Collection › LCMS Convention Workbook (St. Louis, Missouri) › 2023 · 68th Convention, Milwaukee › Page 353
LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2023, Page 353

Scan: The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod
Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

UNIVERSITY EDUCATION
•

Creating structures and opportunities by which church
worker programs at LCMS colleges and universities can be
strengthened and sustained (Section D).

and
WHEREAS, This review has produced concerns, among them
being:
• That while the new governance model allows greater
autonomy to universities with respect to “left-hand
kingdom” responsibilities, the new bylaws are highly
prescriptive and give large measures of control outside the
local board of regents, particularly the selection of members
of the board of regents.
• The concern is that the Commission for University
Education (CUE) proposal seems to diminish the legal
separation between the national Synod and the universities,
which would therefore increase the liability risk to the
Synod.
• That the CUE can not only and exclusively remove an
elected BOR member for training deficiencies but can force
a local board of regents to remove an appointed board of
regents member for the same.
• That the prior approval panel, with a disproportionate
amount of influence by the CUE, creates the list of
presidential nominees from which the board of regents may
select their president vs. the board of regents creating and
narrowing a list of nominees to be vetted and approved by
the prior approval panel.
• That the LCMS BOD, in consultation with the CUE, can
specify, amend, or rescind the benefits of affiliation from
time to time without the consultation of the local board of
regents, creating an unclear future for universities legally,
financially, strategically, and missionally, and doing the
same to students themselves.
• That the CUE’s decisions regarding accreditation with
respect to Lutheran identity and mission outcome standards
may not be appealed. Regional (secular) accreditors all have
an appeal process in place that is outlined and known.
and
WHEREAS, This review has produced questions, among them
being:
• How might the reality of today’s students and the schools as
a mission field be more prominent and celebrated in the
Preamble and throughout?
• It appears that the workload of the CUE is even greater than
the CUS. How will that work be resourced? What will be any
added costs to the church and/or schools over time? What is
meant by “direct costs” in terms of accreditation visits and
board training?
• What happens when the CUS is dissolved? What entities
would retain any remaining assets or liabilities? How will all
the endowment funds currently overseen by the CUS be
managed? As members of the CUS, would the schools now
be liable for any debt that might remain? What are the legal
implications of dissolving the CUS?
• What is the difference between being accredited and
affiliated? Can a university be affiliated and not accredited?

•

353

While an institution is on probation for up to five years, it
can no longer certify graduates for placement on the LCMS
roster. How do those students become certified for
placement? Additionally, while a church work program is on
probation for up to three years, would students within the
program need to transfer to a Concordia with an accredited
program?

and
WHEREAS, The Michigan District Board of Directors responded
to the LCMS 2019 Res. 7-03 Committee request for comments in a
letter dated Aug. 17, 2021, expressing their concern over proposed
changes to the governance model for our Concordias; and
WHEREAS, The current and former chief executives of the
Concordias publicly shared at the Council of Presidents meeting,
Wednesday, Nov. 17, 2021, their concerns over the proposed
changes; and recommended rescinding the 2019 Res. 7-03
recommendations; and
WHEREAS, The Michigan District board has examined these
concerns and concurs with the executives of the Concordias; and
WHEREAS, These concerns need to be addressed in an open and
transparent manner throughout Synod before any changes to our
governance model are made; therefore be it
Resolved, That until these concerns are addressed, the
implementation of the recommendations of the 2019 Res. 7-03
Committee should be suspended.
Michigan District
Ov. 7-07

To Appoint Task Force to
Refocus Concordia University System
for Education of Professional Church Workers
Consistent with Lutheran Confessions
WHEREAS, The Concordia University System (CUS) is
comprised of six universities in the United States which are
affiliated with The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod (LCMS);
and
WHEREAS, The initial purpose of these universities was to
prepare men and women for full-time service in the church; and
WHEREAS, The majority of students at CUS institutions are not
preparing for full-time church work; and
WHEREAS, From 2004 to 2018 enrollment for pre-seminary
(undergraduate) students declined by 59 percent; for Lutheran
school teachers, by 61 percent; and at the seminaries, by 55 percent
(Set Apart to Serve research). Furthermore, 44 percent of active
ordained men are over 55 years of age; and
WHEREAS, A number of the faculty at CUS institutions are not
rostered members of Synod nor members of LCMS congregations;
and
WHEREAS, The encroachment of false teachings from the secular
culture onto CUS campuses threatens the confession of our faith;
and
WHEREAS, A refocused CUS would enhance the ability of the
Synod to attend to the integrity of our confession; therefore be it
Resolved, That the Montana District in convention memorialize
the Synod at its 2023 convention to direct the President of the Synod
to appoint a blue-ribbon task force to perform the following:
2023 Convention Workbook