Estranged members sue ELCA-LCMC congregation

[DCharlton]

Don't forget, the ELCA Facebook...

Brian is speaking of the ELCA Clergy group on Facebook.  It's 3600 members includes ELCA traditionalists (including past and present leaders in Lutheran CORE), along with former ELCA clergy now in LCMC or the NALC, along with a few LCMS pastors.  I can't speak for the level of conversation or debate there, as I left the group fairly early in its existence.  But I do know that the moderator, an ELCA parish pastor, ably moderates other groups of diverse theological/pastoral membership. 

Pax, Steven+

I did not know that. It wasn't indicated in what I read and replied to.

Can I conclude that you believe the ELCA facebook site for lay people does kick people off for those reasons?

[George Erdner]

Don't forget, the ELCA Facebook...

Brian is speaking of the ELCA Clergy group on Facebook.  It's 3600 members includes ELCA traditionalists (including past and present leaders in Lutheran CORE), along with former ELCA clergy now in LCMC or the NALC, along with a few LCMS pastors.  I can't speak for the level of conversation or debate there, as I left the group fairly early in its existence.  But I do know that the moderator, an ELCA parish pastor, ably moderates other groups of diverse theological/pastoral membership. 

Pax, Steven+

I did not know that. It wasn't indicated in what I read and replied to.

Can I conclude that you believe the ELCA facebook site for lay people does kick people off for those reasons?

You can do better than that. You can take my first-hand word for it, along with the words of others who have reported similar experiences. I spoke of CORE in positive terms prior to the launch of the NALC, and was told not to mention "schismatic" groups. I pointed out that CORE was little different from RIC, being an organization dedicated to what they believed was faithful witness within the ELCA's "big tent". My posts disappeared, and I found I could no long post or reply. Others reported similar treatment.
 
At the time, it never occurred to me that some inquisitor might demand proof, so I didn't maintain good records.

[DCharlton]

I thought you had a reason for saying what you said.

[Charles_Austin]

One might conclude that if it is a discussion group for members of the ELCA that those who do not want to be members of the ELCA just might not belong there.

[Steven Tibbetts]

I disagree with your continued insistence that the Sexuality Study was and is rightfully dismissed as evidence of what congregations and individuals in the ELCA thought at the time.  While not proving what the majority thought at the time, it should have made the Sexuality Task Force and the ELCA leaders aware that there was a clear possibility that the direction they had chosen was at odds with the will of the majority of ELCA congregations and individuals. 

Pastor Stoffregen's has also on this forum doggedly aimed to confuse the congregational responses, which no one has claimed to be a proper statistical sample, with a separate survey commissioned by the Task Force, which was done in accordance with proper statistical procedures.  Of course, he doesn't like the results of that survey any more than he likes the results of the congregational responses.

Kyrie eleison, Steven+

[Steven Tibbetts]

One might conclude that if it is a discussion group for members of the ELCA that those who do not want to be members of the ELCA just might not belong there.

Uh, Charles, I was unaware that you hold mentioning Lutheran CORE in an ELCA circle was promoting schism in the ELCA.

Pax, Steven+

[Charles_Austin]

You should know, Steven, that I was not referring to members of CORE, those who wish to stay in the ELCA. I was referring to people like Mr. Erdner who do not want to be in the ELCA, who despise the ELCA and mock our leaders, but do not have the whatever it takes to leave.

[Brian Stoffregen]

I disagree with your continued insistence that the Sexuality Study was and is rightfully dismissed as evidence of what congregations and individuals in the ELCA thought at the time.  While not proving what the majority thought at the time, it should have made the Sexuality Task Force and the ELCA leaders aware that there was a clear possibility that the direction they had chosen was at odds with the will of the majority of ELCA congregations and individuals. 

Pastor Stoffregen's has also on this forum doggedly aimed to confuse the congregational responses, which no one has claimed to be a proper statistical sample, with a separate survey commissioned by the Task Force, which was done in accordance with proper statistical procedures.  Of course, he doesn't like the results of that survey any more than he likes the results of the congregational responses.

The survey commissioned by the Task Force did not follow the type of guidelines for random sampling that I learned in college.

[DCharlton]

I disagree with your continued insistence that the Sexuality Study was and is rightfully dismissed as evidence of what congregations and individuals in the ELCA thought at the time.  While not proving what the majority thought at the time, it should have made the Sexuality Task Force and the ELCA leaders aware that there was a clear possibility that the direction they had chosen was at odds with the will of the majority of ELCA congregations and individuals. 

Pastor Stoffregen's has also on this forum doggedly aimed to confuse the congregational responses, which no one has claimed to be a proper statistical sample, with a separate survey commissioned by the Task Force, which was done in accordance with proper statistical procedures.  Of course, he doesn't like the results of that survey any more than he likes the results of the congregational responses.

The survey commissioned by the Task Force did not follow the type of guidelines for random sampling that I learned in college.

But a personal observation about a facebook page?

[George Erdner]

One might conclude that if it is a discussion group for members of the ELCA that those who do not want to be members of the ELCA just might not belong there.

Uh, Charles, I was unaware that you hold mentioning Lutheran CORE in an ELCA circle was promoting schism in the ELCA.

Pax, Steven+

To repeat one point, this was before the NALC was formed. It was, in fact, before CORE had even announced the decision to create a new church body.

[A Catholic Lutheran]

A workshop for congregation councils asked the question: "How do you know if your decisions are faithful ones?" The same question can apply to synods, districts, or national denominational decisions. Often in congregations decisions are judged by their effectiveness or efficiency -- or, in other terms, "the numbers" -- more people, lower costs, etc. Numbers are measurable.


