Collection › LCMS Convention Proceedings (St. Louis, Missouri) › 1983 · 55th Convention › Page 129
LCMS Convention Proceedings St. Louis, Missouri — 1983, Page 129
front matter 1
Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
Page 21
Page 22
Page 23
Page 24
Page 25
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
Page 33
Page 34
Page 35
Page 36
Page 37
Page 38
Page 39
Page 40
Page 41
Page 42
Page 43
Page 44
Page 45
Page 46
Page 47
Page 48
Page 49
Page 50
Page 51
Page 52
Page 53
Page 54
Page 55
Page 56
Page 57
Page 58
Page 59
Page 60
Page 61
Page 62
Page 63
Page 64
Page 65
Page 66
Page 67
Page 68
Page 69
Page 70
Page 71
Page 72
Page 73
Page 74
Page 75
Page 76
Page 77
Page 78
Page 79
Page 80
Page 81
Page 82
Page 83
Page 84
Page 85
Page 86
Page 87
Page 88
Page 89
Page 90
Page 91
Page 92
Page 93
Page 94
Page 95
Page 96
Page 97
Page 98
Page 99
Page 100
Page 101
Page 102
Page 103
Page 104
Page 105
Page 106
Page 107
Page 108
Page 109
Page 110
Page 111
Page 112
Page 113
Page 114
Page 115
Page 116
Page 117
Page 118
Page 119
Page 120
Page 121
Page 122
Page 123
Page 124
Page 125
Page 126
Page 127
Page 128
Page 129
Page 130
Page 131
Page 132
Page 136
Page 137
Page 138
Page 139
Page 140
Page 141
Page 142
Page 143
Page 144
Page 145
Page 146
Page 147
Page 148
Page 149
Page 150
Page 151
Page 152
Page 153
Page 154
Page 155
Page 156
Page 157
Page 158
Page 159
Page 160
Page 161
Page 162
Page 163
Page 164
Page 165
Page 166
Page 167
Page 168
Page 169
Page 170
Page 171
Page 172
Page 174
Page 175
Page 176
Page 177
Page 178
Page 179
Page 180
Page 181
Page 182
Page 183
Page 184
Page 185
Page 186
Page 187
Page 188
Page 189
Page 190
Page 191
Page 192
Page 193
Page 194
Page 195
Page 196
Page 197
Page 198
Page 199
Page 200
Page 201
Page 202
Page 203
Page 204
Page 205
Page 206
Page 207
Page 208
Page 209
Page 210
Page 211
Page 212
Page 213
Page 214
Page 215
Page 216
Page 217
Scan: The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod
⤓ Download page image (full resolution)
Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected
wie
wow on
ADDRESS: FOCUS ON THE CHRISTIAN FAMILY 131
through the power of technology by which we can not
only prevent the conception of a child but with which we
can destroy a child before birth, a child Luther calls “the
tender fruit” (WLS, #2826, p. 905). Contrary to the
traditional view—and certainly to Luther’s view—
pregnancy and maternity today are not perceived as
blessings or gifts. Many refer to women’s procreative
potentiality as “an infirmity in the abdomen”; a threat
to her freedom and selfhood. Science has become the
woman’s savior, freeing her from her nature and from
the acceptance of her natural limitations.
Some months ago I was invited to address a class of
seventh- and eighth-graders at a progressive private
school. Prior to my arrival I was sent what the students
called “a position paper on sexual rights.” Among other
things it said:
If a couple is involved in procreational sex, that is, they
intend and plan to have a child, then an abortion of that
pregnancy would be wrong.
But if they are involved in recreational sex—as we are
[these seventh- and eighth-graders]—then abortion would
be perfectly right because they just wanted fun and nota
family.
Thus, these 12- and 13-year-olds had effectively
separated what they do from what their bodies do,
ignoring the Scriptural truth that what we do in our
bodies is done by us (1 Cor. 6:18; Human Sexuality,
CTCR, Sept. 1981, p. 7).
