Talk:Canonization of Pope Pius XII

Catholicism Mid‑importance

Canonization of Pope Pius XII is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to the Catholic Church. For more information, visit the project page.CatholicismWikipedia:WikiProject CatholicismTemplate:WikiProject CatholicismCatholicism articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Catholicism task list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : see Draft articles
Assess : see Category:Unassessed Catholicism articles; Category:Unknown-importance Catholicism articles
Cleanup : Blessed Virgin Mary (see the talk page)
Collaborate : Invitation template needed, see Category:WikiProject invitation templates
Copyedit : Cuthbert Tunstall
Expand : Angelus; Roman Catholicism in Kosovo; Bishop Adolph John Paschang; Cum sæpe accidere; Altar Society; American Board of Catholic Missions; Bernard Häring
NPOV : Americanism (heresy); Ensoulment
Photo : see Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of Catholicism
Stubs : see Category:Stub-Class Catholicism articles; Category:Catholic Church stubs
Update : Peer review; John Aloysius Maguire
Verify : Archdiocese of Glasgow; Archbishop of Westminster; Bishop; Saint Mungo; Sanctification; Westminster Cathedral
Other : Watch recent changes for Catholicism articles

Untitled[edit]

Can you give reference to JPII declaration of Pius XII "Servant of God" in 1990? I was not able to find proof for this anywhere. E.C. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.227.112.67 (talk) 04:44, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relevancy[edit]

I think it would be best if this article were limited to information that pertains to the canonization, rather than information about Pius XII generally. Particularly in the support and opposition sections I have tried to find quotations that not only are a reaction to the process but actually comment on it. More general stuff, I think, does not belong here and would make this article unmanageable. In particular the recent blockquote in the support section only references the Pius controversy generally and does not express support for or comment on his cause for canonization. Savidan 15:54, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I might tend to agree, but I found the article as it existed particluarly unbalanced and POV. It had a section under opposition for "historians" and for "Jewish groups", giving the impression that both historians and Jewish groups universally opposed Pius' virtue, when that could not be further from the truth. Martin Gilbert one of the most noted Jewish scholars on the subject considers the attacks to be pure bunk. Moreover, in addition to the need to include the material for balance, the comments included go to Pius' virtue and to the purported opposition which is based on the objections to his virtue. Also, most commentary by informed participants are made in light of Pius' cause for canonization. Mamalujo (talk) 23:46, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Too Jewish-centric and confused view of what canonisation is[edit]

The majority of the text in the article is not related to the actual canonisation of Pius XII (ie - the presentation of evidence regarding mircales), but rather, the whining about it from non-Catholic polemicists (who do not accept Jesus Christ and thus, I presume rabbinic Judaism does not "recognise" Catholic saints as in heaven, anyway). This sort of stuff needs cutting down drastically. It also puts across a sort of notion that members of the Church randomly "choose" saints, as if it was some sort of beauty pagent or popularity contest. This is not how canonisation works. - Yorkshirian (talk) 10:48, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is not Catholic-pedia. The text is related to the canonization; encyclopedia coverage of this topic includes praise and criticism from non-Catholics. All of the material is sourced. Since Wikipedia is not paper, there is no reason to "[cut it] down drastically" other than POV pushing. "I don't like it" is not a good reason to remove neutral and referenced material. Savidan 06:26, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]