Reusable Toilet ‘Wipes’?!

Wallypop Family Wipes.

And angry Brits complain about Americans using soft toilet paper.

Pope Shenouda: “Christ a Palestinian”

Pope Shenouda III is proving an embarrassment to his flock, Robert Duncan reports.

Augustine on the Eucharist

Pat Madrid takes pains to argue that Augustine of Hippo was a Catholic bishop and that he believed what the Catholic church presently teaches on the Eucharist.

But  Catholic teaching developed much after the time of Augustine (d. 430).  Particularly important to the development of Catholic teaching were the controversies between Paschasius Radbertus (d. ca. 860)  and Ratramnus (d. ca. 868), that over the teachings of Berengar of Tours (d. 1088), and the incorporation of the Aristotelian categories of substance and accidents by Thomas Aquinas (d. 1274).

Here’s another collection of Augustine quotes (it appears to be Madrid’s source). It would do well to read his sermon on John 6, too. Augustine doesn’t get into any of those points that would separate the Catholic view from, say, the Calvinist view. For Augustine, it is faith in Christ that is determinitive; to eat Christ is to have him dwell in us, and for us to dwell in him. Augustine’s teaching lacks the gritty realism of folks like Radbertus. He doesn’t speak of worshipping the Eucahrist, or of parading it around Hippo. He doesn’t speak of concomitance, or hint at withholding the cup from the laity. He doesn’t speak of having the sacrifice offered on behalf of the dead.

So be very careful. Don’t claim more for Augustine than you can get from the text itself. Don’t impute to him developments that took place centuries later.

Williamson Apologizes

Clearly an imposed apology.

Update: But it didn’t meet the conditions imposed.

Synagogue Visit

I’m taking a group of college students to visit a Jewish synagogue this Friday night–Congregation Shaar Hasholam in Clear Lake.

We’re going to meet at 6:00 for a chat with Rabbi Stuart Federow (come prepared with questions), and the service itself will be at 7.

We have room for more. If you’ll join us (meet us there at 6), just send me a note so I can have an idea of how many to expect. “The more the merrier,” the rabbi says.

Membership Declines

The National Council of Churches reports on denominational statistics, with the numbers for the 25 largest denominations (the Seventh-day Adventist Church might be number 26, with 1,000,472 members in the US–15,000,000 in the world).

Mainline churches continue their decline, including the ELCA. See a bigger picture of its downward trend here. It started in 1987 with 5,288,048; 20 years later it was down to 4,709,956.

Can you really do a comparison? No. The churches listed count membership differently. Some include infants while others include only adults. Churches are self-reporting–and some individual congregations don’t have accurate rolls.

RIP John Fenton

I see, belatedly, that The Rev. Canon John Fenton (Christ Church, Oxford)  passed away in late December. An illustrious New Testament scholar, I had a short course with him during my D.Min. work, and I remember some wonderful chats with him.

Having been educated at a Lutheran seminary, I was shocked to learn there were NT scholars who disputed the reigning Q theory. Oxford and Cambridge continue to hold to Matthean priority, he noted, and view Q as an unnecessary, and typically German, peculiarity. Did my NT professors at Gettysburg (names like Nieting und Krodel) ever hint that someone might have a solid argument against the Germans? Ha.

Rodeo Time in Houston

It’s rodeo time in Houston!

Alan is disappointed that the Barbecue Championship coincides with the start of Lent.

Be that as it may, the smoke is ascending heavenward, the trail rides are heading to the city, and the parade will be this Saturday morning (I’ve never made it to the parade, and now that I am otherwise occupied on Saturday mornings, I guess I never will).

You can get half-price carnival ride tickets until tomorrow. The rodeo itself is a great deal: tickets start at $16–on Wednesdays they are only $10–and that gets you admission to the grounds, to the rodeo action, and to the concert which follows. We’re going to see Reba on March 11.

Time to dust off the Stetson.

After The Passion

A friend reminds me that The Passion of The Christ debuted five years ago today (Ash Wednesday).

