A thoughtful, welcome comment

You can find the comment excerpted below in its entirety here. It's dated October 5 at 7:26 a.m. I wanted to make a few comments.

Anonymous said ...
Sorry, I don't understand all the choices with a Google or Wordpress or whatever but my name is Robert Smith and I joined La Casa after all the problems with ELCA in my parish in Fountain Hills. I have been a member a little over a year. The congregation I used to be a part of is now split ,with people who believe the ELCA stance in one place and others another.

One reason I am reluctant to identify myself is that so often those folks who are more traditional are attacked as fundamentalists. I finally decided that it was time to step forward and state the following:

1) I do not agree La Casa is a fundamentalist church in worship or class offerings. It is the most traditional Lutheran church I have ever been a part of . I have taken several classes and men's studies and been very impressed. At least in what I have been a part of , free and open discussion is encouraged and people do disagree. I was part of a class last year that was controversial and some viewed the book studied as too liberal. As I said above, it seems our leaders are getting it from both sides, for some too liberal, for some too conservative.

2) As for the argument above about the Truth Project, Peter, I can't say as I have not attended. I guess if you feel so strongly La Casa is wrong in what they teach, then why do you stay ? There are plenty of revisionist ELCA congregations that teach the bible is myth and only symbolic out there to choose from .

3) In my home congregation I saw some folks on the liberal end of the spectrum do hideous things in the name of being "progressive" and against the ones they saw as "fundamentalist". Both extremes really bother me. Yes there are closed minded and nasty fundamentalists but the same is true of so called "enlightened" progressives or liberals or whatever they want to be called.

People can be closed minded on all ends of the spectrum.

Thank you, Robert, for joining our conversation and getting involved.  We are not here to judge, or as you say so specifically, engage in one extreme or the other.  You are definitely preaching to the choir on that topic. 

We are here to try to avoid the situation that you describe as having happened at your former congregation.  Make no mistake, here we love and respect the good that La Casa and its leadership has done.  We only want full disclosure, a balanced open discussion of the issues from both protagonists and antagonists, and complete education of the congregation resulting in a representative vote. 

I've heard that only a fraction of your former church family voted, as did a minute fraction of Community of Joy. I feel that a fraction of our congregation should not be relied upon to speak for 3,500 members.  It is not so much about staying or going, as it is allowing for full, open, and informed discussion members.  Having been involved not only here, but in many other different scenarios where the argument gets caught up in personal attacks and disrespect of the opposing side of an argument, I do not wish for us to revisit what you have been through; nor do I want us to rush to judgment when there is so much information on both sides of the discussion yet to be heard. 

La Casa has been my home for 20 years.  I have every hope that we come through this period of our history stronger for having a deeper understanding and revelation of the Glory of Christ’s teachings.

Please be present at the NOVEMBER 7, 2010, congregational meeting and vote your conscience.  Thank you for your input, and peace be with you.  Yours in service of Christ, Tom