Now I understand :)

[Edial]

My opening post disappeared - my mistake. :)

I am rephrazing it. ...

Basically I was saying that I just found out that I belonged to an ELCA church, while thinking it was LCMS. :)

Yet I could not see some of the things that I saw here at the forums at my church.

There were "hints" of both. :)

After trying to understand, I spoke to Pastor and he quit LCMS and came to ELCA in 1981.
He said it was due to certain legalism.

Yet he runs the congregation Scripturally - no liberalism of ELCA and no legalism of LCMS.

I also was saying that as to a former atheist, religion does not appeal to me, but the Scriptures do. :)

And I do see traditional aspects on both sides.
So, from a religious perspective, it can be really confusing. :)

So, ... that was my paraphrase of the OP.

If anyone has the original OP, I would appreciate if you would let me know. :)

Thanks,
Ed

[LilLamb219]

Care to explain what non-scriptural aspects of Lutheranism you're referring to?

[C.F.W. Walther]

Yea really.

[Jim47]

Hi EdI am reading another book that you might be interested in. In fact others may also be interested in it. Its called "Church Fellowship" by John F. Brug. Its available thru Nothwest Publishing House. The purpose of this book is to study and explain WELS fellwoship practices. I think the LCMS may also be accused of some of the same things from what you are saying.

[Edial]

Care to explain what non-scriptural aspects of Lutheranism you're referring to?
Just from what I see ...
From LCMS - closed communion excluding other Lutherans.

From ELCA - women Pastors.

[LilLamb219]

Your statement about LCMS, is it the closed communion part that you see as being non-scriptural or only the closed communion that doesn't include other Lutherans part that you see as being non-scriptural? I'm just trying to get a feel for what you're saying.

[LutherNut]

Just from what I see ...
From LCMS - closed communion excluding other Lutherans.

The LCMS practice of closed communion is VERY Scriptural.
There is nothing in Scripture that stipulates whether or not one is "Lutheran." In fact, I have never seen the word "Lutheran" in the Scriptures.

1 Corinthians 11:26, "For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until He comes." In that verse, the word "proclaim" carries a lot of weight. What exactly is "proclaimed" by the participation in the body and blood of Christ? Fellowship. One cannot honestly make a common proclaimation where fellowship does not exist. Communion is a public expression of the unity of faith. There can be no communion where unity does not exist. Unfortunately, there is no unity between the LCMS and the ELCA. By simpll calling oneself "Lutheran" does not make it so.


Besides, since the LCMS does not consider the ELCA an orthodox Lutheran church body, excluding confessing members of the ELCA is not really excluding "other Lutherans." I'm not aware of any LCMS pastor who would deny the Sacrament to a WELS/ELS member, but a "good confessing" WELS/ELS member would not even approach the altar in an LCMS church.

[seajoy]

An lcms pastor, that is a friend of mine, offered for me to take communion at his church, one sunday morning when I was visiting there (I'm wels). I declined his offer...he was not one bit offended, nor was I offended that he asked me. We just both understand close communion. It is the fellowship of those professing the same thing.seajoy

[Edial]

Your statement about LCMS, is it the closed communion part that you see as being non-scriptural or only the closed communion that doesn't include other Lutherans part that you see as being non-scriptural? I'm just trying to get a feel for what you're saying.
I already said what I was saying.

Thanks,
Ed

[Edial]

An lcms pastor, that is a friend of mine, offered for me to take communion at his church, one sunday morning when I was visiting there (I'm wels). I declined his offer...he was not one bit offended, nor was I offended that he asked me. We just both understand close communion. It is the fellowship of those professing the same thing.seajoy
It is not Scriptural, seajoy.

And it does not really matter what both parties agree upon.
We could both agree on many un-Scriptural things.

I am not attracted to such thinking.

Thanks, :)
Ed

[Edial]

The LCMS practice of closed communion is VERY Scriptural.
There is nothing in Scripture that stipulates whether or not one is "Lutheran." In fact, I have never seen the word "Lutheran" in the Scriptures.
I limited the scope to Lutherans, since they believe the same things about the bread and wine, as compared to other denominations.

1 Corinthians 11:26, "For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until He comes." In that verse, the word "proclaim" carries a lot of weight. What exactly is "proclaimed" by the participation in the body and blood of Christ? Fellowship. One cannot honestly make a common proclaimation where fellowship does not exist. Communion is a public expression of the unity of faith. There can be no communion where unity does not exist. Unfortunately, there is no unity between the LCMS and the ELCA. By simpll calling oneself "Lutheran" does not make it so.

... I'm not aware of any LCMS pastor who would deny the Sacrament to a WELS/ELS member, but a "good confessing" WELS/ELS member would not even approach the altar in an LCMS church.

This is called, justifying oneself.

If one cannot have fellowship with a brother, he should fix it and not justify it by doing theological gymnastics.

To say that, since we do not "like" each other we do not partake together is bad enough.

But to say that we agree not to partake together and make peace with it, is serious business.

Yet to say that what we are doing is GOOD, is blasphemous to the very Sacrament that we claim to hold dear.

ISA 5:20 Woe to those who call evil good
and good evil, ...


And since we cannot accept such sins coming from our hands, hearts and mouths and repent - we do not repent.

... and on the "light side" ...

All that "brother" stuff that Jesus talked about really concerns others and not us, since we exclude each other out of love. :D :D :) .

These knitting needles can come up with some doozies. :)




Besides, since the LCMS does not consider the ELCA an orthodox Lutheran church body, excluding confessing members of the ELCA is not really excluding "other Lutherans."
This cannot be taken seriously - allow me make some fun ...

---- having fun section ---
So, all of the ELCA then is a bunch of misfits that are not worthy of Lutheranism ... a dirty dozen, a Lutheran wannabes, funny-looking-people ... :D :D :)
(... some people said that I look like Danny DeVito from Taxi ... :D :) ).

And since I also (to my surprise :):)) was a member of an ELCA all this time, while thinking otherwise, am not worthy of LCMS by default (unless of course, I repent in sackcloth and ashes :)), it somehow makes sense that God "took me out of LCMS" without me even realizing it. :D :D :) .

So, since I am here now, I probably will not make many friends either, since I'll probably be pushing that "same old book" in some of the more "uncomfortable" places.:)

Oh well ... :)

--- end of having fun section ----

Thanks,
Ed

[seajoy]

It is not Scriptural, seajoy.

And it does not really matter what both parties agree upon.
We could both agree on many un-Scriptural things.

I am not attracted to such thinking.

Thanks, :)
Ed
Ed,

The fellowship of professing the same thing is not un-Scriptural. I'm sorry if my telling of an example of what Luthernut was talking about, appeared that way to you.

It's more than what we believe about communion...it's the whole package. Above you gave an example that elca ordains women, and that you think that's wrong. I am not in agreement with that either, so I could not partake of the sacrament with them.

It doesn't mean I don't like them, we are just not in agreement.

This is the first time I've ever been accused of speaking un-Scripturally. With the type of ocd I have, a few years ago that would have thrown me into quite an anxiety attack. Thanks for the therapy...The Lord has helped me come a long way from those days.

seajoy

[LilLamb219]

Edial, you can say it's unscriptural until the cows come home, but that doesn't make it so. LutherNut and Seajoy gave you the biblical reasons behind closed communion and yet you refuse to believe, but that still doesn't make it unscriptural.

[Edial]

Ed,

The fellowship of professing the same thing is not un-Scriptural. I'm sorry if my telling of an example of what Luthernut was talking about, appeared that way to you.
But seajoy, why would you want to put it that way?

Of course "the fellowship of professing the same thing is not un-Scriptural". :)

But that's not what I was saying.

It's more than what we believe about communion...it's the whole package. Above you gave an example that elca ordains women, and that you think that's wrong. I am not in agreement with that either, so I could not partake of the sacrament with them.

It doesn't mean I don't like them, we are just not in agreement.
OK.
Would you have a communion with me, now that I am an ELCA, yet do not hold to various ELCA liberal teachings.

This is the first time I've ever been accused of speaking un-Scripturally. With the type of ocd I have, a few years ago that would have thrown me into quite an anxiety attack. Thanks for the therapy...The Lord has helped me come a long way from those days.

seajoy
I do not mean to upset people in that way by saying these things at all.
If I did, I am sorry.

I do not know what "ocd" means, but it is probably important.

The purpose of saying "un-Scriptural" is not to condemn at all, but to make a distinction between the what we think is right and the Scriptures.

This does not affect one's salvation at all.

I believe I underlined certain things to Luthernut that make my point in the context of being Scriptural or un-Scriptural.

Thanks,
Ed

[Edial]

Edial, you can say it's unscriptural until the cows come home, but that doesn't make it so. LutherNut and Seajoy gave you the biblical reasons behind closed communion and yet you refuse to believe, but that still doesn't make it unscriptural.
Oh, but I do understand the Scriptures-based explanations behind closed communion.
There are always explanations to this or that that are Scripturally backed.

(But these explanations clash with other plain teachings of Jesus. And once such things happen - a mis-application of Scriptures occurs).

Un-Scriptural does not mean not having references, but a mis-application of Scriptures.

I find this to be the common misunderstanding of many when "un-Scriptural" term is used.

Thanks,
Ed

[RayJGentry]

OCD is Obsessive Compulsive Disorder

[LutherNut]

I limited the scope to Lutherans, since they believe the same things about the bread and wine, as compared to other denominations.

But that's the point, Ed, not all who call themselves "Lutheran" believe the same thing concerning the Sacrament. If they did, the ELCA would have never entered into altar fellowship with church bodies that reject the body and blood of Christ in the Lord's Supper. That reason alone is enough to bar someone from the Sacrament in order to prevent them from sinning and bringing God's judgement upon them.

If you are truly opposed to the unScriptural practice of ordaination of women, they why do you remain a confessing member of a church body that does so? Do you commune at the church you attend? You know, by doing so, you are making a public statement that you are in full agreement with what they hold, teach, and confess. When you receive communion with them, you are saying that you agree with their practice of ordaining women.

Do you truly agree with it or disagree with it? Your words say one thing, but your actions say the exact opposite. This is the very thing that Jesus accused the Pharisees of doing: doing one thing but saying another.

[seajoy]

OCD is Obsessive Compulsive Disorder
Thanks Ray, I was just about to say that!

I sometimes forget that not everyone knows what ocd is.

[seajoy]

But seajoy, why would you want to put it that way?

Of course "the fellowship of professing the same thing is not un-Scriptural". :)

But that's not what I was saying.


OK.
Would you have a communion with me, now that I am an ELCA, yet do not hold to various ELCA liberal teachings.


