Talk:Chalcedon Foundation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Supports death penalty for homosexuals?[edit]

Does the Chalcedon Foundation really support the death penalty for homosexuals? The source given for that only states that Rushdoony does. TimBentley (talk) 19:12, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

The foundation is based almost entirely on Rushdoony's philosophies, and is the vehicle for continuing to promote them, so yes. The SPLC makes the connection and I'm not aware of any sources that have refuted it. - MrX 19:30, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
Egads. Your edit summary next to the section name made me think your account was compromised.   little green rosetta(talk)
central scrutinizer
23:29, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
! a vote. lol. - MrX

Source of Foundation's name[edit]

I have modified the start of the History section to reflect accurately the source of the claim the Chalcedon declared the church subject to the state. It is very difficult to prove a negative, but I cannot find such a statement in the records of the council which I have in an abbreviated version. (If it were made I should expect it to have been included.) It is not found either in TH Parker's Bampton Lectures on the Church and State or any other RS source for early church history. Jpacobb (talk) 21:57, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I have fixed the source for the original text, which is from the Foundation' vision statement:
"Chalcedon derives its name from the great ecclesiastical council of Chalcedon (A.D. 451), which produced the crucial Christological definition of Jesus Christ as God of very God and Man of very man, a formula directly challenging every false claim of divinity by any human institution: state, church, cult, schools, or human assembly."
It can be found here. - MrX 22:31, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
The notion that the Church is merely a "human institution", while held by many Calvinists and Protestants in general, is something the bishops who actually attended Chalcedon (as well as the other Church Fathers) would have considered a heresy. They considered the Church to be nothing less than the Mystical Body of Christ. So the irony is that had Rushdoony lived back in the 5th century, he and his teachings would have been declared anathema by the very council he named his foundation after. FiredanceThroughTheNight (talk) 00:44, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
And the double irony is: why would an Armenian (who made a very big deal about his heritage) name his foundation after a council that the Church of Armenia famously rejected? Of course, Rushdoony's interpretation of Chalcedon differs greatly from the actual historical significance of that council anyway. Talk about historical revisionism. FiredanceThroughTheNight (talk) 03:24, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chalcedon Foundation. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:09, 19 November 2016 (UTC)