Difference Between Wesleyan and Lutheran?

[jrtrent]

How much conformity does the LCMS require for lay members?

I’m curious about that, too. I’ve appreciated Lutheran theology. I spent many months attending an LCMS church, enjoying it immensely and learning a great deal. Speaking with the pastor there, I knew I could not become a member in good conscience because I had issues with some of the things taught in the Book of Concord, including its stance on anti-Christ.

“We accept the Lutheran Confessions as articulated in the Book of Concord of 1580 because they are drawn from the Word of God and on that account regard their doctrinal content as a true and binding exposition of Holy Scripture and as authoritative for all pastors, congregations and other rostered church workers of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod.” lcms.org/?pid=414

Some Lutheran organizations use fewer items, and I ended up in an AFLC Lutheran congregation (until it suffered internal dissent and split). This organization doesn’t use the entire Book of Concord as an expression of its belief, so there is less you have to sign on to in order to join.

“We accept the ancient ecumenical symbols, namely, the Apostles’, the Nicene, and the Athanasian Creeds; Luther’s Small Catechism and the unaltered Augsburg Confession as the true expression of the Christian faith and life.” aflc.org/index.php/doctrine.html

I don’t know if there is a direct correlation, but the AFLC’s history stems from Scandinavian Lutheranism, and it was reported that “King Frederic II of Denmark looked at the Book of Concord then threw it into the fire. ‘This book will do nothing but bring strife,’ he said.” christianity.com/church/church-history/timeline/1501-1600/lutheran-book-of-concord-went-on-sale-11630029.html

 

[pablope]

There is a difference in being a bishop of a diocese and being a Pope. One can be a bishop of Rome without embracing what Protestants find wrong with the papacy.

Sorry…more rationalizing…the Bishop of Rome is tied to the papacy…you cannot take one and not the other…either you take all or nothing.

So…what you are saying is…protestants…to continue to justify themselves…would pick and choose what to believe, what to agree with?

So taking this further…you pick and choose what you want the Bible to say (if it does not agree with your interpretation or tradition)?

 

[jinc1019]

I’m curious about that, too. I’ve appreciated Lutheran theology. I spent many months attending an LCMS church, enjoying it immensely and learning a great deal. Speaking with the pastor there, I knew I could not become a member in good conscience because I had issues with some of the things taught in the Book of Concord, including its stance on anti-Christ.

“We accept the Lutheran Confessions as articulated in the Book of Concord of 1580 because they are drawn from the Word of God and on that account regard their doctrinal content as a true and binding exposition of Holy Scripture and as authoritative for all pastors, congregations and other rostered church workers of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod.” lcms.org/?pid=414

Some Lutheran organizations use fewer items, and I ended up in an AFLC Lutheran congregation (until it suffered internal dissent and split). This organization doesn’t use the entire Book of Concord as an expression of its belief, so there is less you have to sign on to in order to join.

“We accept the ancient ecumenical symbols, namely, the Apostles’, the Nicene, and the Athanasian Creeds; Luther’s Small Catechism and the unaltered Augsburg Confession as the true expression of the Christian faith and life.” aflc.org/index.php/doctrine.html

I don’t know if there is a direct correlation, but the AFLC’s history stems from Scandinavian Lutheranism, and it was reported that “King Frederic II of Denmark looked at the Book of Concord then threw it into the fire. ‘This book will do nothing but bring strife,’ he said.” christianity.com/church/church-history/timeline/1501-1600/lutheran-book-of-concord-went-on-sale-11630029.html

Really interesting information.

I am very interested to see if an LCMS member can provide a solid answer for us.

As one person cited earlier, the LC-MS website suggests that the entirety of the Book of Concord is accepted by all pastors, staff, and congregations…But I thought that is generally a requirement related to whether or not a congregation can be added to the LCMS, not whether an individual member is bound to believe everything. If a person agrees with 99.98% of everything in the Book of Concord, are they allowed to receive communion? Ironically, not even the Catholic Church requires this kind of agreement to receive communion because a Catholic could hypothetically say they don’t understand an issue or that they don’t think the evidence supports the Church’s position BUT they will submit to the Church’s authority. Because there really isn’t the same kind of authority in the LC-MS, I wonder how all of this works itself out. It would be quite extraordinary if a church professing to be following the teachings of Martin Luther and his immediate followers would cast people out of its church for disagreeing with their own views when the very same thing happened to Luther himself (although that was, admittedly, a much bigger deal).

I can understand requiring a great deal of agreement, I can understand requiring certain essentials, I can’t understand requiring the laity to agree to everything in the Book of Concord, especially something like the view of the Anti-Christ, when that is totally up for interpretation.

 

[jinc1019]

Sorry…more rationalizing…the Bishop of Rome is tied to the papacy…you cannot take one and not the other…either you take all or nothing.

So…what you are saying is…protestants…to continue to justify themselves…would pick and choose what to believe, what to agree with?

So taking this further…you pick and choose what you want the Bible to say (if it does not agree with your interpretation or tradition)?

Pablope, this is pretty much way off topic. This thread has nothing to do with the Lutheran view of the papacy. You can always start another thread addressing this question.

