Talk:Catholic clergy involvement with the Ustaše

}}

Bias

This article is biased. I recognize the translation of term "prekrštavanje" into "baptism" and "forced baptism". Catholic church recognizes baptism of Orthodox Church to the full extent (unlike protestant) (source: http://orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/maximos_reply.aspx). I know it takes nothing to change a term from "baptism" to "conversion" but just noticing that article has that recognizable signature. According to the article it would mean that people were baptized twice and it is not permitted to baptize twice by Catholic church (surce: http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/is-getting-baptized-more-than-once-a-sin-against-the-holy-spirit). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.147.119.226 (talk) 19:31, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Wrong citation?

As far as I see there is a failure in the citation of Saric in the chapter "Role in Ustaše violence". In the article is written:Ivan Šarić is believed to have been the "worst" of the Catholic bishops who supported the Ustaša; his diocesan newspaper wrote: "there is no limit to love...... with reference on Michael Phayer :The Catholic Church and the Holocaust, 1930-1965 page 35. But in the book actually is written: "there is a limit to love......". I corrected the citation. Regards Seader (talk) 20:09, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Ustasamilitia.jpg

Please see commons:File talk:Ustasamilitia.jpg. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 09:16, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Page numbers

@Ozhistory: do you have the Phayer book(s) and could you fix refs that say e.g. "Phayer, p. 237" without specifying which of the two books is being referenced? Thanks! GregorB (talk) 14:48, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 March 2015

Footnote 71 has a link leading to a web-based attack identified by norton. There is a problem loading that page

"Sud odbio tužbu preživjelih iz holokausta u NDH protiv Vatikanske banke". Slobodnadalmacija.hr. Retrieved 15 May 2013.

87.115.169.107 (talk) 19:07, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

 Done Marked as a deadlink in case anyone can find an archive link of it. Amortias (T)(C) 20:25, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Catholic clergy involvement with the Ustaše. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130328013239/http://www.slobodnadalmacija.hr:80/Svijet/tabid/67/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/85610/Default.aspx to http://www.slobodnadalmacija.hr/Svijet/tabid/67/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/85610/Default.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:27, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Status of Marcone

So what was the official status of Marcone in Croatia? In different places he is currently called either apostolic visitor or apostolic legate — which one is correct? --Deinocheirus (talk) 16:49, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

It's confusing because different sources use different terms, some incorrectly. So far as I recall, he was appointed to the Bishops' Conference as apostolic visitor, but acted as a defacto legate. I'll have to look at some sources. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:45, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Catholic clergy involvement with the Ustaše. 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/20151021052427/http://www.news.va/en/news/the-papers-of-apostolic-visitor-giuseppe-ramiro-ma to http://www.news.va/en/news/the-papers-of-apostolic-visitor-giuseppe-ramiro-ma
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151021052427/http://www.news.va/en/news/the-papers-of-apostolic-visitor-giuseppe-ramiro-ma to http://www.news.va/en/news/the-papers-of-apostolic-visitor-giuseppe-ramiro-ma

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 10:43, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Some notes on the title of this article ...

I have some questions about the current title of this page (Catholic clergy involvement with the Ustaše). The use of term "Catholic clergy" in the title would imply that this article actually deals with personal involvement of various Catholic clerics with the Ustaše. In fact, the scope of this article is much wider, since it also deals with institutional relations between Catholic Church and Independent State of Croatia. At the very beginning of the page, the first sentence states that this article "covers the role of the Croatian Catholic Church in the Independent State of Croatia (NDH)". Therefore, we should consider the possibility of replacing title words "Catholic clergy" with "Catholic Church" since that would be more consistent with actual content of this article. There is another issue with second part of the title: "involvement with the Ustaše". Such wording would imply that this article is dedicated to Catholic-Ustaša involvement in general, from the very beginnings of the Ustaša movement to the present day, and that is not so, because this article is focused only on events starting from 1941. The long and complex history of Catholic-Ustaša relations during prewar years, up to the 1941, is currently mentioned in this article with only one sentence! Also, many important issues considering Catholic relations with Ustaša emigration during later postwar decades are also not mentioned. Therefore, we should consider the possibility of replacing title words "involvement with the Ustaše" and redefining entire title into: Catholic Church and the Independent State of Croatia. Such title would be much clearer and consistent with actual content of this article. Any thoughts on that? Sorabino (talk) 23:59, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Catholic clergy involvement with the Ustaše. 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/20131019142753/http://dalje.com/en-croatia/sister-amadeja---righteous-among-the-nations/245249 to http://dalje.com/en-croatia/sister-amadeja---righteous-among-the-nations/245249

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 20:44, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Archbishop Stepinac section neutrality

Aloysius Stepinac#World War II should be more accurately summarized in this article's section on Archbishop Stepinac. Currently it seems like some aspects are cherry-picked, making this an incomplete covering of the topic which is non-neutral. More precisely, most of the sources cited in this article are the ones that assert Stepinac's support (to a degree) of the ISC regime. wumbolo ^^^ 16:22, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Rename proposal

