What's the Difference?

[LutheranHawkeye]

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.

So you left the Missouri Synod because a minority of our congregations are using contemporary worship. I confess that the abandonment of the liturgy in some of our congregations makes me sick, but I would never choose the liturgy over doctrine. If you don't agree with certain things that the WELS teaches then why join it, it's not true confessional unity? I'll state what I've said to you before, go to one of these churches and ask the pastors if they will conduct the Divine Service the way that they were taught in seminary, if not then report them to the circuit leader, DP etc. etc., I'm sure they'd be breaking some synodical rules about not offering the Divine Service, if they don't listen go higher. Never compromise your beliefs. If the LCMS churches around you won't conduct LCMS worship, it's up to the laity, ie. you to ask them to. Pastors are shepherds of their entire flock, just because they're in California doesn't mean they get to disregard this.

 

[DaRev]

So you left the Missouri Synod because a minority of our congregations are using contemporary worship. I confess that the abandonment of the liturgy in some of our congregations makes me sick, but I would never choose the liturgy over doctrine.

You hit the nail on the head with this statement. Too many equate the liturgy with doctrine.

The real questions to ask are 'what are they teaching and preaching?' If it's something other than Confessional Lutheran doctrine, then it's a problem.

'What is the message being conveyed in their choice of worship music?' Again, if it contradicts our Confessional teachings, this should be questioned. The LCMS has a nice resource for determining the doctrinal correctness of worship songs called "Text, Music, Context: A Resource for Reviewing Worship Materials".

'Are matters of practical theology being done in accord with Confessional doctrine and Synodical guidelines?' How is the Sacrament being administered? Are women assisting with the administration of the Lord's Supper? These and other questions should be considered.

Remember, our Confessions state that the worship service need not be the same in all places. But they most definately need to be in accord with our Confessional doctrine and practice.

 

[seajoy]

The worship service we attended in St Louis last year had a women handing out the Elements. It was an LCMS church. It surprised me a bit.

 

[LutheranHawkeye]

I have no problem with women helping out ushering, or assisting with handing out the Eucharist. As long as the pastor consecrates the bread and wine, I see no problem with it, although I'll hopefully soon be corrected by either an LCMS or WELS member because I've never been educated on this issue, and I'm actually looking for a little guidance. Thanks

 

[BelindaP]

I had a question about the fellowship aspect of worship. From what I've read, the WELS don't agree with worshipping with non-WELS, as that is considered to be fellowship as well. Is that a correct reading on my part? If so, does that mean that WELS won't attend churches of other faiths or synods?

 

[Tangible]

My local LCMS church probably resembles the vast majority of small churches across the midwest. We have a senior pastor who is celebrating his 50th year of ministry this year, and a young associate pastor who doesn't seem like the kind to cause waves.

We really only use the new service books on communion Sundays, 2nd & 4th of the month. The rest of the time we use a printed order of service in the bulletin. It's not as 'high-liturgy' in style as the service book, but if it's contemporary, then it's 1972 contemporary, not 2009 contemporary. Some of the hymns are ones we sang in my old Baptist church (with a few different lyrics), and the liturgical texts have a little bit of a 1970-80s United Methodist kind of feel (if you know what I mean).

I really like the higher style of the LSB and I've lobbied the associate pastor in that regard, but being a new member I doubt if I've got much clout, or that he has much of a say in planning the services for that matter. Also I don't want to be percieved as one of these new members who come in and want to show these 'old fogeys' how it's supposed to be done.

One thing that has me a little worried is the fact that they have started asking for donations of instruments; like bass, drum set, amps, etc. for a youth praise band. There is a small separate building they use for the youth group and hopefully this praise band stuff won't ever see the light of day in the sanctuary.

I've done the whole contemporary praise band thing, and that's part of what I want to leave way behind me in coming to the Lutheran church. I worry that in trying to curry to the percieved musical tastes of the 'youth' they are only setting them up to move away from truly liturgical worship and into the modernistic, shallow mega-church style.

One thing that I am very thankful for, and this was something mentioned to me by the associate pastor, is that at least the current hot controversy in the LCMS is (merely) regarding worship style, and not things like ordination of women or homosexuals, or whether to use higher criticism to interpret scripture.

Most of what I've seen on the internet is in support of high-church liturgy, and honestly I'm intrigued by that because I see it as even farther from the pop-culture, youth group for grownups thing I'm actively fleeing. But I know that even if the services might seem a bit kitchy to me, I know that I will be hearing Law and Gospel clearly preached and that the Sacraments will be rightly administered, and I thank God that he has lead me and my family to a more scriptural church than we were in before.

 

[BelindaP]

I enjoy the liturgy most of the time, but I am not opposed to the introduction of more contemporary worship in a second service. The Book of Concord was very clear that how the service is run isn't what is important. The teachings are the important part. So, it galls me to no end when people try to equate contemporary, non-liturgical worship with heresy. I remember hearing stories in the first Lutheran church I attended about how they lost half their membership when they switched from having services exclusively in German. It's the same sort of thing.

