Talk:Pio of Pietrelcina

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pio of Pietrelcina is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
August 14, 2007 Featured article candidate Not promoted
WikiProject Saints Pio of Pietrelcina is part of the WikiProject Saints, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Saints and other individuals commemorated in Christian liturgical calendars on Wikipedia. This includes but is not limited to saints as well as those not so affiliated, country and region-specific topics, and anything else related to saints. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Saints Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

Contents

[edit] Randi Article

link: http://www.randi.org/joom/content/view/172/27/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.149.240.241 (talk) 11:36, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Attribution

It never ceases to amaze me how otherwise intelligent people believe in this rubbish. Stigmata? Papal infallibility? Please .. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.152.40.212 (talk) 08:05, 25 October 2007 (UTC)


There a million stories of reported miracles attributed to to Padre Pio can anyone who knows any referenced material add them?

- There were 'a million stories' of miracles, but not one reliable piece of evidence. Nor will there be of course. --kscally 20:36, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I seem to remember that Pater Pio had stigmata (bleeding of hands and feet as Christ) , but I don't know if that's a proven fact. 212.35.106.250

  • HOW can you say it was not a proven fact? you havent even researched this Saint yet are writing about him? He had to undergo numerous psychiatric and Medical exams and they all came back that Medical the wounds weren't mad made and his mental health was fine.

- Despite 'numerous psychiatric and Medical exams' there is not a single name of one of the medical professionals involved, no copy of one of their reports, and not one verifiable piece of supporting evidence to cite.--kscally 20:36, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Certainly, it will be argued over and over again. There is a famous photograph of the priest showing his stigmatized hands. A seemingly identical photo shows him without scars. It has been said by some that this shows the wounds to be concocted, while others have said the photo without the scars was doctored. The photos, I believe were well-known at the time, and so I don't think there was too much controversy around them.

You are right, Pater Pio was a stigmatic during 40 years (I dont know exactly), but what I know exactly is, he was an Italian, not a Czech one. User:JanJosef

Move to Padre Pio ? --Jiang

Am I blind, or is his real name entirely missing from the article? Kickstart70 22:34, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Why we don't have here any of his prophecies related to John Paul II?

[edit] First line

I propose changing the first lines to:

Francesco Forgione (May 25, 1887 - September 23, 1968), canonized Saint Pio of Pietrelcina, was an Italian priest. He took the name Pio when he joined the Order of Friars Minor Capuchin. After his ordination to the priesthood he was popularly know as Padre Pio.
He had the stigmata for many years, and what was so unusual about Pio's stigmata was that when it bled, the blood smelled of perfume or flowers. . . .

Any concerns about this?

Question: Is "Pater Pio" really common among English speakers? I have only ever heard of "Padre Pio," among English and Italians. I propose moving this page to either Pio of Pietrelcina or Padre Pio. Any thoughts?

--Eoghanacht 20:45, 2005 May 4 (UTC)

Article currently begins: "Saint Pio of Pietrelcina, was an Italian serial killer, convicted of murdering 117 young men and woman in the late 1950s. After a mix-up he was canonized by the pope, who had actually meant to begin the process of ex-communication."

I don't know how to report vandalism, but I know it when I see it.

[edit] Article name change

I went ahead and changed the article from "Pater Pio" to "Pio of Pietrelcina." As best I could determine, the title was chosen by a Czech user, where he was known as "Pater Pio." I decided against moving to "Padre Pio" somewhat because 'Padre' was not really part of his name, but mostly because "Pio of Pietrelcina" is how the saint is mostly likely to be referred to in future Church literature, and in terms of naming things (schools, churches, etc.) after him. --Eoghanacht 18:38, 2005 May 10 (UTC)

Padre Pio is the only way I have ever heard anyone refer to him within the church. My cousin, a Franciscan monk, has met him, and has shown me literature (all in english) and everything refers to him as Padre Pio. I think you should reconsider removing Padre. Even John Paul II referred to him as Padre Pio.

