ELCA vs TEC

[DeFyYing]

Hi, I grew up Roman Catholic and was Orthodox for a few years but started having some theological as well as social doubts that has me trying to decide between the two liturgical mainline denominations. With Lutheranism I'm pretty much all on board with the Augsburg Confession and really like Lutheran theology. I have attended an "Evangelical Catholic" Lutheran church that has that liturgical reverence as well as a commitment to the confessions.

With Anglicanism it seems that it's very fragmented, with a lot more diversity of theological and liturgical preferences. Yet, it's interesting that the reformed evangelicals, charismatics, laudians, and anglo-catholics are all in communion with each other despite their differences. I am particularly interested in the "Old High Church" as well as the Anglo-Catholic traditions, and after attending St Thomas Fifth Avenue for Evensong I must say that the liturgical beauty attracts me.

I think it boils down to whether or not I believe a church should be confessional or not. With Lutheranism everyone believes in the same things as there is a coherent doctrinal statement that keeps everyone united, and they vary in terms of worship practices. With Anglicanism, it seems that the only doctrinal requirement are the Creeds. I find myself a little at odds with the 39 Articles, but it seems that generally they aren't heeded much attention by Episcopalians so I don't know if that matters. While I understand the two are in full communion, I plan on pursuing ordination so I need to pledge my "loyalty" to one of them lol

To me, they seem like solid protestant faiths with lots of similarities, both having a strong liturgical and doctrinal link to the early Church. However, as I try to finalize my choice I feel conflicted regarding their emphases.

Which is the correct approach? From the surface, it seems that having doctrinal orthodoxy through a common confession is a good approach as there is teaching that's upheld to catechize the church. With this in mind, diversity can be found in worship based on individual preferences.

However, on further reflection a faith expression categorized by common worship (lex orandi, lex credendi) while allowing multiple perspectives on the eternally unknowable questions to coexist in communion with each other seems appealing, as well. Perhaps having freedom to believe independently is the way things should be done, but then I wonder what authoritative truths can be taught as a standard if everything is a free-for-all?

I'm stuck, guys, I'd appreciate the help.

 

[seeking.IAM]

Which is the correct approach?

I think one is not more correct than the other.

With Anglicanism, it seems that the only doctrinal requirement are the Creeds

The Creed has been the foundational statement of Christianity for nearly 2,000 years. I think that is more than sufficient.

The choice is yours. I recommend following the path that best nurtures your faith.

 

[Albion]

It sounds like you will have to decide which of those views holds sway over your conscience. Once that is decided, the choice of a church home, assuming it's either TEC or ELCA, would seem to me to have been made for you.

 

[DeFyYing]

I think one is not more correct than the other.



The Creed has been the foundational statement of Christianity for nearly 2,000 years. I think that is more than sufficient.

The choice is yours. I recommend following the path that best nurtures your faith.

That is true, I don't mean to criticize the Anglican tradition on being creedal rather than confessional. I guess it's just a little foreign to me as someone who grew up with a strict catechism of doctrine in the Roman Catholic church, it's freedom that I don't know what to do with

 

[DeFyYing]

It sounds like you will have to decide which of those views holds sway over your conscience. Once that is decided, the choice of a church home, assuming it's either TEC or ELCA, would seem to me to have been made for you.

Thank you, it's definitely a hard decision and I have a lot of respect for both traditions. With Anglicanism it almost feels like I have to pick a "denomination" within a denomination what with all the churchmanships and whatnot lol

 

[seeking.IAM]

I guess it's just a little foreign to me as someone who grew up with a strict catechism of doctrine in the Roman Catholic church, it's freedom that I don't know what to do with

I think you are correct about the freedom. The Episcopal Church is not dogmatic, which to me is one of the beautiful things about it - that there is room for variance under the big tent. As a late in life convert, I like that it allows me to carry with me what I have previously valued and held as true without requiring me to jettison a belief to fit in with dogma. I suppose that would be quite a culture shock coming from Catholicism.

 

[Halbhh]

...there is room for variance under the big tent. As a late in life convert, I like that it allows me to carry with me what I have previously valued and held as true without requiring me to jettison a belief to fit in with dogma....

Actually, that's how it seems to me to be in every church I've been in -- all the individual people have their own individual attitudes/beliefs, in every denomination. They only broadly agree on a kind of 'mostly' basis with any list of church specific doctrines. In reality, you talk with someone, and you learn what they think and it's not identical to the doctrines of their church, I've found repeatedly.

