Talk:Bernadette Soubirous/Archive 1

Someone without a Wikipedia account wrote this:

 The miraculous spring of Bernadette no longer flows, and water is being piped in
 from the municipal water supplies.

I have written to the Lourdes Bureau to ask about this and get verification, and meanwhile put it here. While I am aware that work was done on the rock from which Bernadette's spring flows back in the mid- to late 80s, this was done to help the spring flow more freely and was very much in the spirit of the masons and millers, including Bernadette's dad, who worked on the original guttering and catchbasin for the water as it came up from the hole she dug, as (she said) at her Lady's request. --Bluejay Young 01:13, 17 December 2005 (UTC

Okay, here's what I got from the Bureau this afternoon: "During the winter we stop few tabs [she means taps], because the temperature are to cold and the risk is the tabs could be frozen .Sincerely Yours, Service Accueil, Dominique" Well, I can certainly understand that. Still looking for verification about the municipal water being substituted for spring water. --Bluejay Young 01:44, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

• As a non-believer I found this article, although well-written and interesting, extremely biased, favoring a Catholic believer-in-miracles point of view. Only a devout Catholic would be convinced by the story and by such statements as " her body was found to be "incorrupt" — preserved from decomposition, perhaps by supernatural means." It is sad to see this sort of thing on Wikipedia and adds to the the feeling that is growing in the academic world that Wikipedia cannot be taken seriously. Unfortunately I have only one source to consult--Lourdes: body and spirit in the secular age by Ruth Harris and available through Penguin-and it is not available online. The book is scholarly, impeccably researched, and readable. Above all, it is without either religious or secularist bias, unlike the article here. rvogensen 16:18 18 December 2005 GMT

I did say "perhaps". You seem to think that my reportage means that I am "convinced" of anything. I am convinced that the events occurred; they're a matter of historic record as you well know. Whether or not any of it was of supernatural origin is a matter of speculation. I have tried to be very careful to say "Bernadette reported" or "she said this happened." I'll go through it again and make sure I've got them all.

Your concept that "only devout Catholics" (I am nothing of the sort) would fall for what you think is an obviously falsified story shows that while you may have some background info, it isn't enough. The preservation of dead bodies is a historical fact. It's usually something in the ground or climate conditions. Catholics are free to believe or disbelieve that some, not all of these preservations are divine intervention.

I'm getting a little tired of seeing reportage on this type of event denigrated as "sad" or "pathetic". Reporting that some people believe that this event was for real is not an indication that the writer himself believes that way. If you want to take over the article and rewrite it, this is Wikipedia. Be careful not to include your own biases, which have no more place in Wikipedia than mine do. My interest in Bernadette has little to do with religion and more to do with the way women were perceived at the time. --Bluejay Young 01:44, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

The changes of Barbara Shack

Dear Barbara, I reverted your changes because it is not useful to delete a whole paragraph. The paragraph of the exhumation is very useful. I made a few changes in order to secure the neutral viewpoint. If you want to make more changes please discuss them first. --Benedikt 10:15, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Barbara Shack 16:45, 17 February 2006 (UTC)I added natural explanations to make the article more neutral and more informative.

Dear Barbara, you made several changes. I changed the first in the main paragraph to make it more clear. I removed the link because firstly it doesn't deal with the person Bernadette and secondly it is inappropriate to have a critical link in the first paragraph of an article.

I deleted the second change because its content was already in that paragraph.

I also deleted the part about the body preservation because its content is about preservation in general and not about the preservation of the body of Bernadette Soubirous. The article already says that Bernadette preserved body received a wax mask in 1925. There was no other preservation on her body. That you use the link to hiddenmysteries.org a second time could be considered as spam. Please stop inserting discussed and removed paragraphs again and again without discussion. -- Benedikt 08:03, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Why NOV

Barbara Shack 12:24, 18 February 2006 (UTC)I left the article as follows:-

==Bernadette's body exhumed==

Her body was first exhumed on September 2 1909, in the presence of representatives appointed by the postulators of the cause, two doctors, and a sister of the community. Although the crucifix in her hand and the rosary had both oxidized, her body was found to be "incorrupt" — preserved from decomposition. This was one of the miracles cited for support of her canonization. Her body was washed and reclothed before burial in a new double casket.

