Being Christian in the ELCA

[compwiz02]

Hi, I'm new here. I grew up in the ELCA. Not by choice, though. My dad disliked the Catholic Church and made the whole family go to a Lutheran- ELCA Church. As I grew older, I did go to many Catholic masses (my mom is Catholic and my wife is also Catholic) and I felt like I disagreed with some of the things the Catholic Church did. Closed communion being one of them. I also do not understand how they believe in transubstantiation. My younger brother decided he agreed more with the views of the LCMS and got confirmed there. I disagreed with the idea of closed communion so I knew I could never go to an LCMS service. I think the idea of rejecting someone to partake in the Body and Blood of Christ is a violation of what Jesus taught. So, I stayed in the ELCA church. Though as time went on, I realized I also disagreed with some of the views of the ELCA. I lean conservative on some issues and agree on the idea that homosexuals should not be ordained. Another reason why I stick to the ELCA is they allow you to not 100% agree on everything that they do. I dislike the idea that I have to agree with everything Martin Luther believed in and his interpretation of the bible so I would definitely not fit in with the LCMS. As I continue to explore my faith, I've started to avoid identifying myself as any denomination or branch of Christianity and attend service as a Christian. I think identifying as a denomination creates division, which is something Jeus taught against.

 

[Shane R]

You might get a lot of satisfaction from an NALC church.

 

[Danny&Annie&theChristmas]

I was raised in the Episcopal Church. I left that decades ago. I tried reattending, but found it too much against my beliefs. I believe the true Body of Christ to be scattered all over the world amongst all the man made denominations.

 

[compwiz02]

You might get a lot of satisfaction from an NALC church.

Jeez, how many Lutheran sub-denominations are there? I recently learned that an LCMC "denomination" exists and they position themselves between the ELCA and LCMS. Is the NALC similar to the LCMC?

It blows my mind how there are disagreements within the Lutheran community. Some Lutherans calling other Lutherans "heretics" or "non-Christians". I decided to no longer identify myself as a "Lutheran" or even as a "Protestant" and simply identify as a "Christian". The division that is caused by people aligning with different denominations is shocking. Though admittingly, I feel myself being more comfortable in the ELCA church simply because they open themselves to everyone, which I believe Jesus advocated.

Also, after doing some research, I've realized that Lutherans also believe in the Real Presence in communion and reject what most Protestants call "consubstantiation". I personally believe that the bread and wine become the real Body and Blood of Christ but are still bread and wine. I think the concept of "transubstantiation" makes everything confusing.

 

[JM]

Jeez, how many Lutheran sub-denominations are there?

Lutheranism is one denomination with different synods or governing bodies not unlike Presbyterianism, Anglicanism, etc.

It blows my mind how there are disagreements within the Lutheran community. Some Lutherans calling other Lutherans "heretics" or "non-Christians". I decided to no longer identify myself as a "Lutheran" or even as a "Protestant" and simply identify as a "Christian".

Well, calling yourself "Christian" doesn't really clear up your issues with disagreements and distinctions now does it. Protestant is a category not a denomination so calling yourself a Protestant would make more sense then the overly reductionist "Christian."

Though admittingly, I feel myself being more comfortable in the ELCA church simply because they open themselves to everyone, which I believe Jesus advocated.

Sure, they are so open they no longer hold to Christian beliefs and truths, historic or biblical.

Yours in the Lord,

jm

 

[compwiz02]

Lutheranism is one denomination with different synods or governing bodies not unlike Presbyterianism, Anglicanism, etc.



Well, calling yourself "Christian" doesn't really clear up your issues with disagreements and distinctions now does it. Protestant is a category not a denomination so calling yourself a Protestant would make more sense then the overly reductionist "Christian."



Sure, they are so open they no longer hold to Christian beliefs and truths, historic or biblical.

