The Perception of the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod at a Pretty Okay American Divinity School

Just in case anybody was wondering.

The back-story: making broad sweeps in my History of Modern European Christianity class, we touched on the "Confessional Awakening" that accompanied Lutherans' 19th-century emigration to America. The awakening bit was defined as follows, that these sojourners were arriving at the view that the Lutheran Church was the best model among churches because it possessed the fullest truth of Christianity. Then, the comment was made, "Now... If anyone knows anything about the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod..."

In case you were wondering. Yes, people know about us. Here's what we've taught them.

In an era when the question carries particular force as well as open-endedness, "What does it mean to be a Methodist/Episcopalian/Baptist/Presbyterian/Lutheran today?" the LCMS cuts a figure as a church body that does a fine and thorough and admirable job of building confessional identity among its member congregations. This is directly a result carried over from that sense of confessional awakening, which expounds upon the belief that Lutheranism (later, LCMS Lutheranism) is the purest and fullest truth of Christian doctrine and practice. The other direct result to carry over from that sentiment, and so the other inevitable aspect of that figure the LCMS cuts in the imagination of our fellow pilgrims, is elitism, exclusivity, and pride.

In other words, as a church body, the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod is known for knowing who it is. And claiming that identity, often in very harmful ways.

Now maybe that confessional elitism reading sounds implausible to you. Maybe you think close communion practices and the marginalization of women and homosexuals within the denomination are harmless idiosyncrasies, part of being "conservative," or maybe you think it's right. You'll be happy to know I made the case (since I have some experience with this), that there are LCMS pastors out there who have no investment in this confessional awakening hooey and have as their priority simply ministering to their people, to the best of their abilities. There are wonderful examples of this mentality; my pastor in Florida is one of them.

And now let me lay out the other side.

When I was in high school my LCMS congregation decided to revisit and reviatalize its Christian practice of hospitality. Part of this involved swelling the lists of congregation members who would serve as ushers or greeters. That's where I got pulled in; and that's where I had the opportunity to hear a pastor (he's no longer there) describe our intention thusly: We were there to welcome people to a church that would be good for them. We already had the best theology; now we were going to show them we were loving, too.

Kind of sounds like my class notes: "the Lutheran church as the best model among churches because it possessed the fullest truth of Christianity."

This is not the isolated view of a single clergyman. It's being taught at the seminary. Once, when I thought St. Louis might condescend to let me study there for a masters of divinity, I wrote to them that my desire to apply stemmed from my desire to be formed by their standards for the exposition of scripture and Christian doctrine. The reply came, informing me that part of what made their standards for the exposition of scripture and Christian doctrine so great, so in possession of the fullest truth, was the exclusion of people like me from that degree program. (That would be women.)

All that's to say, when the comment came up in class, what most struck me was not the fact that other denominations pay attention to us. Just that they've paid enough attention to know us quite so well.