It has become clear that congregations that depart the ELCA will not become part of a single, unified dissident body; instead two separate and distinct organizations will be vying for allegiance: the existing Lutheran Congregations in Mission for Christ (LCMC) and the yet to be formed North American Lutheran Church (NALC), spawned by Lutheran CORE. And then there is the third organization, the WordAlone Network that is caught between but with an apparent lean toward CORE (shared offices and staff, for instance).
Public pronouncements from the two organizations do not hint at any competition—“two rails of the same track” saith their spokesmen. Yet, there are subtle indicators of tension.
A disclaimer has suddenly appeared on the blog of the WordAlone Network:
This website is sponsored solely by the WordAlone Network and is not a publication of LCMC – Lutheran Congregations in Mission for Christ, nor does it necessarily represent all the organizations that are a part of Lutheran CORE.
Last week, I commented upon the schism amongst the schismatics by quoting at length from a post from the Google Group, “Friends of the LCMC” where the question was raised, “what, specifically, does the NALC offer that LCMC DOES not or CANNOT offer?”, and the post concluded that the “LCMC and NALC will be splitting a small pie”.
In response to my post, there was a “shhh” whispered on the LCMC friends group site.
we [must] watch what we say and how we appear to the inquiring public … But last fall, we had some harsh comments being made. I am just reminding everyone (myself included) that our tone matters because this is a publicly accessible forum.
More recently, a Friend of the LCMC created and posted a pdf document comparing the proposal for a new denomination from NALC with the existing LCMC. The creator commented about the comparison:
Suffice to say, the proposal may differ from the final product, but based on what I see, I am not impressed.
Clearly, there are ecclesiological differences (in a nutshell, denominationalism vs congregationalism), but the point I want to make here is that there are elements within these organizations at pains to draw distinctions, thus evidencing the competition that exists and will exist as NALC nears formation. To carry their metaphor of a railroad track forward, are the tracks about to split?
For the sake of perspective, I again offer the reminder that the ELCA consists of over 10,000 congregations; to this point, less than 200 have passed a first vote to leave the ELCA. I think the LCMC critic of NALC is absolutely right—the two organizations will be splitting a small pie, and Lutherandom will see two more small, splinter organizations to take their place with the Lutheran Brethren (123 congregations) and Association of Free Lutheran Churches (AFLC) (270 congregations) while aspiring to the size of the Wisconsin Synod which claims around 1,300 congregations.
Reconfiguration of North American Lutheranism? Splitting a small pie or pie in the sky?
Interesting how you keep getting caught up with numbers. Is there some magical number that qualifies a group as valid or important or worthy?
LCMC (as of today) already has 356 member churches in 38 states and 8 countries. LCMC has a decade of history and ministry. Maybe the number of churches will continue to grow rapidly, maybe it won’t. Nonetheless, important and vital ministry is happening, and people are getting connected to Jesus. Shouldn’t that be a cause for celebration for all Christians? Where two or three are gathered Jesus is present (he doesn’t say 1000s or 10,000s).
Obie, as usual I admire your intelligent and thoughtful observations. But I can’t help wonder if you’re also somewhat gleefully trying to stir up more controversy than actually exists (or ever will exist)?!
@Zach Thompson
You raise some fair points.
I think I have less of an issue with LCMC because I don’t hear their rhetoric as offensive as that of CORE (heretical, unbiblical, unchurched) nor as blatantly hyperbolic (reconfiguration of North American Lutheranism). I also think that LCMC can function quite well as a small organization because it doesn’t really intend to be an organization at all–merely a fairly loose affilation of like minded congregations.
The problems with size comes into play when a congregation needs the assistance of a larger organization (training pastors, supporting colleges for its youth, mission support, disaster relief, etc.) to do what it cannot do alone. Congregationalism as a church model can work very well if the congregation isn’t really interested in the strength and power and support that can only come from participating in a parent organization.