Here are links to things I have written on the subject:

• The Passion of the Christ: Crisis and Opportunity in Jewish-Catholic Relations.
• Passionate Blogging: Interfaith Controversy and the Internet. In J. Shawn Landres and Michael Berenbaum, editors, After The Passion Is Gone: American Religious Consequences (AltaMira, 2004).
• The Sources of The Passion of The Christ

Cultures

Various US publishers routinely give travelers advice for what to do or not to do in other countries, so we don’t offend them.

Does anyone have a link to a site where these sensitive cultures give advice to their citizens about what to do or not to do when visiting the US, so they don’t offend us?

Vetting Prayers

I have a very bad feeling about this.

How Not to Be Relevant

Priest uses Super-Soaker instead of aspergillium at RIT Newman Center. Via Jeff Miller.

An ELCA Pastor on “The Recommendations”

Steven Tibbetts comments on the proposal before the ELCA.

Murder by Cop

Murder. That’s the only word I think fits the tragic case of Aaron Hobart. He was murdered by a cop.

I’m grateful details are finally coming out. The boy was not “violent”–just non-cooperative The family didn’t ask for the cops–they asked for a crisis intervention team, as their psychiatrist had told them. The cop was not alone–two others were there. He shot this boy multiple times (and friends of the family say they shot him in the back).

But we live in an area where cops are untouchable and grand juries are stacked by the DA.

Evangelism

Poster and flier for our upcoming evangelistic series …

Walter Hoye’s Sentencing

Account of what happened in the court room when Walter Hoye was sentenced for daring to walk silently in front of an abortion clinic.

Galveston

The daughter and I went down to Galveston today for the Mardi Gras celebration. We went to the Krewe of Barkus and Meoux parade on the Seawall and then strolled the Strand, collecting 30+ strands of beads between us, plus some cups, candy, and a stuffed animal.

The devastation from Hurricane Ike is evident throughout the island, though forgotten by the rest of the world, which finds Katrina a more fitting disaster for some reason.

The Vatican on Speech and the Press

Prior to Vatican 2, numerous popes condemned freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and religious liberty. Everyone says Vatican 2 changed all that. But consider this case. When a TV program mocked Catholic faith, the Vatican did not write to the producers to express their sorrow or to persuade them they were wrong. Instead, they protested to the nation’s government–as if they expected the national government to do something about speech the Vatican disliked!

A Family Tragedy

[Updated] A teenage son with a history of mental illness, off his medication, got into a heated argument with his parents. It escalated, and they called a crisis intervention hotline. The person at the hotline chose to send the police. When a police officer came to the door, the son opened it. A struggle ensued. The police officer drew his gun and fired at the unarmed boy five times as he attempted to flee. Four bullets hit him in the back, one lodged in the door.

Here are a couple of news reports: Fort Bend Now; KHOU.

My info comes from a friend of the family. Please pray for them.

Darwin’s Day

[This is an approximation of the sermon I preached today at Houston International Seventh-day Adventist Church. The only notes I was using were on my PowerPoint presentation; I tried to reproduce the gist of it after the fact here.]

2009 is a big year for Darwinists. February 12th marked Darwin’s 200th birthday–this past week Houston marked Charles Darwin’s 200th birthday;  November will bring the 150th anniversary of the publication of The Origin of Species. Houston is a leader in science research and education, so it isn’t surprising that Houston is participating in the anniversary celebrations. The major museums and many of the colleges and universities will be having displays and lectures to commemorate, and to reinforce, Darwin’s theory of evolution.

It’s a celebration, but in the announcements of the talks one can also detect a bit of defensiveness. Darwinists are afraid–afraid that they are losing ground. A 2005 National Geographic poll of 34 American and European countries asked people to respond to this question: “Human beings, as we know them, developed from earlier species of animals.” The United States placed 33rd (followed by Turkey), with only 40% of respondents saying the statement was true.

Darwinists are especially alarmed at the inroads that have been made by “Intelligent Design,” which they regard as a stealth form of Creationism. Despite losses in Dover, PA, and in Kansas, the issue keeps returning. “Intelligent Design” was the brainchild of Michael Behe, a professor of biochemistry at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania. His 1996 book, Darwin’s Black Box, laid out his arguments. Just as we can tell that Mt. Rushmore is not the product of the ordinary mountain-forming processes of uplift and erosion, so we can see evidence of intelligent design in life. He argues on the basis of what he calls “irreducible complexity,” and gives the mouse trap as an example of a machine that could not be any simpler without being unable to function as a mousetrap. He points to certain cell structures, such as the bacterium flagellum, as an example in nature. If you take away one item in its structure, you don’t have a flagellum that functions less well, you have something that doesn’t function–at least not as a propulsion device. How then could it have evolved through the Darwinian process of random variation and natural selection over the course of eons of time?

