“E.L.C.A.” (by Pr. Charles Henrickson)

August 20th, 2009 Post by

Click the music link and sing along!

E.L.C.A.
Tune: “Y.M.C.A.”

“Luth’ran”
Doesn’t mean quite the same
As what you’ve been
Taught to know by that name.
We’re removin’
All the scandal and shame
Of a church that stands for something.

Luth’ran,
No, you’re not misinformed,
Yes, it’s true now,
We commune the Reformed.
No forced union
Made us bow or conform,
Just a warm and fuzzy feeling.

It’s fun to be in the E.L.C.A.
It’s fun to be in the E.L.C.A.
We have women in black,
Now there’s no turning back
To the hang-ups of dead white guys.

It’s fun to be in the E.L.C.A.
It’s fun to be in the E.L.C.A.
You can set yourself free
From dead orthodoxy,
You can do whatever you please.

Luth’ran,
Won’t you please come along
To the Elca,
Where’s there’s no right or wrong.
In the Elca,
Heretics can belong,
They can teach at seminary.

“Luth’ran,”
But our fingers were crossed,
All our doctrine
Has been totally lost.
All that’s Luth’ran
Is what we have embossed
On our cards and stationery.

It’s fun to be in the E.L.C.A.
It’s fun to be in the E.L.C.A.
We have women in black,
Now there’s no turning back
To the hang-ups of dead white guys.

It’s fun to be in the E.L.C.A.
It’s fun to be in the E.L.C.A.
You can set yourself free
From dead orthodoxy,
You can do whatever you please.

Elca,
Where it’s very uncouth
And unwelcome
To say you have the truth
And where seldom
Is a word ever heard
To discourage sin or error.

Elca,
Where it’s all shades of gray,
I said, Elca,
Where it’s hip to be gay.
Our umbrella
Is as big as a tent,
There’s no need for you to repent.

It’s fun to be in the E.L.C.A.
It’s fun to be in the E.L.C.A.
We have women in black,
Now there’s no turning back
To the hang-ups of dead white guys.

It’s fun to be in the E.L.C.A.
It’s fun to be in the E.L.C.A.
You can set yourself free
From dead orthodoxy,
You can do whatever you please. . . .






Rules for comments on this site:


Engage the contents and substance of the post. Rabbit trails and side issues do not help the discussion of the topics.  Our authors work hard to write these articles and it is a disservice to them to distract from the topic at hand.  If you have a topic you think is important to have an article or discussion on, we invite you to submit a request through the "Ask a Pastor" link or submit a guest article.


Provide a valid email address. If you’re unwilling to do this, we are unwilling to let you comment.


Provide at least your first name. Please try to come up with a unique name; if you have a common name add something to it so you aren't confused with another user. We have several "john"'s already for example.  If you have a good reason to use a fake name, please do so but realize that the administrators of the site expect a valid email address and also reserve the right to ask you for your name privately at any time.


If you post as more than one person from the same IP address, we’ll block that address.


Do not engage in ad hominem arguments. We will delete such comments, and will not be obligated to respond to any complaints (public or private ones) about deleting your comments.


Interaction between people leaving comments ought to reflect Christian virtue, interaction that is gracious and respectful, not judging motives.  If error is to be rebuked, evidence of the error ought to be provided.


We reserve the right to identify and deal with trollish behavior as we see fit and without apology.  This may include warnings (public or private ones) or banning.

  1. Kiki M
    August 23rd, 2009 at 21:37 | #1

    Wow. I didn’t know that. What about alcoholics, or other addicts? It brings many questions to my mind. Like, when a baby is baptized, they become a member, right? (or not right?) So, if they are a member and eventually discover they are gay, then what? Do you have excommunication?

  2. Kiki M
    August 23rd, 2009 at 21:40 | #2

    So, (another question, sorry) how are people screened if they want to join a LCMS church? Do you take just anyone?

