Author Topic: Tuesday: 7 Marks  (Read 2269 times)

Richard Johnson

  • ALPB Administrator
  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 10775
  • Create in me a clean heart, O God.
    • View Profile
Tuesday: 7 Marks
« on: August 24, 2010, 11:08:49 PM »
Sorry to be posting so long after the fact, but the church where we're meeting has no WiFi, so it has to wait until evening.

The morning session began with Eucharist, including a fine sermon by Pr. Cathy Ammlung of Maryland. Then the group got back to the discussion of the previous night. I made my little speech questioning what the purpose of this group really might be, but obviously those who were gathered wanted to constitute this society, and they did so. They adopted a constitution, and proceeded to elect officers: Pr. Tim Hubert, Vicar; Pr. Steven Tibbetts, Secretary; Mr. Mike Bennett, Treasurer; Pr. Cathy Ammlung, director at large.

The one interesting conversation was whether to delete a paragraph in the constitution related to the groups view of marriage and sexuality. (You can see the entire constitution on their web page; google Seven Marks Society.) There was one point of view that this, while the issue de jour, is not an appropriate thing to write into the constitution—too time conditioned, and there are other issues (e.g., language about God) that are equally contentious and important. The other point of view is that this is absolutely central to the current crisis in the Christian church. And after discussion, they carried the day, 25-18.

Those numbers, incidentally, give you a sense of the numbers here. There were considerably more people here than that—I think my estimate last night is pretty close—but not all chose to vote (suggesting, of course, that they don’t intend to be part of this endeavor). A conversation in the hall with a couple of leaders of Lutheran CORE suggested that by far not all CORE leadership is favorable to this Seven Marks Society. The Society, nonetheless, voted to join Lutheran CORE, so they are now part of the coalition, along with Word Alone and various other smaller reform groups (one of which, IMO, they are destined to remain).
The Rev. Richard O. Johnson, STS

gcnuss

  • Guest
Re: Tuesday: 7 Marks
« Reply #1 on: August 25, 2010, 10:44:34 AM »
Richard,

Thanks for your summaries.  I think you have covered it well.

I have to admit that I'm not at all sure that the Seven Marks Society, even with the adoption of a constitution, has a clear sense of identity or purpose.  Aside from being committed to mutual support (and commiseration) for those of like mind on the sexuality issues, I question whether it will have any impact on the ELCA and its policies and structures.  I was interested in the support for the three-fold ministry but wonder in what Lutheran body that might happen -- certainly not the ELCA which consciously rejected the concept.

Just a couple of thoughts.



Dadoo

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 3056
    • View Profile
Re: Tuesday: 7 Marks
« Reply #2 on: August 25, 2010, 11:08:18 AM »
Richard,

Thanks for your summaries.  I think you have covered it well.

I have to admit that I'm not at all sure that the Seven Marks Society, even with the adoption of a constitution, has a clear sense of identity or purpose.  Aside from being committed to mutual support (and commiseration) for those of like mind on the sexuality issues, I question whether it will have any impact on the ELCA and its policies and structures.  I was interested in the support for the three-fold ministry but wonder in what Lutheran body that might happen -- certainly not the ELCA which consciously rejected the concept.

Just a couple of thoughts.


Gary,

I am thinking that none of the major Lutheran Church bodies in the US will pick up on threefold ministry. I do not see NALC doing so. I would venture the guess that the good people that have been planning NALC see threefold ministry as a deal-breaker that would turn too many away from the new denomination. I understand them, mind you. It is strange territory to everyone since none of us - well, pretty much none; there might be some from somewhere -  really ever have served or lived under such a polity. From their standpoint, why risk it. It is not really a large part of the living Lutheran memory in America.

As EC's we need to ask ourselves whether this is really critical territory that we need to conquer and hold. In this generation I would say we need to be those who maintain the memory and possibility of it but we need to come to terms that in our generation it will not happen on a large scale.  If one was to wish to serve out one's days in such a polity, the ILF - LCI is there to receive. It has promise but it is small at this time. Every generation gets to have its "sucks to be you" moments. We get to pass memory on but we don't get to see the article realized. If God has need of it, He will resurrect the idea at the appropriate time.

As for 7M: They need to come up with a reason for being by year's end or it will become entirely irrelevant.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2010, 11:14:42 AM by Dadoo »
Peter Kruse

Diversity and tolerance are very complex concepts. Rigid conformity is needed to ensure their full realization. - Mike Adams