VALLEY OF DECISION

The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America has just declined to make any changes in current policies regarding the ordination of non-celibate gays and lesbians. The measure, which required a 2/3rds majority to be approved, failed by a 49%-51% margin. More comment forthcoming.

UPDATE: As promised earlier, here is more on the decision.

The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) has, from its 1987 inception, been tormented by issues of human sexuality. Well, okay, that’s overstating it a bit. The ELCA has been tormented by the question of how the church ought to deal with the issue of homosexuality as it relates to society, as it relates to our parishioners, and as it relates to ordination.

The 1999 Churchwide Assembly of the ELCA directed the church’s Division for Church and Society to come up with some recommendations for consideration at this year’s assembly. The Division came up with a document called Journey Together Faithfully which explored (in what I thought was a fairly evenhanded fashion) a variety of opinions related to the question of homosexuality as it relates to Scripture, doctrine, and the life of the church. The task force which crafted this study solicited responses from both individuals and congregations which were then used to help craft the task force’s recommendations for action.

After taking the church’s temperature, the task force found, to the surprise of no one, that there was deep division within our church on this issue, although, overall, most respondents seemed to be in opposition to changing current policies. They came back with a threefold recommendation regarding the issue of homosexuality:

1. Given the deep divisions and high level of emotion involved in the debate, we should pledge ourselves to live in unity, since there are forces right now tending to break the church’s unity.
2. The church should not at this time grant blanket approval to same-sex unions throughout the ELCA, even though some of our 65 synods currently permit this.
3. No changes to our standards for ordination (which state that ordained ministers who are “homosexual in their own self-understanding” should refrain from sexual relationships) should be made, but the church may opt not to discipline those who refuse to comply with these standards and may even allow for an alternate process by which exceptions to those standards could be granted.

The first of these was fairly non-controversial and passed easily, but not unanimously. The second was approved by a 2-1 margin, but a motion to reconsider that decision remains on the floor of the assembly. The third was far and away the most controversial of the recommendations. (It required a two-thirds majority to pass because it amended the church’s bylaws; the other two recommendations required only simple majorities.) Recommendation #3 failed by 49% in favor to 51% opposed. While there were only fourteen votes preventing this recommendation from getting a simple majority, it fell far short of the 66%-plus-one needed for approval.

Caution should be taken in interpreting these numbers. It is possible (though, in my opinion, not likely) that a significant number of those in favor of ordaining non-celibate homosexuals voted ‘no’ on this recommendation because they felt it didn’t go far enough.

Again, more coming later, albeit under a separate post.

(BELTWAY TRAFFIC JAM for August 12, 2005)