Talk:Veronica Lueken
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
Untitled
Add NEW comments at the bottom of the page or in the section on that topic. Thank you.
comment
Hi. The accompanying entry is a wholly new analysis of Veronica Lueken, and as you can see from the copious references, it does not simply reproduce content from the Last Days Ministries website. I am not the author of the original deleted piece, so please, don't delete my take on this person and her worldview!
User: Calibanu, 17: 14, 16 May 2006.
To the previous person who vandalised this entry. Kindly do not do so any further. I have deleted your previous edit, as it was in violation of NPOV requirements, contained claims without independent verification, and also duplicated statements made elsewhere in the text. I have retained the St Michaels World Apostolate Mission edit, as it includes valuable information about what occurred after Mrs Lueken's death. Please note that I have striven to be as neutral as possible in recording the details of this woman's life and desist from any further excessive amendment of this entry.
User: Calibanu 10.28, 5 July 2006
Cite sources
Hi, I've noticed that this page has a very nice set of references at the bottom. However, each assertion needs to have its own reference, so that a reader does not have to search through the sources to find out where a particular line came from. You can read more at Wikipedia:Citing sources, or leave a note here if you have questions. —Mira 04:01, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
Mugavero & Objectivity
There are three Ad hominem attacks on the late Bishop Mugavero: one each time his investigation and denunciation is mentioned. This adds nothing to the reader's understanding of Veronica Lueken or her movement or of his investigation into her visions. Is it being suggested that he did not believe in her visions because he may have been gay? I'm sure the writer's disagreement with the Bishop's conclusions is strong enough to be stated rationally, not by simply attacking him as gay. Anyone familiar with her visions knows that they are quite powerful and that they do question the authority of church leadership. His conclusions, then, seem pretty straightforward, whether one agrees with them or not. So why question their authenticity based on his private life or unrelated performance?
Also, for the record, there is only one source for the claim that Mugavero was gay: a lawyer who is making a case against the church accused the bishop at a press conference (picked up by the Guardian and Daily News).
I ask that you remove the unnecessary repetitions of this and qualify the accusation by stating the context in which it was made.
As for objectivity, why not include information about the factional split between followers of Veronica Lueken into the Our Lady of the Roses Shrine and St. Michael's World Apostolate factions, which is the most important event in the movement since Veronica Lueken's death? The only mention of her husband, Arthur Lueken, is in passing, even though he became President of Our lady of the Roses in 1997 and presumably played an important role in her life. At least why not include the our lady of the roses website?
Njsamizdat 14:47, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Njsamizdat. As the original author of this article, I would firstly like to thank you for your objection to its earlier vandalism. Secondly, I was interested to read about the schisms that have occurred within the Bayside circle since Veronica Lueken's death. Originally, I compiled this from available non-web source material, and as I noted within the text, there has been no detailed analysis of the sect since Mrs Lueken passed away.
If you could provide the article with any documented evidence about the aforementioned split from either an online source, newspaper article or any other publication, then please do not hesitate to add such a reference to it.
[User Calibanu] 11.37, 12 September 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Calibanu (talk • contribs) 23:55, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Hey now! This article has made a 180 turn. Your original is terrific.
Njsamizdat 18:49, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
[[]]
I'm researching the movement and would love to know more about the schism. I've gone to both websites (Our Lady of the Roses and St. Michael's World Apostolate) and they seem to be for the same organization. (They have the same PO Box and hold vigils at the same place and the same time.) Can anyone explain this? Thanks.
Nikolaipdx (talk) 02:50, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
The Schism at Bayside
The original Shrine of Our Lady of the Roses is still very much in existence and is managed by Vivian Hanratty. The web sites associated with the original Bayside movement are http://www.ourladyoftheroses.org , http://www.tldm.org and http://www.roses.org. The "schism" that is mentioned in the above posting occurred about 1996-1997, when the then Vigil coordinator and office manager, Michael Mangan attempted what could be described as a "coup" against Arthur Lueken, at the time the president of the Our Lady of the Roses Corporation. ( I personally drove "Artie" to his lawyers and sat next to him in Queens County Civil court as he fought a brutal court battle with Mangan for ultimate control of the Shrines corporation, bank accounts and assets.) Ultimately Arthur won the court battle, but at the price of having a split occur, with Mangan and the majority of the Shrine workers and followers leave to start a "splinter group" called "Saint Michael's World Apostolate", which Mangan alleges he was "appointed" by Veronica personally to carry on the Bayside mission. (The "Warning in 1997 Rose Notes" debacle news article was crafted entirely by Mangan with no authority or approval from any of the Shrines board of directors at the time. http://www.roses.org/news/warn97ng.htm This caused a tremendous amount of embarrassment, loss of credibility to the Shrine and it's mission.) A remnant few original workers remained with Artie, Ann Ferguson, Veronica's personal secretary, Vivian Hanratty, Gary Wohlscheid of These Last Day's Ministries, (the radio station "arm" of the original shrine) and several others, and despite much adversity and persecution the original mission which Veronica started forty one years ago is still alive and well and holds it's rosary prayer vigils on the originally requested eve of the great feast days of the Roman Catholic Church. It also distributes the original un-editied messages given with no subjective interpretations added. NB: Both organizations have independent P.O. Boxes and phone numbers now for several years. — Preceding rjs comment added by 173.100.110.225 (talk) 16:28, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
- Start-Class biography articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- Start-Class Saints articles
- Low-importance Saints articles
- Saints articles needing infoboxes
- WikiProject Saints articles
- Start-Class Catholicism articles
- Mid-importance Catholicism articles
- WikiProject Catholicism articles
- Start-Class Alternative views articles
- Mid-importance Alternative views articles
- WikiProject Alternative views articles