Talk:Anglican Mission in the Americas

Christianity: Anglicanism Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Anglicanism (assessed as Low-importance).

This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary.

Prologue

This is a new article about a controversial subject for the Anglican Communion. I believe that it is important that Wikipedia has an article about AMiA, but the present article is wholly one-sided. This article needs to be rewritten so that it is an accurate account of events, and the views of opposing parties. Gareth Hughes 23:34, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I added the first paragraph, and removed what I regard as biased text from the end of the entry. Daniel Luechtefeld, 24 June 2005.

Original page was verbatim from AMiA website

The original text, which I edited, had apparently copied and pasted directly from the AMiA's own offical website. Daniel Luechtefeld

As one that has completely studied the AM's history and is in the process of becoming a priest in the AM, I can say that this article shows complete bias against the AM. Honestly, it saddens me to see others desire to come on such an informational page, filled out by someone from the AM, and attempt to discredit the entire organization by editing the content. Does the malice of those that hate the AM know no bounds? As it stands, this article does NOT represent accurately the history and mission of the AM! 2602:306:34AF:A250:3DC0:298A:5F07:60BF (talk) 16:52, 12 March 2015 (UTC)Jeremy S. Crenshaw[reply]

Completely revised

Went for a wholesale neutral treatment. Daniel Luechtefeld

I am sure that your wholesale changes were not authorized by the AM, and they are certainly not neutral! 2602:306:34AF:A250:3DC0:298A:5F07:60BF (talk) 16:54, 12 March 2015 (UTC)Jeremy S. Crenshaw[reply]

Time to consider removing NPOV

It's been edited a number of times by myself and someone of a differing perspective. My opinion is that we've reached a happy medium where the NPOV flag can be lifted. Daniel Luechtefeld 23:30, 27 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the article still seemed a bit pro-AMiA, but I've fixed that. I also cleaned up the article a bit in general and added a bit about the relationship between Rwandan clergy and AMiA clergy (notably that most AMiA clergy are Americans who've had little contact with Africa). --Zantastik talk 10:25, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I changed "nearly all AMiA clergy are Americans who have had extremely little contact with Rwanda" to "many AMiA clergy are Americans who have had extremely little contact with Rwanda," just to be fair, as most Anglican clergy I know have a lot of contact with Rwanda. Also, I'll update the "women in the priesthood" section, mentioning that there are two woman priests in the AMiA today, and they were ordained before the policy was passed.(Anglican 22:21, 10 October 2005 (UTC)Anglican)[reply]

In Communion ?

I wonder if it's completely correct, in the third bullet point, to state "both the ECUSA and the AMiA are in communion with the Church of England." ? There seems to be some controversy as to whether the AMiA can be said to be "in communion" with the CoE. See the discussion on the Anglicans Online site for details. Dhuff 19:26, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Change in Name

The Anglican Mission in America has changed it's name in the recent past to the Anglican Mission in the Americas. I cannot find documentation as of yet as to why the name change has taken place (though see below), but I do see that the name has changed on AMiA's official website. What are the steps to follow to change the title of this article from "Anglican Mission in America" to "Anglican Mission in the Americas"?

According to my pastor (I attend an AMiA church) the change was made due to the fact that there are AMiA churches not only in the US and Canada, but also in one (or several) countries in South America. {{helpme}}

ChuchoHuff 17:35, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you would want to change the name of the article, go to that article, click the "Move" tab at the top, type in the correct name where you want it moved and then click OK. Please be sure that the talk pages get moved as well. Then, a screen will come up saying it is completed, but to check other pages that where Wikilinked to the former name of that page. Please update the wikilinks on those pages as well, please. If you need any help, please ask me and I will be glad to give you a hand. Take Care...NeutralHomer ^T:C 19:50, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Personal Ordinariate

Apart from the Traditional Anglican Communion, the article should really consider verifying whether groups within the Anglican Mission in the Americas have ever sought a similar canonical structure to the proposed personal ordinariates. ADM (talk) 18:08, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Highly doubt it. The AMiA is (correct me if I'm wrong) more evangelical and charismatic. I'd find it difficult to believe that any one in AMiA is seeking to be assimilated into the Catholic Church. Ltwin (talk) 05:55, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Anglican Mission in the Americas. 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}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 02:59, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]