ELCA Actions Summary (2009) by Roger Sween
Pat Sween and I attended the biennial Churchwide Assembly of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA). Following is a report of what transpired with particular attention to the changes in ELCA teaching and practices related to human sexuality. Though well-covered in newspapers and in blogs and reports of various kinds, including official ELCA documents (see http://www.blogger.com/www.ELCA.org) , my effort here is to state what happened told within a limited explanation of the context in which actions occurred. Not everyone will want all of this summary even when brief. In that light, I have omitted the intended section on bound conscience (authoritatively stated on the website), bulleted the actions taken, and drastically capsulated the two documents in question. Accordingly this summary has the following parts.
Audience for this Summary.
Actions Taken with Votes (Selected).
Process of the ELCA.
Social Statement on Human Sexuality.
Ministry Recommendations.
Discussion and Voting.
Conclusion.
Audience for this Summary.
This summary intends to communicate with those we know whom we assume to be interested in the subject and in an eyewitness account of what happened at the ELCA Assembly. Thus a direct announcement was sent to our pastors with the request to make this summary available to the Council of United Lutheran Church in Red Wing, our colleagues in Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays – Red Wing, and our colleagues with whom we worked in developing resolutions for the April 2009 Southeastern Minnesota Synod Assembly. We also included members of a theology discussion group in which we participate, other friends including some newly met through this Assembly, our children and some of our other relatives.
Actions Taken with Votes (Selected).
Following is a highlight of actions taken that I present with minimal comment.
18 August. Lutheran Malaria Initiative. Under the UN Fund, a partnership with the LCMS to eradicate malaria from sub-Saharan Africa by 2015. 989 Yes; 11 No – passed with 98.9%.
19 August. Social Statement: Human Sexuality: Gift and Trust (as amended). 676 Yes; 338 No – passed with 66.67%, exactly the 2/3 required.
20 August. Social Statement Implementing Resolutions. 695 Yes; 285 No – passed with 70.92%
20 August. Full Communion with The United Methodist Church. 884 Yes; 41 No – passed with 95.59%.
21 August. Amended order of consideration of Ministry Policies Recommendations to 3, 1, 2, 4. Many found that 3 was necessarily prior to the others. 717 Yes; 270 No – passed with 72.64%
Resolution 1 on bound conscience as amended.
RESOLVED, that in the implementation of any resolutions on ministry policies, the ELCA commit itself to bear one another’s burdens, love the neighbor, and respect the bound consciences of all. 771 Yes; 230 No – passed with 77.02%.
Resolution 2.
RESOLVED, that the ELCA commit itself to finding ways to allow congregations that choose to do so to recognize, support, and hold publicly accountable lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships. 619 Yes; 402 No – passed with 60.63%.
Resolution 3.
RESOLVED, that the ELCA commit itself to finding a way for people in such publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships to serve as rostered leaders of this church. 559 Yes; 451 No – passed with 55.35%.
Resolution 4 expresses the principles the ELCA will honor and the processes that it will follow and develop to raise up, call, support and maintain rosters of ordained ministers, associates in ministry, deaconesses and diaconal ministers for public ministry. 667 Yes; 307 No – passed with 68.48%.
22 August.
2010-2011 Budget Proposal. 863 Yes; 71 No – passed with 95.46%.
Allow voting members to register in writing their votes on Resolutions 2 and 3 of the Recommendation on Ministry Policies. 473 Yes; 399 No – passed with 54.24%.
Allow voting members to register in writing their votes on Resolution 4 of the Recommendation on Ministry Policies. 520 Yes; No 359 – passed with 59.16%.
Request that the ELCA develop a social statement on justice for women in church and society to be received for approval in 2015. 754 Yes; 176 No – Passed with 81.01%.
Re-election of Carlos Pena to a six-year term as Vice President of the ELCA; 4th ballot. 580 of 954 cast for three remaining candidates – passed with 60.8%, 60% required for election
Election of the ELCA Council.
Other Constitutional changes and motions.
Process of the ELCA.
This Assembly is a body composed of voting members and non-voting members with voice who participate in key decisions regarding ELCA operations, teachings, and policies. Though voting members comprise both clergy and lay members, and though they come from district level synods of the church, the Assembly is not strictly speaking a representative body. ELCA polity is that voting members in Assembly embody the church as a whole and reach their decisions through attention to authoritative scripture, historic church teachings, and reasoned discernment.
As such, this approach stands aside from the purely democratic process of counting votes across the whole membership and carrying results from congregation to synod to Assembly so that the wishes of those in the pew accumulate to final representational decisions. The conciliar approach is historic in the Christian Church, originating in the process relayed in Acts 11.1-18 and archetypally in 15.1-21 whereby the church in Jerusalem first accepted the mission of Paul and Barnabas to the Gentiles and afterwards accepted that the rite of circumcision was not a necessary precursor to the faith of a Christian.
The ELCA formed in 1982 from three previous bodies: the American Lutheran Church, the Lutheran Church in America, and the Association of Evangelical Lutheran Churches. The process of merging Lutheran bodies with various national and doctrinal origins into larger bodies has been going on for more than a hundred years. Other large Lutheran bodies, chiefly the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod and the Wisconsin Synod continue as distinct entities. Internationally Lutherans join in the Lutheran World Federation with 140 churches from sixty-two countries.
ELCA over the years develops social statements that express the church’s teaching on various questions. Some of these include such topics as abortion, church in society, death penalty, economic life, education, environment, and race. Social statements are comprehensive articulations of an area of concern that establishes core teachings on that area and guides the church in its subsequent actions and its officers, pertinently the Presiding Bishop, in speaking on these issues.
We were observers of this historic ecclesiastical practice in its Lutheran dress during the four days that we listened, prayed, worshiped with and followed the Assembly deliberations. ELCA had much before it and in the week among other items approved establishment of the Lutheran Malaria Initiative for sub-Saharan Africa, communion with the United Methodist Church, a proposal to develop a social statement on the status of women, adopted a budget, and voted for a new vice-president and eleven new council members.
However, it’s principal items of business from the standpoint of expectation, range of viewpoints, potential departure from the past, and time given to consideration were the issues related to human sexuality and future ministry practices.
