View source for Talk:Archbishop of Canterbury

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?  --[[User:ASDamick|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.) --[[User:Magda|magda]] 13:57, 7 Feb 2005 (CST)

Is that better? --[[User:Magda|magda]] 14:30, 7 Feb 2005 (CST)

Okay.  I'll work on that.  -- [[User:Joffridus|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.  --[[User:ASDamick|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?  [[User:Pistevo|Pistevo]] 01:20, 10 Aug 2005 (EDT)

== Saints ==

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)

== Reginald Pole ==

Reginald Pole, while post-Reformation, was actually a Roman Catholic Archbishop (under Mary). Should he be listed as such? -- [[User:Joffridus|Joffridus]]

Yes. Under Queen Mary, the see was Roman but it was still the archbishopric of Canterbury. --[[User:Fr Lev|Fr Lev]] 20:41, August 7, 2009 (UTC)

== King Lucius ==
The ''History'' section of this article mentions King Lucius connected with the origins of Christianity in Britian. However I believe modern scholarship has largely dismissed this legend as erroneous; there is a good explantion of why it is not factual at the Catholic Encyclopedia's article on [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05378a.htm Pope St. Eleutherius]. I therefore suggest either qualifying or removing the reference.
Cheers, :)
[[User:Angellight 888|Angellight 888]] 01:57, August 9, 2009 (UTC)