Author Topic: Plenary 5 Wednesday afternoon, 4th and fifth ballots, ELECTION  (Read 5868 times)

Charles_Austin

  • Guest
Re: Plenary 5 Wednesday afternoon, 4th and fifth ballots, ELECTION
« Reply #15 on: August 20, 2013, 11:04:49 AM »
Pastor Charlton writes:
 It is the fear that traditional language for God will produce patriarchy, violence, sexism, racism, homophobia and exploitation of the environment, that motivates these freer alternatives. 

I comment:
Maybe. Maybe partly. Maybe only a little bit. But can one deny that the "traditional" (whose "tradition"?) language is patriarchal; that some of those other things have been fueled (incorrectly, but fueled nonetheless) by that patriarchal language?
And maybe those "freer alternatives," while not the whole deal when it comes to God language, can serve some purpose?

Pastor Charlton writes:
Those favoring more traditional and orthodox language likewise believe that proper God language guards and preserves the apostolic message for current and future generations.
I comment:
What is the content of that "apostolic message" that needs preserving? That God is creator? That Jesus is savior? That the Holy Trinity is Father, Son and Holy Spirit? And can this "preservation" only be accomplished through a certain set of gender-oriented words? Or not?

Steverem

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 1581
    • View Profile
Re: Plenary 5 Wednesday afternoon, 4th and fifth ballots, ELECTION
« Reply #16 on: August 20, 2013, 11:18:28 AM »

   Mr. Harrod was at the Assembly on behalf of the Institute for Religion and Democracy, an organization that decided long ago that LCA and ALC and ELCA Lutherans were on the wrong track politically. I did not know they had expanded their mission to include theology and liturgy. They were off base back then, and they are further off base now. And I'm sorry I even spent time with criticism from them.


And I bet you thought we'd never agree on anything - I, too, am sorry you spent time on it.

DCharlton

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 7023
    • View Profile
Re: Plenary 5 Wednesday afternoon, 4th and fifth ballots, ELECTION
« Reply #17 on: August 20, 2013, 11:25:31 AM »
Pastor Charlton writes:
 It is the fear that traditional language for God will produce patriarchy, violence, sexism, racism, homophobia and exploitation of the environment, that motivates these freer alternatives. 

I comment:
Maybe. Maybe partly. Maybe only a little bit. But can one deny that the "traditional" (whose "tradition"?) language is patriarchal; that some of those other things have been fueled (incorrectly, but fueled nonetheless) by that patriarchal language?
And maybe those "freer alternatives," while not the whole deal when it comes to God language, can serve some purpose?

Pastor Charlton writes:
Those favoring more traditional and orthodox language likewise believe that proper God language guards and preserves the apostolic message for current and future generations.
I comment:
What is the content of that "apostolic message" that needs preserving? That God is creator? That Jesus is savior? That the Holy Trinity is Father, Son and Holy Spirit? And can this "preservation" only be accomplished through a certain set of gender-oriented words? Or not?

We're back to Seminary 101.  I'm not going to rehearse the arguments on the last 25 years. (As a pastor and reporter in the ELCA, you should have been paying more attention.)  What I have said about both groups is accurate.  Both groups agree on one thing:  God language matters.   

I don't think the concerns of those who favor reformulation of God language are trivial.  They have made a strong case that language has been used to perpetuate power and violence.  That I disagree with their overall theory of language and the conclusions they reach does not mean that I haven't considered what they have to say.   
« Last Edit: August 20, 2013, 11:41:19 AM by DCharlton »
David Charlton  

Was Algul Siento a divinity school?

Keith Falk

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 1651
    • View Profile
Re: Plenary 5 Wednesday afternoon, 4th and fifth ballots, ELECTION
« Reply #18 on: August 20, 2013, 12:25:21 PM »
Here is what Bishop Erwin is said to have written in another forum (copied/pasted from the Lutheran CORE FB page):


"Bishop Erwin wrote this on another forum:

I can think of at least one bishop who would be happy to preside at an evangelical mass in the context of a Churchwide Assembly! That would be me.


Don't be misled by this article; I did the author the favor of speaking with him personally, but was still unable to prevent him from making some fundamental errors. Much of what he says has no relationship to the worship service of which he writes. Principal among the errors is that I was not either the presider or planner, but rather the preacher at the service. A video of my sermon is available online somewhere through ReconcilingWorks, and i expect anyone would find it orthodox enough.


I don't always get to choose what people put in liturgies in which I am involved, and though I tend personally to the traditionalist end of the spectrum, I am fairly latitudinarian in practice. I would not involve myself with a liturgy I thought heretical, though I might in my inmost heart prefer other language was used in some of the ones in which I am involved. Because I work in lots of settings where experimental liturgies have been used, I am hard to shock. And everything in this particular service fit in the general category of inclusivizing language. Nothing more radical (or more new) than the New Zealand prayer book. Das war wohl aber keine evangelische Messe!


As one can expect, for many on both ends of the spectrum there will never be anything satisfyingly free of the things they dislike. "There oughta be a rule against that!" is something I frequently hear from quite different kinds of people. But the rest of live in the messy middle, trying to keep the faith as we can in matters over which we have limited control.


Blessings to you all, as you try to show that what makes the traditional liturgy powerful is not that it is old, but that it is beautiful and true."
Rev. Keith Falk, STS