Talk:Black church

message: Currently there is only one section which remains unrefernced. That is the "National Baptist Convention, USA, Inc" section.--Sefringle 02:01, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Got it, thanks. CJ 02:48, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

text: This article is studded with requests for citations, but I don't think every sentence of every paragraph needs a source.  Often paragraphs may be based on one source.--Parkwells (talk) 17:10, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: references

message: There are a few sentences starting with "Because" or "But". Bad grammar, but overall the article is fine. Alientraveller 17:50, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've gone through and cleaned up the grammar some. CJ 19:43, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I'd like to get the social issues section expanded, especially with regard to some of the differences of opinion during the Civil Rights era. But it's difficult to find reliable sources because everything is so embellished. But if we can find the sources for it then yes it would definitly be warranted. There are also some theological differences that should also be expanded upon. Provided sources for them can be located. CJ 17:07, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Here's another online source that appears to be fairly NPOV and academic.    There might be something here you can use on the differences in attitudes re. social activism.  Timotheos 19:19, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I'll take a look. CJ 19:29, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm not sure I'm understanding your concerns. I can add more sources, but is it really necessary to provide redundant sources? Also, where prose is concerned. Your example was you don't get how sentences tie together. The very next sentence shows that. "In 1787, Allen founded the all-Black Mother Bethel African Methodist Episcopal Church after St. George's white members, increasingly uncomfortable with the large number of Blacks the charismatic Allen had attracted to the church, began relegating Black worshipers to the church balcony." Maybe I'm missing the point. CJ 15:16, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA on hold 

message: It looks like this article is really about African-AMERICAN churches, not churches in Africa, for example.  If that's the case, wouldn't it be a good idea to indicate this in the first sentence?  Maybe if we said "...that minister to African-American communities" (instead of "Black communities), that would be clearer for non-U.S. readers. Make sense? Timotheos 03:17, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've reworded the opening sentence to clarify that it is talking about Black-Americans/African-Americans. CJ 10:56, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Scope - African American churches?

message: There seems to be some editing & reversion regarding which Black denomination is the largest in the U.S.  Both NBC-USA and COGIC claim about 6 million members.  Both denominations' statistics are approximations and are dated, so it's hard to determine which one is the "largest."  Perhaps we should stick with "one of the largest Black denominations" wording for each of them, until a reliable, dispassionate source can be cited. Timotheos 19:01, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm aware that both claim to be the largest. But, the statistic is currently documented with an independent source. I'm looking for scientific stastical studies that are more reliable.CJ 20:38, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: (16 years later) Why don't we create an article (or section) listing the largest predominantly African American Christian denominations? I wasn't able to find this basic information in a chart anywhere on Wikipedia. 98.123.38.211 (talk) 01:09, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Which denomination is the biggest?

message: Hi CJ. In copyediting the History section, it's possible I may have unintentionally altered your intended meaning here and there. If you find any such instances, please revert them or fix them. What you have here is interesting and worthwhile and seems generally well-supported. The short section on Politics and social issues is perhaps an exception. It could be expanded, I think, and probably should be. Just from general knowledge of the world, I'm guessing that divisions must exist within the Black church about social issues and moral issues. Your single example of a moral issue, homosexuality, suggests that moral issues  in the Black church are focused on sex. This implication is probably unintentional and stems from your use of only the one example. Have Black churches (and White churches, for that matter) decided that social issues such as racial discrimination, voting rights, and poverty are not moral issues? Finetooth 19:24, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyediting notes

message: The article could be improved by more depth in discussion of how enslaved Africans dealt with religious traditions, especially as there were markedly different conditions in different colonies in the 18th c. Blacks didn't establish their own churches only in reaction to white actions or racial discrimination. When they were freed, many wanted to withdraw and consolidate within their own communities, including establishing their own churches. I've just been reading about this, but now have to find out where. Also the black churches had a much stronger role in the Civil Rights Movement than is touched on here.--Parkwells 20:47, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Depth of discussionn

