Jump to content

Talk:Catholic theology: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 158: Line 158:


:To give this topic that kind of weight, I think there would have to be very widespread discussion and/or decrees at the highest levels of the Catholic Church, it's doctrinal offices, by multiple popes, saints/[[Doctor of the Church|doctors of the Church]] etc. that clearly affirm it belongs on the same level as the three examples cited above. Such discussion and acceptance would need to be of considerable antiquity. Is this a matter discussed at length by the [[Fathers of the Church]]? Are there pronouncements from any of the [[Ecumenical council|Ecumenical Councils]] that teach on this matter in the same way they make pronouncements about the Virgin Mary or Trinitarianism? I am not satisfied that such is the case. It wasn't even until 1962 that John XXIII (controversially) inserted Joseph's name into the canon of the last edition of the ancient Roman Missal (the last before the Pauline reform of 1969). As of now, I am not persuaded. The sources cited seem to be engaging in a form of doctrinal speculation or [[theologoumenon]] and that is not something that we can promote. If and when this gains wide spread acceptance verified by formal doctrinal pronouncements we could revisit the subject. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem|talk]]) 04:14, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
:To give this topic that kind of weight, I think there would have to be very widespread discussion and/or decrees at the highest levels of the Catholic Church, it's doctrinal offices, by multiple popes, saints/[[Doctor of the Church|doctors of the Church]] etc. that clearly affirm it belongs on the same level as the three examples cited above. Such discussion and acceptance would need to be of considerable antiquity. Is this a matter discussed at length by the [[Fathers of the Church]]? Are there pronouncements from any of the [[Ecumenical council|Ecumenical Councils]] that teach on this matter in the same way they make pronouncements about the Virgin Mary or Trinitarianism? I am not satisfied that such is the case. It wasn't even until 1962 that John XXIII (controversially) inserted Joseph's name into the canon of the last edition of the ancient Roman Missal (the last before the Pauline reform of 1969). As of now, I am not persuaded. The sources cited seem to be engaging in a form of doctrinal speculation or [[theologoumenon]] and that is not something that we can promote. If and when this gains wide spread acceptance verified by formal doctrinal pronouncements we could revisit the subject. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem|talk]]) 04:14, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
::@[[User:TonyBallioni|TonyBallioni]] Sorry to disturb your semi-retirement, but I'd be interested in your take on this. -[[User:Ad Orientem|Ad Orientem]] ([[User talk:Ad Orientem|talk]]) 04:38, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Revision as of 04:38, 12 October 2024

Catechism merge discussion

NO ACTION
I also agree that while there's a close relationship they are not the same thing; non-Admin closure per WP:SNOW -- Kendrick7talk 04:10, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

  • Oppose merge. There are clearly two different topics here. One is a book, which happens to contain the theology of the Church. The other is not a book. Elizium23 (talk) 04:31, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Since the Catechism (one volume) digests doctrine and dogma, it is not speculation; Catholic theology (hundreds-of-thousand volumes) is broader and includes speculation that has not developed to the level of doctrine or dogma. Catechism is a WP:NOTABLE reference work that should remain a separate article. –BoBoMisiu (talk) 14:11, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. They are clearly distinct topics. However, in the spirit of BWalkerJr's comment above, some of the content of this article could be moved to the Catechism article, and this article should be expanded to talk more about theology as such, as a field of study, and particularly its historical development over time. For instance, the article on Science or Philosophy (or on any particular fields therein) does not focus primarily on a summary of all the knowledge in the field but rather focuses on explaining the nature, methods, and history of the field. Theology, "queen of the sciences," should be no different. -hugeTim (talk) 19:20, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 21 November 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. The consensus is to follow the parent article and simply use "Catholic". If that article gets moved to Roman Catholic Church then obviously there will need to be a new discussion for this article's title. Old page history at the target moved to Catholic Theology in order to preserve attribution. Jenks24 (talk) 14:05, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Roman Catholic theology → Catholic theology – The contents of Catholic theology also had discussed a few critical difference between eastern and western theology that were not covered in this article. The Catholic theology page has several problematic phrasing, such as not distinguishing Roman Catholic from Latin Catholic. Seeing that neither page has grown significantly since the above discussions, I merged the shorter article into this larger one (currently named "Roman Catholic theology") to cover this gap. I would further propose this page be renamed "Catholic theology", if simply to match the Catholic Church article. --Zfish118 (talk) 18:30, 21 November 2015 (UTC) --Relisted. Natg 19 (talk) 07:22, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support, per this ngram. The Anglican and other churches claim to be "Catholic" as well. I think this is only for the purpose of using the Nicene Creed. As the old joke goes, if you ask, "Where is the Catholic Church?" no one will send you to the Anglican church. H. Humbert (talk) 11:22, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the Roman Catholic Church article should never have been moved to Catholic Church in the first place, because the Anglican Church considers itself part of the Catholic Church (per the two creeds mentioned in the lead of this article) but it does not recognise the Bishop of Rome as its head. Given the first sentence of this article which includes Magisterium and the mention of Vatican II, in the last sentence of the first paragraph, this article is about Roman Catholic theology not Catholic theology. -- PBS (talk) 14:23, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It's confusing to have these dueling naming conventions; not to mention the whole "Roman" addition was an appellation created by the anti-Catholic movement of a few centuries ago in order to make the Catholic Church seem like a foreign enemy (q.v. Romanism, Papist, etc.). If Anglicans called themselves the London Catholic Church, PBS would have a leg to stand on. But per Humbert, there's not any actual confusion here. (And there is also some chance for added confusion with the beliefs of the Roman Rite, which is just one of many Rites within the Catholic Church.) -- Kendrick7talk 19:07, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Despite identifying myself as a catholic Protestant Christian, everyone knows what you're talking about when you say Catholic Theology. If consensus is for Catholic Church to be there, then this page should follow suit. I might reconsider if the Catholic Church discussion were reopened. --JFH (talk) 19:49, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 11 external links on Catholic theology. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 17:50, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Visual editor problem on this article?

