LCMS Convention Proceedings St. Louis, Missouri — 1981, Page 75

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

jada and look upon Mexico the way we did in the
ays of General Pershing is blindness. The Synod of
coisa very small group. Mission work in Mexico is
“weemely difficult. We need to think of work in terms of
fexico and other Latin American countries and the
aribbean as a Very significant portion of the mission
allenge of this church. Much more needs to be done.
fe’ve made some small beginnings, but they are only
innings.
When we look at our own nation, at the newly
blished census statistics, at known population shifts,
@ simply are going to have to start facing some
‘alities and making some far-reaching decisions. We
e sat on the sidelines and looked at the statistics of
ihe Lutheran Church in America and The American
;theran Church as they have lost even more members
ghan we have despite our conflict. This may make us feel
oud, or at least less embarrassed, but there is small
comfort in this. The fact is that the LCA is located
gely in the northeastern section of the United States,
“which has had a net loss in population over the past
“decade. The American Lutheran Church is located in
“the upper Midwest which, next to the northeast, has
. suffered the greatest loss in population and has barely
held its own during the last decade. The southern and
western parts of the United States are absolutely
swarming with displaced and uncared for LCA and
ALC Lutherans. They are also filled with the same kind
_ of Missourians.

I have distributed to our District Presidents and to
our Board of Directors material relative to population
migration in our country. These statistics and informa-
tion are scientifically irrefutable. We have to devise a
method of following our people into the areas of this
nation where they are moving. Unfortunately, particu-
larly in the South, to some extent in the southwest, this
has been an area where our church has not been strong.
In 1969, 70 percent of the membership of the Missouri
Synod lived in 12 midwestern and upper midwestern
states. Today that figure is 65 percent, and it is going
down steadily.

We simply are not spending our money wisely,
serving our people, or carrying out the Great Commis-
sion of our Lord if we still continue to think that each
District is to do its work only in its own geographical
area. There are Districts in this church where it would
be almost impossible to establish another Missouri
Synod church, and if we did so it would be at great cost,
at glacial growth, and would end only in a small,
confused, and often poorly pastored congregation. The
same amount of effort, money, and resources, spent in
other parts of the country would produce infinitely
greater results. We have to learn to think synodically
and nationally and internationally rather than
parochially or only in terms of our own community, our
own Circuit, or our own District. The test of this will
come when we have the division of money raised for the
North American Mission program of Forward in
Remembrance. It would be a marvelous thing to say
that we are the greatest church in the country in the

PRESIDENT’S ADDRESS 75

area of parochial schools and are the most unparochial
church in the area of missions.

Related to this is something that has plagued not
only your President for the past 12 years but preceding
Presidents back into the dim and distant past, together
with District Presidents, Boards of Directors, boards,
commissions and committees of the Synod, and all
those who have had to do with trying to make this old
contraption that we call the Missouri Synod run. We
havea Constitution that was drawn up for 12 congrega-
tions with an aggregate of 4,000 members. This Consti-
tution has basically been changed very little in these
134 years.

I am not advocating any significant changes in the
Constitution. It is like our United States Constitution. It
was drawn up by a man who was a constitutional and
ecclesiastical genius; namely, C. F. W. Walther. But in
the structure that has developed out of this Constitution
we are in some ways still back in 1847, and in many
ways we are back in 1920 or 1930.

The need for changes in our structure has been so
evident that during these entire 12 years, without
cessation, we have had a committee or task force on
structure. We have spent hundreds of thousands of
dollars on these committees and task forces. I am
endorsing the proposal that we now create a Standing
Committee on Structure that can give its attention to
each aspect of the synodical structure which needs
revision and review. I also am strongly urging that the
convention pass the recommendations of the present
Task Force II as slightly revised by Floor Committee
No. 2. Not everything may be perfect, you may not like
everything, but some things have to be changed; and
where we make mistakes, the Lord is merciful, the
Synod somewhat merciful, and we can make new
changes and new revisions as we go. But we do need to
change some of these things. They are antiquated,
cumbersome, and almost impossible to work with. I
have heard that some may want to table these proposals,
which in effect kills them for the time being until a
future convention. Responsible churchmanship, how-
ever, calls for facing the issues rather than avoiding
them. Let us discuss, debate, if need be, and then decide.
One decision, especially, simply must be made, that
having to do with the triennial cycle of conventions. The
Internal Audit Department reviewed the Task Force
recommendations and developed the estimated cost
savings of $3,725,060 to be achieved over the six-year
period required to fully implement the new convention
cycle. During the six years one Synod convention would
be eliminated at an estimated cost of $1,618,760, and one
year of District conventions would be eliminated at total
estimated costs of $1,095,500. Meetings and other costs
eliminated by the combination of boards and commis-
sions would save an estimated $168,467 per year for a
total savings of $1,010,800 over six years. All estimates
are based on currect costs.

Which brings me to one of our chief considerations.
We have had this enormously successful Forward in
Remembrance campaign. A very special word of thanks