Collection › LCMS Convention Workbook (St. Louis, Missouri) › 2019 · 67th Convention, Tampa › Page 18
LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2019, Page 18

Scan: The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod
Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

18

OFFICER, BOARD, AND COMMISSION REPORTS

Issues for 2019 Convention Delegate Consideration

properties, and human capital) as a matter of chief
priority to ensure consistent alignment with and
support of Synod mission emphases and priorities
(our international schools need, first and foremost,
to be about doing the work of the church!); and then
to better serve the needs of the international schools
themselves (e.g., in recruitment of LCMS-rostered
church workers to serve in school administrator,
faculty, and staff positions).

2019 Convention floor committees and delegates, the following list presents several important matters (insofar as these
are from my perspective as CMO) to which I would draw your
attention for awareness and action as you deem appropriate:
••

••

••

Clarity, consensus, and harmony on the practical
meaning and application of Bylaw 3.8.3, with respect
to the requirement that the BIM (and within the
context of all of its duties and responsibilities set
forth in that bylaw) “… shall serve as the only sending agency through which workers and funds are sent
to the foreign mission areas of the Synod, including
the calling, appointing, assigning, withdrawing and
releasing of missionaries (ministers of religion–ordained and ministers of religion–commissioned) and
other workers for the ministries of foreign areas …”
continues to present a puzzle. Despite the issuance of
CCM Opinion 14-2724, a desired clarity, consensus
and harmony remains elusive among the laity, church
workers, congregations, districts, Synod, synodwide
corporate entities, RSOs and non-RSOs and mission
societies and other entities and organizations affiliated with the LCMS through official and unofficial
means. Please read carefully the comments provided
below by the OIM executive director and global staff
in regard to the damaging consequences of such lingering unresolved differences of opinion and practice
among us in even the most basic and minimally effective communication and coordination of our work
as members of one church body, especially in global
mission fields outside of the 35 districts of the Synod.
This is not a matter of “who controls” or “who’s in
charge”—for “absolute control” is not what is needed
or desired and no one in the LCMS has the capacity to implement such control absolutely on a global
scale—but rather: How can we best honor, love, and
respect one another in life together, in Christ, as we
strive to advance the Gospel to the peoples and nations of the earth? And then do that in a fashion that
reflects utmost excellence in the stewardship of the resources (e.g. the Word, human, talents and expertise
and gifts, financial, material, etc.) that God has so
abundantly rained down upon His Church?
Encouragement to the Synod’s international schools
in Asia (Hong Kong, Shanghai, and Hanoi) to be
steadfast and thorough in a Lutheran Christian identity and mission, even in situational contexts where
constraints imposed in the left-hand realm would
otherwise attenuate or preclude a clear proclamation
of the Gospel and the connection of unbelievers to
their Savior Jesus.
The time has come, for instance, to set in place a sufficiently well-structured and funded LCMS international
schools administrative organization that would provide
continuous, well-informed guidance and oversight of
these very significant enterprises (some of the largest
in Synod, and they are rich in mission and market
opportunities, current/future financial assets, physical

2019 Convention Workbook

Such an administrative-oversight organization
(and its staffing) should rightly be located within
the CMO’s office (that is, as part of the OIM) and
be funded by the vast financial resources generated
by these schools themselves, from their own ongoing operations (not taking precious mission dollars
that are better applied in other mission and ministry
initiatives). It would intentionally/aggressively work
to ensure the fulfillment/implementation of BIM
ends policies. “Policies determined by the [BIM]
(implemented by staff) may include but not be limited
to: … international schools” (Bylaw 3.8.3). “[OIM]
responsibilities may include but not be limited to:
… establishment and maintenance of international
schools” (Bylaw 3.8.3.3).
••

The program offices that are under the supervision of
the CMO will strongly welcome any resolution bringing about well-defined and sufficiently funded initiatives to effect better communication, coordination, collaboration, and cooperation between all of us—Synod,
districts, congregations, RSOs, other agencies, church
workers, and congregants—as we go about the work
of the church together.

••

We pray that Convention delegates will especially
take note and get behind the ONM’s “Making
Disciples for Life” and PED’s church worker/student
recruitment initiatives.

Reports by Program Unit
OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL MISSION (OIM)

Rev. Daniel McMiller, Executive Director
The Office of International Mission plans, coordinates, and executes LCMS international mission
and mercy work in order to expand and sustain the
global confessional Lutheran community.
Through the seven current mission priorities of the LCMS,
affirmed and adopted at the 2016 Convention and previously
cited (above)—whether in new mission starts or working with a
mature partner church—our focus is to bring the pure Gospel
to new people who do not know Christ, and to labor to plant
the seed of the Living Word more deeply with those who already
hold it dear by faith. LCMS missionaries spread the Gospel,
plant Lutheran congregations, and show mercy. In the reports
that follow, it will be evident that this is done both in new fields
and where emerging or partner churches request our support to
enhance their capacities to tell the world about Jesus today and
for generations to come.