Ads


Russell E. Saltzman

view all featured authors »

Unraveling the ELCA

If the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America isn’t exactly falling apart at the seams, it certainly is becoming frayed at the edges. The North American Lutheran Church and another association, Lutheran Churches in Mission for Christ, are plucking former ELCA congregations up at a greater pace than I predicted. I thought the NALC would have maybe five hundred congregations in five years. Instead they have two hundred twenty in their first nine months.

Still, this should hardly please anyone. Formation of the ELCA in 1987 was a heady time, producing the successful merger of two-thirds of America’s Lutherans gathered under one denomination with five-point-two-something million members in more than eleven thousand congregations. Lutherans had finally achieved part of the dream, all Lutherans in America in one Evangelical Lutheran Church.

But even in the run-up years as the ELCA was being formed, spoilers were at work warning against the diminution of Lutheran theology at the expense of corporate merger.

Richard John Neuhaus, then still a Lutheran pastor and editor of Forum Letter, was among those warning voices. On some points, I think, he was the warning voice, always insisting that real theology should inform churchly decisions, and when churchly choices departed from theology trouble always lies ahead.

When early in the formation process ELCA planners decided to impose a quota system to staff governing boards and fill church conventions, Neuhaus flatly said the Lutheran jig was up. The Lutheran merger enterprise had given up on serious theology and was adapting itself to a cultural fad, identity representation. From that fad, others would come. He kept harping on Martin Luther’s Small Catechism, something about it being the Holy Spirit who “calls, gathers, enlightens, and makes the Church holy,” tucked away in Luther’s explanation of the Apostle’s Creed.

Quotas were supposed to correct certain inequities in heretofore white-male-dominated institutions, like the Democratic Party and American Lutheranism. I don’t know how quotas were to help the Democrats, but they were supposed to make Lutheran churches holy. Neuhaus annoyingly kept saying the holiness of the church is located elsewhere than in quotas. It’s found in fidelity to the call of God to serve—regardless of external factors like sex or race.

Governance by quotas denies the call of the Holy Spirit, Neuhaus said. Even allowing that inequities existed—and who’s kidding whom, of course they did—the imposition of quotas precluded the call to repentance. What the church will not do by the gospel, quotas will rectify by the force of law. The Spirit clearly needed a goose and ELCA planners were just the people to help it along.

Quotas in the ELCA—or “representational principles,” as they are called—still rule. Every ELCA board, church assembly, and what-not beyond the congregation must be composed of ten percent “people of color or whose primary language is other than English,” fifty percent female, fifty percent male, sixty percent laity, and forty percent clergy (the same fifty-fifty male/female ratio works for clergy representation too).

So take a committee of, oh, ten people. Four are clergy and two of them are female. It would help in the formulation if one of the clergy females was a black woman who was raised speaking a language other than English, but you can’t have everything. Six of the ten must be lay persons, also selected on the fifty-fifty male/female basis, but someone in there needs to speak Spanish (there have been no determinations whether German, French, or even Australian counts as a primary language other than English).

Familiarity with pending issues or possession of a theological education does not factor in at all. The only real requirement is speaking the right language, being the right race or sex, and I would guess, knowing how to use a calculator to make it all work out would be of help. For dyscalculia-types like me, we never stood a chance.

When the details of the proposed quota system went around among the merging Lutherans, they received little support. Congregational straw votes repudiated them, district conventions and synod assemblies rejected them, major Lutheran periodicals (independent and officially denominational) editorialized against them, and the ELCA planners went ahead and included them in the governing documents.

Had there been any kind of real ratification process in place, something that required ELCA planners to actually heed what congregations were saying or to listen to the then-current governing bodies of the merging churches, quotas would have been defeated. As it happened, quotas and other disputed features became embedded in the ELCA’s constitution. At the 1987 Columbus, Ohio ELCA constituting convention, delegates from the merging churches were told it was all or nothing. The provisions could not be amended, nor rejected. Some few delegates might vote no, but not too many, please.

The imposition of quotas is and always will be one of those “what-ifs” of history. Not a big “what-if” to be sure. It’s not like quotas in the ELCA decided anything really important in world affairs, not like the Battle of Gettysburg or the October Revolution. But it nags at me still when I think of all that has happened to Lutherans in America since, whether there might have been a definite turning point that could have prevented it. I keep returning to quotas.

