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

[gausmann]

For those who actually can stay somewhat on topic (ever try Ritalin),  it was reported that Christ the King in Fisher's, Indiana, semi-host of the 2008 CORE meeting failed in its vote with about 55% for leaving and the rest against.

[Brian Stoffregen]

Larry writes:
I suppose you could use that same logic to rationalize relationships with children, goats, or even wild mushrooms.
I respond:
Not if one reads and follows the ELCA Social Statement on Human Sexuality. Not if one pays attention to what some of us have been saying in this forum for years.

Because we all know that is what defines God's accusing Law which drives us to the sweet Gospel of forgiveness and salvation.

The ELCA Social Statement on Human Sexuality which ostensibly is clear on God's teaching while Scripture is "silent".

9Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, 10nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 (ESV)

The ESV by translating two Greek words with "men who practice homosexuality" is offering an interpretation of those words that is not held by all translators. The third edition of BDAG offers only one suggestion for translating ἀρσενοκοίτης, pederast. The definition it gives of the word is: a male who engages in sexual activity with a person of his own sex. It also takes exception to the some of the translations of this and μαλακοί. "On the impropriety of RSV's 'homosexuals' [altered to 'sodomites' NRSV] s. WPetersen, VigChr 40, '86, 187-91; cp. DWright, ibid. 41, '87, 396-98; REB's rendering of μαλακοἰ οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται with the single term 'sexual pervert' is lexically unacceptable."

[This might also suggest that the single phrase used in ESV is also lexically unacceptable.]

Whether or not you agree with the entry in this Greek-English Lexicon, it indicates that there are differences in understanding and translating and interpreting those words.

[Brian Stoffregen]

In how many of those "other times and places" was it possible for same-gender couples to legally marry?

In how many times and places has civil government allowed for things that are not consonant with Christian teaching?

Just because same-gender couples are allowed a civil marriage does not mean that the Church should abandon its own teachings, held from the beginning, that same-sex behaviors are sinful and forbidden.

But because the state has made a change in this regard, it means that the church is dealing with a new circumstance that it hadn't seen before. While the church has traditionally proclaimed that sexual behaviors were to be within a marriage relationship, suddenly there was a new wrinkle to "marriage relationship".

I don't know if there will ever be universal agreement among Christians about this. It seems to me that we haven't even come to universal agreement about the purpose(s) of sexual relationships -- a topic that the use of contraceptives added a whole new wrinkle to the traditional discussion.

[Brian Stoffregen]

Larry writes:
I suppose you could use that same logic to rationalize relationships with children, goats, or even wild mushrooms.
I respond:
Not if one reads and follows the ELCA Social Statement on Human Sexuality. Not if one pays attention to what some of us have been saying in this forum for years.

Because we all know that is what defines God's accusing Law which drives us to the sweet Gospel of forgiveness and salvation.

The ELCA Social Statement on Human Sexuality which ostensibly is clear on God's teaching while Scripture is "silent".

9Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, 10nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 (ESV)

The ESV by translating two Greek words with "men who practice homosexuality" is offering an interpretation of those words that is not held by all translators. The third edition of BDAG offers only one suggestion for translating ἀρσενοκοίτης, pederast. The definition it gives of the word is: a male who engages in sexual activity with a person of his own sex. It also takes exception to the some of the translations of this and μαλακοί. "On the impropriety of RSV's 'homosexuals' [altered to 'sodomites' NRSV] s. WPetersen, VigChr 40, '86, 187-91; cp. DWright, ibid. 41, '87, 396-98; REB's rendering of μαλακοἰ οὔτε ἀρσενοκοῖται with the single term 'sexual pervert' is lexically unacceptable."

[This might also suggest that the single phrase used in ESV is also lexically unacceptable.]

Whether or not you agree with the entry in this Greek-English Lexicon, it indicates that there are differences in understanding and translating and interpreting those words.

I don't grasp the significance of the difference.

It still condemns being a male who engages in sexual activity with a person of his own sex as unrighteous.

I see no Scriptural teaching that explains that judgment does not pertain in the case of PALMSGR.

The word πόρνοι ("sexually immoral" in ESV) traditionally referred to a man having sex with a prostitute and the word μοιχοί ("adulterers" in ESV) traditionally referred to a man having sex with another man's wife. Since these words refer to a man having sex with a woman, does it mean that everyone man who has sex with a woman is unrighteous? We have never taken that view. What makes sexual relationships unrighteous in these cases (and the same gender ones) is the relationship between the partners -- they are not married to each other.

[Brian Stoffregen]

Simply because society has attempted to redefine marriage to widen it to a commitment between two men or two women does not widen God's definition or render such a relationship sexually moral.

That is one way to interpret the verses. It is not the only way.

[SmithL]

Larry writes:
I suppose you could use that same logic to rationalize relationships with children, goats, or even wild mushrooms.
I respond:
Not if one reads and follows the ELCA Social Statement on Human Sexuality. Not if one pays attention to what some of us have been saying in this forum for years.

