For me, this is a “make or break” issue. I have no plans to give to ELCA ever again. In my opinion, ELCA is teaching a heterodox message that is unacceptable and that I will not support. This is non-negotiable until somebody can convince me that the Bible does not say what it means and mean what it says. I believe that when CWA acted as it did it was doing nothing less than encouraging people to sin rather than to seek forgiveness for their sins, and I believe that leading others to sin is a serious sin in its own right. Rather than being compassionate to sinners, ELCA has effectively given them false hope and encouraged them to further destructive behavior. That is not the type of church organization I will support.

An organization that relies on voluntary contributions from members cannot act as the ELCA did and still expect people to continue to contribute at the same level. When CWA acted as it did, its action led to an all too predictable reaction. This is not to say that ELCA should always act in the way that it most popular or most likely to cause giving to increase; however, it is to say that ELCA cannot sow seeds and then ignore or decry the crop that grows as a result of the seeds that were sown.

This is much more dire for institutions like our seminaries and Ivys like Harvard that rely on their endowments for operational support. I was in seminary 2002-2005 and my husband was in seminary from 2001-2004. We heard during our entire tenure the difficult financial situation that seminaries were facing because of the pressure to keep student debt as low as possible while maintaining a balanced budget. When the first early signs of recession were showing in 2002, endowments were showing unrealized strain. However, the need to discount tuition was also growing greater than ever with parish salaries also dropping.

I heard the “we’re ok” reports at CWA with the ear that I have developed listening to financial reports in seminary and in my work in higher ed. We’re doing ok means that we’re stable at this moment. We’ll figure it out tends to be the continual mindset. They didn’t know what was going to happen for sure until the 20th day after the start of fall semester when official matriculation numbers are available.

Students are more and more unwilling to embark on graduate school that will not return on the investment. Especially when the system expects great expenses on relocation multiple times during the education process.

What I see is a need to reevaluation of the ministry equipping process within the framework that all higher education is facing a need to restructure to face a new economy and learning environment. It will be interesting to see what evolves to meet this new day.

@David Housholder: That is a great summary of our situation—indeed, “the perfect storm.” As to your final comparison with New Orleans, and having just been there, that too may fit but perhaps not in the way you intended—though maybe it is. NOLA is still there and functioning but also still seriously wounded.

@Leslie: I have no doubt what you say is true but what a sad comment on the state of ordained ministry. Every ordained pastor is bound to respect the confidentiality of conversations, regardless of their positions. As an alternative, at the very least they should make clear that positions they hold may require them to disclose information they receive in such conversations and/or request permission of the person involved to disclose such information. Nonetheless, Leslie, as I said, I know your experience is not unique. How do we forget the most basic standards of pastoral ethics?

@Jeff: The financial report presented at CWA09 may have been accurate at the time. The affects of a recession are rolling and are experienced at different levels at different times. Hence, unemployment typically remains high long after a recession is officially declared to be “over.” That seems to be especially true in this case and my impression is that many congregations did not see a significant drop in contributions until this past fall—and not just Lutheran ones. While the actions of CWA09 are a part of the problem, I think it was also just coincidental that the recession’s wave crested (if it has!) at about the same time.

One last observation: As I see these events rock the church one after another, I keep wondering: Where is the leadership? (The silence from Higgins Road after the Augsburg Fortress pension fiasco was deafening.) It must be obvious by now that the ELCA is in need of a major makeover: Who is going to lead that? Right now is doesn’t seem like those currently in leadership positions have the vision or the energy for the task.

It’s all of the above.

It’s the perfect storm.

It’s an ecclesiastical Katrina in slow motion.

But, like New Orleans, we’ll get through this.

A difference in strategic vision has led the Dean to depart. The Dean’s position hasn’t been eliminated … it is just vacant right now.

Thus, the only “downsizing” is in the Seminary Pastor’s office – a full time call to a pastor and a full-time assistant have been downsized to a half-time call to a pastor. Sad, for sure, but hardly a crisis.

In fact, I attended two Lutheran seminaries during my years as a Master of Divinity student, neither of which had a campus pastor. Some students called for such a position, though the pastoral care task was filled by other (called, ordained) staff. Surely this is a loss for the Luther community, but let’s not go to extremes yet (I saw that there’s a new Facebook group for people concerned about the future of Luther seminary, for example).

The hard truth is that the seminary is not generating income as it used to, so something has to go. The good news is that most seminarians have home pastors, and/or mentor pastors, and professors who take their pastoral role seriously.

(This gets to the issue of the identity of our seminaries – are they degree-granting institutions, or places of theological and vocational formation? Surely the two are not exclusive, but I do think there is a tension on some of our seminary campuses, particularly when it comes to issues related to the importance of spirituality, worship life, and pastoral care of the community and students … but that’s stuff for another day.)

Let’s face it, the cost of seminary is high and there is a fairly big staff at each of the seminaries, yet are there that many people clamoring to go to seminary that 8 of them are needed? Maybe before the 60s there were, but the church as a whole (not just Lutheran) has been in decline since the 60s, yet we are still operating as if it were the 50s.

I remember talk 10 years ago when I went to seminary about 1 of them closing, but that never happened.

Personally, I think discussions around re-organization around the ELCA has been a long time coming, but to say that all of this is a result of CWA is just too shortsighted in my opinion.

That’s also why I don’t … and can’t … serve among “Middle American Lutherans” anymore.

It is painting with a broad brush, but I generally find Pacific NW Lutherans more magnanimous toward the larger church, and willing to “cut them some slack” even if they don’t agree with the August vote. That may well be our more independent spirit out here in Seattle. The people I live and serve with don’t see this as a deal-breaker. Midwesterners are entitled to their opinion, but they also need to realize that their choosing not to give is hurting more people than just those within driving distance of Lake Wobegon.

This is just the beginning of what Rick says in his letter may be “many difficult years” ahead.

The truth is, there is (substantially) less support for the post CWA ELCA than there was for the pre CWA ELCA. Thus the vote in Minneapolis put the church in a position that is (much) less supported. People give voluntarily and have lots of choices about where to give. They support causes about which they feel strongly.

The CWA vote put many Middle America ELCA members into a feeling of ambiguity all the way up to hostility toward the new direction of the church. Ambiguity and hostility do not produce offering dollars.

To tell them that they are obligated to give toward something for which they feel deep misgivings is patronizing.

Also, to tell them that this is not a “gospel” issue is patronizing. It simply is a deal breaker for many people and everyone is entitled to a few good deal breakers. That’s called having good boundaries.

Our national church will survive this. We have something of value which the Lord will bless us to preserve.

But our current corporation and its structure may not survive.

I think ultimately if one of the largest ELCA seminaries is going through this, some of the smaller ones on the margin will close.

In our synod, there are several churches that used to have over 400 in attendance that are laying off staff and may actually go bankrupt. That doesn’t count the six that are leaving, most of them very healthy and vibrant churches.

And so it goes.