We're now just under two weeks away from the ELCA Churchwide Assembly, where I will be a Voting Member. The topic of the week will be homosexuality--whether to recognize same sex relationships and whether to ordain pastors in such relationships. The Lutheran blog and journal world have been abuzz about these things for years, and it is the hope of many that this Churchwide Assembly will finally put the issue to rest. I find that unlikely, especially given the correspondence on both sides of the issue I have received over the past several months (one of the "fringe benefits" of Voting Members I was not aware of).
I've been disapointed because most of what I have been receiving is, frankly, crap--appeals to "Jesus loves everybody" or "we've never done things that way", hate mail or thinly veiled fearmongering that this vote (which apparently has already been decided in both directions) will destroy the ELCA. I've seen very little of actual theological substance on these issues, from either side, much to my dismay. My biggest concern is that we will make a decision on homosexuality (in either direction) without doing our theological homework and the result will be disaster.
Several weeks ago I stumbled upon an
open letter in favor of the sexuality statement and policy recommendations from several theologians (a list on which I find all of my teachers, and many of their teachers) that was in response to a
widely circulated one against these two documents Now it was fun to see the competing lists of "important Lutheran theologians" but apart from "find your teammates and pick your side" it was hard for me to see how this contributed much to the debate except listing which theologians agree with the opinions the rest of us have already formed.
But a recent exchange between Herbert Chilstrom (former Presiding Bishop of the ELCA) and Carl Braaten (former Professor of Theology at LSTC and Lutheran theologian extraordinaire) has given me much more hope. For the first time in this whole debate I am seeing some actual theological discussion--honest debate on our core Lutheran theological principles. It is my hope that more people read the l
etter from Rev. Dr. Chilstrom and the
response from Rev. Dr. Braaten and that this sort of interchange forms the background of our discussion and debate in Minnesota.
Finally we are talking about the issues that lay under the issues of "justice" and "sexual ethics" that seem to dominate our talk about homosexuality in the ELCA--and it is these underlying issues that explain why homosexuality is more than just a passing subject in the Lutheran church. Finally we are talking about what we mean by "Word of God" and how has that shaped the decisions we have made on other similar issues--ordaining women and remarried divorced pastors-- that (by one understanding of what the Word of God means) "go against Scripture". Finally we are talking about the fact that we make decisions all the time that affect our ecumenical relationships. Finally we are talking about the unresolved issues lingering in the ELCA since its formation and the unlikely union among pietists (and recovering peietists), liberal Protestants, evangelical catholics, and all sorts of other strands that form our crazy Lutheran family. Finally we are recognizing that this decision is going to be costly, however it is decided, and that we will have to figure out how to live together after the vote has been recorded.
I hope that homosexuality is not yet another stage for a power struggle between these (apparently) competing understandings of what it means to be a "true Lutheran". The ELCA is a wild mix of varying viewpoints, and I think we are at our best when we can actually articulate these things theologically (as Chilstrom and Braaten have done) and discuss them as such. Our theology is best under pressure, and best when we can argue--publicly, openly, and honestly--about what matters most to us, while at the same time putting the best spin on our neighbors' intentions.
And maybe, just maybe, we could get back to more important matters like what it means to follow Jesus and how to proclaim the Good News in a world that is so sick of us fighting amongst ourselves that it no longer gives a crap about what we have to say.
I've gotten hooked on the
music from
Church of the Beloved and I think their song "
Peace" will be my continual prayer as I head to Minnesota--particularly the line "We need each other more than we need to agree." I hope our church can recognize that we need to take care that as we bite and devour one another we are not consumed by one another. No matter how we desire to draw lines in the sand, put "us" on the side of truth and "them" on the side of error, we are all in this thing together--male and female, Jew and gentile, slave and free, gay and straight. I just wish we could act like that sometimes.
Peace
Broken conversations, broken people, we're broken Lord.
Terrified illusions, seeking comfort, we're seeking more.
We need each other more than we need to agree.
Father, Son, Spirit bless us with your love,
with your grace and peace.
Peace.
Let there be peace.
Let there be peace.
Let there be peace.
Let us see and not destroy. Let us listen. Let us listen.
Let us suspend judgement for the sake of love, for the sake of love.
We need each other more than we need to agree.
Father, Son, Spirit bless us with your love,
with your grace and peace.
Love.
Let there be love. (among us)
Let there be love. (among us)
Let there be love.
Erik,
ReplyDeleteI find much to agree with in Chilstrom's letter and likewise in Braaten's response. I agree with Braaten that Chilstrom has made half an argument. I agree with your friend on Facebook that Braaten's tone is hardly respectful of those with whom he differs. But each one has gone beyond the usual campaign rhetoric of this debate, and that's encouraging.
If people can get beyond reciting the usual talking points at the Churchwide Assembly, and begin to get meaty like this, you have an interesting time ahead of you.
In the mean time, I downloaded the music from Church of the Beloved, and will be singing with you.
Ladd