Collection › LCMS Convention Workbook (St. Louis, Missouri) › 1975 · 51st Convention › Page 300

LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 1975, Page 300

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 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 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 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 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 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 454 Page 455 Page 456 Page 457 Page 458 Page 459 Page 460 Page 461 Page 462 Page 463 Page 464 Page 465 Page 466 Page 467 Page 468 Page 469 Page 470 Page 471 Page 472 Page 473 Page 474 Page 475 Page 476 Page 477 Page 478 Page 479 Page 480 Page 481 Page 482 Page 483 Page 484 Page 485 Page 486 Page 487 Page 488 Page 492 Page 493 Page 494 Page 495 Page 496 Page 497 Page 498 Page 499 Page 500 Page 501 Page 502

Scan: The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod

⤓ Download page image (full resolution)

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

300 HIGHER EDUCATION

tential Lutheran church unity by 1980 will have some influence
on the kind of educational offerings at Edmonton. These offer-
ings need to fully take into account the availability of other
Lutheran colleges in this part of Canada currently affiliated with
the other church bodies.

The Task Force is very much aware that the proposed
change from institutional subsidy to student tuition support
will drastically affect Concordia, Edmonton. In light of the
educational objectives of training pastors, teachers, and other
church ministries the Task Force does not believe that Concor-
dia, Edmonton, should be treated as an exception to the support
policy. It is primarily for this reason that the Task Force has
reached its conclusions.

The Task Force Recommends

Gl. That the Board for Higher Education work with the
Boards of Directors of the Alberta and British Columbia and the
Manitoba and Saskatchewan Districts and the Board of Control
of Concordia, Edmonton, to immediately determine the future
of the school:

G2. That plans be developed for Canadian support to main-
tain Concordia, Edmonton, as a synodical school or to develop
other appropriate uses for the facilities:

G3. That plans for Canadian su port or other appropriate
uses of the facilities at Concordia, Edmonton, be reported to the
respective Canadian Districts for resolution at the 1976 conven-
tion: and

G4. That final resolutions be brought to the 1977 synodical
convention for appropriate action.

H. Seminary Requirements

As indicated in the discussion on Concordia Senior College
it is evident that The Lutheran Church — Missouri Synod’s
ability to attract a sufficient number of students for the pastoral
ministry has been directly related to the supply of young men
coming through the traditional “preferred route’ from the
Junior colleges and later through the Concordia Senior College,
Fort Wayne. In recent years the supply of young men in the
preferred track has dwindled, and young men who have pur-
sued their educational objectives at nonsynodical! institutions
have been recruited for the seminary in increasing numbers.
It is painfully obvious that insufficient numbers of young men
are following the traditional “preferred route,” but the semi-
naries have found it possible to recruit non-pre-ministerial
students from the synodical colleges and students who have
attended colleges in other settings to provide a reasonable
supply of pastors to meet most needs.

It should not be assumed that the current situation is a new
experience for The Lutheran Church — Missouri Synod, because
throughout its history fairly large numbers of young men have
entered the pastoral ministry from nonsynodical preministerial
backgrounds and have served the church in an exceptional
manner. The Task Force is convinced, however, that there is
great strength to be found in maintaining a “preferred route”
for a significant number of young men entering the pastoral
ministry. At the same time the Task Force recognizes that
qualified young men must be recruited from other educational
backgrounds to provide for the church's future needs.

In reviewing the future requirements for pastors it appears
possible that a sufficient number could be educated in one
location. However, it is doubtful that a sufficiently diversified
program could be developed at one location to provide for a
variety of student backgrounds and needs or for the variety of
congregational needs. Additionally, it is questionable whether
a single seminary with an enrollment in excess of 1,000 on-
campus students would provide an ideal educational setting for
seminary students.

The Task Force Recommends

H-Al. That The Lutheran Church — Missouri Synod has a
continuing need for more than one seminary:

H-A2. That the operation of more than one seminary can
best be accomplished in separate facilities and at separate
geographic locations:

H-A3. That the Board for Higher Education assist the semi-
naries to plan curricula that provide distinctive and unique
programs in pastoral ministry at each location, so that unneces-
sary duplication of personnel and physical resources is avoided:

H-A4. That at the present time the offering of advanced
degree programs be offered only through the St. Louis semi-
nary: and

H-A5. That every effort be made to provide for the appro-
priate sharing of personnel and other resources, so that the
seminary facilities of The Lutheran Church— Missouri Synod
serve the greatest possible constituency at the least possible
expense to the participants.

Concordia Theological Se minary

The formal beginning of what is now Concordia Theological
Seminary, Springfield, IIl., started in 1846 in Fort Wayne, Ind.
More than one million German-speaking immigrants came to
America in the 1840s and 1850s. The main concern of these
immigrants was survival. The need for training young men for
pastors was soon evident. The need was of an immediate nature,
and lengthy seminary training was impractical. From Fort
Wayne, Ind., this practical seminary was transferred to St. Louis
as an economy move and largely for economy reasons was finally
established at Springfield, III., in 1875 to fulfill the practical needs
of supplying men for parish work among a rapidly growing immi-
grant population. Though this was extremely vital to the growing
church, at least a majority of the young Synod felt that a learned
clergy who had the advantage of being able to read the original
text of the Bible was vital to the church’s future.

Throughout the history of the Springfield operation it is
evident that the needs of the practical seminary frequently
were not given a high priority. Several attempts have been
made to terminate its programs or to transfer the operation
elsewhere. The strengthened academic standards developed
during the early 1960s and the need for recognition of the
graduates having received a quality academic education have
altered the status and financial support of the practical seminary
in a very positive manner. During the past 100 years Springfield
has survived rather difficult obstacles and attempts to close the
seminary. In spite of this, Springfield has proved its ability to
perform a vital service for the Synod.

As a part of its total recommendations the Task Force feels
that the Synod would be well served by reasonably equal
facilities and financial support for the seminary programs. A
variety of servants are needed to serve a diversity of congrega-
tions and ministries. Education for this variety dictates that
quality offerings be made available to meet these needs. The
expense of improving the Springfield facilities to provide for
the future will not overcome the other concerns attendant to
that location. The facilities at Fort Wayne were originally
developed to serve the Synod for the education of future pastors.
The Task Force feels that, although some remodeling and
adjustments are necessary, it would be prudent to utilize all
the resources involved at that location as an appropriate setting
for the Springfield seminary and for other uses of benefit to
pastors and congregations in that region.

The Task Force Recommends

H-B2. That the best use of synodical resources requires that
the facilities at Fort Wayne, Ind., be utilized for seminary
education by Concordia Theological Seminary:

H-B2. That the Board for Higher Education be directed to
transfer Concordia Theological Seminary to Fort Wayne,
Ind., by Sept. 1, 1976:

H-B3. That the Board for Higher Education and the seminary
Board of Control explore the potential of locating various prac-
tical special ministry programs at the Fort Wayne facilities: and

H-B5. That the proceeds from the disposition of the Spring-
field property be used to offset any costs involved in (1) the trans-
fer of appropriate resources of the seminary, (2) the transfer
of appropriate resources of the preministerial program at Fort
Wayne, and (3) for any necessary remodeling of facilities to
accommodate these purposes. Any remaining proceeds shall be
set aside as an endowment for needy students attending a
synodical seminary program.

The Needs for Seminary Training in Canada

The report of the Committee on Colloquies to the 1971
convention indicated that a problem of obtaining a sufficient
number of candidates for Canadian parishes through training
in the United States-oriented seminaries has always existed.
Recruitment of students from Canadian universities has been