Some ELCA synodical and churchwide leaders are taking a hard line and threatening disciplinary action in dealing with pastors and congregations expressing opposition to the actions of the 2009 Churchwide Assembly changing ELCA teaching and practice on sexual ethics to affirm same-sex sexual relationships and to allow pastors and other rostered leaders to be in committed same-sex relationships.
Many ELCA congregations have chosen to redirect their benevolence giving away from the ELCA churchwide organization because they believe the actions of the assembly violate the clear teaching of the Bible and the ELCA Constitution which states that the Bible is “the inspired Word of God and the authoritative source and norm of (the church’s) proclamation, faith, and life.” The changes in benevolence giving have resulted in some cuts in churchwide and synodical budgets.
The 2009 ELCA Churchwide Assembly committed the ELCA to “respect the bound consciences of all.” But some ELCA leaders have had difficulty respecting those whose “bound consciences” have chosen other ways of supporting the mission of Christ in the world than undesignated giving to the churchwide organization.
A Jan. 19 memo from ELCA Secretary David Swartling to synod bishops and vice presidents suggests that congregations could be disciplined and removed from the ELCA if they do not fully and financially support the churchwide organization.
“If it fails to live up to the commitments contained in the governing documents of this church, the congregation necessarily breaches the partnership relationships that are foundational in this church. It thus jeopardizes its standing on the roster of ELCA congregations,” Swartling states. “A congregation that repudiates its constitutional commitments to this church is subject to discipline.”
Some ELCA officials have said that congregations that choose the recipients of their giving beyond their congregation and have redirected some of their benevolence giving to ministries other than the ELCA churchwide organization are “withholding” financial support that the ELCA is entitled to receive. Congregations determine their budgets and the amounts to be sent for ministry beyond their congregation.
A January “Q & A” being used by several synods says, “Is it permissible for congregations to withhold mission support? No. Withholding mission support is unconstitutional and violates the governing documents of the church.”
The “Q & A” document also insists that a synod bishop is entitled to determine all aspects of a required consultation period between a congregation considering ending its ELCA affiliation and its synod bishop. “The bishop leads and is responsible for all aspects of the consultation. . . . The bishop determines how the consultation will be conducted, who participates, how many meetings or forums are necessary, whether mailings are sent, etc.” It also states that the bishop will involve ELCA lawyers in the process “to ensure legality and good order.”
Some bishops have required extensive consultation processes with congregations considering changing their church affiliation. They have approached the process in an adversarial fashion rather than in a pastoral and consultative manner seeking to help a congregation make the best decision given its realities.
In a Dec. 19 story, The Washington Times described what it called “bullying” by ELCA officials against pastors and congregations that do not support the ELCA’s new teaching and policy regarding same-sex sexual relationships. The article highlighted situations in two Illinois synods. Similar stories have come from other parts of the country.
The adversarial approach has not been shared by all ELCA bishops. Some synod bishops have been gracious and understanding in working with congregations that have “bound consciences” that make it difficult for them to provide unquestioning financial support for the ELCA churchwide organization. Some synods have found ways for congregations to give designated gifts to their synod and to some ELCA ministries through the synod.
Some bishops have also been gracious and served in a truly consulting role in working with congregations that are considering the possibility of ending their affiliation with the ELCA.
1 comment:
Let's call things as they are, David, for once. "The changes in benevolence giving have resulted in some cuts in churchwide and synodical budgets"--what we mean by "some cuts" is that real people are being really hurt by the callous indifference of those who love their church so much they can't wait to rip it to shreds. Self-aggrandizing and self-serving pastors who exhort their congregations to withhold funds from the ELCA and the synod have the direct effect of putting people out of work.
I am one of them. And neither the first nor the last.
This bizarre obsession with what other people hundreds or even thousands of miles away may or may not be doing with their body parts has had a very real and very painful effect on me and my family. But it seems that all of these "concerned" pastors are far too busy unzipping to see who has the biggest theology to care about who gets hurt by their posturing and posing.
Is that your idea of "church?" Is that your idea of "Christianity?" If so, you are welcome to them both.
WJR
Post a Comment