-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What's a synod?
- Thread starter Bishka
- Start date
Feathers in Hair
World's Tallest Hobbit
standing_alone
Well-Known Member
From what I understand, a synod, when applying to Lutherans, can refer to local or regional churches, sort of like a diocese, or refer to a larger church group, like the Missouri Synod or the Wisconsin Synod. The Missouri Synod and Wisconsin Synod will differ on ideas about doctrine and such. I may be wrong though, as I haven't been a practicing Lutheran for a couple of years. One way I look at the Synods is that they are almost like different Lutheran denominations, but that's probably due to the way my church always made it sound - which also meant that all non-WELS churches were wrong, but that's a whole 'nother issue. 
Feathers in Hair
World's Tallest Hobbit
Hehee, well I've never heard bad things about the WELSynod.
standing_alone
Well-Known Member
FeathersinHair said:
You haven't? I could have swore I said bad things about them on here in the past!
My brother and brother in law are pastors and I am an ex-LCMS (Lutheran Church, Missouri Synod). The LCMS is the second largest, with 1.9 million members.
The synods resulted from various schisms within the Lutheran Church and so far as I know have little to do with one another organizationally, meaning each can be viewed as a separate denomination, although they may be similar theologically.
-------------------------------------------------------
LCMS vs. ELCA:
Q. What are the main differences between the Missouri Synod and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA)?
A. In terms of the official position of our two church bodies as reflected in formally adopted statements of belief and practice the three main areas of difference between the LCMS and the ELCA are the following:
1. The doctrine and authority of Scripture. The LCMS believes that the Bible is without error in all that it says. The ELCA avoids making such statements, holding that Scripture is not necessarily always accurate on such matters as history and science. Differences between the LCMS and the ELCA on the authority of Scripture also help to explain why the ELCA ordains women to the pastoral office, while the LCMS does not, and why the LCMS unequivocally rejects homosexual behavior as contrary to God's will, while the ELCA has yet to take an official stand on this issue.
2. The ELCA, while affirming its commitment to the Gospel of Jesus Christ as witnessed to in the Lutheran confessional writings, also tends to emphasize the historical character of these writings and to maintain the possibility of dissent to confessional positions that do not deal directly with the Gospel itself understood in a narrow sense.
3. The level of agreement necessary to join together in one church body. While the LCMS believes that the Bible requires agreement in all that the Bible teaches, the ELCA holds that disagreement in some matters of doctrine, such as the mode of Christ's presence in Holy Communion, do not prohibit church fellowship.
LCMS vs WELS
WELS
Q. What are the main differences between the Missouri Synod and the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS)?
A. From the LCMS perspective, the three main theological differences between the LCMS and the WELS are the following:
1) The biblical understanding of fellowship.
The WELS holds to what is called the "unit concept" of fellowship, which places virtually all joint expressions of the Christian faith on the same level. In an official statement made in 1960 the WELS states, "Church fellowship should therefore be treated as a unit concept, covering every joint expression, manifestation, and demonstration of a common faith" (Doctrinal Statements of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod, 1970, pp. 51-52). The LCMS, however, has historically not understood or practiced church fellowship in this way. Our Synod, for example, has made a distinction between altar and pulpit fellowship (for which full doctrinal agreement is required) and other manifestations of Christian fellowship, such as prayer fellowship (which do not necessarily require full doctrinal agreement). Disagreements on this issue led the Wisconsin to break fellowship with the LCMS in 1961.
2) The doctrine of the ministry.
With respect to the doctrine of the ministry, since the days of C. F. W. Walther our Synod has held that the office of the public ministry (the pastoral office) according to the Scriptures is the one divinely established office in the church, while the church possesses the freedom to create other offices, by human institution, from time to time to assist in the carrying out of the functions of the pastoral ministry. The WELS' Theses on Church and Ministry, however, expressly deny that the pastoral ministry is specifically instituted by the Lord in contrast to other forms of public ministry (see Doctrinal Statements, pp. 9-11; cf. the Commission on Theology and Church Relations' 1981 report on The Ministry: Office, Procedures, and Nomenclature.
3) The role of women in the church.
