|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Theological Workgroup By Gary Weant. Center for Theology Colloquium The following document provides a summary of the more salient and relevant observations, comments and reflections which I have attempted to articulate and catalogue during the dialogue fostered by the Covenant Theological Workgroup over the past ten months. This is not an exhaustive discussion of all areas of concern by any means, but an interim report of my reflections and thoughts in light of our dialogue and discussions to date. Contextual Issues
Dialogue & Commentary on Item #1 Early in the discussions, the Workgroup recognized that the ELCA goal of seeking a "resolution" of the issues surrounding homosexuality by juridical and legislative means contributed to at least two major dynamics. The first dynamic can be seen in the drive to seek "resolution" of these matters within a definite timetable and with a stated deadline which has tended to provoke considerable discussion around difficult issues that The Church has been reluctant to address, and, at least up to the present time, found easy to avoid. The second dynamic, at least in the thinking of the Workgroup, has tended to be more problematic. By placing this deeply "controversial"and highly polarizing topic under a Church Wide Assembly resolution with the mandate and expectation that a policy and juridical solution of these matters is either desirable or possible by 2005, the ELCA has, in the thinking of the Workgroup, greatly complicated and frustrated the likelihood that mutual trust can be fostered and maintained amidst honest, open, informed and illuminating dialogue. In the present polarized atmosphere of mistrust and suspicion, the perception seems to be that various schools of thought and "interest groups" are less concerned about open and honest dialogue and more fearful and preoccupied with the suspicion that someone, somewhere is attempting to "manipulate", "engineer" or "skew" the study process to increase the likelihood that "their desired outcome" will prevail.
Dialogue & Commentary on Item #2 In the Scriptures, The Lutheran Confessions(1) and in the writings of Luther(2), human sexuality is understood, viewed and discussed within the wider context and paradigm of marriage, family and human community. In the biblical context, human sexuality is understood to have a number of interrelated, inseparable and complementary dimensions, including: the procreative aspect, the helpmate and partnership aspect, the fulfillment, enjoyment and intimacy aspect, as well as the familial aspect related to family and the wider culture. This biblical paradigm and perspective informed and shaped the earlier social statement of the Lutheran Church in America on Sex, Marriage and Family and continues to give guidance to many across the Church who wrestle with a host of current issues. Maintaining a proper balance among the interrelated dimensions of human sexuality, however, has not always been easy for either The Church or society. There have been periods in history of The Church when the emphasis focused almost exclusively on the procreational dimension of sexuality to the scorn and neglect of the other biblical dimensions. The result of such an imbalance no doubt contributed to a sort of "sexual prudishness" that eventually degenerated into an unhealthy view of marriage as "nothing but a matrix of mutual duties of the partners"(3) and the dubious notion that human sexuality is "dirty", is a subject of "shame", or, at the very least, is a topic that generates much "ambivalence". Today, we are facing the opposite extreme. In the wider culture over the past thirty years, there has been a increasing emphasis on the importance of the individual self as described in more detail in the Dialogue & Commentary on Item #3. Resulting from this wider cultural shift has been a growing tendency to emphasize and focus almost exclusively on individual sexuality and the enjoyment, intimacy and recreational aspect of human sexuality to the neglect of its other biblical dimensions. A major challenge facing The Church will be to develop and foster a discussion which avoids the cultural temptation to examine human sexuality in isolation and separation from its other biblical dimensions.
Dialogue & Commentary on Item #3 While the Enlightenment was beneficial in helping free people from the oppressive tyranny of external powers - political, ecclesiastical, economic, etc.- a danger and unintended consequence of the Enlightenment is modernity's tendency to view the rational, informed self as the ultimate source of knowledge, truth and fulfillment and to manifest an exaggerated disregard for external and transcendent sources of truth and knowledge. Noted Lutheran theologian Robert W. Jenson, who teaches at Princeton, provides a probing, provocative and insightful analysis of the social, intellectual and cultural upheaval taking place in much of Western civilization. According to Jenson, we are experiencing at least a partial collapse of the intellectual foundation upon which modern society was built.(4) Since the time of the Enlightenment in the 1600s, there has been a gradual move away from oppressive external sources of authority such as church and state and a greater emphasis has been given to the authority of the individual conscience. And given the capacity of these institutions to become oppressive, this move was not necessarily all bad. Coupled with this shift, however, was modernity's assumption that one could maintain realistic faith while declaring one's dis-allegiance from God who is both the source and object of such faith. Amazingly, it worked quite well for several centuries. But eventually this arrangement proved to be modernity's own worst enemy.
