My name is Tom Weller. The congregation I've been part of for 20 years, La Casa de Cristo Lutheran Church in Phoenix, has taken the first of two votes required to leave our national church body, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. A second vote must be taken, and two thirds of the members attending the meeting at which the ballot is distributed must vote in favor of leaving. I hope and pray that the second vote, which is supposed to take place in November, ends with our congregation remaining in the ELCA.
We're being told that the church body has strayed from a true interpretation of the Bible because last summer, delegates to the national convention voted to allow gay ministers in committed relationships to be ordained and to serve in ministerial positions. At the same time, the convention voted that no congregation could be forced to accept such ministers. As our bishop, Steve Talmage, explained when he talked with the congregation on Sunday, August 29, allowing something is not the same as approving of it. Allowing the option does, however, give flexibility to congregations who wish to pursue it.
This position, our pastors maintain, has resulted because the church body is now letting society and political correctness, not Scripture, dictate its theology and morality. I respect our pastors and others who hold this position, but I disagree.
In meetings to discuss the issue, we heard about fundamentalism and evangelical approaches, but we never received a full and complete presentation about why the ELCA did what it did and why the national convention thought it was appropriate. I think it's important that we hear from the other side and not just have their position condensed and presented for them. I want to see the time of the presentation well and widely publicized within the congregation, and I want to see that we not vote again until such a presentation takes place.
I understand the discomfort some people have when discussing the subject of homosexuality or being with homosexuals. But I also understand, as someone said at the presentation by Bishop Talmage, that Jesus was a friend to those who were scorned in his day.
I don't think it's as simple as saying that there are seven passages in Scripture about homosexuality that are negative and none in favor. That's true, as far as it goes. But it's equally true that the Bible can be read to condone slavery and forbid women ministers. At the very least, we should have a full discussion about how we as a church and as believers moved beyond these positions.
In the Aug. 7 Newsweek magazine, editor Jon Meacham - a committed Christian - talked about the recent court decision in California to allow gay marriages. You can read the whole article here. The part I want to call your attention to is this:
"Broadly put, the Western monotheistic traditions hold that human beings are made in the likeness and image of God, and are thus all equal in the sight of the Lord. (In his The Tenure of Kings and Magistrates, written in 1649, John Milton put the matter bluntly: “No man…can be so stupid to deny that all men naturally were born free, being the image and resemblance of God himself.”) If a person is homosexual by nature—that is, if one’s sexuality is as intrinsic a part of one’s identity as gender or skin color—then society can no more deny a gay person access to the secular rights and religious sacraments because of his homosexuality than it can reinstate Jim Crow.
"I have made this argument before ... The reaction from the right has always been comfortably predictable, and no doubt will be again. The problem for those who assert biblical authority in support of traditional definitions of marriage is that one could, with equal validity, assert that the lending of money or certain kinds of haircuts are forbidden by God, or that slavery and the subjugation of women are authorized by the Lord. Scripture is not inerrant; believers are called to interpret biblical texts in light of tradition and reason. For now the debate is about civil marriage, but much of the opposition to opening the institution to gays and lesbians comes from those who profess a faith of charity. In the fullness of time, I suspect that bigotry against homosexuals will seem as repugnant as racial prejudice does today. Or so one hopes."
Maybe at some point La Casa should leave the ELCA, but I think before we do, we should have a full, open conversation about what we're doing and why - not just a meeting or two, but an extended discussion in which we explore Scripture and how to interpret it. As part of the discussion, let's allow those who see things differently to speak in defense of their position. Let's hear from those who defend the convention's decision as well as those who don't.
Let's not walk away from a church body that helped us build our congregation and helps us extend our reach in the world without a full discussion about what we're doing. I have tremendous respect for our pastors, but I don't believe we've had that full discussion yet, and I hope we will.
What do you think? Please leave a comment. Also, you can ask your friends to read this by clicking on the envelope icon below. Thanks for stopping by.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
There is something wrong with a church this size if it can't take more time to discuss the issues associated with scripture and the ELCA's decision. What are people afraid of.
ReplyDeleteThis is one of our concerns. I just don't like not having complete disclosure and discussion, and I am very upset with the aura of discrimination this is putting on our church family. There is much more information that needs to be discussed in my opinion. Thank you for your comments. And please remember to vote your conscience whenever the second vote takes place.
