Talk:The New Church
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- Archive talk from old article here
[edit] THE new Church?
Is the article "The" part of the proper name? If not, the article needs to be moved to "New Church." --ElKevbo 15:49, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Yes, "The" is an essential part of this name. Just as there is a Christian Church and various organizations, each being a part of the movement, there is also The New Church and various organizations, each being a part of the movement. Christianity is based on the message of the Gospel, The New Church is based on the understanding of Scripture as revealed in the works published by Emanuel Swedenborg. The concept of "The New Church" is held by all Swedenborgian organizations. If you want I can explain in the article that "The New Church" is both a group of organizations and a foundational concept for all organizations which believe in "The New Church". I can't put this article under the General Church of the New Jerusalem, which is sometimes confused with being "The New Church" itself. I can't do this because the New Church is seen by every New Church organization as something above each organization. Do you suggest that we get rid of the article on Christianity and replace it with the article for the Catholic Church? Yes, this church, The New Church, is known by this very name by many people. The phrase was coined by Emanuel Swedenborg, and has been in continual use every since New Church organizations have been around.
As for references of sources. See the works published by Emanuel Swedenborg including, True Christian Religion, Heaven and Hell, Divine Providence, Divine Love and Wisdom, Married Love, and the New Jerusalem and its Heavenly doctrine. In these works you will find the beliefs that are listed to be representative of those listed in this article. You will also find the development of the concept of "The New Church" which is said to be a religious movement that will be established by the Lord, Jesus Christ. Jasonschnarr 17:33, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Can't there be two pages? One for the wrestling thing and one for the religious movement? Jasonschnarr 02:54, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
- I don't know about "the wrestling thing," but what's the difference between this article and Swedenborgianism? Arch O. La Grigrory Deepdelver 21:23, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
The difference is that "The New Church" is a movement which the works published by Swedenborg speak of. The term "Swedenborgian" implies that a person follows teachings of Swedenborg, but members of "The New Church" do not believe that Swedenborg was responsible for the doctrines of the New Church they believe that The Lord, God, Jesus Christ authored them, through the pen of Swedenborg. Also, the page on Swedenborgianism is biased toward the organization of the Swedenborgian Church of North America, seeing that it is primarily their point of view which is represented and their symbol on the page. I attempted to change this bias but to no avail. This page represents those in the movement who do not see themselves as "Swedenborgians", but rather members of "The New Church". Most people in "Swedenborgian" organizations know about "The New Church" and see it as a movement above any of the organizations based on New Church teachings. That's why it requires an article for itself. Just read what I wrote above. Like "Christianity" it is something above any organization, it is a whole religious movement with more to it than just the ideas you would get in an article on Swedenborgianism. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.54.134.222 (talk • contribs).
- It sounds to me like the difference between branches of the same sect. Your explanation does not quite illuminate. Try again? KillerChihuahua?!? 15:51, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
"The New Church" is both a Swedenborgian concept, as well as a religious movement which various organizations have claimed to support. You could try to lump Swedenborgianism and The New Church together, but the concept of The New Church which is found in the books published by Swedenoborg, upon which the movement is founded, does not work in harmony with what "Swedenborgianism" has become. They are not the same thing. The New Church could be called a Swedenborgian movement, but members of the New Church would rather be referred to as being a part of The New Church movement seeing that there are differences between the two. When one first encounters Swedenborgianism they first think of Swedenborg and perhaps the Swedenborgian Church of North America. When one encounters a member of an organization which sees themselves as part of "The New Church" movement you find that the set of beliefs held and emphasized are distincly different. Members of the General Church of the New Jerusalem are in the largest "Swedenborgian" organization. Members of the General Church have been the strongest supporters of "The New Church" movement, but this movement is not limited to the boundaries of this organization. For example, there are orphanages which are based on the concepts of "The New Church". There are charity groups. There are many groups which would consider themselves part of "The New Church" movement, who would not necessarily be a member of any "Swedenborgian" organization. The concept itself, along with the doctrines it ascribes to have become a movement which cannot be defined by one organization, nor can it be defined by one view of the teachings. The New Church is simply all those who ascribe to certain belief set and live accoring to it. This idea came from those works published by Swedenborg, but the actual movement is different, and often unconnected to the idea that it is from Swedenborg, since it is not seen as being from Swedenborg, but is seen as being from the Lord Himself. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jasonschnarr (talk • contribs).
[edit] Merge with Swedenborgianism?
If these are merged, I'd like the name of the page to be something like The New Church (Swedenborgianism), putting the members' name for it first and the common name second. Is this standard for Wikipedia? Is there a standard? Any other ideas? See also my comments on the Talk:Swedenborgianism page. Coleman Glenn 03:37, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
I totally disagree with you, and I erased the merge suggestion so people don't get any ideas. Have you read my comments in the discussion above? I don't want to be called a Swedenborgian. I find it offensive, that's why I made this page. Also, the idea and content are very different. Jasonschnarr 20:10, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
- Umm okay. Could the influence section be a bit more differentiated in least? Likely non-religious people influenced by reading Swedenborg, and not so much influenced by the "New Church, would think of themselves more as "Swedenborgians." Just like there are Thomists or Randians not necessarily connected to the religions known for them.--T. Anthony 06:04, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
I hope you are able to maintain the page, The New Church as distinct from the page, Swedenborgianism. I was very pleased to find this introduction to The New Church because I find it sympathetic to a conception of The New Church as being commissioned by the Divine. In the study and practice of The New Church and the New Dispensation, the terminology, "The New Church" and "The Lord's New Church" are held proper to Doctrine leading to Eternal Life, and are applied in life, rather than to the world. Best wishes.
I sympathize with those who want to draw a hard line between "Swedenborgianism" and, um..."New Churchism"? But I worry that sectarianism will make the whole subject more confusing and make it less likely that people who want or need this information will actually find it. I suggest looking at what is being done with the whole Mormonism vs. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints mess under the umbrella subject of Latter Day Saint movement. The New Church still has some identity issues to work out as a new church/religion/dispensation/movement with multiple denominations and with multiple names, including "The New Church", "Second Advent Christianity", "New Christianity", "The True Christian Religion", "The New Jerusalem", "Swedenborgianism", etc. As a member, I have opinions on how we should properly "style" ourselves, but as a wikipedia contributor, I am concerned that we not be too dogmatic about something that is really so up in the air. --Mac 14:04, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
I hear what you're saying. I wrote this article and maintain it primarily from a desire to let people know about "The New Church" as it is explained in the Heavenly Doctrines, and how these doctrines interact with other theology. How this concept of the New Church and it's doctrines have played out in the world is not as much my concern. Maybe in this article it should not be called a movement? and instead be called "a concept and formulation of doctrine found in the works of Emanuel Swedenborg which has influenced many "New Church" organizations" maybe? The phrase "The New Church" may not be entirely solidified as the proper name for the movement, but it is the name that the Heavenly Doctrine uses to describe the movement. However it works out in the end, I believe the way I have layed out the doctrine here is an accurate representation of what the Heavenly Doctrines say, containing useful comparisons and understandable explanations of the teachings. Jasonschnarr 05:11, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] POV?
This article needs to be glossed over for POV statements. I caught atleast one. 208.248.33.30
