Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
RakeInTheCache

Worldwide Reformed Churchs Category Proposal

72 posts in this topic

In the tradition of creating categories for different church denominations, I am thinking of starting a category for worldwide reformed churches. These churches can be found all over the world but particularly in the Netherlands, Germany, France, Switzerland, Eastern Europe, South Africa, the US and Canada.

 

The main criteria is that the Church needs to be Calvinist and the denomination needs to have the word "Reformed" or it's equivalent in the local language in the name.

 

Anyone want to join the officer's club?

0

Share this post


Link to post

This is by far the largest group of churches in my closer area. So I am interested.

 

Just a side note: In the German speaking part of Switzerland, this denomination is usually attributed to Zwingli, not Calvin. Maybe there are also more different lineages in other parts of the world. Just something to check.

0

Share this post


Link to post

This is by far the largest group of churches in my closer area. So I am interested.

 

Just a side note: In the German speaking part of Switzerland, this denomination is usually attributed to Zwingli, not Calvin. Maybe there are also more different lineages in other parts of the world. Just something to check.

 

Good point, Zwingli came before Calvin. I'm thinking of calling the category "The Reformed Tradition" and including as well as churches, monuments and historic places associated with the Swiss reformers.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I think this would be a worthy category, as long as people don't vote just on personal preference. Some people think we have too many church categories, but there are also a lot of people who love these categories. Churches are an important part of history and culture, regardless of one's personal beliefs.

 

At least here in the U.S., there are churches who identify themselves as being in the "reformed tradition," that do not have "Reformed" as part of the church or denomination name. Or, they may use "reformed" in a different sense. Some denominations for which there are already categories may consider themselves to be in the theological camp of John Calvin. I'm just saying that writing a description so that it includes exactly what you want to include may be a challenge. I'd love to see this one come to fruition.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I think this would be a worthy category, as long as people don't vote just on personal preference. Some people think we have too many church categories, but there are also a lot of people who love these categories. Churches are an important part of history and culture, regardless of one's personal beliefs.

 

At least here in the U.S., there are churches who identify themselves as being in the "reformed tradition," that do not have "Reformed" as part of the church or denomination name. Or, they may use "reformed" in a different sense. Some denominations for which there are already categories may consider themselves to be in the theological camp of John Calvin. I'm just saying that writing a description so that it includes exactly what you want to include may be a challenge. I'd love to see this one come to fruition.

 

I am intending to explicitly exclude Presbyterian and Church of Scots churches as they are covered in their own category.

 

Another thought I had was to include historic places in the development of the Reformed tradition and not just the history of the Swiss reformers. This would allow historic places related to the Presbyterian and Church of Scots to be included (but of course not including their churches).

 

I would explicitly include United Church of Christ because of the strong linked to the Reformed Church.

 

Can anyone think of any other potential inclusions/exclusions?

0

Share this post


Link to post

I think this would be a worthy category, as long as people don't vote just on personal preference. Some people think we have too many church categories, but there are also a lot of people who love these categories. Churches are an important part of history and culture, regardless of one's personal beliefs.

 

At least here in the U.S., there are churches who identify themselves as being in the "reformed tradition," that do not have "Reformed" as part of the church or denomination name. Or, they may use "reformed" in a different sense. Some denominations for which there are already categories may consider themselves to be in the theological camp of John Calvin. I'm just saying that writing a description so that it includes exactly what you want to include may be a challenge. I'd love to see this one come to fruition.

 

I am intending to explicitly exclude Presbyterian and Church of Scots churches as they are covered in their own category.

 

Another thought I had was to include historic places in the development of the Reformed tradition and not just the history of the Swiss reformers. This would allow historic places related to the Presbyterian and Church of Scots to be included (but of course not including their churches).

 

I would explicitly include United Church of Christ because of the strong linked to the Reformed Church.

 

Can anyone think of any other potential inclusions/exclusions?

 

Oops, sorry, I just saw that historic places are included in the Presbyterian category, so, now I need to think some more about this.

0

Share this post


Link to post

As before, I will strongly oppose to this idea. There are dozens, hundreds, of Christian church denominations. Christians churches should be a single category. It is not but enough is enough. The same way more commercial chains are not accepted as before, it's time to stop the religious fervor which is based in no WM logical at all, quite the opposite.

 

P.S. - Hey Fi67, no worries, go for the Zwingli yourself. Just another one, seems it will be OK.

Edited by Torgut
0

Share this post


Link to post

This is not necessarily a religious category, although in the interest of freedom of expression I don't know why one should be against religious categories.

 

There is definately a historic interest in the creation of such a category. Like it or not Christianity has played an enormous role in the development of the Western world.

 

Btw I don't really get the link between commercial chains and religious fervor.

0

Share this post


Link to post

There is no real link between store categories and denominational categories. Just an analogy.

 

In the early days of Waymarking there were a lot of chain store/restaurant categories created, but then this lost support by the community, and today a new one has almost no chance at all to get approved.

 

Same with churches. There are already a lot of them. And I have noticed well, that also here support for new categories is weakening. But I do think, they are interesting, not for spiritual, but historic and architectonic reasons.

