Well that is true the body and blood are present even if the person doesn't believe. That is exactly why the WELS has closed communion.
If you partake of that body and blood without believing you eat and drink judgement on yourself. That is biblical, so even if Luther would have said otherwise it doesn't matter because the bible trumps the confessions (which are also true because they argue for the bibles positions.
With all respect, probably what you are trying to do is to reach out more people to listen to your words, by trying to speak in English, but seriously you should work on that.... just as a piece of advice , talk in your own language if you don't know English ... or maybe you should ask God for the Gift of tongues so someone could understand what you say...
karpov, Peter did not get the keys. What about the other disciples in the room, and what is described in Acts? And Paul? That phrase you claim about Peter being given the keys is a play on words by Jesus, and nothing more: Peter= Petre= rock. Look at the text and see the combination of "foundation" and "rock".
I've always had issues with so much influence being put on Martin Luther. Its almost like its the WELS version of the Book of Mormon. Its as if they are saying, "Without it, you can't fully understand the Bible!" I'd much rather just read the Bible and learn from the Word of God!
Who is this moron? I belong to WELS and attended it's clergy-training schools. WELS does NOT teach that the presence of Christ is only because of the belief of the individual communicant. And just what "many other teachings" do we have that are not Lutheran? What a jerk!
Well not being episcopal retaining the Apostolic Succession, having no bishops, priests and deacons is not traditional Lutheran. There is indeed another priesthood than the priesthood of all believers.
Dear readers, I am posting a response which goes in reverse, four statements down. This is a copy-paste from the WELS "topical Q&A " from their official site. Compare this to the speaker in this video....
Here's how you tell what is really the belief in WELS or not. You go to the WELS Topical Q&A. I will post next what the seminary teachers have prepared for that forum:
The biblical evidence is as "hard" as it could possibly be. About the bread, Jesus said, "This is my body," and he said about the wine, "This is my blood" (Matthew 26:26, Mark 14:22-24, Luke 22:19-20, 1 Corinthians 11:23-27).
"But that's impossible!" is really the only counter-argument that Protestants have. That is simply not a valid argument in theology. It isn't our place to tell Jesus what is "possible' or "impossible" for him.
Lutherans do not, however, accept the R C doctrine known as "transubstantiation," according to which the priest who celebrates mass is said to exercise a special power, rec'd in his ordination, and miraculously transform the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ (Catechism of the Catholic Church 1375-1377, 1538). None of this is found in Scripture. Transubstantiation arose as an attempt to answer the question, "How do Jesus' body and blood come to be present in the Lord's Supper?"
Lutheran doctrine is, however, that the priest in apostolic succession with St. Peter carries a certain priestly office in which he re-presents Jesus Christ and on his assignment celebrate the holy mass in which we are bringing forth the bread, wine, prayers and collect as a sacrifice and in return we receive the one and only sacrifice on the cross in the consecrated bread and wine, the true body and blood of Jesus Christ.
No one says that Peter has the higher authority. But in the eucharist the priest is re-presenting Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ gave the assignment to Peter and the other apostles to celebrate the mass, so does the priests now.
In the eucharist we are bringing forth the sacrifice of our prayers, our collection and the bread and wine, that is all sacrifice, and we are given the once and for all sacrificed body of Jesus Christ in the wine and bread.
May the Good Lord forgive you for twisting the words of both the WELS and Martin Luther, and moreso, for taking upon the "front:" that you are either fully and sufficiently trained or called by Christians to preach over the Internet. May God have mercy on your blasphemous soul.
I don´t twist the words of Luther. Please read the words of Luther in the Cathecism about the Holy supper and the position of the WELS. VBesides, Is a blasphemy share the word of God? Is a blasphemy to invite to all christians read Luther when he simply taught the Word? Do you think God is angered with someone simply teaches His word?
May the Good Lord give you the strenght to read Luther. You will realize that´s not blasphemy.
It is blasphemy first of all to accuse other Christians for trying their best to understand what Jesus tells us. It is further blasphemy to say that a particular group of Christians accept communion as whatever Jesus says, even if we don't understand it. And it is further blasphemy, a much greater blasphemy, to say that Peter is the only one of the disciples is the one to be trusted. Peter doesn't have the keys.
The priests do normally not turn around but the should elevate the blessed sacrament so that the people can see worship Jesus Christ who is truly present in the wine and bread.
