Church Life after The National Assembly

Every three years our ELCA holds a national gathering to discuss various church policy considerations, approve budgets, elect various representatives, along with time for worship, study, fellowship, etc. Last week such an Assembly was held in Minneapolis from August 18th through the 21st. It seems that media focus was twofold. First, upon an updated “Sexuality Statement” that was discussed and approved. (You can find this on our website link to the ELCA.) Second, much more reporting was given to the debate and vote about whether or not to allow gay and lesbian clergy in “committed relationships” to serve as pastors.

Discussing sexuality issues seems to become very emotional within the church setting. Various viewpoints brought to such discussions may include: “Sexuality is – scandalous…, a sacred gift…, a private matter…, sinful…, etc.”

Last week the sound bytes contributed a sensationalizing summary stating, “The ELCA votes to ordain gay and lesbian pastors!” The news people were incorrect. The ELCA has for years ordained individuals who understand themselves as G/L (my abbreviation in this article for gay or lesbian) as long as they consent to meet the requirements set forth in a document called Vision of Expectations. In effect, G/L people are eligible to serve in ELCA ministry positions as long as they agree to remain celibate.

What voting members approved in last week’s assembly was a provision called the “local option.” It gives congregations the right or freedom to call or refrain from calling as their pastor a G/L clergy person who is in a “committed relationship.” Now, perhaps the devil is in the details regarding how someone defines a “committed relationship.” I frankly leave it up to the people involved. I don’t welcome anyone else questioning or judging my marriage vows, so in turn, I have no need or business questioning a G/L person’s expression of commitment. I trust that it is between them and the Lord.

Our Southwestern Minnesota Synod was represented by 29 voting members that were elected at our recent June Synod Assembly. This group consisted of men and women, clergy and laity whose numbers were determined by a set of recommended percentage guidelines. These 29 people were part of the 1045 total
voting members. The 1045 voting members represented our entire ELCA of 65 geographical Synods. The vote taken that accepted the “local option” proposal was roughly 55% in favor and 45% against. (You can go to the ELCA link for details.)

“What do you think about the vote, Pastor Bob?”

Would you not agree that we approach this issue, like any other discussion with our own set of guiding thoughts, or what are called presuppositions? Let me ask three questions about homosexuality.

First: Is our sexual orientation a choice we willfully make?

Sometimes the question is phrased, “Are people born G/L or do individuals choose to be G/L?” I don’t think that question understands the complexity of our human sexuality, but it does offer a defining difference of stance on our church discussion of homosexuality. If it is “by choice,” then a certain number of people see an obstacle for acceptance of G/L people as clergy, etc. Choice implies willful sin, and of course, sin is to be “named, claimed, and flamed.” (Confession, Remorse, Repentance) If it is “by birth,” that is to say, by some combination of genetic and in utero factors, then a certain number of people find it difficult to exclude G/L people as clergy. In this case the confession might be, “This is how my loving Lord created me.”

Everyone has a right to their privacy. No one should be forced to explain or need to defend their sexuality. Through the years I have had G/L friends confide in me saying that they have always seen themselves as G/L. These are people who are extremely capable, very mature, with great integrity, and appear to me to possess deep, strong emotional health, along with having a zeal for life in Christ!

I come to the discussion about pastors who understand themselves as G/L with the viewpoint that sexuality is not determined by a coin flip; heads - I’m gay, tails - I’m straight. I think our sexuality is determined by a range of factors beyond our choice. Our Heavenly Father is a Creator God of complexity and diversity. Oftentimes there can be a painful struggle for many to come to terms with understanding their sexuality. Unfortunately the Church may add to the burden.

Second: Do you have G/L family members, friends, and neighbors?

“Blood is thicker than water.” So goes an old saying. When discussing the emotional topic of human sexuality our viewpoints might depend upon whether or not we have a personal stake involved. If we were talking about your son or daughter, or brother or sister, or best friend, etc. would your viewpoints be more charitable than if we were talking about “those gays and lesbians over there?”

It’s personal and not hypothetical. Because I have family, friends, neighbors, etc. who are G/L, I respond in ways that display bonded support. The G/L people I know are in the same boat as the rest of us, namely, simultaneously saint and sinner. I think they should have the same rights and privileges, responsibilities and ministries as heterosexual people.

Third: Should all people be held accountable to the same standards of fidelity?

I think G/L people should be held accountable to the same sexual standards of monogamous fidelity as the church states for heterosexual individuals. What percent of legally married heterosexual couples understand their marriage as sacred in the eyes of God? I ask this question because not every married couple confesses a belief in God. In other words, for some, marriage does not have a religious or faith aspect. It is merely a civil, contractual union. And perhaps we would be shocked by the number of marriages where monogamous fidelity was not stated in the vows nor practiced by the spouses.

As Christians we do emphasize vows of monogamous fidelity. We think those are the standards for our faith understanding. I hope that heterosexual couples can be faithful to their vows. Likewise, for G/L couples, I hope they can practice monogamous fidelity as well. The “local option” vote passed last week certainly doesn’t violate the ideal of monogamous fidelity, but instead highlights the aspect of “committed relationship.”

Some reactions to the voting results

One: This vote violates the “authority of Scripture.”

