Talk:Christian unions (student groups)

Proposed merge

I'm proposing that Cold contact be merged into this article. The saying is unique to the Christian Union, and Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Beginning 18:45, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

It was redirected here for some years. Evangelism would have been a better target, as local churches and various missions also try to "reach the unreached", but the term is also used in sales/marketing & recruitment, so I changed the redirect target to cold calling. – Fayenatic L (talk) 19:11, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Evangelical Protestant

Although many Christian Unions do have an Evangelical vision, and although many of the students within these Christian Unions are Protestant it is not always the case. Generally in practice Christian Unions are non-denominational for people to share their Christianity with each other without the traditional lines of Christian denomination. Perhaps a change in this is warranted? garethppls 23:32, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

There are citations to support the current text of the article. Could you supply some reliable source citations to support a suggested re-wording? Bondegezou (talk) 09:22, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, what I am going on is that many Christian Unions in practice have Roman Catholic members, and indeed many include Roman Catholic churches on their websites to be linked. One example is in the about us on the IFES Ireland page, where it claims the following:

As a movement we are guided by three statements: vision, mission and values, which sum up what we aim to accomplish under God’s direction, and how we believe we should go about fulfilling this role. We also have a Doctrinal Basis, which is a summary of the core beliefs we unite around as an interdenominational movement.

Emphasis in particular is on the bold. Source: http://www.ifesireland.org/about-us/vision.php

This is from the following link: http://74.125.77.132/search?q=cache:w30v5Xy2R8QJ:www.ifesworld.org/resources/download.php%3Ffile%3Dreports/2006_IFES_Signed_Accounts.pdf

IFES is a global, inter-denominational partnership of national movements.

We are a gospel people, united more by our commitment to the primary truths of the gospel as laid

out in our doctrinal basis than to any denominational network. The nature of our worldwide Fellowship

is expressed primarily through our network of relationships. The structures of IFES serve us in

facilitating these relationships. We recognise our dependence upon God in prayer for growth and

fruitfulness

It seems very clear that Christian Unions are Christian Evangelical movements rather than specifically Protestant movements.

garethppls (talk) 10:55, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Christian Union overseas

This article talks exclusively about CU in the UK. What about Ireland, Australia and New Zealand, all of which have groups by the name of Christian Union (and also under the IFES)? There are probable more countries too. Matt73 11:02, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Somewhat remedied, I've added a link to IFES Ireland to the article, and added the Maynooth Christian Union. When I get a full look at the list of universities, I will probably update the article further, although perhaps the list needs to subdivide universities by region worldwide or by country. garethppls 23:30, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

58.105.214.139, could you please justify your changes, and explain what Campus Crusade for Christ has to do with Christian Union? What do you mean by "the largest in the world"? I do not agree with removing large chunks of text with an anonymous account and no explanation. I intend to revert them when I have the time. Matt73 13:01, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, I think I've worked it out. The Ivy League Christian Unions are possibly linked to CCC, judging by their staffs' backgrounds. But I still think that this article should have sections for each country. 58.105.215.139 or someone could write about the Ivy League CUs. I'll do this when I have time (ie not for ages), but I'm removing "the largest in the world" now because it is ambiguous and unreferenced. Matt73 13:20, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Who can join

Some editors have inserted statements that "over 75% of the world's Christians would not be able to join", citing the Doctrinal Basis (e.g. here). It is my understanding that anyone can join Christian Unions, and only leaders are required to affirm the Doctrinal Basis. I therefore propose to remove that statement as incorrect. – Fayenatic L (talk) 07:12, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Mmm... My understanding is that individuals CU practices vary, but in my experience it is generally the case that "only" (there are so MANY!) leaders (and speakers etc.) must sign the DB. However – while that means that the "over 75%" could lawfully become members, they could not become members in good conscience. I would say the phrase needs rewriting (since it is a notable issue IMHO that Christian Unions do most assuredly not unite Christians) rather than removing. DBD 10:28, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I understand that the main talks are intentionally open to absolutely all comers, and generally anyone is welcome to attend other meetings for bible study and prayer. Attending regularly looks like "joining" or "membership". In cases where the CU is affiliated to the Students Union, the latter may require the CU to have a defined membership list or a subscription, but otherwise there may be no formality at all. If a student from (say) a Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox or liberal denominational background has a high view of the Bible (not meaning that in a POV way), and believes that they benefit from attending, what's the issue of conscience? – Fayenatic L (talk) 08:37, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

While this is an interesting discussion, I suggest we remember Wikipedia's core principles here. Additions to the article should be verifiable. We have a citation on this point. I recommend people read it: [1]. Any alternative edits would do well to have appropriate reliable source citations. Bondegezou (talk) 15:11, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out that citation. It is quite long, so relevant page numbers need to be added in the footnote. It includes the statement "Many Christians feel excluded from CUs" on page 12. Pages 4 and 12 refer to doctrines in the DB that go beyond the ecumenical creeds, and page 9 mentions that "many" CUs require all members to sign the DB. Page 4 says "Whilst many Christians have no problems agreeing with such statements, a very considerable number do." Page 7 refers to one Orthodox student who complained that he was excluded, but does not indicate what proportion of Orthodox students felt likewise. The figure of 75% is not mentioned and may be WP:SYNTH. – Fayenatic L (talk) 20:18, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I've rewritten the article to follow that source more specifically. – Fayenatic L (talk) 07:42, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Good re-write. Bondegezou (talk) 17:18, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Cheers! I moved on to UCCF and removed some longstanding tags there. Please review that article as well. – Fayenatic L (talk) 21:15, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Christian unions (student groups). 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://archive.is/20051226235925/http://www.evangelical-times.org/etnews/Nov04/Nov04n04.htm to http://www.evangelical-times.org/etnews/Nov04/Nov04n04.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:19, 6 August 2017 (UTC)