This is an interim strategy.
Don’t know enough about the ELCA to comment on that, certainly not enough to label the ELCA leadership evil.
True, most of us don’t know the individual leaders of ELCA - who has supported or opposed this or that. Even if we did, we don’t have the right to judge them personally as to their own good or evil. One could say the same thing about the leaders of Planned Parenthood.
Right.
Its curious that within ELCA there is such a diversity of position. There are elements with a quite Catholic view on the nature of marriage, and elements committed to SSM. I don’t know enough to judge the ELCA as evil, but what I can say is that they choose to admit a range of contradictory positions, some of which I cannot reconcile with any Christian teaching or tradition.
This diversity might be “curious” but not atypical for groups that have moved farther along the path of relativism. Earlier on the whole group is committed to the idea that some things are absolutely true or false, right or wrong. Later there are intermediate stages where there is **gradual ** acceptance of relativism.
ELCA does not have a Magisterium. So you might argue the “ELCA position” is whatever is supported, at a given time, by most members.
SSM is not acceptable in Catholicism. Some Catholics may support it, but that is despite their Catholicism, not “in conjunction” with it.
ELCA can have more than one “position” at any given time, both on pastoral applications, and on matters of faith and morals. There is nothing like a “Magisterium”.
The sense in which I mean it is that it it is not reconcilable with the faith. The ELCA have no common statement of the faith and so multiple positions irreconcilable with each other can be “officially” tolerated.
I don’t know, it seems that most American Catholics have been able to reconcile this and other hot-button social issues with their faith. Somehow everyone just lives with the dissonance; it’s is a belief and practice that’s “officially” tolerated in the Catholic Church as well. My point is that the average Catholic and the average ELCA Lutheran probably wouldn’t hold differing views, and in both Churches a wide range of views are tolerated–so it’s a distinction without a difference. For all practical purposes, the views of the two Churches are more or less the same.
No, they are not the same. Just because many Catholics are in out right rebellion does not mean that the views of the Church follows that rebellion. Read through the Old Testament and you will see time and time again where the Israelites abandoned the faith and followed false teachings. Each time judges and prophets were raised by God to bring them back to Him. He didn’t change and go with the times, but allowed them to suffer the consequences of their lack of faith until they cried out under the burden of those consequences. Many Catholics, ELCA and others that should know better are just like the Hebrews who reject God and “do what [is] right in his own eyes” by following modern day equivalents of Ba’al and Ashtoreth. In other words, being on a boat without a firm hand on the tiller always leads to sin and subjugation.
They are free to disagree, but of course to reject the teachings of the Church is to reject God. You might not believe that, but that is at the core of Catholicism. God and morality are not a democratic process. Seems that in the desert the tribes of Israel “voted” to make a molten calf and God was going to strike them dead expect for the pleading of Moses. At that many were still slaughtered for rejecting God and putting their own idols before Him.
But isn’t “the Church” the same as the people who are in “out right rebellion”? Or a least a majority of them? When you’re talking about the “views of the Church” you’re talking about the views of all Catholics, no? If not, then who is “the Church” that has these “views of the Church”? Aren’t the Catholics that support gay marriage part of “the Church”? They certainly think they are. And no one has told them otherwise. So aren’t the “views of the Church,” in reality, all over the map on this issue?
I read that there are some Roman Catholic politicians who support SS marriage. One of them was greeted cordially by a high official in the RCC and there was no mention of his being outside of the RCC, even though his stance was publicly known.
The “rules” you speak of are of the teaching authority, not the net of free will exercised. If the 14 year old firmly believes 1am is the appropriate bed-time, and the teaching authority (parent) has declared 10pm, the former is irreconcilable with the latter. As parent, you have a right and duty to direct and immediately control your children, and if you choose not to, you call into question whether the rule is of any substance or merit.
And presumably then, the members of the ELCA may relocate to a branch where the position adopted by the minister on this or other matters matches their own views.The Church in this context is not the members of the Catholic Church, but the magisterial teachings of the Church. Catholicism is not a democracy and has a layer above and beyond what many protestants have. We don’t just vote and suddenly God changes at our whim. Because of mankind’s fallen nature they cannot be trusted to follow the path to God if left to their own devices. We see this over and over in the old testament. Christ did not leave the people to just take votes on right and wrong, but left the Apostles and their successors, the bishops, to guide the people just as judges and prophets were raised up to return people to the faith throughout the old testament. The first sin was lack of obedience and many people continue to manifest that sin in rejecting the magisterial teachings of the Church. Just as Adam and Eve lost paradise from their disobedience, many Catholics are at danger of the same thing if they are willfully disobedient to the legitimate authority that Christ left over mankind.
The Church does teach on many things that people simply ignore. Personally I think the Church did much better when she declared rebels as heretics and declared them anathema, but we currently have a kinder gentler Church. I suspect at some time the congenial parent will look at all the wayward children and declare enough. As my pastor once said, he is not here to make friends but get souls to heaven. One doesn’t do that by letting the flock scatter to the four winds.
Yep. It’s the same thing my kids say when they don’t want to do something. “you’re not the boss of me”. Christian charity demands that we instruct the ignorant and admonish the sinner. God did not setup many chosen people. He did not have 10 lists of commandments. What you advocate is that there are many truths and each person’s personal truth is correct. There is but one truth and that is the truth of God.
It is a matter of judgement for how, say, a prominent Catholic who publically promotes actions contrary to the faith ought to be regarded/received/rebuked etc. The most basic principle is that whatever course is taken should do more good than harm.
Well maybe you shouldn’t, but analogies have limits beyond which they don’t fit. Would there be merit is you castigating a neighbour for adopting too late a bedtime for their children - unlikely. Would it be reasonable to discuss the matter? Maybe.