Category Archives: Religious News

ELCA statistics: two years after CWA09

At the 2009 Churchwide Assembly of the ELCA (CWA09), a human sexuality social statement was adopted and ministry policies were revised to allow partnered gays to be “recognized and supported” and to serve as fully rostered clergy. These actions caused some to issue doomsday predictions for the future of the ELCA. Truth be told, some hoped for ELCA devastation and cheerleaded the prospect. Lutheran CORE spawned a dissident denomination with pretensions to “realign North American Lutheranism.” My blog tracking reports identify these Google searches just within the last month: “Collapse of ELCA”, “Downfall of ELCA”, “ELCA decline”, and more.

What is the reality?

To be sure, these past two years have been painful as congregations and members have departed the ELCA, and the process of separation has been conflicted and rhetoric harsh. Coupled with the Great Recession, church revenues have decreased significantly, resulting in deep cuts in order to keep the Churchwide budget balanced.

Yet, the upbeat and hopeful 2011 ELCA Churchwide Assembly (CWA11) struck harmonious chords–consonant and not dissonant. ELCA Secretary David Swartling provided the numbers, according to the latest data available:

95% of over ten thousand ELCA congregations remain
94% of over four million ELCA members remain
There have been 832 first votes to leave (51 congregations voted multiple times)
621 congregations have passed the first vote
517 congregations have passed the second vote
The greatest number of defecting congregations are rural
The greatest number of defecting members are from large, urban congregations (megachurches)
Annual congregational benevolence exceeded $2 billion
Total congregational assets exceeded $22 billion, which is growing
In many communities where congregations have splintered, Synodically Authorized Worshiping Communities (SAWC) have sprung up

A constitutional amendment was passed during CWA11 pertaining to separation procedures. A congregation with a failed first vote must have a cooling off period and may not vote again for six months. Also, a congregation with a failed second vote must start the process over but not before the cooling off period of six months has passed.

And what of the actions of CWA09, were they revisited by CWA11? Were there skirmishes on the floor?

Nary a whisper.

I know that Goodsoil, the LGBT advocacy group, came prepared to defend the actions of CWA09 if necessary, but nothing developed. The recommendation of the Memorials committee to decline any reconsideration was adopted en bloc without comment. No floor resolutions were offered. The anti-bullying resolution passed without any speakers in opposition and with 97.5% in favor. Clearly, this church body has moved on with a sense of hope and renewed mission, and the inclusiveness embodied in the actions of CWA09 is now part of our identity.

With Mark Twain, we may confidently state, the report of our death is exaggerated.

How Can This Be? ELCA Assembly Opening Sessions

The morning and early afternoon of the first day of CWA11 were dry and boring—a lot of “how-to” instructions on procedures as well as introduction of matters to come later. But, with the afternoon worship, the Assembly began to soar. Presiding Bishop Mark Hanson’s sermon was interrupted by “amens” and applause as he offered powerful words of hope and encouragement based upon the Lucan gospel theme of Mary’s annunciation.

“How can this be?” asked Mary, shocked by the angel’s revelation, and this phrase became the bishop’s refrain as he challenged the Assembly to hear Mary’s song and to dare to follow the call of the Spirit to do mission in the 21st century.

So are we ready for the Holy Spirit to move us with Mary? I believe that, as the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, we are being moved by the power of the Holy Spirit to sing Mary’s song of God’s disrupting, dislocating, relocating power.

Friends, you know and I know that religious leaders singing Mary’s song are not packing people into sports stadiums for so-called religious rallies. In a consumer-oriented, competitive, what-has-God-done-for-me-lately? religious marketplace, we are not going to hear much about God dismantling structures that marginalize and exclude people in poverty or those whose race or gender or citizenship or sexual orientation, physical or mental abilities or health make them unwanted, unnoticed.

But that is Mary’s song, and it is Mary’s song that the Holy Spirit will give you the courage and voice to sing. It is Mary’s song of God bringing the despised and the marginalized, the outcast and the downcast, the defeated and the denied, and even
the dead into a new place. The place where God is building the new creation—the new community in Christ.