 

I feel, at this point in time, a new churches category is still possible. So we should go for it, before it's too late.

 

Once it is over, we can think about a good solution for the rest. A catch-all like Signs of History and Specific War Memorials is probably not the best idea, but we still have time to find something better.

0

Share this post


Link to post

There is no real link between store categories and denominational categories. Just an analogy.

 

In the early days of Waymarking there were a lot of chain store/restaurant categories created, but then this lost support by the community, and today a new one has almost no chance at all to get approved.

 

Same with churches. There are already a lot of them. And I have noticed well, that also here support for new categories is weakening. But I do think, they are interesting, not for spiritual, but historic and architectonic reasons.

 

I feel, at this point in time, a new churches category is still possible. So we should go for it, before it's too late.

 

Once it is over, we can think about a good solution for the rest. A catch-all like Signs of History and Specific War Memorials is probably not the best idea, but we still have time to find something better.

 

I guess I've been out of the category approving business for some time. Is there some objective criteria which explains why churches and chains are unlikely to be approved?

0

Share this post


Link to post

Is there some objective criteria which explains why churches and chains are unlikely to be approved?

Objective? I don't think so. I think the general feeling against commercial categories is subjective. If there's an objective reason, I haven't heard of it.

 

Personally, I have no problem with new commercial categories. As long as the category description is properly written, I can fathom that some people would find the category interesting and give it a "Yea" vote (or course, assuming it also meets the global, prevalence, and not-redundant criteria). However, it seems there are others that have a blanket "no commercial" stance and will vote "Nay" regardless of how well it meets the criteria.

 

As for churches, I do agree that there are already enough Christian church categories. Looking through the "Religious Buildings" section, of the 19 categories that are restricted to a single religion or denomination, 14 of them are for Christian denominations (15 if you include Quaker). The only non-Christian ones are "Synagogues", "Mosques", "Buddhist Temples and Public Shrines", and "Hindu Temples" *. I think it's high time we create a catch-all category along the lines of "Other Christian Denomination Churches".

 

Really, how many of these do we need individual categories for before we come up with a catch-all? I think the current 14 or 15 is where we should draw the line.

 

*The other remaining categories are non-denominational or include multiple religions like "Orthodox"

0

Share this post


Link to post

Ok, but taking this to the extreme, i could also argue that we have too many history categories. To my knowledge, the only objective criteria are global coverage and number of locations.

0

Share this post


Link to post

First, another comment about this category directly -- Although there is a strong Reformed stream in the United Church of Christ from its formation in 1957, and other threads joining later, I think that is a strong enough denomination in its own right to merit its own category, particularly considering its size with over 5,000 potential waymarks. And, there are many, especially here in New England, that scarcely would bear the label of Reformed. So, I would specifically exclude them.

 

Second, some remarks in general -- There is no reason for an antipathy toward categories for Christian churches other than personal preference. Religion is an integral part of culture and history regardless of one's personal preferences and beliefs. And in the case of religious buildings there may be also elements of art and architecture that are of interest. Thus they are legitimate objects for Waymarking categories.

 

One could pick many other broad categories and say we have enough, or too many -- museums, sculptures, historical markers, bridges, just to name a few have an array of categories. So there is no reason to single out Christian churches. An analogy to commercial categories entirely misses the point, it seems to me.

 

Third, on observation about Christian church categories -- it is a difficult pie to slice. There have been previous discussions about this. The history of the Christian Church is so fragmented and the present state of things so tangled, that it is difficult to come up with a logical way to create categories. Clearly, a single category for ALL Christian churches is untenable. One might then go to the three major divisions - Orthodox, Roman Catholic and Protestant. Of these, the latter is the one with the most fragmentation, and the former two each have a category encompassing all churches. Some of the protestant categories are very specific, such as the Church of the Nazarene, Wesleyan Church, and Friends. Others lump similar denominations together such as Presbyterian and Methodist. Then there is the Baptist Church category that includes a diverse group of denominations and independent churches together merely on the basis of having Baptist in the name.

 

This is not unlike other waymark category groupings that have developed in a hodge-podge way with sometimes crazy ways and with differing criteria. It is often based on who has the interest to develop a particular category. And, unless there is a drastic flaw in the way the category is conceived and written, I so no reason NOT to approve them just because I don't like them. We serve a large and diverse community, and we should be generous in allowing new categories to develop.

0

Share this post


Link to post

This is not necessarily a religious category, although in the interest of freedom of expression I don't know why one should be against religious categories.

 

There is definately a historic interest in the creation of such a category. Like it or not Christianity has played an enormous role in the development of the Western world.

 

Btw I don't really get the link between commercial chains and religious fervor.

 

And in the interest of freedom to purchase I should now claim new commercial categories like Lidl and so? :-) I am not against religious categories. Mosques, Synagogues, Christian Churches (see, those who played an enormous role in the development of Western World) would do it. OK... still I accept well the main Christian options... Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox... now, one category for each designation that is far too much for my sense.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Why not a category for Lidl? Is there a concern that Groundspeak will run out of space on their server? ;-) But seriously, does everybody know that you can hide categories you have a personal dislike for? Then they don't show up in any search you do.