A different sort of ELCA might have emerged without quotas. The Lutheran collapse into the declining Protestant big-time might have been delayed. Neuahus might have remained a Lutheran, a little while longer at any rate. ELCA national membership might not be poised to dip below four million, and the number of congregations below nine thousand. Perhaps the ELCA would not have adopted an essentially pro-choice abortion statement under a feminist lash, and maybe the ELCA’s health plan would not now be prepared to treat elective abortion as a reimbursable medical expense for pastors and dependents. Maybe the issues around sexuality could have found a classically Christian theological resolution, something more biblically inspired.

Maybe I’d still be serving an ELCA parish. What? Yeah, I had to give that up a couple weeks ago. I joined the North American Lutheran Church some months back, while trying to remain with my ELCA congregation. But that isn’t permitted.

So I am where I am and I’m frankly feeling lost. In the NALC there are no quotas. Some of us find that disorientating. We have absolutely no idea who will show up for our meetings.

Russell E. Saltzman, now a mission pastor for the North American Lutheran Church, was editor of Forum Letter (1991–2007) following Richard Neuhaus. His previous On the Square articles can be found here.

Comments:

6.2.2011 | 2:59am
Don Roberto says:
My brother and his wife, fallen-away Roman Catholics, recently started attending a Missouri Synod Lutheran Church in Southern CA. Though 3/4 Hispanic, they're very well off (expensive club, regular international vacations, etc.) and found the folks at the local RCCs a bit earthy. The Lutherans "share the values" they're trying to inculcate in their two young kids. (Me: do your kids pray? Brother: we encourage them to converse with God.) I am wondering if the Missouri Synod is part of the NALC, and whether they've managed to stand firm in opposition to at least the most libertine of the "modern Western values."
6.2.2011 | 8:04am
Michael Root says:
Quotas may have affected the timing of what has happened in the ELCA, but I doubt they have affected the outcome. The trends are much deeper; look at similar changes in the Church of Sweden. Many factors are at work. I would emphasize the subtle, but decisive theological shifts that took place in Lutheran theology in the period 1920-1950.
6.2.2011 | 8:44am
Nigel Tufnel says:
I wonder if Pastor Saltzman has read Braaten's memoirs?

Braaten argues that the quota system in seminary hiring also eviscerated the teaching of serious theology.
6.2.2011 | 9:31am
The LC-MS is the one always taking heart for “stand(ing) firm in opposition to at least the most libertine of the "modern Western values."
Since the 1970, its been standing athwart history and saying, “Back off!”
6.2.2011 | 9:35am
Rev. Olson says:
The Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (LC-MS) is not part of the NALC nor is it in altar and pulpit fellowship with the ELCA. The NALC still believes the ordination of women is not contrary to the Bible. Missouri Synod Lutherans do not practice the ordination of women. There are many other differences, but this is a sticking point for many ELCA clergy and congregations when they consider leaving and joining the Missouri Synod. This may or may not be Rev. Saltman's reasoning.
6.2.2011 | 11:03am
M S says:
Quotas have probably had a big impact on the ELCA, but like someone else said, it didn't really change the results. The facts show that there are many aspects of the issue that influence the outcome.
6.2.2011 | 12:14pm
Sky says:
“I am wondering if the Missouri Synod is part of the NALC, and whether they've managed to stand firm in opposition to at least the most libertine of the "modern Western values."

Missouri Synod is its own denomination apart from the ELCA and NALC, and MS churches are typically theologically conservative.

Another major difference between NALC and MS Lutherans, in addition to women's ordination, is that the MS has closed communion and the NALC (like the ELCA) has open communion (i.e. any baptized Christian may commune in the church even if not a member of the denomination). Conservative Lutherans in the ELCA may be disgruntled with the ELCA but loathe to join MS because of closed communion, especially if they come from denominationally diverse evangelical Christian families.
6.2.2011 | 12:28pm
Oops. I wrote 'taking heart' I meant to write 'taking heat' freudian slip.
6.2.2011 | 12:37pm
Jeremy says:
Quotas are extreme, but if the Republicans and its conservative parts such as the religious right hope to survive, it's going to have to bring in more minorities. Here's an interesting fact. Ronald Reagan and John McCain won the same percentage of the white vote. Reagan won by a land slide. McCain lost. The conservative movement can't look around and see all white faces with a couple of token blacks and hope to survive in the future.
6.2.2011 | 12:42pm
K.V. says:
I wish this article at least mentioned that 2-million strong body of Missouri-Synod Lutherans. It's as if we don't exist! The formation of the ELCA was in part the result of a number of theologians fleeing the LCMS because our church didn't accept Higher Critical approaches to Scripture.

Also, the LCMS is over one hundred years old. It didn't begin in the 1970s, but 1847.

