So often the contemporary church is ineffectual and weak, with an uncertain voice. So often it is an arch defender of the status quo. Far from being disturbed by the presence of the church, the power structure of the average community is consoled by the church's silent--and often vocal--sanction of things as they are...The judgement of God is upon the church as never before. If today's church does not recapture the sacrificial spirit of the early church, it will lose its authenticity, forfeit the loyalty of millions, and be dismissed as an irrelevant social club with no meaning for the twentieth century.
Martin Luther King, Jr., Why We Can't Wait, 1963
It's appropriate that today is the official day to consider Dr. King's words, because I'm feeling awfully disappointed in the Lutheran church today.
A task force spent four long years studying two issues dealing with human sexuality and just presented their "findings" to the church body as a whole. The first issue was whether the church should sanction, and indeed conduct blessing ceremonies for, same-sex couples (essentially wedding ceremonies, but without the legal authority to peform a "marriage," since that's conferred by the state with the pastor acting as agent of the state--which I disagree with anyway, but let's not get into that). The second issue was whether the church should allow gay people in committed relationships to be rostered clergy serving congregations. (Currently the rule is that any celibate or married person can be a rostered pastor serving a congregation. Fine if you're gay and not in a relationship, but if you enter into any kind of committed relationship the church will strip you of your pastor's robes.)
So after four years of study of this issue, the task force issued the following recommendation:
Nothing is going to change, but we need to respect each others' feelings.
Four years for this? Four years of waiting and praying, just so they could say, "We're too scared to upset the applecart. We're too scared to push for reform and be leaders on earth for God's kingdom. We choose the status quo." What an obscene waste of time and energy.
To be fair, the task force did change one thing. Their new recommendation is that churches should be able to call gay pastors in committed relationships and the larger church "may choose to refrain from disciplining" congregations who do so. So, essentially, what happened to Beth Stroud (she's a United Methodist Church pastor in a committed relationship who was just defrocked by the UMC church body, although her own home congregation in Pennsylvania loves her and affirms her relationship with her partner) can't happen anymore, because an individual congregation can decide that they want to call a gay pastor and the larger church can decide not to prosecute.
That's progress, I guess. But then they had to pile dirt on top of that recommendation by saying that churches who do call a gay pastor in a committed relationship should do it quietly, so as not to offend any other people in the Lutheran church who are offended by gay people.
So that's how it is.
Now, I can't say that any of this surprises me. Although Lutheran theology is actually quite liberal and radical, Lutherans as a cultural group tend to be bland, pleasant, and completely mired in inertia. Too many years of weak coffee and molded jello salads have made us unable to act for social change.
And, another thing to consider is that by making a decision one way or another, the larger church knew that some congregations would leave the church. We're already a church body that's not growing in the U.S. (and with such a non-platform, who would join?), so they didn't want to lose anyone. But I think they hedged their bets on the side of discrimination, figuring that churches in favor of more expression of God's acceptance and love would stay and fight, while churches who wanted to exclude gay people would just pick up their toys and walk away if a decision was made to be inclusive. So politics win the day, even in the church.
Kinda makes you sick, doesn't it? Me, too. But I think the fact that this study has been released just now is no coincidence. God is providing us with the solid example of Martin Luther King, Jr., and all the cracked vessels who've gone before us, fighting for the God-given dignity of all people. There is still work to be done. We just have to keep marching on.
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
Galatians 3:28, The New Oxford Annotated Bible, Revised Standard Version
You summed that up really well. I'm Lutheran too, and that's pretty much how I feel. Of course, my synod (SE Michigan) allows pastors to perform same-sex "commitment ceremonies," so when Em and I decided to get married, it wasn't an issue. I sometimes wonder how the ELCA as a church body officially views our relationship, but I'm kind of afraid to find out.
Posted by: Brooke | January 17, 2005 at 11:20 AM
Thanks for posting this. As a fellow Lutheran, I was dreading the results of the study--I had a feeling that, especially in the current political climate, the recommendations would be as weenie as they are.
You'd think a church founded upon the teachings of such a revolutionary could find its spine on this issue. I guess we can at least be thankful for this small step, and work and pray for greater change.
Posted by: Jen | January 17, 2005 at 11:44 AM
You do this so well Moxie. Thank you for another great post. I am UMC, so I totally understand. Its very difficult, because my home church is very liberal. We even have a transvestite who comes regularly and feels at home, welcomed and loved. But when you know what happens above your home church it becomes very frustrating. I think this is another case where the small voices just have to keep speaking. So, again, thank you. We will all keep moving forward.
Posted by: Kether | January 17, 2005 at 12:45 PM
Surprise, surprise! Your church is hypocritical and you're all tormented by it. How naive can you be? How can you even be a member of a church that rejects homosexuals and same-sex unions? You claim to be a feminist? What sort of feminist would belong to an organization that delegitimizes the capacity for two women to love one another? Please...you're just another self-deluded drone who doesn't practive what you preach. Do you actually think the church is going to change? ever? Don't hold your breath. Be realistic. It will NEVER happen. What are YOU going to do about it?
Posted by: Disorganized Religion | January 17, 2005 at 02:42 PM
Um, OK, troll alert.
I feel your frustration and disappointment, Moxie. D and I are still searching for a church we are comfortable with. Problem is, we can't find one that embraces the voice of Christianity that we see in the Bible -- a tolerant, loving church that focuses on our actions to each other as humans, not our "sins," real or perceived.
That, and the fact that we are practically Buddhist.
When you find a church that does all of that, let me know....
