Talk:Anti-Protestantism

message: For User:Lankiveil, good luck on keeping the catholics from reverting anti-catholicism to being an outrageous irrational psychosis, while anti-protestantism is "kept in its place" as a mere bias.
Votes are in to keep this page, but someone needs to clean it up.
I took a stab at it and removed the NPOV tag, chiefly because there was no explanation for the tag here on the talk page. If someone thinks the article is biased, they should explain here which way they think it is biased and what should be changed, at least in general terms. 
*It =is= biased because "someone" refuses to accept that anti-protestantism is just as evil as anti-catholicism, witnessed by the anti-catholicism page saying that's "irrational" and evil, while anti-protestantism is just a "bias" and is in no way equated to the "racism" and "anti-semitism" that anti-catholicism is equated to. This is soooo pro-Catholic POV that you have to be blind not to see it.
::There is something of an explanation for that. When I still edited here I really did look for sites that were as paranoid to Protestants as people like Jack Chick or Fred Phelps are to Catholics. You may not believe that, but I remember putting all kinds of things like "Protestantism is a cult" or whatever in search engines in hopes of showing the irrational hatred some have for their faith/movement. I think I did find an Eastern Orthodox site saying it and a Belarussian news station which alleged Evangelicals sacrifice babies. I think I even put that in, but mostly I really just can't find stuff like that. This is all I got for "Protestantism is a cult." This is what I got for "Catholicism is a cult." See that didn't get many results either, but it still got 27 times as many hits as the phrase for Protestants. Now the explanation, I think, is that "Protestantism" is not a single religious denomination. Instead it's a collection of denominations associated to a religious movement. Hence Baptists are a cult gets almost one-sixth as many hits as "Catholicism is a cult" yet Baptists don't represent anywhere near one-sixth the population of Catholics. Anyway yeah I am Catholic and I have theological problems with Protestantism, but I think in the world today Protestants are far more religiously persecuted than Catholics. My Dad's side of the family are Baptist and Assembly of God. I removed AoG from some "list of purported cults" many times as they had no real source and it was just meanness I think. Sure I don't agree with Protestantism, but I'm horrified by the treatment they receive in many parts of the world and sometimes receive by Catholics like me. If you can find sources or movements that express irrational or paranoid hatred of Protestants I totally support adding them to the article. Who knows maybe I even helped you do so? I won't do any editing myself as I've given up on Wikipedia as terminally flawed. Still if you want to fix it go for it. In fact I'd prefer it open by saying Anti-Protestantism is "opposition or hatred" as simple "bias" is something I feel about Protestantism.(But not Protestants themselves, any bias I feel is purely theologic and not personal.)--T. Anthony 11:00, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I intend to keep an eye on both, but I invite anyone to help try and keep the two balanced if bias slips into either.  As neither a Catholic or a Protestant, I think I can keep a relatively neutral view of things.  Unfortunately, it's a subject that some people can get very emotional about, and they lose sight of NPOV when that happens.  Lankiveil 12:45, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Keep up the good work

message: So much of this article discusses anti-evangelicalism, or anti-fundamentalism, that the focus of the article doesn't seem to be "anti-protestantism" in general at all.  I'm not sure if the article should be split up into two separate articles on 1)anti-fundamentalism/evangelicalism and 2)anti-mainline protestantism, or if the article simply should have more information on beliefs that are clearly anti-protestant in a general sense. -- Temtem 00:02, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
:The section doesn't read very well, and from my US perspective seems to miss the point.  In the US, some evangelicals fancy themselves persecuted because of laws or policies that prohibit religious displays or proselytizing on public property.  They also feel that official policies, say, of non-discrimiation against homosexuals violates their religious freedom by forcing them to treat people they consider to be notorious sinners equally.  Smerdis of Tlön 14:16, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd be quite happy to par down the section on anti-evangelicalism in this article and devote another article to the subject of how evangelicals are perceived by others. My own political views are not conservative (check out the trouble I had trying to include unfavorable but well-documented facts about Sarah Palin into her biopic, which is zealously guarded by Republicans), but it's pretty obvious that most hostility to evangelicalism comes from the liberal/progressive side of the political spectrum. In this article, I delineated a difference between evangelicals and fundamentalists because both parties define themselves differently and in opposition to each other. I'd be fine if someone added a separate "anti-fundamentalism" section, but I'd be resistant to lumping both groups together under one heading as "anti-evangelicalism/fundamentalism," unless the separate styles and identities of each group are very clearly stated in the article.--ManicBrit (talk) 18:29, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  anti-evangelicalism? 

