wfn.org | ELCA Bishops Discuss Ecumenical Proposals

[ELCANEWS@ELCASCO.ELCA.ORG]

ELCA NEWS SERVICE

March 20, 1997

ELCA BISHOPS DISCUSS ECUMENICAL PROPOSALS
97-10-025-AH

     WOODLAND HILLS, Calif. (ELCA)  -- Bishops of the Evangelical
Lutheran Church in America, meeting here March 6-11, talked about
response in ELCA synods to ecumenical proposals to be considered
at the ELCA Churchwide Assembly in August.  The church is
scheduled to vote on entering into "full communion" with the
Episcopal Church and with three churches of the Reformed
tradition: the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), Reformed Church in
America and United Church of Christ.
     Several bishops reported that opinions in their synods are
mixed or not supportive of one or the other of the proposals.
The ELCA Church Council sent the proposals forward to the
assembly at its meeting in November.
     The Saint Paul (Minn.) Area Synod is "deeply divided,"
according to Bishop Mark S. Hanson.  Hanson tapped a common theme
when he cited "a visceral response ... coming out of a piety that
is suspicious of hierarchy."  In this case, "intellectual
arguments are not helpful," Hanson said.  He asked, "How can we
say to people, it is okay to be a member of the ELCA and not
support these agreements?"
     The Rev. Paull E. Spring, Seneca, Pa., said he will write a
piece for "The Lutheran" magazine opposing  "A Formula of
Agreement" (relating to the churches of the Reformed tradition),
while many in his synod support that proposal.  Spring is bishop
of the ELCA's Northwestern Pennsylvania Synod.
     In the Upper Midwest it is the clergy of the ELCA who are
most likely to be divided on the proposals and most opposed to
the "Concordat of Agreement" with the Episcopal Church, according
to the Rev. David W. Olson, bishop of the Minneapolis Area Synod.
     The Rev. Peter Rogness, bishop of the Greater Milwaukee
Synod, said, "We are in an awkward situation as the vote
approaches because the lines of debate have never been clear."
It does not help to tell people their visceral arguments are not
in keeping with an ecumenical spirit, he said.
     "We are burdened by a process that never opened to the life
of the church," Rogness said.  He finds himself  "with some
reservations about the Concordat," but unable to voice them
without speaking against the processes of the church.  Rogness
said debate has been handicapped.  "We have not been free to be
open and  vigorous in our expression" for fear of inflaming the
argument, he said.
     The Rev. Peter Strommen, Duluth, bishop of the Northeastern
Minnesota Synod, said the church has "an enormous stake in the
passage of the Concordat," making it extremely difficult to
oppose it.  "One difficulty," he said, "is that a well-
articulated argument against the proposals has never been
published by the church, so there is a sense of a highly-managed
process with very high stakes."
     The Rev. H. George Anderson, presiding bishop of the ELCA,
said four "matters of judgment" are important for the church:
"First, will the mission work of this church be advanced or
diffused by either proposal?  Second, does the acceptance of the
gift of the `historic episcopate' vitiate the Lutheran
understanding of ministry?"
     Anderson continued, "Third, are the differences between us
and our partners of the Reformed tradition over the doctrine of
the Lord's Supper church-dividing?  The Formula of Agreement
asserts that they are not.  We must decide if this is true," he
said.  "Fourth, can we accept the doctrinal position of the
United Church of Christ as representative of its congregations?"
     Anderson said he hopes people in the ELCA will have enough
information to make a decision on these four "judgment issues."
On the most basic level, he said, "we must know what the
documents say and assume that they mean what they say.  Don't
assume any subterfuge."
     The Rev. Richard N. Jessen, bishop of the Nebraska Synod,
said he has found "every point of opposition is based on
misunderstanding."
     In the New England Synod there is "very little opposition to
the Concordat" but "strong feelings against the Formula,"
according to Bishop Robert L. Isaksen, "mostly based on anecdotal
evidence" and a sense of "losing the confessional basis of
Lutheranism."  He said, "People need to know we are hearing their
fears, and we will need to stand tall."
     The Rev. Steven L. Ullestad, Waverly, Iowa, said, while
people say their opinions are not being heard, "both documents
have been changed" based on concerns expressed by the ELCA.
Ullestad is bishop of the ELCA's Northeastern Iowa Synod,
     The Rev. Roy G. Almquist, Philadelphia, bishop of the
Southeastern Pennsylvania Synod, said he is "visceral" about
approving of the ecumenical proposals.  He said those who oppose
the proposals are like "some congregations who simply do not want
to change.  They are comfortable with who they are and do not
really care about the church of the future."
     The Rev. Allan C. Bjornberg, Denver, bishop of the Rocky
Mountain Synod, said some people are afraid "this argument will
fracture us."  He said, "Ecumenism means giving and receiving,
it's a conversation with two or more tenable positions."
     In an interview Bjornberg added, "I sense an anxious
reaction that shows a discomfort with opposing positions.  For
some people `being heard' means `you adopt my position.'" He
said, "We have a process, we have given this decision to the
whole church.  Now we need to ask ourselves if we can disagree
and still be the church."
     Bishop Paul J. Blom, Houston, Texas, co-chair of the
Lutheran-Episcopal Coordinating Committee, and Bishop Guy S.
Edmiston, Harrisburg, Pa., co-chair of the Lutheran-Reformed
Coordinating Committee, reported on final meetings of the two
committees.

For information contact:
Ann Hafften, Director (773) 380-2958 or NEWS@ELCA.ORG
http://www.elca.org/co/news/current.html