Thanks for this, Steph!

The Rev. Katrina Foster, a pastor in the Metropolitan New York Synod, pointed out that the church has ordained woman and divorced people in violation of a literal interpretation of scripture.

This is a great point!

This is a reality many people are not going to be happy with---but reality. I am happy about this decision and support it. I am certain that God (by any name) does not love anyone less because of a life choice. If we all were to reach this level of understanding with each other--think about how much pain would this would alleviate.

It may not be the largest Lutheran Congregation very soon.

I guess it was bound to happen. What do you think will happen next? Will it be the ten guidelines, or ten suggestions?

I can see it now, standing before the seat of judgement? "What You have to be kidding me, YOU were serious?

It may have been "bound to happen", but that doesn't make it right.It's never a good thing to throw away the Bible in the name of "social justice."

"Yeah dude....seriously gay but still love you anyway"
will probably be the response.

I am not a Lutheran, but exactly how can you justify this act theologically. I am not being snide here; I would really like to know.

I don't know how to justify this. I'm in shock that a group of supposedly religious people would vote for this resolution.

Well, I was baptized as a Lutheran and I applaud this decision. I think theology isn't the issue. I think the church is just trying to keep up with the times. they don't want to be on the wrong side of history.

The church shouldn't be in the business of "keeping up with the times." That's not what is God's desire, that's just man's desires.

kastarte, if you are a practicing Lutheran, it means you ascribe to their interpretation of Christian theology. It is that interpretation that is being “challenged” so to speak. Being on the "right side of history", is a poor excuse to throw in your understanding of what are the “revealed truths”.

I never claimed to be a practicing Lutheran. Just said I was baptized as one. And all I did was toss out some possible reasons why they may have made their decision.

But if I were a practicing Lutheran, it isn't exactly polite to preach to some one about how to practice their own religion or to tell them how to interpret the theology. Unless you are my priest, and you most certainly are not.

"The church shouldn't be in the business of "keeping up with the times."

UnDave I hope I of all people don't have to remind you that Christians today including your self are living a life style that has modified and adjusted to the times over the centuries. If that is your sincere belief that the church should not change then you might want to start living through the interpretations Christians lived by from in beginning.

Yep...Hypno has a point.

If we were still living according to the biblical rules: women would not be speaking, voting, living alone, or showing even their ankles in public. Men would be required to take up the wives and families of their brothers if they have died, as their own to support and care for.

That is backwards isn't it? Why is it so hard to think that God might be forward thinking as well? If he can be color blind why not sexual-gender blind?

kastarte, When I said "if you were a practicing.." I was not addressing you the individual, but making a general statement with regarding having a religious belief. It would be like "if you were a practicing catholic…, in no way meant to be impugning your personal religious beliefs. I apologize for the misunderstanding.

I hope to hell they don't change this damn site again. God I hate it when my panties get in a bunch

I don't see how people can applaud accepting gay people in every day life, but still believe they should be ostracized in religious life.

I guess that is part of the reason there are so many sects and religions throughout the world, each believing they have the unique way to eternal salvation.

You know the more I think about the Universe the more I believe that God is a lot more liberal than certain religions would have us believe.

You know hypno, i think you might be right.

I have a theory that God is the same deity in each religion, given the same face as those who worship, and being the same being--unites us all in one belief...a higher power.

"The church shouldn't be in the business of "keeping up with the times." That's not what is God's desire, that's just man's desires."

With all due respect I don't think any mortals have any clue what God desires. Religions just morph the message to suit what they decide is moral and just.

>The church shouldn't be in the business of "keeping up with the times." That's not what is God's desire, that's just man's desires.

Totally. The Morman church was wrong to start allowing black men into the priesthood back in 1978.

Harmony, if I had one religious bone in my body I would say, "Amen."

"Religions just morph the message to suit what they decide is moral and just."

And might I ad from a patriarcal point of view.

Hey hypno, lets not get sacrilegious, we all know God is a man.

Comment #24 .........wow. unbelievable.

I am Shocked and dismayed.

I think we ought to stop now. It is unseemly to start on specific sects. A generic discussion on religion is one thing, but once we start singling out specific sects for approbation we are out of line.

I can't really understand these decisions. A religion is a religion, if it keeps changing to adapt to the times against clear commandments, then it is not the same religion anymore. If this group does want to include homosexuals, fine, but you shouldn't still claim to be the same religion that clearly prohibits those acts.

My issue isn't really about allowing gays to be included in the religious world, it is more about the fact that too many changes and the religion is no longer that same religion.

I agree with Dave, somewhat, I think somethings should not change with the times when they are so clearly and universally commanded.

