Lutheran Homosexual Clergy

Luther073082 · Aug 8, 2011

mdseverin said:
I think it would be in everyone's best interest to stop telling people who is a Christian and who is not. Christianity is based on faith and God is the only decider. Read Matthew 13:24-43.

I can claim I'm a jelly doughnut. . . but that doesn't make it true.

Part of being a Christian is one has to come up with a systematic way of determining what groups are Christian and which are not. Because a lot of groups will claim to be Christian, but their claim of Christianity does not make them into Christians. None of this is to claim that you arn't Christians, but I am saying that its important to be able to determine these things.

A similar thing happens with Lutheranism. . . to be honest the ELCA doesn't fit into how a lot of the confessional Lutherans define as being Lutheran. (Which they define as a total adhearence and acceptance of the BoC and holding scripture to be inerrant.)

Words mean something . . . calling you Lutheran for many of us would be like calling Jehovah's Witnesses "Christians". We don't agree with the statement so why should we say it? To keep peace? Would you want to call the people out of Westboro to be Christians?? Furthermore if they called themselves Lutheran. . . Would you call them Lutherans??? Would you agree with them that they are Lutheran because they say that they are??

What about the fundamentalist Mormon's that practice polygamy, kick boys out for violating any minor rule (to eliminate competition for "wives), and marry girls off when they are 12 years old to men that are 4 times their age. . . Are they Christian? They claim they are. What if they called themselves Lutheran? Would you agree with them or call them that?

They can call themselves what they like. . . that doesn't make it true. I can call myself a jelly doughnut. . . that doesn't make it true. Heck I could call myself God, but that certainly wouldn't make me right. . .

If I called myself God. . . would you call me God just because that is how I prefer to be addressed?

All of this will lead to some conflict. To many Roman Catholic's, I'm a protestant, but I see myself as an Evangelical Catholic and not a protestant. In my system of defining protestantism, I define it as a non-sacramental church. But their system is not the same as mine.

You may continue to see yourself as "Lutheran". No one here can change that. But that doesn't mean that we will also see you as Lutheran. Our system of defining what is Lutheran is different from yours.

mdseverin · Aug 8, 2011

Zecryphon said:
We can judge those in the church. Read 1 Corinthians 5 and explain how the ELCA stance on ordaining openly gay pastors who are involved in a sexual relationship is in line with Scripture. Please, I CAN'T wait to hear this one.

I won't go so far as to say the ELCA are not Christians, but I have said and will continue to say you are not Lutheran. Explain it. How can you be Lutheran when you reject the teachings of the Lutheran confessions?

I think you mean 1 Corinthians 6. However, chapter 5 is about sexual sin as well. When I read these chapters I read about a group of people that are using sex for gain, for lust, and for selfish desire. It's not referencing a loving committed relationship. Two people of the same sex in a dedicated and loving relationship is not a sin. Gay sex may or may not be a sin. I'll admit that I don't know. I can see it both ways. Sex is suppose to be used as a sign of love. The times gay sex is mentioned in the Bible, it's always referenced in a sinful and lustful way.

I can call myself a Lutheran because I accept and agree with a vast majority of the Lutheran teaching. Remember, there is no perfect church on Earth.

mdseverin · Aug 8, 2011

Luther073082 said:
Part of being a Christian is one has to come up with a systematic way of determining what groups are Christian and which are not. Because a lot of groups will claim to be Christian, but their claim of Christianity does not make them into Christians. None of this is to claim that you arn't Christians, but I am saying that its important to be able to determine these things.

This debate could go on forever because everyone has their own definition. Faith is a very personal thing.

I define a Christian as someone that believes that Christ came into this world to save sinners and through his death our sins are forgiven. I believe that nothing can come between us in God's love (Romans 8:38-39). And I believe we should, to the best of our ability, follow what Jesus said in Matthew 22, "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: Love your neighbor as yourself."

