I’ve taken a little abuse from time to time in the conservative blogosphere over posts on this blog, but the volume got amped up this weekend over my Wisdom from Herb Chilstrom article.

The American Lutheran Publicity Bureau is a pan-Lutheran organization with members from both the ELCA and the Missouri Synod (LCMS).  It sponsors the Lutheran Forum and the ALPB Forum online, which is not a blog but a bulletin board forum.  Those who register can comment on posts or even initiate a thread, especially under the “Your Turn” category.  I don’t spend a lot of time there, but I do occasionally catch a link into my own blog, and I follow it back only to learn how poorly regarded I am by the ALPB folks. 

Here’s a clue as to the general attitude of ALPB contributors:  An entry entitled “Liturgical boundaries, the role of women” posted yesterday has already received 544 replies and 6,323 views, but an entry entitled “Bragging about an ELCA Church” posted a few days ago has not received a single response, and only 216 folks bothered to read it.

In any case, seems I touched a nerve with my post about Herb Chilstrom’s three questions to those who have departed the ELCA, but certainly not as much as the vitriol directed against Herb himself.  For instance, several (including one of three ALPB administrators, Richard Johnson) thought it great sport to joke about Herb’s present position as Director of the Linnaeus Arboretum at Gustavus Adolphus College coupled with Herb’s article comment about being relieved.  Johnson’s snarky comment, befitting a Jr High School boy’s toilet humor, was:

Too bad. I’ve always enjoyed that arboretum. He’ll likely end up killing the trees. But he’ll be relieved; fewer to tend to.

Most commenters twisted Bishop Chilstrom’s closing statement.  Herb said he was saddened by the departures but also relieved that those remaining could now get on with the mission of the church.  Many commenters overlooked the first part of his statement while indicting the latter, including the use of potty humor masquerading as rational discourse.  How clever! 

Did any actually attempt to answer Bishop Chilstrom’s three questions?  Not really. 

First, what is it about sex that pushed you over the edge?

Second, why are you organizing new churches?

Third, what will you say to your sons and daughters, sisters and brothers and others in your churches when they tell you they are homosexual?

In particular, the silence in response to his third question spoke eloquent testimony.  Ministering to the gays in our midst is not that important to them. 

After a week’s worth of Chilstrom bashing, someone identified as “Bergs” brought up my blog yesterday.  Bergs has a byline on the ALPB forum, battle for truth, justice & the American way, which is a direct quote from the 50’s Superman TV show.  Hmmm.  One wonders if Bergs can leap tall buildings in a single bound. 

Thanks to Bergs’ link to my blog, my article and my psychological shortcomings and even my wretched novel became the grist for ALPB for the next few pages of comments.

the blogist is into power and control.

Said one, and another added,

by [his] own theory, [he is a member] of the “privileged class” …  a convenient diversion. It helps the blogger to not deal with a stark reality: His views are not universally accepted and acclaimed as right.

It’s all true.  I seek a power base as an alternate lay delegate to the next Church Wide Assembly, and my views are definitely not accepted by those who regularly follow the ALPB forum.

A Pastor Charlton reminded the others that I was the author of a novel, but I didn’t receive the recognition for the brilliance I thought I deserved.  That’s true, too.  Awhile ago, a friend joked that the best publicity the novel could receive would be criticism from an esteemed conservative such as Charles Dobson of Focus on the Family fame.  Ah, pastor Charlton, if only you were someone of such import; nevertheless, I would be pleased to have you do a book review—please order your copy here and then you can make informed comments about the novel after you read it.

The same Pastor Charlton also suggested that Bishop Chilstrom and I each derived our foundational ideology from Karl Marx.

Another openly wondered whether my criticisms of CORE, LCMC, and WordAlone were really self-projections.  Charlton again chimed in, suggesting that I have “died to my whiteness”, and I am therefore an honorary person of color.  I guess he could say, I’ve “died to my straightness”, and I’m therefore an honorary gay.

The blog roll of Otagosh of New Zealand includes a special category, Blogs I love to hate, consisting of two bloggers, including the pompous Paul McCain of the LCMS who loves to trash the ELCA, as well as any vestiges of moderation in his own denomination.  He is the Rush Limbaugh of Lutherandom.  McCain wades into the Chilstrom thread with the following piece of brilliance, although he refers to current Bishop Hanson and not retired Bishop Chilstrom (blowhards never miss an opportunity to say their piece even if it is irrelevant to the discussion at hand):

the pious clap-trap he continues to mouth as front-man for the left-wing, liberal, homosexual and feminist agendas that have taken control of the ELCA and the other large state churches in Europe.

