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.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Wonderful.
ReplyDeleteNow 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 sympathy for the ELCA here, this action will insure that even more. How inept can the bishop be?
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 hope you know that your actions are terrible by you and that other guy complaining in public and to the Bishop. Please know your name is not respected any more in the church.And you just guaranteed a massive turnout to vote us out of the ELCA. Congratulations!
I agree with anonymous regarding the Bishop being inept. He comitted to the process as originally published without knowing whether or not the church actually could execute that process. Pastor Garman clearly was trying to include as many people as possible. I agree with this given the size of our congregation. The Bishop actually put the vote whatever the outcome might have been at risk because the outcome clearly could have been challenged legally for not following the by-laws and Roberts Rules of Order.
ReplyDeleteI take issue however with the tone expressed here. If in fact the newspaper article caused the change, and i don't know that it did, we should be grateful that we didn't have a vote and have it legally challenged. What an embarassment for Pastor Garman and the Bishop. As well, to tell someone that they aren't respected anymore because of their opinion is decidedly unamerican and lack christian charity. Besides the fact speaking up is protected by our constitution. I may not agree with what they say but i honor their right to say and applaud them for doing so. A lot of americans have died to insure that we can do this and more of us ought to exercise it. Shame on you for telling anothe memeber that they are not respected because they ahve a different opinion than you and trying to publicly humiliate them. I hope you find it in your hear to apologize.
I would like to agree with the above poster. I've followed this blog since Mr. Weller started it. I'm not sure I know this gentleman, or the fellow he was with in the paper, but I must say that he states his case well, and seems to care a great deal about both La Casa as well as this particular discussion. I admit that I was not inclined to vote in favor of staying with the ELCA when this started, but now I'm not so sure more information would not be a good thing. I'm not sure either that I am educated enough in all the issues to make this kind of decision. In light of this indecision on my part, I now intend to vote against leaving right now, and hope that we can learn more about this situation. I have the utmost faith in our leadership, and love our church and congregation, but I feel insecure about voting to take such a step at this time without knowing more. I feel badly that people are not happy with Mr. Weller's opposing all of this, but I'm glad somebody stood tall and voiced their opinions for the rest of us, so that we could learn a little more and be more secure in our knowledge of the issues. Thank you for speaking your piece, Mr. Weller.
ReplyDeleteObviously some have not participated in one of the many (six? seven? ) open forums and meetings. If you are uneducated about the issues, then it is your own fault. But I wouldn't listen to a member for spiritual leadership. That is what our pastors are for, and Pastor Ruby addressed it all well this morning. Treat all kindly, love all, but our leaders have standards and accountability. Read 1 Timothy 3.
ReplyDeleteOpinions are opinions. God's Word is eternal.
To the first post, I would say thank you for your support. I understand, first hand, the difficulty in assessing and understanding all of this. I've been at it for quite some time. It is never easy to interpret the words held so dearly by so many. As my response to the last poster will indicate, there are often issues with scripture that conflict with one another even in the same book or chapter.
ReplyDeleteLet’s take a look: Our second poster points out the scripture of 1 Timothy 3, in defending, as Pastor Ruby did so passionately on Sunday, the standards to be set for church officials. But let’s look at that chapter in context by examining the passages immediately preceding 1 Timothy 3. Let’s look at 1 Timothy 2: 11-15 (NIV):
A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.
If this passage is “infallible,” it precludes our own Pastor Carol from the pulpit, and the fact is that the overwhelming majority of Christianity would do just that. I’m not suggesting that we should do so for a minute, and I believe the ELCA has chosen wisely in its decision to ordain women. It did so, however, on the basis of scholarship that took many factors into consideration. The Missouri Synod and the Wisconsin Synod, incidentally, and the overwhelming majority of Christianity, cite these passages all the time in justifying their stance that women not be allowed in the pulpit, and they both condemn the ELCA for not reading the passages as they do.
Pastor Ruby is a passionate man in his faith, and for that I salute him, and treasure his friendship. But, can you look at 1 Timothy 3, having just read 1 Timothy 2, and not see that reading Scripture is not just a matter of looking at words on a page and then saying, “Well, that settles it”?
I would say that we have to have the humility to understand that we are seeing in the perpetual mirror dimly! For me, however, the guiding principle is that Jesus Christ gave us the directive to "love one another as I have loved you." Those words are among the 2,026 in the Bible attributed to my Lord and Savior. I choose to follow those Words humbly and as best as I can, knowing that there is forgiveness where I fail or misinterpret how that should be done.
These issues of scriptural interpretation are the very issues I am raising that we as a congregational church family need the time to delve into, study, debate and come to educated conclusion upon. This is why I encourage us to take a step back and examine just this type of issue with scripture before we choose to renounce and leave our national church body. Please consider these thoughts, and be present at the Congregational Meeting on November 14th at 11:45 a.m. Please listen to the discussion presented at this meeting and vote your conscience. Yours in service to Christ, Tom.
With all due respect, you challenge our pastors now on their sermons and their integrity. That is wrong, and you have crossed the line. YOu are free to disagree with our pastors, but not challenge their preaching. If you don't agree with it, there are plenty of ELCA churches to choose from .
