E-Harmony, Virtual Learning and SMP Pastoral Formation

May 20th, 2014 Post by

hand-holding-mobile-smart-phone-1417191-m        On-line dating sites are proliferating. And, to head this one off at the pass, I am not employing their services! Many options including “Christian Mingle,” and “E-harmony,” provide services to singles in society. Data and facts are checked in the appropriate boxes and communication commences. But a virtual relationship based on “facts” goes only so far. Should things continue in a positive direction, individuals then consider the “big” question: should they meet in person? An unspoken realization confronts these individuals: facts are important, but not sufficient for authentic community. Instinctively they know that meaning is found when knowledge is applied within community or relationship.

On-line learning is most effective when learning revolves around the communication of basic facts as seen in the disciplines of computer programming, chemistry, mathematics and so on. In this domain the virtual is most helpful. Is the accumulation of bare knowledge and facts sufficient for a relationship of any meaning? Most seeking a relationship would unequivocally say, “no”. The accumulation of facts and data are at best preliminary when people are yearning for something authentic.

Though it is counter intuitive, there is a growing awareness in society that virtual relationships are sadly having the unintended consequence of driving people further apart. Just look at how teenagers are glued to their cell phones even at meals or on dates! Knowledge and data are faux substitute for a relationship. The more people communicate through their devices the less authentic community they have. So endemic is this development that a Washington Post article in June 2006 said:

Americans are far more socially isolated today than they were two decades ago, and a sharply growing number of people say they have no one in whom they can confide, … A quarter of Americans say they have no one with whom they can discuss personal troubles, more than double the number who were similarly isolated in 1985. Overall, the number of people Americans have in their closest circle of confidants has dropped from around three to about two.[1]

To think the proliferation of facts will secure relationships has depersonalizing gnostic overtones where meeting and knowing the individual is subordinated to bare knowledge. David Timms has observed the following:

Lynn Smith-Lovin, a Duke University sociologist who helped conduct the study [in the above Washington Post citation]; noted that people may have six hundred friends on Facebook and email twenty-five people a day, but rarely discuss matters of personal importance.  Western culture is adrift. At some point in the past, we left the moorings of community and settled for society. The shift has had profound implications. Society speaks to our ability to organize ourselves as a group of people. Community speaks to our connectedness to one another. Society refers to structures and systems. Community refers to relationships. The two terms share common ground—people—but their commonality stops there. A stronger society does not necessarily produce a stronger community. For example, a well-oiled Little League Baseball club (a sporting society), with weekly email contact and automated phone reminders of upcoming events, carefully planned game schedules, and smooth administration does not automatically produce camaraderie among parents and goodwill among players. As a group of people with a mutual interest in baseball they may have a strong society but relatively weak community. Many people within that society get a service they want, but may barely know each other. The club (society) has rules that tell people how to report misbehavior, fulfill team responsibilities, collect sponsorship, and treat umpires. But a community requires more than policies and procedures. Indeed community cannot be legislated with bylaws or constructed with a constitution.[2]

To that end, participants in on-line dating sites will decide to cross the Rubicon and meet person-to-person. Though facts are helpful, purveyors of “compatibility” wisdom know their limitation when it comes to authentic community. The desire to meet in person signals that relationships formed in close proximity have a more sure foundation than what can be offered through a “data dump” and over the “Wi-Fi.”

Is pastoral formation about facts, relationships, or, is it about both? If it is about both and one component is minimized, is the pastoral formation of the individual compromised? Pastoral training certainly includes the impartation (indoctrination) of facts which in the context of the church is rightly called “doctrine”. In our day and age the transmission of facts—doctrine—is highly desirable and necessary. As C.F.W. Walther wrote years ago, “A proper indoctrination is needed by you [seminarians and pastors] more than by pastors in Germany; for you are living in the land of sects.”[3]

If the “data dump” of doctrine were the sole prerequisite for pastoral formation, then the growth of pastors would be no different from the training of computer programmers, chemists, mathematicians, etc. But no one would say that Pastoral Office is solely about the impartation of facts. We are not gnostic Christians! Above all, the Pastoral Office is about meaningful community as the called man lovingly serves the bride of Christ with Word and Sacrament. Pastoral formation was not innate to the Twelve, Timothy and Titus, and nor is it with us. Along with the Holy Spirit’s work, sainted men of God recognized by the church are privileged to help form shepherds in a designated community.

