In our January and February 2022 publications I wrote a two-part article which explored the question of how the LGBTQ+ agenda and community were able to be so successful in completely taking over the ELCA and in such a short time. Here are links to that two-part article, which I entitled, “How Did It Happen?” – LINK and LINK.
I described the strategies and principles of Community Organizing as outlined in a resource from ReconcilingWorks, “Building an Inclusive Church Toolkit” (BIC). Here is a link to that Toolkit – Building an Inclusive Church – ReconcilingWorks.
On its website ReconcilingWorks describes its mission in this way. “Since 1974, ReconcilingWorks: Lutherans for Full Participation has advocated for the full welcome, inclusion, and equity of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, and asexual/aromantic (LGBTQIA+) Lutherans in all aspects of the life of their Church, congregations, and community.”
The Toolkit outlines steps to take to gain the support of Early Adopters, the Early Majority, and enough of the Late Majority in order to achieve the 75% approval vote that is required by ReconcilingWorks for an organization to become Reconciling in Christ (RIC).
I am a retired ELCA pastor, rostered in the Grand Canyon Synod. I attended one of the recent Spring Conference Assemblies. At the gathering it was mentioned that a motion will be coming to the 2027 Synod Assembly that the Synod become Reconciling in Christ and (typical of the ELCA) that there be a full year of study and discussion leading up to the vote. It was also said that ReconcilingWorks is no longer a one-issue organization. It is no longer focused solely on the welcome and inclusion of all forms of sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression. It is also concerned for the full welcome and inclusion of people of all races as well as differently abled people.
With their approach of building relationships and capitalizing on shared values, I immediately recognized Community Organizing.
I wrote to the Bishop of my Synod, stating that I found the presentation to be manipulative, questionable, unfair, and unjust.
What is manipulative is adding the inclusion and welcome of people of all races and differently abled people to the meaning of being Reconciling in Christ. I assume that is being done in order to “grease the skids” and gain support for a more wide-spread acceptance of the inclusion and welcome of people of all sexual orientations, gender identities, and gender expressions.
What is questionable is the statement that the focus of being Reconciling in Christ has been expanded from being merely LGBTQ+ welcoming and inclusive to also being welcoming and inclusive of people of all races and as well as differently abled people.
The website of ReconcilingWorks does not speak so clearly of such an expansion of concern. Here is a link to their website – Home – ReconcilingWorks.
True, the description of “Our Vision” and “Our Values” in the purple rectangles on their Home Page does not restrict their attention solely to LGBTQ+ persons as the purple rectangle “Our Mission” does, but still it appears that the local, Grand Canyon Synod task force – I assume following the principles of Community Organizing as outlined in the Toolkit and in order to gain wider support – is misrepresenting what it means to be Reconciling in Christ by giving their own, expanded definition and version of Reconciling in Christ. If the local task force has a definition and meaning of being Reconciling in Christ that is not the same as the definition and meaning of ReconcilingWorks as a whole, then the local task force should not use the term Reconciling in Christ.
I clearly remember a few years ago the tensions between the BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, People of Color) LGBTQ+ community and the non-BIPOC LGBTQ+ community within Extraordinary Lutheran Ministries after the dust up in the ELCA’s Sierra Pacific Synod regarding former bishop Megan Rohrer (the ELCA’s first transgender bishop). I would be surprised if there is now such peace and harmony between these two groups that the LGBTQ+ community is willing to share equally the spotlight with the BIPOC community.
That is what is manipulative and questionable. What is unfair and unjust is the way in which people who are welcoming of all races, are concerned for differently abled people, and hold traditional views on marriage and sexuality who therefore vote No on the resolution that the Grand Canyon Synod become Reconciling in Christ will then be made to appear as racist and uncaring. People who hold traditional views on marriage and sexuality will be further isolated and stigmatized. For example, the “Building an Inclusive Church Toolkit” calls those with traditional views Laggards. (Which does not sound inclusive to me.) Once again, the truly marginalized in the ELCA will not be the LGBTQ+ community (who constantly claim that they are marginalized) but those who hold traditional views.
Either way – whether ReconcilingWorks as a whole is now expanding its focus to include people of all races and differently enabled people or the Grand Canyon Synod Task Force is coming up with its own version of what it means to be Reconciling in Christ – either way this is an example of the strategy of Community Organizing. ReconcilingWorks – either as an entire organization or at the Grand Canyon Synod level – is setting people up so that if they are open and welcoming to all races and differently abled people, then they certainly will be just as open and welcoming to all forms of sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression.