We observed these particular issues brought attendance at Assembly additional to the 1,045 voting members and others with voice, ELCA and synods’ staffs, and guests. Sitting with us in the visitors’ section were dozens of returning and intermittent observers, pro or con or undecided on the issues but intent on their outcomes as much as were the voting members. When we attended a worship service at Central Lutheran Church, organized by Goodsoil for affiliated supporters of the proposed sexuality report and ministry practices, 1500 people attended, a mix of those at Assembly and others from the surrounding area joined in common cause.
In 2001, the ELCA Assembly began the process of developing a social statement on human sexuality as the church sought to deal with a number of contemporary issues, including questions related to homosexuality. Social statements typically take some years to reach completion and action; the recent one on education (2007) took four years. This process seems overlong to some people, especially since a social statement can be directed to deciding unresolved issues, clarifying decisions, and bringing some kind of relief or desired change. The time goes from creation of a Task Force, design and development of a study, and publication of a preliminary report to study, review and comment on the interim work by members, congregations, and synods. The Task Force considers the comment received, makes further analysis and develops recommendations that in turn go out for another round of review and comment. In this particular case, the Assembly in 2007 gave the Task Force an additional charge of recommending ministry policies. The Task Force makes a final report, then heard and memorialized in Synods; that is, the synods may vote to recommend, refuse, or amend the recommendations. The ELCA Council of 33 members receives the memorials and determines how to forward them to the Assembly.
The Council also appoints an ad hoc committee to hear any further amendments and may merge, recommend or not recommend them.
Social Statement on Human Sexuality.
Human Sexuality: Gift and Trust (Feb. 19, 2009) addresses the question, “how do we understand human sexuality within the context of Jesus’ invitation to love God and love our neighbor?” The statement, therefore, starts from the Gospel and the Lutheran theological understanding of its message. We live out this message through our vocation of serving the neighbor. In terms of sexuality, relationships are built and continued on trust. God’s goodness and love show from the creation include gendered bodies and sexuality.
The biblical narratives also depict how people violate God’s trust. Nevertheless, God remains faithful. We believe that God has given the law to reveal sin and order society and to point us to God’s intentions and promises for our lives. We understand human sexuality and ethics in general to be part of God’s rule in this world, not through the Gospel in the world to come. Thus the way we order our lives, important for us as a people of faith, are not central to the fulfillment of the Gospel itself.
Set free by the death and resurrection of Christ, Christians continue in this created world, experienced no longer as a threat, but as God’s gift. In a complex world, we rely on the Scriptures, also guided by the Lutheran Confessions. We appreciate the gifts of knowledge and learning with insights through reason, imagination, the sciences, cultural understanding, and the creative arts. Thus, these deliberations related to human sexuality do not threaten the center of our faith.
[The following paragraphs are quoted directly with references given with lines cited from the original release and the later publication format with page numbers.]
Sexuality especially involves the powers or capacities to form deep and lasting bonds, to give and receive pleasure, and to conceive and bear children. Sexuality can be integral to the desire to commit oneself to life with another, to touch and be touched, and to love and be loved. Such powers are complex and ambiguous. They can be used well or badly. They can bring astonishing joy and delight. Such powers can serve God and serve the neighbor. They also can hurt self or hurt the neighbor. Sexuality finds expression at the extreme ends of human experience: in love, care, and security; or lust, cold indifference and exploitation. – lines 347-353 & page 7.
While Lutherans hold various convictions regarding lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships, this church is united on many critical issues. It opposes all forms of verbal or physical harassment and assault based on sexual orientation. It supports legislation and policies to protect civil rights and to prohibit discrimination ... It has called upon congregations and members to welcome, care for, and support same-gender couples and their families, and to advocate for their legal protection.
The ELCA recognizes that it has a pastoral responsibility to all children of God. This includes a pastoral responsibility to those who are same-gender in their orientation and to those who are seeking counsel about their sexual self-understanding. All are encouraged to avail themselves of the means of grace and pastoral care.
This church also acknowledges that consensus does not exist concerning how to regard same-gender committed relationships, even after many years of thoughtful, respectful, and faithful study and conversation. We do not have agreement on whether this church should honor these relationships, uplift, shelter and protect them, or on precisely how it is appropriate to do so.
In response, the church draws on the foundational Lutheran understanding that the baptized are called to discern God’s love in service to the neighbor. In our Christian freedom, we therefore seek responsible actions that serve others and do so with humility and deeper respect for the conscience-bound beliefs of others. We understand that, in this discernment about ethics and church practice, faithful people can and will come to different conclusions about the meaning of Scripture and about what constitutes responsible action. We further believe that this church on the basis of “the bound conscience,” will include these different understandings and practices within its life as it seeks to live out its mission and ministry in the world. - lines 612-636 & pages 10-11.
This church recognizes that
· Some are convinced that same-gender sexual behavior is sinful, contrary to biblical teaching and their understanding of natural law. See further lines 639-644.
· Some are convinced that homosexuality and even lifelong, monogamous, homosexual relationships reflect a broken world in which some relationships do not pattern themselves after the creation God intended. See further lines 646-651.
· Some are convinced that the scriptural witness does not address the context of sexual orientation and lifelong loving and committed relationships we experience today. See further lines 653-659.
· Some are convinced that the scriptural witness does not address the context of sexual orientation and committed relationships that we experience today. See further lines 661-670.
These four bullets are also found on page 11 of the revised format.
Both sexuality and trust are fundamentally relational and grow out of the web of family ties and social interaction. We must appreciate the significant influences, both positive and negative, of social forces and social contexts on human sexual behavior. The church must speak out where such forces cause harm. Seeking the Spirit’s guidance, we discern guidance for living faithfully in terms of human sexuality.
Ministry Recommendations:
Report and Recommendations on Ministry Policies (Feb. 19, 2009).
In 2005, the Task Force for the ELCA Studies on Sexuality in its first report recommended restraint from discipline regarding the question of rostering people in lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships. The Assembly declined to approve an alternate recommendation from the Church Council for rostering people in such relationships. In 2007, the Assembly asked the Task Force “specifically to address and made recommendations to the 2009 Churchwide Assembly on changes to any policies that preclude practicing homosexual persons from the rosters of this church.”