The notion of God and the existence of transcendent reference points as credible
sources in one's quest for truth was pushed further and further to the periphery.
Under this arrangement, it was only a matter of time until the modern world
fell captive to the notion that humanity is quite capable of defining truth
and creating meaning and purpose for life quite apart from antiquated notions
about God and transcendent truths. The cumulative yield of an idolatrous
obsession with individualism has now given birth to a postmodern world in
which the rational, informed self is understood to be the final seat
of all authority. In a contemporary drama hauntingly similar to humanity's
fall in the Genesis narrative (Genesis 3: 1-24) we moderns have once again
succeeded in trivializing God and placing self at the center of the universe
(Romans 1:18-32). In the absence of any transcendent reference points, all
discussions of truth are reduced to "one person's opinion versus another."
In such a climate, everything becomes politicized and the clash of opinions
is resolved not by appeals to any common ground or zone of truth, civility
and virtue but by the mere wielding of power which enables one group's opinion
to be foisted upon others whose opinion is backed with less power. In a day
and age when there is no consistently agreed upon vision of truth, the vacuum
is easily filled with an inordinate obsession with power (James 4:1-6, Ephesians
2:1-3). The increasing fragmentation and polarization of our culture into
ever more strident and vocal extremists and absolutist groups both religious
and political, "right" and "left", only serve to further hasten the loss
of community. In some ways, Friedreich Nietzsche's chilling vision of the
human lust for power(5) has in far too many
cases become our primary modus operandi (mode of operation).
The rediscovery of a vision of truth which transcends our human distinctions
and barriers and undergirds and makes possible life in human community is
sorely needed (Galatians 3:25-39, Ephesians 2:13-22). Areas of Convergence and Common Ground
Dialogue & Commentary on Item #6 Regardless of one's view and stance with respect to homosexuality and homosexual behavior, there seems to be an emerging consensus that the legacy of discrimination, resentment, hatred, ostracism, scorn and contempt directed against homosexuals is an injustice and a tragedy which we need to move beyond. Regrettably, this legacy of contempt and scorn has and continues to compound the pain, hurt, shame and despair which has burdened homosexual persons and their families. The Gospel calls us to a life of love and servanthood. Nowhere is this seen more clearly or persuasively than in John 15:9-17. In this narrative, Jesus washes the feet of the disciples and gives a new command that we are to love one another as he has loved us. The Greek vocabulary word the New Testament uses consistently throughout this narrative in reference to God's love is agaph. This is a love that is infinite, unconditional and transformative of everything that it embraces.(6) This narrative provides an excellent summary of the Gospel. We are to love agaph (agape) one another, not to earn or gain God's love and favor but because, in Christ, we have already been loved (agaped) by God. Certainly, conscientious Christians of sound mind and noble convictions can disagree about many things and are, likewise, called to resist Sin and Evil. Yet, in the midst of such challenges and disagreements the Good News of the Gospel reigns supreme: We have been loved and have been drawn into the struggle to love one another.
