progressive involvement

Christianity Today shows some love to Lutheran "dissidents"

Which is not at all surprising.  David Neff, editor-in-chief of Christianity Today, looks kindly upon the Lutheran CORE convocation which recently gave us the North American Lutheran Church.  He attended the gathering and offers snippets from various convocation speeches to make the point that the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) is oh-so-far from scripture and is made up of gnostic heretics besides.

He began with a quote from Luther--"Unless I am convinced by proofs from Scriptures or by plain and clear reasons and arguments, I cannot and will not retract." 

Unfortunately, he got it wrong.  The actual quote does not refer to "plain and clear reasons and arguments."  Most translations render this simply "plain reason."  In any case, Neff recalls Luther's accent on scripture, but plainly ignores Luther's emphasis on reason.

When the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America passed its social statement on sexuality last summer, approving of gay unions and gay clergy, it made no effort appeal to Scripture at all. This frustrated and angered conservative Lutherans, who would have disagreed with the statement's teaching even if the document had appealed to scriptural authority. But to ignore Scripture entirely? How un-Lutheran.

"Made no effort to appeal to Scripture at all"?  Neff apparently didn't actually read the statement on sexuality, Human Sexuality:  Gift and Trust, to which he links.  I tried to count the number of scriptural references in it and already had 25 listed before I was half way through the first chapter.  Neff is simply wrong.

Still, even though Neff doesn't believe that the document has scriptural support (though it does), it wouldn't have mattered anyway since "conservative Lutherans...would have disagreed" with it even if it did. 

In other words, Neff makes a rather glaring admission:  "conservative Lutherans" would not have been swayed by a scriptural argument.  (The journalist, Michael Kinsley, defines a "gaffe" as when someone "tells the truth by accident.")

From there, Neff summarizes the speeches of the usual suspects--Carl Braaten, Robert Jenson, Paul Hinlicky, Robert Benne, and others.  Braaten played the "gnostic card," which is surely the most hackneyed accusation in modern Christianity.  In virtually every theological discussion, someone gets labelled a "gnostic," even though there isn't one person in a hundred who knows much about what gnosticism is.

Coming in a close second is the label of "antinomian," which comes from a Greek word which means "against law."  As if passing the baton in this relay of sanctimony, it was left to Paul Hinlicky to accuse the ELCA of being "antinomian."  We've tossed out "the law," doncha know.  (I'm reminded of a Catholic priest friend of mine who once said, "I've known a lot of people who love God, and I know a lot of people who love God's law.  You know the funny thing?  They are rarely the same people.")

Both Braaten and Hinlicky lamented the decline of "theological authority."  Braaten plumps for something he describes as "conciliar consensus of the apostles' authorized successors," by which he apparently means bishops--(this has worked so well for Rome). 

Hinlicky locates this authority in the "power of the keys," which means pastors and heirarchy.  In other words, people cannot be trusted to think on their own.  This would seem to contradict Jesus who once asked the people, "Why don't you decide for yourselves what is right?" (Lk 12:57)  Neff made this point again in his summary:

The crisis (of authority) resulted from an abandonment of the combined authority of canon, creed, and church—or less alliteratively, Scripture, a normative set of teaching that guide scriptural interpretation, and authorized leaders charged with faithfully handing on the faith.

Except that the ELCA did not abandon scripture, as can be plainly seen in the human sexuality document.  The ELCA did not abandon "creed" since there is nothing in any of the creeds concerning homosexuality.  Actually, we didn't even really abandon our "authorized leaders";  the majority of them supported the document.

We did, however, abandon "the way we've always done things" in regard to rostering of partnered gay pastors, and we did it both in light of scripture and reason. 

  

Mainline decline

David Householder's article on Lutheran decline is causing some stir, probably not so much because of the points he makes, but because of his style in making them.  "Lutherans don't have enough babies" is not the way most of our analysts would put it, though that is clearly the essence of the situation.

Or close to it anyway.  A few years ago, a well-constructed study indicated that 80% or more of mainline protestant decline was because of lower birthrates.  This should not be surprising.  With increasing affluence comes lower birthrates.  That's true throughout the world. 