ELCA members have sharply differing conclusions on how to treat this question. Nevertheless, significant areas of agreement exist. All desire to live godly and self-giving lives in gratitude for the gifts of God. All believe that we are called to proclaim and serve God in the world. Members are committed to let the Bible and the Lutheran Confessions guide them, to lead faithful lives and support others in leading faithful lives, and to pray and work for the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America to be an effective instrument of God’s mission.
Therefore the four recommended steps, reported as Resolutions on Ministry Policies above. Because of varying differences on the most faithful course for the ELCA, the report includes two unsigned contrasting dissenting positions.
Discussion and Voting.
The ELCA met in Assembly from Worship on August 16 to Worship on August 23. Between those days, the Assembly had to crowd its many items of business, endeavoring to follow a timeline while allowing the full measure of participation and discussion that the voting members wanted and found possible. Pat Sween and I witnessed most of the activity from August 18 through August 21, and though not participating to the extent demanded of the members, felt emotionally drained and physically exhausted by the time we headed home and for the days after.
Presiding Bishop Hanson worked admirably to keep the proceedings on a business-like and courteous ground, but managing 1,045 voting members and all other concerns including an electronic voting system that did not always work perfectly clearly taxed him. Because worship services were daily joyous events, and because the Assembly paused often to pray and sing, the proceedings continued with great harmony and little rancor given the disputations on the issues.
Consideration of the sexuality statement and the ministry recommendations followed similar patterns. These included working in time for voting members to attend hearings, speak in alternating pro and con positions on the floor in “quasi-committee of the whole” and speak when the items came up for a vote both in the time allowed and in extending the time.
As stated previously, most of the discussion focused on the issues of same-gender relationships, what we have termed homosexuality. Two or three minute exchanges on the floor continued back and forth with almost no actual discussion; that is, what one said did not follow systematically or logically from what the previous speaker had said.
Proponents stressed the work of the church to welcome and include; many told personal stories of their own experience of being welcomed, what was possible in congregations, and the love for members who because of orientation or same-gender relationships have been excluded from ministry.
Opponents stressed that homosexuality is a sin and no biblical sources give a positive picture of it, God’s plan is for heterosexual marriage, and the basis of “bound conscience” is flawed. Arguments that base change on making people feel good or attempting to attract numbers lost during the history of the ELCA are both invalid reasons.
While some endeavored to show that Lutherans do not automatically follow scriptural dictates without reference to context – particularly in the Holiness Code of Leviticus – the proponents refrained from arguments that would theologically challenge the opponents but sought to hold forth in the area of God’s love and grace shown through Christ.
Early on, voters turned down a procedural effort that would have required a 2/3 majority on the ministry recommendations as is required constitutionally on the social statement. Efforts were made to change the recommendations or to remove them entirely, but from the first the body approved only those amendments that clarified wording or made procedural changes that they regarded as reasonable and productive of greater agreement.
When the social statement passed by the bare 2/3 it required, members passed the implementing resolutions by 70.92%. When 72.64% agreed to place resolution 3 on ministry first, 77.02% voted for it passage. When resolution 2 passed by 60.63% and 3 by 55.35%, 68.48% voted for the implementation measures. These voting patterns show a good measure of cohesion and willingness to provide for the realization in practice of what is begun in principle.
Certainly, an undertow of protest existed, best seen in the votes for Vice President of the ELCA in which the major challenger in the final ballot, Ryan Schwarz, spoke of his opposition to the church’s changing stands on same-gender relationships.
Conclusion.
Pat Sween and I feel fortunate to have participated, even from the sidelines, in this historic event. We come away with renewed hope for the future, with acceptance of the burdens we now bear for those of conscience other than our persuasion, and for the challenges ahead in being faithful and socially active. As a very good friend wrote to me, “you will learn that living for justice is much harder than voting for it.”
Thanks to Pat Sween for her assistance on the report, to Katharine Sween, Scott Heins and their children, who accommodated us for four nights, and to the many friends and new acquaintances who shared the days with us.
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Justice
A Communion Worship in a Spirited Lutheran Fashion.
ELCA Assembly (18 August 2009) 11:30 A.M.
We gathered and chorused the traditional Russian Orthodox “Holy God, ... have mercy on us” around each confessional petition, beginning,
For self-centered living,
and for failing to walk with humility and gentleness...
followed by the proclamation of the forgiveness and Canticle of Praise.
Readings of the Word began with Micah 6.1-8, followed by Psalm 15. Bridging from the first through the second, we sang the 2009 Refrain by Paul Friesen-Carper. We acclaimed the Gospel with alleluias and heard Luke 4.16-21.
Do justice, love kindness, walk humbly with your God.
He has told you, O mortal, what is good;
and what does the Lord require of you
but to do justice, and to love kindness,
and to walk humbly with your God? - Mic. 6.8
O Lord, who may abide in your tent?
Who may dwell on your holy hill?
Those who walk blamelessly, and do what is right,
and speak the truth from their heart... – Ps. 15.1-2
Jesus reads from Isaiah 61.1-2:
“The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,
because he has anointed me
to bring good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives
and recovery of sight to the blind,
to let the oppressed go free,
to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”
Pastor Megan Torgerson of St. Paul preached on Justice.
Justice! The word is even nice to say, so sibilant – justice. How can anyone argue with justice? But there is a darker, sneaky side when we say justice, but think vengeance. With vengeance, justice shrinks to the return of loss for loss, an eye for an eye. Vengeance tastes sour and catches guttural in the throat – vengeance.
Micah tells that God wants justice too. Be wary, God’s justice is dangerous. Isaiah tells of freedom and the rest by which we receive what we cannot even expect. What God gives is to slow down and walk with us, a kindness granted to each one and to the neighbor.
And so we sang, “Come! Live in the light!” before proceeding to the Eucharist, singing the while the lyric “Here Is Bread,” the serene “Cuando el pobre/When the Poor Ones,” and the swinging “Just a Closer Walk with Thee.” The Sending hymn to the majestic music of Gustav Holst had apt words new to me, “Let Streams of Living Justice Flow.”
And so came the dismissal: Go in peace. Serve the Lord. Remember the poor.
Thanks be to God!
ELCA Assembly (18 August 2009) 11:30 A.M.
We gathered and chorused the traditional Russian Orthodox “Holy God, ... have mercy on us” around each confessional petition, beginning,
For self-centered living,
and for failing to walk with humility and gentleness...
followed by the proclamation of the forgiveness and Canticle of Praise.
