The Disciplinary Process for Wayward LCMS Recognized Service Organizations

District Presidents are primarily responsible for overseeing the process to keep RSOs in line. Which ones are doing it?

As multiple instances have again come to light of various “Lutheran ministries” deliberately subverting LCMS Recognized Service Organization (RSO) requirements, the whole arrangement appears to be the Hotel California; you can check out any time you like, but you can never leave.

Organizations like Lutheran Family Services Rocky Mountain (LFS-RM) have been flaunting fostering children to homosexuals.¹ It’s also notable that LFS-RM’s pregnancy counselling services have unsettling statements about pregnancy that do not obviously preclude abortion:

We are here to give you unbiased and accurate information about all of your options in pregnancy. Our hope for you is that you make a well-informed decision and feel confident on your path forward.

We Support…

Individuals in whatever path they choose.

https://www.lfsrm.org/Pregnancy-Options-Colorado

Simple Reasons for the LCMS to Immediately and Permanently Terminate an RSO

RSOs are tax-exempt service organizations independent of the LCMS, but tacked on in the interest of “cooperation in externals” to extend the Synod’s mission and ministry. The LCMS grants RSO status to signify that the organization fosters the church's mission, operates in harmony with Synod programs, and respects its doctrine and practice (as outlined in the Synod's Constitution, Article II). RSO status is governed by LCMS Bylaws Section 6.2 (from the 2023 Handbook) and policies from the Synod's Board of Directors (e.g., Policies 5.9.1–5.9.2).

The Synod does not exert control over RSOs, endorse them, or take financial responsibility for any debts or service expenses/functions. The recognition is a statement about “alignment” that allows the RSO to operate autonomously under the direction of its board of directors. However, organizations must agree to conform to the Synod’s doctrine and practice, which must be clearly stated in the organization’s governing documents.

RSO status is granted for a period of five years at a time and requires reapplication for renewal every half decade. RSOs are classified into three types²:

1. Witness

2. Educational

3. Mercy

Status is granted by either the Office of National Mission (ONM) or the Office of International Mission (OIM), and there could be some custom tailoring of requirements to address the organization’s specific ministry and service focus.³

The RSO program started in 1979 with significant updates implemented in 2008. Upon reviewing the various RSO clauses and documents, it is evident that another substantial update is long overdue to clarify and expedite the termination process for organizations that become wilfully deviant or “misaligned”.

Source.

Correction and discipline

RSO status can be addressed if an organization deviates from alignment with LCMS doctrine and practice (not respecting the Synod’s teaching or having conduct that opposes it). Unfortunately, there is no formal "expulsion" process like that for Synod members (Bylaw Section 2.14–2.18), because RSOs are independent entities. Consequently, the RSO program is based on overlapping levels of trust and goodwill:

1. The RSO Standing Committee does its job correctly.

2. The granting mission office does its job correctly.

3. The District President does his job correctly.

4. The RSO conducts itself with integrity.

RSO discipline, as it exists, is handled through the immediate ecclesiastical oversight of the District President where the RSO is resident, reporting, evaluation, and policies established by the granting mission offices.

Surprisingly, there is no detailed process for termination/expulsion. Withdrawal is explicitly mentioned in Bylaw 6.2.3(c), but details are office-specific and not exhaustively detailed; therefore, mission offices are expected to develop and apply their own criteria for withdrawal. Where disputes arise, the mechanism triggers resolution efforts, and withdrawal is treated as a last resort. This is a significant oversight in the bylaws, given the many long-standing violations and indifference to the explicit theological alignment requirements.

Ongoing Monitoring and Ecclesiastical Oversight

• Responsibility: Monitoring occurs through:

  • Initial and Renewal Evaluations: At application and every 5 years during reapplication, all criteria (e.g., doctrinal harmony, program alignment) are evaluated (Bylaw 6.2.3–6.2.4). This includes reviewing governing documents, activities, and the composition of the board.

    • Many of the RSOs have retained status despite manifest opposition to Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions. The evaluation process is undeniably broken unless this is a case of POSIWID - the purpose of a system is what it does.

  • On-Site Visits: Granting offices (e.g., mission offices) or agencies may conduct visits during application, reapplication, or as needed (RSO FAQs).

    • Visit reports should be mandatory and attached to RSO records for online access by all LCMS parishioners. Surprise inspections at any time and for any reason should be included in the requirements.

  • District President Oversight: District presidents exercise ecclesiastical oversight (defined as monitoring, inquiry, suggestions, and reporting concerns) over RSO operations within their districts (Bylaw 6.2.1 [b–c]). This includes supervising rostered workers (e.g., called pastors) and ensuring activities do not contradict doctrine.