Dialogue & Commentary on Item #9 The citation of these primary and relevant texts is based on a variety of sources, including, most notably, the recently published study by Dr. Robert A.J. Gagnon.(7) He provides one of the most thorough and exhaustive analysis of these texts available to date. Genesis 1-3 (The Creation Narratives) The Creation narratives place discussions of human sexuality within the context of the "order of creation" and the wider context of marriage, family and human community. In these texts, the predominant focus, references and assumptions are linked to heterosexual orientation and relationships. No reference, per se, is given regarding homosexuality. Genesis 19:4-11 (The narrative of Sodom and Gomorrah) There is considerable debate and discussion surrounding this narrative regarding the nature of "the great offense" in this text. Some commentators argue that the primary "offense" was not homosexual relations but the chronic and gross lack of hospitality on the part of the residents of Sodom and Gomorrah toward the sojourners traveling through and visiting in these cities. Paul Jersild argues that there is sufficient ambiguity surrounding the "offense" described in this text to render the text not very helpful or relevant to current discussions of homosexuality.(8) Other scholars insist that "the great offense" was the preponderance of homosexual relations accompanied by episodes of gang rape. In the opinion of a considerable number of biblical scholars (Wold, Grenz, Springett, Nissinen, Edwards, Greenberg, Scroggs and Young),(9) a major factor in understanding this text turns on both the context of the narrative and on the proper meaning of the Hebrew word KCi(yaw - dah) (10) which occurs in verses 5 and 8. This Hebrew verb can be translated both "to get acquainted with" and "to have intercourse with". Hence, as in the case of numerous biblical narratives, the context is often crucial in helping discern which nuance of meaning is intended. The context of this narrative suggests that a sexual connection is implied.(11) Other scholars argue that Lot's willingness to go to such extreme measures as to offer his daughters to the strangers for sexual relations rather that have the visitors engage in homosexual acts with other men, dramatically underscores the extent of biblical repugnance to homosexual intercourse and behavior. The yield of the narrative provides, at the very least, a message of silence regarding homosexual relations and, in the view of some scholars, a very negative view toward homosexual behavior. Romans 1:1-3:20 (Narratives describing human nature and the manifestations of Sin) For many scholars, this narrative is one of the most pivotal, relevant and significant. The primary discussion and debate turns on how Paul understands and uses the concepts of "human nature" and "natural" with reference to our humanity. Of particular significance in the interpretation of this text, is the meaning of the Greek phrase para fusin (para physin) which occurs in Romans 1:26-27 and is translated "contrary to nature".(12) Some scholars argue that in this narrative Paul assumes an "atomized" and "individualized" human nature.(13) Other scholars insist that on the basis of the Greek text, Paul in referring to a more generalized and universal understanding of human nature.(14) The way one answers this question has a major impact on the relevancy of this text to the discussion of human nature and sexual orientation. Still other scholars argue that Paul would have viewed homosexual behavior as unacceptable, but insist that we simply set Paul's thinking aside and adopt a new perspective.(15) If it is assumed that Paul means an "individualized" human nature, rather than a generalized or universal notion of what it means to be human, then a person could, theoretically, follow a wide variety of desires and exhibit an almost endless mix of behaviors with the understanding that such actions were simply reflections of a person's individual nature. Indeed, to do anything other than this would be "contrary to one's individualized nature." The problem with such an interpretation is twofold. First, such a view runs counter to other biblical texts and the overall biblical paradigm which reflects the orders of creation as well as the interrelated and complementary dimensions of human sexuality. Second, this understanding completely relativizes both human nature and human behavior, making it virtually impossible to provide any meaningful or coherent basis for determining what distinguishes the healthy from the unhealthy, the natural from the unnatural, the ethical from the unethical, truth from falsehood, sinfulness from righteousness, etc. 10. It is imperative that a biblically legitimate and theologically informed method of interpretation (hermeneutic) be used when attempting to understand complex biblical narratives and discern their applicability to complex ethical and pastoral issues. In faithfulness to the Scriptures and The Lutheran Confessions, we affirm a Christocentric Hermeneutical Principle which recognizes Jesus Christ as God's Living Word, that he is the clearest revelation of God's love and will, and the lens through which the whole of Scripture is most accurately interpreted. Dialogue & Commentary on Item #10 With regards to the interpretation of Scripture, we subscribe to the classic theological model known as the Christocentric Hermeneutical Principle(16), (17) which was rediscovered during the Reformation of the sixteenth century but which has continuity with both the Scriptures and the life of the Church from the earliest apostles to the present.