I do not mean to upset people in that way by saying these things at all.
If I did, I am sorry.

I do not know what "ocd" means, but it is probably important.

The purpose of saying "un-Scriptural" is not to condemn at all, but to make a distinction between the what we think is right and the Scriptures.

This does not affect one's salvation at all.

I believe I underlined certain things to Luthernut that make my point in the context of being Scriptural or un-Scriptural.

Thanks,
Ed
Ed,

Usually one follows the teachings of the church they belong to. Even if we may agree that women should not be ordained...how many other things are there that we may not agree on. What your church professes...you usually profess as well. You see, it can get quite complicated if you don't profess the same things.

OCD is a mental disorder, I appreciate your understanding that it is important. You did actually help me to see how far I've come. I guess this is for another thread, at another time.

Back to the discussion....
The point that's being brought out here is why anyone would want to have others think that you are in complete agreement with things you don't agree with. It would be confusing to someone with a weak faith, or a new christian. Such as (example) "I didn't know the lcms church is ok with unmarried couples living together like some elca churches are." This could be a question in someone's mind, if they saw these 2 church bodies communing together, and you wouldn't even know this person was thinking it. How then could we respond? The list could go on and on.

seajoy

[Edial]

Ed,

Usually one follows the teachings of the church they belong to. Even if we may agree that women should not be ordained...how many other things are there that we may not agree on. What your church professes...you usually profess as well. You see, it can get quite complicated if you don't profess the same things.

OCD is a mental disorder, I appreciate your understanding that it is important. You did actually help me to see how far I've come. I guess this is for another thread, at another time.

Back to the discussion....
The point that's being brought out here is why anyone would want to have others think that you are in complete agreement with things you don't agree with. It would be confusing to someone with a weak faith, or a new christian. Such as (example) "I didn't know the lcms church is ok with unmarried couples living together like some elca churches are." This could be a question in someone's mind, if they saw these 2 church bodies communing together, and you wouldn't even know this person was thinking it. How then could we respond? The list could go on and on.

seajoy
I understand that.

I wound up in ELCA and I do not plan leaving it now, since I was not the one who placed myself there.

My views on life are Scriptural in these areas.

Would you have a communion with me under those conditions?

Thanks,
Ed

[RayJGentry]

we're starting to get into the issues of believing exactly what the church you're a part of believes. that gets really hard for a lot of people. what if you disagree with one important part, but everything else is in line but there's no other church you fit in to better? God will judge us each on our own. i do honestly think if somone finds a good church to be in, but maybe doesn't believe what that denomination believes, but fits with the congregation itself, that is often more important.

that's something about the ELCA too, is that the ELCA ordains women, but if a congregation was uncomfortable calling a woman pastor, they would not be obligated to. i think the ELCA gives more leeway (sp?) for a congregation than many denominations do. granted, if you're part of hte ELCA, you're part of a denomination that ordains women, but i think for most Christians it's the congregation they attend that shapes thier personal theology rather than the whole denomination. of course there are issues and definately problems subscribing to that. however for some people, i think it's better to be part of a individual congregation that preaches the Gospel and that their faith can grow in.

i would never attend an ELCA congregation if i thought thier doctrine was off base. now i know some of you will say, "but the doctrine of the whole ELCA IS off base", but just bear with me. i would attend another church. this would also apply to corrupt clergy, and lay leaders or other issues like that. likewise, i think most of you would not attend an LCMS congregation if something fishy was going on. you would probably find another congregation. likewise, i think that there can be very othodox lutheran churches within the ELCA just as there can be churches within the LCMS many of you would never attend. granted because the LCMS is a "tigher ship" of "this is how it is and this is how it isn't" there's probably less of them. but because of the ELCA's flexibility it leaves the opportunity for congregations that are within your realms of correctness on many issues, but probably not all at once, otherwise they would be part of the LCMS.

one last thing: when i was down in omaha, i spoke at a church that used to be ELCA, but though the ELCA was gonig too far left, so broke off. they have some sort of fellowship with the LCMS, but are not actually part of it. is anyone familiar with this?

[Edial]

But that's the point, Ed, not all who call themselves "Lutheran" believe the same thing concerning the Sacrament. If they did, the ELCA would have never entered into altar fellowship with church bodies that reject the body and blood of Christ in the Lord's Supper. That reason alone is enough to bar someone from the Sacrament in order to prevent them from sinning and bringing God's judgement upon them.

If you are truly opposed to the unScriptural practice of ordaination of women, they why do you remain a confessing member of a church body that does so? Do you commune at the church you attend? You know, by doing so, you are making a public statement that you are in full agreement with what they hold, teach, and confess. When you receive communion with them, you are saying that you agree with their practice of ordaining women.

Do you truly agree with it or disagree with it? Your words say one thing, but your actions say the exact opposite. This is the very thing that Jesus accused the Pharisees of doing: doing one thing but saying another.
As I mentioned, the Pastor is quite conservative in these areas.
So am I. So are quite many in that church.

Some of the ladies state that they want women in ministry. When they asked me, I stated that men and women have their respective responsibilities within the church.

And we do have a very respectful attitude to each other primarily due to very good inputs from all at Pastor's Bible study.

When I first came there, Pastor was not there. One lady was distributing the elements. I quietly left the church without partaking.
When I asked the Pastor, he said that she was there before he was ... in other words, ELCA "politics".

Concerning other things, the congragation is solidly conservative (from what I see).

I did not go into that church knowing "in-house Lutheran problems".
I heard of them prior to that from the papers and decided to see what is going on in that church.

If homosexual attitudes or a talking the Scriptures away would be instilled, I would not have stayed.

I also thought that I was in the LCMS church looking at the posts in these forums.

And as I mentioned to seajoy, because I was not the one who placed myself in the ELCA, since I thought it was LCMS, I will stay, as long as what is going on continues.

Having said that, would you LutherNut, knowing that I hold to the conservative views, have a communion with me, Edial?

I posed the same question to seajoy.

Thanks,
Ed

[ByzantineDixie]

If one cannot have fellowship with a brother, he should fix it and not justify it by doing theological gymnastics.

To say that, since we do not "like" each other we do not partake together is bad enough.

But to say that we agree not to partake together and make peace with it, is serious business.

Yet to say that what we are doing is GOOD, is blasphemous to the very Sacrament that we claim to hold dear.



As an Orthodox Christian, I obviously do not hold to open communion but you make an excellent point here, Ed. The Cup cannot be divided. My priest gave a homily on this not long ago. It's hard to work out the differences but it is work that Christians are called to do.

[SPALATIN]

we're starting to get into the issues of believing exactly what the church you're a part of believes. that gets really hard for a lot of people. what if you disagree with one important part, but everything else is in line but there's no other church you fit in to better? God will judge us each on our own. i do honestly think if somone finds a good church to be in, but maybe doesn't believe what that denomination believes, but fits with the congregation itself, that is often more important.

Ray,

While it is easy to say that "I agree with this, but not that." it comes down to seeing what scripture says about issues such as these. The ELCA will hold to a higher critical view of scripture. Those that hold this view will look at a part of scripture and then determine if it was divinely inspired or not. They have already determined that anything Paul said to Timothy in regards to the woman's role in the church was for that time only and can not be used as a model for today.

So where do you draw the line? Paul said in the second letter he wrote to Timothy that "ALL SCRIPTURE is GOD BREATHED and is useful in teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness. The ELCA HC proponents will claim that Paul was only speaking of the Old Testament because the New Testament had not been canonized as yet.

So the issues are the issues and scripture either is or is not divinely inspired. If it is inspired then I think we need to take Paul's word to Timothy very seriously. Feminism has made it's mark in the ELCA and it is trying to get it's hands on the LCMS. It behooves us to stop feminism in the church from growing any more than it already has and to begin to push it back. Why do women want this job anyways? Just to prove they can do it? What a stupid reason for wanting a job.


that's something about the ELCA too, is that the ELCA ordains women, but if a congregation was uncomfortable calling a woman pastor, they would not be obligated to. i think the ELCA gives more leeway (sp?) for a congregation than many denominations do. granted, if you're part of hte ELCA, you're part of a denomination that ordains women, but i think for most Christians it's the congregation they attend that shapes thier personal theology rather than the whole denomination. of course there are issues and definately problems subscribing to that. however for some people, i think it's better to be part of a individual congregation that preaches the Gospel and that their faith can grow in.

i would never attend an ELCA congregation if i thought thier doctrine was off base. now i know some of you will say, "but the doctrine of the whole ELCA IS off base", but just bear with me. i would attend another church. this would also apply to corrupt clergy, and lay leaders or other issues like that. likewise, i think most of you would not attend an LCMS congregation if something fishy was going on. you would probably find another congregation. likewise, i think that there can be very othodox lutheran churches within the ELCA just as there can be churches within the LCMS many of you would never attend. granted because the LCMS is a "tigher ship" of "this is how it is and this is how it isn't" there's probably less of them. but because of the ELCA's flexibility it leaves the opportunity for congregations that are within your realms of correctness on many issues, but probably not all at once, otherwise they would be part of the LCMS.

one last thing: when i was down in omaha, i spoke at a church that used to be ELCA, but though the ELCA was gonig too far left, so broke off. they have some sort of fellowship with the LCMS, but are not actually part of it. is anyone familiar with this?[/quote]

[seajoy]

I understand that.

I wound up in ELCA and I do not plan leaving it now, since I was not the one who placed myself there.

My views on life are Scriptural in these areas.

Would you have a communion with me under those conditions?

Thanks,
Ed
Ed, you are wearing me out :) . And I mean that in the kindest way I can!

You can't understand our reasons for close communion, and I can't understand someone staying in a church where you don't agree with their teachings. I say we just leave it at that.

How about a cup of coffee?

:D seajoy

[RayJGentry]

to spalatin -
i don't think that most women in pastoral roles in the ELCA do it to prove they can. i believe they feel they are called. now one can disagree whether or not a woman CAN be called to that role, but i think that's why. i do believe that all scripture is God breathed and USEFUL for teaching. even an elca pastor can use paul's letter to timothy to teach something relevant today, without twisting what is said. i think we just differ on what God Breathed means. you may very well have a better understanding of the greek than i do and it's something i'll look in to.

but i think that ed is making a very good point. until this post, ed was considered LCMS (besides the open communion thing) and most of you would have communed with him, correct? well, now that we look at the situation - his personal beliefs have not changed, but we find out he attends an ELCA church - would you commune with him?