0

Share this post


Link to post

That's a good point. Some of the voting against categories that I've seen around here could have been managed by the naysayers simply putting the category in their Ignore list, rather than voting against the category.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Why not a category for Lidl? Is there a concern that Groundspeak will run out of space on their server? ;-)

 

No idea. But it won't pass the pool. It was tried twice. Not by me.

 

But seriously, does everybody know that you can hide categories you have a personal dislike for? Then they don't show up in any search you do.

 

Oh fine... so why vote at all? We should all be able to create whatever categories and then the rest of the "world" can always hide them, right?

0

Share this post


Link to post

I think this would be a worthy category, as long as people don't vote just on personal preference. Some people think we have too many church categories, but there are also a lot of people who love these categories. Churches are an important part of history and culture, regardless of one's personal beliefs.

 

At least here in the U.S., there are churches who identify themselves as being in the "reformed tradition," that do not have "Reformed" as part of the church or denomination name. Or, they may use "reformed" in a different sense. Some denominations for which there are already categories may consider themselves to be in the theological camp of John Calvin. I'm just saying that writing a description so that it includes exactly what you want to include may be a challenge. I'd love to see this one come to fruition.

 

Yes, this is a challenge because it's a bit tangled. So here's a stab. A church or historical site belonging to a denomination in the World Communion of Reformed Churches, except those having the word "Scotland" or "Presbyterian" in the name.

 

Here's a link to the World Communion of Reformed Churches. http://wcrc.ch/wcrc-member-churches/

0

Share this post


Link to post

I think this would be a worthy category, as long as people don't vote just on personal preference. Some people think we have too many church categories, but there are also a lot of people who love these categories. Churches are an important part of history and culture, regardless of one's personal beliefs.

 

At least here in the U.S., there are churches who identify themselves as being in the "reformed tradition," that do not have "Reformed" as part of the church or denomination name. Or, they may use "reformed" in a different sense. Some denominations for which there are already categories may consider themselves to be in the theological camp of John Calvin. I'm just saying that writing a description so that it includes exactly what you want to include may be a challenge. I'd love to see this one come to fruition.

 

Yes, this is a challenge because it's a bit tangled. So here's a stab. A church or historical site belonging to a denomination in the World Communion of Reformed Churches, except those having the word "Scotland" or "Presbyterian" in the name.

 

Here's a link to the World Communion of Reformed Churches. http://wcrc.ch/wcrc-member-churches/

 

I am now going to make my THIRD attempt at submitting a Wesleyan Church waymark. In all cases I have made special trips to these places before failing to create an acceptable waymark.

 

The church in board Texas Wesleyan University in Fort Worth TX turned out to be a United Methodist Church. I did not create the waymark.

 

The Christ Wesleyan Church in Beford TX turned out to be a Congregational Methodist Church. I created the waymark, but it got declined (with a good explanation -- thanks Larry).

 

Now I am off to a third city to try, try, try again.

 

I did the research for Christ Wesleyan -- I looked up Wesleyan churches in D/FW, and checked the website which said they follow Wesleyan teachings. A church with Wesleyan in its name is a Wesleyan church, right? And a church whose broader group says it is a Wesleyan traditional Protestant denomination is a Wesleyan Church, right? Wrong both times.

 

(Hopefully the churches listed on Wesleyan.org are real Wesleyan Churches, even though they don't always have Wesleyan in their names.)

 

The point of this whine: My view of church categories is changing. I had been one to approve them all. Now after my experience I am thinking that these church categories are getting sliced and niched to such a degree that it is very hard for a waymarker to know what to waymark.

 

If this particular denomination is tangled or confusing, maybe it is time to create the dreaded Catch-All category for these niche denominations.

 

Just a thought :) happy Waymarking out there :)

Edited by Benchmark Blasterz
0

Share this post


Link to post

Interesting story, thanks for sharing your experience. I could see how it might be particularly frustrating where churches in a denomination might be few and far between. But... I think we've all had that experience were we went out of the way to waymark something particularly interesting only to find out later that it didn't fit the category. I think it's part of the hobby.

 

Again, I think the only really objective criteria I have come across is the geographical coverage and the number of potential waymarks. Other than this, for me the field is wide open.

0

Share this post


Link to post

The web site you give in support of the proposal lists The Uniting Church of Australia as a member of the Reformed Church. I submit these as Methodist Churches. These churches don't have the word Reformed in their name but the definitive source of Reformed Churches should be that web site otherwise your proposal would have no legitimacy.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I'm thinking now of requiring that the church meets at least two of three criteria. (plus the presbyterian exclusion)

 

1) The theology must be linked to Zwingli/Calvin

2) Have "Reformed" in the name

3) Be listed on the web site I mentioned above

0

Share this post


Link to post

Why not create a category titled: Calvinism. The followiing URL has a list of many reformed churches under the Calvinism banner.

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denomkinations#Calvinism

 

The web site also lists denominations, for lack of a better word, that have many churches affiliated with them. To prevent / reduce the number of church / religious categories, it may be preferable to support categories that include churches that share the same beliefs, faith, dogma, etc. There are probably minor differences within individual churches listed under Calvinism, but that should nor bar them from being included in the Calvinism category.

