Started by Keith Falk, August 11, 2007, 03:19:31 PM
Quote from: Charles_Austin on August 15, 2007, 02:06:54 PMJ. Ruby writes:No, they just had their OWN Eucharist, called the Goodsoil Eucharist. Talk about heresy. I comment:Explain to me how this gathering of Lutherans celebrating the sacrament, led by a bishop in good standing, is heresy. What name they call it means nothing.
Quote from: Richard Johnson on August 15, 2007, 06:17:49 PMHere's the official intepretation, in Bp. Hanson's summary of Assembly actions:It is important that we accurately describe the assembly's various decisions regarding our current studies on sexuality and standards for rostered ministries. It is significant that the tone of our discussions was thoughtful and respectful, reflecting the commitment made by the 2005 Churchwide Assembly that we "concentrate on finding ways to live together faithfully in the midst of disagreements ..." The following summary may inform your discussions: The ELCA Churchwide Assembly rejected resolutions that would have changed ELCA policy and practice to permit persons in same-gender relationships to serve as rostered leaders. The assembly affirmed the study process that will lead to the development of a social statement on human sexuality, voted to share with the study's task force the synod memorials on this matter, and directed the task force to address current policies precluding "practicing homosexual persons" from serving as pastors or rostered leaders as part of the recommendations it will bring to the 2009 Churchwide Assembly. While voting on several occasions not to change the ELCA's constitution, bylaws, or policies, the assembly did take action to pray, urge, and encourage the leadership of the ELCA to "refrain from or demonstrate restraint in disciplining" pastors and other rostered leaders who are "in a mutual, chaste, and faithful committed same-gender relationship" and are currently serving in this church, as well as congregations that call such otherwise qualified candidates. Let me underscore that this third action is not a change in the official documents or policies of the ELCA. Attempts to make such changes were rejected by the assembly. However, the assembly offered the advice and counsel described above to bishops and others in positions of authority as they make pastoral decisions on matters relating to discipline as issues of human sexuality are being studied throughout the church prior to action by the 2009 Churchwide Assembly. The third action does not bind bishops to follow this requested course; rather, it expresses the sense of the assembly to encourage restraint in discipline during this time of deliberation. As we prepare for a social statement on human sexuality in 2009, it is essential that leaders of this church invite ELCA members to participate in the current phase of the ELCA Studies on Sexuality. The development of social statements is participatory in nature. Responses to the third study are welcome until November 1, 2007. Watch for the first draft of the social statement in March 2008. Please encourage thoughtful response to it. You will find more information at www.elca.org/faithfuljourney .On an afternoon in the middle of the assembly, voting members participated in a "committee of the whole" discussion. I want to share with you the compelling image of that discussion from Bishop Peter Rogness of the Saint Paul Area Synod. He described the long lines of people at every microphone and then wrote, "Since [assembly] rules indicate we alternate speaking pro- and con-, a set of two microphones stands at each station -- one green, one red. I looked at the microphones closest to me and saw Saint Paul Area Synod voting members standing in both lines. I was proud of that. We've been together enough to enjoy and respect each other, and we went to different lines. And then we worshiped together, ate together, did other work together. This synod -- and this church -- is not simply a red line synod or a green line synod. We are church together. We can commit ourselves to living together, faithfully." [/color]
Quote from: ptmccain on August 15, 2007, 10:35:31 PMI'm trying to understand what comfort there is to be found in the fact that no policies were changed, when the CWA urged its Bishops to refrain from disciplining anyone violating those policies when it comes to homosexual relationships.
Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on August 16, 2007, 12:14:15 AMQuote from: ptmccain on August 15, 2007, 10:35:31 PMI'm trying to understand what comfort there is to be found in the fact that no policies were changed, when the CWA urged its Bishops to refrain from disciplining anyone violating those policies when it comes to homosexual relationships.Essentially, the CWA put their "stamp of approval," on what some bishops have been doing for the past decade or more. They believe, and now, rightly so, that they were acting within the policies and procedures of the ELCA.
Quote from: Richard Johnson on August 16, 2007, 12:21:33 AMOh, I think not. In what possible sense can you say they were "acting within the policies and procedures of the ELCA?" The CWA motion did not change the "policies and procedures of the ELCA," and CERTAINLY it didn't change them retroactively. Even Hanson's e-mail says this was really a sense of the house resolution, and that nothing has changed in terms of policy.
Quote from: revjagow on August 16, 2007, 12:17:26 PMQuote from: ptmccain on August 15, 2007, 10:35:31 PMI'm trying to understand what comfort there is to be found in the fact that no policies were changed, when the CWA urged its Bishops to refrain from disciplining anyone violating those policies when it comes to homosexual relationships.Me too. Bottom line: I have happily served in many contexts with my fellow clergy from the ELCA. We have a lot of shared ministries such as camps, schools, and human care institutions. My family is a Lutheran mix and I like to think that my relations with fellow clergy and joint ministries reflects that, currently. However, this action by the convention severely limits me and my participation in many cooperative endeavors. For instance, I would not send my youth to a camp that had an ELCA minister who is in an open, homosexual relationship. Nor would I send my children to a school that a had a rostered worker in an open, homosexual relationship. Can you see this from my point of view? At my church, we are teaching what we believe is God's Word when it comes to our sexual behavior, and I will not put the children of my congregation in a position where that is being contradicted by other Lutheran clergy. These are not theological differences that we can gloss over and still decide that we can work together. From where I sit, the situation is bad. This past convention made it worse. I am begging whoever has any voice in this study over the next three years to avert what I think will be the most profound split in Lutheranism. This is my extended family and I can't tell you how much this tears me apart, personally. I take no comfort in the posts on this thread that have been all "no, no - nothing happened, its all O.K." Its not O.K. until the study in 2009 concludes that Lutherans are sticking with the church catholic when it teaches sexuality. Period.
Quote from: Charles_Austin on August 16, 2007, 07:08:13 PMEric asks:What "work" do you refer to Charles?I respond:The "work" that will be necessary to learn how to understand, get along with and minister alongside of people with whom we disagree, with people who believe in salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ - the Lutheran essential - but may have different views of certain Bible passages about creation, marriage, divorce, circumcision or kosher food (should any of those other issues arise.) Those who are for a complete change in our policies might have to take some workshops or retreats out to the prairies of the Dakotas, and those who oppose any change might have to pay a visit to New York, Atlanta or New Jersey. That's the "work" I mean. And if folks aren't willing to do that, we may be in for some tough times.