Well it's my 500th post, better make it worthwhile.
I really wasn't posting with the idea doing a lot of debate. It was mostly to convey the public image I believe the WELS has which is mostly-it doesn't have one. Or maybe that isn't quite correct, it probably gets the image most people would think of from the LCMS or the ELCA because they are larger and more known, or even from the Roman Catholics since they would all be more familiar to most than the WELS.
I don't think when the ELCA or the LCMS are busy fighting that people outside of Lutheranism pay any attention past Lutheran. Here's an interesting exercise if you want to take the time. Make a little questionaire, put some things that are true and some that aren't and have some people outside the church fill them out. Wanna bet on whether most think the news releases for the last year about the ELCA apply to the WELS? When was the last time someone mentioned they heard your church was considering allowing homosexual ministers, or is associated with the Anglicans? I would guess not too long unless you just don't talk about such things with others.
I think I have seen that the WELS is starting to podcast some services is that correct? That sure looks like a low cost way to reach out to people. And I think each synod should actually be collecting good sermons for people to see on the websites. My synod is as deficient there as any.
I hope you didn't take my statements to mean that I don't think the WELS does any outreach at all, but the question really is, why is there so few volunteers to help? Do we only think of missions as something done in a third world country?
And I've spent some time trying to figure out how you are supposed to evangelize because as I understand the WELS position members aren't even supposed to pray with those not in communion. So if I am at someone's door trying to get them to come to church, it wouldn't be proper to even pray with them for God's guidance. I haven't been able to really find a position on reading the Bible with others, that seems to me too to be a worship.
For instance from the WELS site:
[size=+2]
[size=+2]Q:[/size]I know you have answered a similar question regarding "avoiding" Christians who are not in doctrinal agreement, but does that actually mean that you cannot even pray with someone from a non-confessional Christian church? That seems a bit extreme. Is that really cooperating with them in their sin? What is the scriptural warrant for such practice?
[size=+2]A:[/size]Prayer is always an act of worship. We cannot say, "This prayer is simply an act of friendship or sociability." By its very nature prayer is a religious act. All prayer, therefore, should be offered in accordance with the biblical principles of fellowship, which call for unity as a prerequisite for worshipping together.
There is little specific treatment of the subject of prayer fellowship in the New Testament. Prayer is simply treated as one expression of fellowship among many others. The early Christians "devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer" (Acts 2:42). However, there is nothing in Scripture to suggest that prayer should be treated any differently from any other expression of fellowship. Since God-pleasing prayer always flows from faith, every prayer is either an expression of faith (and therefore an act of worship), or it is an abomination. There is no middle ground. If true prayer is always an act of worship, joint prayer calls for the same unity of doctrine as any other act of worship. The scriptural commands "have nothing to do with them" and "keep away from them" cannot mean "pray with them." We therefore do not pray with Christians who are adherents of false doctrine.
There are times when praying for a person is an expression of fellowship with him, for example, when praying for the success of an individual's ministry (Romans 15:30-32, 2 Corinthians 1:11) or in Jesus' high priestly prayer (John 17). There are, of course, many other circumstances when praying for a person is not an expression of fellowship, as when Christians pray for the enemies of the church or when we pray for the government (1 Timothy 2:1-2). Our prayer for false teachers should be that God will lead them back to the truth.
Praying in the presence of a person is not the same as praying with a person. Paul had no hesitance to pray in the presence of heathen on board the ship (Act 27:35), but he did not join their heathen prayers nor ask them to join in his. Simultaneous silent prayer within a group that is not united in doctrine is not an expression of prayer fellowship.
Praying with a person, however, is always an act of joint worship and therefore an act of fellowship. The disagreement between the Wisconsin and Missouri Synods concerning the doctrine of fellowship centered on the propriety of praying with people with whom we are not in doctrinal agreement, particularly with the leaders of heterodox Lutheran churches. At one time both synods opposed such prayer, but beginning in the 1940s that Missouri Synod changed its position to allow such prayer.
Now there you are, asking them to come. They aren't members, at least not of your church, maybe not even Christians. So you can't worship with them. So what do you do? Tell them you are going to silently pray for a moment, but please don't join in, it wouldn't be proper?
Here is an interesting question, not because it is correct, but how would a lifelong member of the WELS get such an impression, and if people within the church are getting that impression, what is the impression outside the church?