message: In general Jehovah Witnesses, Evangelicals, Pentecostals, Seventh-day Adventists, Baptists, Mormons, and a few fringe sects receive the most negative imagery.
:Would Jehovah's Witnesses, Seventh-day Adventists, and Mormons even be considered "Protestant?" --Temtem 00:22, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
* I can answer your question for 1 group at least, SDA are definately considered protestant, they are a pretty traditional schism group from methodists and as such trace their roots back to Martin Luther. If you consider Seventh Day Baptists to be a protestant group then you have to include SDA. The dietary guidelines, and every other difference which I know of is voluntary rather than law. They are based on biblical inerrancy like all of the traditional protestant beliefs. And are not incompatible with other protestant groups.
*However, I believe with Jehovah's Witnesses there is an incompatible doctrine problem with the concept of Trinity and Jesus's Divinity. But I haven't done any research.
--Darkfred 11:46, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  divisions 

message: should we make mention of the relationship between Anti-Protestantism and Anti-freemasonry?
grazon 06:26, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  well 

message: I have removed some references that seem unsupportable and some that have no citations.
this article seemed very pov to me, not accepting that protestantism is disliked by many for its effects on socioty and not "hated" in any way.  i have changed the first sentence thus.  I have also changes the part where evangelicals were "hated".  citing from the anti-clericalism article, much opposition to religion is opposition to the hirearchicle socioty that it produces.  anti-protestanism is mostly just a variant of this opposition.  specifically, hirearchy is easier to build when your religion is easy to convert to like protestanism and especially evangelicalism.  also see the revolutionary communist party's stance on "christian fascism"
--67.161.93.159 06:13, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  changes 

message: I have removed the pre-history section because it conveys and anti-catholic tone and mostly because it doesnt relate to modern protestantism.  the idea that anyone who dissented from the catholic church was a protestant no matter what their beleif is fronted by people in the anti-catholic movement.  christianity, similarly, cannot be discribed as a protestantism of judaism to be jumped toghether with all other splits from that religion.
--67.161.93.159 06:23, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  removal of section 

message: On May 4, User:24.2.52.199 has made some statements that are basically evangelical POV.  While I welcome this user's perspective, some of the claims are quite clearly not suitable.  For instance:
* "Evangelicals are one of America's most persecuted religious groups.", pure POV, that is not sourced or documented in any way.
* "This view is shared by many non-evangelicals, like Catholics, Jews, Hindus, and some liberal Protestants(Epicopaneans e.g.)", not only poorly spelled, but possibly a veiled POV attack.
* "there is no other Christian group more devoted to spreading the Gospel", this is what many evangelical Christians may perceive about themselves, but again, it's an unsourced (and unsourcable) piece of POV.
You can see for yourself here what was changed.  Based on the above, I am going to wind back some of this user's changes to this article.
Lankiveil 11:23, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  pro-evangelical POV 

message: Re the latest changes, a few pieces of clarification are needed here. The penal laws were first passed in 1609, first Jacobites did not appear until 1689. The xenophobia here refers to the Catholic rebels and was not perceived, it was unfortunately very real. James II did not institute "extreme discrimination" against anyone. What uthe penal laws first passed in 1609, first Jacobites appear in 1689. Thexenophobia here refers to the Catholic rebels. James II did not upset the whigs, covenanters etc was that he repealed the anti-catholic legislation and opened the military and public office to them. As part of this package of religious toleration, James was also prepared to offer toleration to the radical Presbyterians in Scotland, albeit after brutally repressing their armed rebellion - the Killing Time. What is says on the walls of Derry, that James was an, "arbritrary and bigotted monarch", does not stand up to the facts I'm afraid. 
Jdorney 13:44, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Irish sectarianism