It's as simple as that. Anyone that believes that is a Christina in my eyes. The Old Testament is filled with laws that no one could keep. That's why Jesus came. He didn't come to abolish the laws, but to fulfill them. And the definition of fulfill is to complete. Therefore, none of those laws, including the ten commandments, are in effect. Of course if you love your neighbor as yourself you wouldn't break any of those commandments.

Zecryphon · Aug 8, 2011

mdseverin said:
I think you mean 1 Corinthians 6. However, chapter 5 is about sexual sin as well. When I read these chapters I read about a group of people that are using sex for gain, for lust, and for selfish desire. It's not referencing a loving committed relationship. Two people of the same sex in a dedicated and loving relationship is not a sin. Gay sex may or may not be a sin. I'll admit that I don't know. I can see it both ways. Sex is suppose to be used as a sign of love. The times gay sex is mentioned in the Bible, it's always referenced in a sinful and lustful way.

I can call myself a Lutheran because I accept and agree with a vast majority of the Lutheran teaching. Remember, there is no perfect church on Earth.

No, I meant 1 Corinthians 5, but it's nice to see that you think you can read my mind. ^_^

Oh, a loving committed relationship. Well can you find verses in the Bible where God approves of one of those for those who practice sexual immorality or sex with the same gender? I know the homosexuals love to spout this nonsense about two people being in a committed loving sexual relationship is not condemned or forbidden by God, but the funny thing is, none of them can produce any Scriptures that back up that statement. You can call yourself an oak tree too, but does that make you one?

Luther073082 · Aug 8, 2011

mdseverin said:
I can call myself a Lutheran because I accept and agree with a vast majority of the Lutheran teaching. Remember, there is no perfect church on Earth.

Lutheran teaching as defined by whom or what?

Luther? Melancthon?, the Book of Concord, The Augsburg Confession?

What defines the Lutheran teaching that you accept and agree with the vast majority of?

Because I belive that you and I also have differing definitions of what constitutes "Lutheran teaching".

mdseverin · Aug 8, 2011

Luther073082 said:
Words mean something . . . calling you Lutheran for many of us would be like calling Jehovah's Witnesses "Christians". We don't agree with the statement so why should we say it? To keep peace? Would you want to call the people out of Westboro to be Christians?? Furthermore if they called themselves Lutheran. . . Would you call them Lutherans??? Would you agree with them that they are Lutheran because they say that they are??

What about the fundamentalist Mormon's that practice polygamy, kick boys out for violating any minor rule (to eliminate competition for "wives), and marry girls off when they are 12 years old to men that are 4 times their age. . . Are they Christian? They claim they are. What if they called themselves Lutheran? Would you agree with them or call them that?

They can call themselves what they like. . . that doesn't make it true. I can call myself a jelly doughnut. . . that doesn't make it true. Heck I could call myself God, but that certainly wouldn't make me right. . .

If I called myself God. . . would you call me God just because that is how I prefer to be addressed?

All of this will lead to some conflict. To many Roman Catholic's, I'm a protestant, but I see myself as an Evangelical Catholic and not a protestant. In my system of defining protestantism, I define it as a non-sacramental church. But their system is not the same as mine.

You may continue to see yourself as "Lutheran". No one here can change that. But that doesn't mean that we will also see you as Lutheran. Our system of defining what is Lutheran is different from yours.

You are worrying too much about labels. When we agree on 90% of the same things, don't you think we should be on the same side? No label is going to conform to you 100% of the time. You are picking out details instead of looking at the big picture. I'm sure there are members in your denomination that do not agree with everything, but they agree with most. Are you going to single them out? Christianity is about coming together but it seems like you just want to separate everyone out.

Zecryphon · Aug 8, 2011

mdseverin said:
You are worrying too much about labels. When we agree on 90% of the same things, don't you think we should be on the same side? No label is going to conform to you 100% of the time. You are picking out details instead of looking at the big picture. I'm sure there are members in your denomination that do not agree with everything, but they agree with most. Are you going to single them out? Christianity is about coming together but it seems like you just want to separate everyone out.

