Talk:Edgardo Mortara
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
An event mentioned in this article is a June 23 selected anniversary.
Contents |
[edit] Anthony Hopkins
Anthony Hopkins was to appear in the role of the pope in a movie about this case. Some web sites suggest it may have been cancelled. What's going on? Michael Hardy 23:38, 5 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- ummm, Elian Gonzalez stole the show and is now old hat? :) 204.52.215.107 13:51, 6 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Mortara's date of birth
I wonder about the assertion that 1852 was his date of birth. In June of 1858 he was kidnapped at the age of six, according to Kertzer's book. If his seventh birthday were later that same calendar year, then that and Kertzer's assertion would both be consistent with his having been born in 1851. I seem to recall having read this -- I check on it some time soon, I hope. Michael Hardy 00:25, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Kertzer's book says he was 19 years old when Garibaldi's forces took Rome in 1870, and that he was 23 years old when he was ordained in 1874, and also that he was six years old when he was abducted in June 1858. That implies that he was born later than that date in June 1851 but not later than the end of 1851. "Six years old in June 1858" does not imply he was born in 1852, if, as is conventional, we take "six years old" to mean that his sixth birthday has arrived and his seventh birthday has not. Michael Hardy 21:10, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)
... and one of the external links quotes Edgardo Mortara as saying that he was born on August 27th, 1851. Michael Hardy 01:56, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Correction to this old comment of mine
Above I said "when Garibaldi's forces took Rome". In fact by that time, Garibaldi was no longer an officer in the Italian army. He wasn't there that day (September 20th, 1870.) Michael Hardy 06:09, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Baptism
I removed the reference to jews a ssecond class citizens.
The Church has always held baptism to signify a person is a christian, and does not require baptism by a priest. And it is not illogical to require a christian to be brought up by a christian -- in the same way that the child of a Jewish mother would be jewish because the mother was responsible for the upbringing of the child.
- The child of a Jewish mother would be Jewish because in Judaism the measure of Jewishness is whether one's mother or father was also a Jew. If one had a Gentile mother and a Jewish father, one might still be ethnically half-Jewish, and even brought up in a Jewish household, but not considered intrinsically Jewish unless one had actually converted. By contrast, the child of a Jewish mother and non-Jewish father is considered completely Jewish, even if he never practises or learns anything about his mother's faith.
- Nuttyskin 01:43, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
The references in the article seem NPOV. Excesively anti-catholic. the late 1840s were a time of political upheaval in Europe and all governments reacted including the Papal States, which was probably the most reactionary to start with.
Recognition that Roman government was one of the most extreme in Europe and not unique would help balance. garryq 23:42, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I have rewritten the paragraph. I agree that "second-class citizens" was not a very helpful phrase, since no-one had the rights of "citizens" in the Papal States. But it is a simple fact that the 19th century Church was anti-Semitic in doctrine and practice, and that the child baptism rule applied and was intended to apply to Jews - there were no other religious minorities in the Papal States. It is not "anti-Catholic" to say these things. The Church itself has acknowledged and apologised for its history of anti-Semitism - though not so far in this case. Adam 04:20, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
To baptise and then kidnap a child to change its religion against the wishes of its parents is undoubtedly wrong - I really despair at the 1st para of Garryq's contribution above - and it's hardly anti-catholic to say so. The involvement of the Pope would seem to indicate this was not purely an act by the civil authorities.
Exile 21:34, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Question. "Edgardo's baptism, even though illegal, was valid, and made him a Christian." In what way was the baptism illegal? Was it in violation of some sort of civil statute of the Papal States? I don't understand, and I trust (hope? :P) I'm not the only one. If someone could clarify, that would be great. :) --Jen Moakler 23:51, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
- It's been a while since I read Kertzer's book. But I think it was illegal because the parents did not consent to it. If he'd been an adult, he himself would have to have consented. Michael Hardy 23:58, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
-
- This is a specious argument: if he'd been an adult, the servant girl would not have baptised him. As it is, Edgardo Mortara was spoonfed both Catholic doctrine and Papal political propaganda, and brought up in a "veal crate" of all-enveloping religious devotion, designed to make him what he in fact became: a virtual clone of Pius IX, and an apologist for his actions.
