Den episkopale kirke har nylig hatt sin General Convention, og resultatet har blitt slik at stadig flere av de konservative medlemmene og prestene lurer på om de skal forlate kirken; og hvor skal de da gå? I den største lutherske kirken i USA, ELCA, er den teologiske og moralske situasjonen nokså lik, så også der diskuterer mange om de skal bli værende i kirken. (En slik liberal utvikling i kirkesamfunnet var ikke grunnen til at jeg ble katolikk, men jeg vet at mange i Den norske kirke også tenker i disse baner.)
Den tidligere lutherske presten, Leonard Klein, som ble katolikk for litt over tre år siden og katolsk prest for et par-tre måneder siden (se her i min blog) svarer sin venn, som har bestemt seg for å bli værende i ELCA slik:
It seems to me that Richard Niebanck has given the best reasons for staying: the first is to minister and serve where one was first called to do so; the second is that one is still a Lutheran and agrees with the premises of the Reformation. One can, however, only do the first with integrity if the second remains true.
The argument that one should stay where he is planted is not by itself sufficient. This is the point I made some time back (to the) argument that the sin and tragedy of the brokenness of the Church make it impossible to leave one’s post. The truth is that there could come a point when everyone would have to make the break – when Baal-worship is enforced something has to give, even if it’s one’s own martyrdom. Or if Radner ceased to be an Anglican theologically and came to believe the Catholic doctrine of the Church, as I realized I had done years before I finally followed my own logic.
You can only stay if you believe in the life and confession of the communion in which you find yourself. So while all of us converts were motivated to face the question by the decay of the ELCA, … made the move for different reasons – not just to find a life raft. The reasons are basically two: first, that one at some point ceased to be Lutheran theologically and came to believe that the Reformation itself was problematic and, second, of course, that along with this decision one came to see in Rome (or Orthodoxy) the ancient, apostolic Church. Cardinal Newman, the godfather of us all, argues in basically this fashion. Ultimately for me and, I think I can say, virtually all the others the decision was ecclesial and creedal. My reading of Scripture and church history brooked no other possibility.
Les resten av Leonard Kleins svar her: (Gå til 22. juni 2006)