It’s really not a new argument; it’s a variation of what is known as the teleological argument for the existence of God as articulated by philosophers from Aristotle to Thomas Aquinas. William Paley (1743-1805) compared the natural world to a watch: a glance at its intricate workings tells you it didn’t arise by chance. It was designed. He pointed to structures in the human body, including the epiglottis  and the eye, as indicators of design.

Darwin saw his theory as a refutation of Paley; he believed natural selection showed how complex structures could evolve without divine intervention.

Michael Behe disagrees; he thinks Intelligent Design, as he defines it, is compatible with deep time, common ancestry, and natural selection.

“I have no reason to doubt that the universe is … billions of years old.”

“I find the idea of common descent … fairly convincing”

“… Although some religious thinkers envision active, continuing intervention in nature, intelligent design is quite compatible with the view that the universe operates by unbroken natural laws, with the design of life perhaps packed into its initial set-up.”

It makes you wonder what the fuss is all about. Why do the evolutionists despise and fear him so?–he is one of them! And he sees no incompatibility between evolution and his Catholic faith–as did Pope Pius XII fifty years ago.

Many other religions have also reconciled themselves to Darwinian thought, as noted in a recent Pew study. Last Sunday was celebrated by over a thousand churches as Evolution Sunday, with sermons dedicated to defending Darwin.

No Seventh-day Adventist churches participated. We gather to worship on Sabbath, a day that reinforces in us each week its Biblical rationale:

“For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.” Exodus 20:11

Our observance of the Sabbath has been a bulwark against acceptance of Darwin’s theory (though, regrettably,  some Adventist theologians and scientists are beginning to compromise). But we do not despise science. We value scientific inquiry. We have credible science programs in our colleges and universities. Because of this dual appreciation for the rightful role of both the Bible and science, we have investigated the Bible’s claims and those of Darwin. We created the field of “scientific creationism,” as Ron Numbers details in his history, The Creationists. George McCready Price, a Canadian school teacher and armchair geologist, got the ball rolling. He was followed by Harold W. Clark, who was able to beyond McCready’s amateurism because he had a Ph.D. in biology from UC Berkeley. Their arguments were picked up by Henry Morris and John Whitcomb in their 1961 book, The Genesis Flood, and scientific creationism reached a much broader audience. The Seventh-day Adventist Church founded its Geoscience Research Institute in 1958; Morris would help found the Creation Research Society in 1963 and the Institute for Creation Research in 1972.

The Geoscience Research Institute’s webpage is a wealth of information about Creationism, including back issues of its scientific journal, Origins. Another resource I’d recommend as a basic introductory text is Ariel A. Roth, Origins: Linking Science and Scripture.

Creationists have done a good job of raising substantive questions about evolutionary theory. “Intelligent Design” has served a role here. It has raised the question of design, but it hasn’t been able to do any more than that; its proponents have not proposed any way to test for and verify design. Its critics therefore argue it is unscientific.

But there are other questions we can raise. There are missing layers in the geologic column which cannot be attributed to erosion of those layers. There’s the fact that plant fossils are rarely found in quantity alongside dinosaur fossils, raising the question of what they ate. There’s the question of erosion rates, which are easily measured–these suggest that the continents would have been washed away many times in the hundreds of millions of years needed to evolve life according to the Darwinian timeframe.  There’s the question of the “Prebiotic Soup” out of which life supposedly arose; experiments to replicate it, and form amino acids, have involved chemical mixes that cannot be proven to have existed–the scientists “stacked the deck.” Plus, these assume the possibility of spontaneous generation of life from non-life, something Pasteur proved to be impossible. There’s the question of the “Cambrian Explosion,” in which widely varied forms of life suddenly appear in the fossil record without evidence of their ancestors in earlier layers.