  3. August 23rd, 2009 at 21:45 | #3

    Are you a Lutheran of any sort, Kiki? Have you read the Catechism? Read, under the Chief Part on Confession, the section on the Office of the Keys. That will answer your question about repentance and impenitence, forgiveness and excommunication.

    BTW, do you recognize that God’s word teaches that homosexual behavior is sinful?

    How are people brought into the church? By baptizing and teaching, according to Christ’s commission.

  4. August 23rd, 2009 at 21:48 | #4

    Sorry, Kiki, I forgot that you mentioned in comment #33 that you are a member of an ELCA congregation. Were you taught the Catechism? Do you have a Catechism?

  5. Kiki M
    August 23rd, 2009 at 21:54 | #5

    Yes. I am an ELCA Lutheran. I have read Luther’s small catichism. (This is most certainly true ;)
    As far as sinfulness of homosexual behavior, I don’t know. I have heard much theological discussion about the interpretations of scripture on that.

  6. August 23rd, 2009 at 22:00 | #6

    May I suggest that you read the sermon on marriage I posted today on the home page of this site.

  7. Kiki M
    August 23rd, 2009 at 22:27 | #7

    Yes.
    I read it. Is this why the LCMS does not ordain women? Because we are to be submissive to men?

  8. August 23rd, 2009 at 22:33 | #8

    Is this why the LCMS does not ordain women?

    The question is wrongly put. The burden of proof is on those who advocate the innovation that is the ordination of women. The Missouri Synod, like the vast majority of Christendom throughout history, does not ordain women to the office of the ministry. It is up to those who break with the Scriptures and Christian history to prove their case of why they ordain women.

  9. August 23rd, 2009 at 22:40 | #9

    Is this why the LCMS does not ordain women? Because we are to be submissive to men?

    The Ephesians 5 passage is about Christian marriage, about Christian wives voluntarily submitting to their husbands as unto the Lord, and Christian husbands loving their wives and giving themselves up for them as Christ loved the church. It is not directly about not ordaining women to the ministry. Other passages speak more directly to that matter, e.g., 1 Corinthians 14 and 1 Timothy 2.

  10. Kiki M
    August 23rd, 2009 at 23:02 | #10

    I’m just an interested lay person, not a scholar. What I have observed is that a female pastor can use gifts that speak and minister to some folks that a male may not be able to. In a small way it is like AA. It takes an addict to truly help another addict in a way that no one else can. And I can extend this to gay clergy. In some churches, there are many gay members. To hear the gospel of Jesus from a person you can so fully relate to is powerful.
    I’m not at all trying to be difficult…but I have a hard time understanding why someone with a call to ordained ministry should be denied the opportunity to respond to that call. Can you understand my point?
    Kiki

  11. Pastor Tim Rossow
    August 24th, 2009 at 06:23 | #11

    Kiki,

    We don’t expect you to be a scholar but we do hope that you can see the difference between how you are doing theology and how the lay people and pastors on this site are doing theology. You are basing theology on expediency and practical matters. (For example, your defense of women pastors is a pracitcal one – that is, that they have something to offer.) These things are important but they do not trump God’s word. If God’s word tells us something that does not seem expedient or practical for us or does not even seem to make sense to us, we do not reject it and choose what makes sense to us. We choose to believe what God’s word says.

    For instance, it does not make sense to human reason that the body and blood of the Lord could be in, with and under the bread and wine of holy communion but we believe it because the Bible says it is so.

    The Bible’s view that homosexuality is a sin may not make sense to those who accept the culture’s view of homosexuality that it is not a sin but the Bible says it is and so we believe it.

    I encourage you to re-think how you understand theology and place God’s word above all. We will never see eye to eye on this as long as you are putting practical matters above Scripture and that of course is contrary to what Jesus wants us to do. He says that as long as we continue in his word we are his discples (John 8:31).

    TR

  12. Steven Peterson
    August 24th, 2009 at 13:02 | #12

    Here is an update from the ELCA perspective. Here are the views of Bp. Kevin Kanouse of the NT-NL Synod (a former pastor and family friend): http://www.ntnl.org/resources/NR-8-09.pdf.

