COP Secretary Rev. William Klettke, president of the New Jersey District, reported that, as of September, 209 LCMS congregations were calling sole pastors; 33, senior pastors; and 33, associate or assistant pastors. He also reported 203 congregations with temporary non-calling vacancies and 395 with permanent non-calling vacancies.
As a frame of reference, Klettke also listed the numbers for September 2007: 349 congregations calling sole pastors; 58, senior pastors; and 83, associate or assistant pastors. That same month, there were also 418 congregations listing non-calling vacancies, compared to the total of 598 in September 2010.
In 2007, the report did not distinguish between temporary non-calling and permanent non-calling vacancies, Klettke said.
"There is not a lot of mobility these days," said LCMS First Vice-President Rev. Herbert C. Mueller Jr., referring to the report and the state of the economy. He also added, "This is the lowest number of calling congregations that I remember and the highest number of non-calling congregations."
The COP's next meeting is Nov. 16-17 in Nashville, before the 2010 Lutheran Church Extension Fund Fall Leadership Conference there.
The concept of "non-calling" congregations is absurd. That many of these congregations stay this way for years or decades is a scandal. The Office of the Ministry is not an option. We have too many of these in the NID. If a parish really cannot or most likely will not commit to having the Office of the Holy in their midst they should be strongly urged to merge or form dual parishes, not to close, mind you, but to find other ways to have the Office of Christ as they are commanded.
ReplyDeleteFr. Anderson,
ReplyDeleteIndeed. It gets worse as you move West and encounter the lay ministry abomination.
How about 4, 5, even 6 point parishes? We once did this and today communication and ease of travel make it even easier.
This would call for real leadership and teaching from our district presidents, but I do believe it would be feasible. We certainly have enough pastors willing to work who do not currently have work. . .
+HRC
Sadly, no such "glut" exists in the United States Army Chaplaincy. We are woefully short of LCMS pastors in all three components: active, Guard and Reserve.
ReplyDeleteWhat is the age restriction on chaplains?
ReplyDeleteRobert, I'm not a Chaplain Recruiter, but I can give you some guidelines: for the Reserve or Guard, I believe it's in the neighborhood of 42-45, BUT if you have prior service that makes you younger in the Army's eyes. For Active Duty, it's probably around 42.
ReplyDeleteI just checked our Chaplain Recruiting website, and the verbiage was, "the Army will not bring in a Chaplain over the age of 50." And even that's negotiable if you have prior service.
ReplyDeleteHaving worked under a military chaplain (National Guard - with a very long deployment to Iraq) senior pastor, I would point out that this is not a career choice to enter into lightly. If you are considering this, talk to a lot of chaplains - and be sure to get the perspective of someone who is not thrilled with his government service to get a feel for the pressures, restrictions, etc., of trying to render unto God while serving Caesar. The latter's view of chaplains can been in his own tax code: Pay received for being a chaplain does not fall under the clergy pay rules, for it is given to one as an officer of the military, not as a clergyman!
ReplyDeleteI would certainly hate to see the chaplaincy become an "employer of last resort" - all the while recognizing the grave need so many faithful pastors find themselves in nowadays in our fellowship.
+HRC
To serve as a military chaplain, one must have three years parish experience (I know, at least the Navy, allows the vicarage year to count as one.) So a man still needs a "first call" before he can enter the chaplaincy. (And I think that is a very good thing. One should be a pastor in uniform, not an officer whi happens to preach.)
ReplyDeleteLooking at this, I wonder what exactly is included in the new category "temporary non-calling congregations"? If these are shifted to calling, that's a lot of openings and things are roughly right on the 2007 level.
ReplyDeleteYou are absolutely correct, Walter. The most recent class of "Basic Training Chaplains that graduated from Fort Jackson a few weeks ago had 180 trainees. 75% of them were online seminary graduates or students. The Army has to do this because we have slots to fill--especially in the Guard and Reserve. HRC is also correct. This is not a call of last resort. Lengthy absences from your family is the rule--not the exception. The good news is that you don't have to check your confessional identity at the door. Many of the kids coming into the Army grew up in the Midwest. They want the Divine Service and Law/Gospel sermons.
ReplyDelete21 years later, the Wichita amendment begins to bear putrid fruit.
ReplyDeleteI think you guys are blaming the victims here. What do you want small congregations to do that can't pay health insurance costs? Well, yes, vote for Obama who will being cheaper health care to all, can I get an AMEN!!!
ReplyDeleteBut until the health insurance lobby can be defeated what are the options we are looking at here?
1. Close the congregations? We can't do that—congregations close themselves. Apply pressure to do this?
2. Go to multiple point parishes? I don't think this is a bad idea...but you are in essence freezing the status quo and letting the congregation die a slow death. How many of your wives and families want to go to church other than Sunday morning?
3. Get someone to be a pastor there. Sure, we could send someone out of Sem with debts to go and get paid squat...or maybe the worker-priest mode...
You know, it is what it is. The reason we have lay ministry is not because we don't care about doctrine—it is because we DO care. We care so much that we are not willing to say "Look, y'all stop going to the Lutheran church and just go to some other denomination instead." Is it ideal? No, but it is a sinful world.
Until the Prophet Obama is able to bring truth, justice, and a Welfare State to the world, we're just going to have this struggle.
"The reason we have lay ministry is not because we don't care about doctrine—it is because we DO care."
ReplyDeleteThis assertion is absolutely absurd, Mark. Out here in the Northwest District, those who oppose the use lay ministers are routinely accused of "caring more about doctrine than people". We don't have to suggest that people go to some other denomination because we just encourage our congregations to mimic those other denominations. What makes many churches "Lutheran" any more is not their confession but merely their organizational affiliation. Lutheran identity isn't even on the back burner anymore out in these parts. Lay ministry is encouraged as a full manifestation of the "Priesthood of all Believers". The Predigtamt is considered optional at best, and if you insist on things like thorough theological training, ordination, and the like, you are pegged as a radical Fort Wayne sacerdotalist, a cultic purist, and utterly unloving and backward-thinking.
Even the mention of doctrine is a red flag out here. Believe me - they told me so in my pre-sem district interview!
Rev. Keith Reeder
Emmett, ID
Fr. Mark,
ReplyDeleteI lived in NE. Nebraska is a friend of mine. You don't know NE.
The solution really is easy. In fact, there are two easy solutions. First is doing what we used to do in a day and age of less easy travel: the four, five, six point parish.
Second, we simply ordain men. This is the SMP approach, sorta, kinda, with the seminary still getting their cut of the profits/prophets.
I'm a fan of the first option.
Finally, and frankly, your show either ignorance or arrogance in assuming that every small parish is "dying," slowly or otherwise.
+HRC
Heath,
ReplyDeleteYou lost me, Fr—why do you like New England? Did you have something against Randy Moss?
Besides, I'm talking about TN. I'm talking about GA. I'm talking about AR.
You favor multiple point parishes. Pastor working part time in each. Yes, I see that as dying. Is every small congregation dying? No, I was in a small congregation. I'm in one now too I guess. Both of them grew.
But then, both had/have a single pastor there *full* time.
A multiple point parish...what time are services? When are services? How exactly would you do this?
We are not talking about two parishes and going between them. Workable. Three? Four? Six?
Once again, turn to your wife standing there and ask her if she'd take the family to a service at that time, of someone other than you were preaching.
And then, are you locking in a group that isn't going to work.
So, yeah, I favor ordaining men. Give them a supervisor, ordain them, teach them onsite, and let them give consistency to a congregation.
But Heath, this is not a "doctrinal" argument. It is one of approach. We have the issue. How do we best approach it scripturally? You and I disagree on how to best approach this. Our Synod has been working out this issue—and worked through Witchita, Deacons, and SMP. This is not coming from an attitude of "I don't care." I comes from one of I do.
And all we have is a difference in how we do it. I mean...doesn't that make you a bit happy? It makes me happy. You and I aren't that far apart.
Keith Reeder,
ReplyDeleteUm, look, I understand that I represent the stench in the wonderful incense that is Gottesdiesnt, but if you are going to say I am absurd, and if you are going to disagree with me, disagree with me. And what I say. Don't lump me together with everyone who has ever disagreed with you.
We don't have to suggest that people go to some other denomination because we just encourage our congregations to mimic those other denominations.
No, but if you shut down a congregation because you insist that a person needs to go to Seminary, rather than learning on the fly and being ordained locally—well, yes, that is indeed not loving doctrine more than people. It is just being wrong about a Biblical need for seminary training. Ain't none.
I'm sure that commending seminary training is not what gets you labeled as sacerdotal. Saying that only the pastor can really, really forgive sins and that if you don't genuflect you don't really, really have the real presence, and that ordination is a special mark that last outside of a specific call to a congregation—because otherwise, why call a retired pastor "pastor"...well, that is sacerdotal. Except maybe that last one...
No, seriously, I'm sure that posting on Gottesdienst is what gets you called sacerdotal.
And, as well, look at Heath and myself. We're not that far apart on the issue now. We're struggling with how to care for smaller congregations. I'm hearing out my Patriot-loving brother. He's tolerating me and my pretend confusion of states.
I'm sure that all of your brothers recognize the importance of Seminary education. That is why they went to Seminary. I'm sure they recommend it to others.
And please—all Lutherans, even those in the liberal NW, care about doctrine. They care about Christ and his death on the cross. They care about justification. They care about baptism and the real presence (even if they don't genuflect, use individual cups, and grape juice).
