User talk:Anglicanus
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
Contents |
[edit] Anglican collaboration of the month
| The current Anglicanism Collaboration of the Month is Essays and Reviews The next collaboration will be selected on 30 April 2008. (Vote here) |
Wassupwestcoast 02:26, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion
Hello! I noticed that you have been a contributor to articles on Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion. You may be interested in checking out a new WikiProject - |WikiProject Anglicanism. Please consider signing up and participating in this collaborative effort to improve and expand Anglican-related articles! Cheers! Wassupwestcoast 02:29, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Sydney Diocese
Hi Anglicanus, I should have explained my reasons for undoing your revisions.
I get the thing about Sydney being mentioned too much.
The other things I wasn't so sure about. 1. Why cleric instead of clergyman? Clergyman would seem more in the spirit of the diocese. 2. What's wrong with saying the diocese is evangelical in nature? It's more than a tradition - evangelicalism has been an innate part of the diocese since Richard Johnson was promoted by the LMS as the colony's first chaplain. 3. Why larger and not largest? The fact it's prefaced by "one of the" means we're speaking relatively anyway. 4. "as they interpret them" - surely evangelicals lay closer to the spirit of the 39 articles than say anglo-catholics? Anglicanism is by origin a reformed protestant denomination. But this, I guess, is the whole debate in global Anglicanism...
My final issue is the one I'm most confused over... 5. Why do you use evangelical as a proper noun? In my understanding its a common noun describing Christians who understand Christianity in a particular way. That would also mean we need to edit for Liberal, Pentecostal, Charismatic, Reformed, Protestant, etc.
Cheers, Journeyman (talk) 03:12, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Branch theory
That article is in such sorry shape because it was created (and written largely) by the chief Roman partisan in the great CC vs. RCC debate a couple of years ago. The article had a strong anti-Anglican POV when I first found it. I have since made some changes to it. Keep working on it if you can. -- Secisek (talk) 08:34, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

