![]() | Order of the Holy Sepulchre was nominated as a Philosophy and religion good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (June 30, 2017). There are suggestions below for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There is no record or suggestion in the order's documentation that enoblement at the tomb was regarded by the Church as nothing more than a "souvenir" which was contingent upon financial support of the Holy Sepulchre. This statement insults the many pilgrims of virtue who were admitted into the confraternity for centuries before it was elevated to the status of an order. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.240.64.77 ( talk) 05:06, June 24, 2006 (UTC)
It is entirely wishful thinking to say the order existed in this period. The sources cited in this article are all secondary, many of extremely dubious provenance, and none offer any primary evidence whatsoever that there was a military order existing in Jerusalem before the Templars. What bull, specifically, from Paschal II, recognized the order? The letter of Gerard and Warmund is not evidence of an order. What bull, specifically, from Calixtus II, is cited here? The idea of a chivalric order dates to much later than this period. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.65.80.128 ( talk) 02:49, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
Some anon pushed here curious list of hereditary Grandmasters of the Order. He make references to Vatican article, but his view in incorrect. In this article is: "According to accounts of the Crusades, in 1103 the first King of Jerusalem, Baldwin I, assumed the leadership of this canonical order, and reserved the right for himself and his successors (as agents of the Patriarch of Jerusalem) to appoint Knights to it, should the Patriarch be absent or unable to do so." Of course, this right to appoint knights (in case of Patriarch absentia), is not "grandmastership". In the same cited article is :"Throughout the whole period of the Latin Patriarchate’s suppression, the right to create new Knights was the prerogative of the representative of the highest Catholic authority in the Holy Land: the Custos."These custods were Franciscan friars (not monarchs). --Yopie 18:51, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
While usually a dame is a member of a chivalric order in her own right whereas a lady is the wife of a kinght, this is not always the case. A female member of the Order of the Garter in England or the Order of the Thistle on Scotland is a lady, not a dame. Thus, there is nothing unusual in some lieutenancies using the term lady rather than dame. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.181.11.138 ( talk) 21:24, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
The title of a female recipient of the Order is "Domina," which should be translated as "Dame" since she is a member of the Order and not the consort (wife) of a member of the Order. One should not compare this Order to British Orders and British usage for Orders of the British Empire, which has nothing to do with this Order. JustTryintobeJust ( talk) 20:05, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
The new web site of the order, www.oessh.va, identifies female recipients as "Ladies." The whole section on Ranks needs to be cleaned up to fit the current usage. The rank given here as "Grand Officer" is listed on the new web site as Knight Commander with Star or Lady Commander with Star. http://www.oessh.va/content/ordineequestresantosepolcro/en/chi-siamo/chi-sono-i-membri-dell-ordine-.html 97.91.254.54 ( talk) 04:21, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
Since this Order is an Order of Knighthood conferred by the Holy See as a Sovereign State, this Order should not be listed as a "Roman Catholic" order, but as "an Order of Knighthood conferred by the State of the City of the Vatican." Further, there is also an Order of Merit of this Order that is conferred upon non-Roman Catholics as well. JustTryintobeJust ( talk) 20:08, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Inter alia, see
— LlywelynII 09:48, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
This article states that the Canons Regular of the Holy Sepulchre "ceased to exist at the end of the 15th century" (except for the female canonesses). However, the article on the canons suggests that, while the order was technically dissolved by papal bull in 1489, this edict was never put into effect in practice, was reverted in 1499, and that the order survived into the 19th century. Can an informed editor sort out the contradiction please? 193.39.212.64 ( talk) 18:18, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 17:29, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
![]() | Order of the Holy Sepulchre was nominated as a Philosophy and religion good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (June 30, 2017). There are suggestions below for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There is no record or suggestion in the order's documentation that enoblement at the tomb was regarded by the Church as nothing more than a "souvenir" which was contingent upon financial support of the Holy Sepulchre. This statement insults the many pilgrims of virtue who were admitted into the confraternity for centuries before it was elevated to the status of an order. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.240.64.77 ( talk) 05:06, June 24, 2006 (UTC)
It is entirely wishful thinking to say the order existed in this period. The sources cited in this article are all secondary, many of extremely dubious provenance, and none offer any primary evidence whatsoever that there was a military order existing in Jerusalem before the Templars. What bull, specifically, from Paschal II, recognized the order? The letter of Gerard and Warmund is not evidence of an order. What bull, specifically, from Calixtus II, is cited here? The idea of a chivalric order dates to much later than this period. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.65.80.128 ( talk) 02:49, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
Some anon pushed here curious list of hereditary Grandmasters of the Order. He make references to Vatican article, but his view in incorrect. In this article is: "According to accounts of the Crusades, in 1103 the first King of Jerusalem, Baldwin I, assumed the leadership of this canonical order, and reserved the right for himself and his successors (as agents of the Patriarch of Jerusalem) to appoint Knights to it, should the Patriarch be absent or unable to do so." Of course, this right to appoint knights (in case of Patriarch absentia), is not "grandmastership". In the same cited article is :"Throughout the whole period of the Latin Patriarchate’s suppression, the right to create new Knights was the prerogative of the representative of the highest Catholic authority in the Holy Land: the Custos."These custods were Franciscan friars (not monarchs). --Yopie 18:51, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
While usually a dame is a member of a chivalric order in her own right whereas a lady is the wife of a kinght, this is not always the case. A female member of the Order of the Garter in England or the Order of the Thistle on Scotland is a lady, not a dame. Thus, there is nothing unusual in some lieutenancies using the term lady rather than dame. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.181.11.138 ( talk) 21:24, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
The title of a female recipient of the Order is "Domina," which should be translated as "Dame" since she is a member of the Order and not the consort (wife) of a member of the Order. One should not compare this Order to British Orders and British usage for Orders of the British Empire, which has nothing to do with this Order. JustTryintobeJust ( talk) 20:05, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
The new web site of the order, www.oessh.va, identifies female recipients as "Ladies." The whole section on Ranks needs to be cleaned up to fit the current usage. The rank given here as "Grand Officer" is listed on the new web site as Knight Commander with Star or Lady Commander with Star. http://www.oessh.va/content/ordineequestresantosepolcro/en/chi-siamo/chi-sono-i-membri-dell-ordine-.html 97.91.254.54 ( talk) 04:21, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
Since this Order is an Order of Knighthood conferred by the Holy See as a Sovereign State, this Order should not be listed as a "Roman Catholic" order, but as "an Order of Knighthood conferred by the State of the City of the Vatican." Further, there is also an Order of Merit of this Order that is conferred upon non-Roman Catholics as well. JustTryintobeJust ( talk) 20:08, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Inter alia, see
— LlywelynII 09:48, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
This article states that the Canons Regular of the Holy Sepulchre "ceased to exist at the end of the 15th century" (except for the female canonesses). However, the article on the canons suggests that, while the order was technically dissolved by papal bull in 1489, this edict was never put into effect in practice, was reverted in 1499, and that the order survived into the 19th century. Can an informed editor sort out the contradiction please? 193.39.212.64 ( talk) 18:18, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 17:29, 19 February 2023 (UTC)