A lot happened this week. But all I can focus on this morning is yesterday. I was out of the pulpit yesterday, because I was at synod assembly.
We spent much of our time debating resolutions about the Task Force on Human Sexuality's proposed social statement and recommendations on policy changes for how we roster pastors and other leaders.
Once again, I found myself caught in the middle, with no good way to raise my voice. I have grown deeply tired of the debate. We are not persuading one another with our rhetoric, which on one hand says we must choose between the Bible and human wisdom (which is a total false dichotomy) and on the other hand says we must choose between being sharing Christ's love or spreading the hate of outdated policies. Once again, we say with our lips that we strive for common ground. But with our resolutions and speeches, we say that it's my way (which we are just certain is God's way) or no way. One woman even stood up with written notes, convinced that the Holy Spirit had given her these words (which apparently ruled out the Spirit guiding anyone opposed to her views). Thankfully, she spent so much time describing how God had given her these words, that we only had to put up with about 15 seconds of her so called prophecy.
But is there really no centrist position that can be explored? Is there really no way to more fully live out our common beliefs about how the ELCA might regard homosexual persons? I have little problems with the proposed social statement. It’s not the most eloquent document – and it could have used scripture a little more generously, but if you read it, it’s largely an OK document, in my humble opinion, insofar as it genuinely expresses the lack of consensus the church has in interpreting God’s law on matters of lifelong, monogamous, same gender relationship.
But their recommendations bother me. It seems odd to me, given that there is no consensus on these matters that the BEST proposal they could come up with is to try to find a way to let one congregation, synod, segment of the church to their thing and let the others do theirs. That stupid! If Lutheran Disaster response has genuine disagreements on how to best respond to disaster, do they dispatch two teams – one to do their thing and the other to do theirs? When Oak Grove School rebuilds, if they can’t agree on how to best do it, will they build two sets of buildings? No! When we disagree, we must spend greater time living out of the places where we agree.
But I have a similar critique of those who object to the recommendations of the task force – the best you can do is bring resolutions that simply want to keep things the way they are? The best you can do is stand up and tell everyone else how wrong the other side is? Will neither side ever try to truly live more fully in our common convictions?
We have agreed that all are welcome to FULLY participate in the life of the church regardless of their sexual orientation. In other words, the ELCA supports the welcoming of Gay and Lesbian persons to come and hear God’s Word, to eat at His Table, to share their gifts in the life of the church, to be in fellowship with the believers. I completely support this. How can we better live out of this conviction? What are the best practices that are being lived out in congregations across the ELCA that do real ministry with and on behalf of the GLBT community? How are people, in fact, meeting Christ in the face of Gay and Lesbian people as they live out of already passed and supported church policy? I have not once heard reports of such things at synod assembly. I have only heard one side or the other hurl grenades at each other about how they are either unbiblical or unloving.
It is NOT time to stop talking about these things. It is NOT time to reject our Gay and Lesbian brothers and sisters once and for all. It is NOT time to push a change through that alienates half the church. But it is time to stop talking about this issue in the way we have been doing it. If we invested our energy into better living out of our truly common convictions, we’d be a lot better off. And we might actually succeed in being the church on this matter – at least for the present moment.
And that’s the news from Browerville … and beyond.
We spent much of our time debating resolutions about the Task Force on Human Sexuality's proposed social statement and recommendations on policy changes for how we roster pastors and other leaders.
Once again, I found myself caught in the middle, with no good way to raise my voice. I have grown deeply tired of the debate. We are not persuading one another with our rhetoric, which on one hand says we must choose between the Bible and human wisdom (which is a total false dichotomy) and on the other hand says we must choose between being sharing Christ's love or spreading the hate of outdated policies. Once again, we say with our lips that we strive for common ground. But with our resolutions and speeches, we say that it's my way (which we are just certain is God's way) or no way. One woman even stood up with written notes, convinced that the Holy Spirit had given her these words (which apparently ruled out the Spirit guiding anyone opposed to her views). Thankfully, she spent so much time describing how God had given her these words, that we only had to put up with about 15 seconds of her so called prophecy.
But is there really no centrist position that can be explored? Is there really no way to more fully live out our common beliefs about how the ELCA might regard homosexual persons? I have little problems with the proposed social statement. It’s not the most eloquent document – and it could have used scripture a little more generously, but if you read it, it’s largely an OK document, in my humble opinion, insofar as it genuinely expresses the lack of consensus the church has in interpreting God’s law on matters of lifelong, monogamous, same gender relationship.
But their recommendations bother me. It seems odd to me, given that there is no consensus on these matters that the BEST proposal they could come up with is to try to find a way to let one congregation, synod, segment of the church to their thing and let the others do theirs. That stupid! If Lutheran Disaster response has genuine disagreements on how to best respond to disaster, do they dispatch two teams – one to do their thing and the other to do theirs? When Oak Grove School rebuilds, if they can’t agree on how to best do it, will they build two sets of buildings? No! When we disagree, we must spend greater time living out of the places where we agree.
But I have a similar critique of those who object to the recommendations of the task force – the best you can do is bring resolutions that simply want to keep things the way they are? The best you can do is stand up and tell everyone else how wrong the other side is? Will neither side ever try to truly live more fully in our common convictions?
We have agreed that all are welcome to FULLY participate in the life of the church regardless of their sexual orientation. In other words, the ELCA supports the welcoming of Gay and Lesbian persons to come and hear God’s Word, to eat at His Table, to share their gifts in the life of the church, to be in fellowship with the believers. I completely support this. How can we better live out of this conviction? What are the best practices that are being lived out in congregations across the ELCA that do real ministry with and on behalf of the GLBT community? How are people, in fact, meeting Christ in the face of Gay and Lesbian people as they live out of already passed and supported church policy? I have not once heard reports of such things at synod assembly. I have only heard one side or the other hurl grenades at each other about how they are either unbiblical or unloving.
It is NOT time to stop talking about these things. It is NOT time to reject our Gay and Lesbian brothers and sisters once and for all. It is NOT time to push a change through that alienates half the church. But it is time to stop talking about this issue in the way we have been doing it. If we invested our energy into better living out of our truly common convictions, we’d be a lot better off. And we might actually succeed in being the church on this matter – at least for the present moment.
And that’s the news from Browerville … and beyond.
Comments