Posted by: Soper | January 17, 2005 at 03:41 PM
I grew up Lutheran in an urban ministry congregation that was radically political and social-justice oriented. Imagine my surprise when I learned about the homophobic policies of the ELCA as a young adult.
I want to stay and fight, but after the AIDS fight and Right to Marriage fight and the pro-choice fight, and the gut-wrenching pain of this election, I just want to feel that the place I go for spiritual sustenance has my back all the way up to the top. So, I'm going to the local Unitarian Universalist Church now. Let the straight folks and stronger gay folks than I fight this one out.
I really hope that things change and those of us who have been so hurt can someday come home. In the meantime, thanks to you for having the strength to stay put.
Nancy
Posted by: Nancy | January 17, 2005 at 06:23 PM
I thought I was braced for this decision--did any of us really think the commission would recommend anything but the lame-ass weenie option? But reading the report in church yesterday, I still felt sucker-punched. All that debate, all those endless months of letters in the "Lutheran," and we end up with "Let's go on talking to each other?" Although I think the troll up above is not paying any attention at all, I confess, I've spent the last 24 hours (I didn't pay attention to whatever press the preliminary report might have gotten) asking myself if I can continue to belong to the ELCA and call myself an ethical, moral person, not to mention a worthwhile friend to my gay friends.
Look, either the theologians agree that the Biblical passages re: homosexual sex (or relationships, if you're willing to concede that much, which I AM NOT) are more compelling and obedience-requiring than the Biblican passages re: remarriage after divorce being adultery and women keeping silent and subordinate in the church, or they don't. There isn't anything to "discuss," or anything to "prayerfully consider." We ordain women, we remarry divorced people, we roster divorced people who remarry, and all the Biblical prohibitions against those things are a million times more explicit, not to mention sanctioned by Christ (he doesn't say the law condeming the adulterous woman is wrong, just that it can't be enforced by equally sinning people--no where does Christ say a thing about homosexual sex).
This was clearly a sop to the millions of theologically lazy folks who would rather target gay people within the church, single them out for entirely secular reasons, make homosexuals the scapegoats for their anxiety about cultural change, do all that rather than pay attention to theology and the Gospel. What a disgrace.
Posted by: Jody | January 17, 2005 at 07:20 PM
OOh! My very own troll! I was actually thinking if I got one on this post it would be of the God-hates-gays vairety, telling me you can't be Christian and in favor of equal rights for all people. But instead, it was someone who's apparently never heard of the concept of change from within. I wonder if my troll lives in the US, and if so, how s/he can be a citizen of a country that limits huan rights in such an egregious fashion.
Nancy, I'm sorry that you feel you have to go, but I understand it. There's only so much a person can fight before that bone tiredness sets in.
Thanks for all your support and commnets. I'm glad I have a place to get this out and hear some feedback. My husband isn't Lutheran, so he doesn't really get how disheartened it makes me.
Posted by: Moxie | January 18, 2005 at 11:44 AM
The church where my husband is a pastor is one of a minority of progressive churches in the Presbyterian Church (USA). To be in our denomination is frustrating/upsetting--gays can not be ordained to ministry of any kind (not even be an Elder) unless they are celibate(!). There are members of the denomination who are "outing" gay ministers and basically getting them kicked out (or to resign). A lot of church members are leaving the denomination. It's hard to know what to do--leave or work for change? We want to work for change. I'm sure people told Ghandi, Jesus, MLK, Mother Theresa, etc., "Give up! You don't stand a chance!" Giving up in this instance, I believe, is contrary to the will of God and to the example set by Christ. You never give up on being light in a dark world.
Posted by: Darcie | January 18, 2005 at 12:56 PM
Moxie, I'm SO sorry about the multiple posts! Actually, I kept getting the message that says "An error occurred" which lead me to assume that it didn't post, but it did the first time around.
Posted by: Darcie | January 18, 2005 at 01:00 PM
No problem Darcie. I can go clean them up.
Thanks for your comment. I sometimes feel like all the like-minded people of faith should form a separate church, but then that wouldn't help anything either, really.
Posted by: Moxie | January 18, 2005 at 02:25 PM
I'm so glad I'm Catholic! You could learn a thing or two about embracing differences from us, you silly Lutheran, you!
Or...maybe I'm just a self-deluded drone??
*grin*
Posted by: Lisa S (& Riley, Bella, & Adelyn) | January 18, 2005 at 05:25 PM
This is one reason I am really happy to be an Episcopalian. Though we share your general niceness and blandness, the Episcopal Church's policy of "local option" means a bishop can act on his/her conscience, a priest can act on his/her conscience, a congregation can act on its conscience. For the most part there's no "larger church" doing any "prosecution."
And I have to say that the fear that some people will leave is foolish. Some churches left the ECUSA after the gay bishop hoopla, but not many, and overall, demoninational giving has gone up. Membership has been rising. As Gene Robinson (the gay bishop in question) put it, the Church couldn't afford to buy the kind of publicity it got from all that.
And thus: GLBT's who've felt exiled from church for years got to see a church do the right thing and came back.
Here's hoping we get the same-sex relationship blessing in the Book of Occasional services at the next national meeting. It would have passed last time, but the gay bishop thing made it necessary to compromise and continue with the local option solution to that issue for now. Though, even if the service becomes official, as with marriage, no priest will have to perform it--it will still be up to individual conscience.
But on a supportive note, I think the Lutherans will come around soon enough. These polity issues really make some denominations slower than others--it's not theology or the people, but just governance styles.
Posted by: shannon | January 21, 2005 at 12:37 AM