message: I've removed the following paragraph from the article's introduction, because it seemed tangential to the subject of the Black church:
Because of Christian churches' complicated relationship with slavery, when ministers in the South tried to use religion to keep slaves "in their places", some question whether African Americans should continue with Christianity. Many African-Americans are turning to spiritual systems and religions including Orisha, etc, which preceded the American religious movements.
This may be true, but I don't think it's central enough to the subject to be included in the article's lede.  A discussion of the criticisms of the black church from the likes of Malcolm X would, of course, be appropriate, as would a mention of the response of black liberation theology.  Heck, W.E.B. Du Bois was critical of aspects of the Black church in The Souls of Black Folk, which I'd think was more relevant to the history of the Black church than a modern-day return to Orisha. (Honestly, I'd think that more African-Americans have turned to Islam than to Orisha in the past fifty years, although I have no data to support this hunch.)  Anyway, saying that "some question whether African Americans should continue with Christianity" without giving any more context or noting the response of the Black church to this challenge is a violation of the NPOV policy. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 09:45, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed paragraph from intro 

message: Some African Americans would be offended by the title.  Should the page be moved to "African American church" or "African church"?  Please respond on my talk page. If not, why not? The Piano Man (talk) 16:07, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Discussions about the article are supposed to be on this talk page. This deals with churches of African American congregations in the United States, who have developed a unique tradition of Christianity. I don't know who started the article, but "black church" has been a common term within the community. Some people may object to any title.--Parkwells (talk) 00:40, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: OK; sounds good.
The Piano Man (talk) 15:52, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Black church an offensive name? 

message: Women, especially in the Holiness movement, challenged male leaders insistence on institution building.  Although some became preachers, they were not encouraged in independent roles. It's an interesting and complex aspect of the 19th c. growth of the church, as the women challenged male leadership when the church was especially trying to build it up. Deserves more treatment here.--Parkwells (talk) 18:31, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Needs more on roles of women

message: I question how appropriate it is to say that Black churches are "very conservative" regarding gender issues.  The article cited (reference 24) certainly doesn't say that.  I may be splitting hairs, but I think "conservative" is justified, but not "very," because I haven't seen a source quantifying how much less likely African American Christians are to support gay rights than white Christians, especially if similar denominations are factored in.  There's a lot you can say about Black churches and gay and lesbian issues--the article cited points out, for instance, that support for gay rights has declined since 2000, while support among other groups has risen.  That's certainly significant.  But in recent elections, Europe has moved to the right, and the US to the left; that doesn't make Europe more rightist-governed than the US.  40% support in 2004 for equal rights for gays and lesbians is reasonably high among Black churchgoers; I wouldn't be surprised if that was higher than the white average, weighted by denomination, at least, in the same year.69.94.192.147 (talk) 01:17, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: 2009.... see, no one wants to talk about this. --98.246.156.76 (talk) 10:18, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: "Typically are very conservative" with regards to gay and lesbian issues?

message: ...needs to be its own section in this article. You know it, I know it. Stop pretending. "Same-sex marriage and other LGBT issues have been among the leading causes for activism in black churches.[28]" You mean activism AGAINST? Because the way the article is written now the wording is ambiguous (read: piss-poor). --98.246.156.76 (talk) 10:18, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Homophobia

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Black church. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080121131156/http://www.observer.com:80/2007/charter-lawsuit to http://www.observer.com/2007/charter-lawsuit
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:04, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Black church. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081019021534/http://www.library.vcu.edu/jbc/speccoll/vbha/gillmin.html to http://www.library.vcu.edu/jbc/speccoll/vbha/gillmin.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080325005805/http://www.tucc.org/talking_points.htm to http://www.tucc.org/talking_points.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080109055932/http://www.intiman.org/2007season/nativity.html to http://www.intiman.org/2007season/nativity.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071009075118/http://www.ncaaa.org/nativity.html to http://www.ncaaa.org/nativity.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:50, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The article's title is currently "Black church". In the first sentence it's "Black Church". Would someone please fix this. Offhand, I don't know which is better. deisenbe (talk) 10:56, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I tried;  accused me of vandalism. 2600:8800:1880:68:5604:A6FF:FE38:4B26 (talk) 05:18, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Where did I do that? —valereee (talk) 10:37, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: "General note: unconstructive editing". This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions did not appear constructive and has been reverted. 2600:8800:1880:68:5604:A6FF:FE38:4B26 (talk) 19:57, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  I do unconstructive non-vandalistic things with some regularity. --JBL (talk) 13:58, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  why are you enforcing inequity and inconsistency? 2600:8800:1880:68:5604:A6FF:FE38:4B26 (talk) 17:21, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Capitalization