ReplyDeleteWhen societal values trump the Bible and there is no time to discuss, that is when one needs to evaluate their position with God, The Bible and the Missouri Synod.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure I agree with "societal values trumping the Bible". I would argue that societal values are exactly what the Bible embraces, the difference being that the scriptures were written 2 to 4 thousand years ago. The influence on the scriptural writers were most certainly societal values of the time, which of course raises interesting questions. Over the last 3 years since this issue first surfaced, I have taken the time to speak with many clergy of many faiths. The results of those conversations are astounding in the different interpretations to which I was exposed. You are correct when you state that the time to discuss is disconcerting to me; very much so. And you are also right when you point out, at least for me, that I did have to re-evaluate my position with God and The Bible. The Missouri Synod is not on my radar, because Carol Peters would not be able to be the guiding force she is in that particular denomination; at least not from the Pulpit. That is something I find personally distasteful. Now however, we come to a crossroads in our personal walk with our Lord and Savior, and I must ask time and again, what would Jesus do? I cannot imagine my Jesus, the one that I know, excluding anyone from His ministry. At any rate, thank you so much for your comments, which are indeed thought provoking. And please remember to vote your conscience whenever the second vote takes place. God bless you.
ReplyDeleteIt is sad that so much misinformation is shared about our church and the process. There have been at least five open forums on this subject. One of our pastors was in Minnesota and fielded questions at two forums. Our pastors have been clear that all are welcome to church, and that this is about ordination and redefining marriage, not about what society does with civil marriages. Our pastors stated publicly they have counseled people with gay kids or who struggled themselves and never judged them, but treated them kindly. But you cant' ignore the bible!
ReplyDeleteThis is the great problem in our time. People are seeking what they want, not what God wants.
As for your comments on the role ofwomen and slavery, the problem is that there are also passages that say slavery is bad and women should be in leadership. It is my understanding that one can struggle with issues which seem to have different results, but the issue is clear here, and nothing positive is said.
By the way, there are passages in both the old and new testaments
The congregation has been dealing with this for over a year. How long will this go on?
The Bible is not clear to how homosexuality is treated. It is clear to a more fundamentalist view of scripture in which the bible is viewed and inerrant and infallible and the biblical scholar asks the reader to go back to a world view that is steeped in a philosophical view of the world that is now impotent.
ReplyDeleteIf it was clear to the Christian community then we would likely not have these disagreements. To say otherwise is to say that the scholarship on the other side of the argument holds no water and that is not likely.
I attended the sessions and the alternative readings and approaches to scripture were presented as heritcal or at least as falling outside of the christian community (that is post-modern).
So the choices were either heresy or the pastors personal theological interpretations. no where was there a discussion of the historical, philosophical and social factors that theologians have struggled with regarding the interpretation of scripture. If these issues are not dealt with within the church (not just lacasa) the bible will take on the character of the Book of mormon. Don't we want to say that the bible is more true than the book of mormon and not do so by saying God says so in the bible. so who is right? We have to make better truth claims and that will only be done by bringing the lay people to a modern understanding of scripture both as a document and as inspired by god. or should we live in the pre-modern world on sundays and the modern/postmodern world monday through saturday.
fundamentalism is entirely un-lutheran and un luther like. our pastors can do a better job than this and they should.
Tom, not being involved with the inner working of your Church I have no comment, but thanks for sharing. In your Bio your state, "I'm committed to Social Justice" I feel I know you well enough to know you really meant Equal Justice. There is a big difference. Ron Rose,Palm Harbor, Fl
ReplyDeleteThank you for your thoughts Ron. And, as always old friend, you are correct. Equal justice is what this pertains to. Thanks for pointing that out. Tom.
ReplyDeleteI think La casa has about 3000 or more members. 29 have voted here and a handful commented. Complaints about only a small percentage voting or going to meetings. Maybe that is because for most members they agree it is time to vote to leave and move on. Maybe they trust our leaders and that there have been many opportunities to talk about it. Or maybe this issue doesn't register with lack of jobs and a recession.
ReplyDeleteWhat bothers me here is that people say they trust our leaders "but this and that " and kvetch about stuff that just isn't true. This process has lasted a year, and from what I hear going on across elca from friends i'n Midwest has been very detailed and gracious.
