Jump to content

Talk:Emmanuel Milingo

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Moved old discussion to Archive 1

[edit]

Old discussions for this Talk page (August 2006 - September 2011) are at the Archive 1 page (linked above). --Chonak (talk) 00:53, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disputes about sourcing

[edit]

Editors who wish to challenge the sourcing of information in the article, and especially of quotations in the article, are invited to raise any questions on the Talk page. You can use the "New Section" link on this page to start a new discussion thread. Please follow the Wikipedia principle of assuming good faith. If a quotation is involved, please do not modify the quoted text, if its source is not clear to you. --Chonak (talk) 22:50, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Chonak,

I notice that you have changed it back to "Mr" Milingo. Let me try to explain why I had it changed to "Archbishop MIlingo". You are using the AAS text written in Italian. You have translated it yourself "Sig" as meaning "Mr" as indeed it does. But in fact ,you have made, a sort of unauthorised unofficial translation into english but you should have used the official english translation from the Holy See Press Office. cf. http://visnews-en.blogspot.com/2009/12/communique-milingo-dismissed-from.html In this official and your translation of the Italian text is unofficial and unauthorised I believe you should use this offical english translation from the Vatican Press Office and in it You will see that Milingo is addressed as Archbishop Milingo all throughout the text even referring to him as Archbishop after it referes to the effects of him being reduced to the lay state. Some please, please be charitable and use as the official english translation from the Holy See Press Office does and refer to him as "Archbishop Milingo". Many thanks indeed. And as the Wip art. is in english then it seems logical to use the official Vatican Press Office translation in english too! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haroldjn (talk • contribs) 16:00, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Dear Haroldjn, The Italian statement differs from the English statement in just a few details.
The English version begins: "For a number of years the Church has followed with great concern the difficulties caused by the regrettable conduct of Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo." The Italian begins (my translation): "For several years the Church has followed with particular suffering the developments connected with the unpleasant behaviors of the Archbishop Emeritus of Lusaka, Emmanuel Milingo." Clearly the English translation issued by the Press Office is a little bit free, and there's nothing wrong with that. But people who watch the Vatican know that only what is published in Acta Apostolicae Sedis is authoritative: translations into other languages are merely provided as a convenience. Even if produced by a Vatican office, they shouldn't be relied on if they differ from the authoritative document.
Acta Apostolicae Sedis is the journal by which official acts of the Holy See are published. Publication in AAS is itself a sign that this is a serious statement. Legal acts of the Holy See usually do not go into effect until their publication in AAS.
For these reasons, we should treat the statement in AAS as the authoritative expression from the Holy See and not encourage readers to rely on an English-language counterpart that deviates from it in a few details.
For a compromise, let me propose this: (1) Quote from the English-language statement, including the title "Archbishop" instead of "Mr." (2) Recognize that the statement comes from the Secretary of State and not merely from the Press Office, so that there is no longer any need to call the statement "unsigned". (3) The Secretary's authoritative written statement published in AAS should be distinguished from the oral comments of Fr. Benedettini.
--Chonak (talk) 05:05, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Dear Chonak, Many thank fo your comments. I agree to point (1) that Milingo should be ascribed the title of "Archbishop" as ascribed to him in the english translation.

However, in points (2) and (3) it is clear to me that the statement comes NOT from the Secr. of State Office but rather from the Vatican Press Office. Please see: http://visnews-ita.blogspot.com/2009/12/comunicato-riduzione-stato-laicale.html "CITTA' DEL VATICANO, 17 DIC. 2009 (VIS). La Sala Stampa della Santa Sede ha reso pubblico nella tarda mattinata di oggi il seguente Comunicato".If the Communique would have been from the Secr. of State it would have clearly said so. But it didn't. The first Statement concerning Milingo was issued by the Congreg of Doctrine and Faith and NOT by the Secr. of State. The Sec. of States Office deals with Interntional relations between the foreign states and general matters.If a Congreg. would have issued the statement it would have either been the Congreg. of Bishops or the Congreg. of Faith & Doctrine. And it would have been CLEARLY signed too!Therefore this clearly was a statement that came from the Vatican Press Office and was duely printed in the AAS to make things legal. The explanation of it therefore was down to its authors - ie. the Rev. Ciro, deputy director of the Vatican Press Office. Haroldjn — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.10.83.143 (talk) 15:20, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but to come back to the point again. At the bottem of the above mentioned ref. you will clearly see: "Pubblicato da VIS - Holy See Press Office - giovedì, dicembre 17, 2009". Published by the Vatican Press Office. No reference whatsoever is made indicating that it was published by the Secr. of State. For some reason you seem to given something issed by the Vatican Press Office less importance but its purpose is " Il Vatican Information Service (VIS), istituito nell'ambito della Sala Stampa della Santa Sede, è un bollettino telematico che diffonde notizie relative all'attività magistrale e pastorale del Santo Padre e della Curia Romana... ". The Communique was merely published in the official Italian language in the AAS to legalise its effects. If it were from the Secr. of State it would have been duly signed by him or at least the sub _Secretary of State. If it would have been published by any Congregato it would have been published either by the Congregation of Bishops or the Congregation of Faith & Doctrine as was the case when Milingo attempted to marry.And this document was signed by its Prefect. So I am sorry but I suggest that we will have to maintain that it was an "unsigned communique issued and published by the VIS" (as stated on the above mentioned web page whose Italian is exactly the same as printed in the AAS for legal validity of the act. So it is not therefore perfectly normal that the Rev Ciro who was the Communiques author to present and release it at his Press Conference. Is the author not the best one to explain its significance and meaning etc. best wishes, haroldjan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haroldjn (talk • contribs) 17:53, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