message: In several countries with a majority of the population identifying themselves as Catholic, there is a hostility to Protestantism as a whole
CITE
In more modern times, Catholic-Protestant relations have grown calmer. Nevertheless, in general the further a Protestant sect is from Catholicism in its doctrine, the more discomfort among many Catholic people arises. Anglicans and Lutherans are only sporadically viewed in a negative light in modern Catholic countries. However, a Zogby poll of American Catholics showed Catholics having a more hostile attitude toward Fundamentalist Christians than to any non-Christian religion
CITE
This mixture of xenophobia and religious intolerance led to widespread massacres of Protestant settlers in the Irish Rebellion of 1641.
Never knew that xenophobia means confiscation of land (and so on) C I T E
Superdude99 14:53, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a thing on Pew about Protestant/Catholic relations in Latin America. Exempting Northern Ireland this is the only place I've found with violence between the two groups and it's certainly less than the violence a century ago. Added to that people in the US have less problems voting for a Catholic then they did in the past according to Gallup. I can't get at the Gallup deal because you have to be registered to get their older polls. Cite for yourself though as I told you where to look.--T. Anthony 02:18, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I understand skepticism, but really? The polls on Americans being more willing to elect a Catholic than in the past are on several sites. As this concerns Catholic hostility to Protestants more the Second Vatican Council has done a great deal to reduce that and several Protestants attended it. That relations are better with Lutherans and Anglicans can be shown by the fact documents and organizations on that are more common. There is the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification and the Anglican Roman Catholic International Commission. However American Catholics having a hostile view of "Fundamentalists" is supported by Zogby 2001. The poll did not ask views of Lutherans and Anglicans, but do you think it'd have been as negative. As for France or Ireland I didn't having polling data on them when I still edited here.--T. Anthony 10:26, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Npov

message: I have reworded a number of sentences in the Hostility to Evangelicals section to give them some form of understandible meaning.  I still have never heard of any evidence to prove that "In the Muslim world hostility to Evangelical Christians is ... arguably the most violent"  and I would suggest that that be removed if nothing is cited.  Overall, it seems like a pretty big claim and I would rather see it removed than justified in an unclear way.
As for the next section, Im not sure what "The most disliked protestant groups may include: Fundamentalists, Evangelicals, Pentecostals, Seventh-day Adventists, Churches of Christ, Baptists and a few fringe sects" has to do with catholic and protestant disagreement.  What was there before makes even less sense: "The most common objects of hostility among non-Protestants in general might be Fundamentalists, Evangelicals, Pentecostals, Seventh-day Adventists, Churches of Christ, Baptists and a few fringe sects"
Either way, much of this article is poorly worded and/or irrelevent and should thus be clensed.
It should be noted that I deleted the anti-protestanism in britain section because the persecution of catholics there seems                 to be the only evidence of their bias against protestants.  Although I recognize that this is a common trend in this article, this section went ridiculously too far.  Information like that should go in an article concerning anti-catholicism if anywhere, and this article should be discussing the opposite of that.
--Musaabdulrashid 09:00, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure about all of it but the "Center for Religious Freedom" and a few other sources indicate Evangelicals face the most violence in Islamic countries. A recent poll showed people less likely to vote for someone described as "An Evangelical Christian" than for any other Christian group except Mormons. I think the poll was from a Los Angeles paper.--T. Anthony 06:37, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sloppiness 

message: This article is a horrible mess! That's a crying shame because it is an important and interesting topic, and yet the points of merit in the article are sandwiched in between POV bleating and scarcely-hidden doctrinal posturing! Cite more REAL instances of religious discrimination, persecution or ridicule or whatever, preferably from historicial and politically or socially relevant contexts ... but stop blathering over and over that people hate Evangelicals because they "take the Bible literally". That is a blantant doctrinal statement, and it just makes you look like a silly meme-machine. For instance the Zogby poll cited has NOTHING to do with Catholics distrusting Evangelicals because they believe the Bible, but everything to do with political afficilations and agenda, etc. Please, get real, and make this article less embarassing to read!!! Be specific, not knee-jerking!Eschew obfuscation 21:50, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean Up this Act, Please!!! 

