Author Topic: Tuesday morning: Bishop's report  (Read 7977 times)

Norsk

  • Guest
Re: Tuesday morning: Bishop's report
« Reply #15 on: August 16, 2011, 01:08:02 PM »
It is of course true that the 2009 CWA did not specifically approve pastors conducing same-sex "marriages."  However, that assembly most certainly did approve pastors and congregations to "recognize" and "hold publicly accountable" lifelong same gender relationships.  In my personal opinion, it is simply not that much of a stretch to see conducting a marriage ceremony as a form of recognizing and holding publicly accountable.  Indeed what else would do so as clearly and compellingly? 

In other words, this was the plan all along, and there is no reason to be surprised.
« Last Edit: August 16, 2011, 01:29:16 PM by Richard Johnson »

Erma S. Wolf

  • Guest
Re: Tuesday morning: Bishop's report
« Reply #16 on: August 16, 2011, 01:26:34 PM »
Yes, I noticed that as well. Just to be precise, however, this publication is produced by Goodsoil, not LC/NA per se. Not that there's a huge difference, but it's at least worth noting.

Yes, but given it is copyrighted by LC/NA and there is this from the LC/NA website, you can understand my attribution:

"Lutherans Concerned's New Anti-bullying Resource Booklet Now Available         
Monday, 15 August 2011 10:37
Lutherans Concerned/North America's new anti-bullying resource booklet, "Where Hands Will Reach," is now available.  The booklet contains devotions, stories and theological reflections, and is being distributed at the 2011 ELCA (Evangelical Lutheran Church in America) Churchwide Assembly.  The booklet is also available in pdf form on the LC/NA website, www.lcna.org, under Resources."
« Last Edit: August 16, 2011, 01:29:35 PM by Richard Johnson »

James_Gale

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 4117
    • View Profile
Re: Monday morning: Bishop's report
« Reply #17 on: August 16, 2011, 01:32:55 PM »


However, in terms of incremental change that won't need to take a vote, I also note this passage found on page 17 in the reflection "How Will We Use Our Freedom?"
 
"It is fitting that the theme of the 2011 Churchwide
Assembly is “Freed in Christ to Serve,” since that is
a central principle underlying the Social Statement
on Human Sexuality, adopted by the 2009 Churchwide
Assembly—and in many ways, adopting that social
statement has freed the ELCA from the seemingly endless
process of establishing this church’s teachings on sexuality.
Now that the ELCA has resolved that congregations are
free to call qualified ministers in a same-gender relationship
and that pastors can preside over same-gender marriages
(where they are not prohibited by civil law),
we are free, as
ELCA members, to focus on issues other than sex."
(Emphasis added.)
http://www.lcna.org/images/stories/downloads/resources/050_where_hands_will_reach_resource_edition.pdf


It's tough to take seriously the Goodsoil assertion that the ELCA is now "free" to "focus on issues other than sex" when "sex" is precisely what LCNA and Goodsoil want to discuss and are discussing.  Indeed, while I give LCNA credit for noting that people are bullied for various reasons, the only reason that LCNA has pushed the "anti-bullying" resolution is so that the ELCA will have to keep "focusing" on "sex."  LCNA has made clear that its goal is to achieve "full inclusion" in all "Lutheran communities" of people of "all sexual orientations and gender identities."  By telling stories about the victims of bullying, LCNA and Goodsoil will keep pushing to extend the bounds of sexual relationships that they believe should be celebrated within the ELCA.


I've got to give these folks credit, though.  They are very good at driving their agenda.  As political strategists, they are top-flight.

Richard Johnson

  • ALPB Administrator
  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 10678
  • Create in me a clean heart, O God.
    • View Profile
Re: Tuesday morning: Bishop's report
« Reply #18 on: August 16, 2011, 01:33:04 PM »

Yes, but given it is copyrighted by LC/NA ...

Actually the booklet itself says: © 2011 Goodsoil.

But I can see your confusion.

Sort of like--NO, DON'T SAY IT--the confusing connection between CORE and NALC!  :o ;D ;)
The Rev. Richard O. Johnson, STS

lucan

  • Guest
Re: Tuesday morning: Bishop's report
« Reply #19 on: August 16, 2011, 01:34:58 PM »
"LGBTQQIA"?  I think they need to add a few more letters to this already pretentious acronym.

Rev. Luke, STS

Terry W Culler

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 2420
    • View Profile
Re: Tuesday morning: Bishop's report
« Reply #20 on: August 16, 2011, 01:35:25 PM »
What please tell is "queer potential"?
"No particular Church has ... a right to existence, except as it believes itself the most perfect from of Christianity, the form which of right, should and will be universal."
Charles Porterfield Krauth

lucan

  • Guest
Re: Monday morning: Bishop's report
« Reply #21 on: August 16, 2011, 01:40:51 PM »


Quote
It's tough to take seriously the Goodsoil assertion that the ELCA is now "free" to "focus on issues other than sex" when "sex" is precisely what LCNA and Goodsoil want to discuss and are discussing.  Indeed, while I give LCNA credit for noting that people are bullied for various reasons, the only reason that LCNA has pushed the "anti-bullying" resolution is so that the ELCA will have to keep "focusing" on "sex."  LCNA has made clear that its goal is to achieve "full inclusion" in all "Lutheran communities" of people of "all sexual orientations and gender identities."  By telling stories about the victims of bullying, LCNA and Goodsoil will keep pushing to extend the bounds of sexual relationships that they believe should be celebrated within the ELCA.


I've got to give these folks credit, though.  They are very good at driving their agenda.  As political strategists, they are top-flight.

