Current ELCA Crisis

[Studeclunker]

Friends, I do hope that there will not be a split in the church, I have seen it a local levels and it is so difficult to deal with.

A church of 1000 will split, 200 will stay 200 will go the "new way" and 600 will likely not go to church for a long long time.

I hope that doesn't happen.

I suppose you're right, however, would that be any worse than the thousands of people that left the ELCA after the first release of the Statement On Human Sexuality? The vast majority of these people left the Lutheran faith entirely. I would hope that people who left the ELCA might be drawn back into the more conservative branch that splits from the more liberal. Possibly a point to ponder...

 

[D.W.Washburn]

I suppose you're right, however, would that be any worse than the thousands of people that left the ELCA after the first release of the Statement On Human Sexuality? The vast majority of these people left the Lutheran faith entirely. I would hope that people who left the ELCA might be drawn back into the more conservative branch that splits from the more liberal. Possibly a point to ponder...

Do you have evidence of this?

My sense of those who object to the current sexuality statement is that they are either ready to go Missouri or form a new church body.

 

[Studeclunker]

Do you have evidence of this?

My sense of those who object to the current sexuality statement is that they are either ready to go Missouri or form a new church body.

Sorry? Evidence of the thousands of members that left (including myself and my family) or that people might be drawn back?

As to the former, if you were around at that time (ie: a member of ELCA), you would likely have noticed. I suppose the evidence could be found again. After all, it was public record. As to the latter, it was an observation and speculation, so no, I couldn't. I will, however, post this point; I might be persuaded to return to the conservative element of such a split. The question is though, how could a church's leadership that has gone so far down ELCA's road reverse direction so dramatically? All things are possible in the Lord, however, Man's will usually creates some serious... roadblocks.

Also, one must consider the legal ramifications of a split in the ELCA. Would the organization itself disolve, would they become two ELCAs, how would such a thing be accomplished? It's kind of mind boggling as the congregations aren't independent, like LCMS, but more like an episcopy. I didn't get so involved in the operations of my church back then and didn't know how the hierarchy of the Church worked.

 

[D.W.Washburn]

Sorry? Evidence of the thousands of members that left (including myself and my family) or that people might be drawn back?

I'm sorry, I wasn't clear. I meant evidence that a majority of those who left the ELCA had left the Lutheran fold entirely.

As to the former, if you were around at that time (ie: a member of ELCA), you would likely have noticed. I suppose the evidence could be found again. After all, it was public record.

I was around at the time, and I'm aware that people, pastors and congregations left the ELCA.

As to the latter, it was an observation and speculation, so no, I couldn't. I will, however, post this point; I might be persuaded to return to the conservative element of such a split.

I didn't expect evidence for this. It's interesting to me that you would consider return. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you go Missouri? Why wouldn't you stay LC-MS?

The question is though, how could a church's leadership that has gone so far down ELCA's road reverse direction so dramatically? All things are possible in the Lord, however, Man's will usually creates some serious... roadblocks.

I don't expect that the ELCA can, or will reverse direction. The fact is, we're already a church with ordained homosexual pastors living in committed relationships. Interestingly, the same loophole exploited by Word Alone to ordain pastors outside of Apostolic Succession has been used to ordain gay pastors.

Also, one must consider the legal ramifications of a split in the ELCA. Would the organization itself disolve, would they become two ELCAs, how would such a thing be accomplished?

I think the most likely scenario is that a faction would leave the ELCA and form a new corporate identity. I believe that WordAlone is poised to do this.

It's kind of mind boggling as the congregations aren't independent, like LCMS, but more like an episcopy. I didn't get so involved in the operations of my church back then and didn't know how the hierarchy of the Church worked.

The ELCA's ecclesial structure is a mash-up of the ALC's congregational polity and the LCA's more episcopal structure. It's the ambiguity of this structure that makes extraordinary ordinations possible.