[Edial]

Hi EdI am reading another book that you might be interested in. In fact others may also be interested in it. Its called "Church Fellowship" by John F. Brug. Its available thru Nothwest Publishing House. The purpose of this book is to study and explain WELS fellwoship practices. I think the LCMS may also be accused of some of the same things from what you are saying.
I am ordering it.

There is also "Church Fellowship, Bible study course" by Brug, which is not available at this time at Amazon.
Did you hear of it?

Thanks,
Ed

[Jim47]

Edial

I limited the scope to Lutherans, since they believe the same things about the bread and wine, as compared to other denominations.



This is called, justifying oneself.

If one cannot have fellowship with a brother, he should fix it and not justify it by doing theological gymnastics.

To say that, since we do not "like" each other we do not partake together is bad enough.

But to say that we agree not to partake together and make peace with it, is serious business.

Yet to say that what we are doing is GOOD, is blasphemous to the very Sacrament that we claim to hold dear.

ISA 5:20 Woe to those who call evil good
and good evil, ...


And since we cannot accept such sins coming from our hands, hearts and mouths and repent - we do not repent.




Hi Ed

Along the lines of what the others are saying, we need to be careful of whom and what we are in agreement with.
As an example, would you agree with me if I said that I am Lutheran but I deny that Jesus died for my sins and insisted that I have to earn forgiveness on my own, because Jesus work of salvation didn't quite get the job done?
You see when we agree to have fellowship with someone we have to be in agreement with every doctrine, not just one or two.

2nd point: Just because we don't agree to have fellowship with someone doesn't mean that we don't love that person, in fact quite the opposite. Jesus taught us to love even our enemies, but, He also warned us of those who wouldseek to change part of His Word and replace it with their own words and teachings.

Lets take a look at the verse you quotes above from Isaiah. I think you took it out of context, did you not? I am surprised that you would do that Ed. :)

Woes and Judgments
Isa 5:8 Woe to you who add house to house
and join field to field
till no space is left
and you live alone in the land.
Isa 5:9 The LORD Almighty has declared in my hearing:
"Surely the great houses will become desolate,
the fine mansions left without occupants.
Isa 5:10 A ten-acre vineyard will produce only a bath of wine,
a homer of seed only an ephah of grain."
Isa 5:11 Woe to those who rise early in the morning
to run after their drinks,
who stay up late at night
till they are inflamed with wine.
Isa 5:12 They have harps and lyres at their banquets,
tambourines and flutes and wine,
but they have no regard for the deeds of the LORD,
no respect for the work of his hands.
Isa 5:13 Therefore my people will go into exile
for lack of understanding;
their men of rank will die of hunger
and their masses will be parched with thirst.
Isa 5:14 Therefore the grave enlarges its appetite
and opens its mouth without limit;
into it will descend their nobles and masses
with all their brawlers and revelers.
Isa 5:15 So man will be brought low
and mankind humbled,
the eyes of the arrogant humbled.
Isa 5:16 But the LORD Almighty will be exalted by his justice,
and the holy God will show himself holy by his righteousness.
Isa 5:17 Then sheep will graze as in their own pasture;
lambs will feed among the ruins of the rich.
Isa 5:18 Woe to those who draw sin along with cords of deceit,
and wickedness as with cart ropes,
Isa 5:19 to those who say, "Let God hurry,
let him hasten his work
so we may see it.
Let it approach,
let the plan of the Holy One of Israel come,
so we may know it."
Isa 5:20 Woe to those who call evil good
and good evil,
who put darkness for light
and light for darkness,
who put bitter for sweet
and sweet for bitter.
Isa 5:21 Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes
and clever in their own sight.
Isa 5:22 Woe to those who are heroes at drinking wine
and champions at mixing drinks,
Isa 5:23 who acquit the guilty for a bribe,
but deny justice to the innocent.
Isa 5:24 Therefore, as tongues of fire lick up straw
and as dry grass sinks down in the flames,
so their roots will decay
and their flowers blow away like dust;
for they have rejected the law of the LORD Almighty
and spurned the word of the Holy One of Israel.
Isa 5:25 Therefore the LORD'S anger burns against his people;
his hand is raised and he strikes them down.
The mountains shake,
and the dead bodies are like refuse in the streets.
Yet for all this, his anger is not turned away,
his hand is still upraised.
Isa 5:26 He lifts up a banner for the distant nations,
he whistles for those at the ends of the earth.
Here they come,
swiftly and speedily!
Isa 5:27 Not one of them grows tired or stumbles,
not one slumbers or sleeps;
not a belt is loosened at the waist,
not a sandal thong is broken.
Isa 5:28 Their arrows are sharp,
all their bows are strung;
their horses’ hoofs seem like flint,
their chariot wheels like a whirlwind.
Isa 5:29 Their roar is like that of the lion,
they roar like young lions;
they growl as they seize their prey
and carry it off with no one to rescue.
Isa 5:30 In that day they will roar over it
like the roaring of the sea.
And if one looks at the land,
he will see darkness and distress;
even the light will be darkened by the clouds.




... and on the "light side" ...

All that "brother" stuff that Jesus talked about really concerns others and not us, since we exclude each other out of love. .

These knitting needles can come up with some doozies. :)






We don't really exclude each other Ed, we just don't agree with each other on key doctrines.


This cannot be taken seriously - allow me make some fun ...

---- having fun section ---
So, all of the ELCA then is a bunch of misfits that are not worthy of Lutheranism ... a dirty dozen, a Lutheran wannabes, funny-looking-people ... :D :D :)
(... some people said that I look like Danny DeVito from Taxi ... :D :) ).

And since I also (to my surprise :):)) was a member of an ELCA all this time, while thinking otherwise, am not worthy of LCMS by default (unless of course, I repent in sackcloth and ashes :)), it somehow makes sense that God "took me out of LCMS" without me even realizing it. :D :D :) .

So, since I am here now, I probably will not make many friends either, since I'll probably be pushing that "same old book" in some of the more "uncomfortable" places.:)

Oh well ... :)

--- end of having fun section ----

Thanks,
Ed[/quote]

[Edial]

Hi Ed

Along the lines of what the others are saying, we need to be careful of whom and what we are in agreement with.
As an example, would you agree with me if I said that I am Lutheran but I deny that Jesus died for my sins and insisted that I have to earn forgiveness on my own, because Jesus work of salvation didn't quite get the job done?
You see when we agree to have fellowship with someone we have to be in agreement with every doctrine, not just one or two.

2nd point: Just because we don't agree to have fellowship with someone doesn't mean that we don't love that person, in fact quite the opposite. Jesus taught us to love even our enemies, but, He also warned us of those who wouldseek to change part of His Word and replace it with their own words and teachings.

Lets take a look at the verse you quotes above from Isaiah. I think you took it out of context, did you not? I am surprised that you would do that Ed. :)

Woes and Judgments
Isa 5:8 Woe to you who add house to house
and join field to field
till no space is left
and you live alone in the land.
Isa 5:9 The LORD Almighty has declared in my hearing:
"Surely the great houses will become desolate,
the fine mansions left without occupants.
Isa 5:10 A ten-acre vineyard will produce only a bath of wine,
a homer of seed only an ephah of grain."
Isa 5:11 Woe to those who rise early in the morning
to run after their drinks,
who stay up late at night
till they are inflamed with wine.
Isa 5:12 They have harps and lyres at their banquets,
tambourines and flutes and wine,
but they have no regard for the deeds of the LORD,
no respect for the work of his hands.
Isa 5:13 Therefore my people will go into exile
for lack of understanding;
their men of rank will die of hunger
and their masses will be parched with thirst.
Isa 5:14 Therefore the grave enlarges its appetite
and opens its mouth without limit;
into it will descend their nobles and masses
with all their brawlers and revelers.
Isa 5:15 So man will be brought low
and mankind humbled,
the eyes of the arrogant humbled.
Isa 5:16 But the LORD Almighty will be exalted by his justice,
and the holy God will show himself holy by his righteousness.
Isa 5:17 Then sheep will graze as in their own pasture;
lambs will feed among the ruins of the rich.
Isa 5:18 Woe to those who draw sin along with cords of deceit,
and wickedness as with cart ropes,
Isa 5:19 to those who say, "Let God hurry,
let him hasten his work
so we may see it.
Let it approach,
let the plan of the Holy One of Israel come,
so we may know it."
Isa 5:20 Woe to those who call evil good
and good evil,
who put darkness for light
and light for darkness,
who put bitter for sweet
and sweet for bitter.
Isa 5:21 Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes
and clever in their own sight.
Isa 5:22 Woe to those who are heroes at drinking wine
and champions at mixing drinks,
Isa 5:23 who acquit the guilty for a bribe,
but deny justice to the innocent.
Isa 5:24 Therefore, as tongues of fire lick up straw
and as dry grass sinks down in the flames,
so their roots will decay
and their flowers blow away like dust;
for they have rejected the law of the LORD Almighty
and spurned the word of the Holy One of Israel.
Isa 5:25 Therefore the LORD'S anger burns against his people;
his hand is raised and he strikes them down.
The mountains shake,
and the dead bodies are like refuse in the streets.
Yet for all this, his anger is not turned away,
his hand is still upraised.
Isa 5:26 He lifts up a banner for the distant nations,
he whistles for those at the ends of the earth.
Here they come,
swiftly and speedily!
Isa 5:27 Not one of them grows tired or stumbles,
not one slumbers or sleeps;
not a belt is loosened at the waist,
not a sandal thong is broken.
Isa 5:28 Their arrows are sharp,
all their bows are strung;
their horses’ hoofs seem like flint,
their chariot wheels like a whirlwind.
Isa 5:29 Their roar is like that of the lion,
they roar like young lions;
they growl as they seize their prey
and carry it off with no one to rescue.
Isa 5:30 In that day they will roar over it
like the roaring of the sea.
And if one looks at the land,
he will see darkness and distress;
even the light will be darkened by the clouds.





We don't really exclude each other Ed, we just don't agree with each other on key doctrines.


This cannot be taken seriously - allow me make some fun ...

---- having fun section ---
So, all of the ELCA then is a bunch of misfits that are not worthy of Lutheranism ... a dirty dozen, a Lutheran wannabes, funny-looking-people ... :D :D :)
(... some people said that I look like Danny DeVito from Taxi ... :D :) ).

And since I also (to my surprise :):)) was a member of an ELCA all this time, while thinking otherwise, am not worthy of LCMS by default (unless of course, I repent in sackcloth and ashes :)), it somehow makes sense that God "took me out of LCMS" without me even realizing it. :D :D :) .

So, since I am here now, I probably will not make many friends either, since I'll probably be pushing that "same old book" in some of the more "uncomfortable" places.:)

Oh well ... :)

--- end of having fun section ----

Thanks,
Ed[/quote]
Fine.

