordia is deep and
very results oriented, with a focus on mission and margin.”

•

Minutes from the February 2021 BOR meeting: “Time for
us as a board to resolve that we oppose the changes of 7-03
committee. As we are not in alignment with the committee,
and they are not listening to our proposed changes. [sic] Other schools may join us in opposition, but it’s difficult to see
any other school taking the lead.”

•

Minutes from the April 2021 meeting: “Proposal: The Board
of Regents, in its meeting of April 16, 2021, commission
the president to prepare and present models of alternative
governing structures to the board and relationships to be
considered alongside the 7-03 proposed bylaws; and that the
board, after exploring and studying the risks and rewards of
each of the models, determines which one best serves the
school, the church and its constituents. The models presented will continue to align CTX with the church in a way that
is faithful to the doctrine and practice of the LCMS, allows
for a sustainable future, and meets the long-term vision of
the University.”

•

September 2021 State of the University Report about DEI:
“As we take seriously the work of diversity, equity, and inclusion, we are ever mindful of how that work is influenced
by, understood through, and lived out in accordance with our
Lutheran identity. There are many words and phrases in this
work that have been co-opted or misconstrued by various
groups. Our mission must always align with these initiatives.”
2023 Convention Workbook