(18) This method of interpretation is grounded on the conviction that contained within the Scriptures themselves is an interpretive norm which enables the Bible to interpret itself. "And the Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory as of a father's only son, full of grace and truth" (John 1:14, John 1:1-18, and Hebrews 1:1-4). Jesus Christ is God's Living Word, the supreme and clearest revelation of God's ultimate love and will for all creation. The life, death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ is the lens through which all of the Scriptures, faith and life are to be interpreted. The truths revealed both indirectly and repeatedly throughout the Bible come to their cumulative sum and summit in the Christ Event. The grace, love and will of God revealed in Jesus Christ constitute the ultimate truth around which all other truths are placed in their proper perspective.(19) If we visualize the Bible as a large wagon wheel, Christ is the hub and center around which everything takes it rightful place. Unlike fundamentalism, the Christocentric Hermeneutical Principle or Evangelical perspective does not view every portion of Scripture with equal weight. Those texts which point to, preach and inculcate Christ ("treiben Christ" in the words of Luther) and which are consistent with what we know of God's love and will in Christ are given normative status and first priority. Hence, they are binding on the life of the Christian community. Examples: Luke 23:34, Isaiah 53, Psalm 23, Matthew 5-7, John 1:1-18, John 3:16, Romans 5:1-21, etc. Those texts which do not point to Christ or are not consistent with the teachings, life, death and resurrection of Jesus are placed in second priority. They are viewed as part of the Biblical record and may be used for historical and educational purposes but they are not necessarily binding on the Christian community. Examples: Psalm 137, many of the ritual and dietary requirements in the Leviticus Code, the prohibition against eating pork and certain kinds of shellfish, etc. The Christocentric Hermeneutical Principle also serves as an alternative to relativistic liberalism which "picks and chooses" from the Scriptures based on the personal likes and dislikes of the informed rational self. The Evangelical approach to Scripture uses a selectivity but it is a selectivity that is based on what is consistent with the clearest revelation we have of God's love and will made visible in God's Living Word, Jesus Christ. Areas Likely to Yield Constructive Dialogue
Dialogue & Commentary on Item # 13 The Evangelical paradigm of Confession and Forgiveness coupled with the Evangelical and Lutheran dialectic of Law and Gospel may provide an alternative perspective from which to address all manifestations Sin and our human falling short of the righteousness of God. The full message of the Gospel announces God's acceptance of us, in spite of, our unacceptableness. (Romans 5:1-11, Ephesians 2:1-10, Colossians 1:15-24.) We are accepted and forgiven by God, not because of our goodness, but in spite of our unworthiness, because of God's grace made visible in Jesus Christ.(20) Paradoxically, in this life, our unworthiness never completely disappears. Yet, in Christ, God graciously chooses to overlook our "sinfulness" and accepts us into God's presence. The Law relentlessly confronts and reminds us of our inescapable sinfulness while at the same time, the "in spite of" underscores the incomprehensible magnitude of God's grace made visible in the declaration of God's acceptance and forgiveness. In addition to our being accepted by God in spite of our unacceptableness, God's agape (agaph) love by it very nature is creative, redemptive and transformative. In our having been declared forgiven, we are simultaneously embraced, drawn, lured, and lifted into a new trajectory and path of life whose ultimate destiny will result in our being resurrected and fashioned into the people whom God has already declared us to be. One major advantage of the Law / Gospel dialectic and the paradigm of Confession and Forgiveness is that it reveals and undercuts the foolishness and futility of "self-justification" as well as our effort to define as "good", realities that the Scriptures regard as questionable and / or manifestations of Sin. We, along with all of a fallen humanity, are confronted with the grim and horrifying reality voiced by the Psalmist, "If you, O Lord, should mark iniquities, who could stand?" (Psalm 130:3). This perspective can be helpful in addressing the "double standard" that often complicates discussions surrounding human sexuality both heterosexual and homosexual. By affirming our common status as forgiven sinners, we have a less intimidating and more conducive context for dialogue and addressing legitimate differences in perspective.
Areas of Creative Tension and Possible
Progress
Dialogue & Commentary on Item #17 There is a need to develop and strengthen a pastorally sensitive and caring environment which holds homosexual persons in intercessor prayer and from which they can explore a range of possible options for their life. Included among the range of possibilities should be psychological, pastoral and spiritual counseling to discern and confirm one's sexual orientation within an environment which at least holds open the possibility of re-orientation in some cases. Also included should be the exploration of the possibilities of celibacy for those who are irreversibly oriented homosexually. Furthermore, if all other options prove unworkable, there is a need to help all persons sense the prudence of cultivating a faithful, caring, loving, life long, monogamous relationship as a healthier and preferable alternative to the hazards, dangers and ethical ambiguities associated with either a life of isolation, loneliness, despair and destructive self-loathing on one hand, and tenuous, superficial, exploitative, promiscuous and serial relationships(21) on the other. Areas that Represent An Intractable Impasse and The Potential to Cause Schism
