Talk:Francis of Assisi

Stigmata and worse

I am reinstating the following comment, which was arbitrarily deleted by Marauder40. The comment refers to an academic source rather than to hagiographic hogwash and is highly critical of the current article. Has Wikipedia really reached a level where editors think they can just delete comments containing scholarly sources that they do not like? The talk page is there for discussion. Deleting comments instead of discussing them smells of religious fanaticism. Doesn'it?

This article is a joke. Just to give an example, Francis never purported to have received the stigmata. The claim was masterminded after his death by his friend Elias, a brilliant marketeer of dubious character (see e.g. Chiara Frugoni, Francesco e l'invenzione delle stimmate), who became General of the order and led the building of the majestic and utterly un-Franciscan Basilica in Assisi. I understand that this article is a magnet for pious Catholic Wikipedians, but an encyclopedia cannot take a purported miracle at face value. The Italian article, while not perfect, is far better documented and has a decent bibliography. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.72.74.207 (talk) 14:41, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Of course, the stigmata are simply a legendary invention. The article is in part a poor hagiographic story. Is has to be changed. Mr. bobby (talk) 21:09, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Whole article section on Francis's life needs rewrite

The problems with this "biography" are so many and so serious that I don't know where to begin. First, the "scholarly" literature on which it is based is of no historical value whatsoever. It consists mostly of an ancient on-line encyclopedia article (Ignatius Brady), a popular spiritual interpretation by a non-historian (Chesterton), a pious collection of saints lives published in 1950 (Engelbert), and the 1910 online Catholic Encyclopedia.

The bibliography, however, lists soem of the good recent scholarship (along with a lot of pious junk). Someone needs to get a copy of Thompson's _Francis of Assisi: A New Biography (Cornell UP), probably the best historical reconstruction available, and rewrite the whole seciton. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.239.64.253 (talk) 20:11, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

I am hoping to revive this discussion reworking the biographical sections of Francis' life (see above "Early Life Section") with this comment. It appears to my untrained eye that the challenge of biographically describing Francis of Assisi is a long and historical problem that is slowly being overcome by scholarship like Thompson's book. Take this quote from the founding of the order section of this page: "He then led eleven followers to Rome to seek permission from Pope Innocent III to found a new religious order." The citation used is G.K. Chesterton's biography of Francis, which is knowingly more focused on the theological significance of Francis' life. While the idea did not start with Chesterton, I would suspect the grouping of 12 individuals in order to found a new religious order is reminiscent of the 12 disciples of Jesus. Thompson, however, calls into question this accuracy, suggesting it could have been as little as 2 companions with Francis considering the words of one of Francis' companions: Giles of Assisi.

I am not an authoratative enough scholar to commit these changes, considering I have no experience with scholarly literature on his life, but I second the prospect of an actual Franciscan (descriptive rather than pertaining to the order) scholar editing this biography. Of course, these changes can do no more than take the sources available to form a description of Francis' life, and I agree that Thompson's book is one of many that should be used. All of this is motivated by a lecture by Thompson I watched, which can be found on YouTube (see "Francis of Assisi: Lost Between Myth and History" given at the University of Chicago in 2013). Stompsjo (talk) 18:37, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Unsourced additions

User:MichaelAngelosZolindakis has been repeatedly adding unsourced claims. Despite being reverted by several editors, he has continued re-adding the same claims, and is already beyond the three revert rule. User:MichaelAngelosZolindakis, please stop adding unsourced material, before you are blocked. Thank you - Arjayay (talk) 18:06, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Deleting obscure books

I refer to this edit: 07:22, 29 May 2021‎ Melchior2006 talk contribs‎ 67,891 bytes −961‎ →‎Further reading: obscure works deleted, also the medieval references, because the bibliographic info was insufficient (also overspecialized) Some of the books that Melchior2006 deleted are written in Latin or Italian, and I understand their deletion. But two of the books that Melchior2006 deleted, which I had added on 12 April 2021, are written in English and purchased by me in bookstores in the U.S. in recent years. What makes them obscure, and why is obscurity a reason for deletion? Some readers of Wikipedia may be familiar with the popular books on St. Francis and would appreciate knowing of more obscure ones. The two books I added that Melchior2006 deleted are * The Little Flowers of Saint Francis of Assisi (Translated by H.E. Manning), Old Saybrook, CT: Konecky & Konecky, 2005. ISBN 1-56852-559-1 and * Timothy Verdun, The Story of St. Francis of Assisi: In Twenty-Eight Scenes, Brewster, MA: Paraclete Press, 2015. ISBN 978-1-61261-685-8. I haven't put them back in "Further Reading," because, if I did, I wouldn't have the space in my explanation for what I have just written. But, unless someone replies in the next few days and persuades me not to put them back, I will do so and will refer to these comments as my explanation for why I put them back.Maurice Magnus (talk) 18:41, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

thanks for your note and the background explanation. I think it is important to keep the further reading recommendations simple, otherwise the wiki article becomes a clearing house for everything that has been published about Francis, and that is a lot. We can never keep up with the new title. People can find the books you mentioned on amazon. The 28 scenes seem to be one one of a thousand similar titles. And the Fioretti (little flowers) are already listed in the article under Francis of Assisi, The Little Flowers (Fioretti), London, 2012. limovia.net ISBN 978-1-78336-013-0. We need not list them twice. Thanks for your help, God bless. --Melchior2006 (talk) 12:34, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation; I will not put the two books back, even though my inclination is that more is better, although I agree that the goal should not be to include "everything that has been published about Francis." Maurice Magnus (talk) 14:37, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

OK, thanks. People shopping for books about Francis can find the titles on amazon or elsewhere. --Melchior2006 (talk) 09:14, 31 May 2021 (UTC)