Talk:Secular clergy/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Secular clergy. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Question

If these templates, prepared by your experienced wiki-employees, are correct, then these religious people who are from laity are atheists. 128.164.157.184 (talk) 22:57, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Very few people that edit on Wikipedia are wiki employees. The meaning of the word secular within the Catholic Church and other similar groups is different then the common definition of the word. Secular priests are those priests that do not belong to a religious order. Most diocesan priests and deacons are secular clergy. That does not mean they are atheists. Within the church anyone that hasn't taken solemn vows is considered secular.Marauder40 (talk) 00:33, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Divine Office fact check

I believe that deacons are also required to recite the Divine Office daily. Will look into a fact check. 8bitW (talk) 20:09, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Fixed. 8bitW (talk) 23:19, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Content beyond scope of article

The long paragraph in the center of the section on Catholic clergy reads like a thesis on priestly celibacy and is well beyond the scope of the article. Any accurate information should be merged with the clerical celibacy article, which itself is troubled, but still appropriate than this article. I'll leave this notice up for a few days and then make the relevant changes. 8bitW (talk) 20:14, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

I greatly reduced the section on celibacy and archived the original material to my sandbox to make it easier to get to. Waiting for consensus on whether the paragraph should be removed entirely. 8bitW (talk) 23:20, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Role in Philippines Revolution

There are a couple of sections which refer to the role intra-clergy conflicts had in the Philippines Revolution. Although no sources were cited, the statements seem consistent with what is said in the articles that were linked to in Wikipedia. Are outside sources needed for these statements, or consistency with intra-Wikipedia articles enough? 8bitW (talk) 23:23, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Secular clergy. 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:

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) 06:05, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

These sentences do NOT make sense. Please remove this horrible conglomerate of words without meaning.

See what I wrote this is dangerously wrong from someone who knows. 2601:5C0:C300:6BA0:D65:6485:88FA:8E2F (talk) 23:53, 30 June 2022 (UTC)