Talk:Michael Seed

Seed is from the UK

The opening words of the article have been, until recently, "Father Michael Seed (born 1957) is a Latin Rite Catholic Franciscan Friar". This reads (to someone from the UK, where Seed was born and works) as if it is a translation from the original Rumanian or such like.

Therefore I moved the word "Catholic" to the body of the article (most Franciscans are Catholic, and exactitude is served by the later clarification).

And I removed "Latin Rite" as the English tend to use either "Catholic" or "Roman Catholic" to say the same thing. However this appears to have disappointed another editor, who thinks I don't know the various forms. All I was trying to do was make an article about someone from England read as if it was written in English (ie British English).

Incidentally if anyone is interested in the various "Rites" (as well as "rites") in the church, there is an informative couple of postings here.Cistercian (talk) 19:47, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Seed

Hello Cistercian,

You wrote "This reads(to someone from the UK, where Seed was born and works) as if it is a translation from the original Rumanian or such like." Being someone who was born and raised in the UK, I am not sure what you mean about the term 'Latin Rite" being from the original Rumanian; could you please explain?

As you yourself mention, most Franciscans are Catholic - but not all, and not all Catholic Franciscans are Latin (i.e. Roman) Rite. Thus,the desirability to clarify at the start. You are absolutely right in saying that the terms "Catholic" and "Roman Catholic" are almost interchangeable in the UK, but it is not a practice found amongst the Atonement Friars who are very sensitive in regards different rites and Christian denominations. (I say this as someone who has known Mike for many years.) I apologise for any offence caused by implying that you are ignorant of the various rites; insult was not intended.

Please rest assured that people from the UK will understand the article; being British I use British English. What I will do is add place the words 'Roman Rite' in brackets after Latin Rite; do you think that will bring sufficient clarification?

I take it from your name and various entries that you are a Cistercian from Heiligenkreuz Abbey. I hope that you were fortunate enough to be present when Benedict XVI made a visit. Albanman (talk) 17:30, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I hope you don't mind an outsider dropping into this conversation. My background: life-long English with strong Anglican connections. I'm aware of the Franciscan movement in the UK from an Anglican perspective, having first encountered some brothers who were visiting Iona Abbey for a week while I was a short-term volunteer staff member there. I've also stayed at their guest house in Alnwick (north-east England) a couple of times. And I've sometimes used their "Celebrating Common Prayer" in Anglican church services elsewhere in the north-east. All this, note is from an Anglican perspective, with Anglican brothers and Anglican SSF resources. Now I am a sample size of one; which is a very poor basis for making statistical assumptions and extrapolations! Nevertheless, from a UK perspective, it would seem that that there is a substantial Anglican/Franciscan presence here. Switching, then, to the WP article, there would seem to be a reasonable case to qualify the first occurrence of "Franciscan" with a denominational descriptor.

On the "Roman Rite" question, my gut instinct (but I may be wrong) would be to go the other way, and omit that from the lead and instead place it later in the article.

Pulling all that together, after skim-reading the article. (1) The "Catholic" and "Franciscan" are probably both important enough to be in the lead (additionally the first occurrence of "Franciscan" should probably have a "Catholic" very close). (2) the Roman/Latin rite seems to be a relatively secondary issue (I didn't see it anywhere else in the article) so should probably not be in the lead.

Hope that helps! Feline Hymnic (talk) 20:23, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Just happened to look at the entry for Benedict Groeschel (who is at least as significant as Michael Seed) and the lead opens with this sentence

Benedict Joseph Groeschel, CFR (born July 23, 1933) is a Catholic priest, retreat master, author, psychologist, activist and host of the television talk program Sunday Night Live with Father Benedict Groeschel, which is broadcast on the Eternal Word Television Network.

Only if one then clicks through to Franciscan Friars of the Renewal is the specific Rite clarified. This makes sense to me and would seem a good precedent for this (to me my mind still unnecessarily unclear) opening sentence. The authors of the Groeschel article clearly feel able to let much be deduced from the self-evident context. Perhaps one might do the same here? Cistercian (talk) 18:05, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

I've just edited the lead, simply to remove the various 'Rite' clauses, with the sole aim of simplifying that opening section. See how that reads. The 'Rite' information may be significant enough to be mentioned somewhere later on, but I don't know enough about Seed or the Rites to know where and how. Feline Hymnic (talk) 20:50, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

More neutral?

user:Albanman, how is this a "neutral tone"? The ordinary term for adopting a religion is 'convert', 'in their journey to embrace Catholicism' is the language of the converter, not of the neutral observer - and it implies a pre-ordained spiritual journey with a set destination. Pincrete (talk) 13:52, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

user:PincreteHi. Apologies for being vague in explaining my reason. I've known Mike for many years, and some might say that he and I compete for vagueness :) You are, of course, quite correct in saying that "conversion" is the ordinary expression. I've thought about what you wrote, but still fail to see that saying a person is on a journey is the "language of the converter", and certainly not implying anything pre-ordained; rather the opposite, I hope. I don't consider this to be a competition, in any form, so how about we both think/pray over the matter; then, if one of us decides to alter the wording, the other will accept?'Albanman (talk)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Michael Seed. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110726130659/http://www.graymoor.org/main.html to http://www.graymoor.org/main.html

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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:18, 28 January 2018 (UTC)