I've talked with people in many churches over the years, being curious to know what individual people think about various things. And that's very much the case also in this ELCA Lutheran church I've been in for 11 years now: each individual person has their own largely unique set of beliefs/opinions. They only broadly agree mostly with others.

DeFyYing -- I think that's even true in the Catholic church based on the various Catholics I've talked with: they each had their own unique set of beliefs/attitudes. For example: how much Marian devotion, or other such things like whether birth control is really wrong, etc. Whether or not to open communion to other denominations. Whether or not to allow the remarried communion. And more: diverse opinion. Maybe even it would be hard to find 2 Catholics that agree on every one of 25 doctrinal or catechetical teachings things perfectly.

So, in all the churches, I expect, you get the same picture:

A group of people of varying beliefs, who are in church together.

That is true, I don't mean to criticize the Anglican tradition on being creedal rather than confessional. I guess it's just a little foreign to me as someone who grew up with a strict catechism of doctrine in the Roman Catholic church, it's freedom that I don't know what to do with

 

[Albion]

With Anglicanism it almost feels like I have to pick a "denomination" within a denomination what with all the churchmanships and whatnot lol

That's a good point to make. I would suggest a slightly different view of that matter, though.

Anglicans tend to accept that there is a range of beliefs and worship practices, and they do this more than many other communions do. You might have to compare individual parishes in your town if you decide to go this way, therefore.

But that doesn't mean that "anything goes." It does mean that we don't spend much time on being upset that other Anglicans see many things somewhat differently, so long as they are not the essentials.

In Lutheranism, however, there is a perspective which holds that every item of belief must be agreed upon by every Lutheran. That's less evident in the ELCA, I think, than in some of the other Lutheran synods, but it's still an underlying Lutheran principle.

I'm sure that some folks will object to this line of thought, but like many other realities that make one denomination different from the next one, some of this can be quite subtle but still significant at the same time.

 

[Halbhh]

In Lutheranism, however, there is a perspective which holds that every item of belief must be agreed upon by every Lutheran.

lol...someone forgot to tell that to all of the Lutherans, or most all of them, like 98 or 99%.... (and yes, I'm including other groups like the Missouri Synod, though I've maybe only talked in some details with just a couple it was enough to see the same pattern as in other churches)

 

[Albion]

lol...someone forgot to tell that to all of the Lutherans, or most all of them, like 98 or 99%....

Well, you're wrong about that. However, it's less the case in the ELCA than in the Confessional Lutheran church bodies.

and yes, I'm including other groups like the Missouri Synod, though I've maybe only talked in some details with just a couple it was enough to see the same pattern as in other churches)

You need to take another look if you got that impression somehow.

But as with all denominations, Lutheran or otherwise, what the "man in the pews" thinks and believes and what the church he belongs to says is to be believed are two different things.

 

[Halbhh]

you're wrong about that.

I'm wrong(!?) about what Missouri Synod people said to me face to face when I asked them if they thought on their own their church's doctrines about various stuff during long hours of dart league meetings at their churches?


How is it you imagine I don't know what I'm reporting first hand. Is it that you don't read my posts before you respond to them? That would make the sense -- you perhaps simply responded to my post without really reading it carefully.

what the "man in the pews" thinks and believes and what the church he belongs to says is to be believed are two different things.

That's exactly what I was just saying above. Look, please, start to more carefully and sympathetically read before responding. We don't have to have all of these of these disagreements, if you'd merely read first, before responding.

 

[Albion]

I'm wrong(!?) about what Missouri Synod people said to me face to face when I asked them if they thought on their own their church's doctrines about various stuff during long hours of dart league meetings at their churches?

Apparently so. Read the LC-MS documents before thinking that every church member is automatically aware of all these things.

 

[Halbhh]

To repeat myself again...I'll just repeat in the more full wording from I said at first above:

I've talked with people in many churches over the years, being curious to know what individual people think about various things. ....each individual person has their own largely unique set of beliefs/opinions. They only broadly agree mostly with others.

In reality, you talk with someone, and you learn what they think, then you find out it's not identical to the doctrines of their church, I've found repeatedly.

And let me add here, a new bit, that includes pastors and deacon types also.

If you want to know what a pastor thinks about more than just an obvious simple thing, you have to ask. (But you shouldn't judge them for thinking differently than you expect...)

