"Progress"?

This posting is offered as my own summary, inaccurate perceptions included, of the current status of the ELCA following the decision of our Churchwide Assembly to open ordination to our gay, lesbian, and transgendered brothers and sisters in Christ.

Our status at the close of 2009 includes the following observations:

1. Many ELCA members rejoice at the reduction of discrimination against gay, lesbian, and transgendered people by allowing them to be "rostered" in the ELCA. Many ELCA members grieve for the manner in which our Churchwide Assembly has made this decision outside the boundaries of scripture.

2. While I understand the concern about social justice for gay, lesbian, and transgendered persons within the ELCA (as for any minority group), this frankly does not seem to me to be the central issue. As many have already said, it is the issue of how scripture is read and interpreted that is the core issue here, rather than an issue of sexual orientation. Sexual orientation is simply a case in point.

3. The splits generated within the body of the ELCA by #1 and #2 above are becoming clearer, as the polarities within the membership begin to widen and crystalize. This polarization is evident
a. at an individual level, as some leave the ELCA for other denominations,
b. at a congregational level, as some congregations either leave or add an additional
affiliation with a church body such as Lutheran Churches in Mission for Christ , LCMS,
the new church body being formed by Lutheran CORE, etc.
c. at a synodical level, as with the Northeast Iowa Synod and perhaps the South Carolina
Synod.

4. As ELCA staff conduct the business of converting Churchwide Assembly policy into rules and regulations for implementation, it seems to me to be virtually inevitable that the fracture lines will deepen and that schism is on the horizon. Consider: as Dr. Michael Root points out on www.lutheranspersisting.com, the study on which the decision was made argued for flexibility and tolerance (i.e., "bound conscience"), but the pre-existing ELCA Constitution requires that synod constitutions must comply with the ELCA Constitution. The concept of "bound conscience" is incompatible with the ELCA's own constitutional provisions.

5. Fewer people on either side of the issue are listening to what the other has to say.

If the present course is continued (and I see nothing that would suggest 2010 will be different), I expect to see the following:
a. further loss of members and financial support for ELCA ministries,
b. continued deterioration of ecumenical relationships with denominations that have
stayed within the boundaries of scripture and tradition, and
c. the gradual appearance of information in Augsburg-Fortress educational materials for
adults, youth, and children which is inconsistent with scripture and the tradition of the
Church, leading to further loss of traditionalist members, further loss of financial
support.

I grieve for the pain I see in some of my ELCA friends and colleagues. I grieve that, despite our leadership's call for "continued conversation" on this issue, the conversation between traditionalists and revisionists seems essentially to be over. I grieve for the loss of diversity within the ELCA, fully expecting that, in time, the ELCA will reach a state of equilibrium, with a smaller traditional voice and fewer members (including the loss of some who don't really care about the issues but simply don't want to be members of a denomination in continuous conflict). If this happens, the ELCA will be more homogenous but far less rich.
As we face the coming new year, I can't help but wonder: has the "progress" made justified the cost?