 

I would most definitely support such a category.

 

 

 

quote name='RakeInTheCache' timestamp='1417155059' post='5451280']

I'm thinking now of requiring that the church meets at least two of three criteria. (plus the presbyterian exclusion)

 

1) The theology must be linked to Zwingli/Calvin

2) Have "Reformed" in the name

3) Be listed on the web site I mentioned above

0

Share this post


Link to post

It seems the URL got cut off in the last post. I think it should be http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvinism.

 

To quote from this article "The biggest Reformed association is the World Communion of Reformed Churches with more than 80 million members in 211 member denominations around the world." The link already provided a few posts back is the one for the World Communion of Reformed Churches.

 

So, I should point out that a Presbyterian Church category already exists. The Presbyterian Church (called the Church of Scots in Scotland) is a Calvinist denomination.

 

I believe between the Presbyterian Church category and the one proposed here, we would catch by far almost all of the Calvinist churches. So I would venture to say that with respect to the last post, we are on the same wavelength.

0

Share this post


Link to post

The following is only meant to spur further discussion regarding the creation of church categories. The issued at hand, Worldwide Reformed Churches, is discussed at the end of this document.

 

The many variants and exceptions within the Christian churches will make it difficult to achieve consensus. According the above noted Wikipedia article, “the Catholic church does not consider itself to be a denomination, while “some groups viewed by non-adherents as denominational actively resist being called a denomination and do not have any formal denominational structure”. Others are included because they “include some elements of Christian practice or beliefs.”

 

Whatever nomenclature we use to classify the various groups, denominations, congregations, churches, affiliated to a larger group, strictly independent, etc., the terminology employed may be opened to interpretation and lead to some debate of one form or another. We have a tendency to defer to the status quo and approve church related categories when the write-ups are adequate, prevalence is met to a certain degree and we find no valid reasons to deny the addition of a new category.

 

Luckily, most of the larger groups are well known and encompass the highest number of congregations and individual churches.

 

The following list of Christian denominations, congregations and churches, is available from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Protestant_churches#Esoteric_Christianity

 

In an attempt to reduce confusion between the various terms, I have drawn upon them to mean the following in this write-up:

 

Denomination:

 

A large group of religious congregations united under a common faith and name.

 

Waymark categories have been created for the following denominations and individual churches:

 

The number in parenthesis corresponds to the number of individual churches / congregations within that particular denomination)

 

Catholic

Orthodox (Eastern or Oriental Orthodoxy) (51)

Lutheran (68)

Anglican (68)

Presbyterian (80)

Methodist (18)

Baptist (97)

 

Churches / Congregations

 

The following churches / congregations are affiliated with the denominations listed in parenthesis.

 

Wesleyan (Pietists and Holiness Churches)

Church of the Nazarene (Pietists and Holiness Churches)

Assemblies of God (Pentecostalism)

New Apostolic Church (Appears to be an independent church)

Seventh Day Adventist (Sabbath-Keeping Churches, Adventist

Church of Christ Scientist (Independent from the main denominations)

 

Categories have not yet been created for the following denominations. The number of churches per the respective denominations are in parenthesis:

 

Continental Reform (55)

Congregationalist (34)

Anabaptist (29)

Brethren (22)

Pietists and Holiness (16)

Spiritual Baptists (1)

Pentecostalism (61)

Charismatic (12)

Neo-Charismatic (6)

African Initiated (8)

Messianic Judaism / Jewish Christians (8)

United and uniting Church (16)

Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) (9)

Stone Campbell Restauration (5)

Southcottites (3)

Sabbath-Keeping churches, Adventist (7)

Sabbath-Keeping churches, Non-Adventist (14)

Sunday Adventists (4)

Sacred Name Groups (3)

British-Israelism (4)

Christian Identity (4)

Miscellaneous/Other (23)

 

Nontrinitarian groups

 

Latter Day Saints (11)

Oneness Pentecostalism (13)

Unitarianism and Universalism (13)

Bible Student groups (6)

Swedenborgianism (3)

Christian Science (1)

Other non-Trinitarians (18)

New Thought (8)

Esoteric Christianity (6)

Syncretistic religions incorporating elements of Christianity (7)

 

Based on the preceding, there is potential for approximately 425 new waymark categories under Christian churches. This number could be reduced significantly should more emphasis be placed on the denomination, as opposed to the churches within the denominations listed on Wikipedia, when categories are created. Currently, categories have not yet been created in relation to churches within some of the largest denominations, e.g., Pentecostal (61), Continental Reform (55), Congregationalist (34), Anabaptist (29), Brethren (22) and Pietists and Holiness(16).

 

Some of the churches are independent from any of the denominations listed on Wikipedia. An independent category may have to be created to accommodate these churches.

 

I doubt if anyone would object to a Church Category titled: “Christian Churches? It could accommodate the smallest denominations/churches that are not included in one of the main denominations.

