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
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