Content deleted Content added
Balloonman (talk | contribs) →Official association with the Catholic Church: big difference between CFC and CL |
Balloonman (talk | contribs) →An attempt to reach consensus: not about religious authority, but authority of a governing body. |
||
Line 244:
:::::::The difference is that there is no governing body for the Islam that could speak on this subject. However, if a group claimed to be a specific brand of Islam, and the governing body explicitly said no, that's a different story. In this case we have an authoritative body, which regardless of what CFC wishes, has the authority to speak on this subject. The bishops and by extension the USCCB are the authorities in the US. We don't have to listen to claims, we have declarative statement from the governing body. It's pretty black and white.---'''[[User:Balloonman|<font color="purple">Balloonman</font>]]''' ''[[User talk:Balloonman|<b><sup><small>Poppa Balloon</small></sup></b>]]'' 18:50, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
:::::::WP does not recognize religious authority and is not subject to it. –[[User:Roscelese|Roscelese]] ([[User talk:Roscelese|talk]] ⋅ [[Special:Contributions/Roscelese|contribs]]) 18:57, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
::::::::This is not about religious authority. It is about the authority of a governing body of a group(religious or secular) to state declare proper affiliation or distance themselves from such. If we put the word in the lead that the group is a "catholic organization" then we need to state in the lead that the group is condemned by the Catholic Church not to be one. Leave the word out and you can igonre the Churches position.---'''[[User:Balloonman|<font color="purple">Balloonman</font>]]''' ''[[User talk:Balloonman|<b><sup><small>Poppa Balloon</small></sup></b>]]'' 20:29, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
:::::I would also be satisfied with adopting phraseology such as "CFC calls itself a Catholic organization" or "CFC is identified as a Catholic organization by <reporter in secondary source>" [[User:Elizium23|Elizium23]] ([[User talk:Elizium23|talk]]) 18:08, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
::::::No. Again, it is not WP's place to undermine what sources say by attributing unnecessarily. We recognize that your personal feelings on the subject are strong, but we will not discard the views of reliable source upon reliable source for them. –[[User:Roscelese|Roscelese]] ([[User talk:Roscelese|talk]] ⋅ [[Special:Contributions/Roscelese|contribs]]) 18:27, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
|