A DENOMINATIONAL GUIDANCE PROGRAM.. A IHEQLQGECAL EVALUATIQN 0F A PRQPQSED PSYCHQLQGECAL PRQGRAM" WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE LUTHERAN CHURCHES TInesls for flu Dogma oI DI}. D. MICHIGkN STATE UNIVERSITY Donald Richard Ortner 1964 M LIBRARY Michigan State University THESIS This is to certify that the thesis entitled A DENOMINATIONAL GUIDANCE PROGRAM-4 THEOLCEICAL EVALUATION OF A PROPOSED PSYCHOLOGICAL PROGRAM--I'IITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE LUTHERAN CHURCHES presented by Donald Richard Ortner has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D. College of Education degree in_____ dug/VI? M/éw I - 2 Major profesfi); Date October 27. 1961}— 0-169 ABSTRACT A DENOMINATIONAL GUIDANCE PROGRAM-~A THEOLOGICAL EVALUATION OF A PROPOSED PSYCHOLOGICAL PROGRAM—-WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE LUTHERAN CHURCHES by Donald Richard Ortner This study was carried out in response to expres— sions of interest in a church—related guidance program for Lutheran young peOple. It included a survey of the previous attempts made by other Protestant denominations toward the establishment of such a program; an analysis of the writings of the classical Lutheran theologians in the area of voca- tion; a poll of Lutheran seminaries to ascertain present Lutheran emphases in regard to that doctrine; a description of a proposed Lutheran program, and recommendations in re— gard to such a program. A survey of the various denominations that hold membership in the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the U.S.A. revealed that a large number of them state that they maintain church—related guidance programs. A study of these programs, however, showed that only the Presbyterian Church, U.S. (the ”Southern Presbyterian" church) has a program that clearly seeks to point the Donald Richard Ortner counselee to the vocation best fitted to his needs and does not attempt to recruit for church vocations. In an attempt to determine the validity of a pos— sible guidance program in the Lutheran churches, it was seen that, deSpite Luther's clarity and insight into the doctrine of vocation (which states that also laymen are called by God in their work), the Lutheran theologians of the sixteenth, seventeenth, eighteenth, and nineteenth centuries generally did not treat this doctrine in their writings in Systematic Theology. A poll of Lutheran seminaries in the United States and Canada, however, revealed that in 95 per cent of these schools’seminarians are exposed to this doctrine through the assigned textbooks in Systematic Theology courses. In a further poll, four questions were presented to all profes- sors who teach these courses. Seventy-nine per cent of the professors, representing at least 89 per cent of the semi— naries, reSponded. There was nearly unanimous agreement concerning Luther‘s position on the doctrine in question. Seventy-nine per cent of the reSpondents also believed that Lutheran pastors should teach such a doctrine. These find— ings indicate a wide exposure to the doctrine of the lay~ man's vocation in Systematic Theology courses and appear to be a mandate for a guidance program. A distinctly Lutheran guidance program was proposed Donald Richard Ortner in detail. It was suggested that such a program would prop- erly be within the province of the new all-Lutheran agency, the Lutheran Council in the United States of America. Since a deprecation of the layman's vocation is generally connected with very high regard for the ministry, the two were considered side by side. A synthesis which permits the co-existence of the peculiarly Lutheran doctrine of a vocation for the laity and the distinctly Lutheran doc- trine of the ministry was examined in its relation to a pro— posed guidance program. Finally, it was established that, as members of an eschatologically-oriented denomination, Lutherans need not only to find occupations in which they may experience their greatest fulfillment but occupations in which their own faith is least likely to be jeopardized and in which their opportunity for bringing the GOSpel to bear upon the lives of others is most enhanced. Proper safeguards were suggested for those young people of the church who do not express such a faith. An eschatologically-oriented church is also con- cerned with maintaining a sufficient number of clergymen and other professional church workers. Screening processes, while eliminating some who may not qualify for the ministry, reduce the number of potential workers in the church. But a guidance program for all the youth of the church will identify additional, potential church workers. Such Donald Richard Ortner identification must be made without recourse to recruitment and must offer equally complete counseling services for those who choose vocations which are not church—related. The need for a theologically sound orientation and for psychological and educational validity in such a program were emphasized. Accreditation by the proper psychological agencies, co—operation with public school officials, and unmistakably ethical practice were urged. A DENOMINATIONAL GUIDANCE PROGRAM-—A THEOLOGICAL EVALUATION OF A PROPOSED PSYCHOLOGICAL PROGRAM——WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE LUTHERAN CHURCHES By Donald Richard Ortner A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY College of Education 1964 PREFACE The questions evoked by a thoughtful deliberation of church-related guidance programs may be placed in two cate- gories. Both of them are taken into consideration in this treatment. One type would include such day by day problems as a requirement to counsel from a pre—conceived, ecclesias— tical set of values; the need to work with some young people who, deSpite expectations to the contrary, do not share the official beliefs of their denomination; difficulty in main- taining rapport with public school counselors; dealing with attempts on the part of young people and their parents to use the counseling program as an easy entree to affiliated church colleges; and, conversely, attempts on the part of the church to use the center as an agency of recruitment for church vocations. Some solutions to these problems are reflected in the fourth Chapter of the present study and are not original with the writer. The second type of questions, more of a philosophical and theological nature, would center about the consonance of a given, church—related guidance program with the theological position of the parent body. It is particularly at this point that the present study seeks to make an original contribution. ii When it seemed best to limit such a study to a single denomination because of the extensive and somewhat exclusive nature of any one church‘s theology (even in the area of the single doctrine of vocation), the writer chose the Lutheran churches both because they have expressed an interest in a church-related guidance program and also be- cause his training in Lutheran theology would enable him to make the most meaningful contribution in this way. The relatively few differences remaining between the different Lutheran groups do not constitute a problem for the present study; there is no discernible difference among them in their understanding of the doctrine of vocation, and the differences in the closely-related doctrine of the min— istry are not in an area which is relevant to the subject— matter of the present study. It was possible, therefore, for the researcher to treat North American Lutheranism as a single entity. Most of the theological documents of Lutheranism which were examined are not available in English translation. In all such cases, the translations were made by the research- er. The works of Regin Prenter, originally written in Danish, were translated from the official German version approved by Prenter. In several other instances, both the original and available translations were used since the researcher was not always satisfied that the translators had caught the iii flavor of the original.1 In the case of the Augsburg Confes— sion, both the Latin and the German versions (which differ from each other at a number of points) were utilized simulta- neously for translation. 1The language in which the title of each work is quoted in the notes is the language of the version cited (with the exception of Prenter in which both Danish and German titles are quoted but the German version is used). iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The writer wishes to thank some people for their contributions to the study. Dr. Buford Stefflre, Chairman of the Doctoral Committee, generously guided and assisted in the develop- ment of the study and gave most freely of his time. Dr. Walter F. Johnson, Jr., Dr. Cole Brembeck, and Dr. George W. Radimersky, Members of the Doctoral Committee, were eSpecially helpful in examining the possible value of the study and in giving it direction. Dr. John H. Leith of the Union Theological Seminary in Virginia supervised the re- search which underlies Chapter II. ‘ The members of the library staff at Hampden-Sydney College were very helpful in locating the rare theological volumes necessary to the study and in other ways. The Reverend Dr. Alvin Hall Smith of the Presbyte- rian Guidance Program gave most freely of his time for con— tinuing discussions of the various psychological, theolog- ical, educational, and practical implications in a church— related guidance program. Dr. D. Maurice Allan, Mr. Dallas H. Smith, and the Reverend Mr. Logan Cockrum-—all of the Presbyterian Guidance Program-—were eSpecially helpful in delineating the philosophical orientation of the program. Professor Ann Macfie Moore of Longwood College and Professors Hassel A. Simpson and William T. Gay of the English Department of Hampden-Sydney College gave invaluable help concerning style. The Parents' and Friends' Association of Hampden— Sydney College and the college itself through its Committee on Faculty Fellowships assisted with generous grants. The Reverend Dr. W. Taylor Reveley, President of Hampden-Sydney College, and Dr. Charles B. Vail, the Academic Dean, pro- vided the necessary encouragement, time, and opportunity for the study. Most generously, the writer's wife Spent untold hours listening to the various drafts of the study and encouraging its completion. To these and others the writer feels deeply appreciative. PREFACE TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS LIST OF APPENDICES Chapter I. II. III. IV. JUSTIFICATION AND DELINEATION OF THE PROBLEM The History of the Guidance Movement The Philosophical Background of Guidance Guidance and Education Guidance and Psychology Most Recent Directions in Guidance Guidance and the Churches THE HISTORICAL LUTHERAN POSITION RELATIVE TO MAN'S CALLING (VOCATIO) The Position of Luther The Position of Classical Lutheran Theologians THE MORE RECENT LUTHERAN POSITION (OF OUR OWN TIME) RELATIVE TO MAN'S CALLING The More Recent Lutheran Position as It is Seen in the Textbooks Used in Courses in Dogmatics The More Recent Lutheran Position as It is Reflected in Responses to a Questionnaire Sent to the Professors of Systematic Theology Sequences IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE vi Page ii viii 4O 83 133 Page Implications for Practice in the Local Congregation Implications for Practice in the Guidance Center Implications for Practice in the Denominational Program V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . 160 Theological Background Practical Implications BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183 vii LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A. Seminaries Co—operating in the Study B. Textbooks Used in Systematic Theology Courses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C. Questionnaire Sent to Seminary Presidents . . . . . . D. Questionnaire Sent to Professors of Systematic Theology Courses E. Organizational Chart of the Presbyterian Church, U.S. . viii Page 193 195 198 200 202 CHAPTER I JUSTIFICATION AND DELINEATION OF THE PROBLEM Various Protestant churches have in recent years shown some concern for broadening their youth programs to include guidance for a life vocation. Several of them have been moving in this direction. The present study will be concerned with the desirability of such a movement, espe— cially as it relates to the Lutheran churches in the United States and Canada. It would be folly to attempt a study of a proposed denominational guidance program without a brief examination of guidance in its various general aspects and without a summary of the attempts‘made by various denominations to organize such programs. Inasmuch as the former has been well documented in a wide variety of books (to which ref- erence will be made), the present attempt will utilize a comparatively small number of these to set the stage. In the case of the latter, however, there will be a thorough examination of all the programs listed with the National Council of Churches since such an evaluation is not readily available elsewhere and would per se constitute a positive contribution to the field under our investigation. I. THE HISTORY OF THE GUIDANCE MOVEMENT There has been an interest in man’s mode of making a living from the earliest times. In the very first book of the Holy Scriptures, the occupations of Cain and Abel are mentioned in more than passing.l The various utopian pro- jections, including Plato's Republic, More's Utopia, Cooper‘s Crater, Melville's Typee and Maggi, concerned them— selves with this problem. St. Paul spoke of diversities of gifts in what one might today style church vocations.2 The views of Luther and Calvin will be documented later. In recent times, guidance traces its origins to Frank Parsons,3 founder of the Vocation Bureau of Boston in 1908. It was his contention that three broad factors were involved in a wise choice of vocation. The first of these was a clear understanding of oneself, one‘s aptitudes, abilities, interests, ambitions, resources, limitations, lGen. 4:2-5. 21 Cor. 12. 3Frank Parsons (1854—1908) was a political scientist, a Specialist in currency and railroads. After a serious operation, and while he was suffering from Bright's disease, he became associated with Meyer Bloomfield in settlement work in Boston. With the financial aid of Mrs. Quincy A. Shaw, he established the Vocation Bureau. Edwin D. Mead, in a letter to the “Public" (October 16, 1908), Spoke of his career as ”an attempt to make the world over . . . into some reflection of the Kingdom of God.” (Dictionary of American Biography.) as well as the reasons behind these. The second concerned itself with knowing the requirements and conditions of suc- cess, the advantages and disadvantages, the compensations, opportunities, and prospects in different lines of work. The third factor consisted of true reasoning on the rela- tions of these two groups of facts.1 Parsons‘ bureau continued to function after his death. It published the occupational information which it continued to collect, engaged in counseling, and eventually introduced guidance into the public schools of Boston. In 1917, the Division of Education of Harvard University took over the work of the bureau. Between 1910 and 1915, Eliot, president of Harvard; Hanus, a professor at the same univer- sity; MacLaurin, president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Mead, a professor at the University of Chicago; Spauling, superintendent of the Minneapolis schools; and Thorndike, a professor at Teachers College, contributed to the early studies in guidance. Professional organizations and conferences arose, reflecting interests in guidance. The National Vocational Guidance Association dating from 1913 and originating in Boston today has a membership in 1"Choosing a Vocation” (Boston: Houghton—Mifflin, 1909), p. 5. Quoted in Percival W. Hutson, The Guidance Function in Education (New York: Appleton-Century—Crofts, 1958), p. 7. excess of 5,000. Its professional periodical has a contin- uous history since 1922. The National Occupational Con- ference, the Minnesota Employment Stabilization Research Institute, the Adjustment Service of New York City, and the Research Division of the National Employment Service con- tributed greatly to the present status of guidance.1 II. THE PHILOSOPHICAL BACKGROUND OF GUIDANCE A mere recitation of the history of the guidance movement is not sufficient to an understanding of the churches‘ interest in the subject. The question, “Why guidance?" needs to be explored briefly also. Speaking of the whole personnel movement (of which the guidance of . . 2 . . . adolescents is a part), C. Gilbert Wrenn in Philosophical and Psychological Bases of Personnel Services in Education answers his own question, "What is important in Student Personnel Work?” with this personal View; 1. Above all else, personnel services in educa— tion is predicated upon seeing the learner totally. 2. We are dedicated to treat the student with di nit , to reSpect his integrity and his right to self-fulfillment. 1A summary, based on Hutson, p. 7. 2C. Gilbert Wrenn, since 1902 Professor of Psychol- ogy at the University of Minnesota. Editor, Journal of Counselinngsychology. (Who's Who, 1964-65.) 3. Personnel work is concerned with the stu- dent's plans for the future as well as optimum living in the present. 4. We are the prime advocates of individual differences in the school. . . . We are more responsible for seeing that unique- ness is reSpected. 5. Personnel work depends upon a varied meth- odology, one that is fitted to the ends to be served. . 6. The important element in all personnel service is the quality of the relationship established between worker and learner, between worker and colleague. 7. Personnel service must remain in the cen— tral stream of educational effort. We are to be neither a fifth wheel nor a steering wheel, rather a part of the chassis.1 In a less personal manner, Mathewson2 defines guid— ance as the systematic, professional process of helping the individual through educative and interpretive procedures to gain a better understanding of his own characteristics and potentialities and to relate himself more satisfactorily to social requirements and opportunities, in accord with social 1C. Gilbert Wrenn, ”Philosophical and Psychological Bases of Personnel Services in Education,” Chapter III in Personnel Services in Education, The Fifty-eighth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part II (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1959), pp. 4lff. Throughout this study, only added emphases will be indicated, All other emphases are original. 2Robert Hendry Mathewson, Professor of Education, Division of Teacher Education, Board of Higher Education, New York City. (A.P.A. Annual, 1963.) and moral values. Stoops2 and Wahlquist3 have said succinctly that guidance is a continuous process of assisting the individual to develop and become more able to solve his own problems and to live with satisfaction and benefits to himself and to society. While there is evidently an abundance of definitions of ”guidance”—-a very large number of them stating essen— tially the same basic need for services of this kind--such help ought not to be limited to ”those children who have strayed," or "who are not good and nice," for whom, to con- tinue with Arbuckle's5 description, ”the American culture shows little sympathy.”6 Rather the rapidly changing labor lRobert Hendry Mathewson, Guidance Policy and Prac- tice (New York: Harper and Row, 1962), p. 239. 2Emery Stoops, Professor of Educational Administra- tion and Supervision, University of Southern California. (Text). 3G. L. Wahlquist, Assistant Superintendent and School Psychologist, El Monte Union High School District, California. (American Psychological Association Annual, 1963.) 4Emory Stoops and Gunnar L. Wahlquist, Principles and Practices in Guidance (New York: McGraw—Hill, 1958), p. 239. 5Duga1d Sinclair Arbuckle, since 1947 Professor of Education and Director of Counselor Education, Boston University. (Who's Who, 1964-65.) 6Dugald S. Arbuckle, Pupil Personnel Services in American Schools (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1962), p. 19. market, the continuing difficulty of admission to this mar- ket, the expanding opportunities for women in the profes— sions, changing attitudes toward work occasioned by automa- tion, and the tensions created by the fact that, as Arbuckle sees it, "the children, still living off their parents until their late twenties, magnanimously allow[ing] the parents to exist in the same world with them“l--all cry out for the very best guidance available. III. GUIDANCE AND EDUCATION That guidance has been closely allied with education we have shown both in the historical sketch and in the fact that the definitions are drawn from works in the field of education. In answering a question, however, that deals with the involvement of the churches in the area of guidance, it is not sufficient that we say in effect that guidance has, in the past, been almost exclusively related to the field of education. We must rather demonstrate the reason for the existence of guidance in that particular milieu. Hutson? argues that, even though guidance is being 11bid., p. 18. 2Percival W. Hutson, Professor of Education, Univer- sity of Pittsburgh. (American Personnel and Guidance Asso— ciation Annual, 1963—64.) performed by agencies other than the school, it is obvious that the school is the institution predominantly charged with the function.1 His position is supported as a reason— able one by Johnson,2 Busacker,3 and Bowman4 who point out that neither academically inclined students nor any others can excel in their studies or realize their full potentials later unless a number of conditions are met. Students need to attain a fairly realistic understanding of themselves. It is important that they make decisions about their high school programs on bases other than misinformation, personal whim, or the choices of friends. They should be spared the experience of floundering aimlessly for lack of thought regarding even tentative vocational goals. The distraction arising from problems of growth and development, physical handicaps or emotional difficulties ought to be minimized. It is necessary that they negotiate effectively the change to secondary school, especially in regard to independent 1Percival W. Hutson, The Guidance Function in Educa- tion (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1958), p. 75. 2Mauritz Johnson, Jr., Professor of Secondary Educa— tion, Cornell University. (Johnson et a1., Junior High School Guidance. See below.) 3William E. Busacker, Pupil Personnel Consultant, Herkimer County Board of Education, New York. (A.P.G.A. Annual, 1963-64.) 4Fred Q. Bowman, Jr., Guidance Co-ordinator, North Syracuse Central High School, New York. (Johnson et a1., Junior High School Guidance. See below.) study. It is important that they be provided with ample opportunity to discover and nourish worthwhile interests. They need to come in contact with teachers who possess the necessary information about them to provide the kind of educational experiences they need. And they need to encoun- ter adults who are able to furnish them with reliable infor- mation about the educational and vocational opportunities available to them.1 Clearly then, in our American culture, the school is charged with the preparation of the child for the world of work. Choices concerning future vocation are intimately tied with the preparation the school can offer. Even in the ideal situation in which parents see themselves as active partners with the school in the presentation to the child of those experiences which will prepare him for life, these experiences will be almost entirely connected with the cur— ricular and co—curricular activities of the school. With this end in mind, C. Gilbert Wrenn2 recommends that the professional job description of a school counselor Specify that he perform four major functions: lMauritz Johnson, Jr., William E. Busacker, and Fred Q. Bowman, Junior High School Guidance (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1961), pp. ix—x. 2See Note 2, p. 4. 10 (a) counsel with students (b) consult with teachers, administrators, and parents as they in turn deal with students (c) study the changing facts about the student population and interpret what is found to school committees and administrators (d) coordinate counseling resources in school and between school and community.1 That, ideally, the guidance of youth is not a func— tion which school counselors wish to usurp as their exclu- sive right underlies the approach described by Johnson, Stefflre,3 and Edelfelt4 when they point out that guidance workers are now seen as members of a team. This team in- cludes health workers, social workers, and psychologists.5 At the same time, these authors warn that a proliferation lC. Gilbert Wrenn, The Counselor in a Changing World (Washington: The American Personnel and Guidance Associa— tion, 1962), p. 137. 2Walter F. Johnson, Jr., Chairman and Professor, Guidance and Personnel Services, Michigan State University. (Johnson et al., Pupil Personnel and Guidance Services. See below. 3Buford Stefflre, Professor, Guidance and Personnel Services, Michigan State University. (Johnson et al., Pupil Personnel and Guidance Services. See below.) 4Roy A. Edelfelt, National Commission on Teacher Education and Professional Standards, N.E.A. (McGraw-Hill advertisement.) 5Walter F. Johnson, Buford Stefflre, and Roy A. Edelfelt, Pupil Personnel and Guidance Services (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1961), p. vii. 11 of specialists will not answer the need for the individual- ization of education.1 And they express a belief that guidance Specialists will one day be seen primarily as the educational Specialists on the pupil personnel team. The fact that precisely this educational relation— ship with students-—not a father—confessor role——is the aim of those who are reSponsible for training guidance personnel is pointed out by Williamson.3 In fact, he says that our services are in the nature of educative relationships with students.4 In seeking, then, to understand the possible role of the churches in guidance, it is necessary that one graSp the position of the schools. Theirs is not a defensive, en— trenched, and exclusive position. Rather, schools are logically the center for a guidance that seeks to provide curricular and co—curricular experiences that prepare young people for the world of work. lIbid., p. vii. 2Ibid. 3Edmund G. Williamson, Dean of Students and Professor of Psychology, The University of Minnesota. (A.P.A. Annual, 1963.) 4E. G. Williamson, Student Personnel Services in Colleges and Universities (New York: McGraw—Hill, 1961), p. ix. 12 IV. GUIDANCE AND PSYCHOLOGY The close tie between guidance and psychology may be observed readily. PrOSpective guidance personnel frequently take courses taught by departments of psychology. They may have an academic minor area of study in psychology. In addi- tion to the various personnel organizations, they join such professional psychological groups as the American Psycholog- ical Association and its affiliates. They use psychological tests. Some of them Speak of the kind of counseling they do as psychotherapy. That there is a deeper tie between guidance and psychology is clear, for example, in Allport's1 writings. He aSSumes a psychological orientation for guidance when he states that it must recognize man's ”proactive future oriented growth" as basic to a professional practice that seeks to be effective.2 In the same issue of the Harvard Educational Review, Michael, Meyerson, van Kaam, Rogers, Shoben, Wrenn, Whitla, Hummel, Tiedeman, and Field discuss such psychological topics as a behavioral approach to coun— seling and guidance, counseling from the point of view of 1Gordon Willard Allport, since 1942 Professor of Psychology at Harvard University. (Who's Who, 1964-65.) 2Gordon W. Allport, "Psychological Models for Guidance," Harvard Educational Review, XXXII, No. 4 (Fall, 1962), pp. 373ff. 13 existential psychology, ego-counseling, psychological and educational bases of academic performance, and the like. The churches, seeking to clarify their role in assisting youth in the search for vocation, will not only need to consider their dependence upon persons engaged in psychological pursuits, but should also want especially to benefit from the insights psychology has gained concerning the development of man's motivations and the growth of vocational choice in each person. V. MOST RECENT DIRECTIONS IN GUIDANCE As customs and superstitions arise in many profes— sions and receive a credence they do not deserve and which need to be examined, so there have been recent examinations of some widely accepted principles and techniques also in guidance. Such an examination by Barry1 and Wolf2 sought to review the current guidance practices and to separate 1’2Ruth Barry and Beverly Wolf, connected with the Graduate Training Program in Counseling, Board of Higher Education, New York City, with Columbia University, and with Hunter College. (Barry and Wolf, An Epitaph for Vocational Guidance, advertisement on jacket. See below.) 14 what is valuable from that which is irrelevant.1 Of eSpe- cial interest to a church-related program is their observa- tion that ”vocational guidance methodology was and is pred- icated upon the outmoded assumption that information teaches, that advice and information—giving are functions of the counselor, and that vocational guidance can exist apart from 'personal' guidance.”2 The same authors concern them— selves with the ongoing, continuous, generally irreversible process of vocational development hypothecated by Donald Super3 and with Super's position that, when a person chooses an occupation, he is, in effect, choosing a means of imple— menting a self—concept.4 Further concern is expressed by Barry and Wolf in the matter of test Scores--an exceedingly important warning in view of the frequent misunderstandings of church guidance programs as testing programs.5 The authors use the term "extremely risky” in reference to predictions on the basis lRuth Barry and Beverly Wolf, An Epitaph for Voca— tional Guidance (New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, 1963), p. v. 2 Ibid., p. 9. 3Donald B. Super, Professor and Research Associate, Horace Mann-Lincoln Institute, Teachers College, Columbia University (A.P.A. Annual, 1963). 4Barry and Wolf, pp. 19, 24. 51bid., p. 34. 15 of an individual's test scores. These and other similar, well-documented warnings not only suggest that churches which consider guidance pro- grams read carefully the analyses by Barry and Wolf. Rather, they also suggest the employment of properly qualified and trained staff members who keep abreast of the most recent developments in all fields of guidance. VI. GUIDANCE AND THE CHURCHES Having taken a cursory look at the backgrounds of guidance historically and in relation to philosophy, educa- tion, and psychology, it is still necessary that we survey the attempts of the various church bodies in what they con— sider to be guidance. A semantic problem arises at this point. What may be called "guidance” in the churches may actually consist of "direction." What may appear to be the presentation of various options may be so loaded with value judgments that the choices are no longer open without incur— ring the diSpleasure of the ”guide.” It will of course be impossible to survey every church organization in the United States within the Sc0pe of our analysis. The writer has consequently limited the Ibid., p. 34. 16 study to those denominations which hold membership in the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the U.S.A. and Specifically to those within this body which are reported as having a "guidance program.” Of the three large Lutheran denominations in the United States, only one, the Lutheran Church in America, qualified under both provisions indicated. Programs with Varying Degrees of Recruitment The Church of God (Anderson, Indiana). The program of the Church of God (Anderson, Indiana) is closely tied to the admissions program of its denominational college. A request for information on our part concerning this church's guidance program brought a wealth of literature from Ander- son College. A positive approach to Christian vocation is evident in some of these materials. The brochure, ”It All Adds Up,"1 points out that Anderson College was founded as a pre—theological school. It continues to point to the fact that its graduates even today have a sense of mission in life. Anderson College graduates, it continues, have accepted reSponsible positions in ”such vocations as educa- tion, medicine, business, and the ministry.” It offers the 1"It All Adds Up” (Anderson, Ind.: Anderson College, n.d.). 17 same urgency of commitment to prospective students. Other brochures are typified by the pamphlet, ”Is God Calling You?"1 which describes college courses and recruits for the ministry. The United Presbyterian Church in the United States of America. The literature of the United Presbyterian Church, U.S.A.2 in the area of vocation is rather extensive. It insists that a program of vocational counseling and guid- ance must be an integral and vital part of the total minis- try of each congregation.3 Vocation for the laity is clear- ly defined in the Handbook on Vocations: Within one's vocation as a Christian, there is freedom to choose the sort of work he will do. But if one takes his true vocation seriously, his choice of work will be deeply affected by his faith.4 While this may come dangerously near to recruitment, a 1"Is God Calling You?” (Anderson, Ind.: Anderson College, n.d.). 2Generally speaking, the United Presbyterian Church U.S.A., operates in the North, the Presbyterian Church U.S. in the South. Both operate in some border states. They have some joint work. For the purposes of this study, the "U.S. Church” may be considered as Southern, the ”U.P.U.S.A. Church" as Northern. 3W.L. Jenkins, The Church and Vocation, A Handbook on Vocations for Local Congregations (Philadelphia: Divi- sion of Vocation, Board of Christian Education, The United Presbyterian Church, U.S.A., 1962), p. 5. 4Ibid., p. 6. 18 subsequent paragraph in the same document makes it clear that this is not the case: When the church states that all Christians are being called to a life of service to God, laymen cannot be considered as being in ”part— time Christian service.”l Despite the clarity exhibited in this statement, the amount of Space given to church vocations in the same brochure and the Specific information given in regard to church vocations is out of proportion to the many other vocations one might enter. A brochure that purports to treat all Christian vocations, not simply church vocations, does in this way communicate a set of values which at least approaches re— cruitment under the guise of counseling. A companion volume 7 Vocation and Ministry, affirms the essential vocation of all believers and ”the expectation that each one will serve God in his daily work."2 As one should expect from the title, non-church vocations are treated only briefly. While the program of the United Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. deserves careful study by other denominations because it endeavors to use high school counselors and secular agencies, it must be pointed out that it is not free 11bid., pp. 6-7. 