Would you Jim have a communion with me Edial (an ELCA) knowing that I hold to the same faith that you do?

Thanks,
Ed

[Jim47]

Fine.

Would you Jim have a communion with me Edial (an ELCA) knowing that I hold to the same faith that you do?

Thanks,
Ed[/quote]


Ed

This is a little hard to nexplain given the amount of time that I have right now, and I won't have much time until at least tommorow night.

The short answer is "No"

This is doen out of pure Christian love, not spite or hatred or any other thing. The moment that I agree to have Holy Communion with you when you believe differntly on key doctrines means that my desire to fellowship with you measn more to me then being faithful to God's Word.

The only thing we can do as faithful servants of God is remain a strong voice and remain steadfast to the clear teachings of God's Word. The moment we do other then that we have given into deception which is just what Satan would have us do. As freinds concerned for each others faith it is of utmost importance that we remain steadfast in truth and give a clear witness.

I hope that helps you understand a little of what I am saying.

For much better and clearer instruction go WELS question and answer forum

Look under fellowship, LCMS and other

http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1519&cuQA_qaID=1&cuTopic_topicID=62

http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1519&cuQA_qaID=1&cuTopic_topicID=63

[Edial]

Ed

This is a little hard to nexplain given the amount of time that I have right now, and I won't have much time until at least tommorow night.

The short answer is "No"

This is doen out of pure Christian love, not spite or hatred or any other thing. The moment that I agree to have Holy Communion with you when you believe differntly on key doctrines means that my desire to fellowship with you measn more to me then being faithful to God's Word.

The only thing we can do as faithful servants of God is remain a strong voice and remain steadfast to the clear teachings of God's Word. The moment we do other then that we have given into deception which is just what Satan would have us do. As freinds concerned for each others faith it is of utmost importance that we remain steadfast in truth and give a clear witness.

I hope that helps you understand a little of what I am saying.

For much better and clearer instruction go WELS question and answer forum

Look under fellowship, LCMS and other

http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1519&cuQA_qaID=1&cuTopic_topicID=62

http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1519&cuQA_qaID=1&cuTopic_topicID=63

You misunderstood. :)

I do not believe in different doctrines from what you believe.

Would you still decline communion with me although we fully agree on the Biblical doctrines?

Thanks,
Ed

[Edial]

Ed, you are wearing me out :) . And I mean that in the kindest way I can!

You can't understand our reasons for close communion, and I can't understand someone staying in a church where you don't agree with their teachings. I say we just leave it at that.

How about a cup of coffee?

:D seajoy
This is a response. OK.

So to you it does not matter what are the person's personal beliefs, just what he belongs to.
OK.

Thanks,
Ed

[LilLamb219]

but i think that ed is making a very good point. until this post, ed was considered LCMS (besides the open communion thing) and most of you would have communed with him, correct?

Not everyone thought of him as being LCMS.

Edial, Jim believes that closed communion is biblical and you do not agree with him on that, so, you are not in agreement to go to the Lord's table together for communion. Disagreements need to be settled before being together at the Lord's table.

[Edial]

Not everyone thought of him as being LCMS.

Edial, Jim believes that closed communion is biblical and you do not agree with him on that, so, you are not in agreement to go to the Lord's table together for communion. Disagreements need to be settled before being together at the Lord's table.
Many make strawmen and then shoot them full of holes. :)

One defines a closed communion, disagrees on some things that are not Scriptural, and "makes" communion his own thing all the while displaying certain harshness in the regular conversation and concluding that this is love.:)

Those knitting needles are back at work.:)

(I am not talking about Jim, here).

Lillamb219, would you have a communion with Edial who believes the conservative doctrine and is willing to have communion with you?

Ed

[seajoy]

This is a response. OK.

So to you it does not matter what are the person's personal beliefs, just what he belongs to.
OK.

Thanks,
Ed
Ed,

It indeed does matter what a person believes. And I take offence in the fact that you are trying to turn my words into something they don't mean. The way you said it was very hurtful.

Most people profess what their church professes, otherwise they wouldn't belong there. I made my point earlier on this.

I guess you wouldn't want a cup of coffee with me...but my offer still stands.

seajoy

[C.F.W. Walther]

And as I mentioned to seajoy, because I was not the one who placed myself in the ELCA, since I thought it was LCMS, I will stay, as long as what is going on continues.


Ed, I cannot believe someone your age, as a matter of fact of any age, would join a church without noticing the specific denom/synod. I haven't ever seen a Lutheran church that didn't have it posted on their marque what synod they belonged to. And after being there awhile, why didn't you leave knowing that they were ELCA if you didn't agree with them? Some of this doesn't make sense since there are other LCMS congregations within driving distance. Sounds to me like you are trying to convert them over to your way of thinking just like you do here. I think I said one time before, jokingly, that you argue just for the sake of arguing and that you reminded me of my oldest son. He spends hours on the internet arguing with other people because he has no friends to do things with because of his argumentative nature. Actually I'm saying all this in love of Christ, at least I feel I am :)

Yet to say that what we are doing is GOOD, is blasphemous to the very Sacrament that we claim to hold dear.


Why would you say that when we are concerned about other peoples damnation? We could just sit back and say nothing about it and hope they read the parts in the Bible that supports not participating with unbelievers.



.

[C.F.W. Walther]

http://www3.christianforums.com/images/userinfo/happybirthday.gifSeajoy. To another great person born in August!!!!!!!

[seajoy]

http://www3.christianforums.com/images/userinfo/happybirthday.gifSeajoy. To another great person born in August!!!!!!!
Back at ya, Radidio!;)

[Edial]

Ed,

It indeed does matter what a person believes. And I take offence in the fact that you are trying to turn my words into something they don't mean. The way you said it was very hurtful.

Most people profess what their church professes, otherwise they wouldn't belong there. I made my point earlier on this.

I guess you wouldn't want a cup of coffee with me...but my offer still stands.

seajoy
Now, I have to watch my language.
What did I say that was hurtful?
I did not mean it.

My question was whether you would have a communion with me when I have concervative views yet belong to ELCA. That's all.

And, I did not address the cup of coffee, because that seemed to be a compromise to the question. :)

(We could have coffee, no problem).

There is no mystery in the question - a direct question.

Thanks,
Ed

[LilLamb219]

Lillamb219, would you have a communion with Edial who believes the conservative doctrine and is willing to have communion with you?

You would not be allowed to take Holy Communion at my church, Ed, and I would not go take Holy Communion at an ELCA church as we are not in agreement on many things. Does that answer the question? No strawmen here.

[Edial]

Ed, I cannot believe someone your age, as a matter of fact of any age, would join a church without noticing the specific denom/synod. I haven't ever seen a Lutheran church that didn't have it posted on their marque what synod they belonged to. And after being there awhile, why didn't you leave knowing that they were ELCA if you didn't agree with them? Some of this doesn't make sense since there are other LCMS congregations within driving distance. Sounds to me like you are trying to convert them over to your way of thinking just like you do here. I think I said one time before, jokingly, that you argue just for the sake of arguing and that you reminded me of my oldest son. He spends hours on the internet arguing with other people because he has no friends to do things with because of his argumentative nature. Actually I'm saying all this in love of Christ, at least I feel I am :)



Why would you say that when we are concerned about other peoples damnation? We could just sit back and say nothing about it and hope they read the parts in the Bible that supports not participating with unbelievers.



.
Wait a minute. What is this, Radidio?

As I told you, I came from a Baptist background. I had no idea about the acronyms.

I still cannot see the acronyms in the church.

As a matter of fact I thought I saw LCMS on one of the plaques and thought to myself that I am LCMS after hearing about it.

I did not tell it to others.

People at these forums told me that I am LCMS. I said OK. What do I know?

I just found out about this this Sunday, and I was surprised. What is this, Radidio?

Don't you believe me?

And you are saying I am arguiing for the sake of arguing? Like your son?

What the heck do you know about me? You know ANYTHING at all? What makes you conclude such things?

Did you meet with me? Did we discuss private things? Do you know me life?

Your son has an argumentative nature and has no friends, so he spends hours on Internet - therefore it's me?

Do you know how much people that know me love me? (Now I sound like a real idiot by saying that, but I have no choice against such accusation "in love")

Oh yeah, "In love" judgement.


I did not do it.

It HAPPENED this way. God did it.

Argue with Hiim.

Ed

[seajoy]

Now, I have to watch my language.
What did I say that was hurtful?
I did not mean it.

My question was whether you would have a communion with me when I have concervative views yet belong to ELCA. That's all.

And, I did not address the cup of coffee, because that seemed to be a compromise to the question. :)

(We could have coffee, no problem).

There is no mystery in the question - a direct question.

Thanks,
Ed
It would not be my decision as to if I could commune with you, it would be the pastor's. And as I said in an earlier post, a pastor of the wels or lcms, would have to have a long talk with you, before that could happen. You are in association with a church that goes against these 2 church bodies in many areas. It's not my decision to make, in my own church. I would not commune in an elca church because of these disagreements.

You have illuded to me talking unScripturally in an earlier post, and you now are saying that I don't care what a person believes, and all I care about is what church they belong to. I have never been accused of either of these things before, and to have it happen twice....if you are trying to hurt my feelings, you have. I may be a tad too sensitive for this forum.

Please consider the things you say before you say them. You are speaking to Christians here.

(glad you decided coffee would be ok)

seajoy

[Edial]

You would not be allowed to take Holy Communion at my church, Ed, and I would not go take Holy Communion at an ELCA church as we are not in agreement on many things. Does that answer the question? No strawmen here.
OK.
So, I guess after I am interviewed at your church and it is seen that I hold to the identical Scriptural views, yet am an ELCA, I will be denied communion.

In the eyes of Christ himself, this is wrong, Lillamb219.

Thanks,
Ed

[LilLamb219]

So, I guess after I am interviewed at your church and it is seen that I hold to the identical Scriptural views, yet am an ELCA, I will be denied communion.


You say that closed communion is wrong and unscriptural...you don't hold to what scriptures say according to the LCMS because of this. Since you believe that closed communion is wrong, why on earth would you want to try to barge in at the table of a LCMS church?

[Edial]

You say that closed communion is wrong and unscriptural...you don't hold to what scriptures say according to the LCMS because of this. Since you believe that closed communion is wrong, why on earth would you want to try to barge in at the table of a LCMS church?
I will repost this ---
So, I guess after I am interviewed at your church and it is seen that I hold to the identical Scriptural views, yet am an ELCA, I will be denied communion.

