What's the Difference?

[BelindaP]

Lately I've been studying up Lutheran doctrine. And I can't figure out the difference between the WELS and the LCMS. They both hold to the Confessions being an accurate description of biblical doctrine. Is it primarily small things such as evolution and the like? Or, are there bigger issues between the two?

 

[filosofer]

Howdy. Two biggest issues are church and ministry. On the overall scale of doctrine, relatively minor, but still some differences.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

The doctrine of church fellowship, especially, along with the rights of women in the church (whether or not they can vote in church matters - WELS says no, LCMS says yes).

That's sorta it in a nutshell, but it hardly scratches the surface of the problems the two synods have with each other.

We do continually pray for unification between the two.

 

[BelindaP]

Thanks for your answers.

I think the conservative wing of the LCMS will probably merge with the WELS at some point. And the conservative ECLA will probably merge with the liberal wing of the LCMS. Wonder what the new synods will call themselves.

 

[filosofer]

Thanks for your answers.

I think the conservative wing of the LCMS will probably merge with the WELS at some point. And the conservative ECLA will probably merge with the liberal wing of the LCMS. Wonder what the new synods will call themselves.

Unless there is some agreement on church and ministry concerning C. F. W. Walther, you probably won't see WELS and LCMS move. It might be that there will be a small group from LCMS, a small group from WELS, and a small group from ELS that will join together, but it will be around Waltherian understanding of ministry.

I doubt that there will be much merger between ELCA and LCMS factions. Most in the ELCA do not look with favor upon the LCMS, which has a history of many, many decades of developing (long before any on this board were born, and long before the ELCA (or even their predecessor bodies, ALC and LCA, were formed).

 

[PreachersWife2004]

I don't see anyone from the WELS splitting or merging, but I do see different factions of the LCMS and the ELCA splitting off and not necessarily merging, but just being.

 

[Tangible]

The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod - WELS

Missouri Synod - Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS)

 

[BelindaP]

Looks like the WELS website has a hard time presenting the differences without putting in some jabs. And, some of the characterizations of the LCMS are just plain wrong, or at least slanted to make us look the worst way possible.

 

[seajoy]

Looks like the WELS website has a hard time presenting the differences without putting in some jabs. And, some of the characterizations of the LCMS are just plain wrong, or at least slanted to make us look the worst way possible.

You asked what the differences are. WELS gave their side in their website. I don't see the jabs you are talking about, and I have belonged to both Synods. There is disagreement - it's why we aren't in fellowship.

 

[BelindaP]

You've been in both synods, but you chose the WELS. It makes sense you wouldn't notice the jabs.

 

[LilLamb219]

Please, non-members should stick with questions and fellowship postings. Don't start arguments.

 

[Studeclunker]

Belinda, I would appreciate you keep your jabs in your belt, as it were.

I just recently left the LCMS for many of the same reasons that WELS broke fellowship. Personally, I find WELS a bit too tightly laced. However, and this is important, I believe that the LCMS is falling apart at the seams. The same issues and practices that caused the split between the two synods is now causing the LCMS to fall apart. WELS doesn't understand the atonomous nature of the congregational organization in LCMS. This loose type of organization has been both a strength and weakness of theirs. Often, one can travel from one LCMS congregation to another and see vast differences between them. Some LCMS congregations ceased resembling Lutheran worship style years ago. Others are so loose in their fellowship as to appear unionistic. I know this as I was till very recently, LCMS. The sheer stupidity of the Ablaze programme is what finally drove me to break with my synod and move on to WELS. I may not agree entirely with their(WELS') stance on women, and a few other things, but I can't remain in an organization that is so dishonest as to abandon the basic principles of liturgical worship that are the hallmark of Lutheran worship style. This, 'not my Grandfather's LCMS,' is not mine either. I had hoped in the last Synodical conferrence that the current president would be removed. I knew when pres. K. continued that I couldn't.

No, it's not digs at the LCMS that you see on the WELS site. It's just wording the statements to be such that they're saying, "This is what we perceve LCMS to be practicing." This is because LCMS hasn't changed their official stance and their current practice doesn't very closely match it.

 

[QuiltAngel]

Having been a member of the old LCA which was one of the three that merged to form the ELCA, I do not see a merger between liberal LCMS and conservative ELCA either. If there are any splits, I think there will be two more Lutheran bodies.