2W.L. Jenkins, Vocation and Ministryi a Handbook on Vocation and Church Vocations for Judiciaries and College and University Pastors (Philadelphia: Division offVocation, Board of Christian Education, The United Presbyterian Church, U.S.A., 1961), p. 3. 19 from attempts to recruit. It is, therefore, a guidance and recruitment program. The Christian Churches (Disciples of Christ). The rather extensive program of The Christian Church bears the candid name, ”Disciples' Guidance and Recruitment Services.” However, the program cannot be dismissed simply on the ad- mission of recruitment. This is not merely a recruitment for church vocations as is borne out in various brochures. So, a brochure accompanying the filmstrip, ”A Program of Guidance and Recruitment” seeks to point up the congrega- tion's reSponsibility as a two-fold one: providing Chris- tian vocational guidance to its youth and enlisting young people in a consideration of the church vocations.l Another brochure, "Disciples' Guidance and Recruitment Program,” points out, as one of the program's goals, the need to pro— vide for every qualified young person both the opportunity to consider church vocations and the opportunity to know more about himself in relation to the real facts about var- ious vocations in the church. But it does urge the avoid— ance of the tragedies which might result if a young person 1"A Program of Guidance and Recruitment," advertise- ment for the filmstrip of the same name (Indianapolis: The United Christian Missionary Society Film Library, n.d.). 20 who is not qualified chose the ministry.1 Nevertheless, recruitment seems to be the program's only real raison d‘étre. To this end, Jay R. Calhoun writes in the program's booklet, "The Philosophy of Guidance and Recruitment,” that the program is a "seed—bed of interest in the church voca- tion . . . from which candidates for the Christian ministry can grow."2 On the other hand, Donald Reisinger, author of the program's pamphlet, "The State Procedures,” emphasizes the reSponsibility to "find the life work which will best allow [one] to serve God and man.” Even if the recruitment phase of the Disciples’ pro— gram could be eliminated, a more serious problem would also need to be resolved. The position of the psychologist with one of the Disciples' church-related colleges is ambiguous and possibly unethical. The ambiguity comes from the expec— tation that the psychologist will be the necessary middle— man “inasmuch as . . . test information cannot be released l“Disciples' Guidance and Recruitment Program” (Indianapolis: The United Christian Missionary Society, n.d.). . 2Jay R. Calhoun, ”The Philosophy of Guidance and Recruitment" (Indianapolis: The United Christian Missionary Society, n.d.). 3Donald Reisinger, "The State Procedures" (Indianap- olis: The United Christian Missionary Society, n.d.). 21 from the high school to local church leadership.”1 The possibly unethical expectation of the psychologist involves evaluating the high school counselor's information and pass- ing it on to the local minister.2 The extensive program of the Disciples, then, is what it purports to be, a program of recruitment for church vocations with a little something for every one. It pro— vides well-written, accurate career pamphlets for church . 3 . . vocations and for screening prospective church workers. 1Charles F. Kemp, ”The Role of the Psychologist” (Indianapolis: The United Christian Missionary Society, n.d.). 2Cf. Principle 2.34—1: ”When clinical information must be reported to a parent or guardian or some other non— professional person reSponsible for or interested in the client, the psychologist is expected to assure himself that the person is a legitimate receiver of such information.” Ethical Standards of Psychologists (Washington: The American Psychological Association, 1953), p. 65. 3These pamphlets published by The United Christian Missionary Society, Indianapolis, are as follows: ”The Christian Ministry"; ”The Pastoral Ministry"; ”The Ministry of Christian Education”; "The Ministry of World Mission”; "The Ministry of Home Mission”; ”The Ministry of Church Music"; ”The Campus Ministry"; "The Military Chaplaincy"; "The Ministry of Social Work"; and ”The Institutional Chaplaincy." 4Kemp, p. 2. 22 The United Church of Christ. At present, The United Church of Christ has no denomination-wide guidance program. Before its merger into the present denomination, the Evangel— ical and Reformed side of the merger offered a guidance test.1 But most of the guidance that is done today in the united church is carried out by those who have the reSpon— sibility for the care of ministerial students. The United Church of Canada.3 It is the point of view of the United Church of Canada that ”every Christian has a ministry” and that one may make a significant contribu— tion to society wherever one is.4 The remainder of the bro- chure, "Specialized Ministries” (from which this quotation was taken) typically relates the occupations named in the pamphlet to Specific jobs to be done in and for the church. 1Letter from the Reverend George Nishimoto, Church Vocations Secretary, Council for Church and Ministry, United Church of Christ, New York, N.Y., Jan. 23, 1964. 2Ibid.; and ”Our Ministry to Ministers” (New York: Stewardship Council of The United Church of Christ in cooperation with the Council for Church and Ministry, n.d.), p. 3. 3The United Church of Canada is included in the present study because it was listed by the National Council (to which it belongs) as having a guidance program and be- cause it produces through its Interboard Committee on Re- cruiting for Church Vocations an unusually large number of brochures, aesthetically pleasing and highly creative. 4"Specialized Ministries" (Toronto: The Interboard Committee on Recruiting for Church Vocations, The United Church of Canada, n.d.), p. l. 23 A more inclusive booklet, ”Careers in the Church,” carries out the same point of view. It begins with ontological questions and soon suggests that the answers may lie in a . l . . career in the church. Another pamphlet, ”The Ministry of Education," seeks to enlist teachers for the church'S' schools. The brochure, ”Eternal Destiny,” typifies in the highest form an attitude abroad in the churches concerning vocation. It is not what one might hope for as a statement of the Protestant doctrine of Christian vocation, but it summarizes the position of the United Church of Canada when it says in part: Not all of us can serve in a church vocation—-it is part of His eternal destiny that shop keepers, clerks, lawyers, street cleaners, policemen are all part of His plan. But for some of you none of these callings will mean that you find your place in His plan. You may be equipped with temperament and talents which will find their fullest expression in a Church vocation.3 1"Careers in the Church” (Toronto: The Interboard Committee on Recruiting for Church Vocations, The United Church of Canada, n.d.), p. 1. 2”The Ministry of Education” (Toronto: The Inter- board Committee on Recruiting for Church Vocations, The United Church of Canada, n.d.), p. 6. 3"Eternal Destiny” (Toronto: The United Church of Canada, n.d.). 24 The Methodist Church. Despite the ongoing social concerns which have long marked The Methodist Church, its literature does not distinguish between church vocations on the one hand and the Christian vocation of every believer on the other. Although the Interboard Committee on Chris- tian Vocation states aptly that it "recognizes the poten— tial sacredness of all useful work”1 it aims to assist annual conference Commissions on Christian Vocations ”to develop a sound plan of recruitment and guidance of persons for the pastoral ministry, the missionary enterprise, medi- cal and social service, and Christian Education.”2 That the guidance of persons into traditionally non—ministerial roles such as the medical and social services is also recruitment becomes clear when the authors make it apparent that they are not Speaking of 32X physician or 32y social worker, but of those who work for the church. It is pointed out that annually The Methodist Church ”must recruit” about 9,000 persons for the various vocations in the church. l"Interboard Committee on Christian Vocations" (Nashville: Interboard Committee on Christian Vocations, The Methodist Church, n.d.). 2Ibid. 31bid. 25 The Church of the Brethren. The youth department of the Church of the Brethren has found it impossible to devel- op any extensive guidance program and relies upon the mate— rials produced by the National Council of Churches.1 At the time of writing, National Council materials were materials for recruitment to church vocations. The Evangelical United Brethren Church. The Evangel- ical United Brethren Church has no Specific guidance program. There is some "guidance in terms of the Christian ministry,”2 but that, of course, deals with church vocation rather than Christian vocation. Although there has been some increase in "Speaking and thinking about some kind of elementary testing program," it is thought of as ”a basis upon which we can counsel young men more effectively.”3 The restric- tion to males as well as the origin of this statement in The Board of Ministerial Education and Relations makes the pro- jected "elementary testing program" a screening device for 1Letter from Joseph M. Long, Director of Youth Work, General Brotherhood Board, Church of the Brethren, Elgin, 111., January 4, 1964. 2Letter from J. Arthur Heck, Executive Secretary- Treasurer, The Board of Ministerial Education and Relations, The Evangelical United Brethren Church, Dayton, Ohio, January 2, 1964. 31bid. 26 the ministry rather than a program for all youth of the church. The African Methodist Episc0pal Church. While the African Methodist Episcopal Church has no program at the present time beyond services available at denominational schools, such a program is under consideration for the fall 1 of 1964. The Moravian Church in America, North. The program of the Moravian Church in America, North, consists only of co-operation with local public schools and participation with other denominations in providing materials for a guid— ance program through the Department of the Ministry of the National Council of Churches.2 Since the latter deals only with recruitment for the ministry, the only program support- ed by the Moravians is a recruitment program. The Reformed Church in America. Although a co-opera- tive relationship exists between it and the Presbyterian 1Letter from Sherman L. Greene, Jr., Secretary- Treasurer, General Board of Education, Division of Educa- tional Institutions, African Methodist Episcopal Church, January 9, 1964. 2Letter from John S. Groenfeldt, General Secretary, The Board of Christian Education and Evangelism, Moravian Church in America, North, Bethlehem, Pa., January 8, 1964. 27 churches,l there is no evidence of a guidance movement in the Reformed Church in America. Requests for information in this area directed to the address furnished by the National Council of Churches brought three pamphlets,2 none of them remotely connected with vocation or with a guidance program. The American Baptist Convention. ”Guidance and Recruitment Program" is the candid title of the literature produced by the American Baptist Convention.3 The purpose of this program is ”to assure an increasing flow of qual— ified, committed and dedicated candidates for the ministry” which is defined in a footnote as inclusive of all church vocations. 1For example, The Hymnbook, Published by the Pres— pyterian Church, U.S., Presbyterian Church, U.S.A., United Presbyterian Church of North America, Reformed Church in AmeriCa (Richmond, 1955), p. 5. 2Howard G. Hageman, Our Reformed Church (New York: Board of Education, Reformed Churchiin America, n.d.); Grace Pelon and Elsie B. Stryker, Our Church at Work (New York: Board of Education, Reformed Church in America, n.d.); and Illustrated folder and brief history of the national head— quarters of the Reformed Church in America. 3”Guidance and Recruitment Program” (Valley Forge: Commission on the Ministry, American Baptist Convention, 1962). 28 The term "Christian vocation” is used in the American Baptist program in a unique sense. It includes a commitment to discipleship, involvement in the organized church, motiva- tion to propagate the Gospel, evidence of leadership ability, evidence of intellectual ability and achievements, and a willingness to enter the academic disciplines to prepare adequately for the ministry.1 Nevertheless, although the ministry receives a prior claim on the youth of the church, provision is made for those who should not be recruited; the latter are not referred beyond the local congregation to the state or city committee. In a private communication, the Director of the Com— mission on the Ministry states that, while ”American Bap— tists do not have a program of 'guidance,‘” the commission encourages local churches to work with the public school guidance people and will hold a workshop in the fall of 1964 to study the resources available to the local churches.3 1Ibid., p. 3. 2This differs in essence from the recommendation made in Chapter V of the present study where provision is made for a full—scale guidance program also for those who are identified as non-ministerial; and ”Guidance and Recruitment Program," p. 11. 3Letter from Robert D. Rasmussen, Director of the Commission on the Ministry, The American Baptist Convention, Valley Forge, Pa., December 24, 1963. 29 The Protestant Episcppal Church. An example of guidance becoming recruitment is seen in the program of the Protestant Episcopal Church. A request to the Episcopal Church Center (from which the National Council of Churches suggests that information on a guidance program may be ob— tained) brought a short letter which said in part: We do not know what you are referring to by "guidance programs." This office does issue pamphlets, such as the enclosed, for persons 1 considering the field of Church vocations. These pamphlets2 sought not only to interest the reader in such obvious church vocations as the priesthood or director- ships in Christian education; they listed many job opportu- nities for administrators, executives, church social workers, doctors, nurses, technicians, p£_gl., but presented them as opportunities to work for the church. Despite this direc— tion, the pamphlet ”Job Opportunities" states: 1Letter from Mary A. Griffin, Secretary to Mrs. Robert N. Rodenmayer, Division of Christian Ministries, The National Council, Episcopal Church Center, New York, N.Y., December 19, 1963. 2These pamphlets published by The National Council Episcopal Church Center, New York, N.Y. are: "Live Option for You?"; ”Are You a Many-Sided Man?”; ”Consider the Church"; "Job Opportunities”; and ”Facing up to the Need for Professionally Trained Church Workers.” 30 If you are considering the social work profession, the Church offers a unique chance for you to use your own particular skills and interests in a variety of jobs. These Church—sponsored jobs do not alone consti— tute Christian vocation. Christian achievement in any job, whether or not it is working for the Church, is a contribution to the Church. The Lutheran Church in America. Of tremendous in- terest is the work done by the Lutheran Church in America and, before the recent merger, one of its antecedents, the United Lutheran Church in America, in the utilization of psychological services for the screening of ministerial candidates. The following quotation is not only typical of the materials being produced for this body; it also answers some of the deep concerns all Lutherans have had in regard to screening theological candidates with psychological instruments: When you start thinking about this whole problem of psychological services there is one conception that I would like you to keep in the back of your mind and that is the conception of the call. With- out the call the ministry is only one more social service vocation. Very often in the process of examining the recruitment and the selection and training of ministerial candidates we come to the point where we almost feel that the call has gone out the window and that what is left is intellec- tual aptitude, and interest, and emotional 1Ibid. 2This is discussed further in Chapter V of the present study. 31 stability, and the like. Let me underscore that it is extremely important that we understand the Spiritual impact of the call. God calls us into His service. We differ in the degree of our reSponse and our acceptance of this call. We are called to sublimate our hostile, destructive, and aggressive impulses, to defer or forego many of our gratifications, to live under authority. These factors can be measured because they are also psychological in nature. The extent of our acceptance of this call and its demands upon us determines whether or not we are fit for service in the ministry.1 Similarly the "Review of Preliminary Studies by Pilot Project Synod Sub-Committees” sought, according to its agenda, to develop a blueprint for strengthening psycholog- ical services to students preparing for church vocations.2 Guidance for other than church vocations is sought only for those who fail to complete the screening process success- fully and for those who are encouraged to leave the parish ministry. The question is raised whether the synod should provide guidance counseling and employment services for these individuals.3 According to its Manual of Notations 1"Toward a Conceptual Basis for Psychological Services" in The Conference on Lutheran Ppychological Serv- ices (New York: Board of Theological Education, The Lutheran Church in America, 1961), p. 3. 2"Review of Preliminary Studies by Pilot Project Synod Sub-Committees” (New York: Board of Theological Education, The Lutheran Church in America, 1961), p. 3. 3"The Richmond Conference on The Development of Model Guidance Services for Church Occupations Candidates" (New York: Board of Theological Education, The Lutheran Church in America, 1962), p. 22. 32 on Psychological Services for Church Vocations Study Commit- Iggp, the Lutheran Church in America program may be de— scribed as a project in applied psychology. It is a con- scious effort to introduce modern methods of personnel selection in the church setting.1 But it is not a guidance program for all youth of the church. Summary. Clearly, then, the various programs con— sidered above offer little help for the person interested in a Christian vocation. The Protestant doctrine of Christian vocation, that every Christian's work can be a vocation and that vocations are not confined to those who work for the church in a full-time capacity, is frequently expressed. But even where the distinction between a church vocation-- full time church work-~and Christian vocation-~every Chris- tian's daily work——is made, the latter is either ignored, or pressed into the service of recruitment for church vocations. The materials cited offer varying degrees of assistance to other church bodies who would seek improved methods of re- cruitment. They offer little help in the area of Christian vocation. Church vocations are generally portrayed as being lJ. Victor Benson, A Manual of Notations on Psycho- logical Services for Church Vocations Study Committees (New York: Board of Theological Education, The Lutheran Church in America, n.d.), p. 2. 33 superior. It is as though the Protestant reformation had never occurred. The Presbyterian Guidance Program The Presbyterian Church in the United States, a con- servative body limited generally to the Southern and border states (and to a vigorous foreign mission program), through the Lexington Presbytery in the Synod of Virginia estab- lished an experimental Counseling Center in 1948. In 1951, the program was presented to the Presbyterian Educational Association of the South. In the following year, it became the official program of the General Assembly (that is, of the entire "Southern Presbyterian" church). The theological basis for the Presbyterian Guidance Program was Spelled out at the 1956 Conference on Christian Vocation by the Reverend Fred Rogers Stair, Jr., when he said in part, . . . the doctrine of Christian vocation . deals with the fact that we are especially created. We are Spiritual beings who in work are to be spiritual blessings. It says that we are social beings who are to live in service for other people and for God. 1For the particularly Lutheran position on Christian vocation and the doctrine of the ministry, see Chapter V. 34 The word vocation means the same thing as ”call- ing," God who ”has saved us and called us." . God does not save us from sin into nothing. We are not brought into a vacuum, but we are saved from sin into service. We are saved for something and the something for which we arE—_ savedfis our vocation. Our commitment to Christ and our determination to devote all we have and are to a job will Show us the call to Christian vocation. The foregoing, highly abbreviated, is typical of a large body of literature which has developed about the Presbyterian Guidance Program since its inception. The involvement of a theological as well as psychological moti- vation is apparent throughout. The theological basis for this program is generally in harmony with the understanding expressed by Luther,2 a basis which is lacking in every other program considered in the preceding pages. That basis may be stated very simply. God is interested in the total life of the Christian. Prominent in this totality of a per— son's life is his means of earning a livelihood. The work of a Christian lay person is as important to God as the work lFred Rogers Stair, Jr., The Christian in his Daily Work (Richmond: Department of Christian Vocation, The Presbyterian Church, U.S., n.d.), pp. 9-14. 2See Chapter II. But the Presbyterian program lacks the Lutheran eschatological emphasis detailed in Chapter V of the present study. 35 of a clergyman. The Christian who is conscious of his Christian vocation does his work ”as unto God.” Properly the Presbyterian Guidance Program is seen as an extension of the work of the local church. It is here that the young person works with a vocational aide. The aide has had some training in working with young people. The doctrine of Christian vocation (as expressed in the pre- ceding paragraph) is presented to the counselee. Brochures and other materials are available to the aide in a Pre- Counseling Kit.1 For the counselee who completes the pro- gram in the local church, an appointment is made with a Presbyterian Guidance Center. The work at this Center revolves about a counseling program. Testing is done only in the framework of counsel— ing the total person. The program's handbook makes it very clear that the counselor must add his interviewing skill, trained insight, and professional understanding to all the different kinds of personal data and to test results which he has collected before and during the visits to the center. lPre—Counseling Kit (Richmond: Department of Chris— tian Education, The Presbyterian Church, U.S., n.d.). 2Further details are outlined in Chapter IV of the present study in connection with a proposed Lutheran guid— ance program. 3Presbyterian Guidance Program Handbook (Richmond: Board of Christian Education, The Presbyterian Church, U.S., 1963), p. 43. 36 In the 1963 revision of the Presbyterian Guidance Program Handbook this phase of the program is succinctly defined in these words: The Center visit is an intensive two-day experience of work and study involving his potential and where he may use it realisti- cally. Its value lies in the student's readiness to profit by comprehensive personal counseling. In a face-to-face relationship the counselor works closely with each young person. As test results are considered they are given their proper place in the total pic— ture. Their value is seen clearly only against the background of, and in connection with, all other personal data. Throughout the latest revision of the Presbyterian Guidance Program Handbook the Protestant doctrine of Chris- tian vocation is kept clearly in evidence. The mission of the church is pictured as being ideal for the totality of life, an attitude which has been neglected or remained un— recognized. Its members share one gospel, ”go forth on one mission—-to redeem the world 32d its work."2 [Emphasis added] In its attempt to teach and to challenge young peo— ple, the church must concern itself also with the relevance of faith to that area of life which will take more of their waking hours and energy than anything else they will do. 1Ibid. 2Ibid., p. 11. 37 This “demands so much of a young person that unless he can make of it the dedicated service to God and man which our Creator has ordained, it will lose its meaning and purpose.”1 The task of the church is seen as a challenge to its members to make their Christian faith ”relevant to the world in which they work.”2 The section, ”Work and the Meaning of Vocation,” ends with these words: In both the Old and the New Testament daily labor is seen as a God—ordained duty. Men of the Bible thought of work as the will of God. They reSpected his call as a command for them to subject their lives to his will. The historical section of the same volume points out that the reformers proclaimed anew that God can be glorified in the midst of the world at work. It continues to point to any worthy occupation as a means of service. And then it affirms: Martin Luther freed the term ”vocation” from its use in his day as only a synonym for certain religious callings--priests, monks, and nuns. He declared that every Christian's daily work must be a calling received from God and performed to His glory. John Calvin more carefully defined the relation between the call of God and man's responsible llbid., p. 15. 2Ibid., p. 17. 31bid. 38 witness. . . . Calvin regarded all men as equally called of God in their daily occupa- tions as they are in their family, community, and church life. He held that every man, if he would follow his own divine purpose in the world, must use his natural abilities in law- ful, useful work, in gratitude to his Maker. This was an important, an integral, part of the call of God to all men to live their lives in the Christian vocation.1 At this point the book points out how this understanding of Christian vocation was lost through the Industrial Revolu- tion and the Machine Age.2 The same book quotes with approval Wade H. Boggs, Jr., in All Ye Who Labor: Even if a particular public school system were financially able to staff its guidance program so that all the basic services were made avail- able to each pupil, from the Christian stand- point such a program would still be inadequate because of the absence of a Christian philosophy of vocation. Throughout the 117 pages of the Presbyterian Guid— ance Program Handbook there is no attempt to recruit for the ministry or for other church vocations. This is not neces- sary because the church has a separate department of enlist— ment. The philosophy stated so clearly in the passages lIbid., p. 19. 2Ibid., p. 20. 3Ibid., p. 23; and for the context of the quotation, see Chapter V of the present study. 39 quoted above is put to practice throughout the program. Conclusion Clearly, then, many Protestant denominations claim to be involved in a church guidance program. Of the denom- inations investigated-~all those member churches of the National Council listed as having such a program-~some have no program, some have a ”guidance” program that is clearly a program of recruitment. The Presbyterian Church in the United States (the so-called "Southern Presbyterian” church) alone has a church—related program that clearly seeks to point the counselee to the vocation best fitted to his needs without attempting recruitment for church vocations. Since the present work is chiefly concerned with the advisability of a guidance program for the various Lutheran churches, subsequent chapters will concern themselves with the historical Lutheran position relative to man's calling, the more recent Lutheran position, implications for practice, conclusions and recommendations. Basically several ques- tions are involved: Is such a program consistent with Lutheran theology? Can it be carried out practically? How should this be done? CHAPTER II THE HISTORICAL LUTHERAN POSITION RELATIVE TO MAN’S CALLING (VOCATIO) An examination of church—related guidance programs, reported in the previous chapter, showed that only one large Lutheran body has such a program. That program was clearly Seen to be a recruitment program, albeit an excellent one. Since the primary question under consideration centers about the advisability of church-related guidance programs for Lutherans, the historical Lutheran position relative to man's calling will be examined in this chapter. Theologians in the Lutheran tradition, writing chiefly in ecclesiastical / Latin, employed the term vocatio in the sense of a call and in the sense of a calling. The former is used of man‘s con- version—5a call to faith--while calling refers to man's occupation. Later theologians, writing in German, used the term B332: in the restricted sense of calling or occupation. With the coming of the reformation came a change in the understanding of the term vocatio beyond the distinc- tions just noted. Before Luther, vocatio was used only when referring to priests, monks, and nuns--those who were in the 40 41 full—time employ of the church. Martin Luther is generally credited with that Protestant doctrine of vocatio which states that it is not necessary to be in the church's employ to have a Christian vocation. In this chapter, Luther's position will be examined both on the basis of his own writ- ings and on the basis of the works of others who have made what purport to be thorough studies of his teaching. This will be followed by an examination of the writings of Lu- theran theologians in the period since Luther in an attempt to assess the extent of their agreement with Luther‘s posi- tion on vocation. I. THE POSITION OF LUTHER Luther as Seen in His Own Writings As early as 1522—1523, when Luther was preaching on the First Epistle of Peter, he Spoke of the common man's vocation. A man who is a servant, Luther said, should con- sider his service to his master, who may be peculiar and angry, ”as something done for Christ Who became a Servant for him.”1 In 1523, in a treatise on the election and in— stallation of church workers, he warned against those who 1Martin Luther, Sammtliche Schriften (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1910), IX, p. 1208. 42 say, “We are priests; you are laymen. . . . Only we are Christians. Only we can pray. You are heathen. You should not pray."l In the same year, in a sermon on the Sunday after Christmas, Luther spoke of God's interest in a per- son's occupation. God finds it unbearable to see someone leave his calling to take up church work.2 This was in har- mony with a statement he had made earlier that year in a sermon for the Sunday after the Ascension when he said: Nothing is nobler than obedience to the voca- tion and work which God has placed upon a person. One ought to be content with it agd With serVice to his neighbor and the like. By 1530, Luther's position had become even more out- spoken. Preaching at Coburg on April 20, he stated that the monks and sectarians (i.e., non-Lutheran Protestants) were teaching that living a God—pleasing life in an ordinary occupation was impossible; Christ, however, permitted secu- lar occupations and work around the house.4 On September 21 of the same year, speaking at the same place, he insisted that the work and the calling of a hired man or of a house- maid please God more than all the works of monks and nuns. 1Ibid., x, p. 1584. 2Ibid., XI, p. 257. 3Ibid., XII, p. 613. 41bid., VII, p. 2430. 43 The work of the former, not of the latter, is based on God’s ordinance. In 1536, Luther began to lecture on the Pentateuch.2 In his interpretation of Genesis 17:9, he stated that there is only one way of serving God: going about with a simple faith, being diligent in one's vocation, and having a good conscience.3 At Genesis 18:9, 10, he warns that housewives who were wont to run to the church, to fast frequently, and the like, should instead be diligent in looking after their houses and families. There are many other references to vocation in Luther's lectures on the Pentateuch,5 but this is both typical and succinct: An obedient maid, a manservant, and a pregnant woman are more glorious than a praying monk. The monk is concerned only with the outward appearance of his act. The others are consid— ering their vocation as well as God's ordinance. lIbid., p. 2447. 2That is, The Five Books of Moses, Genesis through Deuteronomy. 3Ibid., 1, pp. 1071f. 4Ibid., p. 1164. 51bid., I, pp. 262, 315, 867, 1181; III, pp. 321, 1100; Iv, pp. 1960, 1983; and v, pp° 831, 1309, 1541. 6Ibid., 1, p. 1310. 44 Luther's writings on the New Testament date from 1539. Many of them had originally been notes and were gathered later from various places. George Walch, a Luther editor, points out that many of the manuscripts were torn and full of holes.1 From these fragments, however, can be gathered Luther's continuing emphasis on vocation. Typical is a statement from his commentary on St. Luke 12:35: ”One should work as though he would live for ever. He should, however, also be prepared to die at any moment.” In his sermons designed to be read at home in prep— aration for Sunday worship, Luther proclaims repeatedly that the manservant and the maid who do their duty at home are more pleasing to God than the monks who pray, fast, and attend masses. In the same work, Luther admits that monks who enter Cloisters, live strenuous lives, fast, keep vigils, and pray——these monks make a greater impression upon the world than do persons in other occupations. But monks have no vocation. God has not called them to do this. At the same time, the world pays little attention to the maid who cooks, cleans, and Sweeps. Because it is done in response to God's 1Ibid., introduction to Volume VII. No pagination. 2Ibid., VII, p. 1446. 3Ibid., XIII, p. 158. 45 command, her work surpasses by far all the piety and the strenuous life of monks and nuns. The maid has Godis com- mand to honor father and mother and to help at home. Monks and nuns have no divine command for their work. For Luther, obedience to one‘s employer is enjoined by the fourth commandment.2 In effect, he places masters 1p . . . 3 . loco parentis and parents gp loco Dei. For this reason, young people should be trained to regard God‘s Word highly, especially when it speaks of their station in life and of their vocation. In this way, they may learn what it means to serve God. Luther as Seen by Others Strangely, some authors in detailing the life and teachings of Martin Luther either ignore his understanding of vocation altogether or Speak of it merely in passing, While it is understandable, if not justifiable, that children's books like the colorful work of McNeer and Ward5 1Ibid., p. 872. 