For immediate release.
Chicago, IL, USA. The Conference of Bushes of the largest denomination of trees in the U.S. will meet this month in Chicago to weigh in on a procedure to receive pines to its Roster of Ordered Timbers.
The rules and procedures of Every Leaf Counts in America (ELCA) have long denied pine trees leadership roles, although the evergreens have been allowed to participate in the laitree. "We welcome pines to full participation in the life cycle of the ELCA," declares a letter from the Conference of Bushes written in 1993.
According to the earliest botanical manuscripts, especially the authoritative Historia Plantarum by Theophrastus, pines are considered needle-bearers rather than leaf-bearers. This distinction has long been understood as an unsurmountable barrier to coniferous service on the ELCA Roster of Ordained Timbers.
"The taxonomy is simple. The Botany is very clear about this," says Roy Oaken, president of Leaves Alone, a splinter group promoting leaf purity within the denomination. "Pines do not produce fruit. They are unable to make nuts. The Botany declares that we should 'be fruitful and multiply.' Pines do that, but not in a normal way, and we don't want our saplings learning about that or being told that it is okay. Our roots have grown a certain way for thousands of years, and we simply will not change our roots because the larger plant kingdom is suddenly more accepting of pines."
[Broadcasting note: In a departure from standard usage, the last two letters of Leaves are accented. Proper pronounciation of the organizational name is "Leave-us Alone."]
In August of 2009, members of the ELCA met in Assembly in Minnesota, one of the most densely forested states in the country, considered a sort of "tree Mecca." Two thirds of the trees at the Assembly were from the laitree, with the remaining voters perennials from the Roster of Ordered Timbers and the Conference of Bushes. The Conference of Bushes is made up of elected representatives of each of the sixty-five regional synods of the ELCA (including Sumac-Zion, a non-geographical synod). Bushes enjoy higher status in the denomination by virtue of being closer to the ground.
The Assembly voted to alter its traditional practice and allow certain parks and woods to accept pines as Ordered Timbers. No ecosystem that did not wish to have pines in leadership roles would be forced to do so. Still, for those evergreens which have been standing up against their exclusion from leadership, the decision was monumental.
"This is the day we've awaited for so long," said Ash Virginia Pine, director of Even the Leafless Matter (ELM), which rosters conifers unwilling to adopt counterfeit leaves in order to be accepted on the Roster of Ordered Timbers. "Our trees are just like the other trees serving in leadership positions across our forests. Science has shown that needles are, in fact, the same as leaves. They just look a little different and are a lot stronger. We actually consider our pines to be pretty special, and to have a particular role to play in the larger society. Think about it: across the country there are pines in millions of living rooms at Christmastime. The plant kingdom--indeed the whole world--is moving toward acceptance of pines. It is time for the ELCA to grow taller and accept our unique gifts."
Though the vote took place back in August, a plan to actually receive pines barred from the Roster has been slow to germinate. The plan will require layers of fertilizer from several constituencies across the denomination, including the Department of Vocation and Ecosystems, the Forest Council, and the Conference of Bushes.
The Conference of Bushes meets March 4-9 to look at a proposal for including ELM trees on the Roster of Ordered Timbers. ELM members are hopeful that the proposal will not include a rite of re-ordering, which would be tantamount to being torn up by the roots.
Monday, March 01, 2010
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Rick Steves: Travel Guru, Lutheran, Pot Smoker
I love that one man is all three of those things. I love Rick Steves. And I love that he is brave enough to say what very few Lutherans would ever say outside of their homes, let alone to a Christian Century reporter--that he smokes pot.
I don't mean to suggest that smoking pot is something of which one ought be proud. Neither should one be proud to be a drinker or a television watcher. All of those drugs cause a lot of problems in our world. And the majority of users of alcohol, television, and yes, marijuana, are not harming themselves or others.
I don't smoke pot. I have, and I didn't like it. I quit when I was fifteen, to the chagrin of my stoner friends, who would occasionally try to saddle me with a contact high by blowing a "power hitter" in my face. Yeah, I probably should have found some different friends, but we moved to California just as I started high school, and the stoners are the most permeable membrane in high school culture. That's my 'scuse, and I'm stickin' with it.
I don't smoke pot, but I'm not all that concerned about most of the people who do. Alcohol creates many more problems in our lives, our families and our society, and I've never been able to figure out why it's legal and pot is not.
In fact, legalizing marijuana could actually solve a few problems, like the myriad issues of an illegal drug trade, the funding of dangerous cartels in Mexico and Central America, and the overcrowding of our jails. Let's concentrate on the drugs which are truly dangerous, and on those who abuse marijuana...oh, and alcohol, while we're at it.
Rick Steves said that out loud to Christian Century magazine. That is wicked, dude.
I don't mean to suggest that smoking pot is something of which one ought be proud. Neither should one be proud to be a drinker or a television watcher. All of those drugs cause a lot of problems in our world. And the majority of users of alcohol, television, and yes, marijuana, are not harming themselves or others.
I don't smoke pot. I have, and I didn't like it. I quit when I was fifteen, to the chagrin of my stoner friends, who would occasionally try to saddle me with a contact high by blowing a "power hitter" in my face. Yeah, I probably should have found some different friends, but we moved to California just as I started high school, and the stoners are the most permeable membrane in high school culture. That's my 'scuse, and I'm stickin' with it.
I don't smoke pot, but I'm not all that concerned about most of the people who do. Alcohol creates many more problems in our lives, our families and our society, and I've never been able to figure out why it's legal and pot is not.
In fact, legalizing marijuana could actually solve a few problems, like the myriad issues of an illegal drug trade, the funding of dangerous cartels in Mexico and Central America, and the overcrowding of our jails. Let's concentrate on the drugs which are truly dangerous, and on those who abuse marijuana...oh, and alcohol, while we're at it.
Rick Steves said that out loud to Christian Century magazine. That is wicked, dude.
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
First the Train Left the Station. Now It Has Left the Tracks
I'm so sad about Massachusetts; all I can do is write. Maybe this isn't the end (cue very psychedelic Doors song). Maybe we'll still get a health care bill that's worth a darn. But this morning I'm afraid that all that work has been in vain again, and I just can't believe that this desperately needed reform was derailed by:
1. Martha Coakely not knowing who Curt Shilling is. C'mon Boston--I know you love your teams, but c'mon!
2. A lawyer who once did a Cosmo centerfold posing as "Everyman."
3. The Washington bubble.
4. The ability of Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh to convince people that they don't need something they really do need. And to further convince them that the message that they need it is some kind of plot to hurt them.
5. People who already have universal health care deciding that the rest of the country doesn't need it.
1. Martha Coakely not knowing who Curt Shilling is. C'mon Boston--I know you love your teams, but c'mon!
2. A lawyer who once did a Cosmo centerfold posing as "Everyman."
3. The Washington bubble.
4. The ability of Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh to convince people that they don't need something they really do need. And to further convince them that the message that they need it is some kind of plot to hurt them.
5. People who already have universal health care deciding that the rest of the country doesn't need it.
Wednesday, January 06, 2010
Is Grease Really the Word?
I was on call tonight, and didn't have to go in. Since it has been snowing (again!) all afternoon, that was a wonderful gift.
