It is probably wise to offer a precise definition of “Open Communion” since that term can mean the extreme of offering our Lord’s Body and Blood to any and all who present themselves—even pagans and other non-Christians (as is practiced in some Episcopal congregations)—or the more restictive practice of most ELCA congregations of inviting “all Baptized persons who believe in the Real Presence of Christ for the forgiveness of their sins...”
It is argueable that the ELCA has departed from the Galesburg Rule by opening Lutheran Altars to non-Lutheran communicants. It is equally argueable that the LCMS has departed from the Galesburg Rule by not opening their Lutheran Altars to all Lutherans communicants. The practice is more restrictive than Rome (which communes all who are in communion with the Bishop of Rome, regardless of Rite) and Orthodoxy (which communes all who are Chrismated, regardless of ethnicity).
If the first 'argueable' is true, then how, in your opinion, should the LCMS respond? By continuing altar fellowship?
all Baptized persons who believe in the Real Presence of Christ for the forgiveness of their sins...”
Many baptized believers in the Real Presence overlook a wide gulf in other doctrinal areas with LCMS. Where then is the spiritual unity? Where is that common confession of faith?
Despite the bad feelings it caused, I could not bring myself to commune at my brothers ELCA church. Now that they have left the synod, no problem. It is bot the open altar with the episcopalians that bother me. It is rather the departure from biblical orthodoxy that I no longer felt comfortable in approaching their altar