Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

St. Timothy Church puts 'Lutheran' back in name
Charleston Gazette (WV) ^ | 11/2/9 | Alison Knezevich

Posted on 11/02/2009 8:04:35 AM PST by SmithL

CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- St. Timothy Lutheran Church in Charleston is going by its full name again.

Since August, a black cloth had hung over the word "Lutheran" on the church's sign on Corridor G. It was Pastor Richard Mahan's way of protesting the vote by leaders of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America to allow gays and lesbians in lifelong, monogamous relationships to serve as clergy.

The church removed the cloth a little more than a week ago. In its place, a new symbol hung for about a week: A sign that stated "Reclaiming the Name" in red letters, under the word "Lutheran." The church has since removed those words from the sign.

Last week, Mahan declined to comment on why he removed the cloth. He wouldn't say what "Reclaiming the Name" means.

But it's clear the controversy over gay clergy has overshadowed other matters -- not just at St. Timothy, but at Lutheran churches across the country, said Bishop Ralph Dunkin of the ELCA's West Virginia-Maryland Synod.

"This has just diverted the whole mission of the church," Dunkin said.

(Excerpt) Read more at wvgazette.com ...


TOPICS: Current Events; Evangelical Christian; Moral Issues; Religion & Culture
KEYWORDS: elca; lutheran; reclaimthename

Kenny Kemp
St. Timothy Lutheran Church has removed a black cloth from its sign. The cloth was a show of protest against the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America's vote to allow gay clergy. Pastor Richard Mahan hung another sign saying, "Reclaiming the Name," but has since removed that, too.

1 posted on 11/02/2009 8:04:36 AM PST by SmithL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: lightman

Reclaim the Name?

I think the ELCA should remove “Lutheran” from their name.


2 posted on 11/02/2009 8:05:57 AM PST by SmithL (The Golden State demands all of your gold)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

Do the churches allowing gay ministers just remove the portions of the New Testament which condemn homosexuality?


3 posted on 11/02/2009 8:11:30 AM PST by cvq3842 (A fool and his liberty are soon parted.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

I hope the conservative Lutheran churches break away. A freind was married in the Lutheran church. The pastor seemed like a great guy and I generally like the Lutheran church.


4 posted on 11/02/2009 8:15:48 AM PST by Frantzie (Judge David Carter - democrat & dishonorable Marine like John Murtha.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stylecouncilor

ping


5 posted on 11/02/2009 8:23:55 AM PST by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

My Lutheran church removed itself from the ELCA. Problem solved.


6 posted on 11/02/2009 8:38:50 AM PST by Trod Upon (Obama: Making the Carter malaise look good. Misery Index in 3...2...1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
...to allow gays and lesbians in lifelong, monogamous relationships to serve as clergy.

Which is not guaranteed until death do them part, but then, the same could be said for heterosexual couples.

7 posted on 11/02/2009 8:55:26 AM PST by heartwood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

Before the church moved (to make room for hospital sprawl) it was located very close to my home. Mahan is a good man.


8 posted on 11/02/2009 9:05:22 AM PST by youturn (Conference, Christine!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aberaussie; Aeronaut; aliquando; AlternateViewpoint; AnalogReigns; Archie Bunker on steroids; ...


Lutheran (EL C S*A) Ping!

* as of August 19, AD 2009, a liberal protestant SECT, not part of the holy, catholic and apostolic CHURCH.

9 posted on 11/02/2009 10:10:11 AM PST by lightman (Adjutorium nostrum (+) in nomine Domini)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL; lightman

Yeah. They should also change “Evangelical” to “Extremely Liberal” and “Church” to “Club”. (Thanks to my Serbian Orthodox priest for saying in a sermon that any so-called “church” that does not preach the Resurrection is not a church, but a club.)

Then they’ll be the “Extremely Liberal Club in America”, and retain the acronym “ELCA”. That suits them fine!!!!


10 posted on 11/02/2009 11:13:24 AM PST by Honorary Serb (Kosovo is Serbia! Free Srpska! Abolish ICTY!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: cvq3842
Do the churches allowing gay ministers just remove the portions of the New Testament which condemn homosexuality?