Mainline protestants were among the first Americans to become generally affluent--probably all that Calvinist influence--and theirs has been the first birthrate to decline.  (Evangelical birthrates are likewise showing signs of decline.  In a few years, we may be hearing about the perilous state of evangelicalism.) 

That's most of it, but there is another, and potent, second factor:  increasing antipathy toward all forms of religion.  Those who self-identity as "seculars" were once a steady 7% or so of the population.  Suddenly, that number has jumped to 15%.  Among young people, it's around 25%.

This has been going on "under the radar" for some time, but seemed to "crystallize" on 9.11 when 3000 people were killed in the name of Islam.  What happens in one religion affects them all.  People start to think that if this is what religion does, then they want to have no part of it. 

Plus, it's not like Christianity in America has presented such a sterling image that it can withstand some negative religious publicity.  Thirty million people have already left the American Catholic church, mostly because they perceive it as too conservative.  American young people consider American Christianity to be "judgmental" and "prejudiced," indeed "unChristian."

They are not wrong to think this.  A casual observer of American religion, as presented through the media, would likely conclude that the Christian religion is the stalwart opponent of womens' rights, gay rights, science, and the Enlightenment.  Is it any surprise that many people might be down on religion?

The traditionalists will try to attribute the decline to something called "liberal theology," as reflected in the ELCA's vote to roster partnered gays.  If that were indeed so, then the arch-conservative Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (LCMS) should be growing.  It's not.  Its rate of decline is about the same as that of the ELCA.  (Last year in fact, twice as many people went from the LCMS to the ELCA as went from the ELCA to the LCMS.)

The ELCA will get smaller not because our theology is "wrong" or because God is somehow punishing us for being impertinent.  We will get smaller mostly because of demographics, and secondly because the cultural climate takes a dim view of religion, particularly--let us be frank--conservative religion. 

Long term, the situation may look some different.  Who knows?  In ninety years, we may look back and say that the ELCA, precisely because it was not conservative, turned out to be one of the few Christian traditions to survive the 21st century. 

  

Reaction formation

The Lutheran CORE convocation in Grove City, Ohio has generated yet another denomination.  The new denomination will be known as the North American Lutheran Church (NALC).  NALC's formation is in response to the decision of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA), one year ago, to approve rostering of partnered gays.  HuffPost:

As of early August, 199 congregations had cleared the hurdles to leave the ELCA for good, while 136 awaited the second vote needed to make it official. In all, there are 10,239 ELCA churches with about 4.5 million members, making it by far the largest Lutheran denomination in the U.S.

Most of those 199 congregations that have left the ELCA have joined an entity called Lutheran Church in Mission for Christ (LCMC), a loosely-configured association of independent congregations--"a website and a mailing list," as someone has put it. 

Some dissenters wanted a more traditional denomination and opted to form NALC.  Former ELCA bishop, Paull Spring, was elected as bishop of the new group.  So far, 18 congregations have signed up.

The new group says it is about more than "the gays," though that is clearly the primary driver for the move.  Spring said there were other "serious concerns," however, such as the use of inclusive language "that strips male references to God." 

This is a curious reference.  In Hebrew religion and in Christian theology, the overwhelming majority of opinion has been that God is not to be understood in gender terms.  The Deity is beyond both male and female, which means that there is nothing particularly sacrosanct about speaking of God as "he."  This "serious concern" seems strained.  Spring continues:

"Which is the authoritative voice of the church today?  Is it holy scripture, which Lutherans have always confessed, scripture alone, or is supposed to be some combination, that as well as some mood of the times?"

ELCA exegetes argue, convincingly in my view, that the dissidents have failed to make a Biblical case for the exclusion of gays.  Two of the words at issue--malakoi, arsenokoi--turn out not to mean what people have long thought.  In fact, we don't know for sure exactly what these words mean.

Moreover, Spring misunderstands the "scripture alone" principle.  It does not mean that other sources should never be considered, or that the Bible should be seen as "inerrant" with pronouncements on every issue under the sun.  The "scripture alone" principle simply means that a teaching should not be in contradiction with scripture. 