So, if the ELCA Social Statement on Human Sexuality had been written earlier, maybe all of the PALMSers in Sodom and Gomorrah would have been spared.

[gausmann]

Let's try again-For those who actually can stay somewhat on topic (ever try Ritalin),  it was reported that Christ the King in Fisher's, Indiana, semi-host of the 2008 CORE meeting failed in its vote with about 55% for leaving and the rest against.

[Erma S. Wolf]

Let's try again-For those who actually can stay somewhat on topic (ever try Ritalin),  it was reported that Christ the King in Fisher's, Indiana, semi-host of the 2008 CORE meeting failed in its vote with about 55% for leaving and the rest against.

Paul, thank you for giving this information to us.  I remember how gracious the pastor and others at Christ the King were to us at that time.  I wish they were not going through such a badly split vote.  They are in my prayers as they determine what to do next.

[gausmann]

  Hi Erma, yes the senior pastor and the congregants we met were indeed very helpful and gracious hosts, they will be in need of prayer.

It seems as though that congregations which have a good proportion of people interested in leaving the ELCA have dealt with this in a number of ways:
1) Stay together as best one is able to in mission
2) Leave for another denomination and a face a possible small to large split
3) Intentionally leave if the vote does not go the way one hopes- starting a new congregation or leaving one or more conservative congregations in the area
4) Go independent Lutheran rather than make where to go an issue or simply because one can
5) Have appointed task forces slowly and deliberately deal with the issues
6) See what happens when a pastor resigns in light of a division
7) Divide a multipoint site (maybe Dayton)
Wait things out relatively passively and see what happens
The number of options keeps growing not surprising since no two congregations are alike, and because just reporting the numbers doesn't reveal to any of us the climate in a particular congregation.

I should also report that two congregations in parish arrangement that are located in Lebanon County Pa, Lower Susquehanna Synod have successfully carried out their first vote to leave.

[Brian Stoffregen]

Larry writes:
I suppose you could use that same logic to rationalize relationships with children, goats, or even wild mushrooms.
I respond:
Not if one reads and follows the ELCA Social Statement on Human Sexuality. Not if one pays attention to what some of us have been saying in this forum for years.

So, if the ELCA Social Statement on Human Sexuality had been written earlier, maybe all of the PALMSers in Sodom and Gomorrah would have been spared.

We have no evidence of any PALMS in Sodom and Gomorrah. We are told how all the men of the city wanted to rape the visitors to their town.

[Pilgrim]

We have no evidence of any PALMS in Sodom and Gomorrah. We are told how all the men of the city wanted to rape the visitors to their town.

Tim wonders: Let me see if I understand your reasoning here. No evidence in one place, but absolute certainty of situation (OT). No evidence in another place (NT), but silence "can" suggest a different situation (still no certainly), and from that we get permission to act differently 2,000-years hence. Have I got your convoluted exegesis right?  If this is considered "astute exegesis" whomever holds said opinion really needs to go back to school.

[Paul L. Knudson]

Thanks, Paul.  I also appreciate your attempt to have some discussion on topic instead of endless go arounds.  I was at the Fisher event and know this must be a major challenge.  I served a congregation before retirement that now has approximately 3,000 members, not that large but with probably a similar breakdown, 55% for leaving and the rest not wanting that outcome.

It can get so complicated.  One looks for wisdom to handle the division.  Calvary in Golden Valley seems to have found one way that will work for them.  I am sure one way fitting all simply is not workable.  I would think with a huge plant and "campus" such as at Fishers that the need to handle a likely sizeable mortgage adds its own dynamics. 

I also believe that in reality there are many bonds that unite the actual membership where significant grief will be experienced with an outright split.  We need to find folk out there who can add to a constructive conversation about these kind of situations along with those being experienced in small two or three point rural parishes.  We have some responsibility to offer best scenario possibilities up for consideration.  You note a number of them in the Fishers situtation.

[Keith Falk]

Epiphany Lutheran in Centerville, the (now) largest congregation in the Southern Ohio Synod, had conducted a straw poll to determine whether or not to have an amicable split since tensions have continued after a February vote to essentially agree to disagree.  The straw poll was overwhelmingly against a split (387-168), the Dayton Daily News reports.

[pr dtp]

Simply because society has attempted to redefine marriage to widen it to a commitment between two men or two women does not widen God's definition or render such a relationship sexually moral.

That is one way to interpret the verses. It is not the only way.

I could interpret it to mean that you owe me 1 million dollars.  Correctly stated, that simply is an interpretation. However, the validity of that interpretation is one you might want to contest.  On what basis?

[SmithL]

Epiphany Lutheran in Centerville, the (now) largest congregation in the Southern Ohio Synod, had conducted a straw poll to determine whether or not to have an amicable split since tensions have continued after a February vote to essentially agree to disagree.  The straw poll was overwhelmingly against a split (387-168), the Dayton Daily News reports.

They're going to have another vote, this time whether to leave the ELCA.  Once they have the results of that vote, I wonder if they'll reconsider the split.