Why did the task force create a report and recommendation on the ELCA’s ministry policies?
The 2007 ELCA Churchwide Assembly directed the task force "specifically to address and make recommendations to the 2009 Churchwide Assembly on changes to any policies that preclude practicing homosexual persons from the rosters of this church” (CA07.06.27). This report and recommendation is the product of that request.
How was the content of this document created?
This report and recommendation represents the best thinking of the Task Force for the ELCA Studies on Sexuality, which is responsible for it. It is supported by a strong majority of the task force, although not all agreed with all aspects.
It looks as though the recommendation contains four resolutions. Would they all be subject to a vote at the same time?
The recommendation consists of four resolutions, each of which takes a step in the decision-making process. The task force proposes to the assembly that consideration of each resolution depends on passing the previous one, so if a resolution is defeated, the process stops.
What is the purpose of this recommended decision-making process?
The task force recommends the assembly begin by declaring its intention about what it wants to do. The proposed process begins with resolutions about
whether or not this church wants to find a way to recognize publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships; and
whether or not this church wants to move in the direction of rostering people living in such relationships. Then, if both of these are adopted, the next resolution asks if this church will commit itself to doing so with respect for the bound consciences of others.
If so, then the process leads to considering
how this could be accomplished. The resolutions begin by seeking agreement on the principles before they address the practice.
What is the task force asking in the first resolution?
The first resolution asks the
whether or not this church wants to find ways to recognize lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships. The task force believes this commitment needs to be made before asking the question of rostering, in order to ensure that people in lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships may be held accountable to a common standard.
Does the first resolution mean an official rite would be created in the ELCA for those in lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships?The task force is not prepared to recommend an official liturgical rite or order of public accountability because this church does not have biblical and theological consensus on the matter. At the same time, most task force members believe that ways can be found within local congregations to surround the commitments of lifelong, monogamous, same-gender couples with prayer and, in so doing, provide public affirmation and accountability within those communities.
What is the task force asking of the assembly in the second resolution?The second resolution asks this church whether, in principle, it is committed to finding a way for people in such publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships to serve as rostered leaders of this church. This step is based on the assumption that, before being able to consider specific proposals for how to accomplish such a change, this church must decide, in principle,
whether or not it wants to move in this direction. The approval of this resolution would not, at this step, imply a commitment to a particular way of accomplishing this.
What is the intention of the third resolution?The third resolution is similar in nature to the first resolution of the recommendations that came from the task force in 2005, which stated “that the ELCA be urged to concentrate on finding ways to live together faithfully in the midst of disagreements, recognizing the God-given mission and communion that we share as members of the body of Christ.” The task force believes that, before considering any concrete proposal to approve the rostering of people in publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships, the assembly must first consider whether it is willing to commit this church to taking such a step in the spirit of mutual support, love, and community in Christ.
How does the fourth resolution work?
If the assembly has voted to commit this church to find ways to recognize and hold accountable people in their same-gender relationships, to commit this church to find a way to roster people in such relationships, and to commit this church to do both in ways that enable us to bear one another's burdens and respect bound consciences, the task force proposes this means of implementation:
- Add a new element of structured flexibility to existing candidacy and call policies;
- Move from a policy that says a person in such a relationship can never be considered for rostering to a policy that trusts those to whom this church already has given responsibility for these decisions to;
- Allow them to act, should they so chose, within their arenas of responsibility;
- Using consistent churchwide policies that respect bound consciences; and
- Discern whether or not the ministry of Christ may be served best by approving or calling a specific gay or lesbian person who is living in a publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationship.
If the “structured flexibility” resolution (#4) is passed, where would pastors, deaconesses, diaconal ministers, or associates in ministry who are living in publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships be able to serve?
He or she would be able to serve only where those with responsibility for decision-making (i.e. congregations, synods, and bishops, or candidacy committees) decided that the mission of this church would be served best by approving or calling that particular candidate or rostered leader.
How would “structured” flexibility (#4) affect those Lutherans who are convinced that there should not be any changes to ELCA’s present policy regarding people in lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships?
If this approach to structured flexibility were adopted, it would still protect any congregation, candidacy committee, synod, or bishop by not requiring them to violate bound conscience by approving, calling, commissioning, consecrating, or ordaining anyone in a publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationship.
How can I respond to the Report and Recommendation?
At this point, the task force has completed its work. The way to respond is through your Synod Assembly. Synod Assemblies can consider and approve memorials in response to the report and recommendation, which are sent to the Memorials Committee of the Churchwide Assembly.
What is a memorial?
Synod assemblies address the Churchwide Assembly through memorials. A memorial adopted by a synod assembly is submitted to the Churchwide Assembly with a recommendation for action from the Memorials Committee of the Churchwide Assembly. Memorials should be reserved for broad policy issues that belong in the Churchwide Assembly.
Did all members of the task force agree with this recommendation?
The recommendation represents the best thinking to date of the ELCA Task Force for Studies on Sexuality, which is responsible for it. Not all members agreed with all aspects, but it was passed by a strong majority of the task force.
What is the significance of the dissenting positions?
Some task force members from two very different perspectives felt the need to record dissenting opinions. This is a further sign that the task force reflects differences that that exist throughout this church. The fact that the task force members embraced both agreement and dissent among themselves embodies the respect for conscience and sharing of burdens that they have encouraged among members of this church.