[edit] Request for Expansion

This article isn't very detailed when compared to the articles of other saints. See my talk page for more details and possible topics.Trevor 04:19, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

I would use alot of his writings but they would get edited out..-Gio

[edit] Cadaver photos

During his funeral preparation, someone took photos of Padre Pio's bare feet and hands and no wounds were visible on the corpse, which created some scandal with allegations of stigmata fraud. Others said it must be another miracle, since the limbs were too good for such an old person, looked almost like a baby's skin. 213.178.109.36 20:43, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

On this subject, the line "Photos taken of his bare feet and hands during his funeral procession created some scandal with allegations of stigmata fraud, although deluded believers cited it as yet another miracle." seems inappropriate for two reasons: (1) it makes no mention of why these photos "created some scandal with allegations of stigmata fraud", and (2) the gratuitous insertion of the word "deluded" to describe believers.65.16.78.62 15:00, 25 October 2007 (UTC) Jerry Beckett, Dallas, TX
ahh another critic. where are these pictures? I researched this also. His spiritual directors were skeptics and he was made to under go numerous Doctor tests. I think 38 by agnostics, atheists and religious. They all said that the wounds were unexplainable and The Blood was real. plus the wounds didn't build scabs over them. - Gio
Even devotees of Padre Pio say that the stigmata was not visible on his corpse. The stigmata healed a few days before he died. He lost a cup of blood per day from his side alone, and this was confirmed by many doctors. But when he was buried, all the wounds had healed. For more information on this, Br. Michael Dimond, a sedevacantist monk, has compiled a small pamphlet about him. I will try to get the sources from his work.

[edit] Pietrelcina or Pietralcina?

Two recent edits changed "Pietrelcina" to "Pietralcina" in the text (though without moving the article). Both names seem to be attested (a Google search turns up 457,000 for "-e-" and 80,200 for "-a-", with Pio mentioned in many results under both spellings). But the town's own official website uses the "-e-" spelling, so I am reverting the changes. Vilĉjo 23:54, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Title

I have added the infobox, but was not sure whether to state his Title as Confessor or Capuchin Monk ie. Professed priest of the Order of Friars Minor Capuchin. Someone who is clear about this please edit the Infobox and put in the appropriate one. Thank you. I remain, Yours Faithfully, Savio mit electronics 11:24, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Images or Photographs

I feel it would enliven the article if more photographs or images are added to it. I was not able to find any non-copyright protected images that have direct relevance to Padre Pio to include in this article. Before I started contributing to this article, the article contained two images with direct relavance to Padre Pio, a photograph of Padre Pio and a photograph of the Pilgrimage Church. All the other images I added have only an indirect relationship to Padre Pio and I only added them since, as the article became a bit long after my edits, it appeared dry with only two images. If any of you have any images that could be included in this article, please do so. Thanking you, I remain, Yours faithfully, Savio mit electronics 04:26, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Critics of Padre Pio

I have provided more details referencing negative criticism of Padre Pio originating from Catholic sources. I have heard that that the founder of Romes University Hospital retracted his criticism of Padre Pio on his death bed but can find no hard evidence to support this. Any information on this subject would be appreciated. 23 September 2006 3:33pm --—Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.195.129.80 (talk • contribs)

Greetings, friend!
I take it you mean Fr. Agostino Gemelli. One of the sources I cited says that Monsignore Carlo Maccari retracted his criticism and prayed for St. Pio's intercession on his deathbed, but says nothing about Fr.Gemelli. Also, it in turn quotes another source, but it is not specific, (It merely says "according to Official Capuchin Literature") so I don't know how far it qualifies as hard evidence. I wonder if this should be added to the Biography section.
I offer prayers for all Wikipedians on the Feast Day of St. Padre Pio (today, September 23).
Peace!
Yours,
Savio mit electronics 15:22, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stigmata

Is it just me, or does this article have the same date for both his invisible and visible stigmata? Both have as the date September 20th, 1918. It seems to me that the date for the invisible stigmata is incorrect, based solely on the context of the article, as the next paragrahs have him writing a letter concerning the event in 1911, a letter which would have been written at a later dater. Furthermore, this section also states that the visible wounds 'only reappeared in September 1918". i suggest this sate be double-checked and corrected. I have viewed the sourse cited for the writing in 1911, and from that site have determined that the proposed date would be sometime in 1910. Honeslty, IMHO, it is unecessary to even have a date for this event, because such an event may have occured on many dates in his life, and it was the visible Stigmata in 1918 which truly brought about his fame. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.191.9.180 (talk) 02:57, 27 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Jessie Grimond in Rome

Two statements from an newspaper article appear in this article.

  • Although Padre Pio was personally exonerated, there were claims that his fame was used to raise funds for right-wing religious groups.
  • Benito Mussolini was supposed to have written to him, expressing hope that one day the friar would be made a saint.

Grimond, Jessie. "Million to see canonisation of Padre Pio, the miracle monk who makes", The Independent, 2002-06-16. 

No specific information is given about who is making the claims and what right-wing religious groups were the beneficiary of his fame.