"If we were still living according to the biblical rules: women would not be speaking, voting, living alone, or showing even their ankles in public. Men would be required to take up the wives and families of their brothers if they have died, as their own to support and care for. "

There are Biblical references taht directly contradict these social customs. There is also specific Biblical references that condem homosexuality. Prove to "me" Biblically that homosexuality isn't a sin, and then I don't have a leg to stand on in this case. The problem is you can't. How the ELCA has gotten around that is to first say that the Bible is "the inspired writings of man". By humanizing the Bible, they now can say: "Well, there are certain parts of the Bible that we choose to ignore." I don't know about any of you, but I consider that wrong.

"UnDave I hope I of all people don't have to remind you that Christians today including your self are living a life style that has modified and adjusted to the times over the centuries. If that is your sincere belief that the church should not change then you might want to start living through the interpretations Christians lived by from in beginning."

I agree that there are social customs that have changed (Slavery, allowing women to have a voice and vote). But some things have never changed. 1) There are certain things the Bible says you shouldn't do. 2) You aren't accepted at the Table unless you are a repentant sinner. That doesn't mean you won't sin again, it just means that you acknowledge that you have wronged, and promise to try to live a better life. Taking that a step further, you aren't accepted at the table, how can you stand up and claim to be a leader, and have think you have God's blessings when you are not living what you are preaching?

" A generic discussion on religion is one thing, but once we start singling out specific sects for approbation we are out of line."

I've never seen similar concern expressed over the Muslim bashing that goes on here regularly

So basically religious people that are against homosexuality don't tolerate it because they don't like it. While they'll tolerate the other things that have strayed from the bible because it doesn't bother them.

I'm starting to understand!!!! LOL

This is still morphing the bible to suit your own purposes, so what's the difference?

Well I don't know what you all are doing this morning but I'm going to church.

Steph, being a Muslim is like being a Christian, it encompasses a number of sects with various interpretations of "revealed truths". Condemning "Islamo Facists" (A term created by a Muslim spokesman BTW, and not some Christian radical) is not the same as condemning Islam. When I condemn Christian radicals that claim that they know that blacks are inferior to whites, because it says so in the bible, I am in no way condemning main stream Christianity. As to my consistency on this matter, I think you will find whenever I saw a misstatement as to the beliefs on Islam I would indeed call the person on it, and explain the actual theology (always with the caveat I was speaking knowledgably, but not authoritatively on the topic. ) I am fairly sure any of the Muslims who are on here, will correct me if I am speaking in error.

Harmony, it is my understanding that today’s mainstream sects, use the words found in the "New Testament" as being authoritative and that those 4 books, corrected, modified or changed a number of beliefs found in the "Old Testament".

I do agree with you about the morphing of the bible though, it seems like if you parse the "right" passage in a vacuum you can pretty much find justification for almost any action.

i.e.
"Judas went out and hanged himself, go forth and do likewise."

"So basically religious people that are against homosexuality don't tolerate it because they don't like it. While they'll tolerate the other things that have strayed from the bible because it doesn't bother them. "

What things do I say I tolerate that has strayed from the Bible?

I think a lot of it is simply very individual and group subjective. For instance UnDave and by the way I'm not judging you for this but there are some Christians out there that would criticize you for allowing your child to dress as DarthVador. A character that engendered all that is dark and evil. I know some people that don't let their kids anywhere near Harry Potter, lol.

You know you could argue that Darth was redeamed (born again).

Hypno

Some have, and I'm sure more will. Their reasoning isn't grounded in Scriptural belief, but is more of a social custom that has become irrelevant.

Humans sin. Every single one of us. We are also ALL offered repentance and forgiveness...without any stipulations with regard to sex, religion, or culture.

Why is homosexuality not seen as culture? I believe it is. I also believe God would not turn away from anyone.

I find it a bit hypocritical for a religion to view divorce as okay and then in the same breath condemn something else. Divorce has moved from taboo to an everyday occurrence(which is sad) but it demonstrates that religion DOES change it's views on subjects. Homosexuality appears to be the last on the list.

Note: My husband and I disagree on this one and he has a sibling that is gay. He is conflicted by his love for a sibling and his upbringing from the church.

I see it is differently from a medical standpoint. I see homosexuality as something one is born with. It is not contagious, nor is it something one just "chooses" but is to their core--who they are.

I cannot imagine God would create an individual and not have compassion for them or love them any different because they are different from what everyone else deems as "normal" ....and there are some real HUGE differences in what people in general consider normal.

Would a married family man who has a penchant for silk, ladies stockings, or shoes be viewed as less lovable if he hid it? If he hides it does it make it okay? I believe that many would say as long as they did not know about it--that it is not their business and not the churches either.

In that regard I say...why should anyone feel the need to hide who they are? God sees it all and forgives still. People are the ones who are unforgiving.

