A place to discuss La Casa de Cristo Lutheran Church and it's future, as well as discuss the issues and concerns of the day. Feel free to post your feelings about any topic that is of concern to you.
Monday, November 29, 2010
For the many of you who have asked how it went; the La Casa Congregation voted to leave ELCA. We had over 800 folks show up to vote, which is double the attendance of the first congregational meeting. We had 166 of those vote to remain in ELCA. We had 2 representatives speak in favor of staying within ELCA; and 2 members of the congregation speak in favor of leaving. The question was called, after those 4 speakers. There were other speakers wishing to be heard who were not allowed due to the question being called, which is a parliamentary procedure stopping discussion. The motion was passed and 713 of the congregation voted to leave ELCA, and 166 voted to stay with ELCA. These numbers represented 81% of the attending congregation, and the motion was therefore carried.
So what now for La Casa de Cristo? This faith family has chosen to take a path which veers definitely to the conservative viewpoint. La Casa de Crist0 has also opted to use instruction contained within "The Truth Program", as one of its curriculum. In my opinion this represents a definite shift for the congregation from mainstream ELCA stance, to a much more conservative stance.
Where do I go from here is a question I have entertained frequently in the last two weeks. It is obvious which path the congregation of La Casa has taken. This is not the path I choose to take. I have not; cannot; and will not stand with any group of humankind who espouses discrimination, prejudicial behavior, bigotry, or exclusion, no matter how it is cloaked. The faith family of La Casa and the leadership do not see this issue the way I do. If this path is the one La Casa chooses to walk, then so be it. After much thought and prayer, I cannot read and interpret scripture, the way this faith family has chosen to interpret it.
Therefore, I will be leaving my church family of 20 years effective January 1, 2010; the day that La Casa officially becomes an unaffiliated Lutheran Church. I am sad to see our relationship end, but do so with a clear conscience, believing that human rights and the 11th commandment trump the arguments put forth by the proponents of leaving ELCA. I have chosen to transfer my church membership to the faith family at Trinity Episcopal Cathedral of Phoenix, Arizona with whom I have been active for the last year or so, who shares a philosophy and theological interpretation of scripture much more closely matching my own. I also intend to be a regular guest at Living Water ELCA Lutheran Church in Scottsdale, a small faith community to which I have recently been exposed.
My book is now in publication and I am expecting a release date of March 2011. The title is "What would HE say?" and is a study of the dynamics of this most recent struggle for human rights. There have been some advance sales, which is encouraging. This blog will remain up and continue the fight for human rights and advanced theological opinion. It will be an open blog to which any of you can post thoughts regarding the issue of scriptural interpretation and the role of GLBT's in today's evolving interpretations of scripture. From time to time I will post opinion from "guests" who I happen to know personally who will shed light on the many possibilities involved in this ongoing debate.
I was part of an interview done involving Pastor Garman and I regarding the La Casa issue by the Walter Cronkite School of Broadcasting. For those of you who wish, the link to this interview is now online. It can be found at: http://www.vimeo.com/17309191
Our congregational vote takes place this coming Sunday. I want to share some thoughts in advance of the vote.
As we all know, one and a half years ago, ELCA voted in the churchwide assembly to allow for the ordination of gay clergy in committed, long-term relationships. Since that time the Presbyterian Church, in which I was raised, has also grappled with this issue. The resulting firestorm has created serious problems for churches within the denominations and their leadership and congregations, as well as the denomination itself and its leadership.
It's important to consider what the assembly DID and what it DID NOT do. That they voted for the decisions in question is a demonstration of inclusion by the church body to allow those congregations wishing to do so to hire clergy who are gay and in committed relationships. What they DID NOT vote for was an edict to all ELCA churches that they would all follow the decisions. No one is forcing anything on our church family, nor is anyone telling us who or what our hiring policies must include. That is for US to decide, not ELCA! This is the policy of the church body.
We are being asked to make a decision on partial information, just as we interpret scripture in part, only to understand more fully later.
For the past 90 days, I have put my thoughts on a blog, answered questions, and made statements of what I believe. In that time, I have received 400-plus emails to my personal site; another 400-plus to my private email site; numerous phone calls; and a few comments made to me in passing. The blog has been viewed more than 4,000 times. Apparently I have struck a nerve. I have indeed become “That Guy,” the face of the opposition to this move, which I consider to be a move away from the Christ that I love and worship.
I have attended forums; studied the issues; stepped outside the confines of La Casa and spoken with more than 200 lay and clergy people from around the country all conflicted by this and the underlying issues. I have read countless pages of documentation, some provided by ELCA; some provided by members of other churches conflicted by these issues; and some gathered from a lifetime of studying the human condition.
Sunday, I will come to vote my conscience on this issue. I hope you will come to do the same. But it troubles me greatly that amidst all the angst, we as brothers and sisters in Christ miss the point of what it comes down to in this meeting.
God so certainly created you and me. To say, as some are prone to do, that the living creature created of color is inferior because he or she is not white; to say the living creature created female is inferior because she is not created male; and to say that the living creature created homosexual is inferior because he or she is not created heterosexual, is not something that the Lord and Savior I worship would say, do, or perpetuate. I cannot subscribe to the man-driven thesis that anyone is lesser than another for anthropological reasons.
Some have asked why it is now that a little-known, little-cared-about in the grand scheme of things, long-haired old man would take up such a cause.
My answer to them and to you is: “IT IS TIME”.