I am so tired of being confused with the ELCA. The LCMS has its own problems, but its held it own numbers-wise and has largely remained faithful to its confessional, theologically orthodox heritage.
6.2.2011 | 12:56pm
I am reminded of an old friend in the ELCA who once explained the quota system to this LCMS guy as "first you have to pass the dermatological test and then the gynecological test. When you are being considered for a committee, they begin by turning you upside down like kitten..."

I am saddened by what i see happening in the ELCA today. But i wonder if the NALC has really been able to avoid the same issues. It seems that the crowd that sought to seize ordination as a right instead of a calling to serve in the 1960's is still as vociferous in their claims. But isn't that the very logic of the homosexual lobby which has occasioned the split we are seeing today in the ELCA? When the discussion of ordination is held in the vocabulary and mode of a civil rights discussion, i think the problems are much, much deeper.
6.2.2011 | 1:26pm
Bob Lundgren says:
Saltzman was at his best in describing the Lutheran fiasco. The issues are more than quotas, for the worldly trend of Lutherans dates from the day the first immigrant arrived in the promised land. My own parents, grandparents and great grand parents adored their Swedish heritage, yet could not wait to become fully Americanized, jetisoning a dumb ethnic image. In simple terms, all Lutherans (including LCMS) are susceptible to acculturation, ignoring Biblical authority.
6.2.2011 | 1:54pm
David Gray says:
The problem for most congregations fleeing the ELCA is they haven't repented of the sin that brought the ELCA to its current state. A hermeneutic which allows ordaining women can't rationally oppose ordaining homosexuals. Liberalism is like leprosy.
6.2.2011 | 1:54pm
I wish people would understand that it isn't the homosexual lobby which has occasioned the split we are seeing in the ELCA - but many other factors. The biggest being those serious theological shifts referred to by Dr. Root. About those quotas. We had a woman in our congregation who happened to be of Native American descent.She attended worship rarely, mostly to appease her husband who was a long time member. She preferred to practice her own brand of worship more in tune with her culture. She was called for every conceivable committee that the synod had, regardless of our conversation with the synod office on her lack of interest in worship or congregational life. But because she accepted the invitations to serve on these committees, - and often showed up in native dress, she was continued to be called. Quotas - gotta love them!
6.2.2011 | 2:00pm
Andrew Fitch says:
All of the Lutheran church bodies are imperfect and in need of Christ to unify and purify. The real problem is our consistent attempt to resolve a problem by running away and forming our own group of others that agree with our issues at the time. We need to learn how to truly listen to each other and live with each other in true fellowship. We also need to learn how to appropriately argue our positions and seek the wisdom of God to guide our decisions.
6.2.2011 | 3:14pm
Roger Garner says:
David Gray summed it up in four words: "Liberalism is like leprosy."
6.2.2011 | 3:55pm
Quotas are a symptom of a deeper issue: the loss of fidelity to being one, holy, catholic, and apostolic. Frank Senn put it well when he said that Lutheranism at its best has sought to embrace and be faithful to the fullness of the catholic tradition. What we have seen in various forms is either Lutheran sectarianism, or departure for the sectarianism of liberal Protestantism. The trendsd were already present in the former ALC/LCA.
6.2.2011 | 3:58pm
Mark B says:
This is not a theological statement but a practical one. Church groups need to be accountable, open and able to tell/hear the truth about themselves. Quotas seem to be a really good way to lie to yourself about who you are.

In that vein, toward KV & David Gray, the LCMS is far from immune to decay. Although the most 'confessional' among us would say it is because we are too liberal, that is a hard sell. In 1987, when the ELCA was cobbled together, the LCMS reported 2.61 million baptized members. The 2008 number is 2.34m. The peak membership year was 1970 with 2.79m. The largest decline really starts in the last 10 years. Getting data from an LCEF (LCMS banking arm) presentation to the Iowa and MN districts, the average age of an LCMS member is 65. The lowest estimate I have seen of that number is 56. Whichever way, the emerging picture is largely a body aging in place.

It should tell the LCMS something that an exodus out of the ELCA for theological reasons toward a more traditional doctrinal stand has not even bothered to look at the LCMS, instead going to the effort to found/build NALC and LCMC. We could warm ourselves with nice thoughts of our doctrinal purity, or we could ask more difficult questions.

