LCMS Convention Proceedings St. Louis, Missouri — 1992, Page 126

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

126 ‘ RESOLUTIONS

3. The-electronic media outreach portion of the Board
for Communication Services budget is reclassified to Mis-
sion and Outreach. The primary purpose is outreach to the
unchurched, and the programs are similar to worldwide
media outreach programs, which have been included in
the Board for Missions Services budget.

4. The audit costs for colleges, universities, and semi-

naries will now be reported under the category of preparing
church workers. Placement costs will also be reported in
this category.

5, Ministerial growth and support efforts applicable to
full-time church workers will now be reported under the
category of preparing church workers. These efforts are
similar to and are coordinated with the continuing edu-
cation programs offered by the Synod’s colleges, univers-
ities, and seminaries.

Future budgets.With the exception of some minor re-
finements, the Board of Directors and the floor committee
believe that the 1992/93 budget accomplishes the “right
sizing” of the Synod’s programs and staffs for the 1990s
and perhaps beyond. Subject to no further declines in in-
come from Districts, the board in future years intends to
apply anticipated reductions in development and planned
giving costs, supplemental retirement benefits to Veterans
of the Cross, and interest and debt service, equally to Mis-
sions and Outreach and to Preparing Church Workers, un-

til each receives 37% percent of the unrestricted dollars.

To Integrate and Expand Synod’s Method
for Mission and Ministry
Planning and Implementation

RESOLUTION 4-024
Overtures 4-01, 4-26-27 (CW, pp. 217-20, 227-28)

Rationale:

By the adoption of two specific resolutions, delegates to
the 1989 synodical convention set in motion a process in
which the Synod became involved in an evaluation of its
organizational effectiveness in relation to its primary pur-
pose. One, Res. 8-02A, asked the whole of the LCMS (con-
gregations, District and national staffs, boards and
commissions) to “involve itself in a coordinated planning
and decision-making process to assure more effective and
better coordinated services to congregations,” and also
asked that “proposed structural changes be brought to the
1992 synodical convention for approval” should such
changes seem advisable.

More specifically in adopting Res. 1-01, “To Intensify
and Prioritize Mission,” the Board of Directors was in-
structed “to evaluate the structures of our Synod in the
light of God’s primary purpose for the church” and to “rec-
ommend to the 1992 synodical convention a structure for
mission and ministry which gives priority to God’s primary
purpose for the church.” The Board of Directors, in re-
sponding to this directive, asked the Commission on Struc-

ture to take the initiative on this matter and to develop”

appropriate recommendations.

These convention actions were the culmination of de-
cisions already made by the 1986 synodical convention di-

recting the Commission on Structure “to initiate
churchwide discussions on the matter of planning and de-
cision making in the church on all levels, and on the basis
of these discussions .... submit to the 1989 convention
proposals for improved planning and decision making, rec-
ommending necessary structural changes” (Res. 5-01A).”
In approaching these assignments the commission stud-
ied past research, including the 1989 report of Colarelli,
Meyer and Associates (CMA). The commission also asked
the Synod’s Research Advisory Group whether these 19803
findings are still valid for the 1990s and were advised that
various focus-group meetings and other research since

- 1989 reinforce the CMA findings. Therefore, the CMA

study, which involved 650 congregational, District, and na-
tional leaders across all 35 Districts, and which contained
the following eight “valued elements,” served as guiding
principles to the commission in considering refinements in
synodical structure. These “valued elements” indicate con-
gregations desire the following:

1. A vision for the future of the LCMS that is based on
wide input and review and that generates broad com-
mitment and support.

2. The continued centrality of the congregations:

* Congregations need high quality and timely service
from Districts and the national office that meets
their needs in carrying out the mission.

+ Districts and the national office need to respect and
be sensitive to congregational uniqueness and
diversity.

¢ Districts and the national office need to recognize
that it isn’t easy for congregations to make input
(but input has to be obtained nevertheless). There
must be interactive, “high touch” methods to get
congregational input.

* The identification of needs and the development of
programs and other interventions must be “close to”
the congregations.

3. The bonding of congregations and Districts to each’
other through sharing of information, providing mu-
tual assistance, and being a resource to each other.

4. A synodical leadership group that has an overall un-
derstanding of the life of the church in today’s chang-
ing world:(i.e., the “big picture”). ‘

5. Funding by voluntary contributions from congrega-

_ tions to Districts to the Synod.

6. Effectiveness of implementation:

+ Accountability: Somebody in charge, somebody who
can follow up.

« Efficiency: Less duplication, bureaucracy, and
complexity.

7. Provision of some services from the national office,
including
¢ Seminaries and colleges;

* world mission;

+ Doctrinal review;

* Curriculum resources;

+ Administrative and support services;