What amount of money would corporate Synod have to finance each year for the Concordias and the Seminaries to get past the "Synod doesn't do enough/Synod doesn't do anything" perspective? How much money would it take for the educational institutions to feel like the Synod supports them?
Don't misunderstand me. I'm OK with the situation as it is now and am not interested in the synod financing the CUS system nor was I schilling for it. The synod's budget has been strained for a while as it is. I am interested in how much they do currently give relative to the actual cost of running the CUS. And in that perspective, $1.4 million is not very large.
Which is fine, btw. I personally have no need to feel like the Synod financially supports us (though I do want Synod to pray for us and to vocally support our mission). We need to be able to have our own houses in order.
I only popped in to affirm Pres. Gard's point which is still valid and which depends precisely on Synod NOT supporting the CUS in any significant fashion. To wit:
Based on the most bang for your
buck in providing future LCMS church workers......Seward is the crown jewel.
Seward is a great school.
But "bang for your buck"? You do realize that the Concordias receive nothing from the Synod. There is no "your buck". Each school must be self-funding.
The Concordias are the most cost-efficient missions of the Synod. They cost you nothing. But they proclaim the Gospel to thousands on the Synod's behalf. And they train Church workers without costing you or anyone else a single penny. You are welcomed.
To which, again, I say "Amen."
I'm going to write this as a private person, not as a staff member of Synod. The opinions I'm about to express are mine and mine alone, and not to be seen as the view of the headquarters. I'm writing them on my personal computer from the basement of my home, not on any work-issued equipment.
Having served on staff at one of the seminaries and at one of the colleges/universities for a combined 23 years, and as an alum of one of the Concordias, I personally endorse the value of our higher ed system. I pray for them. Our team prays for our colleagues who serve the LORD at them, the students who attend them, and the families who entrust their sons/daugthers/brothers/sisters/grandchildren/nieces/nephews/uncles/aunts to their care. We need as many of them as we can afford.
I do believe statements to the effect of "the Concordias receive nothing from the Synod" is problematic. If a Concordia has donors who are members of LCMS congregations, or groups within congregations, or the congregations themselves, or the LWML, or foundations established by LCMS congregational members, the statement is (putting the best construction on it) misleading. The SYNOD - the people of the LCMS - aren't giving nothing.
I've seen this kind of statement used -
and did this myself at one point - to make the case for contributions. "Pity us and give money to us because the big bad Synod (meaning St. Louis) doesn't give us anything, or such a small percentage of our funding that it is meaningless to us." It can be a cornerstone of the case to the church for direct funding. All a statement like that does is make people mad at their church body, and question why they want to be a part of such a dysfunctional group.
It's become part of our culture - blame St. Louis and you can raise more money. Why do I say this? In part because I did it. Colleagues in the profession are still doing it.
The old system of funding mission and ministry through a unified budget hasn't existed for decades. It started in and with the Concordias, hit RSOs, moved through the seminaries, is now hitting Synod, will increasingly hit the districts and finally touch congregations. The people of the LCMS "broke up" with the unified budget (corporate Synod) four decades ago if not longer.l
In its place God's people prefer to back the things that matter most to them and carry the greatest personal meaning for them. The financing system adapted to that.
Yet people - and especially people of influence - still point a finger of blame as if the old system somehow still exists and should be chunking big money toward certain facets of the overall work of sharing the Gospel. They still talk as if the breakup - which hurt - happened yesterday. Honestly, if I talked to my friends today about a girl I broke up with thirty years ago and blamed her for most of my woes, they'd question my mental state. Why do we seem to still point accusing fingers four decades later?
I'm not angry or upset about this. Honestly, I think we just haven't learned to use different, more accurate, words. Take missionaries. Old language says "missionaries have to go out and raise their own money because Synod doesn't help them." That's not true. Missionaries go out and are participants in raising money because that's how most people/congregations today want to be involved, and because missionaries today depend 100 percent on donor designated (restricted) gifts given for missionaries - not the unrestricted worship offerings passed through the congregation budget to district and then to St. Louis. If you want to see missionaries get out of that process, call me.
The Concordias today depend entirely on the generosity of God's people - many in the LCMS - to keep moving forward in mission. It won't be too much longer and the national headquarters will have to say the same thing. The context of how things are paid for shifted out from under the unified budget. People want to be connected closely to the mission and ministry that matters most in their hearts, and all giving is voluntary. They want to know the missionary or Concordia their voluntary offerings are supporting. And that's not bad. It's just the way the world is.
I'm not angry about it. Dr. Yak isn't angry about it. But it sure seems to me that not a few others still are angry about it. If not angry, pick another emotions (frustrated, resentful, disillusioned,...).
I still believe it is inaccurate and misleading to use the "Synod doesn't support...." statement, as if it had the money and capacity to make a meaningful choice to do things different than the way it handles things now. Corporate Synod, at the current level of funding CANNOT support everything. It would be more helpful to say "the worship offerings you give at church aren't the source of funding for our Concordias, who rely on personal and group generosity from direct gifts."
Synod is prohibited by both law and ethics from taking donations given to support missionaries and redirect them to universities or seminaries, or from taking a gift to the Joint Seminary Fund (seminaries) and use it to fund a missionary. The only dollars where that latitude exists are the undesignated/unrestricted.
We broke up with the unified budget. The people in leadership were too young when it happened to be the cause of the breakup when it happened. Let's move on.
Again, these are my
personal thoughts as a human being, not a Synod staff person. Go after me for having them, not corporate Synod.