Do they care about what you think they should care about? Maybe not. But that does not mean they do not care about doctrine—it means that they do not care about any and all doctrines equally. At that point, we can rattle on about doctrine versus doctrines—all fun and games—but this is a long way from saying "They don't care." They do.
Dear Mark,
ReplyDeleteI appreciate your response. But please, PLEASE just respond to what I've said and don't put words in my mouth or make assertions based on false premises. For the record, I don't judge my surroundings by a "Gottesdienst" standard. Nor do I genuflect. My comments had nothing to do with genuflection and other liturgical practice. This is not a discussion on worship. This is about preparing pastors. You seem to want to dismiss my comments under the assumption that I hold everyone strictly to the rubrics of Piepkorn/McClean, and that everything is to be viewed through Gottesdienst lenses.
You assume much when you make assertions about how things are out here. Again I direction your attention to my closing comment about my pre-sem interview. I know it should be inconceivable that some not care about doctrine, but it is true. I've seen it and heard it first hand, and it is most unsettling. It has nothing to do with posting on or reading Gottesdienst. It has nothing to do with "what I think they should care about". I was told most clearly that if you care too much about doctrine, you will be more concerned about it than people, and that there was a "purity cult" at Fort Wayne that I ought to beware. Then one of the participants told the old joke about how there will be more than just LCMS Lutherans in heaven, but SHHH! They think they're the only ones there!
That's really the way it is. Therefore do not marvel that I say these things.
Doctrine is life.
ReplyDeleteKeith Reeder,
ReplyDeleteI appreciate your response. But please, PLEASE just respond to what I've said and don't put words in my mouth or make assertions based on false premises.
(Chuckle) Fair is fair right? I promise to do my best!
Nor do I genuflect.
EepKay IetQuay...
This is about preparing pastors. You seem to want to dismiss my comments under the assumption that I hold everyone strictly to the rubrics of Piepkorn/McClean, and that everything is to be viewed through Gottesdienst lenses.
I'm not dismissing all your comments. I dismissing your comments about me being absurd. You lead with that, you gotta take the blows that follow.
I also don't know who McClean is...
But, surely this is a good thing right? I mean, we just have a few misunderstandings between us and bam, we can solve those and the next thing you know, we can be talking seriously about what to do with smaller congregations who can't afford a pastor. This is how things work, right?
You assume much when you make assertions about how things are out here. Again I direction your attention to my closing comment about my pre-sem interview.
You know, I know some guys out there, I have been interviewed for a position at your Concordia—and I generally see how our Synod operates.
I stand by my statement: I don't think it is legit to say "No one cares about doctrine in the NW." And I think that when people say "Doctrine versus people" they generally don't mean "Any and all doctrine versus people" they mean "Certain doctrine versus people." Which I tend to think as legit. David at consecrated bread after all.
I do think that there is such a thing as a purity cult and people in our Synod saying "I am more confessional than you" or "I am more theological than you" or "I am more liturgical than you."
And...I think there is such a thing as a missional cult, with people saying "I love the lost more than you" or "I do what Jesus says and you don't even try." That sorta thing.
Isn't there some happy medium to find? Some place to talk about what we believe and why it is important?
And what do we do with small churches...wait, I said that already.
I think so. I'll bet your brothers out there do as well.
K said "Doctrine is life"
Sure. Equally true is the statement "Not all doctrine is life."
Dear Mark,
ReplyDeleteWe agree that there are "cult" aspects to be avoided in both doctrine and missions. I think the first thing is to stop pitting them against one another. (This is just my general assessment and not my response to anything you've stated.) But Christians are not free to change doctrine, for we profess to teach nothing but the clear Word of the Lord.
I do not presume to judge hearts and paint everyone in my district with the same brush, and I regret that my previous comments may have indicated otherwise. I can only discern the fruits I see, and those fruits have been consistently antithetical to AC XIV as it was accepted for over 450 years. I realize that Synod opened the door to lay ministry at Wichita, but we go beyond it out here to the point that the calling of ordained pastors has been officially discouraged. Our former DP even wrote a piece in the district newsletter a couple of years ago, calling us traditionally-minded clergy as "aloof professionals" who prefer to "network with their museum-keeper colleagues." The piece then praised the laity who "require their church workers to be forward-thinking."
Re: "Doctrine is life": I realize that we disagree on the relationship between doctrine and practice. But if doctrine itself comes from God's Word, then I think we tread very thin ice when we presume to decide for ourselves that some articles of doctrine are disposable. So, if "not all doctrine is life", please tell me, which doctrine is not life?
Keith Reeder,
ReplyDeleteI think the first thing is to stop pitting them against one another.
I agree with this. And I agree because I do it all the time. I tend to think of the Synod as two bodies, two categories and just lump everyone in one gang or the other.
I think that as you speak to individuals, and actually have to directly encounter what they say and where they are, that this disrupts some of the stereotyping that we (me) do.
