User talk:Buddhagazelle

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Fawcett5 03:04, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Invitation to join WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy
Hi there! I've noticed that you've edited articles pertaining to the Eastern Orthodox Church. I wanted to extend an invitation to you to join the WikiProject dedicated to organizing and improving articles on the subject, which can be found at: WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy. This WikiProject was begun because a need was perceived to raise the level of quality of articles on Wikipedia which deal with the Eastern Orthodox Church.

You can find information on the project page about the WikiProject, as well as how to join and how to indicate that you are a member of the project. Additionally, you may be interested in helping out with our collaboration of the month. I hope you'll consider joining and thank you for your contributions thus far! &mdash; A.S. Damick talk contribs 03:50, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to the Eastern Orthodoxy Project
Welcome to the Eastern Orthodoxy Project. I noticed that you added yourself to the participants listing today, and just wanted to say 'welcome'. Let me know if you have any questions about the project or how to get orientated to it. I look forward to your contributions! &mdash; Antonios Aigyptos talk  17:41, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Note on adding full Eastern Orthodox Project to your watchlist
This is a note for members of the Eastern Orthodox Project: Since the project's main page has been converted to a portal-style box format, each of the boxes is actually its own page (you can see the page outside its box by clicking the 'Edit' link on any often the section boxes on the project page, which takes you to the edit page for its contents). Because of this, updates to individual box contents will not necessarily show up on editors' watchlists, if you've only got the main project page watched.

In order to keep up to date with all updates to the Project and its pages, I'd recommend adding each subpage to your watchlists. These are:


 * WikiProject_Eastern_Orthodoxy - The main Project page
 * WikiProject_Eastern_Orthodoxy/Intro - The introduction to the Project text, in the top box
 * WikiProject_Eastern_Orthodoxy/Scope - Goals of the project text
 * WikiProject_Eastern_Orthodoxy/Subsections - Listing of Project sub-areas
 * WikiProject_Eastern_Orthodoxy/Tasks - Main listing of pages, etc., needing work
 * WikiProject_Eastern_Orthodoxy/Templates - Listing of Project templates
 * WikiProject_Eastern_Orthodoxy/Participants - Listing of members
 * WikiProject_Eastern_Orthodoxy/Related - Listing of areas related to Project
 * WikiProject_Eastern_Orthodoxy/Notes - Notes on Project

If you add all of the above pages to your watchlist, you should be informed whenever any part of the WikiProject Eastern Christianity is edited/updated. To discuss this, please see the relavent section of the Project's talk page. &mdash; Antonios Aigyptos talk  09:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Article for deletion
Hey help me with this article deletion please. PLEASE HELP. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Historical_persecution_by_atheism#.5B.5BHistorical_persecution_by_atheism.5D.5D I would like to word it right but can not because there is no way to not be offensive I can't think of how. Please help. Also could you contribute to the article about all the happened to Ethiopia under the Red Scare in the 70's Please vote to keep the article. Thanks LoveMonkey 06:25, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

help me with edits
help me with formatting christian palestinian edits

hello rjwilmsi, I am tioeliecer, I had info. to add to article, but because I access through cybercafe, I hadn´t enough time to edit my contributions. Help me with this: A Gaza Baptist Church Seized: link: http://www.comeandsee.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=781

Palestine: Palestinian gunmen burn Qalqiliya YMCA http://www.comeandsee.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=768

Palestine: Bible Society library bombed in Gaza : link:http://www.comeandsee.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=796 And on a reported dead link: change this: 17^ Five churches bombed and attacked AP via Yahoo! News 16 September 2006 (Link dead as of 15 January 2007) for this http://www.comeandsee.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=769

You can add these: http://www.religioustolerance.org/ata01.htm http://healtheland.wordpress.com/2007/02/11/palestinian-christians-being-persecuted-versus-real-christian-persecution/

My personal background is: I`m evangelical, no zionist, Venezuelan.

Reply: Mcorazao

 * Mcorazao: Buddhagazelle, I meant no disrepect.

...