message: I am somewhat puzzled by the this lengthy section of the article. It seems to be looking at the situation in Ireland through the wrong end of the telescope. Much of the anti-Protestantism it details is merely an observation that the Catholics did not enjoy being under the heel of the Protestant Ascendency and reacted against it. It would make more sense to have it in the Anti-Catholicism article. Following a similar logic persecution of the blacks in the Southern States of the USA could be twisted round to 'shocking anti-White sentiments of blacks in Alabama when confronted with a lynch mob' or the persecution of Christians by the Romans to 'terrible anti-pagan feelings of Christians about to be eaten by lions'. Colin4C 13:20, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You seem to be looking at this through the wrong end of a telescope yourself.. perhaps binoculars would be better for you! :) To explain, there is definately anti-Protestantism in Ireland, and there has been such a feeling here since the Reformation basically. --Mal 18:25, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, yes, in the sense that the Jews and the Moslems had mixed feelings about Torquemada and the Pope back in Olde Sunny Spaine in Ye Oldeden Dayes. However I do grant you that since the time of Eamon de Valera ("don't listen to him!" - my Irish friends say.....) the Protestants have faced discrimination in the Republic of Ireland. But this is hardly the greatest hardship that Protestants have faced (not as bad as the Netherlands under King Philip for instance). Colin4C 22:19, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Protestants in Ireland have faced discrimination too. Also, Protestants in Ireland (and in Britain) have faced discrimination from the likes of William III & Mary, James II and others at various times since the Refomation.. not to mention from specific groups. Whether or not this anti-Protestant sentiment was worse than or not as bad as in other countries is neither here nor there. --Mal 03:05, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Protestants facing discrimination from King Billy! Don't tell that to Ian Paisley or the Orange Order...But, yes, confusingly for this article, there was a three corner fight in old Ireland (and England) between Anglicans, Presbyterians and Catholics. Is there a wikipedia article for Anglican Protestants vs Presbyterian Protestants I wonder?....not to mention Scottish Presbyterians versus Cromwellian Nonconformists which resulted in several major battles on English and Scottish soil during the Civil War...Colin4C 03:48, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anti-Protestantism in Ireland 

message: There has been a couple of uncited, dreadfully POV comments appearing in the article from an AOL address recently.  I haven't complained to the IP Talk page, because, well, it's an AOL address, but I'd ask editors to please keep an eye on this article and revert any grossly anti-Catholic edits that are made.  Lankiveil 00:23, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protestant POV appearing from an AOL IP address 

message: Someone keeps adding links to anti-protestant websites in this article.  At first I was just removing them, but now that I think about it a bit more, I have to wonder how useful most of the links there actually are.  This is the article about "Anti-Protestantism", not a page where we discuss why Protestantism is wrong.  Yet, most of the links are either justifications for, or criticisms of, Protestantism.  This doesn't make sense to me - surely any links provided should be on the actual topic of anti-Protestantism, not Protestantism itself.
As such, I'm going to do some fairly serious culling of the links section in the next couple of days, unless someone raises objections.  Lankiveil 00:08, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link Section 

message: I concur with Greatgavini's tagging the new section as non-noteable.  It's also original research. Majoreditor 18:24, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Hostility to Calvinistic Christians or Protestants who believe that they have eternal life