When we have been disrupted by God’s grace, when we have been dislocated, when we have been knocked off balance by God’s word of judgment and left wondering, “How can this be?” the Holy Spirit moves us. The Holy Spirit relocates us into God’s
abundant mercy, into a community of faith that with Mary believes “Nothing will be impossible with God.”

Oh yes, this is who we are as the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America—a community freed in Christ to serve. So let this assembly unfold. Come, Holy Spirit. Come with your power, Holy Spirit. Move us as you moved Mary. Move us to sing, to live Mary’s song. Move us to faith. Move us to a living, daring confidence in God’s grace. Move us to respond with Mary, “Here am I—here we are. Let it be to me—let it be to us, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, according to your word.”

If the opening worship was the main act, there was also a sideshow. The clownish Fred Phelps of the Westboro Baptist Church, the same who protest at military funerals, attempted to picket our Assembly, but the host Convention Center refused to let them on the grounds. Thus, their demonstration went unnoticed a mile away, and after an hour they departed.

After worship and after dinner, the Assembly returned for Plenary Session II Monday evening, and the main item on the agenda was the kickoff of the ELCA Malaria Campaign. The presentations roused the voting members to the point that I half expected a motion from the floor to raise the appeal to a higher level than $15 million. Despite the fact that malaria is both preventable and treatable, a child dies from malaria every 45 seconds. Every 45 seconds!

Here are the opening paragraphs of the resolution adopted by a vote of 968-19.

To launch the ELCA Malaria Campaign under the auspices of ELCA World Hunger as a major fundraising effort of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, its synods and congregations, and its affiliated ministries, auxiliaries, and individual members, that will encompass the best efforts of this church to join companion churches in Africa and
ELCA full-communion partners to contain deaths related to malaria by 2015;

To join with domestic and global partners to address malaria as a disease intensified by poverty within the context of comprehensive and sustainable community development and in close cooperation and partnership with this church’s companion churches in Africa and The Lutheran World Federation;

To invite every congregation, synod, affiliated ministry, auxiliary, and individual member of this church to make a contribution toward the goal of $15 million over the next four years (2011–2015) while emphasizing that gifts to the ELCA Malaria Campaign are not intended to replace giving to ELCA World Hunger but demonstrate commitment above and beyond normal ELCA World Hunger giving;

Over $1.5 million was pledged before the Assembly opened, and another $150,000 or so was pledged during the assembly.

After the plenary, I fired up my laptop in the lobby (the only place wireless was available without an exorbitant fee), but I barely checked my email before I was swept up in an engaging conversation that lasted late into the night—thus setting a precedent that would continue for the duration.

Holy Trinity of New Prague followup

I previously mentioned Holy Trinity of New Prague at the end of my recent update on the Lutheran Congregations in Mission for Christ (LCMC). This church and city are near my home in Northfield, Minnesota, and I previously reported that this ELCA congregation was considering dual affiliation with LCMC despite clear messages from their ELCA Synod office that dual affiliation was unconstitutional. What is more, after the Synod Bishop was invited by ELCA supporters to speak, the Bishop was “uninvited” by the church council, and the meeting had to be arranged at the local Knights of Columbus meeting hall rather than at the church building. That much was previously discussed here.

The dual affiliation vote was scheduled for Sunday, August 14th, the same day that I traveled to Orlando for the start of the ELCA Churchwide Assembly (CWA11). The Delta flight from Minneapolis was full, and at least half the passengers were Lutherans like me traveling to the Assembly. While we awaited the prearranged shuttle to the convention center, I overheard a conversation about Holy Trinity, and I visited with Synod staff who had just learned that the vote to dual affiliate had failed 145 to 117.

Since then, I haven’t heard much from New Prague. Presumably, both sides are evaluating the consequences of this rejection of the leadership of the pastor and the council. What is the future of that pastor, who invested a heavy measure of his good will with the congregation, in a failed attempt to lead down a path the congregation chose not to follow? Will the pastor attempt to salvage his congregational standing? If so, how? Having cast his lot with LCMC, how will the pastor continue as rostered ELCA clergy? Even if the pastor is contrite, will the majority of the congregation have any confidence in and support for the pastor?