How do you propose that we determine faithfulness in our decisions? How does a legislative body determine what is God's truth and will for them at this time? Was it God's will for Luther to be kicked out of the church and begin a split in the Western Church? Was it God's will for Seminex and the AELC to happen that split the LCMS? Was it God's will that LCMC and NALC be formed that further split the church? Why is one "split and a new church body" God's will and not another?

Or, a much more common occurrence, how does a congregation determine if calling a candidate as its pastor is God's will?

Your basic premise is so badly flawed that I don't think it can even be worked with.
How do you propose that we determine faithfulness in our decisions?  The classic Lutheran answer is how do "our decisions" relate to the Holy Scriptures.

How does a legislative body determine what is God's truth and will for them at this time?  Here you run into problems.  God's truth is not "voteable."  This is the essential problem with the ELCA.  We, as Christians dwell UNDER the Scriptures, not above them, voting on them.  The Scriptures speak to us, we are supposed to listen.  Certain things... the "unity of the Church," the Commandments, God's Holy Name and essence, God's revealed intention for human sexuality...these things are not open for "vote."  And, though I know you will doubtless disagree, God's Truth does not change from time to time.

Was it God's will for Luther to be kicked out of the church and begin a split in the Western Church?  Maybe.  Even Jaroslav Pelikan (of Blessed Memory) called the Reformation a "tragic necessity."  But the bigger problem for you is that you confuse God's will with the effect of sin in a broken reality. 

Was it God's will for Seminex and the AELC to happen that split the LCMS?  Maybe.  But again, see the above comment. 

Was it God's will that LCMC and NALC be formed that further split the church? Maybe, if the Truth is preserved and the Faith is proclaimed.  But you keep asking about OTHERS, never asking (nor answering) the question of yourself...  The guilt of fracturing is not upon one party, but upon all.

Why is one "split and a new church body" God's will and not another?  I guess the answer comes down to how you measure faithfulness.  If one body has become schismatic, rejecting God's self-revealed will in the Scriptures in favor of principles that are counter to Scripture the faithful may have to defy the schismatic group in favor of being faithful.... 

...At least that was what Luther and company came up with.

So, to some of the major issues that have faced the church, the best you can conclude is that maybe they were God's will!! So  it's a crap shoot if something is God's will or not. We just sin boldly and let God figure it out.

First, I don't have the hubris to claim to know God's intent in all things.  God's wisdom is beyond comprehension.  So yes...  "maybe."

Second, nice that you would side-step my main point, which is that Scripture is the way that God imparts knowledge of his will to us...  Not through "legislative" assemblies, not through a mystical "prophet" who carries some personal claim to private and special knowledge.  For a self-styled exegete...and one who claims to be "orthodox" and "Lutheran... you deftly ignored this point.  What is the role of scripture in imparting knowledge of God's will and shaping our action, Brian?

"Crap-shoot"?  Not even close.  The fact is that we have broken and wounded the world through our sin, and therefore trying to discern "God's Will" in the after-effects of a broken world is treacherous.  You and Pat Robertson seem intent on doling out Divine attributions...  That's kinda currious, dont'cha think?

[Brian Stoffregen]

Second, nice that you would side-step my main point, which is that Scripture is the way that God imparts knowledge of his will to us...  Not through "legislative" assemblies, not through a mystical "prophet" who carries some personal claim to private and special knowledge.  For a self-styled exegete...and one who claims to be "orthodox" and "Lutheran... you deftly ignored this point.  What is the role of scripture in imparting knowledge of God's will and shaping our action, Brian?

There is no knowledge from scriptures without people reading and interpreting it. Thus our understanding of God's will always comes through human decisions about those words God has given us through the biblical writers. Those human decisions can be at an individual level or through a deliberate process of a group of people. If we say that the Word or the Spirit guides our decision making process, isn't that getting into the "private or special knowledge" you oppose? Do we not believe that the Spirit does work through our legislative processes, our exegetical work, and prayerful interpretive decisions?

[Steven Tibbetts]

The survey commissioned by the Task Force did not follow the type of guidelines for random sampling that I learned in college.

And you make this judgment based on what?  I don't know what you learned in college, but we've been told by those who commissioned the survey of ELCA members that they were done in accordance with proper sampling procedures. 

It's nice, though, that you are finally acknowledging a survey separate from the formal responses to the Task Force's studies.

[Steven Tibbetts]

You should know, Steven, that I was not referring to members of CORE, those who wish to stay in the ELCA. I was referring to people like Mr. Erdner who do not want to be in the ELCA, who despise the ELCA and mock our leaders, but do not have the whatever it takes to leave.

If that is the case, Charles, then you ought to have read what George actually wrote before snidely commenting on it.

[A Catholic Lutheran]

Second, nice that you would side-step my main point, which is that Scripture is the way that God imparts knowledge of his will to us...  Not through "legislative" assemblies, not through a mystical "prophet" who carries some personal claim to private and special knowledge.  For a self-styled exegete...and one who claims to be "orthodox" and "Lutheran... you deftly ignored this point.  What is the role of scripture in imparting knowledge of God's will and shaping our action, Brian?

There is no knowledge from scriptures without people reading and interpreting it. Thus our understanding of God's will always comes through human decisions about those words God has given us through the biblical writers. Those human decisions can be at an individual level or through a deliberate process of a group of people. If we say that the Word or the Spirit guides our decision making process, isn't that getting into the "private or special knowledge" you oppose? Do we not believe that the Spirit does work through our legislative processes, our exegetical work, and prayerful interpretive decisions?

And you claim to be "Lutheran"... how???

Pax Christi;
Pr. Jerry Kliner, STS