Do you really want to belong to an orangization that condems a rather significant part of society? You folks sound like racists... What happened to throwing the first stone?
Say again?
rather significant part of society?
"Significant"? Paleaseeeeeeeee
I can't speak for Lutherans, but as a Catholic I certainly do, inasmuch as sin should be condemned. All forms of sin should be condemned. Should sinners themselves be condemned? No. Reproved? Yes. Disciplined? Yes.
Since homosexual *behavior* is prohibited in scripture and, consequently, by church tradition for 2000 years, it would be arrogant for a church to condone it in its leadership.
What do you mean condemn? If you refuse to call sin, sin, you're the one condemning them. It's akin to shoving a blind man off a curb into the path of an oncoming bus.
I aledge that the real homophobes are those who claim to defend and promote homosexuality. The truth is homosexuality is highly dangerous behavior leading to death and destruction. It is far more compassionate to warn them of the danger.
You're missing the point of the "throwing stones" story. Jesus saves the woman by pointing out to those about to stone her that they too are guilty of sin. When they leave, Jesus does not turn to the woman and say, "You know a significant part of society are adulterers, so don't sweat it." He says, "Go and sin no more."
Homosexuals should be treated with dignity and respect, they struggle with sin like the rest of us. But their sins should be treated like all other sins, with repentance and an attempt to overcome them. Christianity is not about defining deviancy down so we can all just get along, it's about aspiring to live our lives to Christ's standards to the best of our ability.
ESAD
The Lutheran church was already "not condemming" the gays; However it is going way to far in allowing them to LEAD the congregation in sin, by allowing pastors and marriages to be gay.
It is the Bible that condemns such as these (Romans 1) not the organization.
And really, "rather significant part" is just so much hyperbole.
It is not condemning...is is not condoning. No one is being judgemental except those who would condone. To condone by acceptance is judgemental of that which is unnatural, perverse and an abomination. If someone or a church accepts non-repentant, practicing homosexuals, then they have cast the first stone of judgement.
Additionally, they have given homosexuals a false hope that because churches who call themselves Brides of Christ accept them and their perversion that God will also accept them in heaven. They are guilty of the same abomination and an even worse one as setting themselves up as God and making judgements.
Racists? Wow, talk about throwing stones..you just tossed a rock.Nobody's talking about race here.
And belonging to a part of a group that condems a significant part of society? Homosexuals are less than 10% of society, and Lutheran homosexuals would be (I am guessing) less than 5% of that...so should the wish of many be overridden for the sake of a few? That is not what democracy is about. And I never considered homosexuals to be "signficant"...
Do you think God's laws and statutes are designed to harm homosexuals ? Do you really think he hated homosexuals so much he created laws regarding immorality that were designed to make their lives miserable ?
Sorry, my God loves everyone too much.
What happened to "Go and sin no more."
It's not about condemning a rather significant part of society.
First: You use the word 'significant' - homosexuals make up less than one percent of the population, afflicted with a condition that has no known genetic cause. This means the condition is either psychological, or it is simply a lifestyle.
Second: The church already makes room for homosexuals and any other and all sinners. All are unworthy, every one. We are justified by faith and faith alone in Jesus Christ as our Savior. All who call upon Him and repent are saved.
Okay, so now let's talk about our homosexual pastor. He's unrepentant. He's in a 'committed' relationship, as if that is supposed to make homosexuality okay (labeled by the Bible as an 'abomination' specifically, just so we're clear on it). And he's going to stand before God and His Church and say, "Unless you renounce sin, and ask God for His eternal forgiveness, you are not saved."
After we are saved, we vow to do better as people. We'll always be afflicted by sin, and we struggle with our nature until we die, but we are saved.
The homosexual pastor sends the opposite message. He says that today's sin is tomorrow's committed relationship. He says you can indulge openly and purposefully in sin without it bothering God.
We are saved, but we are still accountable for our every action here on earth. Ordained homosexuals, by their nature, say that you can have your cake and eat it to, and be okay in the eyes of God. It isn't true. What's worse is that the ELCA knows that.
I sin everyday, and I hate it, because I know it offends the God who loved me enough to sacrifice His own Son. How does a pair of homosexuals, one of which is a pastor, square that up with God, and still try to advise me in my walk with Christ?
Homosexuals are as welcome as any sinner is in my Church. Yet I would no sooner call a homosexual to be our pastor as I would a serial rapist, a thief, a killer, or an adulterer. There is no spiritual leadership potential in any of those lifestyles.
The ELCA is trying, like the Episcopals, to re-write the Bible for a looser age.
Also, you say we sound like RACISTS. Race isn't something you can control, as it is in your genes. We are open to all races. Homosexuality has no genetic cause. If you are homosexual, then clearly you are afflicted psychologically, or you are making a bad lifestyle choice.
Homosexuals aren't doomed, and neither is any other sinner who repents their sins and struggles to do better. The Kingdom of God is wide open to the repentent homosexual.