I’m new to Northfield and the Southeast Minnesota synod of the ELCA, one of sixty-five synods spread around the country. Each synod has a chief administrator and “pastor to the pastors”, a bishop. In Southeast Minnesota, that would be Bishop Huck Usgaard. On Wednesday the 9th, Bishop Huck invited the clergy from the 185 congregations of the synod to come together to discuss the recent ELCA Churchwide assembly actions approving gay clergy in “publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous” relationships and allowing congregations to recognize and support same gender couples. I was pleased to be present.
The bishop began by reminding the assembled that the ELCA and its predecessors have a history of conflict over issues of inclusion as old as Paul and his Gentile churches against James and the Jerusalem church. Closer to home, he shared the story of the two Lutheran churches of his home town in Iowa that had a vigorous dispute over the theology of predestination in their early days, but when they celebrated their centennial, those gathered couldn’t remember which congregation took which side. Then there was slavery and some churches were quiescent and others were activist, then women’s ordination divided congregations, and now policies of LGBT inclusion.“We’ll get through this, too,” was the implicit message of assurance.
Each of the clergy who had been voting members at the ELCA convention in Minneapolis in August were asked to share their impressions. Six or eight spoke. All, save one, were positive, even though some acknowledged they had voted “no” on the key resolutions. The one was quite negative and accused the ELCA of going against the word of God. He quoted extensively from the assembly address by the president of the Missouri Synod (LCMS), which in turn quoted from the 16th century Reformation era Formula of Concord. He fit the pattern of the Lutheran Core / WordAlone response, and he echoed their talking points … rejection of the Word of God … reference to Reformation documents … strong rightward tilt toward the LCMS. See my earlier posts here and here.
A question and answer session was followed by small group discussions. How were voting members picked? From conference meetings. The Bishop reported hearing suggestions that voting members were hand picked and/or were incompetent and/or were pressured, and for the only time during the day, he showed his irritation as he rebuked such suggestions. Have any congregations notified the bishop of an intention to secede? Not one, not yet. There was appreciation expressed for the pastoral leadership of presiding bishop, Mark Hanson, during the assembly.
We broke bread and drank wine together. Spontaneous hymn singing, a capella, broke out.
In closing, the bishop expressed hope that no members and no congregations would leave the ELCA, but he also said those staying should not be motivated by revenge or ill will—better to leave than fester. He quoted Gamaliel’s speech to the Sanhedrin after Peter and others were arrested:
keep away from these men and let them alone; because if this plan or this undertaking is of human origin, it will fail; but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them—in that case you may even be found fighting against God!
Love the Bible passage:
“keep away from these men and let them alone; because if this plan or this undertaking is of human origin, it will fail; but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them—in that case you may even be found fighting against God!”
It fits so perfectly. Thanks.
Thank you for your affirming report, as I am that pastor whom you report as being “negative”. I truly believe the ELCA has walked away from the Word of God and now has officially placed human experience equal (and maybe superior) to the authority of God’s word to his people. (Suggested homework: What exactly was Luther’s chief protest against the Catholic church?)
I’ve read that bloggers are considered members of the press and in fact can be granted press credentials at events upon request. While this meeting wasn’t billed as closed to the public. It was however, best to be called a “privilege meeting” between pastors of the SEMN Synod of the ELCA and Bishop Usgaard. Robert, I don’t believe you are a member of the rostered clergy in this synod or the ELCA for that matter. Am I correct?
Anyhow, We were never told “the press” was present as a courtesy (not that it would have mattered as far as I am concern). Did you disclose your presence and your intent to publish your observations of this meeting? If you had, I know Huck, out of his integrity, would have told us someone was going to report on this meeting. Therefore, I must express disappointment in your lack of honesty and integrity. Are these foundational characteristics of your blogging?
By the by, it was this negative pastor that kicked off the spontaneous hymn sing during Holy Communion.
@Rev. Cary Larson
Pastor Cary,
I look forward to meeting you in person, one day.
No, I am not rostered clergy, but I participate in a text study with a group of Northfield/Faribault area clergy, and I was invited to attend Bishop Huck’s gathering by the former Cannon River Conference Dean, and I traveled with a pair of local pastors. Initially, I resisted attending for the reason that I am not clergy, but these Pastors persuaded me.
It appears from your comment that you believe I fairly reported what I saw and heard, including the references to your own participation in the meeting. I was not aware that you sparked the spontaneous hymn singing, but thank you for that.
I respect your opinions even though I disagree. I have blogged extensively here about my opinion that the ELCA assembly actions were entirely consistent with the core message of the Biblical Word. I also understand that you disagree with my opinion, and that is ok, too. As we wrestle together as Jacob did, we may be bruised but hopefully we also become Israel. We must not fear disagreement but embrace it and the debate, dialogue, and discussion that hopefully helps all grow in faith and understanding.
The only disappointment I have in your comment is that you question my honesty and integrity. Certainly we can agree to disagree without impugning the good faith we each bring to the table.
Cary – You seem to have the opinion that the recent meeting with Bishop Huck was somehow exclusive to the ordained. You say, “It was however, best to be called a “privilege meeting” between pastors of the SEMN Synod of the ELCA and Bishop Usgaard.” Having been the Dean of the Cannon River Conference for some 5 years (now retired as of 2008), I can say with that history under my belt that it is a basic value of the various and assorted Conferences of the 65 Synods, that they are NOT CLERGY CLUBS! In fact, when I was Dean, 2 out of 5 Conference Deans were LAITY, as were all of the Treasurers, and 1 Vice Dean. It also happens that there were other lay persons present at that particular meeting (as there often are!), among them some interns and SE MN Synod support staff. Your post clearly implies that you have an opinion of lay persons, especially those who maintain blogs, that is radically different from mine. I like the sunshine they bring to the ELCA. I invite you to also welcome our lay leaders, and lay theologians, by showing them your hospitality.