We're not debating minor issues here. Same-sex clergy, clergy living in sin, communing members of churches who do not adhere to the real presence of Christ in the Lord's Supper, these are not minor issues, but very important ones, and should not just be "swept under the rug," like you seem to want to do in order to "just get along." That may fly with most of your ELCA brethren, but it doesn't fly with us Confessional Lutherans.

mdseverin · Aug 8, 2011

Luther073082 said:
Lutheran teaching as defined by whom or what?

Luther? Melancthon?, the Book of Concord, The Augsburg Confession?

What defines the Lutheran teaching that you accept and agree with the vast majority of?

Because I belive that you and I also have differing definitions of what constitutes "Lutheran teaching".

Book of Concord

mdseverin · Aug 8, 2011

Zecryphon said:
No, I meant 1 Corinthians 5, but it's nice to see that you think you can read my mind. Oh, a loving committed relationship. Well can you find verses in the Bible where God approves of one of those for those who practice sexual immorality or sex with the same gender? I know the homosexuals love to spout this nonsense about two people being in a committed loving sexual relationship is not condemned or forbidden by God, but the funny thing is, none of them can produce any Scriptures that back up that statement. You can call yourself an oak tree too, but does that make you one?

Then what about 1 Corinthians 5 did you want me to explain? I thought the issue we were discussing was homosexulaity and not incest. I wasn't trying to read your mind.

mdseverin · Aug 8, 2011

Zecryphon said:
We're not debating minor issues here. Same-sex clergy, clergy living in sin, communing members of churches who do not adhere to the real presence of Christ in the Lord's Supper, these are not minor issues, but very important ones, and should not just be "swept under the rug," like you seem to want to do in order to "just get along." That may fly with most of your ELCA brethren, but it doesn't fly with us Confessional Lutherans.

Well, I never claimed to be a Confessional Lutheran. We have differnt opinions. I am not going to change your mind, and you are not going to change mine. So what is the point? I started this thread not to debate one another, but to find out if anyone knew if other "Lutheran Churches" ordained homosexuals.

Zecryphon · Aug 8, 2011

mdseverin said:
Then what about 1 Corinthians 5 did you want me to explain? I thought the issue we were discussing was homosexulaity and not incest. I wasn't trying to read your mind.

Explain how the ELCA's current policies regarding same-sex relationships and clergy who are participating in openly gay sexual relationships lines up with 1 Corinthians 5. 1 Corinthians 5 does mention incest, but it also talks about adultery aka sex outside of marriage.

1Co 5:11 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler--not even to eat with such a one.
1Co 5:12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge?
1Co 5:13 God judges those outside. "Purge the evil person from among you."

How do your teachings line up with these verses? Are you in accordance with them or not? How do your teachings line up with the whole chapter? Are you in accordance with them or not?

Luther073082 · Aug 8, 2011

Zecryphon said:
Explain how the ELCA's current policies regarding same-sex relationships and clergy who are participating in openly gay sexual relationships lines up with 1 Corinthians 5. 1 Corinthians 5 does mention incest, but it also talks about adultery aka sex outside of marriage.

1Co 5:11 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler--not even to eat with such a one.
1Co 5:12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge?
1Co 5:13 God judges those outside. "Purge the evil person from among you."

How do your teachings line up with these verses? Are you in accordance with them or not? How do your teachings line up with the whole chapter? Are you in accordance with them or not?

When I was in the ELCA, just prior to the vote to accept practicing homosexuals as clergy. . . my regional synod had at their meeting the Keynote speaker a woman who was defrocked from the clergy of the ELCA because she left her husband for another woman. Which is apparently also acceptable in the ELCA.

I sent that verse in protest to my synodical bishop.

I wonder if she's re-entered the clergy now.

Zecryphon · Aug 8, 2011

Luther073082 said:
When I was in the ELCA, just prior to the vote to accept practicing homosexuals as clergy. . . my regional synod had at their meeting the Keynote speaker a woman who was defrocked from the clergy of the ELCA because she left her husband for another woman. Which is apparently also acceptable in the ELCA.

