Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu (David M Tate) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: open communion Message-ID: Date: 12 Feb 90 09:48:22 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Univ. of Pittsburgh, Comp & Info Services Lines: 28 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu In article harry@atmos.washington.edu (Harry Edmon) writes: > >The WELS has the most conservative stance. They have a very narrow >definition of Fellowship that even prohibits the saying of prayers >with those who are not in Fellowship with them. For example, at LCMS >conventions we always invite the other Lutheran bodies to send >representatives and give them time to address the convention. Both >the ELCA and WELS send representative, but the WELS representatives >will not address the convention since that is "Fellowship". I suppose Jesus couldn't have belonged to WELS. That dude would talk to or pray with anyone, completely indiscriminately! I mean, didn't he have any proper sense of spiritual repugnance? ( 1/2 :-) ) Seriously, I find this sort of position (if accurately reported) to be wholly indefensible and thoroughly unChristian. Without flaming any individuals, who I will assume to be well-intentioned and sincere, I must ask what justification could possibly be offered for this position. Clearly, one who held such a belief could not also think that the excluded denominations' members are also Christians... -- David M. Tate | "The logarithms of 1,2,...,10 to base 10^(1/40) dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu | are conveniently close to whole numbers, which | when you think about it, is why there are 12 "A Man for all Seasonings" | semitones in an octave." -- I. J. Good.