My central question, and the one I would like to have answered, is what are the differences between Wesleyan teachings and Lutheran teachings.

 

[Jeff77]

Jeff,

Not to be used against you… In what ways do you have a lot of problems?

Curious I am…

Thank you, Pork

As far as the LCMS goes, we are broken down into many different districts around the United States. Some districts are very conservative, reflecting the LCMS as a whole, but some are very liberal. Our last synod president was from my district, Texas, and he was and is a very liberal man. He helped to foster the Church Growth Movement in our synod. This movement is an attempt to modernize church services, change the liturgy, and include praise and worship bands. The goal was to attract younger people and charismatics. I think it’s a fallacy to think we need to change anything. People should change for the church…not the other way around.

I am very happy wth our local parish. We have a fairly young pastor…29… And he’s a part of a movement going on in the seminaries, right now, to keep and maintain our liturgical history.

Also…the LCMS has a deaconess program. I have no problem with this, but they at not minsters, and not to act as one. I have seen pictures, though, of a female vested in one church…and she was acting as an assistant during service…st the altar! Sorry, but I have a problem with this.
I guess you could say I yearn for synodical conformity and consistency between parishes and districts.

I am in agreement with the Lutheran Confessions and apologies.

 

[Jeff77]

I will second “The Lutheran Difference,” as an excellent resource for seeing the differences between Lutherans, Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodoxy, Wesleyans, Baptists, Anabaptists, Reformed, rationalists, and liberals. All of the comparisons are taken straight from each’s confessional documents and catechisms.

 

[jinc1019]

I will second “The Lutheran Difference,” as an excellent resource for seeing the differences between Lutherans, Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodoxy, Wesleyans, Baptists, Anabaptists, Reformed, rationalists, and liberals. All of the comparisons are taken straight from each’s confessional documents and catechisms.

Thanks for all of your thoughts Jeff. I will take the suggestion and try to get my ands on the Lutheran Difference. Thanks for sharing about the LCMS!

 

[pablope]

Pablope, this is pretty much way off topic. This thread has nothing to do with the Lutheran view of the papacy. You can always start another thread addressing this question.

My central question, and the one I would like to have answered, is what are the differences between Wesleyan teachings and Lutheran teachings.

I apologize…I did not wish to derail your thread. You had asked about LCMS belief in their confessions…one of which state the pope is the anti-christ.

 

[jinc1019]

I apologize…I did not wish to derail your thread. You had asked about LCMS belief in their confessions…one of which state the pope is the anti-christ.

You are quite right, I derailed my own thread before you did! However, I opened a new thread to deal with that question. I am still hoping a knowledgeable scholar can outline some of the differences here before I go off and order a book on Amazon.

 

[JonNC]

unfortunately there are some LCMS churches that don’t strictly practice close communion. We do at our parish.

As to agreeing with every single word of the confessions…that’s a good question. I haven’t really ever pondered that. We believe that the confessions are normed by scripture, so I would lean more to the side of yes, you should agree with the confessions. Is it something that should keep you away from the grace provided through receiving the Holy Eucharist? In most cases, I would think not. I have a lot of problems with how some of the LCMS distiricts conduct themselves, but I consider myself in total agreement with worship at our local parish.

Just to be clear, “close” communion is not exactly “closed” communion. From the LCMS

Are only LCMS members able to commune at an LCMS church?

Q: Being raised in the LCMS, I was surprised today when I was visiting a LCMS church that had a pamphlet explaining their beliefs about Communion. It went on to say that if the visitor believed these things also then they could commune at that church. I thought that only LCMS members could commune at LCMS churches. Has this changed?

A: The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod has never understood or applied the historic practice of close[d] Communion in such a way as to mean that only LCMS members are permitted to commune at LCMS altars. The official position of the Synod is that not only are members of other Lutheran churches with whom we are in altar and pulpit fellowship invited to commune with us, but also that in certain extraordinary cases of pastoral care and in emergencies members of churches not in fellowship with us may be given Communion.
The Synod stated, for example, in 1986 “that pastors and congregations of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod continue to abide by the practice of close Communion, which
includes the necessity of exercising responsible pastoral care in extraordinary situations and circumstances” (1986 Res. 3-08 “To Maintain Practice of Close Communion”).
A number of resources are available and touch on this subject, including the Commission on Theology and Church Relation’s (CTCR) 1983 and 1999 reports on Theology and Practice of the Lord’s Supper and Admission to the Lord’s Supper. Usage:

Jon

 

[pablope]

Martin Luther left the Catholic Church directly. He was a leader in the magisterial Reformation, meaning that he believed that church and state should be interrelated. Lutherans also kept many of the practices of Catholics.

Wesleyans derive their theology from John Wesley. Wesley was an Anglican priest who was dissatisfied with the coldness and going-through-the-motions attitude of many Anglicans at his time. Wesley became a leader among evangelical Anglicans and other Christians in England. They began to look for a more deeper peity and a more holy and faithful life. They were very methodical about how they structured their spiritual lives, and became known as Methodists. Methodists and other Wesleyans have traditionally placed a very big emphasis on sanctification and holiness.

So Wesleyans are really the Methodists?