Talk:Roman Catholic Diocese of Westminster

[Untitled]

I've moved the old page to /Archive 1. First off for any lurkers the section Liturgical and Pastoral Life in the Diocese on the main page is under mediation (cabal case), the other sections are not currently in any dispute.

Kevin -

Don't make any changes directly to the article for now. But make a list of any changes you would like. Mark them as either "strong preference", "weak preference" or "possible alternative". Roydosan don't respond to the list yet. Just let him make it. jbolden1517^Talk 22:34, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Kevin's list of changes

Well I'm generally happy with that. It gives LMS activities a very slight emphasis by virtue of being first in a list, but not undue or unique recognition. I would think that the monthly CCR meeting at Euston should merit inclusion.

Okay. I'm one of those boneheads whose logical abilities require commenting to each paragraph, so please bear with me. I'm going to try to italicize all of my comments so you can tell it's me commenting. For us Yanks that aren't familiar with the Archdiocese, what exactly is the CCR? CQJ 17:21, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

I put it immediately behind the normative Roman Rite because it is also a Roman Rite unlike the ones that follow. The CCR (Catholic Charismatic Renewal) use the normative Roman Rite so I don't see how they fit in here. The CCR group at the diocesan seminary is mentioned under music.

Ukrainian/Maronite/Melkite/Chaldean/Ethiopian/Eritrean/Belarussian Rite Catholics, as I understand it(I am happy to be corrected) all have their own hierarchies, and therefore any links that they have with the Latin Rite Archdiocese as purely courtesy relationships. They are independent from the Archdiocese of Westminster, and so, although the different status of the Churches in question vis a vis Rome is acknowledged, they have no more to do with the subject of this article than do the Anglican, Baptist or Methodist communities that meet within its boundaries.

I'm assuming that the above nationalties/heritages attend Eastern Rite churches rather than the Roman Rite churches, or are these nationalities/heritages/specific parishes attached to the Roman Rite church? For example, St. John's in X Archdiocese is known for X nationality attending Roman Rite services? This is not clear to me since I'm not within the Archdiocese itself.

The Ukrainians do have their own hierarchy in England. As far as I'm aware none of the others do and as far as I know they would all be expected to submit to the local ordinary in non liturgical matters. They are all listed under the Archdiocese of Westminster in the Catholic Yearbook so I think it's fair to list them here. I think they have much more right to be included here than Anglicans and Baptists since they are Catholics and submit to the Holy See. CQJ there are a number of Churches/parishes for the expatriate communities which use the normative Rite in languages other than English. The Eastern Rite Churches/parishes use their own rites not the Roman rite.

The list of religious, although lengthy, is not comprehensive, and therefore again could give rise to the possibility of preference as a grounds for inclusion/exclusion. I would prefer a list of the houses that are the provincial house for the orders in question, and otherwise a reference to the full list of religious on the diocesan website, as there already is for parishes and organisations. The final sentence of the male religious paragraph is of questionable status in terms of NPOV and encyclopedic language: is it verifiably imposing?

Are there claims that the mentioned religious orders have to the formation of faith in the Archdiocese that other orders do not? For example, it would be foolhardy within the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Indianapolis article not to mention Blessed Mother Theodore Guerin. I guess what I'm saying is this, is there a specific reason that those other orders Kevin is mentioning as a group are not mentioned that may be credible or warranted?

The religious orders might be better tabulated in the article which might aid a comprehensive list. The statement about the Oratory is factually correct - the Church is the second largest after the Cathedral and is in a very prominent position. I think the word 'imposing' is appropriate here. CQJ I can't answer that question but I could look it up in the Catholic Directory - though as I remember it didn't have much information other than locations.

If you are still visiting J_B, sorry to hear that such a supportive member of the Wiki commnity has been pushed away: thanks and good luck. Kevin McE 09:34, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

(end italics)With that said, would it be mutually agreeable between you all if we could see what changes Kevin would make to the newer section either here on the talk page or on the main page? CQJ 16:52, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

I second that Kevin. CQJ I'm happy with that. Roydosan 08:42, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I still think that "imposing" is a POV, and am unclear as to how your assertion that you think it appropriate negates that. Is being the second biggest anything noteworthy per se? I think that a list of religious orders that is not comprehensive (and I am not convinced that such is appropriate here) is not encyclopedic: I think this is the level of info at which it is far more appropriate that people look to the diocesan website than to Wikipedia. But yes, I think this is a reasonable model to use to overcome the (IMO) unbalanced presentation of weblinks previously found in this and other articles. Kevin McE 11:28, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

OK well removing the word imposing is not a problem for me. Though I used the word because the Church is the second largest in the diocese and in a popular area of central London not because I simply asserted it was appropriate. There aren't many of the religious orders missing from the list so it wouldn't take much to add them. I agree with you to an extent about the level of info which is why I think it would be better presented in a table - but I don't know how to do that. The article is quite short in terms of information in general so including the religious orders helps 'beef it up' a bit. Roydosan 09:11, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

"There aren't many of the religious orders missing from the list" hmmm: you list 15 male and 8 female orders: the diocesan yearbook lists 47 orders of men and 98 of women. Too many for a helpful list on this site, I would venture to suggest... Kevin McE 23:30, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

That's why I think presenting them in a table would be better - but I don't know how to do it. I just picked out the best known orders from the Catholic Directory - tabulating the information would enable a more comprehensive list without making it overly repetitive reading. Roydosan 01:05, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Leaving wikipedia

I've decided to leave wikipedia User:Jbolden1517#I'm done. You may need to find another mediator. Good luck in resolving this and remember try and be nice to each other and build up general principles from easily resolvable facts. jbolden1517^Talk 21:29, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Hey guys...

Just stopping by to see what's going on with the article. The liturgy section (which is in dispute according to the notes) looks pretty straightforward - if you all need help with it, please drop me a line. CQJ 14:34, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

The liturgy section is not in dispute per se. It is a possible compromise solution but is waiting for feedback from the other party in the mediation but thanks for the offer. As we have just lost our mediator maybe you could offer some help in this respect? Roydosan 15:26, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

If the article compromise solution is mutually agreeable, I think your need for a mediator would be moot at that point. However, should you need one, I'd be more than happy to scrounge one up for you. CQJ 15:46, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Title of primate

This section appears entirely unreferenced, and carries speculation as to the unstated motivation of actions and presumptions about what might happen in the hypothetical case of disestablishment of the C of E. In short, it is full of OR. Have a while to hone it, but otherwise it is only fit for deletion. Kevin McE (talk) 20:47, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

No improvement in terms of verification, therefore section being deleted. Kevin McE (talk) 18:47, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Request change of name

The Roman Catholic Diocese of Westminster is the name of the legal entity, and the way the diocese always refers to itself. Whilst it is canonically an archdiocese, it should not be referred to as such when the name is being used as a title. See Westminster Year Book 2014 (ISBN 978-0-9555525-8-8).

Archdiocese

I'm still a bit confused after reading this. Why given that it's bishop is the top figure of the Catholic Church in the country is Westminster not styled an archdiocese? Why is the Province of Westminster without an archdiocese, the only province in Great Britian without one? I could have sworn when I read this article years ago this was explained. --Criticalthinker (talk) 16:11, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Should have read above my entry. In either case, it should be described (lower-case, or course) as an archdiocese in the opening sentence, since that it was it formally is. --Criticalthinker (talk) 12:00, 1 May 2018 (UTC)