Is it inevitable?

[ctobola]

I thought of trying LCMS but I just have a hard time with the local LCMS having closed communion.

Akolouthein,

It sounds like you have some real concerns about the direction of the ELCA. I can relate, as I was absolutely distraught when we decided to enter into the agreement with the Episcopalians. (That's another story.)

For me, it came down to realizing that I don't live my faith at the level of denominiations... and they have become a real distraction from what the Church really is.

I belong to a congregation of believers. Period. The congregation where I worship is affiliated with the ELCA, but that isn't the focus of who we are. We are a body of believers in this community and that is the important thing.

I think you are right to have hesitations about the LCMS and WELS. The whole issue of close communion sends a very clear message regarding what they are about.

I'd enjoy dialoging more with you; and I'm also going to start a thread about the nature of the Gospel and the Church that will likely speak to some of the issues you're struggling with.

In Christ, -Cloy

 

[Protoevangel]

I belong to a congregation of believers. Period. The congregation where I worship is affiliated with the ELCA, but that isn't the focus of who we are. We are a body of believers in this community and that is the important thing.

I think you are right to have hesitations about the LCMS and WELS. The whole issue of close communion sends a very clear message regarding what they are about.

How arrogant!

It's OK to be ELCA, even if they do teach it's OK to murder innocent babies, and even if they do place themselves above Holy Scripture, (you see, that's not the focus of who we are), but... stay away from those LCMS and WELS churches, they practice close Communion (and of course, that is the focus of who they are)!!!

 

[ctobola]

How arrogant!

It's OK to be ELCA, even if they do teach it's OK to murder innocent babies, and even if they do place themselves above Holy Scripture, (you see, that's not the focus of who we are), but... stay away from those LCMS and WELS churches, they practice close Communion (and of course, that is the focus of who they are)!!!

Dan,

Please don't accuse me of arrogance. That's hurtful.

I agree that the ELCA needs to change it's stance on abortion -- and I'm going to stay here and fight for that change.

But when it comes down to the issue of being too tolerant, I think that's much less of a sin than being separatist and self-righteous. (The Pharisees said the same of Jesus -- "Look, he associates with prostitutes and tax collectors.")

The difference is that implementing a "we're right and you're wrong" mentality (and you're correct -- that's who they are... and that's the message they send to the world) totally shuts off communication and prevents people from hearing the message of the Gospel.

I guess it comes down to whether you consider the Church a museum for saints, or a hospital for sinners.

I would never consider my brothers and sisters in the WELS/LCMS to be outside the Church... but I think the message they're sending is not what they intend to communicate.

Hope that helps you understand where I'm coming from.

In Christ, -Cloy

 

[Protoevangel]

Please don't accuse me of arrogance. That's hurtful.

Yes, that was out of line. I am sorry. I will try to focus on the argument, instead of assigning a motive to that argument.

I agree that the ELCA needs to change it's stance on abortion -- and I'm going to stay here and fight for that change.

But when it comes down to the issue of being too tolerant, I think that's much less of a sin than being separatist and self-righteous. (The Pharisees said the same of Jesus -- "Look, he associates with prostitutes and tax collectors.")

Two thoughts:
One - You have asserted, but not demonstrated that close Communion equates to, or is based on, “self-righteousness”. Like you, I disagree with the practice of close Communion, but I am much more concerned about the piece of lumber in my own synod's eye than I am about declaring my judgment upon their synod, for their spec!
Two - Even assuming, purely for the sake of the conversation, that close communion were based on self-righteousness, is that really so much worse of a sin than condoning the torture and mass murder of of innocent children? Once again, spec/log.

The difference is that implementing a "we're right and you're wrong" mentality (and you're correct -- that's who they are... and that's the message they send to the world) totally shuts off communication and prevents people from hearing the message of the Gospel.

I guess it comes down to whether you consider the Church a museum for saints, or a hospital for sinners.

Or perhaps it comes down to whether the Church will stand for the truth despite the direction the culture is heading. Your assumption that the LCMS and WELS reject sinners is unfounded and scandalous. You are presupposing their guilt, and making your accusation in a forum where they are not allowed to defend themselves. That is bad form.

I would never consider my brothers and sisters in the WELS/LCMS to be outside the Church... but I think the message they're sending is not what they intend to communicate.

So let's concentrate on their spec? Talk about how bad they are while covering up the blood on our hands? Is that your answer?

Hope that helps you understand where I'm coming from.

Once again, I don't think you were any less clear in your previous post.

 

[Willy]

How arrogant!

It's OK to be ELCA, even if they do teach it's OK to murder innocent babies, and even if they do place themselves above Holy Scripture, (you see, that's not the focus of who we are), but... stay away from those LCMS and WELS churches, they practice close Communion (and of course, that is the focus of who they are)!!!

