Talk:Americanism (heresy)

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

United States Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Christianity: Theology Low‑importance Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by theology work group (assessed as Low-importance). Catholicism Low‑importance Americanism (heresy) is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to the Catholic Church. For more information, visit the project page.CatholicismWikipedia:WikiProject CatholicismTemplate:WikiProject CatholicismCatholicism articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Catholicism task list: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Sanctification; Westminster Cathedral Other : Watch recent changes for Catholicism articles

The Catholic Church was NOT divided along ethnic lines. In fact, that was a major complaint of Germans- the Irish dominated them. See "The Catholic Experience" by Andrew Greeley.

This article seems to contradict itself in saying that Catholicism was the majority, then that there was a Protestant majority.

No, I think what the writer means is that Catholicism was the largest single denomination at that time, but that the (combined) protestant churches made up a religious majority of US citizens.

For your information, there were more Protestants than Catholics at the time mentioned, but there were more Catholics than any single Protestant sect (such as Lutherans, Methodists, etc.)

♣ seems like a decent article. quickest and easiest way to un-bias it is to not say "it is a heresy" but "it is declared a heresy by the Catholi church" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.89.111.144 (talk) 00:14, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

As any credible historian would state, this article is clearly Modernist and anti-Catholic. Please revise or remove it. 141.161.59.60 01:55, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interestingly, this article has no verifiable sources and makes pretty strong claims. I tend to agree with the above commenter that it needs a thorough revision. Any 'credible historian' up to it? I'll have to do some research before I can help on it, though. --Miguel1626 02:00, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article should clarify that the Magesterium’s condemnation of “Americanism” is now obsolete: the principal of freedom of religion as a natural human right was adopted into Catholic dogma by the Second Vatican Council in its declaration Dignitatis Humanae, in 1965. The thought of John Courtney Murray SJ, an American theologian and historian, was instrumental to this change of tack. -a theologian —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.101.37.7 (talk) 18:24, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If John XXIII at the beginning of Vatican II, and Paul VI at its conclusion, stated that Vatican II would be and was a Non-dogmatic council, how did Dignitatis Humanae become adopted dogma?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.117.220.145 (talk) 01:30, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This concerns POV tag cleanup. Whenever an POV tag is placed, it is necessary to also post a message in the discussion section stating clearly why it is thought the article does not comply with POV guidelines, and suggestions for how to improve it. This permits discussion and consensus among editors. From WP tag policy: Drive-by tagging is strongly discouraged. The editor who adds the tag must address the issues on the talk page, pointing to specific issues that are actionable within the content policies, namely Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Simply being of the opinion that a page is not neutral is not sufficient to justify the addition of the tag. Tags should be added as a last resort. Better yet, edit the topic yourself with the improvements. This statement is not a judgement of content, it is only a cleanup of frivolously and/or arbitrarily placed tags. No discussion, no tag.Jjdon (talk) 19:52, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since the US does not and has never supported absolute freedom of the press, we've got a red flag to start off. We've got another because what the Catholic Church holds to be individualism does not map to the same concepts that are most popular in the US under the same word. Great care should be taken care to distinguish between the two and here there has not been. Furthermore, The Syllabus of Errors is not a separate condemnation but a listing of previously condemned errors without argumentation and only with a reference to the actual condemnation. Relying on it is worse than discussing only the Cliff's Notes of Moby Dick as if there were no actual novel. At least with the Cliff's Notes version there's at least an effort to tell the whole story. TMLutas (talk) 03:16, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The relevant section of

By this, it's clear that Americanism was not viewed by the papacy as a term of heresy but could be viewed both positively and negatively depending on how it manifested. The actual faults that some shorthanded as americanism are pretty standard problems for Catholicism, the impulse to not actually preach the doctrines of the Catholic Church because they are uncomfortable, that private judgment not supersede Church teaching, etc. In other words, Americanism is not any particular unique heresy or even a collection of heresies and sometimes is not a heresy at all but rather a bad case of resurgence of old heresies that afflicted the Church in America as they had afflicted the Church elsewhere before and since. The article is really in trouble. TMLutas (talk) 03:33, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some critics of the Second Vatican Council have made the charge that the substantial role of liberal Americans during the Council contributed to the liberal Zeitgeist of that period, in a sense that approaches the 19th century Americanist doctrines. For instance, the constitution

I added another reference to the Further Reading section. Im surprised it wasnt up there already. Its by Fr. McAvoy.--76.31.242.174 (talk) 07:06, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Has anyone read the beginning of this article. I quote "Coined in the nineteenth century, in Roman Catholic use the term Americanism referred to a group of related heresies which were defined as the endorsement of the separation of church and state.". That's not English. Perhaps the author meant "Coined in the nineteenth century, in Roman Catholic doctrine, the use of the term Americanism referred to a group of related heresies which were defined as the endorsement of the separation of church and state.". Yes, doctrine is probably the wrong word. Perhaps ideology would be better (probably not). How about "Coined in the nineteenth century, in Roman Catholic teaching, the use of the term Americanism referred to a group of related heresies which were defined as the endorsement of the separation of church and state." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.31.233.83 (talk) 18:52, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The text of the section "Suppression of Americanism" (and possibly other sections) appears to be very closely paraphrased from this book, published in 2014.

https://books.google.com/books?id=g3zhAwAAQBAJ&pg=PT53

173.61.128.57 (talk) 01:42, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Looking at page history, it appears the close plagiarism is the other way around. Well, then.
  173.61.128.57 (talk) 01:55, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I get it that Catholics usually care more about something being forbidden than about what it actually is, but the lede should list the essential tenets of it. Like Arianism, where the lede says, Arian theology holds that [..]. --Hob Gadling (talk) 06:57, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree; I read the article, and my understanding is that "Americanism" refers to separation of church and state. I can't imagine that being a heresy; does the Church teach that it must control the state? Luke10.27 (talk) 01:45, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

refers to separation of church and state That makes sense.

does the Church teach that it must control the state? I don't know if they actually teach it, but in practice, they always tried to do it whenever they could - from the conflicts with the antique Roman Emperors, via conflicts with the Emperors of the Holy Roman Empire in the Middle Ages, to close collaboration with Fascist leaders in the 20th century. And when they succeed, those who disagree with them die soon.

I guess we need more explicit sources. --Hob Gadling (talk) 07:53, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What nonsense! Johnbod (talk) 21:14, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not familiar enough with Catholicism to incorporate it into the article, as I'm not sure I wouldn't miss something, but wikisource:Catholic Encyclopedia (1913)/Testem Benevolentiae seems to be at least partially about Americanism. Luke10.27 (talk) 18:20, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was more about cuddling up to the state, rather than keeping apart. But since the whole idea was a vague European fantasy that nobody was able to define, "essential tenets" are going to be elusive. There's more lower down, but we should have some better summary of the alleged views near the top. Johnbod (talk) 21:14, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]