Changing Realities - or - Distortion of the Gospel

[Mel Harris]

In press releases from the LWF Council Meeting, we have two very different statements.

The aim of the LWF task force appointed by the LWF Council in 2004 is not to give a Lutheran position on the issue of marriage, family and sexuality, but to provide guidelines on how the member churches can deal with discussion around this issue, the general secretary stressed.

The task force will present to this year's Council a report titled "The Proposed Guidelines and Processes for Respectful Dialogue" to help member churches discuss the changing realities in relation to marriage, family and sexuality in the world today.

and

He appealed for assistance from the global communion, "holding the preaching of the gospel in the United States accountable, for it being the crucifying gospel of God's radical grace in Christ through faith rather than some other distortion of the gospel that we so now export and is pure heresy."

Am I the only one who is confused by these statements?  General Secretary of the LWF, Rev. Dr Ishmael Noko seems to have stated that the council will not be considering a proposal for a Lutheran position on the issues of marriage, family and sexuality, but rather proposed guidelines and processes to help us (the member Churches of the LWF) respectfully discuss various opinions concerning these things.  Whereas, LWF President Mark S. Hanson seems to have said that the global communion needs to hold us (those of us living in the good ole U S of A) accountable, to make sure that we are not proclaiming a distortion of the gospel, that we are not exporting pure heresy.

In other words, either the reality is changing around us, so we need to learn how to discuss how we might need to change what we are proclaiming, or we need to be held accountable so that we do not proclaim a changed, different gospel.

I will grant that both of the quotes above are taken out of context.  Noko seems to have been responding to a question about polygamy, and Hanson seems to have been talking about the prosperity gospel.  Still, it seems strange to me, that at the same time that the global south of the Anglican Communion is trying to hold TEC accountable for what it is proclaiming, Hanson seems to be inviting something similar for us.

Am I the only one who read these press releases in this way?

Mel Harris

[Eric_Swensson]

No Mel, I don't think you are alone, but whatever we say here Charles is not going to like.

[Charles_Austin]

Eric writes:
whatever we say here Charles is not going to like.

I comment:
Or ... at this point in the discussion ... care much about.

[navyman]

Has the Lutheran Church of Today really lost its true Lutheran Gospel?  Have we watered it down?  Have we dropped Law and Gospel?  Have we produced a Gospel that accepts the world and its culture?  Does the Lutheran Church of Today preach and practice the true Gospel of Jesus Christ?

Especially when one hears, water down gospel, man made gospel, the new gospel, the cultured gospel, and so on.

What did Martin Luther consider to be the true Gospel?  How does the true Gospel relate to the truths of the Bible, God's Word?

How did Luther look at the Bible?  What did he think it was, and who wrote it?  In light of what Luther thought of the Bible and its author, it seems modern man and its scholars have dropped the ball, BIGTIME!

Don

[MEKoch]

The Society for the Holy Trinity is going to spend three years looking at the 'marks of the church.'  I think in those basic Lutheran marks you will find an answer. 

Have we traded the Gospel for a bowl of cultural pottage? 

Michael Koch

[navyman]

The Society for the Holy Trinity is going to spend three years looking at the 'marks of the church.'  I think in those basic Lutheran marks you will find an answer. 

Have we traded the Gospel for a bowl of cultural pottage? 

Michael Koch

I think the church of today has done just that!  Instead of Law and Gospel, its acceptance of everything God was against!

Don

[Gladfelteri]

Still, it seems strange to me, that at the same time that the global south of the Anglican Communion is trying to hold TEC accountable for what it is proclaiming, Hanson seems to be inviting something similar for us.

Considering that the ELCA is in Full Communion / Altar and Pulpit Fellowship with TEC and TEC (led by its Presiding Bishop) is focused on continuing on its chosen course regardless of the consequences, does + + Hansen really have much of a choise if he wants the ELCA to stay in Full Communion with TEC? 

[navyman]

Is this one of the major differences regarding LCMS and ELCA?

Regards!

Don



We highly regard the Lord's Supper, confessing that we do not receive only bread and wine to remember Christ's sacrifice, but that miraculously we receive the very body and blood of Christ. We believe that through eating and drinking this Supper our sins are forgiven, our faith is strengthened, and our selves are joined ever more closely with our Savior. We are thus taken into closer communion with the Father, who is one with Christ. We are also brought into closer communion with brothers and sisters in the faith--the body of Christ. We do not believe only that Communion brings unity (see 1 Corinthians 10:17), but also that through unity of doctrine we have true communion in the Lord's Supper (see Acts 2:42); thus, our union in the Body of Christ is strengthened. This unity comes not because we decide to share something, but because of what Christ is sharing with us.

Both because of the unity which the Lord's Supper brings and because of the unity that is called for in partaking of the Supper, we practice closed (or close) communion, wherein the pastor examines those who desire to commune before admitting them to the altar. This is for the benefit of the individual, so that one does not eat and drink to his or her harm (1 Corinthians 11:27-29). It is also for the Church, so that it does not incorporate into itself those who ignore the Real Presence of Christ in the Supper or despise the forgiveness of sins which is Christ's gift in this eating and drinking (1 Corinthians 10:17-22).