Pastor Saltzman is in the NALC, apparently not turned off of ecclesial structure even after the ELCA experiment. The LCMC on the other hand appears to be the neo-LCMS. After rowing the bishops of Higgins road across the river like Stephan of long ago, they are congregational in nature banding together only in the most limited sense.
6.2.2011 | 5:13pm
TeeJay says:
I think the slide down the ELCA Lutheran slippery slope did occur as our author here reflects and Neuhaus pointed out, but the quotas were the symptom and not the illness. As pointed out here.. "The Lutheran merger enterprise had given up on serious theology and was adapting itself to a cultural fad, identity representation. From that fad, others would come." When we ceased to wrestle with one another for a right interpretation of scripture for the sake of unity, we failed to move toward unity. I contend that Lutherans should do as our forebears in faith did, in that Peter and Paul went "prosupon" concerning circumcision. It is through such "Nose to-Nose" argumentation that the church of Christ grew in spite of them, and will still do so in spite of us.
6.2.2011 | 5:23pm
As another former ELCA pastor, I have to disagree with Pr. Saltzman. The point at which the ordination of practicing homosexuals became inevitable is when people started worrying about how the people in the pews felt about their Methodist aunt not being able to commune with them more than they worried about what they were saying theologically by treating the public confession of the Faith as subordinate to making ecumenical nice-nice. Of course, given the Pietistic background of much of the ELCA, that set of skewed priorities was more or less implied from the start.

Close communion- the historic practice of the Christian Church generally and the Lutheran church in particular- suggests that truth is, at least to a degree, knowable, and that it matters. This is not a popular position in a religious culture in which feelings and wish-fulfillment trump Scripture and the historic content of the Faith, and allowing the whole family to commune takes precedence over integrity of the congregation's confession.

Open commuinion makes church discipline impossible as a practical matter, of course, and women's ordination is forbidden by 1 Timothy 2:12 as emphatically as homosexual practice is forbidden anywhere in Scripture- and this in a culture in which female religious leadership was the norm rather than the exception. I'm very much afraid that the LCMC and the NALC are ELCA's waiting to happen. They seem not to have learned anything at all.
6.2.2011 | 6:13pm
John Faber says:
Have to disagree, Mark B. It shoudl tell those who left the ELCA something that they themselves chose not to even consider a more traditional doctrinal stand and the LCMS, but rather chose to start a couple of outfits which departed from traditional Lutheran teaching on both women's ordination and close communion- and in the process ignored what Scripture says about the former, just as the ELCA did with regard to homosexuality.
6.2.2011 | 8:01pm
Don Roberto says:
Very interesting to learn more about Lutheranism. As an orhthodox RC, trying to become more familiar with other viewpoints, I see the LCMS as the subsect most faithful to Truth. But it, too, suffers from the serious—arguably fatal—logical flaw of the "solo scriptura" philosophy. Unlike the Ten Commandments, we were not handed the Bible: It was compiled by the (Catholic) Church Fathers. And it could not be clearer that w/o a Magisterium, the result is inevitably "multi interpretura," given that the Bible is not exactly an easy read.

6.2.2011 | 8:40pm
Morgan says:
I'm a former member of the Presbyterian Church USA, which has gone through the same kinds of things. Reading your description of the dynamics at work in the formation of the ELCA gives the impression that, for all the talk about unifying Lutherans, the real goal of those in control of the ELCA-to-be was to further a particular agenda, that of the gospel of inclusion, regardless of the consequences. And I'd imagine they're not too genuinely concerned about the new splintering they've created in recent years, because their goal is to force that agenda on the church no matter what. It's sad, though.
6.3.2011 | 12:43am
Bryce says:
Interesting article regarding the quota system. As one who was just a kid at the time of the merge, it is interesting to learn more about how all of those decisions were made and ponder the ramifications. Thank you for that.

A minor correction and a footnote: LCMC stands for Lutheran Congregations in Misson for Christ, not Lutheran Churches as the article states. And since I first became a part of the LCMC family in May 2009, the association has more than tripled to just shy of 700 congregations. It will be yet a few more years before we fully know the true impact to ELCA congregations as the fallout slowly marches on.
6.3.2011 | 9:31am
Dan Hinton says:
After taking a class in late 20th Century American Lutheranism, I've wondered the "what-if" question myself. Edgar Trexler's book High Expectations (Augsburg Fortress, 2003) tells the story of the formation of the ELCA, and the subject of quotas is a major theme of the book. You really get a good idea of how that system shaped the discussions.
6.3.2011 | 11:03am
My friend, Pastor Saltzmann, has taken a courageous stand and has now paid the price for it. I know, for a fact, that there are a good number of people now affiliated with the NALC who realize that the ordination of women, and the theological foundation that was laid to justify it, is very much a key part of the utter collapse of Lutheran fidelity in the ELCA which is now tearing apart at the seams, not simply fraying. The ELCA's finances are in a freefall. Many congregations are simply "voting" with their bank accounts, even if they have not taken a step to leave the ELCA.

