Author Topic: SEMN Resolution Concerning Those Who Lead Congregations Out of ELCA  (Read 19051 times)

Brian Stoffregen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 46249
  • "Let me give you a new command: Love one another."
    • View Profile
Re: SEMN Resolution Concerning Those Who Lead Congregations Out of ELCA
« Reply #60 on: May 14, 2011, 04:51:23 PM »
That said, while I certainly don't support LCMC and NALC pastors and lay-people "raiding" ELCA communities with the "missionary zeal" that you speak of, given some of the reprehensible actions I have seen displayed by ELCA officials, clergy and lay-people I can understand why some might be tempted to cast aside proper protocol.

As I posted earlier, the average attendance reported by ELCA Congregations shows that Average Attendance is only around 1/3rd of the reported Baptised Membership figures. And, as we've discussed in other threads, the ELCA, like most denominations, does a really poor job of keeping track of members who simply stop going to church. Look in the Trend Reports on the ELCA website at how many congregations suddenly drop 10%-20% of their Baptised Membership to category "D", Statistical Adjustment, because the congregation finally got around to dropping names of people who hadn't attended or otherwise participated in church life in years. Clearly, the loss of membership in the ELCA and other denominations even before the 2009 CWA debacle gives some evidence that congregations are not doing a very effective job of rounding up their own "strays". So, I ask again, is rounding up strays whose shepherds have abandoned really "sheep-stealing", or is it the rescue of lost lambs?

Your reading of the stats is most likely misleading. While the average worship attendance may be only 1/3 of the baptized membership, it doesn't indicate how many of those baptized members were at a worship service during the last month, or six months. One of the changes I've seen and I've read about is that there are fewer every-Sunday-worshipers. Over a period of 12 months, it is likely that over 90% of the baptized members in most congregations have been to at least one worship service or even 70% in a congregation that hasn't pruned its membership rolls for years. I would venture that it is inaccurate in every case that only 30% of the baptized attend worship services over a period of a year.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2011, 05:02:45 PM by Brian Stoffregen »
"The church ... had made us like ill-taught piano students; we play our songs, but we never really hear them, because our main concern is not to make music, but but to avoid some flub that will get us in dutch." [Robert Capon, _Between Noon and Three_, p. 148]

George Erdner

  • Guest
Re: SEMN Resolution Concerning Those Who Lead Congregations Out of ELCA
« Reply #61 on: May 14, 2011, 05:35:51 PM »
That said, while I certainly don't support LCMC and NALC pastors and lay-people "raiding" ELCA communities with the "missionary zeal" that you speak of, given some of the reprehensible actions I have seen displayed by ELCA officials, clergy and lay-people I can understand why some might be tempted to cast aside proper protocol.

As I posted earlier, the average attendance reported by ELCA Congregations shows that Average Attendance is only around 1/3rd of the reported Baptised Membership figures. And, as we've discussed in other threads, the ELCA, like most denominations, does a really poor job of keeping track of members who simply stop going to church. Look in the Trend Reports on the ELCA website at how many congregations suddenly drop 10%-20% of their Baptised Membership to category "D", Statistical Adjustment, because the congregation finally got around to dropping names of people who hadn't attended or otherwise participated in church life in years. Clearly, the loss of membership in the ELCA and other denominations even before the 2009 CWA debacle gives some evidence that congregations are not doing a very effective job of rounding up their own "strays". So, I ask again, is rounding up strays whose shepherds have abandoned really "sheep-stealing", or is it the rescue of lost lambs?

Your reading of the stats is most likely misleading. While the average worship attendance may be only 1/3 of the baptized membership, it doesn't indicate how many of those baptized members were at a worship service during the last month, or six months. One of the changes I've seen and I've read about is that there are fewer every-Sunday-worshipers. Over a period of 12 months, it is likely that over 90% of the baptized members in most congregations have been to at least one worship service or even 70% in a congregation that hasn't pruned its membership rolls for years. I would venture that it is inaccurate in every case that only 30% of the baptized attend worship services over a period of a year.