So when we look for the woman, we find some for
whom mothering is demeaning and others who view the
female body as a prison, a betrayer, which she must
control through the genius of technology, suggesting in
the process that somehow her body is an enemy—or evil.
And third, as we look for the woman, we find some
among the “new breed parents.” Prior to the 1980 White
House Conference on Families the General Mills Cor-
poration provided for each delegate the results of an
extensive survey which revealed the existence of “new
breed parents,” the term developed to describe those
women (and men) who specifically and deliberately
rejected the idea of sacrificing for their children.
Yet Christian morality has always centered on
woman’s life-giving, life-nourishing, and life-sacrificing
virtues, with Christian women (and men) understand-
ing that the highest act possible for one who is created is
to allow the activity of the Creator to have its full
expression, to be, in Luther’s words, “the workshop of
the Supreme Majesty.”
Luther roots the mothering role of women not in his
sixteenth-century culture or his male chauvinism, but in
the creation itself. “Through the Holy Spirit,” Luther
writes, “Adam called his wife by the excellent name of
Eve, that is, mother. He does not say woman, but
mother, and adds ‘of all the living’ (Gen. 3:20). Here you
have the true distinction of womanhood, to wit, to be the
Source of all living human beings. The words are brief,
yet they are an oration such asneither Demosthenes nor
icero ever composed. But this oration is by the Holy
Spirit, who is most eloquent. ...If this Orator so defines
and praises woman . . .” (WLS, #4703, p. 1457). That
settled it for Luther!
How fortunate for us that it also settled it for the
unwed, teenaged girl named Mary, who was not a “new
breed parent,” but rather a woman who, in submission
and obedience, said simply and sacrificially, “I am the
handmaid of the Lord” (Luke 1:38).
But handmaidens of anybody—the Lord or little
ones—do not compute in a secular society that says, DO
YOUR OWN THING! LOOK OUT FOR NUMBER
ONE!
Our society has communicated a message to women
that mothers do not play a very significant role, further
maintaining that one cannot even be a good mother if
one is not self-fulfilled. It mistakenly believes that
fulfillment comes almost exclusively from the market-
place rather than the family.
A year ago a large audience gathered to hear the very
prominent feminist and scholar, Germaine Greer,
author of the best selling book The Female Eunuch. She
had just returned from India where, commissioned bya
family planning group, she was charged with persuad-
ing women to have fewer children. She began her visit
knowing the world had too many people. There were
certainly too many of “them.” But were there? she soon
began asking herself. In all of the villages sle visited
she never found an unwanted child. Parents, she said,
cherished their children and sacrificed greatly for them,
and they looked upon her as an unfortunate woman
because she had none.
She couldn’t explain her failure to have children
except to say that “in my society there is no idea of
continuum. In my society the individual life is self-
contained.”
To the audience she said, “They hardly knew the use
of the word ‘I.’ It’s ‘we’ every inch of the way.” She was
struck by their selflessness, the sharing and love of the
families. “The entire village had squeezed into half a
room and had left the other half to me,” she said. “When
I looked at these people, I knew perfectly well who there
were too many of in the world. There were too many of
>
me.
Part IHI—Focus on Children
If Luther said anything about grandparents, I
couldn’t find it. And if he didn’t, perhaps it was because
he thought that Proverbs 17 had said it all: “Grand-
children are the crown of the aged” (v. 6).
How true! And itis also true that no one hasa greater
appreciation for children—as children—than do grand-
parents. I know, because I am a member of that
endangered species. And God knew that my schedule
didn’t allow me to take off a month for grandmothering
every two years or so when a new baby arrived, so He
sent them all at once: triplets!—all boys, all now two,
and all over everything! Caring for them is like trying to
organize grasshoppers!
The daughter to whom God entrusted them is the
most ideally suited person in the world to referee a three-
ring circus, but there was one week this winter that
would have tested the patience of even... well, let me put
it this way: Of all the challenges placed before Job,