    I responded to my mother that whenever I would hear the “The Spirit is Moving!” from the pro-gay crowd up north, I think I understood how a Polish villager felt upon hearing “The Wehrmact is Moving!”

    Here was my response to my family:

    All,

    I appreciate Bp. Kanouse’s letter. But, the horse has now left the barn, hasn’t it? Will there be a counter move at the next CWA to reverse course? Unlikely. It’s much easier to give inappropriately than to take away properly. And what happens when one of the synods elects a gay bishop? What will happen to all of the congregations whose bound consciences prohibit them from calling a gay pastor? How will they be accommodated? In short, they probably won’t. I doubt that conservative churches are going to be tolerated nearly as much as the pro-gay churches were over the last 8-10 years that called gay pastors or kept them on the roster. The Church of Sweden had similar provisions in place and dropped them within 10 years. “Bound conscience” seems to be a limited time offer!

    I also keep thinking about other synod and national gatherings, especially youth meetings. What’s the official policy going to be? Openly gay. Any conservative opposition will likely be muted or ignored. Conservatives were effectively marginalized throughout the whole sexuality study process (at least in E.WA and ID the synod really came out with a major propaganda campaign) and I get the feeling that conservatives are needed in the ELCA in a “give us your money, and shut up while we make fun of your backwards ways” manner. Object lessons for comfortable derision at synod gatherings. The rhetoric out of (some, I’m generalizing I know) the LCNA/Goodsoil types is rife with talk of “neanderthals” v. “a new poetry”, etc.

    And I won’t even get into the whole full communion with the Methodists debacle. How you have full communion with a group that doesn’t even believe the same things happen in the Eucharist is beyond me. Full communion for the ELCA is sort of like Most Favored Nation status for the U.S. Everyone gets it, regardless.

    I’m now realizing just how far the church has moved away from what I was taught in confirmation; I guess you can blame Bomgren;). I hardly recognize the ELCA anymore. As someone else said, it has the appearance of a bottle of perfume, but there’s nothing in it, only the outward form. The ELCA has now affirmed its official theology as: “A God without wrath brought men without sin into a kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a cross.” – H.R. Niebuhr.

    I understand the Bishop’s call to remain, I’m just not sure my heart’s in it anymore. If we conservatives haven’t been listened to for the last 8-10 years, why would the culmination of events at CWA and calls now for unity this past week suddenly change that? I expect that “consensus” on sexuality will be declared soon by a coalition of the blind leading the blinded. Perhaps going over to Missouri would entail giving up some things, but I feel I may be giving up more by staying and trying to change something that will not be changed.

    Love,

    Steve

  13. Kiki M
    August 24th, 2009 at 19:59 | #13

    Hi.

    Thanks for the reply. You wrote:
    “We don’t expect you to be a scholar but we do hope that you can see the difference between how you are doing theology and how the lay people and pastors on this site are doing theology. You are basing theology on expediency and practical matters. (For example, your defense of women pastors is a pracitcal one – that is, that they have something to offer.) These things are important but they do not trump God’s word. If God’s word tells us something that does not seem expedient or practical for us or does not even seem to make sense to us, we do not reject it and choose what makes sense to us. We choose to believe what God’s word says.”

    I do understand the difference in how most on this board do theology and the way I approach it. I do think practical is important! Jesus did too. As far as God’s word trumping everything else, you are selective in what parts of God’s word you choose to use as your trump card. What about the rest of the laws of Leviticus? You (we) don’t practice them today. Why just certain things you interpret as important? Like no women clergy? The homosexual thing is another matter in scripture. Much of what is thrown about as refering to homosexuality in the Bible is actually refering to rape, incest or pagan rituals.
    I guess we don’t agree. That’s OK. There is room for everyone in God’s Kingdom (or so I believe). Thanks for the discussion.
    Ya know, I just wanted some interpretations and explanation of where the LCMS comes from on these topics, so I could more fully understand. I know I have learned primarily ELCA theology. But it seems you are defensive, as if my questions were somehow bad or wrong. I am not damned to hell cuz I support the ELCA and their inclusion of all who are called to share their gifts. I am grateful they will accept sinners.
    Peace to us all~
    Kiki

  14. Pastor Tim Rossow
    August 24th, 2009 at 22:06 | #14

    Kiki,

    I am not selective in what I pick as trump cards. I asserted that the entire scripture trumps human reason.

