![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
I understand that catholics also have a theory of glorification. If anyone knows anything about that i would greatly appreciate there posting it.
I'm no theologian, but it could have something to do with the Catholic views on the relationship between body and soul. The eventual glorified body recieved would be a true (or true-er) reflection of the beauty of the soul rather than the unglorified, which has the imperfections of this world.
I also agree that this article needs a clean up. All points are stated as fact, without giving reference to the denomination that believes this school of theological thought.
"For the most part, all protestant denominations believe in this form of glorification, although some have alternative names."
Say what? "For the most part", "all", "some". What is actually meant to be conveyed with this phrase. That most of all denominations believe this but some don't? Huh?
I'd also like to see the direct quote by C.S. Lewis which has been paraphrased in this article. I have read the book "The Weight of Glory" and did not get the impression that Lewis was conveying this thought at all. Citation, please?
Don't know anything about the Catholic understanding of glorification, but I added a space for it-- to show that the article is incomplete. Also added Orthodox Christian use of "glorification," and subsumed the rest of the article under a Protestant heading. It'll take a Protestant theologian or five to parse the details of which denominations/ schools practice which theory of glorification. Buddhagazelle 18:15, 2 March 2007 (UTC)Buddhagazelle
I moved the cleanup tag to the Protestant section and made it more specific. There should probably be a general statement about 'glorification' above the table of contents? Buddhagazelle 18:32, 2 March 2007 (UTC)Buddhagazelle
I removed the entire Eastern Orthodox section on glorification. I am sorry to say this as an Orthodox theologian, but it was full of mistakes, and although it would be better to be re-written, it is better that it is withdrawn until such a time as a more accurate piece is submitted. One of the several mistakes is the supposed use of 'glorification' as, supposedly the Orthodox word for canonization. I have no idea where this is coming from, because there is no word δοξασμός or anything similar, that could be translated as glorification. Traditionally the expression is the 'recognition' or even 'proclamation' of one's sainthood. I cannot tell if 'glorification' is used in a part of the Orthodox world, or if it a particularly American Orthodox use, but either way it is certainly not correct to say that "glorification is the usual word for canonization in the Eastern Orthodox tradition". I don't know who Fr Alexey Young is, and whether he grew up as Orthodox, but it is apparent that while he thinks of the use of 'glorification' as normative for Orthodoxy, it does not appear in any of the sources he cites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.98.192.103 ( talk) 21:38, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
by no means should this article be merged with 'glory' while the idea of glorification is based in the idea of glory they are too distinct to be grouped together under either name. in the same was that you can't put sanctification under saint you can't classify glorification under glory. J.L.Main ( talk) 08:23, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
The Canonization article gives a much more in depth look at Glorification in the Orthodox Church than this Glorification article. Should I just copy and paste that information over to here? Or would anyone be in favor of a merger? They are both very similar concepts (neither of the 2 churches create saints, but rather, they recognize a saint through their respective canonization/glorification processes as a person that is in heaven). However, I don't know how to title the merged article. Maybe: Saint Recognition Processes. Or: Canonization and Glorification. Then have Canonization and Glorification redirect here? -- Icehcky8 ( talk) 13:37, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi
Is it possible we could discuss the merger of
Glorification (theology)? What were you're reasons for the merger?
Glorification contains a long unreferenced section from the Eastern Orthodox perspective which creates the impression it's primarily an Eastern Orthodox term. Given the often completely divergent views within Christianity wouldn't it be better to have separate articles?
Knobbly (
talk)
02:42, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Knobbly, the reasons I merged
Glorification (theology) into
Glorification are that the first is a stub article and
Glorification is a short article as well. So it made sense to me to place that extremely short content, which has been a stub for more than two-and-a-half years with very little improvement in all that time, into the more general article. I still see no reason for this small stub to continue on its own, unless you and others are willing to expand it. I will not merge it again right away, however I still think the merge should be strongly considered. It would be better to expand this in the general article, as well as to expand the other short sections in that article, than it would be to maintain separate short and very short articles. So I will open a merge discussion to see if other editors have opinions like yours and mine. –
p i e (
Climax!)
16:04, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
It has been suggested by editor Knobbly that this article is heavily weighted toward the Eastern Orthodox meaning and usage of the term "glorification", and I agree with Knobbly. Since the above merger discussion will close soon, this discussion is moved to its own section. Please feel free to share your opinion about this NPOV issue. – Paine ( Climax!) 17:01, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
This is a mess. So far I have
The question I have relates to Orthodox Christianity: does "Glorification"
Based on whether the correct answer is #1 or #2 I present alternative proposals for splitting the current contents:
Suggested disambiguation skeleton:
The two splits from the current article would be
Same as case #1 except that