This is not something a person should be repentant for. It is like telling me that because I strongly desire chocolate and simply MUST have it...I should be repentant?

Nope. I am just strongly attached to chocolate--it is harmless to me and those around me--so leave me alone. It isn't like I'd eat it in the middle of church.

And yes....I am very familiar with the bible. My father is a retired baptist minister. I was reading the King James version while other kids my age were reading Dr Seuss.

Bottom line...I believe if you pray about something and feel a confirmation that it is true...it is true. Beliefs should be something you each find "true" to yourselves...not spoon fed ideas by doctrine.

I don't know of any pastors who are serving a congregation who are divorced. It's wide spread, but it's not exactely accepted. I also agree that we all sin, but when you fail to be repentent, you fail to live by God's teachings. That isn't to say that you won't go sin again, but the point is that you should try not to sin. How can a homosexual who is willingly committing the "act" trying not to sin? If you can't repent, you aren't able to lead by example.

"Beliefs should be something you each find "true" to yourselves...not spoon fed ideas by doctrine."

I really have a problem with this. If we are each, as individuals, going to find something that is "true", then why have God, or the Bible? The bottom line, yes everyone is welcome to the table. Only a certain few are invited to lead the flock.

Dave...have you not contemplated/prayed about something and come to a conclusion which you know to be true...true as how you see it to be regardless of what anyone else may think or say?
I contend that many do not bother to ponder things for themselves and look for what they feel to be truth. It is easier to rely on others or religion to determine your beliefs.
An example could be the evolution verses biblical view of life on our planet. I can see the science behind evolution ans appreciate it but on a personal level I see the biblical view as my truth. It was a decision I had to make when surrounded by so many differing views.
People are still divided by religion even though they have a belief in a higher power in common. It is these doctrines that separate people...not the core beliefs.

I have, for 7 long years. I have concluded that in this case everyone else is wrong, and it'sthe next step in political correctness. We've chosen to through out portions of the Bible that we find.....inconvenient. If this is going to be the norm (eliminating parts of the Bible you don't like or want to follow), then I can think of several I'd like to change.

One of my father's favorite sermons involved a reader's digest which had been made to look like it was a bible. He ripped portions out of it and tossed them on the floor. It was a very visually productive sermon.

I believe each person chooses what parts they believe and ignore...or pretend to support while doing something else all together.

I just think it is hypocritical to have them point at something else to perhaps make themselves feel a bit more safe. "At least I am not doing THAT" sort of thing.

I can't believe God would choose one sinner over another. I was taught we have a level field of forgiveness.

One another note...if our children are taught in school the different sexual preferences and that they must be given as much respect as any other....how do we take them to church on Sunday to have them condemned?

Suppose you have a child that has decided that they are gay and society tells them it is okay, schools say it is okay, but your church tells them they are going to he*l. Would you love them any less because of who they are?

"I believe each person chooses what parts they believe and ignore...or pretend to support while doing something else all together. "

While each person may choose what parts they believe and what parts they ignore, the Pastoral leadership should not. They are set to a higher standard. It's their job to lead the way, to show "the way" to live, but show forgiveness when the masses fail to do so.

"One another note...if our children are taught in school the different sexual preferences and that they must be given as much respect as any other....how do we take them to church on Sunday to have them condemned?"

Since the church has been shut out of the school system, the message will invariable be different. What society says is ok will always fall short in the eyes of God. It's the parents job to remind their children of that difference. Just because someone says it's ok to jump off the Golden Gate Bridge, is it?

"Suppose you have a child that has decided that they are gay and society tells them it is okay, schools say it is okay, but your church tells them they are going to he*l. Would you love them any less because of who they are?"

I would love them with all my heart, and encourage them to not sin. I would remind them that the school and society are not interested in their eternal soul, and those two institutions usually swing to the popular movement of the day. Their message isn't consistant, and tend to be very fickle.

The bottom line here is we aren't talking about welcoming homosexuals into church, we are talking about unrepentant sinners leading the congregation. How would you feel if Obama invited William Ayers to be in charge of showing everyone what Patriotism really means? Or Osama Bin Laden in charge of tolerance?

FINALLY.

I commend the ELCA on this decision. I especially commend the the Episcopal church for taking the first steps and inspiring this movement.

I was born and raised by a pastor of the ELCA synod and couldn't be prouder for this decision. I'm glad they've decided to be on the right side of the issue.

"if our children are taught in school the different sexual preferences and that they must be given as much respect as any other....how do we take them to church on Sunday to have them condemned?"

I think schools should teach tolerence period, I don't really see a need to dicect and explain each sexual orientation to a child. I guess it would be fine for study in H.S. but as long as mutual-respect and tolerence is a strong foundation in a childs life I think most of the rest will take care of its self.