 

[doulos_tou_kuriou]

Here are some thoughts for this current discusison:
1) I am unsure about the masses, but I am aware that in the last 10 yrs or so a great many theologians in the ELCA and some of rather honorable mention (such as Joroslav Pelican for example) have left the ELCA not for more conservative Lutheran denoms but for the Catholic and Orthodox church. Whether this reflects the direction of the exodus of the laity I am unsure of.
2) Should the ELCA split, the nature of the split will likely depend on the size of the split. If only the really conservative and Word Alone churches leave, then they will likely just form some independent denom and do things pretty much as they are except consider themselves "free" from the title and stereotypes of the ELCA. They will turn around, not look back, and want nothing more to do with their former synod, or at least want as much to do with them as the LCMS for example would want.
3) If however there is a great split, say closer to 50/50 for example or at least some noticable size, one that includes many of the conservative leaning moderates, I would venture that the bodies will be in rather close. I would guess that they would be in full communion minus the exceptions: one would be something like, practicing gay pastors of the ELCA would not be permitted to "cross over" so to speak in pulpit swap type stuff. That is what I would presume, a close but distinctly seperate group.
4) One thing to discuss that I am unsure how it has been thought out by many is the pension issue. This for example has caused some LCMS pastors I am aware of who did not leave at seminex and later wished to to stay in the LCMS, because your pension is bound to your synod. If churches leave the ELCA, they will be responsible for supporting the pastors they take with them. And with all respects, Lutherans in general have been short on giving and horrible at talking about money in the church of late. As one woman I know who is a board member of one of the ELCA seminaries put it, "Lutherans often act as if money itself were a dirty thing." So many churches right now, especially now in our economic times are struggling to stay open, to take on the burden of their pastor's pension may be just too much. Yes money is not everything, and yes they need to follow where they believe the true witness to the gospel is, but it is irresponsible to leave pastors in financial insecurity.
pax

 

[Till]

Here are some thoughts for this current discusison:
1) I am unsure about the masses, but I am aware that in the last 10 yrs or so a great many theologians in the ELCA and some of rather honorable mention (such as Joroslav Pelican for example) have left the ELCA not for more conservative Lutheran denoms but for the Catholic and Orthodox church. Whether this reflects the direction of the exodus of the laity I am unsure of.

Musings of a Pertinacious Papist: Lutheran converts & the ELCA "brain drain"

 

[Korah]

Musings of a Pertinacious Papist: Lutheran converts & the ELCA "brain drain"

As Mr. Spock would say (though not in the new StarTrek movie to my recollection), "Interesting".
With the staunchly Roman Catholic books Braaten recommends at the end, one would think that by now (four years after the 2005 date of his letter to Bishop Hansen) he has turned Roman Catholic or at least become more open to that route.
I'm not going back to RC nor do I have the slightest inclination towards Eastern Orthodoxy (though Western Rite has some allure), so I definitely want ELCA to rediscover the "evangelical catholic orthodoxy" (all small "c's") he champions. I don't think I have anywhere else to go. If only a small Gnesiolutheran denomination splits off, I will be even more stuck with predominantly Liberal Protestant leaders in ELCA. From my point of view the best that seems possible now is for a large enough branch of ELCA to split off to accommodate my Liberal Catholic preferences. I still view the Augsburg Confession and the Apology as the best statements of what I believe.
My personal dilemma is that I live in California where local churches are least likely to line up with a faction I favor.
Korah

 

[D.W.Washburn]

As Mr. Spock would say (though not in the new StarTrek movie to my recollection), "Interesting".
With the staunchly Roman Catholic books Braaten recommends at the end, one would think that by now (four years after the 2005 date of his letter to Bishop Hansen) he has turned Roman Catholic or at least become more open to that route.
I'm not going back to RC nor do I have the slightest inclination towards Eastern Orthodoxy (though Western Rite has some allure), so I definitely want ELCA to rediscover the "evangelical catholic orthodoxy" (all small "c's") he champions. I don't think I have anywhere else to go. If only a small Gnesiolutheran denomination splits off, I will be even more stuck with predominantly Liberal Protestant leaders in ELCA. From my point of view the best that seems possible now is for a large enough branch of ELCA to split off to accommodate my Liberal Catholic preferences. I still view the Augsburg Confession and the Apology as the best statements of what I believe.
My personal dilemma is that I live in California where local churches are least likely to line up with a faction I favor.
Korah