 

[DeFyYing]

I think you are correct about the freedom. The Episcopal Church is not dogmatic, which to me is one of the beautiful things about it - that there is room for variance under the big tent. As a late in life convert, I like that it allows me to carry with me what I have previously valued and held as true without requiring me to jettison a belief to fit in with dogma. I suppose that would be quite a culture shock coming from Catholicism.

That freedom seems really nice, I find myself at odds with the 39 Articles but it seems that they are not binding in TEC. I've heard that they are more binding in other churches in the communion like the CoE

 

[Halbhh]

That freedom seems really nice, I find myself at odds with the 39 Articles but it seems that they are not binding in TEC. I've heard that they are more binding in other churches in the communion like the CoE

Because we moved a lot, I've been in a lot of churches and denominations. So, I can tell you additional things from that first hand experience in many churches.

From our now 11 years in an ELCA church (where I teach some also), this ELCA church is definitely not dogmatic in attitude -- we have just like any church a diverse membership that has a range of various individual views, and those diverse views are tolerated in a non dogmatic way. So, when some outsider (as above in this thread in post #8) speculated Lutherans are dogmatic or generalized from some smaller group that there is for Lutherans generally a check on whether someone agrees with doctrines, that was only his outsider view, and mistaken; but, with so many Lutheran churches, there will inevitably be a few that are more rigid like that, just like in any denomination except UU perhaps. (Also, the ELCA is the main group, twice as large as the next closest, the Missouri Synod)

But, we do very consistently follow our liturgy practices of readings, experiencing the real presence in the communion, preaching generally from the gospel readings, confession, periodic reciting the creeds, and just generally the main Lutheran practices which of course overlap with most other churches, though the Lutheran church seems very complete in those ways.

All that said, I can also attest (from visiting any churches also of the same denominations) that every individual congregation/pastor is unique, so that you have to go try out an individual church to really know what it is like.

I've never been in any church aside from a visit to a UU church that is so welcoming to diverse viewpoints as this one, out of 8 denominations I've attended at least 3 services in.

 

[seeking.IAM]

That freedom seems really nice...

I think there is a reason our book is called "The Book of Common Prayer," not "The Book of Common Belief." I think it's more than just name

 

[Albion]

That freedom seems really nice, I find myself at odds with the 39 Articles but it seems that they are not binding in TEC.

For the sake of the discussion here and you getting some useful information with which to make a decision, what are those items that you disagree with in the Articles?

While it's true that laypersons are not bound by them, most of the statements therein are typical of Anglicans, even considering the range of opinions that are, in practice, tolerated.

I myself would not want to join any denomination, even if that church made no effort to impose them upon me, if its beliefs and practices were substantially different from what i believed.

 

[DeFyYing]

For the sake of the discussion here and you getting some useful information with which to make a decision, what are those items that you disagree with in the Articles?

While it's true that laypersons are not bound by them, most of the statements therein are typical of Anglicans, even considering the range of opinions that are, in practice, tolerated.

I myself would not want to join any denomination, even if that church made no effort to impose them upon me, if its beliefs and practices were substantially different from what i believed.

I think my only disagreements are Article XXII and XXVIII. For the former I'm not necessarily "opposed" to it but I lean towards a more bodily, corporeal presence rather than a spiritual presence. I've heard Pusey upheld a more Lutheran view of the Real Presence, but from a "plain" reading of the Article it seems more Calvinist. For the latter, I see a lot of value in images and iconography. I think I'm in agreement with everything else though

 

[Albion]

Thanks for that reply. The Anglican view is not that of Calvin, but in any case, it's only one issue. And as for the other one you mentioned, images are quite common in Anglican and Episcopal churches and are frowned upon only in the most firmly Evangelical congregations.

With images, you are referring to Article XXII, I take it. That Article rejects "Worshipping and Adoring" images and relics, etc., not the mere display of images. Any Lutheran church you'd be considering would have the same view of this matter.

 

[DeFyYing]

Thanks for that reply. The Anglican view is not that of Calvin, but in any case, it's only one issue. And as for the other one you mentioned, images are quite common in Anglican and Episcopal churches and are frowned upon only in the most firmly Evangelical congregations.

With images, you are referring to Article XXII, I take it. That Article rejects "Worshipping and Adoring" images and relics, etc., not the mere display of images. Any Lutheran church you'd be considering would have the same view of this matter.

Gotcha, thank you! I guess im more onboard with the Articles than I had realized