Lest I give the impression that everyone over at ALPB Forum is a boogeyman, Pastor Charles Austin had the last word (as I write this on Monday evening—I’m sure there will be plenty more venom to come).  As the lone voice crying in the wilderness, Pastor Austin had earlier defended Bishop Chilstrom and me, and he wrapped up the thread with this response to McCain.

keep on predicting and praying for an apocalypse in international Lutheran relations, for doom and gloom is the coin of your realm and you obviously seek riches.
Some of us have greater hopes for partnership in the Gospel and greater trust in the fellowship of believers granted not by your permission or with your approval, but by the Holy Spirit.

Although McCain may be the most outspoken and outrageous of the naysayers, why is it that some persist in cheerleading the troubles of the ELCA?  Pastor Austin’s initial response to the thread raises the best question:

So those who disagree with the ELCA can call our leaders liars and political operatives, accuse them of abandoning the Bible, and worse; but a relatively mild editorial such as the one in question gets people upset?

I don’t get it.

Since the formation of the ELCA in 1988, the denomination has been shepherded by three presiding Bishops:  Herb Chilstrom, H George Anderson, and currently Mark Hanson.  Herb and wife Corrine now reside in retirement in St. Peter, Minnesota.  On August 26th, Herb penned an op-ed piece for the newspaper in nearby Mankato—his response to the formation of the North American Lutheran Church (NALC) as a splinter from the ELCA.  Bishop Chilstrom asked three rhetorical questions of those who have departed the ELCA for NALC, Lutheran Congregations in Mission for Christ (LCMC), or another church body.

First, what is it about sex that pushed you over the edge?

The retired Bishop wonders why some elevate questions of sexual behavior over more momentous issues such as abortion, war and peace, and the death penalty.  What is it about the sexual behavior of others that causes such a visceral outcry and schismatic response?

[Other issues seem] far more serious than getting upset about two adults of the same gender who, like most of us straight folks, chose to live peacefully in a life-long relationship — the only such pairing the ELCA has approved. Like their straight neighbors, they live peacefully, go to their jobs every morning, pay their taxes, volunteer for good causes and, in many cases, worship with us. What is it that upsets you about this?

Ah, the straw that broke the camel’s back comes the response.  The various dissident groups go to great lengths to suggest that LGBT issues were merely the tipping point that reflects a lengthy ELCA drift away from tradition and traditional Biblical interpretations.  To be sure, LCMC was formed nearly a decade ago, and many LCMC congregations departed the ELCA prior to CWA09 (but the LCMC has doubled in size since CWA09).

Here is my take.  CWA09 resolutions were not the tipping point but the opportunity seized upon by long time ELCA detractors to scare the the folks in the pews into following their leadership.  For much of the hierarchy of WordAlone, CORE, NALC, and even LCMC, their disaffection with the ELCA goes back to the very beginning, and it can all be summed up in one word—CONTROL.  This blog has previously critiqued the comments of dissident theologians Nestingen, Braaten, and Benne who in similar ways lamented the egalitarian impulses of the newly formed ELCA thereby diminishing the power of the male elites.  Over the years, this coterie repeatedly attempted, unsuccessfully, to achieve leadership status within the ELCA.

But then came CWA09.  They saw their chance and they took it.  CWA09 handed the dissidents a cultural wedge issue that they could use to drive ELCA congregants and congregations away from the ELCA and into their own organization, under their control.  So, Herb, it is not about sex.  Nor is it truly about Biblical interpretation.  Here the Missouri Synod critique of the new Lutheran church bodies makes sense—if these new organizations truly want to be Biblical traditionalists, why do they allow female clergy?  Or divorced clergy?  The existence of female and divorced clergy within their ranks puts the lie to the claim that it is all about strict and traditional Biblical interpretation.  No, Herb, it is something else.  It is all about power and control.

Here is Bishop Chilstrom’s second question:

Second, why are you organizing new churches?

Surely there must be one among them [existing Lutheran bodies] that would welcome you. Why go to all the unnecessary expense of setting up an entirely new structure with officers, boards, committees and institutions?