The field of cladistics, or biological classification, also raises important questions, notably the lack direct ancestors, or “missing links,” at the points where species are said to branch off. And there are fewer of these than there were a generation ago, because some classic examples, such as the evolution of the horse, have proven to be false.

Another classic example proven false is the embryonic chart of Ernst Haeckel. He attempted to show that all embryos look basically the same, saying it was an evidence of common origin. He argued that “ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny”–that is, the development of the embryo repeats its evolutionary history. Haeckel’s chart was reproduced in countless biological texts, including Kenneth R. Miller & Joseph Levine, Biology (4th ed., Prentice Hall, 1998). But that was the last year that Miller and Levine included it. They tell the story on their webpage:

British embryologist Michael Richardson and his colleagues published an important paper in the August 1997 issue of Anatomy & Embryology showing that Haeckel had fudged his drawings to make the early stages of embryos appear more alike than they actually are! As it turns out, Haeckel’s contemporaries had spotted the fraud during his lifetime, and got him to admit it. However, his drawings nonetheless became the source material for diagrams of comparative embryology in nearly every biology textbook, including ours!”

To their credit, they did what was right:

So, what have we done?

Well, we fixed it!

In 1998 we rewrote page 283 of the 5th edition to better reflect the scientific evidence. Our books now contain accurate drawings of the embryos made from detailed photomicrographs.

But other textbook authors appear not to have gotten the memo. Haeckel’s embryos appear in other textbooks since, including Raven and Johnson, Biology (2002 and 2004), despite Richardson’s proof that they constitute “one of the most famous fakes in biology.”

So Creationists–and even evolutionists, in the last two cases–have done a good job of raising questions. But that’s not enough. This point was made effectively by Randy Olson in his film, “A Flock of Dodos.” Intuition–the sense that something isn’t right–is a good starting point. It’s how all science starts. But it isn’t science unless it goes on to propose a hypothesis to explain the data, tests the hypothesis, and submits the paper for peer review.

Are Creationists doing research and publishing in peer reviewed journals? Seventh-day Adventist scholars are. I could mention many examples. Ariel Roth has worked in the area of the growth of coral reefs, fossil and modern, showing that instead of requiring millions of years to form, the deepest could have been formed in about 5000 years. Harold Coffin and Clyde Webster have looked at the Yellowstone fossil forests; Coffin compared them to transported forests in the aftermath of the eruption of Mt. St. Helens, while Webster went further, examined the lava flows, comparing their chemical signature to lava flows of active volcanoes in Hawaii, and demonstrated that dozens of layers of forest were deposited by eruptions that occurred in the space of a couple of years. Paul Buchheim has looked at the deposition of layers in fossil lake beds, demonstrating that they, too, could be formed in much shorter time than has been assumed.

And there is still room for nature to play a hand and surprise everyone. This was the case in the creation of the Canyon Lake Gorge in the Texas Hill Country, which was carved in the space of three days in 2002.

But we have to be honest and acknowledge that there has been plenty of un-scientific creationism as well; frauds have been proposed by hucksters–and accepted by gullible creationists. We can mention the various claims of having found human footprints in the Paluxy River in Glen Rose, TX, or Ron Wyatt’s fantastic claims of having found Noah’s Ark and the ark of the covenant. I remember as a kid hearing people suggest that dinosaurs never existed; either the fossils were put together in the wrong way or God tricked us by putting phony fossils in the rock. Some have suggested Satan made dinosaurs, or that man “amalgamated” them through cross-breeding, creating “confused species.” But what species we know today could have been crossed to create a brachiosaurus? I think of the scene where this dinosaur first appears in “Jurassic Park.” He didn’t look at all confused to me–though the fictional scientists did! But I loved the look on their faces, a mixture of disbelief and awe and wonder and a giddy desire to get closer. That’s how we should approach these magnificent extinct life forms, seeing them as examples of God’s marvelous creative power.

Creationists have also been guilty of playing a kind of “bait-and-switch.” This happened in the case of Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District. That was the school district where they required teachers to read a short statement in biology classes suggesting “Intelligent Design” was an alternative, and if they wanted to know more about it they should read the book, Of Pandas and People. In the court case it was demonstrated that earlier editions had spoken of “creation”–this edition simply replaced “creation” with Intelligent Design. The “smoking gun” was this passage in a draft:

“Evolutionists think the former is correct, cdesign proponentsists accept the latter view.”

They wanted to insert a theological belief into the public schools, and they did so by a sleight-of-hand, using “Intelligent Design” as code. And the Judge caught them, and determined they were unconstitutionally seeking to bring a religious belief into the public schools.

We Seventh-day Adventists, though we are proponents of creationism, do not see that we must introduce it into the public schools. We believe Jefferson was right to advocate that the first amendment erects a “wall of separation” between church and state. We do not see it the place of the government to advocate religious beliefs–even those we agree with.

We may use science to show that our belief in Creationism is reasonable, but we cannot pretend that our belief comes from any other source than Scripture. Let’s not be embarrassed to affirm it. We keep the Sabbath, and believe in Creationism, because we accept the plain teaching of Scripture:

“For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.” Exodus 20:11

And we see that Scripture raises other important issues, questions that must be answered by those who think that Christianity and evolution can be combined. A book that details many of these is John Baldwin, Creation, Catastrophe, and Calvary: Why a Global Flood Is Vital to the Doctrine of the Atonement.

One of the key arguments Baldwin makes is this. The Bible says the creation was “very good.” It says (Rom 5:12), “Through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin…” But Christ paid “the wages of sin” by his own death. “The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death” (1 Cor 15:26 ). And having destroyed death, God creates the earth anew, free of sin and death:  “And I saw a new heaven and a new earth” (Rev. 21:1).

Evolution says, on the other hand, that death predated humanity by billions of years. If that is true, Christ’s death does not pay “the wages of sin, ” and we can’t have hope that death will be destroyed. Embracing evolution destroys both the atonement on Calvary and our hope in the Second Advent.

Proper understanding of Creation takes on a new importance in the last days, as we read in Revelation 14:

“And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, saying with a loud voice, ‘Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters’” (Revelation 14:6-7).

Let me highlight one phrase: we are to worship the one who “made heaven, and earth, and the sea.” There’s one other place in Scripture where that phrase is used–the Sabbath commandment. Here in the Three Angels’ Messages of Revelation 14 is a clear allusion to the Sabbath in the center of an eschatological warning about worship.

Consider the phrase, “the fountains of waters”–it’s an allusion to another passage, the “fountains of the deep” that erupted in the flood. God’s warning of judgment to come asks us to consider both the Creation and the flood, assuming the historicity of both.

The same connection is made by Peter:

Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, and saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: but the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. (2 Peter 3:3-7)

Attention was focused on the judgment message of Revelation 14 in 1844–the same year Charles Darwin published a preliminary “Essay” that was foundational for his later volume, The Origin of Species. We as Seventh-day Adventists can take that as providential–at the very time Darwin was proposing his theories of natural selection, God was raising up a people to proclaim God as Creator, worshiping him on the timeless memorial God gave of Creation, the Sabbath.

Let’s hear again the angel’s message. What does it tell us to do? Fear God, give glory to him, and worship him. To “fear” God comes from the Greek phobéomai, a word which itself comes from the Greek, phébomai , “to flee.” The Greek translation of the Old Testament, the Septuagint, uses it to translate the Hebrew terms for “to be afraid” or “to tremble”; to “reverence.” We need a vision of God’s majesty, as seen by Moses, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel and John. We’ve tamed him down; but he’s not tame, as C. S. Lewis said–he’s a roaring lion. We need to approach him with fear and trembling and awe.

“Give glory to him” comes from the Greek, dóxa, itself a translation of the Hebrew term, kābôd. One one level it refers to the brilliance of God’s presence; when we “give glory,” it means acknowledging or extolling God’s greatness and power. It means lifting him up in praise, exalting him on high.

And to “Worship him” is to throw ourselves down before him–from the Greek, proskynéō, literally to bow down in adoration and worship before God’s majesty. We need to rethink what we do in worship. Too often our worship time can be a busy time; we have announcements, and we chit-chat, and the kids run underfoot, some are watching DVDs, others eating and drinking or playing. We need to recover the kind of worship called for here–it starts by recognizing who God is, this awesome God who created the universe with a word, glorifying him, and throwing ourselves at his feet.