In an embarrassment of riches, VH1 is showing "Movies that rock!" and tonight's is Grease. I saw Grease three times in the movie theater--at a time when I could hardly afford to see a movie once. Even if it was a buck fifty.
Grease is a sausage movie. Don't think too hard about it, and don't look too close. Just enjoy it. Yes, Olivia Newton John is in high school. Yes, that car got itself built and painted. Yes, all of these improbable love stories, including the one between the greaser and the uber-naive Australian virgin, will work out. I love this movie, because it enables me to suspend disbelief and believe that it all works out in the end, no matter how crazy mucked up it is all the way through.
It also takes me back to a time when I thought everything was simple that way. Before I realized that I didn't admire Rizzo--I was crushing on her. And Stormy Ruecastle (with whom I took the bus every morning in fifth and seventh grade--Stormy was a year ahead of me in school and she and her best friend Rene were the coolest girls ever. On the planet, I mean.) It was a simpler time.
And Grease was the word, which really sums up the whole thing, don't you think?
Friday, December 04, 2009
Would Jesus Withhold Mission Support?
That's always a good question, right? What would Jesus do?
Some of those who stand in great certitude about what Jesus would do are withholding their money from their ELCA congregations. Whole congregations are withholding mission support from the ELCA churchwide organization.
Forty-five people lost their jobs at churchwide, in part as a result of this withheld support. Budget cuts are more complex, of course--it's a bad economy and we continue to decline overall.
But a whole bunch of those people lost their jobs because of financial blackmail. Maybe that's harsh, but I don't think so, and if it is, then it is deservedly harsh. Our congregation disagreed with decisions made by churchwide for years, and never once voted to withhold funds. We would have considered it unjust. I would have considered it immoral. A good portion of the money that goes to churchwide funds disaster response, water programs in the 2/3 world, the ELCA World Hunger Appeal.
If we're going to call ourselves members of the ELCA, then we should commit to the organization, and that means supporting it with our dollars. It's no different than being the member of a congregation. If you commit to the organization, you are expected to support it. That's part of the commitment.
So, congregations withholding your money: please stop. Or withdraw altogether, as would be more honest and fair.
Money is a tool and we should definitely allow our values to direct our spending. But just as I don't shop at Walmart, I don't park in their parking lot, either.
Some of those who stand in great certitude about what Jesus would do are withholding their money from their ELCA congregations. Whole congregations are withholding mission support from the ELCA churchwide organization.
Forty-five people lost their jobs at churchwide, in part as a result of this withheld support. Budget cuts are more complex, of course--it's a bad economy and we continue to decline overall.
But a whole bunch of those people lost their jobs because of financial blackmail. Maybe that's harsh, but I don't think so, and if it is, then it is deservedly harsh. Our congregation disagreed with decisions made by churchwide for years, and never once voted to withhold funds. We would have considered it unjust. I would have considered it immoral. A good portion of the money that goes to churchwide funds disaster response, water programs in the 2/3 world, the ELCA World Hunger Appeal.
If we're going to call ourselves members of the ELCA, then we should commit to the organization, and that means supporting it with our dollars. It's no different than being the member of a congregation. If you commit to the organization, you are expected to support it. That's part of the commitment.
So, congregations withholding your money: please stop. Or withdraw altogether, as would be more honest and fair.
Money is a tool and we should definitely allow our values to direct our spending. But just as I don't shop at Walmart, I don't park in their parking lot, either.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Are We "Post-label"? Should We Be?
I was part of a panel yesterday at St. Paul School of Theology here in Kansas City. The panel 
was sponsored by Sacred Worth, a group at the seminary which supports and celebrates its LGBT students, most of whom are closeted because they are on the ordination track of the United Methodist Church, and there's no Extraordinary Methodist Ministries and someone should really start one...but that's another post.
At the forum, a topic was raised which has been rolling around in my head for a while now. A young man I know and like very much asked how welcoming churches ensure that their LGBT members are known for more than being LGBT. The responses from panel members then went mostly to the "labels are so not helpful" place.
I see where that thinking arises, and I understand it. It would be great if we lived in a world in which all were loved and valued equally, and perhaps the need to name ourselves by gender, sexual orientation, affinity, political persuasion, etc. is simply perpetuating the divisions in our society. Maybe if we stopped using labels we would stop needing them. "We borrow our authority from the future" is the way that Pastor Jeff Johnson--one of the deans of LGBT inclusion in the Lutheran church--has put it.
I see that thinking, but I raise you this: we don't live in that world of peace and harmony and equal value. We live in a culture which still privileges straight over gay, white over black (brown, yellow). We live in a world in which women are still paid significantly less for doing the same work as men and are denied opportunities in nearly every field. And as long as we live in that world, I think it is important to name those inequalities, and to claim our wholeness as black people, gay people, transgender people, women, Latino/a/s, queers, radicals and youth. If I left you out, please name and claim yourself.
Not naming ourselves doesn't keep us from being what we are. Not naming ourselves doesn't alter the field of disproportionate allocation of resources upon which we play. In fact, here's my big fear: when we do not name those who are pushed to the margins, we will default to privilege. When we do not have Black History Month, we'll continue to celebrate White History Month. Every month. And yes, that still makes the "score" eleven to one, and that's a big problem. But it's a start.
What do you all think? Are labels not helpful? Is there a way to usher in a new world without them? Or do you need to be named for exactly who and what you are?
was sponsored by Sacred Worth, a group at the seminary which supports and celebrates its LGBT students, most of whom are closeted because they are on the ordination track of the United Methodist Church, and there's no Extraordinary Methodist Ministries and someone should really start one...but that's another post.At the forum, a topic was raised which has been rolling around in my head for a while now. A young man I know and like very much asked how welcoming churches ensure that their LGBT members are known for more than being LGBT. The responses from panel members then went mostly to the "labels are so not helpful" place.
I see where that thinking arises, and I understand it. It would be great if we lived in a world in which all were loved and valued equally, and perhaps the need to name ourselves by gender, sexual orientation, affinity, political persuasion, etc. is simply perpetuating the divisions in our society. Maybe if we stopped using labels we would stop needing them. "We borrow our authority from the future" is the way that Pastor Jeff Johnson--one of the deans of LGBT inclusion in the Lutheran church--has put it.
I see that thinking, but I raise you this: we don't live in that world of peace and harmony and equal value. We live in a culture which still privileges straight over gay, white over black (brown, yellow). We live in a world in which women are still paid significantly less for doing the same work as men and are denied opportunities in nearly every field. And as long as we live in that world, I think it is important to name those inequalities, and to claim our wholeness as black people, gay people, transgender people, women, Latino/a/s, queers, radicals and youth. If I left you out, please name and claim yourself.
Not naming ourselves doesn't keep us from being what we are. Not naming ourselves doesn't alter the field of disproportionate allocation of resources upon which we play. In fact, here's my big fear: when we do not name those who are pushed to the margins, we will default to privilege. When we do not have Black History Month, we'll continue to celebrate White History Month. Every month. And yes, that still makes the "score" eleven to one, and that's a big problem. But it's a start.
What do you all think? Are labels not helpful? Is there a way to usher in a new world without them? Or do you need to be named for exactly who and what you are?
