Talk:Óscar Romero

message: The notability of the subject is questioned.  Oscar Romero is the subject of a statue at Westminster Abbey in London, putting him in the company of William Shakespeare and Winston Churchill (two others honored there).  He was cited by Pope Benedict during his Angelus address on March 25 because March 24, the date of Romero's death has become a worldwide Catholic holiday.  There is a movie about Romero ("Romero," 1989), and he was portrayed in four other movies, including Oliver Stone's "Salvador."  Pope John Paul II twice visited his grave.  The National Catholic Reporter wrote that "no saint-in-waiting figures more prominently than Oscar Romero."  (John Allen, The Word from Rome, NCR, October 17, 2003.).  Romero is listed in the book 100 Spiritual Leaders Who Shaped World History, Bluewood Books (2001), written by Samuel Crompton, alongside Jesus, St. Paul, Muhammad, Moses, Confucius, the Buddha, Confucius, St. Francis, and ohers.  He was listed among the "Top 100 Catholics of the Twentieth Century."  On and on and on.
The published material about Romero is too lengthy to compile.  There is an outdated list available at:
http://www.mbeaw.org/resources/voices/romero.html
In short, my question to Wikipedia is this.  In light of the foregoing, why should this question NOT be immediately taken off the table? (Note: the "What links here" tab alone denotes the hundreds of other Wikipedia articles that reference Romero and would be left "orphaned" if this story was deleted.")  Carlos Carlos_X 02:00, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Carlos; I've gone and removed the notice. It would seem like the user Dangerous Boy is going around to every Catholicism- and Christianity-related article he can find and adding the 'non-notable' notice to them. Other examples include Roman Catholicism in Sudan, Christianity in Eritrea, Roman Catholicism in Portugal and even Bishop of Kensington. By the looks of it he's been on this trolling rampage all month. Knyght27 01:43, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not "notable"??? 

message: "While Romero has not been canonized by the Roman Catholic Church, which has not given support to liberation theology, he is recognized as a saint by the Church of England."
No he hasn't. The Church of England does not canonize saints. DJ Clayworth 21:40, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree entirely. What is there now is fine. (And interesting. I didn't know he was commemorated that way). DJ Clayworth 17:44, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)

text: as much as I love the memory of the man, he has not been declared a Saint by the Catholic Church.  That category should be removed.Richardson mcphillips (talk) 15:59, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Romero simpy not a saint in the Church's view 

message: SqueakBox, on the one hand I agree that an explanation of liberation theology belongs in liberation theology, on the other Romero does appear to be associated with it and I think at least a few lines should be incorporated in the article saying what it is, tying it to the Salvadoran situation. In theory, hyperlinks make any kind of redundancy in articles superfluous; in practice, I think a small amount of overlap is acceptable and useful. The concept has fallen out of fashion and unlike, say, "capitalism", I doubt that everyone knows what it is. I am going to think about how to best integrate something about it into this article. -- Viajero 13:29, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  On liberation theology 

message: after witnessing numerous violations of human rights, began to speak out on behalf of the poor and the victims of his country's long and bloody civil war. This brought him into conflict with both the right-wing paramilitary death squads and with the hierarchy of the Catholic Church.
:Speaking out on behalf of the poor did not bring Romero into conflict with the Catholic Church.  Promoting Marxism as a means of helping the poor did.
Please source your claim that Romero promoted Marxism? --SqueakBox 22:01, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)
:I'll take back my claim that Romero promoted Marxism personally.  But it is much more likely that the he came into conflict with the Church because of his association with liberation theologians who did promote Marxism, than that the source of the conflict was merely that he "spoke out on behalf of the poor."  If this were the source of the conflict between the Church and Romero, then the Church would have also been in conflict with Mother Theresa.
How do you propose to change the text so we can have an NPOV and remove the notice of partiality?  --SqueakBox 00:16, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)
:How about this?:
::Óscar Arnulfo Romero y Goldámez (August 15, 1917 – March 24, 1980) was a prominent Roman Catholic Archbishop from El Salvador who, after witnessing numerous violations of human rights, began to speak out on behalf of the poor and the victims of his country's long and bloody civil war. His political activism brought him into conflict with both the right-wing paramilitary death squads and with the hierarchy of the Catholic Church. -- Temtem 18:53, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)
How about "this political activism"?
--SqueakBox 19:32, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)
:The problem with that is its implication that the political activism was limited to speaking out on behalf of the poor.  I think it would be better to leave the matter open in the introduction and describe the political activism in the body of the article.  -- Temtem 19:36, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)
Well I don't object to it's (his political activism) insertion. Don't know what others may think. If you put this in will you also remove the POV or are their other biases too?  --SqueakBox 19:42, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)
:I for one can live with this formulation. I am curious though how Temtem thinks Romero went beyond just "speaking out". You imply that it went much further than this. -- Viajero 19:53, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Good, glad we could resolve this. -- Viajero 21:28, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  bias 