Dialogue & Commentary on Item #18 In approaching this matter, it is helpful to keep in mind a number of key elements which characterize the Lutheran understanding of ordination. Setting aside for a moment the perpetual tension that resides within The Lutheran Confessions as to whether ordination is best understood as an "office" or a "function",(22) there are some overarching themes that should inform this discussion.(23) First, while ordination is extremely important in the life of the Church and necessary "for the sake of good order", issues related to ordination are not salvific. Hence, a person's "readiness or the lack thereof" for ordination into the Office of Word and Sacraments in no way either secures or jeopardizes a person's salvation. Neither should one's participation in or absence from ordination be construed as either enhancing or calling into question one's status before God, the validity of one's baptism or one's inclusion and acceptance into the fellowship of The Church. Because ordination is not salvific and is not intended as a statement of one's status before God, but is given for the proclamation of The Gospel, the administration of The Sacraments and for the sake of good order, The Church has for good reason seen fit to place a number of rather specific qualifications and expectations on those who are called to this Office. In light of the inherent meaning and purpose of the call to the Office of Word and Sacraments, it is both logical and prudent that the vision, expectations and qualifications for this office be developed and affirmed in such a way that the proclamation of the Gospel, the administration of The Sacraments and the facilitating of good order be strengthened and enhanced rather than obfuscated or frustrated. Moreover, in light of the Scriptures and The Lutheran Confessions,(24) ordination is understood not as a guaranteed individual right but is a prerogative of the Church, a privilege and an Office to which a person is called by The Holy Spirit who works, both inwardly and subjectively through our hearts and outwardly and objectively through the visible Church.(25)
Dialogue & Commentary on Item #19 For many people, the very nature of homosexual relationships takes us to one of the more difficult and troubling aspects of the present conversation. In what way, if any, can The Church acknowledge, recognize or address such relationships? How can we be both caring and sensitive to people on one hand while at the same time remaining faithful to our call as God's people and to the teachings of The Scriptures? From a biblical perspective, relationships are understood as being informed and shaped on the basis of both kind and quality. For example, incest and pedophilia are deemed questionable on the basis of the kind of relationship present, regardless of how loving and caring one may argue the quality of the relationship is. One factor fueling the current debate is the tendency to drive a wedge between the biblical dimensions of kind and quality with respect to human relationships. In the current discussion, both extremes are present. There are those who want to place primary emphasis on the kind of relationship involved to the neglect of the importance of quality. There are others who argue the opposite extreme by insisting that the quality of a relationship trumps and overrides the kind of relationship involved. From a biblical and theological perspective, the issue is not an "either or" but a matter of "both and." For many across the church -- scholars, pastors and lay people alike -- The Church would be hard pressed to find a biblical basis for conferring upon homosexual relationships a status equal or equivalent to that of marriage, since marriage is defined biblically on the basis of both the kind of relationship as well as the quality of the relationship. Short of this move, however, there may be a way to find some common ground for viewing such relationships within the context of friendship. ENDNOTES 1. Robert Kolb and Timothy J. Wengert, eds., The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2000), pp. 249, paragraphs 7 & 9. (Throughout The Lutheran Confessions, discussions of human sexuality and "sexual desires" repeatedly take place within the context and biblical matrix of marriage, family and human community.) 2. Ibid., pg. 414-415, paragraphs 206-218. (In this section of The Large Catechism, Luther elaborates on the Sixth Commandment and its implications for marriage, human desires, family and the wider human community.) 3. James F. Childress and John Macquarrie, eds., The Westminster Dictionary of Christian Ethics (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1986), pp. 520. 4. Robert W. Jenson, "How the World Lost Its Story," First Things, October 1993, pg. 20. 5. Ivan Soll, "Friedreich Nietzsche," World Book Encyclopedia, (World Book: Chicago, 1988), Vol. 14, pp. 410-411. 6. Anders Nygren, Agape and Eros (New York: Harper and Row, 1969), pg. 210. 7. Robert A. J. Gagnon, The Bible and Homosexual Practice: Texts and Hermeneutics (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2001. 