Wikipedia

Talk:Eastern Catholic Churches/Archive 1

< Talk:Eastern Catholic Churches
Latest comment: 17 years ago by Nightstallion

The result of the debate was move, but as to where, I didn't see a single preferred option. Consequently, I've decided to move it to Eastern Rite Catholic Churches, which seems best to me, but this should not be seen as a final decision. —Nightstallion (?) 10:36, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Move

Latest comment: 17 years ago78 comments9 people in discussion

I suggest this page is moved to "Eastern Rites of the Catholic Church" or "Eastern Rites in the Catholic Church". The term "Eastern Rites" denotes the rites themselves: Byzantine, Armenian, Melkite, etc., and the rites themselves are used by the Orthodox Churches, too. Dpotop 12:10, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Ditto. —Preost talk contribs 12:57, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
I think the appropriate page name would be "Eastern Catholic Churches", which is currently a redirect to "Eastern Rites". Unfortunately there are a large number of pages which currently link to "Eastern Rites". Gimmetrow 13:24, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
This is, I think, even better. As for the large number of pages, a bot can easily be used by someone to fix the links. —Preost talk contribs 13:26, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
So, is there someone that is good at moving pages or references? I only know how to do it "by hand". Dpotop 14:54, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm of the opinion that this article should be turned into a disambig page with links to the various meanings, while its current content should be moved to Eastern Catholic Churches. —Preost talk contribs 15:05, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
I agree. But shouldn't this get more input from other editors? Gimmetrow 15:19, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
"Eastern Catholic Churches" is fine with me. Lima 15:26, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

By the way, I am very pleased to have provoked discussion on the merge question. I was annoyed to find nothing about the proposal on the Talk page on which I was invited to discuss the proposal, and not even on the other Talk page. Lima 15:47, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Should someone put in a move request? Gimmetrow 00:19, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

The category for vestments has been replaced by 3 categories for Anglican, Roman Catholic, and Orthodox vestments. Category:Vestments is up for deletion) The vestments used by Eastern Catholics are currently only in the Category:Orthodox vestments, referring to a church rather than a liturgical rite. Just thought I would draw the editors attention to this as it may involve a similar issue. Gimmetrow 15:44, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I very much don't like "Eastern Catholic Churches". The word "Rite" is key, and, at any rate, "Eastern Rite" is the name by which they're best known. I wouldn't object especially to Eastern Rites of the Catholic Church, although I think this would be unnecessary. john k 17:17, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

The problem with "Eastern Rite" is that it's POV. Catholic POV, to be precise. NPOV is Eastern Rites in the Catholic Church, or Eastern Rite Catholic Churches, or Eastern Catholic Churches. Dpotop 17:28, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
Just in case you don't know. The rite is the ceremonial, not the confession or the church hierarchy itself. For instance, the Byzantine rite and the Armenian rite are used both by Eastern Catholic churches and by Orthodox ones. Dpotop 17:27, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
At some time in the past (not sure when), western Catholics used "Rite" to refer to both the ceremonial and the juridical structure of the Eastern Catholic Churches. Gimmetrow 17:37, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
But again, it's POV. Dpotop 17:54, 1 June 2006 (UTC)


Ok, I took a look in the Catholic Encyclopedia, and it seems that they say Eastern Catholic Churches [1]. I'm placing a move request. Dpotop 18:02, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Which I support. It looks like only "john k" objects. Note that the plan is to have a page at "Eastern Rite" that talks about the liturgical ceremonies. Hopefully a disambig note at the top will address the objection? Gimmetrow 18:13, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
No problem. Dpotop 20:56, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I believe that if you are only talking about what is Catholic in the East, you must keep it singular as "Eastern Church" or "Eastern Catholic Church". If you want to make it plural, you have to omit the "Catholic" part and make sure to include both dissident and non-dissedent in the article. I believe that is the way the CE lays it out. --Diligens 18:58, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Recommended reading for Diligens: Decree of the Second Vatican Council on the Catholic Churches of Eastern Rite Lima 19:55, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
You know very well I won't be surprised if Vatican II overturned another traditional concept. There are so many of them! So what do we have when two reliable sources conflict? An article that has to carefully be neutral to both. Surprise! --Diligens 20:04, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
The Catholic Church is currently organized under the form of a set of particular churches, of which the eastern catholic ones are only a part. This is a fact, I thought there is no dispute over it (unless you consider the dissident, or traditionalist Catholic Churches, but then these are not of Eastern Rite, and are also not covered by the current content of the article). Anyway, my problem with the current name is far more fundamental. I'm Orthodox, of Byzantine Rite, which is an Eastern Rite, and there are some 300 million like me in the world (meaning it's not a marginal issue). You cannot just appropriate the "Eastern Rite" term because some time ago the Catholic Church called some parts of it "Eastern Rite". :) Dpotop 20:53, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
The idea of Gimmetrow seems good to me. The article concentrates on the rites (rituals), and a disambig note points to other uses. Dpotop 21:04, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
Diligens, the old Catholic Encyclopedia article also refers to "Eastern Catholic Churches" in the sense we are using them here. Read further down in that article. Even many Eastern Catholics take offense at the phrase "Eastern Rite" to refer to a Church. (I'm trying to be careful not to speak for everyone.) Now, it is true the Wiki naming conventions say that articles should be named in the singular, but I think this can be argued as an exception. "Eastern Catholic Church" suggests a single particular church among the Eastern Catholic Churches. "Eastern Church" or "Eastern Churches" would seem to risk confusion with Orthodox Churches. Gimmetrow 21:34, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

