Well, as most of you know the ELCA has voted on a social statement on sexuality that, among other things, lifts Vision and Expectations exclusion of homosexuals in publically accountable monogamous relationships. I was at Churchwide Assembly, where this was voted on, as a visitor for the first couple days. I got a taste of the arguments that CORE and Lutherans Concerned were using.
With all that in mind I have two thought experiments:
1.What if we had been arguing these things in a homo-normative society about the inclusion of heterosexuals in the ministry? Think of all the examples of bad heterosexuals and bad heterosexual relationships in the Bible. I mean Solomon forsook his religion in the name of women. Ruth trades sex for status. Jesus said if you even look at a woman with lust in your heart you’ve committed adultery.
And you say you want these people as pastors? Not only that you want these people to… marry? To reproduce?
2. What would the argument look like if, in two years time, we try to re-bottle (re-closet?) this, that is undo the ministry recommendations? Would we use the same arguments? Would CORE talk more about personal experience and Lutherans Concerned talk more about the Bible? What would shift? Was this a Pandora’s box moment or an experiment?
I know a lot of folk seem to think progress is inevitable, that once something is normalized it is normalized permanently. I think people who think this haven’t read history. I think the progress of 2009 could be wiped out in 2011. Actions cause re-actions, etc.
At any rate, think about these things, and if something interesting comes up post!