Posted on 10/01/2009 7:00:12 AM PDT by rhema
A Lutheran congregation in Minneapolis said Wednesday that it voted to leave the denomination because the church's governing body had voted to let gay men and lesbians serve as pastors.
Sunday's vote by members of St. Paul's Evangelical Lutheran Church is the first step in the process a congregation goes through to leave the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, or ELCA, the largest Lutheran denomination in the country.
The church was among three that voted Sunday to leave the ELCA; the others were in Arizona and Virginia. St. Paul Evangelical's senior pastor, the Rev. Roland J. Wells Jr., said the congregation no longer had faith that the ELCA represented the "Lutherans in the pew."
"For 20 years, we have fought and discussed things that are really rather minor and esoteric, things that the Bible really doesn't speak to us much about," he said. "We've talked about the nuclear freeze and apartheid. We debated pulling our assets out of South Africa. It's been a political discussion driven by activists on the very far and flaky left of the ELCA."
Under ELCA rules, the congregation must wait at least 90 days before taking a second vote. If two-thirds of the voting members say the church should leave, then it will no longer be part of the ELCA. In April, the church joined another denomination, the Lutheran Congregations in Mission for Christ.
In a letter Tuesday, Wells told Bishop Craig Johnson, of the Minneapolis Area Synod, that the congregation had voted to leave.
"We take this action with profound sadness; we continue to grieve over the need to take this action, and pray for the repentance of the ELCA's leadership so that it would return to the clear teaching of God's Word," Wells wrote.
In an interview, Johnson said he was "saddened" by the vote, but church policy was set.
"We know that there are faithful people on both sides of these issues," he said. "We're saddened and disappointed when people can't see their way through to be with people with differing views."
The national assembly's vote in August was the result of a contentious debate within the denomination over homosexuality in general and specifically, whether noncelibate gays and lesbians should be ordained as clergy. (Celibate gay men and lesbians already can be ordained.)
The assembly's delegates approved a resolution saying the church would seek some way for people in "publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous same-gender relationships" to serve in any of the church's four leadership roles, which includes pastors, associates in ministry, diaconal ministers or deaconesses. The vote was 559-451.
Lutheran theology generally views the Bible as a dichotomy of God's laws and gospel — the law condemns all of us, while the gospel saves. In simplified terms, Wells and other opponents of the resolution place an emphasis on the law part, saying that their interpretation of Scripture holds that God views homosexuality as a sin.
The resolution's proponents believe the emphasis should be on the gospel aspect. They generally believe that all humans have sinned and that "self-righteousness is no longer possible," said Johnson. "That's a basic idea in Lutheran theology — God saves us; we do not."
Wells, who has been at St. Paul's Lutheran Evangelical Church for 21 years, said that the national assembly's vote was "rigged" and that the group was bullied by "the activist fringe."
"When the ELCA took actions that even the liberal United Methodist and Presbyterian Church USA have repeatedly rejected, the sign was clear that the stranglehold of the activist fringe have taken control of the leadership of the church," he said. "Those of us in the center, representing over 80 percent of ELCA Lutherans in the pew, can see that it's time to form a new church body."
Wells' congregation voted 74-3 to leave the ELCA. St. Paul's Evangelical Lutheran Church has about 500 baptized members, but church attendance is generally about 100 to 130 each Sunday.
He said it is clear God views homosexuality as sin.
"For us, the ordination issue is far secondary," he said. "For us, the issue is, 'How does God speak to humankind,' and we believe God speaks to us in the Bible, and God loves us. We believe that God leads us to that in ... the whole healing words of Scripture. We don't believe that God desires certain kinds of behavior."
The Minneapolis congregation was one of at least three that voted Sunday to leave the ELCA over the issue, said Melissa Ramirez Cooper, a spokeswoman for the ELCA Churchwide Office in Chicago.
"We've heard, certainly, of some congregations that expressed their intent, but whether they chose to follow through is another matter," she said. "One of Bishop (Mark) Hanson's remarks to the congregations was to just take a moment to breathe. We have many congregations that support the actions of the assembly as well."
Wells said the issue had been tough for his congregation.
"It's a very sad time," he said. "Garrison Keillor has probably done a better job of explaining Lutherans than Martin (Luther) himself. We're not a people who like the limelight. We're not people who like to get angry, and we're not people who like to debate things. But we also don't like having people grab power. It kind of goes against our Scandinavian sense of fairness."
Johnson said the national delegates knew they were dealing with a divisive issue.
"We understand that there are faithful people on both sides of this issue and that it is possible for faithful people to disagree, but when that disagreement leads to a break in fellowship, it is tragic," he said. "We know that St. Paul's Evangelical Lutheran Church is following their conscience. However, we regret that St. Paul's Evangelical Lutheran Church has made this decision."
Sure. Put flaming homosexuals in charge of watching over the purity of the flock. That ought to work out well - NOT.
They call this a church? What do they use as a Baptismal pool? A Bath house?
Ping for later
Human Sexuality and Sexual Behavior
A Social Statement of the American Lutheran Church, a predecessor church body of the ELCA (1980)
[the ELCA's accompanying we-reserve-the-right-to-be-apostate clause]
Predecessor Church Body Document Disclaimer
Please note: this document is one which was voted on by a church body which preceded the founding of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA). Any such statement has the status of a “historical document.” These documents may guide the ELCA and inform the work of the Department for Studies, and act as policy when sufficient agreement exists and the ELCA has not adopted another statement on the same subject. However, social statements of predecessor church bodies do not constitute ELCA policy, as they have not been voted on by a Churchwide Assembly. When quoting or referring to these documents, please take care to make the non-binding nature of this relationship clear.
