This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations 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.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
The way that the WCC was seen in the 80's to be cooperating with the KGB should be present here. It needs a section (written in an NPOV manner), I think. In fact the article is very content free on the (not very distinguished) history of this organisation. It reads like a puff-piece. 95.147.174.120 (talk) 12:34, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There have been claims that the WCC was infiltrated by the KGB (including such claims by the KGB itself, in its internal documents), but nothing was ever proven. It may be true. Or it may be that the KGB was trying to make itself sound more powerful and influential than it actually was, by claiming to have agents everywhere. In any case, the article should present such accusations as accusations, not as facts. Ohff (talk) 01:39, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think there is any doubt whatever on the matter; the KGB had officers in place and determining policy. It was remarked on at the time, how often the WCC adopted policies which were good for the USSR, bad for the WCC and terrible for the Russian Orthodox church. There was no real surprise when the facts came out. 2.26.91.228 (talk) 18:23, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"It was remarked..."? Well, who remarked? What did they say, exactly? Which policies are you talking about? In fact, as I said before, there are no facts - there are only accusations. So there is plenty of doubt on the matter. All the accusations about KGB influence come from anti-WCC and anti-ecumenist organizations. Neither the WCC itself, nor any of the Churches participating in it, have ever issued a statement accepting these accusations over the past 25 years. That's the very definition of a controversy: an organization says one thing, its critics say another. Ohff (talk) 10:20, 5 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
How about Momchil Metodiev's work Between Faith and Compromise, ISBN: 978-9542806493? Mark Tooley of the IRD's take on the work is here. It would be helpful to have a reference to a proper response to these concerns. Cpsoper (talk) 14:18, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have added a short referenced section with guarded wording detailing the most salient claims and linking to one principal Russian investigator. Cpsoper (talk) 05:29, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's quite ridiculous that this article as I just now found it contained no mention of or link to Programme to Combat Racism, even though this is what the WCC received the most mainstream media coverage for during the 1970s-1980s in some countries, and it generated huge antagonism towards the WCC in the United States, and made any cooperation between the WCC and the vast majority of U.S. evangelicals / Christian conservatives impossible for many years. I think that the whole controversy deserves detailed mention on this page, but for now I've just added a see-also link... AnonMoos (talk) 04:20, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have reverted the edit on this subsection title. The issue of the criticism in the reference is Israel not the World Zionist Council and its policy.Cpsoper (talk) 09:28, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have added a short section on this matter, which forms a substantial part of the WCC's output, with crosslinks to other pages. The cited quote encapsulates an example of the opinion that is critiqued. Cpsoper (talk) 03:00, 28 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This is a large subject, and although the content of this section is currently only related to activity of the KGB and its daughter agencies, it could be amplified with reference to other situations. I have reverted the section heading till further discussion. Cpsoper (talk) 22:28, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have reverted a recent edit removing the subsection title, thus downplaying its significance. This is an important aspect of this article and goes some way to redressing the lack of secondary source data.Cpsoper (talk) 09:26, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have just modified 7 external links on World Council of Churches. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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.
Such template should be put at the beginning of the article or replaced by a similar one regarding only the section. Xx236 (talk) 07:33, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
