Talk:Pope

New Eliakim section

The New Eliakim section seems overdone. Firstly, I think it's weird that it's above the section on the "election, death, and resignation" of the pope, given its lower importance. Secondly, the whole section has only one citation not to the Bible. The citation is supposed to substantiate the claim that the Catholic church teaches that the pope is the new Eliakim, but goes to an apologetics blog that isn't run by the church (instead it's Catholic Answers (https://www.catholic.com/about), which is "an independent, lay-run apostolate... [that doesn't] ask for—nor receive—financial support from the Vatican, any diocese or bishops conference, or any other organization that is part of the institutional Catholic Church"). IMO, if it's to persist, it should be moved down the page and revamped with better sourcing. 184.23.20.208 (talk) 18:38, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

Alternatively, maybe the New Eliakim argument should have its own page? 184.23.20.208 (talk) 18:41, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

I agree. This topological interpretation of Eliakim has come up here and there (e.g., https://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/homilies/2012/documents/hf_ben-xvi_hom_20120629_pallio.html), but it's not something that Church has included in her Catechism or defined in a more formal way. It's given too much prominence here as though it were a major teaching about the papacy. Prosequor (talk) 15:43, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

I'd like to add that the picture show is not of the steward/chancellor Eliakim, but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eliakim,_son_of_Abiud Robert.E.Riley (talk) 02:07, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

Misty

Hello,pope and Vatican!I need some extra love I hope you remember me.Love Misty.I Love you and need you now. 2600:6C4C:6FF0:81B0:70A4:7D5C:94D6:9E80 (talk) 01:57, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

K 2600:6C4C:6FF0:81B0:70A4:7D5C:94D6:9E80 (talk) 01:58, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Visible head

@Johnbod and I seem to having a very weird argument. It started with me being confused by the wording of the lede: why is the Pope the "visible head" and not just the "head" of the Church? Googling led me to Head of the Church#Catholic_Church which nicely explains the distinction. So I linked it. Johnbod reverted my change, saying it wasn't a useful link. There was a strange little back and forth where the goalposts shifted a couple times until he was saying, OK, you can have your link, but you have to change "visible head" to "head on Earth." He has not explained why.

I guess either term will do, but I really would like an explanation as to why the change is necessary. "Visible head" is more popular historically. The term is used elsewhere in the article and in the article I linked. It's been the wording in this article for a long time, and wasn't seen as a problem before Johnbod decided he didn't like my link.

Tagging @EXANXC and @Graham11 since they recently made edits to the lede. Isaac Rabinovitch (talk) 23:36, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

The linked graph is interesting but I think we need some RSs that address this. I'm currently separated from Donald Attwater's Dictionary, but I'll check an OUP primer on the church for their preferred terminology later tonight. ~ Pbritti (talk) 00:20, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

User:Isaac Rabinovitch, it wasn't seen as a problem (apparently) until YOU saw it as a problem! Now you complain about my efforts to make it clearer. That something has been on Wikipedia for years is the weakest of all arguments. But I'm glad you have finally decided to take it to talk rather than edit war. "Visible head" and "head on Earth" are certainly two ways of saying the same thing. The question is which is less likely to throw a reader -frankly this rather than, at the start of the lead, what is "preferred terminology" if that needs explaining in what is already a WP:SEAOFBLUE. Your own edit summaries: "The visibility thing is unclear to us non-Christians" and "if you're not acquainted with Catholic theology, you don't know watch "visible head" means" make it clear that "visible head" doesn't work for you, & I can't blame you. Either way, an explanatory note is probably better than sending the reader off to another article. But don't worry, if I see you in confusion in the future, I'll be careful not to attempt to help you! Johnbod (talk) 01:45, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

"The term "head on earth" is misleading as it suggests Christ is only the head of the Church in Heaven and not on earth. According to Catholic teaching, Christ is also the "invisible head" of the Church on earth, while the Pope is the "visible head" of the Church on earth. The linked article also states the same thing, so it's better to change "head on earth" to "visible head" and link it to the other article.

Mystici Corporis Christi "For Peter in view of his primacy is only Christ's Vicar; so that there is only one chief Head of this Body, namely Christ, who never ceases Himself to guide the Church invisibly, though at the same time He rules it visibly, through him who is His representative on earth [pope]."

Baltimore Catechism No. 3

"Q. 495. {116} Who is the invisible Head of the Church? A. Jesus Christ is the invisible Head of the Church.

Q. 496. {117} Who is the visible Head of the Church? A. Our Holy Father the Pope, the Bishop of Rome, is the Vicar of Christ on earth and the visible Head of the Church." EXANXC (talk) 03:37, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Well, whatever. I still think an explanatory note here is needed, to avoid puzzling readers (including the vast majority of Catholics, whose education won't have got them as far a Question 496). Johnbod (talk) 16:45, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

This is an article lede, which needs to be uncluttered. I share your dislike of SOB links, but I don't think this counts as one. Isaac Rabinovitch (talk) 16:56, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Silver hammer

The article states that it is 'reportedly' customary to prove a Pope is dead by tapping him on the forehead with a silver hammer, while calling out his Christian name. However, the Snopes article linked in the footnote lists this as unproven, and other articles regarding the practice seem to point to it being entirely a fictional ritual. Should the ambiguity not be made more clear, or the article amended to to suggest that such a ritual is simply a rumour with little backing? 81.109.89.141 (talk) 04:11, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 September 2024

Change "Pope Francis in 2021" in the line in the info-box just under the image to "Pope Francis in 2021" for easier redirecting for people who found this article while looking for the article for the current pope. AxelTrold (talk) 14:48, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

 Done NotAGenious (talk) 16:52, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

@ 2001:D08:1B92:87BD:75F0:3220:14F5:2E50 (talk) 19:08, 22 September 2024 (UTC)