Lutherans can you explain the synods?

[commenter]

I

ATraveller:

The LCMS and WELS would remove pastors committing such abominable offences despite being congregational bodies. They have removed clergy over less serious matters too.

It’s one thing to remove a person from position as pastor. But do the various Lutheran bodies recognize the ordinations of the others?
I assume LCMS would not accept an ELCA minister as a visiting minister. But does LCMS regard the Eucharist consecration by an ELCA minister as “valid” - does the Real Presence result?

I assume WELS does not regard the ordination of a female minister as having any value at all. But if an ordained man from a liberal Lutheran denomination converted to WELS, would he need to be re ordained?

I suspect I’m trying to impose my RCC template where it doesn’t fit.

I had an email conversation with a friend who happens to be in an LCMS seminary. He had some rather helpful insights on this.
He said that, unlike the LCMS, the WELS holds that no Pastoral office was actually established by Christ. Only that Christ gave the church the authority to call persons to execute certain tasks. To the WELS, “pastor” doesn’t truly exist in the way orthodox churches understand it.
They teach that men are to execute the functions of whatever office exists whenever possible, as that is the Order of Creation. However, if men are unavailable, WELS teaches that women can fulfill any and all functions of whatever office-- including presiding over the Sacrament!

As far as other Lutheran pastors are concerned, the LCMS looks at those coming into the LCMS on a case by case basis. Depending on their understanding of doctrine and of the pastoral office, they could be installed or they might be Ordained. When coming in, they receive seminary training called colliquizing

Though they may use the word “sacrament”, they probably have more the concept of “ordinance”, such as the two Scripture commanded actions of baptism and Lord’s Supper, - presiding over - rather than Catholic view of “sacrament”.

 

[JonNC]

Though they may use the word “sacrament”, they probably have more the concept of “ordinance”, such as the two Scripture commanded actions of baptism and Lord’s Supper, - presiding over - rather than Catholic view of “sacrament”.

First, to be clear, Ian not presuming to speak for WELS, and am open to correction if a WELS member is here.
That said, I wouldn’t put that much stock in the use of the word “preside”. If one is Lutheran and teaches and confesses the Augsburg Confession, one must necessarily view it as sacrament.

 

[Thorolfr]

I think I read once that the consecrated bread and wine become the real presence only “on reception” i.e. at the moment they are taken into the body of the person receiving them. I think that this came from the Book of Concord or some other early Lutheran document. I have a copy of the Book of Concord but haven’t read it cover to cover.

 

[Thorolfr]

Lutherans are far too congregational in this country to paint with a broad brush. Just as there are ELCA congregations I would never want to be associated with, there are LCMS congregations as well.

As you said, there are individual congregations in both the ELCA and the LCMS that are more or less conservative. And even within individual congregations there are some members who are more conservative than others. I talked to someone a few years ago who said that they had attended a LCMS congregation recently that still didn’t allow women to vote (i.e. on congregational matters). That’s probably not usual for most LCMS congregations I wouldn’t think although I could be wrong.

 

[MiserereMei]

I think I read once that the consecrated bread and wine become the real presence only “on reception”

I am almost certain this isn’t in the BoC. However, some Lutheran praxis did arise as a compromise because some held to the receptionist view.

I know all of my professors would be horrified to hear a student of theirs expressing such. Also, every Lutheran church I’ve attended has had at least some reverential bowing at the consecration and elevation, along with some mutterings of “My Lord and my God”.

LCMS congregation recently that still didn’t allow women to vote (i.e. on congregational matters)

No LCMS church I’ve attended had this position. Of course, I have only attended urban churches, so there may be an urban/rural divide. I wouldn’t know, really.

 

[JonNC]

I think I read once that the consecrated bread and wine become the real presence only “on reception” i.e. at the moment they are taken into the body of the person receiving them. I think that this came from the Book of Concord or some other early Lutheran document. I have a copy of the Book of Concord but haven’t read it cover to cover.

It isn’t there. From the AC:

Article X: Of the Lord’s Supper.
1] Of the Supper of the Lord they teach that the Body and Blood of Christ are truly present, and are distributed 2] to those who eat the Supper of the Lord; and they reject those that teach otherwise.

 

[JonNC]

I am almost certain this isn’t in the BoC. However, some Lutheran praxis did arise as a compromise because some held to the receptionist view.

I know all of my professors would be horrified to hear a student of theirs expressing such. Also, every Lutheran church I’ve attended has had at least some reverential bowing at the consecration and elevation, along with some mutterings of “My Lord and my God”.

I find receptionism as heterodox as consubstantiation.

 

[MiserereMei]

I find receptionism as heterodox as consubstantiation.

Psalm 133:1 (RGP:LP): How good and how pleasant it is, when brothers live in unity!

Also,

From the AC:

Thanks. I didn’t have that handy at the moment.

 

[ltwin]

I think I read once that the consecrated bread and wine become the real presence only “on reception” i.e. at the moment they are taken into the body of the person receiving them. I think that this came from the Book of Concord or some other early Lutheran document. I have a copy of the Book of Concord but haven’t read it cover to cover.

This sounds like something Thomas Cranmer, an Anglican, believed.