The rest of our teachings are in the Book of Concord. You can find them there. If you send a mail to me I could send back to you a summary of our beliefs. Some of them openly are little different from the ones confessed for WELS but match with the Book of Concord. Besides we are so conservative.
I am not trying to start a fight here. I think we agree on this. However, I want to clear up some misconceptions about our beliefs.
One more thing, I think you are focusing too much on the visible church. We should think about whether or not we follow what God himself tells us, rather than who are what we follow on this earth.
Hi my dear friend. We follow the Scriptures as Luther did. We believe based on the Scriptures that the real presence is verified the very moment the words are given for the pastor (St Agustin said the same, the word and the element make the sacrament). Luther held that view as well. We still hold that view. Even though Melanchton (and the WELS) insist the faith plays a roll there we don´t think the faith plays any roll in the Holy Supper. Whether we believe on it or not Jesus is there.
The WELS neither any church of the CELC believe that the real presence is effected by the faith of the communicants. In the WELS This We Belive you can read:
" We believe that Christs words of institution cause the real presence--not any human action. "
I would like to know where you got your information about our teachings. What you say is wrong. We do not teach that. We teach the real presence of Jesus Christ's body and blood with the bread and wine. Scripture does not explain how this is possible, but it is still true.
The real presence you believe is the one conditioned on faith as Melanchton and Simon Wolferinus taught. I have the books of the wels. Luther (based on the Bible) held the real resence (unio sacramentalis) is there at the very moment the pastor states the words given on the Scriptures.
I already told you. I, and the WELS do not believe what you say we do. Our faith does not influence the real presence of the Lord's Supper. I've been through a WELS grade school, high school, and I am in a WELS college now. All my teachers say the same thing.
I have always been taught in my religion classes that the body an blood are always there with the bread and wine. We know that it doesn't matter whether or not someone believes it. It is for this very reason we practice closed communion. Our Lord tells us through Paul that anyone who does not believe this eats and drinks to his own destruction.
Yeap, we agree on that. Nevertheless we must insist the unio sacramentalis is verified at the very moment the WORDS are stated on the altar. That´s the point the WELS has forsaken. That´s the itsy bitsy detail...
What difference does it make that we follow Martin Luther perfectly? He is not God. Granted, he did have a lot of things right (by the grace of God); however, we must always search the scriptures themselves. Following church fathers over God's word is what got the Jews in trouble in Jesus time. It's what got te Catholics in trouble in Luther's time, and it's a very real danger to us today. I am a member of the WELS, and it bothers me when someone quotes Luther without referencing the bible.
We follow the original teachings of Luther because he simply taugh what is on the Bible. Granted, he made mistakes as human, we don´t follow those mistakes. But he was loyal to the Bible. We simply do that. We don´t quote Luther without Bible. We QUOTE the Bible and we are happy when we realize Luther was on the same ground. That´s a big difference. Luther was simply a good father. We follow his example.
Yes ELCA is not longer a lutheran church. The thing that the WELS be more conservative in many aspects does not mean they are 100% lutherans. There are many articles about it. Just read them and read the books of Martin Luther. Even the The Book of Concord. You will be surprised.
May the Lord be with you.
Jorge Angel Mijangos
President of the Confessional Mexican Lutheran Sinod. SILCOM.
Hi again Jorge! I think we have a bit different opinion about the apostolic succession and the historic episcopate. I am with the Church of Sweden (which as a body is not regarded as confessional, only parts of it). The first lutheran bishop after the Reformation was consecrated by a roman catholic bishop therefore we claim that we maintain an unbroken line of the apostolic succession and historic episcopate. Some thinks this is necessary, other just very good. Pax et bonum, blessings!
I´m so happy to talk to you. It´s true, as I told you I love so much our heritage of the apostolic succession an the historic episcopate. Even though I must admit it´s not part of the ancient Church (they even weren´t organized) but I insist that´s part of our heritage as our clerical garments are our heritage. And I really love the fact that the Church of Sweden keeps that heritage with them. The history (even traditions) are part of us. I love them.
Hi Jorge! Of what Lutheran church are you?! I agree that it is not lutheran, not even christian, to believe that sinners and unbelievers do not receive blood and body of Jesus Christ.
But a necessity is that the church still has the historical episcopate and the apostolic succession, I do not think WELS have that..
