The long awaited and much ballyhooed Convocation of Lutheran CORE is underway in Grove City, Ohio. At the Convocation, eighteen former ELCA congregations have banded together as charter members of the CORE created Lutheran denomination auspiciously called The North American Lutheran Church (NALC).
Eighteen.
Newly elected NALC bishop Paull Spring predicts the new denomination will soon grow to as many as two hundred congregations. Even this optimistic view seems a far cry from “A Reconfiguration of North American Lutheranism”, yet the press release yesterday persisted in that hyperbole and added the prideful presumption that the actions of CORE were the Lord’s doing:
Our Lord’s reconfiguring of the Lutheran landscape not only in North America, but worldwide, is breathtaking and exciting.
Eighteen.
Spring suggested that the ELCA gay friendly resolutions of a year ago were merely the tipping point, and it was the ELCA’s long term drift away from Scripture that is really the issue. According to the Associated Press report on the Convocation and an interview with Bishop Spring,
He gave as an example the ELCA’s use of inclusive language that strips male references to God — such as “Father” and “Son” — replacing them with words like “Creator” and “Savior.”
Did he really say that? Did he really claim that “Creator” is non-scriptural? Did he really argue that “Savior” is non-scriptural? The verses that prove the contrary are too numerous to list, but here are a couple of obvious examples. Surely the recycled Bishop is familiar with Romans 1, perhaps the favorite “clobber passage” of those who would use Scripture to bash gays, where Paul nobly references “the Creator”. And what about those favorites of churchly misogynists, the Pastoral Epistles–surely the Bishop knows these well? How did he miss the numerous references there to the “Savior”? What kind of Biblical parsing is the Bishop up to?
In this case, at least, it would appear that the arrogance of Biblicism is matched by its incompetence.
This just proves that when you have a straw man argument for a lot of your criticism you’re just, well, grasping at straws a lot of time.
So the hymn Beautiful Savior (which, for the record is one of my favorite traditional Old Skool hymns) was just a rouse to push a leftist agenda when it was written.
In 1677.
Sure. Okay, Bishop, whatever you say.
There’s already talk that my former congregation is going to align with NALC because all of the Special Congregational meetings to vote were oh so much fun last year. So you can probably make that nineteen congregations when you count it up.
The hymnbook has used Maker, Redeemer, and Comforter. I wonder if there are some old clergymen whose memories are really failing them that are still trying to be in control.
I’m kind of enjoying the fact that the new synod’s acronym is an anagram of LC/NA (Lutherans Concerned/North America). 🙂 Small of me, I know.
On the positive side, the guy is no longer in the ELCA. NALC will not even be a thorn in our paw. Good luck, and God speed to them, may they find happyness in their discontent
@Obie
While I share your sentiments at many levels, I would admonish you to respectfully mind the bound consciences of these followers of Christ who at least claim to be acting in good faith. What their hearts might actually believe is one thing, but we must not be rash to judge. As Bp. Hanson has reminded those gathering in convocation in his recent pastoral letter to remember the eighth commandment and our Lutheran understanding of it, so too has he reminded us that we as faithful ELCA Lutherans also have a duty to do the same toward our NACL brethren – “We should fear and love God that we may not deceitfully belie, betray, slander, or defame our neighbor, but defend him, think and speak well of him, and put the best construction on everything.” I found myself also admonishing a member of Lutheran CORE the same thing just yesterday, but we must also remember the same for us as well.
@Ray
Yours is a position that might at first seem like a good and simple solution, and you’re not alone in thinking so. Someone wrote me today about the creation of NALC, claiming it might be the best thing that has happened to the ELCA since it will now be free to pursue God’s call without many opposing it. I only pray that we don’t become too homogeneous and that we don’t miss good insights for lack of faithful Christians who look at particular issues and problems from a perspective that is different than our own. I believe that, through their leaving, these people have made the ELCA only more ideologically the same and haven’t really helped the face of Lutheranism in America. I do hope that I’m wrong…
Martin Luther refers to the Trinity as Creator, Redeemer and Sanctifer in the Large Catechism.
The one thing I don’t understand about this: Why form Lutheran CORE to do this? WordAlone had already started LCMC, they already had a structure in place do what Lutheran CORE set out to do … So why didn’t WordAlone Network simply start the NALC?
