LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2026, Page 73

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

OFFICER, BOARD, AND COMMISSION REPORTS
Though many respondents noted that many pastors struggle to understand the complexities of the
Synod (and districts), residential formation provides more opportunities for exposure to and
experience in Synod and district relations. Since a non-residential student remains in the same
district in which they have been catechized and formed, their view of the Synod may reflect this
limited point of view. Residential routes provide for experience in the student’s home district, the
district of the seminary, and the district of their vicarage, all before the church calls a student to
(possibly) yet another district. During their time at seminary, students are often involved in
events that involve officials from the Synod. Thus, by the time a man graduates from a
residential seminary, they have experienced at least a tangential exposure to a broader swath of
the Synod than a man who remains in the same location and situation during his training and
subsequent call.
Strengths of Both Routes:
Though discussion often focuses on the distinction between residential and non-residential routes
to ordination, men formed by either route share some strengths. First, those who graduate from
either route are largely described as men of sincere faith who are committed to serving the
church. Non-residential and residential route pastors confess the Gospel of Jesus Christ as the
only means of salvation and confess the Lutheran Confessions as a true exposition of God’s
Word. Graduates from both routes desire to learn more and to improve their ability to serve their
congregations. Overall, graduates of both routes express their appreciation for the cohesive
community created through their education; residential pastors with those in their class and time
on campus together, while SMP pastors through their cohorts.
District Presidents noted residentially formed pastors bring formal theological leadership, while
SMP formed pastors offer strong relational credibility. 13
Observation from Standing Partnership
In their summary of the information gained through their extensive interviews and surveys, the
employees of Standing Partnership observed: “Even those who are not in the LCMS [i.e.
employees of Standing Partnership] noticed a strong perception that non-residential pastors are
not prepared theologically on the same level as residential pastors. There is a clear perceived lack
in theological understanding and ability to read and interpret the Scriptures with adequate depth
and knowledge. This is due not only to the lack of biblical languages, but also to the overall
depth of theological knowledge in the non-residential routes. This disparity does not necessarily
reflect the integrity or faith of the men who have received such training, but the curricular
differences between the routes.”

13
One such observation: “I think many of our SMPs are very conscious of the mission of the Gospel and have a zeal
for outreach and are energized along those paths. That’s why they went into the program and wanted to become
pastors, even though the challenges were daunting. I do think there may be a tendency for those men to be more
governed by their zeal in an emotional way. And perhaps there’s a temptation to rely upon those interpersonal kind
of skills and emotional motivations and not the same kind of reliance on the objective Word, and a trust that the
Word is going to do the heavy lifting. On the other hand ... when you spend 3 years in classroom … earning an
academic degree … I think those men may be more tempted to rely upon their academic prowess and rely upon the
objective power and authority of the Word — which I would absolutely say is a good thing — but perhaps undersell
the importance of the way in which the Lord works through means…. So, I think again, there’s dangers and
temptations on either side.”