ELCA Church Wide Assembly ends

Two years ago, I attended the ELCA 2009 Churchwide Assembly (CWA09) as a volunteer, and I had plenty of opportunity to submit reports to the blogosphere. Many readers found this blog at that time and have continued as regular followers.

The 2011 biennial Churchwide Assembly (CWA11) convened in Orlando a week ago, Monday the 15th of August, and I was there as a voting member. I fully intended to provide ongoing blog updates, but that proved to be impossible due to time and energy spent in plenary sessions, worship, morning discussions in the lobby while sipping Starbucks coffee, or late night gab sessions with friends old and new.

I met a few blog or social media contacts face-to-face: blogger Pastor Justin Johnson from New York, Augsburg Fortress CEO Beth Lewis, and Pastor Nadia Bolz-Weber of Denver. I rekindled friendships with the leaders of Lutherans Concerned/Goodsoil. I enjoyed a couple of long discussions with my cousin Bill Gafkjen, who is finishing his first year as Bishop of the Indiana-Kentucky Synod; Bishop Bill was added to the St. Olaf Board of Regents during the Assembly, so we look forward to seeing Bill in Northfield from time to time. John Nunes, President and CEO of Lutheran World Relief, offered a verbal book report to me and other conversation partners regarding my Wretched Man novel. And so many more …

So, please excuse the tardy nature of my assembly reports, which I will post here this week.

At this time, I will offer this foreword. On Thursday evening, Bishop Huck Usgaard gathered the voting members from the SE Mn Synod for a final prayer huggle. Erica Staab asked each to offer a one-word summation. Here are a few responses: awesome, overwhelming, fulfilling, gratifying, uplifting, powerful …

One veteran suggested this was the most spirited and spirit-filled Churchwide Assembly since the very first one two-and-a-half decades ago. Others offered these metaphors: a cleansing exhale after a long time holding our breath, all in the boat paddling in the same direction, eyes meeting in trust rather than averted in suspicion.

More to come …

Submissive wife?

At the Republican debate last night, Michelle Bachman was asked whether she was a submissive wife. Perhaps the question itself was sexist, but prior Bachmann statements suggested that she accepted certain Biblical writings about women rather literally, and the question was asked against that background:

It is a philosophy that Michele Bachmann echoed to congregants of the Living Word Christian Center in 2006, when she stated that she pursued her degree in tax law only because her husband had told her to. “The Lord says: Be submissive, wives. You are to be submissive to your husbands,” she said. [referring to Titus 2:5]

Last night, Bachman responded to the question by suggesting she “respected” her husband. Equating “to submit” with “to respect” is more than a tiny stretch, but I’m sure her minions were satisfied with her Biblical exegesis. Read more …

ELCA Churchwide Assembly to consider anti-bullying resolution

I have two vivid bullying memories from my youth half a century ago.

I attended a small, mid-Minnesota K-12 public school, and the first memory is a positive one. In early elementary school, the class always formed a line in the hallway before moving anywhere (being line leader was a great honor). One day as the line was assembling, a high schooler who happened to be passing through the hall picked on one of my classmates—don’t remember who or why, but what I do remember was a senior, an athlete, upbraiding the one who did the taunting. In effect, the hero said, “if you want to pick on someone, start with me,” and of course, that was the end of it.

The second memory is one that makes me cringe, because I was the bully ringleader. In fourth grade, we had put together an exhibit of frontier days in Minnesota (it was the year of the Mn centennial) that included household items from the mid-nineteenth century. The gist of our bullying one day was to tease a girl from a poor family by suggesting that they still used these implements of a bygone era. Silly, yes. Trivial, no or I wouldn’t still feel guilty about it fifty years later.

Bullying among our youth, especially towards those perceived to be gay, has received a lot of attention recently, especially here in Minnesota where one large school district experienced a handful of teen suicides in which prior bullying may have been a factor.

In prior posts, I have repeated the haunting question of retired presiding Bishop of the ELCA, Herb Chilstrom, “what will you say to your sons and daughters, sisters and brothers and others in your churches when they tell you they are homosexual?”, and I have posed the further question whether one’s church is part of the problem or part of the solution. Clearly, the ELCA as a church body seeks to be part of the solution.