This might be a good place to interject some basic data about the numerous small and uniformly conservative Lutheran Church bodies that exist in the US in open criticism of the more-progressive ELCA.  For comparison, the ELCA has over 10,000 congregations and over 4 million members (statistics for each derived from Wikipedia or the organization’s website)

• Missouri Synod (LCMS) 2.4 million members
• Wisconsin Synod (WELS) 1,300 congregations
• Lutheran Congregations in Mission for Christ (LCMC) 500 congregations
• Free Lutheran Churches (AFLC) 270 congregations
• Lutheran Brethren 123 Congregations
• North American Lutheran Church (NALC) 18 congregations.

Bishop Chilstrom assumes the reason why LCMC and NALC don’t join one of the other bodies is because LCMC and NALC will continue to ordain women as their legacy from the ELCA.  I know the LCMC is attempting to to position itself as the moderate middle of Lutherandom with the more progressive ELCA on the left and the more conservative others on the right.  There would also appear to be an organizational difference between LCMC (congregational autonomy) and NALC (a denominational structure).  I have previously characterized LCMC as a website and a mailing list.  Their organizational paid staff is minimal.  No seminaries, no colleges, no candidacy committees, no disaster relief, no missionary support, no … fill in the blank.  It is merely an affiliation of like minded congregations that are free to do their own thing with minimal organizational support or control.

There’s that word again.  CONTROL.  See the answer to number 1, Herb.

Here is Bishop Chilstrom’s final question:

Third, what will you say to your sons and daughters, sisters and brothers and others in your churches when they tell you they are homosexual?

This is the nub of it.  We can argue about “gay issues” till we’re blue in the face, but we miss the human element.  This not some academic argument; this is about real lives, children of God, baptized brothers and sisters.  I asked last week how many church bulletins proclaim “all are welcome”—and really mean it. 

“What will you say to your sons and daughters?” Herb asks. 

Will you offer empty platitudes (hate the sin but love the sinner)?  Will you “pray the gay away?”  Will you offer junk science such as reparative therapy that will only deepen their pain?  Will you turn your back or offer an embrace?

Retired Pastor Duane from my congregation tells the story of the gay high school boy who came out to him and then asked Duane to accompany him when he came out to his parents. 

Mom came out of the kitchen, wiping her hands on her apron, with a worried look on her face when the pair arrived in the driveway.

“Mom, I’m gay,” the boy said.

“Is that all?” and mom smiled with relief and gave her son a hug.

They were still in the driveway when dad arrived in the pickup with mud flaps and a rifle slung in the rear window.  He exited the cab with a mixed expression of anger and concern.

“Dad, I’m gay”, the son said.

Dad’s face drained of all color, and his eyes turned black.  He looked at his son, his wife, Pastor Duane, and back at his son.  Then, his eyes moistened and his lips quivered.

“I don’t understand,” he said, his voice cracking, “and I probably never will.  But, you’re my son, and I love you.”  Father and son fell into each other’s arms, shaking and sobbing.

This isn’t about doctrine, or confessionalism, or Biblical interpretation, and it ought not be about control.  This is about grace.  This is about trust.  Let go and let God.  Listen to the wisdom of Herb Chilstrom:

I am both sad and relieved that you are leaving. Sad, because this was not what we hoped for when the ELCA was formed some 22 years ago. We believed we could be a church where we held to the essentials and allowed for differences on non-essentials.
But I am also relieved. Now those of us who remain in the ELCA can get on with our primary mission of telling everyone  — everyone — “Jesus loves you. You are welcome in this church.”

Since Lutheranism was born and raised in northern Europe, it is not surprising that Minnesota, settled largely by Scandinavian and German immigrants over a century ago, is truly God’s country for many North American Lutherans.  Roughly ten percent of all ELCA Lutherans in the US reside in Minnesota, home to six of sixty five regional synods and 1,143 congregations out of 10,400 nationwide.

The Minneapolis Star Tribune (Strib) is the leading Minnesota newspaper, and its Sunday, August 22, edition contained an excellent article reporting on the status of the ELCA one year after the momentous gay friendly resolutions of the 2009 Churchwide Assembly (CWA09)—held in Minneapolis, of course. 

This blog has long suggested that the defections from the ELCA are best characterized as a trickle but not a torrent.  Strib reporter Jim Spencer concurs.   The article is entitled “Lutherans bowed but unbroken”, and that is an apt summary of the article that suggests:

Disappointed opponents predicted a fracture that would cause 1,000 congregations to withdraw.  A year later, the ELCA remains largely intact.  “That 1,000-congregation figure has proven to be wishful thinking on the part of those who wanted it to happen,” said Larry Wohlrabe, Bishop of Minnesota’s rural Northwestern Synod.