    • RSOs must facilitate oversight and consult district presidents in call processes or mission activities (e.g., church planting requires concurrence; Bylaw 6.2.1 [d]).

      • Based on the conspicuous offenses of many senior RSOs, DP oversight is abysmal, and, consequently, Synod President and BoD oversight of the DPs is abysmal.

• International Oversight: For global work, RSOs must cooperate with the Office of International Mission and respect the protocols of partner churches (Bylaw 6.2.1 [e]).

• Reporting Concerns: If a district president identifies "unresolved doctrinal and practical concerns" (e.g., actions contrary to Synod doctrine), they report to the granting mission office (Bylaw 6.2.1 [c]). This triggers further investigation.

  • Any member of Synod or a parishioner should be empowered to submit a report that initiates cascading investigations.

Identifying and acting on misalignment

• Non-alignment might include:

  • Acting contrary to doctrine (e.g., unionism, heterodox practices; promoting homosexuality, Constitution Article VI).

  • Programs not in harmony with Synod emphases (Bylaw 6.2.1).

  • Failure to respect ecclesiastical supervision or congregational rights (Bylaw 6.2.1 [b]).

  • Ethical/financial issues (e.g., failing an audit, receiving an audit management letter citing material concerns or deficiencies, poor fundraising practices; Policy 5.9.1.2.3).

• Concerns often arise via district reports, complaints, or reapplication reviews. The RSO Standing Committee (Policy 5.9.2) oversees the uniform process, including monitoring reapplications.

Resolution and Investigation Process

• Informal Efforts: The Synod prefers “evangelical resolution” with an emphasis on nurturing relationships; withdrawal is rare and handled administratively to avoid public attention and negative press. The District President or mission office may:

  • Advise, admonish, or counsel the RSO (similar to general Synod principles in Bylaw 1.10 for disputes, though not directly applicable to RSOs).

  • Request responses to inquiries or suggest changes.

• Formal Review: If concerns persist:

  • The granting mission office investigates, potentially with on-site visits or additional requirements (RSO FAQs; Bylaw 6.2.3 [c]).

  • The RSO Standing Committee (comprising Synod officers and appointees; Policy 5.9.2) may review for consistency.

• RSOs must indemnify the Synod against claims from such reviews (Policy 5.9.1.2.8).

Withdrawal or Revocation of Status

• Authority: Each mission office adopts policies for withdrawal of status (Bylaw 6.2.3 [c]). This is not a centralized Synod-wide trial but an administrative decision by the granting office, subject to Board of Directors policies (Policy 5.9).

• Triggers: Proven non-alignment (e.g., via reports or failed reapplication) leads to non-renewal or early withdrawal. Status is not "in effect" without a signed agreement (RSO FAQs), so misalignment voids renewal.

• Process Steps:

  1. Notification: The mission office notifies the RSO of concerns and provides opportunity for response/correction (implied in monitoring; no explicit timeline).

  2. Decision: If unresolved, the office withdraws status, informing the RSO and Synod (e.g., removal from The Lutheran Annual listing).

  3. Appeal: Not explicitly detailed, but RSOs could appeal via Synod dispute resolution (Bylaw 1.10) if it involves a call-related issue or agreement breach. Otherwise, it's at the office's discretion.

• Consequences:

  • Loss of privileges: Ineligibility for Synod-rostered workers on calls, loans (Lutheran Church Extension Fund), Concordia Plans, Foundation services, or use of Synod logo (Policy 5.9.2.3.3).

  • Rostered workers may lose Synod membership if serving the RSO (Bylaw 2.11–2.13).

  • No Synod liability for the RSO's debts/services (reinforced in agreements; Policy 5.9.1.2.5–2.7).

  • Public delisting: potential impact on partnerships with districts/congregations.

Conclusion

The LCMS’s eccentric fondness for “cooperation in externals” has caused it many problems, not least with its RSOs. There is ample evidence of accretion of heterodox and heretical doctrine and practice over decades. Yet, the worst offending RSOs remain entrenched, even if they have progressively shed direct LCMS representation from their boards (a red flag…?).

The RSO situation can be likened to the Jeffrey Epstein drama - the base wants the persistent evasion and pretending to end. They want immediate and decisive action, not the endless jinking and juking we are served up, which sidesteps accountability and discipline. It is grossly hypocritical to impose Lutheran Identity and Mission Outcome (LIMO) requirements on our Concordias when the Synod is aligned with the Church of Satan in some RSOs.

