Talk:Ordinance (Latter Day Saints)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mormonism and the Latter Day Saint movement 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Untitled [edit]

It would be good if this article would cover the relationship between the Mormon conception of "ordinance", and the concept of "sacrament" in some other Christian denominations. Are ordinances and sacraments two different words for the same thing, or does the difference in terminology reflect an underlying conceptual difference? -- samuel katinsky — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.111.13.34 (talkcontribs) 09:23, 16 March 2005‎

Covered in Sacrament#The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) & Sacrament (LDS Church). -- 208.81.184.4 (talk) 20:46, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Secrecy Concerns [edit]

I think it's a little troubling that these pages about LDS temples don't include references to criticisms of the closed nature of temples and the concerns about the secrecy of what exactly is happening inside. Right now, the articles read as a little bit biased in favor of the church. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.253.18.168 (talk) 02:33, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

What happens in temples is not secret. It's sacred. And the temples are not "closed". There's a HUGE difference. Anyone who qualifies as worthy to enter the temples can find out what goes on in them. The articles are not biased in favor of the Church. Groups of editors work together to ensure that a neutral point of view is achieved. If you have any specific concerns, please state them. If not, then it's pointless to suggest the degree of criticism you are recommending, as this would violate the above WP policies. Thanks. --Jgstokes-We can disagree without being disagreeable (talk) 13:39, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
So true. Wikipedia can be both accurate and fair. Correct information is instructive. Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 00:22, 5 January 2013 (UTC)