 

I assume that adherents of a church listed within one of the main denominations would not object to being identified as being from that family of churches on Waymarking.com. It may be that someone may object to their churches being grouped as part of an independent Christian or Christian Church category, but this should not prevent the Waymarking community from approving these categories. Our objective is to waymark buildings, not endorse, promote or defend a religion.

 

From my cursory review of other religions, there appears to be as many distinctions within their religion as there are within the Christian faith. If we approve separate categories for all other churches, sects, faiths, etc, it will become unmanageable

 

While we have not yet reached our saturation point, we may do so in the near future. In an attempt to address, this issue, I offer the following suggestions. Please also contribute suggestions that will hopefully lead to some form of consensus.

 

Consider

 

Approving denominations as opposed to churches in that denomination.

 

It would be easier to do this if categories already existed for all of the Christian denominations listed on Wikipedia. If someone were to submit a waymark for the Church of Tuvalu (Church), for example, that waymark could be added to the Congregationalist Churches (Denomination) category. If that category had not yet been created, the peer review process would have to review the submission on its own merit, unless the owner is asked and agrees to create the Congregationalist Churches category first. If the individual has no interest in doing so, the only alternative will be for someone coming forward and volunteering to create this new category (denomination). If there are no volunteers, the category will either be denied or approved, should all of the relevant conditions be met. If the waymark is approved, this will not help in reducing the proliferation of church categories. Since the Waymarking community is given a key role to play in the approval of categories, we should exercise our prerogative and deny some of the church categories that would better fit within a larger denomination category that would include churches of different names but sharing the same beliefs.

 

Also, categories for the main Christian denominations, as well as those for Independent or Christian Churches, should perhaps be created at the earliest opportunity. Volunteers could be sought through the forums. An absence of volunteers will lead to the status quo being maintained.

 

With respect to the proposal for a Worldwide Reformed Churches Category, I have reviewed the relevant write-ups on Wikipedia for some of these churches and note that Calvinism is identified as an “orientation”, as opposed to an actual denomination and/or church. I stand to be corrected however, as I am not an expert on this subject. However, wikipedia defines churches by classification, orientation and polity (governance). The following reformed churches are classified as follows: Christian Reformed Church - Classification -Protestant - Orientation - Evangelical / Calvinist - Polity - Presbyterian - United Reform churches in America - Classification - Protestant - Orientation Mainline / Calvinist - Polity - Presbyterian - Reformed Churches in the Netherlands - Classification - Protestant - Orientation - Mainstream Reformed, polity- presbyterian. The common denominators are Protestant and Presbyterian. The orientation, while influenced by Calvinism, is not shown as such for all the churches listed under the title “Continental Reform Churches”. If these Reformed churches follow a Presbyterian governance, one would think that the reformed churches could be waymarked under the Presbyterian category. Another alternative would be to create a “Continental Reform Church” category as it would be easier to manage for reviewers, in that all of the churches listed under the Continental Reform churches on Wikipedia would be accepted, irrespective of their orientation and polity / governance. In so far as the Church of Scotland, it is classified as Protestant, Calvinist and Presbyterian. In my view, that church, if waymarked, should be under the Presbyterian category as it is listed under the Presbyterian banner on Wikipedia.

 

It seems the URL got cut off in the last post. I think it should be http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvinism.

 

To quote from this article "The biggest Reformed association is the World Communion of Reformed Churches with more than 80 million members in 211 member denominations around the world." The link already provided a few posts back is the one for the World Communion of Reformed Churches.

 

So, I should point out that a Presbyterian Church category already exists. The Presbyterian Church (called the Church of Scots in Scotland) is a Calvinist denomination.

 

I believe between the Presbyterian Church category and the one proposed here, we would catch by far almost all of the Calvinist churches. So I would venture to say that with respect to the last post, we are on the same wavelength.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Have we thought about why we think about imposing limits on the number of categories that can be created? The rules of the hobby don't impose strict limits. For me as long as the category can be considered distinct from another one, it should be permitted. And I think there are many reasons to consider one protestant denomination to be distinct from another one.

 

Furthermore, we already have categories that could encompass other ones, but we seem to manage these pretty well already using exclusions.

Edited by RakeInTheCache
0

Share this post


Link to post

Another alternative would be to create a “Continental Reform Church” category as it would be easier to manage for reviewers, in that all of the churches listed under the Continental Reform churches on Wikipedia would be accepted, irrespective of their orientation and polity / governance.

 

Continental Reformed could be the right solution. Thanks for posting.

0

Share this post


Link to post

That is a good question. From my perspective, I feel that it is more likely for categories to be approved if the buildings / churches to be waymarked are well represented and found in many countries. Also, it will increase the opportunities for lesser known churches to be waymarked if they are grouped together with churches that share the same classification.

 

 

 

quote name='RakeInTheCache' timestamp='1417503512' post='5452192']

Have we thought about why we think about imposing limits on the number of categories that can be created? The rules of the hobby don't impose strict limits. For me as long as the category can be considered distinct from another one, it should be permitted. And I think there are many reasons to consider one protestant denomination to be distinct from another one.

 

Furthermore, we already have categories that could encompass other ones, but we seem to manage these pretty well already using exclusions.

