Estranged members sue ELCA-LCMC congregation

[Charles_Austin]

dcharlton writes:
Now, he puts forward this anecdote about facebook as proof that a majority of those in the ELCA support its direction.

I muse:
Well, I guess technically, until 5,000 pastors and 2.5 million people leave the ELCA; y'all have to admit that at least a majority of those in the ELCA support its direction enough to stay in it.

Oh, and 3,000+ ELCA pastors on Facebook vs. a dozen or so on ALPB. Duh!

[efretheim]

dcharlton writes:
Now, he puts forward this anecdote about facebook as proof that a majority of those in the ELCA support its direction.

I muse:
Well, I guess technically, until 5,000 pastors and 2.5 million people leave the ELCA; y'all have to admit that at least a majority of those in the ELCA support its direction enough to stay in it.

Oh, and 3,000+ ELCA pastors on Facebook vs. a dozen or so on ALPB. Duh!

The first million of those have already left.  The second may have, but just not be reflected in the numbers, may have been counted different because they still attended an occasional service after they left and there was a new catagory added to count these.

Doesn't really matter about the pastors.  There are lots of Bishops running around their closet cathedrals and plenty of pastors who got their ordination for $5 from the back of Psycology Today.  Without any people, the ELCA pastors will have about the same audience as those guys - and the same IRS tax status.

[Brian Stoffregen]

Doesn't really matter about the pastors.  There are lots of Bishops running around their closet cathedrals and plenty of pastors who got their ordination for $5 from the back of Psycology Today.  Without any people, the ELCA pastors will have about the same audience as those guys - and the same IRS tax status.

The LCMS trend isn't much better than the ELCAs, and they don't have a national church body vote or rampant liberalism on which to blame their losses. If the day comes when there are no more ELCA members, I'll bet that there won't be any in the LCMS either.


The major issue in the loss of church members regardless of where the denomination is on the liberal-conservative spectrum is that people today just aren't interested in religion. From studies I read years ago, most of the people who are not attending church are not staying away because of what a church did or didn't do, what a church believes or doesn't believe, but because church is just not a priority in their lives. Many other things are more important.


We, in the church, certainly aren't going to change that culture by waging wars against one another.

[Don Whitbeck]

Doesn't really matter about the pastors.  There are lots of Bishops running around their closet cathedrals and plenty of pastors who got their ordination for $5 from the back of Psycology Today.  Without any people, the ELCA pastors will have about the same audience as those guys - and the same IRS tax status.

The LCMS trend isn't much better than the ELCAs, and they don't have a national church body vote or rampant liberalism on which to blame their losses. If the day comes when there are no more ELCA members, I'll bet that there won't be any in the LCMS either.


The major issue in the loss of church members regardless of where the denomination is on the liberal-conservative spectrum is that people today just aren't interested in religion. From studies I read years ago, most of the people who are not attending church are not staying away because of what a church did or didn't do, what a church believes or doesn't believe, but because church is just not a priority in their lives. Many other things are more important.


We, in the church, certainly aren't going to change that culture by waging wars against one another.

Brian:

The major issue in the loss of church members regardless of where the denomination is on the liberal-conservative spectrum is that people today just aren't interested in religion. From studies I read years ago, most of the people who are not attending church are not staying away because of what a church did or didn't do, what a church believes or doesn't believe, but because church is just not a priority in their lives. Many other things are more important.

Brian, this shows how out touch the ELCA is with the common pew people. As well, people were leaving before CWA2009, because they saw what was coming and they had no voice in it.  After, CWA 2009, and the decree comes into effect, the plug was pulled, and the water started to drain out of the ELCA, and still is.

The Leadership wasn't interested in what we believed, what we felt, or why money was with held from the ELCA before and after the fact.

To make this type of comment just show you how out of touch you and HQ, and the Bishops have been over the past few decades.  I really find your comment disingenuous, to say the least.   

[Chuck Sampson]

Someone writes:
How many times has this been discussed, on ALPB over the years?  The conclusion is that same.  Even after years of discussions, we reject your liberal revisionist doctrine, as you reject our conservative view of Lutheranism.

I muse:
Ah, but "confessional Lutheran" has only been in this forum for seven months, so how can he or she know about "years of discussions"?

Well, Charles, perhaps he has been "lurking" for years.   Perhaps he has had more than one screen name over the years.    Perhaps (or most likely) he doesn't really care what you think about this.

[DCharlton]

dcharlton writes:
Now, he puts forward this anecdote about facebook as proof that a majority of those in the ELCA support its direction.

I muse:
Well, I guess technically, until 5,000 pastors and 2.5 million people leave the ELCA; y'all have to admit that at least a majority of those in the ELCA support its direction enough to stay in it.