    Concerning homosexuality the Bible teaches that it is a sin in such passages as Romans 1:26-27, Leviticus 18:22, 20:13, I Cor 6:9-10, Genesis 19:4-9. These are straightforward uses of the term “homosexuality.” You have used human reason to add to the text that these are referring to rape, incest and pagan rituals. When the Bible speaks of those things it uses those terms. Homosexuality is homosexuality. It is not right to import your own meaning into the words.

    On another matter you say that there is room for everyone in the kingdom of God. Where does it say that in the Bible? It is not right for you to simply assert things as your belief. True Christian belief is not based on what we believe. It is based on what God’s word says.

    Why do you call me defensive? I am not defensive. I have challenged you on what you have asserted and asked you to defend it. That is not being defensive.

    TR

  15. Kiki M
    August 24th, 2009 at 22:26 | #15

    I guess I am worse than an ELCA Lutheran! I tend toward Universalism :) What am I doing here on an LCMS board? LOL.
    God’s grace is not limited by our understanding of it. Nor is God’s grace limited to this side of the grave! God wants all of His children at the banquet table. And we will all be there, because of His mercy.

  16. Pastor Tim Rossow
    August 24th, 2009 at 22:42 | #16

    Kiki,

    You are welcome here. We are universalist in that sense. :) We appreciate your point of view but disagree with it and will keep pointing out how and why we differ.

    God’s grace is not limited. His son’s blood paid for all sin. His grace is understood only through his word however and that word is clear that salvation is only for those who believe in Jesus Christ. In that sense we could call His grace limited because His word limits it in that way.

    Thanks for your input and also thanks for being fair and civil in your comments.

    TR

  17. Kiki M
    August 24th, 2009 at 22:55 | #17

    I used to believe that salvation was only for those who believe in Jesus Christ, as you stated. I was in fact, somewhat zealous about that…but I was younger then ;) If grace is grace, how can expectations be put upon it? God’s grace is only if you believe in Jesus Christ? It doesn’t fit the character of God.
    It’s like God’s grace is too extravagent to be just purely grace…a gift…so we humans have somehow quantified it so some are “in” and some are “out”. We have humanized it really. We live in a world of winners and losers. And someone has to lose so someone else can win. But I really don’t think God does it our way. He lavishly redeems all people through the ultimate sacrifice of Himself. So we don’t have to die. That is my take on it.
    And I am open to discussion.
    Kiki

  18. Susan R
    August 25th, 2009 at 12:19 | #18

    Kiki M.:
    Your take on it seems to be the sum of what you’ll take as truth.
    That what you used to believe when younger has evolved into something else entirely, is not the working of maturity or growth, but of influences outside of the Word of God.
    John 14:6,7 testify, through Christ’s own words, that there is no other way to the Father than through Christ.
    Surely you know these words. Surely you see the ‘limits’ placed on what a person can believe, as well as practice and profess, and still hope to find himself in Heaven.
    Does it follow, then, that Christ Himself limited the extent of His grace?

  19. Kiki M
    August 26th, 2009 at 08:13 | #19

    Hi Susan,
    No. I don’t think Christ Himself limited the extent of his grace! Yes. There is no other way to the Father but through Christ…and Christ died for ALL. Regardless whether they know it, accept it or believe it! Christ paid the sacrifice. All are saved because of His atoning death and resurrection. We can rejoice! “Saving souls” is not up to us! Jesus did it. To proclaim the Good News of this fact is our job, that’s all. Now that’s Good News!
    Thanks.
    Kiki

  20. August 26th, 2009 at 08:49 | #20

    Christ died for ALL. Regardless whether they know it, accept it or believe it! . . . All are saved because of His atoning death and resurrection.

