Talk:Counter-Reformation
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] A lot of work to do here
Wow, there is a lot of work to do here. The treatment of Trent is very poor. It should be outlined briefly by sessions without such sweeping statements with a POV tone. Since Trent had numerous sessions over the course of several decades, it should be a recurring subheading. There is so much material here that it should be first decided whether to organize it chronologically or thematically. Previously, the structure was a real mess with Trent as a heading following be Reforms as a heading with the "Reforms section being a continuation of the Trent discussion. It is even confusing to describe it!
Anyway, am chipping away at this, if anyone out there is interested, give me a holler!--Vaquero100 00:36, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
== I've deleted the signed comment suggesting this page be moved. If the move is uncontroversial, just do it. If you expect the move to be controversial, follow the procedure described at Wikipedia:Requested moves. --Stebulus 03:28, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Requested move to Catholic Reformation
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the debate was no consensus for the move --Philip Baird Shearer 22:06, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
I would like to propose that this article be moved to "Catholic Reformation." There are several good reasons for this. First, it was a reform in the Church. "Counter Reformation" makes it sound like it was anti-reform, which is clearly not true. Second, "Counter Reformation" also makes it sound like it was only a response to the "Protestant Reformation." This is only partially true. Many of the reforms of the Catholic Reformation are not particularly related to Luther or his successors. These aspects include: the profound spiritual movements of the spanish mystics and the French school of spirituality as well as the development of the seminary syste --Vaquero100 07:51, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
Counter-Reformation → Catholic Reformation — The term "Counter-Reformation" implies that the movement was anti-reform. "Catholic Reformation" is the more accurate term as it describes a reform within the Catholic Church. This has become the academically accepted term. --Vaquero100 05:48, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Survey
- I support such a move, for the reason that Catholic Reformation is the preferred term among many scholars today. Maestlin 14:52, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose strongly: The term Counter Reformation is by far the most commonly used term in English for this historic movement. Even the Catholic Encylcopedia uses the term Counter Reformation as an article title. Even if there is a growing movement among some scholars as some above suggest to use Catholic Reformation the term has not established itself in common usage. This is an encyclopedia and it seems more fitting of an encyclopedia to use the commonly used term for an event. I think using the title Counter Reformation with a mention of the term Catholic Reformation in the first paragraph is sufficient - this is also what Encyclopedia Britannica does. I certainly see no reason to abandon the more commonly used term as the article title for one that is far less used. --Westee 13:24, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose Counter Reformation is the common name. --Philip Baird Shearer 16:41, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
- Strongly Support Catholic Reformation is the term currently favored by academics and Counter-Reformation is a misnomer at best. As a reform movement within Catholicism, Catholic Reformation is the only term that makes sense. Those searching for Counter-Reformation will find the article without difficulty by redirect. --Vaquero100 19:17, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose per Westee. Duja 10:27, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Support The renaming does make sense, and is used. Popular culture uses Counter reformation, but popular culture also uses AD/BC dates, and at wikipedia many editors have pushed that issue as well. Catholic Reformation is the NPoV term, IMHO. Dominick (TALK) 14:03, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Strongly support per Vaquero100. Grumpy Troll (talk) 16:59, 14 June 2006 (UTC).