I wasn't suggesting that the only 30% of the baptized membership attends at least once. If you count the CEO's and the once-a-months, there are still a significant number of never-ever-attends on the lists. The stats about average attendance being only around a third of baptised was only meant to indicate that "some" of the members on the roster don't attend. The other portion of my post, the part I boldfaced above, should be sufficient all by itself, with no other evidence at all, to indicate that there are "lost lambs" out there whose names might be on a piece of paper in a filing cabinet in a congregation's office (or on a hard drive, this being the 21st century), but who need to be rescued.

Whether it is two-thirds, one tenth, 27.65%, or some other quantity is irrelevant. As long as there are some Lutherans out there who have wandered away from their congregations, and their congregations aren't being very effective at bringing them back, then there is a need for someone to reach out to them.

Personally, one of the more challenging things about worship on Easter Sunday is not accidentally treating a CEO as a visitor. Many CEO's take offense at not being recognized as members during their two visits to the church every year.

Evangel

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 780
  • Rev. Mark Schimmel
    • View Profile
Re: SEMN Resolution Concerning Those Who Lead Congregations Out of ELCA
« Reply #62 on: May 14, 2011, 06:16:38 PM »
I know I'm butting in on something that isn't really any of my business--but, it just seems to me reasonable that a congregation/pastor leaving the ELCA behind would want to leave the health and pension plans also.  That should be part of the planning process.

Pr. Culler, "employees" who leave their "jobs" are permitted legally to carry their pensions with them when they go. Are you suggesting that a pastor with decades of contributions setting in the BOP account should abandon that potentially life-sustaining income as a matter of principle? Really???? How does a 50 or 60 or 70 year old pastor "plan" to make that adjustment???

A lot of what I am reading in this thread suggests to me what my mama used to say: "Two wrongs do not make a right." Certainly the conduct on all sides is not perfect, as Pastor Wolf has confirmed. But this resolution seems to suggest that the ELCA should sink to the low level of those they are condemning, and get that pound of flesh from those who have dared to show their opposition.

Unethical -yes. A matter for discipline? Hard to accomplish. But this punishment --taking away health care and pensions -- seems to me not to fit the "crime".

Church employees can indeed take their pension funds with them - or by agreement between the ELCA BOP and LCMC - they can leave it in the ELCA BOP fund and continue to participate in that plan. 

There is no risk of losing vested pension dollars by leaving the ELCA.  If it happened in years past that pastors lost their pensions by choosing to leave their denomination it was before current pension law.

LCMC has a fine pension plan and also an insurance plan (which does not offer abortion coverage BTW).  I don't know why a pastor would want to continue in the ELCA plans - but obviously some have their reasons - I can imagine (but have no actual knowledge) there may be some potential pre-existing condition gotchas that might make remaining in one's current plan advantageous.
Mark Schimmel, Pastor
Zion Lutheran Church, LCMC
Priddy, TX
--
ACXXIII, "Your majesty will graciously take into account the fact that, in these last times of which the Scriptures prophesy, the world is growing worse and men are becoming weaker and more infirm."

racin_jason

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 1177
    • View Profile
Re: SEMN Resolution Concerning Those Who Lead Congregations Out of ELCA
« Reply #63 on: May 14, 2011, 08:01:04 PM »
We have heard it said "let's get the sexuality debate behind us so we can get on with mission and ministry"...well, here we go some more.

Such a piece of legislation hurts the whole church. It should have never reached the floor. It amounts to "we're-mad-churches-are-leaving-so-let's-retaliate".

This is immature and vindictive.  
« Last Edit: May 14, 2011, 08:42:21 PM by racin_jason »
Recipient of the official Forum Online Get Us Back on Topic Award

RevSteve

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 941
    • View Profile
Re: SEMN Resolution Concerning Those Who Lead Congregations Out of ELCA
« Reply #64 on: May 14, 2011, 08:38:18 PM »
Will this now go on to CWA or what?? Or is this just something that will only apply in the SEMN synod?? Are there any other synods that have similar resolutions up for vote this year??
Pastor Steven M. Bliss LCMC and NALC-  St Olaf Lutheran Church, Bode, Iowa

New quote, got tired of questions about Dante quote...