In essence, yes.

However, of course they are more sophisticated appearing about it--and--are heavily reliant on their membership who are carefully groomed to be biblically ignorant.

The typical approach is to use later than NT-times Greek lexicons to claim that the words Paul uses (the only NT writer to specifically talk about homosexuality)are about ABUSIVE relationships (i.e. man/boy, or master/slave), OR, ones specifically involving PROSTITUTION.

Of course with Greek of the NT days, this is nonsense--but, since our sources of Koine (NT-style) Greek are limited (mostly to the bible) scholars can sound intelligent arguing this way (and besides, those same scholars don't actually believe the bible anyway...).

Therefore, the rationalization goes, if Paul is just talking about abuse, and/or, prostitution, then, a lovely, warm, sweet, monogamous, homosexual relationship must just be fine, right? After all JESUS never condemned homosexuality, right? (Uggh, gagggg. These are their arguments, NOT MINE!!!)

The sad thing is, this also rests on a lousy understanding of the Old Testament--and Christianity's relationship to its laws. Jesus, or rather the record we have of Him, never condemns rape, incest or bestiality.... (and as far as I know, Paul never specifically condemns those 3 either, though in 1 Cor. he condemns a form of legal incest--that is a man sleeping with his step-mother.)

So how, as Christians, are we to know for sure that rape, incest, or bestiality are wrong? (I know, our common-sense and hearts tell us, but what else objective can we rely on?) The Holy Spirit inspired the Old Testament too....as well as its law....ALL of it.

Christians have always divided the commands of the OT into 3 kinds:

CIVIL: having to do with the laws governing the OT theocracy of Israel (which was actually long gone, even in Jesus' day)
CEREMONIAL: having to do with governing Israel's religion and sacrificial system (feasts, blood laws (that includes Kosher dietary regulations), and the animal sacrificial system) and
MORAL (personal & corporate behavior--other than religious regulations).

Gentile Christians are responsible ONLY to follow the MORAL laws--and these include sexual morality. Leviticus 18, for example, clearly defines and condemns incest, bestiality and homosexual behavior. Other passages condemn rape.

If we throw out the OT laws on homosexuality--saying the OT is irrelevant, and not in effect, then there is no direct NT warrant to forbid incest, bestiality, or rape either.....as the NT writers ASSUMED the OT morality. Jesus naturally assumed and knew his followers naturally assumed the moral laws of the OT were for all time--therefore he didn't HAVE to repeat them--they were already written. We must do the same.

Yes, if we believe in Jesus, we are sinners saved by grace--and the law (of sin and death) doesn't reign over us any longer. However, God's good law is still in effect--though it does not--and never has--save us. God alone personally does the saving--not a set of precepts.

"The New Testament is in the Old Testament concealed, as the Old Testament is in the New Testament revealed." ~old Puritan saying

11 posted on 11/02/2009 12:14:04 PM PST by AnalogReigns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Honorary Serb
» “Extremely Liberal Club in America”

Perfect! It underscores the fact they are neither Lutheran, nor Evangelical, nor a Church.

12 posted on 11/02/2009 12:50:29 PM PST by TonyRo76 (American by birth. Patriot by choice. Christian by grace.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Trod Upon
My Lutheran church removed itself from the ELCA. Problem solved.

Recently?

13 posted on 11/02/2009 1:01:08 PM PST by aberaussie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: AnalogReigns

Thanks very much for response!


14 posted on 11/02/2009 3:07:13 PM PST by cvq3842 (A fool and his liberty are soon parted.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: AnalogReigns

Excellent rundown of the arguments.

The other argument I’ve heard is that the Bible should be taken in the context of the time it was written and, therefore, all those details dealing with relationships and societal morals don’t apply today since society has changed since biblical times.

Again, their argument, not mine.


15 posted on 11/02/2009 8:42:53 PM PST by javachip (TARP - proof there is no situation so bad that government can't make it worse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson