The Dakotas have seen more than their share of anti-ELCA sentiment since the actions of the ELCA church wide assembly in 2009 (CWA09). I don’t have the actual statistics, but it is my impression that the percentage of congregational departures from the ELCA is higher in the three Dakota synods than nationally (South Dakota synod, Eastern North Dakota synod, and Western North Dakota synod).
The public debate has shifted recently from the CWA09 pro-gay policies to a pending ELCA social statement on genetics.
First, a bit of background about social statements. Since the birth of the ELCA in 1988 as the result of merger of prior church bodies, the ELCA has adopted ten social statements on subjects such as abortion, race, health care, and most recently in 2009, human sexuality. The process begins with an enabling resolution arising from a church wide assembly or church council and typically continues over several years of discernment, discussion, and drafts and culminates in a document presented to a church wide assembly for ratification, which requires a 2/3 majority. For example, the recent human sexuality statement process began with an enabling resolution in 2001 and was ratified after a lengthy discernment and discussion process.
Social statements are developed through a participatory process over a 5-6 year period. In particular, this social statement involved a broad and reflective process of study, discussion, prayer, and dialog engaging the entire church beginning in 2002. It involved three studies and over 30,000 responses to those studies. In 2008, 111 synodical hearings took place. Forty-two synods adopted memorials to the churchwide assembly, some calling for its adoption (37) while others called for its rejection (5).
Now back to the current discernment process for the pending statement on genetics. The enabling resolution that began the process came from the 2005 church wide assembly, and the final document will likely be presented to the next church wide assembly for consideration and possible adoption in 2011.
Seems those who would wish the ELCA ill are spreading false information about the draft document in the Dakotas, and one congregation has publicly stated that its vote to withdraw from the ELCA was based in part on its perception that the statement was anti-farmer. According to a Christian Century article:
A rural North Dakota church has voted to leave the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, not only to protest its recent policies to allow gay clergy but also its proposed statement on genetically modified foods.
Members of the Anselm Trinity Lutheran Church near Sheldon, N.D., interpreted the ELCA’s draft statement as saying farmers who use genetically modified seeds are “pretty much sinners,” said church council president Jill Bunn.
The North Dakota church has joined the more conservative Lutheran Congregations in Mission for Christ [LCMC], which attributes most of its growth to departing ELCA churches.
Eastern North Dakota Bishop Bill Rindy and others have jumped to the defense of the ELCA by attempting to correct the misinformation that is spreading. The Fargo Forum newspaper has a series of news articles and op-ed pieces; unfortunately, their articles are quickly archived and require a payment for access. Yesterday’s op-ed piece by local farmer and agronomist Sarah E.H. Lovas included the following comments [emphasis mine]:
I am a farmer from Hillsboro, N.D., and my farm enjoys biotechnology on 100 percent of the acres we farm. My day job is as an agronomist where I sell seed and monitor crop acres for farmers. The majority of the seed I sell is biotech and I use biotech in many of my agronomic recommendations.
Last summer, the infamous Dakota Farmer article was used as an instrument of fear in my congregation. My response was to read the ELCA Draft Statement on Genetics, pray and reflect on what the statement contained … I did not find any place in the document where the ELCA bans the use of GMO technology in farming. It does not outline specific farming practices at all. As a matter of fact, I found the document actually telling me to use GMO technology, but in a responsible manner …
I suggest that if you are a member of an ELCA church and this topic affects you, read the draft statement and respond. You do not need me or anyone else to tell you what your opinion is. Formulate your own. Make sure to read the draft statement, as there is a lot of misinformation floating around.
Thanks, Sarah, for offering more light and less heat to the discussion.
Meanwhile, in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, a post from the synod blog reports:
The South Dakota Synod is pleased to announce that a new ELCA community of faith is coming to life in the far northwest corner of Sioux Falls. A new sign stands tall on the land that the Sioux Falls Area Strategy Task Force chose years ago. And as the new overpass off I-90 at Marion Road opened this week, the area is poised for growth. Today, however, there are nearly 10,000 people in the area…without a gas station, a grocery store…or a church!
In September, the synod called Roe and Pat Eidsness to be lay mission developers, and they have literally moved into the neighborhood! They are currently meeting with prospective members in their home, even as they search for a larger, temporary meeting place. They have been visiting area congregations and meeting with Crossroads pastors to create awareness of the new mission start and to seek partners in the mission.
Our prayers and best wishes go out to Roe and Pat and the others behind this new start.
This will be another hot topic for the uneducated rank and file to get upset about.
How long have farmers been using hybrid seed corn ? At least as long as my 73 years and that was a genetic engineering feat. It is my feeling that the church should stay out of science except to address the misuse and extremes that could happen. Eastern North Dakota was upset about the gay issue. I have relatives there and this will just be something else to get upset about.