In the eyes of Christ himself, this is wrong, Lillamb219.
--- end of re-post---

And the fact that I am coming to an LCMS communion in your imagination, is not because I am barging in, but for several other reasons.
If you deny me because I am ELCA while I do not deviate doctrinally from the Scriptures, it is not my problem.

You are acountable to God - you explain this to Christ.

And by the way, do you know why I left the Baptists?
One primary reason - Baptists are hard people.
Love is leaking out, a transmission fluid leak, all kinds of noises.

From what I see here at the LCMS - that they exclude ELCA "out of love" - I do not believe that for a moment. :)

Ed

[RayJGentry]

i guess i'm still wondering about my other post. if someone (anyone, not Edial) was attending an ELCA church because it was what was available (or say the LCMS church had doctrinal problems, or the leaders or pastor was corrupt in someway) so they attended a conservative ELCA church, even though they did not agree with their doctrine, because they were a confessional congregation and provided what that person needed to grow spiritually, would they be denied communion in an LCMS church, or would you, specifically, opt not to commune with them (say in an intimate setting or something)? i think that's what edial is getting at.

secondly, don't tell me that to commune at an LCMS church requires a lengthy discussion with a pastor. i've been to several. each time the pastor has asked me to speak with an elder. i told them openly i was ELCA, we briefly discussed sacramental theology and they welcomed me to the table.

i communed with them because i thought that's all closed communion was about. i thought it was to keep people who has vastly different beliefs regarding the sacrament specifically or someone who had not been taught the meaning of them from communing. at the time i had no idea that it was there to keep people who did not belief, up and down the board, the same thing as LCMS from communing. knowing this now, i would probably not commune at an LCMS church since that seems to be what it was about.

i still believe that the sacrament of communion is about the sacrament of commuion. if you would call me a brother in Christ, even if you think i'm wrong on issues, but my belief of communion is the same, that's what seems to be important to me. Christ called us to commune in remembrance of him. i was under the impression it was a fellowship of believers that communed together. i thought it was about remembering Christ, not remembering ourselves.

i do apologize if anyone takes offense to this. i am not intending to be attacking, just presenting how i feel communion is being treating in the whole scope of things. this is not an attack on anyone here. i'm leaving the post as-is though, because in light of this thread, this is how i'm seeing things. feel free to help me out if i'm mistaken somewhere. God Bless.

[LilLamb219]

Love is leaking out, a transmission fluid leak, all kinds of noises.

I beg your pardon?

[Jim47]

Dear Ed :)

This is almost laughable. :D

Just think back over all the conversations we have had with you over the last few monthes. I think everyone considers you a friend, but I am baffled when you say we agree on all key doctrines. Really Ed, I know you are a lot smarter then I am, and even I have figured out that there are a bunch of things that you and I don't agree on. I really appreciate your posts though, cause they keep us all on our toes.

I know! :doh:

This is all just a big quiz isn't it? :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[SPALATIN]

i guess i'm still wondering about my other post. if someone (anyone, not Edial) was attending an ELCA church because it was what was available (or say the LCMS church had doctrinal problems, or the leaders or pastor was corrupt in someway) so they attended a conservative ELCA church, even though they did not agree with their doctrine, because they were a confessional congregation and provided what that person needed to grow spiritually, would they be denied communion in an LCMS church, or would you, specifically, opt not to commune with them (say in an intimate setting or something)? i think that's what edial is getting at.

Ray,

I would opt not to commune you because of the association with the ELCA the first time. I would then want to sit down with you and discuss the issues and the confessions with you and then if I felt you were more in line with my church's standing on the confessions I would probably allow you communion.

secondly, don't tell me that to commune at an LCMS church requires a lengthy discussion with a pastor. i've been to several. each time the pastor has asked me to speak with an elder. i told them openly i was ELCA, we briefly discussed sacramental theology and they welcomed me to the table.

Your experience so far is limited to a few churches which probably don't put a whole lot of emphasis on the confessional aspect as they should. It is deeper than just knowing the Real Presence of Christ in the Bread and Wine upon consecration.

If you were to join an LCMS church you would need to go through an adult catechism. I doubt you would be able to transfer your membership.

i communed with them because i thought that's all closed communion was about. i thought it was to keep people who has vastly different beliefs regarding the sacrament specifically or someone who had not been taught the meaning of them from communing. at the time i had no idea that it was there to keep people who did not belief, up and down the board, the same thing as LCMS from communing. knowing this now, i would probably not commune at an LCMS church since that seems to be what it was about.

To take communion at an LCMS church you should be in full fellowship with an LCMS church. Though finding one that practices full CLOSED communion anymore is far and few between.



i still believe that the sacrament of communion is about the sacrament of commuion. if you would call me a brother in Christ, even if you think i'm wrong on issues, but my belief of communion is the same, that's what seems to be important to me. Christ called us to commune in remembrance of him. i was under the impression it was a fellowship of believers that communed together. i thought it was about remembering Christ, not remembering ourselves.

Ray,

It is about remembering Christ. That is exactly what the LCMS is doing and I am sorry that you have gotten the idea that it is anything else. We unfortunately consider the ELCA to be a heterodox body and not an orthodox one. WELS considers the LCMS to be heterodox and will not commune us if we were to attend one of their churches. I would respect that

. When you take communion with people from a specific church you are in essence claiming to agree with them and their confession of faith. What if you found out that the church you belong to actually confessed to something that was out of line with scripture? Would you still commune with them? You probably would not. I would claim "in statu confessionis" which means that you are worshipping among them but not communing in protest to their false confession

i do apologize if anyone takes offense to this. i am not intending to be attacking, just presenting how i feel communion is being treating in the whole scope of things. this is not an attack on anyone here. i'm leaving the post as-is though, because in light of this thread, this is how i'm seeing things. feel free to help me out if i'm mistaken somewhere. God Bless.

I am not taking offense here at all. I am hoping that I can help you to understand that taking the Holy Eucharist goes much deeper than what you have been taught to date. If you would like to continue this conversation just let me know. We in the LCMS are not as bad as we sometimes come off to the ELCA folks. We are however, misunderstood often.

[C.F.W. Walther]

Ed I'll ask you the same thing you are accusing me of and that is, why are you assuming things about other people as you have of seajoy and others? You tell lillamb it's in her imagination? Do you know them personally or do you know their hearts? Is this how you normaly act when your back is against the wall, you use any device necessary to retaliate?



Ed as of right now within the LCMS there is only what we can gleen from the LCMS website about communion. Even within the ranks there are differences of opinion about close/closed communion. To say one way or another about what is "right" in communion I would have to default back to the confessions and Walther. Anything other than that cannot be reliable. Even each congregation has their own ideas.

If we are to be confessing Lutherans then we have to base our beliefs on what Luther and Walther espoused and to bring the Bible to bear through the words of our "confessional" books ie: BOC et. al.

In short if you cannot or will not believe what is written here then in all good conscience we at "certain" LCMS churches cannot or will not commune with anyone that cannot confess these truths. Simple as that.






How is Jesus present in His Supper?



We do not try to explain how Jesus is present under the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper,rather we believe,teach,

confess and rejoice that He is present.We Lutherans let the words
of Jesus stand without arguing about their possibility,or trying

to explain how they are true.As Luther put it so clearly,“We
maintain that the bread and the wine in the Supper are the true
body and blood of Christ”(SA III.6).Everyone who communes
receives into their mouths the body and blood of Jesus Christ,
whether they believe it or not,be they worthy or unworthy.
Jesus’Word is sure and certain. The Holy Spirit gives us
faith to trust in and believe Jesus’words,“Given and shed for
you for the forgiveness of sins.” Faith in Christ’s promise is
what makes us worthy to receive His Supper.Christ’s words of
institution retain their validity and efficacious power and thus,
by virtue of these words,the body and blood of Christ are truly
present,distributed and received.






What does the Lutheran church believe about





the Lord’s Supper?


The Lutheran church believes, teaches and confesses that

the Lord’s Supper is the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus
Christ,under the bread and wine,given to us Christians to eat
and to drink.We hold that the bread and the wine in the
Supper are the true body and blood of Christ and that these are
given and received into the mouths of all who commune.
Those who believe the promise: “Given and shed for you for
the forgiveness of sins,”receive forgiveness of sins,life and salvation.
This promise, along with the bodily eating and drinking,
is the main thing in the Sacrament.
The Lutheran church rejects and condemns incorrect
understandings of the Lord’s Supper,such as the view that the
sacrifice of the Mass delivers man from his sins,or that the
substance of the consecrated bread and wine is actually

changed into the body and blood of Christ.We also reject and
condemn the view that in the Lord’s Supper the true body and
blood of Christ is not received by the mouth of the communicants,
under the bread and wine,but is received only spiritually

in the heart by faith,or that the bread and wine are only symbols
of the far-distant body and blood of our Lord.






“The Holy Supper is one of the marks,one of the banners

of the church,one of the seals of the church’s doctrine
and faith (Rom.4:11; see 1 Cor.10:21; Ex.12:48). In
whichever church one receives the Holy Supper,one is
confessing that church and its doctrine.There cannot be
a more inward,brotherly fellowship than that into which
one enters with those in whose fellowship he receives
the holy Supper. . . . Even one who confesses the Real
Presence cannot ordinarily, except in the case of death,
be admitted if he is and wants to remain,not a member
of our orthodox church,but rather a Roman Catholic,
Reformed,so-called Evangelical or Unionist,Methodist,
Baptist, in short,a member of an erring fellowship.For
the Sacrament,as it is a seal of faith,is also the banner of
the fellowship in which it is administered” (Walther,

Pastoral Theology, p.110–111,149).




















1. Is it proper for a Lutheran to attend the Lord's Supper at the altars of churches not in

doctrinal agreement with the church body of which he/she is a member?


In accordance with the confessional nature of participation in the Lord's Supper (cf. pp. 19-23),
and in agreement with Lutheranism's historic position, it is inappropriate to attend the Lord's Supper at non-Lutheran altars. Since

participation in Holy Communion, Scripturally and confessionally understood,
entails agreement in the Gospel and all its articles, it would not be appropriate to
attend the Lord's Supper in a church with which such agreement is not shared.






2. Is it proper to celebrate Communion as a device for furthering or attaining pulpit or






altar fellowship?


No. The Confessions rightly teach that Eucharistic fellowship is a thankful celebration of that
unity which God has bestowed in the Gospel rather than a device to advance Christian fraternity

[LutherNut]

Ed, I would have to say that after reading many of your posts and having been in conversation with you here on a number of issues, your doctrinal ideas are not at all in line with any Lutheran teaching, including the ELCA.

Your ideas regarding close communion are not in line with Lutheran teaching.

