LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 1973, Page 48

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

a

48 THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS

Committee to Evaluate the Lutheran Council in the U. S.A.
was appointed. Missouri Synod representatives on that com-
mittee were Dr. Roland Wiederaenders, Dr. Milton Car-
penter, Dr. Herbert Mueller,

The interchurch committee divided itself into three sub-
committees: (1) Constitutional Questions, (2) Program
Evaluation, (3) Fiscal Policies and Procedures. Although
subcommittee 2 was not able to complete its work, the
Committee met several times in plenary and presented its
report at the cut-off date to the three church body presi-
dents. They in turn submitted it to the Executive Commit-
tee of the Lutheran Council.

In the meantime, the annual meeting of the Council
early in 1971 had authorized a study of “the proliferation
of inter-Lutheran activities outside the framework of the
Council.” When it became apparent that many overtures
to the 1971 convention of the Missouri Synod were calling
for a thorough study and evaluation of the Council itself,
an executive directive enlarged the scope of the February
directive to include a broad self-study of the Council. The
results of this self-study, conducted largely by Council staff,
were also submitted to the Executive Committee of LCUSA.

The Executive Committee distilled these two reports,
added observations and conclusions of its own, and decided
to submit this material through the General Secretary for
reaction to four consultations:

(1) A consultation of service beneficiaries of LCUSA
(e. g., welfare associations, etc.)

(2) A consultation of members of standing committees
of LCUSA

(3) A consultation of church body program executives,
such as missions, public relations, ete,

(4) A consultation of the staff of LCUSA.

The results of these consultations were synthesized by
the General Secretary who presented the consensus report
and recommendations to the Executive Committee,

The Executive Committee again combed through this
material and proposed recommendations to the 1973 annual
meeting of the Council.

In can be readily seen that in this long and tedious
process some of the concrete suggestions hammered out in
the small subcommittees of the original Interchurch Com-
mittee to Evaluate LCUSA were diffused.

As a result, it would seem that not much change of a
substantive nature has resulted, at least not in the direction
of simplification. This also means that it continues to be
difficult, in the minds of the Missouri Synod participants,
to properly evaluate the Council as requested in Res. 3-18.

These insights were shared as directed by the 1971 con-
vention resolution with the Board of Directors. The board
in turn now submits the following report and recommenda-
tion to the New Orleans convention:

The Board of Directors is of the opinion that at the
present moment in history the Synod may well regard its
participation in LCUSA as primarily an investment in
inter-Lutheran relationships in the United States.

Furthermore, there are practical benefits which have
resulted and which may result from our Participation in
the Council. It must be admitted, however, that it has
been extremely difficult because of varying structures
and of differing budget approaches to pinpoint not only
the specific programs and activities but above all their
specific cost, which in turn would enable the Synod to
make a more reasoned judgment as to the value of any
specific program or activity. Over against this, it should
be noted that the Board of Directors’ own approach to
budgeting has already yielded better results in effecting
savings and better coordination of effort and we are also
given the assurance that as time oes on the budgeting in
the Lutheran Council will delve to a deeper level at
which it will be easier to determine the cost of individual
programs and activities. Both the Synod and the Council

to make better judgments on the extent of the Synod’s

participation in the Programs and activities of LCUSA.
Therefore, the Board of Directors recommends that

the Synod continue its membership in the Council and

that the Synod give the Board of Directors and through
it all boards and commissions the directive to keep the
programs and activities of the Council under constant
scrutiny to help determine in which of these the Synod
should participate in order to receive the utmost advan-
tage from every dollar invested from the monies con-
tributed by God’s people.

Boarp oF Directors

Herbert Mueller, Secretary

2-06

Report of LCMS Representatives
to the ALC-LCMS Commission on Fellowship

In accord with Resolution 3-21 of the 1971 Milwaukee
convention of Synod, the commission which was established
to “assist the church bodies in the proper understanding and
practice of fellowship” continued to meet. The members
from the American Lutheran Church graciously acceded to
our requests to meet and cooperated wholeheartedly in
answering questions and studying issues. The intention to
meet more frequently was hampered by the extended illness
and death of Dr. Kent Knutson. Nevertheless, meetings were
held in Chicago on Dec. 9 of 1971, Feb, 24—25, April 21—23
of 1972, and Jan. 19, 1973. Another meeting is scheduled for
April 26—27, 1973. The LCMS representatives on the com-
mission are President J. A. O. Preus, Vice-Presidents Theo-
dore F. Nickel and W. Harry Krieger, Drs. Richard Schultz
and Ralph Bohlmann, and Pastor Richard Warneck.

The LCMS commissioners attempted faithfully to convey
and interpret the action of the Milwaukee convention re-
garding fellowship with the ALC. The request that the
ALC reconsider its action regarding the ordination of
women to the pastoral tinistry was presented as a matter
of serious concern. The ALC commissioners expressed
willingness to discuss the matter, pointing out that only a
synodical convention of the ALC could properly decide
whether or not to reconsider the action of a previous con-
vention.

On Oct. 21, 1971, the Church Council of the ALC issued
a statement entitled “Fellowship with The Lutheran Church
— Missouri Synod, Guidelines for Development.” Therein
the ALC Church Council reiterated its desire to maintain
and improve fellowship with the LCMS and its congrega-
tions. It restated the position of the ALC that the ordina-
tion of women lies within the freedom of administration of
the churches and does not involve the authority of Scripture.
Moreover, the ALC Church Council specifically requested
“a formal statement on the understanding of the basis for
fellowship from The Lutheran Church — Missouri Synod in
order to ascertain whether or not the Missouri Synod has
changed its position since the declaration in 1969.”

From this exploration of the issues as each group of
commissioners saw them, the agenda for the meetings during
the biennium was established. The issues which surfaced
were: The Ordination of Women to the Pastoral Ministry as
a Doctrinal or Administrative Concern, The Basis of Fellow-
ship, and The Doctrine of the Word and the Nature of
Scriptural Authority. The following papers were read and
discussed in the meetings:

1. “What Do the Scriptures Say About the Ministry of
Women in the Church?” — pr. Joseph Burgess.

2.“‘An Explanation of the Position of The Lutheran
Church — Missouri Synod on the Ordination of Women to
the Pastoral Office,” together with documentary exhibits —
Dr. Ralph Bohlmann.

3. “The Position of The Lutheran Church — Missouri
Synod on the Basis for Fellowship,” together with docu-
mentary exhibits— Dr. Ralph Bohlmann.

4. “Reflections on the Theological Basis for Church Fel-
lowship” — Dr. William Weiblen.

5. “Some Questions and Comments on Dr. William Weib-
len’s Reflections on the Theological Basis for Church Fellow-
ship” — Dr. Ralph Bohlmann.

6. “Orders of Creation and the Principle of Ordination
as it Pertains to Ministry” —Dr. Martin H. Scharlemann
(guest consultant).

7. “Some Observations on the Orders of Creation and the