Of the sixty-five regional Synods of the ELCA, thirty-seven have passed a nearly identical anti-bullying resolution onto the Churchwide Assembly (CWA11) for consideration. CWA11 opens on Monday, the 15th of August, and I’ll be there as a voting member.

Here is pertinent language from these memorials (the full text is here—click on memorials committee report):

WHEREAS … research indicates children with disabilities or special needs are at a higher risk of being bullied than others (Rigby, K., 2002, New Perspective on Bullying. London. Jessica Kingsley Publications); and it has concluded, “Bullying around issues of sexual orientation, non-conforming gender behaviors, and dress was the most common form of bullying, second only to issues of appearance (e.g., body size and disability)” …

WHEREAS, in the social statement Human Sexuality: Gift and Trust (2009), this church declares, “Likewise, it [the ELCA] will attend to the particular needs of children and the families of those with actual or perceived differences in sexual orientation or gender identity because they are especially vulnerable to verbal, physical, emotional, spiritual,
psychological, and sexual abuse;” …

WHEREAS, the voice of the church addressing the intersection of race, economic status, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, psychological, and physical ability is a powerful witness …

Here then are the series of action items taken from the Alaska resolution simply because theirs is first alphabetically.

RESOLVED, that the Alaska Synod encourage new partnerships among our congregations, the synods, the churchwide organization, outdoor ministries, campus ministries, Lutheran School Associations, Lutherans Concerned/North America, Lutheran Social Services organizations, public schools, counseling centers, and other governmental organizations in order to support and offer preventative programs addressing bullying, harassment, and other related violence, especially with
higher risk populations; and be it further

RESOLVED, that these partnerships be encouraged to create or join with existing preventative programs which:

a. utilize positive, inclusive, empowering and developmentally appropriate materials,
b. raise participant’s awareness about the issue, c. focus on prevention,
d. seek to change bystander behavior into ally behavior, e. create partnerships between youth and adults; and be it further

RESOLVED, that these partnerships seek funding for these efforts from a combination of existing funds and new funding sources not otherwise accessible individually such as foundation grants, synod and other Lutheran organizational grants (e.g., Thrivent Financial for Lutherans, Wheat Ridge Ministries, Women of the ELCA), private and governmental funding sources; and be it further

RESOLVED, that the Alaska Synod memorialize the 2011 Churchwide Assembly to encourage, support, and publicize new partnerships in ministry that emerge in this church addressing the prevention of bullying, harassment, and related forms of violence, especially with higher risk populations.

The Memorials Committee issued a favorable recommendation including the following language (emphasis added):

Thirty-seven synods have presented similar memorials on the topic of “preventing bullying, harassment, and related violence.” These memorials ask the Churchwide Assembly to take action to expand the ministries of this church that address the problems of bullying, harassment, and related violence. The majority of the memorials cite two social statements in support of this request: (1) Our Calling in Education (2007), which affirms that opposition to bullying and other forms of harassment are components of truly safe schools, conducive to effective teaching and learning; and, (2) Human Sexuality: Gift and Trust (2009), which notes that children with actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity differences and their families are frequent targets of abusive behavior. The citations from the two social statements of this church rightly identify concerns within these statements that this church
should aggressively address bullying and related forms of abuse.

Lutherans Concerned North America sponsored and promoted these resolutions at the Synod level and will be advocating for them at CWA11.

Lutheran Congregations in Mission for Christ (LCMC) Update

Lutheran Congregations in Mission for Christ (LCMC) has been around for a decade or so. For awhile, many of their loose association of congregations remained ELCA but such dual affiliation is no longer possible (see below). In earlier posts, I suggested LCMC was merely a website and a mailing list and not much more. Are they a denomination? Hear their own explanation:

LCMC has referred to itself as “a post-denominational association of congregations,” as a way of acknowledging that its horizontal structure is different than the more vertical structure of many classic denominations.

But having said that, LCMC is recognized as a church body (denomination) by the IRS, by the ELCA, and by other denominations. LCMC does have structure that is defined in its Constitution and bylaws. LCMC has member congregations, association-wide meetings, a clergy List (roster), a retirement and health plan, and regional and otherwise configured Districts for congregational support. LCMC does endorse chaplains for the military and its pensions and health plans transfer. Seminary students have a candidacy process and clergy a certification process.

