Talk:Western Christianity

message: Compared to the Eastern Christianity article, this one needs a lot of work. Perhaps someone with more knowledge on the religions could follow the Eastern Christianity's format and at least make the article in equal size to the Christianity Template? I think several of the paragraphs on the "Eastern Christianity" could almost be copied onto this one, with just a little rewording. For example: The Eastern churches' differences from Western Christianity has as much to do with culture, language, and politics as theology. For the non-Catholic Eastern churches, a definitive date for the commencement of schism cannot be given (see East-West Schism), although conventionally, it is often stated that the Assyrian Church of the East became estranged from the church of the Roman Empire in the years following the Council of Ephesus (431), Oriental Orthodoxy separated after the Council of Chalcedon (451), and the split between the Church of Rome and the Orthodox Church is usually dated to 1054 (often referred to as the Great Schism). So if somebody has the time and better knowledge of the workings between the Western Churches, could they consider expanding the article? Irish♣Pearl 20:54, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Added some more information, but a lot more is still needed and someone should go over to check what I did add. If I have more time, I'll try to research and put more detailed information in, but this was all I could do for now. Irish♣Pearl 21:37, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  In Desperate Need of Information 

message: I have set up a survey on the new graphic at the Schism talk page; I didn't then realize it was being used on other pages. It is probably sensible to centalize discussion - the Survey is here  Johnbod 03:55, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Graphic - Survey 

message: This page does need a lot of work, and here I go. Leadwind (talk) 18:59, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  high-importance stub 

message: How do you explain them not being a part of Western Christianity. I'm curious.Ernio48 (talk) 23:18, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Your POV is not verifiable. There are no RSs for the term "Western Christianity" being used in that way. tahc chat 23:22, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Could be. But it is against pure logic.Ernio48 (talk) 16:51, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The logic used is that Christianity is, at its heart, Trinitarian. Groups that deny the Holy Trinity in some way are considered so far outside the boundaries of standard Christian doctrine so as to not be Christian anymore. That includes the groups you mentioned. However, I'm not sure why this is an issue for you. Wikipedia does not exclude these groups from the big tent of Christianity and permits them to self-identify. They are present in the "Christianity" navbox at the bottom of this very article. And they are not explicitly excluded by the definitions in the article. So why has it even come up? Elizium23 (talk) 18:23, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Christian Science, multiple others 

message: In the last two months, two different editors added Western Rite Orthodoxy to the introduction. So, clearly, this is an issue that needs to be discussed. Should Western Rite Orthodoxy really be mentioned here? I am strongly inclined to say no, for the following reasons:
* Western Rite Orthodoxy is an extremely small movement. No statistics on membership are available, but the relevant article indicates that its size is measured on the order of perhaps a hundred parishes worldwide. It is certainly far smaller than Eastern Catholicism, or any medium-sized Protestant denomination. Therefore, if we're not even mentioning Anglicanism or Lutheranism by name in the introduction, it seems highly inappropriate (undue weight) to mention this much smaller movement.
* Are there any sources that talk about Western Christianity and actually mention Western Rite Orthodoxy? As far as I know, there are not. So it's probably original research for us to just decide that Western Rite Orthodoxy belongs with Western Christianity. Frankly I suspect that it's too small for anyone to have bothered to categorize it.
I also want to make a more general point: We shouldn't just assume that the difference between "Western" and "Eastern" Christianity is purely liturgical, so that any church using a Latin rite is automatically "Western" and any church using a Byzantine/Syriac/Coptic/etc. rite is automatically "Eastern". Bear in mind that a large minority of Western Christianity is composed of low-church Protestantism that doesn't have any liturgy at all. So the difference between "Western" and "Eastern" Christianity obviously cannot be just a matter of liturgy alone. Ohff (talk) 16:45, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Western Rite Orthodoxy? 

message: why is there such a big gap between the "not be confused with latin church" and the rest of the article? i tried to fix it, but the gap won't seem to go for some reason. Farleigheditor (talk) 11:48, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  weird formatting at start 

message: The article describes a binary and exclusive distinction between Easter and western churches Western Christianity is one of two sub-divisions of Christianity (Eastern Christianity being the other).This is made without mention to early Christin faiths funded well before the great schism of 1054 or other schism of east and west such as Marcionism or Arianism funded in the 2nd and 3nd centuries AD before even the Nestorian schism in 431 AD mentioned in the article and without a definitive east west divide to my knowledge. 87.43.37.135 (talk) 10:02, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not accurate to early Christianity