To anonymous above,
ReplyDeleteIf it is true that the meetings were attended by only a small percentage of lacasa members isn't that even more of a reason for us to take our time. Perhaps many of Lacasa's members were not raised Lutheran or raised in any church and this is confusing for them. I attended one of the meetings and the presentation was anything but unbiased. Only when the facts are out will the congregation be able to make an informed decision.
I don't know what happens in the midwest (even though I grew up there). I do know that a friend of mine belongs to a church in Fountain hills where they did a survey asking members if they wanted to stay in the ELCA. An overwhelming majority of people (over 80%) stated they wanted to stay in the ELCA. The pastor and council wanted to leave so they are pushing a vote through to leave. A large majority of the founding members of this church are forming anonther church in the same community. In addition a friend of mine participated in the committee at Lacasa and I was told that leaving the ELCA was a foregone conclusion at the first meeting. That's confusing. I thought that committee was there to study the issue?
It seems to me that we need to take more time on this issue and the fact that so little of the congregation is engaged with such an important issue is a very good reason to slow down.
I would say your comments are hearsay and border on breaking the eighth commandment.
ReplyDeleteThe team fully discussed staying, and did not make their recommendation lightly. Staying was fully discussed' and one of four options. I was there . Please don't pass along innuendos and rumours.
I don't expect you to post this. I left a post earlier and shared with you your view of the task force was completely off base. I was on it, we worked for months, we looked at all options. Whatever your "friend" said it is simply not true, and there was one person on the task force of 10 who missed most the meetings and it was probably that person. You have not posted my post which showed another side, which leads me to believe you would prefer to spread misinformation.
ReplyDeleteYou are entitled to your opinion. You are not entitled to spread untruths about fellow church members. How Christian is that? You run around pointing your fingers at people and accuse them of not telling the whole story, or stacking recommendations when people were in tears and agonized over leaving , but knew it was the right thing to do. If you were a good person, you would change your comments about the task force. It is hurtful. And you are not being an open and honest person by doing such things.
This site posts any and all comments, as long as they're civil and free of improper language. No comment has been held back as of today. Comments are not always moderated and published immediately as they are submitted (depending on my schedule), but all have been published within a few hours of being submitted. The exchange of the three comments dated September 14 is frank and forthright, and I thank both anonymous commenters for taking time to enter the discussion.
ReplyDeleteI agree with tom. if someone on the committee had an opinion about the process then they did. the fact that it was discussed here is good. IF it came from someone on the committee then it is not hearsay nor is it an innuendo or a rumor. It simply represents someone's opinion. What i undestood the point the earlier post was making was that if there are misunderstandings or confusion on the part of lacasa members (grew up lutheran or not, from the midwest or not) then why not slow down the process to clear up the confusion? Why the hurry to leave if the participation in the process of such a small percentage of the church.
ReplyDeleteTo the person who wrote the comment dated September 15, 9:40 AM:
ReplyDeleteThank you for your support. You mention the issue of confusion, which is just what I want to clear up. Only through a concerted effort to educate the entire population of our church family on all sides of this issue can we expect to make an intelligent choice. This requires patience, not panic. Please remember to vote at the second congregational meeting, and please vote your conference. Yours in the service of Christ, Tom.
"I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." Ghandi
ReplyDeleteyes. this is sad.
ReplyDeleteFirst, I don't appreciate coming out from worship to find a flyer on my windshield. If you want to reach out to the LCDC community, find another way.
ReplyDeleteNow.....
This decision process was not done in haste or without anguish. It was forced by the ELCA finally adopting a stance that is currently popular in the secular world. It is counter to the teaching of scripture. ELCA national meeting votes were taken, the ordination of gay pastors and marriage of two same sex partners was voted down repeatedly; the proponents continued their politicking until they got their way. During these years, any one that wished to speak against these resolutions was shunted off, shouted over or just not allowed to speak.
The basis for LCDC is the Bible; we worship under its precepts. The ELCA's stand is in direct conflict with scripture...so LCDC has chosen to de-affiliate to stay true to God's word. I understand why. If we do not take scripture as God's word, and we as men can not fully understand God's mind, then we have built our faith on shifting sands.
Last, I read the comments about why the congregation was not surveyed, how you didn't get to comment or attend meetings, etc. This has been going on for several years; if you did not feel your voice was heard, did you take your time to meet with the pastors and discuss it with them? It's easy to get on a blog and comment; it's harder to stand for your beliefs.
