Yesterday the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America, meeting in Orlando, rejected a proposal to permit ordination of gays living in committed relationships under certain conditions and a push to allow blessing of same sex unions. News reports indicate that concern for avoiding schism in the denomination was a very important factor in the vote.
Earlier this week I came across a report in the Presbyterian Outlook that the Theological Task Force on Peace Unity and Purity (PUP, for short) did not plan to take a position on the issue of the ordination of non-celibate gays in the report it is due to issue September 15 after several years of study and discussion. This is a surprise to most observers, who have been expecting the PUP to make recommendations on the subject. (Note that in the PCUSA system presbyteries, which are regional governing bodies, can raise these issues for vote in the General Assembly without the need for recommendations from a national group like PUP.)
I wonder if we are seeing a trend here. Are the Lutherans and Presbyterians daunted by the spectacle of the fracturing of the Episcopal Church over the ordination of the gay bishop in New Hampshire who lives openly with his partner? Although extremists on both sides of this issue may continue to roil denominational convocations with attempts to change the status quo to either permit ordination of gays or make enforcement of present ecclesiastical requirements more rigorous perhaps neither will make any headway as the unity of the church becomes perceived as more important than winning or losing votes on a very divisive issue.
And maybe that would allow these mainline denominations, which are in steep membership decline, some respite from internal strife over the relatively few issues which are divisive so that they can rediscover their common beliefs.
Earlier this week I came across a report in the Presbyterian Outlook that the Theological Task Force on Peace Unity and Purity (PUP, for short) did not plan to take a position on the issue of the ordination of non-celibate gays in the report it is due to issue September 15 after several years of study and discussion. This is a surprise to most observers, who have been expecting the PUP to make recommendations on the subject. (Note that in the PCUSA system presbyteries, which are regional governing bodies, can raise these issues for vote in the General Assembly without the need for recommendations from a national group like PUP.)
I wonder if we are seeing a trend here. Are the Lutherans and Presbyterians daunted by the spectacle of the fracturing of the Episcopal Church over the ordination of the gay bishop in New Hampshire who lives openly with his partner? Although extremists on both sides of this issue may continue to roil denominational convocations with attempts to change the status quo to either permit ordination of gays or make enforcement of present ecclesiastical requirements more rigorous perhaps neither will make any headway as the unity of the church becomes perceived as more important than winning or losing votes on a very divisive issue.
And maybe that would allow these mainline denominations, which are in steep membership decline, some respite from internal strife over the relatively few issues which are divisive so that they can rediscover their common beliefs.
1 comment:
Good posting and I hope you are right.
My concern, however, is that issues like homosexuality are symptomatic of an even deeper rift in theology withing the mainlines. The gay rights debate reflects some extreme divergences in issues like Christology, the authority of Scripture, and even the very nature and function of the Church itself.
And if such is the case, then the problem we face is disastrously simple- we have two camps building on very different and non-compatible foundations with a large group in the middle trying to keep the peace.
Not to be pessimistic, but if this is where we really are, the prospects of rediscovering common ground are slim even if we manage to find peace on the sexuality issue.
But I hope that you are right and I am wrong.
Post a Comment