Poll

How should pseudonyms be handled on ALPB

Maintain the status quo and stop whining about them.
30 (58.8%)
Forbid them.
3 (5.9%)
Allow them, but discourage their use.
6 (11.8%)
Make up strict rules for the Moderators to enforce.
2 (3.9%)
Publish some guidelines and ask for voluntary compliance
10 (19.6%)

Total Members Voted: 39

Author Topic: The Use of Pseudonyms on ALPB, yes, no, or maybe  (Read 5535 times)

DCharlton

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 6831
    • View Profile
Re: The Use of Pseudonyms on ALPB, yes, no, or maybe
« Reply #30 on: January 31, 2013, 03:24:20 PM »
But I understand - from Pastor Hannah's writings and others - how the witch-hunters in the LCMS might drive some to remain nameless.
Rarely if ever is the term "witch-hunters" used in reference to one with which one agrees with ... leaving the use of the term as a reference to one who disagrees with you.

That being said, it seems that the term "witch-hunters" is in itself divisive and hardly demonstrates tolerance and respect for fellow Forum contributors ... and is no more acceptable coming from a non-pseudonym contributor than a pseudonym contributor.

Is the use of "witch-hunter" actually a God pleasing way to "defend him, [think and] speak well of him, and put the best construction on everything."

We in the ELCA are glad that we have no such witch-hunters on this forum who drive some to remain nameless. 
David Charlton  

Was Algul Siento a divinity school?

Steven Tibbetts

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 10213
  • Big tents are for circuses.
    • View Profile
Re: The Use of Pseudonyms on ALPB, yes, no, or maybe
« Reply #31 on: January 31, 2013, 03:55:20 PM »

 But I understand - from Pastor Hannah's writings and others - how the witch-hunters in the LCMS might drive some to remain nameless.


Pseudonyms have been a normative practice of online forums for as long as there have been online forums. And today, January 31, 2013, as I look at the online forums on which I hold some sort of membership -- on matters of faith and religion, sports, automobiles, politics, science fiction, or just people gathering together from a community or holding some other common interest -- using a "handle" rather than one's real name is more common than not.

Some forums, including those what ought to have no controversy or "fear" for participation, actually forbid participants from using their real names!

That some people with long-standing reputations on on-line forums (such as this) claim to be ignorant of such merely reveals how unaware they are of things outside of their own -- actually quite narrow -- little worlds.

Pax, Zip+
No "witch hunters" in the ELCA? HA!
« Last Edit: January 31, 2013, 03:57:55 PM by PrZip »
The Rev. Steven Paul Tibbetts, STS
Pastor Zip's Blog

MaddogLutheran

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 3490
  • It's my fantasy football avatar...
    • View Profile
Re: The Use of Pseudonyms on ALPB, yes, no, or maybe
« Reply #32 on: January 31, 2013, 04:15:03 PM »

 But I understand - from Pastor Hannah's writings and others - how the witch-hunters in the LCMS might drive some to remain nameless.


Pseudonyms have been a normative practice of online forums for as long as there have been online forums. And today, January 31, 2013, as I look at the online forums on which I hold some sort of membership -- on matters of faith and religion, sports, automobiles, politics, science fiction, or just people gathering together from a community or holding some other common interest -- using a "handle" rather than one's real name is more common than not.

Some forums, including those what ought to have no controversy or "fear" for participation, actually forbid participants from using their real names!

That some people with long-standing reputations on on-line forums (such as this) claim to be ignorant of such merely reveals how unaware they are of things outside of their own -- actually quite narrow -- little worlds.

Pax, Zip+
No "witch hunters" in the ELCA? HA!

Woof!
Sterling Spatz
ELCA pew-sitter

Dave Likeness

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 5099
    • View Profile
Re: The Use of Pseudonyms on ALPB, yes, no, or maybe
« Reply #33 on: January 31, 2013, 04:16:35 PM »
It was the late, great Dr. Fred Danker who told
his students at Concordia Seminary St. Louis
the importance of Pseudepigrapha.  He said that
the theologian can learn something from these
sources.

These raises the question:  Do we make a clear
distinction between pseudonymous and the
other term in this discussion, anonymous?
As we consider the 2nd Amendment it also applies
to theologians who post on this Forum.

