I have been and will continue to be a cheerleader for my beloved ELCA, and I will defend with pride her courageous decision last summer to include our LGBT brothers and sisters in ordained ministry and to offer blessing of their relationships. I have also blogged extensively about the parallel Episcopal efforts to include “all the baptized in all the sacraments.” But, there is one denomination that we sometimes overlook and take for granted; the United Church of Christ (UCC) was the original pioneer in recognizing gay clergy over a generation ago. I have friends in my local UCC congregation, and their attitude towards the new ELCA policy is “what took you so long.”
With a hat tip to the blog Straight not Narrow—Presenting Jesus beyond the Walls, I offer the following YouTube video that remembers the ordination of William (Bill) R. Johnson, the first openly gay person to be ordained to the Christian ministry … on June 25, 1972. The whole movie takes about twenty minutes and is broken into two parts for YouTube. They’re worth the time.
So how is that working out for the UCC? Wikipedia cites a 44% membership loss in the last 45 years. Coincidence?
@Tony Stoutenburg
Coincidence? Yes, I think there are vastly more important reasons for the declining populations of all traditional denominations, and of church membership generally. More to the point, the local UCC congregation that I know about does extremely well, thank you very much, with a strong social justice orientation.
@Obie: I agree that there are vastly more important reasons. But, IMNTBHO, the over-arching problem is a willingness to play fast and loose with the meaning of Scripture. As Peter Akinala, the Anglican Bp of Nigeria asked a few years ago (and I am quoting from memory here, so this is likely a paraphrase) “If you do not believe what the Bible says, why did you bring it to us and tell us to read it?”
This is not a call for a wooden literalism; I am not an inerrantist. But one of the Reformation principles was that ‘Scripture is clear.’ The progressives in the ELCA have dropped back into the mode of late medieval Catholicism: you can’t understand what it really means until you have someone with the proper credentials explain it to you.
Churches which go with a clarity of Scripture approach – some of whom are badly misguided, IMO – are those which, overall are growing. (E.g. Trinity UCC/Chicago, where there was both a strong social justice orientation AND a pretty socially conservative Biblical outlook, as I understand it, though I am no Jeremiah Wright expert). The mainline, for the most part, is not growing.
Blessings TS
@Tony Stoutenburg
I think you offer several excellent points.
As a local pastor suggested–tongue in cheek–Luther saw a problem with the Latin Bible; Hans couldn’t read it. When Luther translated it into German, he encountered a new problem; Hans now could read the Bible. There needs to be a delicate balance between private inspiration/interpretation and the teaching authority of the church. Too heavy handed, and you end up with a rigid Catholicism, but too much private inspiration, and you end up with David Koresh.
I agree with you that an attraction to Evangelicalism and a primary reason why many Evangelical churches are thriving in the face of an overall decline in American religiosity is the moral clarity offered. Black and white. Right and wrong. No shades of gray and no nuance. Frankly, that strikes me as dumbing down the text. While that approach may be popular, does that mean we should surrender to literalism and ignore the difficulties of applying texts from an ancient culture to 21st century issues? Call me an idealist, but I think we’re all better off being honest about what the Bible is and is not. I think that claiming that the Bible is clear when it is not is essentially a failure of leadership on the part of those who ought to know better. As I see it, the problem with the evangelical’s black and white, right and wrong world view is that it becomes easy to slip into judgmentalism and condemnation of the gray folks in the world.
Obie,
I would argue that the Bible is clear. There are parts that are clearly allegory, and there are parts that are less clearly allegory, but may be, but the message of the Scriptures is clear. “The trees of the filed shall clap their hands.” Is 55:12. Do trees have hands? Or is the prophet declaring that all of creation celebrates God? I’m good with the latter
A biblicaly correct evangelicalism does see the world as black and white: God is good and we are not. But God’s intentions for us are also clear. And whenever I am tempted to claim that the Bible is not clear, it is usually because I disagree with what it clearly says. To claim that I know better is not a form of leadership, it is the sin of Adam.
And I do not know that Luther ever complained that Hans could read the Bible; that was more of Erasmus’ complaint.
Blessings, TS
Tony, this is the “Voice of Dissention” writing with a pen name. Lets not condemn the UCC for their gay vote. That does not appear to be why they are losing members. The UCC pastor told me that the UCC has a policy to allow churches to choose about being open to all lifestyles. If you look on the UCC website you will see which ones do and which ones don’t. I think it has more to do with apathy and the resistance of the old guard in the churches to change. I went to the UCC church and made a comment about their library not having any fiction and immediately got shot down by an extended family member. This church appears to be one of the more conservative ones. They have a nice choir and my husband joined it.
Because of your talk in our town our ELCA church went LCMC. It was also because your pastor friend led the anti gay movement here. I must stand with my grandchildren who have a transgendered father . If I stay in the “Church of my Grandmother” I will be saying to them than I condemn their father who went through a long battle with his sexuallity before having the surgery.