Readings of the Word began with Micah 6.1-8, followed by Psalm 15. Bridging from the first through the second, we sang the 2009 Refrain by Paul Friesen-Carper. We acclaimed the Gospel with alleluias and heard Luke 4.16-21.
Do justice, love kindness, walk humbly with your God.
He has told you, O mortal, what is good;
and what does the Lord require of you
but to do justice, and to love kindness,
and to walk humbly with your God? - Mic. 6.8
O Lord, who may abide in your tent?
Who may dwell on your holy hill?
Those who walk blamelessly, and do what is right,
and speak the truth from their heart... – Ps. 15.1-2
Jesus reads from Isaiah 61.1-2:
“The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,
because he has anointed me
to bring good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives
and recovery of sight to the blind,
to let the oppressed go free,
to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”
Pastor Megan Torgerson of St. Paul preached on Justice.
Justice! The word is even nice to say, so sibilant – justice. How can anyone argue with justice? But there is a darker, sneaky side when we say justice, but think vengeance. With vengeance, justice shrinks to the return of loss for loss, an eye for an eye. Vengeance tastes sour and catches guttural in the throat – vengeance.
Micah tells that God wants justice too. Be wary, God’s justice is dangerous. Isaiah tells of freedom and the rest by which we receive what we cannot even expect. What God gives is to slow down and walk with us, a kindness granted to each one and to the neighbor.
And so we sang, “Come! Live in the light!” before proceeding to the Eucharist, singing the while the lyric “Here Is Bread,” the serene “Cuando el pobre/When the Poor Ones,” and the swinging “Just a Closer Walk with Thee.” The Sending hymn to the majestic music of Gustav Holst had apt words new to me, “Let Streams of Living Justice Flow.”
And so came the dismissal: Go in peace. Serve the Lord. Remember the poor.
Thanks be to God!
Bishop's Report
One evangelical church united for Christian ministry.
ELCA Assembly (18 August 2009) 9 A.M.
Rev. Mark Hanson, Presiding Bishop of the ELCA since 1991, invoked in his remarks the ensuing 500th anniversary of the Lutheran Church, to come in 2017, as a benchmark of what delegates desire and think possible. Martin Luther, after all in posting his 95 theses on the Castle Church in 1517, sought not division, but discussion that would lead to reasoned reform of the existing catholic church throughout the German states and Europe. For various reasons, including the privilege of some and the intemperance of others, his wishes turned out otherwise.
We have been moving towards that unity we desire ever since.
Just as Luther saw the church rooted in the scriptures, so Hanson convoked the ELCA delegates as “a book of faith assembly.” May it take root in all 10,146 ELCA congregations. Book of faith is a recent initiative of the ELCA to enliven, promote and support reading and study of the Bible more widely among individuals, families, groups, congregations, synods, and the church as a whole. Other denominations are also engaged in similar parallel efforts.
Hanson quoted Garrison Keillor, the resident satirist on Lutherans, concerning evangelism. “Ours is not the worst church in town, so you might want to take a look sometime.” In contrast to this bit of Lutheran stoicism, Bishop Hanson waxed pentecostal. The ELCA has lost 465,000 members since 1991, but evangelism is not about numbers. It is about renewal. Hanson called for a corps of 1,000 additional congregation-based evangelists by 2017 who will reach those neglected, rejected and unchurched in their communities.
He envisioned the work of Lutherans in Congress, the descendants of an immigrant experience, working for immigration reform, health reform, and HIV and AIDS assistance alongside global partners. Similarly, ELCA is joining the Lutheran Malaria Initiative under the auspices of the United Nations Fund for the eradication of Malaria in sub-Saharan Africa by 2015. Among other efforts on behalf of the environment and the status of women is middle-east peace-making and the realization of Jerusalem as a city shared by Jews, Palestinians, and Christians.
What will be our witness in eight years? God’s gift of unity to the larger human family, unity without uniformity.
ELCA Assembly (18 August 2009) 9 A.M.
Rev. Mark Hanson, Presiding Bishop of the ELCA since 1991, invoked in his remarks the ensuing 500th anniversary of the Lutheran Church, to come in 2017, as a benchmark of what delegates desire and think possible. Martin Luther, after all in posting his 95 theses on the Castle Church in 1517, sought not division, but discussion that would lead to reasoned reform of the existing catholic church throughout the German states and Europe. For various reasons, including the privilege of some and the intemperance of others, his wishes turned out otherwise.
We have been moving towards that unity we desire ever since.
Just as Luther saw the church rooted in the scriptures, so Hanson convoked the ELCA delegates as “a book of faith assembly.” May it take root in all 10,146 ELCA congregations. Book of faith is a recent initiative of the ELCA to enliven, promote and support reading and study of the Bible more widely among individuals, families, groups, congregations, synods, and the church as a whole. Other denominations are also engaged in similar parallel efforts.
Hanson quoted Garrison Keillor, the resident satirist on Lutherans, concerning evangelism. “Ours is not the worst church in town, so you might want to take a look sometime.” In contrast to this bit of Lutheran stoicism, Bishop Hanson waxed pentecostal. The ELCA has lost 465,000 members since 1991, but evangelism is not about numbers. It is about renewal. Hanson called for a corps of 1,000 additional congregation-based evangelists by 2017 who will reach those neglected, rejected and unchurched in their communities.
He envisioned the work of Lutherans in Congress, the descendants of an immigrant experience, working for immigration reform, health reform, and HIV and AIDS assistance alongside global partners. Similarly, ELCA is joining the Lutheran Malaria Initiative under the auspices of the United Nations Fund for the eradication of Malaria in sub-Saharan Africa by 2015. Among other efforts on behalf of the environment and the status of women is middle-east peace-making and the realization of Jerusalem as a city shared by Jews, Palestinians, and Christians.
What will be our witness in eight years? God’s gift of unity to the larger human family, unity without uniformity.
Sexuality Report
Human Sexuality: Gift and Trust. A proposed social statement.
The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) develops social statements through an established process. Once an issue has been framed and the church-wide Assembly adopts a charge, ELCA staff work with a task force to study the issue. They develop positions, put them out for local study and comment, reshape them, review them again, and consider them at the synod (district) level. Final action takes place at a later church-wide Assembly.