If you wish too stay in an ELCA church, there are many around the Phoenix area.
"As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord."
If La Casa leaves the ELCA as proposed, we will making a statement that is most un-christian and that reflects poorly upon all of us. If we are to follow the teachings of Christ, the Christian religion must be inclusive. All are sinners, yet all are welcome. By our proposed action we are proclaiming to the world that we welcome all people as brothers and sisters in Christ--but not if you were born gay or lesbian. No matter that you have the love of God in your heart. No matter that you have been called by God to minister to his people. If you are gay or lesbian, don't apply at La Casa. We judge you unfit. God may have called you but we will not.
ReplyDeleteIs this a message that we want to give? Is this the brand we want our Church to wear? Is this a decision that our Lord would second? Can we, as a congregation, live with this?
Please, could someone provide the scriptural sources in the Bible about homosexuality? I unfortunately do not know the Chapters and Verses which others refer to and would like to read them before making this decision.
ReplyDeleteI only attended one meeting and am unclear what the affiliation of La Casa de Cristo will be if it leaves the ELCA. It was indicated the church will still be Lutheran, but will it be a stand alone congregation? Can a church call itself Lutheran if it isn't in a Synod?
Is there anywhere online where one can read all the details regarding this issue? I tried to find information on La Casa's website, but wasn't able to find anything beyond the modified by-laws that would be proposed if the vote to leave the ELCA passes. I scanned through the proposed by-laws, and couldn't find anything that appears to pertain directly to this particular issue. As a long-standing member of La Casa, I attended one of the meetings that was held several months ago, but I've since lost my notes. I thought surely that La Casa would post all of the information regarding this issue on the website, so that everyone in the congregation could be fully informed before the 2nd vote is taken. That doesn't seem to have happened, however, so either there is some other website where all of this information has been posted for our reading pleasure, or for some reason it is being kept under wraps. I sure hope it's the former...
ReplyDeleteGod has not asked us to tolerate sin in order to be liked by our community. God is clear on this. What other sins should we tolerate to be liked by the community? All sinners are welcome in the church because we are all sinners. I do not believe that people who are openly defiant of Gods laws should be in a leadership role in the church. The ELCA does. I think this is scripturally wrong. What's next? Should we overlook adultery? Sin is Sin. God loves everybody equally. Whether or not they believe they are homosexual has no bearing on God's love for them. But if they choose to practice homosexual acts, God has made it clear that this is a sin.
ReplyDeleteAgain, this sin is no worse nor better than any other sin. Sin is sin in Gods eyes. It's the fact that they continue to thumb their nose at God and say they know better than God that I feel disallows them to be leaders in the church.
We are asked as Christians to be in the world but not of the world. The world says homosexual acts are okay, to each is own. God says homosexual acts are an abomination to him:
Romans 1:26-27 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. [27] In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. [NIV]
1 Cor. 6:9-10 Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders [10] nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. [NIV]
These verses are not taken “out of context” nor are they unclear in any way. But don’t forget, it’s the sin God hates, not the sinner. He loves homosexuals every bit as much as anybody else. We love them too. We can only hope that they will develop a personal relationship with Christ and then the homosexuality will be between them and Christ. I have plenty of my own sins to worry about. Their sins are between them and God, until they request a leadership position in the church.
Scripture is interpreted by human beings. This is at the crux of the problem. There are many factors that influence the interpretaion scripture this is why the scriptural interpretation on homosexuality has different sides. For example why do we have two creation stories? Why do some biblical scholars believe that Paul didn't write some of the books of the New Testamant that the bible attributes to him. Scripture was thought to be just as clear when it came to slavery, women and their value in society, and was used by the lutheran church and its theologians to support a Nazi regime in Germany. And of course in all these instances the good christians believed the bible supported their position. All of the people holding these positions believed their house served the lord. All of them believed they had good biblical support for their positions. One liners I don't believe really serve the broader issues being addressed here. The issue as I understand it here is some of the people writing want a fuller discussion of the scriptural and biblical issues around both lacasa deciding to leave and the elca choosing to approve the ordination of gay and lesbian ministers. its not enough to simply say the bible is clear about it. IT IS NOT. In that light then lets have a full discussion of the biblical, historical, theological issues before we make a decision. What is the worst thing that could happen; we could all have a better understanding of the bible. who could be agains that?
