Talk:Methodism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Christianity Portal Methodism is part of the 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 so as to become familier with the guidelines.

B

This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

	Methodism is part of WikiProject Anglicanism, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B	This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.
Article Grading: The 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.
WikiProject Anglicanism To-do:

[edit] Anglicanism Project?

Why is Methodism part of the Anglicanism project? I know that Methodism started out within Anglicanism, but that connection disappeared over 200 years ago. KitHutch 02:20, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Connection

How does the "connectional" model of organization compare with the episcopalian model described in that article? They sound similar; are they the same, or are there some important differences? Wesley

It is important to note that we are not a connectional people because of biblical or theological or even historical mandates. The evolution of our polity has, however, been a natural response to these elements in our background and they continue to inform and direct our efforts. [1]

If I'm interpreting this correctly, the term is adopted in order to express the fact that Methodist episcopalianism does not claim any biblical, theological or historical mandate for this form of government, and adopts that form of polity for practical reasons (although the Bible, theology and history have had a measure of influence on its development). To make a difference between jus divinum (divine law) episcopalianism, and the Methodist aim to construct a maximal network for pragmatic reasons (which happens to be episcopal), the Methodists appear to prefer the term "connectional" to "episcopalian", as introducing less confusion and implying more completely the principle upon which polity has developed (although the latter is still an accurate term, it appears - with the appropriate qualifiers). Mkmcconn

Wouldn't it be better to call this article "Methodism" rather than "Methodist"? -- Mike Hardy

I was just coming here to ask that. -- Zoe

I'd go for that. We'd have to delete the redirect that's there, to move this page. Right? Mkmcconn

[edit] Number of adherents

I came to this article wondering how many adherents the Methodist denominations had, and how these adherents were distributed geographically. The article has no such information. Can someone who knows add it? If this is not the right article to answer these questions, at least there should be a crosslink to the right one. I also wondered how the number of Methodists grew between Wesley's time and the present. Thank you.

[edit] Universities

Where does "the most famous of these is the prestigious Ohio Wesleyan University" come from? This seems POV, and I replaced it with "...and altogether there are about twenty universities and colleges named after John Wesley still in existance," unless there is a good source (Also see Wikipedia:Avoid peacock terms).
--Asbestos 17:52, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I've reverted an edit by an anonymous user (who can be identified as User:Ranamim by his IP address) who reverted my edit. The sentence under dispute was originally:

"Numerous originally Methodist institutions of higher education were founded in the United States in the early half of the 19th century. The most famous school among these institutions is the prestigious Ohio Wesleyan University in Delaware, Ohio."

I changed this to

"Numerous originally Methodist institutions of higher education were founded in the United States in the early half of the 19th century, and today altogether there are about twenty universities and colleges named after John Wesley still in existance."

This would seem to me to be more NPOV, but if you wish to discuss, please do so here and not by reverting without signing in.

--Asbestos 15:54, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I feel that the changed sentence is written from a more NPOV standpoint, and is therefore more encyclopedic, and should thus remain in this article. If the anonymous user/Ranamim, or whatever, does not want his edits changed then maybe he should create a website on this topic, because the nature of Wikipedia is that articles will constantly be updated and improved beyond their original content. Rje 03:28, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] ==

I know I am adding my two cents worth almost four months later, but it seems to me that statement "the most famous of these is the prestigious Ohio Wesleyan University" couldn't be qualified in an objective way, and if it could be, who would make that determination As an OWU grad I can tell you that it was a nice place to be, made lifelong friends, met my husband and a received a good solid education. But prestigious? ;-) Jrossman 02:25, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Methodists and Catholics

Can someone please state the big differences between the two religions; United - (Methodist) & Roman Catholic.

Is it necessary for one to convert to the other for marriage ?

In reply: I can't speak authoritatively, but I think the big difference is the Apostolic Succession. I suspect that the Methodists would recognoze a Catholic marriage, but that the Catholics would not recognize a Methodist marriage. I don't think it's neccessary to convert to Catholicism to marry a Catholic. A preacher or priest should be able to tell you for sure, and would probably not be surprised at the questions.

I am a United Methodist pastor who married a Roman Catholic. Married in a United Methodist Church by a United Methodist pastor, our marriage is not recognized as sacramental by the Roman Catholic Church. I don't believe I would have needed to convert in order to have a Roman Catholic wedding, but I probably would have had to agree to raise the children as Roman Catholics. While I certainly have nothing against Roman Catholicism (and my wife has since become a United Methodist), I wasn't going to make that promise, wanting my children to, of course, be a part of my own church family. A Roman Catholic priest might be able to enlighten you a bit more. KHM03 22:27, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Evans ?

I removed Clement A. Evans from the "see also" section; he's not very prominent, but might be better listed on a different page. KHM03 00:19, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Evans was quite prominent in the rise of the "holiness movement" within Methodism in the Atlanta region, a movement that spread throughout the South. He pastored churches of over 1,000 people in an era when the average Methodist church was less than 70 members. Hence the reason why I originally included him in the "see also" comments. 129.252.52.221 16:44, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

The problem is that there are many significant pastors & preachers; we simply can't list all of them! KHM03 17:04, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Something which may interest editors of this page

Any help which could be provided would be greatly appreciated. Agriculture 07:35, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] How is this not worth posting?

On Jan 14th 1991 On his television show The 700 Club, Pat Robertson attacked a number of Protestant denominations when he declared: "You say you're supposed to be nice to the Episcopalians and the Presbyterians and the Methodists and this, that, and the other thing. Nonsense. I don't have to be nice to the spirit of the Antichrist."

grazon 05:38, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

It isn't about Methodism. It's about Pat Robertson. Please don't keep trying to insert this in articles about the groups he is attacking. It isn't relevant to those articles. — Mark (Mkmcconn) ** 04:29, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Pat Robertson isn't just a bum on the streets he's a power broker on the National level and if he's saying things like this those he's smearing need to know it.

grazon 05:39, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

It doesn't matter if he is the Great Wazoo of all wazoos, his comments are not relevant to this article. He has no authority, in Methodism, Presbyterianism, or Episcopalianism. It belongs in an article about him, and is of no consequence to understanding the groups he has attacked. — Mark (Mkmcconn) ** 05:55, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Persecution of members of a faith is part of their history.

grazon 05:57, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

How about if we wait until persecution actually starts, then. — Mark (Mkmcconn) ** 06:00, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

persecution starts with slander and I'd just as soon let people know the slander is taking place.

grazon 06:04, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Blogs are good for letting people know about slander taking place. Wikipedia is not a blog, or an indiscriminate collection of information. Please only add content that assists in understanding the topic, info about Mr. Robertson and the things he says belong in the article about him; info about Methodism, etc., belong in their appropriate articles. — Mark (Mkmcconn) ** 06:11, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Ok Elder mark ;)

BTW any idea where (other than on Pat's page) the quote should go?

grazon 06:15, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

I don't know. It's really not such an important comment as you want it to be. After all, the comment was made 14 years ago. The man has a longstanding reputation for saying more than he means, and he gets plenty of grief about it. — Mark (Mkmcconn) ** 06:26, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

what can I say?

I don't like OUR churches being called supporters of the anti-Christ.

grazon 06:28, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

don't let it get to you - much worse is said of other religions...

[edit] Language conventions

Recently User:Saikiri reverted a spelling variation, calling it vandalism in the edit comment. This is inappropriate as it was simply the difference between British and American spelling. Both conventions are regarded as appropriate in Wikipedia, so it is not vandalism. In cases of dispute, Wikipedia policy is that the original convention takes precedence.

The page history reveals that the page was started October 29, 2001 in American English, no other English was used until June 6, 2003, when two words were introduced with British spelling. So strictly speaking, the article should continue in American English. However I note that the section of history which occurred in England seems to be written in British English and that part referring to the American experience seems to be writting in American English. We could consider that an appropriate compromise. Is that agreeable to all? At any rate let's refrain from calling the other spelling covention vandalism. Pollinator 04:51, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, you darn Brits. KHM03 12:46, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Philosophy

[In the study of human knowledge, methodism refers to the epistemological approach where one asks "How do we know?" before "What do we know?" The term appears in Ernest Sosa's seminal essay "The Raft and the Pyramid: Coherence versus Foundations in the Theory of Knowledge," and is to be contrasted with "particularism."

Since the question "How do we know?" does not presuppose that "we know," it is receptive to skepticism. In this way, Sosa claims, Hume no less than Descartes was an epistemological methodist.

See "Particularism."]

This entry is not "unrelated nonsense." It is a matter of coincidence that "methodism" is a word already in use by a religious group: in epistemology, the term distinguishes an important approach to epistemological problems.

If it is possible to start a new page, that would be fine with me. Otherwise, the section will remain on this page. Religion has no more a claim to the term than epistemology.

Here you go: Methodism (philosophy) Tom Harrison ^(talk) 01:49, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks... but typing in "methodism" neither takes one to a disambiguation page, nor is there any link on this page. Can you rectify this please? Thanks Tom.

[edit] Linking error - Oxford

Hi. I would do this myself but I just want to check I'm not being stupid as I am no authority on the topic.

Under 'The Wesleyan Revival' section it mentions some students from Oxford regarding how the term 'Methodist' came into being. The link on Oxford directs to the city of Oxford article. Surely it should direct to the University of Oxford article?

[edit] NPOV

Does this: "a striking and sobering piece of liturgical writing" sound POV to others/anyone else? I'm im the only one, I'll give it up, but I really feel that it is not NPOV and should be removed. Thanks. Carl.bunderson 23:16, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's not trying to be POV - i.e. it is not trying to claim that Wesley or Methodism is particularly inspired; I was just trying to (a) give people an idea of its tone and (b) get across that it is rather more interesting than most of the contents of the typical Methodist liturgy book. This bit of phrasing has lived in the article for about 18 months without attracting any NPOV criticism, which suggests it's not widely seen as inappropriate. seglea 00:04, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Alright then, it just sounded a bit funny when I read over it. Carl.bunderson 00:10, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Interesting use of the word "sobering" in an article about methodism which in the UK for many a long year was Teatotal —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.210.142.186 (talk • contribs) 15:05, 2 October 2006 (UTC)