Talk:Roman Catholic Diocese of Orange

Any thoughts on including a map of the dioces? TMLutas 16:55, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Halloween Mass

I removed the following:

Various liturgical abuses have arisen in the Diocese of Orange. The most publicized abuse is the "Halloween Mass" located in Aliso Viejo, where the presiding priest and the laity attending dressed up in Halloween costumes with the priest changing into a Barney costume at the end of Mass. After this incident was publicized and appeared on youtube, the priest wrote a letter of apology to Bishop Tod Brown, which is available on the Corpus Christi Parish website.

As we know, we have notability guidelines and sourcing guidelines. A youtube video, which is self-published, cannot be used as a source. I did a Lexis-Nexis news search for the past year for the word "Halloween Mass", and I came up with one article from the LA Times from 21 October 2006, entitled "Wandering Parish Is Going Home; Corpus Christi Catholic Church in Aliso Viejo joins other Orange County senominations with a new, artful structure built to order." with the quote Unconventional for a church? Absolutely, parishioner and development coordinator Ron Ploof said, but that's Father Fred. Since the church's inception Bailey has instituted, among other things, an annual summer margarita night and a costumed Halloween Mass in the fall. I searched other sources, and couldn't come up with anything but blogs mentioning this. I do not believe when someone is searching for the Roman Catholic Diocese of Orange, one of the most notable things is a Halloween Mass held by one of the churches in the Diocese. I'm not convinced this is notable, and more importantly, I've yet to come across reliable sources that present this in the manner of the most recent edits. But I'm taking things here to talk to see if we can't work things out or find a common ground. Thanks.-Andrew c ^[talk] 21:44, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

The source for the Halloween mass is mentioned on the parish website as I have shown via the priests apology for having it, youtube is video evidence for it taking place. It's one among SEVERAL liturgical abuses in the diocese, that is why it was mentioned--this event did not happen once and cannot be denied. IF it's not notable at all then why is it such a big topic for bloggers? The Halloween Mass was one of many that were going to be listed. The Halloween Mass was left up because it was the easiest to prove with out blogs. Why is okay to note the diocese troubles sexual abuse scandal but not the spiritual issues? God forbid Bishop Brown be presented as not favorable among the faithful. even in spiritual matters. By the way I can only assume someone will report on the testimony he made recently on the scandals. I live in his diocese and find only reporting the sexual abuses offensive to those in the diocese, when there is so much more wrong than just bad priests. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.173.206.21 (talk) 02:21, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

This might sound blunt, but I don't mean this is an accusatory fashion. It sounds like you are editing with an agenda. You said that you want to introduce several alleged liturgical abuses into the article because you live in the diocese and believe that there is so much more wrong. Wikipedia is not the place for you to air your grievances with your church. We can only summarize what reliable sources publish about the subject matter. While I can understand that you can personally be offended that the sex scandal gets more media coverage than a Halloween Mass, wikipedia is not the place to right that wrong. The media clearly has reported on the sex scandal. It is notable, not only because the settlement was the first in California, but also because it was the largest until 2 month ago. I still don't see the minor actions of one of the 50 odd churches in the Diocese should get mention here. -Andrew c ^[talk] 03:15, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Minor actions??Alleged??..how do things that are widely known and even VIDEO taped and documented by priests and the bishop himself constitute allegation? If its video taped and the priest apologizes for doing it on the parish website and in newspaper--it is fact not allegation, those are very reliable sources since they speak for themselves. These events have primary sources and witnesses. All of these "minor" actions put together make on giant mess. My reporting them is establishing the lack of proper order in the diocese and that sexual abuse is just one of among many issues. Wikipedia is where actual, modern events are document, not denied. Evidence was provided, the importance was established, whether or not the media chooses to report it is irrelevant, Catholic newspapers have reported on these issues and they are VERY relevant to the Diocese of Orange. As far as the secular media is concerned, if it's not the pope, a sex scandal, or some homosexual, chances are they will ignore the story or give it little attention. Especially since American media has traditionally had anti-catholic bias.76.173.206.21 05:50, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

High schools

Some of the high schools have connections which are mainly geographic to the diocese. The one in Silverado Canyon, for example, is run by a religious order. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.89.192.125 (talk) 18:10, 18 December 2007 (UTC)