Friday, October 23, 2009
Writer's BLOCK
Yeah, I actually do mean to have "BLOCK" in capital letters, even though that is the online equivalent of shouting. I'm having one of those days when I feel like shouting, mainly because I can't seem to write and I need to write because on Sunday I have to preach just like almost every Sunday and yes, that does get to be a little creatively challenging. Or it gets to be challenging to my creativity--that's more correct.
I'm thinking I'll write here and maybe that will help me write there.
So there was this guy Martin Luther and he had a hammer. He hammered in the mo-or-nin'. At least, I assume he used a hammer and the Peter, Paul and Mary reference works better if he did.
He had a hammer and he thought of ninety-five ways to say "The church is in error and the pope is a bad man and indulgences suck." A bit of an over-writer, Luther. Much different from an underwriter, which is someone who tries to deny you insurance.
Luther wasn't about denying. He was about affirming--affirming the relationship between people and a loving God who also wasn't about denying. The church had begun to proclaim a god (yes, I also meant the small "g") who was capricious enough to send folks to some mythical joint called purgatory until their families ponied up enough money to get them sprung. Because apparently this god was deeply invested in how many cathedrals could be built in his name (definitely meant "his").
That reminds me...so I was reading the Word Alone Network News. (I'd link Word Alone, but I love you, gentle readers, so I don't want you going there. And besides, you all know how to work Google.) Word Alone is a conservative Lutheran organization dedicated to the idea that we must so fear and love God that we should follow scripture exactly as written (in Leviticus 18 and the other 4 passages, that is, but not the rest of Leviticus except where convenient and not Mark 9 where Jesus offers some really clear teaching about divorce). So the recently divorced president of the Word Alone Network is writing about the outcome of the Churchwide Assembly, and she was writing about this guy named God who didn't look familiar to me at all.
Is there more than one? We do seem to act that way sometimes. I'm not really claiming to be right here (though I do think that I am). I'm just sad that we can just all get along and we went through the Reformation over whether God saves us by grace or because we're good and we are still busy telling each other to be good and ignoring the plank in our own eyes.
And I'm no closer to a sermon now but maybe just a little and I meant to write that contradiction in the last sentence of this post.
I'm thinking I'll write here and maybe that will help me write there.
So there was this guy Martin Luther and he had a hammer. He hammered in the mo-or-nin'. At least, I assume he used a hammer and the Peter, Paul and Mary reference works better if he did.
He had a hammer and he thought of ninety-five ways to say "The church is in error and the pope is a bad man and indulgences suck." A bit of an over-writer, Luther. Much different from an underwriter, which is someone who tries to deny you insurance.
Luther wasn't about denying. He was about affirming--affirming the relationship between people and a loving God who also wasn't about denying. The church had begun to proclaim a god (yes, I also meant the small "g") who was capricious enough to send folks to some mythical joint called purgatory until their families ponied up enough money to get them sprung. Because apparently this god was deeply invested in how many cathedrals could be built in his name (definitely meant "his").
That reminds me...so I was reading the Word Alone Network News. (I'd link Word Alone, but I love you, gentle readers, so I don't want you going there. And besides, you all know how to work Google.) Word Alone is a conservative Lutheran organization dedicated to the idea that we must so fear and love God that we should follow scripture exactly as written (in Leviticus 18 and the other 4 passages, that is, but not the rest of Leviticus except where convenient and not Mark 9 where Jesus offers some really clear teaching about divorce). So the recently divorced president of the Word Alone Network is writing about the outcome of the Churchwide Assembly, and she was writing about this guy named God who didn't look familiar to me at all.
Is there more than one? We do seem to act that way sometimes. I'm not really claiming to be right here (though I do think that I am). I'm just sad that we can just all get along and we went through the Reformation over whether God saves us by grace or because we're good and we are still busy telling each other to be good and ignoring the plank in our own eyes.
And I'm no closer to a sermon now but maybe just a little and I meant to write that contradiction in the last sentence of this post.
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Not a Vagabond Any Longer
I seem to have bought a house. It's not totally final yet, but things are looking good. So I have answered my beloved's request to take "vagabond" out of my little subtitle/descriptor/bio thingy at the top of the page.
It's late and I'm tired, but also wanted to say this. Barack Obama makes me proud to be an American. I don't love everything he's done, but he is a good man and he's doing as good a job as anyone could do right now. I think.
Oh, and I still love my Wolverines and those really awful Chiefs. These are the times that try fans' souls...
It's late and I'm tired, but also wanted to say this. Barack Obama makes me proud to be an American. I don't love everything he's done, but he is a good man and he's doing as good a job as anyone could do right now. I think.
Oh, and I still love my Wolverines and those really awful Chiefs. These are the times that try fans' souls...
Monday, August 24, 2009
CWA: What Does This Mean?
I've been asked a lot over the past week what the decisions made at Churchwide would mean for myself and my congregation. It's kind of funny, really, that after all of these years of praying, begging, cajoling and demonstrating, the answer is actually "not a whole lot."
Oh, and also, "a whole lot." Great Lutheran paradox, that.
My congregation already has a pastor in a "same gender, life-long, monogamous, publicly accountable relationship." Okay, I'm fudging "publicly accountable" a little, since we are waiting until we live in the same state to take the ELCA up on its support of our getting married (they'd never say "married," but I can. Married married married. That's what they voted on and they know it.).
Our congregation is under censure by our Synod (the regional body--in this case Missouri and Kansas). Under the terms of our censure, we're not allowed to serve on committees of the synod or churchwide expressions. Which does leave us feeling a little cut off, and provides a great excuse to stop paying benevolence to the Synod--which I'm proud to say we have not done. We have done our best to stay in relationship with the larger church, and I'd say it has been mainly mutual. Bishop Mansholt has been expecially gracious in extending a hand of friendship to Abiding Peace.
But being under censure for eight years kind of sucks, and we'll be glad to have it lifted.
And I will be glad to stop suffering the little indignities that arise so often, especially around the first weekend in June, when the whole Synod meets in Assembly. I'll be glad to receive mail from the larger church addressed to "Rev. Donna Simon." I've been ordained almost nine years; I think it would be nice to be addressed properly. Someone in the Synod office actually works overtime making sure that I know that he or she doesn't recognize my ordination. I get mail addressed to "Ms. Donna Simon." If you left off the "Ms.," I'd just think you weren't using titles, and blow it off. But "Ms." says what it is intended to say: "This is the best you're going to get from us."
We submitted a resolution to the Synod Assembly this year, signed by over a hundred people. When it appeared in the Assembly notebook, I notice that my name was one space off of the line at the left margin. This was because they had deleted "Rev." from in front of my name, and hadn't gotten it pulled all the way back to the margin.
Little indignities. Sitting in the back. Not having a title. Sometimes not even having a name. I saw a dear friend, Pastor Karen Parker, at Churchwide. We had a class together while I was in seminary--a writing class with Brian Wren--go ahead and be jealous, those who know who Brian Wren is. I have seen Karen around the church over the years, and it was so nice to see her. We were chatting and she asked for my email address, which I started to give her. Then she said, "Oh, I'll just look you up in the Directory. I raised an eyebrow and she quickly realized why. "I guess I can't do that," she said. "Soon," I said, and we both smiled.
It will be nice to be in the Directory. It will be nice to maybe even get to help lead worship sometime at a Synod Assembly. Other than those things, not much changes for me. I'm already called as an out pastor, and I am committed to seeing our church grow and flourish.
I love that the opportunities for call will come to others, though. I love that I can say I'm proud of one of the churches which is extending a true hand of love and hospitality to God's lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and gay children.
What does this mean? All are welcome in this place.
Oh, and also, "a whole lot." Great Lutheran paradox, that.
My congregation already has a pastor in a "same gender, life-long, monogamous, publicly accountable relationship." Okay, I'm fudging "publicly accountable" a little, since we are waiting until we live in the same state to take the ELCA up on its support of our getting married (they'd never say "married," but I can. Married married married. That's what they voted on and they know it.).
Our congregation is under censure by our Synod (the regional body--in this case Missouri and Kansas). Under the terms of our censure, we're not allowed to serve on committees of the synod or churchwide expressions. Which does leave us feeling a little cut off, and provides a great excuse to stop paying benevolence to the Synod--which I'm proud to say we have not done. We have done our best to stay in relationship with the larger church, and I'd say it has been mainly mutual. Bishop Mansholt has been expecially gracious in extending a hand of friendship to Abiding Peace.
But being under censure for eight years kind of sucks, and we'll be glad to have it lifted.
And I will be glad to stop suffering the little indignities that arise so often, especially around the first weekend in June, when the whole Synod meets in Assembly. I'll be glad to receive mail from the larger church addressed to "Rev. Donna Simon." I've been ordained almost nine years; I think it would be nice to be addressed properly. Someone in the Synod office actually works overtime making sure that I know that he or she doesn't recognize my ordination. I get mail addressed to "Ms. Donna Simon." If you left off the "Ms.," I'd just think you weren't using titles, and blow it off. But "Ms." says what it is intended to say: "This is the best you're going to get from us."
We submitted a resolution to the Synod Assembly this year, signed by over a hundred people. When it appeared in the Assembly notebook, I notice that my name was one space off of the line at the left margin. This was because they had deleted "Rev." from in front of my name, and hadn't gotten it pulled all the way back to the margin.
Little indignities. Sitting in the back. Not having a title. Sometimes not even having a name. I saw a dear friend, Pastor Karen Parker, at Churchwide. We had a class together while I was in seminary--a writing class with Brian Wren--go ahead and be jealous, those who know who Brian Wren is. I have seen Karen around the church over the years, and it was so nice to see her. We were chatting and she asked for my email address, which I started to give her. Then she said, "Oh, I'll just look you up in the Directory. I raised an eyebrow and she quickly realized why. "I guess I can't do that," she said. "Soon," I said, and we both smiled.
It will be nice to be in the Directory. It will be nice to maybe even get to help lead worship sometime at a Synod Assembly. Other than those things, not much changes for me. I'm already called as an out pastor, and I am committed to seeing our church grow and flourish.
I love that the opportunities for call will come to others, though. I love that I can say I'm proud of one of the churches which is extending a true hand of love and hospitality to God's lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and gay children.
What does this mean? All are welcome in this place.
CWA Wrapup, Very Brief
We will call and ordain lesbian and gay persons. We will bless same-sex unions.
More work is needed, as we are still allowing a lot of opting out on both of these.
But for now, we dance.
More work is needed, as we are still allowing a lot of opting out on both of these.
But for now, we dance.
Friday, August 21, 2009
CWA Day Four
Today is the day. On the agenda: The four recommendations of the ELCA Sexuality Task Force, which--if passed--lead to the conditions under which a lesbian or gay pastor in a "publicly accountable, life-long, monogamous same gender relationship" could serve an ELCA church. We're not quite actually affirming the right to call a gay or lesbian pastor, since we're still allowing congregations (and perhaps synods, bishops, etc.--it's not clear) to respect their own "bound consciences" by refusing to call someone. It's a step on the pathway to full inclusion, and a good one.
I need to be in the hall, so will cheat and give you the ELCA News Service report on what has happened so far. Nutshell: We moved the resolution calling on ELCA members to respect one another's bound consciences to number one and approved it after lengthy conversation. (And can I just say that it is baffling to me that people would actually stand at a microphone and argue about whether or not we should respect one another. I wonder sometimes if they actually listen to what they're saying. A guy actually said earlier that "the purpose of the church is to provide standards for rostered leaders." Yes, he said "the." Definite article. Tautological argument. The church exists to provide standards for leaders of the church. Here I thought it was to be about Christ's mission on earth. Silly me.)
The second item up was Recommendation Two, which allowed for congregations that wish to do so to publicly affirm "life-long, monogamous, same gender relationships." A lot of conversation again (though I think less than on the first recommendation, which is bizarre to me). Then the question was called, and it passed by just over sixty percent and we cried, likely not for the last time today.
Back at the beginning of the day, the former governor of Minnesota (and what's with Minnesota governors?) offered a substitute to the four recommendations which mirrored the current policy language. Blah, blah, blah, and it received just 33.9 percent. We see there, though, that the supermajority would not have carried, so that vote on Monday is looming large. Speaking of which, they tried it again, inviting the Assembly to vote on whether a two-thirds majority should be required for resolutions related to ministry policy. It recieved just over forty percent, seven percent less than it received on Monday. They should probably quit while behind.
On a personal note, I am tired tired tired, but feeling wonderful. Colleen has been an amazing partner, supportive, helpful and loving. I am so glad to be here to witness this moment in the life of the church. And am going back to witnessing it now.
MINNEAPOLIS (ELCA) -- Voting members of the 2009 Churchwide Assemblyof the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) are in the middle oftaking steps to make it possible for the Lutherans in same-genderrelationships to serve as professional leaders in the denomination.The churchwide assembly, the chief legislative authority of the ELCA,is meeting here Aug. 17-23 at the Minneapolis Convention Center. About2,000 people are participating, including 1,045 ELCA voting members. Thetheme for the biennial assembly is "God's work. Our hands."Voting members have begun considering four distinct resolutions Aug.21, which are designed to change current ELCA policy that requires thedenomination's professional leaders to abstain from "homosexual sexualrelationships."The resolutions are contained in a report and recommendation onministry policies developed by the Task Force for the ELCA Studies onSexuality.A majority vote is required to pass each of the four resolutions.With a 771-230 vote, the assembly amended and approved a resolutionthat states "that in the implementation of any resolutions on ministrypolicies, the ELCA commit itself to bear one another's burdens, love theneighbor, and respect the bound consciences of all."With a 619-402 vote, the assembly approved a second resolution thatcommits the ELCA "to finding ways to allow congregations that choose to doso to recognize, support, and hold publicly accountably life-long,monogamous, same-gender relationships."Prior to considering the two resolutions, voting members defeated a"substitute" motion with a 344-670 vote to strike out all four resolutionsand replace it with the following: "rostered leadership of this church whoare homosexual in their self understanding are expected to abstain fromhomosexual sexual relations and practicing homosexual persons areprecluded from rostered leadership in this church." Albert Quie, votingmember from the ELCA Minneapolis Synod, made the substitute motion.As voting members were considering resolution two, Edward A. Kirst,voting member from the ELCA Northeastern Ohio Synod, made a motion torequire a two-thirds vote -- instead of a majority -- for approving theremaining resolutions. That motion was defeated with a 407-576 vote.During the afternoon plenary, voting members will consider the tworemaining resolutions -- that the denomination find a way for Lutherans insame-sex relationships to serve as ordained ministers and otherprofessional leadership roles in the church, and that the denominationconsider a proposal for how it will exercise flexibility within existingstructures and practices to allow for Lutherans in same-sex relations tobe approved for professional service in the church.
I need to be in the hall, so will cheat and give you the ELCA News Service report on what has happened so far. Nutshell: We moved the resolution calling on ELCA members to respect one another's bound consciences to number one and approved it after lengthy conversation. (And can I just say that it is baffling to me that people would actually stand at a microphone and argue about whether or not we should respect one another. I wonder sometimes if they actually listen to what they're saying. A guy actually said earlier that "the purpose of the church is to provide standards for rostered leaders." Yes, he said "the." Definite article. Tautological argument. The church exists to provide standards for leaders of the church. Here I thought it was to be about Christ's mission on earth. Silly me.)
The second item up was Recommendation Two, which allowed for congregations that wish to do so to publicly affirm "life-long, monogamous, same gender relationships." A lot of conversation again (though I think less than on the first recommendation, which is bizarre to me). Then the question was called, and it passed by just over sixty percent and we cried, likely not for the last time today.
Back at the beginning of the day, the former governor of Minnesota (and what's with Minnesota governors?) offered a substitute to the four recommendations which mirrored the current policy language. Blah, blah, blah, and it received just 33.9 percent. We see there, though, that the supermajority would not have carried, so that vote on Monday is looming large. Speaking of which, they tried it again, inviting the Assembly to vote on whether a two-thirds majority should be required for resolutions related to ministry policy. It recieved just over forty percent, seven percent less than it received on Monday. They should probably quit while behind.
On a personal note, I am tired tired tired, but feeling wonderful. Colleen has been an amazing partner, supportive, helpful and loving. I am so glad to be here to witness this moment in the life of the church. And am going back to witnessing it now.
MINNEAPOLIS (ELCA) -- Voting members of the 2009 Churchwide Assemblyof the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) are in the middle oftaking steps to make it possible for the Lutherans in same-genderrelationships to serve as professional leaders in the denomination.The churchwide assembly, the chief legislative authority of the ELCA,is meeting here Aug. 17-23 at the Minneapolis Convention Center. About2,000 people are participating, including 1,045 ELCA voting members. Thetheme for the biennial assembly is "God's work. Our hands."Voting members have begun considering four distinct resolutions Aug.21, which are designed to change current ELCA policy that requires thedenomination's professional leaders to abstain from "homosexual sexualrelationships."The resolutions are contained in a report and recommendation onministry policies developed by the Task Force for the ELCA Studies onSexuality.A majority vote is required to pass each of the four resolutions.With a 771-230 vote, the assembly amended and approved a resolutionthat states "that in the implementation of any resolutions on ministrypolicies, the ELCA commit itself to bear one another's burdens, love theneighbor, and respect the bound consciences of all."With a 619-402 vote, the assembly approved a second resolution thatcommits the ELCA "to finding ways to allow congregations that choose to doso to recognize, support, and hold publicly accountably life-long,monogamous, same-gender relationships."Prior to considering the two resolutions, voting members defeated a"substitute" motion with a 344-670 vote to strike out all four resolutionsand replace it with the following: "rostered leadership of this church whoare homosexual in their self understanding are expected to abstain fromhomosexual sexual relations and practicing homosexual persons areprecluded from rostered leadership in this church." Albert Quie, votingmember from the ELCA Minneapolis Synod, made the substitute motion.As voting members were considering resolution two, Edward A. Kirst,voting member from the ELCA Northeastern Ohio Synod, made a motion torequire a two-thirds vote -- instead of a majority -- for approving theremaining resolutions. That motion was defeated with a 407-576 vote.During the afternoon plenary, voting members will consider the tworemaining resolutions -- that the denomination find a way for Lutherans insame-sex relationships to serve as ordained ministers and otherprofessional leadership roles in the church, and that the denominationconsider a proposal for how it will exercise flexibility within existingstructures and practices to allow for Lutherans in same-sex relations tobe approved for professional service in the church.
Thursday, August 20, 2009
CWA Day Three
Pretty uneventful day yesterday. A tornado hit the Convention Center and we passed the ELCA Sexuality Statement by the exact number of votes needed (676 to 338).
Just another day in the life of the Body of Christ, which is nudged forward and sometimes blown off of its heels by the Holy Spirit.
No one hurt in the tornado, though it did halve the steeple at Central Lutheran across the street. Central is the church which is graciously hosting Assembly members for worship and meals. They've set up an open-air restaurant in front and a pub in back. Both are in pieces now, and it is sheer blessing that the tornado didn't touch down during a mealtime or happy hour.
I missed the vote on the Sexuality Study, having made plans to share dinner with Lyle, a dear former member at Abiding Peace. But my friend Jen sent a text when it happened, and we rejoiced. I was surprised, since there was so much bickering back and forth about the statement, that I didn't think they'd get to a vote, even after extending the debate (hence my absence--I wouldn't have scheduled dinner during a Plenary).
The Goodsoil worship service was scheduled for last night, and it was grand that the vote did in fact happen, because we were buoyed by the good news, which just made the service that much more special. There had to be well over 500 people over at Central. Perhaps closer to 800 or more. The very large sanctuary was full. Barbara Lundblad (Numero Uno Preacher in the World) preached, and the music was great.
The air in that sanctuary was electric, and it is clear that a great healing is taking place. It will not be finished here; much more is needed. And we still have the vote on the ministry standards coming. That is the policy change in which we have invested so much fear and hope.
Pray for the Assembly. Pray for the church. Pray for those who will celebrate and those who will mourn. Pray for God's will to be done.
Just another day in the life of the Body of Christ, which is nudged forward and sometimes blown off of its heels by the Holy Spirit.
No one hurt in the tornado, though it did halve the steeple at Central Lutheran across the street. Central is the church which is graciously hosting Assembly members for worship and meals. They've set up an open-air restaurant in front and a pub in back. Both are in pieces now, and it is sheer blessing that the tornado didn't touch down during a mealtime or happy hour.
I missed the vote on the Sexuality Study, having made plans to share dinner with Lyle, a dear former member at Abiding Peace. But my friend Jen sent a text when it happened, and we rejoiced. I was surprised, since there was so much bickering back and forth about the statement, that I didn't think they'd get to a vote, even after extending the debate (hence my absence--I wouldn't have scheduled dinner during a Plenary).
The Goodsoil worship service was scheduled for last night, and it was grand that the vote did in fact happen, because we were buoyed by the good news, which just made the service that much more special. There had to be well over 500 people over at Central. Perhaps closer to 800 or more. The very large sanctuary was full. Barbara Lundblad (Numero Uno Preacher in the World) preached, and the music was great.
The air in that sanctuary was electric, and it is clear that a great healing is taking place. It will not be finished here; much more is needed. And we still have the vote on the ministry standards coming. That is the policy change in which we have invested so much fear and hope.
Pray for the Assembly. Pray for the church. Pray for those who will celebrate and those who will mourn. Pray for God's will to be done.
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
CWA Day Two
First, an apology. The email access at the Convention Center isn't what I hoped. I thought I'd be able to get WiFi in the Plenary sessions, but it's not available. So I'm sending less than intended.
Second, I'm totally sharing Ruth Ellen's drinking game idea with everyone I know.
CWA: Day Two
The ELCA has voted in Assembly to launch the Lutheran Malaria Initiative. We will begin with at $2.8 million grant and then raise funds to do our part toward the very attainable goal of eradicating malaria. The initiative will concentrate on sub-Saharan Africa, though the hope was expressed from the Assembly floor and the dais that it will expand to other parts of the world in which malaria takes lives.
We also talked about human sexuality—the sexuality of gay humans, that is. We moved into a Quasi Committee of the Whole, which is fancy legal language for “a big structured conversation.” Persons line up at green and red microphones and get three minutes to share their feelings about the matter at hand—in this case, the ELCA Social Statement on Human Sexuality.
Folks at the green microphones felt that we ought to finally move forward toward real welcome of our transgender, bisexual, lesbian and gay neighbors.
Folks at the red microphones felt that we ought to quit talking about feelings. This is the Tactic Du Jour for the red mic crowd. Assign all impetus toward change to the realm of “capricious emotion.”
We heard this argument in a slightly different way at Synod, from the gentleman who argued that we seemed to be deciding policy “based on some kind of wishy-washy love thing.”
Is feeling such a bad thing for the church? Shall we really not use emotion as one (and it is only one, not the sole basis of our platform) deciding factor in making change?
Second, I'm totally sharing Ruth Ellen's drinking game idea with everyone I know.
CWA: Day Two
The ELCA has voted in Assembly to launch the Lutheran Malaria Initiative. We will begin with at $2.8 million grant and then raise funds to do our part toward the very attainable goal of eradicating malaria. The initiative will concentrate on sub-Saharan Africa, though the hope was expressed from the Assembly floor and the dais that it will expand to other parts of the world in which malaria takes lives.
We also talked about human sexuality—the sexuality of gay humans, that is. We moved into a Quasi Committee of the Whole, which is fancy legal language for “a big structured conversation.” Persons line up at green and red microphones and get three minutes to share their feelings about the matter at hand—in this case, the ELCA Social Statement on Human Sexuality.
Folks at the green microphones felt that we ought to finally move forward toward real welcome of our transgender, bisexual, lesbian and gay neighbors.
Folks at the red microphones felt that we ought to quit talking about feelings. This is the Tactic Du Jour for the red mic crowd. Assign all impetus toward change to the realm of “capricious emotion.”
We heard this argument in a slightly different way at Synod, from the gentleman who argued that we seemed to be deciding policy “based on some kind of wishy-washy love thing.”
Is feeling such a bad thing for the church? Shall we really not use emotion as one (and it is only one, not the sole basis of our platform) deciding factor in making change?
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Churchwide Assembly. It Begins.
Greetings from Minneapolis, Land O' Lutherans!
The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America's eleventh Churchwide Assembly has begun. Last night the first Plenary session was held, and the session, scheduled for two and a half hours, only went over by slightly more than an hour. This is a vast improvement over the Orlando Assembly back in 2005, when the first session went until 11:30 at night. Our Presiding Bishop, Mark Hanson, joked that it was 11:30 in Orlando when we ended, so those who had money in a pool should probably consider it a draw. He is a real card, our bishop.
This session went long, just as did the one in Orlando, because up for consideration was a change in the proceeding which would require a 2/3 "supermajority" to change the current ministry standards in the ELCA. This is a maneuver by conservatives to keep the standards as they are: sans homosexual participation.
A little backstory: We have reached the end of an eight year process of study mandated by the 2001 Churchwide Assembly. The ELCA convened a Sexuality Task Force, wrote a Statement on Human Sexuality, and made recommendations on changing our ministry standards to allow congregations to call openly gay pastors if they wish to do so.
This is a big deal.
So the question came up: how much of a majority do we need to pass these ministry recommendations? The Social Statement will need 2/3, per the ELCA bylaws. But changing standards and practices is usually a simple majority vote. The Church Council (the one for the whole church) recommended to recommend a simple majority, which is what it took to enact the policies, so there's some parity there.
The conversation was lllonnnng, and it veered rapidly into debate over the proposals, and not the procedures required to pass or deny them. Bishop Hanson admonished the speakers to avoid this veering, to little avail.
Long story short (too late!), the vote was evennnntually taken, and only forty-seven percent of the Assembly voted to require the supermajority. Since the change required a two-thirds vote, this means it failed by a bunch. Good start to the Assembly, I think.
Here's the News Service release:
ELCA NEWS SERVICE
August 18, 2009
ELCA Assembly Defeats Super-Majority Requirement
09-CWA-O3-MS
MINNEAPOLIS (ELCA) -- Voting members of the biennial assembly of theEvangelical Lutheran Church in America turned back a motion that wouldhave required a two-thirds majority for changes in policies relating to the rostering of clergy, associates in ministry, diaconal ministers and deaconesses. The vote, with 57 percent in opposition, came late in the evening of the first day of the gathering. A vote to allow people living in committed same-gender relationships to be on the professional rosters of the ELCA is scheduled for Friday, Aug. 21.The action leaves in place a recommendation that a simple majority vote be sufficient for the proposed policy changes. By vote of 979-24 the assembly adopted the order of business as recommended.
The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America's eleventh Churchwide Assembly has begun. Last night the first Plenary session was held, and the session, scheduled for two and a half hours, only went over by slightly more than an hour. This is a vast improvement over the Orlando Assembly back in 2005, when the first session went until 11:30 at night. Our Presiding Bishop, Mark Hanson, joked that it was 11:30 in Orlando when we ended, so those who had money in a pool should probably consider it a draw. He is a real card, our bishop.
This session went long, just as did the one in Orlando, because up for consideration was a change in the proceeding which would require a 2/3 "supermajority" to change the current ministry standards in the ELCA. This is a maneuver by conservatives to keep the standards as they are: sans homosexual participation.
A little backstory: We have reached the end of an eight year process of study mandated by the 2001 Churchwide Assembly. The ELCA convened a Sexuality Task Force, wrote a Statement on Human Sexuality, and made recommendations on changing our ministry standards to allow congregations to call openly gay pastors if they wish to do so.
This is a big deal.
So the question came up: how much of a majority do we need to pass these ministry recommendations? The Social Statement will need 2/3, per the ELCA bylaws. But changing standards and practices is usually a simple majority vote. The Church Council (the one for the whole church) recommended to recommend a simple majority, which is what it took to enact the policies, so there's some parity there.
The conversation was lllonnnng, and it veered rapidly into debate over the proposals, and not the procedures required to pass or deny them. Bishop Hanson admonished the speakers to avoid this veering, to little avail.
Long story short (too late!), the vote was evennnntually taken, and only forty-seven percent of the Assembly voted to require the supermajority. Since the change required a two-thirds vote, this means it failed by a bunch. Good start to the Assembly, I think.
Here's the News Service release:
ELCA NEWS SERVICE
August 18, 2009
ELCA Assembly Defeats Super-Majority Requirement
09-CWA-O3-MS
MINNEAPOLIS (ELCA) -- Voting members of the biennial assembly of theEvangelical Lutheran Church in America turned back a motion that wouldhave required a two-thirds majority for changes in policies relating to the rostering of clergy, associates in ministry, diaconal ministers and deaconesses. The vote, with 57 percent in opposition, came late in the evening of the first day of the gathering. A vote to allow people living in committed same-gender relationships to be on the professional rosters of the ELCA is scheduled for Friday, Aug. 21.The action leaves in place a recommendation that a simple majority vote be sufficient for the proposed policy changes. By vote of 979-24 the assembly adopted the order of business as recommended.
Friday, June 26, 2009
Get a Job!
I was talking with a dear friend and member of my church last night and she was sharing her frustration with the comments of Rep. Cynthia Davis of Missouri, who represents a wealthy suburban district outside St. Louis.
Rep. Davis has suggested that young people old enough to get jobs should be working at McDonald's, where they will get a free meal during their shift, rather than having lunch at churches offering free lunches over the summer.
(Parenthetical Thought: Maybe I should work at McDonald's. The Bristol makes us pay half price for lunch, which makes most of the menu out of reach for servers who are making an average of $25-30 for a lunch shift.)
Back to Rep. Davis. Her comments are dumb. And typical of social and fiscal conservative thought. If you are having a hard time, you should get a job. And ya know--they're right. Working is the best way to make money, if you don't happen to be part of a wealthy family in, say, suburban St. Louis. Of course, it is a lot easier to get a job if you happen to have all of the privileges of being from a wealthy family in suburban St. Louis.
And that's all I'm going to say about this, because my friend Andy has written an insightful, wise, brilliant blog article about the whole thing. Read it here.
Rep. Davis has suggested that young people old enough to get jobs should be working at McDonald's, where they will get a free meal during their shift, rather than having lunch at churches offering free lunches over the summer.
(Parenthetical Thought: Maybe I should work at McDonald's. The Bristol makes us pay half price for lunch, which makes most of the menu out of reach for servers who are making an average of $25-30 for a lunch shift.)
Back to Rep. Davis. Her comments are dumb. And typical of social and fiscal conservative thought. If you are having a hard time, you should get a job. And ya know--they're right. Working is the best way to make money, if you don't happen to be part of a wealthy family in, say, suburban St. Louis. Of course, it is a lot easier to get a job if you happen to have all of the privileges of being from a wealthy family in suburban St. Louis.
And that's all I'm going to say about this, because my friend Andy has written an insightful, wise, brilliant blog article about the whole thing. Read it here.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Stop Talking, Reverend. Please.
I have defended Jeremiah Wright in the past year. He has used language I wouldn't use, but we do not preach in the same context. I have tried to give him the benefit of the doubt, and have even blogged about how unfair it is to lift words and phrases out of the man's sermons in order to somehow taint him, and by extension, Barack Obama.
But I wish now that he would go on retreat and spend some time alone with God, working through his prejudices. Because when one doesn't have the sense to avoid making blatant anti-Semitic statements into a microphone, it's time to go up on the mountaintop and get straightened out. (Yes, I said "straightened." It's only a word, and it has more than one meaning. In this case it means "subjected to a little can of divine whoop-ass.")
Asked by a reporter whether he had talked to his former parishoner Barack Obama, Wright answered "Them Jews ain't going to let him talk to me. He'll talk to me in five years, when he's a lame duck, or in eight years when he's out of office." You can listen to it here if you have the stomach.
Questioned about the remark later, Wright said that he misspoke.
You think?
Unfortunately, he elaborated. What he meant to say was "Zionists."
Oh, well that's alright then.
I wonder who stayed up all night thinking of that clever semantic dodge?
Here's what he should have said: "Yeah, that was an awful thing to say. I had no idea that I was capable of such a hateful stereotype, and I'm ashamed to have said it. I apologize to the Jewish people, and to anyone who was offended by my remark. I am going up on the mountaintop now."
But I wish now that he would go on retreat and spend some time alone with God, working through his prejudices. Because when one doesn't have the sense to avoid making blatant anti-Semitic statements into a microphone, it's time to go up on the mountaintop and get straightened out. (Yes, I said "straightened." It's only a word, and it has more than one meaning. In this case it means "subjected to a little can of divine whoop-ass.")
Asked by a reporter whether he had talked to his former parishoner Barack Obama, Wright answered "Them Jews ain't going to let him talk to me. He'll talk to me in five years, when he's a lame duck, or in eight years when he's out of office." You can listen to it here if you have the stomach.
Questioned about the remark later, Wright said that he misspoke.
You think?
Unfortunately, he elaborated. What he meant to say was "Zionists."
Oh, well that's alright then.
I wonder who stayed up all night thinking of that clever semantic dodge?
Here's what he should have said: "Yeah, that was an awful thing to say. I had no idea that I was capable of such a hateful stereotype, and I'm ashamed to have said it. I apologize to the Jewish people, and to anyone who was offended by my remark. I am going up on the mountaintop now."
Saturday, June 13, 2009
Panic in the Streets! Digital TV is Here!
Seriously, and I do mean seriously: if the conversion from analog to digital television signals is catching you by surprise, as it is some 16,000 people in the KC Metro today, then you obviously don't watch television. Because if you do watch television, you've been bombarded with reminders that you have to do something to your TV if it isn't digital-ready. You've also been bombarded with ads which suggest that you'll lose your signal if you don't subscribe to a cable provider. The premise of these ads is completely untrue--you just need a converter box, which costs an average of ten bucks if you use the free coupon the government sent out. It makes one wonder how much money Time Warner and Comcast paid to facilitate the switch, which is surely making them a fortune.
I'll just be glad when the switch is completed today, so that the constant reminders will cease, and I can return to the wholesome and educational programming normally on my television.
Sunday, June 07, 2009
That Wishy-washy Love Thing
Sunday, June 7, 2009. Lindsborg, KS. Central States Synod Assembly--Day Four.
This would be a very long blog entry if I tried to capture all of this Synod Assembly in a single article. So I'll try a few impressions first, with a promise to write more later. Right now I'm actually still sitting in a session, so just impressions for now.
First, the Synod Assembly is a yearly gathering of ELCA members, rostered leaders (clergy, Parish Ministry Associates, Associates in Ministry, etc.), synod staff, and churchwide leaders. The Central States Synod is comprised of all of the congregations and associations of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America located in Kansas and Missouri. The Synod Assembly is the highest legislative body in our synod.
We've all been in Lindsborg, Kansas ("Little Sweden!") since Thursday afternoon. There's been lots of business, but really we've been focused on sex. Again. Not sex, really, but human sexuality. Not human sexuality, really, but homosexuality. And not homosexuality, really, but the burning question before our denomination: Will we let gay and lesbian persons who admit that they are not practicing celibacy to be pastors in our church?