message: This article makes two mutually exclusive statements about when during his last Mass, Archbishop Romero was assassinated. 
The first occurs during the Introduction, which says that "In 1980, he was assassinated by gunshot while consecrating the Eucharist during mass."
The second occurs during the Archbishop portion, which says that "While celebrating mass at a small chapel near his cathedral, Romero was shot to death while he was giving a sermon in which he called for soldiers to disobey orders that violated basic human rights."
I do not know exactly which version is correct, though I surmise that it is a minor incongruity between the two and that Arbishop Romero was assassinated while consecrating the Eucharist after he had given a homily calling for soldiers to disobey orders that violated human rights.
For those of you that are unsure why these events are necessarily mutually exclusive, it is that the Consecration of the Eucharist is a totally and completely distinct part, action, and ritual of the Mass from the Homily or Sermon. 
I hope that someone with more knowledge than I can correct this.
140.247.179.161 20:03, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discrepancy as to Time of Death 

message: What about the sentence saying John Paul II supported non-democratic governments in the sole purpose of containing communism? It would be important to have the source of such information.
Agreed and removed. For the second time, I might add, SqueakBox 00:21, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Pope statement

message: Is there a source for statement that "May God have mercy on the assassins" were his last words?  I tried to verify this but was unable.  If someone can find a source for this, please cite it.  Otherwise I will remove the quote from the article. 134.173.94.191 20:07, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Sources?

message: Is there a colour picture?  --Daniel C. Boyer 01:09, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Coat of arms

message: What about the play the Fifth Sun written about Oscar Romero?-Giant89 17:19, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Fifth Sun 

message: I propose to repace the second paragraph of the canonization section (which I wrote last year) with the following one:
Twenty six years after Romero's assassination, the canonization cause is stalled.  In March 2005, Monsignor Vincenzo Paglia, the Vatican official in charge of the drive, announced that Romero's cause had cleared an unprecedented hurdle, having survived a theological audit by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, at the time headed by no other than Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger -- the future Pope Benedict XVI -- and that beatification could follow within six months.  FN1.  Dramatically, Pope John Paul II died within weeks of those remarks, and the transition to a new Pontiff slowed down the work of canonizations and beatifications.  Moreover, the new pontiff, Pope Benedict XVI, instituted liturgical changes that had the overall effect of reigning in the Vaticans' so-called "factory of saints."  FN2.  Later that year, an October 2005 interview by Cardinal Jose Saraiva Martins, the Prefect of the Congregation for the Causes of Saints, appeared to put the kibosh on the prospect of an impending Romero beatification. Asked if Msgr. Paglia's predictions checked out, Cardinal Saraiva snipped, "Not as far as I know today."  FN3.  In November 2005, a Jesuit magazine whose contents must meet Vatican approval signaled that Romero's beatification was still "years away."  FN4.
FN1.  http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=35989
FN2.  http://time-proxy.yaga.com/time/archive/preview/0,10987,1059021,00.html
FN3.  http://www.30giorni.it/us/articolo.asp?id=9359
FN4.  http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0506300.htm
168.98.32.21 18:05, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New canonization update paragraph 

message: Does anyone know, is this the bust on the UCA campus in San Salvador, just outside the Museo? Gershonw 05:16, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo of the Bust 

message: The current article goes past the funeral info so briefly (not even using the word "funeral") that at first I thought it had been omitted completely. I'll be editing in a moment to try and flesh out that amazing part of the story.  I hope others will supplement the item as time goes on.Lawikitejana 02:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The funeral needs more info