I occasionally lead worship at a local Native American Center. Recently I had a conversation with an elder and a younger Native American man about the difference between Native Spirituality and Christianity. The young man said, “The difference between Native American Spirituality and the Christian faith is up close they appear to be slightly different, yet when you look down the track, toward the horizon they appear to come together.” “Yes” the elder said, “But if you walk down the track to that point on the horizon the tracks are still apart.” CORE, Word Alone, NALC and LCMC will always be like that, appearing to come together in the future, but they will always be separate. I still believe, in the end, it will come down to leadership.
I was at the meeting between LCMC, LCORE and Word Alone leadership. Lots of love and shared passion between the groups. The future of American Christianity isn’t in mega-denominations with political power, it’s in smaller, mobile networks of like-minded churches. I love and support what NALC is doing while being a member of LCMC from the beginning. Whether LCMC ends up with our current 356 churches or grows to 500, 1000 or more, we’re really not in competition with NALC, the ELCA, or anyone else. It’s about like-minded people networking to do Kingdom work. For disclosure purposes, I serve on the LCMC Board of Trustees. Thanks for a thought provoking post.
Obie, just keep up the blog. You are making the LCMC and Lutheran CORE more accountable. There are political issues out there that people aren’t talking about. Is it about the Word of God or about power ?
Lilly, in my opinion as I read the history of Luterhenism in North America almost all schisms and mergers have been about power, who will be in charge, of course it is wrapped in terms like Word Alone, Mission, Interpretation of Scripture but X-Ray movements and who will be in control is always underneath. There have been groups who wanted to split with the ELCA since the merger, and in my conversation with many of them it has been about who was selected to lead, what traditions were brought forward, and which traditions left behind, by the various groups who joined the ELCA (ELC vs. ALC is big up here), where the national office be located, on and on and on. They long for the “Good old days” and forget the issues that brought them together in the first place (again, what those issues were depends on which side of the fence they are on). It didn’t start with CCM but that was the first big bump in the road, the sexuality issue is the current cause of choice for those unhappy people. In 50 years our children will look back and simply wonder why? Just as we do today as we look back on church history and wonder why the church split over having worship in English or Predestination or a host of other issues.
Disagree, Ray. As the ELCA continues to become like the UCC, with bibles being issued that promote univeralism (passed out to 37,000 youth in New Orleans) and downplay the uniqueness of Christ, it will be the fact that there will FEW if any denominations in the future.
Years ago church growth experts told us this would happen, and were laughed at. We will see global alignments as the world shrinks in terms of technology. So, LCMC may well thrive connecting globally, or not. NALC may or may not ever get off the grown.
But don’t downplay what happened last August as just a bunch of malcontents. The ELCA is bleeding a lot more than they will admit, not in terms of churches leaving, but laity walking,and churches in conflict.
What MOST folks miss in all this is the focal point is on the 200 congregations out of 10,000 leaving. That is not the issue. It is the thousands of congregations losing ten or twenty percent or more of their membership.
Now, you tell me, if the average attendance of an ELCA church is 100 a Sunday, how many does the average church lose that will cause it to go under?
And Lilly, your question about power is a good one. Maybe the ELCA leadership should be asked the same question, as they pushed through the agenda last August when sixty percent of laity in the last study opposed it.
If a Pastor tries to push something through at a congregational meeting for decades, and knows half the parish is opposed, why is their surprise or hurt when half the folks redirect giving or walk?
Jeff you make some good points, but don’t make it sound like 100% of the people in the congregations are going with their congregations when they do leave. As many congregations are learning, the two-thirds that showed up to vote (sadly a far smaller number then are members)are about all that want to stay once the vote is taken. It is a messy time to be the church.
We just visited my husband’s boyhood UCC church in our town and discovered that it is a more conservative one. The UCC has a designation for churches to use if they are completely open to all lifestyles. This one hasn’t adopted it. Since I have issues with being an Orthodox Lutheran, I think we will try the UCC for a while. It may not work. But at least I will have a break from the infighting that came before the LCMC vote.
Interestingly, the LCMC pastor says God is doing all the work while the church president says there is a lot of hard work to do re-doing the constitution and making all the other changes.