The Twelve had three years of “resident education” which included the modeling of their Office and the imparting of facts from Christ before they went out on their own. Timothy and Titus came under the “seminary influence” of St. Paul’s teaching. A nod to this residential education is seen at circuit meetings when pastors reference their seminary professors who modeled and taught the faith. Often the most formative interaction with a seminary professor occurs not in the impartation of facts in the classroom but in the commons, or in quiet conversation. This is also seen parish life where critical times of community between parishioners and pastor may not occur in Bible Class or the pulpit, but at the home visit.

Certainly SMP trained men have a sense of congregational community nourished from the body of Christ, their home parishes. But does virtual learning do as well as residential learning in fostering a collegial pastoral community amongst fellow shepherds? District Presidents tirelessly encourage pastors to not forsake circuit meetings because they are an opportunity to learn from one-another. That District Presidents have to encourage attendance at circuit meetings decries that “unexcused” absences are all-too-frequent. Will a “virtual” seminary education encourage or discourage physical, flesh and blood attendance at circuit meetings?

Modeling the office also has similarities to the role of a father and husband. Increasing numbers of men in our society do not have a resident father at home and this is detrimental. When men get married, learning occurs on-site in the “vocation” of father and husband amidst the hurly-burly of family life. Husbands and fathers draw on their earthly fathers, grandfathers, and confidants and in a similar way seminarians grow from their spiritual fathers in the seminary. More than simply the impartation of facts is needed to develop a man into a husband and father. The proliferation of men’s retreats testifies that some things are more “caught” than “taught” in the safety of a “seminary” community.

Sociological data unfailingly affirms that having family meals together is vitally important in the formative development of children. Families who do are stronger and healthier on every scale of sociological measurement. Seminary life is centered around the family meal of Holy Communion which in addition to the gift of Christ’s forgiveness also fosters trust and love for brother seminarians which continues as pastors in the parish.

Our parish helps support Rob Lutz from Crookston, MN who every summer spends his time in Yambio, South Sudan. He is involved in helping form and support the budding seminary associated with the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Sudan (ELCS). We also support Rev. James Kollie of Cotton Tree Liberia, in West Africa. Time and again Lutz and Kollie share how men so value a residential education they leave their families for months-on-end to be formed into shepherds who will lovingly serve Christ’s people in the Public Office.

A recent edition of the Reporter[4] has a wonderful article describing the dedication of a new building housing the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Ghana’s (ELCG) Lutheran Theological Seminary. In the minds of our Lutheran brothers and sisters in Ghana, a traditional seminary is so desired and necessary for pastoral formation that ELCG Bishop Rev. Dr. Paul Kofi Fynn mentions how the dream of a seminary was 25 years in the making! A striking picture of the Seminary building at its dedication is festively shown on p. 7.

In his book, Living the Lord’s Prayer, Timms quotes Shane Hipps, who has strong cautionary words regarding the development of virtual communities.

In virtual community, our contacts involve very little real risk and demand even less of us personally. In this sense we experience the paradox of intimate anonymity. [This virtual community] functions a bit like cotton candy: it goes down easy and satiates our immediate hunger, but it doesn’t provide much in the way of sustainable nutrition. It spoils our appetite for the kind of authentic community to which Scripture calls us.… If virtual community functions like cotton candy, then authentic community is more like broccoli. It may not always taste good but it provides crucial nourishment for the formation of our identity. Authentic community will undoubtedly be marked by conflict, risk, and rejection. At the same time it offers the deepest levels of acceptance, intimacy, and support.

Virtual community declares mine and yours and his and hers as though everyone lives independent lives lined only by a thread or two. But genuine community demands an authentic, collective, inclusive our—multiple lives woven strongly together, not simply hanging by threads.[5]

Sadly, we hear reports where virtual conversations have become vitriolic as people hide behind anonymity. Barriers are less rigid when people live in community which promotes trust and healthy conversation about potentially divisive issues. Congregational community develops amongst those who faithfully attend their local church. But how well does SMP training go in developing a collegial esprit de corps of pastoral identity? Collegial pastoral community certainly is strengthened through residential community life as seminarians interact with each other for three years developing trust and understanding amongst themselves. As creatures reflecting the image of the Triune God, the awareness that ultimate meaning is found in community has been built into our DNA.

