Is Lutheran- Missouri Synod church a good church to recommend?

Not open for further replies.


Puritan Board Freshman
I was LCMS about ten years ago, and I do have some positive memories of the church. On paper at least, they had a high view of the confessions even though I found them very confusing at times. Since the LCMS is much larger than all the NAPARC churches combined, they have more of the tendencies of broader evangelicism. Another thing you will notice is that the culture is different than a Reformed church. Even among the laity, Reformed churches I believe tend to be more grounded in doctrine and theology than Lutherans. The LCMS churches tend to have a very negative view of the Reformed even though there is a lot in common.

When it comes to the Gospel, you'll get it preached to you every Sunday, but sermons will tend to be half the time that you'll hear in a Reformed church. Another thing you'll notice is a lot of images, crucifixes, and symbolism that is throughout the service. I remember one service I saw an advent wreath being blessed, which I thought was really strange. Besides their view of the Sacraments, you'll see that they have no problem with images. Also relating to the Law, they don't believe the fourth commandment (which is their third) is binding on all people. Another thing you'll notice is that the third use of the Law is barely emphasized or taught in LCMS churches even though it's in their confessions. If I were you though, I would probably exhaust all my options as far Reformed churches before considering an LCMS. Your sister wouldn't be that bad off because she would be hearing the Gospel preached, but there will be some issues that she will have to deal with.


Puritan Board Doctor
I know some good MSL folk, if it were "push-to-shove" I would recomend a MSL body over almost any NCC Mainline church.:gpl::2cents:


Puritan Board Post-Graduate
If you are as I am "extra calvinist" regarding the Lords Supper Only a good Reformed church will be satisfactory.
I believe the sacraments serve as a public testimony of a previous grace. Therefore, the sacrament is “a sign of a sacred thing, i.e. of a grace that has been given. I also believe that Christ becomes present spiritually and as an Extra Calvinist I have become I can not accept the lutheran teaching on consubstantiation any more than theroman catholic teaching of transubstantiation. ”Luther's teaching still stems from the same misguided teaching of Roman Catholic sacramentalism. That is the major objection I have to the Lutheran Protestants. I believe Communion bears witness to something already accomplished, as does also Baptism.

I believe as a Calvinist that Christ’s humanity is not infinite or omnipresent and therefore can only be at one place at one time, even after the ascension. I adhere to the historic view as espoused by the Chalcedonian definition and believe that Christ’s human nature cannot share attributes with the divine nature. This position is at odds with the Roman Catholic view of Transubstantiation as well as the Lutheran view of Consubstantiation, both of which believe that Christ’s human nature can be at more than one place at one time during the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper. I am also an "extra" Calvinist The “extra” in that I believe that while Christ’s humanity was finite, there was a sense in which Christ was still infinite, holding the world together. In other words, finite could not contain the infinite (finitum non capax infiniti).

Because of the Lutheran view of sacrament especially the Lords Supper, I would try to find a Reformed church to join if possible.
Last edited:
Not open for further replies.