I propose renaming this to "Catholic clergy involvement with the Ustaše and Axis occupiers in the Yugoslavia" or, alternatively, "Catholic clergy involvement with the Ustaše and Axis occupiers in NDH", or something like that. This widening of scope should make the article more interesting, and it would be more natural that way because the Ustaše were subordinate to the Axis occupiers in NDH. (To be specific, I have statements by Archbishop Šarić about Hitler in mind.) Notrium (talk) 01:38, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

I disagree. The scope of this article is about the Catholic Church and the Ustashas. It is a wide enough scope as it is, without involving the Germans and Italians as well. If you want to create another article about the involvement of the Catholic Church with the Germans and Italians, go right ahead. Catholic clergy involvement with the Axis powers in the Independent State of Croatia would seem to be an appropriate (but rather long) article title. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:53, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

• Support renaming and Oppose proposed title - The "Axis occupiers in NDH" would make the title too long but also misleading because it might imply that Axis occupied NDH. On the other hand, the current title is not precise and concise enough. As far as I know, the sources deal with the participation of Catholic clergy in the genocide of Serbs in NDH. This genocide was performed by all institutions of NDH and all of its forces, not only Ustaše. Maybe more precise and concise title would be Participation of Croatian Catholic clergy in the genocide of Serbs?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 20:12, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Participation of Croatian Catholic clergy in the genocide of Serbs is a bad title, because it ignores the genocide of the Jews and Roma, the forced conversions of Serbs and Jews, etc. Notrium (talk) 20:54, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Yes, you are right. Would addition Jews and Roma people make it better or it is too long? Participation of Croatian Catholic clergy in the genocide of Serbs, Jews and Romani people?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 23:06, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

That still elides forced conversions and support without participation from the scope. Note that, e.g., Stepinac supported the Ustaše regime publically but did not actually participate in the genocide, so with your title he would be mainly off-topic to the article. Notrium (talk) 23:39, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

If you want to proceed with this, it involves a change of scope, and a RfC will be needed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:35, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

This does not look like a dispassionate encyclopedic name. Furthermore it does imply a change of scope -- Ustasha gov't participation, though it implies a sort of complicitness, is not specifically participation in (the/parallel) Holocaust(s). This would shrink the scope of the article significantly.--Calthinus (talk) 07:19, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

I do not feel a title change is warranted. As mentioned previously, the change in title would make large sections of the article redundant. Actions against the Jewish community is more or less covered in: Conversion of Jews to Catholicism during the Holocaust. In regards to the Roma population, I have not come across a significant body of literature that states that they experienced forced conversions and Catholic sponsored killings on a mass scale, however I could be wrong.ThreatMatrix (talk) 12:20, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Problems with the article

I am going to list some problems with the article that I do not have time to fix right away, feel free to work on them if you wish:

• Too much weight is being given to Archbishop Stepinac, and the "Catholic hierarchy" section does not actually explain the hierarchy. Some research is needed here: did they have an Episcopal Conference of Croatia and Episcopal Conference of Bosnia back then? If so, what were their roles/power? Mention Šarić, the other Archbishop, more. And the other, regular, bishops, too. Also, the orders (Franciscans, specifically) are not directly under the bishops' command or are more autonomous than regular priests (answering to the international order leadership); as far as I understand Catholic hierarchy.

• The structure of the article encourages and necessitates redundancy. E.g., there are many sections where the same information about (pro/contra) Stepinac can be repeated.

• The article currently seems to be biased in Stepinac's favor, we need many more examples of him supporting the Ustaše puppet state and being what would today be perceived as immoral. I heard stories from people who were alive at the time (WW2) of him having ceremonies of blessing the Ustaše military, etc. Also, Catholicization of the Serbs. EDIT: The Aloysius Stepinac article seems much better.

• It is also biased in the Franciscans' favor, who were quite diabolical in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina during WW2. I have a good ref for that that I will use now, but much more work is needed in that direction.

• Here is a random source with lots of useful sourced info: http://www.fantompowa.net/Flame/yugoslavia_catholic_church.htm . It should not be cited, of course, but scraped for sourced quotes, info, etc. EDIT: Here is some more: https://libcom.org/library/role-catholic-church-yugoslavias-holocaust-se-n-mac-math-na-1941-1945 http://www.juliagorin.com/wordpress/?p=2647 Notrium (talk) 02:46, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

No, it should not. For someone as controversial as Stepinac and the crimes of the Catholic Church in the NDH during WWII, we need high quality academic works from sources outside of the former Yugoslavia, not some random self-published website. Do not add anything from it. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:11, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

That is what I said. Of course I would not ever cite a URI that contains "fantompowa.net/Flame". We should just take sourced info from it and cite the sources the web page itself cites, if they turn out to be legit. Notrium (talk) 12:55, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean. Each source mentioned on the website would need to be checked against the actual source before we would use it to cite material in the article. There is nothing to indicate that the website is an accurate reflection of what is in the actual sources, assuming they are reliable themselves. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:50, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Yes ... Again, that is what I said myself. Notrium (talk) 12:03, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

• I agree with every point of your comment Notrium.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 19:41, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

• NDH - salute.jpg (discussion)
• Prisilno pokrštavanje Srba u Slavoniji.jpg (discussion)

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:20, 5 October 2021 (UTC)