Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Bakasuprman (talk | contribs) at 21:34, 9 February 2008 (→PCLM: where's catholic?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

India Start‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Christianity Start‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Misplaced Pages. 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 Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sources only address Catholic christians no other denominations

The sources used for this article only address the practices and abuses found amon Catholic Indian Christians in Tamil Nadu and Goa. This is misleading, which could be the purpose to label all Indian christians, when it only has sources for one denomination (Catholicism) and at that specific regions. This can be seen as trying to POV this article against the whole faith, which is probably why my edits to make it more specific and neutral are being undone. For this article to be accurate, it should refer to Catholic not christian, when making specific claims or references. There are no sources for any other denomination, aside from the mention of the syrian christians as middle caste, so User:Bakasuprman and his friend User:Indiarising need to stop the reversions and read the sources again. Plus unsourced text needs to be removed, i.e. "Dalits are denied arable land by uppercaste clergy" which among other things shows a willingess to twist the text for personal biases. --Kathanar 19:58, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

There is a source for the Dalits denied land. See Economic discrimination part of . Also, Dalitchristians website publishes about all Christians, not just Catholics. In any case, Catholics are majority in India and protestants are minority. There are many minority societies in India that do not do Castes but unnecessary qualification makes the article unencyclopedic because this is understood. Remember that the article needs expansion, not reduction. The other thing is your bizarre addition regarding "abuses". The article is not being used to spread anti-Christian hatred. That would be totally wrong. The article merely writes about castes but does not take a POV position on it. Concerning your statement about "Catholics only", the Britannica article also talks about Syriacs (St Thomas followers) who are not Catholics because Catholicism did not come into being during the heydey of the holy apostle Thomas (honor be to his memory) India Rising 20:04, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Its true what you said; "There is a source for the Dalits denied land." I'm glad you read that, thats all it said, it didn't say they were denied land due to uppercaste clergy, just due to their being ( no mention of dalit christian in that sentence), meaning the general condition as dalits and being part of the caste system (previous condition). So that is a falsity and twisting facts to say "uppercaste" clergy were the ones preventing them from owning arable land. As you said the dalit christian website might publish about all christians, but when refering to abuses it only has references about the Catholic church, read the article again, no mention of any other denomination. I say Catholics only, because this article and sources only talks about abuses by "uppercaste" catholic christans against "lowercaste" catholic christians. Thank you, I do appreciate you being respectful to Apostle Thomas, the reference to the "Thomas Christians" only refers to their caste status in society in general, syrian christians were considered a caste among Kerala society( caste system in kerala actually is kind of unique it might require another article), theres no caste division among syrian christians, its the caste itself(i.e. no kshatriya syrian christian, no vasiya syrian christian, etc., etc.) I'm just trying to make the article more accurate according to what the sources say, otherwise its just twisting facts. Please review the sources again to see what I'm saying. Thank you for your response, I do appreciate hearing your views, I've asked an administrator User:Dbachman to take a look, as I wanted to make sure everyone could keep their cool( I do mean me as well). --Kathanar 20:31, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. Notice that the title of the article says Caste system among Indian Christians, which can mean two things. 1) Caste System within Christian society and 2) Caste System of Christian society. The St Thomas Christians part concerns the second point, since they are collectively a single caste, a concept which they also regard. The indianhope article's main subject is Caste discrimination of Dalit Christians by upper-caste Christians ("This study is an attempt at assessing the existence and the extent of the practice of untouchability within Christian Church (principally , the Roman Catholic Church in Tamil Nadu).") rather than by others (that matter is discussed in SC articles where the issue of their quota status etc is written about).Thus, the wp article does not "twist facts" but paraphrases them. While I agree that Catholics are mentioned as the only example, the subject of the articles involve all Christians, not just Catholics. Thus, the articles use Catholics as examples, not as subjects. Despite this, you raise a valid question. What is the status of Caste among protestants, evangelicals etc? Since the answer to that question requires additions,I guess that is why there is an expansion tag in the article, which indicates that it is far from complete. It looks that the articles referenced talk about Christians in the main point, then give only Catholics as examples. However, because they do imply Castes among other denominations, some research is required. It is possible that the protestant and other non-Catholic denominations may not have much casteism. If that is the case, sources are needed to establish. That is why the expansion tag is there to tell readers that the article as it is now is not the whole story and there may be deeper aspects that need proper sorting. In order to do that, explicit sources are needed. I will see if I can do some work on this. In the meantime, outside commentary is always welcome. India Rising 21:06, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you User:Indiarising for your thoughts on the matter. I do agree on what the title says and means, but we cannot make general statements or conclusions if it is not sourced specifically. This would present information that could be misleading. In general, evangelical christian churches are the ones which are going to be the least caste-like, as well as probably most protestant churches, though who knows what can happen in all the churches. But thats exactly the point, if we don't know, we should only talk of what we do know or can cite. Changes can be made the article as new information is found or arrives, we shouldn't make statements and then wait to see if we kind find the info to match it, there are rules about verifiability. I think we're saying the same thing about syrian christians, I'm just addressing the caste disrimination practices in churches that is talked about. Again thank you for your cooperation and together we can make this a better article. Have a good day--Kathanar 21:51, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

what can I say? try Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution. As long as there is no disruptive behaviour, edit-warring, or WP:POINT (like the tongue-in-cheek 'debate' aimed at creating a deadlock we see on Talk:India), there is no need for admin intervention. If the sentence

