The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod will hold its triennial convention July 10-17. It will take up initiatives that would, without exaggeration, significantly alter the ways that the LCMS conducts business and reflect a theology of how our churches work that is different than what the LCMS has confessed in the past. Consolidated power, proportional representation for larger congregations, less lay representation, and hiding debt through board restructuring are all in play.
Such things will be decided by people smarter than I am. Pray for them.
The current Synodical President, who is seeking reelection, asks in his June 2010 (PDF) issue of “President’s Leadership News” that the delegates in Houston meet with Ephesians 4:1-6 in mind, “eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (verse 3). This is a good goal.
We must acknowledge that any such unity of the church and with the church must be maintained by submitting our reason and judgments to the Word of God, and in our case, the Lutheran Confessions. A group of people can be united in confession yet confess something other than what the Holy Spirit has intended for us to know. The ELCA becomes more and more united as those who protest the actions last August in Minneapolis leave. Unity is no virtue unless it is united with the Word of God.
In my short stint as an LCMS layman who travels on behalf of his employer, I have seen things firsthand that would indicate we in the LCMS are not united with each other and with the Word of God. Some of these been blogged about:
- Removal of basic teachings such as the Creeds and the Lord’s Prayer from the worship service without comparable replacements, most often during “contemporary worship”,
- A lay minister who did not vest while officiating a service of Holy Communion and preached on the parable of the Ten Virgins without delivering the Gospel,
- A vicar who preached on Jonah 3 without mentioning baptism or the Gospel,
- A pastor whose sermon topic was a Mardi Gras parade,
- A pastor who had no theoretical qualms with using elements other than bread and wine for Holy Communion,
- A church that separated kids from the Divine Service,
- Sermons where the only identifiable sin was not telling others about Jesus,
- And others.
Other bloggers have reported on other and greater divergences from the Word and the Confessions, most notably lately Frank Gillespie’s detailed report on a Prayer and Spiritual Formation Workshop that not only plagiarized a good article by Pr. Bill Cwirla on Confession and Absolution but then went on to teach outright mysticism in the name of the Southeast District of the LCMS.
The LCMS is not simply arguing among itself in matters of women’s ordination, open communion, worship forms, administrative structure, and how we represent the Biblical faith to our Christian brothers of differing theological opinions. We are divided in our ability to preach Christ crucified for sinners. We are divided in our ability to confess the faith. We are divided in our fealty to Holy Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions.
As the convention begins in a few days, pray for our delegates, that they may hear the Word of God and the Lutheran Confessions and that they may employ the whole counsel of God to confess the faith and to administrate the Synod in accordance with that faith. These are wounds which cannot continue to be healed lightly.
As an outsider (i.e. non-Lutheran) who greatly respects the Lutheran church, I don’t see a major issue presented in your bullet points. Frank’s point on bringing mysticism into the church is huge.
Roger,
Thanks for stopping by. It might not be obvious to many outside the LCMS that we are a sacramental church body. Through God’s means of grace, where he has promised us we may find him, God blesses the church, giving forgiveness of sins, life, and salvation. The sacraments are the Gospel in action.
When the Gospel is assumed in the mishandling of the parable of the Ten Virgins, denied in the moral of a Mardi Gras parade sermon that we choose to move closer to God as he gives us treats, or confused in a Holy Communion where the scriptural bread and wine are substituted, then we don’t have the Gospel any more.
A church without the Gospel isn’t the church. Our faith is endangered when we aren’t reminded of what God has accomplished for us on the cross and has promised for us in his sacraments.
I hope that this clarifies the post some and that your respect for Lutherans grows as you learn more about what we confess. Thank you again for your comments.
Roger, you are more Lutheran than many Lutherans. I apologize if you find that statement offensive. That being said…
Are you saying that you don’t see a problem with a pastor using milk and cookies for communion? If that is so, why not?
Do you think it’s OK for a pastor to preach a sermon where the problem of sin is obviously absent or he forgets to even mention the Gospel? If the problem of sin, which damns us all to Hell from the moment of our conception, isn’t preached in a worship service, when would be a good time to bring it up? How are we to know that we need a Savior to propitiate God’s wrath is sin isnt meantioned? How do we know that we need a Saviour if Jesus isnt meantioned? Is it possible to rightly preach a sermon without meantioning the Gospel?
I’ll stop there for now.
Frank:
Funny that we would meet here.
I don’t have a problem with using milk and cookies for communion if that’s all one has on hand. I think this is an issue of sincerity and only God would know the hearts of those taking communion. The same can be said for one’s method of baptism. However, my beliefs are rooted in a “remembrance” view of communion and baptism. We differ on that point. I doubt that we’d get far trying to debate one another. But you know how much I respect the LCMS. I truly, truly do.
I believe that a pastor should preach as he is led by the Holy Spirit through the scriptures. I believe that it’s best for a pastor (or any teacher of the word, for that matter) to regularly preach through the books of the bible in an expository fashion so that it allows the Word of God to speak for itself (i.e. it lets GOD speak). I like the idea of allowing God to be in control.
To go through a passage and forget to mention something is one thing. To do it on purpose (e.g. missing a painfully obvious teaching) is wrong. To do it on accident is forgivable unless it’s a regular occurrence. If that’s the case, perhaps it’s best for that man to find another vocation. I hear Arby’s is hiring.
“I don’t have a problem with using milk and cookies for communion if that’s all one has on hand. I think this is an issue of sincerity and only God would know the hearts of those taking communion.”
I understand that your “remembrance” position on communion.
I have trouble imagining that there is ever a time when bread and wine are not available, ever. But don’t you think that Jesus gave us the means of how he wanted this sacrament (even if you think it is only a remembrance) to be distributed. In the Lutheran way of thinking His words are crystal clear so we have no excuse whatsoever to play around with either the elements or words. He didn’t use milk and cookies so we don’t. He said “Take, eat; this is My body, which is given for you” and “Take, drink ye all of it. This cup is the new testament in My blood, which is shed for you for the remission of sins” so this what we say.
Now, even if you believe that the Lord’s Supper is only a “remembrance,” can you make a defense of using milk and cookies or even the contents of a happy meal for a meal which Christ Himself instituted?
“To go through a passage and forget to mention something is one thing. To do it on purpose (e.g. missing a painfully obvious teaching) is wrong. To do it on accident is forgivable unless it’s a regular occurrence.” Dan is not talking about a pastor who just preaches a bad sermon every now and then or just misses the mark because he’s making a point that goes over everybody’s head. He is talking about what is going on in many of Americanized Christianity’s churches but specifically in the LCMS and that is preaching to felt needs or preaching Christless sermon series that (I don’t think by accident) exclude or downplay what Jesus did and does for us. In my neck of the woods this is often done in the name of growing the kingdom where we become so “seeker sensitive” we look more like a rotory club meeting than we do a church. We don’t reach the lost by not telling them about Jesus (I know you don’t believe this but it’s just a sore point with me) and those who say otherwise shouldn’t even be employed at an Arby’s much less a church.
Frank:
We agree on the whole church growing / seeker sensitive crap. I believe the seeker sensitive movement has it’s roots in the evangelical churches where I reside–primarily from the Willow Creek church in Chicago. A church service should be a church service…PERIOD. Non-believers may come to that service and see what transpires. They may or may not be moved to act upon what they witness. If we’re doing what we’re supposed to be doing (i.e. worshiping God, teaching from the scriptures, proclaiming the gospel, taking communion together) we let God sort out the work to be done. Go figure that God might actually be in control.
As for the elements of communion, it certainly makes sense to model the example given by Christ at the Last Supper. However, I cannot serve alcohol to my kids. Am I cheating them out of the only true sacrament? No. I may be in a situation where I don’t have access to bread and wine but desire to have communion. There’s NOTHING in scripture that says we must only have communion in a church. I believe I’m free to use whatever I have at my disposal and I believe this is consistent with the teachings of Jesus on the Sabbath in Matthew 12. He certainly knows our heart. This is why I don’t bother getting into debates over the method of baptism. The baptisms recorded in scripture were probably done in bodies of water where participants were thoroughly dunked in and out of water. Not ever church does this, but it does not take away from the significance of the sacrament.
Roger, a couple of things.
Kids can have communion wine. Many Lutheran churches confirm and allow to the Lord’s table kids in eighth grade, and some confirm even sooner. The volume of wine, one swallow, isn’t enough to make them even tipsy.
I’m a little concerned about the implication that since Jesus knows someone’s heart, this makes the sacrament valid. That leaves one riding a hamster wheel trying to be good enough to earn divine rewards. As we look at our lives and our hearts, we must recognize that we are sinners. The sacraments, like the Christian faith, don’t rely on our works, and this is a good thing. They hang on the promises of God. Where we are faithless, God is faithful. Where God’s Law says, “Be perfect, as your Father in heaven is perfect,” the Gospel says, “He that knew no sin became sin for us.”
As the sacraments are gifts, we need to see how God packaged those gifts for us. We take bread and wine, as Christ instituted. To use milk and cookies, or grape juice, declares an expansion of the promise that Scripture does not support.
Our sinful hearts do not a sacrament make. We rely not on ourselves but the promises of God.
And where is it in scripture that says you MUST use bread and wine. And if so, what kind of bread? What kind of wine? What did Jesus and His disciples wear when they took of the bread and the fruit of the vine? Should we wear that as well?
