Posted on 01/13/2005 10:01:46 PM PST by kattracks
Check this out! Scandanavian Lutherans that are more hard-nosed than the LCMS! It's the Evangelical Lutheran Synod.
http://www.evangelicallutheransynod.org/President/news/marriage2004
Wow, thanks for pointing that out to me. I'll give them a look. This Scandinavian would like a hard-nosed church when it comes to actually upholding scripture.
Methinks the great falling away, the apostate church, is in full swing. I find it stunning that people have risen to leaderships in these churches and yet seem to have ZERO grasp of, or care about, what the Bible says on such important issues. When someone takes a leadership position in our church, they have to openly share their testimony on how and when they came to Christ, state their belief in the Bible, etc. etc. etc. Apparently that kind of process is totally non-existent in these churches, with advancement no more dependent on spiritual and biblical issues than would be a VP position at the local bank.
MM
These numbers, along with my own experience in ELCA congregations (I've been in several all across the United States) - belie a substantial majority of "biblically faithful" members.
I attended the Delaware/MD synod assembly meeting a couple years ago when we were debating the effective "cross-rostering" of Lutheran and Episcopal pastors in rural communities it may help. It was a very heated debate on the floor and the one thing I took away from it is there's a LOT of more conservative ELCA members (even in relatively liberal synods) than people realize. It just takes a lot (perhaps too much) to get them riled up.
At some point, we have to stop running away and engage these falsehoods and work to turn the Church around (and I'm not just talking about Lutheranism), otherwise we are merely succumbing to the powers of darkness and allowing the Church to be subverted. Where do we draw the line?
I'm staying on (in the ELCA) in the (perhaps vain) hope I can still have some influence in my local church to somehow counteract the influences of the liberal synodical leadership.
...But after reviewing some other posts by your other LCMS brethren, I can't help feeling like a piece of carrion on the Christian Battlefield being circled by Vultures.
We (those of us trying to save the ELCA) need your prayers, not your scorn.
"So, because you are lukewarmneither hot nor coldI am about to spit you out of my mouth. " - Revelations 3:16
"The hottest places in Hell are reserved for those who in time of
great moral crises maintain their neutrality." - Dante Aleghieri
Add the Lutheran church to the lost
Sorry you feel that way. The Lutheran Church has numerous synods and the ELCA is the only one who is subscribing to this blatant disregard of Scripture. The ELS (Evangelical Lutheran Synod), the Missouri Synod and the Wisconsin Lutheran Synod are not affiliated with the ELCA. So please, do not lump us all together.
I can vouch for that. I also will vouch for the WELS (Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod) Both consider the Bible the inerrant inspired Word of God.
One doesn't need to be take as extreme a position as LCMS to see the problems with ELCA. Such a shame. 16 years ago when I was first born again, the first church I went to was ELCA and it was pretty durn orthodox about sexual matters. Go to the ELCA website today and it looks far more like a Unitarian church than what Martin Luther conceived of.
Well now, it depends... if you want to follow the precepts of Martin Luther... or Lex Luther.
The one sticky thing about orthodox Lutherans, is they affirm that the church only exists "where the sacraments are rightly administered" (i.e. according to Lutheran doctrine). I'm curious, where did they think the church was during the Roman Catholic years before Luther when a non-Lutheran transubstantiation was believed? Do they believe that, say, Baptists (with their symbolic communion) can't be Christians?
ps as you can maybe tell, i am not a lutheran now
I'm not going to argue that we've got serious problems in the leadership. Perhaps this is blind faith, but I still believe it's possible to turn that leadership around, particularly when they still talk like this (from the report):
"...Indeed, this church holds that 'Marriage is a lifelong covenant of faithfulness between a man and a woman,'(Message on Sexuality: Some Common Convictions, 1996)"
My feeling is that until they forsake this language entirely or otherwise make it clear at the CWA in August that they continue to follow this path, we need to keep working on reforming the leadership.
The point is, this whole thing is a "trial baloon" by the liberals in our synod to see if they can swing the pendulum any further without breaking it in two. You can see in the language of the report that the Task Force clearly sees and fears this as a pontential point of division for the ELCA.
They are attempting to "soften" the heresies they're introducing by basically developing a "don't ask, don't tell" approach. If these recommendations were moved and accepted on the floor at CWA in August, it would still (IMHO) split the church because I think most of us see it basically nullifies the "Vision and Expectations" and "Definitions and Guidelines for Discipline" documents specifically prohibiting the rostering of Homosexuals, even though this report says that is not what they're intending.
I saw a lot of Lutherans hotly debate "Called to Common Mission" at the Delaware/MD synod a couple of years ago. That was a much finer theological hair to split than this and the measure encoutered some difficulty even in a predominantly liberal synod.
Given the gravity of this issue and the feelings of the ELCA congregations, I really can't see this passing. The most likely outcome (and we've been here before) is that after considerable and heated debate on the measure it will be tabled, and we will still be left with the "Vision and Expectations" and "Definitions and Guidelines for Discipline" documents.
...at least until they try again...
Time for bed. Catch you all later! :)
Yet another organized faith group, caves in to the homosexual agenda.
Vatican Document On Homosexual Unions
Homosexual unions are totally lacking in the biological and anthropological elements of marriage and family which would be the basis, on the level of reason, for granting them legal recognition. Such unions are not able to contribute in a proper way to the procreation and survival of the human race. The possibility of using recently discovered methods of artificial reproduction, beyond involving a grave lack of respect for human dignity,(15) does nothing to alter this inadequacy.
CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING PROPOSALS TO GIVE LEGAL RECOGNITION TO UNIONS BETWEEN HOMOSEXUAL PERSONS
Catholic Ping - please freepmail me if you want on/off this list
ELCA Ping for later.
rather significant part of society?
"Significant"? Paleaseeeeeeeee
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.