The thread for info on churches voting to change affiliation & all follow-up.

[Brian Stoffregen]

Haven't there been thirteen other threads on this topic?

Peace,
Michael

Thirteen?  Much more than that, methinks -- up to 13 times 13.  With the same inanities arguments from Brian every time.

And your arguments have changed?

[Pilgrim]

Tim notes: Brian, yours haven't, and they're still as vapid as mist and you still believe them. More's the pity. And with real lives at stake you seem benignly oblivious. 

[MaddogLutheran]

Haven't there been thirteen other threads on this topic?

Peace,
Michael

Thirteen?  Much more than that, methinks -- up to 13 times 13.  With the same inanities arguments from Brian every time.

And your arguments have changed?

Read his reply more closely...it is more simply that his arguments are not inane.  They rest on the shoulders of generations of the faithful that have gone before, the Church Fathers. Yes, I know, you claim that your perspective is based on something more authoritative, Scripture, except that you (and others, I acknowledge) continue to claim to find something that none of those previous generations managed to notice.  The contradictions inherent in this have been pointing out by myself and others before, but you refuse to take this criticism seriously.  Not to mention that your line of reasoning hasn't been cited as an official justification for the ELCA's policy changes in any churchwide document.  Hence the continuous opposition to your posting whenever you raise them here--particularly when you make them sound self-evident, which they most certainly are not.  No one could ever come to the position you hold from the divine revelation we possess without having decided in advance what answer you wish to find--as evidenced by the inconsistent alternating between arguments from silence and hyper-literalism, just for starters.

[Charles_Austin]

And the arguments opposing the views of Pastor Stoffregen are equally predictable, repetitive and plowing the same soil. They have not been convincing in years of debate and are not likely to be convincing now.
Which is why - a view that doesn't apply to Scott - we in the ELCA should be seeking ways to minister together rather than beating each other over the head with arguments that have not worked in the past.
From my perspective, I see the "traditionalists" refusing to accept the reality that - in large parts of the ELCA and now in our official policies - same sex unions may be blessed and people in such unions may serve as pastors in congregations willing to call them.

[MaddogLutheran]

And the arguments opposing the views of Pastor Stoffregen are equally predictable, repetitive and plowing the same soil. They have not been convincing in years of debate and are not likely to be convincing now.

Yes, those argument are predictable and old, because they are time-tested and proven.

Which is why - a view that doesn't apply to Scott - we in the ELCA should be seeking ways to minister together rather than beating each other over the head with arguments that have not worked in the past.
From my perspective, I see the "traditionalists" refusing to accept the reality that - in large parts of the ELCA and now in our official policies - same sex unions may be blessed and people in such unions may serve as pastors in congregations willing to call them.

And perhaps why there are so many congregations attempting to leave the ELCA (and even if with not enough votes to succeed, destroying their vitality in the process), that the ELCA has decided it needs to revisit the rules, and attempt to suppress the news reporting on the number of congregations who actually have voted to depart.  All is Well^TM.  Changing the rules won't help those divided congregations survive, merely preserve real estate assets for the ELCA synods, as the Episcopal Church has come to view it as a matter of dollar and cents.

As I said previously, if you've already decided the way you want things to be, then there's no point in listening to people making opposing arguments based in scripture, arguments that had been held as true by numerous generations.  But by all means, frame this as personal and relative, and not based on divine revelation.  That's what the advocates of change have done, to avoid confronting the actual faith received.

[Paul L. Knudson]

Christopher, I recognize your answer may well apply to severely struggling rural parishes.  I know this is true in my wife's home parish in northwest Minnesota.  At least they are choosing not to consider the issue for fear of rocking the boat.  I do not think it explains the fact that there are many fairly large congregations in the Dakotas, and yet none of them has moved to leave.  Milbank attempted to do so but failed in its vote.  Powers at be worked on that one pretty diligently from my understanding.  I know many pastors are upset by the general direction of the ELCA, but being careful and solid pastors they are not seeking to force the issue in a destructive manner.

[Erma S. Wolf]

Christopher, I recognize your answer may well apply to severely struggling rural parishes.  I know this is true in my wife's home parish in northwest Minnesota.  At least they are choosing not to consider the issue for fear of rocking the boat.  I do not think it explains the fact that there are many fairly large congregations in the Dakotas, and yet none of them has moved to leave.  Milbank attempted to do so but failed in its vote.  Powers at be worked on that one pretty diligently from my understanding.  I know many pastors are upset by the general direction of the ELCA, but being careful and solid pastors they are not seeking to force the issue in a destructive manner.

Paul, I'm really out of the loop on what is happening in South Dakota congregations, esp. regarding why they are staying rather than trying to leave.  But here are some of my supposes:
   1) Between Canton and Brandon (two large congregations who both took first votes that only showed how divided the folks were on the issues) a lot of large-ish congregations are pretty skittish about votes right now.  Nobody wants to end up where either of those congregations have gone.
   2)  Every single medium to large congregation in the Sioux Falls area has undergone a major building program in the past 5 years, and consequently all have large mortgages.  The Lukan parable about counting the cost before going to war is very applicable here. 
    3) Mission/former mission congregations can't leave.  They'll lose everything. 
   4) I could be wrong on this, but my read is that the loyalty isn't to the ELCA (for the conservative-tilting pastors and congregations).  But there is loyalty to being with other South Dakota congregations, working on mission options through the synod, and especially the camps.  That is holding some in with the notion to just ignore Higgins Road and focus on South Dakota. 
   5) And I think South Dakota is more divided than anyone anticipated a few years ago.  I say this based not only on local matters in the Crossroads Conference, but on what happened in the synod assembly earlier this year.  It will be interesting to see what comes out of the assembly in 2011. 

A few thoughts.  Some may be wrong, or all; or all may be correct, and I still might not really understand what is going on.  But I do know that a lot of people in other areas are scratching their heads over South Dakota right now. 

Erma 

[pr dtp]

Haven't there been thirteen other threads on this topic?

Peace,
Michael

Thirteen?  Much more than that, methinks -- up to 13 times 13.  With the same inanities arguments from Brian every time.

And your arguments have changed?

Your argument goes back to the garden, when the first critic of God's word asked, did God really say....

Of course, your opposition's point seems to predate the "argument."

[Paul L. Knudson]

Thanks, Erma.  I would imagine you are on target in your observations.  I trust you have an avenue for ministry now in a near by Iowa parish, at least for a time.  No one wants to destroy parishes, and so it is understandable that care is being taken and leaving may not be the right move.  I do hope the pastors that have been meeting in the Sioux Falls area are doing well personally.

[Brian Stoffregen]

And the arguments opposing the views of Pastor Stoffregen are equally predictable, repetitive and plowing the same soil. They have not been convincing in years of debate and are not likely to be convincing now.

Yes, those argument are predictable and old, because they are time-tested and proven.

I'm sure farmers of generations past could tell us the time-tested and proven horse breeds to use in plowing and harvesting their fields. Their arguments, as good as they are, are not really relevant to farmers who are now using motorized vehicles for their plowing and harvesting. Farmers in the first or even the 16th century had no idea of the farm issues and implements that farmers use and discuss today.

Within business, relying on the time-tested and proven ways of the past are certain to mean failure in the future. "Wrecked by success" is a phrase in one book I've read. "If it ain't broke, break it," is the title of another book.

[Revbert]

And the arguments opposing the views of Pastor Stoffregen are equally predictable, repetitive and plowing the same soil. They have not been convincing in years of debate and are not likely to be convincing now.

Yes, those argument are predictable and old, because they are time-tested and proven.

I'm sure farmers of generations past could tell us the time-tested and proven horse breeds to use in plowing and harvesting their fields. Their arguments, as good as they are, are not really relevant to farmers who are now using motorized vehicles for their plowing and harvesting. Farmers in the first or even the 16th century had no idea of the farm issues and implements that farmers use and discuss today.

Within business, relying on the time-tested and proven ways of the past are certain to mean failure in the future. "Wrecked by success" is a phrase in one book I've read. "If it ain't broke, break it," is the title of another book.

But, in both cases, the authors point out that when things ARE working well, one shouldn't mess significantly with things.

2,000 years of Christian teaching, and thousands more of Jewish teaching, have served the world fairly well (yes, Brian, I know about the Inquisition and some other stupidity in our history). The revisionism of some has not proven to do anything but create MORE division in the body of Christ in the past 25 years or so. I would go so far as to suggest that the revisionist approach to human sexuality, particularly same-sex relationships, has the potential effect equal to the "filioque" schism between East and West.

Art

[Pilgrim]

Tim notes: Having farmed, I'm not sure which is more absurd, the absurdity of the comparison or that absurdity that you apparently think it makes enough sense to post it. 

[Mike Bennett]

And the arguments opposing the views of Pastor Stoffregen are equally predictable, repetitive and plowing the same soil. They have not been convincing in years of debate and are not likely to be convincing now.

Yes, those argument are predictable and old, because they are time-tested and proven.

I'm sure farmers of generations past could tell us the time-tested and proven horse breeds to use in plowing and harvesting their fields. Their arguments, as good as they are, are not really relevant to farmers who are now using motorized vehicles for their plowing and harvesting. Farmers in the first or even the 16th century had no idea of the farm issues and implements that farmers use and discuss today.

The Commandments are superseded by technological advances?  That's as arrogant a thing as I've read here for awhile, which is saying a lot.

Mike Bennett

[Mike Bennett]

Within business, relying on the time-tested and proven ways of the past are certain to mean failure in the future. "Wrecked by success" is a phrase in one book I've read. "If it ain't broke, break it," is the title of another book.

In fact some past business practices are "time-tested and proven ways of the past" and continue to be such, while other past business practices need to be put aside.  Distinguishing one from the other requires wisdom.  Thinking that "If it ain't broke, break it" is wisdom is in fact foolishness (though you can make money writing a book with that title, because a greater fool will buy it).

Mike Bennett

[Dan Fienen]

The axiom "If it's old it must be good today" is foolish, almost as foolish as the axiom "If it's new it must be better."

Plenty of old technology is still good, as good or better than anything new.  I was watching a show on gourmet coffee and they showed coffee roasters who purposely sought out coffee roasters and grinders that were 100+ years old.  Nothing better has been built for doing the job they want done.  On the other hand, some old technology is just old, worn out and obsolete.  It depends on the technology and what it is being used for.

Some new interpretations of Scripture may be valid, some may be simply inovations for the sake of saying something different and supporting something someone wants that was not supported before.  It's not whether it is a new thing or an old thing, but what it is.

Dan