Penny Edgell, a University of Minnesota sociologist who studies American religion, said fears of the ELCA collapsing under the weight of gay clergy decision were “overstated.”

But, as Pastor Jeff from Arizona who frequently comments here will remind us, this past year has not been without pain.  Many congregations remaining ELCA are roiled with internal conflict.  Financial contributions are way down although most observers would agree that has more to do with the Great Recession than ELCA politics.  Declining membership continues, but that has been true for decades, and Professor Edgell notes,

“What’s happening to American Christian churches doesn’t have much to do with these hot-button issues,” Edgell said. “It has to do with demographics. Younger generations don’t view these institutions the same way their parents did.”

Cheerleaders for the demise of the ELCA will not go away quietly.  Lutheran CORE, the primary ELCA irritant, will audaciously roll out its new denomination this weekend, the North American Lutheran Church (NALC), trumpeted as “a reconfiguration of North American Lutheranism.”  Spencer’s Strib article suggests:

While fewer than 10 congregations have committed to joining NALC, organizers say hundreds eventually will.

Perhaps.

On September 18th, Minnesota will celebrate a Rite of Reconciliation that will formally reinstate Pastor Anita Hill of St Paul and others onto the ELCA roster of ordained clergy.  A similar ceremony welcomed seven California LGBTQ pastors onto the ELCA roster earlier this summer.  Pastor Hill was mentioned in the Strib article:

“I feel a sense of loss for those who felt they had to leave because I am welcome,” said Anita Hill, a lesbian who is a pastor at St. Paul-Reformation Lutheran Church in St. Paul. Hill defied her church’s ban on gay clergy for eight years as her congregation endured sanctions and battled for change. “I never thought the inclusion of some required others to depart,” she said.

How many church bulletins proclaim “All are welcome”?  And mean it?  Enjoy this UCC video that is critical of congregations that merely give lip service to full welcome.

For the past few months, Minnesota Public Radio (MPR), through its Public Insight Network and Speaking of Faith project, has been soliciting feedback from ELCA Lutherans regarding the gay-friendly policy changes resulting from the Churchwide assembly one year ago (CWA09).  Many of the responses were published recently in an article entitled A church divided, together.

The responses run the gamut of human emotions and of church political views. 

A church organist expressed depression at being forced, for reasons of income, to remain employed with an ELCA congregation despite his unyielding conviction that the ELCA had devalued the Bible:

I have had a long, depressing period of very serious soul-searching, and haven’t the slightest doubt about my convictions.

I feel as though I’ll be working in this congregation until my retirement, but that it will no longer be “my church”. My offerings are all now going elsewhere, to ministries where the truth of the Bible is valued.

Another pair of congregants, husband and wife, with a long history in their small town congregation, feel the strain on their social relationships because they chose to leave and attend a different congregation that has severed ties with the ELCA:

Their social network centered around the church, and now their friendships are suffering. “We have a lot of really good friends that are members of that congregation and we still see them socially. But it certainly has put a strain on our relationship. It’s not easy to make that kind of a break,” he says.

A congregant from Arizona said the heavy-handed and questionable tactics of the anti-ELCA faction caused him to become a strong supporter of the ELCA, calling the rabble rousing of the dissidents “the worst display of Christian disharmony I have ever witnessed,” and he deeply resented that:

We lost a beautiful church and campus many of our members had worked hard and long to establish. The legal methods our anti-ELCA group used were devious and too easy for them to destroy our former church. Church members should have the right to disagree but it should not be so easily possible for them to destroy a church.

Perhaps the most eloquent lament over the consequences of fear and mistrust came from a gay man from rural Minnesota whose father was pastor of the local ELCA congregation, fired for speaking on behalf of his son and the ELCA revised policy.  At first, the young man was overjoyed at the decisions of CWA09:

I was never prouder. I was so excited. Thrilled. Giddy with the Holy Spirit. Yes, this was my church! Yes! Yes! Yes! This is the church my Dad preached in every Sunday. This was the church I joined with my Mom and the choir, filling it with song. This was true fellowship. This was love. Loving your neighbor as you love yourself. This is God’s Love. This is why Jesus died on the cross. He died for me. So that I could be part of this wonderful family.

