LCMS Convention Proceedings St. Louis, Missouri — 1989, Page 57

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

i
:
:
:

:

;
’
q
:
1

4. In 1988, instances of inter-Christian worship activ-
ities in violation of our Synod’s stated policies were re-
ported in the case of 65 pastors and 52 congregations. In
all such cases; District Presidents without exception report
that they have dealt, cr are still dealing with, the situation.
Not all such efforts to correct inappropriate practice have
been successful. In several cases, congregations report lo-
cal understandings or arrangements for special services
that go back for several decades, including the period when
the LCMS was in fellowship with the American Lutheran
Church. The Vice-Presidents and I have visited with cer-
tain District Presidents about situations where we see lit-
tle or no improvement. Although I readily acknowledge
that our practice is not 100 percent perfect in this area, I
strenuously object to the occasional opinion that nothing
is being done about it. As a matter of fact, our deliberate
efforts for the last several years have contributed to a prac-
tice that is considerably better today than it was 5, 10, or
20 years ago, and we continue working to strengthen it.
Moreover, synodical and District supervisors are commit-
ted to following fraternal, evangelical, and patient ap-
proaches in dealing with one another and helping one
another to grow, confident that the Lord of the church will
bless such efforts more richly than a rules-oriented ap-
proach that seeks to eliminate problems by automatically
excluding those who cause them.

Doctrinal review. The President’s office is responsible
for supervising a process by which all materials issued by
our official synodical entities are reviewed to make sure
that they are faithful to the Synod’s doctrinal position. At
the present time, nearly 100 persons serve as doctrinal
reviewers. Several portions of the program are adminis-
tered through the office of the president of Concordia Pub-
lishing House, and other dimensions of it are administered
directly by my office staff. In cases of disagreement or con-
cern about the doctrinal content of published material, the
Commission on Doctrinal Review provides for further
review.

Considering the thousands of pages reviewed every
year, we have had very few complaints or criticisms during
the past triennium. One notable exception occurred in
1987, when the Board for Parish Services challenged some
Sunday school materials that had already cleared the doc-
trinal review process. The commission did not rule on
whether that challenge should be sustained or not because
the Board for Parish Services elected to proceed with the
preparation of alternate Sunday School materials before
filing its specific concerns with the Commission on Doc-
trinal Review.

In 1988 the Commission on Doctrinal Review assisted
me in reviewing and strengthening the procedures and
administration of our various doctrinal review programs.
This review led to a number of adjustments in the process
and procedures of doctrinal review, all designed to make
sure that the materials utilized by our members are indeed
faithful to the Word of God and the Lutheran Confessions.

Communication. One of the major tasks of the Presi-
dent’s office is to communicate with the members of the
Synod about the many items of interest and concern. I have
continued to provide a monthly article for the Lutheran
Witness, intended primarily for the laity of the Synod. On

Sn

REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT 57

an occasional basis, I send a Letter to Pastors to all of the
Synod’s clergy. In addition to such written publications, I
have addressed a number of special conferences and meet-
ings throughout the church, several of them on pastoral
and theological issues and others on the directions and
goals of the Synod. From time to time I have also prepared
videotaped messages to congregations or circuits when it
was impossible for me to be present personally. Hundreds
of pieces of correspondence are also handled by the office
every week, with the goal of responding to every letter in
the most personal way possible.

Convinced that communication is a two-way street, both
Vice-President Mennicke and I attempt to spend as much
time as possible in personal visits in order to listen to the
boards, staffs, Districts, Circuits, and conferences of the
Synod.

Government contacts. I have represented the Synod in
a number of contacts with national governmental leaders,
particularly in areas where the Synod has a direct interest,
such as pro-life questions, tax matters, chaplaincy pro-
grams, the welfare of church workers serving abroad, pol-
icies affecting our secondary and elementary schools, and
human-rights dimensions of national and international
events. Such contacts have been greatly enhanced by a
generous grant which enabled the Board of Directors of
the Synod to provide for a full-time presence of the Synod
in Washington, D.C., both to expedite the provision of in-
formation to governmental entities and to provide for a
flow of information and counsel to our various synodical
offices and congregations. Such information is also shared
on a regular basis with the leaders of the Wisconsin Evan-
gelical Lutheran Synod. The Washington Office of Gov-
ernment Information (whose report appears elsewhere in
the Workbook) has also enabled our church body to have
direct contact with other Christian groups who share our
concerns about moral and ethical issues, family and edu-
cation concerns, and other government issues affecting our
institutional life together.

International visits. In June 1987 I represented the
Synod at the meeting of the International Lutheran Con-
ference in Berlin, West Germany, which was attended by
25 church bodies in partnership with our Synod. I also
serve on the continuation committee of this group, which
has become the major instrument for fostering strong re-
lationships between our church body and confessional Lu-
therans around the world.

In May 1987 I also participated in a week-long theo-
logical education conference involving the Synod and its
partner churches in Central and South America, held in
Caracas, Venezuela.

In November 1987 I visited with the Council of Presi-
dents, Commission on Theology and Inter-Church Rela-
tions, and other leadership groups of The Lutheran Church
of Australia in Adelaide in an effort to share resources and
strengthen the bonds between us. One year later, I re-
turned to Adelaide to bring the greetings of the LCMS to
the 150th Anniversary celebrations of our Australian
partners.

In January 1989 I visited the leadership of our partner
churches in the Philippines, Korea, and Japan, both to
address some tensions that have developed in our rela-