Your ideas about justification and salvation are not at all in line with Lutheran teaching.

Lutheran teaching is based solely on the Scriptures. You claim that your ideas are Scripturally based, but they do not at all jive with what Lutherans (evangelical catholics) have held, taught, and confessed for centuries. I will never believe that they are all wrong and only you are correct.

I doubt very highly that if you were to ever have an extended conversation with a confessional Lutheran pastor that he would allow you to commune until such time as your theological faults have been corrected. And it's not because he doesn't want you to receive the Sacrament, it's because his love for you is such that he wants to prevent you from communing to your judgement.

[stumpjumper]

Well... Glad I'm not involved in this discussion :D

Stumpjumper steps out the back door quietly...

[Melethiel]

Well... Glad I'm not involved in this discussion :D

Stumpjumper steps out the back door quietly...
*follows*

I had typed up a response, and then thought better of it. :P

[Jim47]

*follows*

I had typed up a response, and then thought better of it. :P


Aww, come on thats no fun. :P

Be brave.

[Edial]

...
It is about remembering Christ. ...

We unfortunately consider the ELCA to be a heterodox body and not an orthodox one. WELS considers the LCMS to be heterodox and will not commune us if we were to attend one of their churches. ...
...
I did not know about WELS not communing with LCMS !!

I am sorry Scott, but this sickens me a bit.

And you are saying - It is about remembering Christ !?

I am telling you, religion is one complex concoction of traditionalism, IOW - politics.:)

Take it from a former atheist - it is NOT appetizing.

Ed

[Edial]

Ed I'll ask you the same thing you are accusing me of and that is, why are you assuming things about other people as you have of seajoy and others?

What did I assume?
Don't bounce the ball Radidio.

You tell lillamb it's in her imagination?
This is what she said -
Since you believe that closed communion is wrong, why on earth would you want to try to barge in at the table of a LCMS church?

my response -
And the fact that I am coming to an LCMS communion in your imagination, is not because I am barging in, but for several other reasons.

I showed that it is her imagination that I am "barging in" and I explained later on.

Next?
And if you do not have more, please address yourself for a moment.
Your judgemental "love" at that post is not welcome.


Do you know them personally or do you know their hearts? Is this how you normaly act when your back is against the wall, you use any device necessary to retaliate?
I respond to posts.

You repond to your speculations, at least in that post.

Once again, you assumed that my back is against the wall, or I might be defending myself due to you hitting "the nail on the head".

Radidio, you hit your thumb.

Ed as of right now within the LCMS there is only what we can gleen from the LCMS website about communion. Even within the ranks there are differences of opinion about close/closed communion. To say one way or another about what is "right" in communion I would have to default back to the confessions and Walther. Anything other than that cannot be reliable. Even each congregation has their own ideas.

If we are to be confessing Lutherans then we have to base our beliefs on what Luther and Walther espoused and to bring the Bible to bear through the words of our "confessional" books ie: BOC et. al.

In short if you cannot or will not believe what is written here then in all good conscience we at "certain" LCMS churches cannot or will not commune with anyone that cannot confess these truths. Simple as that.




How is Jesus present in His Supper?







We do not try to explain how Jesus is present under the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper,rather we believe,teach,



confess and rejoice that He is present.We Lutherans let the words
of Jesus stand without arguing about their possibility,or trying

to explain how they are true.As Luther put it so clearly,“We

maintain that the bread and the wine in the Supper are the true

body and blood of Christ”(SA III.6).Everyone who communes
receives into their mouths the body and blood of Jesus Christ,
whether they believe it or not,be they worthy or unworthy.
Jesus’Word is sure and certain. The Holy Spirit gives us
faith to trust in and believe Jesus’words,“Given and shed for
you for the forgiveness of sins.” Faith in Christ’s promise is
what makes us worthy to receive His Supper.Christ’s words of
institution retain their validity and efficacious power and thus,
by virtue of these words,the body and blood of Christ are truly
present,distributed and received.



What does the Lutheran church believe about







the Lord’s Supper?




The Lutheran church believes, teaches and confesses that



the Lord’s Supper is the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus
Christ,under the bread and wine,given to us Christians to eat
and to drink.We hold that the bread and the wine in the
Supper are the true body and blood of Christ and that these are
given and received into the mouths of all who commune.
Those who believe the promise: “Given and shed for you for
the forgiveness of sins,”receive forgiveness of sins,life and salvation.
This promise, along with the bodily eating and drinking,
is the main thing in the Sacrament.
The Lutheran church rejects and condemns incorrect
understandings of the Lord’s Supper,such as the view that the
sacrifice of the Mass delivers man from his sins,or that the
substance of the consecrated bread and wine is actually







changed into the body and blood of Christ.We also reject and
condemn the view that in the Lord’s Supper the true body and
blood of Christ is not received by the mouth of the communicants,
under the bread and wine,but is received only spiritually


in the heart by faith,or that the bread and wine are only symbols


of the far-distant body and blood of our Lord.






“The Holy Supper is one of the marks,one of the banners


of the church,one of the seals of the church’s doctrine
and faith (Rom.4:11; see 1 Cor.10:21; Ex.12:48). In
whichever church one receives the Holy Supper,one is
confessing that church and its doctrine.There cannot be
a more inward,brotherly fellowship than that into which
one enters with those in whose fellowship he receives
the holy Supper. . . . Even one who confesses the Real
Presence cannot ordinarily, except in the case of death,
be admitted if he is and wants to remain,not a member
of our orthodox church,but rather a Roman Catholic,
Reformed,so-called Evangelical or Unionist,Methodist,
Baptist, in short,a member of an erring fellowship.For
the Sacrament,as it is a seal of faith,is also the banner of
the fellowship in which it is administered” (Walther,







Pastoral Theology, p.110–111,149).







1. Is it proper for a Lutheran to attend the Lord's Supper at the altars of churches not in

doctrinal agreement with the church body of which he/she is a member?




In accordance with the confessional nature of participation in the Lord's Supper (cf. pp. 19-23),


and in agreement with Lutheranism's historic position, it is inappropriate to attend the Lord's Supper at non-Lutheran altars. Since

participation in Holy Communion, Scripturally and confessionally understood,
entails agreement in the Gospel and all its articles, it would not be appropriate to
attend the Lord's Supper in a church with which such agreement is not shared.




2. Is it proper to celebrate Communion as a device for furthering or attaining pulpit or








altar fellowship?




No. The Confessions rightly teach that Eucharistic fellowship is a thankful celebration of that


unity which God has bestowed in the Gospel rather than a device to advance Christian fraternity




Radidio, this is talking about prohibition of interdenominational communion.
(Is Partoral Theology part of the Confessions?)

Right in THIS thread, I see that WELS do not commune with LCMS.

Radidio - let's drop self-justifying ourselves under a "banner of love".

Ed

[C.F.W. Walther]

Your judgemental "love" at that post is not welcome.

Radidio - let's drop self-justifying ourselves under a "banner of love".





It's not judgemental its............
BIBLICAL!..................BIBLICAL........................BIBLICAL!...............BIBLICAL............. BIBLICAL!

[Edial]

Ed, I would have to say that after reading many of your posts and having been in conversation with you here on a number of issues, your doctrinal ideas are not at all in line with any Lutheran teaching, including the ELCA.

Your ideas regarding close communion are not in line with Lutheran teaching.

Your ideas about justification and salvation are not at all in line with Lutheran teaching.

Lutheran teaching is based solely on the Scriptures. You claim that your ideas are Scripturally based, but they do not at all jive with what Lutherans (evangelical catholics) have held, taught, and confessed for centuries. I will never believe that they are all wrong and only you are correct.

I doubt very highly that if you were to ever have an extended conversation with a confessional Lutheran pastor that he would allow you to commune until such time as your theological faults have been corrected. And it's not because he doesn't want you to receive the Sacrament, it's because his love for you is such that he wants to prevent you from communing to your judgement.
LutherNut, back to the Scriptures and the Confessions.

This is Lutheranism.

Where can you show Scripturally or Confessionally that I disagree with Lutheranism?

Some almost had "a fit" when they heard that I am Old Earth and not Young Earth - I was called a non-Lutheran.
And their presentation had no verses, by the way.

Some had another "fit" when they heard that I believe in the upcoming 1000 yeard. Non-Lutheran! Non-Lutheran!
Scriptures and the Confessions please.
And their presentation had no verses by the way.

Some had a "stroke" when they heard that justification is not always synonymous with salvation.
Therefore one cannot lose personal justification as in Abraham's case, yet lose salvation.
Got you! Got you! ... Got what?
Scriptures and the Confessions please.
And their presentation had no verses by the way.
Then others said that indeed this way of looking on things is a bit deeper than the Confessions present.
That is fine, but it not against the Scriptures and the Confessions.

And my favorite one (actually it is becoming one of my favorites:) ) - Your ideas regarding close communion are not in line with Lutheran teaching.

When I saw that WELS considers LCMS heterodox and does not commune with them :D ... forget us the ELCA misfits, Lutheran wannabes ... :)

And then a statement - Lutheran teaching is based solely on the Scriptures. (frown)... :)

... and then there is that love thing.

Yeah, right.

Ed

[Edial]

It's not judgemental its............


BIBLICAL!..................BIBLICAL........................BIBLICAL!...............BIBLICAL............. BIBLICAL!
Oh yeah ...

When you psychoanalyzed me from afar and that reminded me of your son, therefore I am just like your son in your Freudian moment ... and then you call that it is done "in love" (that love thingy back again) and then when you are called on that there is that "you did the same thing to others" and when that is flopped, then there is this - it is Biblical !

Let's not forget that "love thingy" again, that seems to be popping out in all of it's glorious fonts and colors.

Ed

[Edial]

Dear Ed :)

This is almost laughable. :D

Just think back over all the conversations we have had with you over the last few monthes. I think everyone considers you a friend, but I am baffled when you say we agree on all key doctrines. Really Ed, I know you are a lot smarter then I am, and even I have figured out that there are a bunch of things that you and I don't agree on. I really appreciate your posts though, cause they keep us all on our toes.

I know! :doh:

This is all just a big quiz isn't it? :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Jim, please see my itemized response to LutherNut concerning this.

And the point of my agreement or disagreement on Lutheranism is NOT with LCMS or ELCA or WELS or ABCD or MICKEY, (I am not good at acronyms :)), but with the Scriptures and the Confessions.

I do not understand the rest, and I personally have no deep-seated desire to be "enlightened" outside of what is.

As I stated previously, as a former practical atheist the religious aspects of Christianity outside of Scriptures or the Confessions do not appeal to me.
Others love it, I shrug my shoulders.