message: I am sorry but this article is not sourced. Please fully source it using WP:RS, secondary reliable sources(does Britannica Encyclopedia has an article on him? that might be useful) and then nominate it for "Good Article" status. Thanks --Aminz 10:13, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA failed 

message: Hi, I found this article requesting copy editing on the LOCE page. Anyway, I'm about halfway done but must go to the office now to do some 'real' work....however, I find this topic fascinating as I studied a bit of Latin American history in school (years ago) and would like to see it eventually promoted to GA status. However, there are significant chunks of text without sources and direct quotes lacking references as well. I'm also concerned about NPOV. I tagged all as appropriate.  
As I said, I would love to see this article get up to GA (I remember reading a fascinating ....so, I will try and finish the copy edit later today and take a look at finding some sources. Let me know if there is more that I can do to help :) Thanks! Lazulilasher (talk) 13:10, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed "and his blood spilled onto the altar with the contents of the chalice". It's a bit too mystical for an encyclopedia article. It doesn't help that the entire sentence describing his death is not cited.  --94.76.220.9 (talk) 14:10, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  That seems reasonable.  The movie Romero (film) depicts it that way, and perhaps that is the source of this statement.  I believe that it is established that he was shot while elevating the chalice (although I agree that a footnote with source would be good).  The movie is by and large historical with regard to Romero's life (some of the minor characters are fictional, probably because the actual people were still living).  But I don't consider the film to be a reliable source when it comes to specific cinematic details such as this.  (If I had to guess, I would think that the contents of the chalice mostly landed on the altar, but if Romero fell backward his own blood would have ended up on the floor.  But that's my guess.) — Lawrence King (talk) 16:34, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copy Edit/Notes 

message: :Image:Shield01.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 05:30, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Shield01.jpg

message: At the start it says he was born on 25 August - then in Childhood it says 15 August. Which is right? Culnacreann (talk) 18:58, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date of Birth? 

message: I found this weird website that attempts to link the persecution of Latin American jesuits with the early death of John Paul I. I don't subsribe to any of it, but it is still intriguing to read anyways.  ADM (talk) 03:49, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: John Paul I conspiracy

message: I find it somewhat problematic, at least from a technical point of view, to list many of the murdered El Salvador clergy as martyrs, since many of their assasins were themselves CINOs (Catholics in name only). If we were to follow that logic, then the murder of Yitzhak Rabin in Israel would also have to be considered a form of martyrdom in the Jewish tradition, Rabin having been killed by an extremist Jew. This is of course different from typical cases of martyrdom, where religious believers are killed by non-believing persecutors, such as in the French Revolution and in the Spanish Civil War, where fanatical Masonic forces ordered the killings of priests and nuns. ADM (talk) 04:40, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: With regard to Catholic terminology:  I disagree.  Under canon law, someone baptized a Catholic remains a Catholic unless they make some kind of public renunciation of their faith.  Therefore, it follows that a significant number of the people in the French Revolution and Spanish Civil War who killed bishops, priests, nuns, and lay faithful were themselves canonically Catholic -- in other words, they came from Catholic families and had been baptized as infants, even though later in life they may have become atheists or agnostics or whatever.  And yet Catholic usage recognizes their victims as martyrs.  So I don't see why a priest murdered by a member of a Salvadoran death squad isn't equally a martyr, even if his killer was baptized as a Catholic.  With regard to Wikipedia:  I don't think that Wikipedia articles should be judging who is a martyr and who is not.  That's a POV judgment.  Of course, Wikipedia can (and in notable cases, should) report that a certain person has been officially pronounced a martyr by some church or organization, or that a certain person is widely regarded as a martyr by some group of people -- because this can be asserted with NPOV. — Lawrence King (talk) 16:40, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Catholics killing Catholics

message: The Assassination and funeral section of this article mentions the Doe v. Rafael Saravia case that was decided in the Eastern California US District court. I've been scouring the net for a copy of the Doe v. Rafael Saravia, 348 F. Supp. 2d 1112 (E.D. Cal. 2004) opinion and cannot find it. However, I found a summary procedings of that case through the site derechos.org. Enderandpeter (talk) 05:53, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: On the Doe v. Rafael Saravia case

message: As far as I can tell, the Romero mentioned in the Josh Ritter song (Harrisburg) referenced at the bottom of the article is not Oscar Romero.  Yet perhaps there's some potential poetical interpretation that I can't figure out.  Can anyone see any justification for the link?Prhodian (talk) 00:43, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Josh Ritter song?