In addition, there are various instances of economic discrimination where Dalit Christians are not allowed to own arable land by upper caste Christian clergy.

is under dispute, you should add {{fact}} and ask for precise attribution (whose opinion is this? what instances? who does object to that opinion). At the moment, it is just an unsourced claim. We don't want unsourced claims, even if they are true, we want to report on opinions and analyses by someone. Keep this in mind, and there will be no need to disagree, you're just here to document the disagreement of other people. dab (𒁳) 10:54, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Finger Pointing

Is this just finger pointing by Hindus, who are fed up with criticisms of Hindu racism in the caste system? "You say Hindus are racist--but look, Christians do it, too." While racism by any group should not be condoned, this purported Christian racism is because they have not given up their Hindu caste system roots. The Bible states that there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free; all human creatures are inherently equal in worth. That goes for whether their ancestors called themselves--or others called them--Brahmins or Dalits.

Note, Spaniards and Portugeuse in the Americas also formed de facto race-based caste systems, and the United States had it's one-drop rule. Those too were not sanctioned by the Bible, although the nations which had them were nominally majority Christian. Chiss Boy 15:55, 21 February 2007 (UTC) Chiss Boy 15:51, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Basically you hit it on the nail, this article was made for no other purpose than to distract from any criticism of the original system, using ploys of muddling the issue with these inane articles and trying to spread misinformation where they can. This article is already addressed in a sub article of the Indian Caste System, so I would think there is no need for this article. You will see this type of behavior a lot on Wiki, as you have a gang of them working together on the supremacism of their views, its ridiculous and heinous.--Kathanar 17:15, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

This article is more about propaganda than facts. It seems an attempt by hindus who want to pass the blame for maintaining the caste hierachy in India. I agree that there were possibly discremination among christians and other religious groups in the 19th century and earlier. However, the situation in South India now is quite opposite to what is written in this article. I have seen the catholic church actively helping the dalit community within, often by collecting money and giving it to dalits for helping them build house, get education etc.

christians

The source refers to all Christians, not just Catholics. Obviously this goes against Kathanar's beliefs. Its not just Catholics that virulently discriminate against dalits.

Averting the Apocalypse: Social Movements in India Today by Arthur Bonner

Hindu And Christian In South-east India By Geoffrey A. Oddie

Bakaman 22:29, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Expand the quotes, please, so that a determination can be made. Hornplease 01:32, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

There is no need. The quotes discuss the disputed content, by not limiting it to "sections of catholics".Bakaman 23:36, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Context is nevertheless required. Since you are citing these works, you can perhaps provide the context? Hornplease 01:55, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Google books' (unfort.) partial glimpse of the context do not show these practices as representing all Christians in all India for all time. the second citation refers to what certain Tanjore missionaries described as the prevailing practice in their congregations prior to 1833. the first is actually a quote whose provenance unknown from the G-books preview. so yes, exact context is required. Doldrums 14:38, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Averting the Apocalypse talks about stratification in Tamil Nadu, stratification in Gujarat and stratification in Kerala of Christians on caste lines. It is a much better source than dalithinduchristians.org or whatever hkelkar put in december to document discrimination on caste lines in Churches. In fact, I specifically used it to replace the old site. Other books talk about how the government splits Latin Rite and Syrian rites by caste lines, calling Syrian rite high caste and Latin rite low caste, evidenced in the case Valsamma Paul vs. Cochin University. Another book notes that it was harder for people of lower castes to enter the seminary(A History of the Christian Tradition: From the Reformation to the Present).Bakaman 17:13, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

statements from the sources restricted in regional, denominational or temporal scope shouldn't be reported as being universally true. S. M. Michael's Untouchable: dalits in modern India (page 17, preview-able on Google books) has this to say, "aste does not function in the Christian community in the same ways throughout India. Three variables account for virtually all the differences: location (rural versus urban), region (north versus south), and denomination (Protestant, Roman Catholic, or Syrian Christian)." and then goes on to describe these differences and attempts to summarise Caste within the Christian community. in the light of this, i'd like to see quotes from the sources to substantiate the broad statements in the Caste Discrimination among Indian Christians. Doldrums 07:29, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Contradictions

Our drive-by vandal seems to not understand that his whitewashed version of the page is contradictory.