There’s an in-depth story in this morning’s Argus Leader (Sioux Falls paper) about WordAlone and the role it played in NALC:
http://www.argusleader.com/article/20100829/NEWS/8290321
@Mike
I think this would be a better question for Tony to answer but the pastor and a council member here went to that CORE meeting in Indiana last fall. When he came back he started talking up LCMC. NALC will have bishops but LCMC will not. At the time I was favoring the CORE/NALC position because of the structure. Things seem to be going pretty well for the LCMC church here. They have an intern now. I am still cautious though as to what will happen in the future. It just seems to me that checks and balances are missing. Time will tell how this plays out.
And how many different Lutheran denominations does this make… 18? Or is it 118? And when does the multiplicity of nearly-identical denominations become a parody? Ah well…
I understand the structural diffrences between the LCMC and the NALC, and why some congregations would prefer one over the other. I just don’t understand why WordAlone didn’t create both of them (why did WordAlone create CORE to do it)
@Mike
Hi Mike, It is anyone’s guess who rubbed whom the wrong way. Religion and politics get complicated by opinion and those opinions can get fierce. It seems to be the same way in any denomination where there isn’t a pope to say “My way or the highway” . I am a lay person so I just sit back and watch the action. When I get involved, I get too involved.
@Mike
It is all about power, who will be the leader. Spring wants to be a Bishop again, it seems that whenever these things happen who will be in power always takes an equal, or more than equal, position over Theology.
It doesn’t seem to me that WordAlone creating Lutheran CORE had anything to do with power or differences or questions about who would be the leader (unless I’m missing something) I’m not aware of political differences that led WordAlone to create Lutheran CORE, but maybe I’m just not aware of them? I just don’t understand the reasoning behind WorldAlone’s decision to create Lutheran CORE.
Guess the basic question I have is: Why did WordAlone create Lutheran CORE to create the NALC? Why didn’t WordAlone just create the NALC?
In every establishment, there are different points of view. It is like LCMC people are saying “I don’t want anyone pushing me around.” The CORE/NALC are saying,” Now wait a minute . We do need order. We do need structure.” We will see what happens if an LCMC pastor gets too big for his/her britches and the congregation kicks them out.
In the early church, St. Paul was pleading for things to be done orderly. Even though we don’t agree with the power in the Catholic church, the pope and his establishment do keep things under their thumbs. I have left the LCMC church but among my friends I refer to the pastor as “His Holiness.”
My understanding is that Lutheran Core was/is a broader conservative coalition than WordAlone. WordAlone was formed in protest of the Episcopalian stuff a decade ago (among other things). I was voting member to the CWA last summer, and hung out with Lutheran Core folks there. I was interested to find quite a wide range of people represented in Core. There were people, like me, who are very low church types, wearing shorts and sandals. There were also people who were very high church, wearing clerical collars (bigger ones than I’ve even seen around here in the midwest). We didn’t all agree on ecclesiology, by a long shot, but were united in opposing the new proposals. I was also interested as I visited with Core folks, that many (mostly the high church folks) were very much in favor of the Episcopal agreement (CCM)…and were not very enthusiastic about WordAlone at all. So, anyhow, that is my observation…that Core (at least at CWA) was a very broad coalition. Now, that coalition is moving towards LCMC (for the low church crowd), NALC (for the high church crowd), and/or staying in the ELCA and staying allied through membership in Core.
@Mike
A little history for you from one who was there for a lot of it.
99-2000 WA was formed to oppose the imposition of the hysterical episcopate in.
March 2000 At the first convention, the board was instructed to form a new denom for those who could not in good conscience stay in the ELCA and fight, though we pledged continued cooperation. (Which continues to some degree.)
2005, as there were elements in the ELCA that agreed with WA on sexuality and other Scriptural matters BUT disagreed vigorously with WA on the 99 vote on episcopacy, WA formed 2 orgs: Luth Churches of the Common Confession (LC3) and the COalition for REform (Lutheran CORE.) LC3 was folded into CORE in 07 or 08 as I recall. CORE brought together WA, the East Coast Black Shirts, the West Coast Inerrantists, etc. WA was and is the largest component of CORE.
I may be off here, but in 05, a group called Solid Rock was created solely to seek to defeat the LGBT agenda at the CWA.
In 07 & 09, it was under the CORE banner that these groups united to do the same thing.
NALC will have a bishop, and that is contrary to the very DNA of the typical WA’er. Which is why there will be two organizations.
Hope that helps. TS
@pastor joelle
He does indeed, but one of the problems with using the functions of God as names for the Trinity is that then we lapse into modalism. When I pray to the Creator, am I praying to the Father who speaks, the Son through whom all things were made or the Spirit who moved over the waters?
Part of the issue is the slippery slope. Look where the Presbys have tried to go with Rock, Redeemer, Friend … Traditionalists would point out that we have a name for God … what’s wrong with it is not with the name, but with us.