We have a handful of people in our congregation who are allergic to gluten (which seems to be on the rise today). Therefore, we switched to a gluten-free bread. Does this make for genuine communion bread? What if you were allergic to the skins of grapes used in wine and juice? Does Jesus know your heart or are you forever shunned by Him and the church? What if you were a recovering alcoholic and had put your trust in Christ above your trust in booze. It seems like it would only be wise to steer clear of ANY type of alcohol.
Furthermore, scholars are not sure of the type of bread Jesus used with His disciples. It could have been unleavened bread if the event took place during a traditional Seder meal, or it could have been regular table bread (i.e. leavened) if it took place after Passover.
Is Confirmation in scripture? Do you baptize believers in lakes, streams or the ocean as they did in scripture? The same standard you use to prove the necessity of bread and wine for authentic communion is not used by the LCMS for for baptism.
I believe in the ordinance of communion and baptism and I believe we should go out of our way to present the elements in the same way that they were presented in Holy Scripture (i.e. bread and fruit of the vine). However, I do not think the intent of scripture was to prescribe an exclusive formula. Heaven forbid that one should be out of bread and wine or juice and wish to remember what Christ did on the cross for us.
I don’t take this matter lightly as you seem to suggest of me. One has to look at the real significance of the ordinance of the Lord’s Supper. It’s not the elements. It’s the fellowship and recognition we have as believers in what He did for us–sacrificing His body and blood on the cross for our sins. This paid the price for us once and for all.
My point is that calling a symbolic view of communions “remembrance view” is inaccurate. Lutherans believe in the real presence as provided to help us remember the Gospel. When you eat and drink the very body and blood of Christ, its not working magic, it is reminding you Christ is real, his death and forgiveness is real, and it is really given to me personally. The real presence also helps us remember that it Christ does everything for us, we do nothing. So even one who hates Christ receives his gifts if he communes unworthily, the gift does not depend on the one receiving it to be true body and blood.
Maybe I’m missing you, but my only point is that remembrance of Christ is dependant on real presence. You can’t remember christ the way he wants you to without eating and drinking his physical body and blood.
I don’t get your baptism argument. We baptize with water as instructed: not with blood or wine or oil. We baptize in the name of father son and holy spirit. Nothing else is required. The 3000 b aptized on pentacost were very likely sprinkled due to the water availability in Jerusalem, but immersion was also certainly done. The didache is good evidence of that.
LCMS members care about doctrine, whether doctrine of preaching, worship, or sacrament, and will eagerly discuss it at any chance!
What’s rememberence view that’s different than Lutherans view?
LUtherans believe that we remember Jesus (and everything he taught and his death) by eating and drinking his body and blood like he instructed. Heck, that’s the only reason to go to church, to be reminded of the Gospel.
As far as elements, its only valid if performed as instructed. I’m curious to hear what possible motivation might justify altering Christ’s clear instruction to use bread and wine other than vanity and narcissism. If there is an allergy, consume the other. Availability is not an issue anywhere in the world.
“We also reject and condemn the view that…the bread and wine are only symbols of the far-distant body and blood of our Lord.”
(let me know if you’re not aware of the source of this quote)
Evangelicals do not view Jesus as “far-distant.” That seems like a deist view to me.
Again, it seems to me that if the LCMS uses this argument for the Lord’s Supper, it makes no sense for that same organization to baptize infants and babies. I’m not even saying that I’m totally against the idea of baptizing infants and babies. I’m only saying that if the same argument was used with regards to baptism as it is with communion, you would have a different approach to baptism.
I also find it odd that LCMS members are on blogs crying out against the dealings of their own denomination and yet are the first to defend it when I say something about communion.
If I got on a blog and spoke against my church, I’m quite sure I’d be asked to leave.
And yet, I still have great respect for the LCMS and the friends I have in the denomination. There is nothing personal meant in my posts here. I have found all of my dealings with online Lutherans to be stimulating.
Lutherans, like Roman Catholics, Anglicans, Eastern Orthodox, and others, baptize at any age because it’s scriptural. For a longer answer see: http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=2612
“If I got on a blog and spoke against my church, I’m quite sure I’d be asked to leave.”
The LCMS is not (yet, anyway) a magisterial denomination. Though some issues at the convention this week would bend the denomination to a more magisterial character.
Thanks for bringing us back on topic!
“Lutherans, like Roman Catholics, Anglicans, Eastern Orthodox, and others, baptize at any age because it’s scriptural. For a longer answer see: http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=2612”
I’d rather see the answer in scripture if you say it’s scriptural.
However, I know we’ll never get anywhere with this. I’m not here to fight Lutherans. I want to fight Greek Orthodox weirdos!
I’m kidding.
“I’d rather see the answer in scripture if you say it’s scriptural.”
At the bottom of the first paragraph.
Woops, stupid BB, response posted above in previous thread.
Again, remembrance isn’t an argument against real presence; that was my point.