Talk:Michael Cox (independent bishop)

message: Why does the article say that Cox's consecration was invalid?  If, as is stated in the article on Ngô Ðình Thuc Pierre Martin, Archbishop Thuc consecrated Clemente Domínguez in 1976, then Cox's 1982 consecration in the Palmarian church is possibly valid.  Presumably the Vatican agrees, if consecrations by Cox are regarded as "valid but unlawful".  Frjwoolley 20:09, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Consecration invalid?

message: "Cox planned to protest against the ship being sailed into Ireland by the pro-choice feminist group Women on Waves."
This isn't clear. How it reads is Cox didn't want his ship sailed into Ireland by Women on Waves. How did they get a hold of his ship? Why didn't he want them to sail it? Like, what? Sorry, maybe I'm just daft.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.56.232.96 (talk) 23:33, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  What?

message: This page is blatantly NPOV, but I do not know enough about the specifics of Cox's clerical history etc to deal with it. - Kwekubo 03:11, 7 September 2005  
*There is nothing in the current version of the article that is not factual. I've removed the POV tag. - Brother Dave Thompson 02:02, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: POV?

message: I have moved this page to accommodate the other Michael Coxs who have Wikipedia entries. There is now a disambiguation page at Michael Cox. I hope everyone is OK with this and the name I gave this article, but please feel free to edit :) Aled Dilwyn Fisher 00:37, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moving Page 

message: Due to the recent edits, I've submitted this article to Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard#Ciarán Broadbery and Michael Cox (clergyman) for further input. --Closeapple (talk) 16:44, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Original research discussion

message: A 2006 personal opinion by a columnist, Christopher Howse, published in the "Personal View" section of telegraph.co.uk commenting, in part, on the personal website of his subject, Pat Buckley (). I gleen two facts about Cox from Howse's opinion:
*Cox is an episcopus vagans according to Howse – he wrote that, "Buckley is one of a [...] bunch who [...] have been made bishops by [...] episcopi vagantes"
*"There has been controversy over the validity of his  consecration" when Howse wrote his opinion in 2006.
Howse's "Personal View" is used to support this sentence:
# he is a bishop
#Howse wrote in his 2006 "Personal View" that "controversy over the validity" of one of Cox's acts
#Judge Durcan stated, in court, in 2014 that Cox "is not a bishop." 
Including these gives WP:BALANCE and WP:RNPOV to the article. –BoBoMisiu (talk) 15:10, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Howse in telegraph.co.uk 

message: Losing a single election and never holding a political office is not a political career. The section title is irrelevant and misleading. –BoBoMisiu (talk) 22:02, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The section title should be changed or removed all right. The sentence is worthy of inclusion, though, as clergy and bishops do not usually run for or hold public office (in Ireland, at any rate). BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 18:11, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Cox was a candidate who lost one election – the fact is irrelevant – if he were a jockey his gates opened and the pony stood still. The reason clergy incorporated in the Latin Church of the Catholic Church do not hold political office is because they "are forbidden to assume public offices which entail a participation in the exercise of civil power" and "are to refrain completely from all those things which are unbecoming to their state". –BoBoMisiu (talk) 20:52, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  No political office 

message: , thanks for your edits. Just to note, Cox doesn't say or claim he was consecrated by Thuc. He was consecrated by his episcopal successor.  Your current wording is therefore misleading.  Cox "saying" he is a bishop sounds, to me, as if WP is saying he's just making it up, but (although I accept "claims" is normally a word to avoid), "Cox claims" reads more neutrally in this context than "Cox says".  The other option, of course, would be to just state that Cox is a bishop without going into how he became one. Second issue - Cox consecrated Buckley - he didn't ordain him.  I also think the inclusion of what the English/Welsh conference's press office thinks about an Irish bishop is a complete red herring.  It's equally unqualified to speak about the German RC hierarchy, the price of fish in Adelaide, or the Oscars. It should probably be removed in its entirety but if it is retained, the clarification should also be retained.  BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 15:10, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: "Ordaining" and "consecration by laying on of hands" (which is what Apostolic Succession entails) are essentially theological equivalents.  And "day" is better than "claim" as a general rule. "Bishop" is not a special class of priest, by the way, it is a hierarchical position as being head if a diocese and not a "super-priest."  Even the Pope remains a "priest" by the way. The person does not assert that he is a "Roman Catholic Bishop" - but that he is Bishop (that is, a hierarchical title) in his "Independent Catholic Church."  As he does not say it is "Roman Catholic" it is pretty much irrelevant whether the RC church considers him a "bishop" or not.  See such sources as http://courseweb.stthomas.edu/jmjoncas/LiturgicalStudiesInternetLinks/ChristianWorship/Texts/Centuries/Texts_1900_2000CE/RCWorshipTexts1900_2000CE/Rite_of_Ordination_of_a_Bishop.htm and   http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/vocations/priesthood/priestly-formation/faqs-priesthood-ordination-seminary.cfm .  Note that "ordination" is currently more common than "consecration" for the act. Understood? Collect (talk) 20:22, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  a 2004 AP story in the Sydney Morning Herald said: "Cox,  says he was ordained a priest by a Vietnamese Tridentine bishop in 1978, then consecrated to become Ireland's only bishop of the Tridentine sect," –BoBoMisiu (talk) 21:05, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: And again - he was ordained a priest, and ordained a bishop - the term "consecrated" does not have a separate and distinct theological value from "ordained". And, in fact, mindlessly copying exact words from a source is improper where simple synomyms are at our disposal.  See also Puglisi 1996 "consecratio  and benedictio are, in the Roman sacramentaries,  the proper designation of ordination prayers, and there is no apparent distinction of meaning between these two words." Collect (talk) 21:37, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  I am not arguing with you. The sacrament is ordination. In the context of episcopal, both terms are used in documents on vatican.va, Catechism of the Catholic Church, and in Code of Canon Law translation. –BoBoMisiu (talk) 22:30, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I prefer "ordination" to "consecration" and, with bishops, both words are officially used and acceptable but I think it is preferable to have consistency in the article. Anglicanus (talk) 22:55, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Consecration 