However, if one insists that a view that is outside of the Scriptures and the Confessions be a motiff for separation, I find that incorrect in the context of Christ and his teachings.

Thanks,
Ed

[LilLamb219]

However, if one insists that a view that is outside of the Scriptures and the Confessions be a motiff for separation, I find that incorrect in the context of Christ and his teachings.

Closed communion is scriptural...so it should concern you. It would do you best to try to learn why instead of just insisting that it isn't over and over again.

[C.F.W. Walther]

Oh yeah ...

When you psychoanalyzed me from afar and that reminded me of your son, therefore I am just like your son in your Freudian moment ... and then you call that it is done "in love" (that love thingy back again) and then when you are called on that there is that "you did the same thing to others" and when that is flopped, then there is this - it is Biblical !

Let's not forget that "love thingy" again, that seems to be popping out in all of it's glorious fonts and colors.

EdI must have touched a "sore" spot with you. Since you are sooooo defensive I must have hit the right one. Deep down you want to confess that you really want to be confesional Lutheran but your pride is standing in the way. It's allright---let it loose. Truth hurts Ed.

Bet ya can't resist being argumentative. It must be terrible wanting to respond to this post but if you do them you prove I'm right :)

No "love" this time fella---you're past that---I'll let God love ya.

[Edial]

I must have touched a "sore" spot with you. Since you are sooooo defensive I must have hit the right one. Deep down you want to confess that you really want to be confesional Lutheran but your pride is standing in the way. It's allright---let it loose. Truth hurts Ed.

Bet ya can't resist being argumentative. It must be terrible wanting to respond to this post but if you do them you prove I'm right :)

No "love" this time fella---you're past that---I'll let God love ya.
Check your thumb. :)

And so far, I see Radidio's name at this thread doing all kinds of gymnastics.
(Oops, I fell for Radidio's snare ... tsk, tsk, tsk ... )

And as usual, your deep seated Freudian observation that I really want to be LCMS is kind of off the mark, shall we say?
Check your forefinger by the way :).

So, the wild swings kind of missed the head of the nail. :)

And concerning that love thingy again, if it is "past love", it was never there in the first place. :)

Ed

[tschenks]

However, if one insists that a view that is outside of the Scriptures and the Confessions be a motiff for separation, I find that incorrect in the context of Christ and his teachings.


Please attend the Divine Services and worship all you want ... you are welcome to the Service of the Word. But Holy Communion involves fellowship within the church -- it is a testimony of the unity of faith.

Excerpt from the Brief Statement of the Doctrinal Position of the Missouri Synod (1932):

28. On Church-Fellowship. - Since God ordained that His Word only, without the admixture of human doctrine, be taught and believed in the Christian Church, 1 Pet. 4:11; John 8:31, 32; 1 Tim. 6:3, 4, all Christians are required by God to discriminate between orthodox and heterodox church-bodies, Matt 7:15, to have church-fellowship only with orthodox church-bodies, and, in case they have strayed into heterodox church-bodies, to leave them, Rom. 16:17. We repudiate unionism, that is, church-fellowship with the adherents of false doctrine, as disobedience to God's command, as causing divisions in the Church, Rom. 16:17; 2 John 9, 10, and as involving the constant danger of losing the Word of God entirely, 2 Tim. 2:17-21.

[Edial]

Please attend the Divine Services and worship all you want ... you are welcome to the Service of the Word. But Holy Communion involves fellowship within the church -- it is a testimony of the unity of faith.

Excerpt from the Brief Statement of the Doctrinal Position of the Missouri Synod (1932):

28. On Church-Fellowship. - Since God ordained that His Word only, without the admixture of human doctrine, be taught and believed in the Christian Church, 1 Pet. 4:11; John 8:31, 32; 1 Tim. 6:3, 4, all Christians are required by God to discriminate between orthodox and heterodox church-bodies, Matt 7:15, to have church-fellowship only with orthodox church-bodies, and, in case they have strayed into heterodox church-bodies, to leave them, Rom. 16:17. We repudiate unionism, that is, church-fellowship with the adherents of false doctrine, as disobedience to God's command, as causing divisions in the Church, Rom. 16:17; 2 John 9, 10, and as involving the constant danger of losing the Word of God entirely, 2 Tim. 2:17-21.
Why do you think WELS considers you heterodox?

Thanks,
Ed

[tschenks]

Why do you think WELS considers you heterodox?

Thanks,
Ed

Because WELS considers their entire synod to be one church. The LCMS is 6,000+ different churches.

You can find multiple pages of what WELS thinks about the LCMS at wels.net.

[SPALATIN]

Communion is like Tim said. It is the unity of faith in the church. You have put your allegiance with the ELCA Ed and they are not part of OUR church. They do not have Altar and Pulpit fellowship with the LCMS and because of that people from the ELCA should not partake of the Eucharist in an LCMS church.

[Edial]

Communion is like Tim said. It is the unity of faith in the church. You have put your allegiance with the ELCA Ed and they are not part of OUR church. They do not have Altar and Pulpit fellowship with the LCMS and because of that people from the ELCA should not partake of the Eucharist in an LCMS church.
I understand that quite well. :)

I am just curious what you think of WELS when they consider you LCMS heterodox and refuse communing with you.

Do they have a point?
Why? and Why not?

And by the way, I do realize that you feel quite comfortable with separate communion from the WELS. :)
That's the religious aspect. And in that context, division is always explained in a very civilized tone. :)

But I am not talking about religious aspect of Christianity.

Thanks,
Ed

[stumpjumper]

How can there be more than one Church?

[Edial]

How can there be more than one Church?
Oh, religion, religion.
You can do "wonderful" things.

You do not only split the church, but even convince them to be HAPPY and justified that they are split. :D :):)

My hat off to you. You really know your job well. :)

Ed

[Edial]

Because WELS considers their entire synod to be one church. The LCMS is 6,000+ different churches.

You can find multiple pages of what WELS thinks about the LCMS at wels.net.
Do you think they are correct in considering you heterodox and why or why not?

[stumpjumper]

Oh, religion, religion.
You can do "wonderful" things.

You do not only split the church, but even convince them to be HAPPY and justified that they are split. :D :):)

Yeah. That "one holy catholic and apostolic Church" thing that I say every Sunday doesn't seem to coincide with that ;)

My hat off to you. You really know your job well. :)

Ed

No problem. I'm pretty sure I know what you're talking 'bout...

[tschenks]

If we were to use WELS' line of reasoning, every congregation in every denomination in every city across the planet would consider each other heterodox.

They might as well be ... case in point being the multiple denominations of Christianity. Even the Evangelical Lutheran Church (the original Lutherans, not the ELCA) considered itself to be the true Church and everything else heterodox if not already going to hell.

I fully realize there is one Christian and Apostolic Church. The Holy Christian Church/Communion of Saints/Invisible Church is those who are true believers regardless of denomination; the visible church includes those people with the wicked and hippocrites. We are all rotten, miserable sinners so it's not up to me to judge that millions of baptised Christians are false believers simply because their synod and my synod don't write the same thing on a piece of paper.

However, you will not commune with me at the Lord's Supper at my church unless you are examined for what we consider false beliefs, which usually involves being a confirmed member in good standing from a LCMS church, or someone who subscribes unconditionally to the Lutheran Confessions. Our Pastors aren't mind-readers, so that amounts to taking you at your own word that you do agree with us.

[Edial]

If we were to use WELS' line of reasoning, every congregation in every denomination in every city across the planet would consider each other heterodox.

They might as well be ... case in point being the multiple denominations of Christianity. Even the Evangelical Lutheran Church (the original Lutherans, not the ELCA) considered itself to be the true Church and everything else heterodox if not already going to hell.

I fully realize there is one Christian and Apostolic Church. The Holy Christian Church/Communion of Saints/Invisible Church is those who are true believers regardless of denomination; the visible church includes those people with the wicked and hippocrites. We are all rotten, miserable sinners so it's not up to me to judge that millions of baptised Christians are false believers simply because their synod and my synod don't write the same thing on a piece of paper.

However, you will not commune with me at the Lord's Supper at my church unless you are examined for what we consider false beliefs, which usually involves being a confirmed member in good standing from a LCMS church, or someone who subscribes unconditionally to the Lutheran Confessions. Our Pastors aren't mind-readers, so that amounts to taking you at your own word that you do agree with us.
Oh, I do not have a problem interviewing...

I am not clear about the next to last sentence.
If my personal believes are in accordance with the Confessions and I am ELCA, would that be a problem communing with me?

Thanks,
Ed

[tschenks]

Oh, I do not have a problem interviewing...

I am not clear about the next to last sentence.
If my personal believes are in accordance with the Confessions and I am ELCA, would that be a problem communing with me?

Thanks,
Ed

That's up to the Pastor to decide.

[Protoevangel]

Edial, When I was ELCA, and visiting LCMS and LCC churches while working on the road, I think I only encountered two Pastors who were not comfortable Communing me. Unfortunately, I had waited until the morning of Services before I talked to these two pastors, and we really didn't have the time to get into any kind of real discussion.

But honestly Ed, as a personal opinion, I would suggest that based on your arguments over the past few months, I don't think you should pursue Communion in an LCMS Church, but only when you truly agree with her teachings. I say this not as a judgmental "elder", lording it over you, but as a concerned brother who is reconsidering his own status as a Communing member of the LCMS.

[C.F.W. Walther]

Our Pastors aren't mind-readers, so that amounts to taking you at your own word that you do agree with us.
And I think it's just for that reason that there is latitude granted by some pastors. Not knowing who is of the "church" but just making decisions not on what he sees in the visible church. Hard distinctions for a pastor to make. The only thing an LCMS pastor can go on would be our confessions and to abide by them. I don't think that he would have a guilty conscience if he slighted someone even from the "church universal". After all God knows his heart.



.

[Edial]

Edial, When I was ELCA, and visiting LCMS and LCC churches while working on the road, I think I only encountered two Pastors who were not comfortable Communing me. Unfortunately, I had waited until the morning of Services before I talked to these two pastors, and we really didn't have the time to get into any kind of real discussion.
But why then is there such a strong negative attitude here, at this forum, concerning not Communing an ELCA member??

Now, I really do not understand.


But honestly Ed, as a personal opinion, I would suggest that based on your arguments over the past few months, I don't think you should pursue Communion in an LCMS Church, but only when you truly agree with her teachings. I say this not as a judgmental "elder", lording it over you, but as a concerned brother who is reconsidering his own status as a Communing member of the LCMS.
I am not pursuing anything in that context.

When I became a Lutheran, this topic never even crossed my mind.