Hmm. a look at the Caste_system_among_Indian_Christians#Kerala section talks about virtually all Christians in that state. Orthodox, Catholic, Protestant, not mostly catholic at all. Also the mention of the Nasrani in the first paragraph directly contradicts the statement that it is mostly catholic.Bakaman 18:16, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Bakasuprman (talk • contribs) 00:33, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

I have reverted as there has been discussion from our resident troll for one month.Bakaman 02:05, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

PCLM

PCLM is Catholic. They state so on their website. Their last open letter went to the Pope and the Catholic Bishops Conference. They are hardly relevant to, nor do we have any evidence that they are discussing, other Indian churches.

Similarly, when social organisation in Kerala is described, do not use phrases like "Christians in India" because that is a gross misrepresentation of the references. Relata refero (talk) 06:15, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

PCLM did not criticize "Catholic schools", they criticized "Christian schools". If you read the sources, you would have seen that. That they are a Catholic group is irrelevant since the article discusses "Christian schools".

Caste discrimination persists among all religious groups all across India. The majority of Christians in India live in the South, so if the sources discuss all Indian Christians while focusing on the South, it is not incorrect to reflect what the sources say and talk about Indian christians.Bakaman 03:30, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Refs have also been provided noting the reasons as to why it is not so prevalent in North India. The converts there arent dalits, and the number of North Indian christians compared to South Indian christians is small.Bakaman 03:51, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

PCLM wrote a letter to the Pope and the Catholic Bishops Conference. Catholics habitually speak of 'Christian' as referring to themselves and 'Protestant' when referring to others. Regardless, I think you've made a start in providing some much-needed detail. Relata refero (talk) 06:46, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Your statement is OR. There is no reason for anyone to believe that the PCLM is only speaking of Catholic schools, especially when many other sects run "Christian" schools in India including seventh day adventists, baptists, etc.Bakaman 19:18, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps because they addressed their letter to the Pope? That would give most observers a clue. Relata refero (talk) 20:19, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Plus they say convent school. Also they say 'neglect' not discrimination. Relata refero (talk) 20:23, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

The words "pope" and "catholic" do not not come up on the source, leading me to believe you are making fantastical assumptions about the source. The phrase "dalit christians" comes up over 7 times, meaning they are talking about Christians generally, which obviously includes convent schools.

Exploitation, Neglect, etc. are all terms with a negative connotation. Pettifoggery isnt going to change the fact that a spade is a spade.Bakaman 20:28, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Here's one of their letters to the Pope. Notice the use of the word "Church" anc "Christian" with reference to Catholics alone. (This is not uncommon.)

In the TOI article, they talk specifically about convent schools. Again, Catholic.

Exploitation and neglect are hardly the same thing. I can only suppose that you should be more careful when paraphrasing sensitive material. Relata refero (talk) 20:34, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

(deindent) In the TOI article they discuss both missionary and convent schools, which in some places may be the same (ie a Catholic missionary) or may not. We merely report they only talked about Christians

What they write to the pope is irrelevant when the TOI article references christians as a whole

I stated all these words have negative connotations, and that it merely verifies that dalits are discriminated against by uppercaste Christians, which is backed up by a number of sources.Bakaman 20:45, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

No, the TOI article specifically interpolates the word "Christian" when they had not so universalised their reference to missionaries. (That is what the bracket means.)

The letter to the Pope explains that they talk about Catholics alone, because their concern is the Catholic church; and Catholics tend to refer to themselves as "Christian" not as "Catholic". If you don't believe me, check out the warring archives at Talk:Catholic.

And your inability to comprehend that one word does not mean the same thing as another does not portend well for any article you write. Relata refero (talk) 20:58, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

The TOI article mentions "Dalit Christians", period.

I personally do not care whether they meant all Christians or just Catholics, the TOI article mentioned Christians, that's what wikipedia reports

I am well aware the denotations are different, however the connotations are similar. I have no inability to comprehend anything, on the contrary it is because of my work (with a little help from utcursch in the beginning) that this article is well-referenced, neutral, and educational.Bakaman 21:09, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Your edit was reverted because the revision contained significant inaccuracies as noted on this talk page. Webster agrees with Koshy and his reference is 1994.Bakaman 21:12, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Quotes please (Webster and Koshy).

We can't make a judgment about connotation - at least not one that equates neglect and discrimination.

In order to bring the other sentence into line with the TOI article, we should write "their missionary schools". Anything else is misrepresentation- again. Relata refero (talk) 21:20, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

No we shouldn't, since it mentions Christian missionary schools. Anything else is personal extrapolation. The PCLM went on the record criticizing "Christian missionary schools" and is advocating for "Dalit Christians". That is what is reported, that is what will be displayed.Bakaman 21:26, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

No, they went on the record criticising "Missonary schools". Are you reading the article at all? Do you know what a bracket means? Relata refero (talk) 21:28, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

(deindent) I'm not going to dignify your insults, but will agree they were criticizing missionary schools. Christian was presumably added by the TOI, but the fact is that Catholic is not used.Bakaman 21:34, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

• Start-Class India articles
• Low-importance India articles
• Start-Class India articles of Low-importance
• WikiProject India articles
• Start-Class Christianity articles
• Low-importance Christianity articles
• WikiProject Christianity articles