Here is an email I just received from the office of ELCA secretary, David Swartling.
As of June 30, the Office of the Secretary has been advised that 462 congregations have taken first votes to terminate their relationship with the ELCA (some congregations have taken more than one first vote). Of these 462 congregations that have taken first votes, 312 passed and 150 failed. Synods also have informed the Office of the Secretary that 196 congregations have taken a second vote, 185 of which passed and 11 failed. (The numbers previously reported on June 3 for second votes contained an error; the correct number of failed second votes as of June 3 should have been 10, not 21. Thus, the number of second votes that passed as of June 3 should have been 151, not 140.)
Here was the report from last month for comparison:
As of June 3, we have been advised that 419 congregations have taken first votes to terminate their relationship with the ELCA (some congregations have taken more than one first vote). Of these 419 congregations that have taken first votes, 283 passed and 136 failed. Synods also have informed the Office of the Secretary that 161 congregations have taken a second vote, 140 of which passed and 21 failed.
I suspect that the number has peaked and will now decline. There will be another (likely) smaller surge after the NALC convocation in August, but for the most part, congregations where there is sufficient momentum and critical mass to leave for LCMC pretty much have.
I just got a report on website activity that shows a similar trend http://cwings.org/lcmc.net. After almost falling of the chart in Nov, THIS website, however, seems to just be getting more and more popular! http://cwings.org/theliberalspirit.com 🙂
Assuming for a moment that all 185 congregations that left joined LCMC (which they did not), LCMC has had a growth of 237 congregations in the last 11 months, which means that at least 50+- of those congregations are new starts, most starting in places where an affiliation vote failed.
@Tony Stoutenburg
I suspect you’re right. We’ll see a tapering down, and the ultimate number of departures will be less than “a reconfiguration of North American Lutheranism” as the NALC folks predicted.
When all is said and done and the harsh feelings soften, perhaps all will be in a better place. I am mindful of the experience of my small LCA congregation that fought this same battle a generation ago. After a period of harsh acrimony, the conservatives left and founded their own Free Lutheran Church. Twenty five years later, both congregations are alive and well and GETTING ALONG. Unity in Christ does not mean uniformity.
Thanks also for the site plug!
@Tony Stoutenburg
I’m curious, Tony, what do you think? Is LCMC likely to lose a few congregations when the NALC is constituted? My observation is that some pastors, unsatisfied with the ELCA and unwilling to wait for the NALC may have used the LCMC as a stepping-stone.
@Brant
We have actually told some folks who needed to leave to another Lutheran church body but wanted to leave pre-August that they were welcome to join LCMC and then, when NALC formed, leave if they wished. We may lose a few that way. However, LCMC does not prohibit dual rostering of congregations, and I am told that NALC will not either. There may be some overlap. I know of at least one congregation in SD that is planning to join NALC, but plans to stay in LCMC so they do not have so long a drive to cluster meetings. NALC will be, at least initially, largely based in the East.
From Ed Knudson’s paper,respectfully submitted to Lutheran leaders, “Conservative Lutherans Forsake Heritage for Politics,” prepared for those Lutherans thinking about leaving the ELCA over the Minneapolis decision to affirm same-sex pastoral relationships: “As a pastor who believes that the Lutheran confessional theology is of central importance in the church, I am very concerned that some Lutherans would be willing to forsake the historic Lutheran confessional heritage in favor of a particular political position in the cultural wars at the moment. They are willing to put the confessional heritage at stake in what is an important but secondary debate over the ethics and matters of interpretation of law and scripture. In other words, this debate is not worth this level of division and hostility in the church.”
Knutson’s paper is rather lengthy and it critiques CORE’s politicization of the issue. “Reading the CORE materials,” he writes, “one gets the idea that gay and lesbian persons in the church are actually alien outsiders trying to impose an agenda on the rest of us. There is little respect expressed for gay and lesbian persons in these materials.” He goes on to write “So here is the first thing I would like to say to congregational leaders: Gay and lesbian persons in the church are mostly the sons and daughters of our very church, baptized Lutherans, confirmed in the faith, participating in communion, hearers of the gospel. These folks are not outside aliens. They have been raised in the church. They want to be members of the church. They want to live in relationships ‘under the law’ the same as heterosexual couples, with the same expectations of faithfulness. The Lutheran CORE materials,” he writes, “present no undertanding of this basic fact, that gay and lesbian Lutherans are not first of all ‘homosexuals’ threatening the moral fabric of the nation but are baptized brothers and sisters in the faith.”
It would be interesting to see how many SAWCs and new congregations started as a result of other congregations exiting.
Despite a lot of grandstanding abotu leaving the ELCA, there is the flipside where there are many affirming their affiliation in ways such as this.
And it shows that for every congregation voting to leave, there are those within those congregations that will not follow the majority, and those voices still need to be heard.
I will take a shot in the dark and guess about 20-25, Kelly. It is a lower number than new starts out of congregations that did not change affiliation because, often, there is an alternative ELCA church in town or a short drive away. I spoke at a church in a northern Minnesota town where there was an LCA and an ALC church. One of them has since voted to move to LCMC and the other is not even thinking about it; upon completion of the process, everybody’s best guess is that the churches will swap 20 members. When the church that leaves is the only game in town, as in Elk River or where you are, the SAWC is the option.
I find this thread incredibly naive as to what is going on in the ELCA. I will probably get the usual response that I am being negative, looking for the bad things, being nasty to the ELCA, the usual, but even many of my pastor friends who applauded the changes last year agree with me on this….
Everyone keeps focusing on the congregations leaving as the only sign of challenges in the ELCA, while it is at least number three or four on the list of what is happening. I have no doubts that when all is said and done, the number of churches leaving will be about 10%, maybe less. But realize that for most churches who are not larger churches the process of leaving is complex, and raises multiple issues (future calls, human and financial resources, etc) that most megachurches and larger churches don’t have to deal with.
The real issues continue to be
1) those congregations who remain in name only, but no longer participate in the mission and ministry of the wider church
2) the untold count of how many laity have left churches , not only in those where votes have succeeded or failed (remember, if a vote succeeds to leave, many who favored change will leave, just as those who didn’t will often leave if the vote fails). I know of at least five churches in our synod where the human toll is incredible, despite the church not voting to leave.
When all is said and done, I do believe that longer term the ELCA will continue to minister and survive, and those who have or are leaving are better off leaving than staying and being negative. However, it is very, very naive to believe that the continual updates of counts indicates reality on the ground.
David Swartling has said to several synod assemblies “the number of churches leaving is less than estimated, the redirection of mission support and drop in income greater than expected”. That indicates that there is a lot more going on than meets the eye. And that does sadden me.
Kelly has certainly related the truth of the complexity of leaving in a not-large church. I have always wondered if that was in essence a glimpse into an undercurrent in the congregation that was unseen before.
As far as congregations who remain “in name only” – it’s nothing new. In our synod, those who have not participated for years are the ones who have now left. It’s like they finally got their paperwork filled out (although one neglected to get its 501(c)(3) status taken care of first…not real smart…)
Laity who have left – in my congregation, as our pastor spoke to those who decided to leave (about 20 people out of 750), she realized that they were just looking for a reason to leave, after their previous attempt to “conservatize” the congregation failed. I agree that those who don’t get their way, as it were, will likely leave. But I wonder if that’s the better thing for the congregation anyway – if these folks aren’t comfortable, why would they want to stay? It’s not a matter of tyranny of the majority, but being realistic about the kind of congregation one is in.
Redirection of mission support is an ongoing struggle, and one that I personally find repugnant. Honestly, I see this as one of the key points of any renewal process – getting away from the “benevolence as leverage” situation.
But when it comes to the drop in income – I think it’s equally naive to think that it could only be as a result of the CWA vote. This country is in one heck of a nasty, merciless recession, and too many folks are just trying to pay their rent (because they’ve already lost their house). My state doesn’t see this mess ending for AT LEAST 3 more years. YEARS. In my area, at least, that’s the “lot more going on than meets the eye”.
@Mary
Agreed when it comes to giving. My church is RIC and we’ve experienced a drop in giving – there is not a single person who is upset with the ELCA, but we have a number of members who have been out of work for several months (a handful for a year or more) and many others who have been laid off, and found jobs that paid far less than their old ones. Unemployment is still in the double digits, both in my state and in my city.
And when giving is down in my congregation, we give less to the synod, which then gives less to the national office, etc.
I just went on the website of a church that decided to stay with ELCA. They have a link to WA. I note that the giving is down some (but it is summer). Some members are leaving – some to a small LCMC church nearby. This might be a blessing for the small churches that went LCMC. I agree that some of those who are leaving churches weren’t comfortable in those churches anyway. I think that is where I am at. Since I didn’t grow up here or have a lot of relatives in the now LCMC church, I was always somewhat “new”. What a difference for my husband when it was announced that we were joining his home church.
@Obie — We’ve been wondering about another dynamic not addressed in your summary of Secretary Swartling’s memo. How are former LCA congregations, as well as new starts post-ELCA merger, faring when it comes to gaining synod council approval to leave the ELCA. After the widely-publicized story of FL-Bahamas denying permission to one congregtion to leave, word about this dynamic has been scarce. Any additional insights to share on this?
@Church Grandpa and Grandma
I don’t have an informed answer to the question but only my opinion. I think the FL-Bahamas example is probably an aberration. Since we aren’t hearing other reports of a similar nature, I think it is a fair assumption that such incidents are not wide-spread. I also think the various bishops are reasonably pragmatic–if a congregation votes by 2/3 or more to disassociate with the ELCA, what is served by refusing to accept that congregational decision? To the contrary, I have heard anecdotal reports of bishops or their representatives offering generous counsel and advice to aid the process of disassociating once the will of a congregation to depart is manifest and proper constitutional requirements have been followed.
On the other hand, when a congregation (usually a recent mission congregation) still owes money to the ELCA, I think the ELCA is well within its rights to say you can’t leave unless and until the money is repaid.
@Obie-Thanks for the information. We too, only hear anecdotal reports. Some are positive and encouraging, as the ones you cite. Thanks be to God for those cases and leadership that works departing in peace. Other anecdotal reports, though, are of defensiveness, antagonism and threats toward the majorities– and not always because there are dollars owed — despite clear, constitutionally correct 2/3s plus majority votes that led to this point. This isn’t to say that all sides are always behaving Christ-like. It is just to say “Lord, have mercy” whenever attitudes and behavior re less than exemplary. That said — All the more important to commend those synods that post status reports on congregations that are on a path toward leaving. Truth, disclosure and transparency help clear the air/blogoshpere — if only we could achieve that.
I think we need to give the situation a couple years to adjust. There are still some strong feelings both ways in my former church. There are a couple churches in the area trying to make up their minds which way to go. I am sure that may be the case nation wide.
The pastor at the Congregational Church was not too sure that we should be joining but when she said “We are in full partnership with the ELCA”, I said “That’s why I’m here”. That was all she needed to hear. I bought a UCC hymnal and have been reading all the good “Lutheran” things that are in it. I have been on their website and see all the creeds are basically the same. Yes, there will be differences but at my age I don’t think they will matter a lot.
Not to wast those credits in math at Wisconsin and a fondness for research, Church Grandpa has been crunching numbers …
In May 2010, The Lutheran began quarterly reporting the number of congregations that have withdrawn from the ELCA (p. 38) The second quarterly report of such figures appears in the August issue of The Lutheran. Numbers are based on figures from the ELCA Office of the Secretary, based on reports from Synods.
From the May 2010 figures:(The Lutheran, p. 38)
April 26-August 15, 2009: 6 congregations withdrew
Sept 16, 2009-Feb 28, 2010: 16 ” ” ” ” ” ”
Total for report period = 22
From the August 2010 figures (The Lutheran)
Jan 10 – Feb. 28, 2010: 22 congregations withdrew*
(*these weren’t named in the May 2010 report)
March 7- June 27, 2010: 62 congregations withdrew
Total for report period = 84
Total for the two reports = 106 named congregations have withdrawn from the ELCA since April 26, 2009; all but 6 of these congregations withdrew following the 2009 CWA in August.
According to the memo from Secretary Swartling that started this thread, 185 congregations had passed the second vote which is required for withdrawal during the reporting period, with 179 of those final votes coming after the 2009 CWA. Grandpa calculates (by hand, you should know ) that this leaves a net 79 congregations which, as reported by the synods, have passed the second vote during the reporting period but whose names have not yet appeared in the official list of those which have withdrawn.
Keep in mind: There may be a delay in reporting votes and withdrawals by the synods due to procedural questions (were the votes in order?); constitutional requirements (Former LCA and new ELCA starts since ’88 require synod council approval before withdrawing); or plain old administrative (paperwork) lag.
That said, the number of congregations passage of second votes and the number of congregations reported by name as withdrawn should be an apples-to-apples comparison. Both numbers are attributed to the ECLA Secretary based on synod reports.
Take out the six congregations reported to have left in the four months prior to CWA 2009, and you have 73 congregations that have passed second votes since the 2009 CWA but whose status (withdrawn? reason for delay?) remains undocumented. Put another way, for every 10 congregations that have been reported as withdrawn, there are 7 in limbo between the second vote and withdrawal.
Let us pray for faithful, peaceable and timely resolutions….
Let’s expect some more will leave when CORE gets their new church up and running. The thing is, regardless of CWA 09 churches do have a choice in whom they call for pastor. The UCC passed similar legislation a few years ago but local churches have the choice as to whether they will be open and affirming churches .
There are a number of blogs that seem to have their fingers on the pulse of CORE et. al., and have a list of every church that has voted thus far – updated as recently as the end of June.
I think Lilly is right that it’s not quite over yet. I know of several churches in SD that want to see what happens with NALC before they make any final decisions.
I am one who has left the ELCA, and I am also one who believes that we are just in the beginning stages of seeing people and churches leave the ELCA. Let me explain why: many churches and individuals have not yet left because they want to “stay to be a witness” (I’m sure we’ve all heard that line- regardless of what we think of it-) or some churches and people have decided to wait until after the 2011 Assembly to see what the prevailing thought is. We have seen many synods vote 60-40 or even closer to support or oppose the 2009 CWA decisions. I would think that there will continue to be a greater exodus as churches begin to realize that the 2009 CWA decisions are more or less the prevailing thought in the ELCA. What do others feel about this? Agree or disagree?
@Lilly
What you overlook is that there is more than just whether or not a congregation can choose to not call a non-chaste homosexual. Can an ELCA congregation be sure that a new pastor they call will not teach their children that it is OK to engage in homosexual activity so long as they pretend to be “married”?
@George Erdner
Come on George, your question simply makes me think:
“Can an ELCA congregation be sure that ANY new pastor they call will not teach their children that it is OK to engage in ANY sexual activity as long as they pretend to be ‘married’? ” The question is just silly…
No congregation can be sure any new pastor will do anything; that’s why there are synodical and national standards to be assured that those who are called to ministry fulfill specific expectations of education, experience, and something called ‘maturity.’
I’ve heard such silliness from some folks in my congregation.
I can’t ever, ever remember in my experience in 9 congregations (as a member,
an employee, and as a pastor) where a pastor got all the children together in private, and them plied them with such ridiculous statements or ‘teachings.’
Never.
Such thoughts are simply prejudice dressed up as a warning.
Every congregation has the freedom to choose whatever pastor they want to call to serve their congregation. They have the right to question any candidate as to their teaching methods, or thoughts on the CWA. And I’m sure that any serious pastoral candidate who is addressed with such a question will leave the interview as quickly as possible.
It is not the pastor of the church I would be worried about. It would be the books
and materials that will be come from the synod, and also when the children go to
youth gathering and summer camps. I have already read articles about what is going
on at youth gatherings…..its not good!!!!I would take my family and move quickly..