2The commandments are quoted according to the number» ing used by Jews, Roman Catholics, and Lutherans; ”Thou shalt honor thy father and thy mother. . . .” 3This influenced scholastic Lutheran theologians to treat vocation when they spoke of the family if they dis- cussed it at all. See Abraham Calov, below. 4Luther, XIII, p. 2362. 5May McNeer and Lynd Ward, Martin Luther (New York: The Abingdon Press, 1953). 46 omit Luther's views on vocation, yet it is surprising that the fuller treatments of Luther, written for adults, also omit them. Such omissions occur in the works on Luther by Kuiper,l Maritain,2 and Funck—Brentano.3 Others treat Luther's views on vocation only in passing. Grisar, a Roman Catholic and a lifelong Luther scholar, relegates vocation to a footnote. Here he states that an examination of Luther‘s utterances on vocation would Show his confused views on marriage, celibacy, secular and Spiritual vocation.4 Implicit in his criticism is, of course, an admission that Luther‘s views on vocation dif- fered from the position of the Roman Catholic church. Fife, in a volume of more than seven hundred pages, Speaks only obliquely concerning vocation; and he does this without using the term: While the Scripture makes no distinction between the priest and the laity, save that the former are servants of the GOSpel, these servants have 1Barend K. Kuiper, Martin Luther (Grand Rapids: The Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1943). 2Jacques Maritain, Three Reformers, no translator given (New York; Scribner's, 1929). 3Frantz Funck-Brentano, Luther, trans. E. F. Buckley (London: Cape, 1936). 4Hartmann Grisar, Martin Luther) His Life and Work, adapted from the second German edition by Frank J. Eble (Westminster, Md.: The Newman Press, 1950). 47 now taken away all Christian freedom and made the Christians their servants.1 Although Schwiebert appears to understand Luther's views on vocation very clearly, his total treatment of this subject in a work on 892 pages consists of the following: During the same period,2 Luther also rejected the medieval conception of a Beruf or calling. He rejected the distinction between the clergy and the laity, the recognition of a special calling on the part of the former. Every call— ing, he believed, even that of the simplest folk, was of God. In the Long Sermon on Usury, preached on Christmas Day, 1520, Luther for the)first time stated his view of the ”priesthood of all belive- ers," which wiped out with one stroke any special merit in the work of a regular or secular clergy- man. Rosaries, masses, and other good works meant nothing if they resulted in the neglect of one‘s daily duty in his calling. God had called each man to a Beruf, and this was a trust held in stewardship which man was expected to fulfill on the highest possible plane.3 Jacobs is not only brief; he misses the point of vocation. In his examination of Luther's tract, To His Imperial Majesty and the Christian Nobility of the German Nation Concerning the Reformation of the Christian Church, he states simply that Luther here speaks of the responsibil— 4 ity and the duty of the laity in ecclesiastical affairs. 1Robert Herndon Fife, The Revolt of Martin Luther (New York: Columbia University Press, 1957)) p. 548. During the second decade of the sixteenth century. 3E. G. Schwiebert, Luther and his Times (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1950), p. 451. 4Henry Eyster Jacobs, Martin Lutheri the Hero of the Reformation (New York: Putnam's, 1898), p. 157. 48 A collection of essays under the editorship of the Bishop of Oslo1 shows a similar lack of understanding con— cerning Luther's views on vocation. He reflects Luther's position, saying that it belongs to the clergyman's office to teach £233 a cobbler should make shoes, not ppfl he should make or sell them; in that case, a theologian would have to know all things.2 The bishop misses Luther's point. The reformer spoke at length on the workman‘s attitude toward his work, as has been shown above. Others, however, have graSped Luther's teaching on vocation more fully. In Basic Christian Ethics, Ramsey points out that the Protestant reformation abolished the medieval distinction between Special and religious merit on the part of the clergy and inferior merit on the part of the laity. All vocations rank the same with God regardless of their ranking by men. Luther wanted everybody to be some— body in God's eyes deSpite the fact that, as a result, ”no one would be anybody" from man's point of view. Koestlin bases his observation on the doctrine of lThe bishop is not identified by name. 2The Bishop of Oslo, editor, Luther Speaks, Essays by Lutheran Pastors in Britain (London: Lutterworth Press, 1947), p. 110. 3Paul Ramsey, Basic Christian Ethics (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1950), pp. 153ff. 49 the universal priesthood of all believers and states that a violent revolution took place in the conception of ecclesias— ticism as a result of the reformatory idea of the universal priesthood. Each believer now knew himself to be equally near to God and equally entitled to share the Holy Spirit's gifts. He comes close to understanding Luther's position when he points out that laymen “had all likewise received the lofty and holy authority to exercise priestly functions among their fellow-Christians and fellowmen as members who, just because having equal share in the body and Head, ought to promote one another's mutual well—being, and to allow the vital energy pulsating within them to flow out upon one another."1 Boehmer provides an excellent historical sketch of the development of the doctrine of vocation, stating, as he sees it, the position of Martin Luther. The character of the calling does not matter at all. God does not look upon the work but the mood of the person who performs it. The humbler and more deSpised a task is, the more exalted in God's eyes is the man who, out of obedience to Him, carries it out. Boehmer points out that the idea of calling was already present in Luther's thought in the period between 1Julius Koestlin, The Theology of Luther in its Historical Development and Inner Harmony, trans. Charles E. Hay (Philadelphia: Lutheran Publication Society, 1897), 11,9. 84. 50 1513 and 1517. He shows further that Tauler, Gerson, Antoninus of Florence, Nider, Herold, and Markus of Weida had entertained the same idea. But while these men admitted that a pious, conscientious layman's life is better than a dissolute life in holy orders, yet they regarded the reli— gious estate as the surest way to salvation. By 1516, on the other hand, Luther no longer ascribed such religious superiority to monasticism.l Without explicitly stating it, Boehmer shows the difference between Luther‘s and Calvin’s positions when he says: ”What turns up for a man to do” is of course primarily the work he has to do in his call- ing. . . . Highly as he esteemed work in one's calling, Luther never saw in it the real purpose of human existence. It was simply the opportu- nity which Providence gave each individual for the expression of his faith and his love to his neighbor. Here, too, his ethic was never worldly, earthly, or even economic. It always had a purely religious orientation. Seeing in work "the real purpose of human existence,” foreign to Luther and to Lutheranism, will be seen as the understanding of Calvinism in a later chapter. Thirty years earlier, the same author had already paraphrased Luther clearly when he wrote that God had placed man into this world explicitly to conquer the world. "Not 1Heinrich Boehmer, Road to Reformation, trans. John W. Doberstein and Theodore G. Tappert (Philadelphia: Muhlenberg Press, 1946), pp. l34f. 2Ibid., pp. 313f. 51 the monastery, therefore, but the secular vocation is the normal sphere for proving one‘s faith and one's love for his fellow man.” Bainton puts Luther's doctrine of vocation into proper historical perspective in his section entitled I23 Calling. He asserts that Luther was more conservative than Catholicism because he abolished monasticism and in this way eliminated the opportunity for some peOple to practice what they considered to be a higher righteousness. ”In conse— quence," Bainton continues, ”the gOSpel could be exemplified only in the midst of secular callings, except that Luther refused to call them secular.”2 As Luther had extended the priesthood to all believers, so he now also extended voca— tion to include all worthy occupations. Attention is called to Bainton's descriptions of Jesus working as carpenter, the Virgin Mary working, Peter working, the shepherds at Bethle- hem working, as typical of Luther's position. Boyer analyzes the position of Luther by saying that Luther's point of view, despite his extreme pessimism, was primarily activistic. "Something of the divine energy of God may flow into the lives of humble Christians changing lHeinrich Boehmer, Luther in Light of Recent Research, trans. Carl F. Huth, Jr. (New York: The Christian Herald Publishing Co., 1916), pp. 280f. 2Roland H. Bainton, Here I Stand (New York: Abingdon— Cokesbury Press, 1950), pp. 232-235. 52 them into a priesthood of believers and then move out through them to make their daily task holy and of value in the sight of man and of God.”1 There can be no doubt, then, that Luther had a dis- tinct doctrine of vocation; nor can there be doubt of Luther's ability to communicate across the centuries with writers of our time on this very subject, although some have omitted mention of this important phase of the reformer's teaching and others have touched upon it only briefly. As has been shown above, McNeer and Ward, Kuiper, Maritain, Funck-Brentano, Grisar, Fife, Schwiebert, Jacobs, and the Bishop of Oslo-—all significant writers on Luther—-either miss his presentation of the doctrine of vocation, or treat it superficially, or err in understanding it. Ramsey, Koestlin, Boehmer, Bainton, and Boyer faithfully reflect the reformer's views on vocation. Luther‘s position is simply this: Monks, nuns, and priests have no greater calling than anyone else. In fact, according to Luther, they may have no calling at all. Luther found no command in the Sacred Scriptures for many of the things these people were doing. He did, however, find in the fourth commandment (”Thou shalt honor thy father lMerle W. Boyer, Luther in Protestantism Today (New York: Association Press, 1958), p. 44. 53 and thy mother . . .”) a Biblical warrant for the work of manservants and maidservants. Consequently, every Christian working in his occupation does have a call from God and should not change occupations. ESpecially should he not leave his calling in the world to become a cloistered monk or nun. The position of Luther just related has implications for a church—related guidance program, especially for the Lutheran churches. Luther would say that boys should not be .ppggg to study for the holy ministry; girls should not be ppggd to become deaconesses. All vocations are equally honorable before God. Theologians after Luther—-variously referred to as the classical dogmaticians, the scholastics, or the system— atic theologians-—systematized Lutheran teaching. They organized Biblical doctrine according to subject matter. It is important to observe what scholars since the late sixteenth century did with the doctrine of vocation. These, as well as Luther, are a part of the heritage of modern Lutheranism. A Lutheran church—related guidance program would need to be understood in the light of Luther, the scholastic theologians, and current Lutheran thought. 54 II. THE POSITION OF CLASSICAL LUTHERAN THEOLOGIANS Men studying in Lutheran seminaries today have little access to the theologians of the late sixteenth century, as Preus and Smits point out, since ”the theology of an entire century has been left buried in dust and mold and a dead language.”l Yet these men and their successors for several centuries are important to an understanding of current Lu— theran theology which is built upon their systems. The writ- ings of theologians of the Lutheran classical period concern— ing vocation will be examined by periods. Hoeneckez’3 divides the period from the middle of the sixteenth century to the end of the nineteenth century into three logical sub—periods: l. The time of the flowering of Lutheran theology; 2. The time of the estrangement from orthodoxy and of a seeming return to it; and 3. The time of a genuine return to the old orthodoxy. lHerman A. Preus and Edmund Smits, The Doctrine of Man in Classical Lutheran Theology (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1962), p. v. 2Adolph Hoenecke (1835-1908), Professor and Pres- ident, Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary, leading theologian of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod; his major work (Dogmatik, see below) appeared posthumously. 3Adolph Hoenecke, Evangelisch-Lutherische Dogmatik (Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 1909), Vol. I, pp. 1-191. 55 The Position of the Theologians during the Flowering of Lutheran Theology The first compiler of a Lutheran dogmatics is . . 1 Philip Melanchthon, a contemporary of Luther. Although he Speaks of monastic vows2 and on magistrates,3 he does not make a clear statement on vocation anywhere in his work. Melanchthon's pupil, Chemnitz (1522-1586), was one of Lutheranism's most important dogmatic theologians. ”If Chemnitz had not arisen, Luther would have fallen,” was a common saying among Roman Catholic theologians at the time of Luther's death.4 Chemnitz did not treat the doctrine of Christian vocation at all. This omission had far—reaching effects since later theologians built upon his outline.5 Although Luther and Melanchthon were friends and co- workers, the latter was more liberal in his views, being willing to compromise both with the Roman Catholic Church and with other Protestants. (Melanchthon's first name was Philip; the reapprochement with other Protestants is known 1Ibid., p. 262. 2Philip Melanchthon, Loci Communes, trans. Charles Hill (Boston: Meader, 1944), pp. 126ff. (Original, 1521.) 3Ibid., p. 262. 4Preus and Smits, loc. cit. 5Ibid. 56 as the Philippian compromise.) Contemporary with Chemnitz was Heerbrand (1521—1600), a pupil of both Luther and Melanchthon.1 Heerbrand chose the stricter views of Luther as opposed to the more liberal position of Melanchthon.2 Subsequently, dogmaticians were to follow either Chemnitz or Heerbrand; since the latter chose to ignore the doctrine of vocation,3 as did the former, a tradition was established, in the mainstreams of both liberal and conservative Lutheran— ism, that ignored the doctrine of Christian vocation.4 During the seventeenth century, the dogmatics text- book by Hafenreffer (1561—1691) had the widest currency in upper and lower Germany. Despite an attempt at being prac— tical rather than theoretical, Hafenreffer’s work does not treat the subject of a vocatio for the layman. Hutter (1563—1616) was so much like the reformer that he was called redonatus Lutherus. His writings were lHoenecke, I, p. 5. 2Revere Franklin Weidner, An Introduction to Dog— matic Theology, based on Luthardt (Rock Island: Augustana Publishing House, 1895), p. 189. 3Jakob Heerbrand, Abhandlung der Lehre von der gnaedigen Wahl oder Praedestination, German translation by Gnadekind (St. Louis: Volkening, 1873). 4The term vocatio was still used, but its use was restricted to the call of faith. It did not mean a calling to work. (Exceptions will be noted.) 5Weidner, p. 190. 57 in a narrative style which set them apart from the scholas— tic theologians who employed an antithetical method. It was natural that a man who wrote like Luther should have held . . 1 . . . . the reformer's prinCiples. His Compendium, originally published in 1610, then in 1618, 1622, 1624, 1629, and at varying intervals until the middle of the next century,2 was recently published again in Germany.3 Like so many dogmatics textbooks of the seventeenth century, Hutter's Compendium does not have a clear statement concerning the Christian vocation of the layman. He speaks of a vocation for the ministry.4 He also states that it is necessary to distin- guish between vocations and obedience; vocations are per- sonal and, like businesses, vary from time to time and from person to person.5 But he does not Speak of the layman's vocation as a calling from God. 1Ibid., p. 199. 2Ibid. 3Leonard Hutter, Compendium Locorum Theologicorum (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1961). 4Ibid., p. 79. 5Ibid., p. 122; and this is an exception to the restricted use of the term vocatio. Hutter, however, uses the word only in the plural, vocationes. 58 The great Biblical theologian Johann Gerhard (1582— 1637) is considered the father of the universal method in dogmatics. This method, as Hagglund has shown,1 is in no way derived from philosophical methodology. Rather it is simply the contemporary order for detailing the principal parts of Christian teaching according to the order of the Heilsgeschichte. So that references to later dogmaticians' works may be seen in relation to their outline, Gerhard's outline follows; this became a model for his successors: The Holy Scriptures The Trinity Creation Foreknowledge Predestination The Image of God The Fall of Man Sin Free Will 10. The Law 11. The Gospel 12. Repentance 13. Faith (Justification) 14. Good Works 15. The Sacraments 16. The Church 17. The Three Stations in Life 18. Eschatology.2 \OOONOUI-bbJNH 1Bengt Hagglund, Die heilige Schrift und ihre Deutung in der Theologie Johann Gerhards, Eine Untersuchung ueber das altlutherische Schriftverstaendnis (Lund: Berlingska, 1951), p. 54. 2Johann Gerhard, Locorum Theologicorum (Tuebingen: Cotta, 1775 edition). 59 A thorough search through the works of Gerhard reveals contact with the doctrine of Christian vocation at several points. At one place, he Speaks of the two—fold substance of the ministry: a materia in qua and a pateria circa quam, identifying the former with the things the min- ister does; the latter, with the people with whom he deals. He simply says that lay people have a call to be hearers.1 Later in the same volume, Gerhard compares the ministry of the church with the ministry of magistrates; but he ignores anyone else's vocation.2 In another place, he says God requires all men to be pious at all times. They should have a holy fear of God and should keep the commandments.3 In his commentary on Psalm 105:15 (”Touch not my anointed ones, do my prophets no harml”), he makes application of this passage to clergy and magistrates, but to no one else.4 In another place, he Speaks of Apollo (The Acts 18:24) as an eloquent man, powerful in the Scriptures, schooled only in the teaching of St. John the Baptist, but a layman. Most significantly he continues: "It is therefore impossible 1Ibid., XX, p. 1. 2Ibid., p. 225. 3Ibid., XXI, p. 341. 4Ibid. 60 . . l to deny that . . . Apollo had a diVine call to teach." Attention must be called, however, to the fact that the layman in question was doing something for the church. Gerhard did not Speak of a layman's vocation in his regular work. Elsewhere Gerhard speaks of legitimate vocations, illegitimate vocations, mediate vocations, and immediate vocations.2 He recognizes also a vocation for ”doctors,” i.e., theological professors. In view of Gerhard's tremendous influence on dogmat— ic theology for several centuries, it is readily seen why vocatio (in the sense of a Christian vocation for the laity in their work) was ignored by subsequent theologians as it had been ignored after Luther. The greatest Lutheran systematician, QEIEX'(1612‘ 1686), treats vocation in a number of ways. His is the one clear statement on the layman's vocation since the time of Ilpig., XXIV, p. 67; ”Negari igitur non potest, Philippum et Apollo divinam vocationem ad docendum habuisse.” [Emphasis added.] 21bid., pp. 71-105, 124—135. All these refer to church vocations. An illegitimate vocation would be one obtained dishonestly. Mediate vocations are calls to church positions through a congregation, the church at large, etc.; immediate vocations are calls believed to come directly from God. 3Ibid., pp. 142-145. 61 Luther. Even so, his pronouncements on vocation are imbed- ded in other doctrines. In his first reference to the sub- ject of vocation, Calov Speaks about man subduing the earth. He asks whether man is supposed to subdue his fellow man also. He digresses to a discussion of the marriage relation— ship but returns to his original thesis of man‘s relation- ship to his fellow man, insisting that a distinction needs to be made between the master-servant relationship and the parent-child relationship.1 (Earlier, Luther had treated vocation in the same context. The relationship between a master and his servant was analogous to the relationship between a parent and his child. The theologians between Luther and Calov did not make this connection. Calov is important for the present study because he re-established a connection between the master-servant and parent-child relationship--although it was different from the connection Luther had made.) Elsewhere, Calov, speaking on church history, includes many of Luther‘s emphases in his discussion of the reformer; but he does not touch on Luther's views concerning vocation.2 Calov Speaks of the three-fold orders in the lAbraham Calov, Systema Locorum Theologicorum (Wittenberg: Hartmann, 1655), IV, p. 425; this first edi— tion of Calov is available in the library of the Lutheran Theological Seminary at Gettysburg. 2Ibid., VIII, pp. 239—249. 62 . . l . . church (priests, deacons, bishops) and then continues With . . . . . 2 . . . . a section de vocatione ad S. Ministerium in which he limits the use of the term vocatio to a clergyman's call to the ministry. Calov‘s real importance for the present study lies in the fact that he devotes a separate section to a consid— eration de officiis parentum et liberorum; dominorum et §ervorum.3 Servants, he points out, should heed the Biblical injunction (Ephesians 6:5-7) to obey their masters as they would obey God. The personality of the master must not determine the quality of obedience. Of greatest significance for our understanding of the doctrine of vocation as it is presented by the classical Lutheran theologian Abraham Calov is his subsequent state- ment that there are many considerations in regard to the work of servants taught by the holy apostle in Ephesians, chapter six: Servants have a calling, even though they are servants. They are Christ‘s servants every bit as much as man's. They are under divine command. The circumstances 1Ibid., pp. 285—297. 2Ibid., pp. 298ff. 31bid., p. 574. 4"Si dominus est, obedientia ei debetur.” 63 surrounding their servitude should not embitter them, for . . . 1 it is not eternal but brief. In volume ten of his Systema, Calov has a separate section called de Vocatione. Here, however, he uses vocatio in the narrow sense (of a call to faith) in the manner of Heerbrand, discussed above. (See footnote 4, page 56.) Calov's significance, as has been noted, lies in the inclusion of a section on children and parents, masters and servants. The section is placed between the office of the ministry and the office of magistrates.2 This is noteworthy in view of the apathy evident on the part of other Lutheran dogmaticians of the period concerning a calling for the laity. ,Quenstedt (1617—1688), the bookkeeper of the . 3 . . . . Wittenberg orthodoxy, has been critiCized for reduCing doctrine to dogmatic formulae. His presentation of vocatio, unfortunately, lacks the understanding of Calov. Like the dogmatic writings of many of his contemporaries, Quenstedt lCalov, VIII, p. 579. 2See Gerhard's outline on page 58. Item 17 in that outline encompasses the three stations in life: the min- isterial, the magisterial, and the familial. In some dog- maticians‘ writings, the last-named concerns itself only with the relationship between husbands and wives; in others it includes children; in a few, like Calov, it includes the master—servant relationship. 3Weidner, p. 206. 64 does not treat vocatio as calling; and he does not deal with the subject when he Speaks of the three stations in life.1 This is particularly unfortunate since Quenstedt's works were widely used in Lutheran seminaries in Europe and in the United States for many decades. Contemporary with Quenstedt was Baier (1647-1695). His Compendium theologiae positivae appeared almost at the same time as the monumental work of his older colleague. In Baier, the earliest reference which might be construed as having a relationship to the doctrine of vocation is found in the section on conversion. As a result of one's conversion, there should be a new obedience, an attitude that expresses itself in an attempt not to sin——indeed, a piety of life which should become habitual.2 In passages concerning the ministry, Baier uses the term vocatio of the pastor's call only.3 He Speaks of the secular order and the ecclesiastical order but says the former should be heeded only when it rightly engages in warning and when it helps to lAndreas Quenstedt, Theologica—didactico-polemico sive systema theologicum (Wittenberg: no publisher given, 1685). 2J. W. Baier, Compendium Theologiae Positivae (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1879), p. 236 (original 1686). 31bid., pp. 689, 699. 65 choose ministers.l Thus one of Lutheranism‘s most influen— tial theologians only approaches the subject of a vocation for laymen; he does not really touch upon it. The last of the really orthodox Lutheran theolo- gians, a man of the stamp of Abraham Calov, David Hollaz (1648-1713), uses the categories of calling to faith, the calling of the clergy, and the calling of magistrates. However, he does not treat the marital estate and Speaks of parents and masters briefly, devoting two of his catechet- ical questions to the last named relationship. Thus his book ends significantly with the question, ”What are the duties of masters and servants?” He answers: The masters‘ it is to rule the servants. "The servants‘ it is to honor the masters, to obey them, and to render them faithful service. Although he here cites relevant passages of Scripture, he does not himself make the necessary application that such services should be ”as unto God.“ 1Ibid., p. 700; Baier recognizes only two of the three stations in life referred to by other Lutheran dog- maticians. His "secular order” consists of the magisterial office; his ”ecclesiastical order,” the ministry. The famil- ial order is omitted. It is in connection with the familial order that the servant—master relationship is frequently treated by other dogmaticians. 2David Hollaz, Examen Theologicum Acromaticum &c. (Leipzig: Breitkopf, 1763). 66 A few theologians of note need to be considered briefly to complete a survey of the period of the flowering of Lutheran theology. Dannhauer and Schertzer, who lived 1603—1666 and 1628—1683 reSpectively, published their dogmatics jointly in a single volume. DeSpite a lengthy treatise on marriage, they Speak neither of children nor of servants.l The term vocatio is used elsewhere in their Work only in reference to the minister‘s call.2 Meisner (1587- 1626) uses vocatio only to describe the call to faith.3 Hunnius (1585-1643) uses the word Eggpf (calling) both in the sense of a call to faith and of a calling to become a prophet or a teacher.4 He does not Speak of a layman‘s call in his work. Huelsemann (1602-1661) speaks only of . . 5 . . the "graCious call to faith.” He does not use vocatio in any other sense. lJohann Konrad Dannhauer, Hodosophia Christiana seu Theologica Positiva, &c. (Leipzig: Groschuff, 1713). Bound With Johann Adam Schertzer, Systema Theologiae (Leipzig: Tarnow, 1704). 2 Ibid., p. 693. . 3Balthas Meisner, De statu naturae hum.,%¢9,owWo)o;¢/ac diSputationes (Wittenberg: Gormann, 1618), No paginatiofiIv’ The quotation is Disputation XVII, Question 11, Part IV, paragraph XXXI, subpart 4. 4Nikolaus Hunnius, Glaubenslehre (Noerdlingen: Beck, 1870), Pp. 156f. 5Johannes Huelsemann, De Auxiliis gratiae &c. (Frankfurt: no publisher given, 1705), p. 85 (original, 1638). 67 Clearly, then, the Lutheran theologians of the period which Hoenecke calls "the flowering of Lutheran theology" generally ignored Luther‘s doctrine of the lay— man‘s call in his daily work. Abraham Calov alone in this period treated the Protestant doctrine of vocation proposed by Martin Luther, pointing out that laymen are Christ‘s servants every bit as much as man‘s. The Position of the Theologians during the Time of the Estrangement from Orthodox Theologyiand of a Seeming Return to It This period begins in the age of pietism. Devo— tional aSpectS of religion received greater emphasis than doctrinal formulations. The theologians of pietism rejected the polemics of the previous period since those polemics had been directed against fellow Christians of other denomina- tions. The polemics of pietistic theologians were aimed against "free thinkers and atheists.“l At the same time, they denounced orthodoxy more fervently than atheisim. lHoenecke, I, p. 15. 68 The most renowned of the pietistic dogmaticians was Joachim Lgpgg (1670—1774). In language which is difficult to comprehend because of his application of metaphysical terminology to theology, he touches upon vocation when he states that there is a monkdom in all nations. On the pos- itive side, such asceticism is a merger of the person with the unseen as a life‘s calling in the world. On the nega— tive side, this asceticism consists of a self-sacrifice of the life God has given.1 Most of the later pietists departed from the ortho- doxy of the earlier Lutherans. An exception was Bengel (1687—1752) a man of a more conservative bent than his . . . . 2 contemporaries. His Gnomon Nov1 Testamenti, a commentary on individual passages of the New Testament, uses the term vocatio once in the synoptic GOSpels, once in St. John, once in Ephesians, and four times in the Acts. In each of these, vocatio represents either a call to faith or a call into the ministry. He does not Speak of the layman‘s calling. Bengel‘s Gnomon was used widely. He does not even make a clear statement on vocation in his interpretation of lJohann Peter Lange, Christliche Dogmatik (Heidelberg: Universitflts Buchhandlung von Karl Winter, 1849-1852), III, p. 27. 2Johann A. Bengel, Gnomon Novi Testamenti (Tuebingen: Fues, 1855; original, 1742). 69 Ephesians 6:4.1 Buddeus (1667—1729) the man who sought to harmonize orthodoxy and pietism, Speaks six times of the call of the clergy;2 he Speaks also of the call of magistrates;3 and he speaks on marriage and the family.4 (See Gerhard‘s "Three Stations in Life," number seventeen in his outline, page 58.) In his section on marriage and the family, Buddeus says that masters should conduct themselves in such a fashion toward their servants that God will approve.5 They should try to lead those who are not Christians to faith. Of servants, on the other hand, it is expected that they will honor their masters and follow them with obedience. Faithfulness, indus— triousness, and patience should be shown toward masters at all times. This should be done, not because some masters are pleasant, but because this is demanded by God. lJohn Albert Bengel, Gnomon of the New Testament, trans. Lewis and Vincent (Philadelphia: Perkinpine and Higgins, 1864), II, pp. 4l8f; the passage speaks about fathers and children. Luther and others applied it also to the master—servant relationship. 2John Francis Buddeus, Institutiones Theologiae Dogmaticae (Leipzig: Fritsch, 1724), pp. l3l8ff. 3Ibid., pp. 1342ff. 4Ibid., pp. l360ff. 5Ibid., p. 1372. 70 In contrast to Buddeus, who attempted to harmonize orthodoxy and pietism, Carpov (1699—1768) represents a further estrangement from conservative orthodoxy. He sought to systematize theology by using a mathematical method. Carpov devotes the entire fourth chapter of Part Two of his major work to de Conseqpentibus Lapsis Humani, concerning the results of man‘s fall into sin. He treats questions such as man‘s ability to stand perfect before God, but he has nothing to say concerning the way a man makes a living. He is concerned only with the eternal life.1 Later, when he asks, "Does God rule men?" and ”Through whom does God rule men?“2 he again neglects the opportunity of Speaking on Christian vocation. In a subsequent section on sanctifi- cation,3 he speaks of the increase of the Spiritual life. He lists the results of sanctification but makes no mention of a man‘s attitude toward his work. Earlier, he had asked what vocation is. His answer was simply ”a call to salva- tion." 1Jakob Carpov, Theologia Revelata Dogmatica (Frankfurt: Melchior, 1737), I, p. 791. 2Ibid., 11, pp. 778f. 3Ibid., p. 969. 4Ibid., p. 60. 71 The "Seeming Return” to orthodoxy is associated with rationalizing theologians who reacted against the pietism which marked most of the period under consideration. Prom- inent among rationalizing theologians are Bretschneider (1776-1848) and Wegscheider (1771—1849). Bretschneider treats vocatio as a call to rebirth.l He also uses it of the call of the clergy and of other full time church workers. Wegscheider, in his section on vocatio, says that those who are called to faith should so experience and acknowledge this grace that they will endeavor to widen their calling in Whatever manner is appr0priate.3 He fails to Show what that manner might be. The "Seeming Return” to orthodoxy was evident also in August ngp (1792-1863), a supranatural theologian, who uses vocatio to mean a call to faith. His only other refer- ence to vocatio consists of a page—long footnote in which he quotes at length the earlier, Latin dogmaticians; but here, too, he says nothing relevant to the layman‘s calling. lKarl Gottlieb Bretschneider, Handbuch der Dogmatik der ev.-luth. Kirche, usw. (Leipzig: Barth, 1828), II, pp. 528-543. 2Ibid., pp. 863f. 3Julius A. L. Wegscheider, Institutiones Theologiae Christianae Dogmaticae (Halle: Gebauer, 1833), p. 546 (first edition, 1817). 4August Hahn, Lehrbuch des christlichen Glaubens (Leipzig: Vogel, 1858), II, p. 257. 72 He speaks of the ministry as ”a lofty, self—sacrificing . 1 vocation.” Again, clearly, of the Lutheran theologians of that period which Hoenecke calls ”the time of estrangement from orthodoxy and of a seeming return to it,” only Buddeus adequately reflects or properly interprets the Protestant doctrine of vocation. The Position of the Theologians during the Time of the Return to the Old Orthodoxy Hoenecke‘s third category begins with the beginning of the nineteenth century. At this time, various influences acted upon the dogmatician: newer philosophic systems, a different direction in the philosophy of religion, a new era of faith. In many ways, these influences were reminiscent of the period of orthodoxy characteristic of the time imme- diately following upon the reformation. Schleiermacher (1768-1834), Professor of Theology at the University of Berlin, had perhaps the most profound influence on the Lutheran theology of the nineteenth century, although he was not strictly Lutheran but Spoke in favor of the union of the Lutheran and the Reformed churches. In 1Ibid., p. 401. 