A charge made by the Assembly in 2001 and expanded in 2007 resulted in two documents. The first is this report that addresses “how do we understand human sexuality within the context of Jesus’ invitation to love God and love our neighbor?” The report, following as it does earlier stages of the Task Force's work, omits earlier documents, but references them. The approach is distinctly Lutheran, founded on an understanding that we read and discover the Bible’s message in the light of Jesus’ incarnation, death, and resurrection as the Christ. Thereby God’s grace frees from captivity to sin and allows us to respond to God’s mercy through love for and service to the neighbor, which is our vocation in the world.
The report summarizes the relevance of theological documents from Lutheran history in regard to scripture and develops a concept of “bound conscience.”
This church draws on the foundational Lutheran understanding that the baptized are called to discern God’s love in service to the neighbor. In our Christian freedom, we therefore seek responsible actions that serve others and do so with humility and deep respect for the conscience-bound beliefs of others. We understand that, in this discernment about ethics and church practice, faithful people can and will come to different conclusions about the meaning of Scripture and about what constitutes responsible action. We further believe that this church, on the basis of “the bound conscience,” will include these different understandings and practices within its life as it seeks to live out its mission and ministry in the world. – lines 629-636
Concerning the question of same-gender relationships, the report admits lack of community agreement and states four positions, each of which some Lutherans hold in their own conscience. But none of these positions is a matter of faith. Thus in the absence of general agreement, the Task Force upholds the necessity of respecting one another's bound conscious.
The report spends most of its coverage on Lutheran social ethics, questions of trust in relation to the complexity of human sexuality, social structures that enhance trust, sexuality and social responsibility and issue of moral discernment and mercy towards one another; that is, bearing the burden of one another’s conscience. “Bear one another’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ” – Galatians 6.3.
The report offers fifteen implementing resolutions.
For full documents, see http://www.elca.org
The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) develops social statements through an established process. Once an issue has been framed and the church-wide Assembly adopts a charge, ELCA staff work with a task force to study the issue. They develop positions, put them out for local study and comment, reshape them, review them again, and consider them at the synod (district) level. Final action takes place at a later church-wide Assembly.
A charge made by the Assembly in 2001 and expanded in 2007 resulted in two documents. The first is this report that addresses “how do we understand human sexuality within the context of Jesus’ invitation to love God and love our neighbor?” The report, following as it does earlier stages of the Task Force's work, omits earlier documents, but references them. The approach is distinctly Lutheran, founded on an understanding that we read and discover the Bible’s message in the light of Jesus’ incarnation, death, and resurrection as the Christ. Thereby God’s grace frees from captivity to sin and allows us to respond to God’s mercy through love for and service to the neighbor, which is our vocation in the world.
The report summarizes the relevance of theological documents from Lutheran history in regard to scripture and develops a concept of “bound conscience.”
This church draws on the foundational Lutheran understanding that the baptized are called to discern God’s love in service to the neighbor. In our Christian freedom, we therefore seek responsible actions that serve others and do so with humility and deep respect for the conscience-bound beliefs of others. We understand that, in this discernment about ethics and church practice, faithful people can and will come to different conclusions about the meaning of Scripture and about what constitutes responsible action. We further believe that this church, on the basis of “the bound conscience,” will include these different understandings and practices within its life as it seeks to live out its mission and ministry in the world. – lines 629-636
Concerning the question of same-gender relationships, the report admits lack of community agreement and states four positions, each of which some Lutherans hold in their own conscience. But none of these positions is a matter of faith. Thus in the absence of general agreement, the Task Force upholds the necessity of respecting one another's bound conscious.
The report spends most of its coverage on Lutheran social ethics, questions of trust in relation to the complexity of human sexuality, social structures that enhance trust, sexuality and social responsibility and issue of moral discernment and mercy towards one another; that is, bearing the burden of one another’s conscience. “Bear one another’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ” – Galatians 6.3.
The report offers fifteen implementing resolutions.
For full documents, see http://www.elca.org
Bible Verses
It takes more than citing text to prove a case.
Note: Quotations are from the New Revised Standard Version (1989) used as the Biblical text in The Lutheran Study Bible (2009).
When we disagree over questions of sexuality, arguments will vary dependent upon the uses of approach and evidence. Christians eventually get around to quoting Bible verses at one another, sometimes quite vociferously. Often these texts arrive announced without their context. Arguments of this nature take place even at the most public levels in office, denominational assembly, house presses, and other media.
About three years ago, the Minnesota Senate Judiciary Committee considered proposed language for a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as between one man and one woman. One speaker for the amendment, clergy of a denomination more fundamentalist than most Lutherans, referenced the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. She claimed that God destroyed these cities because of their practice of homosexuality. We often hear this one. In fact, the word sodomy has become a term for anal intercourse or anal rape.
The full story in its context appears in Genesis 18.16-19.38. Three men, visiting as messengers from God, have told Abraham that his wife will bear a son. They prepare to go toward Sodom and God reveals to Abraham the general outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah and “how very grave their sin” (Gen 18.20). Abraham pleads for the righteous to be spared, but none can be found.
The visitors come to Sodom, and Lot, Abraham’s nephew, resident there invites them into his house. The men of the city surround Lot’s house and ask that the men be brought out so they can rape them. Genesis 19.5 uses the usual euphemism “know them,” but Lot recognizes their intent and offers his two daughters instead. The men threaten Lot who must escape from them back into his house.
The visitors reveal to Lot that they have been sent to destroy the city, which they are about to do. They caution Lot to gather his family and leave. Lot includes his prospective son’s-in-law, but they think he is jesting and refuse to go. Fire destroys the cities as Lot’s family escapes only to live in a cave. Subsequently, Lot’s daughters, bereft of husbands, get their father drunk in order to have intercourse with him and produce offspring.
This is the story, routinely botched in the telling, to condemn and distance all homosexuals as wicked and beyond human association as long as they continue in their perverted fixation.
While the Sodom incident may appear, however mistakenly, as the argument from the sinful character of homosexuality, the argument after general human nature comes from the Apostle Paul in his taut theological treatise, the letter to the Romans. In Romans 1 after the salutation, prayer of thanksgiving, and announcement of the power of the Gospel, Paul launches into the universal state of human ungodliness and wickedness (Rom. 1.18-32) followed by the righteous judgment of God (Rom. 2.1-16) by which “God shows no partiality” (Rom. 2.11).