Korah:

The Recommended readings were not Braaten's recommendations. They were from the Pertinacious Papist. I don't think there is any danger of Braaten going RC. I saw a statement somewhere that Braaten made, four years ago, about Lutheranisms detractors being able to use his open letter to the Bishop Hansen. This is, apparently, what has happened on that website. If I remember correctly, Braaten said that this was regrettable, but inevitable.

I saw Braaten's name among the illustrious signatories on the "Open Letter" opposing the task force recommendations that Mr_E linked to in another thread. Braaten is a force to be reckoned with in American Lutheranism. Whether one agrees with him or not, he is to be taken seriously.

 

[servingtheking]

I don't expect that the ELCA can, or will reverse direction. The fact is, we're already a church with ordained homosexual pastors living in committed relationships. Interestingly, the same loophole exploited by Word Alone to ordain pastors outside of Apostolic Succession has been used to ordain gay pastors.

Is it really a loophole if it's in the church constitution now? This isn't a "loophole" if its a bylaw of the church, it's on the books after CCM. Churches "going rogue" and ignoring current church policy is not the same as exceptional ordination which the church allows.

 

[servingtheking]

double post, Sorry All

 

[Korah]

Korah:

The Recommended readings were not Braaten's recommendations. They were from the Pertinacious Papist. I don't think there is any danger of Braaten going RC. I saw a statement somewhere that Braaten made, four years ago, about Lutheranisms detractors being able to use his open letter to the Bishop Hansen. This is, apparently, what has happened on that website. If I remember correctly, Braaten said that this was regrettable, but inevitable.

I saw Braaten's name among the illustrious signatories on the "Open Letter" opposing the task force recommendations that Mr_E linked to in another thread. Braaten is a force to be reckoned with in American Lutheranism. Whether one agrees with him or not, he is to be taken seriously.

I'm delighted that Carl Braaten is as little likely to turn RC as I am. I guess wherever he lines up at the Convention is where I'm at as well.
I know Till well enough to know he's not the "Pertinacious Papist", but I know him well enough to have thought that he was labelling Braaten as one. Shame on you, Till, I was worried needlessly that apparently my strongest advocate in ELCA was going RC. What's your game, Till, are you so anti-papist that you're willing to tar Braaten as a papist? Doesn't that defeat your own enmity against RC?
Korah

 

[ricker]

Do you personally know of any LCMS churches that don't have altars?

Besides, "orthodoxy" refers to the theology in this case.

Just a quick question, not meant to be debate. Where does the alter get it's seemingly vast importance when the word is not even mentioned in the new testament? I would be glad to be informed. I certainly don't mind having the alter in my church.
Thanks and God bless, Ricker

 

[ricker]

Do you have evidence of this?

My sense of those who object to the current sexuality statement is that they are either ready to go Missouri or form a new church body.

No offence to my LCMS brothers and sisters, but it would be difficult for me to join a church that practices closed communion and denies the calling of women to be pastors.

It would also be tough to stay in a church that embraces and celebrates homosexual behaviour. I'm not sure where that leaves me.

My two cents......

 

[doulos_tou_kuriou]

No offence to my LCMS brothers and sisters, but it would be difficult for me to join a church that practices closed communion and denies the calling of women to be pastors.

It would also be tough to stay in a church that embraces and celebrates homosexual behaviour. I'm not sure where that leaves me.

My two cents......

In the same boat as many other concerned folks of the ELCA. Welcome to the dilema.

pax

 

[AngelusSax]

No offence to my LCMS brothers and sisters, but it would be difficult for me to join a church that practices closed communion and denies the calling of women to be pastors.

It would also be tough to stay in a church that embraces and celebrates homosexual behaviour. I'm not sure where that leaves me.

My two cents......