The NALC is in its very infancy and I hope that it is able to extract itself out of the theological structures and assumptions that has led now to the collapse of the ELCA as any kind of recognizable Lutheran church body.

Anyone one in The LCMS who tries to claim perfection for our church body is deluding himself, but, on the other hand, I do sincerely believe The LCMS is the church body that best reflects and represents historic, classical Lutheranism, and, ironically, the church body most closely allied with the Roman Catholic church on the major social and theological challenges of our day.

Anyone interested in getting a sense of what we stand for would do well to consider this collection of resources: http://www.cph.org/tell
6.3.2011 | 11:51am
Nigel Tufnel says:
Does anybody honestly think that there's any future in conservative mainline Protestantism? Tell the truth now. Pastor Saltmaz hinted at the disquieting truth-- that any boost in membership comes from old people changing congregations.
6.3.2011 | 2:47pm
Nigel: There is no "conservative mainline" Protestantism.
6.3.2011 | 3:15pm
A journalist for Time magazine told me that people write about what they are passionate about, if you're not either inspired or ticked off, why write?

With that in mind I went to the ELCA website to discover what they write about the most. what terms are most frequently used, and what does that tell us about their passions. Here are the results of this morning's exercise:

Church 94,400
Lutheran 80,300
Congregation 51,800
God 44,800
Jesus 20,600
Justice 15,000
Prayer 13,400
Advocacy 8,680
Grace 6,500
Gospel 5,360
Society 5,110
Discipleship 4,200
Witness 4,190
Biblical 3,510
Salvation 2,690
Souls 605
"the lost" 234
Tithe 189

You make the call. For me it boils down to this: The application of Grace to Justify Advocacy.

In Him,
Tom
6.3.2011 | 3:33pm
Mark B says:
Nigel - Yes there is hope. Both from a theological certainty and a I've seen it.

Although not the triumphalist story (i.e. look how we're growing and the libs are shrinking) we've been telling ourselves for two decades.

You can hear that hope in Rev. McCain's comments. It is the hope that springs from trying to keep the faith handed down, with ears open to the larger church, and not being afraid to engage modernity. Those churches are the ones engaged in a living faith. Sometimes it isn't pretty, but there is definitely hope. Kinda like the cross that way.
6.3.2011 | 3:44pm
Pastor Jack says:
For me, the biggest problem is the ELCA obsession with "inclusive" language. The fixation on removing all male pronouns for God (i.e., He, His Him) and the instance that Father and Son are just metaphorical images, and that we need to use "expansive language" for God has posed a direct assault on the doctrine of the Trinity. The new book "Evangelical Lutheran Worship" (which fails to be Lutheran, evangelical, or even worship from a Trinitarian perspective) is a triumph of the feminist revisionists. Not even the Psalter escaped their agenda. The Father has been removed from the proper prefaces, and with ELW's many 'options,' it is possible to have an entire liturgy without any reference to the Father and the Son (except for the Lord's Prayer, but I do not doubt that an alternative version is in the works. In the Apostles' Creed Jesus is no longer "His [the Father's] only Son, our Lord," but "God's only Son." The direct relationship between Father and Son has been removed, so that Jesus is no longer uniquely "the Son of the Father." This book foreces me to confess a faith I do not believe, and it is very distressing.
6.3.2011 | 6:23pm
I would just like to say that I grew up in the LCMS church. I moved to ELCA because of the worship style of the particular congregation. I was not aware of all of the stuff that was going on in the upper church, or I never would have stepped foot in there to begin with. My only thing that I do not agree with LCMS is the closed communion aspect. I am quite certain that the 12 apostles WERE NOT LCMS Christians. Does this mean that they would not be welcomed? And while they make a good point about women clergy, at least there are positive biblical cases of women spreading the gospel. I do hope one day that LCMC and LCMS/NALC can agree on communion.
God bless you all,
John V.
Roseville, MI
6.3.2011 | 7:18pm
It is interesting to read that Fr. Neuhaus warned of the early apostacizing trends in ELCA, when he himself was one of the Seminexers who had to be run out of the LCMS for departing from the Bible's authority (one of our chief problems being that we didn't get them all, and they have been a divisive, separating influence through direct influencing and reaction to them, since), and which initiated the formation of ELCA. I wonder when his awakening came about?
6.3.2011 | 7:32pm
nero says:
Get back to the original Protestantism....LCMC, LCMS, WELS, NALC, or the others are all great!
6.3.2011 | 8:24pm
I am a Benedictine Monk, currently in the midst of studying for the Roman Catholic priesthood. But for the first 40 years of my life I was a practicing Lutheran, one who at one time had considered becoming a Lutheran pastor. I still have a strong attachment and love for the Lutheran Church. My family remains Lutheran and have been so from the time of the Reformation. With that in mind, my prayer is that the Lutheran Church would once again become authentically Lutheran. It is not difficult to discern true Lutheran doctrine, one need only read Luther himself or the Augsburg Confession for example. As one who longs for the day of true ecumenical unity, I would suggest that a significant step in that direction would be the clear, unencumbered articulation of respective doctrines and a faithful adherence to same. From that base true Christian dialogue can begin.
6.3.2011 | 9:43pm
Gail says:
Admittedly not trained in doctrine or theology, I'd like to address what I think has been a misunderstanding among some who have commented here regarding communion in the LCMS. I am told it is not "closed" communion, but "close" communion. In other words, our faith is close; the table is NOT closed to those who are not members of the club. Recalling from memory what our bulletin states, all who believe in the triune God, and other creedal points, and that Christ is truly present in the elements, is welcome to the table. This way, visitors do not have to speak with the Pastor first. We have no altar police but leave it up to the individual. Maybe this is not the norm for all LCMS churches, but I do believe the Synod allows some amount of congregational self-governance in that regard.
6.4.2011 | 8:38am
I wish to demur from Gail's comment, although not a Lutheran myself. The distinction between "closed" communion and "close" communion is a historically specious one, a "distinction" without a "difference," and the phrase "close communion" itself seems to be of baptistic provenance. Lutherans, of all people, ought to be completely unapologetic about CLOSED communion, since this is the historic echt Lutheraner stance towards those who do not share what the Lutheran Confessions proclaim about the Bodily Presence of Christ's Body and Blood "in with and under" the bread and wine.

