LCNA responds with sadness...

[Brian Stoffregen]

I sincerely doubt that any one of the traditionalists here would describe homosexuals as "unclean," and you know that, Brian.  I think it's very unfair and unhelpful to say what you have.  Even Bishop Hanon promised, in his closing remarks at the CWA, not to use the word "fear" to describe those who disagreed with the decisions.  That was nice of him, and as a person who is certainly not "afraid" of homosexuals, nor do I consider them somehow "unclean," I very much appreciated it.  One would hope others might adopt the same charitable spirit.

I'm thinking of Peter's statement to Cornelius in Acts 10:28-29: "You are well aware that it is against our law for a Jew to associate with Gentiles or visit them. But God has shown me that I should not call anyone impure or unclean. So when I was sent for, I came without raising any objection." "Unclean" as I'm using the word, and as I see Peter using it here, means an unwillingness to associate with others. I also don't see God changing the Gentiles into Jews before they could be converted. The Gentiles were not even required to undergo circumcision -- the traditional sign of being God's people. In fact, I believe that the Cornelius story is more about the conversion of the Jews than of the Gentiles. It was the Jews, especially those back in Jerusalem, who had to change their convictions about associating and "eating with" Gentiles (see Acts 11:3).

Personally, I think that it isn't that the LCNA crowd thinks God can't change them into new people, it's that they think He doesn't need to.  That's my opinion, anyway, for what its worth.

From many homosexual Christians I've heard about, all prayed mightily that God would change them. It didn't happen. Then what? What do you tell a blind person who has prayed mightily that she might see again and it doesn't happen? Do you say, as many people with disabilities have heard, "If you just had enough faith God would heal you"?

[charles III]

 Someone writes:
So much for respectful discussion. Can we try again?

Amen.

But it looks easier said than done...even for the Turtle.

[James Gustafson]

Personally, I think that it isn't that the LCNA crowd thinks God can't change them into new people, it's that they think He doesn't need to.  That's my opinion, anyway, for what its worth.

From many homosexual Christians I've heard about, all prayed mightily that God would change them. It didn't happen. Then what? What do you tell a blind person who has prayed mightily that she might see again and it doesn't happen? Do you say, as many people with disabilities have heard, "If you just had enough faith God would heal you"?

And what if they are praying to change their condition and desire for any other disorder?  Don't want to desire pornography anymore?  Pray, didn't work? Best give up and give in to the desire then...   

[TravisW]

Personally, I think that it isn't that the LCNA crowd thinks God can't change them into new people, it's that they think He doesn't need to.  That's my opinion, anyway, for what its worth.

From many homosexual Christians I've heard about, all prayed mightily that God would change them. It didn't happen. Then what? What do you tell a blind person who has prayed mightily that she might see again and it doesn't happen? Do you say, as many people with disabilities have heard, "If you just had enough faith God would heal you"?

Just because you're blind doesn't mean that you need to run through busy intersections.  

[James Gustafson]

Someone writes:
So much for respectful discussion. Can we try again?

Amen.

But it looks easier said than done...even for the Turtle.

I personally found Pr. Austin's tart dismissal of Ann's entire post as one of the most insulting posts I've seen around this forum, and later he created a straw man misconstruction of her position to defend his insult.  More than sad.

[Brian Stoffregen]

Personally, I think that it isn't that the LCNA crowd thinks God can't change them into new people, it's that they think He doesn't need to.  That's my opinion, anyway, for what its worth.

From many homosexual Christians I've heard about, all prayed mightily that God would change them. It didn't happen. Then what? What do you tell a blind person who has prayed mightily that she might see again and it doesn't happen? Do you say, as many people with disabilities have heard, "If you just had enough faith God would heal you"?

Just because you're blind doesn't mean that you need to run through busy intersections.

But it usually means learning to read with one's fingers. Deaf people "hear" with their eyes. Adaptations are made when God doesn't change the people's condition.

[edoughty]

I know many who work in LC/NA.  They are people of good will. 

