Talk:Orthodoxy

message: I'm making some minor revisions on a factual basis, and providing a little more information. Also the extraneous last line of the article is both false and nonsensical. It's removed. --Kaelus 20:06, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: In the sections which discuss Orthodox Christianity, there is too much emphasis using the word "Greek".  While it is true that in past centuries "greek" was used as a common adjective to describe the Orthodox Church as a whole, today it has too much of a connotation to mean actually Greek, like the church in or from Greece.  There are many parts of the united Orthodox Church that are not Greek (in country of origin or culture.)
Please consider the following revision:
The word orthodoxy, is usually associated with the Orthodox (Christian) Church which is... 
There is no need to mention specific ethnicities in this page (which is more of a launch-point to topics concerning the word orthodoxy in general, and not meant to be specifically about Orthodox Christianity.)  It may be better to leave out the word "Greek" entirely.
Thanks.
--Johnmblack 18:22, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Emphasis on "Greek" 

message: Would anyone elucidate the issue of when the term in question actually first appeared (or to be found) within the Christian context.Muscovite99 (talk) 17:54, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: The term's sorigin

message: ..."adherence to well researched, well thought out accepted norms"
This sounds POV in favor of orthodoxy. Really the term just means adherence to accepted norms, whether well thought out or not. I think "well researched" and "well thought out" should be remove to be less POV and more accurate.
209.134.115.80 (talk) 18:13, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seems POV 

message: The previous version of the article had: , a concept largely unknown before the adoption of Christianity as the state religion of Rome on February 27, 380 by Theodosius I, see also First seven Ecumenical Councils and State church of the Roman Empire
This is incorrect, since the earlier Council of Nicea (325) also had condemned certain groups as heretics, and there are writings by numerous church fathers at least about two hundred years prior to this (during the Roman persecution of Christians), that condemn various 'heretical' or apostatic groups. In any case, the idea of apostasy has no relation to the adoption of Christianity as a state religion.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.150.220.1 (talk) 18:08, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origins of the 'apostasy' or 'heresy' concept 

message: This article is about the concept of "orthodoxy", an English term that is an antonym of heterodoxy, not Orthodox Christianity. It needs to be rewritten to move that information to the appropriate articles. See orthodoxy (disambiguation) for explanation. Editor2020 (talk) 03:34, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: This articles seem to be solely about religious orthodoxy. The term has been used in a much wider sense as in scientific orthodoxy and political orthodoxy. Either the article should be expanded to cover non-religious orthodoxy or moved to religious orthodoxy. --Cab88 (talk) 01:29, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusion about scope of this article 

message: Thank you for your earnest desire to improve this article. However, your recent edit contained several mistakes, which is why it was necessary to revert it. I will list the relevant problems here, in order from least important to most important:
#Section titles should not be bolded. This is a matter of standard Wikipedia style. Please see any other article as an example.
#The Virgin Mary is not worshiped in Orthodox Christianity, she is venerated.
#Orthodox church buildings face East, not North.
#Most important of all... This page is not actually about the Orthodox Church! The page you are looking for is here. This article is about the general concept of "orthodoxy" (correct belief). We don't need to go into details about Eastern Orthodox Christianity here. That's what the other article is for.
If you go to the actual article that covers the Eastern Orthodox Church, you will see that all of the information you wished to add is already there, and much more. Ohff (talk) 02:48, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course. You can always edit this article - or any other article - and any improvements would be appreciated. But, please keep in mind that this article is not about "Orthodoxy" in the sense of Orthodox Christianity in particular. It's about the general idea of "orthodoxy" (correct belief) and the way it is understood in various different religions and outside of religion. That's why it's so short. Because it's about a very non-specific idea. I really think the article you are looking for is Eastern Orthodox Church. That article covers the Christian church that is most often called "Orthodoxy". Ohff (talk) 03:48, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank You, for guiding me and helping me understand the Wikipedia World better, I believe that the Orthodox article still needs more worldview as shown at the top of the article.Voss101 (talk) 02:49, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  once again: this article is not about the Eastern Orthodox Church. Therefore it is wholly irrelevant to add information about Slavic crosses here. There are plenty of articles from which to choose, such as Russian Orthodox Church etc. I am not sure what you mean by "Slavic Eastern Orthodox Church" as there is no one entity matching that name. Elizium23 (talk) 02:55, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent changes by User:Voss101 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Orthodoxy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130727022718/http://www.freewebs.com/vitaphone1/history/justinianc.html to http://www.freewebs.com/vitaphone1/history/justinianc.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:21, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: It's clear that the article as written is engaged with religious orthodoxy, Christian Orthodoxy in particular. And it's also clear that there are non-religious uses of the word in common parlance. It seems to me that both uses have a place on WP, perhaps in different articles (I favor that), but perhaps not.
One peculiarity of how to handle both uses together in the same article is that non-religious orthodoxy and a strictly western (non-Orthodox) viewpoint of religious orthodoxy are very much in synch with each other. Namely, they both imply adherence to beliefs, dogma, some sort of status quo, often grasped as a kind of doctrine supposedly long-proven and incapable of being overthrown (at least, when one is taking a stubbornly "orthodox" stance). That's ok, because that's the common understanding and the common language usage, and also the point of view of those who use the word that way. It expresses an opinion, but words can do that. And WP can describe the opinion(s) neutrally also, and point out common usage.
The difficulty, however, enters when such westerners are talking about Christian Orthodoxy without themselves being Orthodox, for they typically carry this common viewpoint with them when describing the religion, and express those opinions in those terms. However, it is not the Orthodox point of view, neither of the religion, nor of its stance, nor of what "Orthodox" means, not even of what the word derivation means. For the Greek ορθος (orthos) is correct, or true, while δοξα (doxz) has two meanings, the second of which is less often used simply because it refers specifically to the religion. That meaning is "glory", illustrated in the English word doxology, which most English dictionaries confirm as being about glory or glorification. This is all spelled out in the Eastern Orthodox Church article under the "Orthodoxy" section, complete with plenty of RSes. But it puts virtually this entire article out of synch with Christian Orthodoxy, at least as it describes itself and operates internally. Hence, it's all western POV, whether or not it is ever intended derogatorially. And it's regrettably incorrect in describing what makes Christian Orthodoxy actually Orthodox.
I'll start making alterations here on this basis insofar as I feel able and willing, but really, the article on the church would give anyone material to improve it also. One needs to understand that all of western Christianity has looked at creeds and doctrines, beliefs, and texts, in an unorthodox way for over 1000 years, and so the very way Catholics or Protestants usually approach their own religions is different. Orthodoxy has a different starting point, and a much different attitude. Evensteven (talk) 10:18, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV, But It's Partly a Matter of Scope 

message: A discussion is taking place to address the redirect :Orthodox Christian. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 15#Orthodox Christian until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Veverve (talk) 09:11, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Orthodox Christian" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: What is it? 2601:18C:D07F:B140:89C2:F486:86FA:24EF (talk) 02:26, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orthodox 

message: The redirect Orthodox Christianity has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 19:29, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Orthodox Christianity]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: The claimed lack of orthodoxy within Hinduism is directly contradicted by the article on Āstika and nāstika. The source used appears to be a single biased source. According to that article astika is defined as adherence to the dogmata:
# as those who accept the epistemic authority of the Vedas;
# as those who accept the existence of ātman;
# as those who accept the existence of Ishvara.
All others are called "nastika" which seems to be a slur meaning "atheist." This fits very well with the article's definition of "orthodoxy." Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 10:40, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  No Hinduist Orthodoxy?