73 view of his position that religion is a necessary function of man, that it is not dogma,1 and in view of his concern for developing doctrine from the inner consciousness of the individual person,2 it is surprising that he has little to say about man‘s daily life in his vocation.) Schleiermacher does expound the view which eliminates any sharp distinction between those who discharge ”the ordered ministry” and other Christian people. He states that this is the Biblical posi— tion.3 He does not, however, amplify or apply this View. Twesten, Schleiermacher‘s successor at Berlin, was, like his predecessor, in favor of the church union between Lutherans and Reformed. He regretted the fact that the Philippian Compromise (cf. pp. 55 and 56) had not been accepted. Although he was a mediating theologian who hoped for reunion in the church, he was opposed to a union by . . 4 force. When Twesten speaks of ev11 in the world, he gets near the subject of Christian vocation; but beyond this he lAllgemeine Deutsche Biographie (Leipzig: Duncker & Humbolt, 1890), entry on Schleiermacher. 2Concordia Cyclopedia (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, n.d.), entry on Schleiermacher. 3Friedrich Schleiermacher, The Christian Faith, trans. not given, translation of the second German edition (Edinburgh: Clark, 1928—1960), p. 613. 4A. D. C. Twesten, Vorlesungen ueber die Dogmatik der ev.-luth. Kirche nach dem Compendium de Wettes (Hamburg: Perthes, 1837), pp. 120f. 74 says nothing on the subject in a two—volume work. Church superintendent Nitzsch (1787-1868) was another mediating theologian and defender of the union, a man under Schleiermacher‘s influence. He says Berufung (vocatio in the sense of a call) leads to Spiritual rebirth. The life in Christ is holy only when it separates itself from the world and joins itself to God. It refreshes itself in the act of faith. It eschews the pleasures of the present world.l ngpf (vocatio in the sense of a calling) leads to service under God. It is a freedom in love. But Nitzsch stops Short of Speaking out clearly on Christian vocation.2 Much later, he says Christians Should remain in their earthly calling; they should not break any contracts they may have made to enter professional church work. To leave one‘s earthly calling or to break such contracts would con- stitute a denial both of faith and of love. Instead of entering a church vocatiOn, they should in Christian sim— plicity support the preaching of the faith. They should use their Spiritual life as a model for their earthly affairs.3 He does not, however, tell them to see their daily work as a calling from God. 1Carl 1. Nitzsch, System der christlichen Lehre, (third edition; Bonn: Marcus, 1837), pp. 270f. 2Ibid., p. 297. 3Ibid., p. 322. 75 David F. Strauss, writing in 1840, mentions in pass- ing that the clergy tend to separate themselves from the laity; that they believe they have a Special vocation; that they feel it is their divine calling to instruct the lay people in religious affairs. This difference between clergy and laity, Strauss continues, was changed by the reformation. It was changed still more by the Quaker movement. However, he explains, this is a matter with which the historian, not the dogmatician, should deal.1 Speaking of the results of conversion and justifica— tion, namely sanctification, the Bishop of Zeeland, Martensen (1808-1884) says no work deserves the name Christian unless it purifies the person who does it and tests his faith. The aim of such Christian works is to banish the power of sin. Such works must be holy and creative. They must accomplish new things on earth. No Christian character can exist with- out talent; in fact, character consists of a union of talent and will.2 The foregoing statements might be understood in the Sense of Christian vocation when one considers the mys- tical nature of Martensen‘s writing. He does not pursue the subject beyond this point. 1David F. Strauss, Die Christliche Glaubenslehre in ihrer gpschichtlichen Entwicklung, usw. (Tuebingen: Osiander, 1840), p. 611. 2Hans Larsen Martensen, Christian Dogmatics, trans. not given, original in Danish (Edinburgh: Clark, 1890), p. 395. 76 Kahnis (1814-1888), the leader of the theological faculty at Leipzig in his day and a man of great popularity, does not speak of vocation at all in his work in dogmatics.1 Pfleiderer, publishing in 1869 on the nature of religion, states that rationalism saw pppgl value only in religion: the same moral value in all religions. These morals, he says, are part of a religion manufactured by the priests. The motives of the priests may be either sincere or Selfish.2 The author assumes that no difference exists between the work of laity and clergy; but his assumption is so imbedded in criticism that it may be lost upon the reader. Epigp, writing in 1874, criticizes his fellow dogma- ticians for their narrow, historical treatment of doctrine. They should apply doctrine to life.3 He himself, however, does not touch upon the relationship between faith and the world of work. 4 Franz Frank, whose major work was published in 1878, was one of the most prominent of the so-called positive 1K. F. A. Kahnis, Die Lutherische Dogmatik (Leipzig: Doerffling & Franke, 1864). 2Otto Pfleiderer, Das Wesen der Religion (Leipzig: Fues, 1869), p. 125. 3Heinrich Voigt, Fundamentaldogmatik (Gotha: Perthes, 1874), p. 677. 4Fr. H. R. Frank, System der christlichen Wahrheit (Erlangen: Deichert, 1878). 3L 77 Lutheran theologians of modern times. He based his theology not on Scripture but on the consciousness of the regenerate man-~that is, on the converted ego. He says that there is no basis for stating that the church exists only where there are properly called servants of the Word or even properly elected church officials. Two or three believers may make up a church. Despite his emphasis upon the superfluity of the clergy, he fails to speak about the layman‘s vocation in his daily work. Dorner (1809—1884), of the school of Schleiermacher, barely touches upon vocation in his dogmatics1 but he speaks beautifully and extensively on this subject in his book on ethics.2 Whatever gifts a Christian has, says Dorner, are given to him for the common good. Christian society, there— fore, should not have any drones. Each person ought to have a specific vocation because of his position in the family to which he belongs. Dorner warns against ”private gentlemen,” i.e., men of means who do not work.3 He expresses the belief that "it is a more difficult matter, however, to say anything definite regarding the choice of a vocation. 1Isaak A. Dorner, A System of Christian Doctrine, trans. Caver Banks (Edinburgh: Clark, 1888), p. 189. 2Isaak A. Dorner, A System of Christian Ethics, trans. Mead and Cunningham (Edinburgh: Clark, 1887), pp. 500f. 3Ibid., p. 501. HE I' III a)...“ fin“ Q! De 78 The utmost conscientiousness and the strictest self—examina- tion are necessary here.“1 A theological vocation is mor— ally dangerous for the person who has not experienced an inner call to the ministry. On the other hand, it is very natural that a Christian should want to be a minister, since proclaiming the Word of God is a universal Christian duty. DeSpite his belief in a vocation for the layman, Dorner says a theological calling stands among others like Sunday among the days of the week.2 Dorner‘s social consciousness shows itself when he states that class divisions which compel men to adopt particular vocations have a mechanizing tendency and are therefore immoral.3 But most amazing, there is no transfer from Dorner‘s ethical writings on vocation to his theological publications. C. F. W. Walther, the man credited with founding The Lutheran Church~-Missouri Synod, in his widely publicized 1Ibid. 2Ibid., p. 502; Dorner, as well as Walther, enun- ciates a view current in Lutheranism today (cf. chapter V), that all vocations may become Christian vocations, but that there is still something special about the ministry. This is consistent with Lutheranism‘s eschatological emphasis. 3Dorner, Ethics, p. 502. 4It is, of course, most amazing that a systematic theologian of the nineteenth century should write a book in another discipline, Ethics being a part of Philosophy. 79 work, Kirche und Amt, states the doctrine of Christian voca- tion very clearly: The ministry is not a Special, holy vocation [Stand] in contradistinction to the ordinary Christian vocation as was the levitic priest- hood; but it is an office of service. Walther then continues with proof from Scripture that all Christians are priests, brothers, and the like. Then he Speaks of the right of ministers to preach the Gospel, admin— ister the sacraments, and so forth. Kaftan emphasizes the mystic element in Christianity. Writing in 1901, he states that prior to Hollaz, vocatio and illuminatio were treated as part of the same concept. Since Hollaz, however, vocatio is used of God‘s action in calling man to the salvation God has prepared for him. Illuminatio . . . . . . . 3 . is the enlightening actiVity of the Holy Spirit. It is at this point that one should expect a statement concerning the Holy Spirit‘s illumination in man‘s total life, including his work. But no statement of that kind is present. 1C. F. W. Walther, Die Stimme unserer Kirche in der Frage von Kirche und Amt (Zwickau: Verlag der ev.-1uth. Gemeinden in Sachsen, 1894), p. 221. 2See page 78, footnote 2. 3Julius Kaftan, Dogmatik (Tuebingen & Leipzig: Mohr, 1901), pp. 631f; aware 0 this, the researcher read the sec- tions on vocatio and illuminatio with equal care wherever a section on illuminatio appeared. The results described in Kaftan‘s case in the next two sentences were typical of the other dogmaticians. or} II" Ad 9‘5 4w 8O Von Oettingen of Dorpat, writing the following year in a text which reveals his positive but modern Lutheran theology, devotes one section to the obedience and the good works which are the result of faith. Significantly he states that good works should be used in the service of mankind and in the service of the kingdom of God. . . . This may occur in the way one carries out his work if he evaluates in a conscientious manner the gifts God has given him through nature and through God‘s grace. Von Oettingen continues by asserting that the real aim of a calling is fulfilled when one is prepared to answer to his fellow man for his conduct. At the same time, von Oettingen says the Christian Should preach Christ in his life; i.e., his way of living should be so much better than that of the unbeliever that it will eventually attract atten- tion to Christ.2 Although von Oettingen does not state the doctrine of the layman‘s vocation clearly, an application of his theology to life is very likely to lead to the conduct which is associated with an understanding of Christian vocation. 1Alexander K. von Oettingen, System der christlichen Heilswahrheit (Muenchen: Beck, 1902), p. 557. 2These two are not irreconcilable. The person who begins with the latter-preaching Christ in his life--ought to be able to give account to his fellow man for his actions. 81 H. E. Jacobs, professor at the Gettysburg seminary and the leading theologian of the General Council,1 writing in 1905, states that every office in the church is a minis— try in the wider sense. In this, he approaches the doctrine of Christian vocation. On the other hand, he insists that ppg ministry is a divine institution; other vocations are 2 not. Milton Valentine, who published his Christian Theology3 in the following year, must have made a tremendous impression upon Lutheranism in America. He was the leading exponent of conservatism in the General Synod.4 He present- ed, in his textbook on dogmatics, several excellent, prac— tical arguments in answer to questions which were then plaguing Lutheranism in the United States: evolution, open communion, relationships with non—Lutheran Protestants, and the like. But in this excellent and practical work, there is no concern for vocation——not even the vocation of the 1Now a part of The Lutheran Church in America. 2Henry Eyster Jacobs, A Summary of the Christian Faith (Philadelphia: General Council Publication House, 1905), p. 419; his teaching on this subject is like that of Dorner and Walther. See page 78, footnote 2. This point of view will be examined more thoroughly in Chapter V. 3Milton Valentine, Christian Theology (Philadelphia: Lutheran Publication Society, 1906). 4The General Synod, like the General Council, is now a part of The Lutheran Church in America. 82 clergy.l It is true, then, of the Lutheran theologians of the period which Hoenecke calls ”the time of the return to the old orthodoxy," that very few graSped the Protestant doc- trine of Christian vocation.2 Nitzsch reiterated the ref— ormation principle that no person, having become a Christian, should leave his calling to enter holy orders. Strauss pointed out that there is really no need for clergymen in Protestant churches. Dorner, in his ethical writings, is wonderfully clear on the doctrine of vocation as it applies to the laity; but he does not carry his thoughts over into his writings in dogmatics. Von Oettingen is clear, but he leaves the application of his principles concerning vocation to the reader. SUMMARY To summarize, deSpite Luther‘s tremendous clarity and insight into the calling of the laity, the classical Lutheran theologians of all three periods either did not understand the doctrine, or they simply did not treat it in their writings in dogmatics. 1Valentine‘s text was widely circulated and was quoted in subsequent theological works by both those who agreed with his position and those who disagreed. 2Here, as in previous sections, all the theologians who are quoted in part in various theological compendia (and a selected number of others) have been thoroughly read, in the original wherever possible. CHAPTER III THE MORE RECENT LUTHERAN POSITION (OF OUR OWN TIME) RELATIVE TO MAN‘S CALLING The historical Lutheran position relative to man‘s calling (vocatio) having been documented, the more recent Lutheran position——that of our own time-—will now be dis— cussed. The researcher sought to discover whether Lutherans today agree with their church‘s historical position on vocatio. This presented a real difficulty because of recent attempts on the part of several Lutheran groups to demon— strate that there has been no shifting from the position of the founding fathers in any area of theology.1 To avoid a defensive position on the part of respondents, the question- naire prepared Was an attempt to discover whether there was a "return to Luther" rather than a new position on the sub— ject of vocation. (As has been demonstrated, Luther‘s posi— tion was different from that of the classical Lutheran the- ologians.) An attempt was thus made to discover obliquely 1This is eSpecially true of the Missouri Synod and is immediately apparent even in a cursory examination of its official periodical, The Lutheran Witness, in its issues of the last two decades. 83 84 but honestly any changes in the church‘s position. The nineteen Lutheran seminaries in the United States and Canada were identified. (See Appendix.) A letter was written to the president of each institution requesting the names of the faculty members who taught Dogmatics1 as well as the names of textbooks used in those courses. (See Appendix.) Seventeen seminary presidents replied to the first letter. The remaining two replied when they received a second letter. Consequently, this phase of the study in— cludes all the seminaries contacted.2 The first part of the present chapter, dealing with the textbooks used in classes in Systematic Theology (or Dogmatics), is based upon the returns of the questionnaire just described. The first questionnaire identified forty-two profes— sors of Systematic Theology. The second questionnaire (see Appendix) was sent to each of these faculty members. lDogmatics courses are frequently called “Sequences in Systematic Theology.“ 2These are the seminaries listed for Lutheran bodies which belong to the National Lutheran Council and those which belong to the Evangelical Lutheran Synodical Conference of North America, as well as the seminary of the one middle- sized Lutheran synod (the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod, 300,000 members) and of another Synod which, together with Wisconsin, until recently held membership in the Synod— ical Conference. Smaller Lutheran bodies generally have no seminaries of their own. 85 Thirty-three, or seventy—nine percent, returned the second questionnaire. No attempt was made to follow up this instrument; anonymity was to be preserved in a manner which would be obvious to each reSpondent (because of the possibil- ity of the defensiveness related above). However, a large number of the professors signed the questionnaire. This made it possible to identify the seminaries from which some of the returns had come. Also, although return envelopes prepaid with a postage meter had been provided, some ques— tionnaires returned bearing the identifying stamp of the city of the respondent, thereby identifying other seminar— ies.l The researcher was able to establish the following coverage: 1. All questionnaires were returned from ten of the nineteen seminaries. 2. Fifty percent or more of the questionnaires were returned from six additional seminaries. 3. One-third of the questionnaires were returned from one of the seminaries. 4. There were no identifiable returns from two of the seminaries. 5. Four questionnaires could not be identified. 1To assure continuing anonymity, the envelopes were separated from the completed questionnaires. Those which contained a signed questionnaire were discarded to avoid counting any reSpondent twice when the identifications were made. 86 In this phase of the study, then, at least seventeen of the nineteen seminaries are represented.1 The researcher assumed that replies from at least seventeen of the nineteen seminaries constituted a represent— ative picture. The data in the second phase of the present chapter are based upon these replies.2 The findings should be understood as the reSponses of professors of Systematic Theology in at least seventeen Lutheran seminaries, repre— senting the three major Lutheran bodies in the United States and Canada, the one middle-sized body, and most of the smaller bodies.3 All seminaries replied; seventy—nine per- cent of the professors of theology, representing at least eighty-nine percent of the seminaries, completed both phases of the study. lThe Lutheran School of Theology, with campuses at Maywood, Illinois, and at Rock Island, Illinois, was treated as two separate seminaries even though these schools have very recently begun to operate as a single institution. The researcher felt that because of their diverse history and unusual merger, separate treatment would provide a more accurate picture. 2There remains, of course, the possibility that the four questionnaires which could not be identified represent the other two institutions. 3No seminary was purposely omitted. Lutheran bodies with fewer than 20,000 members generally send their semin- arianS'hotheological schools maintained by other Lutheran churches. 87 Several limitations are implicit in the method of research utilized. No attempt was made to determine the number of students exposed to each professor. Although such an attempt might have made it possible to assign weights to each professor‘s responses, the matter of students‘ positive or negative reactions to each professor could not be deter— mined within the scope of the present study. Rather, an attempt was made to obtain an accurate general picture of the position of Lutheran churches in North America relative to the doctrine of man‘s vocation, as it is reflected in the responses of professors of Systematic Theology. It must also be pointed out that although the doctrine of Christian vocation may be taught in other curricular sequences, no attempt was made to investigate this possibility. I. THE MORE RECENT LUTHERAN POSITION AS IT IS SEEN IN THE TEXTBOOKS USED IN COURSES IN DOGMATICS Traditionally, through courses in Systematic Theology Lutheran seminaries have conveyed to their students the body of doctrine taught by the church. Choice of a textbook has been made with unusual care. Frequently, the author of the textbook has been a senior professor (or former professor) in the seminary in question.1 That the last-named condition no 1Hoenecke and Pieper were both former professors. 88 longer exists in all Lutheran seminaries in North America is evident from both the diversity and the multiplicity of textbooks used in many seminaries. Some seminaries, on the other hand, continue to use a single text as representative of the content of the course and supplement it with a wide variety of outside readings.l At this point, those textbooks which are most widely in use and those which have some other significance will be considered in descending order of popularity. A study of courses, by seminaries, on the basis of the multiple use of textbooks, will follow. Gustaf Auleni THE FAITH OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH Thirteen of the nineteen seminaries report that they use as the single textbook in Dogmatics The Faith of the Christian Church by Bishop Gustaf Aulen of the Lutheran State 2 Church of Sweden. Aulen does not refer to vocation even obliquely in the first three chapters of his eight chapter book. Later, 1Aulen is the single text most frequently supplement- ed by outside readings. 2Gustaf Aulen, The Faith of the Christian Church, trans. Eric H. Wahlstrom (Philadelphia: The Muhlenberg Press, 1960). 89 however, when he Speaks of ”the broken and restored rela- tionship" he points out that God‘s love expresses itself in human life in two ways: as a struggle against evil and as a realization of its own activity. God‘s love makes man an instrument of its own activity. It becomes man‘s task, then, to reveal God‘s loving will in his relationship with his neighbor. ”No one in Christendom,” says Aulen, “has Spoken more emphatically and profoundly about this ‘vocation‘ of the Christian than Luther. The Christian is to be ‘a Christ‘ to the neighbor, and Luther even says that he is to be ‘God‘ to him.“1 Later, Aulen states that Christians have temporal functions which they must carry out in accordance with the vocation given them. He concludes that line of reasoning, saying, Life here on earth is not something indiffer- ent and of less value; it is filled with significance and responsibility in the serv— ice of the heavenly Father.2 In a later chapter on the nature of the church, Aulen refers to the office of the ministry as one of the instruments of the activity of the Holy Spirit. However, he does not, in that chapter, make reference to the vocation of every Christian.3 The reason for his omission of the 1Ibid., p. 271. 2Ibid., p. 290. 31bid., p. 302. 90 layman‘s vocation becomes clear when he says that Luther emphasized the ministry as a divine ordinance even more strongly than did the Roman church.l Aulen‘s position, which later will be shown to typify current Lutheran thought, comes into clear focus when he states that all Christians are members of the body of Christ in the fullest sense, ”but this equality does not mean that a special office of the ministry becomes super- fluous. . . . The Lord calls and consecrates some of them [Christians] for the Special office of serving his church in . . 2 the pastoral ministry.” Even the bishop‘s clearest statement on the layman‘s vocation lacks Specificity: In the measure that man discovers and obeys God‘s will in the various situations in life, his call- ing, which is connected with those ordinances of life given in creation and connected with the law of creation, is deepened and enriched. The call- ing receives a richer content and becomes free and flexible. Man becomes more personally con- cerned in the call, and new possibilities are Opened for works which do not lie within the framework of the law.3 In another passage, Aulen limits the layman‘s voca- tion when he invites the Christian to bring his influence to bear in the fields of legislation, social life, education of 1Ibid., p. 362. 2Ibid., p. 367. 3Ibid., p. 371. 91 youth, and the like. He fails to Speak of the practice of one‘s Christian vocation as an influence in and through the believer‘s daily work. He makes this omission despite the fact that he enunciates clearly the principle that, from the Christian point of view, there is really nothing “secular.“l In harmony with the outline of the scholastic Lutheran theologians delineated in the previous chapter, Aulen follows his treatise on the ministry with a discussion of the office of magistrates. He does not, like the older theologians, enunciate a Special calling for magistrates. But of greater significance for the present study is the fact that he does not, at this point, Speak of the calling of servants and masters as did Calov and other dogmaticians of the classical period. Aulen appears, moreover, to be impatient with his discussions of the ministry and of mag- istrates. He hurries on, therefore, to a subject not usually discussed by Lutheran dogmaticians, the ecumenical movement. Aulen‘s tremendous significance for the Lutheran churches in America is evident from the large number of seminaries in which his work is used as the primary textbook 1Ibid., pp. 372f. 2This is understandable; Aulen has Spent much of his life in the service of the ecumenical movement. Treat— ing ecumenicity in a volume on Dogmatics is unique, nonethe- less. 92 in Systematic Theology. Aulen communicates exceptionally well with the church of the twentieth century. He Speaks out on problems of the church typical of this time. His work is likely to be influential for a very long time; this makes the absence of a clear statement on vocation critical. By adopting Aulen‘s book, seminaries are saying in effect that this is the teaching of the church. Nevertheless, the future pastor, not finding a clear statement on Christian vocation in Aulen, will need to encounter the doctrine in outside readings or in other courses. If he considers the content of Aulen‘s book to be the total doctrinal content of the church‘s teaching, he will receive, at best, a somewhat incomplete presentation of the doctrine of Christian voca- tion. Emil Brunner, DOGMATICS Ten of the thirteen seminaries report that they require a reading of Brunner‘s Dogmatics.l One other sem- inary reports that students are required to read either Brunner or Tillich (Systematic Theology). 1Emil Brunner, The Christian Doctrine of God (Dog- matics, Volume I), The Christian Doctrine of Creation and Redemption (Dogmatics, Volume II), The Christian Doctrine of the Church, Faith, and the Consummation (Dogmatics) Volume III), trans. Olive Wyon et a1. (London: Lutterworth Press, 1949—1962). 93 The subject of Christian vocation is treated by Brunner in the chapter on sanctification. Christian love, he states, accepts the task of reshaping itself.1 It does not permit the ”alien character” of the world to act as a deterrent to this.2 The thought is developed further in the following chapter, ”The Christian in the World.” Here Brunner raises the question, ”How may faith vindicate itself in a world governed by its own laws?“3 He examines, in re- ply, the three traditional answers: monasticism‘s renuncia— tion of the world, Calvinism‘s attempts at theocratic govern- ment, and Lutheranism‘s doctrine of the two kingdoms4 and finds them all inadequate.5 Brunner‘s own answer to the question includes a detailed explanation of Christian voca- tion: In concrete terms ”The Christian in the World” means: the Christian as working man or working woman, as employer, as trade union leader, as judge, as welfare worker or educator, as husband 1Christian love reshaping itself involves both a change from a Selfish love to a selfless love and also a readiness to adapt itself to every new situation. 2Ibid., 111, p. 302. 3Ibid., III, p. 315. 4Uniquely Lutheran is the doctrine of the two king- doms: Christians on earth are living in the kingdom of God‘s grace; upon their death they enter the kingdom of God‘s glory. Citizenship in the former is also citizenship in the latter. 5Ibid., 111, pp. 316—318. 94 or wife, as father or mother—-in short, the Christian in his secular calling. Everyone who has such a calling knows how hard it is to obey Jesus‘ command of love in this social ”niche” of his. Brunner continues to develop this thought at length. He points out that a person is at the same time a husband or wife, a citizen, a worker and member of a trade union organ- ization or an employer, and a church member. He shows that the directives of the Sermon on the Mount are impossible if one understands them in a legalistic manner.2 On the other hand, he reasons that the laws of the world are subject to influences by the church. DeSpite his understanding, Brunner does not state that every man may see his work as a calling from God. The student who studies Brunner thoughtfully may reason to such a conclusion, but there can be no guarantee of this. Paul Tillich, SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY Six of the nineteen seminaries report that they 1Ibid., III, p. 319. 2Turning the Sermon on the Mount into a set of laws designed to redeem the person who keeps them would consti- tute understanding the Sermon‘s directives in a legalistic manner. The opposing view states that the Christian, already redeemed, finds in the Sermon means for expressing his response to the love of God. 3Ibid. 95 require a reading of Tillich‘s Systematic Theology.1 One other seminary, as has been noted, reports that students are required to read either Tillich or Brunner‘s Dogmatics. Tillich does not speak of Christian vocation in the usual sense. There are, however, in his writings numerous implications which, if studied earnestly, may lead the reader to a consideration of the subject. When he Speaks of ”man, self, and world,” he points out that man experiences himself in a world to which he belongs.2 It is not enough to say that man ii 13 a world; he also pg§_a world.3 Tillich asks for an active relation- ship of the Christian to his world-environment. Moving to "freedom and destiny,” Tillich defines the latter as "that out of which our decisions arise.” When man decides on something, it is the concrete totality of everything that makes up his being which does the deciding. That includes body structure, psychic strivings, spiritual character, and the communities to which he belongs. Although Tillich is, at this point, more interested in past communities—~con— sciously remembered or not--than in the present,4 the notion lPaul Tillich, Systematic Theology (Volume I; London: Nisbet & Co., Ltd., 1953); (Volumes II and III; Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1957, 1963). 21bid., I, p. 188. 3Ibid., I, p. 189. 4Ibid., 1, p. 204. 96 of belonging to a community returns to the reader again. Implicit in this thought is man‘s vocational relationship to that community; but Tillich does not actually say so. The implications for Christian vocation become clearer in his treatment of “the reality of the Christ.” He points out that personal life is impossible without an en- counter with other persons within a community.1 He warns against being so pre-occupied with the time of Christ that the Christian communities that have given continuity to the concept of the ”new being in Christ” are ignored. He con- tinues: Although appearing in a personal life, the New Being has a Spatial breadth in the community of the New Being and a temporal dimension in the history of the New Being. The appearance of the Christ in an individual person presupposes the community out of which he came and the community which he creates. Of course, the criterion of both is the picture of Jesus as the Christ; but, without them, this criterion never could have appeared. Somewhat later, Tillich speaks of ”the conquest of the godless state through conversion and transformation for those who are converted.“3 Wherever active members of the church encounter those who are outside the church, the func- tion of missionary expansion takes place voluntarily or lIbid., II, p. 134. 2 Ibid., 11, p. 136. 3Ibid., 11, p. 166. 97 . . 1 . involuntarily. Quite naturally, then, he parallels . . . . . 2 Luther‘s critiCIsm of the clOistered life. Tillich does Speak of a ”vocational consciousness," but he uses the term in a unique way: History runs in a horizontal direction, and the groups which gave it this direction are determined by an aim toward which they strive and a destiny they try to fulfill. One could call this the ”vocational consciousness” of a history—bearing group.3 Here, as in a later section,4 Tillich sees a ”vocational consciousness” on the part of the whole church; but he does not make an application of this to the individual Christian and his life‘s vocation. Near the close of the final volume, Tillich shows that the church has moved away from a sense of Christian vocation (although he does not employ that term). He decries the fact that the church asks its members to separate themselves from the world.5 The seminarian who reads Tillich will not there be lIbid., III, p. 193. 2Ibid., 111, pp. 209f. 3Ibid., III, p. 310. 4Ibid., III, p. 349. 5Ibid., III, p. 375. 98 exposed to a detailed treatment of Christian vocation; he will not even be exposed to it superficially. He may, nonetheless, be led to think seriously of the Christian and his relationship to the world, thereby formulating for him- self a point of view which will include Christian vocation. Francis Pieper, CHRISTIAN DOGMATICS Six of the nineteen seminaries require a study of . . . . 1 . . Pieper‘s Christian Dogmatics. One other seminary requires a study of Christian Dogmatics by J. T. Mueller, an epitome in English of the original German edition of Pieper. Pieper treats the subject of Christian vocation under the heading, "The Quality and Quantity of Good Works.” He points out that the Christian church rejects all works which are performed in obedience to a human norm; they are to be performed in obedience to God‘s will, whether men prize them or not. Such works are exalted and ennobled. "Here the saying ‘In His Majesty‘s service‘ [pip] receives its true and full meaning.“3 Pieper then quotes Luther at length that everything the Christian does in his occupation is a good and precious 1Francis Pieper, Christian Dogmatics, trans. not given (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1950-1957). 2J. T. Mueller, Christian Dogmatics (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1934 and 1955). 3Pieper, III, p. 39. 99 work: It does not look like a great, fine work when he rides out on the field, drives to the mill, etc., but since he has God‘s command and direc— tive for it, such works, mean as they may seem, are nothing else than good works and a service rendered to the Lord.1 He points out that Luther‘s writings abound with such pre- sentations.2 Pieper then applies them to the modern world.3 The seminarian who reads Pieper even in a cursory fashion is exposed to a clear presentation of Luther‘s doctrine of Christian vocation. Karl Barth, CHURCH DOGMATICS Six seminaries require a reading of Barth‘s Church Dogmatics.4 The second half of Part Three of Barth‘s Dogmatics begins with ”the vocation of man.” Barth uses vocatio both lIbid., III, p. 40. 