message: I have deleted this entire subsection because the decline in the number of Protestants is not, in itself, evidence of anti-Protestantism.  Obviously, many Protestants left because they felt they would fare better in a Protestant country than a Catholic one, or at least in a country that was more congenial to Protestants.  However, if we wish to make this case, we need to support it with facts that make the case directly rather than just pointing to the decline in the number of Protestants.
Suppose someone were to argue that the decline is due to a difference in birthrates, or a large number of conversions of Protestants to Catholicism or a higher rate of Protestants leaving the church to become atheists.  Obviously, none of these hypotheses is the likely cause of the dramatic decline in the number of Protestants.  BUT WE HAVE TO PROVE OUR CASE.  It is not sufficient to wave our hands with high-level statistics about the number of Protestants.  We need to find a reliable source who has actually done research on the causes of the decline in the number of Protestants and then present the results of that research.
--Richard (talk) 02:14, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree, the first president of Ireland was protestant, as was one of his successors. The church law on bringing children up as RCs was instigated in Rome, and not in Ireland as the article somehow suggested. There are many reasons for changes.  purple (talk) 11:40, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Courts did, however, enforce the ne temere decree. Mooretwin (talk) 23:27, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No thy did not. Get a grip. RashersTierney (talk) 23:53, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes they did. 
The use of the decree to extract commitments in mixed marriages led to enforcement in Republic of Ireland courts such as the Tilson v. Tilson judgement where Judge Gavan Duffy said
"In my opinion, an order of the court designed to secure the fulfilment of an agreement peremptorily required before a mixed marriage by the Church, whose special position in Ireland is officially recognised as the guardian of the faith of the Catholic spouse, cannot be withheld on any ground of public policy by the very State which pays homage to that Church." Irish Law Times Report LXXXVI 1952, pages 49-73 ''
Mooretwin (talk) 23:56, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Tilson v. Tilson was judged on a pre-nuptial agreement between the parents re education of children. On appeal to Supreme Court it was so held. It had nothing whatever to do with the courts interpreting Ne Temere. RashersTierney (talk) 00:30, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: So... find a reliable source that says that significant numbers of Protestants left the Republic of Ireland because of the "ne temere" decree or the "Tilson v. Tilson" case.  If possible, avoid "hand-waving" articles that claim significant numbers left without statistics to back it up.  The best source would be some sort of survey asking those who left the reasons for their emigration. --Richard (talk) 03:21, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: *A clear case of 'Causal Reductionism'. "Reliable source" is the benchmark.purple (talk) 11:34, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protestant decline in the Republic of Ireland 

message: A phrase is trying to portray one side of the issue, which may (or may not!  :) read "In the United States, critics of the policies adopted by the Religious Right, such as support of traditional one-man one-woman marriage and support of Right to Life for the unborn, often equate evangelicalism as a movement with the Religious Right."
The underlying theme is correct. Conservatives do support these rights for the unborn and support traditional marriage. We need to find and maintain language that is not pov. Since the phrase is trying to slight (label) conservatives/evangelicals, it could be considered "balance" to use their terms for their positions. 
While, "inefficient", another way is to use both terms in two separate statements characterizing both positions. This may be best in the long run. Abortion seems to have gone that way, for example.Student7 (talk) 20:25, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: We DO have NPOV language: they oppose same-sex marriage. No one cares about their "support of one-man one-woman marriage", the issue is their opposition to same-sex marriage. Saying otherwise is POV when characterizing their opponents. And it's not just their anti-abortion stance at issue, it's the opposition to comprehensive sexual education, support of anti-sodomy legislation, opposition to no-fault divorce laws, access to birth control, etc. If you want to spell these out, that's fine, but replacing "reproductive freedom" with "support of Right to Life for the unborn" is not just POV, it's wrong. Glaucus (talk) 20:41, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: pov reversions

message: I deleted an entire paragraph tonight because it had a request for sourcing that is SEVEN YEARS OLD!  People are adding to a paragraph without providing any sources.  If there is major disagreements between majority Catholic countries and Protestants then name them and the sources should be easy to find.  I don't know of any modern country, other than Ireland, where there is tangible anti-Protestantism.  Is it a serious problem in France or Italy?  Then provide some sourcing.  A scholar, some violence acts against protestants, laws discriminating against them, etc.   Alatari (talk) 04:42, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article needs sources! 

message: This section is unsourced and is not anti-Protestantism per se but opposition to some protestant sects and charismatic catholicism, often by people who are protestants themselves.  Unless a source is provided that it is a type of anti-protestantism, I will remove it.  TFD (talk) 21:23, 10 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Hostility to evangelicals