Yours in the Lord,

jm

At the end of the day, the question I ask is: would Jesus be ok with this? "Christian" is a man-made term but it implies no divisions. I guess a more appropriate term would be "follower in Christ". Jesus encouraged everyone to be united as one body and discouraged division. I'll follow His advice and identify myself as His follower rather than align myself to any denomination.

Every synod/denomination asserts they know and follow the truth. the LCMS and WELS think they know and follow the truth and bash the ELCA for "not being Christian". I am of the belief that every person who accepts, beliefs in, and follows Jesus is a Christian regardless of your denomination, branch of Christianity, or synod. Like I said, as long as Jesus is ok with it, then so be it. You may think "The ELCA are not Christians" but does Jesus agree with you? The truth is.....we don't know. We can only assume that what we think is the truth.

 

[Shane R]

Is the NALC similar to the LCMC?

In my understanding, LCMC is a few years older and somewhat larger by parish count. However, they have a partnership with NALC. NALC allows parishes to have dual affiliation with both bodies. Many of the clergy are on both rosters.

Culturally, there are some general differences. LCMC seems to have been more influenced by American evangelicalism. Whereas, NALC churches love to tell me which legacy synod they were founded in: ALC, LCA, Augustana or whatever. I would characterize NALC as being more mindful of their tradition. I don't think you would ever find a case of gently used Service Book & Hymnals in the attic at an LCMC church.

 

[Shane R]

I've been spending some time visiting small rural churches and have come to understand a couple of things about ELCA. The synod is very urban minded. I don't think most of the bishops care about the little rural churches. The rural churches know this and don't generally pay a whole lot of attention to what the bishop is doing and particularly to what is coming out of the headquarters in Chicago. So this detente exists where the bishop mostly ignores these little churches as long as they don't complain and pay their assessment. And the rural churches mostly leave the bishop's office alone as long as they are getting a pastor somewhat regularly. It's really a congregationalist mindset shoehorned into a diocesan polity. The congregations stay because they don't know anywhere else to go and aren't concerned enough about it to look around. Most of them are filled with retirees who aren't overly concerned about much of anything.

 

[RileyG]

Jeez, how many Lutheran sub-denominations are there? I recently learned that an LCMC "denomination" exists and they position themselves between the ELCA and LCMS. Is the NALC similar to the LCMC?

It blows my mind how there are disagreements within the Lutheran community. Some Lutherans calling other Lutherans "heretics" or "non-Christians". I decided to no longer identify myself as a "Lutheran" or even as a "Protestant" and simply identify as a "Christian". The division that is caused by people aligning with different denominations is shocking. Though admittingly, I feel myself being more comfortable in the ELCA church simply because they open themselves to everyone, which I believe Jesus advocated.

Also, after doing some research, I've realized that Lutherans also believe in the Real Presence in communion and reject what most Protestants call "consubstantiation". I personally believe that the bread and wine become the real Body and Blood of Christ but are still bread and wine. I think the concept of "transubstantiation" makes everything confusing.

(Posting as a guest) There is also the Wisconsin Synod which is more conservative than the LCMS. There are also other small Lutheran synods that exist.

The three main ones are ELCA, LCMS, and WELS. NALC is another.

 

[FireDragon76]

Jeez, how many Lutheran sub-denominations are there? I recently learned that an LCMC "denomination" exists and they position themselves between the ELCA and LCMS. Is the NALC similar to the LCMC?

It blows my mind how there are disagreements within the Lutheran community. Some Lutherans calling other Lutherans "heretics" or "non-Christians". I decided to no longer identify myself as a "Lutheran" or even as a "Protestant" and simply identify as a "Christian". The division that is caused by people aligning with different denominations is shocking. Though admittingly, I feel myself being more comfortable in the ELCA church simply because they open themselves to everyone, which I believe Jesus advocated.

Also, after doing some research, I've realized that Lutherans also believe in the Real Presence in communion and reject what most Protestants call "consubstantiation". I personally believe that the bread and wine become the real Body and Blood of Christ but are still bread and wine. I think the concept of "transubstantiation" makes everything confusing.