You can quote the Bible and you can quote Luther all you want, but until you discover some compassion for those touched by this issue, I can’t be with you.
Yes, agree that the ELCA vote was a bad choice but mostly because it was 25 years too soon.
A few months ago while I was still church librarian I ordered the DVD series”The Spreading Flame” from CBD.Com. It is about the Reformation and tells about all of the reformers including Luther. It was an education for me to discover that Luther was not the first and only reformer or Bible translator. So many tried and lost their lives. Maybe it is time for our “Luther Lutherans” to see what the others believe and then maybe they can make educated rather than biased comments. My German peasant ancestors came for the part of Germany that Luther was from and some of them were followers. The only problem with peasants is that most of them were illiterate.
Well, first, Lilly, let’s please not assume that some one who upholds Scripture is anti-gay. I have spoken in several places, but I can guess that you are at one of two.
I also want to say that I have some real sympathy for your former son-in-law. But much as I told my friend Brian, whom I cast in a couple community theater productions on the west coast, I can understand his desires, but I could not condone his having abandoned his wife and two sons to follow them. That did not make him unforgivable, but all actions have consequences, and any married parent who decides to follow their own passions instead of keeping the commitment they have made is creating difficulties that will have real consequences on their children. I commend you for your standing with your grandchildren.
On the other hand, it does them no good to drop what the Bible says about human sexual ethics and substitute situational ethics. If our principles cannot stand up to the situation we are close to, they are not principles at all.
If you stay in that church, you will not automatically “be saying to them than I condemn their father.” I was once on a listserv with a rather famous gay pastor whose ordination got his congregation kicked out of the ELCA. He spoke of going home to visit his family, who had been lifelong LCMS. His grandmother was going on and on at dinner about how liberal LCMS had become and how intolerable it was. And then she turned to my correspondent and asked how his partner was. He was shocked.
I never understood why. The overwhelming principle of a Xn faith ethic is that we love our neighbors as ourselves, which means naming the sin and still loving the sinner.
Finally, let me say that when I was ordained, and again when I was installed (both times), I stood before a congregation and and swore to preach and teach in accordance with the Scriptures and the Lutheran Confessions. I am not going to brag about my compassion, because it is probably insufficient in any case, but there is no compassion in telling a sinner that their sin is just dandy. The Spirit transforms us, not conforms us.
Blessings
Tony
Thanks Tony. That helps.
@Tony Stoutenburg
Tony,
I understand that you believe, quite fervently, that any same gender sexual behavior is sinful according to the authority of the Bible. With this fundamental assumption as your starting point, you then dismiss same gender relationships as following “situational ethics” and not Biblical ethics.
What you don’t seem to understand, or at least you’re unwilling to acknowledge, is that many of us disagree with your fundamental premise. You take it as a “given” that the Scriptural witness condemns same gender, committed, livelong, and monogamous relationships. Many of us don’t take that assertion as a “given” but as subject to serious moral discernment, informed by the Biblical witness but also by the best evidence of modern science and psychology and human experience. It just isn’t as black and white or as simple as you assume.
Disagree if you will, but please don’t condescend to the view that those of us who disagree are unbiblical and adherants of cheap grace “situational ethics”.
If I may be so bold as to quote from a favorite author, “Do not be overconfident, my brash young friend. Self doubt is the blossom of wisdom. Nurture it with awe and wonder.” From my own novel, A Wretched Man.
@Obie, I think that if you quote yourself, you do not need the ” ” 🙂
I understand the difference in viewpoint. But the best evidence of modern science and psychology are, according to the very nature of the scientific method, only theories. To wit: when I was in college, we were informed of the coming global cooling. Now we have politicians trying to lead us to radical social and economic change to prevent global warming… while the top British climate researcher recently admitted that the earth has not warmed in 15 years.
And our human experience is by definition so subjective that it is useless as a paradigm, unless we are just going to be like sheep, turning every one to his own way. And Bible points to that as a baaaad thing.
Of your 4 sources of authority, that leaves the Biblical witness.
I apologize: apparently I spoke inartfully, because I do not consider situational ethics to be a bad thing. Every situation is different, and so the facts of an individual case ought to inform even the most ardent deontologist. My point, hopefully made clearer this time, is that if I have principles, I must apply them in all cases; I cannot pick and choose. In a perhaps clearer (?) example, if I have a principle of not cheating on my wife under any circumstances (and I do) then an encounter with a particularly enticing blond in a nightclub cannot be an exception. If it is, my principle was not worth much.
Likewise, if I have a principle of “hating the sin and loving the sinner,” then I must hate all the sins (and I do not get to choose which ones count and which we can now ignore) and I must love all the sinners. Tough stuff. But if I am going to say, well, I love all the sinners, except that based on John over there, I now have a class of sinners I do not think I have to love … then my principle is no principle at all.
