The Rev. Dr. Herman R. Yoos, bishop of the South Carolina Synod, wrote in an open letter that he has been “wrestling with scripture, tradition and our Lutheran theology” for years, and has concluded that marriage is “a gift (from God) of a lifelong faithful relationship of husband and wife.” But even traditional marriage can be riddled with sinfulness.
“Because of this brokenness (caused by original sin), nothing is as God intended,” Yoos wrote. “Therefore, I believe that one’s sexual orientation is not primarily a conscious choice, but rather is a deeply ingrained part of one’s identity. It seems to me that gays and lesbians no more choose their sexual orientation than heterosexuals do.”
Since gays and lesbians are victims of discrimination and injustice, the church has an obligation to lend its support, he wrote.
“For me, this takes nothing away from God’s gift of marriage as God’s first intention for creation, but it does allow for the recognition of a deep bond of intimate trust that can be found among same-gendered couples who want to live in faithful committed relationships.”
Bishop, with all due respect, your cause could use some rationalizing theology that is just a bit less incoherent than this. Because of sin, we need to accept sin? And we need to accept sin in leadership even more, so people can, uh, see more clearly that sin is . . . well, i’m thinking “something to be resisted, or transformed,” but that doesn’t seem to be where you’re going.
Seriously, there’s got to be better theologizing in defense of changing clergy standards than this.
Alas, few of our Bishops are known for their theological acumen. It is embarrassing to read things like this, but unfortunately this lack of depth is now the norm. Even within our tradition, historically it has been the function of the Bishop’s office to maintain the orthodoxy of the church. That just sort of drifted away with the merger in 1988 and thus we have these sorts of vapid releases.
Knapsack, yes, there should be a better defense than this, but there isn’t. But the vote will likely happen anyway…
An ELCA pastor who finds himself more frequently a stranger in a strange land…
He has been wrestling with scripture, tradition and Lutheran theology allright. They all against his conclusion. He is left with what seems to him to be……..
Brian (#2),
It’s great that you as a Lutheran keep posting here regularly. “Vapid” is a good word for Bishop Yoos’ statement, all right. Other, even less flattering terms could be used as well, of course, but I’ll refrain from that.
So Yoos supports allowing SSB’s, but not ordaining openly gay (i.e., openly immoral) men and lesbians? Sounds almost like a TEC bishop. Logical consistency isn’t required for a “mainline” leader, just being politically correct and appearing moderate, not strident.
Brian, or anyone else, can you tell us where the Lutheran seminary in Columbia, SC stands as this momentous fork in the road approaches? From all I’ve heard, it’s the most conservative of the ELCA seminaries. But I’m not sure what that really amounts to in practical terms.
David Handy+
David,
I still have your number and will try to call sometime this week. Spent the later part of the week with fellow pilgrims with whom I visited Israel earlier this summer.
Don’t know about Southern, but have heard it is one of our last hold-outs. For years Luther was known as a pretty decent middle-of-the road confessional seminary, but it sounds like it’s tilting. All the others are lost causes. Which means for a decade and a half four of them (PLTS in Berkeley, LSTC in Chicago, Gettysburg and Philadelphia) have been pumping out students no longer able to properly distinguish between Law and Gospel. It’s rather amusing to hear their arguments and realize just how clueless they’ve become to their Antinomian tendencies.
The main “resistance” group is called CORE. Do a google on that word and Lutheran. They’ve been attempting to hold back the tide. I plan to be at their meeting come September if, for no other reason, to hear where they think they will go next. Note the pronouns, that means I’m currently not a member.
I’ve been convinced for years the ELCA has long since thrown itself off the same cliff as TEC and the question has merely become how long do you watch the rope spool over the side before you get yanked over with it? And, once having decided the slack is getting lean and determine that line be cut, what does that do to the church catholic? Yes, we Lutherans should have thought that one through in 1530, but that’s another issue entirely …. 🙂
So we have LCMC which is sort of a baptist Lutheran non-denom escape valve. Holds no attraction for me. CORE is talking about setting up a synod within the ELCA – though once the advocates have their victory we know where that will lead; smite the orthodox and push them overboard. Home to Rome or maybe swim the Bosporus? But what happens to the congregation I was called to serve?
