thanks for posting.Interesting that they’ve come to some pretty substantial agreements, but also recognize they’ve got some big differences and that they don’t expect they’ll work them out any time soon. The document doesn’t go into detail on what those differences are but what they describe on the surface doesn’t seem as tangible as the things they all seem to agree on (which is a pretty fundamental and extensive list even in the generalities of this document).
WELS and ELS already are, actually. They broke fellowship with the LCMS in the 50’s and 60’s for fear (rightfully) of the LCMS’s sizable Liberal faction which practiced Historical Criticism. Most of that sort left in the 70’s to lay the groundwork for what would become the ELCA in the 80’s. That left the orthodox Confessionals in Missouri - but the damage had been done. WELS and ELS had already broken fellowship with the LCMS, and were hesitant to believe Missouri had righted its ship.
I don’t know your exact background and no offence is intended if I happen to do so unintentionally. But some of this kind of history makes me quite sad, especially not praying with other Christians so as not to look improper. I’ve experienced this exact WELS/ELS tenant in my own extended family.
No offense taken. I agree wholeheartedly. That’s why I’m on this forum.
So LCMS is more liberal? I didn’t expect that. Do the WELS and ELS view themselves like a Catholic or Orthodox might view themselves? As the one true church body on earth?
Liberal is not at all the word that I would use to describe the LCMS; it has recover and stabilized into a solidly conservative, confessional church. A better description might be more ecumenical. But even that can be misleading, as the LCMS is not one to compromise on doctrine for the sake of empty ecumenical relations.
This has a complicated answer. Obviously they’d believe themselves to be the truest church, but they wouldn’t deny the Christianity of heterodox synods or bodies, nor necessarily the existence of true Christians in flagrantly heretical bodies. After all, they’re bound to the Lutheran Confessions too. Simple answer? Kinda.
I really hate these sort of labelings. However since I have virtually every Lutheran denomination represented in my family, including my spouse who is an ELCA pastor and a cousin who is married to an ELS pastor, I should probably respond.
Yes. I am a WELS Lutheran but I really disagree with them on this. Plus my sons weren’t allowed to join the Boy Scouts, either.
Another new and small one is NALC or North American Lutheran Church.
As well as LCMC which, according to one I was recently attending focuses on mission projects.
I actually know St. Paul’s well. In college, I used to visit a friend there occasionally. Today, that congregation is unfortunately part of the ELCA, but it used to be solidly Confessional when your dad would’ve been baptized. It also planted a few other churches nearby, as different waves of immigrants needed Divine Worship in different languages. Lutheranism is a lot like Orthodoxy in that respect.
The LCMS has actually held talks with both of these bodies, which are semi-Confessional splinters from the ELCA. They exited that body when the ELCA made pulpit-altar fellowship with Reformed bodies and began condoning openly-gay, practicing pastors and hosting gay “weddings.” Of course, they’re considerably farther Left of Missouri (NALC and LCMC ordain women, and practice open communion) than Missouri herself is from WELS and ELS. While reunion is an actual possibility with LCMS-WELS-ELS, there is absolutely no chance NALC or LCMC will ever find unity with “the big three.”
Nalc is hardly "semi confessional " it’s just confessional, as for cummunion , it requires belief in the real presence , hardly " open " .
Any “Lutheran” body that ordains women subscribes to some degree of historical criticism, since it jettisons Holy Scripture’s clear direction regarding men and the Office of Holy Ministry. Such a body cannot rightly be called Confessional.