I talked this over with my daughter who is a medical professional. She feels it is much too soon for the church to be coming out with a social statement on genetics because all the data isn’t in scientifically to say whether embryo stem cells are better than adult stem cells. She said that it is starting to look like the adult stem cells might be better. Once again, lets not get all worked up about what some “mad scientist” might do in a fictional setting while the biologists get a better handle on what might benefit mankind. Right now so much is still in the mouse stage.
The social statement on genetics is ostensibly why the church I grew up in (in the Dakotas) voted to leave the ELCA.
However, the pastor has been active in CORE for years and had been talking up the possibility of leaving the ELCA and joining CORE’s new synod from the moment that CWA 09 was over. Their first conversations centered on the issue of homosexuality, and I think even the anti-gay pastor learned that taking the congregation out based on that issue was a little too ugly and a little too personal. So now, the ELCA is evil because they issue social statements. They are even upset about the social statement on women – so, in other words, they’re mad about what a social statement is going to say even before it’s been written.
So I would take the article from ND with a grain of salt. A lot of people are looking for a reason to be mad at the ELCA and this is as good a reason as any, I guess.
Sioux Falls is probably the most Lutheran city in the US. The last time I heard, I think there were 30 ELCA churches in town, and additional LCMS, WELS, and Free Lutheran congregations.
The real question is why social statements have to keep being issued. At all. It seems in the most recent Church council meeting a big “Go slow” sign was put up in delaying these , several were pushed back.
Or why they ever were. They are a function of the Law, and the church is supposed to be about the Gospel. (CA7)
@ Obie: Not sure about that notion of the Dakotas being fertile ground for departers. My impression has been that it has been hard to get congregations to take that step. Partly a result of (1) a sort of prairie populism that looks favorably on progressivism, (2) the SD bishop is former WordAlone and has tried to find a middle way and (3) the church in Rural Dakota is older than the US average and they are not inclined to change anything because “the next generation should decide these things.” (I have family out there…:) )
I don’t have any stats either. It is curious how the perceptions differ…
I like the way the ELCA does Social Statements. They teach us(or should teach us if Pastors would just hide them in their desk or use them as a weapons) how to talk about controversial issues. They teach us that Christians can have differing opinions. They help us see how our faith is relevant to our lives. People want them to be like papal decrees – declaring “What Lutherans Believe about This Issue” but that’s not what they are for. They are to teach us how to have conversations. Lord knows we need to learn how to do that.
I mean if “Pastors would NOT hide them…”
It does seem to be that a lot of the rank and file don’t want to talk about controversial issues. What is IS ! I think that is too bad.
Confronting controversial issues may mean that one’s beliefs need to be reexamined in the light of modern knowledge and modern conditions, not the long-past pre-modern days of the reformational confessions; and that’s the last thing that many want to do. I’m amazed at how much modernization the ELCA has been able to accomplish; I hope other denominations can do the same.
I have no interest in belonging to a church body that doesn’t at least ask me to think about contemporary issues through the lens of scripture.
@Tony Stoutenburg
I am from the Dakotas originally (and lived there for a time as an adult) and I think you’re right about a lot of what you say here. I do think that a lot of these small town churches aren’t going to be around much longer, regardless of the synod they choose to join. I’ve looked at some of the vote totals of the congregations that chose to leave the ELCA, and I’m not convinced that a congregation can survive in the long term with 12 or 15 or 30 or 40 active members, even if it shares a pastor with other churches.
I have been visiting our local UCC church since the LCMC change of the church I was attending. One day I said to the pastor “This is my soft place to fall.” Interestingly, she used my comment , editted a bit, in her newletter this month. I still “need” to be a Lutheran at times but oh how nice not to have the law shoved down my throat every Sunday. Can more Lutheran churches be “soft places to fall” for those who are struggling with life ? I hope so.
@Jeff
Why is it a question that the church should seek to speak to various issues? I don’t understand why you should say why they continue to work on and issue these should be the real question. You certainly contend that Cnurch, Bible, and tradition says this about at least some of these issues. Yet, somehow it is questionable that we would examine these matters? Seems inconsistent, at least.
As to “go slow,” from the press release on the Council meeting that seems to be a concern from the ELCA Church Council about resources (staff time and money committed thereto) rather than a statement of “be cautious” about doing social statements. The concern was specifically about being mindful of resources. As such, I think it wrong headed and unimaginative, because it is stuck in a frame and procedure in which social statement development has a heavy staff time commitment and significant budget for that, travel, etc. There are other ways the ELCA could work on these that use far fewer dollars and staff hours.