While both the LCMS and the WELS strongly oppose the ordination of women to the pastoral office on Scriptural grounds, the LCMS has concluded that the Scriptures do not forbid woman suffrage in the church. The WELS opposes woman suffrage in the church as contrary to the Scriptures.
source: http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=2135
The synods resulted from various schisms within the Lutheran Church and so far as I know have little to do with one another organizationally, meaning each can be viewed as a separate denomination, although they may be similar theologically.
-------------------------------------------------------
LCMS vs. ELCA:
Q. What are the main differences between the Missouri Synod and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA)?
A. In terms of the official position of our two church bodies as reflected in formally adopted statements of belief and practice the three main areas of difference between the LCMS and the ELCA are the following:
1. The doctrine and authority of Scripture. The LCMS believes that the Bible is without error in all that it says. The ELCA avoids making such statements, holding that Scripture is not necessarily always accurate on such matters as history and science. Differences between the LCMS and the ELCA on the authority of Scripture also help to explain why the ELCA ordains women to the pastoral office, while the LCMS does not, and why the LCMS unequivocally rejects homosexual behavior as contrary to God's will, while the ELCA has yet to take an official stand on this issue.
2. The ELCA, while affirming its commitment to the Gospel of Jesus Christ as witnessed to in the Lutheran confessional writings, also tends to emphasize the historical character of these writings and to maintain the possibility of dissent to confessional positions that do not deal directly with the Gospel itself understood in a narrow sense.
3. The level of agreement necessary to join together in one church body. While the LCMS believes that the Bible requires agreement in all that the Bible teaches, the ELCA holds that disagreement in some matters of doctrine, such as the mode of Christ's presence in Holy Communion, do not prohibit church fellowship.
LCMS vs WELS
WELS
A. From the LCMS perspective, the three main theological differences between the LCMS and the WELS are the following:
1) The biblical understanding of fellowship.
The WELS holds to what is called the "unit concept" of fellowship, which places virtually all joint expressions of the Christian faith on the same level. In an official statement made in 1960 the WELS states, "Church fellowship should therefore be treated as a unit concept, covering every joint expression, manifestation, and demonstration of a common faith" (Doctrinal Statements of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod, 1970, pp. 51-52). The LCMS, however, has historically not understood or practiced church fellowship in this way. Our Synod, for example, has made a distinction between altar and pulpit fellowship (for which full doctrinal agreement is required) and other manifestations of Christian fellowship, such as prayer fellowship (which do not necessarily require full doctrinal agreement). Disagreements on this issue led the Wisconsin to break fellowship with the LCMS in 1961.
2) The doctrine of the ministry.
With respect to the doctrine of the ministry, since the days of C. F. W. Walther our Synod has held that the office of the public ministry (the pastoral office) according to the Scriptures is the one divinely established office in the church, while the church possesses the freedom to create other offices, by human institution, from time to time to assist in the carrying out of the functions of the pastoral ministry. The WELS' Theses on Church and Ministry, however, expressly deny that the pastoral ministry is specifically instituted by the Lord in contrast to other forms of public ministry (see Doctrinal Statements, pp. 9-11; cf. the Commission on Theology and Church Relations' 1981 report on The Ministry: Office, Procedures, and Nomenclature.
3) The role of women in the church.
While both the LCMS and the WELS strongly oppose the ordination of women to the pastoral office on Scriptural grounds, the LCMS has concluded that the Scriptures do not forbid woman suffrage in the church. The WELS opposes woman suffrage in the church as contrary to the Scriptures.
source: http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=2135
Feathers in Hair
World's Tallest Hobbit
Oooo! *reminds self to look through past threads* Juicy!
Actually, I should've clarified- I hadn't actually even heard of the WELS. *blushes* When I was a member of the ELCA in S.C., my mom was on the road to ordination. (Health concerns kept her away.) All that I'd heard about the 'other' synod (being the other one you mentioned) was that they didn't ordain women and that they wouldn't allow people who were visitors at their churches to participate in communion. Not sure if those things were true, but it made for good listening to around the church potluck!