The First Angel’s Message also tells us our task: to proclaim the everlasting gospel to all the world. And that starts here, and now, when we walk through this door to go back out into the world.

Judgment is coming–and that mean’s Darwin will truly have his day. “It is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment” (Heb 9:27). “We shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ” (Rom 14:10). “That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow … and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father” (Phil 2:10-11).

TSA agent: “I don’t look at them as people”

I don’t find that statement by an airport screener very comforting.

Reviewing the Oliver Situation

Revival of “Oliver” prompts debates about Fagin.

Madoff Impact

Elie Wiesel Foundation all but wiped out by Madoff investments.

Catholic Conversion Stories

James Swan looks at the genre.

An LCMA Statement on ELCA Proposal

Paul McCain has it.

Jailed for Speech

A judge has ordered a pastor to go to jail for exercising his First Amendment rights–for “unlawful approach” near an abortion mill.

Video of his actions (and notice the obnoxious behavior of the counter-protester).

SSPX Bishop Expelled from Argentina

Holocaust-denying Bishop Richard Williamson of the SSPX is being expelled by Argentina.

Fear and Loathing in LA

An academic symposium on “Human Rights and Gaza” at UCLA turned into a hate-fest. One-sided scholarly papers by Hamas apologists led to raucus obscene chanting by the audience. Report. Op-ed.

While the four professorial talks were delivered and received quietly, interrupted only occasionally by applause, emotions escalated during the closing question-and-answer session.

Most of the questioners were adults, well beyond student age, and their softball questions about control of Washington by the Jewish lobby and how to divest from Israel were easily fielded by the speakers.

The mood changed when a few pro-Israel attendees got their chance, according to audience members. When Eric Golub asked Hajjar whether she would consider as prosecutable crimes Hamas’ murder of Fatah rivals, the use of civilians as human shields and recruitment of suicide bombers, the professor responded, “If you think I favor suicide bombings, then you have that Zionist hat on your head screwed on way too tight.”

Hajjar later retracted her comment, but her initial response was met by audience cheers and chants of “Zionism is racism,” “Zionism is Nazism,” “Free, Free Palestine” and “F…, f… Israel.”

Although there were no threats of violence and a policeman was at hand, when the meeting concluded, some members of the audience engaged pro-Israel students with further cries of “f… you.”

Shirley Eshaghian, a psychology senior and president of Bruins for Israel, said she left the symposium shaken.

“I never felt so unsafe on campus,” she said. “People were shouting, and I had this horrible feeling that I, as a Jew, was being attacked; that I was being called a Nazi.”

Dana Sadgat, an 18-year-old freshman in computer science, said she was also deeply upset. “This was not put on by a bunch of kids; this was run by an academic department at UCLA,” she said. “There was no speaker there for Israel; there wasn’t even one who was not against Israel. But this experience has made me even more pro-Israel.”

The two students agreed with other attendees that at no point did Slyomovics, the organizer and moderator of the event, try to intervene or urge the audience to observe a basic level of decorum.

UCLA’s PR machine says nothing about the hate.

A student report.

A faculty defense of the “august academic figures” says, “Simply because some in the audience (from all perspectives) were out of line in some groups’ sloganeering, the problems should not reflect on the excellent symposium itself.”

Cheap Dates for Catholic Couples

Commonweal commentary on some USCCB suggestions.

The ELCA’s Sexuality Proposal

The stroke of noon brought the release of the ELCA draft Social Statement on Human Sexuality, along with a Report and Recommendation on Ministry Policies.

The recommendations propose a four-step process; if the first step is passed, they would go on to the next.

Step one asks the assembly whether, in principle, it is committed to finding ways to allow congregations and synods that choose to do so to recognize, support, and hold publicly accountable lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships.

Step two asks the assembly 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.

Step three asks this church whether, in the future implementation of steps one and two (see above), it will commit to doing so in such a way that all in this church bear the burdens of the other, love the neighbor, and respect the bound conscience of any with whom they disagree.

Step four then presents a proposal for how this church could move toward change in a way that respects the bound conscience of all.

