According to Lutheran theology there is only one article on which the Church stands or falls and that is the liberating, transforming and empowering Gospel in juxtaposition to the inciting, accusing, and condemning law. The Gospel is preached, distributed in sacramental form, believed and lived out. Everything else – liturgies, garments, church orders, role allocations, financial administration, etc – are certainly not unimportant, but are derived issues in the life of the church and must be subject to this one article. As a result, there are various traditions in the worldwide communion of Lutheran churches, even within Southern Africa. Some are more hierarchically organised, while some follow more congregationalist principles. Some follow elaborate rituals and liturgies, some try to adapt the form of worship to the perceived needs of the current membership. These differences can be respected in our training institutions without causing divisions. The question is how the core of the Lutheran Church, that is, its understanding of the Gospel, influences life in Southern Africa as a whole.

In Africa, the Church of Christ is still in an enviable position. It has both functional grass roots communities and global links. It still commands respect. It has a pool of dedicated leaders and followers. It has a vision of a renewed human existence and a transformed world. It can appeal to a Transcendent Power which, it believes, is committed to the eradication of evil and the renewal of humanity. However, when one looks at what actually happens in most congregations that gather on Sundays, one is tempted to despair. What kind of impact does Christians really make? Which sections of the population are represented? Which problems are actually addressed in sermons and liturgies?

To me it seems that the basic problem of the Church is a truncated concept of salvation. What we need is a proclamation of the Gospel that is: • holistic rather than spiritualistic;

• • transformative rather than moralistic;

• • public rather than private;

• • empowering rather than authoritarian; and finally

• • inspiring rather than boring.

That is the context in which any reflection on the training of ministers, whether Lutheran or any other, should be seen. Can we really make a difference when we train our future leaders?