Hi my friend! I´m glad to talk to you. As far as I know, the founder of WELS (1849) was a priest, and had the would-be historical episcopate. To be honest, thats a beautiful legend qe still have with us, but through the first centuries of the church that DID NOT EXIST. Even a woman (who was not a priest) was Pope VIII (853 AD). But I confess to you even though The historical episcopate is a legend I love it. I´m the president of the Confesional Lutheran Mexican Church. God Bless You.
I´m so glad to read this so. But I really think you must make it clear in your booklet "This we believe teach and confess"and some other books you have published as well because the position stated in there is closer to Simon Wolferinus than Martin Luther.
4.We believe that all who join in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper receive the true body and blood of Christ in, with, and under the bread and wine (1 Corinthians 10:16). This is true because, when the Lord instituted this sacrament, he said, This is my body. This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins (Matthew 26:26,28).
Well that is true the body and blood are present even if the person doesn't believe. That is exactly why the WELS has closed communion.
If you partake of that body and blood without believing you eat and drink judgement on yourself. That is biblical, so even if Luther would have said otherwise it doesn't matter because the bible trumps the confessions (which are also true because they argue for the bibles positions.
MrWelsluth 9 months ago
Hi, you talk the English Like SHIT!!!
Pinche paisa de mierda
tercermundistaa 10 months ago
the bible says that if an unbeliever takes the lord's supper, he eats and drinks judgement upon himself.
dragonking700 1 year ago
With all respect, probably what you are trying to do is to reach out more people to listen to your words, by trying to speak in English, but seriously you should work on that.... just as a piece of advice , talk in your own language if you don't know English ... or maybe you should ask God for the Gift of tongues so someone could understand what you say...
Massielistika 1 year ago
karpov, Peter did not get the keys. What about the other disciples in the room, and what is described in Acts? And Paul? That phrase you claim about Peter being given the keys is a play on words by Jesus, and nothing more: Peter= Petre= rock. Look at the text and see the combination of "foundation" and "rock".
xpdnc12 2 years ago
I've always had issues with so much influence being put on Martin Luther. Its almost like its the WELS version of the Book of Mormon. Its as if they are saying, "Without it, you can't fully understand the Bible!" I'd much rather just read the Bible and learn from the Word of God!
JamesK123 2 years ago
Who is this moron? I belong to WELS and attended it's clergy-training schools. WELS does NOT teach that the presence of Christ is only because of the belief of the individual communicant. And just what "many other teachings" do we have that are not Lutheran? What a jerk!
senoreric 2 years ago
Well not being episcopal retaining the Apostolic Succession, having no bishops, priests and deacons is not traditional Lutheran. There is indeed another priesthood than the priesthood of all believers.
karpov89 2 years ago
Dear readers, I am posting a response which goes in reverse, four statements down. This is a copy-paste from the WELS "topical Q&A " from their official site. Compare this to the speaker in this video....
xpdnc12 2 years ago
Here's how you tell what is really the belief in WELS or not. You go to the WELS Topical Q&A. I will post next what the seminary teachers have prepared for that forum:
xpdnc12 2 years ago
The biblical evidence is as "hard" as it could possibly be. About the bread, Jesus said, "This is my body," and he said about the wine, "This is my blood" (Matthew 26:26, Mark 14:22-24, Luke 22:19-20, 1 Corinthians 11:23-27).
xpdnc12 2 years ago
"But that's impossible!" is really the only counter-argument that Protestants have. That is simply not a valid argument in theology. It isn't our place to tell Jesus what is "possible' or "impossible" for him.
xpdnc12 2 years ago
Lutherans do not, however, accept the R C doctrine known as "transubstantiation," according to which the priest who celebrates mass is said to exercise a special power, rec'd in his ordination, and miraculously transform the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ (Catechism of the Catholic Church 1375-1377, 1538). None of this is found in Scripture. Transubstantiation arose as an attempt to answer the question, "How do Jesus' body and blood come to be present in the Lord's Supper?"
xpdnc12 2 years ago
Lutheran doctrine is, however, that the priest in apostolic succession with St. Peter carries a certain priestly office in which he re-presents Jesus Christ and on his assignment celebrate the holy mass in which we are bringing forth the bread, wine, prayers and collect as a sacrifice and in return we receive the one and only sacrifice on the cross in the consecrated bread and wine, the true body and blood of Jesus Christ.
karpov89 2 years ago
Right, as if Peter is the higher authority over communion than Jesus.
xpdnc12 2 years ago
No one says that Peter has the higher authority. But in the eucharist the priest is re-presenting Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ gave the assignment to Peter and the other apostles to celebrate the mass, so does the priests now.