In particular, when Gail writes:

"In other words, our faith is close; the table is NOT closed to those who are not members of the club. Recalling from memory what our bulletin states, all who believe in the triune God, and other creedal points, and that Christ is truly present in the elements, is welcome to the table. This way, visitors do not have to speak with the Pastor first. We have no altar police but leave it up to the individual."

I respond: a.) the use of "members of the club" and "leave it up to the individual" display a complete loss of the sense of "Church" and an individualistic atomization of church sense (score one for Pietism!) and b.) "our faith is close" is meaningless in the context, when it seems rather to mean "our practice is promiscuous."
6.5.2011 | 12:46am
Gail says:
Thank you, Mr. (or Pastor, Father) Tighe. I fail to see promiscuity when it is understood that all who come to the table are --> supposedly
6.5.2011 | 11:29am
Gail says:
I don't know why my last comment got cut short. Here it is once again, in full:

Thank you, Mr. (or Pastor, Father) Tighe. I fail to see promiscuity when it is understood that all who come to the table are --> supposedly
6.5.2011 | 5:44pm
Gail says:
Thank you, Mr. (or Pastor, Father) Tighe. I fail to see promiscuity when it is understood that all who come to the table are, supposedly, in agreement with the faith confessed at worship. Pastors or elders don't know the readiness of members any better than that of visitors.

I found a PDF document dated 1999 titled, "Admission to the Lord's Supper" at the LCMS Web site. I have not read the whole thing, but the Q & A part toward the end is helpful for lay people like me. If anyone is interested, here is the link to the page on which the document is listed:

http://www.lcms.org/page.aspx?pid=683

On a little different note - one of the reasons I left the ELCA in 1996, and why whole congregations are now pulling out, was for the Synod’s lack of a stand against unrepentant, practicing homosexuals. I just do not know why it took them so long to make the move. The ELCA's acceptance of the "reimagining" movement that surfaced in 1993 was an even greater heartbreak for me. Anyone who is familiar with that might understand why I pounded my fist on the table and wept when I first read of it. My husband and I took our children to a church that we believe is more grounded in Scripture.

I know how hard it is to leave a congregation. I can only assume that it is particularly difficult for older members who have been in a church for decades, where their children were baptized; where their spouse was buried. It takes courage, wisdom, faith and the support other Christians. I pray for them all.
6.7.2011 | 11:02am
Alice MEV says:
I want to take this opportunity to thank Pastor Saltzman publicly for calling attention in this column to the one matter that I find FAR more disturbing than anything else about the ELCA, and that is its callous attitude toward abortion, or more accurately, toward unborn children--primarily, but also toward their mothers, and ultimately toward everyone whose life is profoundly altered by the deliberate, calculated death of even one unborn child.