message: An innocent reader, coming to this article, would remain entirely unaware that, prior to his assassination, Romero was heavily criticized by Pope John Paul II on a number of occasions and told, inter alia, to cooperate with the right-wing authorities in El Salvador.  Some accounts describe him as being "humiliated" during at least one of his visits to the Vatican.  
I can imagine that the absence of such a discussion might be "no accident".  Anyone know if these matters were previously covered and then edited out?  Anyone immediately on top of this material and in a position to rectify the omission?  Nandt1 (talk) 00:54, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Disappointing that this aspect still remains unaddressed. Nandt1 (talk) 07:27, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Romero and Rome -- a Missing Discussion

message: Despite claims otherwise, Oscar Romero was opposed to Liberation Theology and developed his own theology, with important differences. There was never a "ban" on his beatification process. Its a process that sometimes takes time and despite some questions concerning his beatification there was never an open oposition of Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI to Oscar Romero beatification. I can quote from this link  : "Articles in the news about a rapprochement between the Vatican and Liberation Theology tend to link the that development with news about a breakthrough in the beatification cause of Archbishop Oscar Romero, assassinated in El Salvador in 1980, and deeply linked with the defense of the poor. Although Romero’s name is often associated with the controversial Catholic movement in Latin America, the relationship between the man and the movement is ... complicated.  Here are 5 essential things to understand (and #4 is probably the most important). (...)/ Romero knew that a Vatican correction of Liberation Theology was on the way.  In July 1978, Romero told the faithful that there would be “revisions in Liberation Theology” following Pope John Paul’s visit to Mexico the following year, and Romero warned in his last pastoral letter, issued in August 1979, against a politicized version of Liberation Theology that could render its Christian content “ambiguous,” echoing concerns laid out by John Paul./ (...) Romero’s understanding of Liberation Theology was consistent with Card. Ratzinger’s distinctions between orthodox and heterodox strands.  “Let it be known that I study Liberation Theology through solid theologians, such as Cardinal [Eduardo] Pironio, who currently is the prefect of one of the Pope’s congregations, a man who enjoys the full confidence of the Pope,” Romero said in 1977 (Card. Pironio, an Argentine, shared the ‘folk theology’ used by his compatriot Card. Bergoglio; he was appointed Pro-Prefect of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life by Paul VI and President of the Pontifical Council for the Laity by John Paul II).  Romero’s views of Liberation Theology were also informed by the Opus Dei theologian José María Casciaro, the Franciscan friar Buenaventura Kloppenburg, and the CELAM missionary Segundo Galilea. Romero never references Liberation Theologians such as Leonardo Boff, Gustavo Gutiérrez, Manuel Pérez or Carlos Mugica.  He did not read books on Liberation Theology that he received as gifts while he was archbishop (they were found in their sealed wrappers after his death)./ (...)  Romero cared deeply for the poor and in this he broke bread with Liberation Theology, but he got there through a separate and independent route.  As early as 1941, while he was still a seminary student (and long before Liberation Theology was conceived), Romero wrote that, “The poor are the incarnation of Christ. Through their tattered clothing, their dark gazes, their festering sores, the laughter of the mentally ill ... the charitable soul discovers and venerates Christ.”  [MORE.] He was influenced by his study of asceticism, which pushed him to embrace poverty and discipline. [MORE.]  He was also influenced by the Church Fathers: Fr. Thomas Greenan places Romero “in the patristic episcopal tradition” of St. Basil and St. Ambrose.  Romero’s vicar remembers Romero quoting St. John Chrysostom (“Do you want to honor the body of Christ? Don't ignore Him then, when you find him naked in the poor.”), and in his homilies Romero quoted St. Irenaeus and St. Augustine. [MORE.]  Finally, Romero was profoundly influenced by the social magisterium of the modern popes.// The Church is not going to beatify Romero because it has decided to go easy on trends it formerly deemed to be in error.  Romero, too, recognized that the Liberation Theology movement was adrift and would have been happy to see it guided safely back to port.  Romero himself, however, was able to navigate the treacherous waters and never lose his way."Mistico (talk) 16:32, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Oscar Romero was never a supporter of Liberation Theology

