Talk:Tom Wright (theologian)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

	Tom Wright (theologian) 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.
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.
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] Concern about Auburn Avenue paragraph

Most recently N.T. Wright has been involved in the controversy over Auburn Avenue Theology which is also known as the "Federal Vision", which has some overlap with the 'New Perspective on Paul.'

What exactly does "involved in" mean? I am not aware of him being directly involved in the controversy in the States; only that others have read his work and it has influenced them. The paragraph above implies a direct involvement. David L Rattigan 07:50, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

he has been a speaker at the conference where Federal Vision was first described. So that is fairly direct. The theological connection has not yet been made clear on either of these pages, however. 「ѕʀʟ·✎」 17:33, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

By that definition, then Richard Gaffin has been "involved in" the Federal Vision since he was also a speaker at the same conference. Yet, Gaffin is an outspoke critic of FV. Wright is not "involved in" the Federal Vision controversy. That is an American controversy largely contained with the Presbyterian Church of America. Being a Continental Anglican, I don't seen how one can say that Wright is "involved in" it. I think what the original writer meant was that the Federal Vision writers draw from Wright's theology, but the opposite does not appear to be the case. But if being "involved in" simply means the FV speakers, bloggers and writers are drawing from a theology to make their argument, then we have to include John Calvin as being "involved in" as well, since he's just as important to those writers as anyone living. I deleted the reference, since it's not true. Unless someone can produce evidence that Wright identifies in some way with that group, I don't think mention should be made. Scunning 18:48, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Scunning, good response, perspective and points. I struck out the word 'yet' in my comment above. I agree completely- citable evidence ought to be produced, or it should not be mentioned. Thanks. 「ѕʀʟ·✎」 20:08, 19 February 2007 (UTC)