It's telling that the LCMS could not influence or reform LIRS to return to a Lutheran identity. So much of this is going on, and we are losing institution after institution. Robert Conquest's three laws remain undefeated.
What about the smaller agencies that are RSOs of the LCMS? Is there oversight as to whether their current programs and practices are "in harmony with the doctrine and practice of the LCMS"?
You are focusing on one particular instance, but this does not guarantee that all instances are "well monitored and legitimate". You cannot possibly know that. Nor that because a "system" of oversight exists that it is automatically effective.
Not really. The ratio of RSOs to the staff assigned to vet them is overwhelming. If there is a desire to fix the issue, I will publish some proposed corrective actions. The point is to shift the burden to the RSOs to be in compliance yearly on a range of issues.
Very much so. To receive government money, LIRS signs a contract that prohibits proselytizing. Consequently, even if we had made a sincere effort to reach the people settled in the USA, we were banned from doing so! I asked LIRS to tell me where the nearest refugee cluster was then so that I could arrange for them to receive teaching and preaching. The rep scoffed at me; the question was too absurd.
Indeed, that's why I am specific about this being a decade old, but it remains puzzling that nobody could answer any of the questions.
The LCMS should not be sending any representative to any of those orgs. What is the purpose, especially if they are only there for minority cover?
It's telling that the LCMS could not influence or reform LIRS to return to a Lutheran identity. So much of this is going on, and we are losing institution after institution. Robert Conquest's three laws remain undefeated.
Also worth noting is that funds are still flowing to the LIRS tentacles from Synod congregations.
What about the smaller agencies that are RSOs of the LCMS? Is there oversight as to whether their current programs and practices are "in harmony with the doctrine and practice of the LCMS"?
We should never be party to contracts that prohibit proselytizing. There is never a justification.
You are focusing on one particular instance, but this does not guarantee that all instances are "well monitored and legitimate". You cannot possibly know that. Nor that because a "system" of oversight exists that it is automatically effective.
Not really. The ratio of RSOs to the staff assigned to vet them is overwhelming. If there is a desire to fix the issue, I will publish some proposed corrective actions. The point is to shift the burden to the RSOs to be in compliance yearly on a range of issues.
I didn't let the students in my classes write the rules or decide how they were going to enforce them.
It won't be self-policing; it will be mandatory annual reporting with automated evaluation triggering human review when necessary.
All great questions and #7 and #8 are key.
Very much so. To receive government money, LIRS signs a contract that prohibits proselytizing. Consequently, even if we had made a sincere effort to reach the people settled in the USA, we were banned from doing so! I asked LIRS to tell me where the nearest refugee cluster was then so that I could arrange for them to receive teaching and preaching. The rep scoffed at me; the question was too absurd.
This is a good letter, not perfect, but good. Thank you, President Harrison. https://reporter.lcms.org/2025/lcms-president-harrison-letter-about-u-s-immigration-and-lutheran-organizations/