message: This article adresses the question if Oscar Romero beatification process in the Vatican was ever blocked and it concludes by the negative: Mistico (talk) 16:38, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Oscar Romero beatification process was never blocked

message: Substituted at 11:22, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Óscar Romero. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090215012939/http://www.cja.org/cases/romero.shtml to http://www.cja.org/cases/romero.shtml
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:44, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Óscar Romero. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150203182233/http://www.microsofttranslator.com/BV.aspx?ref=IE8Activity&a=http%3A%2F%2Fpress.vatican.va%2Fcontent%2Fsalastampa%2Fen%2Fbollettino%2Fpubblico%2F2015%2F02%2F03%2F0089%2F00190.html to http://www.microsofttranslator.com/BV.aspx?ref=IE8Activity&a=http%3A%2F%2Fpress.vatican.va%2Fcontent%2Fsalastampa%2Fen%2Fbollettino%2Fpubblico%2F2015%2F02%2F03%2F0089%2F00190.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151012220701/http://romeroinstitute.org/about-us/our-name to http://romeroinstitute.org/about-us/our-name
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100326050411/http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/teks/social/AlphabetizedList_such_as.pdf to http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/teks/social/AlphabetizedList_such_as.pdf
*Added archive https://archive.is/20090923015917/http://www.ploughbooks.co.uk/english/the-violence-of-love.html to http://www.ploughbooks.co.uk/english/the-violence-of-love.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:29, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The article says "was canonized" but the article written 4 days ago says "is to be canonized".  I suppose the man was canonized, but we need a link to an article that says that, not just a proposed action. --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 12:22, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  canonization link 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:36, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:06, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: Content added by  has been removed from this article for copyright reasons. In spite of warning, the individual using this IP has persisted in copying content from copyrighted sources without compatible licensing to Wikipedia. Please do not restore any removed text without first ensuring that the text does not duplicate, closely paraphrase or plagiarize from a previously published source, whether the one cited or another (issues have been detected from other sources than those named). Based on the editing pattern of this person, we cannot make the assumption that the content is usable. You are welcome to use sourced facts that may have been removed to create new content in your own words or to incorporate brief quotations of copyrighted material in accordance with the non-free content policy and guideline. See Wikipedia:Copy-paste and Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/67.184.212.160. Thank you. -- 💵Money💵emoji💵💸 01:45, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright cleanup

message: The article mentions that "In 2008, Europe-based magazine A Different View included Romero among its 15 Champions of World Democracy.[9]". Are we sure that this magazine exists? if it's Europe-based and in English, is it in the UK, Ireland or Malta? If it does, does it have a website? Should there be a page for it? I couldn't find out anything about it. Maybe it's a small publisher. In that case, the country of origin would be helpful.
Ballystrahan (talk) 20:01, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Two very peculiar things. The IP editor, , made a total of 18 edits in 90 minutes in 2008. Every single one of them was to add A Different View to articles. There used to be an article by that name: see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Different View. It was not for a European periodical. I say this smells strongly of a hoax and can safely be removed due to failing WP:V. Thank you for your due diligence on this. Elizium23 (talk) 20:53, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Glad to help. Thank you for following up on this! Ballystrahan (talk) 20:39, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

text: I think it does… thank you for your insightful words of wisdom my friend. Keep being your amazing self always and beat haters with positive words 2600:1700:3870:9C00:91A6:52ED:3F84:E852 (talk) 21:09, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does "A Different View" magazine exist? 

message: The Infobox lists Óscar Romero as a member of TOCarm. I could find nothing to substantiate this claim anywhere. Even the official website of the Carmelites, while paying homage to Saint Óscar, does not claim he was a proper Carmelite. 2804:14D:4CD1:93ED:0:0:0:3238 (talk) 16:34, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Checks out, yes; it says he wore the Brown Scapular, which is not the same as Third Order membership. Perhaps @Bendi07 can offer an explanation. I'll remove it. Elizium23 (talk) 17:03, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Carmelite? 

message: English speakers disagree on how to handle accent marks in words/names from other languages.  What is the "official" Wikipedia policy?  I personally agree with using the spelling of the source language as has been done here, but I notice that a link to this page still works with the diacritic omitted.  Should the mark be added to that link? 伟思礼 (talk) 14:14, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spelling