Many of the Lutheran synods are distinguished as much by different cultural backgrounds, and not necessarily doctrine.

 

[Shane R]

Many of the Lutheran synods are distinguished as much by different cultural backgrounds, and not necessarily doctrine.

This is one of the best points in the thread. I've been reading a book called "Pain in the Belly" by Pr. Thomas E. Jacobson. The subject of the book is Norwegian pietism in the US and Canada. Then, Laestadianism (Finnish pietism) is a related but distinct subject. Both have survived to the present day in a number of small synods or free churches. However, many of these pietists also trickled into various major synods and a fairly significant group ended up in ELCA.

Much of the Lutheran internal debate seems to me to be an attempt to define what pietism is, how the works that pietists value compare and contrast to works of supererogation, and how much pietism is acceptable in a confessional framework. It should be noted that pietist minded churches do not generally subscribe to the complete Book of Concord. Their worship also tends to simplicity or minimalism and might even disparage the Divine Service or Lutheran Mass.

There are some things we can learn from the pietists, such as a seriousness about our Christian life that is badly lacking in some of the synods that emphasize universal objective justification. In practice, much of the teaching on justification leads into anti-nomianism. We see different emphases emerge. ELCA likes to reflect on social justice and doing good to all mankind at the expense of dogma. The more conservative synods tend to reflect on dogma at the expense of teaching on practical living.

And of course, part of the reason pietism was mostly rejected in certain circles was probably cultural. It was a Nordic movement, rather than Germanic or Slavic. The ethnicity divisions have certainly mostly faded but you still see little vestiges in things like whether the congregation has a German heritage day, Danish heritage etc, or how they sing certain hymns. Also on how frequently communion is served and how the pastors dress for services.

 

[FireDragon76]

This is one of the best points in the thread. I've been reading a book called "Pain in the Belly" by Pr. Thomas E. Jacobson. The subject of the book is Norwegian pietism in the US and Canada. Then, Laestadianism (Finnish pietism) is a related but distinct subject. Both have survived to the present day in a number of small synods or free churches. However, many of these pietists also trickled into various major synods and a fairly significant group ended up in ELCA.

Much of the Lutheran internal debate seems to me to be an attempt to define what pietism is, how the works that pietists value compare and contrast to works of supererogation, and how much pietism is acceptable in a confessional framework. It should be noted that pietist minded churches do not generally subscribe to the complete Book of Concord. Their worship also tends to simplicity or minimalism and might even disparage the Divine Service or Lutheran Mass.

There are some things we can learn from the pietists, such as a seriousness about our Christian life that is badly lacking in some of the synods that emphasize universal objective justification. In practice, much of the teaching on justification leads into anti-nomianism. We see different emphases emerge. ELCA likes to reflect on social justice and doing good to all mankind at the expense of dogma. The more conservative synods tend to reflect on dogma at the expense of teaching on practical living.

And of course, part of the reason pietism was mostly rejected in certain circles was probably cultural. It was a Nordic movement, rather than Germanic or Slavic. The ethnicity divisions have certainly mostly faded but you still see little vestiges in things like whether the congregation has a German heritage day, Danish heritage etc, or how they sing certain hymns. Also on how frequently communion is served and how the pastors dress for services.

One thing to keep in mind about Nordic countries; they were Lutheran in the same sense that the Church of England was Reformed.

Pietism was wildly popular in Scandinavia, but it existed in Germany, too. It would also be a mistake to see it necessarily in opposition to confessionalism. The more radical forms were, but there were also many more moderate forms. You can't completely understand Dietrich Bonhoeffer's religious orientation, for instance, if you don't understand it through the Pietism that was an undercurrent in German Protestantism.

The LCMS has its origins in a religious movement that was particularly concerned about doctrinal exactness, whereas alot of other Lutherans have always been more doctrinally open.