What to anticipate Saturday

Started by Richard Johnson, August 11, 2007, 09:32:23 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Charles_Austin

Yes. Regarding any dialog between the ELCA and the LCMS, the answer is "no." And, ELCA congregations are not allowed to belong to another church body.

scott3

Quote from: Charles_Austin on August 12, 2007, 10:23:14 PM
Yes. Regarding any dialog between the ELCA and the LCMS, the answer is "no." And, ELCA congregations are not allowed to belong to another church body.

Think you meant "LCMC".

ROB_MOSKOWITZ

 ;D Sigmund  ;D


Where is that cat?  ;)


Rob Moskowitz

1Ptr5v67

ECUSA has at times taken the position that the rest of the Anglican world should keep their nose out of the ECUSA jurisdiction,    which attitude is often viewed by the rest of the Anglican world as another example of American arrogance,  especially since it is so one sided with ECUSA frequently failing to excercise any restraint at interfering in matters of the rest of the Anglican world.

While the relationship between ELCA Lutherans,  and other Lutherans of the world is not exactly the same as the ECUSA/ANGLICAN relationship,   I  nontheless sense a similar elitist attitude in many ELCA Lutherans,  and fear this is but another sign that ELCA Lutherans are continuing down a similar path of mistakes as ECUSA has been traveling.   

It would be inappropriate for ex-ELCA and/or other non-ELCA Lutherans to show up at the CWA and attempt to influence what happened,  for the floor of the CWA is truly their jurisdiction.    By contrast,  this  ALPB forum is an appropriate place,  perhaps the best place,   for other non-ELCA Lutherans to freely speak their mind about what they see happening in the ELCA.     ELCA is mistaken if they have the attitude that they can do anything they want (and the rest of the Lutheran world be dammed),  for the actions of the ELCA reflect to a certain degree on all Lutherans (whether in the USA or the rest of the world).  And that gives other non-ELCA Lutherans the right to discuss their feelings about what they see happening.

In my opinon,
fleur-de-lis

Richard Johnson

On the other hand, let's be clear that you have the perfect right to express you opinion.
That doesn't mean anyone has the right to express any opinion here. Everyone here is participating with the gracious permission of the moderators. That is why we have certain expectations of behavior, conduct, tone, and so forth.
We expect you to be civil. We expect you to be truthful. We expect you to be, well, nice.

In return, you can expect Peter and me to tell you when you're not being nice. And you can expect that if you continue to not be nice, you'll be graciously invited to leave the conversation.

Not applying this to anyone in particular. I just get nervous when people claim they have the "right to express their opinions."
The Rev. Richard O. Johnson, STS

scott3

Quote from: Richard Johnson on August 13, 2007, 01:17:14 AM
On the other hand, let's be clear that you have the perfect right to express you opinion.
That doesn't mean anyone has the right to express any opinion here. Everyone here is participating with the gracious permission of the moderators. That is why we have certain expectations of behavior, conduct, tone, and so forth.
We expect you to be civil. We expect you to be truthful. We expect you to be, well, nice.

In return, you can expect Peter and me to tell you when you're not being nice. And you can expect that if you continue to not be nice, you'll be graciously invited to leave the conversation.

Not applying this to anyone in particular. I just get nervous when people claim they have the "right to express their opinions."

Agreed.  So how about this.  If someone has a problem with a post, rather than attacking the poster for uncivility or discouraging discussion or whatever, report the post to the moderators and let them handle it.

I believe this is what you're saying, no?

Charles_Austin

Scott writes:
Agreed.  So how about this.  If someone has a problem with a post, rather than attacking the poster for uncivility or discouraging discussion or whatever, report the post to the moderators and let them handle it.

I comment:
Not agreed.

ghp

Quote from: Charles_Austin on August 13, 2007, 09:01:51 AM
Scott writes:
Agreed.  So how about this.  If someone has a problem with a post, rather than attacking the poster for uncivility or discouraging discussion or whatever, report the post to the moderators and let them handle it.

I comment:
Not agreed.

Warum nicht?

Elucidate, bitte...

-ghp

Charles_Austin

Glen Piper asks (re my "not agreed" posted upstream):

Warum nicht?

Elucidate, bitte...

Ich antworte:
In meiner meinung, gibt es nichts falsch... no, let's stay with the primary language.  I see nothing wrong with some fervently expressed opinions, and if they cross some lines, I don't mind if members of the forum complain publicly rather than only running to the moderator. ("Teacher! He called me a dirty name!")
The issue is not merely language, but the quality of information and - at times - a compendium of posts that, in my not so humble opinion, are unhealthy and destructive of dialog. But it's a case-by-case situation.

ghp

Quote from: Charles_Austin on August 13, 2007, 10:53:43 AM
Glen Piper asks (re my "not agreed" posted upstream):

Warum nicht?

Elucidate, bitte...

Ich antworte:
In meiner meinung, gibt es nichts falsch... no, let's stay with the primary language.  I see nothing wrong with some fervently expressed opinions, and if they cross some lines, I don't mind if members of the forum complain publicly rather than only running to the moderator. ("Teacher! He called me a dirty name!")
The issue is not merely language, but the quality of information and - at times - a compendium of posts that, in my not so humble opinion, are unhealthy and destructive of dialog. But it's a case-by-case situation.

Vielen Dank.

I was just curious, especially given the original lack of explanation, why you disagreed.

I think there can/should be a happy medium, in terms of how an offensive post might be dealt with. There is nothing wrong with calling BS on someone. Heck, that's part of the fun.  ;)  That said, egregious violations of board behavioral rules & norms are best handled by the moderators, and if someone would prefer to go that route instead of a direct confrontation, then that would be ok, too.

Reasoned/semi-reasoned discussion = good
Ad hom flamewars = bad

We need, I think, to recognize and accept the difference.

-ghp

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk