My view
plays a tone-deafness one encounters far too frequently in the ELCA. If one can’t stand behind the teaching of the ELCA and its word to the larger public, one has to think seriously if one truly belongs. The ELCA made its decision in 2009; it is unbecoming of the ELCA and its apologists to whine over the
consequences it invited. Michael Dooley Indianapolis
She understands
Those who choose to leave do so for the same reason I choose to stay. They feel just as strongly about the wrongness of gay inclusion as I do about the rightness of inclusion. Had the ELCA voted to disallow such inclusion, I would have left the church because I feel strongly that all people should be treated equally, regardless of sexual orientation. The same holds true for those against inclu- sion. This isn’t selfish. It’s staying true to one’s beliefs. Those beliefs may be radically different, but dismissing them
with a Bible quote isn’t helpful. Jennifer Protil Silver Spring, Md.
Down on the farm Those leaving wouldn’t be a serious factor if the church had a “farm system” in place, guaranteeing a steady flow of new worshipers. We are contending with a distracted society that no longer sees church membership as a given or
church life as a pleasant social exercise. Rudy Dalpra Safford, Ariz.
Send “Letters” to: Letters to the Editor, The Lutheran, 8765 W. Higgins Rd., Chicago, IL 60631-4183; fax: 773-380- 2409; email
lutheran@thelutheran.org. Please include your name, city and state. Your letter will be considered for publication unless you state otherwise. The Lutheran publishes letters representa- tive of those received on a given subject. Be brief and limit your letter to a single topic. Letters may be edited for space and clarity. Letters must be signed, but a re- quest for anonymity will be honored if the subject matter is personally sensitive.
“My view” submis- sions should be 400 words on a societal event or issue or on issues in the life of the ELCA. All submis- sions are subject to editing. Send to: “My view, ” The Lutheran, 8765 W. Higgins Rd., Chicago, IL 60631; email: lutheran@
thelutheran.org; fax: 773-380-2409.
Costello lives in Maywood, Ill., and is a candidate for ordained ministry in the ELCA and a graduate of Lenoir- Rhyne University, Hickory, N.C., and Lutheran Theological Southern Seminary, Columbia, S.C.
By Rebekah Weant Costello
Sounding the alarm All not well in theological ed.
O
n July 1, 2012, Lutheran Theological Southern Semi- nary became part of the Lenoir-Rhyne University School of Theology. The coming together of these
two Lutheran institutions seemed necessary given the fis- cal challenges under which the seminary had labored. In addition, it made sense historically, given the high rate at which Lenoir-Rhyne graduates fed into the seminary. As an alumnus of both, I am an example of this trend. The joining of the two institutions could be celebrated as a new paradigm for theological education in the ELCA. There is merit in celebrating the possibilities that come with new partnerships among Lutheran institutions of higher learning. However, before we praise this shift we must first reckon with its cost. In the wake of the merger, three tenured faculty mem- bers of the seminary were let go: Mary Havens, the H. George Anderson Professor of Church History and Lutheran Confessions; Robert Hawkins, professor of wor- ship and music, dean and organist of Christ Chapel; and David S. Yeago, Michael C. Peeler professor of systematic theology. This was a monumental cost. The heart of Southern Seminary, its alumni, faculty, friends and portions of the wider ecclesial academy were devastated. These fine theologians and exemplars of Christian character formed pastors and church leaders to follow Jesus and to serve Christ’s church. The theological void left by their dismissal is difficult to fill, especially given the fiscal limitations under which the seminary must operate.
I find it difficult to believe that the ecclesial and theo- logical density of Southern Seminary has not been impov- erished by this reduction in faculty. But can we expect anything other than this if the mission of our seminaries is driven predominately by fiscal rather than theological concerns? Let me be clear—my intent is not to denigrate faithful
Christians who made tough decisions while facing finan- cial limitations. Nor is it to undermine the faithful Chris- tians who teach and serve with diligence at both institu- tions. Rather, my intent is to sound an alarm across our church: all is not well with theological education and faith formation. In the face of declining enrollment, decreased financial support of these institutitons and denominational attrition, how can we, as a church, better support our semi- naries and further their mission to form pastors and ros- tered leaders for ministry in the church?
March 2013 49
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