John Brooks, spokesman at the ELCA’s Chicago-based headquarters, said Lutheran CORE’s move was not unexpected. He expressed hope that church members would ultimately opt to stay in the denomination as it strives to be “a place for all people despite any differences we might have on any issues.”

A place for all people despite any differences tends to be a sports arena, not a church. I do appreciate how slavishly the ELCA has followed the script which has driven the actions of TEC for more than 20 years.

I don’t understand. What is keeping this group from moving to LCMS?

This proves it!
The same mathematical equation, which had defied all known theorems when it appeared in TEC, now exists in the ELCA:
Inclusion = Contraction

Or WLS for that matter?  I sure am glad I don’t have any family left in the ELCA.  My mom’s family are Lutherans, but they’re all either in other denominations or are LCMS.

Br_er Rabbit, it ain’t that easy!  The Missouir Synod has a very complicated way of receiving “outside” Lutheran congregations and clergy.  In addition ... well, you almost have to be a life-long Lutheran to know some of the other issues.  There’s just no space to explain it all ...

Sarcastic comment deleted by elf.

A new one, and we already have…?

Re #7
Antonio,
You bear me to it.  Just how many Lutheran denominations do we need?  Which one is the REAL Lutheran Church?  At this rate they will start to look like…

Wait.  Better not go there.

In ICXC
John

Ugg typo.  bear=beat*

How many Lutheran denominations does it take to change a light bulb?

How many continuing Anglican churches does it take, as well?

The LCMS has strict rules on fellowship, one of my reasons for joining the ACNA. Additionally, they prohibit Women in the pastorate (which I agree with), and many departing will find that hard to swallow.

Wonder if they will get more folk to leave than Bishop Duncan was able to get to leave TEC and join ACNA?

I think I get it. LCMS = too literalist so CORE = ACNA = Slightly Less Liberal Protestantism.

Hey Brer Rabbit.  You ask why they don’t just join LCMS.

Here’s just one example: many of the disenchanted ELCA folks probably aren’t ready to sign off on a literal six day creation, where the earth is a few thousand years old, etc.  Official LCMS dogma holds this (and views this as very important).  I was surprised to discover this myself when I began attending a small LCMS church nearby a year ago.

Of course, such doctrine isn’t for me a dealbreaker, in the sense of me feeling like these guys have got something wrong that is really crucial or central to the gospel.  It’s a side issue (from my perspective anyway) and I view them as total brothers in Christ.  On the other hand, if I were to JOIN the LCMS, I feel like I’d be saying that I agree with all of their doctrinal assertions.

Creationsim is just one example—as Pastor Rod mentions there are certainly other reservations that an ELCA member might have.

How many continuing Anglican churches does it take, as well?

Touché, former LCMS. And thanks, everyone. I just didn’t know the Lutheran Landscape. In defense of Anglicans, at least ACNA is consciously trying to reduce the number of organizations. Now, whether that works or not, is another question.

Jon (#14),

It’s true that six-day creation is more or less official LCMS doctrine, and I don’t know whether the LCMS would refuse to admit a pastor who would not sign off on it; but strictly speaking the doctrinal standard of the LCMS, to which all pastors and congregations must subscribe without qualifications, is the 1580 Book of Concord (aka the Lutheran Confessions)—not the LCMS “Brief Statement” of 1932, where the official endorsement of creationism is found.  Six-day creationism and biblical literalism are not to be found in the Confessions.

Some ELCA folks are indeed put off by the supposed “fundamentalism” of the LCMS.  But I think the truth is that WO is the deal-breaker.

I have been LCMS for about 15 years now, and I have never experienced this so-called “fundamentalism.”  I know it’s there “officially,” but it plays no role in the day-to-day life of the Church.

Upon reading my previous comment, I realize I was not clear on my views . . . being a long-time reader but a first-time commenter, I realize it might come back to bite me in the future . . . for the record, I’m Anglo-Catholic, and as such oppose WO (due largely to my LCMS upbringing).

How about an ACNA ordinariate for Lutherans? (only half tongue-in-cheek)

James,

There have been conversations along those lines.  There is at least, so I’ve been told, one proposal in the works.  I think it’s an interesting idea worth pursuing.

As per why not LC-MS, looking at it strictly from a global perspective, they are not part of the LWF.  LC-MS has some great pastors and i count a few among my friends.  Alas, it is mostly a US focused denomination.  That said, many Lutheran churches in the LWF are not happy with the ELCA.  Sound familiar?  Like you guys, when this is all settled there will be rending of the church on an international scale.

RE: “Wonder if they will get more folk to leave than Bishop Duncan was able to get to leave TEC and join ACNA?”

Wonder if the ELCA will lose as much percentage-wise from their denomination as TEC has in the past 6 years.

Sarah,

IMHO, the ELCA will come apart more quickly than TEC.  Within five years I suspect it will be a hollow shell of its current structure.  Many of our congregations (one estimate puts it at over two thousand) are already at risk.  With ASA of 80, it only takes the loss of three or four families for the congregation to no longer be financially viable.  Before that final shutting of the doors, the synods and national expression will feel the money pinch sooner.

Eight million dollars and 40 staff were cut just this week in Chicago.  That’s only months out from the vote this summer.  Many congregations, mine included, have believed it important to honor our pledges to the larger church through the end of the year.  Most of our congregations have their annual meetings in January.  That’s when the defunding of the national church will really start to gather steam.

All and all the advocates were successful.  For many of them this has never been about the mission of the church, but removing from the public square another impediment to gay marriage.  They’ve won another round.

21. Brian, You are very likely right and the only way to hold these congregations together will be to quickly move them out of ELCA.  It seems to me that the national meeting this summer was more “pie-in-the-sky, we have the national-level majority, we can do what we want” rather than “what will this do to our grass-root congregations?”  It is about like TEC’s “We have to kill this church to perfect it.”

10.  Br_er Rabbit,  I have heard the answer to your question somewhere.  I think it is: “it depends on the willingness of the light bulb to repent.”

I’ve not bothered to verify this, but it has been said that one new protestant denomination per week has been formed since the Reformation.

I attended a LCMS church for a short time when I lived in an area that did not have an Episcopal Church.  The restrictions were not just on WO, but women were not allowed to teach anyone but children and other women, could not be lectors and were not allowed in any leadership positions in the church.  I can understand how some who oppose WO would not want to go that far.  As far as attending a LCMS church that doesn’t go that far .... many have left TEC churches that do not conform to the new innovations because of the formal stance taken by the denomination.

#24 Julia,

Sounds just like our REC/ACNA parish!!  Just wonderful.  None of the ladies are “chomping at the bit” to take on traditionally male roles and the men don’t bother with the altar guild.  Everybody is happy doing what they do and nobody is “looking for greener pastures.”

RE: “Everybody is happy doing what they do and nobody is “looking for greener pastures.”

I can see how that would be—and it would then necessarily preclude women like me from wishing to be a part of the group.

Which would mean that in your parish you could still say “none of the ladies are chomping at the bit to take on traditionally male roles.”
; > )

Sort of a self-fulfilling group . . . which is fine, of course!  Churches and indeed whole denominations should have the right to make their own rules about such internal-parish matters.