I am one whom God has indeed changed through prayer.  God did not change me into a heterosexual; rather, God changed me from a fearful, isolated, suicidal gay teenager into a happily gay man who is certain that God's grace is sufficient for me.

 

[iowakatie1981]

Thank you, yes, it turns out that I've read Acts.  A couple of times now.  I'm fairly certain that "associating with" and "visiting" people is a lot different than ordaining and "blessing permanent long term public mutually whatever but not marriage don't freak out."  

Now, for something you don't know about me...

I'm a cancer survivor and my leg was amputated when I was 12 years old.  I understand what people in the "disability" commmunity think, and I thought that we were being told not to treat homosexuality like a disability.  Right?  And by the way, if anyone ever tells me that if I had more faith God would heal me, I tell them to shut up.  I have NO TIME for people who want to use my illness or disability to define me (OMG that's so inspirational...That must have been such a terrible thing for you.  How can you go on?  It must completely impact your worldview.  That's so amazing.  Wow, I would never be able to do that.  Since you're a cancer survivor...Since you're an amputee...), which is part of why I'm frustrated by people who want to define themselves or others entirely by their sexuality.  

You missed (or ignored, whatever), the entire point I was making.  Which is that "traditionalists" do not think that they can not or should not associate with or visit homosexuals.  And that the last thing I am suggesting is that those (or many or most) in the LCNA group lack the faith to be healed.  It is that they do not believe that their sexuality is something that needs to be healed.  I am stating this from a neutral stance - it is simply a difference of opinion, so to speak, that happens to be such a fundamental difference of opinion that it frequently impedes conversational progress.  

I fully believe that God could heal me if He (egads!) chose to.  Because he hasn't up until this point does not mean that He won't in the future.  Now, if he doesn't, well, this will continue to be my burden to bear.  And I will accept that I may not have children because the age I was when I had chemotherapy predisposes me to something called "premature ovarian failure," and I'm 28 with no marriage in sight.  And I have to deal with the fact that I cannot join the military, much as I would love to.  And it's really hard for me to ride a bike because of the level my amputation was done at.  But I am not running around telling the Air Force that they "have to let me in, because what do you mean you have standards, that's so discriminatory and aren't you a federal organization you're not allowed to discriminate it's not my fault I have this disability!" That is the impasse we are at here.  

[Pilgrim]

Iowa Katie,

Wow! Thank you for your forthright courage in sharing. My congregational treasurer is a double amputee as the result of an intentional decision due to her disease of scleroderma. Her life and witness, if I am understanding the intent of your post accurately, is very similiar. Again, thank you. Those who have ears to hear...

Pr. Tim Christ

[iowakatie1981]

Pastor Christ,

Thanks for sharing - praise God for that woman's life and witness!

Katie

[Marshall_Hahn]

I respect LC/NA's desire to effect changes in the teaching and policies of the ELCA, as much as I disagree with those changes they propose.  They have made it clear what they would like to see happen and have worked hard to do it.  I even grudgingly admire their tenacity, even while I lament the harm they have brought to the church.

But I do not respect the misconstrual presented of the motivations of those who disagree with them, as evidenced in this news release.  I do not respect a number of their tactics in portraying themselves as the "victims" and their opponents as "bigots" and "homophobes".  Even though the words are not used in this press release, the meaning is clear.  

People are not leaving the ELCA because they cannot stay in the same church with homosexual people.  They are leaving because they cannot stay in a church which teaches error.  They are leaving the ELCA because they cannot agree with blessing what they understand to be sin.  Either Emily Eastwood knows this - and is mischaracterizing people on purpose - or she does not know this - and clearly is the one who has not been listening to those with whom she disagrees.

I spoke with several people at the CWA who were in favor of the proposed changes.  I had some long conversations with people trying to understand each other - and came away with a good deal of respect for their willingness to engage in that conversation.  I would expect each of those people with whom I spoke to be appalled and embarrassed by what LC/NA has presented here.  Every bit as much as I would be appalled and embarrassed if Paull Spring or one of the leaders of CORE were to come out with a news release disparaging the motives of LC/NA or Bishop Hanson.

