Is "Unity" our new God?

Maybe it is just because I am stuck in the middle of this whole thing, but it seems that "Unity" has become the new object of worship for our churches. (Well, I could say that it is homosexuality, and probably not get a whole lot of argument. But in the "mainline" denominations, I still think it is "Unity.")

In the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA), I had heard over and over, "I don't care if we have a gay pastor or not, I just think that pushing the matter will split the church." And so in the spirit of "unity," a Christian church acts in a highly un-Christlike manner.

Now, of course, these people could be totally against gay pastors and are just using the agreement of unity to hide behind. But of the people I met, they seem to truly be worried about the Church splitting. And this was before they knew I was gay.

And then there is the situation in the Anglican Union. Again, if they accept GLBT people fully into the life of the church, factions of the religion have threat end to split. So, does the church sell out a whole group of people just to keep unity? Again, un-Christlike.

Change the argument for a moment. "We don't want black pastors because they will split the church." How absurd! "We don't want a bishop who is in an inter-racial relationship because the African Primates will want to pull out." How stupid! But this is the type of argument that is thrown around.

Christ was accepting of all types of people. Religions have bastardized that principle by saying they are accepting but then placing all kinds of barriers to that acceptance.

What we have is a bunch of people who say they are trying to uphold the teachings and practices of Christ until those teachings and practices cause some to feel uncomfortable. Didn't Jesus cause others to feel uncomfortable? What if Jesus didn't act because it my cause a split in Judaism?

Christianity isn't about being comfortable, it is about doing what is right!

More thought on the ELCA Churchwide Assembly

Although I was only there for one day, I did watch chunks of it on the internet. You gotta love technology!

One of the things that really p*ssed me off was the "Greeting" from the President of the Lutheran Chruch Missouri Synod. In general I thought it was pretty civil concerning the rocky history of the two sects. Where I got hot under the collar is when the the Rev. Keischnick said he prayed, "that we will be able to come to harmonious conclusions regarding the authority and interpretation of the word of God, so the distance between us will not be widened, but will be bridged." Which is ancient right-wing for, "If you don't interpret the Bible the same way we do, we will take our Saviour and go home."

If the ELCA allowed GLBT clergy, then they were not going to interact with the ELCA. WHO CARES? Why should the ELCA listen to them anyway? They are back in the dark ages. They will not ordain women and they do not believe anyone except them can pray appropriately. Not the kind of Lutheranism that I understand. We know that when they say, "conclusions regarding the authourity and interepretation of the word of God," that means to interpret it THEIR way. They are not willing to conceed that the Spirit may be moving them to change.

I thought his comments were pot shots and had no place at the Assembly. I thinik the LCMS should be ashamed at using such strong-armed tactics.

The article from The Lutheran can be found here.