Jeff, exactly how did the bibles that were passed out at the Youth Gathering promote universalism?
I see more paranoia and delusions of grandeur from the CORE folks today.
Jeff, if you’re not happy with the ELCA… leave. We’ll survive just fine without you and your false claims.
@Obie Holmen
Congregationalism as a church model can work very well if the congregation isn’t really interested in the strength and power and support that can only come from participating in a parent organization.
Obie, you’ve got me to thinking: Perhaps the ELCA churchwide organization is trying to be something it was never intended to be, namely, a “parent” organization. The original design of the ELCA was of “three interdependent expressions” — congregation, synod and churchwide — not a parent-and-children organizational relationship. The “parent” in Chicago is feeling the loss of the “children’s” support in ways that go beyond the number of congregations taking votes to depart, join LCMC and/or the NALC.
Some might draw parallels to the parable of the Prodigal Son. I would submit, the ones leaving are not prodigal sons/daughters. Perhaps the “parent” here is the prodigal?
The laity in the ELCA has allowed this to happen. We have always referred to the church wide expression as “Higgins Road” as if it were the Vatican and not an equal expression along with congregations and synods. (I know the argument, they don’t act like equal partners, well I don’t agree) When the CWA makes a controversial decision those who disagree blame “Higgins Road” as if the decision was made by a couple of Bishops over a cup of coffee and a smoke. Do I think the current system is perfect, no! However I have served in a Presbyterian church where the each congregation votes on church wide issues and that doesn’t seem to work very well either. I wish our laity would be more informed, and be more active in leadership on the synod and CW level, unfortunately for the most part, the majority who don’t participate would rather complain then participate.
Ray –
Indeed. Your point is well articulated. The interesting part about demanding a level of “purity” of thought in any group is that the dividing line between who’s within the bounds and who is not always becomes a little arbitrary. Like all things, it seems that the old maxim “everything in moderation” applies here.
For traditional Christianity, the Apostles’, Nicene (& Athanasian) creeds serve as that dividing line. I don’t think that should change. However, we would be smart to admit and recognize that there are plenty of folks in our pews who don’t believe every single words of those, either. Are we going to demand ideological purity and kick them out? Or are we going to see that as an invitation for conversation and education?
Basically, in sociological studies (my field before this), there is a concept known as “contrastive identity formation.” This is where you base your identity on who you are NOT. I have no doubt that any group that is founded as a rejection of another group’s loss of ideological purity will itself suffer schisms down the road, because more will be found in their own ranks who do not meet the arbitrary, requisite level of purity of thought.
Maybe a little humility is in order in this conversation – no organization will ever have the required purity of thought to earn their way into the kingdom. Let’s not go forgetting that we all start and end our journey at the foot of the cross. (I’m becoming more and more convinced that humility is THE core Christian value most in danger of disappearing in these conversations)
@Jonathan
This is just another scaremongering tactic employed by CORE/Word Alone and LCMC, and it is unfounded yet it rings well in the ears of the Hauge folks who see evil in everything the church tries to do. Just the thought that someone might get into heaven who “isn’t as good as I am” scares the grace right out of them.
This is about power and purity and the purity train has left the station and its starting to get funny. Now Bible translations themselves are being deemed not pure enough? Is the inquisition next? Take a breath Jeff and drink a cool glass of water before writing such stuff.
I am moderate to conservative in my theology, Biblical interpretation, national politics and social issues. But to start making these kinds of claims about the ELCA is just silly and cheapens the entire discussion. Regardless of whether I agree with the ELCA churchwide stance or not, my congregation has continued to be given the option to choose by vote who will serve as its pastor, and by policy which rites the pastor will or will not perform. The ELCA votes allow the members of my congregation to interpret scripture according to their conscience.
It is political rhetorical nonsense that argues that those advocating leaving the ELCA want to be independent of judicatories or parent organizations so that “freedom” can be enjoyed in their congregations. They absolutely don’t want that. What they want is to increase their personal sense of power over the members of their congregation without accountability to others. The folks that are leaving are not offering “freedom” rather they are forcing a particular interpretation on their congregations and forcing a particular type of pastor on their congregation.