"Doin stuff is overrated. Like Hitler did a lot of stuff but don't we all wish he would have just sat around all day and got stoned?"-Dex from the Tao of Steve

dkeener

  • Guest
Re: SEMN Resolution Concerning Those Who Lead Congregations Out of ELCA
« Reply #65 on: May 14, 2011, 09:49:04 PM »
Will this now go on to CWA or what?? Or is this just something that will only apply in the SEMN synod?? Are there any other synods that have similar resolutions up for vote this year??

I hope not. The resolution was Submitted by the "Facilitator’s Table", whatever that is, of Trinity Fellowship ELCA, Rushford, MN.  According to the ELCA trend report Trinity Fellowship has 0 baptized member, 0 confirmed members and 0 average attendance.  This usually indicates that the congregation is a mission start or "synodically authorized worship community". Their website contains no information but they do have a facebook page which says they meet in a local Presbyterian church. One would think they would have better things to do - but I suspect there is history.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2011, 10:13:30 PM by dkeener »

dkeener

  • Guest
Re: SEMN Resolution Concerning Those Who Lead Congregations Out of ELCA
« Reply #66 on: May 14, 2011, 10:09:35 PM »
After a little investigation I see that there is a large (900+) member LCMC (former ELCA) congregation in Rushford. I suspect that the mission start (they began in Feb. 2011) is part of the fallout.

Steven Tibbetts

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 10213
  • Big tents are for circuses.
    • View Profile
Re: SEMN Resolution Concerning Those Who Lead Congregations Out of ELCA
« Reply #67 on: May 14, 2011, 10:24:11 PM »
Will this now go on to CWA or what?? Or is this just something that will only apply in the SEMN synod?? Are there any other synods that have similar resolutions up for vote this year??

The resolution was addressed to the Church Council, so that is who it would go to.  If they had intended for it to go to the CWA, the Reference and Counsel Committee should have presented it (with appropriate re-writing) as a memorial.  Of course, with the Bishop reportedly running around with Roberts' Rules for Dummies...

kyrie eleison, spt+
« Last Edit: May 14, 2011, 11:07:50 PM by The Rev. Steven P. Tibbetts, STS »
The Rev. Steven Paul Tibbetts, STS
Pastor Zip's Blog

Coach-Rev

  • Guest
Re: SEMN Resolution Concerning Those Who Lead Congregations Out of ELCA
« Reply #68 on: May 14, 2011, 10:43:50 PM »

That's how someone gets to posting 17479 posts without saying much that is new.


Now that one made me laugh.  I've often thought the same thing...  oh, and its 17507 now.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2011, 10:54:55 PM by Coach-Rev »

Coach-Rev

  • Guest
Re: SEMN Resolution Concerning Those Who Lead Congregations Out of ELCA
« Reply #69 on: May 14, 2011, 10:46:44 PM »
And if your view of abortion is such that you will not pay into a plan that provides coverage for certain abortions, then you have another decision to make.

Austin, would you please, PLEASE stop instructing people that "they have a decision to make."  Quite frankly, it grows exceedingly tiresome.

Coach-Rev

  • Guest
Re: SEMN Resolution Concerning Those Who Lead Congregations Out of ELCA
« Reply #70 on: May 14, 2011, 10:52:37 PM »
If an assembly chooses to consider a resolution, no one, not even the bishop, can prevent it from doing so. Judging by the final vote; it would seem that this synodical assembly wanted to consider this resolution; however ill-advised and badly-worded it was.

No, Charles, that's not exactly true.

It should have been ruled out of order, because (as noted above), the ELCA BOP is a separately chartered body, and the ELCA Church Council can no more tell the BOP what to do than it can tell the NALC what to do.

Of course, if the ELCA Church Council were to tell the BOP to do something, I think the floodgates of lawsuits would open against it, the BOP, and AFP as the "separate organizations" position would be deemed a falsehood.

I guess I came late to the party.  Glad to see that this was already articulately stated.  Thank you.