2Ibid., III, p. 42. 31m Mueller‘s Christian Dogmatics, this passage is not quoted; a reference is made to the passage in Luther, but this is to the German St. Louis edition. Only the seminarian who follows this reference and reads German will be exposed to this view. Mueller‘s summary of the passage is too brief: "Luther rightly condemned the fictitious holiness of the monks and nuns and praised the true holiness of works performed by all believers in the humblest calling as works hallowed by God‘s commandments." (p. 405.) 4Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics, trans. T. H. L. Parker, W. B. Johnston, Harold Knight, J. L. M. Haire (Volumes I-IV; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1936-1962). 100 in the sense of a call to faith and of a calling in one‘s life and work. The former he treats as “the event of voca— tion,“1 the latter as "the goal of vocation.“2 He says, ”The purpose of man‘s vocation is that he should become a Christian.“3 This is followed by a section on "the Chris- tian as witness.“4 He says at this point that, being ”in Christ” means that Christ lives ”where this man is, in his . . . . . 5 . thinking, vocation, resolution, and action.” Christ estab- 6 lishes the order of his relationship to His own. Barth illustrates his position in this manner: To use for once the imagery of Roman Catholic worship, the Christian is not a priest, nor does he read the mass, nor have anything to do with the transformation, the sacrifice and the dispensing of communion; he is only the server or altarboy who carries the missal back- ward and forward and swings the incense and rings the bell at the decisive moment. Yet he is this, and assists in this way. He is called to this minstering presence. What makes him a Christian, and distinguishes him as such, is that he also acts as minister in what Christ does. In this Sense we may well say that he co-operates in the work of Christ.7 1Ibid., Iv, p. 497. 2Ibid., IV, pp. 520ff. 31bid., IV, p. 521. 4 Ibid., IV, p. 554. 5Ibid., IV, p. 594. 6Ibid., IV, p. 601. (1239., IV, p. 602. 101 It is almost impossible to read Barth‘s two—hundred- page discussion on "the vocation of man” without inferring the relationship of vocation to one‘s daily work. Barth continues the line of reasoning suggested in the longer quotation above when he writes on ”the community for the world.“1 Discussing "the task of the community”2--and by community he means the Christian community, i.e., the church-—he points out that the Christian community is not sent into the world haphazardly or at random, but with a very definite task.3 To this community the Gospel is com- mitted.4 It must exist actively for the world.5 The voice of the community ”is very largely that of individuals im- pressing their life and witness on their own time and place 6 . and beyond.” Although Barth does not say directly that God has called man in his dailygwork, this point of view is consistently communicated through passages such as those cited. Ibid., IV, pp. 762ff. lpiQ., IV, p. 784. 121g., IV, pp. 795ff. 4;pgg., IV, p. 800. 5gpig., IV, p. 830. Ibid., IV, p. 887. I u r‘. 1’ ‘7 :. J- 102 Anders Nygren (editor)i THIS IS THE CHURCH Four seminaries require a reading of This is the Church,1 a symposium by a number of authors Within the Lutheran State Church of Sweden. Nygren, writing the first article, points out that the individual cannot carry out the task which is his as a Christian by simply copying someone else. ”Rather each finds his own particular mission through the place which has been accorded to him in the one, common body.“2 This appears to be intended in a vocational sense and should, therefore, be read in a vocational context. Fridrichsen in his chapter, ”The New Testament Congregation," states that the Christian owes all that he has of real value to the congregation in its gifts. He can, therefore, no longer live unto himself. Nevertheless, he is ultimately answerable to God.3 If ”no longer live unto himself” be translated into the totality of life, the phrase implies Christian vocation. Odeberg‘s chapter, ”Individualism and the Concept of the Church,” echoes Luther‘s views on vocation. Man cannot 1Anders Nygren et al., This is the Church, trans. Carl C. Rasmussen (Philadelphia: The Muhlenberg Press, 1952). 2Ibid., p. 14. 31bid., p. 59. 0f 103 say that one person‘s station is higher than another‘s. That which appears weakest and poorest and least significant in the eyes of the world may be the most important function of all in God‘s sight.l Sjbberg, writing on ”the church and the cultus in the New Testament," shows how impossible it would have been for the Christian in the early days of the church to lead a Christian life without the support of his fellow believers. He lived in a pagan environment; but in the cultus or the Christian congregation, he came into contact with the powers of the world to come. Sjbberg ends with a statement that is provocative for Christian vocation: ”Opposition between ‘personal‘ and ‘cultic‘ piety can arise only if the cultic loses the reality which it had for the New Testament Chris— tians, or if the personal is so diluted as to become only an intellectual philosophy of life.“2 His concern for the ineffectiveness of a faith not put into action has vocation- al overtones. Linton‘s essay on ”church and office in the New Testament" presents the Lutheran position that the office of the ministry is something apart from the vocation of all Christians; it is not something secondary and accidental in lIbid., pp. 70f. 2 Ibid., p. 99. 104 the structure of the church.1 This recurring concept that there is a vocation for all Christians, but that the holy ministry is something set apart will be dealt with in Chapter V of the present study.2 It is treated in the same volume at greater length in Josefson‘s study, ”The Ministry as an Office in the Church.” While there is no difference, Josefson points out, between the clergy and other Christians as to their person, there is a difference in the office. The Lutheran view of the ministry [he writes] rejects any presuppositions as to a certain Spiritual status, Roman or pietistic. The concept of Spiritual status is in part trans- formed by Luther, and in part broadened to include all Christians. All Christians belong to the priesthood. All Christians are bound to serve God. But they do not for that reason all hold the office of the ministry.4 Wingren‘s chapter, ”The Church and Christian Voca- tion," sounds a warning. The high church movement5 has llbid., p. 135. 2It will be seen that this is a uniquely Lutheran concept, and that it has significance for a Lutheran Guidance Program. 3Nygren, p. 271. 4Ibid., p. 272. 5High church is used in the modern sense, denoting a strong revival of liturgy and formalism. In Lutheran high churches, the pastor‘s actions in The Service are strongly reminiscent of those of the priest in the Roman mass. The doctrine, however, is not changed. It is the liturgical actions, vestments, etc., which set the Officiant apart visibly, to which Wingren has reference. 105 brought about a revival in the ministry. But it may also have taken away from the people ”any sense of the fact that God is also present in everyday life, where the church bells 1 This movement often tends to look on may not be heard. life as profane, which can be sanctified only by the church through the work of the priests.“2 Although there are further references in Nygren‘s compendium,3 it is clear that the seminarian who is exposed even superficially to this work will be brought face to face with a clear Lutheran position on Christian vocation. Heinrich Schmidg THE DOCTRINAL THEOLOGY OF THE EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH Three seminaries require study in Schmid‘s The Doctrinal Theology of the Evangelical Lutheran Church.4 1This phrase, which may seem to the reader to be cryptic, is an indirect quotation from a well-known Scan- dinavian hymn, "Kirken den er et gammelt Hus.” It is no more cryptic than an allusion to the Book of Common Prayer‘s reference to those who go down to the sea in Ships. 2Priest is used simply as synonymous with "pastor” in the Church of Sweden. It is not intended as a Special reference to those who favor a more ritualistic service; Nygren, p. 292. 3Ibid., pp. 305, 277. 4Heinrich Schmid, The Doctrinal Theology of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, trans. C. A. Hay and H. E. Jacobs (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1961). 106 Schmid follows very closely upon the outlines of the seventeenth century scholastic dogmaticians. The wide use of quotations would justify calling this a compendium of the classical Lutheran theologians. Like the Lutheran scholas- tics, Schmid Speaks of "the three estates in the church,”-- the ministry, the civil authority, and the domestic estate. The last-named is subdivided into the marriage relation, the paternal relation, and the servile estate.1 Although it is at precisely this point that some of the Scholastic theolo- gians (e.g., Abraham Calov) spoke on Christian vocation, Schmid does not consider it. There is, instead, a cross- reference to the decalogue; but an examination of the ref— erence reveals that vocation is not treated at that point, either. Vocation is also Significantly omitted in the sec— tions on sanctification and on good works. Seminarians who are exposed only to Schmid will not be confronted with the doctrine of Christian vocation in their Systematic Theology textbooks. lIbid., pp. 604-623. 107 Oscar Cullmann, THE CHRISTOLOGY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT Three of the seminaries require a reading of Cullmann‘s The Christology of the New Testament.1 Since Christology, a study of the person of Jesus, treats only a specific portion of Systematic Theology, the breadth found in more general works is lacking in Cullmann‘s text. Nevertheless, Cullmann engages in a reasoning whose conclusion might suggest Christian vocation. Jesus‘ role as a prophet, he says, ”exactly correSponds to the earthly vocation of Jesus as he actually conceived and executed it.” At another point, Cullmann, like Tillich, teaches the con- cept of vocational consciousness of the church as a body; but he does not use the term.3 Although Cullmann makes neither Jesus‘ vocation nor that of the church personal for the modern Christian, the studying seminarian might make such a connection. 1Oscar Cullmann, The Christology of the New Testa— ment, trans. S. C. Guthrie and C. A. M. Hall (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1959). 2Ibid., pp. 43-44; historically, theologians have Spoken of Jesus‘ role as prophet, priest, and king. Cullmann is saying that it is the role of prophet which Jesus saw as His vocation. 3Cullmann, p. 134. 108 Edmund Schlink, THEOLOGY OF THE LUTHERAN CONFESSIONS Two seminaries require a reading of Schlink‘s Theology of the Lutheran Confessions.l Schlink approaches the subject of Christian vocation in his chapter on the church. He says that the works of Christians which are performed out of love to God are not ”marks of the church“2 but are done as prayers of thanksgiv— ing; they are the weapons of Jesus Christ against the devil.3 He sets in juxtaposition the priesthood of believers and the ministry of the Word. The Spiritual office has been entrusted to fill believers; but its administration is not left to the whim of every individual believer. [Emphases added.] The ministry is entrusted to the church, and the church calls particular believers into the office of the min- istry. Nevertheless, ”the public ministry is not a creation lEdmund Schlink, Theology of the Lutheran Confessions, trans. P. F. Koehneke and H. J. A. Bouman (Philadelphia: The Muhlenberg Press, 1961). 2By "marks of the church” theologians mean those conditions which identify the presence of the church. In classical Lutheran theology, the preaching of the Word and the administration of the sacraments are considered to be the marks of the church. A few modern theologians add prayer as another mark of the church. Schlink is saying that Christian good works are 223 the marks of the church. Rather, they are the result of Christian faith and are used by Christ to combat evil. 3Sch1ink, p. 218. 109 of the congregation demanded by the moral principle of order, but it is an immediate1 institution of God through the com- mand and promise of Jesus Christ.“2 Even the church officers must not proclaim the Gospel, but ”they must do all they can so that the ministry may reach all subjects3 with glad tidings.”4 Despite his considerably strong emphasis on the office of the ministry, Schlink does not treat the Protestant doctrine of Christian vocation fully; the seminarian will have to infer it. Regin Prenter, SKABELSE 00 GENL¢SNING. DOGMATIK (SCHUPFUNG UND ERUUSUNG. DOGMATIK) In the judgment expressed by one of the professors . 5 . of Systematic Theology, when Prenter‘s work6 is translated 1Immediate in the sense of direct; without an inter— mediary. God instituted the ministry directly; it is not dependent upon the will of the congregation. 2Schiink, p. 245. 3Subjects in the sense of citizens. 4Sch1ink, p. 258. 5Carl E. Braaten of Maywood. 6Regin Prenter, SchUpfung und Erldsung, Dogmatik Band 1 u. 2., official German translation by C. Boehncke- Sjbberg of the Danish original, Skabelse ogGenlpsning. Dogmatik. 2. udgave. (GUttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1958). 110 into English, it may occupy for a while the position of greatest popularity now held by the writings of Aulen. Apparently under the assumption that their students can read Danish or German with understanding, two seminaries now re— quire a study of Prenter. In his chapter ”The Man of Salvation,” Prenter Speaks of the enlightenment which follows upon a calling to faith;1 but he does not speak of the enlightened conduct of the Christian in relation to his vocation.2 In the same chapter, Prenter has a lengthy article on the ministry. He condemns the Roman position, with its emphasis on apostolic succession, as mechanical. He condemns the Reformed3 posi— tion, with its emphasis on the piety of the individual min- ister, as dependent upon the personality of individual men. He supports the uniquely Lutheran position with its emphasis on the minister who carries out his divine office in the congregation. [Emphasis added.] ”Inasmuch as the congrega- tion is the believing people ruled by the Word, it has placed itself under the Word and expresses this position in 1Ibid., 11, p. 458. 2Classical Lutheran theologians Speak of the enlight- ened conduct which follows upon conversion. A modern theolo- gian might take the further step of applying this to the totality of life, including one‘s vocation. Prenter, strangely, does not take even the first step. 3Reformed in the sense of ”non-Lutheran Protestant." 111 its recognition of the particular office of the ministry.“1 He progresSes to show that the ministry is also placed under the same Word. Prenter fails to apply his views to the doctrine of Christian vocation. Karl Barth, CREDO Two of the seminaries require a reading of Karl Barth‘s Qgggp.3 In this volume, there are many statements which approximate an exposition of the doctrine of Christian voca- tion. Barth warns that the church‘s life is not satisfac- tory when it merely confesses its faith.4 The life of the church must be seen in the lives of individual Christians whom Barth considers to be slaves without rights of their own.5 Because they are slaves, every aspect of their lives——even their most secret thought——is invaded by the lPrenter, II, p. 499. 2Prenter‘s concept of the ministry is, however, significant for an understanding of modern Lutheran doctrine. 3Karl Barth, Credo, A Presentation of the Chief Problems of Dogmatics with Reference to the Apostles‘ Creed, trans. J. Strathearn McNab (New York: Charles Scribner‘s Sons, 1936). 4Ibid., pp. 9f. 51bid., p. 54. 112 lordship of Christ. However, the Christian is in danger of overthrowing the lordship of Christ in his life to become his own master.l On the other hand, once the believer is no longer lord of himself, he becomes free for service to his brothers, "in whom Christ meets him with the reminder that everything we do, or fail to do, to them is done, or not done, to Him Himself.H2 The Christian does not really succeed in serving Christ by serving others because his service is not adequate; his failure shames him.3 In nggp, Barth uses the term vocatio only in the sense of being called to faith.4 Although the seminary student reading this volume may make an application which approaches the doctrine of Christian vocation, he does not find it stated in the work. J. S. Whale, CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE Although Whale‘s Christian Doctrine5 is required by only one seminary, it is the critical book for teaching of 1Ibid., p. 55. 21bid., pp. 156f. 3Ibid., pp. 157f. 4Ibid., pp. 193f. 5J. S. Whale, Christian Doctrine (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1941-1944). 113 Christian vocation in the Systematic Theology courses of that seminary. Whale quotes with disapproval Pope Pius X‘s state- ment that ”in the pastoral body alone reside the necessary right and authority to guide and direct all members toward the goal of the society. As for the multitude, it has no other right than that of allowing itself to be led and, as a docile flock, to follow its shepherds.“l Like Prenter, Whale warns against both the mechanistic and the pietistic concepts of the ministry. An Anglican, Whale correctly but without using the term assesses Lutheranism‘s loss of the active use of the doctrine of vocation: ”Lutheranism has sometimes been in danger of quietism;2 the Lutheran ethic was not unaffected by its strong eschatological3 interest. Nevertheless, it would be an absurd caricature of the Lutheran system to omit or belittle its emphasis on lIbid., pp. 133f. 2One of the responding professors of Systematic Theology also observed that Lutheranism even today is not entirely free from quietism. Both Whale and the professor use the term in the usual dictionary sense of a mysticism which teaches that perfection and Spiritual peace are attained by self-annihilation and passive absorption in contemplation of God and divine things. (Webster, New Collegiate, 1961.) 3Lutheranism‘s emphasis on eschatology--the doc- trines of death, resurrection, immortality, final judgment, and eternity-~will be treated fully in Chapter V since it gives Special direction to a Lutheran understanding of the importance of the ministry as a vocation. 114 . . . . . . l sanctification as an abiding process in the Church." He does not, however, apply sanctification to Christian vocation. Leonard Hodgson, THE DOCTRINE 0F THE TRINITY Only one seminary requires a reading of Hodgson‘s The Doctrine of the Trinity.2 That seminary‘s textbooks in courses in Systematic Theology total twenty-three works by twenty—two authors-—as widely diverse as an English 3 translation of a portion of Prenter‘s work and a volume by Hendry,4 on the one hand, and Honest to God,5 on the other. Significantly, of all twenty-three volumes only Hodgson has an unmistakably clear statement on the doctrine of Christian vocation. Hodgson Speaks of the application of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity in our lives. The Christian is torn between 1Whale, p. 146. 2Leonard Hodgson, The Doctrine of the Trinity (London: Nisbet and Company, Ltd., 1943). 3Regin Prenter, Spiritus Creator, trans. John M. Jensen (Philadelphia: The Muhlenberg Press, 1953). 4George S. Hendry, God the Creator (London: Hodder and Staughton, 1937). ' 5John Arthur Robinson, Honest to God (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1963). 115 a self which wants to serve the Lord (in what would be called a church vocation) and selves which prefer engaging in scholarly pursuits, administrative business, or enter— tainment. He needs, then, to ask which of these selves he really is.1 ”But the true pattern of unity for men who are made in the image of God is one in which there is a place for all our different selves, so far as they are good selves.“2 These different selves are not to be suppressed or repressed as evil; they are to be offered in willing surrender to God. For example, the man who is called to be a scholar must curb his desire to engage in manifold prac- tical activities.3 This implies a very advanced understand- ing of Christian vocation. God wants the Christian to serve Him voluntarily in his daily work, not to expend his energy in church work4 or other tasks to the detriment of that work 5 to which he has been called by God. lHodgson, p. 184. 2Ibid., p. 185. 31bid. 4Ibid., p. 186. 51bid., p. 187. 116 Arthur Cohen, editor, A HANDBOOK OF CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY Only one seminary requires a reading of Cohen‘s Handbook.l This work is of importance for the present study, however, since no other book on that seminary‘s required reading list for Systematic Theology sequences adequately discusses the doctrine of Christian vocation. This small volume uniquely presents theological topics arranged alphabetically. The very last topic is "Vocation," expounded by David J. Maitland.2 Maitland examines the term vocation historically and demonstrates the fact that using it merely as synonymous with occupation is ”emptying [it] of its original content.” He states that "hainng] a vocation is to be recalled into the community of God‘s people.“3 The Christian is not to be morally or mystically [pip] superior but is called "as one who has gained a new relationship in the world.“4 Maitland continues: 1Arthur A. Cohen (ed.), A Handbook of Christian Theology (New York: Meridian Books, Inc., 1958). 2Ibid., p. 371. 31bid. 41bid., p. 372. 117 Vocation has ramifications for men‘s work. . There is no God-preferred work. The clergy have not entered upon labors which assure their supe- rioritygto the commonality. Nor, on the other hand, is the clergyman any more accountable to serve God reSponsibly in his work than is any Christian in his. [Emphasis added.]1 The seminarian who reads the chapter on vocation in Cohen‘s book will be exposed to a very clear statement of the doc— trine. Gustaf Wingren, LUTHER ON VOCATION and Werner Elert, THE STRUCTURE OF LUTHERANISM Wingren‘s Luther on Vocation2 and Elert‘s The Structure of Lutheranism3 are not of crucial importance for the present study Since each is required in a seminary which also demands an acquaintance with other books containing clear statements on vocation. However, because they are popular and speak in sufficiently clear terms concerning the doctrine under discussion, they may be discussed briefly. Wingren begins his chapter by pointing out the diver- sity of meanings for vocatio. He says, in part, that voca— tion ”can also be used as meaning the work which one does as lIbid. 2Gustaf Wingren, Luther on Vocation, trans. Carl C. Rasmussen (Philadelphia: The Muhlenberg Press, 1957). 3Werner Elert, The Structure of Lutheranism, trans. Walter Hansen (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1962). 118 farmer, craftsman, etc. This use of the term occurs in I Corinthians 7:20. . . . It is not the office as such which is called vocatio but the action by which one rightly enters . 1 . the office." Much later in the same volume he says: Luther himself had a clear sense of vocation for his work of reformation; and to that end he found Special support in the oath he took when he was made a doctor of theology. Each is to do his own work, without eyeing others or trying to c0py them.2 Elert‘s position may be summed up briefly in his own words: "The pastor‘s calling is exactly analogous to worldly callings, as Luther sets forth in his exposition of Ps. 32. . . . Every performance of what a calling requires is a service to God. But only when it is actually done . 3 because of ‘a call and a command.‘ [Sic]” John P. MeyerJ DOGMATICS NOTES, VOLUMES I AND II, BASED ON DR. HOENECKE‘S "DOGMATIK” and Adolf Hoeneckei EV.-LUTH. DOGMATIK Only one seminary requires a study of Meyer‘s lWingren, p. 1. 2Ibid., p. 172. 3E1ert, p. 348. 119 Dogmatics Notes1 and Hoenecke‘s EV.-Luth. Dogmatik2 and these constitute the total reading requirement for courses in Systematic Theology in that seminary. Meyer treats vocation under sanctification. The brevity of the entry should be understood within the context of an outline rather than a regular textbook. Good works, says Meyer, are done by the Christian willingly according to God‘s rule laid down in the decalog.3 God prescribes good works: —1) By demanding love as the fulfillment of the Law. cf.Rom. 13, 8-10; Mt. 22, 35- 40; Gal. 5, 13-15. —2) By giving each one a certain ”station” in life. cf.I Cor. 7, 20-24; Eph. 5, 22; etc. —3) By placing over us persons representing Him. cf.Eph. 6, 1.5.6; Rom. 13, 1-7; Heb. 13, 17.4 Human nature, Meyer continues, is prone to despise the God- given works and to indulge in self-chosen ones. He cites 1John P. Meyer, Dogmatics Notes, Volume I and 11, based on Dr. Hoenecke‘s "Dogmatik” (Mequon, Wisconsin: Seminary Mimeograph Company, 1941-1956). 2Adolph Hoenecke, Ev.-Luth. Dogmatik (Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 1909). 3Meyer, II, p. 78. 4Ibid., II, p. 79. 120 Roman monastic vows and the social gOSpell as examples.2 A comparison indicates that Meyer departed from Hoenecke‘s outline at this point. There is no discussion in Hoenecke parallel to the quotation cited above. Hoenecke follows the outline of the scholastic theologians discussed in the previous chapter.3 Having spoken of the office of the ministry and of magistrates, he typically considers the family relationship. Here he follows those dogmaticians who do not enter upon a discussion of employers and employ— ees in this connection. (See Gerhard‘s outline in the pre— vious chapter.) Hoenecke does quote Luther in reference to the dif- ference between various members in the church: God has to have many and diverse offices and stations. For this reason, there are all kinds of different gifts; and He sees to it that each needs the other, and none can do without the other. What good would electors, nobles, or regents be if there were not also ministers, preachers, and teachers? In the same way, those who till the soil those who work with their hands, etc. [sic]A l“Social gOSpel” is used here to identify and to criticize activities which are aimed at an improvement of social conditions in the community at the expense of spir— itual conversion. Meyer warns against doing what man rather than God considers good works. 2Meyer, II, p. 79. 3Hoenecke, IV, p. 215. 4Ibid., IV, p. 172. 121 At several points, then, the seminarian who studies Meyer and Hoenecke will be clearly, although briefly, ex- posed to the Protestant doctrine of Christian vocation. Summary Within the context provided above, it is possible, by means of the textbooks assigned for courses in Dogmatics, to identify the Lutheran seminaries in the United States and Canada which expose their students to the Protestant doc— trine of Christian vocation. The nature of the exposure to this doctrine has been shown. The number of seminaries which present these materials to their students through textbooks in Systematic Theology will be discussed directly below. Exposure through lectures will be treated later in this chapter. Exppsure through Brunner. Eight seminaries, requir- ing a thorough study of Brunner‘s work in dogmatics, expose their students clearly to the idea of everyman‘s work as a vocation. The fact that this is a calling from God should be stated more clearly. Exposure through Pieper. Six other seminaries, requiring the use of Pieper‘s Dogmatics as a textbook, most clearly present to their students the doctrine of Christian vocation. 122 Exposure through Nygren. One other seminary, requir- ing a study of Nygren‘s This is the Church, very clearly presents to its students the Protestant understanding of Christian vocation. Exposure through Maitland in Cohen. In still anoth- er seminary, of five books required only one treats vocation clearly. The doctrine of vocation is taught in that semi— nary through Maitland‘s article in Cohen‘s handbook. How— ever, this excellent article might be lost upon the student because of the alphabetic arrangement of topics in this small book. Vocation, nevertheless, being the last of the articles, may be encountered even by the student who merely peruses the book. Exposure through Hodgson. The seminary which requires a study of twenty—three texts in its Systematic Theology sequences presents a clear eXposure only in the work of Hodgson. That presentation is Such that seminarians should gain a clear understanding of the doctrine of voca- tion. Exposure through Hoenecke and Meyer. The seminary which uses Meyer and Hoenecke provides its students with an adequate exposure to the doctrine of Christian vocation. It is clear but brief. 123 Exposure through Tillich or Brunner. One seminary requires that, in addition to Aulen, its students study either Tillich‘s or Brunner‘s system. Those students who elect to read Brunner will be exposed properly to the doc— trine of Christian vocation; those who read Tillich will not. Summation. Of nineteen Lutheran seminaries in the United States and Canada, eighteen give their students some exposure to the doctrine of Christian vocation through text— books in Systematic Theology. The nineteenth gives a choice between Brunner and Tillich and may expose some students to the doctrine in that way. Although it may appear to be easier to measure accurately what is taught on the basis of professors‘ views on vocation-~as will be done below-~there is no guarantee that a professor who holds a view considers it sufficiently relevant to introduce it in a Specific course, eSpecially if the textbooks in use ignore the sub— ject. Knowledge of the textbook‘s emphasis is important also because the three year period usually Spent in a sem- inary is relatively short compared to the lifetime in the ministry. There is the possibility of continuing exposure to the doctrine when a textbook treating vocation enters a pastor‘s library as a reference book on the church‘s teach— ing. 124 II. THE MORE RECENT LUTHERAN POSITION AS IT IS REFLECTED IN RESPONSES TO A QUESTIONNAIRE SENT TO THE PROFESSORS OF SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY SEQUENCES The coverage and response to the second question- naire, addressed to the men reported by their seminaries as teachers of Systematic Theology courses (Dogmatics), has been reported above. At this point, the individual ques- tions and their answers will be discussed. Question One The first question read: (1) Do you believe the following quotation from Brauer and Pelikan, The Lutheran Reformation, adequately describes Luther‘s position on the Calling (vocatio) of the laity? "In Lutheran piety at its best, such church membership was not restricted to questions of church attendance and the like. What the Reformation sought to achieve was an inter— pretation of its duties as calls from God, so that as citizen, father, or workman a man worked in response to God‘s call. No longer were the clergy the sole possessors of a divine vocation; any honorable work could now be a calling from God, however humble or 1 menial it might appear in the eyes of men. . . .” Yes, I believe this is essentially Luther‘s position. No, I do not believe this is Luther‘s position. See comments on the reverse side of this sheet. AAA vvv lJerald C. Brauer and Jaroslav Pelikan, The Lutheran Reformation (Chicago: Commission on College and University Work, The Lutheran Church-—Missouri Synod, and Division of College and University Work, National Lutheran Council, 1963). 125 The reSponse to this question was almost exclusively in the positive direction: Twenty-nine of 33 respondents, or 87%, answered in the affirmative. None answered in the negative. Three of 33 reSpondents, or 9%, gave comments without checking either of the foregoing options. One reSpondent, or 3%, did not reSpond to this question in any way whatever. Clearly then, there is wide agreement--near unanimity—~that the quotation from Brauer and Pelikan adequately describes Luther‘s position on the calling of the laity. With this background, it is possible to discuss the other questions not only on the basis of a common experience, but Specifi- cally with the conviction that the term vocatio is under- stood consistently by the various respondents. Question Two The second question read: (2) Do you believe Lutheran pastors today generally teach a vocatio for the laity Similar to that which is credited to Luther in the quotation above? ( ) Yes, I believe Lutheran pastors teach this kind of a vocatio. ( ) No, I do not believe that Lutheran pastors teach this. ( ) See comments on the reverse side of this sheet. 1Relevant comments will be incorporated into the discussion in Chapter V. 126 The reSponse to this question follows: Twenty of 33 reSpondents, or 61%, answered in the affirmative. Four respondents, or 12%, answered in the negative. Seven respondents, or 21%, gave comments without checking either the positive or the negative option. One respondent, or 3%, checked the positive response, the negative response, and the response which indicated that comments had been made on the reverse side of the Sheet. One did not reSpond. Although the agreement at this point is not as great as that found in the case of question one, at least a majority of the seminary professors polled believed that Lutheran pas— tors generally teach such a vocatio. Some seminary profes- sors travel widely through the church; and some of these have a better opportunity to observe the individual pastors at work. The real significance, however, will lie in a com- parison between question two and question three. Question Three The third question asked, (3) Do you believe Lutheran pastors should teach a vocatio for the laity? ( ) Yes, I do. ( ) No, I do not. ( ) See comments on reverse side. The reSponse to this question was: Twenty-six of 33 respondents, or 79%, answered in the affirmative. 