G
German_Melkite
Guest
What is the general opinion on the various church and eparchy web sites? Are they used a lot? What is good and what would make them better?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
C
Cluny
Guest
I’ve found some of them more helpful, with more information that I seek, than others–same as any web site.
F
Formosus
Guest
Some are good, some aren’t. It really just depends. I do regularly check the UGCC’s official website for news or new interviews from His Beatitude.
S
S_J_Thaikattil
Guest
The official church websites should serve as sources of reliable information on the church. With so much misinformation and propaganda also available on the Internet, the churches should seek to provide as accurate information via their website as possible. The information on the website should be written with the intent to inform a lay person. In the age of the Internet , all sorts of people all over the world seek information. One cannot take it for granted that people have basic information and are merely seeking more detailed information, which may be the case for some but not for all. A succinct history with a timeline of the church, with the most important persons listed, going as far back as possible to the origins of Christianity is a great help.What is the general opinion on the various church and eparchy web sites? Are they used a lot? What is good and what would make them better?
S
S_J_Thaikattil
Guest
It would also be helpful to have important links which gives additional reliable information on the Church which might be posted elsewhere. It goes without saying every Catholic Church should have links to the churches of origin whereever applicable (all the Eastern Churches belong to this category) , Bishop Conferences in their respective countries/in countries of origin in the case of Eastern Churches and to the Vatican.
A good list of references with more information about the church is an added bonus, even if all articles/books may not be unbiased sources of information and may represent only the perspective of a particular author. Religious scholars are not necessarily unbiased historians (even historians may have their own bias even though they try their very best to be as objective as possible). Since they usually represent a certain religious tradition, of necessity, perhaps unconsciously, they *may *portray that particular tradition in a more positive light than it deserves and other traditions in a less favorable light. Revisionist history can be produced in the name of academic work, hence one should always have a skeptical attitude while reading anything and seek other independent sources of information that corroborate any claims.
A good list of references with more information about the church is an added bonus, even if all articles/books may not be unbiased sources of information and may represent only the perspective of a particular author. Religious scholars are not necessarily unbiased historians (even historians may have their own bias even though they try their very best to be as objective as possible). Since they usually represent a certain religious tradition, of necessity, perhaps unconsciously, they *may *portray that particular tradition in a more positive light than it deserves and other traditions in a less favorable light. Revisionist history can be produced in the name of academic work, hence one should always have a skeptical attitude while reading anything and seek other independent sources of information that corroborate any claims.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.