But then, the fear-mongering and ostracizing began:

I hear talk of false prophets and evilness and their eyes turn toward me. Me. Me?!

Wow. This is not right. This is not right at all. I must have gotten off at the wrong stop. Made a wrong turn. Crossed the wrong road. Maybe I’m lost in a dream that went south. Way south. The eyes on me hurt. The judgment hurts my very soul. Teenaged boys stare at me as if I were possessed. Young women avert their eyes. My Dad is sneered at. My Mom cries.

Yet, the young man’s hope is unbowed:

No, I didn’t take a wrong turn. My Dad is still my Dad. Wise and with God. Always with God. My Mom still loves her choir and her bells and her Bible. The Bible is the very same one I read growing up. And I know I’m not that false prophet people talk about. God knows I’m not that false prophet. I know the ELCA was right with God when the resolutions passed this past August. They did it with prayer. They did it with care. The Holy Spirit was with them as it was with me… then and now.

I know Jesus died for me. I know he rises again and is in my heart and soul.

As for my church? Fear and ignorance can be a deadly work. Thick and messy. But I’m on a mission. God’s mission.

I will find my church. I think I know where it is. I hope and pray my church is in Hawley, Minnesota. Right where it’s been for well over a hundred years. The foundation appears as strong as it ever was…with God. Working with God’s people.

I am convinced that this strife will pass, and while we grieve the loss of those who feel compelled to depart, we who are the ELCA shall emerge, smaller perhaps, but stronger and more committed to the love of Christ and an inclusive church that lives that love.  I concur in the comments of the husband and father from St. Louis:

I have discovered that I feel strongly about oppression in all its forms.

I believe that although the ELCA may have lost some members because of this vote, it is because we have chosen to be more open and welcoming, less fear-mongering, and truer to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

That can only be a good thing.”

And, finally, I offer the summation of the woman from Woodbury, Minnesota, a straight ally, who felt ostracized by her conservative congregation before finding a comfortable home in a more inclusive setting:

… in the process I have made many new Christian friends. I also connected with some who had also transferred from other churches for the same reason. Finally, I felt understood.

I wish this transition had been easier for the ELCA, but the difficulties of my journey, which pale in comparison to the journeys of those more personally affected, have enriched my life.

A recent thread of comments on this blog has touched upon the potential legal implications of the ELCA pro-gay CWA09 resolutions on individual congregations that refuse to call or hire gay clergy or to perform any type of blessing service on same gendered partners.  For my part, I have insisted that CWA09 resolutions are entirely irrelevant to the legal rights and responsibilities of congregations, especially in light of the long standing constitutional and statutory doctrine of the “ministerial exception”.  Succinctly, this doctrine prevents courts from interfering in the hiring and employment practices of churches even when the practice would constitute illegal discrimination in the secular realm.  CWA09 will certainly not change or soften that doctrine.  Neither the courts nor ELCA synods will force local congregations to hire gay clergy over the objections of the local congregation.  Any suggestion to the contrary is either misinformed or demagoguery.

On the other hand, when a congregation enters into the secular realm as a landlord or accepts governmental funding for particular programs, then the situation can become blurry.  Without exploring the nuances of such instances, the point remains, CWA09 resolutions didn’t change the law.  The legal rights and responsibilities of local congregations toward gay and lesbian persons will be determined by the courts according to their policies, procedures, and precedents, and the resolutions of CWA09 will not control the courts nor lessen the legal prerogatives of individual congregations.

Switching to another legal matter, marriage equality for gays and lesbians, the court decision last week that overturned Prop 8 in California was the subject of a couple of the Sunday morning network news talk shows.  Since I’m usually busy on Sunday mornings, like many of you, I seldom watch these programs live.  Thus, I’ll imbed a couple of videos of a pair of key discussions involving the two attorneys who successfully led the Prop 8 challenge.  In case you hadn’t heard, these two high profile attorneys were the same two who opposed each other in the Supreme Court decision in 2000 that stopped the Florida recount thus allowing George Bush to become President.  While many conservatives might be unimpressed by the involvement of Democratic attorney David Boies, his teamwork with well-known Republican attorney Ted Olson has been noteworthy.  Each of these esteemed lawyers spoke yesterday.

First, I offer Ted Olson’s interview with Fox News’ Chris Wallace:

 

Second, I offer the debate between David Boies and Tony Perkins, the conservative leader of the Family Research Council on CBS’ Face the Nation.