Messages

211

Your Turn / Re: Formal discussions for the LCMS and the EECMY

« on: February 01, 2014, 11:26:05 AM »

Yep, we all saw it.  Dr. Strickert's edit doesn't take that away.  HE was the one violating the eighth...

Educate yourself here, here, here, here, and here on the meaning of the phrase, "rather than."

Someone did me the disfavor of pointing me to the "Lutherquest" site, where Neologist "Carl" has joined with confreres including at least one who's on this board from time to time in
a) commenting on the poor theological quality of the interlocutors on the alpb forum
b) banding together and adding all manner of other (to them) humorous additional neologisms referring to women who serve as pastors

Adolescent hijinks on parade. 

Dave Benke

I guess they are modeling how one should love one's enemies. 

Donna

212

Your Turn / Re: What should the ban policy be?

« on: January 22, 2014, 06:53:22 PM »

Charles really irked me sometimes. We disagreed at times. He was an attack dog at times. Sometimes he needed to shut his pie hole.

On the other hand, at times he seemed wise and insightful to me. He seemed to honestly represent some of the best I had known of ELCA pastors when I was a part of that body. I think at times he lacked self-consciousness - and did not realize how his words were perceived. But I think sometimes he liked rabble rousing.

I have had 4 people on Ignore on this forum. Charles was never one of them. (For the record those folks were/are at different ends of the denominational spectrum - it is about personalities and style, not POVs).

I am not going to get into discussing Pr. McCain or any other poster. After this, I will no longer comment on Charles, who I will, to a degree, miss.

I am sorry to see him gone. Perma-banning is always a sad and (hopefully) difficult decision. I will rely on the moderators to manage these things wisely. (I will note that I liked Pr. Mozolak's suggestion in the other thread about having bans issued by moderators of the same denominational background if possible.)

I hope banning is based upon things like derailing threads; beating the same old dead horse topics in every thread wherein one posts; name-calling and mean-spiritedness; and unrepentant refusal to comply with the directions and admonishment of the management of the board. (Pretty much like it is in sports forums I frequent.)

That's more than I meant to say. So I will shut up now.

Donna

213

Your Turn / Re: Questions About 8 ELCA Seminaries

« on: January 22, 2014, 10:41:21 AM »

Tim notes: While y'all were "enjoying" your snow shoveling, I was debating between an 8 or 9 iron from 130-yards with a light breeze.

...and now we know where all the men have gone....

214

Your Turn / Re: communing everyone

« on: January 21, 2014, 09:37:31 AM »

Don't forget that the 2013 ELCA Assembly authorized a review of the document "Use of the Means of Grace" to address just this discussion. See also this blog from the originator of this memorial:

http://www.elca.org/en/Living-Lutheran/Blogs/2013/08/~/link.aspx?_id=D96758D3EDDA43DFBF8D68C402621A70&_z=z

215

Your Turn / Re: Questions About 8 ELCA Seminaries

« on: January 19, 2014, 07:33:43 AM »

The ELCA underwent a deep study of Theological Education (headed by Dr. Phyllis Anderson) in the early 1990s which concluded that 8 seminaries would not be viable in the future. There was a recommendation that "clusters" be formed and educational responsibilities be divided up among the entities. (a crude summary, but I remember it that way - I was on a seminary board at that time).

The reality, in my experience, was that the seminaries instead engaged in entrenchment and were seeking to stake out their territories, so to speak, in order to NOT be merged/purged out of existence. You don't hear much about the clusters anymore. I don't see that the recommendations bore too much fruit.

I thought there was a lot of common sense in the report and recommendations. But that is just MHO. I think Mr. Austin demonstrates similar common sense in his well-received thoughts, above.

I couldn't find the report online. I did find a document from ATS which summarizes the document and surveys what happened after it came to the 1993 assembly.

http://www.ats.edu/uploads/resources/publications-presentations/theological-education/2000-theological-education-v36-sup.pdf

Perhaps this will contribute to the discussion.

Donna

216

Your Turn / Re: Questions About 8 ELCA Seminaries

« on: January 18, 2014, 04:32:54 PM »

Frankly, if the numbers in 2013 of ELCA + LCMC + NALC is greater than the ELCA in 2008, I'd be very happy. We are to grow the kingdom of God, not our denominations.

Indeed.
Neither the LCMC nor the NALC have published numbers, so it is hard to know. It is telling, though, that 2 denominations who like to shout about how they are about "making disciples" don't seem to have any way of tracking that.

Looks like the NALC is showing 130,000 members.
http://thenalc.org/about-us-2/

Welcome back Pr Donna!

Just in time for me to pull the plug once for all, as many others before me have done.

Don't go, Jeff!!! I was looking for someone who might agree with me that "making disciples"  might not be measured, primarily, in numbers and percentages...!

217

Your Turn / Re: Questions About 8 ELCA Seminaries

« on: January 18, 2014, 09:54:59 AM »

Frankly, if the numbers in 2013 of ELCA + LCMC + NALC is greater than the ELCA in 2008, I'd be very happy. We are to grow the kingdom of God, not our denominations.

Indeed.
Neither the LCMC nor the NALC have published numbers, so it is hard to know. It is telling, though, that 2 denominations who like to shout about how they are about "making disciples" don't seem to have any way of tracking that.

Looks like the NALC is showing 130,000 members.
http://thenalc.org/about-us-2/