And yes, as a matter of fact, many in the church do consider the "mood of the times," and quite rightfully so.  Back in the 1950's, Paul Tillich argued for a "method of correlation" whereby the church interacts with the modern world.  In the 1960's, Vatican II likewise argued for dialog with the world and a spirit of openness and cooperation.  This is not a bad thing, but a good thing.

The North American Lutheran Church anticipates that it may have as many as 200 congregations within the first year.  They may make it, though it should be noted that this expectation is, itself, a significant dialing back of earlier, more optimistic prognostications.

 

 

Our so-called "burnout"

Yesterday, Paul Vitello had a piece in the New York Times on clergy burnout.  He discussed the piece on NPR today.

Members of the clergy now suffer from obesity, hypertension and depression at rates higher than most Americans. In the last decade, their use of antidepressants has risen, while their life expectancy has fallen.

In my own denomination, 69% of pastors reported being overweight.  (These must be easterners--no way it's that high here in the west.)  64% of ELCA pastors have high blood pressure, and 13% take antidepressants.

This, one might have noticed, is somewhat at odds with our theology.  Lutheran theology says that God's radical love and acceptance is supposed to diminish anxiety, not stir it up.  As one of my seminary profs, Fr. Thomas McGonigle, once said, "The Lutherans say they believe in salvation by grace, but they sure don't act like it."

Whence cometh all these problems?  Several forces are in play.  For one thing, clergy are no longer--thank God--held on a pedestal, which also means that we don't get the deference or respect that we used to get.  This, too, is really a good thing, but may come as a surprise to people who expected something different.

Secondly, the culture at large has pretty much had it with religion.  The ranks of those who self-identify as "secular" expands with every passing day.  If "spiritual, but not religious" people--i.e. people who take the trouble to self-identify as "spiritual" but don't like church--were a denomination, they would be the largest in the country.  (Second largest?  Former Roman Catholics.)

You can't really blame people.  If they had a dollar for every time they heard about a crime committed by clergy, or heard a clergyperson say something inane or ridiculous, most could retire.  Compared to our latter-day charlatans, Elmer Gantry was a piker.  Wear a clergy collar on the street and people are as likely to see you as a child molester as they are to see you as an emissary of Jesus the Lord.

Third, people in this country don't care all that much for preachers anyway, and never really have.  In the late 17th and early 18th centuries, the so-called "Great Awakenings"--(which weren't)--were anti-clergy.  Why?  Partly, it was egalitarian fervor.  The idea of a clerical class struck many early Americans as undemocratic. 

Priests weren't even popular in the New Testament.  When Jesus told a story about a priest who passed by a half-dead man without helping (Lk 10:25-37), you can bet that heads nodded throughout the crowd.  They didn't much care for these priests, who usually left you with the feeling that you weren't giving enough, or praying enough, or righteous enough.  Who needs that? 

It is true that there's always a certain market for piety--some people actually like it.  That point acknowledged, it's also true that most people don't care for sanctimony or smarminess, which, unfortunately, is stock-in-trade for some pastors.  As my Uncle Robert likes to say, "Save it for Sunday, preacher."

Some clergy discomfort, it must be said, is their own dang fault.  Some pastors go into the business because they want to be loved.  In order to get love, they act loving themselves.  They will do about anything in order to be well thought of.  They'll work 100 hours a week.  They'll make sure the pop machine is stocked.  They'll come back from vacation to visit the council president's nephew with an infected hangnail.  ("See how much pastor loves us!")

Gerhard Krodel, seminary professor at the Lutheran Theological Seminary at Philadelphia, used to say that every seminary student had one quality which prevented him or her from ever being a decent pastor.  "They're all obsessed with righteousness," he said.

Yes, one must get it right.  One must perform.  One must be "righteous".  Only then do my parents--or my congregation--pat me on the head and tell me how "good" I am.  We make prospective seminary students pay $1500 for a psychological assessment before they can even think about going to seminary, yet we don't check for one psychological imbalance, called "neediness" or "dependency," which is quite likely to keep that person, and the congregation, in a state of emotional and spiritual immaturity.

This is my theory of why so many pastors smile through their sermons.  They could be preaching on depression and heartbreak, smiling all the while.  To steal a line from Sally Fields, their smile says, "Like me, like me, really like me.  See how loveable I am?" 

