Talk:Pope Zosimus

NPOV

It seems to me that this excerpt is not particularly NPOV:

"Thus, finally, the occupant of the Apostolic See at the right moment maintained with all authority the traditional dogma of the Church, and protected the truth of the Church against error."

Sounds like this comes from a book of Catholic "propaganda" (it's a direct quote from the old Catholic Encyclopedia article, in fact)

I've not changed it yet myself, but perhaps more experienced wikipedians might get involved? -- sk4p 23 jan 2006

I agree with you. It seems like the whole of the early Popes who are called saints may well be of dubious historicity. I guess someone should look into other less complimentary information about the early popes.Johnor 10:33, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

I changed the line to read "Thus the occupant of the Apostolic See protected the traditional dogma of the Church." This seems better to me, so I removed the disclaimer. Niasain 22:31, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

I just came across this, and it still feels NPOV to me. I think this sentence would be best left out completely; moreover, I don't think its accurate anyway as St Augustine was the first Patrician to extensively write on grace. Carl.bunderson 23:04, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

It seems very non-NPOV, and such sentences as "The skillfully chosen expressions of Pelagius concealed the heretical contents", "it was proved that the pope had been deceived by the heretics", "Zosimus recognized the true character of the heretics", all unattributed, suggest polemic rather than neutrality. To me this makes the whole page unreliable. Skmacksler (talk) 00:21, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

r.e. NPOV - I agree -

This article is very roman-catholic centric -zosimus is venerated as a saint in the eastern and oriental orthodox churches as well (and probably via history, in the anglican and lutheran churches, etc) , and not mentioned as such here - similarly the use of an unqualified 'pope' title (e.g. do you mean 'patriarch of rome' or 'leader of the entire church') is contentious given the continued great schism and its relation to roman catholic claims of papal supremacy. I'd expect something more like Saint_Peter with church-neutral historical content, and a separate by-church tradition sections for this to be a 'proper' article. See also: http://orthodoxwiki.org/Zosimus_of_Rome and http://ccdl.libraries.claremont.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/cce/id/1955/rec/2025 , etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.119.86.136 (talk) 03:07, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Date of death

This article with the Catholic Encyclopaedia (1913) state, that Zosimus died on 27th December, but many other wikis (de, fr, cs) and Encyclopædia Britannica state that he died on 26th December. Should be clarified. --Silesianus (talk) 12:26, 24 February 2014 (UTC)