A fact from Patrick McLaughlin (churchman) appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the Did you know column on 26 March 2008, and was viewed approximately 5,700 times (
disclaimer) (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
University of Oxford on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford articles
This article has been
automatically rated by a
bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
As I said in the summary when moving him away from
Patrick McLaughlin (priest), for the last twenty-six years of his life he wasn't a priest. Perhaps I've missed the part of the naming convention which requires 'priest', could the mover-back please say more?
Xn405:01, 22 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Sorry, I didn't realize the move would be controversial or I would have dropped a note here. I still think years of birth and death are the wrong way to go - we typically use occupation in article titles. It seems to be as a priest that he made his most notable accomplishments, though I understand it's not ideal. How about
Patrick McLaughlin (former priest)?
Nesodak (
talk)
14:27, 22 March 2008 (UTC)reply
It's more complicated than that. Anglicans of course recognize their own orders and consider that their priests can become former priests. Roman Catholics don't recognize Anglican orders (a decision of
Pope Leo XIII in 1896) and for converts they require re-ordination. McLaughlin wasn't ordained again. But most Orthodox churches do recognize Anglican Orders. Depending on the degree of his commitment to Rome, McLaughlin may have come to the view that he had never been a priest, but his Orthodox friends wouldn't have agreed with him.
I'm wondering if the section on descendents is necessary, and if it might be outside of the guidelines for living persons. I don't think we need more than a cursory mention that there were N-number of children, and perhaps birthyears. Occupations, names of grandchildren, etc., aren't necessary, unless some might be noteworthy in their own right.
PurpleChez (
talk)
19:49, 25 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Perhaps this section may not seem essential, but there's an important difference between being necessary and being valuable. My reason for including that very brief information is that it relates to the subject's lifetime and puts him in the context of some of the influences on him. Wihout knowing at least something about a man or woman's own family (partners, children and grandchildren, in particular) you will never really begin to understand that person. This must be especially so in the case of a married priest who joins a church with a celibate priesthood!
Xn404:30, 26 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Left?
The lead says he "left the Church of England", but the article only says he resigned his orders? Is this the same thing? Not just in practice, but did he become a non-Anglican formally?
Srnec (
talk)
00:15, 26 March 2008 (UTC)reply
It is meaningless to say a priest of the Church of England resigned holy orders informally. Father Patrick wrote a formal letter of resignation to his bishop who was only too delighted to have this brilliant innovator off his hands. Like his aunt
Louisa McLaughlin he went his own way when obstructed by authority.
Neurolinguist (
talk) —Preceding
comment was added at
01:37, 26 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Srnec has the beginnings of an argument, but it's an academic point, given other events. P McL plainly didn't formally cease to be a member of the C. of E. by giving up its priesthood, but he did so ipso facto when he joined the Church of Rome.
Xn404:30, 26 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Not at all, thanks for your help. Of course, as an
Anglo-Catholic, he no doubt saw himself throughout as a member of "one holy, Catholic, and apostolic Church". These are deep waters.
Xn404:44, 26 March 2008 (UTC)reply
I'm a member of a Baptist church (but not necessarily a Baptist) who considers himself a member of the "one holy, Catholic, and apostolic Church". Deep waters indeed!
Srnec (
talk)
05:27, 26 March 2008 (UTC)reply
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Patrick McLaughlin (churchman). Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.