message: you added  which is fine. But, you also the : "An opinion of the bishop's conference for England and Wales re an Irish bishop is out of jurisdiction and irrelevant; Irish opinion now also included"
Your opinion seems to contradict at least one source: Ratzinger reply to Murphy-O'Connor about Broadbery's request for a declaration on the nullity of his ordination.
Can you find a source for your opinion? We can add that. –BoBoMisiu (talk) 15:17, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you change the heading of this section? It's not my opinion, it's a fact that the English and Welsh Bishop's Conference has no jurisdiction over Ireland. Thanks. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 15:39, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  no, the heading is precise. Please read about this to familiarize yourself with the content. It is your opinion about who is the competent authority involving events that several people participated in, and that occurred in more than one diocese in more than one country. –BoBoMisiu (talk) 16:30, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not supplying sources for edit summaries. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 16:45, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  fair enough, but you may want to familiarize yourself with more background material. –BoBoMisiu (talk) 17:42, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roman Catholic Church jurisdiction 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Michael Cox (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/20110228051241/http://www.rte.ie/news/election2011/results/laois-offaly.html to http://www.rte.ie/news/election2011/results/laois-offaly.html
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) 19:29, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Michael Cox (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/20160329162818/http://involve.ie/wp-content/themes/Involve/Magazine/VOT%20Nov%202008.pdf to http://involve.ie/wp-content/themes/Involve/Magazine/VOT%20Nov%202008.pdf
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) 16:03, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Michael Cox (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/20160327143205/http://ciaranbroadbery.ie/images/letter_from_Cardinal_Razinger_001.jpg to http://ciaranbroadbery.ie/images/letter_from_Cardinal_Razinger_001.jpg
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) 04:27, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hi . See the sentence "He is the founder and bishop superior of the Irish Orthodox Catholic and Apostolic Church"? See the number right after it. Click on it, it brings you to the reference used to back up the previous sentence. In this case, it's this newspaper article. Wikipedia relies on verifiable, reliable sources and the source in question backs the statement. You can't remove it because you disagree with it or don't like it. If you continue to remove sourced content, you risk being blocked. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 11:30, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Bastun, I understand your point of view, but I changed that information because if you search about the Orthodox Church you will find out that it was not founded by this bishop, the Orthodox Church appeared in 1054 when the Church of Christ divided in two: Orthodox and Catholic. Also, it has a different organisation, and in this Church are not allowed female priest. There are various countries that have this religion, as: Russia, Greece, Bulgaria, Ukraine, Romania, Serbia etc. I don't know what sources has that newspaper, but I can search for credible sources in order to show that I'm not talking about something I invented. I believe that the people that need to know that this bishop has nothing to do with the Orthodox Church. So thank you for telling me what you have said, I will come back with the information I told you about, and hope you will consider suitable for Wikipedia! Have a nice day! TheDodoBird01 (talk) 13:51, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: And the article doesn't claim that Cox founded the Orthodox Church, it claims he founded Irish Orthodox Catholic and Apostolic Church, which is something different. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 13:42, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Irish Orthodox Catholic and Apostolic Church 

message: :The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Moved to Michael Cox (independent bishop). Everyone appears to agree that the article must be moved, and "independent bishop" appears to be the solution drawing the least objection. bd2412 T 15:02, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Michael Cox (bishop) →  – The present title is WP:INCDAB due to the presence of Michael Cox (archbishop of Cashel), another bishop of the same name with more historical significance. Michael Cox (bishop) should redirect to the dab page. Other options for the disambiguation were named in the previous RM and other discussions, such as Michael Cox (independent bishop) and Michael Cox (independent Catholic bishop); any of them would be suitable. Former title Michael Cox (Catholic bishop) would not be suitable for the reasons highlighted in the last RM. Cúchullain t/c 18:04, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

text: The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move.  Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
===Page move, 1 April 2020===
I am confused about the rationale for moving this page.  said something about his "denomination" being clear? Why does that matter? Per WP:CONCISE I believe we endeavor to use short and sweet disambiguation suffixes. There was no need to tack on "Catholic" to this dab. There is no other independent bishop named Michael Cox, am I right in thinking this? Elizium23 (talk) 17:42, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 2 July 2018 

message: I am confused about the rationale for moving this page.  said something about his "denomination" being clear? Why does that matter? Per WP:CONCISE I believe we endeavor to use short and sweet disambiguation suffixes. There was no need to tack on "Catholic" to this dab. There is no other independent bishop named Michael Cox, am I right in thinking this? Elizium23 (talk) 17:42, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Page move, 1 April 2020