While we understand our association to be post-denominational, we are a denomination by most societal definitions.

While the LCMC organization has certainly developed in the last couple of years, it is still the case that they are intentionally congregationally based, and their national and regional structures are mere skeletons. They still have a miniscule staff and the services they offer to clergy and congregation are extremely limited. LCMC clergy tend to receive less in salary and benefits than their ELCA counterparts (see below), and their clergy standards are looser. Some clergy who have been disciplined by the ELCA have found a safe haven in the LCMC. They have no seminaries but merely working arrangements with existing seminaries that actually have more of a Baptist bent than Lutheran. A quick review of the pictures on their website suggests their informality … mostly open shirts without tie or clergy collars, and their worship style tends to be “low church”.

It is also their reputation that they have been extremely aggressive in courting ELCA congregations to switch, and their tactics have been questioned. That continues.

Anecdotally, there is a situation right here right now that is illustrative. Holy Trinity Lutheran Church in nearby New Prague, Minnesota, an ELCA congregation, has a vote scheduled this weekend to consider dual affiliation with LCMC. I became aware of that when my blog lit up earlier this week with folks from that community searching Google for variations on the term “dual affiliation”. A year ago, I wrote a blog post that questioned whether LCMC supporters were pushing dual affiliation as a non-constitutional measure to exit the ELCA. That is, in congregations where the votes are not there to achieve a withdrawal from the ELCA, some LCMC folks promoted affiliating with the LCMC, a violation of the ELCA constitution, with the hope that their punishment would be a banishment from the ELCA. They get out of the ELCA without meeting the requirements for doing so, and the ELCA is perceived as the bully … the best of all possible results.

Back to Holy Trinity in New Prague.

My sources tell me that there were two “informational” meetings recently with LCMC representatives present to make their case, but that ELCA representatives were not allowed. In fact, the ELCA bishop or his representative is persona non grata on congregational property, and the Bishop’s meeting with ELCA supporters today will take place at the local Knights of Columbus meeting hall and not at the church building! My sources also tell me that the instigator is the senior pastor, and that also fits a pattern. More often than not, when a congregation has exited the ELCA, it is because their clergy led their flock over the cliff. In an interesting twist, some suspect the senior pastor is pushing dual affiliation as a way to retain his own ELCA based salary and benefits but to allow the congregation to save money by hiring a lesser paid associate pastor from the LCMC roster.

I have a button from a United Methodist Conference that reads, “All means all”, which is meant to critique congregations that claim “all are welcome” but set preconditions. In the case of Holy Trinity in New Prague, their claim, “Holy Trinity is a congregation of warm, welcoming people who are reaching out to new people with the love and grace of Jesus Christ” apparently doesn’t apply to their own Bishop.

In any case, the ELCA does not currently allow dual affiliations, and the scheduled vote is contrary to constitution. Some have whined, “but the ELCA used to have dual affiliations with some Missouri Synod congregations,” and that is true. So, why does the ELCA strictly interpret its constitution now regarding the LCMC? Let me answer with a question: why would the ELCA permit a dual affiliation with an organization that is in its origin and identity antagonistic toward the ELCA?

Lutheran CORE update

Once an advocacy group within the ELCA, Lutheran CORE cut ties to the ELCA immediately after the 2009 Churchwide Assembly and in 2010 formed its own denomination, The North American Lutheran Church (NALC). That denomination meets this week in Ohio for their second annual convocation.

From their website and their recent newsletters, it is clear that CORE/NALC continues to self-define as opposition to the ELCA. To the question Who are you? the answer would appear to be, we are not the ELCA, and ELCA bashing continues to be the coin of their realm. A recent post on the CORE blog contains the entire letter of resignation from the ELCA by a pastor, who happens to be the blog moderator, and he graciously acknowledges that “many” of his former pastoral colleagues in the South Dakota Synod (not “most” and certainly not “all”) are “faithful Christians”. A newsletter article written by NALC Bishop Paull Spring asks, “What is to prevent the North American Lutheran Church from reverting to what the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America is?”