 

[seajoy]

You've been in both synods, but you chose the WELS. It makes sense you wouldn't notice the jabs.

Perhaps you are seeing jabs that aren't there because you are LCMS.

 

[QuiltAngel]

I see that both the LCMS and the WELS in their statements regarding the other Synod state what they see to be the reasons for having broken fellowship back in the early 60's as well as for the reason for not having fellowship today. I don't see either jabbing the other. The way one views something is going to be different than another based on the perspective we have of a certain situation. The whole point is that both Synods have their reasons and that at this point, there is not agreement to re-establish fellowship. Filo and PW both have stated the whys behind this. Our Synods will continue to talk, but at this point, there will not be fellowship.

 

[BelindaP]

Please, non-members should stick with questions and fellowship postings. Don't start arguments.

I am an LCMS member. I think that qualifies me for membership. And, I'm not trying to start an argument.

 

[filosofer]

I forgot the biggest difference: spelling.

 

[Studeclunker]

I see that both the LCMS and the WELS in their statements regarding the other Synod state what they see to be the reasons for having broken fellowship back in the early 60's as well as for the reason for not having fellowship today. I don't see either jabbing the other. The way one views something is going to be different than another based on the perspective we have of a certain situation. The whole point is that both Synods have their reasons and that at this point, there is not agreement to re-establish fellowship. Filo and PW both have stated the whys behind this. Our Synods will continue to talk, but at this point, there will not be fellowship.

Exactly, thank you Angel. Two viewpoints of the same thing.

 

[DaRev]

There are two main differences between the LCMS and the WELS.

One is fellowship and what is necessary to have full fellowship. The two used to have full fellowship until 1961. At that point both sides seemed to have changed some of their fellowship criterium; the LCMS is less stringent in certain aspects regarding fellowship, and the WELS became a bit more stringent on theirs because they viewed that the LCMS was sliding in the other direction. These moves were enough to cause fellowship to be broken.

The other has to do with church ministry. The LCMS views the Office of the Pastoral Ministry as the one divinely instituted office and applies the Scriptural teachings regarding the ministry (e.g. who can and cannot be called) to that Office and not necessarily to man-made offices in the church. The WELS applies the Scriptural teachings of the Pastoral Office across the board to include man-made offices as well. They view all offices in the church as a part of the ministerial office. The LCMS, however, does apply those Scriptural teachings to those positions that are directly tied to the functions of the Pastoral Office (although, unfortunately, not all congregations follow this).

 

[PreachersWife2004]

There are two main differences between the LCMS and the WELS.

One is fellowship and what is necessary to have full fellowship. The two used to have full fellowship until 1961. At that point both sides seemed to have changed some of their fellowship criterium; the LCMS is less stringent in certain aspects regarding fellowship, and the WELS became a bit more stringent on theirs because they viewed that the LCMS was sliding in the other direction. These moves were enough to cause fellowship to be broken.

The other has to do with church ministry. The LCMS views the Office of the Pastoral Ministry as the one divinely instituted office and applies the Scriptural teachings regarding the ministry (e.g. who can and cannot be called) to that Office and not necessarily to man-made offices in the church. The WELS applies the Scriptural teachings of the Pastoral Office across the board to include man-made offices as well. They view all offices in the church as a part of the ministerial office. The LCMS, however, does apply those Scriptural teachings to those positions that are directly tied to the functions of the Pastoral Office (although, unfortunately, not all congregations follow this).

To touch on that last point, for example, in larger WELS churches where there is a school, the principal (as part of his call, which we consider to be a divine call) may assist in serving communion. He may teach a bible class on Sunday. In some churches, an elder is called to assist with communion. This does not translate into these people preaching on Sunday in the pulpit. It just means that we believe the call to be a principal or a teacher in our synod schools is just as a divine call as the call to be a minister is. A school secretary or a church secretary, though, are not considered a ministerial office. In the same respect, women cannot be Elders, nor can they be members of the council, nor are they allowed to vote. They can, however, be chairpersons on committees (have done so several times myself) and can be teachers in the schools and in Sunday School, and we have one rare situation where the principal of one of the elementary schools is a female because the staff is also female. She does not serve the church as would a male principal - she is not called to assist with communion nor does she teach bible class on Sundays.

Clear as mud, right?