Visitors of on-line dating sites quickly admit that for a relationship to grow in a healthy manner face-time—not virtual time—is needed. In pursuit of this goal, church officials never tire of encouraging pastors to maintain and cultivate authentic pastoral community by attending circuit meetings and pastors’ conferences. It remains to be seen if pastoral collegial community can be develop in the SMP programs to the same extent it is developed through four year residential seminarian life.

As with all new endeavors, more understanding will unfold in time. My prayer is that this inadequate article will not bring unrest amongst the brothers; but prayerfully a modicum of understanding and continued conversation as we address these new issues. I am desirous to learn from the comments that will be forthcoming.

In Christ,

- Pastor Weber

 

[1] Shankar Vedantam, “Social Isolation Growing in U.S., Study Says,” Washington Post, Posted Friday, June 23, 2006. >>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/22/AR2006062201763.html<< [Accessed March 9, 2014].

[2] David Timms, Living the Lord’s Prayer (Minneapolis: Bethany House, 2008), 26-27.

[3] C.F.W. Walther, A Proper Distinction Between Law And Gospel, trans., W.H.T. Dau  (St. Louis, MO.: Concordia Publishing House, 1928), 178

[4] Pam Nielsen¸ “Dedication a Dream Come True for Ghana Church Leaders,” Reporter (March 2014): 1, 7.

[5] David Timms, Living the Lord’s Prayer (Minneapolis: Bethany House, 2008), 36-37.


Categories: Pastor Karl Weber Tags:




Rules for comments on this site:


Engage the contents and substance of the post. Rabbit trails and side issues do not help the discussion of the topics.  Our authors work hard to write these articles and it is a disservice to them to distract from the topic at hand.  If you have a topic you think is important to have an article or discussion on, we invite you to submit a request through the "Ask a Pastor" link or submit a guest article.


Provide a valid email address. If you’re unwilling to do this, we are unwilling to let you comment.


Provide at least your first name. Please try to come up with a unique name; if you have a common name add something to it so you aren't confused with another user. We have several "john"'s already for example.  If you have a good reason to use a fake name, please do so but realize that the administrators of the site expect a valid email address and also reserve the right to ask you for your name privately at any time.


If you post as more than one person from the same IP address, we’ll block that address.


Do not engage in ad hominem arguments. We will delete such comments, and will not be obligated to respond to any complaints (public or private ones) about deleting your comments.


Interaction between people leaving comments ought to reflect Christian virtue, interaction that is gracious and respectful, not judging motives.  If error is to be rebuked, evidence of the error ought to be provided.


We reserve the right to identify and deal with trollish behavior as we see fit and without apology.  This may include warnings (public or private ones) or banning.

  1. Big Boy
    May 25th, 2014 at 03:46 | #1

    @ Helen

    “My son was refused the congregation’s scholarship aid because he had announced plans to attend CTS and the Pastor did not approve his plans. Our Elder expressed regrets; he’d asked for the funds (which we didn’t know were possible).”

    I don’t want to get into a harangue, but how did you not know congregational aid was possible given CTS writes a letter to their home congregation on the behalf of each and every student that attends.

    Moreover, the student is provided a copy of that letter in email when it’s sent.

    Lastly, I’m not sure I follow. You are required to have four letters of recommendation to CTS and your pastor is required to be one of them. Did your pastor not approve of their attendance period, or just to CTS? (Pastor could easily pull recommendation as there is no simple way to transfer packets between seminaries)

    Or was this for CS SL? And your pastor did not want him to go to CTSFW? And may I ask why he didn’t want him to go to the latter?

  2. helen
    May 25th, 2014 at 12:10 | #2

    @Big Boy #1
    Or was this for CS SL? And your pastor did not want him to go to CTSFW? And may I ask why he didn’t want him to go to the latter?

