# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_1973_S432
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

416 OTHER REPORTS

pledge to continue to proclaim Christ and Him crucified
through The Lutheran Hour and in our personal witness.
May your 50th convention redound to the glory of God.

May God’s Holy Spirit guide and direct you as we work
together to contend for the faith, that our children and our
children’s children may continue to have His Word in all
its truth and purity.

BoarD OF GOVERNORS

Gus S. Melde, President

Ben F. Jutzi, Executive Director

X-02

Report of Lutheran Women’s Missionary
League

With the theme “Serve the Lord with Gladness” (Psalm
100:2) as a guide, and Mission Education, Mission Inspira-
tion, and Mission Service as objectives, the women of the
Lutheran Women’s Missionary League are faithfully wit-
nessing to their Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, in word and
action.

Mission Education and Inspiration objectives are carricd
out in the following ways:

Bible Study: “Grow Up, Christian" (1971): “Declare His
Glory” (1972); “Send Me Too” (1973). Mustard Seeds,
mini-Bible studies: “Joy of Being’; “God's Beautiful
World”; “I Thee Wed"; “The Spirit and Me.”

Society Resource Folders

Christian Growth Institutes (22 held regionally in the
past biennium)

Leadership Training Program

Lutheran Woman’s Quarterly, the official LWML publica-
cation, reaching almost 280,000 women each quarter.

Mission Service: services to our missionaries overseas as
well as at home. The 1971—73 mission projects: Television
Evangelism for Children; Lutheran Association of Mission-
aries and Pilots; St.Stephen’s Lutheran Church, Chicago:
New Guinea Scholarship Fund; Mission in Belem, Brazil:
Pre-School Day Care, Teen Center, Honolulu, Hawaii; Sharon
Lutheran Church, Hong Kong; Captioned Films for the Deaf:
Center Church, Seoul, Korea; Each One — Reach One (an in-
vestment of self).

The total mission goal for the 1971—73 biennium is $450,-
000. The international league receives 25 percent of all mis-
sion offerings, while districts retain 75 percent. No funds are
solicited outside league membership.

The Headquarters Office of the LWML, located in Con-
cordia Publishing House, St.Louis, is staffed by a head-
quarters secretary and two additional full-time workers.

In May of 1973, the Atlantic District of the LWML di-
vided into three districts — Atlantic, New England, and New
Jersey, bringing the total to 43 districts in the United States
and Canada, with 515 zones, 5,955 societies, and 196,875
members.

We are grateful that our Synod is including an increasing
number of women on its committees, boards and commis-
sions.

Florence Montz, President

X-03

Report of General Secretary
of Lutheran Council in the U.S. A.

At its last convention in Milwaukee, the LCMS called
for a thorough study of the Lutheran Council in the U.S.A.
and invited the two other church bodies cooperating in the
council, the ALC and the LCA, to become involved — which
they did. At the same time a somewhat more informal study
took place under the direction of the council's executive
committee.

These studies sought to answer the key questions raised
by a church body representative: Is the agency as currently
structured enhancing or impeding inter-Lutheran coopera-
tion? How responsive is the council to the will of the
churches?

The studies’ findings were remarkably parallel and com-
plimentary. The council was seen in a variety of roles: initi-

ator, catalyst. nudger, promoter, sensitizer, enabler, facilita-
tor, communicator, resource, channel, lifesaver. Numerous
areas of concern were pinpointed and many suggestions
made, such as, that church leaders lack knowledge about the
council, that the status of local and regional inter-Lutheran
planning and its relationship to the church bodies are un-
clear, that a critical review of the council’s work should take
place at each annual meeting.

To generate further thinking regarding the council's fu-
ture, four consultations were held during the summer of
1972. Persons invited to attend were users and beneficiaries
of council services, members of council standing committees,
executives of the program units of the church bodies and
the council's staff. These persons repeatedly expressed the
following “musts”: a constant reexamination and reaffirma-
tion of the cause of the council and its value to the church
bodies; a clear mandate for the council’s “proactive” (leader.
facilitator) role in the multilevel system of inter-Lutheran
cooperation, plus systematic planning and accountability;
more participatory council management involving bene-
ficiaries of its services at all levels: a revision of the council's
present rigid structure to facilitate flexibility and varying
functions.

The council's executive committee took the studies and
the data gathered at the consultations —some of which was
presented via video tape — and translated the desired
changes into amendments to the constitution and bylaws.
Adopted by the council's annual meeting early in March, the
changes mostly reflect a new style of management and
functioning stressing planning, coordination and flexibility.
The council's basic assignments in the categories of theologi-
cal studies, mission services, welfare services, educational
services, service to military personnel and public relations
remain relatively unchanged.

We feel that there will be something extremely salutary
about the establishment of a Committee for Planning and
Development. Staffing will come from a new Office of Re-
search, Planning and Development, which incorporates the
old Office of Research, Statistics and Archives. Through this
new planning process representatives of the three church
bodies will in collaboration evaluate the programs of the
council and anticipate new areas of service. The new com-
mittee will report directly to the annual meeting and thus
provide the church bodies with a complete and timely pic-
ture of the inter-Lutheran system of cooperation. With this
kind of process available, we can rightfully expect a reduc-
tion in the extent to which we as the council and inter-Lu-
theran cooperation as a goal are victimized by the unilateral
action of one of the church bodies or by the timing of con-
ventions.

Several changes more clearly establish that the commit-
tees of the council work in the interests of the cooperating
church bodies. The church body presidents are now auto-
matically placed on the executive committee, and the church
bodies now have the final determination of the persons from
their constituencies who are to serve on the various standing
committees. These committee members are to represent per-
tinent interests and specializations within the churches.

We expect support and coordination across the council
through our new Office of Communication and Interpretation,
the reconstituted Division of Public Relations. The same
is true of Luthcran approaches to government through the
new Office of Public Affairs and Government Relations. The
various dimensions of its task were formerly assigned to
a unit in the DPR.

During the past 2 years the Divisions of Mission and Wel-
fare Services have increasingly meshed their programs as
they have related to a broad range of life in the church
bodies. This development has now culminated in a single
Division of Mission and Ministry which “shall assist the par-
ticipation bodies by providing means for furthering coopera-
tion in study, planning and program development in their
mission activities and in their activities addressed to the
social needs of individuals and groups.”

The decision to make the Division of Educational Services
and its Department of Campus Ministry into a Division of
Campus Ministry and Educational Services reflects another
functional reality: campus ministry services have developed
far more rapidly and extensively than have the service op-
portunities in college, theological, and parish education.

The last change resulting from the studies involves a new