:Talk:List of religious leaders in 2010

Related, maybe in the past. Not for the purpose of this list or in the present real world 2010. No relation whatsoever religious wise in reality or in practice either. --Shuki (talk) 18:48, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

:Please cite a source for this position.

:BTW, I am not even sure how religions could be "related in the past" but "not (related) today" unless that just means that are "not the same religion today." For example, if they are unrelated today in 2010, in what year did they become unrelated? ^{User talk:CarlaudeUser talk:Carlaude} 20:20, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

::Also-- WP:BRD means leaving the article (or rather the edits under dispute) as they originally were, while it is discussed. You found the article in [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_religious_leaders_in_2010&direction=next&oldid=335600814 this state] after my edits-- but if you prefer it in the state before that, we can leave it [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_religious_leaders_in_2010&oldid=335442958 like this] while we discuss.^{User talk:CarlaudeUser talk:Carlaude} 21:33, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

:::The two religions, Judaism and Samaritanism, are certainly related, but are clearly separate religions. Christianity is also related to Judaism and when it diverged from Judaism, the Samaritans had already been established as a separate religious group for some hundreds of years. The Samaritans do not regard themselves as Jews, nor do the Jews consider the Samaritans to be Jews. However, having regard to their tiny numbers (some 700) and the fact that many (but by no means all) of the practices of Judaism and Samaritanism are based upon a similar source, I suggest that, in the article, "Samaritanism" appears as a subheading, immediately following Judaism. In the contents list, it would appear as 4.1. Davshul (talk) 15:38, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Rather than saying that the RCC is the gold standard of "Catholicism", I am saying that putting the RCC under the same heading as certain rather curious groups is unfair both to RCC and to Anglicanism, which is excluded from the heading. In the same way, I am happy that the article does not also lump together under a single heading, just because they have the word "Orthodox" in their name, the Eastern Orthodox, the Oriental Orthodox Churches, and groups such as the Inclusive Orthodox Church, the Celtic Orthodox Church in North America, the Western Orthodox Church in America. Esoglou (talk) 20:28, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

:I think you would have a better case if you had a way to refer to these different groups these besides "...Churches not in full communion with Rome". It reads as a RCC POV, even if that is not the intent. ^{User:CarlaudeUser talk:Carlaude} 07:58, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

::You certainly have something of a point. I do not agree that it is RCC-centred to put under a separate joint heading those groups that, while they have "Catholic" in their name, are in large part more distant in attitude from the RCC and its constituent particular churches than very many of the churches listed under headings other than "Catholicism"; but it could be argued that exclusion of Anglicanism was just as wrong under the heading "Catholic Churches not in full communion with Rome" as under the more generic heading "Catholicism". The consideration that it may, after all, be best to put all these very diverse groups (RCC included) under the common heading "Catholicism" makes me wonder whether EOC and OOC should not likewise be under a common heading. Should that heading be "Orthodoxy"? Or should it be "Eastern Christianity"? The latter choice would call for or at least allow inclusion also of two churches that claim to be the continuation of the Church of the East, wrongly called Nestorian. Esoglou (talk) 10:17, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

:::I see that someone has now added the two so-called Nestorian churches, but has inserted them among the Oriental Orthodox churches, whose horror at being considered the same as those two would be greater than the horror of the EOC! Esoglou (talk) 16:47, 10 May 2010 (UTC)