[/quote

Edited by Weathervane
0

Share this post


Link to post

The following is only meant to spur further discussion regarding the creation of church categories. . . . .

 

The following list of Christian denominations, congregations and churches, is available from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Protestant_churches#Esoteric

 

Categories have not yet been created for the following denominations. The number of churches per the respective denominations are in parenthesis:

 

.....

 

Christian Identity (4)

.....

 

 

I respectfully and without pointing fingers at any posters would like to inform folks that the Christian Identity movement is designated a radical racist hate group by many respected civil rights organizations, and followers of Identity Christianity have been on US government terrorist watch lists for years.

 

I recognize the poster was cut-and-pasting a list from Wikipedia, and assume did not know about this particular brand of doctrine, but there is well-founded debate about whether Identity Christianity is really a constitutionally protected religious affiliation, or just a cover for racist whites bent on fomenting race war or carrying out attacks on other religious groups, law enforcement, or racial minorities.

 

I think we need to be very careful in Waymarking not to slice and dice denominations much further than we have already. I like the Calvinism category idea.

0

Share this post


Link to post

The following is only meant to spur further discussion regarding the creation of church categories. . . . .

 

The following list of Christian denominations, congregations and churches, is available from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Protestant_churches#Esoteric

 

Categories have not yet been created for the following denominations. The number of churches per the respective denominations are in parenthesis:

 

.....

 

Christian Identity (4)

.....

 

 

I respectfully and without pointing fingers at any posters would like to inform folks that the Christian Identity movement is designated a radical racist hate group by many respected civil rights organizations, and followers of Identity Christianity have been on US government terrorist watch lists for years.

 

I recognize the poster was cut-and-pasting a list from Wikipedia, and assume did not know about this particular brand of doctrine, but there is well-founded debate about whether Identity Christianity is really a constitutionally protected religious affiliation, or just a cover for racist whites bent on fomenting race war or carrying out attacks on other religious groups, law enforcement, or racial minorities.

 

I think we need to be very careful in Waymarking not to slice and dice denominations much further than we have already. I like the Calvinism category idea.

 

The question one should ask regarding that particular entity is whether it has any place of worship worthy of being waymarked. If it hasn't, and a proposal for creating such a category is never received, the Waymarking community will not have to deal with it. Should a request be received, the views expressed in the above noted post will allow the Waymarking community to make an informed decision.

0

Share this post


Link to post

The following is only meant to spur further discussion regarding the creation of church categories. . . . .

 

The following list of Christian denominations, congregations and churches, is available from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Protestant_churches#Esoteric

 

Categories have not yet been created for the following denominations. The number of churches per the respective denominations are in parenthesis:

 

.....

 

Christian Identity (4)

.....

 

 

I respectfully and without pointing fingers at any posters would like to inform folks that the Christian Identity movement is designated a radical racist hate group by many respected civil rights organizations, and followers of Identity Christianity have been on US government terrorist watch lists for years.

 

I recognize the poster was cut-and-pasting a list from Wikipedia, and assume did not know about this particular brand of doctrine, but there is well-founded debate about whether Identity Christianity is really a constitutionally protected religious affiliation, or just a cover for racist whites bent on fomenting race war or carrying out attacks on other religious groups, law enforcement, or racial minorities.

 

I think we need to be very careful in Waymarking not to slice and dice denominations much further than we have already. I like the Calvinism category idea.

 

On the Wikipedia list, there are three entries under "Calvinism". They are "Continental Reformed Churches", "Presbyterian" and "Congregationalist". There is already a category on Waymarking titled "Presbyterian". These three denomination represent 55, 80 and 34 different congregations for a total of 169. I have not found the number of individual churches per congregation. The issue is fairly simple, does the creator of this new potential category wish to manage all three denominations or only one being Continental Reformed Churches? Considering that there is already a category for Presbyterian Churches, it may be preferable to create only the Continental Reformed Churches at this time and wait for another volunteer to come forward to create a Congregationalist category. On the other hand, creating a Calvinism category would go a long way in reducing the number of categories and create a precedent whereby the "orientation" would be the vehicle by which categories would be approved. Other orientations, to name a few, are: Lutheranism, Anglicanism, United and Uniting Churches, Pentecostalism,, etc. It's really for the Waymarking community to decide.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Well, I must say that I already learned a lot since starting this discussion. I had no idea Calvinism was this complicated.

 

I could agree to calling the category "Continental Reformed/Congregational Churches and Historical Sites". If general opinion is that "Continental Reformed/Congregational" makes the name too long, I would cede and agree to "Calvinist Churches and Historical Sites".

 

The criteria could be

 

1) The denomination is included on the site http://wcrc.ch/wcrc-member-churches/ and/or

2) The denomination is included on the site http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations under the heading Calvinism but not under the sub-heading "Presbyterianism"

 

This would also be excluding

 

1) Any Church with the word "Presbyterian" in the name or equivalent in local language

2) Any Church with the word "Scotland" in the name

0

Share this post


Link to post

Well, I must say that I already learned a lot since starting this discussion. I had no idea Calvinism was this complicated.