    Kiki, you are failing to distinguish between the universal atonement and justification by faith. You are totally excluding the necessity of faith, i.e., of believing in Christ. And that is *all over the place* in the New Testament. You can miss it only if you block it out. Take, for example, these passages:

    Romans 3:21-26
    But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it–the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

    Ephesians 2:8-9
    For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.

    I could cite dozens of passages like this. The New Testament could not be any clearer on this point.

    Jesus did it. To proclaim the Good News of this fact is our job, that’s all.

    Why bother? If “all are saved” “regardless whether they know it, accept it or believe it,” then why bother to preach the gospel and spread the good news? Totally unnecessary.

    But that is not the case. Christ has sent his messengers to proclaim the good news, in order that people would hear and believe the gospel and thus be saved:

    Romans 10:9-17
    if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”
    How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!” But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed what he has heard from us?” So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.

  21. Mark Young
    August 26th, 2009 at 10:29 | #21

    @69, @70: Pr. Rossow, I might add this one, which also refers to Jesus saving those who believe and destroying those who don’t. Note well the Sodom and Gomorrah reference:

    Jude: “5 Now I want to remind you, although you once fully knew it, that Jesus, who saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe. 6 And the angels who did not stay within their own position of authority, but left their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness until the judgment of the great day— 7 just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.”

    And continuing on, note well how this might apply to those in our day who change God’s Word (in this case regarding God’s holy judgement against these sexual sins) to fit the cultural norms:

    Jude: “10 But these people blaspheme all that they do not understand, and they are destroyed by all that they, like unreasoning animals, understand instinctively.”

    And finally, scoffers following their own ungodly passions and causing divisions. This seems to be what has just happened (or was made official) at the ELCA assembly:

    Jude: “17 But you must remember, beloved, the predictions of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ. 18 They said to you, “In the last time there will be scoffers, following their own ungodly passions.” 19 It is these who cause divisions, worldly people, devoid of the Spirit. 20 But you, beloved, building yourselves up in your most holy faith and praying in the Holy Spirit, 21 keep yourselves in the love of God, waiting for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ that leads to eternal life. 22 And have mercy on those who doubt; 23 save others by snatching them out of the fire; to others show mercy with fear, hating even the garment stained by the flesh.”

  22. Pastor Tim Rossow
    August 26th, 2009 at 10:37 | #22

    Mark Y,

    Agreed – excellent scriptural commentary on what is going on in the ELCA.

    TR

  23. Kiki M
    August 26th, 2009 at 21:47 | #23

    Will you be disappointed if you are wrong?

  24. August 26th, 2009 at 21:55 | #24

    Will you be disappointed if you are wrong?

    I don’t know whom you are addressing with that question, Kiki, but in any case it is beside the point. What matters is what God’s Word says, not our own personal opinions about what we think ought to be.

    So how do you handle the countless New Testament passages that explicitly teach salvation through faith, a few of which I have cited in comment #70? How do you explain those particular passages?

  25. Kiki M
    August 26th, 2009 at 22:28 | #25

    OK, well I don’t like throwing Bible passages around to prove points. That’s prooftexting. Sometimes it is like people have elevated the Bible to a status equal with God. We are to worship the One to whom the Bible testifies. It is easier and safer for some to trust a written word that we can use as we want (prooftexting) rather than trust the wildly gracious God whom we cannot control.
    Jesus promised the Holy Spirit to teach us all things (John 14:26 This is how God chose to speak to us.
    “At the name of Jesus EVERY knee shall bow in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confss that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father” Philippians 2: 9-11
    “You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you posses eternal life. These are the scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life” John 5: 39-40

    There are contradictions in the Bible. It is not a rule book to figure out the formula and then package it and keep it unchangeable within a particular church. Christ is the living Word, the One who interacts with us and loves us.

