LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 1975, Page 65

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS 65

During the biennium more than 10,000 requests for informa-
tion, literature, and counsel were received in the commission
office. Many of these concerned new organizations, movements,
subcultures, and quasi-religious entities that have caused dis-
turbances in families and congregations. These are about
equally divided between pastors and laymen (individuals,
church officers, and boards), and about 10% of the requests have
come from other church bodies that do not provide a service
such as the commission’s.

Under Resolution 4-47 of the New Orleans convention the
Board of Directors of the Synod was requested to make recom-
mendations regarding overtures that, for lack of time, were not
acted upon by the convention. The board, in turn, assigned to
the Commission on Organizations for report to the next con-
vention Overture 2-174, which requested that the Commission
on Organizations be instructed to establish guidelines for
evaluation of those lodges known collectively as “the animal
lodges” (Elks, Moose, Eagles) on the basis of their local customs
and practices instead of their charter agreements. The conven-
tion floor committee, after receiving information from the
organizations themselves, prepared a resolution that this
overture be declined because it would lend support to practices
that have been declared illegal in civil courts. The resolution
did not reach the floor of the convention because of the press of
time. The commission has remained in contact with the lodges
in question during the biennium and has received repeated
assurance that local lodges are still bound by civil contract in
their charters and that breaches of charter agreement are
actionable in court. Lodge officials continue to insist that “social
memberships” (uninitiated) are illegal and that it is uncon-
scionable for Christian churches or individuals to encourage,
support, or participate in them.

While the matter of “social memberships” causes the most
disturbances in congregations in regard to the “old-line” lodges,
the various new “movements” and “subcultures” and philos-
ophies are drawing disciples from Christian congregations and
families. The commission is dependent on, and appreciative
of, news articles, reports, handouts, etc., mailed to its office
for informational purposes. Using the commission office as
a clearinghouse, congregations of the Synod can minister to one
another by sharing information and experience that is theirs.

Jakob K. Heckert, Chairman
Philip Lochhaas, Executive Secretary

3-04

Report of LCMS Representatives
to Lutheran Council in the U.S.A.

Appointed to serve as representatives of The Lutheran
Church — Missouri Synod to the annual meeting of the Lutheran
Council early in 1974 were the following: Dr. Ralph Bohlmann,
Dr. Milton Carpenter, Rev. Moses S. Dickinson, Rev. Wilbert
E. Griesse, Dr. August Bernthal, Rev. August T. Mennicke,
Rev. Charles S. Mueller, Dr. Herbert Mueller, Mr. Carl Muhlen-
bruch, Rev. Frederick Niedner, Dr. J. A. O. Preus, Mr. John
Schuelke, Dr. E. C. Weber, and Rev. Arthur Ziegler.

Appointed to serve in that capacity to the annual meeting
in 1975 were: Dr. Milton Carpenter, Rev. Moses S. Dickinson,
Rev. Edmund H. Happel, Rev. Roland A. Hopmann, Dr. Martin
Lieske, Rev. Albert Marcis, Dr. Alvin Mueller, Dr. Herbert
Mueller, Rev. Samuel Nafzger, Dr. J. A. O. Preus, Rev. Herman
C. Scherer, Mr. John Schuelke, Dr. E. C. Weber, and Rev.
Walter L. Zeile.

In each of these annual meetings Dr. Herbert Mueller was
elected vice-president of the Council, and Dr. Milton Carpenter
was elected to join the President of the Synod, Dr. J. A. O. Preus,
and the vice-president of the Council, Dr. Herbert Mueller, as
members of the Executive Committee.

The Board of Directors reported in great detail to the New
Orleans convention on the effort initiated by the Synod to have
a thorough self-study made of the Council. The subcommittee
assigned to evaluate the specific programs of the Council had
been unable to finish its work. As a result one of the outcomes
of that joint study was the creation of a Committee on Planning
and Development. Now serving on that committee as Missouri
Synod representatives are: Mr. John Schuelke, Mr. Norman

Sell, Dr. Alvin Mueller. The Committee on Planning and De-
velopment obtained evaluations of each program by the LCUSA
executives, executive cabinet, and standing committees and
subsequently made its own evaluation of the programs in which
it classified each program in one of the following categories —re-
tain, expand, or curtail. Simultaneous with this review, Mis-
souri’s respective department heads reviewed the LCUSA pro-
grams using the same evaluation documents as LCUSA to
determine the value of various Council programs to the Missouri
Synod. On the base of these studies the Board of Directors con-
cluded that certain programs were of limited value at this point
in time and for that reason the Missouri Synod participation in
these programs should be canceled or curtailed. These reduc-
tions would have been made even if the financial crunch in the
Missouri Synod had not occurred.

The Missouri Synod members of the Executive Committee
immediately notified the committee that the Board of Directors
was proposing to recommend approximately $500,000 as the
contribution to the Council for the 1975—76 fiscal year be-
ginning March 1. For the previous year the contribution had
been $700,000. The Missouri Synod representatives indicated
their willingness either to treat this as a lump-sum contribution
or to indicate the individual programs of the Council that were
of higher priority to the Synod.

After a lengthy discussion in a special meeting of the Execu-
tive Committee of the Council, agreement was reached that
listing the priority of the programs would be preferable. On
this basis the total share of the Synod for specific programs was
$493,000. Priority was given to the following areas: the Division
of Theological Studies; the Office of the General Secretary; Re-
search, Planning, and Development: and the Division of Service
to Military Personnel. It was recommended that a number of
programs be curtailed in other areas, including Mission and
Ministry, Campus Ministry and Educational Services, Youth
Program, Public Affairs and Government Relations, and the
Office of Communication and Interpretation. It should be re-
membered that these priorities were the result of internal
studies extending over several years.

The Executive Committee then discussed the establishment
of an orderly procedure to avoid dislocating staff too abruptly
and to provide for a transition of programs that would not dis-
rupt the ongoing efforts of the Council.

LCMS representatives suggested what they considered to
be an equitable and workable solution: that all present pro-
grams of LCUSA be continued for 1975—76 with each church
body contributing the same percentage of its expected contri-
bution as the LCMS and the necessary balance then to be taken
from present reserves, operating surplus, and other available
funds. This would allow a full year for further study and ample
time for transition. A modified version of this procedure, which
was proposed by The American Lutheran Church and the Lu-
theran Church in America and concurred in by the LCMS, was
finally adopted. It provided for a 4-month transition period be-
ginning March 1 instead of a period of an entire year. This
amount of time was considered sufficient, and it was felt there
was greater certainty that enough reserve funds would be
available.

The other two church bodies—ALC and LCA—had meet-
ings to determine which programs they will continue in without
LCMS participation. Based on input from these meetings, the
degree of curtailment of several programs was adjusted by the
LCMS. This, together with a correction in the allocation percent
to the three church bodies, resulted in a final budget allocation
to LCUSA of $546,075 in 1975 as compared with $700,000 in 1974.

This proposal was then presented to the 1975 annual meeting
of the Council in Minneapolis. At that time several minor re-
visions in the details were made, but basically the plan was
approved. Missouri’s share of the surplus will be contributed
to the operations for the balance of the fiscal year while the
LCA and the ALC shares of the surplus would be borrowed by
the Council at no interest in order to provide the necessary bank
balances in various accounts.

The work of the Committee on Planning and Development
will continue. This committee will make its further reeommenda-
tions to the Executive Committee as it completes its studies.

Therefore, though the actions of the past year were painful,
we are confident that in the long run they will result in a more
efficient and serviceable common agency.