Daniel L. Gard

  • Guest
Re: The Use of Pseudonyms on ALPB, yes, no, or maybe
« Reply #34 on: January 31, 2013, 04:54:31 PM »
It is a sad commentary on our times that anyone feels the need to use an alternate identity. My hope would be that folks would be willing to stand up and be counted for what they believe - in other words, to be confessors of the truth as they see it. But I suppose the time of courage and integrity has passed at least in the minds and hearts of some. And so they choose to have one public image with their own name and different more honest image using some other name. From my perspective, I suppose that pseudonyms are fine if they are used only to put forth ideas. As a rule, I generally do not respond to such pseudonymous postings even though I feel sorry for the real person behind the false identity.

There are exceptions to my personal "rule" about not responding. And that is when the pseudonymous poster engages in the breaking of the 8th Commandment to the detriment of another poster who uses his/her real name or to the detriment of someone who is not even on the forum. What happens is this: the reputation and integrity of real people is slammed while the person doing the defaming is safely hidden behind an assumed identity. I'm sorry but that is a cowardly and malignant action especially in a forum that is openly available to anyone with internet access.

There are some on this forum with whom I have had real differences. But I have nothing but respect for those who use their real names even if I disagree with them.

JMK

  • Guest
Re: The Use of Pseudonyms on ALPB, yes, no, or maybe
« Reply #35 on: January 31, 2013, 06:01:42 PM »
Chaplain Gard,

Believe it or not, even those of us who like to use pseudonyms can be very hurt by accusations of libel that are unwarranted. I am thinking, in particular, of a post that you made on another thread - which took me (Johannes Andreas Quenstedt)  to task for stating that I believed you were against women serving in the military. In the heat of frustration, you wrote:
Quote
You, sir, are wrong in every possible way. You continue to libel me with false statements attacking my name while your own name remains hidden. I have never said that it is my "ethical opinion" that women should not serve in the military. That is absurd as well as utterly false and insulting to me. - Chaplain Gard

Evidently, you took umbrage at my concerns about Chaplains making: "ethical" opinions related to telling people it is wrong for women to serve in the military - i.e. in battle related positions. (emphasis added).

However, that particular statement was directed at all Chaplains reading that post. For there was in fact, an ELCA Chaplain (Imagine that!) that was quoted as saying that women should not serve in the military.

Of course, I did ask you a simple question:

 So, for the record: Are you supportive of women in the military - even in those positions that are subject to combat related dangers?

I know you dodged the question. And you have a right to do so. However, reading what you have posted so far, I prefer to take the best construction on your position of women in the military and so I still hold to my statement that was stated awhile back:



So far, I have only seen just a few LCMS participants argue against women in combat. However, not one LCMS participant has argued against in women serving in the military at all. - Posted: January 29, 2013, 08:27:07 PM (Emphasis added)

So, there you have it. Rest assured that you are forgiven by me. Furthermore, I will do my best to attempt to express and make sure that it is even made more clear by me in the future that you have in no way shape or form expressed any reservation about women serving in the military.

Daniel L. Gard

  • Guest
Re: The Use of Pseudonyms on ALPB, yes, no, or maybe
« Reply #36 on: January 31, 2013, 06:18:03 PM »
I had earlier stated what I could.

And I fail to understand how an anonymous person can ask anyone to go "on the record."

Have a nice day!
« Last Edit: January 31, 2013, 06:33:19 PM by Daniel L. Gard »

JMK

  • Guest
Re: The Use of Pseudonyms on ALPB, yes, no, or maybe
« Reply #37 on: January 31, 2013, 06:59:10 PM »
Quote
I don't see the hysteria. It's a principled argument: Lutherans do not innovate in doctrine or practice as per the AC. WO is both. Hence, it is not a practice that can be acceptable in the Church of the Augsburg Confession.

As to pseudonymns: no problem if you want to use them. But don't expect me to take you seriously in anything you say. Period.

Not that I would expect you to take seriously anything I say, but innovation in doctrine and practice in violation of what the AC reformers originally intended is an extremely difficult concept to work through. WO was not even on the mind of the reformers. However, they did state such things as:

The apostles directed that one should abstain from blood and from what is strangled. Who observes this prohibition now? Those who do not observe it commit no sin, for the apostles did not wish to burden consciences with such bondage but forbade such eating for a time to avoid offense. One must pay attention to the chief article of Christian doctrine, and this is not abrogated by the decree.

...they (reformers) ask only that the bishops relax certain unreasonable burdens which were did not exist in the church in former times and which were introduced contrary to the custom of the universal Christian church. Perhaps there was some reason for introducing them, but they are not adapted to our times. (Augsburg Confession, Article XXVIII)

How do we define the church of former times - e.g. the first four centuries? And does the pope in Rome (e.g. Pope Gelasius I in the late 5th century) have the final say on what customs should be followed? The Greek Orthodox church has lots of customs that the Lutherans don't follow. Should we look to them for approval over what should be allowed?


« Last Edit: January 31, 2013, 07:07:25 PM by Johannes Andreas Quenstedt »

Weedon

  • Guest
Re: The Use of Pseudonyms on ALPB, yes, no, or maybe
« Reply #38 on: January 31, 2013, 07:08:59 PM »
Oh, the church up to the 20th century should do the job. Clearly the reputed ordination of females to the office of the ministry is novelty for the Church in both doctrine and in practice. This one is not rocket science. Even a college prof should be able to figure it out! :)

Charles_Austin

  • Guest
Re: The Use of Pseudonyms on ALPB, yes, no, or maybe
« Reply #39 on: January 31, 2013, 07:24:13 PM »
It took several hundred years for the "Church" to sort out the divinity/humanity of Our Lord. It took another few hundred years to (sort of) nail down certain other aspects of "Church" teaching and practice.
If it has taken a couple of thousand years to sort out details about the pastoral office, is that so terrible? (It might be considered terrible by all those women who felt the call previously and were denied the opportunity to follow it, but that's another matter.)
Tell me at what year/council/synod/conventicle/assembly/convention everything was set once and for all time.


Daniel L. Gard

  • Guest
Re: The Use of Pseudonyms on ALPB, yes, no, or maybe
« Reply #40 on: January 31, 2013, 07:33:13 PM »

Tell me at what year/council/synod/conventicle/assembly/convention everything was set once and for all time.

Easy. Psalm 119:89.

JMK

  • Guest
Re: The Use of Pseudonyms on ALPB, yes, no, or maybe
« Reply #41 on: January 31, 2013, 07:51:57 PM »
Quote
It took several hundred years for the "Church" to sort out the divinity/humanity of Our Lord. It took another few hundred years to (sort of) nail down certain other aspects of "Church" teaching and practice.
If it has taken a couple of thousand years to sort out details about the pastoral office, is that so terrible? (It might be considered terrible by all those women who felt the call previously and were denied the opportunity to follow it, but that's another matter.)

And, the LCMS might take another couple of generations to work through the issue of WO. What is most important now is for various clergy in the LCMS who are open to WO, to put down their opinions for the next generation to reflect upon. For example, I read awhile back that Arthur Carl Piepkorn (although he was not a rocket scientist or a college prof) was once asked about WO.  As I understand it, he did not think allowing for WO was a form of heresy.

Buckeye Deaconess

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 3036
    • View Profile
Re: The Use of Pseudonyms on ALPB, yes, no, or maybe
« Reply #42 on: January 31, 2013, 07:57:49 PM »
What is most important now is for various clergy in the LCMS who are open to WO, to put down their opinions for the next generation to reflect upon.

Quote of the week!  Someone who hasn't been banned from OWN's Facebook page should post this statement there.  Yes, let's leave it to the next generation.  Those young bucks know their Word!

Eileen Smith

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 2140
    • View Profile
Re: The Use of Pseudonyms on ALPB, yes, no, or maybe
« Reply #43 on: January 31, 2013, 08:37:18 PM »
Only those my age and older are the ones whining for WO in Missouri.
(I'll be fifty eight Superbowl Sunday)


Which is why, as stated above is so important:  What is most important now is for various clergy in the LCMS who are open to WO, to put down their opinions for the next generation to reflect upon.

When I was part of the LCMS, one of the women in our congregation felt a strong call to ministry.  After a time of discernment she went to a local ELCA congregation and then to seminary.   She didn't go as a "daughter" of our LCMS congregation, but our Ladies Aid paid for her books.  How things have changed in the LCMS!  And that saddens me. 

To the topic of this post:  I'd prefer not having pseudonyms.   It is good to know with whom one is in conversation.  As well, it can give one the sense of being invulnerable when posting - writing things they might normally not write.  That being said, after seeing some of what has been written to and about posters such as Dr. Benke and Marie Meyer - well, I certainly understand that posters from the LCMS would not feel too comfortable using their name. 

Pastor Ted Crandall

  • Guest
Re: The Use of Pseudonyms on ALPB, yes, no, or maybe
« Reply #44 on: January 31, 2013, 08:42:46 PM »
And, the LCMS might take another couple of generations to work through the issue of WO.

A few more and maybe they can work through the issue of promiscuity...