 

[Tangible]

I think it's a natural, human tendency for conservative groups to splinter, valuing doctrine over unity, while liberal groups tend to form large, 'big-umbrella' wishy-washy groups that value unity over doctrine. It's a continuum.

 

[seajoy]

I had a question about the fellowship aspect of worship. From what I've read, the WELS don't agree with worshipping with non-WELS, as that is considered to be fellowship as well. Is that a correct reading on my part? If so, does that mean that WELS won't attend churches of other faiths or synods?

I do.

 

[DaRev]

I have no problem with women helping out ushering, or assisting with handing out the Eucharist. As long as the pastor consecrates the bread and wine, I see no problem with it, although I'll hopefully soon be corrected by either an LCMS or WELS member because I've never been educated on this issue, and I'm actually looking for a little guidance. Thanks

The distribution of the body and blood of Christ is part of the administration of the Sacrament which women should not do. The reason is that the distribution also contains the proclamation "Take, eat. Take, drink" which are words of Christ and part of the administration of the Sacrament. The work of the administration of the Sacrament, from the reciting of the Verba to the distribution, is the work of Christ being done by the pastor and assistants in the stead and by the command of Christ. It is as if Christ Himself is giving us His very body and blood. The hands that give us the Sacrament veil the very hand of Christ. It is part of the role of 'provider' which is the role and responsibility of the Bridegroom, not the bride.

 

[QuiltAngel]

I am going to give Stude the benefit of the doubt as to his reasons for leaving the LCMS. I have seen LCMS that start with a contemporary service and it is not long that you begin to wonder where their Lutheranism went. Using a contemporary service does not mean this will happen, but it does happen.

I don't know what WELS members do when they are away from home. I do know that I much prefer to seek out a LCMS church which uses the liturgy when away from home than to attend a church of another denomination.

 

[Zecryphon]

I am going to give Stude the benefit of the doubt as to his reasons for leaving the LCMS. I have seen LCMS that start with a contemporary service and it is not long that you begin to wonder where their Lutheranism went. Using a contemporary service does not mean this will happen, but it does happen.

I don't know what WELS members do when they are away from home. I do know that I much prefer to seek out a LCMS church which uses the liturgy when away from home than to attend a church of another denomination.

I search online for a WELS or ELS church in the city or near the city I'm going to be in. This has not been an issue yet, as I don't travel much anymore. But one day I'm sure it will come up and that's my plan. I've never been to an ELS church.

 

[filosofer]

The distribution of the body and blood of Christ is part of the administration of the Sacrament which women should not do. The reason is that the distribution also contains the proclamation "Take, eat. Take, drink" which are words of Christ and part of the administration of the Sacrament. The work of the administration of the Sacrament, from the reciting of the Verba to the distribution, is the work of Christ being done by the pastor and assistants in the stead and by the command of Christ. It is as if Christ Himself is giving us His very body and blood. The hands that give us the Sacrament veil the very hand of Christ. It is part of the role of 'provider' which is the role and responsibility of the Bridegroom, not the bride.

Well, at this point you are pushing what Lutheran doctrine does state and does not state. There is nothing in the Sacrament about the "hands that give us the Sacrament veil the very hand of Christ." That is taking away from the real presence of Christ "in, with, and under" the elements. The pastor/elder/distributor is not an element in the presence of Christ in the sacrament.

 

[filosofer]

You are right. I did not use the Lutheran icon until the last 2 years.

 

[BelindaP]

I used to bear a Lutheran icon. I changed it to Christian a few years ago when forced icon changes were being implemented. It is my message that I am Christian above and foremost. Lutheran is my flavor.

 

[Zecryphon]

I used to bear a Lutheran icon. I changed it to Christian a few years ago when forced icon changes were being implemented. It is my message that I am Christian above and foremost. Lutheran is my flavor.

Seems to me, from what you've said elsewhere that Christmas Calvinist is your flavor.

 

[Tangible]

Maybe crypto-Lutheran?

 

[Zecryphon]

Maybe crypto-Lutheran?

What's that? Sounds like a Lutheran who has passed away to me.

 

[Studeclunker]

So you left the Missouri Synod because a minority of our congregations are using contemporary worship. I confess that the abandonment of the liturgy in some of our congregations makes me sick, but I would never choose the liturgy over doctrine. If you don't agree with certain things that the WELS teaches then why join it, it's not true confessional unity? I'll state what I've said to you before, go to one of these churches and ask the pastors if they will conduct the Divine Service the way that they were taught in seminary, if not then report them to the circuit leader, DP etc. etc., I'm sure they'd be breaking some synodical rules about not offering the Divine Service, if they don't listen go higher. Never compromise your beliefs. If the LCMS churches around you won't conduct LCMS worship, it's up to the laity, ie. you to ask them to. Pastors are shepherds of their entire flock, just because they're in California doesn't mean they get to disregard this.