8. Paul Jersild, Spirit Ethics: Scripture and the Moral Life (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2000), pg. 136. 9. The Bible and Homosexual Practice: Texts and Hermeneutics, pg. 74. (Of particular significance is note 91, pg. 74). 10 Michael S. Bushell, BibleWorks for Windows (Big Fork, Montana: Hermeneutica, 1998), Gen. 19:4-11 with reference supplied for the meaning of KCi (yaw - dah) as listed in Brown Driver Briggs - Gesenius Hebrew Lexicon, 1997). 11. The Bible and Homosexual Practice: Texts and Hermeneutics, pp. 73-74. 12. BibleWorks for Windows, Romans 1:26-27 (with reference supplied for the meaning of para fusin (para physin) as listed in the Friberg Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament, 1994.) 13. Ibid., pp. 137-142. 14. The Bible and Homosexual Practice: Texts and Hermeneutics, pp. 254-258. 15. Robert A.J. Gagnon, "Gays and the Bible: A Response to Walter Wink", The Christian Century, Aug. 14-27, 2002, pg. 40. (In this article Gagnon engages in a spirited exchange and discussion of homosexual behavior with noted, biblical scholar, Walter Wink. Wink, who generally supports a change in the church's position on homosexual behavior, concedes in the article that Paul would not have accepted a homosexual relationship. Wink's position is that Paul's objections are neither persuasive nor binding and that a new judgement about homosexual behavior needs to be adopted.) 16. Carl Braaten, Principles of Lutheran Theology, (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983), pp. 63-85. (Braaten gives a rather detailed history and theological analysis of this concept and its impact on the full range of Christian doctrine.) 17. Carl Braaten, Justification, The Article by Which the Church Stands of Falls, (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1990.), pp. 15-28. (In this book, Braaten gives an additional survey of the primacy of the Gospel, the Good News of God's infinite and unconditional love made visible in Jesus Christ, as well as its centrality in the Christian Faith and in the life of the Church.) 18. Robert L. Wilken, "Interpreting the Bible: Three Views," First Things, August / September, 1994, pp. 44-46. (In this article, Wilken provides an analysis of a 1993 report released by the Vatican's Pontifical Biblical Commission on "The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church." The Commission's report represents a perspective around which a sizeable number of Roman Catholic, Evangelical and Protestant scholars have converged regarding the theological and biblical merits of the Christocentric Hermeneutical Principle and its significance for the interpretation of the Bible.) 19. Paul Tillich, Systematic Theology (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1967), Vol. III, pp. 125. 20. Systematic Theology, Vol. I, pp. 285-286 and Vol. II, pp. 178-179. 21. Helmut Thielicke, The Ethics of Sex (Grand Rapids: Michigan: Baker Book House. Reprinted with permission from Harper and Row, Publishers, Inc., New York, New York, 1964), pp. 269-292. (In this section, Thielicke, the noted Lutheran theologian and ethicist, provides an informed, insightful and persuasive discussion of the options facing homosexual persons). 22. Robert Kolb and Timothy J. Wengert, eds., The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2000), pp. 220-221, paragraphs 7-13. 23. Ibid., pg. 40, Article V, paragraphs 1-4. 24. Ibid., pp. 340-341, paragraphs 66-72. 25. Vision and Expectations (Chicago: The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, 1990.), pp. 5-6.
NORTH CAROLINA SYNOD - ELCA The Occasion The Covenant Theological Workgroup was formed to assist the N.C. Lutheran Synod in fostering dialogue and in responding to the study of human sexuality currently underway across the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. While the workgroup reflects a diversity of perspectives, we share in common the following earmarks of the Church: (a) a recognition of the Scriptures as the rule and norm for faith and life, (b) the centrality of Jesus Christ as the clearest revelation of God's love and will, (c) the wonder, joy, virtue and call to discipleship of a life made new in Jesus Christ and informed by the Good News of the Gospel, and (d) the value of our life as a people of God gathered in worship, nourished through Word and Sacraments and steeped in prayer, both corporate and individual.
At their first exploratory meeting, the workgroup covenanted to pray for
each other and the whole Church, to engage in an ongoing study of the Scriptures
as well as the teachings of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, and
to engage in honest, spirited, civil and ongoing dialogue. The workgroup
also covenanted to remain in prayer and dialogue throughout the duration
of the ELCA study. The purpose and hope of the workgroup are fourfold:
We trust and pray that through these efforts God's love and will can in some way serve as a source of insight, healing and hope not only for individuals who wrestle with these dilemmas but also for the Whole Church as we struggle to remain faithful to the Good News of the Gospel and the ministry to which Christ has called us in our Baptism. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ISSUES IDENTIFIED TO DATE Contextual Issues
Areas of Convergence and Common Ground
Areas Likely to Yield Constructive Dialogue
Areas of Creative Tension and Possible Progress
Areas that Represent An Intractable Impasse and The Potential to Cause Schism
Respectfully submitted,
The Rev. Dr. Leonard H. Bolick, Bishop |