Congregations themselves are quite often partners with the pastor in keeping him or her in the immaturity of "co-dependency."  He or she dotes on them, and, as long as that behavior continues, they'll dote back. 

Both get what they want, sort of.  The pastor gets love and acceptance, or mistakenly thinks so, and may not consciously notice that he or she has to keep performing in order to keep getting this fake ersatz variety of love--emotional "fool's gold," you might call it.  For their part, the congregation gets a devoted servant at their beck and call (who is also seething with rage at their continual "demands"). 

Easily lost in this twisted psychological maelstrom is the whole question of its horrible theology.  You don't have to perform for God's love and mercy, and following Jesus by serving others does not need to be yet another chore.

Jesus didn't chew Martha out for her serving (Luke 10:28-42).  No, he said, "Martha, Martha, you are worried and distracted by many things."  The life of service, following the example of Jesus, is not to be drudgery, nor should it generate anxiety or burn you out.  If it does, you're not doing it right.

Gay pastors to be reinstated in the ELCA today

Seven pastors who were barred from serving in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) because of a policy that required gay clergy to be celibate are being welcomed into the denomination today at St. Mark's in San Francisco.  Denver's own Nadia Bolz-Weber, pastor of House for All, will be preaching the sermon.  Bishop Mark Holmerud of the Sierra Pacific Synod will preside.  LA Times:

Megan Rohrer, one of the pastors who will participate in Sunday's rite of reception service, grew up in South Dakota and attended a Lutheran college where she said students tried to exorcise her "gay demons" by throwing holy water on her. Some of those people are now Lutheran pastors in South Dakota, she said.

Rohrer said she is hopeful Sunday's service will be a "symbol" to young people that the Lutheran church is working toward becoming more welcoming of people of all different backgrounds.

"There's room for them," said Jeff Johnson, another pastor who is being reinstated.  "It's a tolerant church."

 

Sermon for Pentecost 5: Our Trip to Sarteneja

What a wonderful trip!  Whatever remarks I make today can only touch the surface.  Every one of us has tons of stories to tell.  Ask us, and we'll be happy to tell them.  Even if you don't ask us, we'll probably tell them anyway.

Before I say anything else, I want to give my highest praise to Megan and Adam Shaffer.  I've been on this kind of trip before, which is a trip I still talk about years later, and this one was even better than that.  Megan and Adam deserve our highest thanks not only for getting us there and back safely, but for everything else in between.

I want to also mention Praying Pelicans Ministries, who did a bang up job in every way.  Every local arrangement went without a hitch, with the possible exception of scheduling a picnic in a spot with no trees.

I also want to thank all of you.  It was your financial support, your prayer support, your spiritual support which made this mission possible.  You were with us every step of the way.  Sixteen people were the face of the mission, but all of All Saints was the body.

Because white male theologians have been oppressed for, oh, several weeks now

Robert Benne is ticked off that authoritative white men no longer run things in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA).  He said so himself.  He's aggrieved by the ELCA's vote to roster partnered gays, thus departing from the--drum roll!--Great Tradition.  (If you didn't know better, you'd think the Great Tradition was all about "the gays.")

This horror or horrors was the result of not listening to big-wheel white men back when the ELCA was formed in the 1980's.

The planners of the new Lutheran church saw to it that those who provided theological guidance to predecessor churches—then almost exclusively white and male—were marginalized from the real decision-making centers of church life.

He continues by bemoaning the proportional system of representation in the ELCA which increased the voice of lay people, people of color, and women.

This scheme dramatically reduced the role of white, male pastors in the church.

The ELCA continued this gross effrontery by whittling down the influence of bishops--"making the Bishops merely advisory"--and theologians--treating them as "only one interest group among others."  Yet even worse, ELCA policy is now decided by "lay-dominated assemblies" with no instruction from their theological "betters," i.e. those whom Benne calls "authoritative" voices.

Some people might call the intentional inclusion of lay people, young people, people of color, and women the rectification of a long-standing injustice.  Some people might even believe that democratic governance is a good thing.  Not Benne.  He yearns for "authoritative" voices who can tell people they're wrong and straighten them out.