    I suppose you may ask (and I may answer), since it was more than 30 years ago.That Pastor had been on CTS faculty before Robert Preus came. He was [not fond] of Robert Preus.

    The Elder had asked for the undergraduate assistance that the congregation provided for future church workers. As far as seminary references were concerned, Bill joined an LCMS congregation in his college town. I expect he got them from there. By that time we didn’t belong to the original congregation either, because people had gotten involved with Seminex.

    I don’t want to make a thing of this; I only wanted to point out that all the sources of funds you listed are not necessarily there.

  3. Big Boy
    May 25th, 2014 at 12:40 | #3

    @Helen

    I appreciate the brotherly way you wish to resolve this. I would simply ask that you, with supportive fact (please provide a URL link), direct the reader to which source I listed as unavailable.

    Every source I listed, I qualified for personally and I even excluded one that is rare for the seminarian to earn.

    Moreover, the fin aid people will help the seminarian locate as much as possible. They are very diligent in helping their students.

    Again, let’s stick with facts regarding seminary funds and allow the student to make prudent decisions based on the outcome of their own application.

  4. helen
    May 25th, 2014 at 18:28 | #4

    @Big Boy #3

    All of the sources you mentioned probably should be involved.
    I related a personal experience which is hopefully rare, if not unique.
    And old. I would need to ask my grandson, a 2013 graduate, what’s current.

    We are so used to the internet now that we think everything is on it!
    Not. quite. (Yet).
    : )

  5. LadyM
    May 26th, 2014 at 07:05 | #5

    @Big Boy #50 If I unknowingly discouraged men from going through the application process, I apologize. That was never my intent.

    What, then, in your much more learned opinion, would you say is the true reason for SMP and why do men use it if the on campus education seems to be so much better? I was applying secular reasoning to this, apparently in error. Many, if not most degrees that can be accomplished online are cheaper, if one considers the travel, housing, etc. of an on or commuted campus education. I have taken several online classes for this very reason.

    As far as the adoption monies issue, I was speaking of a friend who was at a different seminary thirty some years ago, as well as my former pastors in much the same age group. Perhaps times have changed for the better in that area. That would be wonderful, if true, for both seminaries’ future prospects.

  6. Big Boy
    May 28th, 2014 at 13:07 | #6

    @LadyM

    You bring up a good point: What is the purpose of the SMP program?

    The SMP program is listed on the CSL Website as:

    The SMP program is designed to meet the needs of the church for pastors in mission and ministry opportunities where a pastor with a seminary degree may not be available. (And it is doing so in surprising ways.)

    Wow, the parenthetical there tells the truth, don’t it?

    As they state, the SMP is for places where an MDiv is unavailable. Wow! Just two years ago they couldn’t place all the MDiv graduates…

    I wish I truly knew the intent of the SMP. I asked about it earlier. I can speculate as the effects, but I don’t have concrete evidence of intent. Or if this is simply a case of Laws of Unintended Consequences.

    Something certainly is amiss. But if it is being used as the off the record “budget” program to ordination and call; then the LCMS has more serious problems than I previously thought.

  7. Randy
    May 28th, 2014 at 14:19 | #7

    @LadyM #5

    @Big Boy #6

    I’m not sure of the intent either, but I can tell you the program is being used in multi-pastor churches, that can obviously support a called pastor, far more than they are being used in small rural congregations. See the evidence in the next paragraph:

    According to data collected for the LCMS SMP White Paper dated March 2013, 72% of SMP students reported that they were serving in multi-pastor churches while only 28% were serving in remote locations where a “general pastor” could not be supported. See the following link for this white paper:

    http://www.lcms.org/Document.fdoc?src=lcm&id=1832

  8. Big Boy
    May 28th, 2014 at 21:18 | #8

    @ Randy

    That’s really troubling. The listed purpose is clearly not beig followed.

    Personally, I’d like to see the program abolished.

    As a dovetail, if the LCMS has so much money to built seemigly corrupt administrations in Kenya, it has enough money to pay for students to go through seminary. Get back to the absolute best and brightest and most confessional students.