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Anti-Protestantism. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add  after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20071110183527/http://sabbah.biz:80/mt/archives/2006/10/21/christian-zionism-the-doomsday-code/ to http://sabbah.biz/mt/archives/2006/10/21/christian-zionism-the-doomsday-code/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:19, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Anti-Protestantism. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ucc.org/ucnews/apr01/identity.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060428062021/http://pewglobal.org:80/reports/display.php?PageID=811 to http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?PageID=811
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050729001139/http://www.freedomhouse.org:80/religion/country/index.htm to http://www.freedomhouse.org/religion/country/index.htm#nigeria
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) 14:17, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I have been reading some books on Russian history, and there are some statements from these books that support the idea that anti-Protestant sentiment was articulated by some leading members of the 
Russian Orthodox Church. 
For example, the book The Political Thought of Yu. F. Samarin, 1840-1864 by Loren David Calder (Routledge, 2019), is about the Slavophile Yu. F. Samarin. And there is this passage in it:
" In this time of testing the real champions of Russia's Orthodox Church were Stefan Yavorsky and Feofan Prokopovich. Both men were devout Orthodox churchmen. They best understood the issues and arguments.  Yavorsky understood and articulated the anti-Protestant principle in Orthodoxy and Prokopovich the anti-Catholic one – defending the Orthodox Church from both sides they assured her triumph and 
were the real heroes of the contest."
https://books.google.ie/books?id=Ofe-DwAAQBAJ&pg=PT99&dq=Prokopovich+anti-protestant&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi9-Kad5PfoAhWjo3EKHfPWCW8Q6AEIKjAA#v=onepage&q=%20anti-protestant&f=false
And the book The Cambridge History of Russian Literature, edited by Charles Moser ( Cambridge University Press, 1992) , has this passage: 
"To his contemporaries, Stefan Yavorsky was known first and foremost as the author of the anti-Protestant treatises Vineyard of Christ (Vinograd Khristov, 1698) and Rock of Faith (Kamen very, 1718)."
https://books.google.ie/books?id=6FQ7ALNZXdUC&pg=PA40&dq=%22To+his+contemporaries,+Stefan+Yavorsky+was+known+first+and+foremost+as+the+author%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwifz7Gc6PfoAhWnTxUIHefWDRUQ6AEIKjAA#v=onepage&q=%22To%20his%20contemporaries%2C%20Stefan%20Yavorsky%20was%20known%20first%20and%20foremost%20as%20the%20author%22&f=false
This book, Under Caesar's Sword: How Christians Respond to Persecution (edited by Daniel Philpott & Timothy Samuel Shah, Cambridge University Press, 2018 ) also provides some evidence for anti-Protestant views held by 
some modern-day Russian Orthodox clergy:
"Orthodox leaders are often virulently anti-Protestant as well, describing Protestants as “totalitarian sects” that use “hypnosis, subliminal encoding, mind-altering drugs, and other satanic techniques" to induce people to convert.
One priest pointed to an Orthodox publication that asserted Protestants have a deceptive character, meant to lure potential converts by false talk of Christian love."
https://books.google.ie/books?id=uHRJDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA196&dq=%22one+priest+pointed+to+an+orthodox+publication%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiVxp2P6PfoAhWRonEKHfjSDaEQ6AEIKjAA#v=onepage&q=%22one%20priest%20pointed%20to%20an%20orthodox%20publication%22&f=false
In light of this, I suggest a section covering anti-Protestant activity from Russian Orthodox clergy could be added to this article. 188.141.25.160 (talk) 20:17, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anti-Protestant Sentiment from the Russian Orthodox Church?  

message: Anyone want to explain exactly what this means and why it's not sourced (section on Ireland):
"The Penal Laws had a lasting effect on the population, due to their severity (celebrating Catholicism in any form was punishable by death or enslavement under the laws)"
Enslavement? Never mind "death"? Where's the RS for this text? Jonathan f1 (talk) 21:40, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Penal laws and "enslavement"