Churchwide Issue in 2007
On August 15, 2006, Bishop Ronald Warren of the Southeastern Synod brought forth charges against Rev. Brad Schmeling, who had declared that he was in a same-gender relationship. Understanding Vision and Expectations to preclude this, the bishop began a process of disciplinary reviews. The discipline committee met and affirmed the gifts and ministry that had been done by Rev. Schmeling. The full text of the report is available on the web at at.http://www.elca.org/news/Releases.asp?a=3521. Arguably, the committee report stated that they felt the ELCA guidelines should be revisited and revised. In 2005, CWA moved the bishop’s statement of 1993 from a directive to effective policy, which reads as follows:
WHEREAS, this church holds that "marriage is a lifelong covenant of faithfulness between a man and a woman" (Message on Sexuality: Some Common Convictions [1996], page 3); and WHEREAS, the Conference of Bishops in October 1993 stated, "We, as the Conference of Bishops of the ELCA, recognize that there is basis neither in Scripture nor tradition for the establishment of an official ceremony by this church for the blessing of a homosexual relationship. We, therefore, do not approve such a ceremony as an official action of this church's ministry. Nevertheless, we express trust in and will continue dialogue with those pastors and congregations who are in ministry with gay and lesbian persons, and affirm their desire to explore the best ways to provide pastoral care for all to whom they minister" (CB93.10.25); therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America continue to respect the guidance of the 1993 statement of the Conference of Bishops; and be it further RESOLVED, that this church welcome gay and lesbian persons into its life (as stated in Churchwide Assembly resolutions from 1991, 1995, and 1999), and trust pastors and congregations to discern ways to provide faithful pastoral care for all to whom they minister.
On the heels of the decision in Atlanta, in the New England Synod, Bishop Payne asked that the document bearing the decision of the committee be made available to all rostered leaders of our synod. It concludes, "It is the decision of this discipline hearing committee that the Rev. Bradley E. Schmeling be removed from the clergy roster of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, effective August 15, 2007."
Prior to this conclusion, which was based on current policies and bylaws, the committee stated its suggestion that: 1) Synod assemblies memorialize the Churchwide Assembly to request that "Definitions and Guidelines for Discipline" be revised to "remove the language that specifically precludes practicing homosexuals from service as ordained ministers of this church." 2) Synod assemblies memorialize the Churchwide Assembly to "reconsider and revise "Vision and Expectations" to remove the specific prohibition against homosexual sexual relationships." 3) Synod assemblies memorialize the Churchwide Assembly to reconsider and revise the policy of reinstatement to the rosters to "permit persons who have resigned or have been removed from the rosters of this church solely because they have entered into a loving, lifelong partnership with another person of the same sex that is mutual, chaste, and faithful, to apply for reinstatement immediately."
Many synods have been involved in a memorialization process this year that includes the issues in response to this case and are slated for action at the upcoming Churchwide Assembly in Chicago in August. Will they promote a significant change ahead of the predetermined 2009 Assembly where this issue was to be fully discussed and determined.
The ELW Psalms
Dr. George Muenich
In the new ELW, the Psalms have been critically altered in many instances. Of the one hundred and fifty Psalms, ninety-nine are re-written and don’t even come close to an acceptable translation, let alone paraphrase of the original. They are neither acceptable English, nor do they retain any honoring of the original language. Eighteen of the Psalms are questionable, and only thirty-three are more-or-less acceptable.