Oh, and 3,000+ ELCA pastors on Facebook vs. a dozen or so on ALPB. Duh!

Charles_Austin misses the point.  I don't dispute the obvious.  My point had to do with Brian's movable standard of proof. 

[Don Whitbeck]

Someone writes:
How many times has this been discussed, on ALPB over the years?  The conclusion is that same.  Even after years of discussions, we reject your liberal revisionist doctrine, as you reject our conservative view of Lutheranism.

I muse:
Ah, but "confessional Lutheran" has only been in this forum for seven months, so how can he or she know about "years of discussions"?

Well, Charles, perhaps he has been "lurking" for years.   Perhaps he has had more than one screen name over the years.    Perhaps (or most likely) he doesn't really care what you think about this.

Right on, Pastor Sampson, ignore is another one! 

[Coach-Rev]

Its also not that hard to go back and read the "years of discussions" since any active threads go back quite a while in some cases.

[Charles_Austin]

Someone writes:
The major issue in the loss of church members regardless of where the denomination is on the liberal-conservative spectrum is that people today just aren't interested in religion. From studies I read years ago, most of the people who are not attending church are not staying away because of what a church did or didn't do, what a church believes or doesn't believe, but because church is just not a priority in their lives. Many other things are more important.

Then this someone writes:
People were leaving before CWA2009, because they saw what was coming and they had no voice in it.
I comment:
Well, which is it, "confessional Lutheran"? First you say people don't care, then you say people left because they "saw what was coming" and "had no voice." But if they didn't care, why would it matter to them whether they had voice or not. So which is it?
    Do some serious research on what people think about churches today or at least talk to some of the non-churched or those who want to be "spiritual" but not "religious" before making such sweeping and inaccurate statements.

[Dan Fienen]

My guess?  Take a hundred people who either don't want to be part of a church or were "churched" but are now no longer, and you will get a hundred various mixes of reasons.  Several themes will recur, but each will have their own individual mix of reasons.  Those reasons may even in some cases be the real reasons, or close to it.  People lie to those who ask personal questions, people even lie to themselves.
 
Dan

[Charles_Austin]

Well, not everyone lies, Pastor Fienen. I sit with people every week who often tell me personal things, and have no reason to assume they are lying. And believe me, most of them are not mad at the church for being "too liberal."

[DCharlton]

Well, not everyone lies, Pastor Fienen. I sit with people every week who often tell me personal things, and have no reason to assume they are lying. And believe me, most of them are not mad at the church for being "too liberal."

Does Charles_Austin believe that constitutes a statistically valid survey of opinion in the ELCA?

[George Erdner]

What has not changed in the ELCA during these 24 years is our Confession of Faith. I thought and continue to think that it is a far superior one than what we had in the ALC and in the LCA. There was little differences in the core beliefs of the three predecessor bodies. Polity practices were a different story.

Does this confession of faith accurately reflect what is actually preached and taught in ELCA congregations and seminaries?  Does this confession of faith influence the decisions made by churchwide and synodical assemblies? 

If not, it is little more than a museum piece.

What the ELCA preaches and what it practices, at least at the national level and in most synods, are two very different things.

[Dan Fienen]

Well, not everyone lies, Pastor Fienen. I sit with people every week who often tell me personal things, and have no reason to assume they are lying. And believe me, most of them are not mad at the church for being "too liberal."

No, not everyone lies, but some do.  People also sometimes fool themselves.  I never said that everyone lies.  But sometimes people give reasons that are only part of the reason.
 
Dan

[Brian Stoffregen]

Brian, this shows how out touch the ELCA is with the common pew people. As well, people were leaving before CWA2009, because they saw what was coming and they had no voice in it.  After, CWA 2009, and the decree comes into effect, the plug was pulled, and the water started to drain out of the ELCA, and still is.

The Leadership wasn't interested in what we believed, what we felt, or why money was with held from the ELCA before and after the fact.

To make this type of comment just show you how out of touch you and HQ, and the Bishops have been over the past few decades.  I really find your comment disingenuous, to say the least. 

A comprehensive study was done by Presbyterians on membership losses before 2009. Their conclusion was what I stated. Our denominations were losing members before 2009. If the ELCA and LCMS and WELS are loosing members at about the same rate, it cannot be attributed to being liberal or conservative.


I've also read surveys of the unchurched and one of the major complaints against the church is what they consider a judgmental attitude towards homosexuals.


I believe that the ELCA is quite in tune with the thinking of the secular world. A friend's daughter returned to the church because of the 2009 vote. I doubt that she is the only one.