[pterandon]

>> Is this one of the major differences regarding LCMS and ELCA?

Both because of the unity which the Lord's Supper brings and because of the unity that is called for in partaking of the Supper, we practice closed (or close) communion, wherein the pastor examines those who desire to commune before admitting them to the altar.

I have communed in LC-MS congregations in 5 different states (4 in the Salt Water District, FWIW), and have never ran into close communion.  This practice is what distinguishes some LC-MS congregations from some other ones.

[navyman]

>> Is this one of the major differences regarding LCMS and ELCA?

Both because of the unity which the Lord's Supper brings and because of the unity that is called for in partaking of the Supper, we practice closed (or close) communion, wherein the pastor examines those who desire to commune before admitting them to the altar.

I have communed in LC-MS congregations in 5 different states (4 in the Salt Water District, FWIW), and have never ran into close communion.  This practice is what distinguishes some LC-MS congregations from some other ones.

Did you talk to the pastor of the church pior to taking the Lord's Supper?  Did you tell him that you where a member of the ELCA?  I have, and since I was a member of the ELCA, was denied, because the ELCA doesn't believe as we do!

Some churches practice open going against policy of the LC MS.  As well, I believe Wels, and ELS, have a simular policy, but not sure about that.

Anyway I glad that yu were able to do so!

Thanks for your post!

Regards!

Don

[buechler]

There are changing realities in the West that need to be addressed, but it seems the ELCA and its full communion partners are addressing these issues by surrendering to the culture of death and disregard.

Frankly given the results of the LCMS convention, it would appear that the ELCA should have made full communion agreements with LCMS THE main agreement they went after. Seems like the LCMS (along with some other Lutheran groups) are grappling with these issues in a great deal more faithfully Lutheran and Christian way than our current partnerships. The ELCA could have used the help.

Peace in the Lord Jesus Christ!
Rob Buechler, Pastor
Trinity-Bergen Lutheran Church
Starkweather,ND

[Brian Stoffregen]

Frankly given the results of the LCMS convention, it would appear that the ELCA should have made full communion agreements with LCMS THE main agreement they went after.

We are more then happy to enter a full communion agreement with LCMS, but they won't have us. I was in the ALC when there was fullowship, but then the LCMS voted to undo it. I am fully aware that the LCMS began the process for a common hymnal (which became the LBW) and invited the ALC & LCA (and Canadian Lutherans) to be part of the process, but then they pulled out at the last minute.

I think that for the LCMS to enter into a fully communion agreement with us, we would have to become just like them -- and the ELCA is not just like the LCMS, nor do we want to be. With our other agreements, we did not have to become just like the Reformed or Episcoplians or Mennonites; nor did we insist that they had to become just like us. Rather, to put it in my words (with a little help of scriptures,) we believed that God has made us all one in Christ, but it's been the humans that keep us apart.

[buechler]

Brian wrote: "he ELCA is not just like the LCMS, nor do we want to be"

True, but why? It would seem to me, given the revisionist bent of the ELCA, that what keeps you all from full communion with the LCMS is not simply "closed communion" or "women's ordanation" but a refusal to repent of the worldliness that is reflected too often by ELCA educational material, social statements, and biblical studies.  When I say the ELCA lost out, I mean it lost out on a opportunity to repent and come to terms with the worldly agendas taking root within it. The full communion partners now with the ELCA are no more than worldly organizations in ecclesiastical garb. If not for African Methodist, the UMC would be worse than it is. The UCC is essentially Unitarian Universalist, the ECUSA the same, PCUSA is moving at rapid speed towards discarding Christian Faith, and one could make an argument that this is happening with the Reformed, Mennonite, and Moravian denominations too.

Saying you don't want to be like the LCMS doesn't say enough. The ELCA leadership doesn't really want to be part of Orthodox Christianity, and that is where LCMS firmly is. This seems to be the reason for no full communion with LCMS. LCMS stands for orthodoxy, and the ELCA doesn't. That is why you are aligned with the partners you have. It is very telling, and sad.

Peace in the Lord!
Rob Buechler, Pastor
Trinity-Bergen Lutheran Church
Starkweather,ND

[Vern]

My Daughter and her family belong to an LCMS Church in Plymouth Minnesota, and even as members of the ELCA we do believe as they do that we are receiving the True Body & Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. It's the ELCA that has changed, not us.

Just as the ELCA is trying to water down the Bible, believing in selected parts only they are now narrowing it down to selected parts of the Gospels

May God have mercy on their souls.

Vern

[John Dornheim]

My Daughter and her family belong to an LCMS Church in Plymouth Minnesota, and even as members of the ELCA we do believe as they do that we are receiving the True Body & Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. It's the ELCA that has changed, not us.

Just as the ELCA is trying to water down the Bible, believing in selected parts only they are now narrowing it down to selected parts of the Gospels

May God have mercy on their souls.

Vern

I find little in your post, like the one which proceeds it, that is based upon official positions of the church. You seem to be infering that to believe in Real Presence is an oddity in the ELCA when the exact opposite is true. Your comment about Scripture follows a similar pattern. If there are those who seek to water down the Bible, they are few and far between. They have no more official standing or influence in the church than do those who deny Real Presence.

John Dornheim, OSL