I'm surprised that not even one person who commented here mentioned Pastor Saltzman's acknowledgment of this glaring elephant-in-the-room. If anything is a (deadly) “departure from theology” and an “adaptation” to a “cultural fad,” it is the sanctioning of abortion--and the ELCA does it both in theory, via its social statement, and in practice, through its health benefits plan. Mark B. commented, "We could warm ourselves with nice thoughts of our doctrinal purity, or we could ask more difficult questions.” This, in my mind and heart, is THE most difficult question: Why aren’t more Lutherans outraged about this?
6.7.2011 | 2:11pm
JohnL says:
We left the local LCMS church after its divorcee pastor railed one too many times about the "proper role" of women in Church and society. I didn't want my children to hear what this misogynist had to say - his emotional issues were more important to him than honest preaching. Plus their local decision to "discourage" women from the Church Council seemed utterly unChristian to us.

Joining the local ELCA church was wonderful at first (10 yrs ago) but the continuing corrosion of the liturgy has become hard for us. And I have always been bothered by the implied statement that somehow we were worshipping wrongly before...our decision to leave the LCMS was correct, but our decision to join the ELCA may have been wrong. We share Pastor Jack's concerns.

Pastor Saltzman, I hope you find peace in your decision.
6.8.2011 | 2:43pm
Maurice R. says:
The light has been tuned on in the ELCA. There is no more basic and clear teaching in the Bible than marriage. Now that this teaching (and therefore the Bible) has been "voted" down, (as if that were possible!) anything can and will happen. The Bible has no authority for many ELCA pastors, regardless of the vows they have made. They teach the Bible when they agree with it, and when they don't they simply say, "The Spirit is doing a new thing." Funny how this new "Spirit" thing looks exactly like the culture at large!

These pastors don't believe and submit to the Bible ... they believe in themselves. And what is worse, they are leading people astray. The light has been turned on.
6.13.2011 | 12:24am
I applaud Pastor Russell Saltzman. I think it took great personal courage and even deeper spiritual conviction. I would equate his actions to that of Dietrich Bonhoeffer standing up and against outside forces and wordly influences.
Tyrants whether political or the likes of Bishop Hanson of the ELCA and it's false doctrine who clad themselves as Saviors, need to be exposed for their vile and deadly doctrines and tenents.
If you recall what the Church and pastors in Germany did 1937, 38 , and 39 was dismiss the truth and trade it in for the empty promises of one Adolf Hilter.
I do not feel the current schism would had to have happen if Pastors and State Biship would had the gonads or spine to stand up for the truth and instead of joining the party line.
6.13.2011 | 8:39pm
My wife (and NALC pastor) and I just attended NALC Mission Developer training in May. Without quotas in our new denomination, fully 20 of the 80 participants were of African, Asian, or Latin descent, and many are bilingual. The Holy Spirit needs no quotas when the Word is central. As for women's ordination, I won't make the biblical case here, but the problem in the ELCA was that it was never made from Scripture at all. It was more an appeal to the times, and "everyone else is doing it, so we should get with it, too."
6.26.2011 | 10:00pm
Rich Edinger says:
After growing up Lutheran and spending 35 years of my life attending its churches, I saw this train wreck coming in 2003. Unwilling to expose our young children to this mess, my wife and I converted to Catholicism. They take scripture more seriously than any protestant church I've seen.
7.6.2011 | 9:35pm
Marry Agent says:
I applaud Pastor Russell Saltzman. I think it took great personal courage and even deeper spiritual conviction. I would equate his actions to that of Dietrich Bonhoeffer standing up and against outside forces and wordly influences. I am a Benedictine Monk, currently in the midst of studying for the Roman Catholic priesthood. But for the first 40 years of my life I was a practicing Lutheran, one who at one time had considered becoming a Lutheran pastor. I still have a strong attachment and love for the Lutheran Church. My family remains Lutheran and have been so from the time of the Reformation. With that in mind, my prayer is that the Lutheran Church would once again become authentically Lutheran. It is not difficult to discern true Lutheran doctrine, one need only read Luther himself or the Augsburg Confession for example. As one who longs for the day of true ecumenical unity, I would suggest that a significant step in that direction would be the clear, unencumbered articulation of respective doctrines and a faithful adherence to same. From that base true Christian dialogue can begin.
7.19.2011 | 2:35am
All of the Lutheran church bodies are imperfect and in need of Christ to unify and purify. The real problem is our consistent attempt to resolve a problem by running away and forming our own group of others that agree with our issues at the time. We need to learn how to truly listen to each other and live with each other in true fellowship. We also need to learn how to appropriately argue our positions and seek the wisdom of God to guide our decisions. As another former ELCA pastor, I have to disagree with Pr. Saltzman. The point at which the ordination of practicing homosexuals became inevitable is when people started worrying about how the people in the pews felt about their Methodist aunt not being able to commune with them more than they worried about what they were saying theologically by treating the public confession of the Faith as subordinate to making ecumenical nice-nice. Of course, given the Pietistic background of much of the ELCA, that set of skewed priorities was more or less implied from the start.
7.26.2011 | 4:52pm
St Reformed says:
The ELCA (Evangelical Lutheran Church in America), the church body in which I was baptized & confirmed by committed Christians, has for the past generation acted as a mirror for the political and social views of the Liberal Establishment. They parrot all the secular clichés, assumptions and PC vocabulary to which our culture is continually and toxically exposed. Sometimes, I could not distinguish their views from the Democratic National Committee’s handbook, save for the “Christian” veneer with which they anoint their leftist agenda. I have had enough. That the ELCA shall follow the same tragic trail blazed by the apostate Episcopal Church there is no doubt. Neither is it any consolation. The NALC will be enriched by your presence, Pr. Saltzman.
8.5.2011 | 4:38pm
Gail says:
I am content in the LCMS, but if I were to consider joining another body outside of Lutheranism it would be the Anglicans (not the Episcopalians).
10.25.2011 | 4:49pm
If one is to get into labels for communion practice, then the following is perhaps more true to the LCMS understanding of communion: Open--anyone who shows up can commune, no test as to whether they discern the Body and Blood in, with and under the bread and wine (I Corinthians 11:29). Close--announce or interview prior to communion that a discernment of the Body and Blood is necessary for communion, may also require some level of agreement on doctrine or altar pulpit fellowship. Closed--must belong to that particular denomination or even that particular church.