A part of this section on the guilt of humankind is verses 26-27 which out of all human sin gets fastened exclusively on homosexuals.
“For this reason[i] God gave them up to degrading passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error.”
What is Paul doing in this passage and what does he mean? Robin Scroggs in The New Testament and Homosexuality: contextual background for contemporary debate (1983) reaches the New Testament (chapter 7) after first establishing the Judaic, Greco-Roman, and Hellenistic origins of the same subject. In the case of the texts in Romans, Paul makes a major and obvious overarching theological argument: God’s justice and mercy are revealed from the perspective of the Christ event. Paul is not concerned with individual vices as he is with universal sin, and he repeats the attitude of Jews and Hellenists concerning homosexual acts as part of that catalog. Even so, Paul relates the acts of men with men and women with women to idolatry; that is, the turning away from God that ushers in other calamities of the fall.
What Paul or any Biblical writer may have known of what we now term homosexuality is uncertain. He definitely does not see homosexual acts as pertaining to anyone by nature. However, his example points to heterosexuals acting in contrary defiance of their own nature and thereby offensive to God.
Of all the scattered pronouncements in the Bible, taken to condemn homosexuality, the unequivocal ones are in Leviticus.
Lev. 18.22: You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.
Lev. 20.13: If a man lies with a man as with a woman, both have committed an abomination; they shall both be put to death; their blood is upon them.
The meaning is clear: those wishing to base their beliefs on the witness of the Old Testament must be completely consistent and demand the death penalty for everyone who performs homosexual acts. Of course, for Christians Old Testament texts have to be weighed against the New. In addition, for Lutherans, a hermeneutic applies as illustrated previously.
An examination of all the other verses on matters of diet, dress, nakedness, sexual behavior, and marriage that prevailed in Old Testament days may also illuminate our thinking. They had equal standing in the Leviticus codes, but we ignore many of them today at our convenience. See Walter Wink, “Homosexuality and the Bible,” Homosexuality and the Christian Faith (1999) pages 33-49 for his catalog of these items.
[i] Just prior, Romans 1.25 states, “ ...because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever.”
Note: Quotations are from the New Revised Standard Version (1989) used as the Biblical text in The Lutheran Study Bible (2009).
When we disagree over questions of sexuality, arguments will vary dependent upon the uses of approach and evidence. Christians eventually get around to quoting Bible verses at one another, sometimes quite vociferously. Often these texts arrive announced without their context. Arguments of this nature take place even at the most public levels in office, denominational assembly, house presses, and other media.
About three years ago, the Minnesota Senate Judiciary Committee considered proposed language for a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as between one man and one woman. One speaker for the amendment, clergy of a denomination more fundamentalist than most Lutherans, referenced the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. She claimed that God destroyed these cities because of their practice of homosexuality. We often hear this one. In fact, the word sodomy has become a term for anal intercourse or anal rape.
The full story in its context appears in Genesis 18.16-19.38. Three men, visiting as messengers from God, have told Abraham that his wife will bear a son. They prepare to go toward Sodom and God reveals to Abraham the general outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah and “how very grave their sin” (Gen 18.20). Abraham pleads for the righteous to be spared, but none can be found.
The visitors come to Sodom, and Lot, Abraham’s nephew, resident there invites them into his house. The men of the city surround Lot’s house and ask that the men be brought out so they can rape them. Genesis 19.5 uses the usual euphemism “know them,” but Lot recognizes their intent and offers his two daughters instead. The men threaten Lot who must escape from them back into his house.
The visitors reveal to Lot that they have been sent to destroy the city, which they are about to do. They caution Lot to gather his family and leave. Lot includes his prospective son’s-in-law, but they think he is jesting and refuse to go. Fire destroys the cities as Lot’s family escapes only to live in a cave. Subsequently, Lot’s daughters, bereft of husbands, get their father drunk in order to have intercourse with him and produce offspring.
This is the story, routinely botched in the telling, to condemn and distance all homosexuals as wicked and beyond human association as long as they continue in their perverted fixation.
While the Sodom incident may appear, however mistakenly, as the argument from the sinful character of homosexuality, the argument after general human nature comes from the Apostle Paul in his taut theological treatise, the letter to the Romans. In Romans 1 after the salutation, prayer of thanksgiving, and announcement of the power of the Gospel, Paul launches into the universal state of human ungodliness and wickedness (Rom. 1.18-32) followed by the righteous judgment of God (Rom. 2.1-16) by which “God shows no partiality” (Rom. 2.11).
A part of this section on the guilt of humankind is verses 26-27 which out of all human sin gets fastened exclusively on homosexuals.
“For this reason[i] God gave them up to degrading passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error.”
What is Paul doing in this passage and what does he mean? Robin Scroggs in The New Testament and Homosexuality: contextual background for contemporary debate (1983) reaches the New Testament (chapter 7) after first establishing the Judaic, Greco-Roman, and Hellenistic origins of the same subject. In the case of the texts in Romans, Paul makes a major and obvious overarching theological argument: God’s justice and mercy are revealed from the perspective of the Christ event. Paul is not concerned with individual vices as he is with universal sin, and he repeats the attitude of Jews and Hellenists concerning homosexual acts as part of that catalog. Even so, Paul relates the acts of men with men and women with women to idolatry; that is, the turning away from God that ushers in other calamities of the fall.
What Paul or any Biblical writer may have known of what we now term homosexuality is uncertain. He definitely does not see homosexual acts as pertaining to anyone by nature. However, his example points to heterosexuals acting in contrary defiance of their own nature and thereby offensive to God.
Of all the scattered pronouncements in the Bible, taken to condemn homosexuality, the unequivocal ones are in Leviticus.
Lev. 18.22: You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.
Lev. 20.13: If a man lies with a man as with a woman, both have committed an abomination; they shall both be put to death; their blood is upon them.
The meaning is clear: those wishing to base their beliefs on the witness of the Old Testament must be completely consistent and demand the death penalty for everyone who performs homosexual acts. Of course, for Christians Old Testament texts have to be weighed against the New. In addition, for Lutherans, a hermeneutic applies as illustrated previously.
