This template is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Here is a Lutheranism Template I made, It will link all the Lutheranism articles together nicely since there is nothing to do that now. Josh77723:31, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2006-09-24T23:31:00.000Z","author":"Josh777","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Josh777-2006-09-24T23:31:00.000Z-Template","replies":[]}}-->
Is it really best to use the language in the catechism? I think that its use would give some people, including some Lutherans, pause as to what exactly is intended. I would think it would simply be better to use the more common designators or the common short-hand, but perhaps that’s just me.
I guess not, now that I think of it more, I'll change it back. Josh777
The "Organizations" section lists only the 3 main Lutheran denominations in the USA, while ignoring Lutheranism everywhere else. This is preposterous, considering the global span of Lutheranism. The established state churches in Scandinavia surely deserve some mention due to their importance in Lutheran history. If there is concern over too long a list, then it should be limited only to the international Lutheran bodies. Just about all the major denominations belong to one of the int'l bodies, and they provide a broad ideological and theological spectrum. Fishal 01:58, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
jackturner321:54, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2006-12-18T21:54:00.000Z","author":"Jackturner3","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Jackturner3-2006-12-18T21:54:00.000Z-Re-Arrange_Beginnings_section","replies":[]}}-->
Shouldn't Lars Levi Læstadius and Laestadianism have a place on this template? It's a fairly important current within Lutheranism. Fishal 16:35, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
I find it a little bit strange that still active movements are listed under history. The template would require serious reconsideration and definately a shift from its bias toward history. --Isidorus Finn (talk) 18:58, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-06-12T18:58:00.000Z","author":"Isidorus Finn","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Isidorus_Finn-2011-06-12T18:58:00.000Z-Laestadianism","replies":["c-Epiphyllumlover-2011-07-23T23:10:00.000Z-Isidorus_Finn-2011-06-12T18:58:00.000Z"]}}-->
I put the movements in the order in which they originated. The last seven on the "history" list are still active movements. In English, the word history doesn't preclude something from being both historical and still on-going. A good example would be the history of the women's rights movement. Women already assert the right to vote and to work, but women are still in the process of asserting more equality in society overall.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 23:10, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2011-07-23T23:10:00.000Z","author":"Epiphyllumlover","type":"comment","level":3,"id":"c-Epiphyllumlover-2011-07-23T23:10:00.000Z-Isidorus_Finn-2011-06-12T18:58:00.000Z","replies":[]}}-->
The links to Divine Service and the Lutheran Calendar of Saints are well and good, but why the links to the North American hymnals, and no others? There's no way that all the international hymnbooks, in every language, could fit on the template, so the American ones don't belong here. Fishal 13:21, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
