Talk:Pope Clement VI

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 07:53, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Protecting the Jews
I made a small edit deleting the statement that the Bulls had little effect because persecution continued for more than 3 months after they were issued. Consider how long it would have taken for the news to spread in plague devastated 14th century Europe. At this time, I can't find the actual bulls but in addition to urging the bishops priests and monks to protect the Jews they also 1- forbid forced conversion, 2- threatened excommunication for those attaching Jews, and 3- supressed the organized groups most responsible for the pogroms. Nitpyck (talk) 15:33, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Astronomy
"Jehan de Murs was among the team "of three who drew up a treatise explaining the plague of 1348 by the conjunction of Saturn, Jupiter, and Mars in 1341" (Tomasello, 15)."

I looked up what was happening in 1341, and saw that on February 25, there was a conjunction of Saturn, Mars, Venus, and the moon (and Neptune but Neptune didn't exist in 1341), but Jupiter was in an other part of the sky.

96.247.131.58 (talk) 20:51, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

The date of 1341 is indeed wrong. The Jupiter/Saturn/Mars conjunction was in 1345, and had been discussed 200 years earlier by the Jewish scholar Abraham bar Hiyya. The Pope did not invite Jean de Murs and Levi ben Gerson to his court in 1348 to explain the plague - he invited them prior to 1345, before the plague had broken out, to ask them to write a prognostication for the upcoming 1345 conjunction.

The confusion is probably because the Medical Faculty of the University of Paris ordered an investigation in 1348 into the cause of the Black Death, and concluded it was the conjunction of Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn in 1345.

LeicesterChris (talk) 13:44, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Petrarch
I look at this article in amazement, noting that it contains not a word about Petrarch, who provides first-hand information about the figures of the Papal Court, and was the greatest literary artist of his day. A damaging omission. --Vicedomino (talk) 11:33, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Others did not know how to be pope
I am removing the following sentence from the article, "Upon election as pope he exclaimed as he looked forward to a reign of regal self-indulgence: "My predecessors did not know how to be pope."[citation needed] I found the origin of the quote, in the 'Life of Clement VI' by Peter of Herenthal [Baluze Vitae Paparum Avinionensium I, p. 298.   However, the context attaches the statement to a criticism of his predecessors, who too sparingly reserved for their own use the appointment to vacant bishoprics, prelacies, monasteries, etc.  It is not a statement about his intended mode of life, like Leo X's, "God has given us the papacy; let us enjoy it."  As used in the article, the statement is tendentious and provocative.   --Vicedomino (talk) 03:11, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

The Lead is still inadequate
The material in the Lead about music is interesting trivia, but not reflective of his job as Pope or his impact on Church policy. The remark about granting absolution to those dead of the plague is part of his job, admittedly, but not a major part of the difficulties that faced him during the Black Death. This trivia should be removed (not a problem, as it is duplicated elsewhere in the article), and some attempt at summing up his Pontificate (not derived from the Catholic Encyclopedia) should be substituted. --Vicedomino (talk) 15:19, 31 August 2017 (UTC)