Talk:Communion-plate

Catholicism Low‑importance

Communion-plate is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to the Catholic Church. For more information, visit the project page.CatholicismWikipedia:WikiProject CatholicismTemplate:WikiProject CatholicismCatholicism articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Catholicism task list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : see Draft articles
Assess : see Category:Unassessed Catholicism articles; Category:Unknown-importance Catholicism articles
Cleanup : Blessed Virgin Mary (see the talk page)
Collaborate : Invitation template needed, see Category:WikiProject invitation templates
Copyedit : Cuthbert Tunstall
Expand : Angelus; Roman Catholicism in Kosovo; Bishop Adolph John Paschang; Cum sæpe accidere; Altar Society; American Board of Catholic Missions; Bernard Häring
NPOV : Americanism (heresy); Ensoulment
Photo : see Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of Catholicism
Stubs : see Category:Stub-Class Catholicism articles; Category:Catholic Church stubs
Update : Peer review; John Aloysius Maguire
Verify : Archdiocese of Glasgow; Archbishop of Westminster; Bishop; Saint Mungo; Sanctification; Westminster Cathedral
Other : Watch recent changes for Catholicism articles

Approved, officlal[edit]

We generally avoid using terms like "official" when describing something that is, by definition or nature, already official. Neophyte editors like to mention a bishop being "officially installed" to his diocese, or a document being "officially promulgated". In reality, this is a WP:PEACOCK term that is intended to lend an air of cachet unnecessarily to the thing in question. Now to the issue at hand: documents by the Holy See are copyrighted. There was actually a case when Pope Francis released Lumen fidei and a popular apologist converted its format and re-shared it for eBook users. He was immediately beset by copyright claims from the USCCB. So you see, there is no "unofficial" translation of a modern copyrighted Church document that is legal and quotable here. The situation is, of course, very different for historical publications where there are indeed no "official" translations at all, and a plethora of independent, even scholarly ones. In those cases, we can of course refer to the translator by name or the specific publication in order to distinguish it for the reader. 2600:8800:1880:91E:5604:A6FF:FE38:4B26 (talk) 20:29, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As you say, there often is a plethora of independent, even scholarly, translations of Holy See texts. The translation of the 2002 Roman Missal (of which the 2002 GIRM is part) that the English-speaking episcopal conferences have authorized for use at Mass was decided on by the conferences themselves and confirmed by the Holy See. It is not just one of the plethora of English translations of the 2000 and (with slight variations) 2002 GIRM that appeared before the episcopal conferences published theirs. It has a status that other translations do not have, a status that some would certainly call official. Of course, if you dislike the use of "official", you may choose some other way to describe the distinct status that it does have. Bealtainemí (talk) 09:21, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]