The brochure announcing the Convocation and the accompanying theological conference contains the following:

Yet, some Christians and churches act as though …
This conference will seek to reaffirm the strong teachings of classical Lutheran theology, rather than follow the more fashionable trends of various liberal and liberation theologies.
it is time for Lutherans to reverse the direction of current mission policy, which is backed by a faulty theology.

The conference will feature the usual suspects that are continuously recycled–Braaten, Benne, Nestingen–and also a special guest speaker … a leader of the schismatic Episcopal group (ACNA).

Recent issues of the NALC newsletter suggest the denomination now numbers 200 congregations and 100,000 members. For comparison, the ELCA has roughly ten thousand congregations and 4 million members, the Missouri synod has 2.4 million members, and the Wisconsin Synod nearly 400,000 members. The other dissident organization that has split from the ELCA, Lutheran Congregations in Mission for Christ (LCMC) apparently has over 300,000 members.

The newsletters also note that CORE/NALC meets a couple of times a year with LCMC, “to consider how the two church bodies might better work together” but nothing substantial comes from these meetings other than “all those present were grateful for the chance to talk, listen and grow in their appreciation for each church body, better appreciating our similarities and differences. There was also a sense of hope for a developing partnership in mission and ministry.” My prediction is that too much turf would have to be surrendered by one or the other organization to form a meaningful partnership. As one LCMC pastor candidly acknowledged back in 2009 “LCMC and NALC will be splitting a small pie”.

Presbyterians, Methodists, and gays: an update

In May, the Twin Cities Presbytery became the latest Presbytery to affirm changes in the Presbyterian Church USA (PCUSA) constitution. Their vote meant that a majority of Presbyteries had affirmed changes that would allow gay clergy, and thus the Presbyterians joined other mainline Protestant denominations with similar policies (United Church of Christ–UCC, Episcopal Church USA—ECUSA, and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America—ELCA).

More recently, Presbyterian Ecclesiastical courts have issued two decisions interpreting and implementing the policy changes. In both cases that began before the recent policy changes, the ordinations of openly gay persons were at issue. Last week, the Scott Anderson case was dismissed on the basis that the issues were now moot, and

the way is now clear for him to proceed to ordination as Teaching Elder (the traditional Presbyterian term for minister). In his case, the GAPJC [court] found that the opponent’s argument was now moot because the rule barring participation in leadership by lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender members no longer exists in the Book of Order.

The second case was remanded for further proceedings for somewhat murky reasons. See the reports at More Light Presbyterians for more information on both cases.

Scott Anderson currently serves as executive director of the Wisconsin Council of Churches. Here is the link to an earlier blog post that discussed his case. I recently had the pleasure of visiting with him during the Wisconsin United Methodist Annual Conference where we each had booths in the exhibit hall.

At that same UMC Wisconsin Conference, I renewed friendships with Pastor Amy DeLong and her supporters. Here is my earlier blog post about Rev Amy. At the Wisconsin UMC Annual Conference in early June, Rev Amy was only a week away from her own trial before a UMC ecclesiastical court, charged with a) being a “self-avowed practicing homosexual” and b) for celebrating a holy union of a lesbian couple.

Amy was calm and committed to the course ahead.

“What are your chances of winning?” someone asked.

“One hundred per cent,” Amy replied.

As Amy’s trial was pending, others within the UMC had engaged in supportive actions. On January 31, 2011 a large group of retired UMC bishops issued a statement calling for a removal of the UMC ban on gay clergy. At this spring’s round of UMC regional conferences, significant numbers of UMC clergy signed documents promising to “offer the grace of the Church’s blessing to any prepared couple desiring Christian marriage,” including same-sex couples, which was precisely the second charge against Rev Amy. I attended the Northern Illinois UMC Annual Conference, and they passed a resolution offering their own twist—for clergy convicted of officiating at a gay marriage, the penalty would merely be a one day suspension, an obvious signal to the Wisconsin Court in Rev Amy’s pending trial that a slap on the wrist punishment would be in order.