PLEASE SEE: http://press.catholica.va/news_services/bulletin/news/18881.php?index=18881&po_date=26.09.2006&lang=fr#Testo in lingua inglese An unsigned statement clearly from the Vatican Press Office "DICHIARAZIONE DELLA SALA STAMPA DELLA SANTA SEDE SULLA PRESENTE SITUAZIONE ECCLESIALE DELL’ARCIVESCOVO EMMANUEL MILINGO" 2006 Not from the Sec of State!!! The statemnet was no different from the statement also issued by the Vatican Press Office about him being reduced to the lay state - both unsigned!!!!!!!And at least the 2009 communique was published in the AAS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haroldjn (talk • contribs) 18:06, 14 September 2011 (UTC) The 2009 Vatican Press Statement "COMUNICATO DELLA SALA STAMPA DELLA SANTA SEDE: DIMISSIONE DALLO STATO CLERICALE DI EMMANUEL MILINGO" http://press.catholica.va/news_services/bulletin/news/24835.php?index=24835&po_date=17.12.2009&lang=fr#TESTO IN LINGUA ITALIANA The 2006 Declaration entitled: DICHIARAZIONE DELLA SALA STAMPA DELLA SANTA SEDE SULLA PRESENTE SITUAZIONE ECCLESIALE DELL’ARCIVESCOVO EMMANUEL MILINGO". The 2006 Declaration is written clearly in the same language as the 2009 Communique - but they (the Vatican Press office, I think , forgot to publish the 2006 Declaration in the AAS. (I am not absolutely sure about that but think so anyway.) Who can therefore seriously doubt the authorship and origin of both documents!!!!!!!! best wishes,[reply]

Haroldjn — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haroldjn (talk • contribs) 19:02, 14 September 2011 (UTC) Dear Chonak, Hoping that you are well? I had another thought about the matter and it is if the 2006 DICHIARAZIONE of the Vatican Press Office was not published in the AAS (and I think it wasn't but cannot be sure) at least I could not find it on the Vatican achieve site. Something is surely odd- the Costa and Thuc illicit episcopal ordinations and the lefebrve illicit ordinations were condemned directly in a clearily signed document from the Congr. for Doctrine and Faith. Milingo was cautioned about his attempted marriage by the Congret. of Doctrine and Faith in a clearly signed document. BUT the Vatican Press Office were the ones that dealt with the illicit Milingo ordinations and in an unsigned document too. Maybe someone in the Vatican Press Office forgot to send the 2006 Declaration to the Secr of State to be published in the AAS. But if the 2006 Declaration of the Vatican Press Office was not published in the AAS then according to what you have said its contents have no legal effect!!!!!!! Obviously if the Vatican Press Office dealt with the Milingo question in 2006 they are clearly going to see it through to the end. Seems to me that someone in the Vatican Press Office remembered to send the 2009 Communique to the Secr of States Office for publication in the AAS. Here in Brazil were I live, the various government Ministries , Agencies etc have to send all their acts and nominations to the President's Office so they can get published in the Governments Offical Journal callled Gazeta Oficial- only when they are published there they become legelly valid and take effect. Maybe the Holy See did not go through the normal channels because they wanted to leave the 'door open' for Milngo and his bishops, never ever accused of being schismatic. Incidently, even though the illicitly ordained bishops of Lefebrve had their excommunications lifted they are still (like the Milingo bishops) insofar as hey have no canonical mission meaning no fromal legal mission to exercise any ministry. Perhaps this fact should be clearly indicated on the art about Archbishop Milingo. I just want you, Chonak to try and keep the tone of the article as fair as possible without any undue prejudice to Milingo. haroldjn — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haroldjn (talk • contribs) 13:44, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Emmanuel Milingo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:57, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Emmanuel Milingo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:13, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Emmanuel Milingo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:03, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sedevacantist, Protestant, or "Catholic"?

[edit]

There are multiple sources which claim these, specifically of him being a Protestant now after his laicization or him becoming a member of one of the random "Catholic" churches. KEleison (talk) 22:33, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Like which ones? For that matter, do you have a source for his death, so that I do not revert you for the same thing that an IP user was blocked, per WP:BLPREMOVE? Elizium23 (talk) 00:13, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Just searching online brings a bunch of results, but some claim he became a Moonie. Also, there are many sources for his death but not on major news networks. For example, one source I found using Yandex was https://tumfweko.com/2021/02/07/former-catholic-archbishop-emmanuel-milingo-dies/ KEleison (talk) 00:29, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also, Mwebantu Zambian News Network reported his death as well. KEleison (talk) 00:37, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

His death has been publicly denied. He is in hospital but hopefully getting better. --79.24.121.9 (talk) 11:11, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
[citation needed] Elizium23 (talk) 18:54, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Here it is the official denial. And he is recovering even faster than expected. --79.24.121.9 (talk) 19:06, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not a WP:RS. Neither is tumfweko.com. So far I have seen no RS with any news. Elizium23 (talk) 19:51, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The Zambian Observer is a reliable source. He is still in hospital, but better. And in any case, that's you who needs to have reliable sources for his death, which aren't there beucause it is utter fake news.--79.24.121.9 (talk) 19:51, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Emmanuel_Milingo&oldid=1211942317"