For what it's worth, when it comes down to it, and having to make a choice between those options, I would go with the one erring on the side of Grace rather than erring on the side of the Law (though I'm not advocating we simply ignore the Law altogether).

I may draw a hard line in the sand if the church tells me I have to become homosexual, but simply allowing others to be homosexual and practice it, regardless of how I feel, at least I can see that as erring on the side of Grace. Perhaps that is overly simplistic, but it is where I am right now.

 

[soccerguy2594]

Have I missed something or have people forgotten about the "local option" in the resolutions. Since people on both sides are "bound by conscience" then the real debate should be focused on the "local option" provision. How do people feel about that? Are we becoming too congregational with this provision? It seems - since the merger - the ELCA has never figured out what its polity is? I know we are somewhere in the middle, but what takes presidence?

 

[Korah]

Just a quick question, not meant to be debate. Where does the altar get it's seemingly vast importance when the word is not even mentioned in the new testament? I would be glad to be informed. I certainly don't mind having the altar in my church.
Thanks and God bless, Ricker

The New Testament gives us a two-generation slice of Church history, but what about the other 1900 years? How can we say we are a true part of Christianity if we turn our backs on Church tradition? So we don't. We have altars and lots of stuff that isn't spelled out in the NT. We Lutherans say we are sola scriptura, but we don't really mean it.
The New Testament of course does mention the Last Supper and Hebrews goes deeply into sacrifice. So we can't say the altar is not implied in the NT.

 

[AngelusSax]

The New Testament gives us a two-generation slice of Church history, but what about the other 1900 years? How can we say we are a true part of Christianity if we turn our backs on Church tradition? So we don't. We have altars and lots of stuff that isn't spelled out in the NT. We Lutherans say we are sola scriptura, but we don't really mean it.

Perhaps we would be more honest then to say we are Prima Scriptura?

 

[ricker]

The New Testament gives us a two-generation slice of Church history, but what about the other 1900 years? How can we say we are a true part of Christianity if we turn our backs on Church tradition? So we don't. We have altars and lots of stuff that isn't spelled out in the NT. We Lutherans say we are sola scriptura, but we don't really mean it.
The New Testament of course does mention the Last Supper and Hebrews goes deeply into sacrifice. So we can't say the altar is not implied in the NT.

Thanks. I deeply appreciate the traditions and liturgy in our services in keeping with the Biblical emphasis.

 

[doulos_tou_kuriou]

The New Testament gives us a two-generation slice of Church history, but what about the other 1900 years? How can we say we are a true part of Christianity if we turn our backs on Church tradition? So we don't. We have altars and lots of stuff that isn't spelled out in the NT. We Lutherans say we are sola scriptura, but we don't really mean it.
The New Testament of course does mention the Last Supper and Hebrews goes deeply into sacrifice. So we can't say the altar is not implied in the NT.

I think you miss the meaning of Sola Scriptura.
It does not mean that you only do things that are found in the Bible, it means you only accept the Bible as the true authority on matters of faith and doctrine.
Luther applied sola scriptura to tradition, i.e. the only things necessary to keep would be those commanded in scripture and the only things that could not be continued/practiced were things forbidden or opposed to scripture. We certainly I think appreciate tradition as did Luther, but we recognize its limitation.
If we were only Prima Scriptura we would say scripture first, tradition second. But ultimately tradition is not authority in the Lutheran Church because we have what we call the evangelical freedom. Most of us have chosen to keep with non-offensive traditions with that freedom. But it cannot ultimately be called an authority.
The ELCA especially has been willing to turn its back on tradition in certain areas before because it believes it does not answer to tradition (although some claim that it has turned its back on scripture, but the ELCA certainly does not believe that) but answers to the Word of God. The sexuality issue is an example in which while it sees value in reading the interpretations of the church of 2000 years it ultimately will not put that interpretation over scripture.
The closest one could come to saying we are not "sola" is our adherence to the Lutheran Confessions, but they are only adhered to because they are considered "true witness" to scripture and thus still fall under the ultimate authority of scripture.
pax