I'm a part of the ELCA and very proud of it. I and we don't promote murdering innocent children and do not place ourselves above the scriptures. I wonder what kind of ELCA congregations you hang out with. I've been in scores of them and haven't once heard advocacy for murdering children. I have been at many synodical assemblies and national assemblies and haven't heard this kind of talk either. They must be hiding this agenda from me.

 

[cableguy]

I'm a part of the ELCA and very proud of it. I and we don't promote murdering innocent children and do not place ourselves above the scriptures. I wonder what kind of ELCA congregations you hang out with. I've been in scores of them and haven't once heard advocacy for murdering children. I have been at many synodical assemblies and national assemblies and haven't heard this kind of talk either. They must be hiding this agenda from me.

So you haven't read the ELCA social statement on abortion?

http://www.elca.org/socialstatements/abortion/

Lutherans for Life have a very good argument against this social statement, though right now I can't link it here. I'm sure if you go to their web site you can find it. http://www.lutheransforlife.org/index.htm

 

[Willy]

Yes, I have read the ELCA's statement on abortion. Actually I have studied it and taught a class on it. Nowhere does it advocate the murdering of innocent babies. The statement reflects the ambiguities of a church that is brave enough to proclaim that some issues are extremely complex--so complex that easy answers will not suffice. Actually, if you read the statement, you will note its strong predilection toward the preservation of life.

 

[Protoevangel]

I'm a part of the ELCA and very proud of it.

You go on being proud of being ELCA all you want, Willy. The only thing I will take pride in is being in Christ. Whether it is the forearm of the ELCA or the thigh of the LCMS or the spine of the Orthodox Church, pride does not enter the equation. I have no room for pride in denomination.

...and we don't promote murdering innocent children...

First of all, I did not make the claim that the ELCA promotes the murder. What I did say was that they teach it is OK. There is a very real difference there. If the ELCA actively promoted abortion, there would be no way I could, in good conscience, cooperate with anything the ELCA were a part of. Even still, I have incredible grief that the ELCA teaches that it is ever acceptable to kill an innocent child, for any reason, save perhaps to save the life of the mother.

That the ELCA does teach that murdering babies is acceptable is clear in the ELCA social statement on abortion. It accepts abortion in circumstances such as fetal abnormality and in cases of rape and incest. Beyond these cases "this church neither supports nor opposes" other abortion-restricting legislation.

At the ELCA's 1997 convention in Orlando, a resolution to restrict ELCA funding of abortions to the above cases stated above was rejected 809-121. Actually, that very close to "promoting", dosen’t it?
http://www.wfn.org/1997/08/msg00159.html

ELCA health insurance still covers any elective abortion up to and including the 20th week of pregnancy, as explained in "Detailed information about the ELCA Health Benefits Plan for 2005" http://www.elcabop.org/resources_tools/downloads/pdf/100_05_healthspd.pdf.

A number of ELCA-affiliated hospitals perform elective abortions. Imagine that... ELCA affiliated hospitals profiting from the murder of innocent children. Again, this sounds very close to "promoting" to me.

 

[soccerguy2594]

I feel the main point in any church discussion is whether the topic is church dividing (like the first 4 eccumenical counsels). I think the point was made strongly at the ELCA convention as well as with the task force that this is NOT church dividing.

Whether or not you agree with the decision made at the national convention the way to handle this discussion is not the pick up your toys and go home (i.e. leave the church). There are many Catholics that would love to see women ordained and stay in the Catholic church in order to hopefully reform it. Once you leave you lose your voice. if the church is always reforming then this issue needs to be addressed head on. People have tried to keep the topic of sexuality (straight or homosexuality) out of the church because it wasn't viewed as something the church should talk about. However, if our faith is to pervade our lives then it has to pervade the topic of sexuality.

The ELCA has not been around for a very long time ('87 I think) and some feel it was on shaky ground when it was formed. The key is that we can still be "church" and disagree on some topics. As long as it has no bearing on Salvation (which it does not) then we can disagree.

 

[Willy]

Hey Soccer guy. What do you mean by "salvation?"

 

[soccerguy2594]

In the most general terms by salvation I mean, "your relationship with God." Whether or not you believe the ELCA should bless homosexual unions or ordain practicing homosexuals does not effect the grace of God in your life. Whatever your stance on this issue is, that stance does not put you "outside the church" or "outside the realm of God." So we can learn to live together in this ambiguity.

Does that answer your question, Willy?

