Wednesday, December 19, 2007

Christian Worship supplement

Earlier there was a post about CW. I thought I would open up discussion for those that have used the CW supplement.

Among other things there is a "new" confession that is used. I believe that it is also in the new LC-MS hymnal.

Here is a link to an article about this confession: (the confession is at the end)

https://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=7310

Comments on any other portion of CW (supplement) are welcome.

24 comments:

Anonymous said...

That's new? I think my church has used that one for at least 55 years.

-Jen

Anonymous said...

It doesn't matter if it's new or not. The only thing that matters here is that it's in CW. And if it's in CW, it must be terrible. To tell you the truth, I didn't even bother to read what we're talking about in the first place. All I need to know is that it's something the WELS is doing, so I automatically know I'm supposed to criticize it.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the contribution or rather the lack thereof.

Many of us enjoy the discussion that takes place on this blog. But you seem to be a bit too defensive. Run away from the discussion and watch for your memo from 2929 on what you should say and do next.

jimmy said...

"All I need to know is that it's something the WELS is doing, so I automatically know I'm supposed to criticize it."

Funny. Not because what you said is funny but because the WELSbots first defense against their critics is usually "Stop, you're hurting my feelings with you sarcasm and tone! The tone, the tone!!!!!" Of course all non-WELSbots know what this really means: I can not respond to the substance of your argument. I must make you look like a bad person before all the other WELSbots short circuit."

"Run away from the discussion and watch for your memo from 2929 on what you should say and do next."

This, on the other hand, is funny.

Anonymous said...

Hmm, interesting. A comment about how people are here only to criticize the WELS is followed by two comments that do nothing but criticize the WELS. Why am I not surprised?

jimmy said...

Anon,

You said: "Hmm, interesting. A comment about how people are here only to criticize the WELS is followed by two comments that do nothing but criticize the WELS. Why am I not surprised?"

But all I heard was, "Bleep bloop bleep bleep, I am a WELSbot."

Seriously though. My criticizm is not of the WELS, but of the WELSbots. Kind of like how I think the US Government is the greatest government on the Earth, even though my representatives are crooked jerks.

Oh, but you asked a question--"Why am I not surprised?" You are not suprised because that is how WELSbots are told to be.

Jimmy said...

Sorry for the diversion, I don't want to lead this topic astray. I'm done now.

See ya anonymous WELSbot, oops, I mean, bleep bloop bloop blopp beep.

Anonymous said...

Jimmy,
I think you mother is calling you. It is time to take your meds.

Anonymous said...

"My criticizm is not of the WELS, but of the WELSbots. Kind of like how I think the US Government is the greatest government on the Earth, even though my representatives are crooked jerks."

Jimmy, I have two suggestions:

1. Read Romans 13.
2. Recite the Confession of Sins that John posted and ask your God to forgive you for being disrespectful to the authorities God has established--both synodically and nationally.

Anonymous said...

The maturity shown here is beyond astonishing. Kudos to you all for playing grownup so nicely.

As for the WELSbots and the anti-WELbots, you are all idiots in my opinion. Really, those who kiss the butt of the Synod are really no different then those that don't kiss the butt of the Synod. The only difference is that they are kissing different butts.

Stand proud on your anti-WELS stance. Declare how "free" thinking you are, but always remember you kiss a butt too, it's just not the WELS butt.

Anonymous said...

Typical WELS pity party. Everyone is going to pick on us because we're so superior. We won't respond with anything intelligent. The lcms is just jealous of us. Which not wels butt is being kissed here?

Anonymous said...

I'm neither a WELS or LCMS supporter. Personally, I'm sick of them both.

But, I'm also sick of the supposed alternative.

Basically visible Christianity has me beyond sick to my stomach.

John said...

I guess no one has any comments negative or positive about the CW supplement.

Another Observer said...

John,

I heard one of the services in the CW supplement is called "The Divine Service." Does anyone else know anything about this?

AO

Anonymous said...

No, I've got nothing.

Sorry.

Anonymous said...

I have a comment.

I think the color of the CW is horrible. I think we should have made it green. I feel very strongly that green is more godly than the nasty color it is now.

I really feel Martin Luther and all of the church fathers would agree with me. After all, green symbolizes new life.

If the color is not changed to something within the green family, I am leaving the WELS and starting my own Lutheran church body. Just a heads up, in case anyone is interested in joining me. We could call ourselves the "Green Hymnal Lutherans."

Off to write my hymnal right now.

Another Observer said...

"I have a comment."

I tried to get this back on topic. Please respect that.

AO

Anonymous said...

AO,
I admire your effort, but this place has turned into a madhouse. Semper Ubi toilet humor- cartoon dogs- and massive egos do not a place for discussions make.

Anonymous said...

For some substantive discussion...

I believe the Supplement came out in 2002 or so. In it there is a common service with totally different musical settings. When it's played well by the organists, it's absolutely beautiful! But our organists had a difficult time with it--and so we stopped using it after about five or six times.

As far as the confession is concerned, I believe this is from the Compline service. Before the supplement cam out, I used to listen to the St. Olaf (eegads!) Compline chapel service on MN public radio taking my kids back to school on Sunday nights. I thought it was wonderful and historical! I was thrilled to see it in the supplement, and I've used it several times. I don't feel there is anything wrong with the confession. I believe it's been used for many, many years--just not in Synodical Conference circles.

John said...

For some substantive discussion...

Thanks for the post. I was curious if anyone had used this form.

I'm also wondering why "as a called and ordained servant.." from TLH was dropped from CW.

RandomDan said...

I read the article. It will be an interesting addition to the new service.

BTW, I did not think all the changes to the Common Service are bad. I consider the use of the Psalter a plus. I may not like the slim selection available, but the use of the Psalter is a good thing.

Michael Schottey said...

It is topical to note that there is a "new service settings" that came out a few years ago (which I think some of you are talking about) and a "supplement" (which is in the works)

I was at MLS when they "test" drove the new service settings. They were goofy at first to young high schoolers who thought that we should just import some tambourines and dancing (we actually worked out the choreography.) Now? I love 'em and as i've grown, i've learned how historical and beautiful they are. MLC corporates most of the liturgical songs into our everyday chapel worship.

The "supplement" that is coming out shortly is being finalized, some of the songs have been posted on my website. I got a taste at convention and a few of the songs at MLC services. It will be similar to the old Blue Supplement that once graced our pews. The songs are hit and miss, some may make you groan (no more than #440) but from what i've seen its a nice piece of work.

Anonymous said...

"Ordained" was dropped because it is the divine call from the congregation that places a man as pastor for a congregation, not the ordination.

Anonymous said...

“If we call Sacraments rites which have the command of God, and to which the promise of grace has been added, it is easy to decide what are properly Sacraments....But if ordination be understood as applying to the ministry of the Word, we are not unwilling to call ordination a sacrament. For the ministry of the Word has God's command and glorious promises, Rom. 1, 16: The Gospel is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth. Likewise, Is. 55, 11: So shall My Word be that goeth forth out of My mouth; it shall not return unto Me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please. If ordination be understood in this way, neither will we refuse to call the imposition of hands a sacrament. For the Church has the command to appoint ministers, which should be most pleasing to us, because we know that God approves this ministry, and is present in the ministry”

This seems like a good reason to leave "ordained" in.