# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_1975_S173 # Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration) ADMINISTRATION 173 Districts have been serviced in special projects by various synodical staffers. How do synodical leaders on the national and District level evaluate the work of the Board of Stewardship and staff? A 1974 questionnaire prepared by board chairman Charles Bosma furnished some answers to this question, based on responses from 77 percent of synodical and District leaders queried: 74 percent of the respondents agreed that the Board of Steward- ship adequately fulfills its duties as outlined by the synodical Handbook: 90 percent were against a hypothetical proposal to phase the Board of Stewardship out of existence and give its responsibilities to a subcommittee of the Synod's Board of Direc- tors: 72 percent disagreed with another hypothetical proposal to limit the functions of the Board of Stewardship to raising money for the synodical program. B. Challenges and Problems 1. A definite trend in District executive staffing has been to assign several responsibilities to each executive. In the past. stewardship often was the sole responsibility of an executive. Now most stewardship staffers also have responsibilities in other areas of ministry. As a result, less time and effort and budget are devoted to stewardship cultivation on the District level than previously. 2. Budget cutbacks on the synodical level have meant a drastic reduction in materials produced—compared with 10 years ago—and a lack of national staff to consult with and develop in-depth programs with District leaders. The trend today is to customized programs. This has definite merits. But much good work by Districts is lost for possible use by other Districts because there is no one on national staff assigned to coordinate the sharing of programs and ideas. The Board of Stewardship and staff definitely favor a more service-oriented style of supporting District operations. We would rather serve than prescribe answers. At present, however, we do not have the staffing or the funding to serve districts in the way in which they are asking synodical staff to serve. Conclusions 1. Controversy and conflict within our Synod have affected almost every part of its mission and ministry during the past 2 years. The ministry of the Board of Stewardship is no excep- tion. A prime example is the area of funding the church's ministry. Reduction in initially anticipated income for the present fiscal year reflects economic problems, a reordering of mission priorities, and synodical problems. Of these three factors, the economy may not be as great a factor in giving as some persons would think — other denomina- tions experienced an increase in contributions in 1974. The possible reordering of mission priorities will be discussed shortly. The third factor, synodical problems, has resulted in definite repercussions. The Gospel motivation for giving is being clouded by quarrel- ing and disruptions. The dispute in the Board for Missions has caused some people to question how their offerings for missions are being used. Money is going to other mission agencies, including some with no connections to our Synod or its sister overseas churches. The climate of mistrust has dampened enthu- siasm to the point where mission giving by members of the Synod is definitely affected consciously and unconsciously. Unless the climate is changed, funding of the chuch's mission and ministry will continue to be a difficult and possibly “no win” situation. 2. Coupled with the economic and synodical problems has been a possible reordering of mission priorities by congrega- tions and Districts. This possibility has been discussed in the section on fund procurement. Restructuring of synodical func- tions and subsequent reduction of staff as proposed by some also may reflect a reordering. Such a restructuring is not opposed by the Board of Steward- ship. so long as the present functions of stewardship ministry assigned to it are carried out. However, if resource personnel and programs are to be concentrated on the District rather than the synodical level, then this decision shoud be made by the entire Synod. The Board of Stewardship feels that such a deci- sion should be made by a mission and ministry convocation — a gathering of congregational as well as District and synodical leaders. Such a gathering would adopt a strategy for mission and ministry in the Synod for the coming years. That strategy then would be implemented through any restructuring of functions and staffing necessary on the District. regional. or synodical levels. 3. A renewed understanding is needed of stewardship as the ministry (service) through which a Christian uses life and all of its resources for Christ’s mission. There is a danger that steward- ship will be equated with church fund raising. ignoring the cultivation which views the giving function of stewardship as a grace (or gift) of God. motivated by love instead of guilt, duty. or some other reason. Stewardship ministry is not a once-a-year religious United Way or churchly March of Dimes appeal. If stewardship is equated with fund raising, the church can be equated with other charitable organizations. And the church, motivated by and proclaiming the Good News of Jesus Christ. is much more than a charitable organization. 4. The total stewardship ministry of our Synod involves not only spending at the synodical level. We need to find a way to involve Districts and congregations more directly in the entire budget-setting process. since that process reflects mission priorities. The meeting of the Fiscal Review Commission in March 1975 was a step in the right direct’ »n. The proposed mis- sion and ministry convocation (point 2) is another move in this direction. 5. There is a danger that a report which emphasizes chal- lenges and problems can tend to be very negative reading. Since we have tried to be realistic. there is a positive dimension which needs mentioning. That dimension is the potential in the congregations of our Synod for generous. love-motivated giving for the mission of the church. The Spirit has moved mightily among us in the past. and we remain confident that He can and will move among us in the future. That movement could mean more generous sup- port for the church's ministry and mission. We cannot dictate to the Spirit how or when He should move. We do know that God never asks more of us than He gives to us. We do hope and trust in God. knowing that He has given us the gifts—in money and other ways-—to do His “job” of mission. Our Lord invites us in love to join Him. This report has grappled with the challenges and problems facing our Synod in its stewardship ministry, as well as reporting the activities of the Board of Stewardship. We invite the mem- bers of the Synod to join in facing these problems, confident that the Spirit can take these problems and turn them into oppor- tunities for ministry. We pray His blessing upon the considera- tion of this report and the ministry through you and us which it reflects. Board of Stewardship Charles Bosma, Chairman A. Lorenz Grumm. Stewardship Counselor 4-09 Report of Board of Managers — Worker Benefit Plans The Board of Managers— Worker Benefit Plans. ever mind- ful of its assignment from the Synod and of its tremendous responsibility to the workers in the Synod, continues to expend every effort to render the best possible service to these workers and to maintain the high level of benefits of the Plans in as economical a fashion as is possible. To this end regular sessions are held with the Plans’ consultants. who are well versed in current benefit programming. Since all workers and employers enrolled in the Worker Benefit Plans receive a regular quarterly bulletin which informs them of all current Plans’ changes as well as annual financial data, this report to the convention is intended to cover only the highlights of the activities of the past 2 years. Administration During the past biennium two first-time appointee board members whose terms expired were reappointed to an addi- tional term of 4 years. Another board member. Rev. Carl H. Bensene. found it necessary to resign for health reasons. We express to him our appreciation for his service. In his place