Collection › LCMS Convention Proceedings (St. Louis, Missouri) › 1969 · 48th Convention › Page 48
LCMS Convention Proceedings St. Louis, Missouri — 1969, Page 48
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 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 133
Page 134
Page 135
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 173
Page 174
Page 175
Page 176
Page 177
Scan: The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod
⤓ Download page image (full resolution)
Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected
48 PRESIDENT’S REPORT
sources available for our District Presidents as they
seek to minister to workers and congregations under
these trying conditions. More needs to be done, espe-
cially in a preventive way. More needs to be done by
all of us. In essence we ought to be able to do more
than any other human institution if we are prepared to
conduct ourselves as Christian brethren. Our bonds as
brothers will help us know how to deal with both weak-
ness and false witness, with insecurity and covetousness,
with integrity and dishonor alike.
Some months ago, with the cooperation of the presi-
dents of our two seminaries, I convened a meeting with
representatives of our seminary faculties. I asked that
these faculties undertake a thorough study to determine
what differences, if any, really exist between our theo-
logical professors. Further, I asked that they determine
how significant such differences might be. They have
readily agreed, and they have undertaken these studies
and discussions.
In 1967 the Synod in convention established a new
procedure for the doctrinal review of published ma-
terials. This procedure is now in operation. My office
has solicited from appropriate boards, commissions, and
agencies a listing of the numbers and competences of
reviewers required for their operations. I have now
appointed thirty-four reviewers, and they are now serv-
ing in this capacity. Upon the nomination of the proper
divisions, a board of doctrinal reviewers has been ap-
pointed, made up of eleven persons. This board is at
work drawing up guidelines for the reviewers and is
establishing procedures by which review panels can be-
gin to function when necessary. I have asked that these
reviewers stand ready to submit whatever recommenda-
tions may be necessary for the refinement of the review
procedure.
Meanwhile I urge everyone to read carefully before
jumping to conclusions, to correspond directly with au-
thors and editors before rushing into print. In a special
tract, published at the directive of the 1967 convention,
my office has described in greater detail the nature and
purpose of Christian discipline in our Synod. It is my
earnest hope that this small document can be of help
to all of us as we seek to carry out our responsibilities to
one another and to the doctrine and life of the church.
The Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod outline
the duties of the President’s office in the management of
synodical affairs. They include, besides the supervision
of the doctrine and life of The Lutheran Church — Mis-
souri Synod, such diverse assignments as making nu-
merous important appointments and seeing to it that the
resolutions of the Synod are carried out. During the last
term of office we have created new and refined earlier
devices for communicating and for implementing the
work of the Synod. Immediately after each convention
long lists of resolutions are prepared and discussed with
leaders responsible for carrying out the will of the
church in various fields. As a result, I believe our mem-
bership is better informed and perhaps participates more
promptly and more widely than in the past.
The Synod’s administration has attempted to provide
better planning and coordination. This is desirable, and
it is necessary. It is also becoming increasingly complex
and difficult. Our congregations and agencies, individ-
ually and in cooperation with other churches and often
community organizations, are frequently responding in
their own setting and on their own initiative. Similarly
our Districts are often involved in new and significant
work. All of this means that the Synod is often con-
fronted with an accomplished fact. Decisions have been
made, men and money have been precommitted. As a
national institution we are often compelled to work
around other commitments and other arrangements.
Last but not least, we have expected executives to de-
velop overall planning for the Synod when they are al-
ready overloaded with planning and carrying out their
own large national program. I propose that we now
provide full-time staff for this important planning
function.
In a similar way I propose that we undertake re-
visions in the executive administration of the Synod.
Few men face larger demands than do the District
Presidents as they function on behalf of the Synod within
their Districts and also on behalf of their Districts. The
Synod has attempted to fill at least some of this gap
by the election of five Vice-Presidents, one of whom
serves in a full-time capacity. These men have served
in the church nobly. It is essential, however, that we
review our present operations and the circumstances
under which we function. The aim of this review is to
assure that our work is managed as efficiently as pos-
sible. In my judgment the changes that are visualized
would require no additional outlay of funds. Further,
these changes ought to be ready for adoption in 1971 and
go into effect in 1973; for example: the structure and
function of the Commission on Theology and Church
Relations; the structure and function of the Commission
on Mission and Ministry in the Church; the structure
and function of the office of the President relative to the
work of the Vice-Presidents; the structure and function
of other executive offices.
No report on church administration is possible, it
seems, without a reference to financial matters. I make
no apologies for including such references in this re-
port. First, I review this aspect of Christian steward-
ship as one of the most joyous experiences in life.
Here we personally can demonstrate our trust and love.
Second, the funds we are talking about are related
very intimately with God’s own great work here on
earth.
Since the last convention we have initiated some
exploratory ventures for securing additional funds
from those to whom God has entrusted greater ma-
terial blessings. With the direct support of a small
group, my office has been involved directly in this effort.
The Synod should know and should give thanks to God
that this effort has already produced more than two
million dollars in cash and pledges. This effort, to-
gether with other factors, makes it apparent that our
church should develop a diversified stewardship pro-
gram and reorganize some of its money management