LCMS Convention Proceedings St. Louis, Missouri — 2013, Page 139

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

Resolved, That the Chief Mission Officer and one representative from each seminary shall, in consultation with the Council of
Presidents, provide leadership, coordination, and oversight for the
Specific Ministry Pastor program; and be it further

Additional data are needed to assess the program fully. However,
concerns regarding the program have been raised in overtures and
reports submitted to the floor committee and need to be addressed,
including:

Resolved, That each seminary shall select its own representative.

• the program’s admission criteria (cf. Ov. 5-21; Task Force
Report, p. 414)
• adequate academic standards within the SMP program (fewer
overall courses in comparison with residential seminary
programs (cf. Ov. 5-21, 5-22, 5-28)
• lack of instruction in the biblical languages (Task Force
Report, p. 416)
• confusion regarding the definition of “specific ministry” (cf.
Ov. 5-23)
• lack of a consistent standard for mentoring SMP vicars and
pastors (cf. Task Force Report, p. 415)
• a perception that men are being approved for SMP admission
who should be enrolling in one of the residential degree
programs (cf. Task Force Report, p. 414)
• SMP vicars officiating at the Lord’s Supper without being
properly called (rite vocatus; AC XIV; oral report to the floor
committee)
• the potential challenge of an ordained SMP pastor not
completing the program and how properly to remove
him from the roster of the Synod (oral report to the floor
committee)
On the other hand, both seminaries and several districts report
that SMP students are hardworking, willing to sacrifice (often
bi-vocational, serving for minimal pay), receiving strong support
from their respective congregations, benefiting from contextual
education (learning and application taking place nearly simultaneously), and developing tight collegial bonds within each cohort
of students. A significant number of overtures (5-22, 5-23, 5-24,
5-25, 5-27, 5-31) and reports were submitted in support and commendation of the SMP program.

Action: Adopted (9)
(Res. 5-03B was originally introduced by the committee during
Session 6 and, after discussion, referred back to the committee. It
was brought back as Res. 5-03D during Session 7 and, during discussion, was again referred back to the committee. Finally, during
Session 9, it was brought back as Res. 5-03E reflecting an earlier
convention action which amended Bylaw 3.4.3.8 (as quoted). After
discussion, Res. 5-03E was adopted as presented [Yes: 883; No: 34].)

To Continue and Strengthen Specific Ministry
Pastor (SMP) Program
RESOLUTION 5-04B
Overtures 5-16–25, 5-27–34 (CW, pp. 223–229); Appendix IV
(CW, pp. 414–417)
Rationale
Residential seminary education has served the Synod as a wonderful blessing of Almighty God throughout her history. It remains
the premier path into the Office of the Holy Ministry.
The 2007 LCMS convention established the Specific Ministry Pastor (SMP) program at both seminaries to develop pastors
for “specific ministries” which “include such categories as church
planter, staff pastor, and others as needs arise” (2007 Res. 5-01B).
SMP was also established to address concerns expressed regarding the Synod’s permitting licensed lay deacons (1989 Wichita Res.
3-05B).
The SMP Task Force recommends the continuation of the SMP
program, stating:
Special circumstances (e.g. small parishes which cannot
afford a pastor) exist. Flexibility is vital as the church fulfills her vocational calling to preach the Gospel to everyone
everywhere. While the church cannot maintain her theological integrity, fidelity, and courage in these bewitching
times unless she has an overall well-trained and doctrinally steeped ministerium, special circumstances warrant
less-trained pastors so the means of grace can be delivered
by a called and ordained pastor. Therefore the task force
recommends the retention of the SMP program for special
circumstances.
The SMP program is relatively new, with the first cohort of students completing the program less than a year ago. However, the
practice is not without precedent in the LCMS, since Nothilfern
(“emergency helpers”) were utilized in the early years of the Synod.
Furthermore, the long history of Concordia Theological Seminary
as the practical seminary continued this practice.
R e s olu t i on s

Therefore be it
Resolved, That the SMP program be retained; and be it further
Resolved, That the Synod affirm that SMP pastors are properly
called in accord with Article XIV of the Augsburg Confession; and
be it further
Resolved, That the Synod in convention give thanks to Christ for
the men who have completed the SMP program and are now serving faithfully in Christ’s Church, and for the significant investment
by both seminaries in the development of an SMP curriculum; and
be it further
Resolved, That an SMP Committee as described by Res. 5-03E
consider the concerns enumerated in the 2013 SMP Task Force
Report and in overtures submitted to the 2013 convention of the
Synod; and be it further
Resolved, That the authority over admission to and administration of the SMP program remains with the seminaries while the
respective district president remains responsible for determining
the appropriateness of the specific ministry; and be it further

2 0 1 3 C o n v e n t io n P r o c e e d i n g s

|

139