Over the past dozen years a series of committees, task forces, draft writing, and study teams have translated, interpreted, debated, and presented for the church to study the meaning(s) of what boils down to five biblical references where homosexual activity is condemned. You can find many references of these results by going to the ELCA website and click the appropriate links. These works are too lengthy to try to summarize for my purposes, but you will discover that perhaps to no surprise, that the various academic teaching theologians, parish clergy, bishops, and lay members arrive at a variety of interpretive meanings.
I think their various viewpoints can be put into two categories as either; 1) “No” means “never”, or; 2) “No” means “back then.”

*Regarding “The Authority of Scripture”…a side note

I think a major challenge facing biblical interpretation and application today is determining what constitutes “biblical authority.” We have inherited interpretations that are called “orthodox” teachings. These are understandings that are to be accepted as correct and represent official positions of the church. However, challenges to these understandings arise. Questions are asked such as: Are the “voices of tradition” necessarily correct interpretations of Scripture? How do we even know what the “original Bible texts” were, since we only possess thousands of copies that vary with one another? Why can’t there be more than one understanding or “correct interpretation?” These types of questions are raised by people who approach reading and interpreting the Bible from a set of “post-modern” views.

If you are interested in learning more about this approach to biblical interpretation I will share with you my resource books on Postmodern Biblical Criticism. If you like, I will sit with you and we can discuss your reactions, etc. Also, I remind you that our ELCA goal to promote biblical literacy is called the “Book of Faith” initiative. You can find published “Book of Faith” resources on the ELCA website as well. This fall we will offer adult education opportunities using the “Book of Faith” initiative material. I have some of these published materials on hand. You are welcome to use them for your devotional study.

Two: Are sexuality issues (over) emphasized at the neglect of other teachings?

At our last June Synod Assembly I heard several pastors speak before the floor of delegates to various resolutions pertaining to aspects of the human sexuality statement and the “local option” vote that was scheduled to take place at the upcoming National Assembly. Some were in anguish over the consequences that might arise should the “local option” vote pass. One result mentioned repeatedly was, “I might have to resign my call to serve in the ELCA.” Another was, “I’m fearful that the congregation that I serve might decide to leave the ELCA.”

I feel sad for the difficulty those pastors and congregations find themselves in now, if the same sentiments expressed in June still hold true. But I am curious why some pastors and lay people react with such intensity to the point of quitting the ELCA because the “local option” vote violates their traditional biblical positions when other biblical teachings maybe neglected.

What comes to mind first is all the neglect we give to the biblical concept of the tithe. Probably in every Bible dictionary, almanac, commentary, etc. you can read about all the Bible references, descriptions, and practices of tithing. Generally speaking it is giving to church (God) ten percent of your income. Sometimes people tease by asking the question, “Hey PB, does that mean my gross income or net income?”

The tithe is God’s Law. The tithe is discussed in at least four places throughout the Torah – the Law – the Books of Genesis through Deuteronomy. Read and consider – Gen.14:1-24, Num. 18:21-26, Dt. 14:28-29, and Dt. 26:1-12.

For those congregations contemplating leaving the ELCA, do they have every member tithe? If so, I bet Synod Stewardship Coordinators want to know the strategies for their success. Such congregations would be enviable. If every member does not tithe, then why not the same level of anguish as that resulting from the recent Assembly voting? Shouldn’t their pastor(s) be equally concerned about failing to measure up to the biblical teaching on tithing?

Three: What will other church denominations and members think about us?

I hope others offer prayers on our behalf for healing and effective mission as we would for them, since we are all about the work of proclaiming Christ crucified and risen. And as the Apostle Paul writes in 1 Cor. 12:26, “If one part of the body (Body of Christ) suffers, all other parts suffer with it.”

Some may disown us. We had no business going down this road of challenging traditional biblical authority. Now accept the consequences.

Some may laud our bold, pioneer steps toward full inclusion of G/L people, and hope that their faith tradition can have the courage to do the same.

Four: Where do all of us at PLC and the ELCA go from here?

We have the same mission statements. We subscribe to the same Gospel mandates. We bind ourselves to the same Baptismal vows and Affirmation of Baptism (Confirmation) vows. We have plenty of the same work to do in Christ’s Kingdom as we did before the National Assembly. May God’s Holy Spirit give us all spiritual gifts necessary for faithful lives in Christ.

We are blessed with dedicated, compassionate, intelligent, faithful leaders. I have great respect for our Synod Bishop, Rev. Jon Anderson. He has the same type of people around him as his staff. I met our national bishop, Rev. Mark Hanson. He impresses me as a sincere, extremely capable servant-leader for our ELCA. I believe we are in good hands.

At PLC we still retain all our autonomy according to our church constitution and by-law statements. The “local option” vote does not bind us in any manner.

I hope this blog article will help you think through some of the actions and likely outcomes from the recent National Assembly of our ELCA. By all means seek me out for any follow-up discussion, if you desire such.

Thank you for your partnership in the Gospel and all you do in the name of Christ for our congregation. May the Lord bless us in: Praising God, Encouraging faith, Advancing Christ’s Examples! Peace be with you! (P.B.)