2. This church regards the practice of homosexual erotic behavior as contrary to God's intent for his children. It rejects the contention that homosexual behavior is simply another form of sexual behavior equally valid with the dominant male/female pattern.
3. We have reviewed the challenges to the traditional interpretations of those scripture passages that appear to proscribe homosexual behavior. We are not convinced by the evidence presented. Among passages cited as requiring interpretations different from the traditional interpretation are Genesis 18:l6—l9:29; Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13; Romans 1:24-32; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; 1 Timothy 1:10. While we see no scriptural rationale for revising the church's traditional teaching that homosexual erotic behavior violates God's intent, we nonetheless remain open to the possibility of new biblical and theological insights.
In other words, these squareheads are not sufficiently nuanced enough to realize the gift of being driven to hell by us liberals is to them!
Sadly, this attempt by liberals in the ELCA to be politically correct and “inclusive” will simply split their denomination and drive some members to seek other churches. This seems to be a high price to pay just to make a handful of homosexuals happy and assuage some liberal guilt.
If that is the most pernicious distortion of the doctrine of grace that I've ever seen, then I simply can't recall it. It is the epitome of Paul's "Shall we sin so that grace may abound? May it NEVER BE!"
If this writer is aware, then this writer is evil.
Lutheran theology generally views the Bible as a dichotomy of God’s laws and gospel — the law condemns all of us, while the gospel saves. In simplified terms, Wells and other opponents of the resolution place an emphasis on the law part, saying that their interpretation of Scripture holds that God views homosexuality as a sin.
Bishop Wells, where exactly in the Gospel did Jesus say “Go and sin some more?”
He is absolutely right. The ELCA made a decision that from the get go that it would not allow discussion of doctrine or doctrinal issues. It has substituted biblical Christianity for political activism and ideology. As Rev. Wright says: The chickens have come home to roost.
He is absolutely right. The ELCA made a decision that from the get go that it would not allow discussion of doctrine or doctrinal issues. It has substituted biblical Christianity for political activism and ideology. As Rev. Wright says: The chickens have come home to roost.
But our Romanists (or Lutherans), when, in defending their cause, they see all rational grounds slip from beneath them, betake themselves to a last miserable subterfuge. Although they should be dull in intellect and counsel, and most depraved in heart and will, still the word of the Lord remains, which commands us to obey those who have the rule over us (Hebrews 13:17). Is it indeed so? What if I should deny that those who act thus have the rule over us? They ought not to claim for themselves more than Joshua had, who was both a prophet of the Lord and an excellent pastor. Let us then hear in what terms the Lord introduced him to his office. "This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth; but thou shalt meditate therein day and night - You shall not turn from it to the right hand or to the left; then you will direct your path, and understand it that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein: for then shalt thou make thy way prosperous, and thou shalt have good success" (Joshua 1:7, 8). Our spiritual rulers, therefore, will be those who turn not from the law of the Lord to the right hand or the left. But if the doctrine of all pastors is to be received without hesitation, why are we so often and so anxiously admonished by the Lord not to give heed to false prophets? "Thus saith the Lord of Hosts, Hearken not unto the words of the prophets that prophesy unto you; they make you vain: they speak a vision of their own heart, and not out of the mouth of the Lord" (Jeremiah 23:16). Again, "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly they are ravening wolves" (Matthew 7:15). In vain also would John exhort us to try the spirits whether they be of God (1 John 4:1). From this judgment not even angels are exempted (Galatians 1:8); far less Satan with his lies. And what is meant by the expression, "If the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch?" (Matthew 15:14.) Does it not sufficiently declare that there is a great difference among the pastors who are to be heard, that all are not to be heard indiscriminately? Wherefore they have no ground for deterring us by their name, in order to draw us into a participation of their blindness, since we see, on the contrary, that the Lord has used special care to guard us from allowing ourselves to be led away by the errors of others, whatever be the mask under which they may lurk. For if the answer of our Savior is true, blind guides, whether high priests, prelates, or pontiff, can do nothing more than hurry us over the same precipice with themselves. Wherefore, let no names of councils pastors, and bishops (which may be used on false pretenses as well as truly), hinder us from giving heed to the evidence both of words and facts, and bringing all spirits to the test of the divine word, that we may prove whether they are of God."Surely such are the dwellings of the wicked, and this is the place of him that knoweth not God." -- Job 18:21
(We must not obey blind guides; decisions of later councils faulty in the light of Scripture, 12-14)
12. No blind obedience
No, there aren't.
***”Thus saith the Lord of Hosts, Hearken not unto the words of the prophets that prophesy unto you; they make you vain: they speak a vision of their own heart, and not out of the mouth of the Lord” (Jeremiah 23:16). Again, “Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly they are ravening wolves” (Matthew 7:15). In vain also would John exhort us to try the spirits whether they be of God (1 John 4:1). From this judgment not even angels are exempted (Galatians 1:8); far less Satan with his lies. And what is meant by the expression, “If the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch?” (Matthew 15:14.) Does it not sufficiently declare that there is a great difference among the pastors who are to be heard, that all are not to be heard indiscriminately?***
Applause. You have taken the first step towards a public repudiation of the tyrant and false prophet Calvin. By his own words does he damn himself. I had not expected this from you at this early juncture based upon on our exchanges over the past several weeks. I congratulate you and welcome you back on to the Via of Christ.
Holding a homosexual pastor up for admiration would be like a Catholic holding up Alexander VI as a model pope.
The question being: faithful to whom?
“Come out from among them.”- St. Paul
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.