By the way LCMC friends if it is not about numbers why do you continue to publish numbers on the front page of your website and why do you continue to publish only a combined number of those congregations who have left the ELCA and those ELCA congregations who have remained in the ELCA but are somehow “affiliated” with the LCMC? Not about numbers? Really? Oh I forgot. It is about power and power is about numbers.
I think he is referring to the first edition of the Lutheran Study Bible produced by the ELCA which included in its study notes about the Great Commission (Matthew 28): “…Jesus now sends the disciples to make disciples of all nations. That does not mean make everyone disciples. Most people who are helped by Jesus and believe in him never become disciples. Jesus includes in salvation people who do not believe in him or even know about him…”
This study note is not in the newer editions of the study Bible, after there were many complaints. But first edition study Bibles were given out at the youth gathering…
Zach, does that mean we should start teaching Lutheran youth that all Jews go to Hell? Perhaps you weren’t aware of recent polling from Pew Research says that 80% of American Christians say that more than just Christians will be in Heaven. 65% say many religions can lead to eternal life. Only 29% say their religion is the “one, true faith”. While I find it very unsurprising, white evangelicals and black protestants are the least likely to believe other religions (including Roman Catholicism) go to Heaven. While the report is from December 2008, it is quite fascinating. http://pewforum.org/docs/?DocID=380
Ok, thanks for the clarification Zach.
Zach, thanks for your note. I can understand why it was taken out.
Unfortunately, it gave the anti-ELCA brigade another salvo.
By the way, do you know how many Youth (you know, the young ones who were ACTUALLY there) pointed out that controverisal comment note to me? NONE.
What they DID talk to me about was how they saw the Holy Spirit was at work, in the middle of despair and in the middle of celebration.
And they even talked about JESUS THE CHRIST. So I guess something good came out of that event, even if some “must name Jesus in every 5 sentences” critics think otherwise.
All this talk reminds me of the story of the blind men and the elephant. Each person is saying what God is like to him/her. When is the last time any of us have actually seen God except in the eyes of the people we have helped ? We are His hands and feet so let’s stop fighting about our imagined image of God and get to work doing what we can to straighten out the world, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, take medicine to the sick, rebuild the earthquake ruins,and just let someone go ahead of us in line at the store. If each of us remembers to try to live a little as Jesus taught us , is it really going to matter which version of scripture we read or which brand of Lutheran we are ?
Wow, interesting stuff.
@Michael: “if you’re not happy with the ELCA… leave.”? Hmmm. The love and tolerance of the inclusive crowd is so on display here.
@Obie, if you are going to quote me, please don’t mis-characterize my admonition. It was not a “shhh” any more than Ephesians 4:15a is.
While I agree that CORE’s proposal smacks of hyperbole, we do not wish them ill. I simply think that trying to create a “classic Lutheran denomination” is wrongheaded in this day and age. Time will tell. It has long been clear to those of us in LCMC that there was going to be another group formed. That has much to do with the diverse eccesiologies on display in the CORE coalition.
And frankly, some of the ELCA’s problems date back to 1960. Really. One of my Church History profs said that the great project of the generation of post-war Lutheran theologians was to bring all the Lutherans into one big tent. But the expressions of Lutheranism are much too diverse to be shoe-horned into a one size fits all church body. It was true in 1960, ’62, ’74, ’88 and it is true today.
As for how many congregations leave the ELCA, what is more interesting to me is this: in many places where votes to leave fail, there is a new congregation start that, in a few cases, has almost emptied the ELCA congregation of the regular attendees and officers. The question then is not how many congregations will leave the ELCA, but how many congregations the ELCA will be closing in 2015. That is not a triumphalist question. On the whole, this is so sad for so many people.
And yeah, we at LCMC are a little light headed about the growth in numbers that we are experiencing. It is fun to go to the annual convention and see so many new faces.
And finally, @all of you who think that everything is about power: Marxian class struggle theory is sooo last century.
