Saturday morning: Final plenary, final worship (A-)

[Richard Johnson]

Reparative therapy and similar practices are contrary to teachings of the ELCA.

I'm not supporting reparative therapy, but remind me again where the "teachings of the ELCA" are contrary to it?

[Robert Johnson]

And Steven, good luck on those "other issues," some of which aren't even really in contention. It's the marriage and the gay issue which drives the machine. We all know that.

That's a response based on ignorance.

You expected better?

[Brian Stoffregen]

Reparative therapy and similar practices are contrary to teachings of the ELCA.

I'm not supporting reparative therapy, but remind me again where the "teachings of the ELCA" are contrary to it?

It is so stated in the report and recommendation of the working group on Ministry to and with Same-Gender Couples and Families. I think that they accurately interpret the scope of the four convictions in our Social Statement. They do not include reparative therapy.

[readselerttoo]

CORE was virtually invisible at the Assembly. I ran into one CORE member. I saw no signs, no announcements of any room where they were hanging out.
I was all over the assembly venue every day. If they had intended to have a "presence," they failed at it.
I think some chatter on Facebook (I don't do much over there) had to do with whether CORE had some connection with the groups that try to "cure" homosexuality.

There was an announcement about a CORE reception at a hotel. Some objected because they are not a recognized ELCA group. The other problem is that there is a question of CORE supports groups that try to "cure" homosexuality, such as Exodus International, which believes that they can repair same-sex orientation. (Exodus International went out of business in 2013.) There are also some folks who see CORE as a homophobic hate group and/or an anti-ELCA organization that has no place in an ELCA Churchwide Assembly.

And that is the problem - one either gets on-board with the ELCA  view on sexuality or one has no voice and is seen as homophobic.  In the ELCA - in society in general - those asking for tolerance have no tolerance for opinions other than their own.

 

[readselerttoo]

I honestly do not think one has to "get on board," Eileen. But we must admit that there are those for whom this single issue is just that - a single issue - and tends to be the only thing about the ELCA that involves them. And for some of those people, it is true that their attitudes towards that issue will impact their ability to get a call. Would a congregation that is welcoming and supportive of same-sex couples and their marriage be forced to call a pastor with an exact contrary opinion?
Or, if a pastor who does not endorse same-sex marriage is in a congregation that supports his or her view, can that pastor and the congregation still take full part in the life of the ELCA, sending mission support, getting their kids to the synod camp and youth gatherings, cooperating with nearby congregations (which may have a partnered gay or lesbian pastor)? If so, fine. If they must become isolationist and withdraw from synod and ELCA activities, is that a good thing? I don't think so.

No.  I don't agree.  It is not a single issue item.  Along with this issue is how the natural orders are viewed within the ELCA and how Scripture is interpreted in general.  So, no.  It is not a single issue item.  Frequently behind opinion are preconceptions based on errorneous assumptions.  There has not been sufficient conversation on these items to merit CORE to disappear.  Even though I am not fully on board with all their agenda, they stand for the fact that at least there needs to be more conversation on sexuality, sin and the natural orders, in my mind.

[readselerttoo]

I honestly do not think one has to "get on board," Eileen. But we must admit that there are those for whom this single issue is just that - a single issue - and tends to be the only thing about the ELCA that involves them.

Indeed.  Of course, the question is: for whom in the ELCA is this the single issue?  From its very beginning, Lutheran CORE has sought to address several issues, of which sexuality has never been first and foremost.

Pax, Steven+

Yes.  Thanks for lifting this up for notice.  CORE has always dealt with issues going beyond any single issue!

[readselerttoo]

I clicked around the CORE webpage and didn't find any references to the ELCA Assembly in New Orleans. Most of the stuff on the page was more than a year old, except for some devotional materials.
If CORE had a plan or a witness to the New Orleans Assembly, it wasn't very visible.
And Steven, good luck on those "other issues," some of which aren't even really in contention. It's the marriage and the gay issue which drives the machine. We all know that.

...and hermeneutics and scriptural authority as well.  Not a single issue item!

[Charles Austin]

OK, then tell me where they at the Assembly? Were they in the hearings on the various agenda items? Did they contact Voting Members? Did they seek to become Voting Members? Did they offer memorials on the issues of concern to them? Were they advising CORE members on matters coming before the Assembly? If CORE has issues, or has several issues, then someone explain to me just how they are raising these issues within the context of the ELCA, especially its highest decision-making body, the Assembly. Their website is out of date and has no reference to ELCA Assembly items (unless I missed it in my clicking around.) So where is CORE and its issues?

[readselerttoo]

OK, then tell me where they at the Assembly? Were they in the hearings on the various agenda items? Did they contact Voting Members? Did they seek to become Voting Members? Did they offer memorials on the issues of concern to them? Were they advising CORE members on matters coming before the Assembly? If CORE has issues, or has several issues, then someone explain to me just how they are raising these issues within the context of the ELCA, especially its highest decision-making body, the Assembly. Their website is out of date and has no reference to ELCA Assembly items (unless I missed it in my clicking around.) So where is CORE and its issues?

I'm not an active CORE member, either.  Perhaps they are on hiatus. 