We're also talking about the blessing of same-sex unions, but that issue doesn't seem to have the heat around it. Not sure yet what to make of that. It seems like the two are connected, actually...
We had conversation--a one hour "Committee of the Whole," more about this later--about a Statement on Human Sexuality which will be affirmed (we hope) by vote at the Churchwide Assembly in Minneapolis in August. We voted to memorialize (this is church speak for "ask") the Churchwide Assembly to affirm the Statement. That vote passed by one vote more than a two-thirds majority. A good mandate, I think.
We had conversation--another one hour Committee of the Whole--about the Recommendations of the ELCA Task Force on Human Sexuality. I'll say more about the conversation in a later entry. After lunch, we voted on memorials to churchwide affirming the recommendations, which would allow for the recognition of persons in "publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships," the rostering of such persons, and a commitment to "honor the bound conscience" of persons who disagree across our church.
Some quick thoughts:
Tone of the Assembly: Anxious but respectful. There were few nasty remarks made at the microphone, and the only time the listeners reacted to what was being said was when a guy started in with Sodom and Gomorrah, which he informed us is "about homosexuality." About a hundred people said "no" at the same time, which is an interesting sound. Then the chair told us to settle down.
Number of hugs, high fives, winks, pats on the back, fist bumps and collegial arms-around-the-shoulder I received: I have no idea. I lost count somewhere after a hundred. Apparently people want this change to happen, realize that I will be a big beneficiary of the change, and are okay with that.
Final proof that conservatives just don't get Jesus: The most fascinating line of the whole Assembly was uttered at a red microphone during the discussion of the ministry recommendations on Day Three. The gentleman, having waxed irritated for a minute or so about how he didn't understand why we're even doing this, said, "I've looked at the [Sexuality Statement], and as far as I can tell, it seems to be based on some kind of wishy-washy love thing.
Yes, we mustn't be making decisions based on some ethic of love. Egads.
This would be a very long blog entry if I tried to capture all of this Synod Assembly in a single article. So I'll try a few impressions first, with a promise to write more later. Right now I'm actually still sitting in a session, so just impressions for now.
First, the Synod Assembly is a yearly gathering of ELCA members, rostered leaders (clergy, Parish Ministry Associates, Associates in Ministry, etc.), synod staff, and churchwide leaders. The Central States Synod is comprised of all of the congregations and associations of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America located in Kansas and Missouri. The Synod Assembly is the highest legislative body in our synod.
We've all been in Lindsborg, Kansas ("Little Sweden!") since Thursday afternoon. There's been lots of business, but really we've been focused on sex. Again. Not sex, really, but human sexuality. Not human sexuality, really, but homosexuality. And not homosexuality, really, but the burning question before our denomination: Will we let gay and lesbian persons who admit that they are not practicing celibacy to be pastors in our church?
We're also talking about the blessing of same-sex unions, but that issue doesn't seem to have the heat around it. Not sure yet what to make of that. It seems like the two are connected, actually...
We had conversation--a one hour "Committee of the Whole," more about this later--about a Statement on Human Sexuality which will be affirmed (we hope) by vote at the Churchwide Assembly in Minneapolis in August. We voted to memorialize (this is church speak for "ask") the Churchwide Assembly to affirm the Statement. That vote passed by one vote more than a two-thirds majority. A good mandate, I think.
We had conversation--another one hour Committee of the Whole--about the Recommendations of the ELCA Task Force on Human Sexuality. I'll say more about the conversation in a later entry. After lunch, we voted on memorials to churchwide affirming the recommendations, which would allow for the recognition of persons in "publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships," the rostering of such persons, and a commitment to "honor the bound conscience" of persons who disagree across our church.
Some quick thoughts:
Tone of the Assembly: Anxious but respectful. There were few nasty remarks made at the microphone, and the only time the listeners reacted to what was being said was when a guy started in with Sodom and Gomorrah, which he informed us is "about homosexuality." About a hundred people said "no" at the same time, which is an interesting sound. Then the chair told us to settle down.
Number of hugs, high fives, winks, pats on the back, fist bumps and collegial arms-around-the-shoulder I received: I have no idea. I lost count somewhere after a hundred. Apparently people want this change to happen, realize that I will be a big beneficiary of the change, and are okay with that.
Final proof that conservatives just don't get Jesus: The most fascinating line of the whole Assembly was uttered at a red microphone during the discussion of the ministry recommendations on Day Three. The gentleman, having waxed irritated for a minute or so about how he didn't understand why we're even doing this, said, "I've looked at the [Sexuality Statement], and as far as I can tell, it seems to be based on some kind of wishy-washy love thing.
Yes, we mustn't be making decisions based on some ethic of love. Egads.
Tuesday, June 02, 2009
Out Is In
Here's one for the "Things You Already Knew" category. This just in from CNN: the generations are split about same-sex marriage. Forty-four percent of those polled recently by CNN believe same-sex marriages should be legal. Fifty-four believe they should not. Two percent apparently believe there is another category between "legal" and "not legal."
When you poll 18-34 year-olds, the number jumps to 58% in favor of legal same-sex marriages.
Yeah, so that's all stuff you probably already knew. The numbers continue to improve week by week (at least from my perspective); you probably knew that as well.
And here's something you probably knew intuitively. According to CNN polling director, Keating Holland, "People who say they have a gay friend or relative support same-sex marriage. Most of those who say they don't know anyone who is gay, oppose gay marriage."
People who know gay people like us and think we should be able to get married. People who don't know us (or think they don't) are probably more likely to see gay marriage as a sterile "issue."
Not everyone can come out, but the more of us who do, the more of us there are out there to know. And the more of us out there to know, the better we'll be doing.
So thanks to all of you who are out there. Thanks to all of you who live your lives without apology and allow your friends, coworkers and relatives to know you and love you. Thanks to all of you allies who love and support your LGBT friends and relatives.
We're coming a long way, friends. It gets better every day.
When you poll 18-34 year-olds, the number jumps to 58% in favor of legal same-sex marriages.
Yeah, so that's all stuff you probably already knew. The numbers continue to improve week by week (at least from my perspective); you probably knew that as well.
And here's something you probably knew intuitively. According to CNN polling director, Keating Holland, "People who say they have a gay friend or relative support same-sex marriage. Most of those who say they don't know anyone who is gay, oppose gay marriage."
People who know gay people like us and think we should be able to get married. People who don't know us (or think they don't) are probably more likely to see gay marriage as a sterile "issue."
Not everyone can come out, but the more of us who do, the more of us there are out there to know. And the more of us out there to know, the better we'll be doing.
So thanks to all of you who are out there. Thanks to all of you who live your lives without apology and allow your friends, coworkers and relatives to know you and love you. Thanks to all of you allies who love and support your LGBT friends and relatives.
We're coming a long way, friends. It gets better every day.
Monday, June 01, 2009
The Rock Obama!
I keep telling people they need to see this great bit from Saturday Night Live. I can't get a nice video posting from Hulu, but you can watch it if you click here.
You'll probably have to watch an ad first. Sorry about that. It's worth it, though. At least I think it is.
You'll probably have to watch an ad first. Sorry about that. It's worth it, though. At least I think it is.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)