Has anyone else tried to use the visual editor on the later sections, only to find that they're "stuck" in the reflist and can't be edited except in source mode? Deus vult (aliquid)! Crusadestudent (talk) 06:13, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 1 June 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved. (closed by a page mover) Omni Flames (talk) 06:20, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Theology (Catholic Church) → Theology of the Catholic Church – Regardless of sub-pages, this is <main subject> of <overarching category or organization>. Per WP:NATURALDIS and WP:CONSISTENCY, see Dogma in the Catholic Church, Sacraments of the Catholic Church, Theology of the body, History of the Catholic Church, Vocational discernment in the Catholic Church, Order of precedence in the Catholic Church, Marriage in the Catholic Church, etc. Jujutsuan (talk | contribs) 22:11, 1 June 2016 (UTC) --Relisted. Jujutsuan (talk | contribs) 19:26, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support as a correct reflection of the article's contents. The current title implies that the Catholic Church has a different definition of the term theology than the standard one. However, the topic of article is laid out in the first sentence: "The theology of the Catholic Church is based on..." —  AjaxSmack  02:04, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Catholic theology. 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, 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 10:57, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Catholic theology. 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.

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 08:26, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Catholic theology. 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.

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 19:10, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Catholic Studies" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Catholic Studies has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 April 26 § Catholic Studies until a consensus is reached. Veverve (talk) 15:13, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Catholic studies" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Catholic studies has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 April 26 § Catholic studies until a consensus is reached. Veverve (talk) 15:14, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Undue Weight?

Could @Pbritti explain how the description of the Devotion to Saint Joseph gives WP:UNDUE weight to the article even after multiple papal exhortations about the same? If not, my contributions may be restored. Jeaucques Quœure (talk) 15:55, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Including every popular saint who was the subject multiple papal documents would make this an article about something else entirely. This article is about theology, not devotions. ~ Pbritti (talk) 15:58, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Devotion to Saint Joseph is indeed a subdiscipline in Catholic theology: Josephology Jeaucques Quœure (talk) 17:21, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but so is devotion to quite literally hundreds of other saints. For example, St. Maron and his thought was so impactful that an entire Eastern Catholic church is named for him, yet he receives no mention here. St. Joseph as a subject of devotion is at most a marginal and recent addition to Catholic theology, one that almost certainly does not require even a passing mention on such a broad article. ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:30, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Provide an academic source that notes St. Joseph as a major element of Catholic theology, and you might have a chance for a passing mention. ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:32, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
By that logic Mariology also has negligible notes in secular academic sources other than the Catechism of the Catholic Church but it still has mention in the article. Jeaucques Quœure (talk) 02:43, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Comment: Josephology

Request for Comment: Does the section on Josephology give undue weight to this article?

I am seeking community input regarding the current description of the Josephology in this "Catholic theology" article. I believe that Josephology is central to Catholic theology as major doctrinal topics like Christology, Triadology, or Mariology, which are more widely recognized as pillars of Catholic theology.

I propose that the description of Josephology should be there to ensure that the article maintains a balanced and proportionate representation of Catholic theology. Jeaucques Quœure (talk) 03:23, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To give this topic that kind of weight, I think there would have to be very widespread discussion and/or decrees at the highest levels of the Catholic Church, it's doctrinal offices, by multiple popes, saints/doctors of the Church etc. that clearly affirm it belongs on the same level as the three examples cited above. Such discussion and acceptance would need to be of considerable antiquity. Is this a matter discussed at length by the Fathers of the Church? Are there pronouncements from any of the Ecumenical Councils that teach on this matter in the same way they make pronouncements about the Virgin Mary or Trinitarianism? I am not satisfied that such is the case. It wasn't even until 1962 that John XXIII (controversially) inserted Joseph's name into the canon of the last edition of the ancient Roman Missal (the last before the Pauline reform of 1969). As of now, I am not persuaded. The sources cited seem to be engaging in a form of doctrinal speculation or theologoumenon and that is not something that we can promote. If and when this gains wide spread acceptance verified by formal doctrinal pronouncements we could revisit the subject. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:14, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TonyBallioni Sorry to disturb your semi-retirement, but I'd be interested in your take on this. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:38, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Catholic_theology&oldid=1250725564"