Many in my congregation has become aware that Bishop W. Chris Boerger, Northwest Washington Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, has been speaking out publicly in favor of Marriage Equality and Referendum 74 that is on Washington State's ballot this fall. Some have suggested that this is not appropriate for a bishop to do, especially around such a cultural and church divisive issue.
I tend to agree with this way of thinking. When I was laid hands on by my bishop at the time and my soon to be peers, I took a vow to not ever be a cause of division within a congregation. I have never seen my role as pastor as such. I believe deep down in my heart that the Church can have differences of opinion on cultural issues, but still be united in confessing our Lord as Savior of the world.
But ...
At our Synod Assembly this past spring a resolution was passed overwhelmingly in favor of SB 6239. In that resolution it calls for the NWWS and its member congregation and individuals to study scripture and the ELCA social statement on sexuality: Human Sexuality: Gift and Trust. Bishop Boerger is only following the mandate of his synod, who met in a legally called meeting and through a legal process of the church, to advocate on behalf of the Marriage Equality law and the protection of GLBTQ people.
If anyone is not following through with this resolution it would be I. I have not led this congregation through a biblical study on sexuality nor lifting up our social statement on sexuality. We will need to rectify this situation.
Marriage Equality is a culturally divisive issue with passion on both sides, as are other issues (abortion, immigration, etc.). But, we remain the Church even if we cannot agree, because these are not issues of salvation. Confessing our Lord and Savior as the healer of the world is a salvation issue. Luther would call many of the issues we fight about "adiaphora," a word that in the Greek means "little things." Issues that distract us from our work as the Church Luther would call adiaphora. Why? Because the foremost work of the Church is to proclaim Jesus Christ crucified and risen, baptize in the name of the triune God and advocate for "least of these."
Bishop Boerger is just following the direction of the synod. You may not agree with what he is doing, but he is not doing it on his own initiative. He is doing this advocating on behalf of our synod at her direction.
7 comments:
Given the archetype for the heterosexual life covenant, its status as near genetic memory, the attempt to change its terms may be futile. You can pass ten laws that require everyone to call a rock "a feather" , but it will still be a rock even if it is sculpted like a feather. Calling the gay life covenant "marriage" will not make it a marriage. Rather it betrays an unconscious bigotry against gays. It says that their relationship must be defined a heterosexual if it is to be deemed acceptable. It says we do not believe the malle/male or female/female life agreement is worthy of its own term.
Not sure what you are saying. Apparently you are voting yes on legalizing marijuana. And until you have the balls to post under your real name I feel no need to respond to insipid comments like this. (yes, I get you are trying to use Aristotelian arguments but you failed that class I take it.).
As an evangelical, I contend this issue is entirely one of salvation because it goes to the heart of what our view is of Christ and his work of salvation in redeeming the world. As I understand it, and (I'm sure) very simply stated, the revisionist view is that God loves me, warts and all, and wants to bless me and all the warts that my culture deems acceptable. My view is that God loves me, warts and all, and wants to remove the warts from me so that I may become a new creation in Christ.
The fact that a bunch of mostly white, middle aged men, in one denomination of a church, decided to change their minds about what behaviors they think God should/will bless, is irrelevant in my book. The United Methodist Church could pass resolutions proclaiming that dancing before a golden calf is an acceptable form of worship but that wouldn't make it so.
We have two separate and distinct gospels, Tor. We as a Church need to acknowledge that and not pretend we do.
As an Evangelical Lutheran I contend that I believe that Jesus is our Lord and Savior and I trust that you do, too! The work of the Church is to preach this Good News of Jesus Christ. It does not matter what view we have God's work - God does not care one whit what we think (Job 38:4). So there cannot be two Gospels. (Name calling such as revisionist is just sad.)
There is only one Gospel: Jesus Christ Crucified and Risen for all (Luke 4:18). There is no changing that by anyone - we can agree on this.
But there is a difference between primary and secondary conversations about what God is doing in our midst. Primary discourse or conversation has to do with salvific issues - what is God doing in the world. Primary conversations cannot nor should they involve what we do. We have no say in our salvation - only God is judge (Psalm 62:1, Acts 10:42). Through Jesus' resurrection we are made whole; through Holy Baptism we are joined to the body of Christ; through The Lord's Supper we are forgiven and made whole again. These are all works of God.
Secondary issues have to do with what we are about, what has God called us to be in the world. The issue with secondary conversations or discourses is that they are all tied to our own interpretation. There is much in scripture that we ignore because we change as a culture and we see what is in scripture as secondary conversations: plural wives (Genesis 28:9), selling your daughter (Exodus 21:7), slavery (Genesis 9:25), clothing (Leviticus 19:19), what is clean and unclean to eat (Leviticus 20:25, Acts 10:15), etc. So why not the issue of homosexuality? What makes this secondary issue one that will divide us? It is something very perplexing to me, mostly because it has nothing to do with salvation - for salvation belongs only to God.
Figures an ELCA pastor would call abortion "a little thing".
it is a salvation thing and anyone who supports killing babies that God created will find out how much of a salvation issue it is. Also on homosexual activity, ask the Apostle Paul how big an issue it is. ELCA just know better.
Tor Berg - ELCA people are revisionists. Have you seen the new hymnal where all the masculine pronouns is the Psalms for God are changed? Again, ask Paul if revising scripture is a little thing. You love to cite OT for outdated practices. How about a list of practices supported in the NT that are outdated? I know marriage between a man and a woman in one you would cite, what else? Enough of your cigar puffing pseudo intellectualism.
hynemc - I really cannot follow what you are saying, it does not follow at all what I wrote. If you want me to quote things in the NT that we have changed our minds on, how about slavery (Philemon, Ephesians) or blaming Jews for Christ's death (John) or women covering their heads (Paul) or women in leadership, etc.
You are ignorant and I wish you would spend time reading the Bible and develop an argument instead of calling names or spewing half-truths. I love to argue but please give me the courtesy of spending time in response.
Post a Comment