Transcript 10-The History of Fellowship_WELS and CLC

Church Fellowship
a Bible study course for adults
By Professor John F. Brug
PowerPoint: Angi Kinsley, Pastor Mark A. Cordes
New Life Evangelical Lutheran Church
Shoreview, Minnesota
The History of
Fellowship:
WELS and CLC Relations;
The CELC
Church Fellowship, pp. 87-102
Goals
1.
2.
3.
To understand the break in fellowship
between the Wisconsin Synod and CLC.
To understand the differences that still
separate the WELS from the Church of
the Lutheran Confession today.
To understand the process that led to the
formation of the CELC.
Opening Prayer
Lord, we sorrow over every division in the
church and rejoice whenever true unity is
established. Teach us to understand the
recent history of the Wisconsin Synod that
divided us from some Lutherans and
united us with others. Help us heal the
divisions of the church by working for true
agreement based on your Word. Amen.
Scriptural Principles

Romans 16:17
 Separate

from false teachers (“persistent errorists”)
Galatians 6:1f
 Help
Christians who are trapped in sin.
 Watch out for our own temptations.

2 Thessalonians 3:14f
 “Do
not associate with him.” (not listening)
 “Warn him as a brother.”
What is the CLC?
 The
Church of the Lutheran
Confession is a small church body of
mostly former WELS, ELS who say:
The Wisconsin Synod failed to
break fellowship with Missouri
Synod soon enough.
Due to false doctrine of church
fellowship by the Wisconsin Synod.
WELS and CLC
 What
difference of opinion existed in
WI Synod concerning termination of
fellowship with MO Synod?
Some thought WELS too slow in
breaking fellowship with LCMS.
Others wanted more time to
admonish LCMS.
Why did WELS have hard time
deciding to break LCMS?
1.
2.
3.
LCMS had strong reputation for
orthodoxy, fine confessional
documents, i.e., Brief Statement.
Many zigzags in Missouri’s course.
Many internal divisions in LCMS
 much confusion re. LCMS position.
Hard time for WELS vs. LCMS?
3.
4.
5.
Varying degrees of knowledge,
understanding among members and
delegates of Wisconsin Synod.
Seems Missouri Synod representatives
strung WELS along, holding out hope
with no intention of changing.
Dealing with large group more difficult
than with individual, esp. with only rare
meetings.
WELS Convention History
 First
WELS convention to seriously
consider break of fellowship with
Missouri Synod?
Serious resolution to break: 1953.
 WELS convention which finally broke
fellowship with Missouri Synod?
1961
WELS Convention History
 Basic
reason for this delay?
WELS repeatedly persuaded that
LCMS had not rejected admonition,
might still solve problem.
In retrospect this hope was naïve or
overly optimistic.
Good faith effort to do everything
possible to preserve fellowship.
False Hopes Delayed Break
1.
1953 WELS convention hoped that the
1954 meeting of the Synodical
Conference could solve the problem.
–
Hoped protesting fellowship would be a
strong warning to the Missouri Synod.
False Hopes Delayed Break
2.
1955 WELS convention delayed
because LCMS was triennial.
– LCMS had not convened since our
1953 protest.
– LCMS could not have acted on
WELS warning.
False Hopes Delayed Break
3.
4.
1956 WELS convention won over by
overtures from Missouri
– WELS placed hope in continued
mediation by overseas sister
churches.
1957 WELS allowed more time for
these efforts.
CLC Condemns WELS because…
 WELS
“approved” a preamble which
condemned Missouri’s error.
 CLC says WELS thus identified the
MO Synod as persistent errorists.
 Thus CLC says WELS sinfully
remained in fellowship with LCMS.
Another interpretation of WELS?
 WELS
1955 convention delayed vote
on preamble.
Had not yet identified Missouri
Synod as persistent errorists.
Majority of WELS delegates
believed Missouri Synod had not
yet rejected our admonition.
Interpretation of WELS’ delay?
WELS
still hoped further
admonition would help Missouri
Synod turn away from their error.
WELS conventions accepted
principle that we must break from
persistent errorists, but majority
were not yet convinced LCMS fell
into that category (Brug, pp. 89f).
WELS judgment of early leavers?
 We
do not condemn them for opinion
that Wisconsin Synod was too slow in
breaking with the Missouri Synod.
 Nor do we condemn following their
consciences, not to keep fellowship
with MO Synod longer (Brug p. 91).
Why not reunite WELS + CLC?
 CLC
believed WELS’ failure to
break with LCMS in 1955 and
following years was not just faulty
judgment, but erroneous doctrine
of fellowship allowing fellowship
with persistent errorists.
WELS sees weakness in CLC
 Many
statements from CLC members
on this doctrine do not seem to allow
time for patient admonition of those
who have fallen into error.
 (Brug,
pp. 91f).
Doctrinal Difference?
 Why
does the Wisconsin Synod say
there is no doctrinal difference
between WELS and CLC?
WELS-CLC meetings have
produced agreement on need for
admonition and for separation from
persistent errorists. (Brug, p. 92f)
1987-1990 Reconciliation Failed?
Seemed
agreement on doctrinal
principle had been reached
CLC rep’s insisted on preamble
speaking of doctrinal difference.
WELS never received clear CLC
statement about this difference.
CLC broke off discussions (Brug, pp.
94-96).
What main principle was WELS
trying to uphold with CLC?
 Need
for patient admonition before
we break fellowship with brothers and
sisters who have fallen into error.
 WELS fully supports corresponding
principle that we are not to continue
fellowship with persistent errorists.
What is the CELC?
Organization of WELS, ELS, and world
wide sister churches to preserve and
strengthen our fellowship.
 The CELC replaced the former Synodical
Conference – LCMS, WELS, ELS, and
others (meeting of synods).
 Synodical Conference dissolved 1963.

WELS preserves and expands
fellowship after 1961 break.
 Meet
regularly with ELS in
Confessional Forum.
 Holds “free conferences” to reach out
to other confessional Lutherans.
WELS preserves, expands
fellowship after 1961 break.
 Established
fellowship with
Federation for Authentic Lutheranism
and Lutheran Confessional Church of
Sweden and Norway.
 Meetings to preserve fellowship with
sister churches in former Synodical
Conference.
WELS problem after 1961 break
with Missouri?
Churches that had been in fellowship with
both WELS and LCMS could no longer
remain in fellowship with both since there
was no longer doctrinal agreement
between these churches.
 Such a triangular fellowship cannot hold
with two contradictory doctrinal positions.

WELS attempts to solve this
problem…
 …by
patient efforts to explain our
doctrinal position to overseas
churches.
 Result: All sister churches except the
ELFC of Germany chose to keep
Missouri fellowship.
(Brug,
pp. 101f)
THE CELC

Locate member churches of the CELC on
world map.
Summary
 Some
congregation late 1950’s
separated from WI Synod for not
breaking with MO Synod soon
enough. Saw error in WELS
interpretation / application of Romans
16:17.
Church
of the Lutheran Confession.
Restoration efforts have failed.
Summary
 A worldwide
organization, the CELC,
has recently been formed to extend
fellowship among confessional
Lutherans.
Confessional
Conference
Evangelical Lutheran
Closing Prayer
Lord, we rejoice in our fellowship with
sister churches in the CELC. Watch
over these small churches struggling
in a very hostile environment. Create
in us the desire and ability to support
and encourage them. Bless our
fellowship together. Heal Lutheran
divisions by bringing us to true
agreement in the teachings of your
Word. Amen.