Talk:Blessed Virgin Mary (Roman Catholic)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page started with the Catholic content of BVM excluding large sections from that article, which did not correspond to RC. It will be expanded considerably. --Ambrosius007 (talk) 16:31, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Relation to main BVM Page
Further to what has been said on that page, there still remain important issues to clear up. As I have posted on BVM talk, which History2007 has stated he is not returning to:
- Okay. If you're throwing in the towel on this article, that is your right. What was wrong was to remove a large amount of content from the BVM article without consultation, and on what seems like a sudden impulse. Establishing another article with an almost identical title, but a different emphasis, again without discussion is not good practice. It could create problems in terms of content forks and the integration of all these articles. You and Ambrosius may have a grand design in your head, and it may be a wonderful one, but you shouldn't cause mayhem in a major existing article without discussion or some consenus. The Blessed Virgin Mary article is a High Importance article in Wikiprojects, and it has well over a thousand other articles that link into it, many on the basis that certain information would be here. The articles you are working on are not YOUR articles, they are part of the Wikipedia project, which everyone participates in. So it would be more constructive if you would coolly nd calmly discuss a future relationship between the pages. Xandar (talk) 11:31, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
The current title of this article is also problematic. It might imply that there are several Virgin Marys! "Mariology (Roman Catholic)" is acceptable because there ARE several differing mariologies. Not the case with the BVM, however. A better title might be "Blessed Virgin Mary in Catholicism," or "Roman Catholic views of the Virgin Mary". Xandar (talk) 11:42, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
- I think you will see the the content of this article will continue to diverge from the other very rapidly. It has already started to do so because there is new material that was not allowed to enter into the other article due to focus issues. As for two Virgin Mary's.... well, user who are so smart as to think there are two, generally do not have access to computers. This article will ge new and relevant material that can not be present in the other due to focus issues, as you have seen. History2007 (talk) 15:00, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
The title issue is a little more serious than you are giving it credit for. There is a format for titles at Wikipedia, and they should make sense in English, which this one doesn't, being ungrammatical. And don't think that there aren't a good number of users who will think that there is indeed a separate Catholic Virgin Mary. That is an accusation of some protestant evangelical groups at the moment. [1] So it would make sense to listen a little to what other people are saying. The present title is ungrammatical and misleading and should be changed - as per my suggestions or in some other way. I'm not opposed to an article about the Virgin Mary in her Catholic aspect, but name it properly and dovetail it in with existing articles. Xandar (talk) 15:18, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
- The first sentence in the article says: As the mother of Jesus Christ, the Blessed Virgin Mary has a central role..... and people have one mother.... I see no confusion at all. History2007 (talk) 19:24, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Xandar, I am sorry, I wanted to contact you on a related matter, your very justified points on Christian views of Mary contrasted from May 9?. I actually spent all day today to deal with your matter. I spent much time today on that article to deal with your question, only to see everything destroyed by someone else ( of course it was not you) and then the page closed. Which is okay with me, because few useful elements are in my new page Mariology Ecumenical views In the BVM page I simply wanted to end the unending discussions by proposing a framework, which is more open to other denomitations. (one of the accusations there) You changes it and put the others at the bottom, fine with me.
To me, the BVM page suffers from an inherent contradiction. It professes to explain all kinds of Christian views and ecplains only RC views. We know why this is so, it was not bad intention, simply the participation of talented writers with RC knowledge, like you, history and myself. By creating THIS page, we give you folks in BVM a chance to really include other views more prominently. The Orthodox, for example, have been completely neglected.
There will also be some commonalities between pages, as there is only one Virgin Mary. However, this page will take off in a new direction. Mentioning mariology, will not be mariology (teachings, dogma).It will unfold like no other Marian article the fullness of the veneration of Mary, including teachings on the veneration of Mary. Give us a few days, maybe a week? And then please visit us, and tell us what you think. Sorry for making you angry. Cheers --Ambrosius007 (talk) 19:58, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you Ambrosius. I can see that you and history have been doing an awful lot of good work on the range of Marian articles. I can also see how you can have been exasperated by the activities of a certain person who appears to have some sort of agenda. The BVM page serves an important purpose as a general discussion of Marian veneration, and recently has been the better of the two main Mary pages, so it needs careful improvement to make sure it continues to do so. I was worried that the sudden creation of new pages with no specific pattern might lead to confusion and compartmentalisation of these topics in denominational ghettoes. Hopefully, if there is a clear vision of how these different pages will interact, this will not happen. I still hate the name of this page though. Could you not consider:
- Blessed Virgin Mary in Catholicism
- Blessed Virgin Mary (Roman Catholic view)
- Catholic views of the Virgin Mary
or something similar? Better to settle on the best name now before a lot of links are attached. Xandar (talk) 00:18, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
- Well, thanks for your comments. For me BVM(RC View) vs the current name makes no difference. But the ratio of TalkPage/RealPage text on this website just amazes me..... If one graphs that number it looks very steep. But there is no rush due to links: The REDIRECT is dead, long live the REDIRECT. History2007 (talk) 01:07, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Worshipped?
I notice the word "worship" has been used in the article with respect to the Virgin Mary. Although this word was used in the past, (ie Your Worship, the Mayor,) the meaning has shifted. It was then used with a different meaning to the generally accepted meaning today. For most people, not only protestant christians, the word "worship" has come to mean the worship (latria), due to God alone. Using the word as it is currently used in the article will breed confusion and promote the commonly-spread error that Catholics worship Mary as a goddess. "Veneration" or "devotion" needs to be used instead. Xandar (talk) 19:06, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
- I am just a novice here, so I can not say either way. I am sure Ambrosius will discuss with you. Thanks. History2007 (talk) 19:22, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