There are ninety-nine non-Psalms, shifting and changing words an tenses such that they are new writings due to various avoidances of pronouns in reference to God. They thus fall into a language which is not English, and which violates the original language. If they really wanted to avoid "masculine" pronouns, thus creating paraphrases, they should have played around with the metric Psalters of the Calvinists, and "de-sexed" them, because metric Psalms are at best paraphrases, albeit sometimes quite good devotional literature/poetry in their own right. This falls into a place where on could say that this tampers with Scripture. Revelation 22:18-19 can properly be understood to apply to the whole Bible, and frankly even want the Apocrypha/Deuterocanonicals shouldn’t be messed with; even if they are not canonical Scripture in the sense of the rest of the accepted cannon. The unacceptable Psalms are: 2-4, 9-11, 13, 14, 16, 18-20, 22-25, 27-31, 33-35, 37, 40, 42-44, 46-48, 50, 55, 57, 58, 60, 62-64, 66-69, 72, 73, 75-78, 81, 82, 84, 85, 87, 91, 93-100, 102-108, 110, 111, 113-121, 123, 125, 127, 128, 130, 132, 135, 136, 138, 142, 144-150
There are eighteen dubious Psalms. These Psalms are mostly due to “Politically Correct” switching of singulars to plurals to avoid "masculine" pronouns. They are: 1, 5, 7, 8, 12, 15, 17, 32, 36, 41, 49, 53, 56, 65, 109, 112, 126, 137
There are thirty-three more or less acceptable Psalms in the new hymnal. They are: 6 , 21, 26, 38, 39, 45, 51, 52, 54, 59, 61, 70, 71, 74, 79, 80, 83, 86, 88-90, 92, 101, 122, 124, 129, 131, 133, 134, 139-141, 143
Commitment to the cause of Christ
Dr. Jeffray Greene
These are points to ponder. There are two types of people who will read this article. The first are those who, for the lack of a better label, are historically orthodox in their Lutheran understanding of the use of Scripture. These folk believe something is amiss in the church today because values and understandings they thought were pretty sure, tried and true are up for discussion and perhaps change. The other folk are those who want to see the church move in a different and new direction, away from what they consider an over-zealous use of the law. Many in this roughly defined group believe that the law has been used as a means of intimidation and exclusion and that use in this way needs to be corrected. We are, after all, saved by grace through faith apart from works of the law. Yet, in order to promote their cause, they too find themselves, of necessity, using law to make their point, even though ‘grace’ is their primary proclamation.
I would like to add a different dimension in this discussion. Recently, in a sermon preached on the Fifth Chapter Matthew text, where Jesus was instructing His disciples about divorce, an interesting point for our discussion was made. “Save the cause of adultery,” Jesus said, “divorce is a sin.” The sermon pointed out that this could apply to all relationships, not just marriages. In today’s world, relationships are discarded for almost any and sometimes seemingly every reason. Can the breaking of any relationship be brought within the boundaries of what Jesus was saying? If a child ‘divorces’ a parent, if a member of a congregation ‘divorces’ a congregation, save for a perversion of the relationship, is it unlawful, is it a sin?
In a recent essay, written by a prominent member of the ELCA, he said we should, “call for a communal rather than an issue driven ecclesiology.” This means we should stay together no matter what and not let issues divide us in the midst of even heated debates. It can be argued from Jesus’ statement, that when members of a congregation or the denomination flee for personal reasons, it is a divorce from the congregation or denomination. As members, we commit ourselves not only to the Lord, but also to one another. As the divorce rate has escalated in our contemporary culture, we can see a ripple effect of divorce of individuals who separate themselves from the church with their membership. Many flee commitment, much in the same way many flee marriage for any number of unacceptable reasons. We are called to remain in the relationship until death parts us, that is, unless adultery is involved. Yes there is grace, but that is always conditional upon repentance and forgiveness.
The question in the church today is whether or not what is being proposed, promoted, and sought after is ‘adultery,’ that is a perversion of the true faith. This is no small matter to dwell upon. In the tension between those who find unacceptable practices that they deem contrary to their understanding of Scripture, versus those who believe the old understood values offered as Scriptural are themselves unacceptable, finding the place where faithfulness can be agreed upon and lived is difficult. It is this tension in which we now live.
Contrasting the use of the law, i.e., remaining in a communal ecclesiology, that is, working through our differences together, versus the question of whether or not remaining with a church that is using questionable tactics and promoting questionable materials is not unlike facing the exception clause in a marital relationship by the one who was offended. There is a new theology being offered, does it cross the line? Or, to put it into the more familiar traditional language, is it heresy?
As with every generation in the age of the Fall, we battle against holding to the truth revealed in Jesus Christ, versus the onslaught of the devil who has always been a liar. Picking up our things and walking away is not something that should be done lightly, even if many have done just that. Instead, we are in the relationships we are in and we are all called to be faithful to God’s calling on our life to be a shining light. For the orthodox, there is the call to remain as long as possible for the sake of others. Our contrasting culture declares that its okay if we don’t like something to just leave. It is exactly when we take this untenable situation seriously that we all discover what it means to be a part of the royal priesthood of all believers, called to serve, rather than be served. As has been true throughout the history of the ELCA, we are in the midst of significant dynamics that impact us not only now, but will impact future generations.
To all our readers, I encourage you to remain faithful to the Lord’s calling in your life and to walk through the tensions in our church leaning wholly on the power of the Holy Spirit to guide and direct you. Although it has been our goal from the beginning to encourage faithfulness, we have not been gifted with a prophetic utterance as to where all that is plaguing our church is taking us. We do know that God has promised to work all things fro glory for those who love Him, so that promise is sure. But between these times and the final time, our resolve should be to remain faithful to the One who has obtained salvation for us all, the Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.