Talk:Catholic Worker Movement
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, which collaborates on articles related to the Roman Catholic Church. To participate, edit this article or visit the project page for details. |
| ??? | This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project's quality scale. |
| ??? | This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project's importance scale. |
Might be worth adding something about the recent revelation that the FBI has been conducting surveillance on the group and has referred to them as having a "semi-communistic ideology" [1]. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.236.138.50 (talk • contribs).
Contents |
[edit] Criticisms?
Sure, and there should probably be a criticisms section now that you mention it. --Hyphen5 08:58, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Socialism?
The introduction currently describes CW as a Christian socialist movemnt. Anarchism is much closer to the Catholic Worker ideal than socialism (in the sense of state socialism, libertarian socialism being a different animal (but not most people's first reaction on hearing the word "socialist")). Am going to change it. --134.225.187.103 18:12, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
- That's fine. To be honest, in looking at their website, I had a hard time figuring out just what their ideological viewpoint is. They definitely have communist leanings, but I think they advocate independent communes within a democratic society, not a socialist or communist government at large. I'm not really sure. Any light you can shed on the subject would be appreciated. MamaGeek TALK CONTRIB 18:30, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
- Their views are, as mentioned, essentially Christian Anarchist. In practice that means what you described - autonomous communities existing in unison, helping one another. They define Christian anarchism here.
- Am going to remove the Christian Democracy template if nobody objects by tomorrow as I don't really see how CW can be placed in that tradition. --Black Butterfly 18:19, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
- Someone just removed the christian anarchist from the front description, which I think is okay since CW doesn't specifically define themselves as christian anarchist. But that is their history and underlying philosophy, and it should be represented in the text of the article. I'm not quite up for the challenge right now; anybody else? --LQ 18:01, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Catholic Workers' College
I appreciate that they are different, but should there be a reference to the Catholic Workers' Colleges organised by the SJs and trade unions? ClemMcGann 22:32, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Copyright issues?
Doesn't the credit at the bottom of the article suggest that this is copyrighted material? —johndburger 02:30, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] List of Houses
Removed the old South Bend Catholic Worker (Holy Family) and replaced it with the new house (St Peter Claver). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.43.4.63 (talk • contribs) 006-09-19T13:49:51 (UTC)
I removed the Karen House link, as the web site adds nothing at all to the topic. Per Wikipedia policy, external links must expand on the information in the topic at hand in some specific way. Most of the links to House web sites should be removed, for similar reasons. Wikipedia is not a web directory—there is already a list of House web sites at DMOZ, which is a web directory. I have added a link to that list to the article. I suggest to regular editors of this page that you begin to move links from this article to the DMOZ list. Only legitimate external links should remain here. —johndburger 13:57, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wholesale copyright violation
The Background and Mission section was lifted in its entirety from the Catholic Worker web site. Per WIkipedia policy, I deleted it. —johndburger 03:15, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
- WP:COPY concerns copyrighted material; and since that text is is not copyrighted, we can quote it in its entirety. Although it is admitedly bad practice to rely on quotations, copied information is better than no information (provided it does not infringe on copyright laws). -- WGee 03:57, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