The corpse was exhumed a second time on April 3 1919. The body was found to be still preserved. There was slight discoloration of the face which has been explained as being due to the washing process of the first exhumation.

In 1925, relics were taken from her body and a wax mask was applied to the face and the remains were then placed in a gold and glass reliquary in the Chapel of Saint Bernadette at the motherhouse in Nevers. The site is visited by many pilgrims.

She received Beatification in 1925 and Canonization in 1933 under Pope Pius XI, not so much for the content of her visions, but rather for her simplicity and holiness of life. She is the patron saint of sick persons and of Lourdes. In the section headed, "Bernadette's early life" I wrote, " She was intelligent enough to understand rural skills, like how to look after sheep." Benedikt deleted that. Why? Why does he want people to think Bernadette was less intelligent than she was? I've reinserted the comment.

===Natural explanations for the preservation of a Dead Body===

Corpses, which appear not to decay may have been preserved artificially or embalmed.

Burial in lime-impregnated alkali soil can also preserve a corpse through Saponification of fat and soft tissue. Burial in anoxic acid, wet conditions can tan a dead body as with the famous bog bodies.

If a corpse is repeatedly dug up, examined and conserved this can also lead to apparent miraculous preservation. Wax masks may be used to conceal the poor condition of a corpse. [1]"

This was neutral. It stated the case for alleged supernatural preservation and also the case against it. Now only the case for supernatural preservation is stated. This is biased.

Further bias

Barbara Shack 12:45, 18 February 2006 (UTC)In the section headed, "Bernadette's early life" I wrote, " She was intelligent enough to understand rural skills, like how to look after sheep." Benedikt deleted that. Why? Why does he want people to think Bernadette was less intelligent than she was? I've reinserted the comment. If Benedikt deletes that again this will provide further evidence that he wants to be biased.

Dear Barbara, seemingly you are unwilling read my arguments above. In the article it is already stated that Bernadette was herding sheeps and waiting at a restaurant. It is also stated that she was attributed with simple-mindedness but others doubt this. Your insertion is just shallow talk which repeats already written facts together your personal interpretation.

Regarding the preservation I repeat my argument from above: I also deleted the part about the body preservation because its content is about preservation in general and not about the preservation of the body of Bernadette Soubirous. The article already says that Bernadette preserved body received a wax mask in 1925. There was no other preservation on her body. Barbara, you are always free to write an article about body preservation and link it from this article. Your text is not about Bernadette's body and therefore I deleted it. It makes no sense to list all the means of preservations. What matters are the facts: There was no technical preservation of her body until 1925. The article doesn't say that this was by supernatural means. That's up to the reader. I will revert the article but leave the NPOV and I urge you to discuss before you change the article. I also ask you to make changes in one edit and not in a dozen. --Benedikt 07:46, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Barbara Shack 13:16, 20 February 2006 (UTC)I have already written a section of an article about the preservation of dead bodies. I have linked to that article. I hope that is acceptable to you.

Please stop spamming this article. And please look at my arguments before you reinsert paragraphs again and again. --Benedikt 12:44, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Barbara Shack 14:23, 25 February 2006 (UTC)Earlier you wrote, "Barbara, you are always free to write an article about body preservation and link it from this article." I keep linking to a section of an article dealing with preservation of dead bodies. You keep deleting it, Benedikt . This is inconsistent and Hypocrisy. You've been in trouble for edit wars before.

