Pastor McCain writes:
n my view of things, the conclusion on this issue is inevitable and, as I've said before, by virtue of full communion with church bodies that have an "open" position on homosexuality in the ranks of its clergy, the ELCA is already supporting the position.
I comment:
You are wrong. The fellowship agreement does not bind us or them to accept the disciplinary procedures of the other church body except when an ordained person in that church body receives a call in the other. Please have the courtesy not to declare your "view of things" on our ecumenical agreements when it is clear you do not understand them and willfully misinterpret them.
Pastor McCain continues the misinterpretation and error:
After all the agreement with the ECUSA requires the ELCA to receive all the ECUSA bishops as fully legitimate, so, de facto, the ELCA already has its first "openly" homosexual bishop, boyfriend and all.
I explain:
No. We have no standing to question the legitimacy of Bishop Robinson's ministry within the Episcopal Church. But, according to our present rules, he would not be able to receive a call to an ELCA parish. Your ignorance of our ecumenical documents and how they were developed and are practiced is so stunning that I suggest you restrain your desire to interpret our documents to us and to others here. And the snippy comment, "boyfriend and all," is another example of how you are unable to engage in polite conversation on this subject.