Just so no one misses the point, he rattles off a litany of supposedly bad things proportional representation has wrought:  "feminism, multiculturalism, anti-imperialism and environmentalism."  These supposed perils are what we get for the having the nerve and presumption of thinking for ourselves. 

One wonders, however.  Didn't Jesus have some things to say on women's equality, the affirmation of peoples, the alleviation of political bondage, and the proper stewardship of God's creation?  He said not one word about "the gays," but quite a lot on these subjects.  Those "lay-dominated assemblies" may not be too theologically sophisticated, but they seem to know their Jesus fairly well.

Benne goes on to promote two groups--LCMC and CORE--as options for those who want to leave the ELCA.  Should LCMC and CORE "fail," Benne suggests that the only remaining option "may be a bracing swim across the Tiber"--becoming Roman Catholic, in other words. 

Setting aside the sheer curiosity of a Lutheran theologian, self-identified as "confessional," becoming Roman Catholic--the confessions take a dim view of the Pope--isn't this a rather strange time to hold up Roman Catholicism as a fortress and beacon of traditional morality?

Ah, but they represent the--drum roll again!--Great Tradition, and, in the Great Tradition, the bishops and priests are men whose job (many believe) includes telling people what to think and do.  This reveals an affinity for the more medieval manifestations of the Great Tradition while over-looking its early church egalitarian roots. 

In any case, "Great Tradition," it should be noted, is a fancy way of saying "we've-always-done-it-that-way."   

Rocky Mountain Synod: Movin' on

The Rocky Mountain Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) held its first synod assembly since CWA09.  CWA09 is short-hand for "churchwide assembly 2009," the one in which partnered gays and lesbians were approved for rostering in the church.

Synod assembly opened on Thursday evening.  Our bishop, Allan Bjornberg, seemed somewhat dour in his "state of the synod" speech.  He announced that four congregations had voted to leave the ELCA over the CWA09 vote, and that two others will take a second vote.  Three efforts to leave the ELCA failed.

In most of these cases--all, to my knowledge, both here and in other parts of the country--pastors led their congregations out of the ELCA.  In one of the two congregations still to be decided, a vote had already been taken which affirmed staying in the ELCA.  As I heard the story, the anti-ELCA faction rallied everyone they could find--including, presumably, any stray dogs or cats that might have ambled by--and took another vote, one which, this time, registered 80% who wanted to leave.

The synod is also hurting for money.  Receipts in 2009 were short of budget by about $300,000.  The synod treasurer said the short-fall was "pretty much economic," and added that about $40,000 of the shortfall is "related to CWA09."  The revenue projection for 2010 is $2.5 million, which is almost exactly the same as when Yours Truly served on synod council in the mid-1990's.

Dr. Diane Jacobson of Luther Seminary did the Bible study, which was based in the "Book of Faith" initiative of the ELCA.  Her first lecture was basically an Infomercial for the program, which she then fleshed out in subsequent presentations.  The "Book of Faith" initiative promotes four ways of reading the Bible--devotional, historical, literary, and a special category titled "Lutheran theological."

This was the first synod assembly in fifteen years that wasn't absorbed with questions of human sexuality.  The only resolution to generate any real discussion was one that encouraged congregations to make less of a carbon footprint.  Three speakers took the opportunity to question whether global warming even exists.  Two of them said that there was no consensus on the question from the world of science, which is, of course, not at all true.  In any case, the resolution passed with a strong majority.

Other quick impressions:  Annemarie Burke was responsible for turning the Hyatt's meeting room into a recognizable worship space, which she did admirably.  After his "state of the synod" speech, the Bishop's mood was noticeably more relaxed. 

In other news, it was announced that the ELCA has raised $11.4 million for Haiti Relief, and would start over forty congregations this year.  Two congregations in the Rocky Mountain Synod are being organized with ecumenical partners--United Church of the San Juans in Ridgway, CO, and Camina de Vida in Albuquerque, NM. 

Seminary professor rips Lutheran CORE a new one

The "core of Lutheran CORE is rotten," says Jon Pahl, professor of church history at the Lutheran Theological Seminary at Philadelphia.  How rotten?  Not only does it flirt with historic heresies, at bottom, it is a "schismatic purity movement," which will have little or no impact on Christian history.

