Talk:Merit (Christianity)

Theology Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Theology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Theology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TheologyWikipedia:WikiProject TheologyTemplate:WikiProject TheologyTheology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Christianity Mid‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Philosophy: Ethics Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Ethics

Untitled

How can the neutrality of this article be disputed? no one has said anything about it 68.171.249.134 06:34, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I did not put the flags there, but I believe that if the article is recast in a neutral point of view (NPOV), then it could conceivably have its flags removed. As a theologian I would like to help rewrite and clarify it. I think that the article is worthwhile, and it would be an asset to this encyclopedia if revised. drboisclair 19:41, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This is not neutral. As it says at the bottom, it is just downloaded from the old Catholic Encyclopedia, and is on a topic where there is disagreement between Catholic and non-Catholic views. It needs recasting. J. Franklin, 3 Jan 2006

Also merit is not just a Catholic idea. What about merit in Buddhism and Hinduism? Adam 08:18, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article states that its main purpose is to "vindicate" the particular point of Catholic belief under discussion here. That's not a neutral point of view, it would be better rewritten in a more dispassionate and evenhanded way, with the arguments and counterarguments confined to a separate section in the article, ratehr than interspersed throughout. Dr. Phil 16:06, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Large removal

I just nuked the huge essay that was here. I didn't see anything salvageable while going through it, but if anyone really wants to put some time into this you might want to look at the history. It's a muddle, but there might be some tidbits that could help feed a larger article. --Robth^Talk_Cleanup? 13:03, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrite

Changed cleanup to rewrite

Why not "Merit (Christianity)"?

A page that talks about the various Christian views of Merit - Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox - would be most welcome, I think. If you feel yourself up to that - please write it! -- 92.229.155.131 (talk) 13:00, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is probably because the idea of people obtaining "Merit" hardly plays a role in Protestantism, and certainly not in Orthodox Christianity were the idea is seen as a form of Blasmphamy. It is one of countless Roman Catholic innovations and illusions and dates back no earlier than the 13th century.--71.240.142.106 (talk) 02:41, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is good to have a title Merit (Christianity) and not Merit (Catholicism), because it is not only exclusive for Catholucs but also for Orthodox Christians... Jumark27 (talk) 08:54, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The first sentence

On first reading merit ... is seen to have a claim struck me as both bizarre and non-authoritative as the first sentence for the article. Then I see it comes from An Introduction to Buddhism. I'd rather use the Augustinian definition. Is there a reason for the article not to start with the traditional grace precedes the work which precedes the merit from a Christian reference work? patsw (talk) 21:12, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Eastern Orthodoxy

An Orthodox perspective is needed, but I don't feel qualified to write it. Aren't they closer to Catholics than Protestants on this issue? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 36.11.229.191 (talk) 05:55, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]