The actual proposed resolutions (which, under proposed rules, would require a simple majority):

1) RESOLVED, that the ELCA commit itself to finding ways to allow congregations and synods that choose to do so to recognize, support, and hold publicly accountable life-long, monogamous, same gender relationships.

2) RESOLVED, that the ELCA commit itself to finding a way for people in such publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships to serve as rostered leaders of this church.

3) RESOLVED, that in the implementation of these resolutions, the ELCA commits itself to bear one another’s burdens, love the neighbor, and respect the bound consciences of all.

Then, after a page of “whereases”:

4) … RESOLVED, that the members of 620 the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America commit themselves to respect the bound consciences of those with whom they disagree regarding decisions on the call and rostering of individuals in publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships, in this church and with churches ecumenically and globally; and be it further

RESOLVED, that this church, because of its commitment to respect the bound consciences of all, declares its intent to incorporate structured flexibility in decision-making into its policies and procedures so that synods, bishops, congregations, candidacy committees, and others involved in the candidacy process and in the process of extending calls will be free to act according to their convictions regarding both the approving or disapproving in candidacy and the extending or not extending of a call to rostered service of a person who is otherwise qualified and who is living or contemplates living in a publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationship; and be it further

RESOLVED, that the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America make provision in its policies to eliminate the prohibition of rostered service by members who are in publicly accountable, lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships; and be it further …

And so on and so forth.

The proposed Social Statement, “Human Sexuality: Gift and Trust,” claims to present “A distinctly Lutheran approach”–significantly, it in fact reverses the “distinctly Lutheran approach” to theology. Instead of starting with Law, and proceeding to Gospel, it starts with Gospel, then leads to a watered down Law. It’s “cheap grace,” as Bonhoeffer would say.

Contrast the simplicity of Luther’s explanation in his Small Catechism:

Thou shalt not commit adultery.

What does this mean?–Answer.

We should fear and love God that we may lead a chaste and decent life in words and deeds, and each love and honor his spouse.

And from the Large Catechism:

199] Thou shalt not commit adultery.

200] These commandments now [that follow] are easily understood from [the explanation of] the preceding; for they are all to the effect that we [be careful to] avoid doing any kind of injury to our neighbor. But they are arranged in fine [elegant] order. In the first place, they treat of his own person. Then they proceed to the person nearest him, or the closest possession next after his body, namely, his wife, who is one flesh and blood with him, so that we cannot inflict a higher injury upon him in any good that is his. Therefore it is explicitly forbidden here to bring any disgrace upon him in respect to his wife. 201] And it really aims at adultery, because among the Jews it was ordained and commanded that every one must be married. Therefore also the young were early provided for [married], so that the virgin state was held in small esteem, neither were public prostitution and lewdness tolerated (as now). Therefore adultery was the most common form of unchastity among them.

202] But because among us there is such a shameful mess and the very dregs of all vice and lewdness, this commandment is directed also against all manner of unchastity, whatever it may be called; 203] and not only is the external act forbidden, but also every kind of cause, incitement, and means, so that the heart, the lips, and the whole body may be chaste and afford no opportunity, help, or persuasion to inchastity. 204] And not only this, but that we also make resistance, afford protection and rescue wherever there is danger and need; and again, that we give help and counsel, so as to maintain our neighbor’s honor. For whenever you omit this when you could make resistance, or connive at it as if it did not concern you, you are as truly guilty as the one perpetrating the deed. 205] Thus, to state it in the briefest manner, there is required this much, that every one both live chastely himself and help his neighbor do the same, so that God by this commandment wishes to hedge round about and protect [as with a rampart] every spouse that no one trespass against them.

206] But since this commandment is aimed directly at the state of matrimony and gives occasion to speak of the same, you must well understand and mark, first, how gloriously God honors and extols this estate, inasmuch as by His commandment He both sanctions and guards it. He has sanctioned it above in the Fourth Commandment: Honor thy father and thy mother; but here He has (as we said) hedged it about and protected it. 207] Therefore He also wishes us to honor it, and to maintain and conduct it as a divine and blessed estate; because, in the first place, He has instituted it before all others, and therefore created man and woman separately (as is evident), not for lewdness, but that they should [legitimately] live together, be fruitful, beget children, and nourish and train them to the honor of God.

