Talk:Religious (Western Christianity)

Catholicism only
As of now the article claims to apply to various branches of Christianity, but all text and all references seem to refer only to Catholicism, though that is not stated. Information and sources about non-Catholic use (if the term is indeed so used) is needed. Pol098 (talk) 12:06, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't see in what way the article claims to apply to branches of Christianity other the Catholic. The very title shows that it concerns only Catholicism.  For a broader view, you should go to some article that does not have "Catholicism" in its title: in this case, religious order.
 * I have to revert the edit by which you made this complaint and by which you also suggested that Catholic clergy who have not taken religious vows should not be called clergy but only, to use your words, "those who are considered to be members of the clergy". They are clergy.  In fact they constitute the majority of the clergy.  Esoglou (talk) 14:55, 18 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Esoglou says "I don't see in what way the article claims to apply to branches of Christianity other than the Catholic". Looking at the first sentence may help: "In the lexicon of certain branches of Christianity, especially the Roman Catholic, Anglican, and Orthodox branches...". I don't see where this comes from but I find it puzzling as I haven't come across other cases; as there's no source for this I've removed the reference to other branches. If the term is more generally used the article needs another title. The "single source" tag I added was due to the absence of sources for Anglicanism or Orthodoxy, and becomes redundant. The thrust of my other changes, reverted, was due to a point that may be clear in Catholic circles, but is puzzling to the general reader: the concept of people considered to be members of the clergy but who have not taken religious vows. This doesn't seem to be explained well in the "clergy" article linked, but it is discussed under "secular clergy". "Those who are considered to be members of the clergy" wasn't intended to assert that in some way they weren't really, but to clarify that they are considered clergy despite not having taken vows, but I'll look for some other wording. A lot of articles on Catholicism, in particular, have jargon which is mysterious to the non-specialist. I may edit the "clergy" article to clarify this issue; you might like to take a look and check that it remains in order. Pol098 (talk) 21:37, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for explaining and fixing. Clergy are people who have received the sacrament of orders.  Religious are people who have taken religious vows.  Some people have received the sacrament of orders and have taken religious vows.  Some people have received the sacrament of orders and have not taken religious vows: they have not vowed poverty, they have not vowed obedience to a religious superior, they may be bound to continence by their position but not by vow, and by exception some Catholic priests are married and are not bound to continence.  Some people have taken religious vows and have not been ordained.  Religious vows and ordination are quite distinct matters.  Esoglou (talk) 22:01, 19 January 2014 (UTC)


 * I'm glad you agree, I think we're on the same wavelength. Things like "Some people have taken religious vows and have not been ordained" are probably so obvious as to need no comment to the specialist, but puzzling to others. Before seeing this I have been editing the article with a clause from "secular clergy"; I will save the edit and hope it helps, otherwise please revert or improve. Pol098 (talk) 22:26, 19 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Now much better after attention by one who knows the subject; describes what a religious is in a form accessible to the non-expert. Pol098 (talk) 12:21, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Missing qualification before "must be formally dispensed from those vows"
"once any non-ordained religious professes vows, especially final vows, they must be formally dispensed from those vows": Seems like there is an important qualification missing, maybe along the lines "if they wish to leave their institute", perhaps even under a heading of its own. Otherwise it sounds like the natural next step for every single person who professes vows is to subsequently be dispensed from them, which is surely not the case, presumably only for the fraction who want to give it up. Lee Choquette (talk) 19:05, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 27 March 2018

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 05:45, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Religious (Western Christianity) → Religious (Catholic Church) – Article has been moved by User:Anupam per WP:BOLD about half a year ago. The body text of the article seems to discuss the topic entirely from the perspective of the Catholic Church, so it may be sensible to move it back to the original title. Marcocapelle (talk) 20:33, 27 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Oppose Thank you User:Marcocapelle for starting this discussion. The terminology of 'religious' vs. 'secular' clergy certainly exists in the Lutheran and Anglican Churches. I have expanded the article to include sections on these two traditions, which were already mentioned in the lede. As Roman Catholicism, Lutheranism, and Anglicanism are all Western Christian traditions, it makes sense to keep the current title, Religious (Western Christianity). I hope this helps. With regards, AnupamTalk 21:16, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose: I see that Anupam expanded the article to include Protestant denominations that also use this terminology -- because of this, it makes no sense anymore to move the article. --1990&#39;sguy (talk) 23:39, 27 March 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Professed religious
I would be most grateful if someone familiar with the status of professed religious could add a section, describing it, to this article. The phrase is used repeatedly within Wikipedia articles. Please see this search list of about 2,000 such Wikipedia articles.

And yet, there seems to be no professed religious article itself, to which such articles can link. I wish that there were one, but I fear that, with my skills, an attempt by me to create that article may founder.

Thus, as things stand, professed religious is a phrase which is freely used, and yet only those already in the know may enjoy enlightenment. Indeed the digital world (in English) offers scant if any definition of the seemingly common term.

Would some brave editor come to the fore, to fill the perceived niche, and end this anomaly?!

Trafford09 (talk) 08:24, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Beginning of religion and defination and nature of religion
Beginning of religion and defination and nature of religion 2409:4055:715:7A9B:5452:76B3:B99B:FA6C (talk) 09:54, 13 December 2021 (UTC)