Buddhagazelle: Please provide a source for your statement on Orthodox Christianity that "the term Orthodox Christianity when used to refer to these two Churches collectively has little meaning".


 * Mcorazao: Well, it is difficult to find a single source to back up this exact statement. A disproving a negative sort of thing. What the statement was intended to convey (feel free to rephrase) is that although many readers might be tempted to think, based on the terminology, that scholars consider these denominations to be closer theologically to each other than they are to the Roman Catholic Church this is not a scholarly consensus. In other words, it is only intended to say "don't read something into this page that wasn't intended." In terms of "sourcing" I can provide sources that give different conflicting definitions of Orthodoxy. But the point here was that this statement was a clarification so I did not see this as something that required sourcing, per se.

Buddhagazelle: The Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches typically refer to their division as "a split within Orthodoxy," rather than as the one being Orthodox and the other not. In many parts of the world, especially Lebanon and Syria, intercommunion between the two churches is authorized and frequent. Check also the "Relationships with the Eastern (Chalcedonian) Orthodox Churches" on this page, which states that "the official view of both families of Churches was clearly expressed at the 1989 meeting: 'As two families of Orthodox Churches long out of communion with each other, we now pray and trust in God to restore that communion on the basis of the apostolic faith of the undivided Church of the first centuries which we confess in our common creed.'".


 * Mcorazao: You are missing the point and, with respect, you are trying to justify a preconception. The term "Orthodox" as you are using it implies that the Eastern Orthodox and Oriential Orthodox communions are closer to each other theologically than to other communions. Regarding statements of reconciliation I could point out that there have been similar statements of reconciliation between the Oriental Orthodox communion and the Roman Catholic communion. That does not by itself that the Oriental Orthodox and Roman Catholic communion are historically or theologically more closely related than to the Eastern Orthodox communion or others. Similarly one can point out that lots of "Eastern" churches joined into communion with the Roman Catholic church during the late Middle Ages and the Renaissance. That does not mean they were not in schism with the Roman Catholic Church earlier. The main point is that historically the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox communions were united for far longer than the Oriental Orthodox communion was with them. And there were important theological splits along the way. The Eastern churches have a lot of cultural ties with each other because of geography and history which has given them extra impetus to reconcile. But it is insulting to their history to just "lump" them together. You are effectively saying that the historical geopolitical divisions between East and West (which is what the terms Orthodox and Catholic have been used to embody) are more important than the theological doctrines which divided the denominations. Certainly one can argue the geopolitical/cultural divisions often ended up being more important but it is not fair to dismiss the theology even if the denominations are reconciling.

Buddhagazelle: While there is a substantial minority within both the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox traditions that holds the other to be completely non-Orthodox, this is a minority position on both sides. Most Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Christians regard the other to be also Orthodox.


 * Mcorazao: This is kind of dancing around the issue. The Oriental Orthodox communion has made statements that they effectively regard the Roman Catholics as "Orthodox" and, as I pointed out, many churches have switched alliances over history. The point is historically there has never been an "Orthodox" communion and there it was never truly valid to imply that the the communions referred to as "Orthodox" were any closer theologically than other communions. The current reconciliation efforts may create an "Orthodox" communion which certainly changes things but, for now, the history and theology should not be dismissed.

Buddhagazelle: Removing the "Note" does not imply that the two Churches have no differences-- the differences between the two is quite clearly stated (that the one accepts seven councils and the other three). A note to clarify that the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox communions are not (yet) in full communion with one another might be in order. But the "Note" as it stands is really very POV.


 * Mcorazao: Please feel free to reword the note if you have POV concerns (you have not stated what those concerns are).

Buddhagazelle: Don't accuse me of making "uninformed" edits without sourcing your own claims. --Buddhagazelle 02:42, 10 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Mcorazao: I did not intend offense. I chose my words poorly. --Mcorazao 05:08, 11 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I very much appreciate your prompt and courteous reply. As I understand it, your worry is that the following text:


 * The Eastern Orthodox Church: the Eastern Christian churches of Byzantine tradition that adhere to the seven Ecumenical Councils.
 * The Oriental Orthodox Churches: the Eastern Christian churches adhering to the teachings of only the first three Ecumenical Councils (plus the Second Council of Ephesus).


