314
edits
Changes
no edit summary
Applying "soi-disant" on a page for a jurisdiction itself (or worse, the term "vagante") is not educational and of little use.--[[User:JosephSuaiden|JosephSuaiden]] 15:04, December 10, 2008 (UTC)
This is not "Slap-Editing". First of all, the "episcopal" titles that you have listed are incorrect, and I attempted to fix them. Second of all, we have something called "Mainstream Chalcedonian Bias." We should provide our readers with accurate information from the point-of-view of MCB.
Now, an episcopus vagans is defined as a "person who has been consecrated as a Christian bishop outside the structures and canon law of the established churches and is in communion with no generally recognized diocese. Also included are those who have in communion with them a group so small that it appears to exist solely for the alleged bishop's sake." The Sekachev branch of the Russian Catacomb Church 1. consecrated bishops outside the structures and canon law; 2. is not in communion with any generally recognized diocese; and 3. has such a small membership that it appears to exist solely for the bishops' sake. Thus, it meets the qualifications of episcopi vagantes.
As far as the other "bishop" of the PSCA, it is a convention (also in the RTOC article) to list the ranks of their "bishops" at the time of their suspension by a Mainstream body. If the individual was defrocked, then we should list their secular name, as they have lost any priestly or monastic rank. If the individual unilaterally asserts an additional title, we list that title as "soi-disant" -- self-asserting.
If we are going to cover schismatic entities on OrthodoxWiki should be given accurate information about them to our readership. If I declare myself as the Metropolitan of St Petersburg tomorrow, they does not entitle me to a page on OrthodoxWiki. --[[User:Aleks|Aleks]] 13:34, December 11, 2008 (UTC)