Barbara, I have learnt that an article is normally linked only once. Therefore I deleted the article. It seems incoherent to link from the debate section in this article to contra-arguments in the other one. I will shorten your paragraph. The link to natural mummification will fly out. Bernadette is not mummified cf. [2] vs. [3].--Benedikt 16:42, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Barbara Shack 14:57, 27 February 2006 (UTC)Bernadette Soubirous did not look like a mummy after the wax mask had been applied and the Roman Catholic Church had "prettied her up". The Roman Catholic Church has not revealed what she looked like before.

I just cleared this part of the article. Apparently B. was sprayed with a film of wax in order to prevent her skin to change color. I mean you can always doubt the official story but the story leaves no room for B. as a natural mummy. --Benedikt 16:06, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

I am very sad that you think of war. For me this is about truth and not about war. --Benedikt 16:42, 25 February 2006 (UTC) BTW: The dispute about heteronormativity was not an edit war but a discussion. AlexR didn't like my corrections because they affected him personally. As you can see in the history my changes were accepted partially (although of course not every part - and now the article is a mess again) --Benedikt 16:48, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Barbara, you just included another link to the miracle's page. Please take a look at Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(links).

An article may be considered overlinked if any of the following is true: [...] a link is repeated in the same article (although there may be case for duplicating an important link that is distant from the previous occurrence);

I really doubt that it conforms to the guidelines when we link to the miracles article four times. I understand that you are unhappy that such unbelievable (for you, not for me ;-)) facts stand uncorrected in the article. But I don't like the idea of having a link to the miracles page after each paragraph. How should we solve this problem? What about that: After the first paragraph we put in a clause that the dispute about the miracles in Lourdes is dealt with in the other article. Then we can imo delete all the other links to that article. What do you think? --Benedikt 16:06, 27 February 2006 (UTC) Barbara Shack 15:50, 3 March 2006 (UTC)I note Benedict wrote, "This was not a wax mask but spraying of wax. Maybe it could be noted that Bernadette's body is now totally dry. When "knocking" on her body it sounds like carton.)" Wax can be molded after it is sprayed.

Barbara, can you please answer my question here and on Talk:Miracles_connected_with_Lourdes. --Benedikt 06:52, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

At the top of the page it says the Catholic Church confirms this apparition and other religions dispute it. Would it be better to say something like "This article is exclusively related to the Catholic Church. It does not pertain to other religions"? Also, why does the Catholic Church confirm it if other religions doubt it? The facts should be obvious in themselves and not be related to one's religion because an event either occured or did not. We here at Wikipedia are supposed to find what DID occur.JBogdan 18:50, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

This article is riddled, probably by subsequent editors, with ridiculous attempts to denigrate the subject. Such, for instance, as the goofy and irrelevent suggestion that Bernadette's incorrupt body might have been interpreted as a sign of vampirism in other cultures. Ridiculous and totally irrelevent to the topic. The article has been rendered uselsss as a reference because of these invasions. I suggest instead reference be made to the following:

http://www.ewtn.com/library/MARY/BERNADET.htm http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stbernadette/ -- RC

I almost spit my tea on myself when I read this. I think I'm glad I totally missed this one on account of going on temporary hiatus from anything to do with this article because I was tired of the arguments. I'm moving your commentary to the bottom because normally the newest thing that's said goes at the bottom in these discussion pages, not at the top like a blog. --Bluejay Young 23:36, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Please contact the Vatican if you have found any ways that the incorruptibility of Bernadette Soubirous or her immunity to the burning candle could have been contrived so they can have her case reexamined properly--that is their job and they need to know if these "miracles" were faked. Please contact the Lourdes Medical Bureau if you have information on how certain ailments could be "cured" when it was only done by natural means, or how it could be faked. This call for assistance applies especially to medical professionals.

Thank you for recognizing my work needed improvement and taking action on it, Barbara. We here at Wikipedia are supposed to do that. Unfortunately, you did not do the appropriate research. If you are sincerely seeking the truth, please do your homework and contact the appropriate agencies to report the possible falsehood of Lourdes so Bernadette Soubirous can be removed from the list of saints, and so Lourdes can be removed from the list of approved apparitions. JBogdan 00:19, 15 April 2006 (UTC)