@Tony Stoutenburg
You’re not serious are you? The church should be doing social statements because they are matters of law and the church is supposed to be about gospel? And what about the whole law and gospel thing which is rather central to the Luthern hermeneutic of Scripture and theology? Your suggestion simply doesn’t wash. Further, I don’t think these issues can be so neatly divided off as only matters of the law (although they will primarily be that) without any relation to the gospel, because we should also be thinking about how the gospel speaks into the situations and topics considered (although the social statements might not always do that, or do it well, I think they should) and consider how our being recipients of the great gift the gospel brings us might affect how we think about and react to these matters.
@Ann
I thought the place to ask people to look at contemporary issues through the lens of Scripture was called the Sermon. 🙂
I figure you need about 100 active members to support a building, a parsonage and a pastor full time. A big part of the problem is that the young people largely leave. The tech revolution has meant that 1-2 farmers can do what used to take 6-7, so there may be 5 kinds in the family, but one stays to farm and the rest leave for the city somewhere. When I lived in Seattle ’88-90, there was a bar in Kent that advertised “Dakota Night” every Thursday. It was packed. If you tried that in the Twin Cities, you’d end up violating your occupancy max.
And it is not just a Dakota problem. Western MN, eastern WA, all of MT, WY, Eastern CO, Neb. Same story.
@Lilly
In WA I had three ladies who were very active in the local Community Church down the road (it was of the pentecostal variety), who showed up to get their Lutheran liturgical / Law-Gospel fix about 3 times a year.
Has Pastor BC really gone legalistic on us? I’d be surprised at that.
@Tony Stoutenburg
So what is the difference, then, between a pastor preaching on genetics or the role of women in the church and the denomination issuing a social statement? I’m not asking to be snarky; I’m genuinely confused about the position of people who are opposed to the notion that the ELCA issues social statements.
I suppose I am part of the problem as I left the Dakotas in my mid-20s and doubt I’ll be back. Most of the people I graduated with are still in South Dakota – but they migrated to the bigger cities in the state and are no longer connected to rural life at all. I probably shouldn’t disturb this hornet’s nest, but a significant number of the folks I know who left the state entirely are LGBT – and they’re people who are also no longer involved in church of any sort because of Lutheran and Catholic attitudes toward LGBT folks. LGBT people are among the people who are abandoning the Midwest and the church. And we sit here and argue about if “we” should allow LGBT people to play a bigger role in the life of the church and then wonder why that’s happening. All I can do is shake my head.
@Tony
Your crack about the sermon misses the point, in my opinion. The sermon is a monologue that does not provide any time or space for conversation or reflection while it is being spoken. A preacher may invite the congregation to consider some of the general ideas covered in a Social Statement, but the brief time alloted to a sermon simply can’t provide for any in depth dialog that is so necessary for people to gain some understanding of the issues. A Social Statement invites both – conversation and reflection. And, that’s why they are so painstakingly crafted with literally thousands of Lutherans, and others, taking part in the conversations that precede publication.
I’ve never heard of a Lutheran church where during the sermon somebody enters into a conversation with the preacher about the complex issues addressed in ELCA Social Statements. (There may be such a environment, but if so I’m not aware of it!) On the other hand, every Lutheran church I’ve belonged to has regarded the Social Statements as good ways to enter into exactly those sorts of conversations. ELCA Social Statements are literally, “theology from the bottom up” – they come from the people, they are widely circulated among the people even as they are being crafted, and they are put to a vote of the representatives of the people assembled in a formal assembly. Personally, I like that. I like that A LOT!
@Tony Stoutenburg
Yes, Tony the person you mentioned became quite legal in the LCMC process. The last straw for me was when he told our then associate pastor that he couldn’t serve 2 masters. The associate resigned because he felt he was being pressured. He was a good visitation pastor and I think he should have been allowed to complete his contract. One lady was told through her daughter that she had to repent. Yes, she maybe said some things that were taken wrong, but she does not feel welcome in that church now. For me it was the issue of my kids’ divorces. He said “They didn’t ask for a blessing on their divorces. They asked for their sins to be forgiven. ” My daughter had divorced her husband for becoming a woman. I think BC sticks his foot in his mouth and since I have had some further dealings with him , I have decided that maybe the problem is that he just doesn’t think things through. Someday I may be able to forgive him for some of these things and go back to the church where I know a lot of people, but I am not ready yet.
Wow!
@ Lilly, BC did not coin that phrase about two masters, you know. And if he had not said that to the assoc, the bishop would have. As for putting his foot in his mouth, that is a pretty big club he belongs to. Maybe you have already done this, but I would suggest you offer him the same grace that you offer the woman who “maybe said some things that were taken wrong…”
@ Keith, it was not a “crack” about the sermon, it was a serious statement. Soc Statements function as Law and the church’s proper place is to name the Law and announce the Gospel. We are not capable of doing any good works; only when we die to ourselves by the power of the Spirit are good works done in and through us.