Yes, now we go into a discussion of the isolated Lutheran in a place where there is nowhere to worship. This kind of liberal-community church style is common in California. Sadly, I have spoken out numerous times about this kind of practice at the local church. I've spoken privately with the pastor and expressed my concerns on the liturgical, confessional, creedal, doctrinal, and theological license that he takes. He claims to be within the current Synodical rules. I've spoken with the elders and they don't even understand what the issue is. they think the wording of the confessions, creeds and liturgy are fluid and can change from week to week at will. Though I'd been attending their church for four years I was still a newly confirmed member (confirmed last May). I have since seen several members of that church at the WELS. So, I'm not the only one that feels as I do.

Now, I will repeat myself for the third time; would you require that I go a hundred to hundred-fifty miles to attend a congregation that isn't trying to copy the local mega-church?

I don't live in the mid-west where Lutheran churches are common, Hawkeye. Good sound doctrine is rare in California. Especially in the Lutheran church, anymore.

You hit the nail on the head with this statement. Too many equate the liturgy with doctrine.

The real questions to ask are 'what are they teaching and preaching?' If it's something other than Confessional Lutheran doctrine, then it's a problem.

'What is the message being conveyed in their choice of worship music?' Again, if it contradicts our Confessional teachings, this should be questioned. The LCMS has a nice resource for determining the doctrinal correctness of worship songs called "Text, Music, Context: A Resource for Reviewing Worship Materials".

'Are matters of practical theology being done in accord with Confessional doctrine and Synodical guidelines?' How is the Sacrament being administered? Are women assisting with the administration of the Lord's Supper? These and other questions should be considered.

Remember, our Confessions state that the worship service need not be the same in all places. But they most definately need to be in accord with our Confessional doctrine and practice.

Really Revrand? So, it's completely within the LCMS's rules that the altar can be exchanged with a bed showing two people having sex in the sanctuary? This is very, very well published as having been tried in Michigan with the full blessings of the synodical leadership. There are other excesses being experimented with (especially here in California) along the same line. I'll ask you the same question that I put to Hawkeye: I've spoken privately with the pastor and expressed my concerns on the liturgical, confessional, creedal, doctrinal, and theological license that he takes. He claims to be within the current Synodical rules. I've spoken with the elders and they don't even understand what the issue is. they think the wording of the confessions, creeds and liturgy are fluid and can change from week to week at will. So, with all this in mind, do you expect me to go a hundred or more miles to church every Sunday??? Sorry, Revrand, my Christian walk is more important to me than the LCMS. This congregation, in Redding, is poisonous to me. They're the only act in town and know it. Therefore the liberals are shoving their crap down the throats of the conservatives in that congregation. Since the synodical leadership approves of it, and encourages this kind of thing, I'll go over to WELS. There's little to nothing I and the rest of the laity can do otherwise. If you, and the rest of the good pastors LCMS has left, don't like it, then it's long past time for you to do something about it.

 

[DaRev]

Really Revrand? So, it's completely within the LCMS's rules that the altar can be exchanged with a bed showing two people having sex in the sanctuary? This is very, very well published as having been tried in Michigan with the full blessings of the synodical leadership. There are other excesses being experimented with (especially here in California) along the same line. I'll ask you the same question that I put to Hawkeye: I've spoken privately with the pastor and expressed my concerns on the liturgical, confessional, creedal, doctrinal, and theological license that he takes. He claims to be within the current Synodical rules. I've spoken with the elders and they don't even understand what the issue is. they think the wording of the confessions, creeds and liturgy are fluid and can change from week to week at will. So, with all this in mind, do you expect me to go a hundred or more miles to church every Sunday??? Sorry, Revrand, my Christian walk is more important to me than the LCMS. This congregation, in Redding, is poisonous to me. They're the only act in town and know it. Therefore the liberals are shoving their crap down the throats of the conservatives in that congregation. Since the synodical leadership approves of it, and encourages this kind of thing, I'll go over to WELS. There's little to nothing I and the rest of the laity can do otherwise. If you, and the rest of the good pastors LCMS has left, don't like it, then it's long past time for you to do something about it.

I'm really at a loss as to where in my post that you quoted you got the idea that I condone things that are clearly outside the official doctrinal and practical stance of the synod. Placing a bed in the chancel is clearly outside the doctrinal position of the Confessions since it places an emphasis on the flesh rather than on God. I doubt very highly that the synod "approved" such a thing, but there is no doubt they "allowed" it, which concerns me greatly. My post had to do with the worship of our Lord, not the worship of the flesh. Two completely different things.

Also, don't equate the actions of your congregation in CA with the synod as a whole. The LCMS is still very much a congregational polity, and as such, the practices of that congregation must have been asked for and approved by the majority of the laity. There is where your concerns should lie, not with me nor with the synod as a whole.