Lutheran CORE is the primary organizing vehicle for those who are protesting the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America's (ELCA) vote of last summer to roster gays in committed relationships.

Pahl claims Lutheran CORE is guilty of promoting donatism, docetism, pelagianism, triumphalism, homophobia, white male privilege, bad breath, hemorrhoids, global warming, and the heartbreak of psoriasis--and that's just for starters.

One should read the original article and make their own assessment of whether he makes his charges stick.  I found them to be rather hit-and-miss.  When he hits, he hits hard.  On the other hand, his attempt to connect the "dissidents" to white male patriarchy seems pro forma, and their supposed link to American civil religion is not clearly made. 

The charge of donatism bears thought.  The fourth-century donatists opposed the orthodox church of the period because they felt it had been compromised by its accomodation to Rome.  They felt some pastors, and even bishops, were illegitimate because they had betrayed the faith during the period of Roman persecutions. 

Christian people ought not to be such sinners, said the donatists.  The church should be the "assembly of the pure," to their way of thinking, and pastors and bishops ought to be examples of "purity."

Similarly today, dissidents charge that the proponents of change in the ELCA have abandoned the pure orthodox faith and sold themselves out to the impure secular values of inclusion and multiculturalism.  The idea that the "pure" are those who stand on the historic faith and the "impure" are those who have been corrupted by "the world" does indeed have the whiff of donatism about it.

Even more, such a position clears the field for self-righteousness.  When one counts themselves on the "pure" side of the debate, a sense of spiritual and moral superiority toward their opponents inevitably follows, and the temptation to scapegoat the "impure Other" is irresistible.  (Self-righteousness, one notes, is arguably the biggest sin in the Bible.) 

For example, some dissidents, such as Robert Benne, have argued that the ELCA's gay-friendly stance has "led to dramatic membership losses."  We have "abandoned the historic faith" to chase a secular will-o-the-wisp.  The people are outraged and voting with their feet by walking out the door, so Benne and others say. 

Such criticism might make sense if only so-called "liberal" churches were declining while so-called "conservative" ones were prospering.  That is not the case.  The ELCA is down across the board, both liberal congregations and conservative ones, and so is the ultra-conservative Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (LCMS).  If people were leaving the ELCA because they don't like its gay-friendly stance, the LCMS should be prospering.  It is not. 

In fact, religion, both in its liberal and conservative incarnations, is in retreat all across America.  Our energies could more profitably be spent by honestly asking why this is so, and being prepared for the responses we might receive, than in scapegoating those with whom we disagree and trying to blame whatever woes we have on them.

Pahl accuses CORE of adopting an essentially modernist template for its criticism of the ELCA's document on human sexuality, "Gift and Trust."  Indeed, some in CORE like to intone on the "Biblical view of marriage," but the true Biblical view of marriage isn't what they say it is.  Polygamy, one could argue, is the norm through most of the Bible.  No one outside of southern Utah would say that we should follow that path today.

When CORE people talk about the markers of what they call the "Biblical view of marriage," those markers seem less connected to the world of the Bible, but dovetail quite nicely with the social norms of Minneapolis suburbs in about 1955.

Robert Benne has posted his response.  It is heavy laden with sarcasm--Pahl thinks he's hot stuff, a "profound seer," his treatise a mere "rant"--but the only one of Pahl's charges that he specifically mentions is the one of homophobia.  Pahl did hurl that charge, and Benne can safely take offense because Pahl offers no evidence with which to make it stick.

Still, when gays and lesbians are derided as sinners of a particularly virulent variety, when the church is rent over issues of gay sexuality, when those who defend the actions of the ELCA are called heretics and apostates, you can bet there's at least a smidgen of homophobia around some place.  

The church in the power of the Holy Spirit

The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America has reinstated Pastors Bradley Schmeling and Darin Easler.  Both pastors had been off the official roster because they are in committed same-gender relationships.  (More at Lutherans Concerned/North America.)

Extraordinary Lutheran Ministries, an organization founded in order to provide a path for gay and lesbian pastors to serve in congregations, has released the following video which contains rare footage of the first "illegal" ordinations at St. Francis in San Francisco in the early 90's.