My Lord and Savior is a patient Lord. His time came only after the Father deemed humankind to have matured sufficiently from the trials in the deserts of Israel to understand the reason for His coming. The first admonishments from GOD were in the form of “DON’Ts," the list of “shall not’s” or the 10 canonized commandments as it were. This list was to guide the early tribes in their existence. A barely sustainable Hebrew nation was in need of rules and codes to conduct their lives and survive the hardships of the desert. So it was several thousand years before our Lord and Savior was born.
“IT IS TIME,” said the Lord your God, and just as He created Adam and Eve, HE sent his only begotten Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ, to teach us what it means to be of Christ and to live a life like his, however imperfectly we may do so.
“IT IS TIME,” HE declared, that the concept of perfect love be presented to humankind by HIS own spirit made flesh, so that we could all see, feel, and experience what Love fully means. And then what did we do: We condemned that flesh to death. And even then, in the ultimate gift of Love, he resurrected Our Lord and Savior, and death was defeated that we all may believe in Him.
“IT IS TIME,” says the Lord your God, to put aside the petty differences of humankind, and begin the process that would reconcile that which is commanded in law and in THE GREATEST COMMANDMENT, “that we love one another as HE loved us.” To do so, I will argue, is not by exclusion and excuse, but rather by inclusion and love for all humankind.
This Sunday, we will decide a course for US: our families, our church for the future. It will serve as a statement of what WE believe. I will vote against the resolution to leave the ELCA because I believe it sends a bad message to our community ... that we are going out of our way to be exclusive, not inclusive. I will vote with what I see to be the greatest commandment, that we love one another.
My words and thoughts have now been heard. It is not my place to tell you how to vote on this or any other issue or how to live your lives. That is between you and Your Lord and Savior. I stand by the commandment contained in the 2,026 words attributed to our Lord and Savior in the Bible: Love one another as He loved us. He gave us no latitude to love some and not others. He said simply “LOVE”.
May the Lord bless and keep you in this hour of decision, and may His love dwell in your hearts forever and ever.
You can find this comment in its entirety here. It's dated Nov. 3 at 10:28 p.m. I wanted to make a few observations.
Anonymous said … Wonderful. Now a process set up by our leaders to include more members to vote and include everyone has been changed at the very last minute in a power play by the powers that be.
There is no power play here by the “powers that be”, by which I would assume you are referring to ELCA. If you read the bishop’s letter, you will see that this action is mandated by our own constitution and bylaws passed by our congregation, not by anything or anyone else. I believe the requirement is there so that the membership can deliberate seriously and together before taking a final step to sever ties. I trust that discussion will be encouraged before a vote is taken.
I understand the frustration that the bishop’s finding caused, and especially that he didn’t act until after the letter had been sent to the congregation. That was unfortunate, especially when Pastor Garman had had a conversation with him about it.
Even so, the ruling was correct, and it wasn’t challenged. A vote proceeding as proposed would not have been legitimate because it was counter to the constitution adopted by the members of this congregation.
I personally favored the vote after each service format for exactly the reasons you point out. But I can’t agree with you on this point. The vote must take place as specified in the constitution.
Anonymous said … There is no sympathy for the ELCA here, this action will insure that even more. How inept can the bishop be?
I can see that at least for you, there is no sympathy for ELCA “here,” and you seem to believe you are speaking for the entire congregation. However, comments to me by phone, by email, and in person would suggest that at least some members do not want to leave the ELCA at this time.
Anonymous said … This change will actually result in less people voting because they go to church Saturday night or other times. Way to go, your newspaper article backfired and has caused a change.
I want open debate, and I want as many legal voters within the congregation as possible to vote on this issue. The newspaper article did not cause the problem to which you refer. To vote the way that was being proposed would have been illegal, according to our constitution and bylaws, and would have resulted in the vote being thrown out.
Anonymous said … And you just guaranteed a massive turnout to vote us out of the ELCA. Congratulations!
I would hope that we indeed do have a massive turnout. Then the family of La Casa will be represented more fully. I don’t know how the vote will go; no one does. But I’m praying for the guidance of the Holy Spirit for each of us.
I maintain in my reading and studying of the scripture as well as prayer, that we are about to take a giant step backward away from our Lord and Savior, rather than to embrace all folk the way HE did and the way He admonishes us to do. You disagree, I know.That, I would further argue, is the Glory of Christianity, insofar as we disagree but are still able to be brothers and sisters in Christ’s service.
Thank you for voicing your concerns. By all means, be at the congregational meeting now scheduled for Sunday, November 14, at 11:45 am, and vote your conscience. And please learn all you can with regard to this entire issue and the step we are proposing to take before casting your vote.
The congregational meeting has been moved, and the format has been changed. The changes are being implemented because of a directive from the Grand Canyon Synod. They are being pursued to ensure that the meeting will comply with the constitution and bylaws of La Casa as passed by the membership in 2005.
The new date and time for this meeting is Sunday November 14, 2010, at 11:45 in the Sanctuary. A mailing from Pastor Garman and the trustees has been sent to each of you. The mailing includes Bishop Talmage's letter to La Casa, Pastor Garman's response to Bishop Talmage, and the notification of the meeting change.
Please read all the information carefully and refer back to this blog during the next week. This is a most important crossroads for our church. Please be present and vote your conscience.
If you need transportation to or from La Casa on that morning please email me at many.oneof@Yahoo.com, and we will try to arrange transportation for you.
Thank you for your attention to this very important matter.
Posts
