Last year, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America voted to change its doctrine to allow gay clergy in committed sexual relationships. The Associated Press ran a story about one of the consequences of that vote:
Seven pastors who work in the San Francisco Bay area and were barred from serving in the nation’s largest Lutheran group because of a policy that required gay clergy to be celibate are being welcomed into the denomination.
The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America will add six of the pastors to its clergy roster at a service at St. Mark’s Lutheran Church in San Francisco on Sunday. Another pastor who was expelled from the church, but was later reinstated, will participate in the service.
The group is among the first gay, bisexual or transgender Lutheran pastors to be reinstated or added to the rolls of the ELCA since the organization voted last year to lift the policy requiring celibacy.
Although I’m not a member of the ELCA, I am Lutheran and I keep a Google News alert out for the term “Lutheran.” This means I get tons of news about the ELCA. And far and away the biggest story I’ve seen over the last ten months has been case after case of Lutheran congregations leaving the ELCA following this vote.
It’s only been 10-plus months since the vote was taken but I’d estimate that I’ve seen reports of hundreds of churches voting to leave the ELCA since then. This is noteworthy because the process to leave is somewhat complicated. I think there may be different rules for different congregations (depending on which of the three church bodies they were part of when the ELCA formed) but generally the rule is that you need to take two votes separated by over three months’ time. These votes need to pass by a supermajority of two-thirds. And then after you have these votes, I think the ELCA has to officially release you. Here was one case where they refused. I’ve heard of congregations that have failed to get the margin by a few votes. Rather than fight the process, the majority of the congregation might just form a new church. Others have just begun the process of discussing whether to leave. Others have simply decided to just stop giving money to the ELCA. And some have voted on whether to leave and decided to stay.
Now there are 10,000 congregations in the ELCA, so the departure of hundreds of congregations — and thousands of individual members — should be kept in perspective. In my mind, the full fall-out won’t be known for a decade or more. But the departure of what I estimate to be several hundred congregations in only 10 months is newsworthy. Some of these are the largest congregations in the denomination. You can get a nice rundown of how congregations are voting here. It’s probably very similar to what the Episcopal Church experienced in the last few years — the departure of key congregations and forming of new alliances.
But this story didn’t find room for that part of the story or the feelings of those who wish the vote to change doctrine had gone differently. This is the entirety of what was said about the exodus:
A small number of congregations have voted to leave the ELCA in response to the August vote.
See! Nothing but lollipops and roses over in the ELCA. There is nothing to see here. Move along.
Rather than decide what makes a schism noteworthy and what makes it “small,” better to just do the shoe-leather reporting of explaining how many congregations have voted to leave, how many are withholding funds, and so on. Readers can decide what those numbers mean about the effect of last year’s vote. The story began with the reinstatement of seven GLBT pastors. That’s also not a large number. But the significance is important. And it’s significant not just to those that support the ordination of clergy in committed gay sexual relationships but to Lutherans who hold to the historic teaching of the Christian church as well.
Other than that, however, the story is a good write-up of an important event. And the AP has actually been one of the outlets to cover the exodus of congregations, even if that story is ongoing and deserves more coverage in the future.
 | Posted at 8:34 am |  Print
| Permalink | Trackback |
Comments (17) |
July 26, 2010, at 9:41 am
Other things should also be noted. First, you are correct that somewhere between 300-400 congregations have left. Also, many, many have had very close votes to leave, meaning that those many hundreds of congregations are highly divided. Eventually the people who voted to leave will leave.
It should also be pointed out that the financial outlook of the ELCA has been horrible since the vote. They’re monies are down something like 30-40%. Doubtless the economy is a contributer, but it’s too significant to simply have to do merely with the downturn in the economy.
Also, my friend who is an ELCA pastor tells me that in places like the eastern North Dakota synod, congregations are refusing to contribute to the synod’s general fund if any money is given to the national denomination. They’re having to set up a separate fund which these churches can put their money in with the guarantee that no money will be given to the national church.
Combine this with demographic decline, and the ELCA is big, big trouble.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
July 26, 2010, at 10:59 am
Of course a story is needed dedicated to the effect of dissent from the national vote. However, that’s a bit of a moving target. The best anyone could do would be a “fuzzy snapshot” — stats that are bound to be out of date by the time they reach print, and anecdotes that may be more interesting than informative. I am concerned that someone would attempt to wrap up all the ferment over this subject in Protestantism, and produce an unclear picture of any one denomination.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
July 26, 2010, at 12:44 pm
How does this affect heterosexual clergy who are not married? After all, someone can have a partner (and indeed, children) and be in a “committed sexual relationship” and not be married for whatever reason.
Will this permit non-celibate, non-married straight clergy now?
Yes, I foresee the objection that straight (as opposed to gay) clergy always have the option of marriage, but suppose the clergyperson’s partner doesn’t want to get married, or is not yet free to marry, or both of them agree it’s not the time yet (education, career, family reasons)?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
July 26, 2010, at 1:25 pm
The passage that I found interesting was
I’m not sure if the reporter hit the GLBT macro on that one, for I’ve yet to hear of any transgender Lutheran pastors.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
July 26, 2010, at 1:46 pm
In the immediately previous GetReligion story, mention was made of the contention that “if the Catholic Church would only modernize on these kinds of social issues, these people would not leave and, thus, the church would enter a new era growth and prosperity.” And the issues with the Episcopal Church were brought up as a counter to that idea. Apparently one could equally note the ELCA.
On the other hand… is the number of people who agree an important factor when evaluating a moral issue? In that previous story, tmatt notes that “Many traditional Catholics are just as sure that their pews would be full, once again, if only the [ones who don’t accept the authority of the Church of this world] would pack up and leave.”
Would it be an interesting story to see if the ECLA accepted the risk of such disaffiliation to take what they perceive to be a moral stand?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
July 26, 2010, at 2:02 pm
According to Laurie Goodstein’s story on the same topic in today’s NYT, only 185 congregations have left the church so far. That’s less than 2 percent:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/26/us/26lutheran.html?emc=tnt&tntemail1=y
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
July 26, 2010, at 2:30 pm
Mark, check out Mollie’s linked AP story. It describes Meghan Rohrer, “who is transgender and a lesbian.”
Horror film directors, please note - According to the article, ‘gay demons’ are impervious to holy water.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
July 26, 2010, at 3:29 pm
Ray, an excellent question. I wonder if it’s a characteristically American error (as opposed to a feature of all egalitarian democracies) to confuse public opinion with moral reasoning. If the ELCA is really taking a moral stand in the face of predictable backlash, then I can respect them, even while remaining “fully convinced” of an opposing view (a la Romans 14).
However, I can see at least two alternative accounts of the motives and reasoning of the voting body of the ELCA. i) They are taking a short-term hit in order to position themselves for an anticipated future when the majority of potential churchgoers accept committed gay relationships. ii) They (i.e. a majority of voting delegates) honestly believe that this “anticipated future” is a present reality.
Aided by the MSM, the public tends to view organizations like the ELCA and the Episcopal church (whether good or bad) as innovators, looking to thrust their organization into the future, rather than updaters trying to adapt to a present social reality. However, I have an unconfirmed hunch that many of the people involved in these decisions come from progressive/urban/blue areas where gay relationships are already affirmed in their community. Instead of seeing themselves as pioneers, they might see their mission as helping their local church, as well as the broader denomination to which they belong, adjust to the social reality around them.
I could be way off the mark, but that’s why we need journalists to answer these questions: do those in the ELCA who favor this change see themselves as innovators or updaters? Do they see themselves as leading public opinion, flaunting it, or responding to it?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
July 26, 2010, at 3:37 pm
What I find interesting in the treatment is that there is no real demographic viewpoint, just a lot of lists of congregations and their votes. My eyeballing of the linked list seems to say that the disaffected churches are either in the sunbelt or very rural. One story mentions a small Wisconsin town that had two Lutheran churches with one pastor. One church left, the other stayed with members sorting themselves out.
What would be helpful would be some context. Is this the culmination of a long battle between factions, as in the Episcopal church? Or is it something revolving around the GLBT issue alone? Did ELCA accept female pastors with a great deal of struggle or was that fairly harmonious? Are there other issues that serve as a for-runner of the current situation? No clue, and the stories don’t illuminate.
IMHE, ELCA churches tend to be concentrated geographically. I grew up in a town of 5,000 with 5 Lutheran churches. So, if 2 left, the members would simply rearrange themselves into compatible congregations. Is this the case for most of the congregations? That members can find a Lutheran church that suits them on this subject?
One thing overlooked here is that urban and inner suburban congregations already have GL communicants who are open about their orientation. Gentrifying neighborhoods usually have large GLBT populations. And these people have rescued numerous churches from the wrecking ball. Covering those that welcome the GL clergy would have provided some balance.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
July 26, 2010, at 3:40 pm
As usual, the coverage ignores the fact that ELCA is part of a world wide church. And that the changes bring the church into line with the practices of the Lutherans in Northern Europe. The MSM always notes this about the Episcopalians but almost never the Lutherans.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
July 26, 2010, at 5:07 pm
Interesting local take on the story, with information omitted from the other stories:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/07/26/BAAE1EJRB7.DTL
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
July 26, 2010, at 5:38 pm
One thing that strikes me that is different about coverage of the Catholic stance on the Christian moral tradition and what is going on in the mainstream Protestant Churches is how the mass media runs so many articles by Catholics disgruntled that the Catholic Church is not following the path of so many Protestant Churches on many morality issues.
Yet,considering the exodus from so many mainstream Protestant Churches over morality issues by disgruntled members and congregations, I can’t recall seeing in the mainstream media much of any attention paid to the attitudes and complaints of those mainstream Protestants who are disgruntled. Clearly there must be many of them. But I have never seen a major article profiling them or giving them a media soapbox, the way they cater to disgruntled Catholics.
On the other hand I have seen many profiles and overviews in the mainstream media portraying the radical moral changes in Protestantism as the start of a new day of moral enlightenment but never as the moral night closing in —as so many people both Catholic and mainstream Protestant believe is descending on Christianity.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
July 26, 2010, at 5:52 pm
Deacon, you may be right, but it may not have anything to do with attitudes about Catholicism or Protestantism. When the secular abstract of the story is that a class of people will no longer face some barrier that has existed because of what they are — female, gay, whatever — the MSM tend to treat it as a human advance and interview cheerleaders. When the story is the imposition or persistence of such a barrier, the MSM treat it as a step backward or a lack of progress, and look for dissenters to inverview. It’s an epiphenomenon of a progressive secular worldview.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
July 26, 2010, at 7:47 pm
“I’m not sure if the reporter hit the GLBT macro on that one, for I’ve yet to hear of any transgender Lutheran pastors.”
I actually attended an ELCA seminary before converting to the LCMS. I assure you, I personally knew an transgender pastor. The ELCA was even uncomfortable with her and she ended up at an independent “Lutheran” (the most loose sense possible) church in the San Francisco bay area. This person’s church is now debating about whether or not the enter fellowship with the ELCA again.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
July 26, 2010, at 9:09 pm
Dalea:
If the coverage had included reference to ELCA’s relationship to Lutheranism worldwide, it would still be misleading to say “the changes bring the church into line with the practices of the Lutherans in Northern Europe.” There are a number of independent Lutheran church bodies in Northern Europe who disagree strongly with the ELCA on this issue. Likewise, many churches in the Lutheran World Federation (the international Lutheran body of which ELCA is a member) have strongly opposed the ELCA’s actions, such as the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Tanzania (5.3 million). See it’s response to the ELCA (and some of the European Lutheran churches you mention) here.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
July 27, 2010, at 12:06 am
Something else the reporter might have done is mention the doctrinal drift that follows acceptance of homosexual behavior among the clergy. I’ve been driving past Ebeneezer Lutheran Church for about 15 years and in that time have seen it move along a path where a sign said “where all are welcome” to the display of gay flags, to a sign that says god loves all her children, to a complete name change to http://www.herchurch.org/ with worship of non-Christian gods, including what looks like a Canaanite fertility deity on their goddess rosary.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
July 27, 2010, at 2:00 am
What’s so frustrating, even at this relatively early date (just under a year after the decisions of the ELCA in these matters)?
Just this: Narrative is too often trumping hard data, which is, arguably, nearly impossible to obtain at this time.
Sooner or later, someone will actually get to look at all the statistics rather than just anecdotes. Once someone (or a group of researchers) can access the official stats and analyze them from geographic and demographic perspectives (not to mention that all-important matter of which former church body the congregations come from), the result should be one doctoral dissertation that many will actually want to read.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0