As for the notion that social statements are bottom up, then why the 6-7 figure budgets in addition to staff time commitment? As far as I can tell, they are most often pushed for by a relatively small minority who advocate for a particular position, and the social statement ends up trying to split the difference so that no one is offended. Consider the soc st on Death Penalty from 1991 tinyurl.com/29kjhe2. I do not know what it cost or how long the process was, but is there anything there that could not have been produced by a single Christian ethics prof in an afternoon? And if the congregation wishes to discuss it, informal settings like coffee hour and more formal ones like adult forums are the appropriate forum. A social statement might be the catalyst for such a conversation, but a good book or newspaper column may as well.
@ Ann. I do not want a pastor preaching on genetics … unless (s)he has an advanced degree in it. (We are long past the day where the pastor is automatically one of the two best educated people in town.)(Roles of women in the church is a non-issue for me; Acts 2:18, Gal 3:28) And even if (s)he does have such a degree, any discussion thereof is Law. We wrestle with conditions on earth as it is, but ultimately, the sermon (99% of the time) ought to move to what Jesus has done in spite of us, fulfilling the Law, and it ends there. (To end with a list of things that we ought to do after knowing that is Calvinist / Barthian, not Lutheran.)
Finally, I noticed you were careful to refer to a denomination issuing social statements, not a church. That’s good. But the ELCA constantly refers to itself in the Soc Statements and pronouncements on geopolitics as “this church” which is an unConfessional way for a denomination to refer to itself.
@ Obie, I saw your gateway-to-the-book page on Cephas. Have you ever come across the notion that Cephas in Gal 2 is not the same person as Peter? Paul refers to Peter in v 7-8 and then goes on to recount the confrontation with Cephas in vv 11 ff. I first heard that from Arland Hultgren and I am persuaded. (Not that I expect you to go and rewrite the book :); just an interesting aside.)
And on a personal note, I spent last week helping push 3 dozen or so Odocoileus virginianus to get their proper dose of aerobic exercise; my son managed to take one off the road and out of the way of your car, next time you drive through N Wisc.
Blessings, TS
@Mark C. Christianson
Sorry, I missed your comment before I posted my opus above. Yes I am serious. And while I really like what you have to say in the last couple lines, I think I addressed most of this above.
Blessings
TS
@Tony Stoutenburg
Tony,
I am aware of the minority view (a very small minority) that considers Cephas and Peter to be separate persons. I also am unpersuaded, but it is curious why Paul calls him Peter twice in Gal 7 & 8 but always Cephas elsewhere in his writings. I understand that some ancient manuscripts substitute Cephas for Peter in these two verses. Those who prefer the minority interpretation would appear uncomfortable with the way Paul portrays Cephas.
@Obie Holmen
It could be that Peter falls back into his old habits, but I think that his experience at Joppa / Caesarea would have made it hard for him to have acted as “Cephas” did. Or maybe, it was the fact that he acted that way that caused Paul to refer to him by his aramaic name …
Kind of like the traditional argument for John writing 1 Gospel, 3 letters AND the Apocalypse. The last one, in particular, makes no sense to me, and the best argument is that the authors all have the same name. So. I know a lot of John’s. Also a few Peter’s and even 3 Obies . (No Cephas’s though.)
It doesnt change the import of the message of Galatians, I just find it interesting.
Blessings TS
@Tony Stoutenburg Congratulations on the deer hunt.
I will take your comments under advisement. I don’t seem to be able to get past the gay issue and the amount of bias that turned up at Christus. Having gone through it as a family issue , I still can’t see why there was such an uproar about a couple dozen pastors with alternate lifestyles being admitted to the ministry. I think you scared people in to believing that one would have to take one as a pastor regardless. While these are civil rights related , the church has some special privileges that make them immune to prosecution or so I understand.
So far as the statement on genetics is concerned, I get scared every time a theologian tries to mix science and religion. My husband taught physics and chemistry for over 30 years. My son is a biology/botany major in undergraduate studies. I see time and time again where science is damned by someone in the church without their realizing the number of lives that are being saved now or the quality of life that is being improved by scientific data. While there are misuses out there in-vetro fertilization has blessed many many infertile couples. Stem cell research promises hope for many with now incurable diseases or injuries.
Obie, I cannot verify this information independently, but here is a report with some state by state numbers. http://tinyurl.com/3xf73xn
@Tony Stoutenburg No the sermon is NOT the place to look at contemporary issues through the lens of scripture – that is for adult forums, bible study, sunday school and social issues. The sermon is for the proclamation of God’s love and forgiveness. Then we as a community wrestle together with how to live that out.
@Obie Holmen
I was taught, and I also looked it up in a Biblical Greek dictionary, that Cephas is from the Aramaic and Peter is from the Greek. Both words mean, “rock”. One meaning, one guy, two different languages.