# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_1981_S161
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS 161

number of requests for the commission’s services has grown by
over 400 percent.

The number of ‘“‘new”’ religious expressions in the United
States has been estimated at about 5,000; of these, approxi-
mately 500 are particularly troublesome to Lutheran con-
gregations and pastors. Among these are especially those
cultic groups that declare themselves to be “Christian” but
deny chief doctrines of the Holy Scripture, namely, the deity of
Christ or the sufficiency of His atonement.

Requests for information and/or counsel have come from
all of the United States, 18 foreign countries, 18 state and
private universities, many civil and social agencies, 20 church
bodies and such diverse entities as European broadcasting
systems and the Library of Congress. The commission co-
operates with 12 information agencies and parents’ groups in
the gathering of materials, preparing evaluations from the
Christian perspective, and sharing resources. The commission
has been singled out as a reliable source of information and
counsel by the Lutheran World Federation, the World Council
of Churches, and a number of denominational journals in the
United States, including a general “Going to College” hand-
book. During the past biennium the commission was called
upon by a number of church bodies in the United States and
abroad to assist them in establishing service arms similar to
the Commission on Organizations.

Since the last convention of the Synod the executive
secretary of the commission has filled 80 speaking engage-
ments attended by more than 12,000 people. These range in
length from two hours to three-day seminars. None of the costs
of these were borne by the Synod’s budget. Because the number
of invitations far exceeds the time available for out-of-office
engagements, priority was given to the Synod’s colleges and
seminaries, District leaders conferences, and other gatherings
through which the commission’s services could be multiplied.

The commission’s 1979 projection that the next few years
will see larger numbers of people involved in humanistic
substitutes for religion appears to be correct. Secular hu-
manism, coupled with “do it yourself’ religious therapies,
appears to be gaining strength, due in part to resentment of
exploitative and manipulative religious expressions.

Religious involvement may be less evident than formerly in
America’s “old line’ lodges, but most of these retain their
explicit and implicit religious pronouncements and required
subscriptions. Members are still identified with the religious
tenets of organizations, regardless of the purpose for which
they join. Because of the unitarian-universalism of some of
America’s “new” religious expressions, a few church bodies
that formerly were unconcerned about the religious involve-
ment of some lodges are beginning to take a second look at
them.

chief concern of the commission prior to the 1981 con-
vention of the Synod has been the proposed restructuring of the
Synod. Whether the commission on Organizations is to be
made a part of the Commission on Theology and Church
Relations or a resource committee under the Board for Con-
gregational Services, the commission’s concern is that its
identity, not its autonomy, be preserved. It is under the name
“Commission on Organizations” that its functions and services
are known at home and abroad. Under this name itis respected
and listed by independent and church-related agencies and is
most familiar to synodical pastors and congregations.

In addition to its direct services to congregations and
pastors, the commission continues to coordinate and equip
volunteer assistants, maintain liaison with officials and other
boards and commissions of the Synod, and establish and
maintain contact with religious organizations and movements
for the purpose of keeping informed and apprising them of the
church’s concerns.

Rudolph H. Harm, Chairman
Philip Lochhaas, Executive Secretary

3-05
Report on Lutheran Council in the U.S.A.

The Handbook stipulates that synodical representatives to
the Lutheran Council in the United States of America shall
submit a formal report to each convention of the Synod.

The revised structure of the council is now in place. The
Missouri Synod is entitled to three core representatives, who
are J.A.O. Preus, Herbert Mueller, and John Schuelke. For the
annual meeting the core representation of each church body is
expanded according to a formula based on baptized member-
ship. The additional representatives of the LCMS for the
annual meeting are Ralph Bohlmann, E.H. Happel, W. Herbert
Krieger, Roger Leenerts, George Mohr, Norman Sell, and Ed
Schmidt.

Perhaps the major undertaking of the past biennium was a
consultation on church-state relations under the auspices of
the Office of Governmental Affairs of the Lutheran Council.
Although the LCMS does not participate in the Office of
Governmental Affairs, it received an invitation to participate
in the consultation together with all other Lutheran bodies in
this country. Attention was given to the role of the churches in
a modern form of government with participatory involvement
also of the voluntary sector (including the churches). The
results of that consultation have been made available to all
Lutheran congregations in the United States.

The officers, elected annually, are at the present time
Herbert Mueller (LCMS), president; Angeline Haines (LCA),
vice-president; Robert Hoyt (ALC) secretary.

A very extended report on the work of the cou.cil may be
found in the section of the Workbook entitled “Other Reports.”
Delegates are referred to that document for a detailed report of
the council’s activities during the past biennium.

LCMS Representatives
J.A.O. Preus

Herbert Mueller

John Schuelke

3-06
Report of Lutheran Church—Canada

As a point of information for those delegates who are not
conversant with the structure and relationship of the Lutheran
Church—Canada to the Missouri Synod, it might simply be
said that at this time the three geographical Districts of
Canada, namely the Alberta and British Columbia, Manitoba
and Saskatchewan, and the Ontario Districts, form the
Lutheran Church—Canada. It is a structure or vehicle at this
time working to establish an independent, autonomous, sister
church body in this nation. The nongeographical Districts—
the SELC and the English Districts—along with the Canadian
portion of the Minnesota North District are also involved in the
planning for this new church body.

With the actions of the 1979 convention giving the LCC its
full approval we have moved closer to this goal of self-
governing and indigenous church body. Following the synodi-
cal convention and its action regarding the future of the LCC,
the District conventions considered the steps that had to be
taken before the new church body could come into being. Since
all three Districts must be in agreement with the steps and the
direction the new church would be taking the LCC board of
directors asked each convention to adopt identical resolutions,
resolutions that had been passed in the 1979 Lutheran
Church—Canada convention. These resolutions in brief dealt
with the matter of autonomy, structure and constitution of the
church body, mission directives and directions, ability and
feasibility of financial management, evangelism outreach,
and various other church-related matters. Each of the con-
ventions was able to agree either fully or in principle with the
matters placed before it; with the exception of the matter of
higher education, primarily that of seminary training in
Canada.

This particular issue had the three Districts proposing
different means of achieving the goal of seminary education.
The Ontario District proposed that the issue of seminary
training be settled before the Lutheran Church—Canada
comes into being; The Manitoba and Saskatchewan District
asked that the Synod reconsider the implementation of sec-
tions of 1979 synodical convention Res. 6-04A and the Alberta
and British Columbia District did not bring forth a proposal
but rather took the time to have the delegates come up with
alternatives and preferences for the seminary issue. Due to the
fact that there was no concensus from the three Districts on
this matter, there will be memorials to this convention con-