@Obie
Actually, LCMC has a ministry board and a process that looks much like candidacy.
As for your repeated accusations that there is misogyny and power/control issues at play in the Lutheran Reform/Renewal movement, I would commend to you Charles Krauthammer’s recent column, “The Last Refuge of a Liberal.”
@Zach
Right you are. I was still writing when you posted. well said.
Tony-
Thank you for the information! one correction: the East Coast Black Shirts were actually a rugby team, not a Lutheran group (just kidding).
Seriously though, maybe I’m too cynical but it seems like one group stands to benefit from creation of the NALC more than any other group. That is (seems like) WordAlone Ministries, which (if i’m not mistaken) will sell its publications and its services to NALC congregations (and probably the LCMC congregations as well, as it probably has been doing for years).
Is it not a conflict of interest for a group that stands to benefit financially to be so involved with the formation of the new denomination? I don’t know the answer to that, but it seems like potentially it might be. Thanks again for the info – it’s very interesting to me, as a Lutheran.
“the arrogance of Biblicism is matched by its incompetence.” Priceless, Obie–I’ll have to remember that one. Thanks again for your reality checks on all this over-wrought nonsense.
Well, we could talk about other numbers as well. Like over 100 congregations joining LCMC. Or the number of congregations losing members that are not leaving ELCA but may have to close or merge. Or the congregation here in a suburb of Phoenix that is split and having two locations, one pro-ELCA, one not. Or….(insert your story here).
NALC may well fly and have 500 churches. It may start small and grow. It may stall out. LCMC may grow exponentially, or not much more.
None of this diminishes that the real hurt is going on in divided churches. Some are not divided. Some , this isn’t an issue. But for many , it is.
I initially thought that the flood of exiting churches from the ELCA would come in the first few months. I now realize that 2011 or 2012 will be the true gauge. Congregations are voting weekly, and aside from those voting to leave, the damage done in others won’t be known until 2011 or 2012 annual reports.
I encourage those who read this blog to go to the “Sola Publishing” site and see what is available. To me, it looks like the potential to be very good is there. However, the group had to come up with some of this in a hurry and the format may be lacking the polish that will sell well. I had noted that for several years, materials from Augsburg had been shallow and expensive. Even years ago in the early 80’s some of us in the ELCA went to the materials of other denominations to get better Bible background. One thing I do agree with is teaching the Bible stories first and adding the activities as time allows. I hope Sola will develop the materials for rotational Sunday School models. Perhaps this already fits. While I didn’t agree with LCMS politics, Concordia materials are pretty good Lutheran Bible based materials ( although I personally don’t like the Arch Books).
Thanks Lilly. I’ll pass this comment on to Steven.
@Lilly
Thanks for pointing readers here to SOLA. C.Grandpa and I are really encouraged by what SOLA is producing — not to mention that they’re also beta-testing new offerings like the confirmation curriculum that’s under development. As for biblical story-based teaching with substance, check out what SOLA is working on in the way of materials for Sunday Schools in small-membership congregations. It’s going to be intergenerational, I hear, and I’m thinking it could adapt well to a rotational model.
@Church Grandma and Grandpa
I always liked James Nestingen’s Bible studies for the ELCA women. I hope he is able to do some things for SOLA. I am no longer in a Lutheran church but I have an interest in seeing where things go. I believe in teaching the Bible stories and “Jesus Loves Me” as young as possible because by the time kids get to confirmation age, most of them are more interested in horsing around or chasing boys. I already have donated some board books to the nursery at the church I am joining. The Bible can not easily be taught in public schools because of the religious diversity there, so why should the churches be teaching Social Studies?
Hey Ob’
I know how much you enjoy the intra-conservative sniping, so check out this one from Russell Saltzman, former editor of Forum Letter… in http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2010/08/31/not-your-smallest-lutheran-church/
“Still, 200 parishes—that figure would make the NALC the fourth largest Lutheran synod in United States (depending on whether you are counting “associations” or “synods”—never mind, Lutherans know the difference).”
Meeeeooooowwwww.
Gee, Obie, first you and the Steadfast boys, now you and Saltzman. Better be careful … progressives may begin to talk! 🙂
@Tony Stoutenburg
I read this one and I can answer the question about who transsexuals are attracted to.– In the part of that world I have contact with occasionally, it seems that transsexuals are attracted to other transsexuals. “They are the only ones who understand” I have seen the partnerships develop with my x son in law who is still somewhat masculine now teamed up with a transsexual who was a man but you would never know it. Both pass as women but the partner is a very attractive tall blond.