Is this rule being adhered to in this sub-forum?

[DaRev]

I note that some in this discussion have an icon that just says "Lutheran" (as does mine). Some have added the name of their congregation. Some have added the denomination to which their congregation belongs.

But, does that mean that everyone in the LCMS, WELS and ELS groups agree with each other in all things? Could someone still be considered a part of those groups and disagree with another person in one of those groups about something? Will that be accepted? OR is this subforum only for the purpose of agreeing with each other and disagreements and/or discussions about varient opinions will not be permitted? Perhaps that needs to be decided and clarified...

Your "icon" is not the Lutheran icon, but rather the generic "Christian" icon. I believe that Radidio and DanHead are referring to the specific Lutheran (Luther's Seal) icon that appears next to the posters name.

Of course the LCMS and WELS members do not agree in all things. And those things are discussed here. The point, however, is that those who post here and discuss these things are actually members of those church bodies and have a full understanding in what those church bodies actually teach. This seems to be the issue here. Those from outside the membership of these confessional church bodies should post their questions, statements, debates, etc. to the general forum. That's why it exists. These subforums are reserved for members of these confessional church bodies. That's why they exist.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Of course the LCMS and WELS members do not agree in all things. And those things are discussed here. The point, however, is that those who post here and discuss these things are actually members of those church bodies and have a full understanding in what those church bodies actually teach. This seems to be the issue here. Those from outside the membership of these confessional church bodies should post their questions, statements, debates, etc. to the general forum. That's why it exists. These subforums are reserved for members of these confessional church bodies. That's why they exist.

Perhaps you then need some way to determine whether the people who post here understand Lutheran theology. I wonder how that will be determined? Will you ask for their educational credentials? Will you have a quiz they must pass? And if someone understands a position, can they still discuss it? Is it possible that a person who understands Lutheran theology might disagree with another person who understands Lutheran theology? If so, how does that address the issue of disagreeing?

Perhaps you need to define more sharply what "member" means. Do you mean baptized? Communicant? Confirmed? And how will you determine that? Will you ask for a letter from their pastor? And it is possible for someone to be a member of an LCMS church and disagree about something with a person who is also a member of an LCMS church? If so, how does that address the issue of disagreeing?


It seems to ME the only PRACTICAL way to handle this (and the way it's done in all other subforums) is that the poster identifies to what group (and if appropriate) subgroup he/she identifies with. They, then, can "debate" only in that group or subgroup. According to the rules we agreed to here at CF, I cannot "debate" in the Catholic forum because I've designated myself as Lutheran - I CAN post and discuss things there (and in the subforums thereof if they have any), I can't "debate" there. That's the way the rule has been applied in all other denominational forums.


IF the issue is "debate" (a subject issue that staff really struggles with), then simply make a rule that disagreements or discussions about such aren't allowed here. Only agreements are permitted. I think that's going to be tough to enforce and for staff to interpret, but if this is a kind of "refuge" where disagreements aren't expected, you can certainly say they aren't allowed.


IF you want a private blog where you personally can control who has access and what is posted, then it might be good to consider creating private blog.


Just MY $0.01...


- Josiah

 

[Protoevangel]

I don't think this needs to be so complicated. I think I have even been making it more complicated than necessary. This sub-forum should be no different than the normal denominational forums. It is our main TC-L forum that is different (open to lively, but respectful, debate from any/all).

 

[C.F.W. Walther]

Assign someone with a neutral personality who doesn't get irritated and who is on here alot and let them be a someone that represents the people instead of CF and let them handle the panic button and then help defend us when we are questioned by the mods.

 

[Chemnitz]

To answer what I think was pjmclean's question, though:

All that is necessary to be considered Lutheran is membership in a Lutheran congregation.

Some are baptized as children, some are adult converts...it's pretty simple though...

 

[Jim47]

I note that some in this discussion have an icon that just says "Lutheran" (as does mine). Some have added the name of their congregation. Some have added the denomination to which their congregation belongs.

But, does that mean that everyone in the LCMS, WELS and ELS groups agree with each other in all things? Could someone still be considered a part of those groups and disagree with another person in one of those groups about something? Will that be accepted? OR is this subforum only for the purpose of agreeing with each other and disagreements and/or discussions about varient opinions will not be permitted? Perhaps that needs to be decided and clarified...

I believe everyone is in agreement here that we welcome conversations and questions from all people, not just Lutheran.

It is commonly known what points of difference the LCMS and WELS have. Other than a few comments and some friendly discussion I can't recall a single argument, although if we wanted to debate things between our synods that would be allowed. Myself I have a lot of respect for my LCMS friends and don't see the point of debating. They all know what I believe and I know what they believe for the most part, and neither one of us is going to cut the other down or try to steal from the others synod. I of couse whole heartedly welcome anyone to ask me questions and join me in worship.

I also agree with what Dan said. This whole thing has gotten way too complicated. I think what set this off was that some here percieved that what you were posting was debate and not done in a cordial manner. I know from our private conversations that is not the case, but as I said before, "perception is everything"

If the forum Mods percieve any rule violations then it is a rule viloation. The same goes with posts, if someone percieves another to be unfriendly then it is unfriendly. I am only saying this because I think it finally has to come out in the open so we all understand each other.