"Eastern Catholic" embeds the PoV that the only Catholics are those in communion with Rome. The Holy Apostolic and Catholic Assyrian Church of the East (which the rest of us call the Nestorians) would disagree. I don't see how "Eastern Rite" can seriously be confused with the Orthodox, who call themselves Orthodox. Septentrionalis 23:30, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, it could be, since the Eastern Orthodox have their own rite, they could be considered to be what is referred to as Eastern Rite. My only concern in this prolonged controversy over naming has been disambiguation and self-identification. The dilemma is that the term "Catholic Church" is both the name preferred by the institution headquartered in Rome, but is also a preferred self-identity of many denominations not in communion with Rome. So, what to do, what to do?
In this case, do you think that there would be a reasonable likelihood of "Eastern Catholic Church" being confused with the Nestorian (or Assyrian) Church? If the answer is "no," the term is not ambiguous. Do you think that it would clash with the self-identity of the Nestorian Church - that is, is it a name that they call themselves? If the answer is "yes," then perhaps "Catholic Churches of the Eastern Rite" would be a preferred compromise, with "Eastern Catholic" redirecting here, and a dab to the Assyrian Church of the East at the top of the article. Fishhead64 00:04, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm not a member of the Assyrian Church; but Holy Apostolic and Catholic Assyrian Church of the East is what their article calls them, and I believe is a self-identification. Eastern Catholic is at least a reasonable abbreviation for this, and should be avoided here. I like your compromise. Septentrionalis 01:47, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

For the most part, Orthodox, Roman Catholic and other Eastern Christian churches use the word "rite" to refer to a set of ceremonies. In addition, the RCC has used the word "rite" to refer to a juridical/hierarchical church united to Rome. This is generally a use of the western RCC. This article, as it currently stands, reflects the latter meaning. Many of the editors would like to move the content of this current article elsewhere, and use the space at "Eastern Rite" for the other meaning, the set of ceremones used in common by the various Orthodox, Eastern (Roman) Catholic and other Eastern Christian churches. That's the primary reason for seeking the move. Where does the current content go? "Eastern Catholic Churches" was one idea (presently a redirect here). Another possibility is "Catholic Churches of the Eastern Rite." Any other suggestions? Gimmetrow 02:43, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Ditto. In Romania, you have a Greek Catholic Church that has exactly the same rite as the Orthodox one. And when I say exactly the same, I mean they even say the Creed without filioque during mass. Of course, for theological purposes they will use the regular Catholic Creed, but maintainig the rite unchanged was a fundamental condition when part of the Orthodox Church united with the Roman See. So, this is the Byzantine Rite, an Eastern Rite, which is used by both churches: an Orthodox one, and (since the 17th century) the Greek Catholic one. Dpotop 06:31, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I can also understand the problem of Septrentrionalis, but I believe it can be solved with a disambiguation page. Anyway, the Catholic and Orthodox Churches (both Eastern and Oriental) consider themselves both Catholic (universal) and Orthodox (of correct faith). The ambiguities can certainly be solved using disambig links. Dpotop 06:31, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Quick straw poll

I can only think of one another: "Eastern Roman Catholic Church" (to distinguish from other eastern Catholic Churches). Any other options could be added below to a straw poll on this matter. Please indicate below your preference, and make any comments you wish to explain your vote. Fishhead64 06:19, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Keep as Eastern Rite