    If all scipture is equally inspired and authorative, God is as likely to drown us in a flood as He is to forgive our sins.
    “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. The second is like it, Love your neighbor as yourself” Matt 22: 37-39 All the law and prophets hang on these two commandments” Matt 22: 40 That’s powrful language from Jesus. It is all about Love…not rules, not who can be ordained and who isn’t good enough. None of us are. I think when it comes down to it, Love wins. Period.

  26. August 26th, 2009 at 22:55 | #26

    OK, well I don’t like throwing Bible passages around to prove points. That’s prooftexting.

    But then that’s what you go ahead and do. You can’t have it both ways, Kiki.

    Also, “prooftexting,” in a pejorative sense, means taking a brief snippet out of context to prove a point. That is not what I have done. The several passages I have quoted have included some extended ones, they are cited according to context, they all say the same thing, and the necessity of faith for salvation is abundantly clear. Really, you could read the entire New Testament and find the same message on every page. Far from “prooftexting.”

    We are to worship the One to whom the Bible testifies.

    How do you know that? I thought the Bible was just a book, and an unreliable one at that.

    “You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you posses eternal life. These are the scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life” John 5: 39-40

    This passage you quote actually works against you, Kiki, since in it our Lord teaches the necessity of faith for salvation.

    If all scipture is equally inspired and authorative. . . .

    So how do you determine which parts, if any, are inspired and authoritative, and which parts aren’t?

    I think when it comes down to it. . . .

    There is your–and the ELCA’s–problem in a nutshell: Personal opinion over God’s Word.

  27. Kiki M
    August 26th, 2009 at 23:02 | #27

    So how do you determine which parts, if any, are inspired and authoritative, and which parts aren’t?

    Yea, my question exactly. If all of Scripture is inerrant and holds the same weight, then you have a problem, because it contradicts itself. That’s why it is necessary to interpret all of scripture in light of all of scripture…and that is why I say that in the end, Love wins.
    To err in favor of love over rules is what Jesus did. And what the ELCA is doing as well.

  28. August 26th, 2009 at 23:11 | #28

    it is necessary to interpret all of scripture in light of all of scripture. . . .

    That is true. And all of Scripture teaches justification by faith. There is no promise of salvation apart from faith in Christ.

    To err in favor of love over rules is what Jesus did.

    What Jesus did is to teach that men should repent, believe in him, and be saved–as he does in the very passage you quoted:

    “These are the Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life.”

    To come to Jesus–i.e., faith–is to have life. To refuse to come to Jesus–i.e., unbelief–is to not have life.

  29. Mark Young
    August 26th, 2009 at 23:31 | #29

    @77: (apologies if this is a duplicate comment, I didn’t see my other one show up).

    Kiki, regarding contradictions, consider the following from C.F.W. Walther’s Proper Distinction Between Law and Gospel. This is a great treasure we Lutheran-Christians (no, all Christians) have. Before reading and understanding this, in my teenage and early college years, I often wrestled with ‘seeming contradictions’. No longer, or, not as much. Thanks Walther.

    Walther writes:
    “Comparing Holy Scriptures with other writings, we observe that no book is apparently so full of contradictions as the Bible, and that, not only in minor points, but in the principal matter, in the doctrine how we may come to God and be saved. In one place the Bible offers forgiveness to all sinners; in another place forgiveness of sins is withheld from all sinners. In one passage a free offer of life everlasting is made to all men; in another, men are directed to do something themselves towards being saved. This riddle is solved when we reflect that there are two entirely different doctrines, the doctrine of the Law and the doctrine of the Gospel.”

    Regarding your comments about ‘Love’ and ‘Love wins’. It is love and it is loving to show a sinner his sin, so that the law might work, before the gospel and forgiveness is offered. It is not love, and not loving, to comfort and make secure a sinner, in his sin by white-washing the sin by saying that ‘love’ overrules rules, as you say. Where does that end? Why only apply this to the sexual sins? Isn’t it also unloving to tell me that I am sinning in other ways too? In all the various ways that I break the commandments. I’m sure one could white-wash many other sins in this way, too, ‘in the name of Love’.