@George Erdner
@Roger Danielson
George and Roger,
I almost deleted your two comments–not because they’re negative but because they’re silly. The underlying assumption of each is that a conspiracy exists to teach ELCA youth to become gay.
Your comments confirm that many opponents of the ELCA policy, while claiming a “Biblical view”, are really just spouting bad science.
@George Erdner
George, I was a Lutheran for over 73 years and during that time, sex was generally a taboo subject in the church. Most people didn’t want to talk about it – especially to kids. I was a Sunday School Teacher, A Sunday School Superintendent, Bible School teacher , and finally a church librarian. I have never seen or heard a conversation in the ELCA that included anything about sex except among adults who got all worked up about the sexuality study. Yes, it could happen that a pastor tells someone that it is ok to be gay and Sunday School teachers could get a question from a child about it. Yes, it could happen, but generally just yet, church people avoid the issue. I think ??????
So far as books and materials coming from the synod about sex ed, maybe it is time they had some. The last time I looked , they didn’t. Now, the Unitarians and the UCC have sex ed materials that may be open and affirming but I haven’t looked at how they handle it yet. Missouri Synod has some sex ed materials too. Just fearing that something MIGHT happen is not the way to go. Fear is a powerful thing and I believe that some public figure once said “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself”.
@Obie Holmen
I don’t understand what you mean by silly?
Here is an example of what I am talking about……
Lutherhill Ministries is an ELCA Summer Camp and Year Round Retreat Center. In April, 2010, Lutherhill hosted a gay youth retreat in cooperation with Spiritual Pride Project. They describe the retreat this way –
“We are offering a weekend camp retreat as a safe, accepting and loving community where GLBTQIA (Gay Lesbian Bisexual Transgender Question Intersex and Allied) youth can discuss how their sexuality and sprituality are beautiful gifts from God. We will accompany each other on the faith journey as we celebrate and struggle with our faith, family, friends, school, relationships, and everything in between. This is still camp after all, so we will enjoy God’s creation and have a blast sharing our creative talents, playing games,and challenging each other. All People of all belief backgrounds are welcome!”
@Roger Danielson
Would you rather that LGBTQ teens go to a reparative therapy camp? Yes, I suppose you would.
@Roger Danielson
Well, apparently the Lutherans are sponsoring this. Or did the other group rent the facility ? I think this means that there is a need for this kind of thing. Does that mean ELCA is teaching kids to be gay ? No, I think it means that the ELCA is ministering to the needs of gay kids. These kids struggle as outcasts from straight society and super straight churches. Here is a place where they can be out of the closet and talk to each other about how to handle the problems associated with being gay. My x son in law teams up with other transsexuals because as she says “They are the only ones who understand .”
What about Nambla? where would you draw the line? Is it ok for the Catholic priests to have boys? Should we pass out condemns to all of them because they are going to
do it anyway? Is it ok to Look a porn on the computer? What about incest?
Are these OK? Does the ELCA believe the is SIN in the World?
@Roger Danielson
Well Roger, I was once a very conservative Lutheran but life has taught me some lessons. One can not blame the ELCA for all the sin of the world but one can be glad that there is someone willing to listen to the hurt people out there and help them in their struggles. Does that mean ELCA condones it ? No, it means that ELCA is reading the words of the New Testament and following Jesus lead in ministering to the sick, the hurt, the “lepers” of the modern day. By the way, I like the way you spelled condoms– “condemns” says a lot.
@Roger Danielson
I am wondering if you are “for real”. The things you ask about sound like a naughty confirmation student. There is a big difference between sex between consenting adults and adults preying on children. If you want to look at porn on the internet, and it is adult porn, no one will stop you but your conscience or your wife. If it is child porn, God help you, I hope you get arrested. There are a number of other issues addressed in the ELCA sexuality statement besides the gay pastor issue. I believe that might answer your questions.
@Obie Holmen
I have another question for you …. What is this Goddess Rosary Prayer?