127 One, or 3%, answered in the negative. Five, or 15%, gave comments only without checking either the positive or the negative response. One, or 3%, did not reSpond to this question at all. It is interesting to note that the professors of Systematic Theology agreed even more widely that pastors should teach such a vocatio: only 61% believed that they gig; 79% believed that they should. Only one professor thought Lutheran pastors should not teach such a vocatio. Nine did not respond affirmatively or negatively to question two. Only six omitted reSponses to question three. It would be logical to assume that the professors felt that they had greater access to their own feelings concerning the impor— tance of teaching a vocatio than they did to the actual con- ditions in the field. The number of non—reSpondents was the same. Some of the reasons the professors gave for their responses will be discussed in a later chapter under recom— mendations since the comments were largely relevant at that point. Question Four The fourth question involved the reading of a brochure which is inserted following this page: 128 In ' ‘ \~ ,, ‘WIAM A. BENrIELD, JR. A NEW LOOK AT VOCATION By WILLIAM A. BENFIELD, JR. Pastor, Highland Presbyterian Church Louisville, Kentur y DID YOU EVER srop ro REALIZE that a man who coaches foot- ball and a man who preaches are do- ing the same kind of work? Or that a woman who teaches in the public schools and ’a woman who directs the religious education program of a church are engaged in the same voca— tion? There are football coaches, school teachers, chemists, nurses, ministers, and many other people who will tell you that their lifework is the same. Oh, it is true that they are doin dif- ferent things, engaged in diflgerent kinds of activities, but their work is alike, it has a common element be- cause they are all engaged in a Chris- tIan vocation. This concept of Christian vocation is not recognized by everyone. Un- fortunately, there are many people who think of a Christian vocation only in terms of what is so often called full-time service with the organized church. Indeed, one of the sad facts about life today is that many young people who are going through the important period of deciding what to do with their lives, think of a Christian vocation as solely in the area of the work of a minister or a missionary or a director of religious education. Now MISSIONARIES ARE IMPORTANT, exceedingly so. The work of the minister or the work of a re- ligious educator is also important. These are Christian vocations, and one of the great needs of the church and the world today is to have more of our young men and women give their lives to full-time service in the church—young men and women with keen minds, dynamic personalities and dedicated spirits. But nor all of us can be missionaries and preachers in the formal sense. Not all of us are supposed to be full-time workers on church staffs. But this does not mean that we can not have a Christian vocation. Many of us need to take a new look. The truth of the matter is that there are many different kinds of Christian vocations. Every Christian should think of his work as a Christian vocation. THIS Is NOT TO IMPLY that just because we have made a pro- fession of faith in Christ as personal Lord and Saviour or that we have membership in a Christian church, our work can be called a Christian vocation. But this is to say that if our profession of faith is effective, if our church relationship is meaningful, then we shall want to spend our lives in work whereby we can serve God and our fellow men. We shall want to have a Christian vocation. The football coach, the private sec- retary, the doctor or nurse, the busi- nessman or woman, the minister and missionary have something in com- mon. They can be engaged in Chris- tian vocations. They‘can try to serve God with their talents and time and opportunities. They can use their work as an opportunity of identifying their lives and the lives of others with the will of God. They can use their work as a means of having a part. In the sharing of the gift of salvation with others. The Bible tells us that God in- tended that some people become preachers and teachers and mission- aries, workers who give their full time in the work of the organized church. But the Bible also tells us that God intended people should work for him in many other fields of endeavor. These people, too, give their full time to God, they are also a part of the work of the church as it spreads out into every area of human relation- ships. IN FACT THIS 13 rm»: WAY the Kingdom of God is to grow in the world. It is important that people worship God in the sanctuary and that we have Christian preachers and pasrors. It is important that the Good ews of God’s redeeming love in Christ be told to people in every land. But it is also important that God’s forgiving love and redeeming power be made real in all of our relation- ships. It is important that out Chris- tian faith go to work in business, in government, in science. in medicine, In every area of life. And if this is to be done we must have men and women who are seeking to serve God in many different kinds of work. We who live in this wonderful land are grateful for the freedom we have in deciding what is to be our lifework and for the opportunities to prepare so well for our chosen vocation. But I am not sure but what the time has come for us to realize that we do not need any more lawyers or doctors or businessmen or church workers as such. We have been “turning them out” by the thousands and yet we still have hun er and suffering, hatred and reed, crime and filth. But take a new ook! What we do need are lawyers and doctors and businessmen and church workers who believe that the answer to our troubled world is to be found in God and Hi: will. What we do need are men and women who Will give their talents and time, their all to the service of Him who is the Way and the Truth and the Life. Reprinted from PIESIYTERIAN SURVEY, DECEMBER, I932 . . f For other literature, write to the Department 0 Christian Vocation, Division of Higher. Education, Board of Christian Education, Presbytenan Church. U. 5., Box 1176, Richmond 9, Virginia. 129 (4) Kindly examine the enclosed very brief brochure, ”A New Look at Vocation” by William A. Benfield, Jr. (Do not return the brochure.) Would you say ( ) This is in harmony with current Lutheran theology? ( ) This is acceptable in a general way? ( ) This is generally unacceptable? ( ) This is not at all in harmony with current Lutheran theology? The response: Ten of 33 respondents, or 30%, answered in the affirmative. Fifteen of 33 respondents, or 45%, gave qualified approval. (”This is acceptable in a general way.") No respondent said that it was generally unaccept- able. One respondent, or 3%, stated that it is ”not at all in harmony with current Lutheran theology." Although there was no provision for comments, 3 reSpondents, or 9%, gave comments only without checking any of the positive or negative responses. Four reSpondents, or 12%, did not reply to this question at all. One of these stated that the brochure was not available. [sic] In the light of the fact that several respondents commented . . . l . that the brochure was CalV1nist1c rather than Lutheran, it is significant that a total of 75% of the reSpondents stated lAlthough Lutherans and Calvinists today respect each other‘s founders, the implication here is that the brochure is embedded in a theology which emphasizes the creation and the governance of God (Calvinistic) rather than the redemption (Lutheran). 130 either that it is in harmony with current Lutheran theology or that it is acceptable in a general way. Even more signif- icant is the fact that actual negative responses (”generally unacceptable” or ”not at all in harmony with current Lutheran theology”) were limited to one professor. Summary. There was wide general agreement on what constituted Luther's position on vocation. While a very large number of reSpondents believed that this kind of voca— tion should be taught by Lutheran pastors, a smaller-~but still significant--number believed that this was being done. A brochure prepared by the minister of a large, influential Presbyterian church for the Presbyterian Guidance Program was examined by the respondents who found themselves widely . . . 1 in agreement With it. CONCLUSIONS All the Lutheran seminaries in the United States and Canada——which represent the three large Lutheran denomina— tions and two seminaries of bodies until recently connected with one of the larger Lutheran conferences——were contacted. All seminary presidents were asked to identify the textbooks lPermission has been granted by the Reverend Dr. William A. Benfield, Jr., and by The Board of Christian Education of the Presbyterian Church, U.S., for reproduction of the brochure. 131 used in dogmatics courses and to report the names of all faculty members who teach these courses. All replied. On this basis, a study was made of the various text- books to which seminarians are exposed in Systematic Theol- ogy classes. All texts significant for this study were reviewed. It was established that in at least eighteen of the nineteen seminaries, or 95%, the required reading in these courses leads to an exposure to the doctrine of Chris— tian vocation through texts in Systematic Theology sequences. The nature and extent of the exposure varies from clear statements in some cases to strong implications in other instances. Four questions were presented to all professors of Systematic Theology. Responses included seventy—nine per- cent of the professors, representing at least eighty—nine percent of the seminaries. There was nearly unanimous agreement concerning Luther's position on vocatio; eighty- seven percent of the reSpondents agreed without any reserva- tions. Sixty-one percent of the professors believed that Lutheran pastors taught such a vocatio for the laity. Seventy—nine percent stated that pastors should teach such a vocatio. Seventy-five percent found a Presbyterian brochure on Christian vocation acceptable. These findings corroborate the previous finding of a wide exposure to the 132 doctrine in Systematic Theology courses and appear to be a mandate for a guidance program. However, the meaning of these statistics in the light of a projected Lutheran guidance program will be more fully discussed in Chapter V. The nature and content of such a proposed program will be outlined in Chapter IV. CHAPTER IV IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE In this chapter, some of the findings of the pre— vious chapters will be examined in the light of a possible Lutheran guidance program. Since the question whether Lutherans should develop such a program will be posed in the fifth chapter, in the present chapter an attempt is made to demonstrate what such a Lutheran program might be like.1 I. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE IN THE LOCAL CONGREGATION Establishing the Program In the description of a possible denomination—wide guidance program, one might begin at either the denomina— tional level or the local level. In view of the fact that local Lutheran congregations are autonomous, the present description begins with the local congregation. This empha— sizes the fact that the program may originate as a service 1Since the Presbyterian Guidance Program of the Presbyterian Church, U.S. ("Southern") is a pioneer among church—related guidance programs and is uniquely a guidance program without attempts at recruitment for church vocations (as has been shown in Chapter I), the discussion which follows draws heavily upon the Presbyterian experience. 133 134 offered by the local congregation. Local autonomy is no accident in American Lutheran- ism. Schaller in his work in pastoral theology points out that, historically, Lutheran congregations in America joined themselves into synods for the sake of mutual strengthening and for greater opportunities in carrying out missionary work. They gave only limited power to synods because they chose to maintain local autonomy.1 The same autonomy is still evident. Various denomination—wide programs are offered to local congregations for their use. Thus, for example, in The Lutheran Church-—Missouri Synod an official manual of the Walther League (the denominational youth pro— gram) says of the local congregation, In youth work it [the local congregation] means the parent body for all youth organizations be- cause the original fellowship is in the congrega- tion and all youth groups are only a fellowship of a portion of the congregation. It is the congregation's consent which brings youth organ- izations into being and into membership in the Walther League.2 Thus there is precedent in history which suggests that the present study begin with the local program. Consequently, an assumption is made at this point that such a program 1John Schaller, Pastorale Praxis in der ev.—luth.. Freikirche Amerikas (Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 1913), p. 134. 2A.B.C. of Youth Work (Chicago: Walther League, 1949), p. 44. 135 exists at the denominational level and that it is available to local churches. The establishment of the program at the denominational level will be detailed later in this chapter. The first task at the local level involves an expla- nation of the historical Lutheran position on vocatio to— gether with its implications for modern life so that the program will be understood in the proper historical perSpec— tive and in the prOper theological context. Help from official church publications and members of the program's headquarters staff will be needed to bring information to the local congregation. Headquarters staff members and others who understand the program should appear before pastoral conferences to explain the program to the clergy and attempt to enlist their support for it. At the begin- ning, members of the headquarters staff may be needed at the local level to explain the program to a number of congrega- tions carefully selected in each area. At the same time, the value of guidance and the need for help in making a vocational choice must be communicated to local congregations. The relative merits of a church- related program as a complement to the public school program will need to be discussed. The point of view of Wade H. Boggs, Jr., in All Ye Who Labor will need serious considera- tion. He writes: 136 Even if a particular public school system were financially able to staff its guidance program so that all the basic services were made avail- able to each pupil, from the Christian stand— point such a program would still be inadequate because of the absence of a Christian philosophy of vocation. The doctrine of Christian vocation holds that the claim of Christ is a total claim over the whole of 1ife--Spiritual and material, social and personal, political and economic. The most crucial need of our day is the evangelization of the common life, the conversion of mere jobs so that they can become callings. Herein lies one of our greatest missionary opportunities. Many thoughtful people are convinced that genuine spir- itual revival must await the rediscovery of the Christian significance of daily work and of the role of the laity in the world. Only the church can effectively challenge young people to make their Christian faith relevant to the world of work. The public schools, because of the tradi- tional separation of church and state, cannot be expected to perform this evangelistic function.l Close co-operation with the public schools is, of course, implicit in the establishment of such a program. School counselors and administrative officers should be informed of the content of the discussions in local con- gregations so that they may have first—hand information. In addition, they should be convinced that such a program neither constitutes a criticism of their work nor is in— tended to be competitive with the services available through lWade H. Boggs, Jr., All Ye Who Labor (Richmond: John Knox Press, 1961), p. 138; it is not suggested that a Lutheran congregation will fully accept this statement. See Chapter V. 137 the schools. The local congregation which has decided to estab— lish such a program would then appoint a number of voca- tional aides. The manner of appointment may vary from congregation to congregation. It is suggested that aides be appointed in the same manner in which Sunday School teachers, youth counselors, and other assistants to the pastor are appointed.2 The vocational aide is a lay person without counselor training. Neither technical skill nor professional training is required for his task. And yet, some learning is essential. It is highly desirable that aides be trained by center personnel or headquarters staff members.3 The Presbyterian definition of the aide seems consistent with the needs of a Lutheran program. In Presby- terian literature, the vocational aide is described as ”an 1In the Presbyterian experience, high school coun- selors often consider the center psychologist a fellow pro— fessional whom they consult and to whom they refer also non-Presbyterian students. Although this is not a part of the center’s intended functions, it is frequently carried out as a professional courtesy. 2This is done by either the pastor, the congrega— tional officers, the voters' assembly, or a Special educa— tion committee. It is suggested that the appointment of vocational aides parallel similar appointments in each congregation. 3The Presbyterian literature also includes guide- lines for the preparation of vocational aides. See the Presbyterian Guidance Program Handbook (Richmond: Board of Christian Education, Presbyterian Church in the United States, 1963), pp. 90—98. 138 adult who has common sense, a sincere interest in young people, a desire to help them, and the willingness to devote time (a few hours a month) in helping them prepare for their Center counseling. He seeks to help them discover the mean- ing of Christian vocation for their life and work, under- stand themselves better, and learn more about the world of work and what is involved in a sound career choice.”1 The vocational aide is ideally a person with a winsome, sincere Christian personality; an understanding of the concept of Christian vocation; and a sincere interest in young people. He is mature, desires to help young people, respects their personal integrity, lets them make their own decisions, and keeps their confidences. He inspires young people to study, is willing to listen, and is both patient and dedicated.2 The possibility of securing such persons appears to be implicit in the fact that the Presbyterian literature describes the aide essentially in these terms after the program has been operating successfully for more than a decade. 1Presbyterian Guidance Program Handbook, p. 90. 2Ibid., pp. QOff. 139 The Counselee After aides have been appointed, it is necessary to identify the persons who will be permitted to avail them— selves of the services offered by the program. Age limits must be established. Parish lines must be considered. Limits in regard to emotionally disturbed young peOple must be set. Age Limits. In the Presbyterian program, high school seniors, juniors, and some sophomores are prepared for visits to centers. Ideally, the pre-counseling in the local church takes place during the SOphomore year in high school, the visit to the center in the junior year. There are valid reasons for this. Although the centers are to be counseling centers, many of the instruments found to be most useful in such a program are not generally adequate for per- sons much younger than ninth or tenth grade.1 In the Pres- byterian program, the center visit during eleventh grade was found to be most meaningful ”because young people of this age are usually mature enough to appreciate and co—operate le. the findings of Darley and Hagenah: ”The evidence seems abundantly clear that interest patterns devel— op and are visible in the moderately able and mature fifteen- and sixteen—year-old high school student.” John G. Darley and Theda Hagenah, Vocational Interest Measurement (Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press, 1955), p. 72. 140 with this type of counseling opportunity, and far enough along in their personal adjustments to have some ideas of their own about their interests, abilities, and ambitions."1 It also permits time for the choice of a college consonant with the insights gained from the counseling experience. Visits during the twelfth grade will increasingly conflict with the time schedule for college applications, eSpecially in areas where ”early decision” plans are operative. In the Presbyterian program, counselees may be older young peOple or adults who are dissatisfied with their pres— ent vocation.2 Lutherans will need to consider the advan- tages and disadvantages of serving such parishioners through the program. (See below.) In the projected revision of their Sunday School materials, Presbyterians will teach the Protestant doctrine of Christian vocation and its implications for career choice at the junior high school level. PrOSpective counselees will thus be prepared for the local church's phase of the guidance program when the revised series is published. Lutheran interest in these new Sunday School lessons has lPresbyterian Guidance Program Handbook, p. 47. 2 Ibid., p. 48. 141 l . . been expressed. Lutherans planning a guidance program would do well to consider the minimum age limits applied in the Presbyterian program as well as a preparatory Sunday School curriculum. Parish Lines. Counselees should normally be members of the Lutheran congregation at which the vocational prepara- tion takes place——or bona fide prOSpects for membership. Since the program will be an extension of the pastor's func- tion, it should not be offered to those not under the pas— tor's care. As a matter of ethics, young people of other churches might be considered if they are referred to the local church‘s program by their own pastor. Theological Students. The Lutheran Church in America has, at present, an excellent program for the screening of lPersonal letter from the Reverend Dr. Oscar E. Feucht of the Board of Parish Education, The Lutheran Church --Missouri Synod, September 6, 1963. 2An analogy might be drawn from those to whom a pastor extends baptism, confirmation, marriage, and burial. This would vary from parish to parish; some clergymen normally serve only their own parishioners, others honor requests for such services from a wider circle. It is suggested that existing local practice in regard to baptism, confirmation, marriage, and burial provide a guideline for the vocational guidance program also. See Schaller, pp. 35, 93. 142 ministerial candidates.l However, there are some points of the Presbyterian system it would be advisable to adopt. In the Presbyterian program, pre—theological students are screened for some presbyteries before they are taken under the care of presbytery.2 This screening is carried out at a Presbyterian guidance center. Lutherans might well con- sider the advantages and disadvantages of delegating such a task to the centers.3 Emotionally—disturbed Youth. Clergymen, realizing that young people with psychological problems need to be helped, may wish to enroll them in the guidance program. However, the distance to the center, the lack of staff time, the frequent lack of training on the part of center staff members, and the possibility of creating a false public image of the center make other avenues of referral preferable. lJ. Victor Benson, The Richmond Conference on the Development of Model Guidance Services for Church Occupations Candidates (New York: Board of Theological Education, Lutheran Church in America, 1962); The Conference on Lutheran Psychological Services (New York: Board of Theological Education, 1960); Manual of Notations (New York: Board of Theological Education, n.d.). 2That is, before they are accepted as bona fide pre—theological or theological students. 3Here, as in the case of older counselees, there is the danger of fractionating the program when centers are required to serve too many ancillary functions. In Chapter V, the discussion concerns the identification of potential theological students. The present discussion deals with those who have already been identified. 143 Young people who are known to need psychotherapy should, therefore, not be sent to the center for this kind of help. When, nevertheless, emotionally disturbed young peOple do come to a center, referral should be initiated. The normal course of referral is to a psychiatrist through the family physician. Under unusual circumstances, another person (like the school psychologist) may be called upon to make the referral. At other times, in the course of counsel- ing with a young person, a psychologist in a center may feel the need for a consultive examination by a psychological services agency. Such consultive examination may be re- quested in consultation with the parents.1 In either case, the psychologist who has worked with the counselee must take responsibility for the referral.2 Further Suggestions. Since all young people in a parish are the pastor's concern, the program should not be limited to college-bound youth; and young peOple who are not planning to attend college can benefit from the program. 1Interview with Dr. Alvin Hall Smith, Director, Pres- byterian Guidance Center, Hampden-Sydney College, Hampden- Sydney, Virginia. 2Cf. Ethical Standards of Psychologists (Washington: The American Psychological Association, 1953), p. 49: "In cases involving referral, the responsibility of the psychol- ogist for the welfare of the client continues until this reSponsibility is assumed by the professional person to whom the client is referred or until the relationship with the psychologist making the referral has been terminated by mutual agreement.” 144 The counselee's contact with the program ought not to end with his visit to the center. He should receive continuing help from the vocational aide in the home con- gregation. The aide, as a result of further contacts, may also wish to consult with the counselor in the center for follow—up visits. Great care must be taken not to urge the youth of the church too strongly to avail themselves of that phase of the program which takes place at the center. The work done in the home congregation is pastoral and theological in nature. A clergyman may, therefore, strongly suggest participation in this part of the program just as he sug— gests attendance at Sunday School, confirmation classes, and the regular youth program of the church. The center's activ- ities, however, being psychological in nature and involving the payment of a fee, ought not to be urged upon reluctant young peOple.2 Vocational aides and pastors must understand clearly that the program is not to be used to recruit young people 1In the Presbyterian program, no further charge is made for return visits to the center. 2Cf. Ethical Standards of Psychologists, p. 49: ”Clinical services must not be imposed upon an individual, nor should a person be unduly urged to avail himself of such services.” 145 . . . . l . for speCific denominational colleges. At the same time, prOSpective counselees and their parents must understand that the center's location at a denominational college does not constitute an easy entrEe to that college. (See below.) II. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE IN THE GUIDANCE CENTER Location and Staffing of Centers The choice of a location for the denominational guidance center poses a number of problems. Choices would include location at a denominational college in the area, location at the headquarters of a denominational chaplain at a public or private university in the area, location at a geographically central position in reSpect to the area which is to be served, and location at the population center of the area. The advantages of location at a college of the denom— ination are manifold. With the understanding that recruit- ment will be studiously avoided, the uncommitted prOSpective college student becomes familiar with his church‘s nearby college, giving that school an advantage over similar, lPresbyterian Guidance Program Handbook, p. 48. 146 equally suitable colleges.l Of greater importance are the public relations aspects of such a location. At present, the relationship between church colleges and the parent bodies are strained in many places. The location of a cen— ter at a denominational college may help to build strong relationships between the college and the church if the work of the center is seen as meaningful and helpful. In the model of Presbyterian experience, it has been possible to have all centers located at Presbyterian colleges. Of greatest importance because it is directly re- lated to the quality of services available to the counselee is the availability of a better-equipped staff when the cen- ter is located at a denominational college. Opportunity for a light teaching load is appealing to many counselors and helps to keep them abreast of developments in psychology. Persons adequately trained seem to prefer the collegiate setting, the stimulation of a campus community, and the status of faculty membership in an institution of higher 1The question of the student's strengthening of his religious beliefs at a school of his own denomination is not mentioned since this might, in effect, be no more than a delay in facing some theological and philosophical prob- lems. 2Provision had, however, been made for location at the headquarters of a denominational chaplain attached to a public or private college or university in cases in which location at a denominational college would not be feasible. 147 learning.l Even if this were not true, normal screening processes employed by college presidents, deans, and depart- ment heads who are accustomed to selecting faculty members are preferable to selection by an inexperienced committee of clergy and laity in each regional area. Location at a col— lege should lead to the former, other locations to the lat— ter. Housing and food services for counselees may be made readily available through the college. While all housing is a problem for many colleges at this time, those whose officers are enthusiastic about the program have been able to provide suitable housing for visiting counselees. At the same time, the church must consider carefully the advantages of a setting which might combine the other three options. It might be possible to locate a center at the headquarters of a denominational chaplain at a public or private university which is centrally located both in reference to geography and to population. A reduction in travel time and expense might make the center experience accessible to a larger number of the church‘s young people. The twin disadvantages of recruitment for the denominational college and of seeking an easy entree to such a college 1Although this has not been researched for this context, there appears to be a consensus of opinion among Presbyterian center directors that this is true. It is frequently enunciated by them. Objections to moving a cen- ter away from a college setting usually come from the center staff members. 148 would be greatly reduced.1 Some of the advantages of the collegiate setting would also be present, although member- ship in the faculty would not be likely. It is the opinion of the Reverend Dr. Reuben W. Hahn, Executive Secretary of the Commission on College and University Work of the Lutheran Church-~Missouri Synod, that location of centers at large state universities at which there is a denomina- tional chaplain would not only be feasible but would be welcomed both by his commission and by its counterpart in the National Lutheran Council.2 The church, accordingly, would be faced with a choice between denominational colleges, where available, and the headquarters of denominational chaplains at state universities. The other options have little to commend them. It is suggested that neither the church college set- ting nor the public or private university setting become an exclusive pattern but that a choice be made for each region. Should such a guidance program become a project of 1The disadvantages would not be eliminated entirely since counselors who would seek to recruit for church col- leges might still do so, and parents who would seek easy admission to the church-related college might attempt to lead the center staff members to make an appeal for their son or daughter. 2Interview with Dr. Hahn. 149 an inter—Lutheran agency representing the three large Lutheran groups in the United States and Canada-—a matter for consideration below—-there would be excellent distribu- tion of Lutheran colleges in all areas of both countries. Significantly, in many areas in which one or two of the large Lutheran bodies have no college, one of the other Lutheran groups has a college.1 It is suggested, then, that conditions in each geographic area of the church be weighed to determine whether in that area a center should be located at a church college or near a large state university. Nor- mally, the former would be preferable because of a need for hiring and keeping staff members. The Presbyterian program requires that all counse- lors working in the center be members of either the National 2 or Division 17 of the Amer— Vocational Guidance Association ican Psychological Association. In addition, accreditation by the American Board on Professional Standards in Vocation— al Counseling, Inc., is a sine qua non for centers wishing to use the name Presbyterian Guidance Program. The er. Dallas Smith, Director of the Presbyterian Guidance Program, suggested to the writer in a private interview that reciprocity between Lutherans and Presbyte— rians would be welcomed. This would provide centers in certain Southern areas in which Lutheran colleges are far apart. 2Professional membership in the N.V.G.A. is required. 150 advantages inherent in such safeguards are immediately obvious. The church is not a psychological agency and would be hard pressed to evaluate staff members and centers ade— quately. No Lutheran guidance program should be considered without such safeguards. Membership in a Protestant church should be essen- tial for staff members. A conscientious Roman Catholic would experience real difficulties communicating the Prot- estant doctrine of a vocatio for the laity.l Since Lutherans occupy a position somewhat different from that of other Prot- estants (eSpecially in regard to lay vocation as compared with the doctrine of the ministry), membership in a Lutheran church would be preferable. An understanding of the Luther- an church's unique doctrine of Christian vocation coupled with an obvious commitment to that doctrine is essential.2 Testing or Counseling A properly qualified counselor will understand that counseling is the heart of guidance. It will, however, be 1For the involvement of members of the center staff in communicating the doctrine of vocation see Chapter V. 2The Lutheran position in regard to the ministry is somewhat different from that of other Protestants. This has been described at various points in Chapter III. In Chapter V, it will be discussed in relation to the Protestant doc- trine of a Christian vocation for every one. 151 consistently necessary to communicate to local churches, their young people, and the parents of prOSpective coun- selees that the center is a counseling center, not a testing center. Without such clarification, the expectations of the counselee may be false. Parents, too, may expect the center counselor to tell them by means of tests precisely what their son or daughter should choose to do for a life's work. The inappropriateness of this point of view has been well documented by Barry and Wolf.1 In contrast, appropriate selection of testing material will be made in consultation with the counselee in the counseling situation. Fees It is estimated that the cost of one center for one year will approximate $25,000. This would include the coun— selor's salary (up to $10,000), secretarial—psychometric assistance ($7,000), rental, utilities, and telephone ($2,500, unless these are furnished by the college or the chaplain's office), capital equipment ($4,000), occupational information and test files ($1,500).2 It is suggested that 1Ruth Barry and Beverly Wolf, Epitaph for Vocational Guidance (New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, 1962), pp. 52ff. 2Because of salary and rental differences, these figures which represent costs in a Southern denomination are probably too low for a nation-wide denomination. 