User talk:Sharbel23

Welcome!

Hello, Sharbel23, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions, such as your edit to the page Catherine of Siena, have removed content unnecessarily. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the sandbox rather than in articles.

If you still have questions, there is a new contributors' help page, or you can and someone will be along to answer it shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and how to develop articles
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• Article wizard for creating new articles
• Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! Aristophanes68 (talk) 20:21, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Dispute Resolution

Hi, just a quick note to let you know I've started a dispute resolution process. This will involve third-party editors looking at the discussion and the sources and coming up with a consensus to move forward and end the dispute between a few editors of the Catherine of Siena article. Thanks for your participation in this process! Blessings, Altenmaeren (talk) 17:03, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Do you give out blessings? St Catherine of Siena believed that outside the Catholic church there is no salvation, that God alone is good, that he alone can give blessings and grace, and that He has only founded one Church - one religion on earth, in which human beings can be saved. She believed these things because the Church teaches them. I pray that you humble yourself at the feet of Jesus who is infinite goodness, and learn about traditional Catholicism. Sharbel23 (talk) 20:36, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! I have my personal views on those issues (and have read Unam sanctam), but here on wikipedia I try to do my best to wear my medieval historian hat and contribute as objectively as I can, as a scholar, to a collaborative encyclopedia for general reference -- to be used by those of every faith, or of no faith. I understand and respect that religion is important to many people on a personal level, but that's a different project for a different kind of online resource, I think! May Advent bring you peace! Altenmaeren (talk) 21:37, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

I think your divorcing two things which can't be separated. Your a person with a soul and all your acts need to be consistent. Why on earth are you trying to keep a reference in the St Catherine article which is so outlandish, so obviously controversial even if you don't accept that it is offensive. I reckon that every Catholic I know would think it horribly offensive and outrageous. I would not be arguing the point like I am if it were something which appeared in history and had some precedent in other saints or mystics' lives, or if were some subject which you could find both proponents and opponents of, and therefore you were reasonably entitled to take one side and put it in the article. But this is nothing like that. A particular individual has gotten it into her head to take a text (letter) of St Catherine and just pull a rabbit out of the hat kind of meaning from it which exists nowhere but her head, and you have found that and want to put it into this article for all to see. Do flat-earthers deserve a mention in science articles? No, they're quacks with a ridiculous idea that only exists in their own head. Why you can't see that this is the same here is beyond me. But it's very reprehensible beyond that because it is so offensive and blasphemous, and your being very uncharitable for not happily removing it. It's not as though it's an essential part of St Catherine's story anyway. Sharbel23 (talk) 21:58, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

I understand your frustrations -- please write a summary of your objections for the dispute resolution page, so that a third-party mediator can find a solution that will suit both of us. I don't want to make you even more upset, but please just visit two things that I think shed some light on both the issue of credibility of sources and the issue of uniqueness of topic. (1) -- Agnes Blannbekin -- this wikipedia article on a 14th century Viennese holy woman. As you can quickly see, there's even weirder stuff in 14th century religious culture! (2) -- Racine Dominicans -- this is Suzanne Noffke's monastery's homepage, and has a little article on the right of the page about her. She's a Catholic Dominican nun in Wisconsin. She's the source of the translation for letter #221 we're arguing about. She is a Catholic nun. She does not seem especially upset, or offended, or think her translations of Catherine's works are blasphemous. Please keep these two things in mind as you consider your reaction to the Dispute Resolution process. Altenmaeren (talk) 22:14, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Dear soul, I urge you to be more careful in what you pay heed to. Agnes Blannbekin may have been a real person, or maybe not. If she was, the truth about her is impossible to verify. What comes to us about her comes from a manuscript which was allegedly only released in the 20th century. So it may just be made up. There are many people out there who delight in blasphemy and mockery of Christianity. They are always trying to use pictures, plays, writings, and all sorts of means to throw dirt on Christianity and it's principal personages. I said in an earlier message that I am very familiar with Catholic saints and mystics. I can assure you that in all the lives of true holy souls there are no accounts of anything to do with a foreskin as far as mystical experiences. If there was, it would be known and written about, and many of us would know. What is said about the character Blannbekin is alien to the holy and pure mysticism of true holy souls. I encourage you to read about the tried and true saints - canonized and thus totally trustworthy. Read about true mystics, and when you become familiar with a number of them, you start to see the themes common to them all. Many believe we are in a time of great "falling away" from faith. I don't want to be harsh, but that Noffke and her monastery do not seem like a place I would ever recommend to anyone. After Vatican 2 (1962-1965) most convents went batty and abandoned traditional monastic customs. Only a few true ones remain in the world, the changed ones are dead or dying with just a few older women, because almost no young women are attracted to modernism, but they are attracted to authentic and holy community life, which is why the traditional ones are full of life. I myself was in a traditional monastery in OK for seven months when I was younger and it was very enriching. I encourage you to pray the Rosary of the Blessed Virgin Mary. With the power of her prayers we can overcome all temptations and all obstacles. She will guide you in truth and virtue, and ever lead you to her Son. Sharbel23 (talk) 23:40, 13 December 2015 (UTC)