In the eucharist we are bringing forth the sacrifice of our prayers, our collection and the bread and wine, that is all sacrifice, and we are given the once and for all sacrificed body of Jesus Christ in the wine and bread.
karpov89 2 years ago
May the Good Lord forgive you for twisting the words of both the WELS and Martin Luther, and moreso, for taking upon the "front:" that you are either fully and sufficiently trained or called by Christians to preach over the Internet. May God have mercy on your blasphemous soul.
rachmaninovpc3dminor 2 years ago 3
I don´t twist the words of Luther. Please read the words of Luther in the Cathecism about the Holy supper and the position of the WELS. VBesides, Is a blasphemy share the word of God? Is a blasphemy to invite to all christians read Luther when he simply taught the Word? Do you think God is angered with someone simply teaches His word?
May the Good Lord give you the strenght to read Luther. You will realize that´s not blasphemy.
Rev. Mijangos
jorgeangelmijangos 2 years ago
It is blasphemy first of all to accuse other Christians for trying their best to understand what Jesus tells us. It is further blasphemy to say that a particular group of Christians accept communion as whatever Jesus says, even if we don't understand it. And it is further blasphemy, a much greater blasphemy, to say that Peter is the only one of the disciples is the one to be trusted. Peter doesn't have the keys.
xpdnc12 2 years ago
I'll also put it to you this way, why do priests turn around and raise the cup as if it were an offering to God? Communion is God's offering to us.
xpdnc12 2 years ago 4
The priests do normally not turn around but the should elevate the blessed sacrament so that the people can see worship Jesus Christ who is truly present in the wine and bread.
karpov89 2 years ago
But St. Peter was indeed given the keys to heaven. The apostolic succession does not only come from him but from the other Apostles.
karpov89 2 years ago
@rachmaninovpc3dminor You better do some research. We believe that it IS HIS Body and His Blood. The Words of Christ. You Must believe.
turtle12383 1 year ago
Can you tell me the rest of your teachings? I would like to know what you believe?
SaxymanMLC 2 years ago
The rest of our teachings are in the Book of Concord. You can find them there. If you send a mail to me I could send back to you a summary of our beliefs. Some of them openly are little different from the ones confessed for WELS but match with the Book of Concord. Besides we are so conservative.
May the light of Jesus be with you.
Rev. Mijangos
jorgeangelmijangos 2 years ago
I am not trying to start a fight here. I think we agree on this. However, I want to clear up some misconceptions about our beliefs.
One more thing, I think you are focusing too much on the visible church. We should think about whether or not we follow what God himself tells us, rather than who are what we follow on this earth.
God bless,
A WELS Teacher In Training
SaxymanMLC 2 years ago
Hi my dear friend. We follow the Scriptures as Luther did. We believe based on the Scriptures that the real presence is verified the very moment the words are given for the pastor (St Agustin said the same, the word and the element make the sacrament). Luther held that view as well. We still hold that view. Even though Melanchton (and the WELS) insist the faith plays a roll there we don´t think the faith plays any roll in the Holy Supper. Whether we believe on it or not Jesus is there.
jorgeangelmijangos 2 years ago
The WELS neither any church of the CELC believe that the real presence is effected by the faith of the communicants. In the WELS This We Belive you can read:
" We believe that Christs words of institution cause the real presence--not any human action. "
lutherchemnitz 2 years ago
I would like to know where you got your information about our teachings. What you say is wrong. We do not teach that. We teach the real presence of Jesus Christ's body and blood with the bread and wine. Scripture does not explain how this is possible, but it is still true.
SaxymanMLC 2 years ago
The real presence you believe is the one conditioned on faith as Melanchton and Simon Wolferinus taught. I have the books of the wels. Luther (based on the Bible) held the real resence (unio sacramentalis) is there at the very moment the pastor states the words given on the Scriptures.
jorgeangelmijangos 2 years ago
I already told you. I, and the WELS do not believe what you say we do. Our faith does not influence the real presence of the Lord's Supper. I've been through a WELS grade school, high school, and I am in a WELS college now. All my teachers say the same thing.
SaxymanMLC 2 years ago
Same here, i went to WELS grade school and am now attending a WELS HS (right next door to MLC ha) and this is not right.
volleyballbaby01 2 years ago
I have always been taught in my religion classes that the body an blood are always there with the bread and wine. We know that it doesn't matter whether or not someone believes it. It is for this very reason we practice closed communion. Our Lord tells us through Paul that anyone who does not believe this eats and drinks to his own destruction.
