This category is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This category is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
This category is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country articles
Do all these abbeys really qualify as theocracies? I mean, you need to have some sort of state or quasi-state in order to be called a t heocracy, don't you? Whereas most abbeys were just a sort of self-governing commune (under supervision by the Popes and the various orders). Maybe the abbeys ought to be removed from this category? -- Bazuz (talk) 23:09, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I would tend to say "no." Abbeys, monasteries, and convents (at least Christian ones) are not really "ruled" by the church, but rather by the specific Rule of that order. In the old days, it was the case that at least a few abbeys which add branches in a wide area might qualify as a semi-independent state, I don't know. But, in general, unless the categorization of abbeys and the like itself gets a bit more specific, and one or more of them is rather more clearly related, we would probably all be better served by keeping those which aren't explicitly regarded by reliable sources as theocracies out of the category. I regret to say I don't know about how applicable it might be to Eastern, non-Christian, monasteries, abbeys, and the like, but I would tend to think that, in most cases, they shouldn't be treated differently than the Christian ones. John Carter (talk) 17:45, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
OK, so I'm removing the abbeys. Bazuz (talk) 16:44, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This turned out to be more complicated than I thought! :) Apparently, the 'former theocracy' categorization is added by some template. I suspect it is the 'former country' infobox when the government type is set to theocracy. Which raises the question: is an abbey a former country? By our foregoing reasoning, it is not. So what do I do then? Remove the infobox as well? This would seem to be a much more dramatic change than what I'd opted for here... :) Any sage suggestions? Bazuz (talk) 16:58, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If you can find which template or infobox adds the category, we can adjust it so that the category is removed, and, possibly, create a different template or infobox with most of the same information which doesn't have the built-in category. I would tend to think that very few abbeys qualify as self-governing entirely, because even those which had "branches" in other countries in the Middle Ages tend to have those branches in other countries with substantially similar legal codes. In the Middle Ages, the Catholic Chuch might be counted as a theocracy, and its various branches subordinate governments, but that is a different matter. John Carter (talk) 16:23, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
