Or not.
Not sure.
Posted on 11/18/2009 3:46:29 PM PST by SmithL
NEW BRIGHTON, Minn. – The split over gay clergy within the country's largest Lutheran denomination has prompted a conservative faction to begin forming a new Lutheran church body separate from the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America.
Leaders of Lutheran CORE said Wednesday that a working group would immediately begin drafting a constitution and taking other steps to form the denomination, with hopes to have it off the ground by next August.
"There are many people within the ELCA who are very unhappy with what has happened," said the Rev. Paull Spring, chairman of Lutheran CORE and a retired ELCA bishop from State College, Pa.
At its annual convention in Minneapolis in August, ELCA delegates voted to lift a ban that had prohibited sexually active gay and lesbian pastors from serving as clergy.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Leaders of Lutheran CORE said Wednesday that a working group would immediately begin drafting a constitution and taking other steps to form the denomination,It's a sign!
Satan is working hard.
I grew up in the ELCA and now attend a non-dom church. If anyone could answer that question I would appreciate it. The LCMS seems conservative and biblically sound in their teachings.
Or not.
Not sure.
* as of August 19, AD 2009, a liberal protestant SECT, not part of the holy, catholic and apostolic CHURCH.
My prayers are with them. They are the faithful remnant.
And schism begets schism.
ditto. i will tell you one thing....God is going to be dealing with a lot of these “worthless shepherds” who have been leading their flocks astray for decades. How is the flock to hear if no one ever tells them (the gospel)? and How are the shepherds to hear if the seminaries never teach them?
I am a LCMS pastor, and the main issue with those denominations that have left the ELCA, such as CORE is doing, is with the LCMS’ position that only males can be pastors. The second issue is with closed communion. Thirty years ago the issue of women in the pastoral office would not have been a divisive issue, since none of the Lutheran denominations ordained women. It is like the old saw about once the horse gets out of the barn you cannot get it back. What the members fail to understand is that the same arguments for women’s ordination are exactly the same ones for accepting homosexuality. Once you ignore the Scriptures and tradition on one point, it opens to door to anarchy.
We left the ELCA 17 years ago for the LCMS. Thank you, Lord. We have been blessed and if the LCMS ever ordains women, we’re outta there.
I am a LCMS pastor, and the main issue with those denominations that have left the ELCA, such as CORE is doing, is with the LCMS’ position that only males can be pastors. The second issue is with closed communion.
I too am an LCMS pastor, and those are exactly the same two issues I would cite, in that order. They don't have a problem with women pastors, and they don't "get" the historic Christian practice of communion fellowship. And really, the underlying problem is an inadequate view of the authority and inspiration of Holy Scripture. That is what led to women's ordination, and now, homosexual pastors. ELCA "conservatives" are liberal by Missouri Synod standards.
What the members fail to understand is that the same arguments for women’s ordination are exactly the same ones for accepting homosexuality. Once you ignore the Scriptures and tradition on one point, it opens to door to anarchy.
Bingo. Both are symptoms of the same problem. As soon as they went for women's ordination, it was inevitable and predictable that they would eventually go for homosexual ordination.
With all due respect your logic is specious. There is no logical imperative between women and homosexuals. Woman, all things being equal are who they are. Homosexuals, however, are defective. Sorry, if that offends, but they are. They do not function as God and/or nature intended. Same-sex attraction is not normal.
Furthermore, homosexual acts are condemned in the Bible numerous times. This is fact. Wishing it to be otherwise does not make it so.
Having said the above, I have no problem with any man or woman becoming a religious leader. But I don’t understand why it’s important for me to know their sexual preference. Why, for example, is it important for me to know that a men’s choral group singing at my local library is “The Gay Men’s Chorus”.
People can be defective physically and mentally and still answer God’s Call. Gay and lesbian clergy should keep their problem to themselves. It is not relevant to their calling. Tolerance is an integral part of all Judeo-Christian faiths. It doesn’t just apply to the homosexual community.
Sorry, but your moral equivalence argument does not apply.
re: the vote
And remember, they had a weird tornado right there when it happened; the weather folks couldn’t explain it.
Bingo. Both are symptoms of the same problem. As soon as they went for women's ordination, it was inevitable and predictable that they would eventually go for homosexual ordination.
I have sometimes written in this forum and on the ALPB forum boards that the slippery slope actually began first with the acceptance of artificial birth control (first among the laity, then among the clergy) and accelerated with the acceptancce of divorce and remarriage-after-divorce (again, first among the laity then among the clergy); all of which combined to create a guiding principle of sex-without-consequences that all but views orgasm as a G*d given right!
I suppose that makes me a right-wing Augustinian but so be it.
Does it?
If the separatists are abandoning a church body which itself has taken a schismatic, sectarian action, one which wilfully and deliberately moves it farther from its global Lutheran partners (ie, the Africans) as well as farther from evangelical Christianity, Rome, and Orthodoxy--how can it be schismatic to move closer to the catholic center?
The newly dissident ELCA congegations are unwilling to give up their female pastorate.
I tried an LCMS church after giving up on the ELCA, didn’t care much for it. We now attend an AFLC congregation. If CORE is everything I think it could be, I might go back to that.
Based on the posts I read and what I am familiar with, I think you are reading things into what was written that are not there. I’m not sure how you concluded that moral equivalency was being forwarded, but not much of your post seems to fit without it.
The statement was that the same arguments for the ordination of women were used to argue for the ordination of gays. The argument was not scripture based; it could not be. But once the “man’s wisdom superseding God’s” path had been followed it was that much easier to do again. Sadly, so many in the church catholic are ignorant of scripture that apostasy is easier to advance with time.
I suspect an example of this very concern is the second half of your post. Church members, and in particular, church leaders are held to a moral standard defined by God in scripture. If a person is known to be in active sin they are to repent or be removed. There is a defined process for this. There is no “don’t ask don’t tell” in scripture.
I’m also very curious to read more about what you mean by “Tolerance is an integral part of all Judeo-Christian faiths.” Please expand on that statement.
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.