Talk:Relations between the Catholic Church and the state

message: I find the following addition dubious:
Notice the absence of a mention of Bosnian Muslims.
Unlike Serbs, they were considered Croatian brothers whose ancestors converted to Islam
Given the quotation immediately preceding this:
"…Some will be sent to Serbia and the rest will be forced to change their religion to Catholicism. Our new Croatia will therefore be free of all heretics, becoming purely Catholic for the future years."
… it seems a bit unlikely. I'd really like to see some citation. At least in most times and places, Roman Catholics have not considered Muslims to be their "brothers" in the struggle against Eastern Orthodox heresy. -- Jmabel | Talk 04:42, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ustashi 

message: I realize that I threw a lot at this talk page with my last entry.  How about we tackle a basic question, first.  I proposed in point 5 above the title Church-State relations (Catholic Church).  This could be a template for other Churches which have very different relations with various states.  
Also, regarding the issue of Roman, I have done extensive research on this topic from a WP policy perspective, which is presented here: CC vs. RCC. The concensus appears to be changing on WP on this topic as Canon law (Catholic Church), Catholic devotions and other similar article titles were upheld in recent weeks.  
It is seems to me that the cheesy present title just invites the anti-Catholic types because it is unacademic.  Once standards of responsible reporting are raised, those folks seem to go away (at least in my experience).
Also, regarding Eastern Rite Catholic Churches, they are in fact Catholic and under the jurisdiction of the pope but are not Roman.  This is in part why Roman Catholic Church is a misnomer and inaccurate when referring to the entire Church in communion with Rome.  Those particular Eastern Catholic Churches have their own history in relationship to Civil governments apart from either the Orthodox or Western (Roman) churches.  Vaquero100 00:08, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Name change

message: "The Catholic churches of Communist China
The Catholic Church is illegal in the communist People's Republic of China. Anyone who swears allegiance to the Pope can be subject to harassment and imprisonment. Many priests and cardinals have languished in jail for years, and still do, because they are loyal to the Catholic Church. For all intents and purposes, religious freedom does not exist in mainland China.
There is a government-approved "Catholic" church, but not one that is recognized by the Vatican.
Pope John Paul II elevated two bishops to be cardinals but did not release their names, nor did they attend the recent conclave that chose Pope Benedict XVI. Speculation is that they are Chinese and would be subject to repression if their identities are known."
I deleted this, since after thoroughly reading it over many times, there is not a single "political tie" to be viewed. It states only persecution of church members (If this is included, than we must also include an article on every single country that opposes/oppresses Catholics?). Hence, I do not believe that it belongs in the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.69.14.35 (talk) 20:55, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleted: "The Catholic churches of Communist China" 

message: I think that whatever a criminal and corrupt person as Mile Budak said abot evil things that he did can not be directly (if can be at all) conect with Catholicism and with Catholic Church.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Josinj (talk • contribs) 10:55, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Croatia 

message: I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
::This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
::#There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
::#It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
::#In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.
Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 03:46, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  removing POV tag with no active discussion per [[Template:POV]] 

message: in reading this it stuck out to me that there were very few citations. I added a few "citation needed" tags, but got tired because almost every sentence is making a claim that is not cited. 
Smartedits5 (talk) 21:56, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  General lack of citations 

message: Greetings fellow Wikipedians! Information from this article is likely relevant to the article Catholic Church and politics. I'm flagging this here in case anyone with time and knowledge or interest in this topic wishes to add some of this information to Catholic Church and politics, which would be greatly appreciated and help round out that article some more. Tomorrow and tomorrow (talk) 00:05, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Catholic Church and politics