Talk:Anglican Church of Southern Africa

Name

OK. I see a problem here. Within the next couple of years, this is going to be the name of the church. Which means that we'll want to move the page here. But we won't be able to b/c a page (albeit a redirect) exists here? I myself am an overzealous creator of redirect pages, but this could prove difficult. We'll have to get it deleted before the move, won't we? Carolynparrishfan 01:39, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

No. If Article A (in this case, Anglican Church of Southern Africa) contains only a redirect to Article B (in this case, Church of the Province of Southern Africa), and there are no other revisions in the history of Article A, then the software will allow you to move Article B to Article A (and Article B will become a redirect to Article A). See WP:MOVE#Moving over a redirect for more information. - htonl 21:35, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

They changed the name in September (link is in the article). I'm in the process of fixing the links.Rockhopper10r 00:07, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Uniform format proposal

A proposal is being floated at the project page that there be a standard format for organising each article about national provinces of the Anglican Communion, including this one. Please consider participating in the straw vote and discussion. Cheers! Fishhead64 21:45, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Correction to Article on Anglican Church of Southern African

The Article on the Anglican Church of Southern African indicates that in 1870 the Church of England in South Africa (CESA) formed a break away group of churches/congregations. This in incorrect. In 1870 Bishop Gray called a synod meeting of the churches in the Southern African region at which the Church of the Province of Southern Africa (CPSA) now know the Anglican Church of Southern Africa was formed. Those churces/congregations which decided to remain part of the Church of England and not become part of the CPSA became known as the Church of England in South Africa (CESA). Thus the CPSA broke away from the Church of England to form a new Anglican province and although in the following years the Archbiship of Canterbury did not recongnises CESA it was in fact the CPSA and not the CESA who broke from the Church of England. One additional note as well as good relations with Anglicans in Sydney, Australia CESA also has good relationship with many evangleical Anglicans in England, many part of Africa and South America. If you want to read more on the history of CESA then read the book "A Candle Burns in Africa" by Tony Ive which was published in 1992 and can be purchased online at the Church Society online store on their website. The address is http:///www.churchsociety.org .

--Pierre217 13:28, 23 September 2007 (UTC)Pierre

May 2008

An unregistered user made a change to this article, relating to the matter raised above. The same user made additions to John Stott and Martyn Lloyd-Jones, which I reverted as they were unsourced contentious material. I am reluctant to do the same here due to the need to maintain NPOV on what sounds like a delicate issue that I know nothing about. If the user who made the edit reads this, please register so we can more easily work together to improve Wikipedia. Sidefall (talk) 22:18, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Personal Ordinariate

Apart from the Traditional Anglican Communion, the article should really consider verifying whether groups within the Anglican Church of Southern Africa have ever sought a similar canonical structure to the proposed personal ordinariates. ADM (talk) 18:08, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Homosexuality

While not supporting the blessing of same-sex unions, the Anglican Church of Southern Africa seems to be on his way to recognize the moral validity of same-sex relationships, based on South Africa law that allows same-sex marriage [1]. This source is from 2009, so any new developments in this question should be added, since they have a great role in the future of the Anglican Communion. It should be noticed that Desmond Tutu stance on the total validity of same-sex unions and non-celibate clergy is his own personal stance, there are certainly many disagreeing voices in the Anglican Church in Southern Africa.Mistico (talk) 17:14, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Possible Partition

Other important question is the possible partition of the Anglican Church in Southern Africa into several national or regional churches, like it already happened in other parts of Africa. Not only because this church is basically the Church of South Africa, as also the general tendency is to create national churches in Africa, so it would make sense the creation of national churches in Lesotho, Swaziland, Mozambique, and Namibia - Angola. From what I have read there are also many voices in these countries and not only in South Africa more in agreement with the Anglican realignment movement then with the unorthodox stances of the Anglican Church in Southern Africa.Mistico (talk) 17:22, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