Marshall Hahn

[charles III]

If you prayed for God to accept you as you are without the need of the Savior and His cross, should God answer that too?

Ye receive not because ye ask not with right motives, may have something more to do with this issue than you think.

[dkeener]

 

People are not leaving the ELCA because they cannot stay in the same church with homosexual people.  They are leaving because they cannot stay in a church which teaches error.  They are leaving the ELCA because they cannot agree with blessing what they understand to be sin.  Either Emily Eastwood knows this - and is mischaracterizing people on purpose - or she does not know this - and clearly is the one who has not been listening to those with whom she disagrees.

This is exactly why I do not believe LCNA is sincere and why they have lost my respect.  This letter was not intended for those who are planning to leave the ELCA but rather for those who are still struggling with what to do.  The message is clear: don't be like those ignorant/fearful people who are leaving the ELCA because they can't stand to be in the same church with homosexuals. Be like the faithful and long suffering LCNA folks who are loving, forgiving, faithful, generous and just want whats best for everyone.

I do believe that, as with all organizations, there are individuals who are sincere and worthy of respect.  I have never met Emily Eastwood and she may be a wonderful person, but I understand that in official news releases she is not speaking for Emily Eastwood but rather for her organization.  This organization has consistantly and knowingly misrepresented those of us who are opposed to the changes. I am willing to "be nice" but I am not willing to "get played." When that starts to happen, I'm sorry but the gloves come off.

[George Erdner]

I know many who work in LC/NA.  They are people of good will. 

I am one whom God has indeed changed through prayer.  God did not change me into a heterosexual; rather, God changed me from a fearful, isolated, suicidal gay teenager into a happily gay man who is certain that God's grace is sufficient for me.

 

If you were to change the reference to being homosexual to being in thrall to some other besetting sin, would you advocate learning to be happy with not being able to resist the temptation to commit that different act of sin? Should a kleptomaniac learn to be happy that God's grace is sufficient for them, and they can continue to shoplift and steal as much as they desire?

[RevSteve]

But I do not respect the misconstrual presented of the motivations of those who disgree with them, as evidenced in this news release.  I do not respect a number of their tactics in portraying themselves as the "victims" and their opponents as "bigots" and "homophobes".  Even though the words are not used in this press release, the meaning is clear.  

People are not leaving the ELCA because they cannot stay in the same church with homosexual people.  They are leaving because they cannot stay in a church which teaches error.  They are leaving the ELCA because they cannot agree with blessing what they understand to be sin.  Either Emily Eastwood knows this - and is mischaracterizing people on purpose - or she does not know this - and clearly is the one who has not been listening to those with whom she disagrees.

Exactly!!! With all due respect to Pastor Wolf, I cannot see this letter from LC/NA as anything but Ms Eastwood simply taking an opportunity to castigate traditionalist Lutherans as hateful, narrow-minded homophobes, in light of this week's announcement from Lutheran Core. She begins her letter by referring to traditionalists as those who oppose full-inclusion of homosexuals and their families. Ms Eastwood, no doubt by now understands that the traditionalist position is not about excluding gay people or their families, but instead about faithfulness to God's Word and yet still she begins by casitgating traditionalists in such a negative light.  

She characterizes those choosing to look outside the ELCA as being motivated only by fear and anger. She accuses those looking outside the ELCA as seeking to isolate themselves from those whom they disagree with. Of course, in the Lutheran Core announcement, it was made clear that the new church-body will seek to still be in respectful relatiosnhip with the ELCA. Of course, Ms Eastwood conveniently left that little nugget of information out. If the Lutheran Core announcement had been anywhere near this condescending, they would have been rightly raked over the coals by the leaders of the ELCA. Yet why do I have a feeling that the ELCA "leaders" will not be critical of this?? In fact, if anything I would not be surprised if they announce their endorsement of this letter.