SaxymanMLC 2 years ago
Yeap, we agree on that. Nevertheless we must insist the unio sacramentalis is verified at the very moment the WORDS are stated on the altar. That´s the point the WELS has forsaken. That´s the itsy bitsy detail...
jorgeangelmijangos 2 years ago
Where is the proof that the words start the real presence? All the passages I have read say nothing to explain how or when unio sacramentalis works.
SaxymanMLC 2 years ago
What difference does it make that we follow Martin Luther perfectly? He is not God. Granted, he did have a lot of things right (by the grace of God); however, we must always search the scriptures themselves. Following church fathers over God's word is what got the Jews in trouble in Jesus time. It's what got te Catholics in trouble in Luther's time, and it's a very real danger to us today. I am a member of the WELS, and it bothers me when someone quotes Luther without referencing the bible.
SaxymanMLC 2 years ago
We follow the original teachings of Luther because he simply taugh what is on the Bible. Granted, he made mistakes as human, we don´t follow those mistakes. But he was loyal to the Bible. We simply do that. We don´t quote Luther without Bible. We QUOTE the Bible and we are happy when we realize Luther was on the same ground. That´s a big difference. Luther was simply a good father. We follow his example.
jorgeangelmijangos 2 years ago
I agree. But some people do not see it that way.
SaxymanMLC 2 years ago
The WELS is closest to what Martin Luther Believed. The ELCA has apostasizaed big time.
October31st1517 2 years ago
Yes ELCA is not longer a lutheran church. The thing that the WELS be more conservative in many aspects does not mean they are 100% lutherans. There are many articles about it. Just read them and read the books of Martin Luther. Even the The Book of Concord. You will be surprised.
May the Lord be with you.
Jorge Angel Mijangos
President of the Confessional Mexican Lutheran Sinod. SILCOM.
Jorge
jorgeangelmijangos 2 years ago
Hi again Jorge! I think we have a bit different opinion about the apostolic succession and the historic episcopate. I am with the Church of Sweden (which as a body is not regarded as confessional, only parts of it). The first lutheran bishop after the Reformation was consecrated by a roman catholic bishop therefore we claim that we maintain an unbroken line of the apostolic succession and historic episcopate. Some thinks this is necessary, other just very good. Pax et bonum, blessings!
karpov89 2 years ago
I´m so happy to talk to you. It´s true, as I told you I love so much our heritage of the apostolic succession an the historic episcopate. Even though I must admit it´s not part of the ancient Church (they even weren´t organized) but I insist that´s part of our heritage as our clerical garments are our heritage. And I really love the fact that the Church of Sweden keeps that heritage with them. The history (even traditions) are part of us. I love them.
May our Lord be with all of you. JAMD
jorgeangelmijangos 2 years ago
Hi Jorge! Of what Lutheran church are you?! I agree that it is not lutheran, not even christian, to believe that sinners and unbelievers do not receive blood and body of Jesus Christ.
But a necessity is that the church still has the historical episcopate and the apostolic succession, I do not think WELS have that..
karpov89 2 years ago
Hi my friend! I´m glad to talk to you. As far as I know, the founder of WELS (1849) was a priest, and had the would-be historical episcopate. To be honest, thats a beautiful legend qe still have with us, but through the first centuries of the church that DID NOT EXIST. Even a woman (who was not a priest) was Pope VIII (853 AD). But I confess to you even though The historical episcopate is a legend I love it. I´m the president of the Confesional Lutheran Mexican Church. God Bless You.
jorgeangelmijangos 2 years ago
From the WELS "This We Believe":
We reject the claim that unbelievers and hypocrites do not receive the true body and blood of Jesus in the Sacrament.
authorizedversion 3 years ago
I´m so glad to read this so. But I really think you must make it clear in your booklet "This we believe teach and confess"and some other books you have published as well because the position stated in there is closer to Simon Wolferinus than Martin Luther.
jorgeangelmijangos 3 years ago
From the WELS "This We Believe":
4.We believe that all who join in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper receive the true body and blood of Christ in, with, and under the bread and wine (1 Corinthians 10:16). This is true because, when the Lord instituted this sacrament, he said, This is my body. This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins (Matthew 26:26,28).
authorizedversion 3 years ago