pretty good lutherans

The following statement was issued today by Lutherans Concerned/North America:

ELCA Church Council Approves All Full-
Inclusion Revisons Without Opposing Votes

This weekend, the ELCA Church Council meeting in Chicago moved the decision of the 2009 Churchwide Assembly into policy by replacing the language in church documents that excluded ministers in committed same-gender relationships with a policy that allows congregations and organizations to call a fully-qualified minister in a committed, same-gender relationship.

And, the Council also approved the way to reinstate ministers who have been removed from the roster because of the previous policy and to receive ELM pastors onto the roster of the ELCA. The Council also made the benefits of the ELCA pension plan available to rostered ministers and employees in committed, same-gender relationships.

(more…)

The latest ministry document drafts are posted on the ELCA Web site .

Under the heading “Working Drafts,” you’ll find:

• Candidacy Manual (Draft 3/15/10)
• Vision and Expectations – Ordained Ministers (Draft 3/15/10)
• Vision and Expectations: Associates in Ministry, Deaconesses and Diaconal Ministers (Draft 3/15/10)
• ELCA Committee on Appeals Progress Report Concerning Definitions and Guidelines for Discipline (3/02/10)

(more…)

UPDATE: By a vote of 98 to 42, church members voted to stay in the ELCA. (147 members attended the vote; 140 voted, the congregation’s pastor reported on Twitter.)

© Pretty Good Lutherans

Members of a northwestern Minnesota Lutheran congregation are meeting at 10 a.m. Sunday to vote on whether to leave the ELCA.

Grace Lutheran Church in Detroit Lakes counts 391 people as members and draws an average of 131 of them to Sunday worship.

Bishop Larry Wohlrabe of the Northwestern Minnesota Synod recently met with the congregation. A few weeks, the congregation’s pastor, Eric Lemonholm, wrote in detail why he supports the ELCA.

“I believe that it would be a serious mistake for Grace to leave the ELCA, and I urge you to prayerfully consider voting “No” on December 20,” Lemonholm wrote. “Let me tell you why.”

Lemonholm’s appeal is now being used by other ELCA congregations around the country also discerning denominational affiliation. Here’s the letter:

(more…)

ELCA leaders are updating church documents to reflect the decision of the national assembly to open ministry to gays and lesbians in committed relationships.

Making the words fit the actions of the assembly is taking longer than some anticipated. The vote happened in August, but discussion over document changes will continue until at least next April, according to the ELCA Web site.

On this Web link, you’ll find the ELCA ministry policies now in place as well as drafts of the revisions.

Scroll to the bottom of the page and under the heading, “working drafts and notes” are:

• draft amendments to “Visions and Expectations”
• candidacy and call process notes for revisions

(more…)

(Note to readers: What follows is an e-mail message sent out this week by Bishop Peter Rogness of the St. Paul Area Synod.)

PART THREE: Registering Dissent

Dear Partners in Ministry,

I am aware that some of the networks that opposed the ministry policies have begun formulating strategies of dissent. You’ve seen the media reports about the meeting of Lutheran CORE this past weekend. WordAlone, Lutheran Congregations in Mission for Christ, and other networks also gather to ponder their strategies.

I understand the desire to register dissent. As I described in part one of this e-letter, what the assembly action sought to do was to not change policy or teaching from one position to another, but to recognize and give affirmation to two differing positions and to ask that policy be drafted to allow room for both. It sought to say that we will adopt a “structured flexibility” that gives expression to the convictions of both those who support and those who oppose the possibility of homosexual persons in relationship serving in this church.

But to those opposed, it feels like those in support “won,” which, of course, they did if the opposing view is that there should be no possibility for such persons serving anywhere. So how do “traditionalist” congregations register their continuing opposition? The options seem limited:

(more…)