What is important is that we all respect each other. Conversation should be possible between us and just work on keeping it friendly. I don't appreciate snide remarks anymore then anyone else does and we are all guilty of that from time to time. A lot of people have debated with one of premier debaters here "Edial" and it hasn't always been as friendly as it should. Myself I think when we bow to name calling etc. we have lost all chance at making our points and having them repected. I have seen some of the views here by others and the scripture they presented to back them. Of course this is all subject to interpretation, hence the difference of beleifs.

Did that make cents ?

 

[Jim47]

Your "icon" is not the Lutheran icon, but rather the generic "Christian" icon. I believe that Radidio and DanHead are referring to the specific Lutheran (Luther's Seal) icon that appears next to the posters name.

Of course the LCMS and WELS members do not agree in all things. And those things are discussed here. The point, however, is that those who post here and discuss these things are actually members of those church bodies and have a full understanding in what those church bodies actually teach. This seems to be the issue here. Those from outside the membership of these confessional church bodies should post their questions, statements, debates, etc. to the general forum. That's why it exists. These subforums are reserved for members of these confessional church bodies. That's why they exist.

I would like to take Rev's post one step further. As Rev pointed out we have the main forum for debate, and that is where all debate has taken place as far as I can recall. If something can be discussed here politely and without any heated discussion then it is permissible. If not, then the topic should be transferred to the main forum. Mods can tranfer these discussions of they turn into debate. All anyone has to do is click on the report button and request it. You don't even have to name an offender, as there will likely be more than one, simply ask that it be transferred.

 

[LutherNut]

I don't think its enough just to have the right "icon" or whatever. If a person asks a question here becasue they want to know what the confessional Lutheran viewpoint is on a particular matter, that's fine. That's why we are here.

But if someone who claims to be a confessional Lutheran, and even has the right words in their profile or their "icon" or whatever, but clearly demonstrates that they haven't got a clue, and furthermore continually argue with those who respond to them and insist that they are right when they've been proven wrong over and over and over, then the line must be drawn.

It should have NEVER gotten as far as it did in this subforum. NEVER. Like I said before, this would have never been tolerated in the ELCA subforum. One of the plethora of ELCA mod's would have ended it in a heartbeat!

I like the idea of being able to request a thread be removed to the main forum, but I will believe it when I see it actually happen.

 

[pmcleanj]

To answer what I think was pjmclean's question, though:

All that is necessary to be considered Lutheran is membership in a Lutheran congregation.

Some are baptized as children, some are adult converts...it's pretty simple though...

Not simple enough for me, I'm afraid

For example. I'm Anglican. Darling Husband is Evangelical Missionary Somethingorother. We've attended a Lutheran church for eight years. When we had attended for about 6 months, the Pastor asked if we wanted to "join the church". We said no, that we were sojourners. So we didn't do whatever it is that one does when one "joins the church" (not an Anglican concept. It is an Evangelical concept, but Dean was born into that church and whatever it is seems to be automatic in that case, because he doesn't recall doing anything.) But we've attended for eight years, pay our tithes, volunteer for Bible Study and Worship team respectively -- but never in leadership roles, never voting, because we "aren't members".

So when/how does one cross the threshold between "she sure hangs around here a lot" and "yeah, she's a member"?

(See, I'm really not from around here. But I'm listening!)

 

[pmcleanj]

... Like I said before, this would have never been tolerated in the ELCA subforum. One of the plethora of ELCA mod's would have ended it in a heartbeat! ...

Well to be fair, one of the ELCA members may well have *reported* it in a heartbeat. If you check out the moderator list at the top of the forum, you'll see you've only got three mods: One ELCA, one WELS, and one poor confused Anglican. The rest are supervisors and chief moderators for the whole gamut of Congregational fora.

I'm counting on Radidio to have his finger hovering over the "Report" button on behalf of the rest of you soft-hearted folks.

 

[Jim47]

pmcleanj



I'm counting on Radidio to have his finger hovering over the "Report" button on behalf of the rest of you soft-hearted folks.

That was good for a chuckle.

 

[C.F.W. Walther]

Not simple enough for me, I'm afraid

For example. I'm Anglican. Darling Husband is Evangelical Missionary Somethingorother. We've attended a Lutheran church for eight years. When we had attended for about 6 months, the Pastor asked if we wanted to "join the church". We said no, that we were sojourners. So we didn't do whatever it is that one does when one "joins the church" (not an Anglican concept. It is an Evangelical concept, but Dean was born into that church and whatever it is seems to be automatic in that case, because he doesn't recall doing anything.) But we've attended for eight years, pay our tithes, volunteer for Bible Study and Worship team respectively -- but never in leadership roles, never voting, because we "aren't members".

So when/how does one cross the threshold between "she sure hangs around here a lot" and "yeah, she's a member"?

(See, I'm really not from around here. But I'm listening!)

