ELCA, Lutheran Confessions Subscription, Variata

I am wondering why the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America (ELCA) does not embrace Philip Melanchthon's Augsburg Confession Variata of 1540 (1542?).  It seems as though they are distancing themselves from Lutheranism (e.g. 2009 proposed sexuality statement & reccomendations), and due to their strong desire toward ecumenism, and the use of ambiguous ecumenical statements for declaring some level of unity (e.g.. Lutheran-Roman Catholic statement on Justification) and joint communion with denominations who hold differing beliefs regarding Holy Communion, etc., it surprises me that they would not resurrect Melanchthon's "new, improved, ecumenically enhanced version of Confessio Augustana (the Augsburg Confession) rather than hanging onto qualified interpretations of the U.A.C.  Any thoughts on the matter?


It seems from the wording of your statement/question that you have a considerably different worldview and set of theological presuppositions from the ELCA. I myself pastor a proudly UAC Lutheran congregation. I can not give an "answer" as such, but can perhaps try to outline some of the basic workings of the mainline/liberal theological mind.

From the ELCA perspective, they are not "distancing themselves from Lutheranism" because they have a different understanding of what "Lutheranism" is. While those on the more conservative side generally define Lutheranism as subscribing to the actual Doctrine of the Confessions and Orthodox Fathers, mainline/liberal theologians see Lutheranism more as a free-thinking spirit to challenge existing dogma and social injustice. They are "like Luther" because they challenge racism, paternalism, homophobia and so forth.

The actual confessions are seen as a historical reminder of where they started and from which their theology continually evolves and progresses. In other words, the wording and theological content expressed in a given document is a "snapshot" of what their spiritual forefathers used to believe 500 odd years ago. They are not "binding" as such today.

Similarly, there has been a rift between various Lutheran church bodies over the last 200 years, mainly in America, regarding confessional subscription. In other words, when a pastor is ordained does he promise to preach and teach according to the Lutheran confessions "because (qua)" they are in agreement with the word of God or "insofar as (quatenus)"? Mainline/liberal churches such as the ELCA represent the latter view.

If you make a "qualified" profession (quatenus), you are free to believe and teach 99% of the Confessions or 1%, according to individual whim. Likewise, one could just as easily make a "qualified" subscription to the Koran, Satanic Bible, or the latest script from Family Guy by simply agreeing with what you see as the "good stuff".

Also ecumenicism and so called "ambiguous" statements are not "dirty words" from the ELCA perspective. Conversely, they see particularness about specific doctrinal formulations as the main cause of division in the church. They would see worrying about the actual text, wording, and translation of the confessions as "divisive and unloving". The goal of many mainline/liberal theologians, from across many denominational lines, is not to confess Truth boldly and clearly, but to manipulate the grammar in a broad all-inclusive way so that nobody can disagree or be offended.

I suppose the short answer is that if the actual wording of the confessions "doesn't really matter" why bother deciding between the 1530, 1540, or 1542 version of some dusty old relic when people are still homeless, women still can't vote in some places, and two-headed lesbian Eskimos still suffer from social injustice?