You know I get a kick Out of people that are suppose to be open minded.. One of
the first things they say to people that don’t agree with them is to call them
names and make fun of them…..:)
Roger and anyone else- If you want to believe everything you read on “Exposing the ELCA” – go ahead. Leave the ELCA if you want to. No one is keeping you there but yourself. I have left but more because there isn’t a viable ELCA church in driving distance right now than because of any of the supposed sins the ELCA has committed. Obie’s site does a service in showing the liberal side of Lutheran policies. I find him to be fair.
@Lilly
No I am not a Naughty confirmation student. I guess I believe what I read in the Bible and take it at its word. When the bible says it is a sin I believe it. Lutherans are suppose to believe the bible is infallible and inerrant.
@Roger Danielson
What you say is true but some of the Bible has to be believed in the historical context it was written in. Some of the Bible is symbolic. If you still have 2 eyes and 2 hands then you are not taking everything literally.
The greatest truth in the Bible is that Jesus Christ died to save us. But the historical Jesus died because Herod was afraid that Jesus was going to be made King because He was of the line of David. God uses these things to accomplish His purposes. If you have the faith of a little child, God Bless You.
Hello all,
I realize I’m fairly late in responding, but I’m one of the directors of Spiritual Pride Project. I wanted to offer some clarification about our retreat. Yes, we did rent the site of Lutherhill. Their mission states that they are “a place for all people” and the ELCA is lucky to have this resource. They also open their facilities to non-Christian groups, so they really are living up to this mission statement.
Also, we are not specifically an ELCA ministry. It just so happens that many of us involved grew up ELCA, but we have also been supported by Metropolitan Community Church, and organizations like Soulforce and Equality TX.
I’m proud of this past year’s event and am happy to see our campers really form a community with each other. They are discovering the church to once again be a place of love and welcome instead of condemnation.
@Lilly
Herod said I find no fault in Jesus, and he washed his hands of the whole thing.
Really, I thought that was Pontius Pilate.
@Lilly
sorry you were right
@Roger Danielson
That’s ok, it made me look it up too to be sure. Each Gospel reads a little differently.
@Lilly
So Lilly …. How do you Interpret Romans chapter 1 ? Historical? Symbolic? or what?
Jesus did die for the sinner, but what would happen if we keep on sinning the
same sin over and over?
Sorry Roger, I am not going to get into this one. This sounds too much like one of my relatives.
@Lilly
Sorry if you think I am preaching at you.. But Lilly, you need to think about it.
It is not up to your relatives or me to change you mind on any things.
No Roger, it is up to the Holy Spirit.
@Roger Danielson
Some of Romans 1 is historic. This is written to the Romans who had many gods and practices that were homosexual in nature. Paul is asking them to set aside these practices and follow Jesus. In the light of modern society I won’t say that this is symbolic although there are some who will. Since I have an ex son-in-law who transgendered I am conflicted on the homo-sexual issue. If I didn’t know some Lutheran boys who are homosexual, I might be dead set against the ELCA inclusiveness. However, Jesus had compassion on sinners and the Risen Christ is with us today, leading us to be compassionate towards people we don’t agree with.
Jesus was compassionate to the women caught in adultery, but what did Jesus say
to her? I believe it is in John Chapter 8.
@Roger Danielson
Now we are talking about adultery. This can be a good sermon for all those out there who are jumping from partner to partner or never getting married at all.
Do you think the church would have any members if we impose the law of Moses on everybody ? You are right of course ,Roger, but when some of these things are in one’s family, sometimes we have to look the other way or be forgiving. Nothing is new with human nature. We were created a little higher than the apes and a little lower than the angels. As soon as we think we are better than everyone else and have a special place in heaven because of it, God shows us our own faults. Have a good day , go and sin no more. 😀
@Lilly
We need to pray for them everyday,God answers prayers. I have a friend that is
97 years old, I have known him for over 20 years and I try to tell him about the Lord but I can’t seem to get through to him.
@Lilly
Sin is sin! God can not look on sin… Yes we need to love the sinner but we
must hate the sin…..