[size=+2]Q:[/size]I have been WELS all my life, gone to WELS grade and high schools. However, it always bothered me why people in our synod seem convinced that most other denominations are automaticlly going to hell. In going to NELHS, many of my friends and classmates there are non-WELS. In religion classes we always talk about how this religion is going to hell and that religion is going to hell. I understand that my friends adhere to Churches that have doctrine that is false. However, I usually base everything on a more personal level. Per se, what they believe themselves. Many times they don't agree with their own churches and confess to the same things we do. One friend of mine is a non-WELS member because she is trying to reform the Missouri synod. My question is, Why is it all our pastors and teachers (generally speaking) firmly believe that only WELS and ELS members are going to heaven? Am I sinning by not basing other people's faith by their church body's confessions, but by their personal faith in Jesus? If other religions believe that Jesus is their Savior why do we attack them for not being WELS? I can understand why we aren't in fellowship with them, but I just think we shouldn't just condemn everyone just because they're non-WELS. Am I practicing syncretism?
[/size]
Now I know that the WELS is not attempting to prevent people from hearing or having contact with the truth, it is concerned with the flip side, exposing people to error. I know the concern is that participation will cause members to be led astray and introduce mistakes and heresies. That is a real concern. I do think it limits outreach, maybe not so much through actual policy as maybe a misunderstanding of policy. It would be like the school that thinks they must prevent kids from praying in order to be in compliance with the law, while actually preventing the kids is against the law. What they aren't to do is to lead the kids in prayer or require prayer.
There is over 300 questions on the WELS site concerning fellowship. Why is it that people are having so much trouble understanding it? I'd bet there are WELS members that don't do things that would be okay just because they are concerned with the policy, and better safe than sorry.
I thought this is an interesting Question.
[size=+2]Q:[/size]
On your recent WELS Web site homepage, you highlighted www.crossroadschicago.org, the Web site of a new WELS mission. When I researched the site, I discovered that the Church Growth Movement is alive and well in WELS. I could not find any reference to WELS anywhere on the site, and the copyright is by Crossroads "Christian" Church. If I didn't know better, I would think I was looking at a Disciples of Christ website! In its statement of faith, which is vague and subject to a great deal of misinterpretation, it states that Crossroads is "a Christian community with roots in the Lutheran tradition." That's the language of the ecumenical movement! What's happening to my WELS? As WELS members, are we now ashamed of the word "Lutheran"? Are we becoming just like the vague and generic evangelical churches that offer a generic gospel so as not to offend anyone? Tell me what's going on in the WELS. This isn't confessional Lutheranism at all!
Interesting isn't it. Looks like it's taking off and doing real well getting people in. Being WELS doesn't appear to be an insurmountable obstacle. So are they wrong? Are they being nonconfessional? Or is it that others love adiaphora so much it isn't treated as such?
I notice the statement against the Church Growth Movement, I would guess that this area is probably the biggest disagreement going on in the WELS right now. Am I right?
Now maybe the site has changed some since the question, but the WELS is mentioned, do you see anything against confessional Lutheranism on it's site? We do discuss in the Lutheran Brethren of getting rid of the Lutheran name because of the baggage it carries of what others have taught people the name means. (Not going to happen) Not because of any shame in being Lutheran, but it is difficult when the word seems more misunderstood than understood. We usually get asked first if it's like the ELCA then the LCMS and then usually get a blank look. More than a few people come to my local congregation despite it being Lutheran (their words not mine though there was a time...)
When you see why people choose a congregation, doctrine would probably rank fairly high on a survey, but few are the people that will go to a doctrinally pure, unfriendly church. Now I don't think the WELS people are unfriendly at all as individuals, but as a synod, that is their reputation. I think a lot of your good potential members never will set foot in the door, partially because of that image. How to change that image?
One question about outreach. What percentage of your church budget or effort is spent on organized outreach? Count things like transportation, advertising, radio, tv, webcasts, mailings to nonmembers, visitations to nonmembers, those sort of things.
One last thing, a lot of people blast Rick Warren's "Purpose driven Life" but have you ever read his "Purpose Driven Church". I thought it was the much superior of the two, and even if one doesn't agree with him in all things, it sure is thought provoking. One thing he concludes is that trying to please everyone in music is doomed to failure. That all you get is everyone is disatisfied, that a congregation needs to make the decision of what kind of music they are going to have and stick with it. Since you are clearly interested in outreach I would recommend reading "Purpose driven Church" not so much as a just a how to manual but to really get you thinking. The idea being to make the effort efficient.
If an iron axhead is blunt and a workman does not sharpen its edge, he must exert a great deal of effort; so wisdom has the advantage of giving success. (Ecc 10:10)
Marv