1. If diversity is the concern, there is an alternate Lutheran church body in thrall to sexual deviancy.

2. Witness Service Organization
Engages in Word/Sacrament ministry (e.g., chaplaincy, media, missions, church worker training/support). - Governed solely by Synod (or partner church) congregations or a board of Synod/partner church members. - Directly supports proclamation, often requiring close doctrinal alignment. Witness RSOs must have boards solely from Synod members

Educational Service Organization
Operates Christian schools, camps, or similar (not governed solely by Synod congregations). - Emphasizes Christian education/nurture. - Status managed per site for schools; evaluated by the geographical district (or non-geographical if applicable).

Mercy Service Organization
Facilitates mercy work (e.g., social services) without compromising standards. - Coordinates with Synod/partner congregations, ideally near Word/Sacrament ministry. - Allows cooperation in externals but maintains confessional integrity.

3. Core Requirements for All RSO Applicants: To qualify, an organization must demonstrate the following through its application, governing documents, and operations:

1. Alignment with LCMS Mission and Doctrine:

   • Foster the Synod's mission and ministry (Constitution Article III).

   • Respect and not act contrary to LCMS doctrine and practice (e.g., Scriptures and Lutheran Confessions as per Constitution Article II).

   • Engage in activities that extend and harmonize with Synod programs without compromising confessional standards.

2. Independence and Governance:

   • Be independently incorporated and operate with freedom in objectives, programs, administration, and finances (Bylaw 6.2.1 [a]).

   • Provide for appropriate LCMS representation on the governing board (e.g., members from Synod congregations; levels determined by the granting office).

   • Include disclaimers in governing documents stating that RSO status is not an endorsement of fiscal solvency or a Synod guarantee of financial obligations (Bylaw 6.2.3 [f]; Policy 5.9.1.2.5).

   • In secured debt agreements exceeding 10% of assets, include a disclaimer that the Synod has no responsibility for repayment (Policy 5.9.1.2.7).

3. Respect for Synod Structures and Supervision:

   • Respect congregational self-governance and district authority (Bylaw 6.2.1 [b–d]).

   • Facilitate ecclesiastical supervision by district presidents for rostered workers (e.g., pastors or commissioned ministers) and operations within districts.

   • For international work, cooperate with the Office of International Mission and respect protocols with LCMS partner churches (Bylaw 6.2.1 [e]).

   • For church planting or missions, consult and obtain concurrence from affected district presidents and mission boards (Bylaw 6.2.1 [d]).

   • Indemnify the Synod against claims arising from RSO status (Policy 5.9.1.2.8).

4. Financial and Ethical Standards:

   • Hold IRS 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status (Policy 5.9.1.2.1).

   • Demonstrate ethical fundraising practices (Policy 5.9.1.2.3).

   • Ensure dissolution provisions distribute assets to another 501(c)(3) organization (Policy 5.9.1.2.4).

   • Provide full financial disclosure if requested (Bylaw 1.5.4).

5. Operational Harmony:

   • Coordinate with LCMS districts, congregations, schools, or auxiliaries.

   • For calls to rostered workers: Board must meet composition requirements (e.g., members from Synod congregations), consult the district president, and use Synod-approved call documents (Bylaw 6.2.2.2).

Requirements by RSO ClassificationThe Synod distinguishes three classes of RSOs (Bylaw 6.2.2), with policies tailored by the relevant mission board (e.g., Board for National Mission or International Mission). Tiers within classes may recognize varying degrees of churchly governance and support.

Application Process and Evaluation

• Evaluation:

  • Processed by the RSO Standing Committee and assigned to a granting office (e.g., National/International Mission) or district (Bylaw 6.2.4).

  • For educational/mercy organizations in one district: May be district-evaluated using Synod-developed tools.

  • For a broader/international scope, directly through the relevant mission office.

  • District presidents provide ecclesiastical oversight and input.

• Agreement: Sign a formal agreement with the Synod (effective for 5 years; reapply to renew).

• Fees: Possible application/renewal fees to cover costs (Bylaw 6.2.4 [c]).

• Monitoring: Annual reports, potential on-site visits; status can be withdrawn for non-compliance (Bylaw 6.2.3).

Additional Notes

• Subsidiaries/Affiliates: Parent RSO status does not extend; each must apply separately.

• Benefits: Eligibility for Synod rostered workers, loans (via Lutheran Church Extension Fund), Concordia Plans, Foundation services, etc., but no financial guarantees.