opposeabstainWhen we encourage editors to use veifiable referenced material, it is suggested that we use an unrefferenced title! (or at least far less referenced)ClemMcGann 17:16, 14 June 2006 (UTC)- Very strong oppose I had never even heard the term "Catholic Reformation" before coming to this talk page. It is quite commonly referred to as the Counter-Reformation even by Catholic scholars. [1] —Mira 01:05, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose Counter-Reformation is the most common in both popular usage and scholarship.--Aldux 18:04, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
- weak support The name "Counter-Reformation" is generic and must go.[2][3][4][5][6]. Where the article should go is less clear. The term most familiar to me is actually "Catholic Counter-Reformation." "Catholic Reformation of the 16th Century" might work too. Gimmetrow 23:58, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
- Weak oppose - I personally feel that Catholic Reformation is more accurate and seems to be gaining usage among (admittedly, most catholic) scholars. However, it has not yet even come close to overtaking Counter-Reformation in common usage. Perhaps once the next generation of text books comes out with the new name, then we should change it. A redirect and a bold in the intro (as exist now), I strongly support. Perhaps a more thourough discussion of the name within the article would be appropriate, as a side note. savidan(talk) (e@) 03:27, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Discussion
Comment Would anyone object if the circular redirect and signed comment were removed from the front page? Maestlin 16:16, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
I just removed the signed comment without reading your comments here. --84.153.53.206 17:13, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
A singular voice of opposition is not enough to justify ceasing the question. --Vaquero100 00:31, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- Vaquero100, suggesting a move is a legitimate action and there are procedures for doing so. There are templates for signalling all sorts of problems with articles. But editorial comments about the article, like yours, do not belong in the article itself. They belong on the talk page. Part of Wikipedia's policy is to avoid or at least minimize self-reference in the text of articles. Removing your comment does not mean anyone is putting an end to the question, because the question is properly inquired here, on the talk page. Maestlin 16:00, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Excuse me if this has already been addressed, but what do recent undergraduate history texts call it? Tom Harrison Talk 20:10, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
Moved from survey section I had never even heard the term "Catholic Reformation" before coming to this talk page. It is quite commonly referred to as the Counter-Reformation even by Catholic scholars. [7] —Mira 01:05, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- Additional note: A Google search gives 631,000 results for "Counter-Reformation" and 99,000 for "Catholic Reformation." —Mira 01:05, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Sorry, I don't see the relevance of this page. Maestlin 19:45, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
- Regarding the google hits, the term "counter-reformation" is very generic. Searching for "counter-reformation" + "catholic" (so that it at least has some relation to catholicism) drops the hits to 338,000 results. Note The Arts of the Anglican Counter-Reformation. Gimmetrow 16:27, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
-
Maestin, you have cited the most controversial and least repected of "Catholic theologians." Read again more closely Richard McBrien's article and you will see he is listed as a dissident and his principal work is banned for use with college students. --Vaquero100 20:11, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- I didn't cite it, someone who didn't sign their comments did. Please review the history of the talk page. The only thing I wrote is "Sorry, I don't see the relevance of this page," referring to the link to some amazon.com review. Maestlin 20:32, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
- What is the source for the claim that his principle work is banned? (PS the "Additional note" below is not by me either.) Maestlin 23:30, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Sorry about that, that was me who forgot to sign. And this is perhaps a better link [8]. The book I linked to uses "Counter-Reformation" in one of its section titles, and actually throughout the whole thing (I own a copy). And, as his article says, McBrien is a professor of theology at Notre Dame, he can't be as horrible as you seem to think he is. —Mira 01:05, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- More links The Catholic Encyclopedia uses "Counter-Reformation." The official Vatican site uses both.[9][10] —Mira 02:14, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
-
-
Count at least one other supporter for this proposal. Know that he is not a Catholic, but a firm believer that this movement was a response to Humanism before it was a response to Protestantism (a response to Humanism which counted among its tennets a rejection of intercessors, and therefore the Catholic Church). Another thing: why is there no mention of catechism in an article about the Catholic Reformation?
- I don't think whether or not this was a reaction to the Reformation is at issue here. We're determining what this event is most usually called, not whether or not we think the name fits. From the Wikipedia naming conventions: (emphasis mine)
- "article naming should give priority to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize"
- "Names of Wikipedia articles should be optimized for readers over editors; and for a general audience over specialists."
- "Use the most common name of a person or thing that does not conflict with the names of other people or things."
- —Mira 05:50, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
I know this is late but I support the change. Arthurian Legend (talk) 00:52, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Counter Reformation vs. Catholic Reformation
Counter Reformation:
GOAL:
to take back what the Catholic Church lost to Protestantism.
PROBLEM:
Protestants didn't come back to the Catholic Church
WANTED:
One main church
VS
Catholic Reformation:
GOAL:
to reform Catholic Church (hence the name "Catholic reformation")
PROBLEM:
Popes aren't calling meetings because they are scared their authority will be lowered,
Finally decide that they will call Council of Trent because Protestantism is spreading fast!
WANTED:
Reform in Catholic Church
71.138.91.40 03:01, 11 October 2006 (UTC)AP STUDENT in HS
[edit] NPOV?
The widely-used term "Counter-Reformation" usually means not only the spiritual reformation of the Catholic Church, but also the violent trials to destroy the protestant movement. E.g. the Hugenots Wars and the Thirty Years War are usually seen as a part of the Counter-Reformation.
In this article, the war violence of the catholic powers is not mentioned at all. The protestants are named "sects", and their eventual return to catholicism is described as fully peaceful. (In the reality, there were hundreds of thousands of victims.)
