Those of you who have been following the news from the Churchwide Assembly may already be aware of some of the more important events that took place last week in Chicago. I thought I would write a report to give you some of my own personal perspective. As it happens, though many of our leaders were in attendance as visitors, I was the only person from the LC3 or CORE Steering Committees to actually be on the floor as a voting member.
The Book of Faith Initiative
In general, Lutheran CORE is supportive of the ELCA’s Book of Faith initiative. Any effort to get people reading and studying the Bible will create the opportunity for God’s Word to accomplish its purpose (Isaiah 55:11). On behalf of Lutheran CORE, I did offer an amendment to the text of the second resolution approving this initiative. This one-sentence amendment included three important points: 1) that God is the primary ‘user’ of Scripture, 2) that the message of Scripture is centered in Christ, and 3) that God’s goal in his Word is to bring about repentance and salvation. One would think that this basic law/gospel description of God’s Word would be self-evident to Lutherans, but as you may have read elsewhere, many voting members considered the words “sinner” and “repentance” inappropriate; one Bishop even denied that God is the user of Scripture.
Though the amendment failed, it was a useful demonstration of the lack of theological acumen at work in the ELCA, and an indication of the direction this project could take if we are not vigilant. On a more practical level, the amendment, offered early in the Assembly by a more recognized WA leader, also allowed Lutheran CORE to test the response of those organized against the traditional view of Scripture; it provided helpful information for us in this regard.
Elections of Bishop and Secretary
There was little doubt among us that Bishop Hanson would be re-elected, but it was gratifying to see Dr. Karl Donfried make a good showing, especially after the attack made on him recently in the Lutheran magazine. The office of ELCA Secretary, however, was open to genuine selection. The candidates in this election varied broadly in perspective, from those who represent the orthodox faith, to those who are decidedly revisionist. In the end, the election went to David Swartling, a lay-person and lawyer, who has served as parliamentarian for the Churchwide Assembly. Swartling came across very competent and well-spoken, and though he is not necessarily a supporter of our concerns, I believe he will be fair-minded and work with integrity.
Sexuality Recommendations
Lutheran CORE and its supporters did a very good job in witnessing to the biblical faith, and making the argument for working with the whole church in its process. I was thankful for and impressed by the many faithful and orthodox Bishops who stood up to speak for sound deliberation and faithfulness to the Word. They deserve our respect. On the other hand, it was very disappointing to see revisionist Bishops actually leading the charge to violate church policy. Bishops certainly have the right to speak, but to have them be the actual presenters of Goodsoil amendments, is quite another matter.
In the end, I found it ironic that after hours of deliberation, and the clear indication that people wanted to follow the process to wait for the Sexuality Study to be released in 2009, the Assembly then (for all intents and purposes) reversed its decision against change, by hurriedly adopting a substitute amendment on restraint. However, given that the arguments on the floor claimed to be for a “cease fire” to “create space” until 2009 for those few synods that really need it, I honestly believe that people didn’t realize that they were voting for a resolution that had no limits whatsoever. In actual fact, the restraint resolution was addressed to all synods and bishops, it contained no time limit, and didn’t even limit the restraint in discipline to the particular case of same-sex relationships (ie. instead of saying a pastor should not be disciplined for being in a same-sex relationship, it said that a pastor in a same-sex relationship should not be disciplined — apparently for any offense).
There is no doubt that the wording of this resolution can and will be used to support much more than was imagined by many who voted for it. Revisionist synods and bishops will now consider themselves free to ‘stack the roster’ as much as they can in the next two years and beyond.
Accountability of Bishops
I appreciated the resolution on the last day, calling for the Conference of Bishops to discuss their mutual accountability, and to return to the 2009 Assembly with their plan for how they will do this. I am hopeful — or perhaps, cautiously optimistic — that this resolution might actually have a real impact on how the Church does its work together. Time will tell.
Conclusion
Over all, despite the important issues addressed, I felt much less stress at this assembly than I did two years ago in Orlando. In general, people were more respectful and less antagonistic. There were even a couple sermons in worship that were not disguised floor-speeches for revision. I will also add appreciation for the fact that both Bishop Hanson and Secretary Almen led the Assembly in a manner that I considered to be even-handed and fair. As in Orlando, I did not have the impression that the system itself was used against us.
I am thankful for the hours of hard work that were put into preparing for the Assembly by the leaders of Lutheran CORE and WordAlone, as well as by the many groups (such as LC3) that support them. These leaders among us are people of integrity, who strive on our behalf to give a faithful and honest witness, and refuse to resort to manipulation and deceit to pursue it. They are people I am proud to call brothers and sisters in Christ, and they have my grateful respect.
