Talk:Lutheran Church – Missouri Synod/Archive 1

message: Why is there one space on each side of the hyphen in the title when the intro bolded word isn't? --Menchi 00:39 1 Jul 2003 (UTC)
: I moved this page here from Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod so it would match the index page and didn't check the article for spacing problems.  OK, I fixed it.  Thanks! Emperorbma 23:25 3 Jul 2003 (UTC)
I Google]d it, and it seems although " - " is common, "--" is the digital official and "—" the print official punctuation. Maybe make article title "—" and redirect the others here? If you think so, please work it out. If not, which one should be our "official" title? --Menchi 23:50 3 Jul 2003 (UTC)
: Hmm there are no pages that would block such a move.  Its up to you...  Either way, people will get what we mean. Emperorbma
:: Done. --Menchi 00:39 4 Jul 2003 (UTC)
----
"...it is often difficult for visitors to know if they are visiting a Lutheran Church or a generic Evangelical Church."
Here are my problems with this statement: 
(1) It is a figurative argument used by lcms opponents of contemporary worship.  It is not a literally true statement.  Of course visitors know they are visiting an LCMS church; it says "LCMS" right at the door.  In an encyclopedia we should not use hyperbole or figures of speech, especially ones used to support a certain position, namely, opposition to contemproary worship.
(2) The phrase "generic Evangelical" is inherently biased.  An Evangelical would not call their church generic.  Evangelical churches are certainly quite different from traditional LCMS churches, but they are certainly no more or less "generic."
I think one thing we could do is add something like "Many members of the church body feel that incorporating Contemporary worship styles will destroy their distinct Lutheran heritage."  This gets the point across while being literally true and unbiased.
Thanks for listening, Fishal 05:49, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uncategorized discussion 

message: As an LCMS pastor, I appreciate the addition of the Law and Gospel section. The current language is not quite the way we teach the doctrine, however, and really doesn't get to the heart of it all. I intend no disrespect to the authors of the section, but will edit it to bring it in line with our teaching. If something doesn't appear correct to any of you, please discuss it here before making any changes. Thanks! Rev. Bob Smith, Electronic Resources Librarian, Concordia Theological Seminary. --CTSWyneken 02:26, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't actually had anything to do with writing this article, but it's always a delight to see contributions from people who actually have training in the field. The current reading is much more clear. -Aranel ("Sarah") 14:33, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks, Sarah! -- Bob --CTSWyneken 12:09, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Law and Gospel

message: Could someone add to the three points of difference between the LCMS and WELS? These differences have practical repercussions (i.e. when one may worship with other Christians and when not), but a non-Lutheran reading this page might be mystified by a free-standing mention of the distinction between alter, pulpit, and other forms of fellowship. Same thing with pastors as a divinely established office. I think this would be better if someone mentioned what these disagreements mean in practice, aimed at a non-Lutheran. Thanks!  Ropcat 04:33, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Differences with WELS

message: The ELCA generally practices open communion, LCMS practices close(d) communion.
The ELCA ordains women to the pastorate, the LCMS does not.
The LCMS officially states belief in the inspiration, inerrancy and infallibility of Scripture.  The ELCA has avoided this, though there are many within the ELCA who believe in Biblical inerrancy.
The LCMS teaches that non-celibate homosexual conduct is a sin.  There is increasing movement toward acceptance of open homosexuality in the ELCA, including same-sex blessings and ordination of openly homosexual pastors, though this is a strong point of contention within the ELCA.
The ELCA maintains full-communion partnerships with non-Lutheran denominations (Presbyterian Church USA; Episcopal Church; Reformed Church in America; and are currently in discussion with the United Methodist Church about such a relationship).  The LCMS does not maintain altar and pulpit fellowship with non-Lutheran bodies, nor with the ELCA (generally, an ELCA member may not commune at an LCMS congregation without first speaking to the pastor).
The LCMS officially states a pro-life position; the ELCA does not, though there are many within the ELCA who are pro-life.
--MarshallStack 06:45, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  What's the difference between the LCMS and ELCA? 