ReplyDeleteNo member should be asked to leave lacasa because they would like a fuller discussion of the issues. that is decidedly unamerican and also very unlutheran. i'm not completely sure but i believe luther made his complaints from within the church. oh well, maybe that's it maybe we just aren't lutheran anymore.
Either Scripture is the inspired word of God, totally inspired by God, or it's not. If you don't believe that God can have his hand in the translation of scripture then you are placing limits on God's power. If you believe that the scripture is fallible, then all bets are off and Christianity is no more than a religious movement. I believe that God's word is as infallible today as it was when it was written. And I believe that the scripture’s points on homosexual relations are clear, and I for one have never seen any evidence to the contrary. Luther was all about scripture. From what I understand his problem with the church was that the church started teaching things that were not supported by scripture. We are trying to keep the church from doing that again. And I disagree with you completely about this not being a “one liner” discussion. To me it’s simple truth. God’s character is the final truth and I think his word is clear on how he feels about homosexual relations. You may choose to disagree but I don’t think you have a leg to stand on. Again, that’s between you and God.
ReplyDeleteComparing my beliefs with Nazi sympathizers, slavery, and the persecution of women is the typical response by today’s society. If we believe that homosexual relations are a sin, we must be homophobes. It’s so typical and so wrong. But I would never expect a non-believer to understand. In this case I mean a non-believer in the inspired word of God.
I applaud your efforts to evoke a more open dialogue at La Casa de Cristo. It is quite apparent that LCdC will leave the ELCA no matter what the congregation would desire. This was evident by the pastors' comments that "all three of them would resign from the church if we vote to stay in the ELCA." If LCdC does not want to appear as biased and shady as they claim the ELCA was in the decision making process last year, they should truly have an open dialogue. An open dialogue should consist of: 1. a committee open to all who want to participate, not simply people hand-picked by the pastoral staff, 2. absentee ballots should be allowed in the voting process to allow for ALL members to vote, 3. discussions initiated by the ELCA should be announced and welcomed: the bishop of the ELCA spoke at LCdC a few weeks ago and went by nearly unannounced at most of the worship services.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion it is unfortunate that LCdC will leave the ELCA. But what is more unfortunate is that the church will leave under the same shameful, "shady" practices they claim to be at the heart of the ELCA. What can one expect from a church where there is very little to no representation from the people - no church council, no committees. People should know that LCdC is run just like a business with a very powerful CEO at its center - and that CEO happens to not be Jesus Christ.
I heard the vote was overwhelming. In any event, the Pastors are responsible for the direction of their flock and will have to answer for their decisions good and bad when they meet their maker. In the meantime the congregation has spoken, and instead of believing they are all a bunch of stupid sheep easily mislead, I believe they all sought God's guidance, examined the choices carefully and voted based on how they felt the Lord was guiding them.
ReplyDeleteIt's a shame that when the vote went against the people who wanted to stay in the ELCA, certain people then turned around and started a blog to sow seeds of dissention, instead of running their concerns through the proper procedures and channels. I’ve seen this happen many times before in various churches of different denominations. Instead of accepting the decisions of the church and supporting the church, or choosing another church home that more closely conforms to their doctrinal statement, people will do all they can to split the church, cause problems, dissention, and generally wreak havoc.
Of course Satan loves every second of it.
It is amazing to me, and I feel evil, to hear somebody say the pastors of La Casa aren't Christ centric. The last I heard it's up to God to make those kind of judgments.
ReplyDeleteSatan is again laughing.
Like one of the earlier posters, I found it very difficult to glean information from the internet on this issue. It just hasn't been condensed and published to the LCdC website, and I'm not sure why. The original letter that was sent out to the congregation last March (prior to the first vote) instructed everyone to visit the LCdC website for FAQs and further information. A google search indicates that there was more information out there at one time, but it has been taken down. Why take down that information, when we are so close to the 2nd (and deciding) vote?
ReplyDeleteI did eventually find enough information through other sources, however, so that I am now completely baffled what all the hubbub is about. The resolution that was passed by the ELCA leaves the decision on whether or not to hire gay clergy of any type completely up to the individual congregations. So the pastoral staff can always decide whether or not to hire someone based on their particular sexual preference.
