Scripture, sexuality & crisis

Lutheran, The, Oct 2004

Letters still show a diversity of thought one year from Churchwide Assembly

Having read the August issue, including synod summaries (page 48), "Where the 'Journey' led" (page 22), and "Marriage amendment reveals sexuality divide" (page 9), I see that the ELCA will be in a no-win crisis come the 2005 Churchwide Assembly. A wake-up call can be found in the word of Jesus, where he says that a house divided cannot stand.

William H. Sunderland

Shillington, Pa.

It strikes me that we're hung up not on Scripture but on the interpretation of Scripture. For any Christian to assert that we take Scripture strictly at face value is simply an untenable position. Indeed, before the New Testament even coalesced in its final form, St. Paul had to argue vociferously that a person need not first become a Jew in order to be welcomed into the Christian community. And Martin Luther taught that each Christian, reading Scripture for himself or herself and guided by the Spirit, ought to be able to rightly understand it without the mediation of the church. Sola scriptura (God's word alone) for him didn't mean one interpretation only. In fact, it was against the prevailing religious establishment of his day that Brother Martin stood his ground, primarily on what he believed to be the church's erroneous interpretations of Scripture. People now are confusing interpretation with Scripture itself. What some are saying, however, is that the prevailing interpretation of Scripture needs to be re-examined in light of a more enlightened understanding of sexual behavior.

William R. Stewart

Arlington, Va.

There's another issue embedded behind the sexuality issue-the lack of community among us. Community is like the durable personal commitment in a good marriage. We will disagree, but no amount of disagreement is going to drive us apart from each other. Our caring and mutual support for each other will continue, even in the worst of our disagreements, because love is stronger and more meaningful than winning arguments.

Art Palmer

Syracuse, Neb.

Ecumenism has been a major emphasis for the ELCA. How then can we even consider approving the ordination of noncelibate homosexual people? Making such a change not only would cut us off from the majority of U.S. Christian church bodies but would also alienate us from most of the world's Lutheran church bodies.

Marc Kolden

St. Paul, Minn.

My congregation recently completed the Journey Together Faithfully study. While we didn't take a vote after the study, I believe virtually all the people felt that homosexuality as taught in the Bible is wrong in God's eyes and that the ELCA shouldn't ordain such pastors or condone such unions. Our congregation also feels it's wrong for the ELCA to spend such an enormous amount of money on the study instead of worthwhile needs. We voted to withhold a portion of our benevolence to the synod and notified the synod of the reason for that.

Jon R. Peters

Kingsport, Tenn.

We've been told for years that our Lord is present in other churches besides the ELCA. Now it's suggested that if Lutherans leave the ELCA over proposed changes in human sexuality teachings, somehow they would be turning their backs on Jesus Christ and his mission. The distress seems to be that those who break fellowship may be going against the Lord's will. Yet there's little concern that these new teachings may offend God.

Michael Wm. Dooley

Indianapolis, Ind.

If we in the ELCA are to be the church, we are to be about seeking healing for our homosexual friends and not about the business of enabling them to live in their sinfulness. Division isn't the answer nor is enabling. I pray that our church returns to becoming a church once again.

H. Ray Ramsburg

Fernandina Reach, Fla.

I read Carl Ellsworth's statement (August, page 22) that he finds "the convenient and casual way people interpreted the Bible" frustrating. I share a similar frustration. I see from his picture that Ellsworth, like me, cuts the hair on the sides of his head, which is specifically forbidden in Leviticus 19:27.1 wonder if he, like me, enjoys pork and shellfish, both of which are specifically forbidden in Leviticus 11:7 and 11:9. He may also receive interest on loans, specifically forbidden in Leviticus 25:36. Do these interpretations of the Bible qualify as "convenient and casual"? A strict reading of the Bible leads one to believe that slavery is perfectly OK. It's condoned in both the Old and New Testaments. Only by ignoring Christ's message of love can one condone slavery. The bottom line is that, as with slavery, Christ's love is the trump card on every issue.

Cameron Bauer

Hayward, Calif.

I've studied, prayed and wrestled as the ELCA has asked us to do on this issue. I was quite prepared to think that [changes were] wrong. But an article influenced my decision in the affirmative. Although the WordAlone movement came out squarely against the ordination of practicing homosexuals, it was a publication of its Network News that made up my mind (May-June 2003). After reading and rereading the issue many times, the words of Professor David Balch struck me. He says: "All people are equals in receiving the sacraments and should be so in administering them." After thinking about that statement, God lifted a burden from my heart. I had to ask: "Has the church used God's word as support for exclusionary practices and divisive thinking? ... Have our practices prevented the unity of God's church?" I began to see that God's call can rest on anyone God chooses. Those whom God calls, we dare not keep out. We deal with it. We discern a person's call to ministry as best we can. If our Lord's prayer is that we all be one, let us be that-and allow the church's discernment process to weed out who is fit and who is unfit for ordained ministry.