Talk:Affirmative prayer

A sustainable article

I know the original page for Affirmative Prayer (a specific method of praying) was deleted for good cause. I am working on being able to satisfy citation requirements before re-introducing the article. However, the redirect of this page to Prayer in Christianity is an error as the techniques of Affirmative Prayer are not restricted to Christanity and in fact are generally denounced by some traditional Christian churches. Various forms of Affirmative Prayer exist in all New Thought churches, as well as some New Age teachings, Hoodoo, Native American and other forms of spirituality. There also is no section on that page for this subject so again the redirect target is an error. I have therefor changed the redirect to the more general Prayer until I can create a sustainable article on this specific subject. Low Sea (talk) 11:43, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Un-redirected

This article is un-redirected now and I added some references and new info. --Linda (talk) 06:23, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I don't have access to the sources but it looks good. Would it be appropriate to provide a link to this article from prayer? A brief mention would be suitable, taking care to avoid undue weight being given to this particular form of prayer. dave souza, talk 09:11, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, a link from prayer to this article would be perfectly appropriate. I'd say the article now has a permanent home in WP, largely due to Linda's efforts in finding proper sourcing for some of the more important statements in the article. Thanks. ... Kenosis (talk) 17:58, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

The "propoer sourcing" referenced was not to independent sources. That is what is needed if there is truly going to be an article on this (non)subject. ScienceApologist (talk) 23:27, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

The sourcing was indeed to independent sources, a fair number of very independent, even exemplary WP:Reliable sources. Pls see my comments below. ... Kenosis (talk) 01:54, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Reinstated the redirect

No way, Jose. There is no evidence here that this is actually recognized by outside authorities as an actual distinction from prayer. You need independent sources to satisfy WP:RS. None were seen in the article in its previous incarnation. I reinstated the redirect. ScienceApologist (talk) 23:27, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

SA, I reverted. Affirmative prayer is not a POV in the sense it's ordinarily used in WP, nor is it a distinction from or argument against prayer, but is a type of prayer, just as supplication, meditative prayer, incantation, etc., are types of prayer. It's not so obscure or antithetical that it can be properly termed a POV fork from "prayer". Agree or disagree with the premises behind it, it has demonstrably gained a wide audience and, particularly with the groundswell of "new age" culture and community that burgeoned starting in the late-70s and 80s, has gained many adherents to its premises. In other words, these words today have a particular, if approximate, meaning as a type of prayer, an identifiable set of characteristics that differentiate it from traditional recitation, supplication or incantation. At a minimum, it's not what we ordinarily understand in WP as a POV fork, and it's adequately notable to stand on its own as an article (e.g., a book by that title, many other books with it included in the title, numerous references to it in various books by a wide range of authors, 12,400 Google hits, etc. ... Kenosis (talk) 23:59, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Also, when I said to Linda above that it was "proper sourcing", I meant it.

Here's the current set of references:

^ Albanese, Catherine L. (2007). A Republic of Mind and Spirit: A Cultural History of American Metaphysical Religion. Yale University Press, p313. ISBN 0300110898.

^ Chryssides, George D. (1999). Exploring New Religions. Continuum International Publishing Group, p375.

^ Umansky, Ellen M. (2005). From Christian Science to Jewish Science: Spiritual Healing and American Jews. Oxford University Press, p104. ISBN 0195044002.

^ Vanzant, Iyanla (2008). Tapping the Power Within: A Path to Self-Empowerment for Women. Hay House, Inc. ISBN 1401921884.

^ Harry Middleton Hyatt (1973). Hoodoo - Conjuration - Witchcraft - Rootwork (Five Volumes). Alma Eagan Hyatt Foundation.

^ Zaleski, Philip; Carol Zaleski (2006). Prayer: A History. Mariner Books, p322. ISBN 0618773606.

^ Inge, M. Thomas (1989). Handbook of American Popular Culture. Greenwood Press, 1256. ISBN 0313254060.

These are, in my opinion, exemplary of the principle of reliable sourcing, particularly given how relatively recent has been the widespread increase in use of this practice.

... Kenosis (talk) 00:31, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Page now well-sourced; let's move forward

I want to thank those who have, over the course of several tendentious edit-wars, stood up for this simple, factual page, which differs from prayer and differs from affirmations and who have added good sources, and fought back the actions of the mindless anti-spirituality cabal who kept trying to redirect it out of existence. cat yronwode, not logged in. 64.142.90.33 (talk) 21:23, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

"loosely organized, decentralized" ... NOT!

I have done some personal research in these topics (New Thought) and the statement that Unity Church is "loosely organized, decentralized" just was jarringly erroneous. That particular denomination of New Thought churches is very centralized with an actual (albeit tiny) town named after it (Unity Village, Missouri) which contains the world headquarters of the religion and the extremely centralized ministerial school. All Unity ministers are required complete a list of specific educational steps including at least 2 semesters physically present at the Unity school and must be interviewed in person at the headquarters before being ordained by the church. No other New Thought denomination comes even close to this level of doctrinal centralization. Most of my sources are offline primary-source texts and personal interviews with a couple of their ministers but here is a non WP:RS but easy-to-read summary of their ordination requirements. Individual churches are managed autonomously but the Unity Church is definitely not "loosely organized" or "decentralized" at all. I have removed the phrase from the article. 104.32.193.6 (talk) 18:20, 5 February 2015 (UTC)