9

73

Non-Survey Observations
Aside from the training differences, pastors from the different routes also manifest other
differences. One major difference is age, with M.Div. pastors much younger on average than
SMP pastors. This has several implications. First, M.Div. pastors have many more years of
service ahead of them, and therefore the church’s investment in their training bears longer
service to the church and the world. The age difference may also account for the perceived
weakness of M.Div. pastors being less inclined to emotional intelligence and less adequately
prepared for leadership and cultural understanding due to their youth. Although pastors formed
by residential routes are younger and may need to learn “on the job” how to be more adept at
leadership and how to interact with the congregation’s unique setting and history, experience
shows that who have served for several years usually learn the culture of their congregation and
grow in their ability to lead the congregations they serve.
When a congregation sends a man to seminary, they are offering up a young man from their
midst for the good of the church at large. That man may return to serve them, or he may be called
to serve other congregations in the LCMS. God may even call him into mission work;
chaplaincy; teaching in an LCMS high school, university or seminary; or other areas of ministry.
When a congregation chooses an SMP pastor, that man is not available for the whole church, but
already has a defined call and ministry. This is a major departure from the way the church has
historically called and shared pastors.
Though many see cultural familiarity as a strength of non-residential routes, this perceived
strength may not be an advantage in every respect. Pastors are called to proclaim the truth of
God’s Word. A person from outside a congregation may have an easier time diagnosing
problems and issues that have become part of the culture of that place. When Jesus called the
12 Apostles, He did not send them to ministries reflective of their cultures. Peter, Andrew, James
and John were all fisherman from Galilee, who were called out of their culture to fish for men.
The book of Acts records that they were in Jerusalem (an urban setting, unlike fishing in
Galilee). John lived out his days in Ephesus where he served as pastor/bishop. Jesus did not teach
His disciples to stay in their homes or cultures, but He called them to leave all things for the sake
of the Gospel. Even the young pastor Timothy was not instructed regarding culture and
familiarity, but instead to preach the truth of the Word to people who looked down on him
because he was young. Paul does not say that he should lead with vision or understanding of the
culture of the congregation. Paul, a man from Tarsus and who was trained in Jerusalem,
conducted his ministry in Gentile locations. This is as far from his native culture as possible.
Men grow from exposure to different cultures and can bring the knowledge of other cultures to
the congregations he serves throughout his ministry in varied contexts and locations.
Receiving a man from the seminary or from another congregation means that both pastor and
congregation must learn together. This is not negative. Though a man from the congregation
comes with familiarity, that familiarity may also come with some blind spots and a timid spirit in
the face of inevitable adversity and controversy. If a man is restricted to one congregation (his
specific ministry), that man may be reticent to address concerns that may result in the
congregation no longer desiring his ministry in that specific context, meaning he may lose his
job. The pastor who serves his home congregation may find it difficult to truly proclaim the law
10

and to pronounce judgment against people he has known and grown up with (or even family
members). Historically, the LCMS has sought to not place a man in his home congregation, since
such a relationship can be difficult for both the pastor and the congregation.
Data from LCMS Rosters and Statistics (compiled 7/30/2025):

The yellow Colloquy SMP numbers reflect the move from Licensed Lay Deacons to SMP as per
Synod Convention resolution. That process has been completed.
The number of pastors formed each year through the SMP and other non-residential routes
continues to increase relative to the number of pastors formed through residential routes. This
means that the percentage of non-residentially formed pastors in the LCMS is increasing.
This increased percentage of non-residentially formed pastors has implications. First, since each
SMP pastor requires lifetime supervision by an M.Div. pastor, there are relatively fewer M.Div.
pastors available for an increasing number of SMP pastors. Some of this is mitigated by the
average length of service of an SMP pastor compared to M.Div. pastors. On average, SMP
pastors serve for 17 years before retirement, while M.Div. pastors serve and average of 37 years.

11

Another implication, and one that bears much more importance for the life of the church is the
reality that SMP pastors have had less theological and biblical study in their programs. This
means that a larger percentage of LCMS pastors are less theologically trained each year. In other
words, the clergy of the LCMS is less theologically informed and trained each year. Since SMP
pastors are noted as being more able relationally and culturally, this ratio could also imply that
the clergy of the LCMS is growing more relational and culturally aware. But this does not take
into consideration that residentially trained pastors do grow relationally and in their
understanding of the culture in which they serve. Preaching Law and Gospel and providing
pastoral care naturally enmeshes a man into the lives of his people and draws the members of the
congregation to interact with their pastor to receive from him the Word of God and the
Sacraments. Pastor and congregation thus grow together as the Body of Christ. Due to the
restrictions placed upon SMP pastors, they are not eligible for leadership positions within the
district or Synod. Therefore, this decreasing ratio of M.Div. pastors also means fewer candidates
for leadership positions in the Synod moving forward.
Concluding Thoughts
The SMP program (and other routes) was not initiated to create an alternative pathway for any
man who desires to become a pastor. Indeed, the SMP program was designed and implemented
to provide pastors for congregations and ministries facing a situation that made waiting for or
calling a residentially trained pastor impossible or extremely unlikely. The experience and
observations of district presidents, circuit visitors and even parish pastors verifies that the
difference in curriculum manifests in pastors with different levels of biblical and theological
acumen. Therefore, strong reasons exist to provide theological supervision for our SMP pastors
throughout their years of ministry. We owe this to our SMP pastors and to their congregations.
We also owe it to young men preparing for a lifetime of ministry in the church and to the future
12

2026 Convention Workbook