Jim_Krauser

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 1151
  • "The one who is righteous shall live by faith."
    • View Profile
Re: SEMN Resolution Concerning Those Who Lead Congregations Out of ELCA
« Reply #71 on: May 14, 2011, 10:55:27 PM »
A presiding officer (especially a bishop) may always speak to a question, reliinquishing the chair to do so.  As a matter of proper procedure (for any one who may chair meetings) however, it is not proper to return to the chair while that matter is still under consideration.  In the case cited, I would hope the error was in advertant.   IN general, I understand why bishops generally remain in the chair and keep their opinions to themselves.  They wish to be seen as impartial and to not injure their pastoral relationships with members by taking sides in controversial matters.  On the other hand, we should also respect them for their shepherding office, even when we might disagree with their counsel.

Again, we are flailing about in the darkness.
I do not think it is possible to "take away" anyone's pension, nor do I think this is what anyone is asking.
But continuing in a particular health benefits plan may - we don't know unless we are in the insurance business, but may - mean that one needs to have a particular relationship with the owners of that plan.
I receive small (very small) pension payments from two large companies where I once worked. When I left those companies, I understood exactly what would happen to the money I contributed to the plan and the money that the company contributed to the plan. In one case, I was not "vested," so I did not get the money or interest on the money that the company contributed, but am only getting interest on what I contributed.
I would bet a steak dinner at Murray's in Minneapolis that the BOP has a clear and logical and legal way of dealing with people who leave the ELCA, either for another church body or to work at Domino's Pizza. Someone should ask them.


They do - it was cited above - IF you were an 'employer' i.e. congregation of the  ELCA on Jan 1, 2005, you may continue to remain and eligelbe employer if the congregation leaves.

IF you were an eligible employee on Jan 1, 2005, you may continue as and eligible employee if you leave you may remain a covered employee

All the congregation needs to is send a letter stating that they've left and wish to remain.  And for the individual, that you receive a letter from your employer stating your serving as the pastor, ie.e word and sacrament ministy.   (The second provision I'm confused about, but we only needed to do the first sinc ethe congregation left)
Jim Krauser

Pastor-Grace Evang. Lutheran Church, North Bellmore, NY

Steven Tibbetts

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 10213
  • Big tents are for circuses.
    • View Profile
Re: SEMN Resolution Concerning Those Who Lead Congregations Out of ELCA
« Reply #72 on: May 14, 2011, 11:04:16 PM »

The resolution was Submitted by the "Facilitator’s Table", whatever that is, of Trinity Fellowship ELCA, Rushford, MN.  


The SEMN Synod's news release on the Synod's Vice-Presidential election IDs Trinity as a synodically authorized worshiping community.  The published resolution had a parenthetical "congregation council" after "Facilitator's Table," so apparently its that equivalent.  I know that our synod's Director for Evangelical Mission has been using the word "table" a lot in our synodical restructuring conversations; I've presumed it's some form of ELCA-speak coming out of Bishop, er, Pastor Bouman's office.

Pax, Steven+
The Rev. Steven Paul Tibbetts, STS
Pastor Zip's Blog

Charles_Austin

  • Guest
Re: SEMN Resolution Concerning Those Who Lead Congregations Out of ELCA
« Reply #73 on: May 14, 2011, 11:14:10 PM »
Pastor Cottingham writes:
Austin, would you please, PLEASE stop instructing people that "they have a decision to make."  Quite frankly, it grows exceedingly tiresome.

I comment:
Well, Pastor Cottingham, it is also tiresome to have to continually instruct people and remind folks of the realities of life. But someone has to do it.  ;D ;D ;D  ::)

George Erdner

  • Guest
Re: SEMN Resolution Concerning Those Who Lead Congregations Out of ELCA
« Reply #74 on: May 14, 2011, 11:33:26 PM »
Pastor Cottingham writes:
Austin, would you please, PLEASE stop instructing people that "they have a decision to make."  Quite frankly, it grows exceedingly tiresome.

I comment:
Well, Pastor Cottingham, it is also tiresome to have to continually instruct people and remind folks of the realities of life. But someone has to do it.  ;D ;D ;D  ::)

No. You are wrong. No one needs to do it. Especially someone who is a bad at it as you are.