[DCharlton]

And Steven, good luck on those "other issues," some of which aren't even really in contention. It's the marriage and the gay issue which drives the machine. We all know that.

That's a response based on ignorance.  I don't know who is running ELCA Witness for CORE today, but when it was Steve Shipman and Cori Johnson, that was not the focus for either of them.

No, it isn't for them. They are not people who hate the ELCA. I'm friends with both of them on Facebook! (Surprise to some of you … and we have had fruitful and civil conversations.) Neither of them are on the board as they once were, so they aren't as involved as they had been with the overall ministry of CORE. (Cori recently got married, so she has devoted her time to some other things.)

That's a record Pastor Stoffregen.  You agreed with me four posts in a row.   I do appreciate your desire to be fair to members of CORE and other more conservative members of the ELCA. 

[DCharlton]

Some objected because they are not a recognized ELCA group.

And you know this how? Who objected? To whom did they object? Apparently it didn't make much difference, since the announcement was made on two successive days.

It's been on the ELCA page on Facebook. (It is decided anti-CORE, with some CORE people having been booted off for supporting their organization in their discussion.)

Let me be sure I understand.  People were kicked off the ELCA Facebook page for simply for defending CORE against charges of homophobia and being anti-ELCA? 

[DCharlton]

OK, then tell me where they at the Assembly? Were they in the hearings on the various agenda items? Did they contact Voting Members? Did they seek to become Voting Members? Did they offer memorials on the issues of concern to them? Were they advising CORE members on matters coming before the Assembly? If CORE has issues, or has several issues, then someone explain to me just how they are raising these issues within the context of the ELCA, especially its highest decision-making body, the Assembly. Their website is out of date and has no reference to ELCA Assembly items (unless I missed it in my clicking around.) So where is CORE and its issues?

I'll send you a link to their latest newsletter if you want it.  The latest issue that is in my e-mail box is CORE Voice.  Issue 4 of 2016.  Pastor Steve Shipman is listed as the editor of the newsletter. 

In that issue, it was reported that Keith Forni was to be the CORE representative to the CWA.    There is contact information in the newsletter if you would like to speak to Pastor Forni about what CORE did or did not do in New Orleans.

There are also several articles on the CORE Blog date July 2016

[bookpastor/Erma Wolf]

Some objected because they are not a recognized ELCA group.

And you know this how? Who objected? To whom did they object? Apparently it didn't make much difference, since the announcement was made on two successive days.

It's been on the ELCA page on Facebook. (It is decided anti-CORE, with some CORE people having been booted off for supporting their organization in their discussion.)

I saw some of those comments on the twitter feed #ELCAcwa.

[bookpastor/Erma Wolf]

It's been on the ELCA page on Facebook. (It is decided anti-CORE, with some CORE people having been booted off for supporting their organization in their discussion.)

Let me be sure I understand.  People were kicked off the ELCA Facebook page for simply for defending CORE against charges of homophobia and being anti-ELCA?

Not exactly. (Sigh.) Some time back (over a year ago, at least), one person was removed from the ELCA Clergy Facebook page for bringing up CORe and defending it. The moderator did the removing. Others in CORE then left on their own, in solidarity. Since then the moderator of that page has changed his policy, and has invited that person back. There are a number of reasons (and good reasons, in my own opinion) why that person has not returned.

I was on the ELCA Clergy Facebook page at that time, and for some time afterwards. Yes, a number of folks there are very anti-CORE. Some for reasons that are understandable; others, not so much.

I have since left the ELCA Clergy page, the ELCA page, and another page started by a CORE person (but not a CORE Facebook page). I just got tired of the incessant drama, and the games played by the (non-CORE) moderator. (Again, in my humble opinion.)

But I am still here.   

[bookpastor/Erma Wolf]

Reparative therapy and similar practices are contrary to teachings of the ELCA.

I'm not supporting reparative therapy, but remind me again where the "teachings of the ELCA" are contrary to it?

It is so stated in the report and recommendation of the working group on Ministry to and with Same-Gender Couples and Families. I think that they accurately interpret the scope of the four convictions in our Social Statement. They do not include reparative therapy.

My theological view is that reparative therapy is contrary to Lutheran theological understanding when such therapy is viewed as a requirement for a person's salvation. I have heard with my own ears the argument that if someone who is gay or lesbian does not seek reparative therapy, then they cannot really be Christian because they refuse to try to be changed into what would be pleasing to God. (Homosexuality being viewed not only as not what God chooses, but as a human choice that is in direct opposition to the will of God.)
I think that is contrary to Lutheran teaching that salvation is by grace alone through faith alone, and does not require any works of the law.

I have my own opinion on whether reparative therapy is valid or not as a therapy; however, I am not a psychiatrist or a trained therapist, and my opinion on this is purely as a layperson who has read about the subject, but has no medical expertise on the matter. My view is only on whether requiring it is theologically valid. And in my view, it is not.

(Full disclosure:  I was a member of the working group on Ministry to and with Same Gender Couples and their Families. This was my theological reasoning for saying that reparative therapy was not within the bounds of the ELCA convictions.)