Collection › LCMS Convention Workbook (St. Louis, Missouri) › 2023 · 68th Convention, Milwaukee › Page 176
LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2023, Page 176
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
176
OFFICER, BOARD, AND COMMISSION REPORTS
•
September 2021 Governance Exploration: “The work on
which the board is embarking will set the institution on a
path in which it can thrive and move ahead. Having explored
options and making a conscious decision allows the institution to embrace its governance relationships and make important decisions for the future.”
•
December 2021 President’s Goals for 2020–2021 include
“By February 11, 2022, the Board has decided on the governance structure that reflects its future relationship with
the LCMS. … I continue to explore this topic with multiple
people, seeking advice and best practices. I believe that the
Board is on track to make a decision no later than February
11.”
Despite repeated clarifications from the LCMS Commission on
Constitutional Matters (CCM) that, in accord with the Scriptures,
presidents of CUS universities must be men, CTX’s proposed new
bylaws are vague on the president being male, making no mention
of his role as theological overseer of the university and changing
pronouns to the generic and grammatically incorrect “their.” Of the
president of any institution of the Concordia University System,
LCMS Bylaw 3.10.6.6 says, “He shall serve as the spiritual, academic, and administrative head of the institution.” The proposed
new bylaws for CTX, however, describe the duties of the president
differently: “The President shall be an executive officer of the University and serve as the head of the University.” Not only does the
proposal remove CTX from the ecclesiastical oversight carried out
by the President of the Synod, the CUS, and the Synod in convention, but it also removes any responsibility for ecclesiastical headship from the president.
CTX’s proposal to separate from the ecclesiastical oversight of
the Synod brings into question CTX’s faithfulness to a Lutheran
identity before such a separation might occur. If CTX is already
robustly and faithfully Lutheran, one could perhaps expect such
a divorce from ecclesiastical oversight to yield—at best—no diminishment of the university’s Lutheran identity. Not one of the
visitors, nor any careful student of the history of formerly churchaffiliated universities, expects such a separation to result in the
university’s increased faithfulness to a scriptural and confessional
Lutheran identity. Therefore, this is the pressing question: If the
current status quo is the ceiling for a Lutheran identity following a
separation of CTX from the Synod, how faithful is CTX presently
to such a Lutheran identity?
shortcoming, however, is its failure to articulate a Lutheran identity. Merely saying “we are Lutheran and we agree with what The
Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod teaches” fails to offer anything
meaningful whereby the teaching and practice of the university
might be evaluated using the DLI, which is its expressed function.
The DLI calls for university leadership that “both represents
and is committed to” the confession of the faith in Article II of
the LCMS Constitution, as well as “a sufficient number of faculty
who deeply understand the ethos of Lutheran higher education.”
And yet, presently only three members of the leadership team are
members of LCMS congregations. The majority of the faculty are
not members of LCMS congregations, although CTX leadership
suggests improvements have been made in the quantity of LCMS
faculty over the last three years. One interviewee described the current process for catechizing new faculty: a four-day orientation in
the summer, which includes a half day on “Lutheran ethos.” Neither Luther’s Small Catechism nor the Augsburg Confession, both
foundational to a Lutheran identity and prescriptive for a Lutheran
ethos, is used.
The visitation team heard from two former faculty members
who believed that their quick and quiet dismissals were due in
part to their fidelity to the Lutheran Confessions. One other former
faculty member grew so tired of secular worldviews and agendas
antithetical to a Lutheran identity that he left for employment elsewhere.
The visitation team produced an extensive list of troubling
things at odds with the insistence of interviewees that CTX is built
on a solid foundation of Lutheran theology, which would positively
influence students, even if they were not Lutheran, some of which
are listed below:
•
The professor of Lutheran identity and mission resigned
from the LCMS clergy roster in 2011.
•
Speakers on Lutheran identity have included the current
dean of Christ College, Valparaiso University, and a former
dean of Christ College, Valparaiso University. No interviewee recalled any faculty instruction in Lutheran identity from
anyone in the LCMS.
•
Non-Lutheran faculty regularly speak in chapel, and the visitation team was told that this practice has BOR approval.
•
In anticipation of the visit, some of the visitation team
members watched the online CTX chapel service for Holy
Tuesday. The service featured a pastor from a local nondenominational church, who invited students to make their first
surrender to God.
•
A post on the CTX website from an administrator closed
with a prayer from Richard Rohr, a Roman Catholic priest
who denies that salvation is only through Christ. This prayer
began and concluded, “O Great Love … we offer these
prayers in all the holy names of God. Amen.”
•
A CTX webpage on “consent” approaches sexual ethics
from a purely secular perspective, without any treatment of
God’s design for marriage and sexuality. “Show your partner
that you respect them enough to ask about their sexual needs
and desires. If you are not accustomed to communicating
with your partner about sex and sexual activity, the first few
times may feel awkward. Practice makes perfect. Be creative
and spontaneous. Don’t give up.”
Lutheran Identity
What does the evidence show regarding CTX’s Lutheran identity? Interviewees assured members of the visitation team that the
university has a clear, distinct Lutheran identity. Few, however,
articulated what a Lutheran identity is. Some interviewees talked
about vocation and preparing students for lives of service. Some
interviewees spoke of the paradoxes of Lutheran theology. Some
faculty told us they were glad to be able to talk about faith in the
classroom; others told us that a Lutheran identity is not part of their
jobs.
In order to maintain alignment with LCMS doctrine and practice, the CTX BOR drafted Concordia University Texas—A Demonstration of its Lutheran Identity (DLI), “a framework by which
CTX will live out and demonstrate faithfulness to its Lutheran
identity.” This document notably states that CTX will continue to
subscribe to Article II of the LCMS Constitution, despite a pending
proposal to separate itself from the Synod. The document’s major
2023 Convention Workbook