And that is precisely what happened. First, the charge that Rev Amy was “a self-avowed practicing homosexual” was dismissed for lack of proof. If I understand the decision correctly, it would have been necessary for the prosecution to prove that she engaged in same-gender, genital, sexual activity, and it was clear the court simply didn’t want to go there. She was convicted of the charge of performing a holy union, but the penalty was a mere twenty-day suspension, plus the task of writing and presenting a document regarding the UMC clergy covenant to be considered by the 2012 Wisconsin UMC Annual Conference for action.

Lastly, new charges have sprung up here in Minnesota. It seems that one of the UMC clergy who promised to perform same-gender blessings if asked to do so, did so. During the recent Gay Pride festival in Loring Park in Minneapolis, Pastor Greg Renstrom of New Harmony UMC in Minneapolis “participated in services of blessings”.

In a commendable display of openness and balance, Minnesota UMC Bishop Sally Dyck writes a current accounting of the case that is published online at the Conference’s website.

Bishop Dyck writes:

I don’t normally discuss formal complaints in a public venue like this or announce them through the clergy e-mail list as I already have done, but this is an unusual situation. This complaint comes in the context of a statement signed by 70 Minnesota United Methodists saying that they would “offer the grace of the Church’s blessing to any prepared couple desiring Christian marriage.” (At the time of writing this column I had not seen the signatory list so I don’t know whether Rev. Renstrom was among them.)

It also comes in the context of the United Methodist Church trial of Wisconsin elder Rev. Amy DeLong, who was tried for violating the denomination’s ban on “self-avowed practicing” gay clergy and its prohibition against officiating at same-sex unions. Many watched the trial closely.

Rev. Renstrom has agreed to this public reporting and I will give him opportunity to approve whatever I release. We both believe that it will help us all understand and bring clarity to this matter of leading holy unions in the context in which we find ourselves. (emphasis added)

To be continued …

Business as usual?

The 2009 Church Wide Assembly of the ELCA (CWA09) arrived with a great deal of anticipation. The Social Statement on Human Sexuality was due for consideration as well as proposed changes to ministry policies. The potential impact on church policy vis a vis the LGBTQ community was huge.

There was also tension as the Convention opened. Lutheran CORE, the conservative opposition to the Sexuality Statement and the Ministry Policy Revisions, maintained a “hospitality” room in a prominent location. Not so prominent, stuck on the second floor and down the hallway, Goodsoil Central nevertheless was a hive of activity of LGBTQ advocates.

A curiosity–there was a discernible difference in appearance between the two sets of volunteers. The folks from Goodsoil Central tended to be rather casual in dress and wore prayer shawls while the cadre from CORE tended toward clergy collars, pressed black suits, and fresh haircuts. Just my impression.

As the start of CWA11 approaches, the mood is different, expressed in the simple, understated Assembly theme–“Freed in Christ to Serve”.

To be sure, there will likely be floor resolutions seeking to rescind the Sexuality Statement and ministry policies adopted at CWA09, but few expect such proposals to receive significant support. There are sixty-five Synods in the ELCA, and there was not much traction for change in their regional assemblies leading to the upcoming Church Wide Assembly. Only three of the sixty-five Synods have submitted “memorials” urging the whole church to reverse course while dozens of Synods (37) have memorialized Church Wide to adopt an anti-bullying resolution advocated by Goodsoil.

Perhaps the biggest business item at CWA11 will be a proposed restructuring requiring constitutional amendments. The amendments proposed by a study commission (LIFT = Living Into the Future Together) call for a shift in governance from a two-year cycle of national conventions to a three-year cycle. Because the national conventions are the ultimate legislative authority of the church, spreading out the time between sessions also requires expansion of the roles of Church Council, Council of Bishops, and Synods to govern in the interim. The proposals have cost savings implications but also a diffusion of authority.

Finally, a social statement on Genetics that has been in the works for a number of years will also be considered by CWA11.

I’ll be there as a voting member, and my Synod (SE MN) will be testing a paperless system by using iPads instead of the reams of paper required to print out the pre-assembly report (which is also available online right now) and other assembly documents. Follow me by RSS feed or Twitter (@LiberalSpirit) for regular updates.