Pastor Steve King
Maple Lake, Minnesota
CORE/LC3
The Book of Faith Initiative
In general, Lutheran CORE is supportive of the ELCA’s Book of Faith initiative. Any effort to get people reading and studying the Bible will create the opportunity for God’s Word to accomplish its purpose (Isaiah 55:11). On behalf of Lutheran CORE, I did offer an amendment to the text of the second resolution approving this initiative. This one-sentence amendment included three important points: 1) that God is the primary ‘user’ of Scripture, 2) that the message of Scripture is centered in Christ, and 3) that God’s goal in his Word is to bring about repentance and salvation. One would think that this basic law/gospel description of God’s Word would be self-evident to Lutherans, but as you may have read elsewhere, many voting members considered the words “sinner” and “repentance” inappropriate; one Bishop even denied that God is the user of Scripture.
Though the amendment failed, it was a useful demonstration of the lack of theological acumen at work in the ELCA, and an indication of the direction this project could take if we are not vigilant. On a more practical level, the amendment, offered early in the Assembly by a more recognized WA leader, also allowed Lutheran CORE to test the response of those organized against the traditional view of Scripture; it provided helpful information for us in this regard.
Elections of Bishop and Secretary
There was little doubt among us that Bishop Hanson would be re-elected, but it was gratifying to see Dr. Karl Donfried make a good showing, especially after the attack made on him recently in the Lutheran magazine. The office of ELCA Secretary, however, was open to genuine selection. The candidates in this election varied broadly in perspective, from those who represent the orthodox faith, to those who are decidedly revisionist. In the end, the election went to David Swartling, a lay-person and lawyer, who has served as parliamentarian for the Churchwide Assembly. Swartling came across very competent and well-spoken, and though he is not necessarily a supporter of our concerns, I believe he will be fair-minded and work with integrity.
Sexuality Recommendations
Lutheran CORE and its supporters did a very good job in witnessing to the biblical faith, and making the argument for working with the whole church in its process. I was thankful for and impressed by the many faithful and orthodox Bishops who stood up to speak for sound deliberation and faithfulness to the Word. They deserve our respect. On the other hand, it was very disappointing to see revisionist Bishops actually leading the charge to violate church policy. Bishops certainly have the right to speak, but to have them be the actual presenters of Goodsoil amendments, is quite another matter.
In the end, I found it ironic that after hours of deliberation, and the clear indication that people wanted to follow the process to wait for the Sexuality Study to be released in 2009, the Assembly then (for all intents and purposes) reversed its decision against change, by hurriedly adopting a substitute amendment on restraint. However, given that the arguments on the floor claimed to be for a “cease fire” to “create space” until 2009 for those few synods that really need it, I honestly believe that people didn’t realize that they were voting for a resolution that had no limits whatsoever. In actual fact, the restraint resolution was addressed to all synods and bishops, it contained no time limit, and didn’t even limit the restraint in discipline to the particular case of same-sex relationships (ie. instead of saying a pastor should not be disciplined for being in a same-sex relationship, it said that a pastor in a same-sex relationship should not be disciplined — apparently for any offense).
There is no doubt that the wording of this resolution can and will be used to support much more than was imagined by many who voted for it. Revisionist synods and bishops will now consider themselves free to ‘stack the roster’ as much as they can in the next two years and beyond.
Accountability of Bishops
I appreciated the resolution on the last day, calling for the Conference of Bishops to discuss their mutual accountability, and to return to the 2009 Assembly with their plan for how they will do this. I am hopeful — or perhaps, cautiously optimistic — that this resolution might actually have a real impact on how the Church does its work together. Time will tell.
Conclusion
Over all, despite the important issues addressed, I felt much less stress at this assembly than I did two years ago in Orlando. In general, people were more respectful and less antagonistic. There were even a couple sermons in worship that were not disguised floor-speeches for revision. I will also add appreciation for the fact that both Bishop Hanson and Secretary Almen led the Assembly in a manner that I considered to be even-handed and fair. As in Orlando, I did not have the impression that the system itself was used against us.
I am thankful for the hours of hard work that were put into preparing for the Assembly by the leaders of Lutheran CORE and WordAlone, as well as by the many groups (such as LC3) that support them. These leaders among us are people of integrity, who strive on our behalf to give a faithful and honest witness, and refuse to resort to manipulation and deceit to pursue it. They are people I am proud to call brothers and sisters in Christ, and they have my grateful respect.
Pastor Steve King
Maple Lake, Minnesota
CORE/LC3
1 comments:
Thanks for your efforts on this, Pastor Steve. We must continue to be witnesses to the Biblical faith that was handed down to us. To paragraph C.S. Lewis "when the parishioners must become missionaries to the Vicar, the church is in trouble. . ."
May we all be missionaries.
Post a Comment