LCMS Convention Proceedings St. Louis, Missouri — 1989, Page 88

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

ADDRESS OF THE FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE SYNOD 89

against brother, distrust and confusion, attempts to lead
the Synod in new and unwanted directions. We had before
us the presidential election itself, the ALC fellowship ques-
tion, a new seminary president who had his own ideas as
to the direction the Synod should take. The effort to keep
the Synod on its historic doctrinal and constitutional basis
was met with almost a civil war, the details of which are
known to most of you and are too tragic to repeat. I tried
to carry out the duties of my office as properly as possible,
but must confess many failures. But, finally, by God’s
grace, the problems were settled, peace returned to the
Synod, and the great Forward in Remembrance thankof-
fering demonstrated the unity and vitality of our beloved
church body.

But there were and are those who wanted to prolong
the war. I was elected and served during the Vietnam war
and felt that continued battle would harm us irreparably.
During those years, when the St. Louis faculty's Concordia
Theological Monthly and its various public relations out-
lets within and outside of the Synod, Elim, Missouri in
Perspective, and all the rest, the periodical Affirm and its
parent Balance, Inc. were of help in the struggle, and for
this we give them and owe them thanks. But as time went
on, I have come to feel that Balance, Inc.—Affirm, together
with their stepchild, Christian News—and if this is con-
tested, at our ’86 convention to criticize Christian News
was to be charged by Affirm with “forgetting Christian
ethics”—would serve Synod best by going out of business—
particularly in their divisive and irritating practice of is-
suing an election list, which by Affirm’s own admission,
resulted in the election of 90 percent of its recom-
mendations.

The releases you have received from Mr. Gordon Nelson,
himself dumped by Affirm, inform you that a prominent
leader of Affirm who is also an officer and an employee of
Synod, has stated that the Affirm election list is prepared
by “unknown leaders,” whom Affirm trusts and whose list
Affirm prints. “Unknown” to whom? Certainly unknown
to the Synod. If “unknown,” how can we regard them as
“leaders”? This is absurd.

I could go on at great lengths to document that Affirm
is very selective in its support of “our priceless theological
heritage.” Some dissent from Synod’s doctrine is conve-
niently and politically overlooked.

Nelson is correct in speaking of Affirm as primarily in-
terested in power—not theology—and now more recently,
seemingly it is just as interested in creating a family dy-
nasty, with three members of one family submitted by the
Affirm-dominated synodical Nominating Committee, with
articles by three members of this family in the June—July
issue of the journal!

My concern with this power politicking is directed to
the virtual control which Affirm now exercises over the
judicial branch of Synod.

Now don’t get me wrong—not all Affirm-elected officers
are incompetent, politically motivated or the captives of
this group. Many of our officers know nothing about Affirm,
and many have served well and should be reelected. But
when Affirm takes credit for electing 90 percent of our
officers and then attempts to influence them, we have trou-

bles, and a shadow is cast over the work of every board
member. While responsibility has constantly been laid at
the door of President Bohlmann for loss of members, fi-
nancial problems, decline of mission expansion, and theo-
logical problems, remember that Affirm has for years
elected the majority of the members of the Evangelism

Board, the Board of Directors, the Board for Missions, the

CTCR, and the Regents of the seminaries. Perhaps they,

too, bear some responsibility for our problems.

It has always worried me that the conservatives can
win elections, but can they govern? We worked hard back
in the 60s and ’70s to restore sound synodical doctrine and
constitutional government in the Missouri Synod. Let’s not
destroy this by power politics, cronyism, nepotism. Shortly
you will be electing the rest of our synodical officers. Let’s
elect free men and free women to give openly debated and
freely arrived-at decisions for the progress and well being
of our church. We are a scriptural, confessional, and or-
thodox church. Let’s run it that way.

As an old soldier who has faded away, I want to make
three proposals to this convention in what I hope will be
my last speech to an LCMS convention.

1. The men who run Affirm are also largely old soldiers,
and the time has come for them to retire and fade away.
I therefore ask that the leaders of Affirm stand before
this convention and (a)tell us who the members of Bal-
ance, Inc. are; (b)give us a financial accounting of your
receipts and expenses (over $1 million) in the face of
the shortage of mission dollars and money for needy
seminarians, and ask your surrogate Christian News to
tell us about its $500,000; (c)tell us who the “unknown
leaders” are who prepare your election list and their
special qualifications as over against, e.g., District pres-
idents, the Little Rock Circuit, St. John’s Church of
Ottumwa, Iowa, or President Bohlmann; (d)go out of
business and let the freely elected officers of Synod su-
pervise doctrine and administration and carry out their
duties without constant carping and second guessing.

2. If these “leaders” refuse to do this, and I fear they will
refuse, then ask the appropriate floor committee at this
convention to frame a proper resolution thanking Bal-
ance, Inc.—Affirm for past services and asking them to
shut down along with their agent Christian News, and
include in the resolution a statement prohibiting syn-
odical officers and employees from participating overtly
or covertly in this or similar organizations.

3. I would also suggest that the President, the COP, the
CTCR, the seminaries, and the Communications De-
partment, and perhaps others, create, without a special
editor or board, a publication under the Synod and the
Eighth Commandment for an organ for orderly, open,
signed discussion or dissent where issues of all kinds
can be dealt with in a brotherly and positive way. We
have too long left this aspect of our “walking together”
in the hands of uncontrollable and often irresponsible
people. Let’s give it a try and perhaps thus we may be
able to be the church we all want to be—alive, active,
moving forward together in Christ and under his Word,
so that we can “tell everyone what He has done.”

J. A. O. Preus, Ph.D.