This article is within the scope of WikiProject Michigan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Michigan 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.MichiganWikipedia:WikiProject MichiganTemplate:WikiProject MichiganMichigan
Episcopal Diocese of Western Michigan is part of WikiProject Anglicanism, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AnglicanismWikipedia:WikiProject AnglicanismTemplate:WikiProject AnglicanismAnglicanism
The older BCP tradition spoke of "consecrating" bishop, "ordaining" priests, and "making" deacons, and then "ordination" also as a generic term for all three rites. This had the unfortunate effect of connoting that "real" ordination was the priestly one, and the other two were either an extra add-on or a preliminary step. Accordingly, the 1979 BCP switches to parallel language. All three rites are referred to as "ordination." The term "consecration" is now reserved specifically for the central consecratory prayer in each rite--all three orders are "consecrated"--but the term for the service as a whole is "ordination", for all three rites. "Consecrated" no longer means specifically bishop, as it once did, and the 1979 BCP--which should be determinative here--is careful never to use the term as a shorthand for "ordained bishop". Tb (talk) 21:46, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
True, they are all three ordinations. And a consecration can refer to a church building, see BCP p. 567. But if we have to write the office to which he was ordained, then I think we should also write the office to which he was elected--it makes for more parallel structure. Or we could just write "elected on...and ordained on..." and not mention the word bishop three times in the same line.--Bhuck (talk) 07:54, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have no objection to just saying "ordained", it seems perfectly clear in context. My complaint is really about the word "consecrated", which is anachrostic. (BTW, the RC church also disfavors "consecration" now as a cipher for episcopal ordination.) Tb (talk) 17:59, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any easily available literature to read on the theological background for why this switch was made? In the German Wikipedia, I recently moved the article "Weihesakrament" (sacrament of consecration), which had been used as the target for redirects from "Priesterweihe", "Diakonenweihe" and "Bischofsweihe" to become a subsection of the article "Ordination" (in which Protestant ordinations were also discussed), precisely because I was a bit uncomfortable with where Anglican ordinations (which confer character indelibis, and are seen as "consecrations", and not just the conferring of an office, and yet where it is not clear if they are true sacraments, or merely sacramental rites) should be fitting in. If you can read German, see [1].--Bhuck (talk) 08:01, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am not comptent to speak of German usage. The typical pattern is for Anglican terminology to roughly match RC terminology. "Consecration" is a more general term (in that many things other than ordinands are consecrated), and historically a more specific one (in that it was used in the middle ages to avoid the implication that bishops were ordained to that office). Now that everyone (in the Catholic tradition--not all Lutherans!) agrees that episcopal setting-apart is really ordination, the need for the old weasel-term "consecrated" (for that's what it was) goes away. However, it may be that, as you describe, the situation in German is different, where "ordination" does not carry the same indelible character notion as "consecrated". However, I would be quite surprised if RCs and German-speaking Anglicans did not use "ordination" for all three, whatever Lutherans say. Tb (talk) 17:59, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
German-speaking Wikipedia is a funny place--in the equivalent article for liturgical year, they even have two separate sections describing Protestant Advent and Catholic Advent, though I can't really see much difference. With the Kulturkampf and other aspects of historical identity-building, there does seem to be a way that language helps to reinforce the sense of separate identity, and so the term "ordination" doesn't get used commonly in lay circles, as far as I can tell, when referring to Catholics--in fact, any time the word "priest" gets used, you hear about "consecration"--my personal impression is that this reflects more cultural identity than anything theologically different. As for German-speaking Anglicans, nearly all of us also speak English, since I don't think Anglican worship takes place on a regular basis in Germany in any language but English (occasional German-speaking services, somewhat more frequently bilingual services, but mostly just in English--at the moment I can think of only two priests in the Episcopal Church in Germany (Convocation of American Churches in Europe) who are native German-speakers...one is a retired judge in Karlsruhe with a very small mission congregation, the other attended Virginia Seminary and has two mission congregations in Bavaria).--Bhuck (talk) 08:58, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the articles should surely be merged, though in a strict sense ordination is a rite and holy orders are what one is ordained into. Tb (talk) 17:59, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
