![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||
|
Greetings. This article obviously focuses on the Catholic approach. There are other approaches, such as Jewish homiletics. Probably parts of this article should be merged with Sermon. And maybe this article should be set up as a spin-out from Sermon, i.e., in summary style. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HG ( talk • contribs) 05:58, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
In other words, the article is a total mess. Not only it lacks any reference to protestant homiletics (other than one mention of Karl Barth), but also its order is not understandable. A lot of facts are not suitable for WP, e.g. "notable French preachers". Eh? Someone with better English than mine clean it up, please. 139.30.62.62 ( talk) 13:30, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
Guys it's been 10+ years and this section of the article is still really poor. The tone and pov are wildly inconsistent with Wiki's house style. The discussion of 'the East' is Orientalist at best, verging on anti-semitic. I get it; the text y'all pulled from is Catholic and apparently from 1910. But to just lay down that Jews Love Ostentation Not Learning!! is a hell of a thing. I don't edit here bc it's honestly cliquey&I've had minor points on stuff I have grad degrees in deleted time&again, but those of you who hang here, please fix this. 82.37.218.159 ( talk) 09:14, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
Rather than tag onto the discussion on Non-Catholic homiletics, I've added this new section. It may well belong as an extension of that discussion.
The contents below the heading on Profane Rhetoric fails to define the topic for the general reader, (such as myself). I was drawn to the article by way of the article on Billy Sunday ("By listening to [John Wilbur] Chapman preach night after night, Sunday received a valuable course in homiletics.") Either the topic heading should be changed, or a new paragraph added that defines "profane rhetoric".
GeeBee60 ( talk) 12:33, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
I've had several people flag me on Twitter (as "the Wikipedia guy" they happen to know) that this section reads to them as glaringly antisemitic.
Here in 2020, it reads like a cut'n'paste from a 19th century encyclopedia that was in the public domain - and I see that large chunks are sourced (and possibly cut'n'pasted) from the 1910 edition of the Catholic Encyclopedia. So that may be tone coming through from the tone of the times ... but it's unlikely to be good sourcing, or good WP:NPOV.
I'm not knowledgeable about homilectics - but I suggest the CE may not be a good or reliable source to make claims about Jews, and this section urgently needs revision - David Gerard ( talk) 18:07, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
I came to this page through a link from an article on Hasidic Judaism and, like other readers, found a discussion of Catholicism. Sadly I lack the knowledge to correct this deficiency, but if there is any reader who does have a scholarly understanding of Jewish ( or Islamic, or any other) homilitics, the improvement would be greatly appreciated — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.32.5.187 ( talk) 02:44, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||
|
Greetings. This article obviously focuses on the Catholic approach. There are other approaches, such as Jewish homiletics. Probably parts of this article should be merged with Sermon. And maybe this article should be set up as a spin-out from Sermon, i.e., in summary style. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HG ( talk • contribs) 05:58, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
In other words, the article is a total mess. Not only it lacks any reference to protestant homiletics (other than one mention of Karl Barth), but also its order is not understandable. A lot of facts are not suitable for WP, e.g. "notable French preachers". Eh? Someone with better English than mine clean it up, please. 139.30.62.62 ( talk) 13:30, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
Guys it's been 10+ years and this section of the article is still really poor. The tone and pov are wildly inconsistent with Wiki's house style. The discussion of 'the East' is Orientalist at best, verging on anti-semitic. I get it; the text y'all pulled from is Catholic and apparently from 1910. But to just lay down that Jews Love Ostentation Not Learning!! is a hell of a thing. I don't edit here bc it's honestly cliquey&I've had minor points on stuff I have grad degrees in deleted time&again, but those of you who hang here, please fix this. 82.37.218.159 ( talk) 09:14, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
Rather than tag onto the discussion on Non-Catholic homiletics, I've added this new section. It may well belong as an extension of that discussion.
The contents below the heading on Profane Rhetoric fails to define the topic for the general reader, (such as myself). I was drawn to the article by way of the article on Billy Sunday ("By listening to [John Wilbur] Chapman preach night after night, Sunday received a valuable course in homiletics.") Either the topic heading should be changed, or a new paragraph added that defines "profane rhetoric".
GeeBee60 ( talk) 12:33, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
I've had several people flag me on Twitter (as "the Wikipedia guy" they happen to know) that this section reads to them as glaringly antisemitic.
Here in 2020, it reads like a cut'n'paste from a 19th century encyclopedia that was in the public domain - and I see that large chunks are sourced (and possibly cut'n'pasted) from the 1910 edition of the Catholic Encyclopedia. So that may be tone coming through from the tone of the times ... but it's unlikely to be good sourcing, or good WP:NPOV.
I'm not knowledgeable about homilectics - but I suggest the CE may not be a good or reliable source to make claims about Jews, and this section urgently needs revision - David Gerard ( talk) 18:07, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
I came to this page through a link from an article on Hasidic Judaism and, like other readers, found a discussion of Catholicism. Sadly I lack the knowledge to correct this deficiency, but if there is any reader who does have a scholarly understanding of Jewish ( or Islamic, or any other) homilitics, the improvement would be greatly appreciated — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.32.5.187 ( talk) 02:44, 23 September 2022 (UTC)