Luther worked within the structures of the Catholic Church to convey his understanding of Scriptures, but when continually hitting immovable walls conscience dictated his actions. Perhaps the LCA has operated from fear that conservative congregations would break from the LCA if women’s ordination was approved. Little thought, however, has been given to the possibility that moderate congregations would break away after suffering the closing down of the discussion.
When is it time to step away from an abusive Church? How long should congregations suffer the manipulation of democratic processes?
The following is Tanya Wittwer’s reflection after General Synod in 2006. The despair she expresses from that time is evident again in our Church as we lead up to General Synod in April of 2013. There is significant expectation of change. Members and congregations of this Church are not content to forever suffer diversions and stalling.
From the beginning of the proceedings it was apparent that the leadership had decided to keep a tight lid on Synod. The first woman to speak asked that one of the two nominees for the position of President share his vision for the church, prior to the election; the incumbent had just delivered his report and it seemed reasonable to be able to at least have heard from each of them. This request (repeated by another woman the following day) was immediately denied.
The ordination question was clearly established as something to be debated from opposing sides, rather than an issue that could be discussed collegially. On the Monday evening of Synod there was an “information evening” at which two seminary professors had been chosen to speak for 25 minutes – one presenting the position that only men could be ordained, and the other responding. Unfortunately it was the No position that established the parameters of the “information” presented. In the format chosen and the time limit given there was no opportunity to address bigger questions of Biblical interpretation, or faithful decision-making. The chair contributed negatively to the debate, with a long, heavy-handed introduction, and unhelpful remarks.
The chair had been clear in his direction that only Scriptural and theological issues were to be addressed, but this did not prevent some of the anti-lobby using manipulative anecdotes and sweeping statements to support their arguments. The style of “debate” meant that there was no opportunity to respond to these. When the chair declared that only those waiting to speak would be given an opportunity, and no more were to go to the microphones, the balance was such that the final five speakers were against the ordination of women. The chair urged people to abstain from voting if they had any doubts at all, or if they thought the time was not yet right. Then the votes were cast.
I felt surprisingly free. I felt free to leave the LCA, and join another denomination. The reaction surprised me, but it felt as if the part of the race I needed to run was complete, and it was time to hand the baton over. I was overwhelmed by the people – many of them strangers – who thanked me for my words, and shared their sadness.
When I woke on Wednesday morning, I had moved to a position of feeling free … to stay, at least for a while. To stay and to support others in being the church we believed we needed to be, even if this meant pushing boundaries. The nice, polite, official way of doing things seemed unhelpful; maybe now is the time to forget being “good.” We need to name clearly the legalistic turn in our church. We need to work against the pressure being applied by Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (LCMS) and the International Lutheran Council (ILC). We need to find ways to proclaim more loudly God’s inclusive grace.
via GENERAL LCA SYNOD 2006 — “There’s nothing new under the sun.” (Ecc 1:9) | Women’s Ministry Network – Tanya Wittwer (6 October 2006)
- Is an LCA schism inevitable? (katieandmartin.wordpress.com)
- LCA walking close to LCMS (katieandmartin.wordpress.com)