# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1979_S58
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

58 PRESIDENT’S REPORT

I also am very frank to state to you that I believethat
in the creation of the concept of sister or partner
churches during the 1960s the administration of The
Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod was to some degree
remiss. In working with young churches, many of them
only about 25 years old, we did not do sufficient
consulting together relative to financial controls, to
constitutional questions, and to matters of general
church administration. There were certain theological
questions left unanswered, and some of these have been
productive of controversies which produced more heat
than light. We did not agree sufficiently on guidelines
for the carrying out of church fellowship. We talked at
great length about autonomy of partner churches, but
we did not draw up sufficiently carefully prepared
documents to answer the kinds of questions that con-
tinue to arise as to the exercise of responsible autonomy.
These matters have been productive of some misunder-
standing, particularly back in 1974, and at the time the
majority of the mission staff of the Synod walked out. I
can only say that I believe the attitude of the partner
churches, particularly those in Asia and Africa, was
most commendable. Europe and Brazil and Argentina
were not nearly so affected by these matters because as
Europeans they had as long a Lutheran heritage as we
do. But in the areas where we were dealing with young
churches in nations which had little acquaintance with
Lutheranism, and with people who were first-generation
Lutheran Christians, the response to all of our internal
difficulties, particularly in view of the lack of a compre-
hensive preparation which we had given them from the
status of being sister or partner churches, was astound-
ingly positive. It is amazing that we did not have more
difficulty than we did.

I am reporting these matters to you at this point not
to alarm you, because actually the majority of the
problems have been solved, thanks to people both in our
Missions Department and to the missionaries and
overseas church leaders, but simply to refer to these
facts as reasons for some of the unrest and as reasons
for some of the resolutions and activities that still need
to be taken in order to straighten out what was a bad
situation, what could continue to cause us some diffi-
culties, and what can impede the growth and forward
progress in the partner churches. I can only say that my
overall relationship with these leaders has been ex-
tremely positive. I treasure their affection and friend-
ship and want the entire Lutheran Church—Missouri
Synod to have an opportunity to take these people to
your hearts, as I know the Missouri Synod has been
taken to the hearts of our overseas brethren. I can only
say that I wish every member of the Synod could have
had the opportunities that I have had to go to such
places as Nigeria, New Guinea, Brazil, Europe, and
many other places to rejoice in the fellowship we have
with our beloved brethren and to see the work and the
circumstances under which they labor. I am convinced
that if more of our people had this opportunity we would
never have to ask for mission gifts again. The money
would literally roll in, together with the prayers and the
love of our people.

Now about the work assigned to Committee 1:
Missions. While all of us should study the rather
lengthy and most informative Report of the Board for
Missions, please note certain facts that should be kept
in mind.

The board has prepared 28 “challenges for the ’80s”
which involve virtually all levels of our structure,
including congregations, our colleges and seminaries,
and others. Please study them carefully. Also, the report
includes valuable information about the area, popu-
lation, economy, politics, and religion of all parts of the
world where work is, or should be, carried out.

While we will not cite the many statistics presented,
a few should be kept in mind by every concerned
Christian. The present population of the world is 4
billion. One billion claim the name of Christian. World
population at the time of Christ is estimated to be only
250 million. Between 1910 and 1978, in one full lifetime,
the population of the world doubled, from 2 billion to 4.2
billion, and it is expected to reach 6 or 7 billion in the
next 20 years.

Yet the report indicates that we are poorly equipped
to handle the obvious challenge of fields white unto
harvest. While 34% of the Synod’s 28-million-dollar
budget is assigned to missions, the purchasing power of
the mission dollar has decreased substantially. Some-
how we must alert our people to the many doors God has
opened for us.

The term “missions” also refers to the work which
remains to be done in North America. Despite what we
may think, over half of our 50 United States have an
unchurched populatign of over 50%. The same applies to
Canada. The report also calls attention to the great
challenge among Hispanics, who presently number
close to 20 million in the United States. The 40 Hispanic
congregations in the Synod are but asmall beginning of
what must be done. Then there are countless challenges
among Black people; Indians, or native American
groups; the deaf; and other ethnic groups which con-
tinue to grow in our midst. I pray that the Synod will
adopt these 28 challenges for the 1980s and then proceed
toimplement them in the next decade. They can be met.
Let us lift up our eyes and rise up to build.

I would finally call to the attention of Committee 1
the reports and overtures on evangelism. The “goals,”
“open house,” and open doors surround us on every side.

II. Task Force on Structure

Floor Committee 2, of which Committee 4 and 5 are
also members, will be dealing with the proposals of the
Task Force on Constitution, Bylaws, and Structure.
This committee met with representatives of the Task
Force at the end of April. It will now formulate reso-
lutions based on their findings. This may well be the
most important item to come before the convention and
will generate probably the most discussion.

Since the Task Force will be reporting to you on how
it came into being, its composition, and its meetings and
activities, I will not reiterate any of that material. I have
deliberately avoided trying to impose any of my ideas
on the Task Force and in the past biennium have had