Blessings. TS
BTW, the final-for-now version of that NALC-LCMC Comparison chart is here
http://friends-of-lcmc.googlegroups.com/attach/9324b32fc6ecc64e/Comparison+LCMC+-+NALC.pdf?view=1&part=4
@Tony Stoutenburg
If you think that my comment “there was a shhh whispered on the LCMC Friends group site” mischaracterizes your actual words, then I will quote them:
Your statement was in direct response to the fact I had referred to the earlier comments on your site. I stand by my statement.
Actually, Tony I have seen first hand this “emptying” of ELCA congregations first hand in Tucson, AZ. There were not one but two LCMC mission churches that have gone directy after two ELCA congregations. They have used lies, fear and propaganda to start their new churches. They have built their churches on this one issue of homosexuality and nothing else.
And where the vote to leave the ELCA succeeds, that there are numbers of people leaving THAT church and joining neighboring ELCA churches. It cuts both ways.
Don’t even bring up the “tolerance of the inclusive crowd” line, because that is sooooooo childish.
You love to dish out the criticisms but you cannot take it.
.
@Jonathan: I know quite a bit about one of the two churches in Tuscon. It has been LCMC since 2001. The issue there was abortion, not homoerotic behavior. (I was at the WA convention where Pr Drum made the LCMC initiating resolution. I know.) I suspect that what you call lies could well be construed as different interpretations – you know, like the ‘two equally valid yet contradictory interpretations’ that PB Hanson is so fond of – but I don’t know, so I will leave it at that.
And when someone tells a Christian brother to leave in the name of inclusiveness, that ain’t a line, that’s hypocrisy.
You wrote: “And where the vote to leave the ELCA succeeds, that there are numbers of people leaving THAT church and joining neighboring ELCA churches. It cuts both ways.” I do not doubt that; I know it to be true. Which is why I called the whole situation sad.
“You love to dish out the criticisms but you cannot take it.” Really? What have I not taken? I willingly have my last name out here, even on this semi-hostile forum. I’m not hiding from any criticism at all. (I’m not even sure I offered any; seemed like fairly neutral commentary to me, but you probably disagree. Believe me, if we want to get into a match, I can get way more critical! After all, my theme hymn is LBW 306.)
But gee, such hostility! It was not my intent to incite that. Blessings. TS
Without a doubt it was a response. No argument there. My caution was to my friends on the listserve, since I have been on listserves (including that one in the past) which had broken out into full contact tackle theology, and that does not always read very well to the general public. In fact, the sentences before your original quotation read: “Let me be clear: My point was not that Brad had said anything
inappropriate. In 13 years of dealing with Brad, I wish I was as
measured as he is. But last fall, we had some harsh comments being made.
I am just reminding everyone (myself included) that our tone matters
because this is a publicly accessible forum.”
So I maintain it was not a shhh moment, but a “be aware that people are watching” moment. You disagree. OK. I’m good with that.
What I am thinking is “Where will all this be 10 years from now?” As LCMC settles in, will there be issues that they never anticipated ? Many people in the LCMC church here are staying because they are lifetime members and want to be buried from the church no matter what denomination it is. Many people like the current pastor but he may or not be here for the 40 years that the beloved original pastor “who did everything” was. Maybe the ELCA will no longer exist or maybe it will be even stronger. Right now there is a conservative backlash that heated up when Obama got elected. That will be the national issue in the fall elections and for years to come. It is good that we live in a free enough country where we aren’t burned at the stake for our differences in beliefs.
You wrote:
More recently, a Friend of the LCMC created and posted a pdf document comparing the proposal for a new denomination from NALC with the existing LCMC.
The pdf document is not available via this link. Thanks.
The schismatics are clearly those who voted in favor of the Sexuality Statement in 2009. They clearly turned their back on the church catholic throughout the ages.
Claiming to be a “Lutheran” organization does not make it so. The ELCA should be thoroughly embarrassed by their actions in Minneapolis, and I pray those in the ELCA will truly repent, and turn from their sin.