Talk:1958 papal conclave

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

Some Minor Errors[edit]

Milanese archbishops are invariably made cardinals at the next consistory yet again this surprisingly did not happen to Montini.

Why "surprisingly again"? It did happen to Montini at the next consistory in 1958. Please check text.

Both Montini and Tardini were consecrated (ordained) as bishops

Not quite. They were not consecrated or ordained. With their elevated titles they were permitted to wear episcopal insignia without being bishop. See text for explanation

... Montini the cardinalate in 1953 but Montini had declined; this was never verified.

It was verified in the Wikipedia Page on Pope Paul VI I verified it below, quoting official speech during the consistory in 1953.


It was also alleged that Sister Pasqualina Lehnert, a nun who had run the Pope's household since his days as a nuncio in Bavaria, had taken a strong dislike to Montini. The Pope's health had deteriorated in the 1950s particularly due to the questionable medical treatment he received from a so-called doctor, named Riccardo Galeazzi-Lisi, that Pius had befriended. Critics of the Pope within and outside the Curia claimed that the nun exercised considerable influence during Pius's final years—even ridiculing her as La Popessa—and used her position to poison Pius's mind against Montini. I took this out. If the housekeeper disliked Montini or not, is irrelevant, because there simply was no consistory before 1958, therefore Montini was not made cardinal before 1958: Nobody else got it either. Sorry, had nothing to do with conspiracies, which do exist, or the unfortuntely undocumented stories about Sister Pascalina.

Her name is Pascalina, not Pasqualina. Wikipedia must correct this eventually.

One more curiosity: How can Archbishop Cushing of Boston participate in the conclave of 1958 without being cardinal? How can he then write vote totals on his sleeve?

But from Where are the vote totals listed in the text coming from?

Perhaps stories are being confused and Cardinal Cushing (http://www.fiu.edu/~mirandas/bios-c.htm#Cushing) vote totals on his sleeve at the Conclave of 1963, the only one in which he did participate, while the vote totals in the text originated in a different story? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gerard Mulholland (talk • contribs) 10:26, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I assume from the Holy Ghost! --Ambrosius007 (talk) 21:13, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All this nonsense is gone now. Montini wasn’t at the conclave, got a few protest votes. The rest is noise. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 23:55, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Another "minor" error: I found the following in reference 49. Please change 33 to 23; I don't know how to get at the reflist.

Cortesi, Arnoldo (16 December 1958). "Pope Elevates 33 to Cardinalate; Deplores China Church Schism" (PDF). The New York Times. Retrieved 25 October 2017. Carlm0404 (talk) 17:27, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Thanks. Sundayclose (talk) 17:37, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The case of Montini[edit]

Why on earth are we giving so much space to someone who was NEVER going to be elected pope in 1958? OK, so some cardinals said they would have voted from him had he been a cardinal at the time. But so what? He wasn't, they couldn't, they didn't, it was never going to happen, and they moved on to someone who was actually available to be elected.

I'd like to see this massive section cut right down to perhaps no more than a mention that Montini was seen as papabile even before becoming a cardinal, but had to wait for the red cap before his time could come. -- Jack of Oz [Talk] 21:13, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree and will do this shortly. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 22:26, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AP article[edit]

In the Siri Thesis section, someone appears to have added the entire contents of an AP article about the smoke confusion. Without a citation, this constitutes plagiarism. A citation needs to be provided to identify the source or the quoted material should be removed. Tad Lincoln (talk) 21:57, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article if accurate, was a copyright violation and needed to be removed at once. The thing is, it isn't accurate. Here's a link[1] to the article in google news archive. Therefore I removed it totally....William 02:10, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. The smoke business is easily covered without violating anyone’s copyright interests. I’ve used the NY Times to describe it when discussing the ballots. I’ll look into the Siri stuff next. Bmclaughlin9 (talk) 23:58, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Papal conclave, 1958. 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.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 22:05, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:1958_papal_conclave&oldid=1196023967"