  9. helen
    May 28th, 2014 at 21:34 | #9

    @Big Boy #6
    As they state, the SMP is for places where an MDiv is unavailable. Wow! Just two years ago they couldn’t place all the MDiv graduates…

    Sure that wasn’t they “couldn’t” place all the confessional M Div’s from Fort Wayne [even if congregations in their district were asking for them]?

  10. Randy
    May 28th, 2014 at 22:03 | #10

    The issues we face in the LCMS are not based on theology and doctrine alone, which are tremendous issues, but we also face one of ethics. CoWo and liberal pastors take ordination vows that they don’t keep. Many pastors say one thing, but do another (SMP implementation), while even others simply refuse to address any who are in error.

    Back in my cadet days we had an Honor Code – “I will not lie, cheat, or steal, nor tolerate those who do.” Sure, we’re sinners and we all fail, but the code meant that we professed a standard and were expected to live up to it. When we failed, our peers would hold us accountable. There are supposed to be accountability mechanisms in place to correct each other when we stray. Can you imagine a system that would allow a military pilot to earn his wings by blowing off every rule in the book? Of course not! Nobody would fly with him. He’d be deemed untrustworthy due to a lack of judgment, air discipline, and character. Yet, we allow, and even encourage, such men to lead our flocks!

  11. Rev. McCall
    May 29th, 2014 at 09:02 | #11

    @Randy #10
    “Can you imagine a system that would allow a military pilot to earn his wings by blowing off every rule in the book?”

    -Wait a minute, are you trying to tell me that “Top Gun” wasn’t based on a real story?!

  12. Randy
    May 29th, 2014 at 09:53 | #12

    @Rev. McCall #11

    Rev. McCall, too funny.

    Unfortunately, I imagine much of what we face in the synod today may remind you of your law enforcement days…….half truths, circular arguments, and an impotent system of corrections…………….

  13. Rev. Robert Mayes
    May 30th, 2014 at 09:08 | #13

    @LadyM #5

    Lady M:

    Let me just suggest that the introduction of the SMP program (as an alternative way to ordain pastors, giving substantially less training) came at the same time as when Synodical president Gerald Kieschnick substantially cut the funding Synod gave to the seminaries, and when Pres. Kieschnick encouraged men to not go to seminary as well as publicly repeated many times that there was too much emphasis in the LCMS on theology and doctrine.

    Hence, SMP came about. And what do you know? SMP gives less authority to the seminaries (since the men who study in this program get less teaching – and some of the teaching come from district-appointed pastors. Political agendas may be involved with the selection of district appointees…). SMP puts less emphasis on doctrine (since it requires less).

    I see SMP as an attempt to dumb down pastors, to make less pastors who would argue against liberal DPs, and more pastors who would be open to false teaching and practice.

    That said, I also recognize that men can come out of the SMP program who are devout, faithful and desire to teach God’s Word according to the Lutheran Confessions. And for that I give thanks.

    In Christ,
    Rev. Robert Mayes
    Beemer, NE

  14. LadyM
    May 30th, 2014 at 09:55 | #14

    @Rev. Robert Mayes #13 Thank you for that insight. I naively thought it was an attempt to produce “numbers” and generate money the Wal-Mart way. I knew it led to your paragraph three results, but I now see them as the primary goals. However, it seems the confessionals who come out of that program are an unintended result! Praise God for that!

  15. Randy
    May 30th, 2014 at 10:18 | #15

    @LadyM #14

    My direct experience is that the SMP program was/is being used by non-confessional M-Div pastors to generate “CoWo clones” who either don’t know better or are taught to not care about the purity of scripture / doctrine and orthodox liturgical practices.

Comment pages
1 2 36691
If you have problems commenting on this site, or need to change a comment after it has been posted on the site, please contact us. For help with getting your comment formatted, click here.
Subscribe to comments feed  ..  Subscribe to comments feed for this post
Anonymous comments are welcome on this board, but we do require a valid email address so the admins can verify who you are. Please try to come up with a unique name; if you have a common name add something to it so you aren't confused with another user. We have several "john"'s already for example. Email addresses are kept private on this site, and only available to the site admins. Comments posted without a valid email address may not be published. Want an icon to identify your comment? See this page to see how.
*

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.