Jump to content

Talk:Veneration of Mary in the Catholic Church

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk | contribs) at 13:32, 6 June 2024 (Removed deprecated parameters in {{Talk header}} that are now handled automatically. (bot trial)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:47, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hyperdulia[edit]

The point in the lede about hyperdulia is quite an important technical point about Marian veneration from a Catholic or Eastern perspective. I do not know why it should be removed. In fact the Protestant accusation of "Mariolatry" does kind of relate to this where we mention latria but without sources and a dispassionate discussion of the refutation, I don't see a need to include that. Secondly, perhaps someone should fact-check through this article. I just found the infobox claiming that "Catholics believe Mary didn't die..." false -- corrected. There may be worse stuff hanging around in here. Elizium23 (talk) 05:49, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed! Johnbod (talk) 17:27, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Whether Mary died before being assumed into heaven remains disputed among Catholic theologians: by the Assumption we declare that her body did not corrupt. But in heaven, as Paul says, there are not physical but spiritual bodies. I agree that the precise type of veneration which Catholics afford Mary is topical to this article, along with correction of false notions. Jzsj (talk) 17:39, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

“Among other heretical views…”[edit]

Seems like the opening line of this article is suboptimal. I could be mistaken, but it seems to be a subjective judgement on Roman Catholicism rather than something becomint of an objective, detached article. Any thoughts? 47.221.153.136 (talk) 18:05, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Papal bull = tautology?[edit]

@Medusahead, I see you've begun modifying instances of "Pope N X issued a papal bull" to remove "papal" because of the tautology. I am not sure this is an error to be corrected, but let's discuss options. A "papal bull" is a common idiom and may be more recognizable to reader ship than simply writing "bull" which may also be misconstrued if unadorned. Would it also be an option to observe MOS:HON and remove "Pope" from the phrase instead? Then we could kill two MOS birds with one stone. Elizium23 (talk) 09:23, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good idea, thank you. However, the word pope comes mostly from the link of the pope's name. (I removed the word "papal" because I felt that it wasn't necessary to say that the bull was "papal" when it had been already said that a pope wrote it). --Medusahead (talk) 09:44, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]