Cary,
As a pastor in my synod recently said “The ELCA does not have a good track record of respecting the bound conscniences of those who disagree with decisions made at CWA.” (ie pastors applying for exceptional ordiantion according historical epsicopate by-law, not only being turned down but essentially being black-balled). The blogger’s referring to you as being “quite negative” and dismissing your comments as simply echoing the Lutheran Core/Word Alone talking points, as well as the SEMN syndod applying the Higgings Road talking points of “acting out of revenge and ill will” to those who might express dissapointment over the decisions made at CWA, suggest that this will not change any time soon. And they wonder why some of us are looking elsewhere.
It’s too bad you weren’t in Fargo, Cary. You would have expereinced fellowsip that has been so sadly lacking in ELCA events of late.
@Rev Steve Bliss
Rev Steve,
While Pastor Cary may not have received a large measure of agreement with his remarks, you wrongly assume that he did not experience fellowship. Indeed, it appears that it was he who spontaneously began the hymn singing that many, including myself, found uplifting. While his political voice may not have resonated, his worshiping voice found communion with all. Don’t equate lack of agreement with lack of community.
Obie,
Sorry, I should have been more clear. I was not referring so much to the gathering you guys were at. But rather to the recent synod-assemblies and especially the Churchwide assembly, where Cary and I both may have found fellowship with each other and our fellow Lutheran Core brothers and sisters, but certainly not with the assembly at large.
That said, I think you might also be a little presumptuous in your comments. While you might be right about Cary haveing expereinced fellowship, I don’t think the fact that he was the one who initiated the hymn singing is justification to assume that he would describe anything he expereinced at this gathering as fellowship.
Knowing Cary as I do, I think I can safely assume that he would agree with me that there is more to fellowship than simply singing together. Regardless, maybe we should both just let him speak for himself as to the degree to which, if at all, fellowship was expereinced.
@Rev Steve Bliss
Steve,
Beauty certainly is in the eye of the beholder and we each experience things differently. My experience of worship at the Churchwide Assembly was very positive, but I know that was not true for all.
Immediately after the critical vote, I came up to a couple of your peers in the hallway, pastors from North Dakota that I had previously visited with as a Goodsoil volunteer. We all knew that we disagreed, and I knew they were in deep pain. I tried to express the sentiment that I understood their pain even though we disagreed on the issues. One said something to the effect, “right now, we don’t feel welcome in this church.” I did my best to empathize and state that I still loved them as brothers in Christ. Tearfully, we shook hands and parted.
And that is the challenge for all of us, to find a way forward in which we disagree, and strongly, on important issues yet remain as brothers and without questioning each other’s hearts. While I resent and will resist angry rhetoric claiming I am now “unchurched’ or engaged in “heresy”, please do not see me as turning a cold shoulder. For me, I hope you and others stay in this church, despite our disagreements. If you feel you must leave, than I will respect that as well, but please understand that is your decision, based on your convictions, and not that you are being encouraged or forced to leave.
@ Rev. Kieth Holmstad
Please do not read into my post that I’m advocating or have advocated for a “clergy club”. I’m about as low church as they come and as a “second career” pastor, I know first hand the indispensable value of lay leaders to the mission of Christ’s church. I have also served this body of Christ as the council chair for two congregations in the ELCA. So, sadly, you mislabel me as one that has some sort of pompous attitude concerning our lay leaders.
The event was billed basically as a “pastor’s meeting” meaning the rostered members of the synod and, generally it goes without saying, the synod staff (clergy and lay) would be in attendance. From the office of the bishop came this in an email to me as one of the voting members to CWA 09:
“We are sending out invitations for all rostered members of the synod to join together on Wednesday, September 9 from 1:00 to 3:00 PM at Christ Lutheran Church, Byron. I am hoping this can be a time of discussion around the recent Churchwide votes. I am hopeful that you as voting members would be willing to share your perspective on what took place.”
Mr. Holmen is welcomed to his opinions and observations and blog about it until the cows come home (and the cows are content in Northfield, so they generally don’t leave). I’m just disappointed that there was no announcement that the event was going to be “reported” upon and that Mr. Holmen apparently did not disclose to the bishop nor his staff, that he would blog upon this event. Again, it mattered not to me, as I would have said, what I said, because as noted above, I was invited to “share my perspective”. Which I did.
I’m just saying it would have been a welcomed courtesy that we would have known: 1) there were other than the rostered leaders present (outside of synod staff) and specifically 2) this event was going to be blogged about. Where is the transparency? Where is the trust? Why didn’t the Northfield News or the Rochester Post get to have a reporter there too if we are going to invite (unofficially) bloggers? Don’t you see we have already an issue of trust within this suffering body and Mr. Holmen’s actions do not provide for fertile ground for reconciliation? THAT is my point.
On the flip side, I’m grateful for Mr. Holmen’s post, as he accurately, for the most part, captured my voice as one who spoke on the behalf of a significant amount of clergy (and lay) in the SEMN Synod and in the ELCA that are in apposition to these decisions that revise holy scripture and the nearly 2000 years of the Church’s understanding on these controversial matters.