Certain comments are to be expected from clergy and professors in the liberal mainline denominations, such as the UCC and ELCA. However, although we all know that there are those within the LCMS that teach contrary to the established teaching among us, few rostered clergy in the Synod today approach the brazen openness of Dr. Matthew Becker with regard to views clearly in opposition to accepted teaching. His writings and comments supporting the ordination of women and evolution are fairly well documented now, especially through the recently published Daystar Reader. Nevertheless, he just added to this list with what I can only call bizarre. Again, over on the Gottesdienst Online site Becker posted the following in the comment section:
What may be Christologically significant is that Adam in Gen 1 is both male and female, androgynous. There have been some in the Christian tradition who have said the same about the second Adam. As an androgynous Adam, Christ redeems both male and females. Julian of Norwich and others in the Tradition come close to this position (Christ with breasts, for example, who feeds his church).
How do I begin to discuss this? Is this really what clergy within the LCMS can now openly teach and proclaim, besides an unapologetic defense of the ordination of women and evolution? What are the limits?