The article should be completed in this direction, or marked as non-NPOV. (I myself cannot do it because of my poor English.)
--M.m.h 13:07, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
- Hmmm... this comment has been sitting here without a response for four months. I think M.m.h makes a valid point. Unfortunately, this is not an area of expertise for me. M.m.h, if you will attempt to write some text that addresses these issues, I will be glad to copyedit for you and insert it into the article.
- --Richard 00:03, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
-
- I will try it to change the first information, so that both the main definitions of the term would be mentioned. --M.m.h 13:48, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Sadly, I think that linking the term "Counter-Reformation" to the violence due to religious intolerance between both Protestants and Catholics (who were equally guilty of such violence as were royalty who wished to excuse mass-murder under religious justifications) is a distraction. Some actually believe that the Jesuits are sworn enemies of Protestantism willing to do whatever it takes to demolish the Protestant sects. I know about this because someone from my church tried to excuse his admittedly anti-papist prejudice using such "reasoning."
Protestants right after the Reformation were just as guilty of murdering Catholics as Catholics were of murdering Protestants. Back then, folks in Europe were not as educated as they are today. The Gutenberg Press was recently invented, and Martin Luther's protest was just starting to get attention. To slur present-day Catholics by using the past is akin to blaming German babies most recently born for the Holocaust. In other words, it is wholly inaccurate.
However, unless we can all agree on a term which does not frighten the small-of-mind who don't bother to do the proper research, we will still have religiously intolerant viewpoints muddying reality. Just think about it. That's all I'm saying.
--Kulturvultur 04:46, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
You are not right. It is not the question to blame somebody, but to describe the term as exactly as possible. At present, only one point of view, or one of several definitions is described. We should at least discern between (1) the counter-reformation as a movement within the catholic church and (2) the counter-reformation as a historical period. --M.m.h 13:48, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
- The Counter-reformation and the religious wars were not as linked as you think. The Huegnot war and the Thirty years war were initiated for purely political resons. This is seen by the fact that Henry of Navre, the Protestant King of France converted to Catholicism and that a century later Catholic France fought against Catholic HRE in favor of the protestant powers. Cite your references before making absurd suggestions that the religious wars were linked. I can't see any POV issues here. The counter-reformation was the peaceful way to bring Protestants back to Rome; the religious wars were politically motivated wars with a secondary objective of changing the religion of the vanquished. Tourskin (talk) 07:02, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Unsourced statement removed
I have removed the following statement, as it was tagged "citation needed" for several months.
- This examination of the Copernican theory was a factor in starting the scientific revolution outside the Catholic Church, which banned the study of Galileo's works until the mid-eighteenth century.
If anyone can find a source to back up this statement, feel free to re-add it. —Angr If you've written a quality article... 18:32, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Expand...
Can we expand Counter-Reformation#Spiritual Movements. I believe it's necessary for that's short it provides very little information. You only said about that Spirituali, but that there are so many other movements have sprung up, including those seen on the introduction part of the article. -Pika ten10 (talk) 06:38, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Art
I'm surprised that there's nothing in the article about Counter-Reformation painting or other art forms except music, or the wider cultural project of the Counter-Reformation. There is a separate entry on The Reformation and art which discusses both Protestant and Catholic art, but perhaps there should be a brief summary in this article. I added a reference to the "See also" at the bottom, but that's not a substitute for a proper mention of visual arts, literature, etc, in the article body. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.172.19.20 (talk) 17:41, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
- I don't know if that was an explicit part of the Counter-reformation. Tourskin (talk) 19:03, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
There should be something more here. -- Secisek (talk) 19:07, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Oddity: counter-reformation reformation
Being a "protestant", I cannot avoid criticise the idiotic term "counter-reformation". OK, a reformation to counter reformations? The best way to counter-reform is to refuse to do anything... Isn't it instead a reformation in parallel, inspired by (the bad sides, mostly) of protestant reformation? This is my criticism, but shouldn't the name of the article be "Roman-Catholic Revival"? Counter-reformation seems to be a bad term, since it gives the false reactionary impression about a constructive and progressive spiritual work. (??) Said: Rursus ☻ 09:33, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
- I agree that the term is - as you say - "idiotic"; It should be Catholic Reformation, there are plenty of references here: [11] ClemMcGann (talk) 09:55, 15 May 2008 (UTC)