Talk:Third order

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Catholicism (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Catholicism related articles 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

The articles Tertiaries and Third Order seem to be discussing the same thing. They should probibly be merged into one article. Gentgeen 09:33, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree! PVTele 11:59, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

  • The Catholic Encyclopaedia, which has articles on both term, clearly explains that Tertiaries is indeed a term for (the members of, and hence the whole of) Third Orders (mind the plural, though!). QED! Fastifex 13:52, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

split the histories of the various third orders into their own articles[edit]

The article is very long. It would be improved by splitting out the various sections on the histories of the different third orders into their own articles. This article could discuss the basic idea of a third order and the general historical development, and include a list of the third orders with articles. Gentgeen 07:45, 10 October 2006 (UTC

Both articles are quite long and not that well organized. Doing things to make them longer is not a good idea. I think that they both need to be cleaned up, boundaries clearly delineated and cross-links introduced.--Filll 13:52, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

  • Merge intro. Split sections. From a non-expert point of view, both articles are too long. Each "Third order of..." sections should be spun-off as their own articles, then the main article should have a list of these. -- Emana 03:26, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

O. Praem.[edit]

Why is the Third Order of St. Norbert not included in the article? 17:22, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Third order of St. Francis[edit]

There is currently a page for the Third Order of St. Francis. At present, it is a redirect to the page Franciscan. On this page, the section for the Third Order of St. Francis comepletely dominates the article, and if all the other orders mentioned here were given the same detail, the page would be incredibly enormous. I think that the majority of the information should go to the existing Third Order of St. Francis page, and only an introductory couple of paragraphs left here. Any thoughts?--Entoaggie09 08:38, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

  • This article still needs a lot of work, but I moved most of the Franciscan section into Third Order of St. Francis— over 50KB of material on its own. The remaining section could stand to be trimmed further, but this article requires additional surgery for tone and contextualization of outdated information, among others.-choster (talk) 02:06, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Merging to Secular order[edit]

It turns out WP does have an article for secular order, current to the 1983 reforms. Since that is the preferred term, this article ought to be merged there; a good deal of the material I tried to integrate into the existing text had apparently been cut and paste from that article.-choster (talk) 19:37, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Inappropriate tone[edit]

Having been mostly copied verbatim from the 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia, this article has an inappropriate tone for Wikipedia. Specifically, the verbiage is archaic and makes certain assumptions that we wouldn't make. Example, "The general idea of lay people affiliated to religious orders, as seen in the Benedictine Oblates or confraters (Taunton, "Black Monks of St. Benedict", London, 1897, I, 60-63; for Norbertines cf. Hurter, "Papst Innocenz III", Schaffhausen, 1845, IV, 148), is too natural for there to be any need to seek its origin." --Boston (talk) 09:23, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

--Actually it seems much has been corrected regarding this and only some of the 1913 article remains as it was--hence the tone has improved and current understandings have been articulated.


This article reads as if 'third order' applies only to the Roman Catholic Church. There is a reference to third orders in general. This article should either be generalised to cover third orders in Christianity in general, or else renamed to make it's 'Roman-centricism' clear —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:51, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Third Rule[edit]

I humbly suggest that if the article says, "The term Third Order designates persons who live according to the Third Rule of a Roman Catholic religious order, an Anglican religious order, or a Lutheran religious order", it also ought to tell us what the third rule is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ocyril (talkcontribs) 13:14, 28 October 2011 (UTC)


"not seldom dogmatically inaccurate"--a tripple negative seems a bit much