I sent that verse in protest to my synodical bishop.

Luther073082 said:
I wonder if she's re-entered the clergy now.

I don't know. But it wouldn't surprise me in the least if they not only overturned her de-frocking but begged her to come back, since the kind of behavior that led to her de-frocking is now acceptable in the ELCA. :doh:

doulos_tou_kuriou · Aug 8, 2011

Zecryphon said:
Yeah, we know Doulos, all you have to do is SAY you are a Lutheran and poof 'you're a Lutheran." Yes and you will answer to your Lord and Savior for being a part of a church that tramples his Word underfoot with a lot of the moves they make. Namely same-sex marriage and your belief that you can be in fellowship with other churches that teach against real presence in the Sacrament of the Altar. How many more parts of the Confessions are you gonna throw out and still claim to be Lutheran? Thank God I probably won't be here to find out.

Well, no, it's not just saying. The point is we use the confessions and Lutheran theology, you may say they disregard this or that or are not confessional, getting into that argument is irrelevant here, because it is not just saying we are Lutheran it is applying Lutheran theology: the historic Lutheran liturgy, justification by faith alone at the center, the church being where the word is preached and sacraments administered, preaching understood as proclamation of the Gospel, Law-Gospel hermeneutic, theology of the cross. You can list this or that where you say "that is not Lutheran" but yet I can list endless and central tenents that are distinctly Lutheran. We teach with the small catechism, our seminarians are not taught with a different confession. It is more than words. Simply put, you can say they are bad Lutherans, they misapply Lutheran theology, but you cannot claim they are not Lutheran because the bottom line is that is the theological paradigm out of which the ELCA has operated.

Zecryphon · Aug 8, 2011

doulos_tou_kuriou said:
Well, no, it's not just saying. The point is we use the confessions and Lutheran theology, you may say they disregard this or that or are not confessional, getting into that argument is irrelevant here, because it is not just saying we are Lutheran it is applying Lutheran theology: the historic Lutheran liturgy, justification by faith alone at the center, the church being where the word is preached and sacraments administered, preaching understood as proclamation of the Gospel, Law-Gospel hermeneutic, theology of the cross. You can list this or that where you say "that is not Lutheran" but yet I can list endless and central tenents that are distinctly Lutheran. We teach with the small catechism, our seminarians are not taught with a different confession. It is more than words. Simply put, you can say they are bad Lutherans, they misapply Lutheran theology, but you cannot claim they are not Lutheran because the bottom line is that is the theological paradigm out of which the ELCA has operated.

You don't actually adhere to all of what the Confessions teach, that's part of the point here. In fact, you said it yourself two months ago or so that the ELCA communes people who do not adhere to the real presence of Jesus Christ in the Sacrament of the Altar. That is hardly irrelevant. So how is it that you have the Sacrament of the Altar? You do not reject those churches that teach falsely on this subject, you welcome them to the rail with open arms.

The fact that you (I'm applying that word not to you personally, but the non-Conservative churches of the ELCA) ordain openly gay practicing homosexuals as pastors is teaching the Word of God faithfully.... how? Not only does it violate Scripture, it also goes against the Sixth Commandment, which is found in Scripture and Luther's Small Catechism which you claim your clergy are taught from. <edit>

lux et lex · Aug 9, 2011

This thread has gotten too bizarre for me. If the conservative Lutherans feel so hell bent on ELCA not being Lutheran or the more ridiculous not being Christian that leaves me to wonder why. We aren't hurting you. Oh, you have to explain that you're not accepting of homosexual clergy, or female clergy. Boo Hoo. We have to explain that not all Lutheran churches are like that and some are open and affirming. I could make thread after thread questioning, no more like ridiculing WELS/LCMS beliefs, but there is no use other than my own enjoyment and feelings of superiority so I don't bother. Do you (general you) constantly need to reaffirm that you're beliefs are "right"? If so, why? God will sort the wheat from the chaff...no need for you to worry about it.