message: Why is a sizable percentage of the article devoted to the current squabbles in the Synod?  They are nothing but a blip in the history of the LCMS, and ought not be included in the article until they are, themselves, history.  Not nearly enough NPOV, indeed. -Rekleov 14:04, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Too much emphasis on the NOW

message: I added a page for Law and Gospel.  Would someone like to help add more information there?  If I have my copy here I will add his Thesis in the beginning.
N9urk 18:13, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Law and Gospel

message: I added a section on ordination with just a brief addition explaining its adiaphoristic nature.  Would anyone care to elaborate about the process some more.  I will dig out my LW and such and add some more later.  N9urk 19:45, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Ordination

message: This section sounds kind of funny to my ears and I can't seem to find the assertions in it anywhere in Christian Dogmatics. I was taught that the doctrine of the church was unified, but made of two parts -- Law and Gospel. Does anyone know where I can find the assertion that the Gospel contains the law? If not, does anyone mind if I delete the paragraph as inaccurate?  --CTSWyneken 16:47, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks! I thought of that, too. That is the way we explain scriptural usage of the word "Gospel." But we do not assert it as a doctrine. In other words, we speak of the two doctrines of Scripture, Law and Gospel, but not: One doctrine. If you can find a way to work the concept into the Law and Gospel section, feel free. --CTSWyneken 03:22, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Doctrine Subsection 

message: Many substantial changes were made by anonymous user 192.160.64.49. At least one is an incorrect statement of LCMS doctrine. I have reverted them since there are too many to evaluate at once. If the editor will register, come here to talk about it, provide citations to substantiate his/her changes and sign their posts, I and other would be happy to talk it out here. --CTSWyneken 01:00, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reasons for Rejecting Recent Mass Changes 

message: To help with this issue, I'm doing a little reading. I'll put what I find here.
"Their spiritual motivation is made clear by the "Emigration Regulations," signed by all before leaving Germany, which might be called their "Mayflower Pact:" "All the undersigned... After deliberate and mature counsel, they can, humanly speaking, see no possibility of retaining in their present home this faith pure and undefiled, of confessing it and transmitting it to their posterity.  Hence they feel in duty bound to emigrate and to look for a country whence the Lutheran faith is not endangered and where they can serve God undisturbed in the way of grace revealed by Him and where they can enjoy fully and without interference or modification they means of grace ordained by God for men unto salvation and can preserve them in their intergrity and purity for themselves and for they children..." (Abdel Ross Wentz, A Basic History of Lutheranism in America Philadelphia: Muhleberg Press, 1995. p. 116. --CTSWyneken 16:37, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  References to the Saxon Emmigration 

message: Ptmccain just added the following: "One element in the Synod includes a number of individuals who remained in the Synod and did not leave during the Seminex controversy. The other element in the Synod forthrightly rejects the theology of the Seminex movement and strives to retain and expand a strong confessing Lutheran identity." Well, by definition, the entire Synod (not just an "element") consists of "individuals who remained in the Synod and did not leave during the Seminex controversy." Obviously I see what he or she is trying to suggest, but the choice of phrasing makes this sentence merely a tautology. One other point: no one under the age of fifty was an adult during the Seminex events. Probably more than half of the LCMS membership has no memory of the events, and couldn't tell you the issues that were at stake if their life depended on it. Doesn't framing current church divisions purely around that controversy ("Seminex sympathizers vs. rejectors") overplay its current relevance just a bit? Ropcat 02:32, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I haven't had time to work on this article lately. Why not solve the problem by referring to published sources and citations? --CTSWyneken 15:15, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Camps

message: These need to be at the top --- they do not do their job, which is to give a quick set of facts for a browsing reader, in this new position at the bottom of the page.  Perhaps someone with a bit more wikixperience could find a way to code it to flow in a more pleasing way?  --Rekleov 23:03, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Basic Facts 

message: As I understand it, the official name of the Missouri Synod uses an m-dash, like this: Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, not a hyphen. Is this not the form used on its website and publications? A small point, but an Ipod isn't an iPod, is it? Janko 14:45, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, that is true. Em-Dash it is. But, to be honest, typing it a few dozen times a day, an occaisonal En-Dash slips through. At least we're not Der Deutsche evangelische Lutherische Kirche von Missouri, Ohio und andere Staate any more. 8-) --CTSWyneken(talk) 14:59, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wouldn't mind being that again.  ;P  Or at least Evangelical Lutheran Synod of Missouri, Ohio and other States.  Tcschenks 21:46, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Official Name and Typography

message: Dear Friends: I've created the very beginnings of stubs for all the LCMS Presidents and linked them all with a succession box. I'd appreciate it if someone would check these and expand the ones just begun. --CTSWyneken(talk) 23:06, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  LCMS President Pages created and linked 

message: Why is Point of Hope Lutheran Church listed on the external links?  I think this is theological 'vanity' editing.  Surely it is not so significant a congregation that it should be linked from the LCMS entry.
I think it should be removed.
Uac1530 02:21, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Point of Hope? 

message: This time to CrossFeed Religious news.
The fact that it is hosted by two LCMS pastors doesn't make it relevant to be listed in the LCMS page.  There are thousands of LCMS-related webpages; they don't all belong on this page.
Uac1530 00:50, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another Vanity Link