Template talk:Western Schism

Untitled

This was originally created by Gparker. I just made it a template. You should refer to him if you have questions, a feature request, or want to thank him for making this. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 18:39, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Name of template

I think the name of the template possibly needs to be looked at. The template's title is currently "Antipopes" and it includes links to the articles of Antipopes going back to antiquity and through to modern day figures who claim to be Pope. This means that the majority of those included actually have nothing to do with the Western Schism. Also as the template focuses on articles Antipopes it does not include articles which relate to topics relevant to the Western Schism. For example Jean Gerson who was a key figure in ending the Schism or relevant events such as the Council of Constance, the ecumenical councils which ended the Schism. The Council of Pisa is listed, but only to denote the line of Pisan Antipopes. Thus I think if the template is to focus on all Antipopes then it should be renamed probably Template:Antipopes to more accurately reflect its use and content, as the current name is not really helpful. Dunarc (talk) 23:55, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Request to remove Pope Michael I and II from Antipopes template

I propose to remove Pope Michael I and Pope Michael II from the "Antipopes"-template. The term Antipope refers to individuals who were rival claimants to that position (and in opposition to another pope) within the same Church. However, this does not accurately describe Bawden’s position and that of his successor.

David Bawden (Pope Michael I) claimed that the See of Peter had been vacant since the death of Pope Pius XII in 1958. He believed that Vatican II constituted a new church, with distinct faith and rituals. Therefore, he did not set himself up in opposition to a reigning pope, but rather saw himself as filling a sede vacante situation. In his view, the “Conciliar Church” was an entirely different religion occupying once Catholic structures.

Labeling him and his successor as an Antipope" is misleading, as it assumes a competing claim against another pope, which he did not express (neither in writing nor in other media). On the contrary, Bawden explicitly criticized traditionalist groups (e.g. SSPX) for rejecting decrees of the hierarchy they consider legitimate. He emphasised that such disobedience is contrary to Catholic dogma.

Sources: - Bawden, *What We Believe*: https://www.scribd.com/document/143226905/What-We-Believe - Bawden, *Traditionalists Admit They Have No Authority*: https://www.scribd.com/document/391186437/Traditionalists-Admit-They-Have-No-Authority - Archived: *Will the Catholic Church Survive the Twentieth Century?* https://web.archive.org/web/20131203045958/http://www.scribd.com/doc/15948721/Will-the-Catholic-Church-Survive-the-Twentieth-Century - Video (Bawden on authority): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VixS8f4fm9U

I recommend therefor to remove both Pope Michael I and Pope Michael II from the template, and maybe creating a new navigational template, for example **conclavist popes**, as this would be a more accurate and neutral classification.

– Tote ratte! (talk) 22:07, 27 June 2025 (UTC)