152 at first the parent body and the regional areal each con- tribute $12,500 for this venture. Eventually, the regional body will be able to operate a center for about $15,000 to $17,000 annually, the remaining expenditures being met by counselees‘ fees. In the Presbyterian experience the total actual cost per counselee approximates fifty dollars, but half of the fee for Presbyterian students is absorbed by the regional subdivision of the denomination. A schedule of fees follows. 1. Presbyterians from supporting synods . . . . . . . . . . . . up to $25.00 2. Students enrolled in a college where a Center is located . . up to $25.00 3. Presbyterians from non-support- ing synods . . . . . . . . . . $35.00 4. Non-Presbyterians . . . . . . . $50.00 In some instances, local Presbyterian churches pay a por— tion-—often one-half—-of the fees charged to clients accord— ing to the schedule above. There are also provisions for 1In the Lutheran Church in America, the largest regional groups are called synods. In The American Lutheran Church, the largest regional groups are called districts, and the word 5 nod is no longer in use. In The Lutheran Church--Missouri Synod, synod refers to the parent body; the largest regional groups are called districts. Through- out the present study, regional group is to be understood as a synod of the Lutheran Church in America or a district of The American Lutheran Church or of The Lutheran Church-- Missouri Synod. 153 counselees who cannot pay. In order to reach the maximum number of clients, it is recommended that no fees be charged the first year in which a Lutheran center operates.l In the second year, the Presbyterian schedule of fees might be attempted. It should then be revised with experience. The regional group, not the college, nor the university Chaplaincy, would properly underwrite further expenditures. Should the regional group represent the all-Lutheran agency, adjustment by membership in the equivalent regional groups will have to be made. The Role of VOCATIO The question of the center's involvement in the Protestant doctrine of Christian vocation is crucial. The task of the center is largely psychological; vocatio is theological. Could not the teaching and application of this doctrine be left to the local congregation? Largely it should. Nevertheless, the experience in the local congrega— tion and the experience at the center must be tied together as closely as possible. Concern over one's calling in the totality of life, including occupation, must be part of the counseling. This should not be unethical counseling to a pre-conceived conclusion. Rather, it should be a recognition 1Interview with Dr. Alvin Hall Smith. 154 of the fact that the counselee is in a church-related guidance program where certain values are held by the staff members. Without this, the church—relatedness is meaning- less.1 In view of the Lutheran stress on eschatology,2 the question of recruitment for church vocations becomes crucial. If, as Lutherans believe, what happens in the present life is important chiefly as it relates to the life of the world to come, should not recruitment for church vocations be attempted at every opportunity? Such reasoning, while log- ical, would reflect a lack of understanding of the Christian vocation of every believer. It would be likely to lead to an admission to the ministry of men who may be willing to serve but are unqualified. The Presbyterian experience may serve as a model also at this point. Although the work of enlistment for church vocations was at one time carried out through the agencies of the Presbyterian Guidance Program, in recent years a separate Department of Enlistment has been created. 1The integration of vocatio in counseling will be discussed in Chapter V. 2Eschatology is, properly, the doctrine of the ”last things,” including death, resurrection, judgment, hell, heaven, etc. Eschatology is here used in the narrower sense implied in the sentence that follows. The subject will be treated more fully in Chapter V. 155 (See Appendix, Organizational Chart of the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church, U.S.) The experience of other denominations whose guidance programs became programs of enlistment has been documented in Chapter I. It will be demonstrated in Chapter V that the Prot— estant doctrine of Christian vocation is not in conflict with the special Lutheran emphasis on the ministry. As has been shown in Chapter II, Lutherans have, at times, lost sight of the doctrine of vocation for the layman. It is obviously important, then, that every opportunity be utilized to keep vocation in this perspective; this includes a recog- nition of the doctrine during the visit to the center. III. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE IN THE DENOMINATIONAL PROGRAM Since the time of World War 1, those Lutheran groups which are now members of two of the three large Lutheran bodies (the Lutheran Church in America and The American Lutheran Church) have been members of the National Lutheran Council. The council was reSponsible primarily for carrying out a ministry to servicemen, college students, and others who were believed to benefit from such a joint ministry. The third large Lutheran body (The Lutheran Church-~Missouri Synod) did not hold membership in the council but co—operated with it in some activities. 156 A new agency, similar to the National Lutheran Council and tentatively named the Lutheran Council in the United States of America, is projected at the present time. It will include all three of the large Lutheran groups. The probability of such an agency's failing to come into exist- ence is so remote that it will be assumed, for the purposes of the present study, the agency will be established within the next two years. Such an agency, representing approximately 8,300,000 of the 8,700,000 Lutherans in the United States and Canada (and consequently referred to hereafter as ”the all-Lutheran agency”), would be ideally suited for the establishment of a Lutheran guidance program. Its constituent bodies will con- trol colleges and student centers which are well distributed throughout the United States and Canada. The all-Lutheran agency membership will include the Lutheran Church in Amer— ica, which has already established a program of psycholog- ical services for its pre-theological and theological stu- dents. It will include The Lutheran Church--Missouri Synod which has a co-operative program between its Concordia Seminary (St. Louis) and the University of Minnesota for training a limited number of selected pastors as clinical psychologists. And it will include The American Lutheran Church, long a leader in co-operative, all—Lutheran endeav- ors. Such an agency could bring to bear upon the guidance 157 program the united support of almost all Lutherans in North America. In addition, the possibility of finding one direc- tor for an all—Lutheran program far exceeds that of finding three directors for three Lutheran programs. The choice of a director for the total denomina— tional program is crucial. It is suggested that such a person have a Doctor of Philosophy or a Doctor of Education degree in counseling psychology granted by an institution whose counselor—training program is approved by the American Psychological Association.1 His competence in counseling high school-aged young people should be evident from evalua- tions of his work by school administrators for whom he has worked in this role. He should be a churchman-—preferably with graduate training as a clergyman, a parochial school teacher, or a Director of Christian Education--since he will need to establish rapport with a large number of church leaders of a similar background. He should understand the Protestant doctrine of Christian vocation within the frame— work of Lutheran theology, especially as it relates to the doctrine of the ministry.2 He should be personally 1While other competent persons are available, a church body would find it difficult to evaluate their train- ing objectively. A.P.A. approval of the program, reported annually in The American Psychologist, would serve as a safeguard. 2This is detailed in Chapter V. 158 committed to the doctrine of vocation in his own life. He should be willing to travel widely throughout the church ‘area, especially during the formative years of the program. Because of the unique nature and successful operation of the Presbyterian Guidance Program, it would be of incalculable advantage for a prOSpective Lutheran director to Spend a year as an intern in that program.1 The director should be firmly committed to psychological and educational research and should plan from the very beginning to execute follow-up studies. SUMMARY This description of a proposed Lutheran guidance program is both psychologically and theologically sound. It seeks accreditation for its centers and for the members of the center staff through several recognized agencies which are accustomed to evaluating agencies offering psycho- logical services. It is based upon the theology of the parent body. It is modeled to a certain extent after the er. Dallas Smith, Director of the Presbyterian Guidance Program, has expressed approval of this plan. (Private interview.) The new director would have to make adjustments from the Presbyterian to the Lutheran program as will be shown in Chapter V. Mr. Smith proposes that the intern serve some time at the Richmond headquarters of the program and some time in various centers. His salary and expenses would have to be borne by the Lutheran churches. 159 successful program of the Presbyterian Church, U.S. It seeks to engage a director who is thoroughly trained in both the psychological and theological fields and who would serve an apprenticeship in the Presbyterian Guidance Program. It looks for the support of nearly all Lutherans in the United States and Canada through an agency which is designed to represent ninety—five percent of the denomination. Such a program would be feasible. Chapter V will review the theological and educa- tional principles outlined in the present and previous chap- ters and will, in the light of the recommendations of the- ological professors (gained through comments on the second questionnaire) seek to determine whether Lutherans should seek to establish such a program. CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A brief history of guidance and a survey of church- related guidance programs in the United States and Canada have been presented in Chapter I. The Lutheran doctrine of vocatio has been documented in Chapters II and III and a proposed Lutheran guidance program outlined in Chapter IV. The final chapter restates the conclusions reached previous- ly in the study and makes recommendations concerning the establishment of a Lutheran guidance program. I. THEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND Eschatology and the Ultimate Aim of Lutheranism Ultimately, the consideration of a denominational guidance program must arise from a church body's stated aims and be in harmony with them. Some Christian churches in the twentieth century stress the life of the world to come. Others concern themselves almost exclusively with life in the present world. Still others attempt to effect a balance, emphasizing neither the life of the world to come nor life 160 161 in the present world. In the last—named category, however, one of the two emphases may predominate. At times, the sixteenth century Lutheran reformers seemed to be concerned only with the life of the world to come; at other times, they seemed to be concerned with both the present life and the life of the world to come.1 The Augsburg Confession (1530) does not actually express an exclusively other— worldly point of view2 since it was the common position held by Lutherans, Roman Catholics, and Reformed in the sixteenth century and was, therefore, not an issue for discussion in a confession which sought to defend the Lutheran position in contrast to the Roman Catholic and Reformed positions. But the Christian faith as a preparation for eternity is implic- 3 it in almost every article of that confession. The Lutheran emphasis expressed in the Augsburg 1Aulen (et a1.) calls an emphasis on the life to come ”other-worldly.” The antonym is ”this-worldly.” 2See Note 1. 3In Article XVII, for example, the confessors taught that "our Lord Jesus Christ will come at the last day to judge and to awaken [£12] all the dead, to give to the faithful and elect eternal life and eternal joy and to condemn to hell and eternal punishment godless persons and devils." Bekenntnisschriften der Evangelisch— Lutherischen Kirche (thtingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1963), p. 72. 162 Confession of 15301 is still applicable today. All Lutheran church bodies subscribe to the Augsburg Confession; Lutheran pastors promise at the time of their ordination that they will teach according to it;2 Lutheran union is predicated upon its acceptance. Modern Lutheran theology continues with a strong "other—worldly” emphasis. Bishop Aulen (whose work T23 Faith of the Christian Church was shown to be the standard textbook in dogmatics in thirteen of the nineteen Lutheran seminaries in the United States and Canada) proclaims a strongly eschatological position of this kind. He points out that it was formerly common practice to treat eschatol- ogy in a concluding chapter in the works on Systematic Theol- ogy so that the subject might be seen as the highest and final point in the content of faith. But this resulted in regarding eschatology as an appendix to the main discussion. Instead, Aulen therefore discusses the subject in various places throughout his text to emphasize the relevance of lUnlike Calvinists, Lutherans do not revise their confessions. It is the Augsburg Confession of 1530 to which Lutherans subscribe today. 2Some will teach according to it because they believe it to be in harmony with Holy Writ (called a quia subscription), others in as far as it is in harmony With Holy Writ (called a quatenus subscription). Some Lutheran bodies require a guia subscription, some a quatenus subscription. 163 eschatology to the whole content of faith.1 One of his eSpecially clear statements follows: As far as Christian faith is concerned, the perfect dominion of God, the ”kingdom of God,” lies entirely outside the bounds of history. The idea that the kingdom of God is realized through an evolutionary and inner world-proc- ess is entirely foreign to the Christian faith. The kingdom of God does not belong to this world (John 18:36), nor does it have anything to do with earthly ideals of blessedness. From this point of View the eschatological character of the kingdom of God cannot be emphasized strongly enough. But this does not imply, how- ever, that the kingdom of God has nothing to do with the world of history. On the contrary, history is the arena where the kingdom of God struggles and wins its victories.2 Aulen‘s position distinctly contains a stress on both the present life and the life of the world to come, but the latter predominates. Although he points out that ”eter- nal life” is not only in the future and that it already exists in and through faith‘s fellowship with God, he insists that "faith's eschatological present must not be separated from hope's future perSpective.H3 At another point, he warns against a faith ”conceived of as exclusively this—worldly” and also against one ”committed to a kingdom 4 that is not of this world.” Later, when he discusses the nature of the church, Aulen points out that the church lAulen, p. 99. 21bid., pp. 144f. 31bid., pp. 286ff. 41bid., p. 289. 164 "becomes an eschatological reality and has its eyes focused on the consummation to come when the old aeon has definitely passed away and the glory of the kingdom of God will be revealed.”1 He says that such a future perSpective is 2 In his discussion of the Lord‘s essential for the church. Supper, he even calls it an eschatological sacrament. The Lord‘s Supper celebrated on earth is a foretaste of ”the great supper in heaven."3 Pieper, whose works are studied in the other six seminaries, has a decidedly eschatological point of view. He devotes the last fifty-seven pages of his original German work to this topic.4 Pieper states that only those who believe in Christ in the present life will have a part in the eternal blessedness. He cites St. John 3:16, 18 and St. Luke 24:47 as proof of the ”necessity of faith in this life for salvation in the future life.” He deduces three further proofs: first, the warning to all servants of the Word to carry out their office so truly and diligently that lIbid., p. 294. 2Ibid. 31bid., pp. 350ff. 4Franz Pieper, Christliche Dogmatik (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1920), III, pp. 569-626. 165 they may not, through their laziness and infidelity, become guilty of contributing to the eternal damnation of those who are lost (Ezekiel 3:18, 19); second, the warning to all Christians to accept responsibility for instructing, admon- ishing, and even excommunicating a brother who is living a manifestly sinful life, to keep him from losing his eternal salvation (St. Matthew 18:15—17); and, third, the warning to all Christians to live exemplary lives so that they may not become party to the eternal damnation of the world (St. Matthew 18:7).1 The United Lutheran Church in America (now a part of the Lutheran Church in America) in its symposium on Chris- tian Social ReSponsibility enunciated an ”other—worldly- this-worldly” eschatology reminiscent of Aulen. Here Lazareth Speaks of "the 'already—not yet‘ tension in which Christians live between the times of Christ's first and second coming."2 Letts, speaking in the same compendium, calls the Lord‘s Supper ”a foretaste of the kingdom” in which Christians share ”with all the company of heaven” in lIbid-, pp. 623f. 2Harold C. Letts (ed.), Christian Social Responsibil- ity, A Symposium in Three Volumes (Philadelphia: Muhlenberg Press, 1957), III, p. 49; Lazareth continues by saying that Christians already experience a foretaste of eternal life by faith in God's kingdom; yet, while Christ's victory over the powers of evil has already dethroned them decisively, he has not yet annihilated them completely. 166 the life of the new age. But he continues, ”This is but a foretaste, a partial realization of that kingdom."l Most succinctly, Letts later Speaks of salvation, stating that ”it involves leading men into obedient service in all aspects of the created world and into eager expectation of the culmination of the kingdom transcending this world.“2 It is necessary, then, to understand both the doc- trine of the ministry and that of every lay vocation within the framework of an eschatology which does not ignore the present life but does, at the same time, look for its full realization in the life of the world to come. A church- related guidance program which operates in an eschatolog- ically oriented denomination must understand this ultimate aim of the parent body. The Ministry Since Lutheran clergymen of our time subscribe to the teachings of the sixteenth—century Augsburg Confession, its statements concerning the ministry are significant for an understanding of that doctrine. Article V states that "God has instituted the office of the ministry for teaching 1Ibid., p. 194. 21bid., p. 198. 167 the Gospel and administering the sacraments.”1 [Emphases added.] In the Augsburg Confession, this doctrine of the ministry as a divine institution exists side by side with the doctrine of the universal priesthood of all believers. The confessors stated that ”the Christian church is really nothing more than the congregation of all believers."2 Since the co—existence of the doctrine of the priest- hood of all believers and the doctrine of a divinely-insti— tuted ministry has strong implications for a Lutheran guidance program, it is important to determine whether modern Lutheran thought has simply failed to repudiate a sixteenth-century position or actually expresses the co- existence of these two doctrines in responsible writings accepted throughout the church today. Therefore, the words of Aulen are relevant: Luther has emphasized even more strongly than Rome that the ministry is a divine ordinance which rests on a divine commission. . . . The ministry . . . possesses . . . an authority given to it by Christ, but this authority is not a personal possession of the minister. The min— istry is a ministry of service, a service in the church. Its function is to serve the brethren by serving the Gospel.3 1Bekenntnisschriften, p. 58. 21bid., p. 62. 3Aulen, p. 362. 168 Aulen summarizes his position, which is typical of both classical and modern Lutheranism, when he says, ”All are members of the body of Christ in the fullest sense. But this equality does not mean that a Special office of the ministry becomes superfluous.”1 The two doctrines exist side by Side in Pieper‘s work, also. ”The public ministry,” he writes, ”is not a human but a divine institution.”2 But he also says, ”Quite correctly does Hase say that, according to *evangelical doctrine' the source of 311 church power rests with the congregation.”3 Many of the professors of Systematic theology who answered the second questionnaire (see Chapter III) added comments which also Speak to this paradox. Since anonymity had not been promised, the reSpondents who voluntarily signed their names to the questionnaire are identified; the anonymity of other respondents is safeguarded. Professor M. H. Otto of the seminary at Mankato, in his comments on Benfield's brochure (see Chapter III), rec— ognizes the dilemma when he points out that it is not quite proper to put the work of a football coach or a nurse on the lIbid., p. 366. 2Pieper, III, p. 506. 31bid., p. 523. 169 level of a minister. ”By speaking thus one is obliterating the one vocation which is devoted to a direct proclamation of the GOSpel." Professor F. W. Tillmanns of the Lutheran Faculty of Theology at Saskatoon Speaks to the same point. He states that for a Christian the various vocations have ”a common element." He believes that nurses and football coaches, for example, as well as clergymen have a divine vocation but insists that ”all divine vocations are not the SAME.” Professor R. Bohlmann of St. Louis writes that one must be careful not to equate general Christian vocation with the vocation of the ministry. While there are paral- lels, the ministerial vocation is somewhat distinct. “The ministry is divinely instituted and comes into being when a man accepts the call of God's priests1 (who in turn were called to be priests by their Baptism) to minister to them and for them." In this sense, Bohlmann sees an important distinction between the call to the public ministry and the calling of the laity. Professor John P. Meyer of Mequon (Thiensville) summarizes the position expressed by the foregoing and other professors when he writes: 1By priests he means all believers; ”the priesthood of all believers." 170 The call into the Ministry, as far as God's "summons” is concerned, is not anything Special; but in its work the holy Ministry is in a class by itself (cf. the required qualifications, e.g., I Tim. 3:1ff). ‘Relevant to a Lutheran guidance program, then, is the doctrine that there are both a vocatio for laymen in their work and a special, divinely—instituted office of the ministry to which some Christians are called. Vocatio The position of Luther, that of the Scholastic Lutheran theologians, and that of modern Lutheran systema- ticians concerning the doctrine of a vocatio for the laity have been documented in previous chapters. The dilemma caused by placing the doctrine of vocation and the doctrine of the ministry side by side has been delineated above.1 The Lutheran church has a strong orientation toward the life of the world to come. This orientation is communicated to peOple through the Word of God and the sacraments which are proffered to mankind through a divinely-instituted ministry. There is, accordingly, a special vocation for ministers beyond the vocation for every man. In the following section, the relationship between the doctrine of vocation and the 1Concerning an apparent conflict between two other doctrines, Aulen says, ”This tension belongs in reality to the very nature of the Christian faith,” pp. 31f. 171 doctrine of the ministry to a church—related guidance pro— gram for Lutherans will be examined. II. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS Introduction Implicit in a guidance program is the possibility that a young man who had no interest in the ministry as a profession may gain the insight that he should study to become a pastor. At the same time, a pre-theological stu— dent may come to understand that he Should enter another occupation instead. For the sake of clarity, however, the non-ministerial counselee will be considered separately from the pre—theological student at this point. The Non-Ministerial Counselee The Lutheran position, deSpite its special emphasis on the ministry, teaches that any decent and worthwhile occupation may become a Christian vocation. It suggests that a person Should seek the work for which he is best 1 . . fitted. He should not lightly leave one occupation for 1Two professors, Ahlen of Northwestern and Ludwig of Columbus, enunciate positions which make guidance toward a vocation almost imperative. The former states that each individual must serve God ”in the calling for which he is best fitted." The position of the latter implies not only guidance toward a first occupation but continued guidance while engaged in an occupation when he says, "Every Chris— tian Should ask himself whether the work he is doing is 172 another.l Implicit in each of these statements is the need for proper vocational guidance. Whether such guidance should come from the public School or from the church needs to be examined. Surely, the public school can guide a man in finding the occupation for which he is best fitted. But only the church is justified in helping him find one in which he is more likely to retain God-approved, and when he can come to this inner assurance he should render that work as 'worship‘ as done to God." 1Luther had said that a man ought not to change jobs to enter the ministry. (See Chapter II.) This has some- times been understood to mean that a person should accept his station in life and should not even change from one ”secular” occupation to another. One of the responding pro— fessors of dogmatics elucidates this point, saying, ”Some vocations may, as vocations, be pretty 'un-Christian' in many of their aSpects. Nevertheless, this is where circum- stances seem to indicate that I am to serve--for the present at least--and if my neighbor is served by my faithful per- formance of this particular work, then I still have right to regard it a holy vocation——as holy as that of preaching the gOSpel.” Another anonymous reSpondent not only clarified the situation, but also applied it to our own time. He warns that some distort Luther's position to mean that one is divinely called to a particular profession, a fixed station in life. This leads to class-stratification. He continues that this is clearly not what Luther meant. ”Each one has a Standort (a standing place) where he happens to be stand- ing, some of these are given and unalienable, such as male or female, son or daughter, in authority or under authority. Others are by choice, such as choosing to marry. But then the 'Standort' is there. The most common misconception is thus that a man has only 223 fixed 'calling.‘ What he is called upon to do depends upon his 'Standort' and what he is to do at a time and place under God. So a man may be called upon to take up arms for his country.” 173 his faith.1 Only the church can guide him to find a life's work in which his own faith will be strengthened and his witness to others will be most effective.2 A public school guidance program could not actively engage in spiritual judgments of this kind. 1This very naturally raises the question, ”Can the public schools properly provide instruction for Lutheran children if they cannot provide proper guidance for them?” The present study does not assume that the public schools cannot provide proper guidance for Lutheran youth. It would seek the churches' support for the public school guidance programs. Rather it states that Lutheran young people will benefit from a Lutheran church-related guidance program as a complement to the public school guidance work. The high school counselor’s aid is enlisted both before and after the visits to the center. (See Chapter IV.) On the other hand, Lutherans are divided on the ques— tion of Lutheran church—related schools. In one of the three large Lutheran bodies (The Lutheran Church——Missouri Synod) and in the one medium—sized Lutheran body (The Wiscon- sin Evangelical Lutheran Synod), large networks of Lutheran schools flourish. In The American Lutheran Church, there is a limited number of such schools. The Lutheran Church in America has pledged its support to the public schools rather than Lutheran parochial schools. No doubt, there are differ- ences of Opinion even within the groups named. But all Lutherans seek to supplement the public school instruction with Sunday Schools, Vacation Bible Schools, weekday instruc— tion classes, released-time programs, confirmation classes, and the like. As conscientious Lutherans would seek to supplement the ”secular” instruction of the public schools with the best religious instruction possible, so they might also seek to supplement the ongoing public school guidance program with a Lutheran church—related program. 2The Lutheran position is different from that of the Presbyterian church at this point. According to Presbyterian doctrine,cnuxza person is one of the elect, he cannot fall from grace. (Cf. Westminster Confession, Article III: "By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life, and others foreordained to everlasting death. These angels and 174 Not every Lutheran is always aware of this; one might rather say that the Lutheran church may not always be eschatological in fact, but it is consistently eschatolog— ical in principle. A Lutheran church—related program should proceed from a set of values which would seek to keep the young Lutheran out of temptation and in grace. It should not, of course, array occupations as more tempting and less tempting, more in keeping a person in a state of grace and less in doing so. But it should look at occupations along a continuum from not acceptable to highly acceptable. Except for the area at the negative pole, however, it should not seek to influence the counselee. men, thus predestinated and foreordained, are particularly and unchangeably designed; and their number is so certain and definite that it can not be either increased or dimin- ished.” Article XVII: “They whom God hath accepted in his Beloved, effectually called and sanctified by his Spirit, can neither totally nor finally fall away from the state of grace; but shall certainly persevere therein to the end, and be eternally saved." John H. Leith, Creeds of the Churchesl A Reader in Christian Doctrine from the Bible to the Present (Garden City: Doubleday and Company, 1963), pp. 198, 212.) According to Lutheran doctrine, however, such a fall from grace is both possible and even likely under cer- tain circumstances. (Cf. Augsburg Confession, Article XII: ”And they are condemned who teach that people who have been saved cannot fall away again.” Bekenntnisschriften, p. 67.) 1This is not as strange as it sounds. One can con- ceive, by analogy, of a proper public school counselor per- mitting his personal value system to be seen when a coun- selee seriously expresses a vocational goal of robbery or prostitution. 175 In the Presbyterian program, the counselee's motiva— tion for seeking a God-pleasing vocation comes from his call- ing as a Christian to redeem the world through his every day work. A Lutheran program, however, would concern itself more with the eternal salvation of the counselee. In either case, striking a balance between indoctrination and counsel- ing may be difficult.1 Lutheran churches planning a guid- ance program will need to enunciate clearly the fact that the eternal destiny of the counselee is a matter of concern for those who work in the program. Without this added fac— tor, a Lutheran guidance program would have no justification. The argument that in some areas public school guidance serv- ices are educationally or psychologically inadequate (and therefore the church needs to Sponsor guidance programs) is hardly defensible. The churches would, in such areas, per- form a greater service by assisting the public school officials in establishing and maintaining a high level pro- gram of guidance by vocal support of the public schools than they would be competing with an inadequate service. Only an argument based on the church's theology--and not one based upon the educational or psychological inadequacy of some school guidance programs—-is valid. 1And yet, the Presbyterian experience indicates that it can be done. 176 As in the Presbyterian program, the Lutheran churches would need to work closely with the high School counselors. The fine line between complementing one another and competing with one another has been maintained in the Presbyterian program. (See Chapter IV.) A Lutheran direc— tor, serving an internship in the Presbyterian program would need to pay special attention to this phase. To summarize, a Lutheran program which adds to the psychological dimensions of guidance the theological factor of a set of values concerning occupations which might jeop- ardize faith could be of significant value. The Ministerial Counselee A warning against the use of a church—related guidance program for recruitment to church vocations has been sounded in Chapter I. And yet, it is precisely in relation to church vocations that there is a critical need. Until recently, the churches did not seek to ascertain in a systematic fashion whether a young person was really Suited to a church vocation. His academic ability and his moral life were, of course, observed. His expressed interests were examined superficially. But the question of whether this person really had the intellectual capacity to pursue studies in a seminary, whether his measured interests matched his assumed interest in the church vocation, whether 177 his personality was such that its needs would be met in the ministry or in other church-related occupations, and whether he was the kind of person who would be successful in inter— personal relations in the ministry--all these were ignored until recently.1 With an awakening interest in psychology and psychological testing, at least one seminary used the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory as a screening device for admissions. Even the psychologically sound program of the Lutheran Church in America has the negative tone implicit in a screening program. Inevitably, such a program concerns itself with identifying those who Should 233 study for the ministry but fails to identify many who Should. Such a pro— gram considers only those who have expressed a desire to enter the ministry. This will very properly eliminate those who ought not to study for the ministry. It will also iden- tify as prOSpective clergy those who have expressed a desire 1On the relative predictive value of assumed inter- est versus measured interest, see Darley and Hagenah: ”The early literature of interest measurement, so well summarized by Fryer up to 1931, was full of studies dealing with the lack of 'permanence' of expressed interests,” p. 37. ”The counselor is often plagued by cases in which little or no consonance exists between claimed and measured interests," p. 61. "Claimed interests have somewhat less permanence over time than measured interests," p. 75. 