Talk:Crypto-Calvinism

message: I have heard Jansenists called this. There is a case for such.
Furthermore, I have also heard American Evangelicals called this from time to time. One could perhaps make a case for such among certain Southern baptists.
I do not know much about Lutheran Crypto-Calvinism but, as I understand the reformers fought over sacrements. First. They also fought on the extent of election (single or double). They did not hold to the same design of atonement as calvinists. This logically developed into the limited atonement doctrine. A step lutherans didn't like. Third, they fought over the place of tradition. Calvinists were prone to cut everything. Lutherans sought to reform what was necessary.
This article doesn't really mention much about what a crypto-calvinist is. It only mentions the political aspects. (which is ok). It also needs touch this charge outside of lutheranism. These instances are less severe but it should be noted.
75.66.190.118 05:58, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crypto-Calvinism 

message: The article mainly treats "Crypto-Calvinism" as equal to "Gnesio-Lutherans". The topic is in fact about a general accusation of "Calvinist" tendencies, and the "Gnesio-Lutherans" is one sect (?), one movement (?), or one political position (?) that used the accusation in excess. "Gnesio-Lutherans" should have one separate article, the issues by User:Terot should be taken care of so that the article attains a non-Bias towards "Calvinist" vs "Gnesio-Lutherans" vs "moderate Lutherans". Said: Rursus ☻ 14:24, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems like the really strange article at Mississippi Synod have been heavily responsible for the bad quality of the article. Those guys maintain that "P. Melanchthon* was the father of Crypto-Calvinists"! Idiotic! How can anyone be "father" of something "crypto+"? Unless the article has some serious bias, the sentence is clearly malformed. I say this as a Lutheran, defending WP:NPOV and religious tolerance. Said: Rursus ☻ 15:06, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Nothing has happened since my previous raving around, so I'm considering kidnapping this article, renaming it to Gnesio-Lutheranism, removing irrelevantia and puting it in a new article called "crypto-calvinism" or some such. Said: Rursus ☻ 18:11, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Two separate articles sounds like a good idea, since the pejorative "crypto-Calvinist" can be used outside of the Lutheran church. Srnec (talk) 03:39, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Rereading my previous statements (while keeping the opinion that "crypto-Calvinist" should be moved to something less pejorative), makes me wonder: Was I drunk, when I wrote that? Anyway, to clarify myself: "crypto-Calvinist" is pejorative kind of (considering that "Calvinist" might be a good thing) - the Gnesio-Lutherans deserve an article for their political standpoint, and "crypto-Calvinist" is a so called accusation that is not about Calvinism, but about enemies of Calvinism, using the word as a political weapon. Anyway: I'll move the page now, since it won't get very much attention. I'm being bold! Said: Rursus ☻ 17:29, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup request

message: I've tried to clean-up the background paragraph, but I don't want to distort the information as I am not an expert on the subject matter. Could someone please have a look at correcting the bad grammar? ZARguy (talk) 15:15, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bad grammar 

message: I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
::This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
::#There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
::#It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
::#In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:25, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  removing POV tag with no active discussion per [[Template:POV]] 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Crypto-Calvinism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070609161947/http://comunidad.ciudad.com.ar/argentina/capital_federal/luteranos/El%20Sacramento%20del%20Altar.htm to http://comunidad.ciudad.com.ar/argentina/capital_federal/luteranos/El%20Sacramento%20del%20Altar.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110220213751/http://www.luther-in-bs.de/actiosac.pdf to http://www.luther-in-bs.de/actiosac.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110221041156/http://www.luther-in-bs.de/Usus.pdf to http://www.luther-in-bs.de/Usus.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090226100541/http://www.lutheranquarterly.com/Articles/2001/1-Spring/LQ151_0224.pdf to http://www.lutheranquarterly.com/Articles/2001/1-Spring/LQ151_0224.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080117235436/http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Augustus_I to http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Augustus_I
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:25, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified