Talk:Bishop

message: Since when was/is a person a bishop (esp. in late-medieval (14th and 15th cent.) England)? Since his election/nomination? Since his consecration? Or since the transfer of the temporalities? Or more than one of these? So when did a bishopric's Sede vacante end after the death/deposition/resignment/.. of a bishop? --A_W_K (talk) 10:47, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Since when a Bishop? 

message: I'm fairly certain that all archbishops that head ecclesiastical provinces in those churches also hold the title metropolitan.  All Roman Catholic bishops do, and the term metropolitan comes from the Eastern churches, which draw a distinction between an archbishop and a metropolitan archbishop.  The only group I am uncertain of is Anglican churches, although the Archbishop of Canterbury is the metropolitan bishop of his ecclesiastical province.  Are there Anglican bishops that function like metropolitans but do not take the title metropolitan? Pmadrid 22:58, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: In the Orthodox Church in America, we continue to distinguish between metropolitan and archbishop. We have just one metropolitan: I believe Metropolitan Herman's full title is "The Most Blessed HERMAN, Archbishop of Washington and Metropolitan of All America and Canada. We have several archbishops who serve various cities and dioceses throughout the U.S. and Canada, while other dioceses are served by bishops. Wesley 03:55, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

text: The Anglican bishop of New Zealand was made Metropolitan when his diocese split in to lots of little ones in the 1800s (see Archbishop of New Zealand). 202.0.40.9 11:29, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Metropolitan vs. Archbishop 

message: Not sure what denomination this is, but the section is very confusing; it is pretty unclear what a bishop is or does in the NAC.  If someone knows more about the NAC, perhaps some clarification would be possible.  KHM03 17:45, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Apostolic Church 

message: Is this a misspelling for deacon? Rich Farmbrough 09:00, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I would think so, although the office of deacon is called the diaconate. Wesley 02:23, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Diacon 

message: There is a problem with the usage of these terms in this article.  Technically speaking the Roman Catholic Church and the so-called Latin Catholic Church are the same.  Rome is a Latin city.  The Eastern Catholic Churches (in communion with Rome) do not refer to themselves as Roman Catholic.  Rome is specifically western (Latin).  It does not mean in communion with Rome.  Please see the website http://www.east2west.org for an explanation of Eastern Catholic churches, and their relationship to their sister church, the Roman Catholic Church, all of which, together, form "the Catholic Church", under the authority of the successor of St. Peter, the Bishop of Rome. User:66.42.173.111  01:51, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Your point?  KHM03 12:14, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The point would be: A-NONE takes BISHOP! Stalemate! >:) Wahkeenah 12:42, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roman Catholic Church vs. Latin Catholic Church 

message: There is a large amount of reference to Suffragan Bishops, but there is no article, I feel there should be perhaps a small seperate article, explaining exactly what one is - and perhaps a small list of notable ones. Ideas? Anthropax 15:19, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Suffragan Bishops?

message: I would suggest that Valid Bishops would be better merged into either Historic episcopate or Apostolic Succession (and then deleted; it is an orphan—see what links there) .  Of course, interesting material could also be copied to Bishop. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 19:43, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would strongly discourage merging this with bishops, but would rather encourage it to be deleted altogether, at least under this title.  "Valid" requires that some be "invalid", and although I believe that there are "invalid" bishops, they aren't those covered in this article; I'd suggest that the "invalid" bishops are those pastors who decide to tack "Bishop" in front of their names. Joseph 01:43, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your suggestion! When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes.  Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the  link at the top. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to).  The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out  how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills.  New contributors are always welcome. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 08:03, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge from [[Valid Bishops]]?

message: Someone who's experienced with dealing with images in articles needs to figure out a way to fix the position of the mitre picture at the very beginning of the article. 
It's stuffing up the position of the TOC. 
I tried to center or right it instead, but that causes a big gap at the top of the article till when the Christianity template ends. --`/aksha 08:44, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture fix 

message: I infer from other articles in Wikipedia that it was once (early middle ages) considered a serious crime for a bishop to leave his diocese to take up the episcopacy of another. I believe that a recently deceased pope was once condemned for doing this and for approving the practice in others. Obviously, this view is no longer followed in the Catholic church; bishops who do well in a small diocese are routinely "promoted" to a larger one. What changed? How and when did the change take place? Rwflammang 15:47, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nothing changed. It has always been possible for a bishop to transfer (if elected by another diocese) with the blessing of the synod to which he is subject. What he may not do is transfer on his own authority, without such a blessing. TCC (talk) (contribs) 20:14, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I had assumed he was asking about the matter addressed by Canon XV of the First Council of Nicaea. . TCC (talk) (contribs) 02:50, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I suspect that HarvardOxon may be right. My confusion was over the charges brought against Stephan and Formosus as described in the article on the Cadaver Synod. Rwflammang 16:09, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It may be  little more complicated. The prohibition is based on  the "husband of one wife" passage in Timothy, interpreted as the bishop taking his diocese as spouse. In the Western church, for the case of bishops other than the Bishop of Rome, dispensation was always possible for those who recognized his authority. To what extent his authority needed to be confirmed by a synod remained disputable, and very much disputed--translations during the middle ages led to long-standing conflicts.  The practical importance increased with the rise of archbishoprics, because an archbishop is the bishop of his city, and without dispensation a bishop could not be promoted to an archbishop. How and when this changed is worth some checking, which I'll do if I can. 
In the case of the Bishop of Rome, there was nobody to dispense him. The only body with possible authority over a pope was a General Council, and these were called on rare occasions to resolve stalemates. For much of the Middle ages, the Pope was therefore selected from someone other than a bishop elsewhere--as can be seen in the articles here on the various popes. Some were abbots. Most, in the early middle ages, were members of the Roman clergy, and there were a number of offices among them from whom bishops were often chosen. Again see the bios, which are ultimately based on the Liber Pontificalis. Again, it would be interesting to see how that changed. DGG 08:28, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Switching dioceses 

message: The most conspicuous omission from this article is a mention of European Protestant churches alongside the American Lutheran church. Can someone fill in about, for example, the Church of Sweden, which I think is a Lutheran church with bishops? 193.63.239.165 10:16, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed. Also, do Methodist churches outside the U.S. have bishops? john k 20:54, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other churches? 

message: What's the proper way of saying mr John Doe is a Bishop? I'm talking something like a Dr. Doe, what's the equivalent?
:Commonly, Bishop Doe. More formally, for Catholics in most of the world, it would be Most Reverend Doe (Most Rev. Doe). Anglicans (and Catholics in the UK) use Most Reverend for archbishops and Right Reverend (Rt. Rev.) for bishops. Gentgeen 23:18, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Unless the bishop is Orthodox, in which case it would be Bishop John. You might not even be given his surname, which he theoretically abandoned when he took monastic vows.  See, for example, . TCC (talk) (contribs) 23:57, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ditto Eastern Catholic. Anglican bishops are often addressed as Dr So-and-so, a relic of the old days. InfernoXV 07:03, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Abbreviated? 

message: The section "Bishops in the Apostolic Fathers" begins with "At the turn of the first century AD, ..."  Does this mean around 100 AD?  I would think that would be the turn of the second century, with the "turn of the first century" as around the year 1 AD (an impossibility).  See 1st century.  I'm confused.  Steve Baskauf 01:56, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the "turn of the first century"? 

message: I presume today's decision on women as bishops (and the Vatican reaction) will be included shortly (and "someone" will do a comic sketch on the Archbishop of Canterbury and Archbishop of York marrying each other.) Jackiespeel (talk) 14:28, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Anglican bishops

message: Just thought I'd point out that there's no information on mode of formal address. Someone might want to include that. --Pstanton (talk) 03:07, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mode of address 

message: A google for Bishop's verge should show importance of mentioning "verge" and "verger" and the Bishop's staff at his seat.
see crosier at our http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crosier
G. Robert Shiplett 13:23, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  verge and verger 

message: The claim that episkopos and presbuteros were synonyms in the Bible is very far from undisputed -- and along demonational lines.Goldfritha (talk) 02:38, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Synonym

message: AFAIK popes (in Rome and Alexandria) are comparable to patriarchs, archbishops and catholicoi, so they should for completeness be mentioned in section Catholic Church, Orthodox churches and Anglican churches. Rursus dixit. (mbork3!) 19:31, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Popes

message: It would seem to me that the John who wrote the Book of Revelation is writing with an authority of a bishop to the seven churches he mentions. This is clearly not mentioned here for a reason. I'm wondering what that reason is. Student7 (talk) 01:39, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Book of Revelation

message: Koyasan Buddhist Temple has a list of bishops, who seem to be the temple leaders since its foundation. Is the title used elsewhere in Buddhism, or is this instance more of a cultural adaptation? --BDD (talk) 02:25, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outside of Christianity 

message: This article already has some overlap with the page, and is not sufficient for its own page. ReformedArsenal (talk) 11:52, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Article is entirely unreferenced, so no content that can be properly merged.TheLongTone (talk) 12:26, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It's easier to find references for a written article than it is to generate content ex nihilo, and this information is applicable information for this article. ReformedArsenal (talk) 17:31, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[Valid Bishops]] 

message: The general gist of this section is basically accurate, but the mention of Diocletian and his division of the empire into dioceses in this context is misleading.  In particular, the phrase, "The most usual term for the geographic area of a bishop's authority and ministry, the diocese, began as part of the structure of the Roman Empire under Diocletian." is false and misleading.  The term "diocese" (dioikesis) had many different meanings, and its use predates the establishment of the Roman Empire in the east (let alone Diocletian).  One such use was in reference to the area surrounding a city (civitas) and dependent on that city for civil administration.  It is this sense of "diocese" which is most relevant to the development of what would become the jurisdiction of Christian bishops.  The dioceses establishment by Diocletian were something else altogether...they in no way correspond to the dioceses of bishops.  The dioceses set up by Diocletian encompass relatively large geographic areas, there were only 12 (later 13) in the entire empire.  The jurisdiction of a bishop was obviously much smaller than that.Ocyril (talk) 20:19, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bishops and Civil Government 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Bishop. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120722082750/http://www.elca.org/ecumenical/fullcommunion/episcopal/ccmresources/text.html to http://www.elca.org/ecumenical/fullcommunion/episcopal/ccmresources/text.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130603023926/http://www.elca.org/lutheranpartners/archives/histepi.html to http://www.elca.org/lutheranpartners/archives/histepi.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
:fixed archive links Wayne Jayes (talk) 16:15, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The pic of the Eastern mitre is not a bishop's mitre, but that of a senior priest. A bishop's mitre would also have a cross on top.  Homoousian (talk) 23:08, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you locate a better photo? Jonathunder (talk) 15:13, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong picture  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Bishop. 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/20110927014929/http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P3U.HTM to http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P3U.HTM
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080220092324/http://bishops.umc.org/interior.asp?ptid=21&mid=5855 to http://bishops.umc.org/interior.asp?ptid=21&mid=5855
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:27, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: HI HOw Are y  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:648:8502:C680:5006:5343:E9BE:5B1E (talk) 22:45, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  I  

message: on what grounds do you call the existence of Buddhist bishops "fringe at best"? Yes, the term may also be translated (literally) to "chancellor", but that is not the term used by Buddhist Churches of America or the Shingon temple in question. They call their leaders bishops. The term has been used for decades, if not more than a century. The Buddhist Churches of America is the oldest Buddhist organization in the United States and it is part of the largest Jodo Shinshu-sect in the world. The term "bishop" is also the term used by scholars, they seldom use the Japanese term and never the word "chancellor". The inclusion of this possible "translation" is only to make it clear that "bishop" is not a literal translation. But this does not have any relevance, since the official title is bishop.
Furthermore, to make some analogies... We do not write "Swans are white birds..." because most swans are white. The existence of Buddhist bishops in official, recognized religious institutions with long histories, makes it necessary to nuance this article. Just because Buddhists are a minority in relation to Christians does not make it right to exclude them entirely. 
Best wishes,
Sigvid (talk) 09:51, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not what users would expect. Leaders of Presbyterian churches are not called bishops, even though the term "moderator" is probably identical to the term used by the Buddhist Churches of America for its leaders. On second thoughts, a separate article on the term "bishop" as may be used in other religions or organisations might be best instead of  note. It would work better as a "See also" banner on the page top. Care to write such on article on the many ways that various terms in Buddhism may be translated into English? Laurel Lodged (talk) 10:21, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I would suspect most English speakers (and Swedish speakers) does not expect the article "priest" to be about anything other than Christians either. I don't see how this makes any difference - Wikipedia articles should be based on the factual reality, not only describe what people already know and expect to find. Yes, a separate article may be warranted, at least if there are many more Buddhist institutions that use the term "bishop" with different connotations (of this I do not know), but this article should still be nuanced to include mentions of Buddihst bishops. To say that "A bishop is an ordained, consecrated, or appointed member of the Christian clergy" is factually incorrect. This is not an opinion - it is clearly so that there are Buddhist bishops. That the original Japanese titles can be translated into other terms does not matter, since the official title is bishop in the English speaking world (in which these organizations operate - Honpa Hongwanji Mission of Hawaii and Jodo Shinshu Buddhist Temples of Canada also call their leaders bishops). As the decade and century has passed, most members of the BCA are born in the US and have English as their native language. As such, many members of the BCA may not even be all that familiar with the term socho, since it is rarely (if ever) used. Furthermore, the bishop-position has different connotations in the BCA than the socho-position has in Japan, so they are not exactly equivalent even if their titles in Japanese are the same. But again, this is not about the Japanese title, it is about the official title of "bishop" used by Buddhist institutions. Sigvid (talk) 10:33, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: "the bishop-position has different connotations in the BCA" - This is sounding more and more like fringe syncreticism. Laurel Lodged (talk) 11:15, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: You took that quote out of its context (or I was being unclear). The bishop position in the BCA is not identical to the socho-position in Nishi Hongan-ji, because their organizational structures are not identical. The BCA structure is modeled after Nishi Hongan-ji, but it is its own organization and has adapted to its particular context (the United States is not identical to Japan, obviously). I got the impression that you wanted to consider "socho" the "right" word and "bishop" to be "wrong". My point with this statement was to refute this: the bishop is the official title in English. Socho is the Japanese word and "equivalent". One can call the BCA bishop "socho" (although it is seldom or never done), but I am not so sure they would call the Japanese socho (in Nishi Hongan-ji) bishop. That was my point. I don't really get what you want to say with calling it a "fringe syncretism". The fact stands that it is the official title and has been so for many, many decades (if not more than a century). Sigvid (talk) 11:35, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  "fringe syncretism" is about taking two facts and putting them together as if they were the same thing. Usually accompanied by no sources to confirm that merger. Laurel Lodged (talk) 11:15, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  which two facts exactly? If you're talking about socho and bishop being the same thing in the BCA, there are plenty of sources on this. I provided 3 sources (academic books) in my edit that you reverted. There are more of them in the article Bishop of the Buddhist Churches of America. There I also quoted the United States Census Bureau from 1941, that writes of the BCA:s leader as "the bishop superintendent". There are a lot more sources available that talks of Buddhist bishops both within the BCA (again, socho is seldom if ever used - "bishop" is the official English title) and other Buddhist denominations. I will make you a list of these sources, and quote them if you so wish. Sigvid (talk) 16:10, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Although I believe it is a bit "too much" with 20+ sources, I have now provided you with a great deal of sources verifying my claims. The title "bishop" (original Japanese titles disregarded) is evidently, as proven by these sources, used by several Buddhist institutions with long histories. I also discovered that Tenrikyo also uses the title in their American district. Sigvid (talk) 21:42, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Buddhist bishops is a thing, and is not "fringe" 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:07, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: I've added some links to the introduction. Bear in mind that many readers don't know what terms like sanctify, pastoral mean, and talking about "fullness of the (ministerial) priesthood" needs links to help people explain. The lead was very technical and maybe some of the jargon needs to be better explained for non-Christians. 31.51.209.241 (talk) 16:48, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terminology