Indeed, the goal is precisely to turn all those who do not embrace "full inclusion" (to the point of performing marriages, etc.) into bigots, to shame them, and drive them to silence.  I'd say this bullying approach is quite ingenious in that sense.  Who can possibly be for bullying?  Well, now that that's settled, stop all that religious stuff that creates the bullying climate, etc., etc.

I hate to say it, but I fear this is much more sinister and cynical, simply because it is pushed in such a subtle way.
« Last Edit: August 16, 2011, 01:47:39 PM by Richard Johnson »

SmithL

  • Guest
Re: Tuesday morning: Bishop's report
« Reply #22 on: August 16, 2011, 02:11:30 PM »
It is also interesting to see that Bp Hanson is talking about LBGTQ et al as if we voted on 'full inclusion' for all the letters of alphabet in 2009.  The rest of LCNA goals will come without any vote, it will just happen.


Come on, now.  Bp. Hanson is arguably taking an incremental approach.  I've seen some argue for the acronym "LGBTQQIA."  Bp. Hanson didn't even mention the "QIA" persons, whoever they are.  Imagine how excluded they must feel.

A google search led me to this site:

http://oregonstate.edu/pridecenter/terms-and-definitions

What do the letters LGBTQQIA stand for?

Lesbian
 Gay
 Bisexual
 Transgender
 Queer
 Questioning
 Intersex
 Ally

•Questioning: Someone who is exploring their Queer potential.
•Intersex: An individual whose biological birth does not correspond with conventional expectations of male/female anatomy or genetics. Some intersexuals consider themselves transgender and some do not. The older term, hermaphrodite, is considered by many to be offensive.
•Ally: Anyone who is politically aligned with the Queer movement.

TMI

iowakatie1981

  • Guest
Re: Monday morning: Bishop's report
« Reply #23 on: August 16, 2011, 02:13:51 PM »


Quote
It's tough to take seriously the Goodsoil assertion that the ELCA is now "free" to "focus on issues other than sex" when "sex" is precisely what LCNA and Goodsoil want to discuss and are discussing.  Indeed, while I give LCNA credit for noting that people are bullied for various reasons, the only reason that LCNA has pushed the "anti-bullying" resolution is so that the ELCA will have to keep "focusing" on "sex."  LCNA has made clear that its goal is to achieve "full inclusion" in all "Lutheran communities" of people of "all sexual orientations and gender identities."  By telling stories about the victims of bullying, LCNA and Goodsoil will keep pushing to extend the bounds of sexual relationships that they believe should be celebrated within the ELCA.


I've got to give these folks credit, though.  They are very good at driving their agenda.  As political strategists, they are top-flight.

Indeed, the goal is precisely to turn all those who do not embrace "full inclusion" (to the point of performing marriages, etc.) into bigots, to shame them, and drive them to silence.  I'd say this bullying approach is quite ingenious in that sense.  Who can possibly be for bullying?  Well, now that that's settled, stop all that religious stuff that creates the bullying climate, etc., etc.

I hate to say it, but I fear this is much more sinister and cynical, simply because it is pushed in such a subtle way.

Bingo.  Anybody else "attend" Willow Creek's Global Leadership Summit last week?  Exhibit A, baby.

revklak

  • Guest
Re: Tuesday morning: Bishop's report
« Reply #24 on: August 16, 2011, 03:12:15 PM »
It is of course true that the 2009 CWA did not specifically approve pastors conducing same-sex "marriages."  However, that assembly most certainly did approve pastors and congregations to "recognize" and "hold publicly accountable" lifelong same gender relationships.  In my personal opinion, it is simply not that much of a stretch to see conducting a marriage ceremony as a form of recognizing and holding publicly accountable.  Indeed what else would do so as clearly and compellingly? 

In other words, this was the plan all along, and there is no reason to be surprised.

Exactly... it is a kind of de facto approval since in order to allow ordained pastors to be in a publically accountable relationship, you have to have some sort of public witness/rite to make the relationship acocuntable to some 'public'  ... yeah, I guess that's how to say it..

BTW it was great meeting you and having breakfast with you and your wife last Friday. 

peter_speckhard

  • ALPB Administrator
  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 19815
    • View Profile
Re: Tuesday morning: Bishop's report
« Reply #25 on: August 16, 2011, 04:03:41 PM »
Once gender is a human contruct, marriage must be a human contruct. To approve homosexual relationships as in any way parallel to heterosexual relationships is to buy all the vowels and most of the consonants of the glbtqqiaetcui agenda. The "a" may stand for "ally" but they're mostly "ui" who refuse to see this.

TravisW

  • ALPB Forum Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 463
    • View Profile
Re: Tuesday morning: Bishop's report
« Reply #26 on: August 16, 2011, 04:48:24 PM »
"Queer Potential" strikes me as the title of a lost Rick James song.  Not sure why. 

Erma S. Wolf

  • Guest
Re: Tuesday morning: Bishop's report
« Reply #27 on: August 16, 2011, 07:28:10 PM »

But I can see your confusion.

Sort of like--NO, DON'T SAY IT--the confusing connection between CORE and NALC!  :o ;D ;)

But you had to go and say it anyway, didn't you?   >:(

"And oh, tis true, tis true!"   :'(

(I'll see your confusion and raise you total befuddlement!)

Richard Johnson

  • ALPB Administrator
  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 10678
  • Create in me a clean heart, O God.
    • View Profile
Re: Tuesday morning: Bishop's report
« Reply #28 on: August 16, 2011, 08:27:42 PM »
Mea maxima culpa. The devil made me do it.  :o
The Rev. Richard O. Johnson, STS

Brian Stoffregen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 44902
  • ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν
    • View Profile
Re: Tuesday morning: Bishop's report
« Reply #29 on: August 16, 2011, 08:30:41 PM »
Mea maxima culpa. The devil made me do it.  :o


Was he a talking serpent?
"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]