User talk:ArtNouveau1900

November 2020
Hello, I'm Donner60. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Word on Fire seemed less than neutral to me, so I removed it for now. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Donner60 (talk) 23:25, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

I disagree. As someone whose expertise is in Catholic history, I have noticed a consistent pattern in Wikipedia of ultra-conservative Catholics patrolling every entry involving Catholics and putting a right-wing spin on it. If you will look at the publication that I describe as right-wing, The Church Militant, you will see that it is extremely right wing! No one who is a post-Vatican II Catholic would support this crap. Similarly, the editor of the entry before me makes claims about Catholic teaching on Adam & Eve which are simply not true. Catholics do not claim that these were real persons. Catholics are not Biblical literalists, and understand the book of Genesis to be an allegory about the creation of the world, not a literal presentation of it. Regarding the mission of Jesus, it is the constant drumbeat of the Church Militant crowd that Jesus' mission was only about your individual soul (actually a Protestant notion!), not any type of social outreach. So, I am intending to shift the balance to a more authentic interpretation of Catholic social teaching and Bible hermeneutics. ArtNouveau1900 (talk) 23:40, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I'm Luigi Albert Maria, the previous editor of the Word on Fire voice. I decided to add a paper from Church Militant because it is the only source I found to discuss in detail and with proper citations, from both the series and biblical and magisterial documents, some controversial aspects of the Catholicism series that were underlined by other reviewers. As far as I can tell, all the objections raised by the author of the paper were sound and supported by ample proofs, reflecting the authentic Catholic magisterium concerning the topics discussed. If you could point to another paper with counter-arguments for those brought by the author, I would be glad to read it. As for your criticisms, they seem to contradict the teaching of the Church about the issues that you cited. For example, Pope Pius XII clarified in Humani Generis that Adam and Eve were real people, who were personally responsible for the original sin. Moreover the same pope explained that the first books of the Bible, while they can't be properly called historical books, however "pertain to history in a true sense". As for the mission of Jesus, your interpretation seems to distort the arguments of the author of the paper. Luigi Albert Maria (talk) 20:00, 18 November 2020 (UTC)