 

[Willy]

I suppose it does. Often when people talk about salvation they mean "going to heaven." I don't think that's particularly Biblical or helpful. Ultimately, I don't see salvation simply as a personal affair. Ultimately it involves the redemption of all that is. Also I would see salvation as being related to healing. The church does rise and fall on the notion that ultimate healing (for the self and all creation) comes not from us but from God. It is not a matter of right action or belief. It is a gift of God's grace. You are right, soccer guy, it is this that ultimately matters. A whole lot of other stuff, while important, is not ultimate. The church does not rise and fall on views of human sexuality. I agree. Did you ever think of seminary? The church needs pastors!

 

[soccerguy2594]

I agree completely Willy. I think salvation is primarily a communal concept. Individual salvation ("me and my buddy Jesus") is such a western thought. We draw this from our very individualistic way of looking at life. While I think a personal relationship with God is a good thing, I believe the concept ("have you accepted the lord as your personal savior?") is used to separate people from each other - the "in crowd." Of course there are other problems with that question the main one being the underlying notion that we can choose. I mean really. If left to our own reason and power I could not (and probably would not) choose God

[cff. 1 Cor 1:18-24 "For the message about the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written, "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart." 20 Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, God decided, through the foolishness of our proclamation, to save those who believe. 22 For Jews demand signs and Greeks desire wisdom, 23 but we proclaim Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24 but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God."]

As for Seminary...thanks for the compliment. If I go to seminary I would have to do an internship in a parish...would I get to choose who my supervisor was?

 

[Willy]

No, but you can interview them now. You can get a sense of whether the two of you would be a good match. I like working with seminary students.

 

[soccerguy2594]

I've been told I'm rather strong willed and "bold." I'm a strong individual which could intimidate those that would be my supervisors.

Could you handle that........Willy????

 

[Willy]

Probably not!

 

[soccerguy2594]

oh well....your loss.

 

[Willy]

True. But I have been known to change my mind.

 

[saami]

The future of the ELCA?

Short term, I don't think anything drastic will happen. I think we will continure to slowly loose members and congregations. These issues will resurface. Just like last time, the ELCA will push their agenda regardless of the divisiveness and harm it causes. The issues will eventually be pushed through.

What! becoming like Baptists who walk out on each other with every little tiff? I though we had more stick to it -ness. The gay clergy and members that got shot down aren't walking out even though they got ripped up and down at CWA. I was there - it was brutal.

We have failed our parishoners of they ever thought that Lutheranism or Christianity was anything but heterodox. We ahve always agreed on some very basic doctrines to hold us together - grace alone, faith alone, Christ alone and Scripture alone. Not a common hymnal or translation of the Bible, etc.)

 

[achurchmouse]

I'm having a hard time being a member of the ELCA right now. They shot down the actively homosexual clergy vote and approval of gay marriage vote, for now, and then , i feel, slap us with a gender neutral hymnal. My wife's family were all raised in the ELCA and we talk about this alot. I just have a feeling a split is inevitable but they disagree. In their defense , they know much more about the ELCA and have grown up in it. I received an email from the Lutheran Journal of Ethics with an article of yet another person justifying homosexual ordination in the church (it seems to me). Please feel free to check it out here. Look , I'm not here to debate, if you think homosexuals should be allowed to be ministers then more power to ya, have fun. I just want to know where people think the ELCA is going and do you think it will be divided sooner or later. It seems to me that articles like this just let us know the fight is far from over.

http://www.elca.org/scriptlib/dcs/jle/article.asp?aid=604

1. With your concerns you should be happy - CWA "shot down" ordination of non-celibate gays.

2. The gender neutral hymnal is not about gays - but about women being about to see themselves in "God's image" Gen 1:27 and being honest with some texts that have been un-necessarly masculinized.

3. You can't have grown up in the ELCA since it has existed only since 1988. And since the ELCA said no to rostering non-celibate gays (many of whom are leagally married) they should be happy because then the church will not split.

4. The ELCA and all other churches have ordained closeted and celibate gays since who knows when - the first ordinations.

My answer to you question - will it divide? NO - because it is too easy to keep being unjust to a minority who because they are Lutheran and believe the Lutheran Church teaches the truth of the Gospel will be satying by and large in the ELCA. Only the conservatives will think of leaving - and they can join Missouri - who seem to tip the scale towards Gospel plus some other believes are what saves. (Jesus' death, plus believing that the Historical Critical Method of interpretation is wrong,plus believing that the Bible is inerrant (adding to the Bible's claims for itself) plus believing that homosexulaity is somehow uniquely disqualifying among sins unlike lying, divorce,etc., plus believing God is actually "Father" = male and that is not just a metaphor, plus... plus...

Grace alone, faith alone, Christ alone, Scripture alone