2006 Synod Assembly

Bishop Harold Usgaard's Oral Report to the 2006 Synod Assembly

Bishop Eliuphoo Sima, the bishop of Tanzania’s Central Diocese, one of our companion synods, explained to me the use of the word “asanti.” It means “thank you.” He says it is the only Swahili word we need to know to understand them. It explains a lot about their faith and character. I fear I do not use the word often enough. And so today I want to especially say “asanti” to some folks who aren’t always publicly recognized for their invaluable efforts. I would like you to meet and thank those members of the synod staff with whom I am privileged to work:

Kathy Bolin coordinates our Lay School of Theology along with our Global Mission efforts; Katie Butler is our new communications director…make sure you introduce yourselves to her this weekend; Audree Catalano is one of the synod ministers with a focus on the rostered members of our synod; Larry Iverson is the other synod minister…he works with congregational life and stewardship; Beth Gabriel is our call process assistant; Carolyn Goulet is the program assistant...you registered with her for this assembly; Cheryse Brenno-Sloan is our statistician and supports our First Call Theological program. Yes, I realize I have skipped one person, but I would ask you to show your appreciation for the good work these folks do.

The other member of the synod staff is Deborah Ann Norrie, my executive assistant. She is my calendar keeper, the office manager, chief financial expert, our walking archives, and the one without whom this assembly would not have a chance. As of this past November, Deborah Ann has served the Southeastern Minnesota Synod for 15 years…longer than anyone. Deborah Ann, I would ask you to come up here …we want to recognize you.

There is one other person to whom I want to say “asanti.” She has been with me the entire way…36 years in fact. Many of you have had a chance to meet her because she has accompanied me on almost every congregational visit in this synod. I think she is great, and just in case you haven’t met her, I want to introduce her to you…my wife Lynette.

What important work our Lord has called us to do. As we join together…congregations, synods, and churchwide… lives are touched with the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Thank you, “asanti,” for your partnership in that task. There is so much to be thankful for. I have noted the good work in the synod and the variety of ministries that continue to evolve in my preassembly report. I invite you to read that if you have not already done so.

Today, I want to focus my remarks on two particular issues about which I have been asked to respond: The first issue is the vote regarding the ELCA studies on sexuality that took place at the Churchwide Assembly in Orlando, Florida, last August. I have been asked by members of our synod to interpret the results for this synod.

You will recall there were 3 resolutions brought before the assembly. The first resolution urged the church to “concentrate on finding ways to live together faithfully in the midst of disagreements.” It passed overwhelmingly by an 87% vote. Some believe this vote was a sign of weakness, an attempt to do anything in the name of peace…to in a sense make an “idol” out of unity. I disagree. Christ has made us one already. That is his ongoing prayer for the church. No matter the issue, that must be our prayer too. The challenge is learning how to live into that unity. That is certainly very different from the culture we live in today. Division comes quickly in our society…threats, ultimatums. There is little interest in listening to the other, scant evidence of humility, a recognition that we might not have all the answers. I believe our Lord speaks to a different way of life together.

I left our synod assembly here last year with a great deal of hope. There were certainly divergent opinions expressed here…differences still exit. But I also heard a sense of something greater still binding us together…and that is Christ crucified, died, and risen. I believe those gathered in Orlando agreed.

The second resolution asked the church to continue in its understanding that “marriage is a lifelong covenant of faithfulness between a man and a woman” and to be guided by a statement of the Conference of Bishops which states “there is basis neither in Scripture nor tradition for the establishment of an official ceremony by this church for the blessing of a homosexual relationship.”  But that statement also expresses trust in pastors and congregations to provide faithful pastoral care for all to whom they minister 

Again, this resolution was passed by a strong 67% vote. Please note that this resolution does not establish a policy for the church…it continues to trust that pastor and congregation are best suited to make these decisions of ministry. It does mean that when pastors ask me about performing a service of blessing, I tell them not to do it…and to expect that if they go ahead with such a ceremony in spite of my counsel, they will receive no support from this office if there are resultant difficulties. Yes, I have received such inquiries here in our synod…though I have received more inquires about performing mock weddings for older heterosexuals who for financial reasons want to be husband and wife without recognition by the state. I advise “no” in those situations as well.

The third resolution was not passed. It needed a 2/3 majority, but only received 49% support. It would have allowed the church, under special circumstances, to ordain, consecrate and commission candidates for ministry who are in lifelong, committed same-sex relationships. Because the recommendation failed, current ELCA policy continues to expect ministers to refrain from sexual relations outside marriage.

I have heard concerns that point to a variety of perceived responses around the ELCA regarding pastors not living in accord with this policy. Indeed, the constitution of the ELCA does offer some flexibility for bishops in dealing with discipline matters. Discipline can proceed in three ways: private censure and admonition; suspension for a designated time or until there is evidence of repentance and amendment of life; removal from the roster. The constitution lists a very specific process for such discipline proceedings. The synod’s council would also certainly be consulted…and has often offered valuable direction for bishops in such matters of discipline.

I believe such flexibility is very helpful. Discipline is not entirely focused on sexuality. It can also relate to heresy, substance abuse, fiscal irresponsibility, and inattention to duties. Issues of family relationships…spousal abuse, lack of child support...might also result in discipline. The constitution even points out that a pastor is to “endeavor to increase the support given by the congregation to the work of the ELCA.” Lack of such encouragement could also be seen as cause for discipline. It makes little sense to me to mandate that every situation be dealt with in the same manner…removal from the roster for example.

I will not speak for other bishops. But I do say to you that I treat sexual misconduct as outlined in ELCA policy as a very serious offense. And I will continue to address such issues in the same way, whether heterosexuals or homosexuals are involved. The church expects that of me.

The second issue that I have been asked about is the so called “marriage amendment.” This proposal would put a referendum before Minnesota voters asking them to approve a state constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman. I have been asked by members of our synod to support it, and to encourage the synod to support it.

I agree with our churches understanding that marriage is “a lifelong covenant of faithfulness between a man and a woman.” As I shared before, I have been blessed by such a covenant for the past 36 years. I also believe that even with all the love that families of every shape and size can offer their children, families do benefit if both a father and mother are present. Those are two of the concerns that I hear expressed by supporters of this amendment. But I just don’t understand how this amendment is going to improve marriages and family life.

Half of the marriages in our society end in divorce. This amendment does not speak to that. Depending on the age of the mother, 30% to 40% of all children born in our society are born out of wedlock. This amendment does not address that. Those are issues that do affect families. It also makes me wonder when it seems that often times the ones supporting such an amendment are also supporting budget cutting in programs that directly affect families…foster care support, the WIC program, assistance to needy families, child care subsidies, education funding. Those are issues that affect families too.

Dr. Susan Pace Hamill holds degrees in theology and law. She speaks of what she terms “low sacrifice decoys” in our public deliberations. This is how she refers to efforts in the public square that really don’t do anything…they just look good. For instance, claiming the moral high ground by initiating court proceedings as to where the 10 commandments can be displayed. How is public morality improved and deepened by such arguments…especially when a majority of citizens can’t even recite 3 of the 10 commandments?

Marriage and family life are issues of extreme importance for the well being of our society. I am ready to join with anyone in that task. We need serious discussion…and intentional efforts…and it will take time and resources. This is no time for “low sacrifice decoys.”  I don’t understand what this “marriage amendment” offers to this effort. It seems to me to be less about marriage and family, and more about political posturing. And for that reason I will not support it.

Thank you for giving me an opportunity to respond to these issues. Thank you for the ongoing conversation we value in this synod. Together we are called into God’s marvelous light…what a privilege.