  • You cannot do this. Not unless you make "Eastern Rite" a disambiguation page. Dpotop 06:31, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
  • You can do this, provided that an explanation is given at the beginning, as in the present text. But the opinion of those discussing the matter is against keeping the present title. Lima 08:59, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
  • If no consensus, this will happen anyway. Gimmetrow 18:15, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Neutral. Not the most clear term, though. Fishhead64 18:54, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
  • This would be perfectly acceptable to me, although I think the fact that "eastern rite" can also include non-Catholic churches should be mentioned somewhere. john k 00:25, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Move to Eastern Catholic Church

  • Support. This is how the Roman Catholic Church defines them. A small disambig must point to the definition of Catholic, however. Dpotop 06:31, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. They do not see themselves as one Eastern Catholic Church, but as several. The (Roman) Catholic Church, which once, in a Latin-centred way, sometimes, but not always, lumped them all together as "the" Eastern Church, now never ignores their distinctive individualities. Lima 08:59, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Ditto. I did not see the difference Church/Churches. Dpotop 09:18, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I mis-typed when making up this template. Fishhead64 18:54, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. There are numerous Eastern Rites of the Catholic Church, and it doesn't make sense to imply this is singular. john k 00:25, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Move to Eastern Catholic Churches

  • Support. This is how the Roman Catholic Church actually refers to them. The plural is necessary in this case, to avoid misunderstanding. Lima 08:59, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. Dpotop 09:19, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. Gentgeen 16:39, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. Gimmetrow 18:15, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. For reasons cited below ("Catholic Churches of the Eastern Rite). Fishhead64 18:48, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. It seems a weird thing to say. All the Eastern Rites are part of a single (holy universal) Catholic Church. The idea of multiple "Catholic Churches" doesn't really make sense. john k 00:26, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
    • Well, the Vatican doesn't seem to have a problem with the term. [2] Gentgeen 01:31, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
    • Neither does the Eastern Orthodox Church - see Balamand Declaration, 8, 16, 17, 21, 23, 34. That should put paid to the idea that some contributors have that "Eastern Catholic Churches" is a POV term. John Kenney would do well to read Particular Church.Lima 04:27, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
      • Though I think your point is right (i.e. regarding the term), the Balamand Declaration has never achieved any official status in the Eastern Orthodox Church, not even by the Antiochian Patriarchate whose representatives signed onto it. Though much hullabaloo has been made about it, it is essentially a dead article WRT all Eastern Orthodox. —Preost talk contribs 17:38, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
        • I agree with Damick: the substance of the Balamand document has not became normative, in spite of the statement in the official publication of the Œcumenical Patriarchate, "Episkepsis," No. 520, July 31, 1995, p. 19: "In a joint communiquée, signed on June 29, 1995, Pope John Paul II and Patriarch Bartholomew expressed their acceptance of the Balamand principles." In spite of that, the document demonstrates what terminology is acceptable to both sides, which is what interests us here. Lima 18:35, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
          • Indeed, as I pointed before, this is a problem of POV. From the interior of the Catholic Church, "Eastern Rite" can simply mean "Eastern Catholic Churches" when used to identify those branches of the Roman Catholic Church that employ an Eastern Rite. But this POV is only Roman Catholic, and greatly reductionist. Even from the interior of the Roman Catholic Church one can see other Churches of Eastern Rites. And, most important, it's very POV. Dpotop 19:58, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
            • Clarify: since you entered support for a move to "Eastern Catholic Churches", it is not that but "Eastern Rites" that you find POV, yes? Gimmetrow 20:13, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
              • Yes, it is "Eastern Rites" that I find POV. "Eastern Catholic Churches" seems NPOV to me (ideally, a disambig note should also be added to the "Eastern Catholic Churches" article to say that some Oriental Orthodox Churches are naming themselves Catholic). Dpotop 22:31, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Move to Catholic Churches of the Eastern Rite

  • Oppose. This expression is found only in the www.vatican.va heading of its English translation of the Orientalium Ecclesiarum decree. The other translations on the same site all have "Eastern Catholic Churches" (in plural, of course): katolických východních církvích; Églises orientales catholiques; Chiese orientali cattoliche; Igrejas Orientais Católicas; Iglesias Orientales Católicas; Makanisa katoliki ya Mashariki. More important, the original text, as published in the official gazette of the Holy See, has "Decretum de Ecclesiis orientalibus catholicis". Lima 08:59, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Question Support: This term is within the Vatican lexicon, as noted, and it may avoid confusion with other Catholic Churches of the East. My question is whether it is the case that "western rite" is understood as applying to the usage of the Latin Church and its offshoots, while "easetern rite" refers to the usage of the Byzantine Church and its offshoots. If so, "Catholic Churches of the Eastern Rite" would be the most precise, unambiguous term, offending neither Orthodox claims nor Assyrian Catholic nor Malabar Catholic claims. And, if so, I would obviously support a move to this name. Fishhead64 17:34, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Support as above. Ingenious, and presumably correct. I would comment that if it is correct in English, that should be sufficient for this version of Wikipedia. If es.wikipedia.org uses a different title, fine.Septentrionalis 18:03, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Neutral, would probably want "CCs of the Eastern Rites" if it happened. Gimmetrow 18:15, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Oppose - If this is chosen, "Catholic Churches of the Eastern Rites" should be the title, as there are several different rites the various churches follow. However, I personally find this selection to be too wordy. Additionally, many Vatican documents after Orientalium Ecclesiarum use "Eastern Catholic Churches" in their official english translations, such as 1981's A Concilio Constantinopolitano I, 1995's Orientale Lumen, 1999's Ecclesia in America, 2000's Apostolic Letter for the 300th Anniversary of the union of the Greek-Catholic Church of Romania with the Church of Rome, 2003's Ecclesia in Europa, and others that would take too long to list. Gentgeen 18:38, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment - I agree with Gentgeen. It is simply not true to say that Catholic Churches of the Eastern Rite "is within the Vatican lexicon." A mistake on a website does not count, when opposed to official documents. There is more than one Eastern Rite, whether by "Rite" you mean liturgical tradition or particular Church. To say the opposite is not correct in English or in any other language. There is no official English translation of the documents quoted. To provide a service, the www.vatican.va website just took one of the several existing English translations. Anything in that translation that departs from the text in Acta Apostolicae Sedis is not just unofficial: it is, in addition, inaccurate. Fishhead is right in saying people sometimes confuse "Eastern Rite" with "Byzantine Rite". He seems to do so himself. This does offend Malabar Catholics. I once had a conversation with a Malabar bishop who was speaking about historical relations between his Church and the "western Church"; it took me a little while to grasp that by "western Church" he in fact meant "Byzantine Church". Both geographically and, in view of the split at the Council of Ephesus, also historically, the Byzantine Church was indeed western for him. The Malabar Church is an Eastern Catholic Church (in the sense intended here), and must be included in this article; the Assyrian Church of the East is not (in the sense intended here), and should not be included in this article. Lima 19:52, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. There are several eastern rites, not just one, and one Catholic Church, not many. I'd much prefer "Eastern Rites of the Catholic Church." john k 00:28, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Move to Eastern Roman Catholic Church

  • Oppose: a) unnecessarily complex; b) should be plural; c) some of these Churches, in particular the Romanian, frequently use "Roman Catholic" to mean "Latin Catholic". Lima 08:59, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Would probably be okay with this if "Churches," but agree is is unnecessarily complex. Fishhead64 18:54, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Rather odd. john k 00:28, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Move to Eastern Rite Catholicism

  • Neutral. There is already a category with this name. Gimmetrow 18:15, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. This has the same problems as "Eastern Catholic Churches," only more so, since it purports to cover all varieties of Catholicism in the East, not merely those in communion with Rome. Fishhead64 18:54, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm mainly noting the precedent. However, there are other categories for Eastern Orthodoxy and Oriental Orthodoxy. How significant is Eastern Rite Anglicanism? Gimmetrow
LOL! I'm thinking mainly of the Assyrian and Malabar Communions. Fishhead64 19:38, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
How are those "Catholic"? john k 00:24, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
Both have bishops in apostolic succession, and self-identify as Catholic. Indeed, the full name of the Assyrian Church is the "Holy Apostolic and Catholic Assyrian Church of the East." Fishhead64 01:37, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. "Catholic", in general parlance, means "churches in communion with Rome." john k 00:29, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
Except when it doesn't. Fishhead64 01:37, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Move to Eastern Rite Catholic Churches

  • Support. Seems similar to "Eastern Catholic Churches" but less close to Assyrian name. Gimmetrow 18:15, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Uh, support, I guess. But how does this differ from "Catholic Churches of the Eastern Rite"? Fishhead64 18:54, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Shorter, word order similarity to my first preference. Gimmetrow
Shouldn't it be "Eastern-Rite Catholic Churches"? Lima 19:57, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I could accecpt this one, but prefer "Eastern Catholic Churches". Gentgeen 20:25, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Support. This seems like possibly the best option to me. john k 00:29, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Eastern_Catholic_Churches/Archive_1&oldid=1156574713"