2See Lyle K. Henry and Donald R. Ortner, ”Student Counseling Program in Twenty Iowa Colleges,” Proceedings of the Iowa Academy of Science, Volume 68 (1961), p. 550. 178 and complete the screening process successfully.l But it cannot identify those young peOple of the church who should consider the ministry but have not expressed such a desire; nor does it concern itself with those who may not be aware of their potential interests and abilities for the ministry or other church vocations. It is proposed, therefore, that a Lutheran guidance program, while carefully avoiding any kind of recruitment, follow up any indications of an interest in the ministry. A properly qualified counselor will understand the signif— icance of the minister scale on the Strong Vocational Inter— est Blank and will consider it carefully in the light of adjoining scales, general patterns, and the position of the MF scale.2 He will in counseling and by further tests attempt to identify those who should be led to gain an in— sight into the ministry or other church vocations as a lSee, however, Ethical Standards of Psychologists, p. 41: ”Multiple loyalties and responsibilities are in- herent in the work of clinical and consulting psychologists. The difficulty often arises when the interests of an institution or organization are in conflict with the inter— ests of an individual.” 2The use of other proper interest measures is not meant to be excluded by this reference to the SVIB. Only one of a number of possible methods for identifying poten- tial theological students is suggested. 179 possible life's work.1 For the church, as for other institutions, self- preservation is essential. Existing programs2 which engage only in Screening those who have expressed a desire to enter the ministry will properly eliminate those who should not serve in a church vocation. But they will at the same time reduce the number of available clergymen. This may lead to one or both of two tempting situations: a reduction of standards for pretheological students in the screening proc- ess and an emotionally charged (and therefore potentially dangerous) enlistment program. The proposed program, on the other hand, seeks to work with all the young people of the church and will, consequently, identify those who have the capabilities for the ministry but have not expressed them. To avoid recruitment, it would be proper to offer to coun- selees identified by the program as potential ministerial candidates the name and address of the denomination‘s 1As such a counselor would seek to establish, for example, a measured interest on the SVIB in engineering by further counseling and by utilization of other instruments (such as the Engineering and Physical Sciences Aptitude Test), so would he also attempt to ascertain potential for the ministry and other church vocations by additional coun- seling and by other instruments. See Alvin Hall Smith, "The Development and Validation of an Attitude Scale for Ministers," unpublished doctoral dissertation, Graduate School of the University of Missouri, 1961. 2The program of the Lutheran Church in America is described in Chapter I. 180 department of enlistment so that they may receive further information about church vocations if, upon reflection, they wish to do so. It would be essential that each counselee . . . 1 make the contact With the department of enlistment himself. SUMMARY An eschatologically-oriented church body is not concerned simply with the earthly welfare of its peOple. It has a great concern for “the life of the world to come.” To this end, members of the church need to consider not only occupations in which they can find their greatest fulfill— ment, but also those in which their own faith is least likely to be jeopardized and their opportunity for bringing the GOSpel to bear upon the lives of others is most enhanced. The guidance program proposed in Chapter IV would tend to eliminate certain occupations but would still permit a wide latitude in a choice of vocations. The choice, within lim— itations, would be made wisely with the help of proper 1There would be no objection to furnishing the counselee with a postal reply card, addressed to the depart- ment of enlistment, which he could complete and mail. 181 psychological services. An eschatologically—oriented church body is also concerned with maintaining a sufficient number of clergymen and other professional church workers. Screening devices in use at present are helpful in keeping from the ministry those who (within the limitation of predictive instruments) would not fit well into pastorates. Their use, however, will inevitably contribute to a condition in which an increasing number of congregations are without pastors. On the other hand, a Lutheran guidance program would identify those who have not expressed a desire for the ministry but whose measured interests and growing insights should lead them to consider it. Such a program, however, is not justifiable if it provides no further services to those who have neither potential nor interest in full-time church work. It must offer to all the young people who enter the program proper counseling services for all those vocations which are not 1One might ask whether such a church—related guid- ance program were valid also for other denominations. As has been pointed out, it is the eschatological orientation of Lutheranism which makes such a program desirable. Denominations which are less concerned with ”the life of the world to come" and those for whom their eternal destiny is a foregone conclusion (see Note 2, Page 173) might have no need at all for such a program. This would properly be the subject for another study. 182 in direct conflict with their faith.1 Of equal importance are the theologically sound orientation of such a program and its psychological and educational validity. Accreditation by the proper agencies (see Chapter IV) is a necessary safeguard for the latter. An understanding of the relationship between the vocation of all Christians and the divine institution of the ministry in an eschatologically—oriented church-body is an indispen- sable condition for the former. A Lutheran program without a sound psychological and theological basis would be a dis— service to the church and its young people. It is recom— mended that the Lutheran churches establish a church-related guidance program based upon their theology and consonant with sound psychological principles. 1The counselor must, however, maintain the profes- sional distance which his own vocation demands. He is not there to plant the faith but to help the counseleee to define, live, and understand the limits of a faith he al- ready has. It is not the counselor's role to be dogmatic but to help the counselee to a more mature understanding of what he believes. Whatever the outcome, the confiden- tiality of the counselor-counselee relationship is invi— olable also at this point. BIBLIOGRAPHY Books A.B.C. of Youth Work. Chicago: Walther League, 1949. Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie. Leipzig: Duncker & Humbolt, 1890. Entry on Schleiermacher. Allport, Gordon W. "Psychological Models for Guidance," Harvard Educational Review, XXXII, No. 4 (Fall, 1962), 373ff. Arbuckle, Dugald S. Pupil Personnel Services in American Schools. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1962. Aulen, Gustaf. The Faith of the Christian Church. Translated by Eric Wahlstrom from the fifth Swedish edition. Philadelphia: The Muhlenberg Press, 1960. Baier, J.W. Compendium Theologiae Positivae. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1879. (First published, 1686.) ' Bainton, Roland H. Here I Stand. New York: Abingdon— Cokesbury Press, 1950. Barry, Ruth and Wolf, Beverly. An Epitaph for Vocational Guidance. New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, 1962. Barth, Karl. Church Dogmatics. Translated by T.H.L. Parker et a1. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1936-1962. Credo, A Presentation of the Chief Problems of Dogmatics with Reference to the Apostles' Creed. Translated by J. Strathearn McNab. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1936. Bekenntnisschriften der Evangelisch—Lutherischen Kirche. thtingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1963. 183 184 Bengel, Johann A. Gnomon Novi Testamenti. TUbingen: FUS, 1855. (First published, 1742.) . Gnomon of the New Testament. Translated by Lewis and Vincent. Philadelphia: Perkinpine and Higgins, 1864. Benson, J. Victor. The Conference on Lutheran Psychological Services. New York: Board of’Theological Education, Lutheran Church in America, 1960. . A Manual of Notations on Psycholggical Services for Church Vocations Study Committees. New York: Board of Theological Education, The Lutheran Church in America, n.d. The Richmond Conference on the Development of Model Guidance Services for Church Occupations Candidates. New York: Board of Theological Education, Lutheran Church in America, 1962. Bishop of Oslo (ed.). .Luther Speaks. Essays by Lutheran pastors in Britain. London: Lutterworth Press, 1947. Boehmer, Heinrich. Luther in Light of Recent Research. New York: The Christian Herald Publishing Company, 1916. . Road to Reformation. Philadelphia: Muhlenberg Press, 1946. Boggs, Wade H., Jr. All Ye Who Labor. Richmond: John Knox Press, 1961. Boyer, Merle W. Luther in Protestantism Today. New York: Association Press, 1958. Brauer, Jerald C. and Pelikan, Jaroslav. The Lutheran Reformation. Chicago: Commission on College and University Work, The Lutheran Church--Missouri Synod, and Division of College and University Work, The National Lutheran Council, 1963. Bretschneider, Karl Gottlieb. Handbuch der Dogmatik der ev.-luth. Kirche, usw. Leipzig: Barth, 1828. 185 Brunner, Emil. The Christian Doctrine of God (Dogmatics, Volume IJ) The Christian Doctrine of Creation and Redemption (Dogmaticsj Volume 11,) The Christian Doctrine of the Church, Faith, and the Consummation (DogmaticsI Volume III). Translated by Olive Wyon, David Cairns, and T.H.L. Parker. London: Lutterworth Press, 1949-1962. Buddeus, John Francis. Institutiones Theologiae Dogmaticae. Leipzig: Fritsch, 1724. Calhoun, Jay R. The Philosophy of Guidance and Recruitment. Indianapolis: The United Christian Missionary Society. Calov, Abraham. Systema Locorum Theologicorum. Wittenberg: Hartmann, 1655. Carpov, Jakob. Theologia Revelata Dogmatica. Frankfurt: Melchior, 1737. Cohen, Arthur A. (ed.). A Handbook of Christian Theology. New York: Meridian Books, Inc., 1958. Collins, Betsy and Cuppy, A.C. The Local Church Procedures. Indianapolis: The United ChriStian Missionary Society, n.d. Concordia Cyclopedia. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, n.d. Entry on Schleiermacher. Cullmann, Oscar. The Christology of the New Testament. Translated by S.C. Guthrie and C.A.M. Hall. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1959. Dannhauer, Johann Konrad and Schertzer, Johann Adam. Hodosophia Christiana seu Theologica Positiva. Leipzig: Tarnow, 1704. Dorner, Isaak A. A System of Christian Doctrine. Translated by Cave and Banks. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1888. . A System of Christian Ethics. Translated by Mead and Cunningham. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1887. Elert, Werner. The Structure of Lutheranism. Translated by Walter Hansen. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1962. 186 Fife, Robert Herndon. The Revolt of Martin Luther. New York: Columbia University Press, 1957. Frank, Fr.H.R. System der christlichen Wahrheit. Erlangen: Deichert, 1878. Funck-Brentano, Frantz. Luther. Translated by E.F. Buckley. London: Jonathan Cape, 1936. Gerhard, Johann. Locorum Theologicorum. TUbingen: Cotta, 1775. Grisar, Hartmann. Martin Luther, His Life and Work. Westminster, Md.: The Newman Press, 1950. Hageman, Howard G. Our Reformed Church. New York: Board of Education, Reformed Church in America, n.d. Hagglund, Bengt. Die heilige Schrift und ihre Deutung in der Theologie Johann Gerhards, Eine Untersuchung fiber das altlutherische Schriftsverstflndnis. Lund: Berlingska, 1951. Hahn, August. Lehrbuch deS christlichen Glaubens. Leipzig: Vogel, 1858. Heerbrand, Jakob. Abhandlung der Lehre von der gnadigen Wahl oder Prfidestination. Translated by J. Gnadekind. St. Louis: Volkening, 1873. Hendry, George S. God the Creator. London: Hodder and Staughton, 1937. Hodgson, Leonard. The Doctrine of the Trinity. London: Nisbet and Company, Ltd., 1943. Hoenecke, Adolph. Ev.—Luth. Dogmatik. Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 1909. Hollaz, David. Examen Theologicum Acromaticum &c. Leipzig: Breitkopf, 1763. Huelsemann, Johannes. De Auxiliis gratiae &c. Frankfurt: (no publisher given) 1705. Hunnius, Nikolaus. Glaubenslehre. Nbrdlingen: Beck, 1870. 187 Hutson, Percival W. The Guidance Function in Education. New York: Appleton—Century-Crofts, 1958. Hutter, Leonard. Compendium Locorum Theologicorum. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1961. The Hymnbook, Published by the Presbyterian Church in the United States, Presbyterian Church in the United States of America, United Presbyterian Church of North America, Reformed Church in America. Richmond, 1955. Jacobs, Henry Eyster. A Summary of the Christian Faith. Philadelphia: General Council Publication House, 1905. Jenkins, W.L. The Church and Vocation. Philadelphia: Division of Vocation, Board of Christian Education, The United Presbyterian Church, U.S.A., 1962. Johnson, Mauritz, Jr., Busacker, William E., and Bowman, Fred Q. Junior High School Guidance. New York: Harper & Bros., 1961. - Johnson, Walter F., Stefflre, Buford, and Edelfelt, Roy A. Pupil Personnel and Guidance Services. New York: McGraw—Hill, 1961. Kaftan, Julius. Dogmatik. TUbingen: Mohr, 1901. Kahnis, K.F.A. Die Lutherische Dogmatik. Leipzig: Ddrffling & Franke, 1864. Kemp, Charles F. "The Role of the Psychologist.” Indianapolis: The United Christian Missionary Society, n.d. Koestlin, Julius. The Theology of Luther in its Historical Development and Inner Harmony. Translated by Charles E. Hay. Philadelphia: Lutheran Publication Society, 1897. Kuiper, Barend K. Martin Luther. Grand Rapids: The Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1943. Lange, Johann Peter. Christliche Dogmatik. Heidelberg: Universitats Buchhandlung von Karl Winter, 1849-1852. Letts, Harold C. (ed.). Christian Social Responsibility. Philadelphia: Muhlenberg Press, 1957. 188 Luther, Martin. sammtliche Schriften. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1910. McNeer, May and Ward, Lynd. Martin Luther. New York: The Abingdon Press, 1953. Maritain, Jacques. Three Reformers. No translator given. New York: Scribner's, 1929. Martensen, Hans Larsen. Christian Dogmatics. Original in Danish; translator not given. Edinburgh: Clark, 1890. Mathewson, Robert Hendry. Guidance Policy and Practice. New York: Harper and Row, 1962. Meisner, Balthas. De statu naturae hum. BL/(a'pw'rrvolaocq disputationes. Wittenberg: Gormann,1618. /’ Meyer, John P. Dogmatics Notes. Mequon, Wisconsin: Seminary Mimeograph Co., 1941—1956. Mueller, J.T. Christian Dogmatics. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1934. Nitzsch, Carl I. System der christlichen Lehre. Bonn: Marcus, 1837. Nygren, Anders (ed.). This is the Church. Translated by Carl C. Rasmussen. Philadelphia: Muhlenberg Press, 1952. von Oettingen, Alexander K. System der christlichen Heilswahrheit. MUnchen, Beck, 1902. Pelon, Grace and Stryker, Elsie B. Our Church at Work. New York: Board of Education, Reformed Church in America, n.d. Pfleiderer, Otto. Das Wesen der Religion. Leipzig: PBS, 1869. Pieper, Francis. Christian Dogmatics. Translator not given. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1950— 1957. Pieper, Franz. Christliche Dogmatik. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1920. 189 Prenter, Regin. Skabelse og Genlpsning. Dogmatik. Translated into German by C. Boehncke-Sjbberg. GUttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1958. . Spiritus Creator. Translated by John M. Jensen. Philadelphia: The Muhlenberg Press, 1953. Presbyterian Guidance Program Handbook. Richmond: Board of Christian Education, Presbyterian Church, U.S., 1963. Preus, Herman A. and Smits, Edmund. The Doctrine of Man in Classical Lutheran Theology. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1962. Quenstedt, Andreas. Theologica—didacticoepoelmico sive systema theologicum. Wittenberg: (no publisher given) 1685. Ramsey, Paul. Basic Christian Ethics. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1950. Reisinger, Donald. The State Procedures. Indianapolis: The United Christian Missionary Society, n.d. Reviews of Preliminary Studies by Pilot Project Synod Subcommittees. New York: Board of Theological Education, The Lutheran Church in America, 1961. Robinson, John Arthur. Honest to God. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1963. Schaller, John. Pastorale Praxis in der ev.—1uth. Freikirche Amerikas. Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 1913. Schleiermacher, Friedrich. The Christian Faith. Translator not given. Edinburgh: Clark, 1928—1960. Schlink, Edmund. Theology of the Lutheran Confessions. Translated by P.F. Koehneke and H.J.A. Bouman. Philadelphia: Muhlenberg Press, 1961. Schmid, Heinrich. The Doctrinal Theology of the Evangelical Lutheran Church. Translated by C.A. Hay and H.E. Jacobs. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1961. 190 Schwiebert, E.G. Luther and His Times. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1950. ' Stair, Fred Rogers, Jr. The Christian in his Daily Work. Richmond: Department of Christian Vocation, The Presbyterian Church, U.S., n.d. Stoops, Emory and Wahlquist, Gunnar L. Principles and Practices in Guidance. New York: McGraw—Hill, 1958. Strauss, David F. Die christliche Glaubenslehre in ihrer geschichtlichen Entwicklung usw. TUbingen: Osiander, 1840. .Tillich, Paul. Systematic Theology. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1953—1963. Twesten, A.D.C. Vorlesungen Uber die Dogmatik der ev.— 1uth. Kirche nach dem Compendium de Wettes. Hamburg: Perthes, 1837. Valentine, Milton. Christian Theology. Philadelphia: Lutheran Publication Society, 1906. Vocation and Ministry. Philadelphia: Division of Vocation, Board of Christian Education, The United Presbyterian Church, U.S.A., 1961. Voigt, Heinrich. Fundamentaldogmatik. Gotha: Perthes, 1874. Walther, C.F.W. Die Stimme unserer Kirche in der Frage von Kirche und Amt. Zwickau: Verlag der ev.-1uth. Gemeinden in Sachsen, 1894. Wegscheider, Julius A.L. Institutiones Theologiae Christianae Dogmaticae. Halle: Gebauer, 1833. Weidner, Revere Franklin. An Introduction to Dogmatic Theology, based on Luthardt. Rock Island: Augustana Publishing House, 1895. Whale, J.S. Christian Doctrine. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1944. Williamson, E.G. Student Personnel Services in Colleges and Universities. New York: McGraw—Hill, 1961. 191 Wingren, Gustaf. Luther on Vocation. Translated by Carl C. Rasmussen. Philadelphia: The Muhlenberg Press, 1957. Wrenn, C. Gilbert. The Counselor in a Changing World. Washington: The American Personnel and Guidance Association, 1962. Other Sources American Baptist Convention, Valley Forge, Pa. ”Guidance and Recruitment Program,” 1962. Letter from Robert D. Rasmussen, December 24, 1963. American Psychological Association. ”Ethical Standards of Psychologists.” 1953. Anderson College. ."Is God Calling You?” n.d. ”It All Adds Up." n.d. The Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), United Christian Missionary Society, Indianapolis, Ind. ”The Campus Ministry.” n.d. "The Christian Ministry.” n.d. ”Disciples' Guidance and Recruitment Program." n.d. ”The Institutional Chaplaincy.” n.d. ”The Military Chaplaincy.” n.d. “The Ministry of Christian Education." n.d. "The Ministry of Church Music.” n.d. ”The Ministry of Home Mission.” n.d. ”The Ministry of Social Work.” n.d. "The Ministry of World Mission.” n.d. "The Pastoral Ministry." n.d. "Program of Guidance and Recruitment.” n.d. 192 Church of the Brethren. Personal correspondence with Joseph M. Long, Elgin, Illinois. January 1964. Evangelical United Brethren Church. Personal correSpondence with J.A. Heck, Dayton, Ohio. January 1964. Lutheran Church--Missouri Synod. Personal interview with Reuben W. Hahn, Chicago. March 1964. Methodist Church, Interboard Committee on Christian Vocations, Nashville. Interboard Committee on Christian Vocations. n.d. Moravian Church in America, North. Personal correspondence with John S. Groenfeldt, Bethlehem, Penn. January 1964. Presbyterian Church, U.S., Board of Christian Education, Presbyterian Guidance Program. Personal interviews with Alvin Hall Smith, Hampden-Sydney, Va. April, May, June, 1964. Personal interview with Dallas Smith. March 1964. . Pre-Counseling Kit. Richmond: Board of Christian Education, 8 North Sixth St. Protestant Episcopal Church, The National Council, Episcopal Church Center. "Are You a Many-Sided Man?" n.d. ”Consider the Church.” n.d. ________ "Facing Up to the Need for Professionally Trained Church Workers.” n.d. "Job Opportunities.” n.d. ”Live Option for You?" n.d. United Church of Canada, The Interboard Committee on Recruiting for Church Vocations, Toronto. “Careers in the Church.“ n.d. ”Eternal Destiny.” n.d. "The Ministry of Education.” n.d. ”Specialized Ministries.” n.d. United Church of Christ, Stewardship Council and Council for Church and Ministry. "Our Ministry to Ministers." n.d. . Personal correspondence with George Nishimoto. January 1964. APPENDIX A SEMINARIES CO—OPERATING IN THE STUDY 194 SEMINARIES CO—OPERATING IN THE STUDY Lutheran Church in America The Central Lutheran Theological Seminary, Fremont, Nebraska Hamma Divinity School, Springfield, Ohio Lutheran School of Theology, Maywood Campus, Maywood, Illinois Lutheran School of Theology, Rock Island Campus, Rock Island, Illinois Lutheran Theological Seminary, Gettysburg, Pennsylvania Lutheran Theological Seminary, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Lutheran Theological Southern Seminary, Columbia, South Carolina Northwestern Lutheran Theological Seminary, Minneapolis, Minnesota Pacific Lutheran Theological Seminary, Berkeley, California Lutheran Seminary, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan Waterloo Lutheran Seminary, Waterloo, Ontario. American Lutheran Church The Evangelical Lutheran Theological Seminary, Columbus, Ohio Luther Theological Seminary, St. Paul, Minnesota Wartburg Theological Seminary, Dubuque, Iowa Luther Theological Seminary, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. Lutheran Church--Missouri Synod The The Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, Missouri Concordia Theological Seminary, Springfield, Illinois. Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary, Mequon, Wisconsin. Evangelical Lutheran Synod Bethany Lutheran Seminary, Mankato, Minnesota. APPENDIX B TEXTBOOKS USED IN SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY COURSES 196 TEXTBOOKS USED IN SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY COURSES (As reported by the co—operating seminaries) Number of Seminaries Using Text 13 1 NM NNNNNNUJ OJ 04-50000 HPHF‘HF‘F‘HF‘P‘H F‘H HF‘P‘ Name of Author and Text Aulen, The Faith of the Christian Church Brunner, Dogmatics Barth, Church Dogmatics Pieper, Christian Dogmatics Tillich, Systematic Theology Nygren, This is the Church Cullmann, The Christology of the New Testament Schmid, The Doctrinal Theology of the EvangeliCal Lutheran Church Book of Concord Barth, Credo Kbberle, Quest for Holiness Niebuhr, (title not identified) Prenter, Dogmatik Robinson, Honest to God Schlink, Theology of the Lutheran Confessions Wingren, Luther on Vocation World Council of Churches, One Lord, One Baptism Althaus, The Last Things Aulen, Christus Victor Baille, God Was in Christ Baille, Theology of the Sacraments Barclay, Promise of the Spirit Brunner, Eternal Hopg Brunner, Man in Revolt Bultmann, (title not identified) Cave, The Christian Estimate of Man Cohen, A Handbook of Christian Theology Cullmann, Christ and Time Dewar, The Holy Spirit in Modern Thought Edwards, Honest to God Debate Elert, The Structure of Lutheranism Fendt, Study Guide and Outline of Dogmatics Heinecken, Beginning and End of the World Number of Seminaries Using Text 1 HrahawrakaHraka HF‘F‘HPH HF‘F‘HP‘F‘HF‘ 197 Name of Author and Text Hendry, God the Creator Hodgson, The Doctrine of the Trinity Hoenecke, Ev. Luth. Dogmatik Jensen, Eschatology Kantonen, The Christian Hope Kantonen, Life after Death Kierkegaard,(tit1e not identified) Kittle, Bible Keywords Knox, Jesus, Lord and Christ Lehman, Meaning and Practice of the Lord's Supper MacKintosh, Types of Modern Theology Meyer, Dogmatics Notes Based on Hoenecke Mueller, Christian Dogmatics Pelikan, From Luther to Kierkegaard Pelikan, The Shape of Death Reu, Dogmatics Schleiermacher, On Religiopg Speeches to its Cultured Despisers Stump, The Christian Faith Taylor, Forgiveness and Reconciliation Walther, Law and Gospel Weidner, Christology Welch, In His Name Welsh, Reality in the Church Whale, ChfiStian Doctrine Wright, God Who Acts In addition, one seminary states that its students must work through the systematic theology either of Tillich or of Brunner. APPENDIX C QUESTIONNAIRE SENT TO SEMINARY PRESIDENTS 199 Name of Seminary: Textbook(s) used in classes in Dogmatics (by whatever name): Faculty Hembers who teach Dogmatics courses (by whatever name): Please return to: Donald R. Ortner Dean of Students Hampden—Sydney College Eampden—Sydney, Virginia 23943 A stamped, self—addressed envelope is enclosed. NAEY THANKS! . 0 ‘ ‘ ... . ... ‘1‘. ’ ,.., . .... . ~ . . _‘ .. .- ._ .. , - pv- - ‘ . . - _ , C‘ ‘ .. . . I d . . . .. . APPENDIX.D QUESTIONNAIRE SENT TO PROFESSORS OF SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY COURSES Box 5 201_ Hampden-Sydney, Virginia Reverend and Dear Sir: Your kindness in completing the questionnaire below and returning it to me in the enclosed enveIOpe will be deeply appreciated. This is part of a doctoral study on vocations. This particular portion examines the idea that there may be a return to Luther in our understanding of Christian vocation. If you feel that the limits imposed by a questionnaire cannot adequately reflect your views, kindly express your views on the reverse side of this sheet. Do try to answer the questions, though, if you possibly can. As I am sure you realize, projects like this are done on a time schedule. Your reply at your early convenience will be most helpful. ReSpectfully yours, Donald R. Ortner (1) Do you believe the following quotation from Brauer and Pelikan, The Lutheran Reformation, adequately describes Luther's position on the Calling (vocatio) of the laity ? "In Lutheran piety at its best, such church membership was not restricted to questions of church attendance and the like. What the Reformation sought to achieve in the common life of Christian peOple was an interpretation of its duties as calls from God, so that as citizen, father, or workman a man worked in response to God's call. No longer were the clergy the sole possessors of a divine vocation; any honorable work could now be a calling from God, however humble or menial it might appear in the eyes of men..." ( ) Yes, I believe this is essentially Luther's position. ( ) No, I do not believe this is Luther's position. ( ) See comments on the reverse side of this sheet (2) Do you believe Lutheran pastors today generally teach a vocatio for the laity similar to that which is credited to Luther in the quotation above 2 ( ) Yes, I believe Lutheran pastors teach this kind of a vocatio. ( ) No, I do not believe that Lutheran pastors teach this. ( ) See comments on the reverse side of this sheet (3) Do you believe Lutheran pastors should teach a vocatio for the laity ? ( ) Yes, I do ( ) No, I do not ( ) See comments on reverse side (4) Kindly examine the enclosed very brief brochure, "A New Look at Vocation" by William.A. Benfield, Jr. (Do 22$ return the brochure.) Would you say ( ) This is in harmony with current Lutheran theology ? ( ) This is acceptable in a general way 2 ( ) This is generally unacceptable ? ( ) This is not at all in harmony with current Lutheran theology ? -----------C------..-------THANK You so VERY WC“-------C----. ....... -------.---- :118 sued but D‘OIUU.‘ “I, n‘J finlisfqmoa n! seashell 1'0? '20. ...' ”l .‘ "‘ .J ’ . ‘3 m" MN" t “3" ‘4 ‘1 .‘A 'LA' "f07’j"- ': 59'. " ”I‘d 'tqfilfi‘vnn 5.00130. “3 I. lnfl‘ " "2. ".'v ; f‘. nu- .zftn‘.* ' 'ku .cnitvnaov no ibuvl 1.10339. . V: "- W. .:.’ ". A t. . ‘ '. .'.‘.:‘.‘-.":l u' '7. I'I‘Hcf 4‘ "MDT! 0. Rd (It "0‘, .2v;a: ,, . 2. ..vnt':~:z r .! w-.vq:t a~i~iz ‘3) Jon: Inc] nor 3! .x.. -L.~ «.av-‘ : v .s .4 ”'pf “:31519 virr A ruulv nuov 13013.1 .n .;:' ""i:ho :' .I .55‘ .9“'tJ‘JL‘ sdJ :9?! u a: ‘13 on .Joodl - " j":' s - 3 -'-. §.. 31"; ~'." '.._2 ‘1‘ ,. 'Iarw. uov Mun ml .1' 'cu .; . -i 2" ’\.Uv’vviJOJ .lzsa .uog :A liq)! . ‘ (1’; . ' .‘i‘l' . . O.” .. . ..... . ...... . ...i. . ...-......-..:...'-..-4..-- ..‘......... o—-—.....-.o--- in; ,r“ ' h “: .~v"3 .11: {1 »‘fi sriwvl‘ 7 -' "viilaw‘uuv 00 (I) ": "a . d . '.ifi;v “ I" ' “ -’ 'JHcibn '{Lilifiiliii grdsdlui ~- I ‘Vw In .rwlnIpv: 3wl;is3 w 'd‘t.3:.~n u: u" J-ur .";H 2" Jo ; liq ‘fit9i3ul ;i .-fi i ‘,: 1c: 1:: ‘"-3a - r-;_ .t w.t' ~un )3 * :va3397 In" ' - t- ' u' u .1 -"~fi- Np - ' 3 L v~.-1‘ul 'nric 39" “1‘: f-rf. 5: .. T0,. -‘~i‘ .- I” -‘ c) v . ,-..=.’ {Hm-3'3 .".'..3‘..'.":.'3.J - 4 ~- . . g r ~ . .-- . - 1'. ..v.vxils :—."»'. ':~ -,ua'. was} '.:' '-f-i- “ ' 2'" ' .I'l-rn 4"“ b: «hummus :71 run liz- :.u' G!‘.tu. ‘ v. .v“ i , n islt'u ”F ainhzseanq “r a . “’f. p! . 3 :z z. r -. " ‘:z t .Un- '-:‘ : r176! a 9d ...‘ ‘-. .7“ '0‘.;) Q": ‘X‘ .-:-- . ~52 ‘; ‘ .--. 1 -‘fl: susiluJ T .eaV ( ) .n“’J.Z;j .' ' ' :1 vil~ w;~!f-\ 36a ab 2 .o“ f ) 1:914 .- 9 :. ."» su:svna QLJ up savanna) nod ( l 333 :*1 gggiwng 1 1""I {tfn: n'o rung! ewczchq cluelful availed you on (S) t 1 no u':J:: up aa‘ er xwuiui a: nulibu!) :1 3,239 :54: u; mallnla 111s! fs-ni b1nnzsq rsvndzhd ova/fed 2 ,eeY ( ) .:~.":1.':‘:.I_ : '30 [mill ”.1” .xlda ncnsJ~aznlchw ncquJuJ Jail ovo:Iad Jon oh I ,ofl ( J 150d; 3153 In ob): vsuavoy sd: no afinmnso: one ( ) hiyndc 310'151 cassd:iu evsllsd no! on (C) ' .ofi ( 3 Oh I .30! ( I V 2130] 9d) 103 gligggz a dose: ) )0" (:1) at}: caravar no aJnannn) ask ( “rol:n>oV in inn! as? L' ,SILHJQ1d 19114 vvsv bsanlons adj animus. 1‘5013 (9) {.nrudoord ed: n1ufie: 122 on) .wl .61013058 .A usltliv {I 'noi¢fld: anaadJnJ Jnc1uua 531w guessed n! at all? ( } V new isaanon a at exdnaqsaa- 01 01‘! t I t oldaanananu {listen-3 03 all! ( 3 9 (gained: nastfl3uJ Jnoasv: d:lw {unawad u: 11. so can .3 all! 1‘). -----v*- ... nO-~--O¢eoo--¢"‘"’-00R5'M Ym 03 WY ”mm. ' (an up! blun' .- O APPENDIX E ORGANIZATIONAL CHART OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, U.S. 203 ORGANIZATIONAL CHART OF THE BOARD OF CHRISTIAN EDUCATION PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, U.S. (Showing the Separation of Enlistment from Vocation)1 DIVISION OF CHRISTIAN TEACHING DIVISION OF MEN'S WORK DIVISION OF HIGHER EDUCATION Rev. John B. Evans, Secretagy Rev. Robert Bluford, Jr., Acting Secretary Rev. Robert Bluford, Jr., Director of Campus Christian Life Rev. H. Davis Yeuell, Associate, Campps Christian Life Mr. Dallas H. Smith, Director of Christian Vocation Rev. Logan V. Cockrum, ASSociate Director, ChristiEn Vocation Rev. James 0. Speed, Jr., Director, Department of Enlistment Miss Katheiine A. See, Associate for Student Aid DIVISION OF CHRISTIAN ACTION DIVISION OF PUBLICATION DIVISION OF CHURCH RELATIONS DIVISION OF FIELD SERVICE 1103rd Annual Report of the Board of Christian Education Submitted to the 104th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the Unifed States (Richmond: Board -ofiChfiStian Education, Presbyterian Building, 1964), pp. 2-4. Born: Education: Elementary: Secondary: College: Experience: VITA DONALD RICHARD ORTNER September 2, 1922 at Bay City, Michigan. St. Lorenz' Lutheran School, Frankenmuth, Michigan, 1928-1936. Michigan Lutheran Seminary, Saginaw, 1936— 1940. Northwestern College, Watertown, Wisconsin, 1940-1944. B.A. Majors: English, History, German, Latin, Greek. Illinois Wesleyan University, Bloomington, Summers, 1942-1946. B.M. Major: Organ. Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary, Mequon, 1944- 1947. C.R.M. (Candidate for the Holy Ministry.) Royal Conservatory of Music, University of Toronto, 1946. Graduate study in Organ and Fugue. University of Toledo, 1955. Graduate study in English. Eastern Michigan University, Ypsilanti, 1955—1957. M.A. in Education.‘ Michigan State University, East Lansing, 1957-1964. Union Theological Seminary in Virginia, Richmond, 1964. 1947-1949, Assistant Pastor, St. John's Lutheran Church, Toronto, and denominational chaplain, University of Toronto. 204 205 1949—1952, Pastor, The Lutheran Church of the Redeemer, Winnipeg, and denominational chap- lain, University of Manitoba. 1952-1954, Pastor, ChristiLutheran Church, St. Catharines, Ontario; Emmanuel Lutheran Church, Jordan, Ontario; Deutsche Evangelisch- Lutherische Gnaden-Gemeinde, St. Catharines, Ontario; and missionary to Latvian and Estonian immigrants. 1954-1957, Pastor, St. John's Lutheran Church, Waltz, Michigan. 1957—1960, Teacher of Latin and English and Counselor, St. Johns (Michigan) Public Schools. Assistant Pastor and Director of Christian Education, Grace Lutheran Church, Pontiac, Michigan. (Interim denominational chaplain, Michigan State University, 1958— 1959.) 1960—1961, Director of Counseling and Assist— ant Professor of Psychology and Greek, Morningside College, Sioux City. Assistant Pastor, Calvary Lutheran Church. 1961-1963, Associate Director to Co-Director, Presbyterian Guidance Center, Hampden-Sydney, Virginia. Instructor in Mathematics to Assistant Professor of Psychology, Hampden- Sydney College. 1961- , Pastor, St. John's Lutheran Church, Farmville, Virginia. 1963— , Dean of Students and Associate Professor of Psychology, Hampden—Sydney College. 1964- , Pastor-at-Large, The English District of The Lutheran Church—-Missouri Synod.