208] Therefore God has also most richly blessed this estate above all others, and, in addition, has bestowed on it and wrapped up in it everything in the world, to the end that this estate might be well and richly provided for. Married life is therefore no jest or presumption; but it is an excellent thing and a matter of divine seriousness. For it is of the highest importance to Him that persons be raised who may serve the world and promote the knowledge of God, godly living, and all virtues, to fight against wickedness and the devil.

209] Therefore I have always taught that this estate should not be despised nor held in disrepute, as is done by the blind world and our false ecclesiastics, but that it be regarded according to God’s Word, by which it is adorned and sanctified, so that it is not only placed on an equality with other estates, but that it precedes and surpasses them all, whether they be that of emperor, princes, bishops, or whoever they please. For both ecclesiastical and civil estates must humble themselves and all be found in this estate, as we shall hear. 210] Therefore it is not a peculiar estate, but the most common and noblest estate, which pervades all Christendom, yea which extends through all the world.

211] In the second place, you must know also that it is not only an honorable, but also a necessary state, and it is solemnly commanded by God that, in general, in all conditions, men and women, who were created for it, shall be found in this estate; yet with some exceptions (although few) whom God has especially excepted, so that they are not fit for the married estate, or whom He has released by a high, supernatural gift that they can maintain chastity without this estate. 212] For where nature has its course, as it is implanted by God, it is not possible to remain chaste without marriage. For flesh and blood remain flesh and blood, and the natural inclination and excitement have their course without let or hindrance, as everybody sees and feels. In order, therefore, that it may be the more easy in some degree to avoid inchastity, God has commanded the estate of matrimony, that every one may have his proper portion and be satisfied therewith; although God’s grace besides is required in order that the heart also may be pure.

213] From this you see how this popish rabble, priests, monks, and nuns, resist God’s order and commandment, inasmuch as they despise and forbid matrimony, and presume and vow to maintain perpetual chastity, and, besides, deceive the simple-minded with lying words and appearances [impostures]. 214] For no one has so little love and inclination to chastity as just those who because of great sanctity avoid marriage, and either indulge in open and shameless prostitution, or secretly do even worse, so that one dare not speak of it, as has, alas! been learned too fully. 215] And, in short, even though they abstain from the act, their hearts are so full of unchaste thoughts and evil lusts that there is a continual burning and secret suffering, which can be avoided in the married life. 216] Therefore all vows of chastity out of the married state are condemned by this commandment, and free permission is granted, yea, even the command is given, to all poor ensnared consciences which have been deceived by their monastic vows to abandon the unchaste state and enter the married life, considering that even if the monastic life were godly, it would nevertheless not be in their power to maintain chastity, and if they remain in it, they must only sin more and more against this commandment.

217] Now, I speak of this in order that the young may be so guided that they conceive a liking for the married estate, and know that it is a blessed estate and pleasing to God. For in this way we might in the course of time bring it about that married life be restored to honor, and that there might be less of the filthy, dissolute, disorderly doings which now run riot the world over in open prostitution and other shameful vices arising from disregard of married life. 218] Therefore it is the duty of parents and the government to see to it that our youth be brought up to discipline and respectability, and when they have come to years of maturity, to provide for them [to have them married] in the fear of God and honorably; He would not fail to add His blessing and grace, so that men would have joy and happiness from the same.

219] Let me now say in conclusion that this commandment demands not only that every one live chastely in thought, word, and deed in his condition, that is, especially in the estate of matrimony, but also that every one love and esteem the spouse given him by God. For where conjugal chastity is to be maintained, man and wife must by all means live together in love and harmony, that one may cherish the other from the heart and with entire fidelity. For that is one of the principal points which enkindle love and desire of chastity, so that, where this is found, chastity will follow as a matter of course without any command. 220] Therefore also St. Paul so diligently exhorts husband and wife to love and honor one another. 221] Here you have again a precious, yea, many and great good works, of which you can joyfully boast, against all ecclesiastical estates, chosen without God’s Word and commandment.

LCMS pastor and theologian Paul McCain is grieving for an ELCA friend.