Was supposed are weasel-words for maybe it happened, maybe it didn't. If it were written as text in the article it would be deleted.

I could not find any online corroboration for either claim. I have several reasons for removing them: they are rather vaguely and tentatively stated in the first place, they are comments about unnamed groups and Mussolini with no participation from Padre Pio. They are relevant to the religiosity of Italy in the 20th century but not directly to the life of the saint. Their appearance gives undue weight to a minority critical of the decision to canonize Padre Pio who found in Jessie Grimond a communication channel. patsw 01:59, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

  • Removed. If you want to revert it, please discuss how the reference to "right-wing religious groups" can be made specific, or how a source can be identified for the Mussolini comment. patsw 23:40, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Self-flagellation

“ Because of the unusual abilities Padre Pio was alleged to possess, and his sometimes extreme signs of devotion, such as self-flagellation... ”

Where does this come from? patsw 02:36, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

  • Removed. If you want to revert this, please identify a verifiable, reliable source. patsw 23:42, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
Maybe you should pick up a book and read something about a subject whose article you want to edit. Check your facts before removing correct information. Dwain 17:02, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Provide proper citations for information you believe to be correct, Dwain, or expect it to be removed. Deoxyribonucleic acid trip (talk) 21:50, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Serious amounts of citations needed

I can't begin to list the number of times this article makes statements without providing proper citations. Almost every paragraph contains a sentence that begins with 'It is believed that...' or 'It is said that...' or 'Padre Pio was afraid that...' or 'He thought that...', and no sources are given for any of these assertions. This is the kind of thing that makes me think that bona fide hagiography (which this is, both in the strict and in the looser sense) has no place in an encylopedia. Until someone can provide sources for any of these assertions, I have a strong mind to cut this article drastically until it consists of nothing but statements for which sources are given. I realise that this is a drastic measure, but I wouldn't tolerate this kind of sloppiness in an article about a scientific or artistic topic and I see no reason why an article on a religious subject should have it any easier. Lexo 21:15, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

There are 92 footnotes in this article. This number compares quite favorably with other Wikipedia biographical entries. I am not sure how this qualifies as "sloppiness." To my knowledge, no article, biographical, scientific or otherwise, requires a footnote for every sentence. The article is about a canonized saint, so of course it is going to contain overwhelmingly positive information about his life. LotR 13:21, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Here here! Dwain 17:00, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Clearly it is necessary to be specific. The phenomenon of constant daily exsanguination is disturbing and remarkable; but could be explained by a variety of non-miraculous causes. At least one of the 92 or more footnotes is therefore required to support the following statement: "His stigmata, regarded as evidence of holiness, was studied by numerous physicians. The observations reportedly were unexplainable and the wounds never infected." First, it would be good to know if there is evidence that 'numerous' independent, qualified and objective medical people did carry out an examination. If there is no evidence then this sentence should be removed. Next, It is not true to say that the observations reportedly were unexplainable, since the article itself offers one explanation in the charge of the use of acid. If the aforementioned physicians report could be obtained, and they have utterly discounted the use of acid, then that may be one explanation less. If they authoritatively ruled out self-inflicted injury of any kind, that would remove others. If they rule out any form of virus, known or unique, we are certainly narrowing the field. But given the supernatural nature of the claim being made, we are entitled to expect a better standard of proof than hearsay. Kscally 18:47, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Lexo above. This article is full of passive voice statements that are problematic (Wikipedia:Avoid weasel words#Other problems). Some examples:

  • It is believed that he was able to see and speak with Jesus, the Virgin Mary and his Guardian Angel
  • it is believed he was subjected to attacks by the Devil.
  • It is believed that the visible wounds disappeared from that point

This fails to say who believes. Take this example from the article that is much better: Based on Padre Pio's correspondence, even early in his priesthood he experienced less obvious indications of the visible stigmata for which he would later become famous. This is clear, NPOV and attributed. --Xeeron 19:51, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Kscally and disagree with LotR. Avoiding criticizing these miracle-statements from a purely scientific point of view just because he has been recognized as a saint by the holy sea is clearly not NPOV! There are POVs all over this article. I do not know much about what further studies have been made but I'm very very sure that there are studies and other material that try to disapprove these statements of miracles. Both POVs should be presented from my POV :-) 213.113.64.67 (talk) 00:10, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Undue weight