Regarding the votes required in order for a congregation to leave the ELCA, I am perplexed why absentee balloting isn't allowed, as it is in political elections. In the first vote, there were roughly 450 congregation members who voted. Last I checked, LCdC has over 3300 members, however. Surely 14% of the laity cannot possibly be representative of the entire congregation! Why not allow absentee ballots? They could be mailed out with the next bulletin, and then perhaps we could get a much better representation of the congregation as a whole in the 2nd (and deciding) vote that is coming up on Nov. 6th.
This issue has apparently been an ongoing discussion in the ELCA for many years. Some years ago another member mentioned that La Casa de Cristo was the major dissenter to this change in the Grand Canyon Synod. They stated this wasn't common knowledge and that person did not want the information attributed to them.
ReplyDeleteSince that time a person in the musical department (a leadership position within the congregation) was asked to leave because apparently he was living with someone in a homosexual relationship. This decision upset many people and yes, some have chosen to leave the congregation. The rest seemed to understand that once this information became public the pastors had no choice but to let this individual go or he had to change his lifestyle. That person was certainly aware of the conditions for his employment. The rumor at that time was that he did not flaunt his lifestyle; instead a large benefactor and powerful member brought this private information to the attention of the pastors.
OK, so rumors are just that, rumors. Don't know the real story and never passed on this information till now. Probably would not open this up for discussion even now except that no one but the creator of this blog seems to feel comfortable with anything but an anonymous comment. That issue in itself causes questions. If you look on the internet there are over 10,000 ELCA churches and only a few hundred have brought this to a vote...an even smaller number have left the ELCA with the second vote. Somehow many Lutherans made a different decision and they are looking to the same scripture. It is worrisome that so few people voted last time. Having this dialogue is important to some of us who previously heard only rumors or second hand information. Let's be careful not to rip each other up or our congregation in the process...Jesus said that I give you a new commandment, Love One Another. We need to do that as we lovingly grapple with this issue.
Here we go with more conspiracy theories. The March newsletter was sent out detailing all that was happening with this issue and pointing people to the website to checkout FAQs and the letter from the ELCA, etc. That was back in MARCH. The only reason it was taken down was because it had been up for MONTHS and was stale. It was replaced with pertinent information about the process and what’s happening now.
ReplyDeleteIt’s very simple. If you are an involved member, you would have seen and heard what was happening with this issue and could have attended the meetings, classes, and discussions on the subject. Then you could have decided to talk to the Pastors, church members, held your own meetings, and come up with an action plan to help influence members to look at things from your point of view.
There has been a lot of time allocated for people to make up their minds on this issue. AND THERE IS STILL ONE MORE VOTE. If you feel the congregation is not accurately represented, then by all means please make sure people TURN OUT AND VOTE.
It the people are really concerned about this issue then surely they can take an hour out of their schedule to vote. If they are new to this issue and this is the first they are hearing of it then that calls their commitment to the church into question.
This issue has NOT been hidden, hushed up, or anything of the sort. I’ve heard enough discussion on the topic that I’m tired of it and wish they’d move on and get it over with already so the church can move on and reach the community with God’s word and do what they were put here by God to do. Not quarrel over internal matters that take the focus away from God and Christ and saving souls.
There is no way to control an absentee ballot process. Again, if you are concerned about the future of the church, put your priorities in order and SHOW UP FOR THE VOTE.
The word of God is infallible but human interpretation is not. women do not wear scarves in church etc, etc,. we know that some of scripture is culturally bound and we do not give it the weight that we might others. The idea that somehow our "society" is what causes these issues in the church is a tad ludicrous. The differences with interpretation have been with the church for over 50 years. And certainly the Nazi regime was supported by good christians that thought they understood scripture and were well meaning. that is not the response of society but actually happened. Your interpretation of scripture may in fact be as off target as the lutheran church's was in germany. The point of this blog, it seems to me, is to point out that to avoid those same mistakes we need to have more open discussion. So if the word of god is infallible could you give me a short explanation as to why we have two creation stories? and, by all means please let me know which one is infallible. I've never understood which one actually took place.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with the person above. we should be allowed absentee ballots. this process has been controlled and managed and biased from the beginning.
I'm shocked to read that in the middle of the discussions the pastors stated that they would resign if LCdC did not vote to leave the ELCA. IF in fact that is true they should resign now. All three of them should so that we can have a fair, balanced and open discussion of the issues. How dare they blackmail the members of this church. That is just shameful. That was a quick way to kill open discussion. If this IS true then people should stop writing about how we had all these open meetings. Once that was out there no meeting was truly open. If this is true how unfortunate.