Actually, I should've clarified- I hadn't actually even heard of the WELS. *blushes* When I was a member of the ELCA in S.C., my mom was on the road to ordination. (Health concerns kept her away.) All that I'd heard about the 'other' synod (being the other one you mentioned) was that they didn't ordain women and that they wouldn't allow people who were visitors at their churches to participate in communion. Not sure if those things were true, but it made for good listening to around the church potluck!
standing_alone
Well-Known Member
FeathersinHair said:
Both those things are true. The reason, if I recall, that visitors (I think, just those that have not been confirmed in a WELS church) cannot receive communion is because communion is a serious religious ritual and to take communion when not believing in Christ (or in the correct Christ
) could threaten that person's salvation.standing_alone
Well-Known Member
beckysoup61 said:How? If they don't believe in it, how is partaking of something going to hurt them? :cover: That's really weird Alyssa. I'm glad you are out of there.
I don't know - it was something on how when you take communion, it is something that is between you and God and to take it when you don't believe in God or your faith is weak (or wrong about something), it threatened your chance of salvation somehow in that you would have accepted a false interpretation of Christianity and thus by taking communion, somehow God recognizes you as having that wrong belief or something (I'm not sure how to phrase it so it makes sense
).Oh, and I'm certainly glad I'm out of there, too.
standing_alone
Well-Known Member
beckysoup61 said:
Ha ha!
Yeah...Hmmm... I never thought (or was told what to think
) about that. Now, if I can jump into "what would my pastor have likely said" mode, I would think that for non-believers (or believers who are "wrong") to have taken communion, it wouldn't automatically mean they were destined to go to Hell, as only God knows and decides who is going to Hell, so we can't say, but so as not to jepoardize their salvation, they shouldn't take communion - at least not in a WELS church until they have been confirmed as a member.quadrophenic_9
Member
It sounds the same as in our church Becky, I could go into the other room and tell you but I haven't posted in a week. People who take the sacrament unworthily with no intention of giving up their sin or repenting are making a very grave sin because they mock Christ and his sacrifice.
standing_alone
Well-Known Member
quadrophenic_9 said:
AH! I bet that's it! I think I remember my pastor saying something to that effect. Thank you!
quadrophenic_9
Member
You don't have to retract anything. I still think it's a little wierd of them to say you're going to hell if you don't believe. Not everyone's faith is perfect before they start practicing. It's a growth process and you need to live your religion before you start to see the blessings. If you're a lacking and you take communion or the sacrament you won't go straight to hell without a second chance, or you shouldn't. Whoever maintains that stance does not believe that Christ can save a soul. Very hypocrytical in my opinion. And I can't spell hypocrytical.
standing_alone
Well-Known Member
quadrophenic_9 said:
Very good points, from a theistic view, however, my church would have argued that everyone is born knowing in their heart that there is a god (and ultimately that it is the Christian god) and it is their duty to find that it is that god, have faith in him (accepting Jesus Christ as one's savior and knowing one cannot be saved accept through faith in Christ, blah blah blah), worship him, and live according to the commandments (as best as one can) - oh, and that the Bible is true and meant to be taken quite literally (the Bible as 100% true was pushed very hard). This is one reason that my church really stressed the importance of worshipping the correct god in this life - as it's the only chance we get to worship and believe in the correct god, as once one dies, they either go to Heaven or Hell for all eternity.
quadrophenic_9
Member
Oh totally! Don't worship the wrong God that would be a disaster, just read the Old Testament. But nobody is without error. People have moments of doubt and I don't hear a lot about forgiveness ever in some of these people's doctrine. It seems like they'd rather scare people into obedience than encourage them through their rough times. Which for most people is the highlight of the Gospel.
standing_alone
Well-Known Member
quadrophenic_9 said:
Definately! That's what church, Sunday school, and confirmation class always was in my church. Fear! Fear and love God! Forgiveness was rarely talked about - it was mentioned that Jesus died for our sins, but that God has forgiven us wasn't stressed so much - more that God hates sin and that sort of thing.
Sometimes I wonder how many people that go to churches like my old church really have strong faith and love for God or are rather just terrified of going to Hell. And I wonder how much fear of God really leads to love of God. Not that I think my church really cared. As long as people were in Church on Sunday, wetting their pants in fear, and putting their signed and numbered envelope in the collection plate, I'm sure my church could have cared less about their spirituality.