 

I could agree to calling the category "Continental Reformed/Congregational Churches and Historical Sites". If general opinion is that "Continental Reformed/Congregational" makes the name too long, I would cede and agree to "Calvinist Churches and Historical Sites".

 

The criteria could be

 

1) The denomination is included on the site http://wcrc.ch/wcrc-member-churches/ and/or

2) The denomination is included on the site http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations under the heading Calvinism but not under the sub-heading "Presbyterianism"

 

This would also be excluding

 

1) Any Church with the word "Presbyterian" in the name or equivalent in local language

2) Any Church with the word "Scotland" in the name

 

I support calling this new category "Calvinism". Continental Reform and Congregational Churches" is also a very valid title for this category, but 'Calvinism" will allow us to reduce the number of church related categories as opposed to the total number of churches to be waymarked. If Calvinism is used as the title for the category, I would simply exclude all of the churches listed under Presbyterian as per the List of Christian Denominations, on Wikipedia. To explain a little more on the differences between categories and individual churches, I take Pietists and Holiness Churches as an example. Two categories have already been created for churches under that orientation, they are Wesleyan and Church of the Nazarene. The remaining category within that orientation are as follows:

 

The Salvation Army

Church of God (Anderson)

Christian and Missionary Alliance

Bible Fellowship Church

Christian Baptist Church of God

Christ's Sanctified Holy Church

 

All of the above noted churches could be waymarked under a Holiness and Pietist Churches category. Otherwise, 6 categories would have to be created to waymark them. If you extrapolate and look at all the orientations and their individual churches under the List of Christian Denominations on Wikipedia, you will note that over 400 potential categories could be submitted for approval.

 

I am prepared to serve as a reviewer for this new category should you be looking for volunteers.

Edited by Weathervane
0

Share this post


Link to post

 

I support calling this new category "Calvinism". Continental Reform and Congregational Churches" is also a very valid title for this category, but 'Calvinism" will allow us to reduce the number of church related categories as opposed to the total number of churches to be waymarked. If Calvinism is used as the title for the category, I would simply exclude all of the churches listed under Presbyterian as per the List of Christian Denominations, on Wikipedia.

 

I did some more thinking after making the last post, and I'm wondering if the title Continental Reform and Congregational Churches would be more understandable for the majority of waymarkers. I wonder how many people are able to make the connection between Reformed and Congregational Churches and Calvinism. Just a thought.

 

I'm also hesitant to give complete control to Wikipedia over the criteria for this category due to the fact that there could be omissions and inaccuracies. That's why I added the second criteria as a complement to Wikipedia. (I had more difficulty finding an equivalent site for Congregational Churches)

0

Share this post


Link to post

 

I support calling this new category "Calvinism". Continental Reform and Congregational Churches" is also a very valid title for this category, but 'Calvinism" will allow us to reduce the number of church related categories as opposed to the total number of churches to be waymarked. If Calvinism is used as the title for the category, I would simply exclude all of the churches listed under Presbyterian as per the List of Christian Denominations, on Wikipedia.

 

I did some more thinking after making the last post, and I'm wondering if the title Continental Reform and Congregational Churches would be more understandable for the majority of waymarkers. I wonder how many people are able to make the connection between Reformed and Congregational Churches and Calvinism. Just a thought.

 

I'm also hesitant to give complete control to Wikipedia over the criteria for this category due to the fact that there could be omissions and inaccuracies. That's why I added the second criteria as a complement to Wikipedia. (I had more difficulty finding an equivalent site for Congregational Churches)

 

It would certainly be easier to identify the churches to be waymarked if you were to use Continental Reform and Congregational Churches as a title. Your second criteria is excellent as well.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Continental Reform is a term I had not seen before, but it makes sense and is easy to understand. I live in an area, where this is the predominant denomination, but if you would ask somebody for the next Calvinist church, almost nobody would be able to give you an answer, I guess.

 

I am intersted in churches in terms of history, culture, and architecture, not so much just listing places for worship; this is fine, just not my personal preference. And this proposal has a lot of potential in that respect. Without any research, I know about twenty Reformed churches within ten miles from home that are over 500 years old, about the same number of great church architecture of the late 19th century and a large number of later architectural masterpieces, especially from the 1930s. So I really hope to see this become a category soon.

Edited by fi67
0

Share this post


Link to post

I am intersted in churches in terms of history, culture, and architecture, not so much just listing places for worship; this is fine, just not my personal preference.

 

I propose the full category name as "Continental Reformed and Congregational Churches and Historical Sites"

0

Share this post


Link to post

So...would United Church of Christ Churches qualify? It seems that they would, and if so, perhaps that should be explicit in the category description.

0

Share this post


Link to post

So...would United Church of Christ Churches qualify? It seems that they would, and if so, perhaps that should be explicit in the category description.

 

United Church of Christ is included in the wikipedia article under the topic Continental Reformed Churches so yes they do qualify under the latest criteria described in this message thread.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I am intersted in churches in terms of history, culture, and architecture, not so much just listing places for worship; this is fine, just not my personal preference.

 

I propose the full category name as "Continental Reformed and Congregational Churches and Historical Sites"

 

For me that would be too long and confusing. I think shorter is better. You can say you will also accept historical sites in the category description.