LCMS practices close communion, but each pastor, as they are personally responsible to Christ for their administration of communion (stewards of the mysteries) may range from announcing, prior interview or membership in LCMS or a church body in altar/pulpit fellowship. Most announce or ask that you speak to the pastor ahead of time.

I tell my congregation that when you are in another church you a guest in their house. You wouldn't go to a stranger's house and help yourself to the refrigerator, nor assume because you have been invited to the party that you are staying for dinner. Talk to the host (pastor) ahead of time to avoid placing him and yourself in an awkward situation that was easily avoided.
11.15.2011 | 2:06am
Tito Galindo says:
I was a long time LCMS member. I'm now converting or reverting back to Catholicism for a number of reasons.
I think the reformation's over. It was supposed to be a better version of the Catholic Church, right? In what way is the ELCA superior to Rome? What can it teach the RCC? Luther had a lot to complain about but whatever it was it couldn't compare with what we have now. The Problem with Protestantism is that it keeps changing. How do you raise a family when you have to change churches every ten years?
11.23.2011 | 10:17pm
Mark D says:
Good article. I have a lot of pent up comment but will limit it to this:

I have essentially "left" my ELCA congregation after 40 + years. The story behind the change is not new and the warning should be clear. This is about social reform, community organizing and maybe worse. The ELCA is now a tool of the liberal left. No longer concerned with what Christ taught, and in fact hiding behind the Christian tenets that work for the end goals and discarding the rest.

I haven't lost my Faith as much as my interest in putting up with political activism in the Church. Afer watching this unfold for years, it is my belief that the ELCA was created by invaders through slow and methodical workings.

Today I believe that the end goal is bifurcated: either replace old fashioned Lutherans with "new progressives" or cause the complete collapse and dispersal of the once formidable group. This entirely for the political gains without regard (or in spite of) Faith.
11.27.2011 | 2:50am
Mainline religion is essentially shrinking away to a remnant that circulates from infusions from former Fundiegelicals embarrassed to be seen jumping around and former Catholics who've been divorced or come out of the closet or married a Mainline Protestant. Without these sources of new members, they would be in even worse shape. Once Ole and Lena are gone, it will get even worse.
10.28.2012 | 1:17pm
I thought this discussion was interesting, at least in how it presented various conservative views toward the ELCA.
type the text above in the box below

Links

Blogs

Find Us

Contact