A Dumb Question About Pastoral Formation: From Someone You Don’t Have to Listen To

Let me begin by disqualifying myself.

I am not a pastor. I am not a seminary president. I am not a district president. And, within the Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod, I am also a woman, which means I have less of a formal voice in conversations about pastoral formation.

So, truly, you don’t have to listen to me.…But I do have a question. And it’s not a theological question, or especially complicated. It’s a question I have been asking myself because things just don’t quite add up.

If theological education has already adapted around the world, becoming more accessible, more affordable, and still rigorous through online and competency-based models, why haven’t the LCMS Seminaries followed suit?

This isn’t theoretical for me. I earned my Master of Divinity on the Kairos University platform. It was not a shortcut. It was structured, demanding, and grounded in our Lutheran Confessions. There were defined courses, required competencies, and real expectations—combining content, character, and the craft. I didn’t just attend classes; I had to demonstrate that I actually understood the material through how it shaped my character and how I applied it to ministry work. I pursued that degree not to become a pastor, of course, but because I am a biblical counselor. If I am going to speak God’s Word into someone’s suffering heart, I need to rightly handle it, as Paul instructs in 2 Timothy 2:15. Formation matters. Truth matters. God’s Word matters.

What makes this more than an abstract conversation is that my husband also completed seminary training, graduating in 2025. As a man in the LCMS, the doors were open much wider for him. Or so we thought. And yet, when it comes to the LCMS system, there is no pathway forward for him. No colloquy. No SMP. No meaningful evaluation of his education. No ordination. Not even a conversation. Just silence. 

At some point, we have to ask this question: If the issue is not education, what exactly is it? Why are there so many barriers to becoming a pastor in the LCMS? At minimum, the current system raises a difficult question: If the need for pastors is growing, why do so many barriers remain in place?

Meanwhile, outside of our internal systems, the landscape of theological education has already shifted. According to data from the Association of Theological Schools, Master of Divinity enrollment has declined significantly over the past two decades, dropping from over 32,000 students to roughly 24,000–25,000 in recent years¹. Many seminaries report ongoing enrollment pressure and shifting student demographics toward older, part-time, and non-residential learners². Even where total enrollment stabilizes, traditional residential MDiv programs continue to shrink. At the same time, online and hybrid education models have expanded rapidly, especially since 2020, as ATS-accredited schools broadly adopted distance learning in response to shifting educational demands³. In other words, the rest of the world has already adjusted.

But the conversation becomes even more sobering when we look at cost. Using publicly available ATS data, the estimated cost to educate one student per year, calculated by dividing total institutional expenses by student headcount⁴, is striking. These figures are not published per-student costs, but estimates derived from ATS-reported institutional expenses divided by enrollment, a common benchmarking method used in higher education analysis. 

At Concordia Seminary, that estimated cost is approximately $58,000 per student annually, and at Concordia Theological Seminary, it is estimated to rise to nearly $80,000 per student per year⁵. Even when accounting for endowment support, those costs remain substantial. By contrast, models like Kairos University operate at a fraction of that cost, closer to $7,000 per student annually, while still delivering accredited, competency-based theological education⁶. That is not a marginal difference. That is an entirely different category of stewardship.

So now the question becomes unavoidable: What are we actually trying to preserve?

This does not appear to be a question of whether rigorous, accessible theological education is possible. It clearly is. Nor is it a question of whether the need exists. Jesus Himself makes that plain in Matthew 9:37: “The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few.” The issue is not whether workers are needed. The issue is whether we are making room to form them.

There is a common concern that expanding online education would somehow undermine residential seminaries. That it would “torpedo” the system. But that argument raises a deeper issue. If a model cannot withstand the presence of a more accessible option, then perhaps the problem is not the alternative. Perhaps the problem is that we have confused a preferred model with a theological necessity.

Scripture does not command a delivery method for pastoral education. It commands fidelity to the Word. It commands proclamation. It commands the making of disciples. In John 15:7, Jesus speaks of His Word abiding in His people, not of His people conforming to a single educational structure. And yet, functionally, we are operating as though formation only counts if it happens in one particular way, in one particular place, under one particular system.

At the same time, we are facing real and growing challenges. Congregations remain vacant. Church planting efforts are constrained. Many individuals who sense a call to serve simply cannot uproot their lives, relocate their families, and absorb the financial burden required for residential education. Not because they lack commitment, but because they live in reality.

So again, the question remains: If we are not going to recognize alternative pathways, and we are narrowing existing ones, why are we not building accessible, rigorous, confessionally faithful online pathways within our own seminaries? Not instead of residential formation, but alongside it. This is a legitimate question.

Right now, the message feels less like careful theological discernment and more like institutional hesitation. Or, to put it more plainly, it feels like fear. Fear of change. Fear of losing control. Fear that if people are given access, they might choose differently.

But the mission of the Church has never been built on fear or limiting access. It has always been built on sending.

One final observation makes this even harder to ignore, even if it comes from a woman. Earlier this year, significant conversations around pastoral formation were already happening—gatherings where pastors, practitioners, and leaders were wrestling with these realities in real time. And yet, many of the key decision-makers were not in those rooms. Now we are hosting “listening sessions,” but in environments where the structure and flow of conversation are tightly controlled. It raises a simple but important question: Are we truly listening, or are we managing the conversation?

So here is my “dumb” question, one more time. Please excuse me for it.

Why won’t our seminaries offer a rigorous, accessible, confessionally faithful online pathway for pastoral formation? Not a watered-down version. Not easier. Just something accessible and affordable.

The need is not going away. The harvest is still plentiful. And the question before us is not whether God is raising up workers. It’s whether we are willing to make room for them.

uniteleadership.org

---

Sources & Notes

¹. The Association of Theological Schools, Annual Data Tables (2005–2023), Table 2.1, “Enrollment by Degree Program,” accessed April 30, 2026, https://www.ats.edu/Annual-Data-Tables.

². The Association of Theological Schools, Annual Data Tables, documenting long-term enrollment trends and demographic shifts in theological education, accessed April 30, 2026, https://www.ats.edu/Annual-Data-Tables.

³. The Association of Theological Schools, institutional reporting and data collected through Annual Report Forms reflecting expanded online and hybrid delivery models across member schools, summarized in Annual Data Tables, accessed April 30, 2026, https://www.ats.edu/Annual-Data-Tables.

⁴. The Association of Theological Schools, Annual Data Tables, Table 1.2, “Total Expenses,” accessed April 30, 2026, https://www.ats.edu/Annual-Data-Tables. Cost-per-student estimates are derived by dividing total institutional expenses by student headcount, a standard benchmarking method in higher education analysis.

⁵. Cost estimates for Concordia Seminary St. Louis and Concordia Theological Seminary Fort Wayne are derived from ATS-reported financial and enrollment data (Tables 1.2 and 2.1) and represent approximate per-student costs based on institutional expense ratios.

⁶. Kairos University cost estimates are based on institutional communication (Nate Helling, 2025) and comparative analysis using ATS data structures; figures are approximate and used for comparative purposes.

---