 * is insufficiently clear on its own, and requires a clarifying note. I have POV concerns with the note as you've written it. However, I would not have POV concerns with the following note: The Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Churches are not in communion and do not represent a unified religious tradition. As such, the term Orthodox Christianity when used to refer to these two Churches collectively refers more to a common Byzantine influence than to doctrinal matters.


 * On the principle of be bold, I'm going to go ahead and make this edit with the full expectation that you will tweak (or rewrite) it.


 * I apologize for turning this into a doctrinal debate, when it's really only an issue of formatting. While you and I have differing opinions on the extent of the difference between Eastern and Oriental Orthodoxy (and I'm prepared to provide further resources and arguments to back my claims, if it's a conversation you'd like to pursue), we agree that the two Churches are separated by a 1500-year-old schism. The issue, it seems, is whether this schism is as deep as it is old, and how best the article can present neutral facts without leading naive readers into mistaken assumptions. Again, I thank you for your swift and reasonable reply, and am truly sorry for having been eager to take offense.


 * --Buddhagazelle 04:33, 12 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm ok with your rewrite, at least for now. It is a little more vague than I would like but, after all, we're talking about a clarification on a disambig page. Thanks for your efforts.


 * And I thank you. Perhaps a page titled Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Ecumenical Relations might eventually be in order?  I think I found your note too strongly worded with regard to the amount of information it contained.


 * To explain further, though, they key thing is the cultural differences vs. the doctrinal differences. One can cynically state that the doctrinal differences were really excuses for politics and therefore they didn't matter. Maybe that is true and maybe it isn't but it is obviously POV. If we treat these religious traditions as legitimate, as we should, then we have to treat the schisms and the importance that they historically placed on these differences as important. You can similarly point to all sorts of interactions between these churches just as you can point to various interactions between Christians, Jews, and Muslims at various times depending on the tolerance of their political and spiritual leaders but that isn't really relevant. Ultimately a faith is a faith and regardless of cultural affiliations or "tolerance" one faith has toward another one has to respect the fact that it is their faith that defines their religion. It may be that the various Eastern faiths are truly on the verge of reuniting which would change all of this but the reconciliatory statements by themselves do not mean we trivialize the fact that they maintain their differences or treat those differences as less consequential than differences with others simply because of cultural affiliation (which, again, is not relevant if we are being truly fair to the religion and not treating the doctrine as political excuses).
 * --Mcorazao 22:32, 12 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Fair enough; though I wouldn't be so quick to claim that doctrine and culture are separate animals. If bishops, priests, monastics and laity of each tradition speak of the others as equally Orthodox-- as has overwhelmingly been my observation and experience everywhere I've been-- and if members of one church are communed in or received into the other without any formality or the blinking of an eye-- as again has been my experience in every Eastern Orthodox parish I've belonged to and Coptic and Indian Orthodox parish I've had friends in-- does one look at this and say "the churches are betraying their own identities"? Or does one take the words & deeds of the faithful at face value?  Quite admittedly, I'm giving you anecdotal evidence and nothing scholarly. And quite admittedly there are parts of the world where the boundaries between the two communions are much less fuzzy than they are where I've lived.  So all this is to say that to claim the two traditions have "nothing in common" is to claim that the words & deeds of many folks in each tradition are mistaken.  Which may be true, but is certainly POV - as of course would be the claim that the differences between the two communions are inconsequential.

WikiProject Christianity
Hello !

You are receiving this invitation because you are a member of one of the related Christianity Projects and I thought that you might be interested in this project also - Tinucherian (talk) 17:09, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Ichthus: January 2012
 In this issue...

- Ichthus is published by WikiProject Christianity For submissions and subscriptions contact the Newsroom
 * From the Editor
 * What are You doing For Lent?
 * Fun and Exciting Contest Launched
 * Spotlight on WikiProject Catholicism

Nomination of Max Linn for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Max Linn is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Max Linn& until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bearcat (talk) 00:24, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!