An examination of all the other verses on matters of diet, dress, nakedness, sexual behavior, and marriage that prevailed in Old Testament days may also illuminate our thinking. They had equal standing in the Leviticus codes, but we ignore many of them today at our convenience. See Walter Wink, “Homosexuality and the Bible,” Homosexuality and the Christian Faith (1999) pages 33-49 for his catalog of these items.
[i] Just prior, Romans 1.25 states, “ ...because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever.”
Monday, August 17, 2009
Lutherans
Out of a shared tradition, we are not all the same.
Lutherans differ in the ways that other Christians differ among themselves. They take different starting points; they emphasize one aspect of scripture to the subrogation or exclusion of others. Likely, Lutherans also vary because as Lutheranism spread across Europe from the early sixteenth century, it took on nationalist characteristics. By the time Lutherans came as immigrants in part they embodied reform movements, including pietism, but also the imprint of state churches varying among the nations.
One mark of Lutheran homogeneity in the United States has been the steady merger of disparate Lutheran bodies with one another as national origins and doctrinal disputes have faded. Of course also observable is that every time a group merges, some individuals and congregations go off elsewhere. Splintering seems a human side effect of merging.
Recently, in a theological discussion group of six couples, Pat Sween has twice asked, ‘What distinguishes Lutherans from other Christians?’ The group consists of four ordained Lutheran clergy, at least three children of pastors, assorted spouses, and all of us Lutherans for life. We should get a good answer. However, the answer both times has been the same. ‘There is no purely distinguishing Lutheran characteristic.’
That is not my experience.
When you look at the catechetical works of Lutheranism, specific teachings emerge beyond just confessing the Apostles and Nicene creeds on a regular basis. Notable teachings follow.
1. Justification. Faith, not anything we do, sets us right with God.
2. Faith. Neither is faith a good work that we do, but what God’s spirit creates in us through Grace.
3. Grace. Grace, due to the all-powerful love of God, restores us to the original blessed relationship with God.
4. Sin. Sin constantly sets us apart from God, a power ultimately overcome through God’s love as enacted by the exemplary life and teaching of Jesus, the Christ (from the Greek, “the anointed one;” i.e., “the Messiah.”
5. Righteousness. Righteousness is the quality of God, a creative and sustaining uprightness to which God calls us, but to which we as humans can only aspire because of sin, and never fully attain on our own.
6. Kingdom of God. God’s kingly rule exists in differing dimensions, as an eternal universality and as the work of God through the invisible church and in the secular world throughout history.
7. Church. The whole people of God at work in the world constitute the church of which individual or denominational polities we may take to be members of the universal in any contemporary setting.
8. Sacraments. The two sacraments, created by God as told in scripture, are special means of Grace. By Baptism, the Church welcomes us as participants in God’s work. By the Eucharist (Lord’s Supper), the Lord our God refreshes and strengthens us for community with one another and service in the world. Both sacraments are acts of God’s love and tokens of our commitment.
9. Vocation. Every person has the potential to serve God’s purposes by serving one another through their capacities (gifts) and role or position attained in the world.
10. Hermeneutics. Here the fundamental problem is to understand the sources of the past in their own environment and so to adequately perceive their meaning and applicability for the present. Martin Luther’s own struggles with faith took him to a reliance on Grace, especially as expressed in Paul’s letter, Romans, as evidenced by the triad ‘Grace alone, Faith alone, Word alone.’ He understood that word alone, however, through a particular hermeneutic.
a. In matters of Faith, scripture alone has authority to constitute the source of divine revelation.
b. The Biblical scriptures come from God through the Church; because of this history, scripture requires interpretation. See also Scope Note above.
c. God speaks to us through scripture in both Law and Gospel, each found in both Old and New Testaments and sometimes the same verse carrying both. Law is that which accuses and judges us. Gospel is that which comforts and saves us.
d. Scripture, in both Testaments, reveals Jesus Christ to us.
e. Scripture interprets scripture in light of the Bible’s central themes and motifs.
f. The Bible as a whole presents God as gracious and merciful, abounding in steadfast love.
g. We understand scripture in its plain sense; that is, verses within their complete textual framework as they seemed obvious when heard by their original listeners or readers.
h. Interpretation is a public act: through the Scripture, God speaks to the whole people, the whole Church.
More could be said of hermeneutics here. I am especially indebted for this section to “How Can Lutheran Insights Open Up the Bible,” Opening the Book of Faith: Lutheran insights for Bible study (2008) by Diane Jacobson, Mark Allan Powell, and Stanley N. Olson, pages 20-45.
Often, Lutherans worry that they benefit from “cheap grace,” because a loving God so freely forgives them. Consequently, they either feel guilty or try harder. Or they may think themselves better than others, a problem exacerbated by seeing Luther and all who came in his wake as central in history. Luther, himself, often presented matters of faith in terms of paradoxes with which we must live – we are free, slave to all.
I have tried to summarize these matters in as holistic and inclusive a manner as I so briefly can. Of course, this is not all, but I hope this little background is helpful to what follows. I have waited too long, and cannot go no further at this point.
Lutherans, I believe, may not all agree, but they may want to do so.
Lutherans differ in the ways that other Christians differ among themselves. They take different starting points; they emphasize one aspect of scripture to the subrogation or exclusion of others. Likely, Lutherans also vary because as Lutheranism spread across Europe from the early sixteenth century, it took on nationalist characteristics. By the time Lutherans came as immigrants in part they embodied reform movements, including pietism, but also the imprint of state churches varying among the nations.
One mark of Lutheran homogeneity in the United States has been the steady merger of disparate Lutheran bodies with one another as national origins and doctrinal disputes have faded. Of course also observable is that every time a group merges, some individuals and congregations go off elsewhere. Splintering seems a human side effect of merging.
Recently, in a theological discussion group of six couples, Pat Sween has twice asked, ‘What distinguishes Lutherans from other Christians?’ The group consists of four ordained Lutheran clergy, at least three children of pastors, assorted spouses, and all of us Lutherans for life. We should get a good answer. However, the answer both times has been the same. ‘There is no purely distinguishing Lutheran characteristic.’
That is not my experience.
When you look at the catechetical works of Lutheranism, specific teachings emerge beyond just confessing the Apostles and Nicene creeds on a regular basis. Notable teachings follow.