Our former DP even wrote a piece in the district newsletter a couple of years ago, calling us traditionally-minded clergy as "aloof professionals" who prefer to "network with their museum-keeper colleagues." The piece then praised the laity who "require their church workers to be forward-thinking."
Is this not true? I mean, is there some truth here? Some law that is appropriate and legitimate?
I don't know how far you guys are going up there. But I do know that you get guys from Sem placed up there. They still must want some pastors who graduated from Sem. But yeah—what about the smaller congregations? What do we do about that? I think that is a stickier wicket. Shoot, Heath is saying that pastors need a back-up plan. There are real challenges going on.
So, if "not all doctrine is life", please tell me, which doctrine is not life?
Tons of examples. Is 2 Peter canonical? Did Mary remain a virgin? Is it allowable for women to vote or not to vote? Did Jonah buy passage or buy the entire boat? What exactly does Paul mean by "tongues"?
Shoot, at times I'm ready to dump the entire doctrine of perspicuity...but not entirely. I think that there are tons of things we can be dogmatic on that perhaps aren't as clear as we pretend they are. And that is just fine with me, because where the bible needs to be clear—salvation by grace—it is. And I can cast my cares on Christ.
"..where the bible needs to be clear—salvation by grace—it is. And I can cast my cares on Christ."
ReplyDeleteAmen to that!
FWIW, when I speak of doctrine, I refer to not to open questions such as the perpetual virginity of the BVM, but things like Closed Communion and who ought to preach / administer the sacraments. BTW, 2 Peter is canonical, even if it is antilegomenon. To teach otherwise in our fellowship is to break a vow of ordination (accepting the canonical books of the OT & NT).
You are right that there are matters on which some take dogmatic positions when they ought not, and please know that I don't judge confessional faithfulness according to semper virgo and the like. I would never bind another's conscience regarding Jonah's maritime transactions. I tell my parishioners all the time in Bible class that it's ok to say that we don't know all the answers because Scripture doesn't provide them. But the Gospel is clear, as you stated above, as well as some of the more sticky and controversial issues such as the ordination of women and Closed Communion. When it comes to women voting, I would say that it depends on the nature of the voting at meetings. Voters' meetings do not debate and vote on doctrine (at least they're not supposed to, according to my congregation's constitution, which refers to these gatherings as quarterly business meetings).
Finally, about smaller congregations. We have them in our circuit and throughout the district. There is no reason why we cannot designate an ordained circuit rider (even on a rotating basis) to feed our Lord's more isolated sheep. We even proposed that to the district. But nope. We were told that it isn't necessary because there are perfectly qualified laymen who need to be encouraged to do Word and Sacrament ministry. And check this out! At our last regional pastors' conference, the words of institution were chanted by the praise team and a lay minister was the celebrant! So you see, lay ministry is not a matter of dire necessity. It is actively promoted among us.
If I may, just to return to the original post: I still do not understand how a six point parish would work. Does the pastor skip a Sunday at half? 7:00, 9:00, 11:00 worship at three? Or does he go to an afternoon service?
ReplyDeleteOn Gott. website here, there is a lot of concern about details when it comes to liturgy. How an individual does something in the service is important—it is not just "Well, do something close to this; work out the details later."
In the same way, I'd like to see what the details are of this six point parish. How often is the pastor there? What times are the services? Are they on Sunday? Every week?
And then, in addition to this, I would like to say that I think that I agree with Fr Curtis overall—if you are going to Seminary, go with your eyes wide open. God is with us always, but He does not promise us smooth sailing all the way.
I would say that you would be wise to have as little debt as possible. Time delayed going to Sem by working at a real job and saving up some money is not wasted time.
But in the end, it is like what I always read about writers. They generally say "If you have to write, you have to write." Same with being a pastor. If there is nothing else you can imagine doing, then by all means, go for it.
At the beginning of this I said that long term "non-calling" parishes are a scandal. They are. I don't blame these saints of God in most cases for these situations. Demographics change - people come and go. But at some point (let us say 40-50 active members or even before that) they have to be made aware of the fact that they cannot go on just for the sake of going on if they do not have a pastor. The church exists where the sheep hear the voice of their Shepherd. The pastor speaks as that voice. They cannot opt out of having that voice in their midst. They cannot. Take a retired man from the parish and send him to the seminary or SMPP, so he can be ordained, return to them and be that voice. Do a five point parish (Services at 8 and 11 Sunday morning, 9am and 7pm Wednesday and 7pm Saturday). And make sure that the call documents make it clear that such a pastor has no more responsibilities than preach, administer the Sacrament and visit as needed. Do something rather than accept the status quo.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the chaplain info. I'm 51 with 6 years prior (Navy). The chaplaincy has always sounded great but I'm not sure a 50-ish guy can keep up with the troops too easily. :)
ReplyDelete