Collection › LCMS Convention Workbook (St. Louis, Missouri) › 2013 · 65th Convention, St. Louis › Page 408

LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2013, Page 408

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 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 Page 438 Page 439 Page 440 Page 441 Page 442 Page 443 Page 444 Page 445 Page 446 Page 447 Page 448 Page 449 Page 450 Page 451 Page 452 Page 453 Page 454 Page 455 Page 456 Page 457 Page 458

Scan: The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod

⤓ Download page image (full resolution)

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

408

Specific Ministry Pastor (SMP) Task Force

distributed by the Specific Ministry Pastor Committee (attached as
Addendum B). The following is a summarization of those portions
of the White Paper that the task force believes are of particular significance to this report.

enrollment (545) resulted in a 1SMP to 4.3 residential enrollment; and
the 2011 SMP enrollment (157) compared to the residential enrollment (491) resulted in a ratio of 1 SMP to 3.1 residential students.

Enrollment History: Numbers of Students (Addendum B, p. 55)

A topic of current discussion is the specific categories of service
intended to be addressed by the Specific Ministry Pastor Program. In
the minds of many, the program was to take the place of and assume
the intentions of the DELTO program, preparing pastors for hard-toserve ministries not suited to calling full time, residentially trained
men. Res. 5-01B, while granting that to be the case in part, placed
emphasis on other specific ministries such as mission developers and
planters, staff pastors, and the like.
Initially, attempts were made to categorize types of service, resulting in more than a dozen categories, some with only one student
identified (White Paper, p. 18). A March 2012 effort to categorize
students in more general categories has resulted in a general picture
of the students participating in the SMP program and the service they
anticipate providing in the future.
With 154 of 157 current participants responding, 94 students
(61%) identified themselves as “staff pastor (or vicar)” in a multipastor congregation, working primarily internally (e.g., youth, music,
education, evangelism, or their congregation’s satellite site); 17 students (11%) identified themselves as “staff pastor (or vicar)” in a
multi-pastor congregation working primarily externally (e.g., mission developer, church planter, etc.). Of 154 participants, therefore,
111 (72%) consider their work to be that of a staff pastor of a multipastor congregation.
Of the remaining 43 participants (28%), 30 students identified
themselves as “sole pastor (or vicar)” providing Word and Sacrament
ministry in an established site that is economically challenged (e.g.,
few people, remote location, etc.), one that cannot support a “general
pastor” (e.g., with an M.Div. degree or Alternate Route certification).
The remaining 13 students (8%) identified themselves as “sole pastor (or vicar)” working as mission developer or church planter (not
working from the context of a multi-pastor congregation).
These numbers and percentages change somewhat when the 154
respondents identified what they anticipated would be their future
service. Now 82 students (53%) anticipated serving as a staff pastor working internally in a large congregation; 20 students (13%)
anticipated serving as a staff pastor working externally in mission
outreach; 37 students (24%) anticipated serving as a sole pastor in
an economically challenged site; and 15 students (10%) anticipated
working in mission outreach apart from the context of a multi-pastor congregation.
This study also obtained information regarding current and future
employment circumstances. Of those responding, 72 students (47%)
are employed in another paid position in addition to their SMP service, while 81 students (53%) are not employed otherwise than their
SMP position of service. When asked what they anticipated in their
future service, 50 students (32%) stated that they anticipate employment in another paid position in addition to their SMP service, while
104 (68%) anticipate full-time employment as an SMP pastor.

When the on-campus orientation of the first group of students
(“cohort”) took place in the fall of 2008, Concordia Seminary (“St.
Louis”) began its program with 29 new students, while Concordia
Theological Seminary (“Fort Wayne”) began with 26. After adding
25 students in the fall of 2009, 24 in the fall of 2010, 19 in the fall of
2011, and a total of 34 new students in the spring quarters the latter
three years, St. Louis had enrolled 131 SMP students. According to
the White Paper, 20 students left the program during the four years,
leaving 111 enrolled in the St. Louis program by early 2012. During
the same period of time, Fort Wayne added 10 students to the original 26 in 2009, 8 more in 2010, and 7 more in 2011, for a grand
total of 51 enrolled during the four years. Five students left the Fort
Wayne program during the four years, leaving 46 enrolled by early
2012. In short, SMP enrollment at both seminaries after four years
totaled 157 students, 25 having left the program (16.5%) during the
course of those years.
Enrollment History: Comparison of Student Body Composition
(Addendum B, p. 58)
A topic of current discussion is the comparative size of the SMP
student enrollment and the residential student enrollment at the seminaries, and the consequences of those comparative enrollments for
the Synod’s seminaries going forward. The White Paper provides
helpful information.
How do SMP enrollment numbers relate to residential student
enrollment numbers? In St. Louis in 2008, the 29 new SMP students and the 93 new residential amounted to a ratio of 1 SMP to 3.2
residential students. In 2009 that ratio dropped to 1 SMP to 3.5 residential. And in 2010 and 2011, the ratio was 1 to 2.9 and 1 to 4.1
respectively. At Fort Wayne, the 2008 enrollment of 26 SMP and
55 residential resulted in a 1 SMP to 2.1 residential ratio, followed
by ratios of 1 to 6.2; 1 to 6; and 1 to 5.1 students. The new student
enrollments of the two seminaries combined and averaged out over
four years resulted in a ratio of 1 SMP student to roughly 4 residential students.
When SMP total enrollment numbers are compared to the total
residential populations of the seminaries, St. Louis’ 2008 SMP enrollment (29) compared to residential (408) resulted in a ratio of 1 SMP to
14.1 residential; 2009 total SMP (49) and residential (376) resulted in
1 SMP student to 7.7 residential; 2010 SMP (87) and residential (326)
resulted in 1 SMP student to 3.7 residential; and 2011 SMP (111) and
residential (309) resulted in 1 SMP student to 2.8 residential.
Making the same comparisons with Fort Wayne total enrollment
numbers, the 2008 SMP enrollment (26) compared to the total residential population (252) resulted in a ratio of 1 SMP to 9.7 residential
students. In 2009, total SMP enrollment (32) compared to total residential enrollment (246) resulted in a ratio of 1 SMP to 7.7 residential
students. 2010 SMP (40) and residential (219) resulted in 1 SMP to
5.5 residential students, while the 2011 SMP enrollment (46) compared to the residential student population (182) left a ratio of 1 SMP
to 4 residential students.
When combining the numbers for both seminaries, the 2008 total
SMP enrollment (55) compared to the total residential enrollment
(660) resulted in a ratio of 1 SMP to 12 residential students; the 2009
total SMP enrollment (81) compared to the total residential enrollment (622) resulted in a ratio of 1 SMP to 7.7 residential students;
the 2010 total SMP enrollment (127) compared to the total residential
2013 Convention Workbook

Enrollment History: Types of Service (Addendum B, p. 60)

Licensed Deacon Program (Addendum B, p. 91)
In the minds of many, the introduction of the SMP program was
expected to reduce the use of the licensed lay deacon program that had
been introduced by the 1989 Synod convention. Eighteen months following the 2007 convention, a special task force sought to gain from
the Synod’s 35 district presidents their initial reaction to the SMP
program by conducting a survey. The survey also sought to determine the extent to which licensed lay deacons were being used. Three
years later (February 2012), the survey was repeated to compare data