Sigh…
Brian
StJohnMD.org
“Vapid” is not sufficient, David. These remarks are incoherent because there is no logical groundwork laid for differing conclusions from the same initial position. But there is one thing fairly sure: The conclusion to be reached here is agenda driven, not scripturally or logically driven so that we may say that the upshot is largely predictable. Still, if I were the Rev. Yoos, I would be mortified to read what I had written when I reread it. Larry
I’m not wanting to be snarky and go for the cheap shot here — i’m sincerely confused by the distinction Bishop Yoos seems to want to make between church/liturgical recognition of partnerships and acceptance of candidates for ordination. There does seem to be a sincere desire for pastoral integrity on his part, but i’m just not able to make sense of the basis he’s using to argue for a “local option” affirmation of rites and ceremonies for partnerships.
And my negative reaction to anyone wanting to, as he says, vote “yes” on #1 but “no” on #2, 3 & 4 is not the often made slippery slope up — polyamory and cousins marrying and dogs and cats together — but the slippery slope down, into triviality. If living arrangements need some form of liturgical affirmation to find justice, are we talking about when roommates choose to share the half-and-half carton? More seriously, i worry less about pressure for the church to bless triads and polygamy than i do for this kind of logic to next ask for a “first-stage blessing ceremony or ritual” for couples moving in together — don’t we, as a church, need to celebrate and affirm partnered singles, who feel awkward and left out of traditional church events and language?
And of course a rite for mourning the parting of the ways, the division of housewares from the kitchen and the returning of keys. That kind of trivialization of liturgy for social justice propositions is where this essay would seem to head next . . .
Last year Newberry College’s Fine Arts and Lecture Series had as a speaker the Rev. Katrina Foster from the Bronx. On campus most of that week, as an ELCA pastor she also preached in the college’s Wednesday Chapel service. Turns out Southern Seminary has, when a speaker at Newberry is a Southern alum, generally invited the speaker to spend a couple of days on campus and preach at the Friday chapel service. Being a Southern alum, the customary invitation was issued to her.
However, Foster had from the floor of the ELCA Churchwide Assembly 2007 announced (no surprise to her congregation, or her Synod) that she was in a committed lesbian relationship and they were raising a child. (A few months after that she and her, uh, status were a feature story, with photo, in the New York [i]Times[/i].) Apparently the President and Dean of the Seminary remembered that, for when she arrived at Southern that Thursday morning, she discovered that she would [i]not[/i] be preaching the next morning. She was instead told that as someone living in violation of the ELCA’s standards, she would not be permitted to be a candidate for ordination at Southern, and thus she certainly would not be permitted to preach in the Chapel.
Apparently by the next morning President Miller’s e-mail and phone had been flooded with protests, but she didn’t preach. Sadly, Southern seems to be the only ELCA seminary willing to uphold ELCA standards. (Pacific and Philadelphia have for several years officially treated what is now “Extraordinary Lutheran Ministries” as just another synod candidacy committee; Luther notoriously sent a a seminarian in the midst of gender reassignment on a specially-arranged internship.) And also sadly, Foster will again be at the ELCA’s Churchwide Assembly as a clergy voting member from her Synod. They are so proud of her, y’know.
Brian, looking forward to seeing you at the [url=http://www.lutherancore.org]Lutheran CORE[/url] convocation next month! It looks like they’ll be proposing (finally) something along the lines of the Episcopal Synod in America from nearly 20 years ago — not leaving, but making a clear witness of faithfulness within. Perhaps not exactly the same issue (or is it?) and, of course, if the ESA was “too little, too late” then (it had to evolve into FIF-NA, then join with others before finally the new Province organized this year), we’re [i]really[/i] behind the 8 ball as far as the ELCA in concerned. Still, we need something for our parishes to go [i]to[/i], and there aren’t any [url=http://www.pastorzip.org/uslutheranlinx.html]really viable options[/url] for the likes of us.
Pax, Steven+
http://www.zionpeoria.org
Thanks, Brian (#5), I look forward to your call.
As for ELCA seminaries, I think you left out Trinity Lutheran in Columbus, OH. I know Mark Powell teaches NT there, and I like much (not all) that’s he’s written.
Let goods and kindred go…
David Handy+