Sigh ... it is perhaps hopeless when even an ELCA seminarian buys into the CT claim that the social statement was theologically and scripturally ungrounded. There is a link to the statement in the article. Click on the link. You will find the Table of Contents for the statement and, more importantly, you will find a link to Background Information and Other Resources, which leads to numerous supporting documents that represent the theological underpinnings of the statement. Many heavily reference scripture. One is a 28-page essay solely devoted to relevant Biblical texts, which itself has over 100 references to other sources discussing relevant Biblical texts. As others have said, you may disagree with the conclusions contained in the ELCA statement. But saying that Scripture was entirely ignored in its development is untrue and absurd. And it is ridiculously trivial for anyone who cares to, to discover that for themselves.

I am presently a seminarian in the ELCA and attended the CORE conference. While I do believe the ELCA would have been better served to theologically ground their social statement on human sexuality, in response particularly to Braaten's concern with the use of reason, I return to the quote by Luther listed on the first page of this article, "Unless I am convinced by proofs from scripture or by plain and clear reasons and arguments, I cannot and will not retract." Luther leaves room for the presence of reason within our theological framework. Binding and loosing is a very Lutheran tradition within the law and our understanding of scripture. We have not abandoned the Hebrew Scriptures. Law and Gospel are contained in both the Old and New Testaments. Also, a point of clarification. CORE's theological conference was free for Seminary students but cost nearly $100 for anyone else who wished to attend. This was not a free conference as this article leads one to believe.

Sorry, but I don't respond well when people like Neff and Braaten suggest that ELCA Lutherans like me sneer at the Bible, have no use for a moral code, and are anti-Semitic ... all assertions I know to be untrue. And virtually nobody posting here seems to want to hear that ... they simply assume these claims are true and build on that to demonize what the ELCA did. So really, no disrepect or ill-will is intended toward the moderator. I'm just extremely disappointed that CT would publish a piece like this in the first place. And if, as someone else suggested, the article accurately reflects the sentiments expressd at the L-CORE conference regarding the ELCA, I'm all the more disappointed.

Friendly Reminder: Remember to keep your comments and posts courteous and respectful. Attack the issues, but not each other. Thanks for contributing, BJ Community Manager

David Neff's summary of the recent Lutheran CORE Theological Conference's presentations does a good job hitting the highlights. However, as someone who was present, I would offer one minor clarification. Dr. Braaten cited sainted Lutheran theologian Gerhard Forde as his source when he described the Lutheran emphasis on the doctrine of justification by faith as a "Lutheran crap detector." Yes, we Lutherans are feisty. It's in our DNA. While at Princeton Seminary, Prof. Edward Dowey, an author of the Westminster Confession of 1967, remarked in a lecture how much more interesting Luther was to read than Calvin. He observed the former was earthy, at times even crude in his descriptions while Calvin was a Parisian attorney exiled to one of Europe's most beautiful cities and clearly never looked out his window!