Talk:Progressive Christianity

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Christianity Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
Assessment comments This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

---

Contents 1 Article was duplicated 2 POV 3 Important Note 4 Focusing the article 5 Bias within the article

[edit] Article was duplicated

Merged and copy edited - removed many red links and wikified Paul foord 12:15, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] POV

The article tends towards a POV defense of Progressive Christianity (from my POV) as well as lacking a proper perspective from religious and non-American political points of view. I added the cleanup tag it hopes of attracting a general re-write from someone who knows the topic well.Eluchil404 04:09, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Then it should be marked as {{POV}}, not {{cleanup}}. --Ezeu 04:32, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

I have reverted an earlier change God's people -> Christians: many of the biblical injunctions are not specific to Christians, but are Old Testament (i.e. Hebrew, Jewish) calls to justice and peace, which apply as universals, not just as exhortations to Christians. Myopic Bookworm 13:36, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Important Note

We should be using the more accurate term "Progressive Protestantism", for Pope Bendict has decreed that it is EVERY Catholic's responsibility to support the aims of "Progressive Christianity". More importantly, the Catholic's inalienable duty to promote social justice is enshrined in the Catechism of the Church. Thus, there can be no such distinct movement within the Church. --WGee 01:33, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Moreover, people have to start describing, specifically, the ways in which the article is allegedly biased. --WGee 01:36, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Focusing the article

My concern with this entry is that it is very America-centred. The very first line links it with 200 years of American history... what about other nations where Progressive Christian thought has flourished and created a far more moderate religious landscape than the USA? Although TCPC is located in the USA, the larger theological movements of liberation theology and the social gospel are not unique to American history. Also, there are many religious organizations world-wide that would fit under the "progressive christian" banner but are not officially associated with TCPC. Also, the neutrality of the article is extremely questionable. Theolad 10:22, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

What's at issue here is that "Progressive Christianity" needs to be differentiated from "progressive Christian thought". Progressive Christianity is a movement in the same way that Evangelical Christianity is a movment. More specifically it applys to a group of liberal Christians who are attempting to bring the church's liturgy and teachings in line with their secular scientific worldview. And while it might feel a great deal of affinity for liberation theology and the social gospel movement, neither are really central tenents of Progressive Christianity. Jaylashen 18:27, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

I have attempted to recast this article so that it actually relates to the specific topic, no more, no less, and added a clarifying note at the top. This I hope will solve both the geographic scope problem and the supposed neutrality problem, and I would hope that both templates can be removed. I have only re-organized the information, since I do not know enough about it to add new material. I have removed duplicate material on particular organizations with their own Wiki articles. (I have stated that the movement is Protestant: since it is called "Progressive Christianity" that it what we must call it!) Myopic Bookworm 15:20, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

In addition, there is no section called "criticisms of pregressive Christianty" in this article, as there is in the "Conservative Christianity" article. Both articles should have similar sections to demonstrate fair reporting. "Progressive Christiantiy" must have a criticisms section to be complete.

[edit] Bias within the article

The article is biased toward anyone not politically leaning toward liberalism. It also gives the impression to the reader that conservative christians are racist which is biased.

It ignores the fact that liberalism in the US is not the same as liberalism in other countries and has different meanings.

It gives the reader the impression that all progressive christians have liberal political views which is not the case.

As a whole the article gives readers the impression that progressive christians beliefs are different due to political philosophy and not thier progressive beliefs in christianity.

It comes out sounding like a political speech against conservatism instead of a true definition of what a progressive christian is.

Progressive christians are identified as "spiritually vital", but according to whom? As an example, other Christians would question the spiritual vitality of anyone supporting homosexual practice. Not all Christians, be they conservative, or progressive/liberal are spiritually vital- this is a personal descriptor of an individual, not of ANY entire group. Instead, the emphasis on the "spiritual vitality" and "willingness to question" of so called progressive Christians comes off as veiled support for the homosexual agenda within the church, something that is not shared by all progressive Christians. Arguably, it is not very distinct from what's commonly labeled "liberal" Christianity, at least in beliefs on "political" issues. Lindalinecm 07:21, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Liberal Christianity is a hermeneutic method and Progressive Christianity is not. You state that Progressive Christianity is arguably the same as liberal, I disagree. If you know that the reference supporting the statement “affirmation of human diversity” is inaccurate and too broad please modify it or request a citation e.g. ^{[citation needed]} If a citation is not provided in couple of days remove the statement.--Riferimento 19:39, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I do not question the reference to "affirmation of human diversity" whatsoever. That is an accurate description of all spiritually vital Christians. If you notice, I left the remaining references the same. However, the words "spiritual vitality" cannot be applied to any Christian "group", be they protestants, Catholics, liberals, conservatives, etc. without sounding biased. Some catholics are spiritual vital, so are some protestants, so are some conservatives, and so are some progressives. Thus, the descriptor is not exclusive to progressives, and certainly is not characteristic of every Christian that self-identifies as progressive. If this is to be left in the first paragraph, it should be cited as the opinion of someone, not used as accurate fact. Furthermore, "willingness to question" is also not a descriptor that makes progressives distinct from others. Perhaps you should elaborate. Are not conservatives willing to question (politics, liberal thought, social justice, etc.) as well? Perhaps "willingness to question tradition" would be more accurate of progressives.

I did not write that section that provides the list, but the editor of that section did provide a citation. I agree that it would be more accurate to use the statement "willingness to question tradition,” but I have not reviewed the citation and I am hesitant to change cited material before reviewing the citation. I am not sure why you consider using the words “spiritually vital” is bias, nor do I understand why you believe that by making such a statement the editor was implying that other groups are not (I also do not care it is certainly not a necessary phrase.) I do question how you are applying your labels. The progressive movement within the Catholic Church is as old as the social progressive movement itself so to imply that progressives are only Protestants is inaccurate. Also liberal and progressive are not interchangeable. --Riferimento 00:53, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I placed a POV check template at the top of the page. It seems that there has been some discussion here about possible bias about the article. I feel like the article has a positive slant, but is there anyone else who would be willing to read the article to see if it appears neutral? 69.128.140.93 (talk) 19:46, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

That last note was mine, but I was signed out for some reason. Sorry. Tnxman307 (talk) 19:47, 28 November 2007 (UTC)