 

It's not my category idea and I am not an officer, but I would consider a clearer title to be simply Continental Reformed and Congregationalist Churches.

0

Share this post


Link to post

What about "Continental Reformed and Congregationalist Church Locations" or maybe "Continental Reformed and Congregationalist Church Sites"

 

I guess I prefer the second. Adding the extra word allows for some distance from a purely religious context.

Edited by RakeInTheCache
0

Share this post


Link to post

What about "Continental Reformed and Congregationalist Church Locations" or maybe "Continental Reformed and Congregationalist Church Sites"

 

I guess I prefer the second. Adding the extra word allows for some distance from a purely religious context.

 

I think the 2nd one is fine :)

0

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe I missed something from earlier, but isn't sites a bit redundant? Many Waymarks are things, but many are also sites. Why not just mention sites or locations in the description, rather than the category name?

0

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe I missed something from earlier, but isn't sites a bit redundant? Many Waymarks are things, but many are also sites. Why not just mention sites or locations in the description, rather than the category name?

 

The reason is somewhat political really. Rumor has it that there are a number of hobbyists who believe that there are too many of these Church categories. Some of this seems to boil down to anti-clerical sentiments. As this category is constructed more for historical interest than promoting Christian values or ideas, putting "sites" on the end of the category name could help in swaying these voters over.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe I missed something from earlier, but isn't sites a bit redundant? Many Waymarks are things, but many are also sites. Why not just mention sites or locations in the description, rather than the category name?

 

The reason is somewhat political really. Rumor has it that there are a number of hobbyists who believe that there are too many of these Church categories. Some of this seems to boil down to anti-clerical sentiments. As this category is constructed more for historical interest than promoting Christian values or ideas, putting "sites" on the end of the category name could help in swaying these voters over.

 

I don't think the word sites" will make a difference, but it is RITC's category. I agree that "sites" is not needed, and at the inclusion of sites Would be better stated in the category description than in the title -- I posted as much :) . But the category owner has said in response that having sites in the name is important to him, so -- there it is :) It will be interesting to see what the community says about it.

 

Those that do not favor any more church categories will vote against this category for that reason, sites included (in name or description) or no sites included. I think it fills a niche, so I hope it passes peer review :)

0

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe I missed something from earlier, but isn't sites a bit redundant? Many Waymarks are things, but many are also sites. Why not just mention sites or locations in the description, rather than the category name?

The reason is somewhat political really. Rumor has it that there are a number of hobbyists who believe that there are too many of these Church categories. Some of this seems to boil down to anti-clerical sentiments.

Colour me confused too. If someone has an objection to the substance of the category, how would adding a single word to the end of the title change anything? The category would still represent exactly the same thing, just with a slightly longer title.

 

As this category is constructed more for historical interest than promoting Christian values or ideas...

This is already the case for every other category under Religious Buildings, and none of those have any of these additional words in their titles. I fail to see why this category needs to be treated any differently.

 

BTW, I was one of those who was wanting to limit the number of new church categories, but I'd be willing to vote this one through since it at least covers more than a single branch/denomination/whatever of Christianity. However, the unnecessary inclusion of "sites" in the title would be considered a point against the category in my eyes. You finally won me over, don't go too far and push me away again! :laughing:

0

Share this post


Link to post

Is this the correct place to make comments about the proposed category description? (I hope it is)

First off, can I say “way to go” to Rake In The Cache for persevering with this category and getting to this stage. This one seemed (to me anyway) to generate a lot of views and replies. I also want to add (as has already been expressed) how well this category captures so many different "denominations" within the protestant church family. Well done.

 

I had a look at the description that has been prepared and here are my comments, for what it's worth

The statement "...the invention of the printing press by Johannes Gutenberg proved extremely significant in that it provided the means for the rapid dissemination of new ideas." (in my opinion) does not add anything to the category description and could be removed to help keep the description as belief as possible while still adequately stating what the category is about. I think the same could also be said for the following paragraph as well: "It may be that the reason there are so many protestant denominations today, is that the reformation encouraged free thinking and an individual relationship with a monotheistic God and in so doing encouraged diverse interpretations, each with a distinct tradition and history while at the same time sharing some fundamental beliefs."

 

Regarding the discussion surrounding "site" in the title...and maybe I missed this in the discussion, but to me that implies that a building is not required. But this is in the Buildings main category, so will that be a problem. I know I have visited locations which had historical plaques relating to important church history, such as the location of the first church meeting in Canada of such and such a denomination, but I think they met in tents and therefore there was no building. or maybe I’ve just completely made all that up in my head? Anyway, would such a "site" be admissible to this category?

 

Finally, as far as photos are concerned, I believe that a photo of the church sign should be a requirements unless the building is no longer used as a meeting place for a "reform" church (such as in the case where a building which once was used for a reform church is now used for a Baptist church, or a daycare, or a pub, yes I've seen it all) in which case the current sign would be irrelevant. or where the church building no longer exists.

 

Hopefully this all adds to the discussion, to me it feels like a bunch of lunch-hour rambling.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1