I did not even know I was ELCA, until at the time of this thread.
My understanding of Lutheranism is Scriptures and the Confessions.

However, I see that it does not appear to be enough in this context.
Somehow Lutheranism went beyond these two on every side.

I am becoming more and more convinced that a proper way of existing within Lutheranism while avoiding traditional aspects of it, is finding a local church (ELCA, LCMS, or whatever else), that does not stress the emphasys on Lutheran denominations, but tries following the Bible and the Confessions and uses these as a measuring rod for Christianity.

I find that Liberalism and Legalism are 2 definitions that I feel very uncomfortable with.

Valuable post, thanks.
Ed

[LilLamb219]

But why then is there such a strong negative attitude here, at this forum, concerning not Communing an ELCA member??

Who is giving a negative attitude? You're being told what is believed and that it is indeed scriptural. That does not make any attitude negative.

[Edial]

Who is giving a negative attitude? You're being told what is believed and that it is indeed scriptural. That does not make any attitude negative.
LilLamb219, answer this directly please.

The WELS considers LCMS heterodox.
You are LCMS.
They will not commune with you, a person of LilLamb219.

Are they correct? Why or why not?

Use Scriptures please, since you are saying that this is Scriptural.

Thanks,
Ed

[LilLamb219]

Edial, it would not be correct for the WELS to commune me since we are not in fellowship. Acts 2:42 and 1 Cor. 10 and 11 speak of unity of doctrine and how important it is. When we are not united together in our doctrine, we should not commune together at the Lord's table and give off the false appearance of having a fellowship that does not exist.

Have you read What About Fellowship in the Lord's Supper? Here is a link to the pdf file:

http://www.lcms.org/graphics/assets/media/LCMS/wa_fellowship-lordssupper.pdf

Also, here is an awesome link of The Seven Myths of Closed Communion, another pdf file:

http://www.lcmsdistricts.org/graphics/assets/media/Minnesota%20North/sevenmyths.pdf

[Jim47]

Hi Ed :wave:

Since you ignored my last post, I thought I would try again. :) (Did I say something that upset you?)

First off, I am WELS as I'm sure most everyone here already knows. I am currently studing a book on fellowship, and of course part of this study is "why" we aren't in fellowship with LCMS and ELCA, and all other denominations.

Let me make a point here: No one in the WELS that has a correct understanding of scripture is saying that members of the LCMS or ELCA or any other church are going to Hell. All who believe in Jesus as their Savior will be saved.

Here in lies the problem. "A little yeast works thru the whole batch of dough" , or, belief in one false doctrine can feed other false beliefs. If this false belief of scripture persists, Satan can rob is of our faith. :cry:

Point ll: I consider you all my brothers and sisters in Christ.

Everyone else seems to understand this Ed, you aren't trying to start a squabble are you? ;)

WELS is not in fellowship with LCMS or ELCA because we do not agree on all doctrines. We do agree on many, but not all. Likewise, LCMS and ELCA believe that the WELS has false beliefs. Scripture teaches us that we should be in agreemnet on all doctrines, not just some of them.

If you go to the following web site and type in unit concept into the seach tool you will find a wealth of info on WELS beliefs.

http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1517&cuQA_qaID=1

[Protoevangel]

But why then is there such a strong negative attitude here, at this forum, concerning not Communing an ELCA member??

Now, I really do not understand.
The Church is "one" both outwardly and inwardly. True unity consists not in the joining together of what is different in spirit, but in inward agreement and a unanimous confession of faith, which is expressed in outward right preaching of the Gospel, and right distribution of the Sacraments. Teaching in the ELCA varies from relatively orthodox/confessional to outright antichristian, and just about everything in between; there is no true unity even within the ELCA, much less in their sophistic "full communion" agreements. For a Confessional Pastor to commune an ELCA member without knowing well what that ELCA member believes, teaches, and confesses, would be unwise, and unsafe for the unwitting ELCA member...

I am not pursuing anything in that context.

When I became a Lutheran, this topic never even crossed my mind.

I did not even know I was ELCA, until at the time of this thread.
My understanding of Lutheranism is Scriptures and the Confessions.

However, I see that it does not appear to be enough in this context.
Somehow Lutheranism went beyond these two on every side.

I am becoming more and more convinced that a proper way of existing within Lutheranism while avoiding traditional aspects of it is finding a local church (ELCA, LCMS, or whatever else), that does not stress the emphasys on Lutheran denominations, but tries following the Bible and the Confessions and uses these as a measuring rod for Christianity.
So who cares what anyone teaches? Should we just all ignore all the heresies and forget about true unity, and just sit around singing Kum by ya?

You know what Ed, I almost never hear the ELCA mentioned in my church, or in any of the other LCMS or LCC churches I have attended, and when I do hear them mentioned, it is always with charity. There has been no emphasis on synods or denominations whatsoever. But when you ask a question, you get an answer.

If you are not in communion with a synod or denomination, then how do you expect them to have any reasonable ability to know what you believe, teach and confess? If you do not believe, teach, and confess what a synod or denomination does, you are not one with that synod or denomination.

I find that Liberalism and Legalism are 2 definitions that I feel very uncomfortable with.

Valuable post, thanks.
Ed
I have known both ELCA and LCMS individuals who are liberal, and others of both synods who are legalistic. Both labels can be used appropriately, but I have found them to be misused and misunderstood more often than not.

[tschenks]

The Roman Catholics consider us heterodox and we don't commune with them either. What does WELS have to do with anything?

[Edial]

to LilLamb219 ...
Edial, it would not be correct for the WELS to commune me since we are not in fellowship. Acts 2:42 and 1 Cor. 10 and 11 speak of unity of doctrine and how important it is. When we are not united together in our doctrine, we should not commune together at the Lord's table and give off the false appearance of having a fellowship that does not exist.

Have you read What About Fellowship in the Lord's Supper? Here is a link to the pdf file:

http://www.lcms.org/graphics/assets/media/LCMS/wa_fellowship-lordssupper.pdf

Also, here is an awesome link of The Seven Myths of Closed Communion, another pdf file:

http://www.lcmsdistricts.org/graphics/assets/media/Minnesota%20North/sevenmyths.pdf

The texts you quoted to show that separate Communion between the Lutheran denominations is Scriptural.

Let's look at these Scriptures and see if they promote separation at the Communion.

The verse you quoted ...

AC 2:42 They devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.

We have the common Scriptures and the common Confessions.

Next text ...

1CO 10:14 Therefore, my dear friends, flee from idolatry. 15 I speak to sensible people; judge for yourselves what I say. 16 Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ? 17 Because there is one loaf, we, who are many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf.
1CO 10:18 Consider the people of Israel: Do not those who eat the sacrifices participate in the altar? 19 Do I mean then that a sacrifice offered to an idol is anything, or that an idol is anything? 20 No, but the sacrifices of pagans are offered to demons, not to God, and I do not want you to be participants with demons. 21 You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons too; you cannot have a part in both the Lord's table and the table of demons. 22 Are we trying to arouse the Lord's jealousy? Are we stronger than he?

Here we are one loaf as Christians AS COMPARED to the others that worship demons.

What are we saying then by separate communions?

next text ...

1CO 11:17 In the following directives I have no praise for you, for your meetings do more harm than good. 18 In the first place, I hear that when you come together as a church, there are divisions among you, and to some extent I believe it. 19 No doubt there have to be differences among you to show which of you have God's approval. 20 When you come together, it is not the Lord's Supper you eat, 21 for as you eat, each of you goes ahead without waiting for anybody else. One remains hungry, another gets drunk. 22 Don't you have homes to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and humiliate those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you for this? Certainly not!
1CO 11:23 For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, "This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me." 25 In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me." 26 For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.
1CO 11:27 Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28 A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup. 29 For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself. 30 That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep. 31 But if we judged ourselves, we would not come under judgment. 32 When we are judged by the Lord, we are being disciplined so that we will not be condemned with the world.
1CO 11:33 So then, my brothers, when you come together to eat, wait for each other. 34 If anyone is hungry, he should eat at home, so that when you meet together it may not result in judgment.
And when I come I will give further directions.

v. 18 - there are divisions among you, which is OK (v.19).
And now for the real problem ...
v.20-22 - they gulp down all the food and wine, without waiting for others. There are poor and weak and old people among them that get no food. (Communion then was a "sit-down" dinner).
v.23-26 - Paul reminds them of the purpose of the Lord's body, of the Commuinion.
v.27 - then there is an unworthy partaking that Paul is stressing. And that unworthy manner is what will make one to sin against the VERY body of the Lord.
v.28-32 - self-examination, one must recognize the very body of Christ in that wine and food that they gulp down before all the others. And then they get judged for that and get sick and some even die.

V.33 - AND CONCLUSION -
So then, my brothers, when you come together to eat, wait for each other. 34 If anyone is hungry, he should eat at home, so that when you meet together it may not result in judgment.

So, do not GULP DOWN THAT FOOD AND WINE.
Leave some for others.

Recognize the body of Christ.

That's all.

Are there other Scriptures?

Ed

[Edial]

to Jim ... Hi Ed :wave:

Since you ignored my last post, I thought I would try again. :) (Did I say something that upset you?)
Not at all Jim. :)
I did not really ignore your post, I just responded with another question at that time.

First off, I am WELS as I'm sure most everyone here already knows. I am currently studing a book on fellowship, and of course part of this study is "why" we aren't in fellowship with LCMS and ELCA, and all other denominations.

Let me make a point here: No one in the WELS that has a correct understanding of scripture is saying that members of the LCMS or ELCA or any other church are going to Hell. All who believe in Jesus as their Savior will be saved.
I understand THAT.

Here in lies the problem. "A little yeast works thru the whole batch of dough" , or, belief in one false doctrine can feed other false beliefs. If this false belief of scripture persists, Satan can rob is of our faith. :cry: .
But that brings us to another problem.

There is no way that one denomination knows ALL the truth.
1CO 13:12 Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

(I know that the EO and RC claim to have the complete truth, or whatever ... ).

And our salvation depends SOLELY on the identity, a personhood, and works of Jesus Christ - THAT's IT.
If we split on other doctrines that are clearly secondary - what is the problem? Young Earth vs Old Earth?

That is why we have the Confessions - a measuring rod for Lutherans.

So, if people agree with the Confessions completely - Communion SHOULD NOT be denied.


Point ll: I consider you all my brothers and sisters in Christ.

Everyone else seems to understand this Ed, you aren't trying to start a squabble are you? ;) .
Do you guys really think that I have an alterior motive for all that?
Do you think I am making up stories concerning things that happened?

PM ME. I'LL GIVE YOU M