One can't help but notice the lack references to any sources skeptical of Padre Pio's miracles. Certainly, there are more pious works written on the man than skeptical ones. This is to be expected: authors generally skeptical of the supernatural are less likely to delve into every detail of Pio's alleged stigmata. Nonetheless, this article's near-exclusive use of sources that affirm the "offical" (Vatican) version of the supposed miracles surrounding Pio is problematic. We're clearly runing into undue weight issues here. Comments? I'm thinking we need an NPOV tag until some more critical sources are worked into the article. The fact that the article is heavily-footnoted isn't enough. Those notes have to point to something other than a never-ending list of hagiographies and pious articles. Surely some skeptics have written a few articles on Pio. --Zantastik talk 13:22, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree, Zantastik. The article adopts a factual tone to describe phenomena that are, to say the least, contestable. Some discussion of contrary views would balance this somewhat. Also, the article opens with detailed trivial facts about his childhood and early adult life: then, out of the blue, casually states "Later, in response to his growing reputation as a worker of miracles..." No account of these alleged miracles is made - let alone of any inquiry into their veracity - despite them being the foundation of his reputation. They are surely more significant in his 1918 life than pretty much any other fact! Deoxyribonucleic acid trip (talk) 21:47, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rubbish?

Herotec! It is true no tricks no acid nothing he is a true man of god! are non-religous? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.241.247.30 (talk) 18:15, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your many, many valuable contributions.
Mdbrownmsw 18:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vatican spectacle: 800,000 reservations, extended to September 2009

Cardinal Jaime Saraiva Martins, prefect for the Congregation for the Causes of the Saints, will celebrate a Mass on April 24, 11a.m. at the Shrine of Holy Mary of Grace, San Giovanni Rotondo, after which the public can view the exhumed remains (from the crypt).[1] Catholic magazine Famiglia Cristiana 2006 poll stated that "more Italian Catholics prayed to Padre Pio than to any other icon, including the Virgin Mary or Jesus". There are 3,000 "Padre Pio Prayer Groups" worldwide, with 3 million members. 750,000 pilgrims worldwide, mostly from Italy, made reservations to view the body up to December, but only 7,200 people a day will file past the crystal coffin.[2] --Florentino floro (talk) 08:19, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

There were accusations that the Vatican was cashing on the tourism aspect of this holy event. So, I researched 4 links and added this, by major revision to include: formalin injection, Gem's London mask, and specifics of display since we have no images here; can anyone UPLOAD image please? May I reproduce the entire 2 sub-sections since, future edits and deletions may not revert these. I found these events and links so important for future researches: On March 3, 2008 the body of Saint Pio was exhumed from his crypt, 40 years after his death, so that his remains could be prepared for display. A church statement described the body as being in "fair condition." Archbishop Domenico D'Ambrosio, papal legate to the shrine in San Giovanni Rotondo, stated "the top part of the skull is partly skeletal but the chin is perfect and the rest of the body is well preserved".[3] He further confirmed that formalin was injected into his body prior to burial to preserve it and his corpse was restored by medical examiners and biochemists. He went on to say that St. Pio's hands "looked like they had just undergone a manicure". It was hoped that morticians would be able to restore the face so that it will be recognizable. However, due to its deterioration, his face was reconstructed (by Gems, a London studio that once supplied Madame Tussauds) with a lifelike silicone (wax) mask to represent his face, complete with beard and bushy eyebrows, because it was too decomposed.[4] Current plans call for Pio's body to be placed in a glass coffin and displayed after April 24th.[5] Archbishop D’Ambrosio confirmed in a communiqué that “the stigmata are not visible.” [6] Cardinal Jaime Saraiva Martins, prefect for the Congregation for the Causes of the Saints, celebrated Mass for 15,000 devotees on April 24, 11 a.m., at the Shrine of Holy Mary of Grace, San Giovanni Rotondo, before the body went on display in a regal crystal, marble and silver sepulcher in the crypt of the monastery.[7] Catholic magazine Famiglia Cristiana 2006 poll stated that "more Italian Catholics prayed to Padre Pio than to any other icon, including the Virgin Mary or Jesus". There are 3,000 "Padre Pio Prayer Groups" worldwide, with 3 million members. 800,000 pilgrims worldwide, mostly from Italy, made reservations to view the body up to December, but only 7,200 people a day will file past the crystal coffin.[8] In his brown monk’s robe and black slippers, Padre Pio is wearing his Capuchin order's brown hood with a crystals and gold embroidered white silk stole on his shoulders, while his hands have a large wooden cross. Officials extended the display through September, 2009.[9][10][11][12] --Florentino floro (talk) 07:28, 26 April 2008 (UTC)