Collection › LCMS Convention Proceedings (St. Louis, Missouri) › 1971 · 49th Convention › Page 69

LCMS Convention Proceedings St. Louis, Missouri — 1971, Page 69

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 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 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 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 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 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 Page 218 Page 219 Page 220 Page 221 Page 222 Page 223 Page 224 Page 225 Page 226 Page 229 Page 230 Page 231 Page 232 Page 233 Page 234 Page 235 Page 236 Page 237 Page 238 Page 239 Page 240 Page 241 Page 242 Page 243 Page 244 Page 245 Page 246 Page 247 Page 248 Page 249 Page 250 Page 251

Scan: The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod

⤓ Download page image (full resolution)

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

THE CONVENTION ESSAY 69

matriage (7:36-38). Other topics in dispute included
the status of slaves (7:17-24), the proper role of women
in the church (11:2-16), food laws (8:10), ecstatic
speaking in tongues (12:10 and 14:1-33), and even the
denial of the resurrection of the dead (ch. 15). It is
significant, I believe, that 19 centuries later four of these
same topics are centers of concern and dispute in the
church of our day.

The polarization in that day went from bad to worse
as Paul attempted to bring peace to the Corinthian
congregation. From his two letters we can reconstruct
the following probable sequence of events: Paul had
written a letter, now lost, which preceded our First
Corinthians (1 Cor.5:9). Then he wrote the letter we
call First Corinthians. He may have then sailed from
Ephesus to Corinth in an attempt to settle the matter
personally. While in Corinth on this visit, he ex-
perienced a most unpleasant situation in which many
showed disrepect for his apostolic office, even claiming
for themselves direct revelations from Christ. In grief
over the divided state of the congregation Paul re-
turned to Ephesus and there wrote another letter, now
also lost. This letter was a powerful reprimand as we
can tell from 2Cor.7:8, where Paul says his severe
letter made them sorry. But they needed Law, and
Paul spoke Law as Christ’s ambassador. Meanwhile
Titus, who probably had carried the severe letter, had
been working for peace in Corinth. Paul headed north
and met Titus in Macedonia. There he received the
good news that many now repented of their sin and
dissension and had extended an olive branch to Paul.
Then Paul wrote the letter we call Second Corinthians,
the letter of reconciliation, the reconciliation of man to
God and of man to man. Paul wrote it in preparation
for his third coming to them (2 Cor. 12:14). He sought
to complete the process of reconciliation reported by
Titus.

In the apostle’s conclusion he charged, “Examine
- yourselves, to see whether you are holding to your
faith. Test yourselves. Do you not realize that Jesus
Christ is in you—unless indeed you fail to meet the
test! .... What we pray for is your improvement” (2 Cor.
13:5 and 9). In that spirit let us these days in our
convention look at our age, our church, and the task
that faces our ambassadorship for Christ.

The year 1971 is not a good one. One commentator
recently wrote: “No one in his right mind would argue
that 1971— with its recession and its exhausting and
hateful war —is the best year this country has ever
seen. Given a choice, many Americans would put on
a blindfold and pick out of a hat another year in which
to live— any one of the past 500.” !

Alienation — the opposite of reconciliation — is a key
word in describing the modern scene. Only a few words
are necessary to remind us of the sad state of affairs.
The last calendar year saw in the U.S.A. almost 1,300
bombings, about twice the 1969 rate. Policemen are
being wantonly murdered in our large cities. Some
predict that gang warfare arising from traffic in nar-

cotics may eclipse even the violence of prohibition
days. Other forms of violence have grown apace
around the world. In many instances even high schools
and junior high schools have become centers of vio-
lence. In some ways we seem to be reverting to the
laws of the jungle.

On the educational scene 1971 has been a quieter
year on college campuses in America. This represents
a hopeful sign that young people are turning more to-
ward orderly processes to achieve their aims. But the
alienation is still there and is deep-rooted. Moreover,
much of the youth’s criticism of our American society
is justified. The National Commission on the Causes
and Prevention of Violence in its final report stated:
“Today’s intelligent, idealistic students see a nation
which has achieved the physical ability to provide food,
shelter and education for all, but has not yet devised
social institutions that do so. They see a society built
on the principle that all men are created equal, but
which has not yet assured equal opportunity in life.
They see a world of national states with the technical
brilliance to harness the ultimate energy, but without
the common sense to agree on methods of preventing
mutual destruction.” 2

We speak much of the generation gap — again with
overtones of alienation. The problem is a great one for
church and state. Margaret Mead in a recent study of
the generation gap has pointed out that our generation
and that of our children face problems no past pair
of generations has ever faced.’ Miss Mead describes
the older generation as those who still hold the seats
of power, and yet as those who grew up before World
War II we are “pioneers, immigrants in time who have
left behind our familiar worlds to live in a new age
under conditions that are different from any we have
known. Our thinking still binds us to the past — to
the world as it existed in our childhood and youth.
Born and bred before the electronic revolution, most
of us do not realize what it means.” On the other
side there is “the young generation . . . the articulate
young rebels all around the world who are lashing out
against the controls to which they are subjected. .. .
[They are] like the first generation born into a new
country. They are at home in this time. Satellites are
familiar in their skies. They have never known a time
when war did not threaten annihilation.”5 And so
we do not understand either the alienation or how
to cure it.

One could go on to talk of social alienation or com-
ment on the implications of the great abuse of drugs
and its tragic results. One could speak of the sheer
size and complexity of societal organizations which,
sociologists tell us, lead to estrangement in trade unions,
political parties, churches, and all other large-scale
organizations. The malady seems to be everywhere.

Perhaps all this is why a wave of nostalgia, of home-
sickness for the “good old days,” is sweeping the United
States. Old musical records, old radio programs, re-
prints of old Sears and Roebuck catalogs, even old