Talk:Filioque: Difference between revisions
Fixed this link |
Fixed the link |
||
Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
: Oh, I see what you mean. I've made the change. -- [[User:Elphion|Elphion]] ([[User talk:Elphion|talk]]) 03:26, 1 November 2017 (UTC) |
: Oh, I see what you mean. I've made the change. -- [[User:Elphion|Elphion]] ([[User talk:Elphion|talk]]) 03:26, 1 November 2017 (UTC) |
||
== External links modified == |
|||
Hello fellow Wikipedians, |
|||
I have just modified one external link on [[Filioque]]. Please take a moment to review [[special:diff/811353923|my edit]]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|this simple FaQ]] for additional information. I made the following changes: |
|||
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120104223251/http://oca.org/orthodoxy/the-orthodox-faith/bible-history to http://oca.org/orthodoxy/the-orthodox-faith/bible-history |
|||
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. |
|||
{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}} |
|||
Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 02:43, 21 November 2017 (UTC) |
|||
== Political Aspects of Filioque Controversy & Schism == |
== Political Aspects of Filioque Controversy & Schism == |
Revision as of 02:10, 1 May 2019
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Filioque article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6Auto-archiving period: 180 days |
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Filioque. 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/20040806145711/http://www.vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/2004/documents/ns_lit_doc_20040629_rite_en.html to http://www.vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/2004/documents/ns_lit_doc_20040629_rite_en.html
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101230214737/http://monachos.net/content/patristics/patristictexts/185-maximus-to-marinus to http://www.monachos.net/content/patristics/patristictexts/185-maximus-to-marinus
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:47, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
"double procession"
The lead says "the double procession of the Holy Spirit." Is this a neutral formulation? Shouldn't it be "the procession of the Holy Spirit as double," or something like that? Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 05:00, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
- I think you will have to explain how they mean different things to you. They seem synonymous to me. -- Elphion (talk) 03:23, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
- Oh, I see what you mean. I've made the change. -- Elphion (talk) 03:26, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
Political Aspects of Filioque Controversy & Schism
The heirs of Charlemagne claimed to be successors of the the Roman Empire (as also did the Emperor at Constantinople); and since it was also the Frankish kings who pushed the Filioque controversy, as discussed in the article; and since the resulting Great Schism - wherein the Pope excommunicated and anathematized both the Emperor and the Patriarch of Constantinople - was politically beneficial to the Franks by discrediting two important rivals it may perhaps be appropriate (provided always that there are credible sources available meeting Wikipedia standards) to add one or more footnotes or citations regarding the political dimensions of the controversy for the benefit of readers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:985:C100:8540:B193:53FF:5C3D:2D08 (talk) 14:08, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
- B-Class Christianity articles
- High-importance Christianity articles
- B-Class Christian theology articles
- High-importance Christian theology articles
- Christian theology work group articles
- B-Class Catholicism articles
- High-importance Catholicism articles
- WikiProject Catholicism articles
- B-Class Eastern Orthodoxy articles
- Top-importance Eastern Orthodoxy articles
- WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy articles
- WikiProject Christianity articles