ReplyDeleteYou can go on about two creation stories (I don’t see two) and do your best to disparage Christians, talk about all the evil they’ve done, talk about how the word of God can’t be trusted, etc., to try to support your beliefs. That is between you and God. But the fact still remains that the scriptures are clear with when it comes to homosexuality. That is the stance of the church. Again, if you disagree with this then by all means show up and vote. If the vote does not go the direction you think it should then, again, you are welcome to put that behind you and support the direction the majority have decided to go, or find a church that more closely resembles your doctrinal statement. Of course hanging around and doing Satan’s work, sowing seeds of dissention, talking about how the pastoral staff are evil, don’t have the membership’s best interest at heart, and generally talk down the church in every way possible,is an option, but we would prefer you didn’t.
ReplyDeleteAgain, there should not be absentee ballots. There is no way to control them. The process has been clear from the beginning. If you are concerned about this issue and direction of La Casa in general, then show up and vote.
Even if absentee ballots were a good idea, why would we want to trust the direction of the church to people who haven’t attended in months, if not years? If they don’t feel that attending regularly is important, how can we take their opinion on this matter seriously? The people who are concerned showed up for all the discussion on the subject and then showed up to vote and will be there for the final vote.
We invite you to show up and vote also, provided you are a member. Or is limiting the vote to membership also ludicrous?
I received an email today from a respondent who suggested that their post had not been responded to. We looked a bit and did find the response as a new post. If you don't see you response on the first page of the blog, search the topical blog posts on the right side of the page. If it isn't there then perhaps yours truly is guilty of missing it and I'd appreciate an email from you so that we can correct it.
ReplyDeleteSome posts may be slower to respond to either for research reasons or because they have been forward to Pastor for comment. So be patient, they will all be there.
It has been suggested that we hold a meeting of concerned La Casa members regarding this issue. I'd like some feedback from you folks to guage interest. Please post your thoughts.
First, no place for Mormon comments and reference on a Lutheran blog. Mormonism is a called and shouldn't be discussed in the same breath with Lutheranism.
ReplyDelete"As a Lutheran, I find the acceptance of homosexuality a delineation from the church's original mission. The ELCA has become a joke of a synod for conservative Lutherans. People who are not Lutheran do not realize the different synods within the church system. Missouri and WIsconsin synods are far more conservative. To date, I do not believe those synods have accepted the ECLA's position. Therefore, I would think the La Casa de Cristo church would join one of those two synods. And to Bishop Steve Talmage, your justification of comparing the number of passages is ridiculous. If it is mentioned specifically only one time in the bible, then GOD's word prevails. You are trying to use generalized passages without specific references to justify the church's position. All said and done, the church is creating a religion to appease the masses rather than appease the word of GOD. No Homosexuals, No woman ministers in my church. God did not create everyone equal. People get that confused with our country's "everyone is created equal" and the adoption of the Human Rights Doctrine."
Well, there you have it. join the missery synod and get rid of our female pastor. I vote for that. at least it would be more consistant than what we are doing. Its also nice to know that being conservative is the test for a true lutheran or one that is not a joke. I'll text that to Luther. corporate killer surely has it going on. thanks for the inside track.
ReplyDeletesigned corporeate killer killer.
You'll find this comment above, dated Sept. 21 at 9:54 p.m.:
ReplyDeleteI'm shocked to read that in the middle of the discussions the pastors stated that they would resign if LCdC did not vote to leave the ELCA. IF in fact that is true they should resign now. All three of them should so that we can have a fair, balanced and open discussion of the issues. How dare they blackmail the members of this church. That is just shameful. That was a quick way to kill open discussion. If this IS true then people should stop writing about how we had all these open meetings. Once that was out there no meeting was truly open. If this is true how unfortunate.
I've delayed publishing it. I asked Pastor Garman to respond, but I have not heard from him, so I am publishing the comment. If I hear more, I will let you know.
This is truly ugly, me thinks I would run, not walk away.
ReplyDeleteChurch is to help ones soul, not destroy it.
Good luck cute stuff, my prayers are with you.
Thanks PK. All prayers gratefully accepted!
ReplyDelete