And BTW, thanks, its been a while since anyone called me young.
Blessings TS
@Tony Stoutenburg
I need to make another comment. My ex son in law was a very depressed and maybe deluded person when he made his choice to become a She. I understand depression and it is also what makes the situation tolerable for my grandchildren. He was evaluated by psychologists before the change . I question if they really knew my ex son in law. While the ex is living as a woman, my daughter doesn’t think she is any happier than before the change. Of course those two have post divorce issues as often happens. My daughter also made the comment that of the gay/lesbian people she knows, she would question the stability of any of those to be able to cope with ministry in a church. What I am trying to say, and Obie disagree if you need to, is that while psychologists think this lifestyle is not mental illness, from what I have observed and my family’s experience, there seems to often be a psychological condition here. To me that puts a different light on it . Is it sin or sickness ? My daughter has made the statement that she won’t be surprised if the ex ends it all some day.
To clarify the above statement, I believe there has been some research done showing that at least for some being homosexual is biological. This may not be true for all. How can we call someone sinful if God created them that way or allowed the variation in their brains. Now if they are into sadism , bondage and the like, yes that can hurt or even kill. That I would call sinful.
On the sin or sickness question, remember that sin is not just acts, it is the human condition apart from the redemption of Christ.
I will lift you all up in prayer.
Blessings
TS
Tony, yes it is the human condition apart from redemption of Christ. That applies to all of us- gay,straight, black, white Swedish, Norwegian,German,and even pagan. You are talking Original sin. The fall of man etc. I told your friend that I thought original sin was actually our animal natures and he came back with the “fall of man”. If we could admit that we were created a little lower than the angels and a little higher than the apes — in the image of God but still creatures, maybe we could get away from all this Holier than Thou stuff and live together and strive for the good of mankind rather than tearing others down. Have a good sermon today and get ready for musky fishing up there.
Hayward is a pretty place and has lots of good fishing. Enjoy God’s creation.
Tony ,I was really angry at your Pastor B friend here a while back. After the first vote I said to him that I would have liked to stay in the ELCA because both of my kids had been divorced. He answered ” They didn’t ask for a blessing on their divorces, they asked for their sins to be forgiven.” I bristled at that and said- does that apply even when your son-in law becomes a woman ?
Well, he was catagorically right but even Luther said there are some cases when divorce is warranted. Pastor B did apologize later when I called him on it and he couldn’t even remember he said that. Then he told our beloved associate visitation pastor that he had to choose between two masters because he was serving part time in an ELCA church. That was the last straw for some of us. Yes, your caution about being careful what you say is a good one. Pastor B likes to hide behind scripture and Luther. That is probably good because he tends to stick his foot in his mouth.
You are both, of course, right about divorce. It is a sin … and it is sometimes necessary. Like when you spouse changes genders. Or when you are simply and totally incompatible (one of Luther’s acceptable reasons.)
As for the details of situations I do not know enough about, I will simply reiterate that the action of the CWA has created consequences for many that are very sad.
Father, forgive them for they know not what they do.
Obsession can be a good thing if it is used for a good cause but obsession can be an evil thing if people act on it out of the depth of their ignorance. An obsession with getting rid of all references to the ELCA in a church website or in the life of a congregation within a week of the vote seems to me a bit excessive and could even be the latter. Perhaps some of your pastors need some counseling.
Some of “your pastors”? You sound like the older brother in yesterday’s Luke reading.
Perhaps if the way some of the ELCA bishops are treating some pastors and congregations in the wake of August, there would be less animus on the part of the pastors who are leaving.
Yes Tony, I do sound like the older brother. I am still angry with the way things went at the new LCMC church. It will take me awhile. In the meantime, I want to help the ELCA remnant get their church started and it will take work. I have been to “Unitarians Considering Christ” twice now. The UCC is my husband’s childhood church. One thing I like is that they are worshiping God without groveling in “sin” before Him. I really think that the basic issue you people have is that benevolence money you had to pay to the ELCA. Yes, it is quite a lot but I am waiting to see if $200 a month will keep the LCMC offices afloat or if that is just a starter. The lakes are opening up in Waupaca Co. The geese are headed your way. Peace be with you and may we once again work together at some point in the future.
“I really think that the basic issue you people have is that benevolence money you had to pay to the ELCA.”
That, and how it was spent, is a part of it, but for me it goes back 13 years.
Blessings
TS
I want to thank you for posting the video of the ordination of William Johnson. It took place just days before my wedding and I think of all the years that have gone by since …. a long time. As a mother of a beloved gay son, who has a passion to see love and justice prevail …. while I am still here to rejoice …. I so enjoyed watching William’s story. We left the ELCA after the Orlando Assembly …. sad and bitter. We found refuge in many UCC chuches over the years.