My research lead me to conclude that a national province in the Anglican Communion to be created needs to have at least 5 dioceses. It is possible that Ghana will be elevated to that status in the near future, but concerning the Anglican Church in Southern Africa, both the churches of Lesotho and Swaziland have currently one diocese, like also the much largers in area churches of Namibia and Angola. Mozambique does have two national dioceses and it seems to most likely country with chances to become a national province. From what I have found, the Anglican Diocese of Port Elizabeth is the diocese more active in the Anglican realignment.Mistico (talk) 19:14, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Bishop Zulu

Need to mention that Bishop A.H. Zulu was the first Black Bishop in South Africa! I may have missed it, but I do not see him mentioned even ONCE on this page. Without him being made Bishop in 1960, there would be no Bishop Tutu or current ArchBishop Thabo Makgoba. They materialized from some past seed. Of course they would have come about sometime eventually, but it is important to include all facts in trusted Wikipedia! transferred from article space: by IdreamofJeanie (talk) 14:52, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

See Alphaeus Zulu. The ordination and consecration of straight black men was never controvesial (women and gay people have been and remain controvesial) so I suspect that is why it is not felt neccessary to specifically mention the first black bishop. Wayne Jayes (talk) 16:24, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Anglican Church of Southern Africa. 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/20160321235240/http://anglicanchurchsa.org/view.asp?pg=about to http://www.anglicanchurchsa.org/view.asp?pg=about
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140714182152/http://changingattitude.org.uk/archives/2083 to http://changingattitude.org.uk/archives/2083

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) 00:49, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Centralised discussion - articles on dioceses - to include "Anglican" in all cases or not

This discussion has been taking place scattered in different places across talkspace, WP:CFD, WP:RM, etc. and I thought it might be useful to centralise the discussion here. The question is about the naming of articles about the dioceses of this church (and the naming of related categories). As I see it there are two different possibilities.

Option 1: Diocesan articles should be named "Diocese of X", unless there is also a Catholic (or Lutheran etc.) diocese of X, and only in that case should it be named "Anglican Diocese of X".

Option 2: All diocesan articles should be named "Anglican Diocese of X".

The same would then apply to the subcategories of Category:Anglican Church of Southern Africa bishops, i.e. "Category:Bishops of X" versus "Category:Anglican bishops of X".

Notifying those who I have seen involved in this discussion: @Oculi, Necrothesp, and Waynejayes:. - htonl (talk) 13:23, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Having stated the question in an (I hope) neutral way, let me put my opinion. I can't seem to discern a uniform standard from other similar category hierarchies. The CoE articles definitely go with "Option 1", but as an established state church they do have perhaps more of a claim to primacy in naming. The ECUSA articles are "Option 2", but that church seems to actually use "Episcopal" in the corporate identity of its dioceses anyway. The Anglican Church of Australia articles follow "Option 2"; but the West Indies, New Zealand and Ireland all follow "Option 1". There really doesn't seem to be any consistency across different churches. I also can't see anything under Category:Wikipedia naming conventions that would give us any guidance.

That being said, then, I think the decision comes down to how you balance WP:COMMONNAME versus WP:TITLECON. And I'm still not really sure which one wins out here. - htonl (talk) 13:46, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

• Option 1. There is absolutely no need to disambiguate unless we need to disambiguate. Most of these dioceses do not share names. Most Lutheran dioceses in Africa do not even seem to have articles. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:33, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
• Just a note to add that I have submitted a CfR nomination for five categories related to dioceses where the Anglican and Catholic churches do both use the same name - see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 May 21#Anglican bishoprics in South Africa. - htonl (talk) 22:29, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
• Option 2 - many (most?) editors are not local and in any case are unlikely to be fully acquainted with the names of all the various denominations which have dioceses (Roman Catholic, Eastern Catholic, Orthodox, Lutheran, Anglican Communion, other Anglican, United Methodists). It is much clearer to include the precise name, which is almost always in the first sentence (XXX is the Anglican diocese). This applies more to categories. (There are dioceses in different countries with the same name: eg Roman Catholic Diocese of Bondo and Anglican Diocese of Bondo.) I am not advocating any such rule for Europe and Asia as bishops and dioceses can go back 2000 years. Option 2 brings clarity and predictability. Oculi (talk) 01:43, 22 May 2021 (UTC)