ReplyDeleteYour point is wrong, anyway..other scriptural passages have women in leadership, and women like Lydia and Phoebe are left in charge of churches. I just finished a womens study at La Casa on that very topic. However, nowhere are there any OTHER standards for leaders than being married between one man and one woman. If people are living together, straight or gay, they are not to lead in the church. Period.
And with the same respect, I submit I do not challenge our pastors' integrity. I've heard thousands of sermons over the years, and certainly do not agree with each and every one of them. This does not mean I challenge the speakers' integrity for having their viewpoints. It simply means that I have another interpretation.
ReplyDeleteIt is their viewpoint, and in this country, and specifically our faith, it is right to not only question, but to submit to scrutiny any ideas with which one has questions. To do so is to grow spiritually.
And I would not argue your second point from the standpoint that women have been placed in positions within church leadership. My point is that other Lutheran denominations, and most of Christianity, do not agree even with this view, which we've come to take for granted.
My point is that scripture is not as cut and dried as we would like. It requires thought.
Do we think we know all there is to know about scripture? I would resoundingly say, we have not even scratched the surface, but we know for certain that it is through Scripture that we learn of God’s love for us and his relationship to us as creator, redeemer and sanctifier.
As to my point being right or wrong, that is for HIM to decide, not you and I on a blog or in a class. I question, I seek interpretation, and I will not stop in my quest for knowledge. I simply disagree with the position being taken, and the choice being offered, without full information and debate. Such is my right; just as it is your right to question me. And I thank you for doing so.
Thank you for offering your opinion. I respect your opinion, as I would hope you respect mine. At any rate, please be present at the congregational meeting on Sunday November 14 at 11:45 a.m. Listen to the discussion, and vote your conscience. Yours in service to Christ. Tom
Hello, I am a member of La Casa de Cristo. I have been watching this blog, and I've noticed that a Peter has said something on it a couple of times. Do you mind if I ask him a question or two?
ReplyDeleteI don't know who this man is who is disagreeing with our church. But, he seems to be pretty smart. Do you know him? Is he really a member of our church? Is he somebody my husband and I should pay attention to, or is this just nonsense? I'm sorry, I don't know a lot of people, and you gave your name on the internet thing, so I thought I would ask you, if you don't mind. Is this guy just a trouble maker? To question a Pastor? Goodness, I would never do that and I don't know what to make of it.
I don't understand why this is such an issue. Are we, I mean La Casa, in trouble? I want to do what is right, but with all this arguing, I don't know who is right and who is wrong. Could you help me?
Hello, Anonymous. I'm humbled that you said such kind things about me. By way of introduction, I've been a member at La Casa for seven years. I served on the board of trustees for two years. I've taught a number of adult classes on Sunday mornings, including a class team taught with Pastor Ruby called Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About the Bible but Never Thought to Ask. It was an honor to teach with him. I don't believe that I'm a troublemaker by nature, but I feel compelled in this case to speak out. I'll tell you my reasons in a second.
ReplyDeleteI'm 60 years old. I'm a lifelong Lutheran, and I graduated from a Missouri Synod college with an education major and a theology minor. I went through those bitter, divisive battles in the Missouri Synod, and I saw a number of excellent, faithful professors unfairly hounded out of the Synod, accused of using modern scholarship methods to make the Bible irrelevant. Interestingly, many of those professors ended up in colleges and seminaries that became part of the ELCA. Pastor Ruby studied under them, and he, like I, thought they were excellent professors and faithful Christians.
My biggest concern is that we've put our national church body on trial at La Casa for more than a year now, but the defendant has had almost no opportunity to be on our campus and talk with us directly. Jesus told us that, when we have disagreements with fellow Christians, or think they've sinned, to engage with them directly - not once but many times. And he told us always to be ready to forgive, not seven times but seventy times seven.
Emotions run high, even (maybe especially) among pastors. I respect our pastors a great deal, but I know they're capable of errors as all of us are.
I believe we've not done as Jesus asked us to do ... talk with those whom we're accusing, not once but several times. Express our concerns. Hear them out. Maybe learn that we have more in common than we acknowledge. And don't walk away without having fully exhausted our avenues for face-to-face conversation and yes, maybe even confrontation.
I believe walking away from a national church body is serious business. Many congregations are choosing to stay and work on these issues rather than leave at this time. I believe that right now, that's the more God-pleasing course of action, and I'm speaking up to have that course fully considered.
I plan to attend Sunday's meeting and make this case publicly, assuming that further discussion will not be discouraged. It would be a pleasure to meet you. I hope you will pray about how you will vote on Sunday, listen to the Spirit whose patience with each of us is boundless, and vote your conscience. Thank you again for your kind words.
Well, my friends, the congregation has spoken. It is definitely not the answer I wanted to hear, but there were 879 members in attendance which is outstanding participation. The tally for those of you who haven't heard was 713 in favor of leaving ELCA and 166 in favor of staying with ELCA. 81% for the move is pretty a strong indication of the congregational wishes. May the Lord guide La Casa in it's new direction. The blog will remain up for awhile yet for anybody wishing to comment, read the information here, or if anything new developes. Thanks to the many of you who commented and Peace be with you.
ReplyDelete