1. Justification. Faith, not anything we do, sets us right with God.
2. Faith. Neither is faith a good work that we do, but what God’s spirit creates in us through Grace.
3. Grace. Grace, due to the all-powerful love of God, restores us to the original blessed relationship with God.
4. Sin. Sin constantly sets us apart from God, a power ultimately overcome through God’s love as enacted by the exemplary life and teaching of Jesus, the Christ (from the Greek, “the anointed one;” i.e., “the Messiah.”
5. Righteousness. Righteousness is the quality of God, a creative and sustaining uprightness to which God calls us, but to which we as humans can only aspire because of sin, and never fully attain on our own.
6. Kingdom of God. God’s kingly rule exists in differing dimensions, as an eternal universality and as the work of God through the invisible church and in the secular world throughout history.
7. Church. The whole people of God at work in the world constitute the church of which individual or denominational polities we may take to be members of the universal in any contemporary setting.
8. Sacraments. The two sacraments, created by God as told in scripture, are special means of Grace. By Baptism, the Church welcomes us as participants in God’s work. By the Eucharist (Lord’s Supper), the Lord our God refreshes and strengthens us for community with one another and service in the world. Both sacraments are acts of God’s love and tokens of our commitment.
9. Vocation. Every person has the potential to serve God’s purposes by serving one another through their capacities (gifts) and role or position attained in the world.
10. Hermeneutics. Here the fundamental problem is to understand the sources of the past in their own environment and so to adequately perceive their meaning and applicability for the present. Martin Luther’s own struggles with faith took him to a reliance on Grace, especially as expressed in Paul’s letter, Romans, as evidenced by the triad ‘Grace alone, Faith alone, Word alone.’ He understood that word alone, however, through a particular hermeneutic.
a. In matters of Faith, scripture alone has authority to constitute the source of divine revelation.
b. The Biblical scriptures come from God through the Church; because of this history, scripture requires interpretation. See also Scope Note above.
c. God speaks to us through scripture in both Law and Gospel, each found in both Old and New Testaments and sometimes the same verse carrying both. Law is that which accuses and judges us. Gospel is that which comforts and saves us.
d. Scripture, in both Testaments, reveals Jesus Christ to us.
e. Scripture interprets scripture in light of the Bible’s central themes and motifs.
f. The Bible as a whole presents God as gracious and merciful, abounding in steadfast love.
g. We understand scripture in its plain sense; that is, verses within their complete textual framework as they seemed obvious when heard by their original listeners or readers.
h. Interpretation is a public act: through the Scripture, God speaks to the whole people, the whole Church.
More could be said of hermeneutics here. I am especially indebted for this section to “How Can Lutheran Insights Open Up the Bible,” Opening the Book of Faith: Lutheran insights for Bible study (2008) by Diane Jacobson, Mark Allan Powell, and Stanley N. Olson, pages 20-45.
Often, Lutherans worry that they benefit from “cheap grace,” because a loving God so freely forgives them. Consequently, they either feel guilty or try harder. Or they may think themselves better than others, a problem exacerbated by seeing Luther and all who came in his wake as central in history. Luther, himself, often presented matters of faith in terms of paradoxes with which we must live – we are free, slave to all.
I have tried to summarize these matters in as holistic and inclusive a manner as I so briefly can. Of course, this is not all, but I hope this little background is helpful to what follows. I have waited too long, and cannot go no further at this point.
Lutherans, I believe, may not all agree, but they may want to do so.
Scope Note
ELCA Decisions on Sexuality and Ministry
This blog concentrates on questions facing the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America regarding questions of sexuality, in particular same-gender relationships and the ministry of pastors who are in committed same-gender relationships.
I speak as a Lutheran in this denomination by all my inheritance going back to the foundation of the Lutheran Church in Norway and by my great-grandparents or grandparents who emigrated to the Midwest and into Minnesota in waves beginning in 1850. I was baptized within the Lutheran church in 1940, subsequently confirmed a Lutheran, active in the Luther League and other religious instruction through high school, and graduated St. Olaf College, 1962, a college of the church. My interest in the church has never waned. I am particularly fond of Bible reading, study and the pursuit of theology.
I see myself in the mainstream of Christianity, however presumptuous that may be. My thinking is based upon a continuing tradition of scriptural relevance and thoughtful consideration that I detect has gone on for the last 2,000 years. I accept in great measure the teachings of the church that through examination over the ages have come to us with systematic consistently. I am "modern" to the extent that I understand our sixty-six books of the scriptural canon cannot be understood in all their parts in the same way, certainly not all literally.
I follow these principles: 1) scripture came to us through many stories, authors, and editors; 2)scripture is a collection of various forms of literature produced over a long period of time; 3)consequently, scripture has inconsistencies; 4)among the forms of literature are myths and metaphors, poetry and other literary types; personal witness or testimony; laws of various kinds; theologies and interpretations; prophecy and apocalypsis; 5) each of these forms has its own context and requires its own approach to understanding; 6) from the first, the church has regarded these scriptures for their particular gifts, passing on what they found true and useful, disregarding those found erroneous; 7) among the tools of understanding scripture is the practice of taking scripture as a whole so that scripture interprets itself, however different its parts; 8)knowledge of the scriptural context increases through continued findings from the Biblical past, chiefly through arachaeology and the recovery of lost texts, even though many of them may be scraps, in the languages pertinent to scriptural origins - Chaldean, Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, and likely others outside my ken.
Finally a 9th: Our knowledge remains imperfect so that our understandings remain tentative at best. We act to the best of our abilities upon conclusions, but we must guard against error and constantly pursue our learning in as self-correcting a mode as possible.
Upon this basis, then, I have come to challenge the views that currently divide Lutherans and Christians and other religious from each other and one another even in their own faith communities. The ELCA, as other bodies, has engaged itself in study on sexuality for the last 10-12 years. In that time, I have learned that among my own denomination that I thought so fondly to be in the mainstream, we also run the spectrum from the most fundamentalist to the most radical. Questions of sexuality are not the only issue at difference among Lutherans, though they appear to be the most volatile and divisive. Nevertheless, we do change and move on.
The history of Lutherans in the United States, is that they have divided in the past over such social issues as slavery, secession, racisism, inter-marriage, church polity, the role of women, birth control, and the ordination of women. Abortion remains a contentious issue, but we have worked through the others or history has dragged us forward, and we have moved on.
Likely, the same is happening now over the bugaboo of sexuality. We will see.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)