Editing Apostolic succession (section)

===Certain parts of Confessional Lutheranism===
Parts of [[Confessional Lutheranism]] have retained apostolic succession, such as the [[Missionsprovinsen|Mission Province]] (Missionsprovinsen), [[Evangelical Lutheran Church of Ingria]] and [[Evangelical Lutheran Church in Kenya]], for example (see [[#Lutheran churches|Lutheran churches]]); these are members of the [[International Lutheran Council]].<ref name="Omwanza2025"/><ref>{{cite web |title=Apostolisk succession |url=https://missionsprovinsen.se/apostolisk-succession/ |publisher=Missionsprovinsen |access-date=27 December 2024 |language=sv-SE |date=23 October 2006 |quote=Missionsprovinsen förvaltar både en lärosuccession, det vill säga vår lära går tillbaka till Jesus och apostlarna; och en episkopal vigningssuccession, det vill säga våra biskopar är vigda med en obruten linje av handpåläggningar tillbaka till Jesus och apostlarna, så långt det går att fastställa.}}</ref>

Certain other Confessional Lutheran churches including [[Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod]] (WELS) and [[Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod]] (LCMS) reject Apostolic Succession as a biblical doctrine.<ref>[https://cyclopedia.lcms.org/display.asp?t1=a&word=APOSTOLICSUCCESSION Apostolic Succession], ''Christian Cyclopedia'', Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod</ref> These churches teach that the Bible contains no evidence showing that the office must be conveyed by laying-on of hands and no Biblical command that it must be by a special class of bishops.<ref name=WELS-DC>{{cite web |url=https://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1518&cuTopic_topicID=68&cuItem_itemID=8947 |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130602105457/http://arkiv.lbk.cc/faq/site.pl@1518cutopic_topicid68cuitem_itemid8947.htm |archivedate=2 June 2013 |work=WELS Topical Q&A |title= Divine Call - Apostolic Succession / Transmutation Authority|publisher=Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod |accessdate=23 Sep 2015 }}</ref> The Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod teaches that there is no evidence the Popes have historic succession from Peter other than their own claim that it is so.<ref>WELS Topical Q&A: [https://web.archive.org/web/20090927214241/https://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1518&cuTopic_topicID=19&cuItem_itemID=6106 Responses the Previous Questions], "There is no biblical or historical evidence for the claims of the Roman Catholic church that Peter was the first pope. In fact there is no evidence that there even was a pope in the first century. Even Catholic historians recognize this as a historical fact...We honor Peter and in fact some of our churches are named after him, but he was not the first pope, nor was he Roman Catholic. If you read his first letter, you will see that he did not teach a Roman hierarchy, but that all Christians are royal priests. The same keys given to Peter in Matthew 16 are given to the whole church of believers in Matthew 18."</ref>

The Wisconsin Synod acknowledges:<ref name=WELS-DCM>{{cite web |url=http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1518&cuTopic_topicID=942&cuItem_itemID=22266 |archiveurl=https://wayback.archive-it.org/all/20080629231826/http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1518&cuTopic_topicID=942&cuItem_itemID=22266 |archivedate=29 June 2008 |work=WELS Topical Q&A |title=Definition of Church and Ministry - Apostolic {{sic|Sucession|nolink=y}} |publisher=Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod |accessdate=23 Sep 2015 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

{{quote|"Since the first ordained Lutheran pastors were ordained by pastors who had been ordained in the Roman Catholic church and so on through the generations, we could claim historic succession as plausibly as can Roman Catholic priests if it simply were dependent on being ordained in a line of pastors.  But for the historic succession to be considered legitimate by Rome or the Othodox {{sic}} or Anglicans it must be mediated through the correct bishops. Rome does not recognize as legitimate even the ordinations done by bishops in historic succession as in the Church of Sweden and the Church of England.  Only through bishops connected to the pope is the historic succession legitimate in their eyes."}}

However, the Synod states that there are a number of major problems with this Roman Catholic view on apostolic succession:<ref name=WELS-DCM/>

* There is no evidence the popes have historic succession to Peter other than their own claim that it is so.
* The bishops claiming succession have not preserved apostolic doctrine, therefore they have no meaningful apostolic succession.
* There is no evidence that the apostles were ordained by laying on of hands when they entered their office.
* There is no evidence in Scripture that the office must be conveyed by laying on of hands and no command that it must be by a special class of bishops.
* [[Acts 1]] actually proves the opposite of what the Catholic Church claims; it proves there cannot be "apostolic successors" today because Judas' replacement had to be an eyewitness of Jesus' ministry.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1518&cuTopic_topicID=19&cuItem_itemID=4302 |title=WELS Topical Q&A: Roman Catholic |access-date=27 September 2009 |archive-date=27 September 2009 |archive-url=https://wayback.archive-it.org/all/20090927211642/https://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1518&cuTopic_topicID=19&cuItem_itemID=4302 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

WELS holds that it's their custom that ordination of pastors is by other pastors, and that neither the Bible nor the Lutheran confessions make this the only divinely mandated way of entering the pastoral ministry: "It is the call of the church that is the essential element, more specifically, the call of Christ through the church."<ref name=WELS-DCM/>