Should we stay or should we go?

The question of staying or leaving the ELCA is not one that I take lightly as pastor and is the greatest personal struggle that I have faced in the last year. It is not and has never been my desire to pull a congregation from the ELCA and since the vote last August, which has implications that are far greater than the question on sexuality, has created for many pastors a great struggle. We have been forced to face the challenge of to whom our loyalties lie. Personally, I still remember celebrating one of the first things I was able to do at the first annual meeting that I was eligible to vote in after I was confirmed and the congregation, which was ALC, decided to join in this new church body of the ELCA. In all the years that has been a reality which, at one time, I was very proud of being able to be a part of that history.

I have been criticized by pastors in my conference about my stance and my views. I have been challenged on my loyalty because some have said that I should be loyal to the Church that supported me in seminary. Ironically one pastor that criticized me was a pastor who he himself had come into the ELCA through the Seminex movement which was a break away from the LCMS Church. The reality that I have faced is that first I must be true to the calling that has come to me through my Lord and Savior, Jesus the Christ. That calling has been to serve the fold to which I have been called.

This year has been a distraction. It has distracted the Church and the church from the mission of Jesus Christ and the ministry to bring the Gospel to all people. The TRUE Gospel which is one that comes to us when we are fully convicted under the LAW of the sins that kill us so that we may rise to new life in our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. He did not die so that we could live as we feel happy living, He died that we could live lives that are transformed and that attract others to the reality that is much different under Him. The politics have taken over the Gospel in such a way that are voice is being marginalized and sidelined. Let us focus less upon Social Justice and more upon God's Justice which, though may appear to be the same and do work in similar areas, are quite different from one another.

Jesus did not die to feed the hungry, He did not die to care for the sick, He did not die to care for the poor, He died to bring salvation to a world that was sick in sin, poor in faith, and dying of hunger for the Truth of our God. We are called as a fruit of that faith the feed the hungry, sick, dying and poor yet that is a fruit and not the sole purpose of who we are in faith. Yet that is what it seems to have become for many in leadership of the ELCA. This was apparent in listening to the speeches that were given at the Church Wide Assembly last August by many in Minneapolis, it was apparent this year at the Florida-Bahamas Synod Assembly, and continues to seem to be the case with much that I hear and read on the ELCA website and from others. We are focusing on a new gospel of love that sells a love that is false and shallow. It is a love that seeks not to offend. A love that seeks not to convict. A love that seeks not to correct.

In a conversation with Bishop Benoway on December 21, 2009 in which we met at a restaurant in Dade City he brought up his concern by what he read that we had voted on earlier in the month. He mentioned the bylaw change that we had approved that put us out of communion with those congregations and rostered leaders that were in full agreement with the changes in ministry standards and the blessings of same-gendered monogamous lifelong relationships. I expressed to him that my desire was not to leave the ELCA and that the changes we were proposing were ones in which we would stand apart from the changes. I expressed to him my unhappiness of the situation. I was honest in my position and clear in my stance. I was also very thankful for the conversation. In that conversation I spoke of my concern for the ELCA and the changes and even went so far as to speak to the main issue. The "teaching" document that was passed The Social Statement on Human Sexuality still said that we respect the traditional view of marriage as defined between a man and a woman and I went with that because if we still believe that marriage is between a man and a woman as the definition then how is that we as a body of faith can take and bless fornication since the biblical and dictionary definitions of fornication is any sexual activity outside the bonds of marriage and we still biblically define fornication as a sin. With this we can set aside any of the verses that constantly being argued about by theologians on both sides of this argument and, if we truly deal with this with integrity, it still creates a huge issue within the ELCA. Truthfully, the ELCA has a decision with this to make either to redefine marriage, which they were not willing to do in the Social Statement, or revisit the decisions, which I don't truly believe that they are willing to do either. Fornication is sin and it covers more than just same-gendered sexual relations, but that is something difficult to separate.

I am not opposed to the ELCA, I am not opposed to the Florida-Bahamas Synod, and there are many wonderful people that I have relationships with that are committed and staying within the ELCA. I pray for the members of Shepherd of the Hills to seek out in prayer God's guidance on this issue. This is not a decision that should be made out of fear or anger, it must be an honest decision on whether or not it is right or healthy for the congregation of Shepherd of the Hills to continue to be a part of the ELCA or could we be a better witness in our faith to our community and the world outside of the ELCA.

Either way it is decided let us focus on fulfilling our mission as His church and seek out to be Christ's hands and feet in our community and out into the world. Amen.