Talk:Southern Episcopal Church

This article was nominated for deletion on 19 June 2022. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article was nominated for deletion on 27 September 2006. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

Tennessee Low‑importance

	Tennessee portal Southern Episcopal Church is within the scope of WikiProject Tennessee, an open collaborative effort to coordinate work for and sustain comprehensive coverage of Tennessee and related subjects in the Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, and even become a member. [Project Articles] • [Project Page] • [Project Talk] • [Assessment] • [Template Usage]TennesseeWikipedia:WikiProject TennesseeTemplate:WikiProject TennesseeTennessee articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Christianity Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Delete?[edit]

Why delete? The church, though tiny, does exist and function, and it does not take up much disk space. Jm546 01:56, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not surprisingly ...?[edit]

It seems to me that the words 'Not surprisingly' introduce an implication of racism in this context, which is unsupported by the next line which gives an explanation for the alienation and anger of many Southern Episcopalians. The explanation given (support of terrorism) is introduced as a new fact and hence not 'not surprising', at least to the way I read the article. If in fact an imputation of racism is intended, perhaps the author could make it a bit clearer to a reader who is not familiar with Southern US (Episcopalian) culture.

This was the era of the Civil Rights Movement, a cause that was strongly supported by the mainstream of ECUSA, including several Southern bishops and numerous clergymen. Not surprisingly, this stand alienated and angered many Southern Episcopalians, especially laypeople. At particular issue in the formation of the SEC was the belief that some of the funds contributed to the ECUSA by member parishes and dioceses were being forwarded to terrorist political groups in the United States, Puerto Rico, and Africa.

--Richardson mcphillips (talk) 20:37, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

'"Bishop" Robert Hotes[edit]

It is interesting that consecrating Bishop Robert Hotes also claims to be Archbishop of the International Lutheran Fellowship. Furthermore, the SEC claims that the online credentialing organization Holy Trinity College and Church is its source for ordination candidates, and this can be traced through an address-of-record to the home of an individual who also claims to be a Father Superior of the Order of Saint Francis - Lutheran (which is sanctioned by the ILF). Ultimately, this "seminary" traces back to Springfield MO and Robert O'Block, who many people feel is creating and operating organizations which issue largely meaningless certificates. The ILF itself has invited O'Block to its gatherings as an SEC luminary. All of this tends to raise questions about who some of these SEC-related individuals really are, and what are they are really up to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RevGoodEnough (talk • contribs) 15:32, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page[edit]

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

http://www.episcopal.co.nr
Triggered by \bco\.nr\b on the global blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 17:03, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The real website of this organization?[edit]

I edited the article to change the web site from http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Southern/index.html to http://anglicanchurch.org/ - These two web sites have the same mission, same logo, same presiding Bishop and much content in common. User:Soleecitor reverted my edits and left the following note on my user talk page:

  The denominational web site is https://southernepiscopal.us/. Your edit of 11 April 2019 directed people to the web site of a splinter group, the Anglican Orthodox Southern Episcopal Church. The confusion is understandable (and indeed is promoted by the AOSEC). Soleecitor (talk) 15:51, 15 April 2019 (UTC)Soleecitor

The web site cited by Soleecitor is a single page with basically the same text as the other two, but with all the internal links to other pages broken. The AngelFire site shows no evidence of having been edited significantly in many years. Comparing to snapshots from 10 years ago on Archive.org confirm that almost no change, with the most significant being the Bishop's email address (when was at anglicanchurch.org back then!). I have no idea what external information is authoritative for this organization, which gives no indication of being currently active as far as I can tell. If anyone has an active web site listing that says otherwise, it would help to update this article. Samatva (talk) 18:14, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notability[edit]

This denomination is hard to verify with independent sourcing. At this point, unless I or anyone else can find some independent reporting that they exist, I’m gonna have to start an AfD. ~ Pbritti (talk) 14:09, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See corporate annual report at https://tnbear.tn.gov/Ecommerce/FilingDetail.aspx?CN=251123173026023201003090206059001040041195046179

denominational website at https://southernepiscopal.us/

sample parish at https://www.sacredheartepiscopal.org/

and listing at http://anglicansonline.org/communion/nic.html Soleecitor (talk) 21:21, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced parts[edit]

@StAnselm: (As per [1]) could you justify while those unsourced parts as well as a part sourced by a source that failed verification 4 years ago (the latter I called FICTREF), must be kept? Or otherwise source those claims with RSs.
Had you wanted to add RSs to source those claims, you would not have simply reverted me and asked I obtain a consensus. So I believe you have very good reasons for keeping all those unverifiable information. Veverve (talk) 03:48, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why it has a failed verification tag. I could access it just fine. St Anselm (talk) 03:59, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The IP user who added the failure of verification did not justify themselves. The information "There is one unaccredited online seminary, Holy Trinity College and Seminary, which offers classes by external studies" is partialy present in the inline ref; the website makes no mention of being unaccredited, and only states it provides "distance studies".

This is one line which can partially be kept. What about all the rest of the article you wanted to keep? Veverve (talk) 04:40, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For example, the SEC uses only the 1928 BCP.[2] St Anselm (talk) 05:01, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@StAnselm: and now you add sources. Had you said I will try to find sources, hold on in your revert, I would not have objected. Veverve (talk) 06:00, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Anglican Orthodox Southern Episcopal Church" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Anglican Orthodox Southern Episcopal Church and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 4#Anglican Orthodox Southern Episcopal Church until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Veverve (talk) 12:01, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All Saints Reverted to St. Andrew?[edit]

WTVF-Channel 5 in Nashville has reported that the church previously known as "All Saints Episcopal Church" is now once again "St. Andrews Church" and part of the Continuing Anglican Movement. Since this congregation is identified in the article as something of the "Mother Church" of the Southern Episcopal Church, does this mean that it has ceased to exist as a denomination separate from the Continuing Anglican Movement? 2600:1004:B12D:11ED:D98B:B069:28E3:3D11 (talk) 23:28, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@2600:1004:B12D:11ED:D98B:B069:28E3:3D11: If you have the opportunity, please link the story here (and consider making an account!). ~ Pbritti (talk) 23:52, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]