- Nuttyskin 01:48, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Quotations sources
May I ask for more or less specific sources for Pius IX quotations? Not that I distrust their truth, just to be able to read them. Thanks in advance. Pfortuny 09:38, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Italian antisemitism
Should it be mentioned that antisemitism was to be remarkablily lower in unified Italy than in other European countries?
- If that's a fact, it could be quite appropriate for this article. Michael Hardy 21:45, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)
-
- I see a problem in properly assessing the "remarkably lower" -unless it is extraordinarily clear, which I may doubt-. Pfortuny 07:18, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)
-
-
- I read something to that tune in Farewell España, a book on Sephardi history. The author compared the antisemitism in Papal States (with the Roman Ghetto and a child whose name I forgot but probably Mortara) with the later situation of Jews in unified Italy, where they were ordinary citizens, but there weren't enormous fortunes as in France, Germany or Britain, hence Christian Italians (in general) didn't felt envy for them.
-
-
-
-
- One of David Kertzer's books The Popes Against the Jews, points out that in other predominantly Catholic countries, nationalist movements were pro-Catholic and anti-Semitic, but in Italy, the nationalist movement was against the church, because the church maintained the Papal States and after their overthrow by the Italian kingdom, tried to re-establish them. Michael Hardy 22:49, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- in Italy, the nationalist movement was against the church
- I can't shake the suspicion that one of the reasons Garibaldi was so championed in Britain especially was his (political) opposition to the Papacy, which seemed to mirror British (religious) opposition to Catholicism, and the Establishment dislike of Catholics in general.
- Nuttyskin 01:55, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
I can't provide a source, but I have read in several places that there was very little antisemitism in Italy from the time of unification onwards, because antisemitism was identified with the Church, and the dominant Italian liberals (despite being Catholics) hated the Church. I read somewhere that there were 10 Jewish generals in the Italian Army in World War I, which since there were only 10,000 Jews in the country at the time means that 0.1% of all Italian Jews were Army generals. Mussolini's fascism was not antisemitic until it was infected with German Nazi ideas in the 1930s. Several of the movements founders were Jews, who were later pensioned off with Mussolini's apologies. Despite the discriminatory legislation of the 1930s (which was widely ignored) Italian Jews were physically quite safe until 1943 when Mussolini fell and the Germans took over. I think it is well known that Italian forces protected Jews in their zone of occupation in France from not only the Germans but also the Vichy antisemites. Adam 00:49, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Elian Gonzalez
This spectacle reminds me of the Elian Gonzalez dispute a few years back. — Rickyrab | Talk 18:01, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] ...Was a six-year-old Jewish boy...
Was he six years old his entire life?
- He was six years old (actually, about two months before his seventh birthday) at the time of the event that made him famous. But for that event, we have no indication that any of us would ever have heard of him. Michael Hardy 15:40, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Died in Paris?
I seem to recall that Kertzer's book says Mortara died in Belgium in 1940, not in Paris. Which (if either) is right? Michael Hardy 02:13, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
-
- Now I've checked it against the book. It says he died in Belgium about two months before that country was invaded by the nazis. 24.118.11.194 21:36, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Date of Edgardo Mortara's testimony in favor of Pius IX's beatification?
This external link appears in the article:
http://www.zenit.org/english/archive/documents/Mortara-PioIX.html
It contains Edgardo Mortara's testimony in favor of Pius IX's beatification. But it does not say when and where he testified. I sent an email more than a year ago to the maintainers of that web site and have received no reply. Can anyone supply that information? Michael Hardy 23:29, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Sad
- His nieces and nephews, as adults, sadly recalled the frequent visits from the priest.
Does this mean that they disliked his visits or that they missed them? --Error 00:28, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