Luther073082 · Aug 9, 2011

lux et lex said:
This thread has gotten too bizarre for me. If the conservative Lutherans feel so hell bent on ELCA not being Lutheran or the more ridiculous not being Christian that leaves me to wonder why. We aren't hurting you. Oh, you have to explain that you're not accepting of homosexual clergy, or female clergy. Boo Hoo. We have to explain that not all Lutheran churches are like that and some are open and affirming. I could make thread after thread questioning, no more like ridiculing WELS/LCMS beliefs, but there is no use other than my own enjoyment and feelings of superiority so I don't bother. Do you (general you) constantly need to reaffirm that you're beliefs are "right"? If so, why? God will sort the wheat from the chaff...no need for you to worry about it.

If you see someone walking out onto a road with an oncomming Semi . . . should you just stand and watch the Semi smash them or should you say "Look out!!"??

I'm not saying that the way its been done has always been right, good or loving. . .

But its not loving to see someone fall into error and not try to convince them to come back to the truth.

It can never be loving to allow someone to become the chaff without saying anything to try to convince them that they are on the wrong road.

I don't think anyone has claimed you aren't Christian. But errors are harmful. Our concern is that the ELCA has essentially nerfed the law. With the ELCA its a difficult thing anymore to determine what is sin and what is not sin. . . they essentially don't seem take anything and define it as sin. . . at least not anything that is legal. It takes and makes it so God has very little to no standard on his creation. And what God's standard is is hard to define. . . For example confessional Lutherans don't belive in sex outside of marriage in any circumstance. However the ELCA has defined it down to a loving and committed relationship. . . What does a loving and committed relationship look like? What defines a loving and committed relationship? What is committment? Does it count if I was committed to her at the time??

And more essentially where does this come from? Does it come from scripture? Does it come from a long held tradition of the church?

Marriage. . .you are either married or you are not married. And its almost always easy to tell who is who in this regard.

So essentially God's law is nerfed into something where sin is hard to define and really less prevelent. And if sin is hard to define and not very prevelent. . . then what is the need for grace?

The law has to convince me that I'm a filthy sinner, that I am no good the way I am. That I have not lived up to God's standard and probably never could.

All of that probably sounds very depressing I'm sure. . . But thats why I need Christ. . . Because I am not good enough the way I am. That its only through Christ that I become good enough.

The church shouldn't be affirming people. When you affirm people you tell them they are good enough the way they are. Well if I'm already good enough, why then do I need Christ? What is the need for grace then?

I'm broken and I need to know that I'm broken in order to truely realize that I need Christ to fix me.

Anyways I don't expect this to change your mind, but I hope you understand. . . our grave concern is that when you nerf the law, you also nerf grace. And if you start nerfing grace it loses its place. And these errors can lead individuals away from Christ when they don't understand or fully know in their hearts their need for grace.

Our other concern is the treatment of scripture as though it is not literal truth. If Jonah isn't the truth. . . then what else isn't the truth? Did Christ literally come to earth and die on a cross to save humanity? Or are the entire gospels all an allegory? What is real in the scriptures? Is any of it real? Is Christ real? Is God even real?

Zecryphon · Aug 9, 2011

lux et lex said:
This thread has gotten too bizarre for me. If the conservative Lutherans feel so hell bent on ELCA not being Lutheran or the more ridiculous not being Christian that leaves me to wonder why.

The "not being Christians" thing I don't get, however, as for not being Lutherans, that's easy. You do not adhere to the Confessions of the Lutheran faith. Here is just one example: admitting people to the Communion rail who do not believe in the real presence of Christ in the Sacrament is in direct violation of what the Confessions teach.

Article X: Of the Lord's Supper (From the Augsburg Confession)

1] Of the Supper of the Lord they teach that the Body and Blood of Christ are truly present, and are distributed 2] to those who eat the Supper of the Lord; and they reject those that teach otherwise.

This is one place in the Confessions where you are told that you are to reject those who teach contrary to the Real Presence of Christ in the Sacrament. The ELCA does not do that. Instead, they go against what the Confessions teach and welcome those who deny the Real Presence of Christ in the Sacrament. If you don't actually follow the beliefs and practices of the Lutheran Church as laid out in the Confessions, how do you get to call yourself Lutheran? Why should you be called Lutheran? Because you say you are? :doh:

lux et lex said:
We aren't hurting you. Oh, you have to explain that you're not accepting of homosexual clergy, or female clergy. Boo Hoo.

Actually, you are hurting Lutherans because you don't tell anybody that your synod teaches contrary to what the Confessions of the Lutheran Church state. So those of us who actually are in accordance with the Confessions in both belief and practice have to correct the errors you have taught to people while claiming to be Lutherans. Also, we're not the only ones who have a problem with homosexual clergy.

1Ti 3:2 Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach,
1Ti 3:3 not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money.
1Ti 3:4 He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive,
1Ti 3:5 for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God's church?
1Ti 3:6 He must not be a recent convert, or he may become puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil.
1Ti 3:7 Moreover, he must be well thought of by outsiders, so that he may not fall into disgrace, into a snare of the devil.

How does the current ELCA practice of ordaining openly gay ministers involved in active homosexual relationships fit this description? I want an answer, not the typical dodge of "well how do ministers without children or a wife fit this description?"

lux et lex said:
We have to explain that not all Lutheran churches are like that and some are open and affirming. I could make thread after thread questioning, no more like ridiculing WELS/LCMS beliefs, but there is no use other than my own enjoyment and feelings of superiority so I don't bother. Do you (general you) constantly need to reaffirm that you're beliefs are "right"? If so, why? God will sort the wheat from the chaff...no need for you to worry about it.

There is no true Lutheran church that affirms sin and that is what the ELCA does when they ordain clergy who are involved in actively homosexual relationships to the office of pastor. Go ahead and make thread after thread, you'll be corrected there too. One reason we have to constantly define what is right as far as Lutheran beliefs go is because of false teaching church bodies like the ELCA.

1Co 5:9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people--
1Co 5:10 not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world.
1Co 5:11 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler--not even to eat with such a one.
1Co 5:12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge?
1Co 5:13 God judges those outside. "Purge the evil person from among you."

God will sort the wheat from the chaff, but we are commanded to purge the evil person from among us. God doesn't turn a blind eye to sin and neither do Confessional Lutherans. Because we love others and the loving thing to do is to correct an erring brother. Now if that brother does not repent of their sin, there are consequences which we on earth can enact.

Mat 18:15 "If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.
Mat 18:16 But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses.
Mat 18:17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.

But I guess your big question in all of the blatant sin being practiced in the liberal ELCA churches is: "What's the big deal, anyway?"

DaRev · Aug 9, 2011

lux et lex said:
We have to explain that not all Lutheran churches are like that and some are open and affirming.

I find it utterly bizzare that people in the ELCA think that embracing things that God in His word clearly condemns as sinful is being "open and affirming".
<edit>

Truly, truly sad.

Rechtgläubig · Aug 9, 2011

lux et lex said:
We have to explain that not all Lutheran churches are like that and some are open and affirming.

Like the elca church that makes clay statues of Caananite gods and prays to mother godess? herchurch

Lutheran Homosexual Clergy

κύριε ἐλέησον χριστὲ ἐλέησον

Grace Alone, Faith Alone, Word Alone

Grace Alone, Faith Alone, Word Alone

Well-Known Member

κύριε ἐλέησον χριστὲ ἐλέησον

Grace Alone, Faith Alone, Word Alone

Well-Known Member

Grace Alone, Faith Alone, Word Alone

Grace Alone, Faith Alone, Word Alone

Grace Alone, Faith Alone, Word Alone

Well-Known Member

κύριε ἐλέησον χριστὲ ἐλέησον

Well-Known Member

Located at the intersection of Forde and Giertz

Well-Known Member

light and law

κύριε ἐλέησον χριστὲ ἐλέησον

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

der Anti-Schwärmer

Similar threads