Talk:Patriarch

message: :Those canons only refer to Patriarchal churches, but even if they did make a more general claim, they still would have absolutely nothing at all to say about the Western Church or the Pope's role as head of the Latin Church because this is the Code of Canons for Eastern Churches. Some of your other edits by which you attempt to bolster your points about the Pope being a Patriarch seem to exhibit confirmation bias. The fact that Benedict XVI appeared in a group with a bunch of Eastern Patriarchs (and Major Archbishops) does not prove that the Pope is a Patriarch. (Consider: at ad limina visits, the Pope often appears and poses for photos with all of the bishops of a particular episcopal conference, so would that prove that the Pope is a member of that episcopal conference?)
:LacrimosaDiesIlla (talk) 19:54, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: You are correct, the "pope with other patriarchs" picture and article by itself is not a sufficient proof, but in the face of an overzealous reverter, i had to throw something out there before the page got reverted half-way through editing again. However, the citations of ecumenical councils going back to AD 325 should be sufficient: The bishop of Rome is patriarch of the Latin Church, whether the title "patriarch of the west" exists or not. First, try finding any list of Catholic patriarchs that excludes the pope, unless it specifically deals only with the Eastern patriarchs. Second, as this is the 1700-year old position of the Church, again, the burden of proof is on the idea that this is no longer the case. Third, even if the CCEO is for the Eastern Catholics, as the CIC is for the Latin Catholics, the CCEO also specifically refers to those areas where it affects also the Latin Church,  CCEO 58 being one such example: "Canon 58: Patriarchs of Eastern Churches precede all bishops of any degree, everywhere in the world, with due regard for special norms of precedence established by the Roman Pontiff." This does not only apply to Eastern bishops, but to "all bishops of any degree" and with specific reference to the overlap with Latin regulations. Still, it does not spell out that the bishop of Rome is a patriarch, but then, why would it? It is, as you say, the Eastern code... that role of the pope is assumed. Elsewhere i quoted the Catholic encyclopedia, both the current one (2002) and the old one that is so popular on wikipedia (1911) both of which affirm the pope's role as patriarch. There are many more, i can continue to add when i'm not doing this instead. Protoclete (talk) 20:36, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Pope as patriarch of the Latin Church

message: Quote: Ghirlandajo (why one schismatic patriarch of Rome should be listed before the Ecumenical patriarch and three other original patriarchates??)
First of all your note is offensive in the history section and please note that the Council of Chalcedon gives the Pope the first place in the order of precedence in Canon 28.
Also I would like to point out that the mutual excommunication made in 1054 was lifted in the 1960's by the Roman Catholic Church and Orthodox Church of Constantinople so in a way one of the original reasons for schism has been solved.
:Whom "Orthodox Church of Constantinople" recognizes as patriarch is the private affair of that church. This church cannot speak for the Eastern Orthodoxy in general. I revert the schysmatic bishop to the end of the list. --Ghirlandajo 17:52, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: About schismatic note on Rome

message: I'm leaning towards turning patriarch into a disambiguation page, and moving the material from this page to patriarch (Christianity) or something like that. The dab page would link to the main senses of the word such as the Christian title, Biblical patriarchs, and patriarchy, as well as less common uses like presiding patriarch and Sangharaja. Opinions?
:Object. Start patriarch (disambiguation) if you have nothing better to do. --Ghirla -трёп- 19:08, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Duly noted, but one must also note that you have not mentioned any particular reason. In the interest of even-handedness, I didn't really explain my reasoning either. My reasoning is that "patriarch" has several meanings, and the Christian church title is not outstandingly more common, although it's an interesting subject that deserves it's own article. The introduction to this article is presently a bit awkward as it tries to cover several subjects, while the body of the article is just a list of Christian church patriarchs. - Nat Krause(Talk!) 21:04, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Object. We don't need more Papist propaganda. --Ghirla -трёп- 19:08, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, obviously it would have to be well de-propagandised before we could use it. - Nat Krause(Talk!) 21:04, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rearranging

message: I have started the above page: links with and between patriarchs would be welcome (in which case the article title would have to be changed - Links between Christian religious heads probably.)
Jackiespeel 16:19, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Links between Popes]]

message: What about some of the smaller churches with patriarchs, such as the Ukrainian Orthodox Church - Kiev Patriarchate? I'm sure there are others as well. Do they deserve a mention in this article? Gentgeen 21:12, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kiev etc.? 

message: The wiki on patriarchs focused only on the patriarchs of Judaic religions (Judaism and Christianity.)
In Mahayana Buddhism, patriarchs played an important historical role.  While Theravada (The Way of the Elders) records that the Buddha explicitly did not leave a successor, Mahayana Buddhism believes that the Buddha did select a monk to be a successor, and that there was a series of at least 28 Buddhist patriarchs.  The Chan/Zen branch of the Mahayana adds another 10, and the Chogye  and Kwan Um (both Korean) subbranches of Zen believe that the patriarchy contains unbroken to this day, though they have different people in mind.  For the Chogye, the 85th is now alive.  The Pure Land branch of the Mahayana also believes that they have the living Buddhist patriarch.
Tharpa —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.66.106.50 (talk) 18:50, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Buddhist Patriarchs 

message: The newly-added section on OT patriarchs is a mess. Should it be cleaned up or spun off into another article? Majoreditor 04:42, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Silly me. I see that there is already an article named Patriarchs (Bible) which covers this material. Majoreditor 04:45, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Patriarchs in the OT

message: in the sub-section on Catholicism it says: "Disputes about papal authority were not initially a major factor in the split between Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, but are now one of the few remaining issues holding back re-unification." I am quite interested in this idea and I'd like to know if there is a WP article that goes into greater detail about these "few remaining issues" and the process/idea of reunification in general. Witty Lama 01:27, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reunification 

message: The Church of England has two primates; the Primate of England (Archbishop of York) and Primate of All England (Archbishop of Canturbury).  I know these are established by law; but don't know enough to add them to the article accurately.  Can anyone help with this?  It's clearly a failing not to include these as they are both long-established and directly successive to the latin patriachy. 118.107.229.34 (talk) 14:31, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: No failing here as this is the Patriarch page. That bit is discussed on it's own page: Primate Caisson 06 (talk) 15:05, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  England (Church of) 

message: Why not give the names here simply as they are correctly known?  Patriarch of Antioch and the Whole Levant, not The Maronite Catholic Patriarch of Antioch and all the East. It might be helpful in one way, but by introducing varieties that leave the reader confused.
Likewise Patriarch of Babylon of the Chaldeans.
And "the Metropolitan and Gate of all India."  The linked Wiki article says that he is locally called as (sic) Head & Father of Syro-Malabar Catholic Church and The Gate of All India."  His real title is "Major Archbishop of the Syro-Malabar Church" and there is no support at all for including him in the list of Eastern Patriarchs rather than Major Archbishops.  Etc. 
If no one objects, I will rewrite this section, and move Mar George. --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 12:17, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  names of eastern Patriarchs 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Patriarch. 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/20100705133253/http://www.churchofantioch.org/coa/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=29&Itemid=45 to http://www.churchofantioch.org/coa/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=29&Itemid=45
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) 18:12, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:40, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion