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
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