So now what do we do? We have a mod that is synonymous to the problem we are encountering. Is this going to bias you to someone that comes in here and is not Lutheran and belongs to a Lutheran church? Not trying to start anything but it is a concern with me.


**finger pauses over report button**

 

[Protoevangel]

Not simple enough for me, I'm afraid

For example. I'm Anglican. Darling Husband is Evangelical Missionary Somethingorother. We've attended a Lutheran church for eight years. When we had attended for about 6 months, the Pastor asked if we wanted to "join the church". We said no, that we were sojourners. So we didn't do whatever it is that one does when one "joins the church" (not an Anglican concept. It is an Evangelical concept, but Dean was born into that church and whatever it is seems to be automatic in that case, because he doesn't recall doing anything.) But we've attended for eight years, pay our tithes, volunteer for Bible Study and Worship team respectively -- but never in leadership roles, never voting, because we "aren't members".

So when/how does one cross the threshold between "she sure hangs around here a lot" and "yeah, she's a member"?

(See, I'm really not from around here. But I'm listening!)

How would this be handled in the Anglican forum? How about the Reformed forum? Is there a "standard" way to handle it, is what I'm really asking.

That being said, if there really is need to define, I will make an off the wall suggestion... How about, if "on the testimony of two or three witnesses," a post or thread is reported as "debate not in accordance with Confessional Lutheranism", a thread can be moved to the main Lutheran forum, where that kind of debate is allowed. This way, we can report a thread and not feel like we are "getting someone in trouble." Except for often repeating offenders, no warnings or anything would ever have to be handed out.

I don't know... It's just a thought.

 

[pmcleanj]

How would this be handled in the Anglican forum? How about the Reformed forum? Is there a "standard" way to handle it, is what I'm really asking.

There isn't really a standard way of handling it, I'm afraid. In the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox forums, you're expected to have either grown up in the denomination, or at least been formally accepted into the catechumenate. In the Anglican forum if you consider yourself Anglican, you're Anglican. Some forums have doctrinal touchstones that determine who belongs -- you have to believe the Fundamentals to be a Fundamentalist, for example. Each different rule of thumb presents its own potential problem.

Your suggestion about moving threads to the main forum seems perfectly workable to me; if that's how the consensus forms.

 

[C.F.W. Walther]

I agree with Dan. Lets do it. Who gets to more the threads?

 

[pmcleanj]

Who gets to move the threads?

Any of the moderators can move a thread. It's best if at least one person reports it -- that sends an automatic private message to all the moderators, and lets us keep track of the request in a formal way.

I'm thinking that, if you think a thread needs to be moved to the main forum, post that comment in the thread -- and if you're the FIRST person to make the comment, also send the report. Witnesses #2 and #3 can just make the comment in the thread, because the moderators will have already been notified to come look into it.

... or, you could designate one specific person to send the report anytime you reach the critical mass of witnesses asking for a thread-move.


... or, every witness who wants the thread moved could send a report -- that would guarantee that the mods got notified. It's a pain to get multiple reports on the same thread, since we look into every individual report anyway. But hey, that's why they call this a ministry.

 

[Chemnitz]

For Lutherans, especially confessional Lutherans, Church membership is essential to having the name "Lutheran".

A person can "Lutheranize" theologically (as does Dr. Douglas Moo at TED on the issue of Law and Gospel, for example and as are several Reformed people lately on the sacraments) without being Lutheran, but I believe that in order for a person to really be a confessional Lutheran they would have had to have taken the step of being either baptized or received by confirmation to the care of a congregation of one of those churches recognized as taking a quia perspective on the Book of Concord.

We don't have a free church attitude about these things...

 

[DaRev]

Perhaps you then need some way to determine whether the people who post here understand Lutheran theology. I wonder how that will be determined?

Actually, quite easy.

When someone repeatedly makes statements and claims that are not at all in line with Lutheran teaching and understanding, it is a pretty clear indication that they don't understand Lutheran theology. The determination comes from their own words.

 

[DaRev]

So when/how does one cross the threshold between "she sure hangs around here a lot" and "yeah, she's a member"?

If there is someone who "attends" a Lutheran church but refuses to join into the fellowship, I as a Pastor would want to know why. Is there a faith issue? Is there a confessional issue? Is there a Biblical issue?

It only follows if someone believes what a church teaches, they would (and should) join that church if they wish to continue attending there. When they refuse to join, that is an indication that there is an issue of unbelief somewhere. That needs to be explored.


DaRev

 

[DaRev]

For Lutherans, especially confessional Lutherans, Church membership is essential to having the name "Lutheran".

A person can "Lutheranize" theologically (as does Dr. Douglas Moo at TED on the issue of Law and Gospel, for example and as are several Reformed people lately on the sacraments) without being Lutheran, but I believe that in order for a person to really be a confessional Lutheran they would have had to have taken the step of being either baptized or received by confirmation to the care of a congregation of one of those churches recognized as taking a quia perspective on the Book of Concord.

We don't have a free church attitude about these things...

...what he said...