Talk:Archbishop of Canterbury

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
m
Line 16: Line 16:
  
 
I came across Ethelhard's commemoration ([[May 12]]) as a saint in [http://www.ortodoxakyrkan.se/Typikon%202005.pdf this typikon].  There are a [http://www.orthodoxengland.btinternet.co.uk/stdmay.htm few] [http://www.odox.net/Icons-Ethelhard.htm more] mentions in Orthodox commemorations, but not many. Found Deusdedit for [[July 14]] in the same typikon. —[[User:Magda|magda]] 12:02, 30 Jun 2005 (EDT)
 
I came across Ethelhard's commemoration ([[May 12]]) as a saint in [http://www.ortodoxakyrkan.se/Typikon%202005.pdf this typikon].  There are a [http://www.orthodoxengland.btinternet.co.uk/stdmay.htm few] [http://www.odox.net/Icons-Ethelhard.htm more] mentions in Orthodox commemorations, but not many. Found Deusdedit for [[July 14]] in the same typikon. —[[User:Magda|magda]] 12:02, 30 Jun 2005 (EDT)
 +
 +
 +
==non-Orthodox==
 +
I am wondering if it would make more sence to NOT list all the "Archbishops" that are "technically" not Orthodox since they are a continuation of the line but post-Schism. I find that keeping the list of Archbishops is deceiving in that it can confuse or imply that there is a connection to Orthodoxy. What do others think? [[User:Ixthis888|Vasiliki]] 07:23, May 11, 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 00:23, May 11, 2009

Would it perhaps make more sense to reverse the order of these lists, so that the earlier archbishops are on the top of the list, and the later ones at the bottom? --Rdr. Andrew 11:55, 7 Feb 2005 (CST)

I think it would be best to have a consecutive list with three subdivisions as opposed to three somewhat disjointed lists. (In other words, yes.) --magda 13:57, 7 Feb 2005 (CST)

Is that better? --magda 14:30, 7 Feb 2005 (CST)

Okay. I'll work on that. -- Joffridus

In case I wasn't clear, I was advising that the list be ordered with the earliest dates at the top, descending to the later dates (which is the same as other chronological lists in OrthodoxWiki articles). Thus, you'd have St. Augustine of Canterbury first, with Archbishop Rowan Williams last. --Rdr. Andrew 19:36, 7 Feb 2005 (CST)

Okay. Done.

i don't know the history very well, but i would think changing it from 'post-reformation archbishops of canterbury' to 'anglican archbishops of canterbury' would be less confusing? Pistevo 01:20, 10 Aug 2005 (EDT)

Saints

I came across Ethelhard's commemoration (May 12) as a saint in this typikon. There are a few more mentions in Orthodox commemorations, but not many. Found Deusdedit for July 14 in the same typikon. —magda 12:02, 30 Jun 2005 (EDT)


non-Orthodox

I am wondering if it would make more sence to NOT list all the "Archbishops" that are "technically" not Orthodox since they are a continuation of the line but post-Schism. I find that keeping the list of Archbishops is deceiving in that it can confuse or imply that there is a connection to Orthodoxy. What do others think? Vasiliki 07:23, May 11, 2009 (UTC)

Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
Navigation
interaction
Donate

Please consider supporting OrthodoxWiki. FAQs

Toolbox