  30. Susan R
    August 27th, 2009 at 20:27 | #30

    If God’s grace is His way of tolerating sin, then what in the world is Death?
    How tolerant is that?
    Kiki M, I commend to you this essay:
    http://pastoralmeanderings.blogspot.com/2009/08/god-is-not-tolerant-grace-is-not.html
    Excellent snippet:
    We must not mistake His willingness to become our Savior as His tolerance of sin. He was so intolerant of sin that He bore all of its weight and took its stain in our place. He made Himself to be like us in every way but sin in order to bear the burden of our sin — death.

  31. James Steinfort
    January 13th, 2010 at 15:40 | #31

    The Grace of God has been central to the stance of the ELCA. How are we to understand God’s Grace. This is my understanding of Grace: 1) Grace is given freely (un earned) to all who believe in Christ. 2) What does it mean to believe in Christ? did not Christ Himself tell His apostles (I am paraphrasing here) If you believe in Me that you must live by the example that I have given you if you are to be My disciples. 3) God’s Grace is a gift but a gift is not a gift any longer if no one is willing to recieve it. 4) How do we express our willingness to recieve this gift? Through repentance and living our lives in the example that Christ has provided.
    The ELCA has cheapened Grace and ignores the call to repentance which Christ clearly called for at every ocassion of addressing the sins of those He incountered. If we all recieve Gace as freely as some woud assert, living our lives in any manner that pleased us, why would we need the Church?
    I am a simple layman who trys very hard not to read some hidden meaning behind the words of the Bible as it seem so many are willing to do. Was not the Bible written for us or was it written only for educated and analytical minds to interpret for us. If I am in error please feel free to enlighten me as I am always open to Spirt filled Word.

  32. Jane
    January 1st, 2011 at 03:23 | #32

    I am way way late in commenting on this- but I just found it in archives. I think it’s hilarious and awesome! I was surprised to see so many people upset by it. I’m a member of the ELCA and fully support practicing gay clergy- and I believe that whether parody was written with a mean spirit or not it was done well, and that deserves credit. Also- it (in a catchy way) presented your valid concerns about our church’s beliefs. Even though I disagree with you on those points, you deserve credit for actually providing reasoning with your argument. As for whether or not I/we/the ELCA is called to repentance by your song- I think your feelings are quite obvious without actually having to spell them out in essay form. The tone and attitude of the song suggests quite clearly that the ELCA has to repent.
    So while I do not agree with your position, I have to give you credit for creating an amazing parody with as much substance as a full length article! Good job!

    Jane

  33. January 1st, 2011 at 13:00 | #33

    Jane : I think it’s hilarious and awesome! . . . I’m a member of the ELCA and fully support practicing gay clergy- and I believe that whether parody was written with a mean spirit or not it was done well, and that deserves credit. Also- it (in a catchy way) presented your valid concerns about our church’s beliefs. Even though I disagree with you on those points, you deserve credit for actually providing reasoning with your argument. . . . I think your feelings are quite obvious without actually having to spell them out in essay form. . . . So while I do not agree with your position, I have to give you credit for creating an amazing parody with as much substance as a full length article! Jane

    Thank you, Jane! Yours is the most perceptive comment I’ve seen yet on understanding the purpose of a parody–and it comes from someone who disagrees with my views! But you really “get it” as far as how satire works.

Comment pages
1 2 6605
If you have problems commenting on this site, or need to change a comment after it has been posted on the site, please contact us. For help with getting your comment formatted, click here.
Subscribe to comments feed  ..  Subscribe to comments feed for this post
Anonymous comments are welcome on this board, but we do require a valid email address so the admins can verify who you are. Please try to come up with a unique name; if you have a common name add something to it so you aren't confused with another user. We have several "john"'s already for example. Email addresses are kept private on this site, and only available to the site admins. Comments posted without a valid email address may not be published. Want an icon to identify your comment? See this page to see how.
*

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.