Talk:Patrick Francis Healy

POV labeling
I question the claim that Patrick Francis was a "black" Jesuit and later a "black" college president. I also question the claim that James Augustine was the first "African American" Bishop. Their photographs show no sign of African features. Furthermore, there is overwhelming first-hand evidence that these men (as well as Patrick Francis's brothers Michael Morris Healy, Jr. and Alexander Sherwood Healy and their sister) saw themselves as White, nothing more. They were accepted as White by their society of the time. They left numerous written documents to this effect, and even the sea-captain’s teen-aged son once scratched his name on a remote rock above the Arctic Circle during an exploration voyage as “the first white boy” to have visited the region.

The notion that a person who self-identifies as White, was raised as White, and looks White, is "really Black" in some invisible intangible way due merely to an acknowledged trace of Black ancestry is a modern notion that became widespread in U.S. popular culture only around the turn of the 20th century. The notion the Healys were "really Black" in some sense would have been as bizarre to them as it would have been to Alexander Hamilton, John James Audubon, Alessandro de Medici, Queen Charlotte, or Florida's first U.S. senator, David Levy Yulee, who led the state into secession.

If the goal is to shed a favorable light on America's mixed heritage, then the goal could easily be met by re-wording to say that "they were among the first  to openly acknowledge African ancestry." Acknowledging a trace of African ancestry is a very different thing from adopting an African-American or Black ethnic self-identity.

I am not sure whether this is a POV problem or simply one of factual inaccuracy, but I would be grateful if someone could address it. In short, the article applies the 20th-century one-drop rule of "racial" self-identity to people who would have ridiculed the notion and who clearly self-identitified ethnically as Irish-American. -- Frank W Sweet 15:42, 28 December 2005 (UTC)


 * It's amazing how much 10 years can shape the consensus, to have us acknowledge that Patrick Francis Healy *was* a black Jesuit and a black college president. Google his name and you'll see all the research and literature that has emerged in recent years about this remarkable man.  It's amusing now to look back at this silly attempt to elide his "trace" (actually 1/4) of African ancestry, or attempt to contort oneself to accept African but not "African-American" identity.  One does not simply "adopt" African-American identity.  In 19th century America, it was imposed upon you by society and state law - which enforced the "one-drop" rule well before the 20th-century.  In the enclaves of Catholic culture, and the brief opening shortly after the Civil War under Reconstruction, a few families like the Healys were afforded the opportunity to prosper in mainstream society, and to openly declare their mixed identity (within their social circles).  The closing of these opportunities in 1880s and 1890s under Jim Crow is confirmed by the absence of such stories after that brief time period. Huangdi (talk) 03:53, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

This is a very deep question about racial identity, not really a useful subject for a very specific biographical page. Probably it ought to be taken up on a page that discusses race or perhaps race in the United States. I think it would be fine to say that they had "African-American ancestry" or "African-American roots" rather than to say baldly that they were African-Americans. But given the one-drop rule in common use in the United States at the time, they certainly suffered under some social handicap. And the proof of this is that the Society chose to send Fr. Healy to seminary and to ordain him in Belgium, where different rules applied. The first African-American to be ordained in the United States, Fr. Augustine Tolton, had a very rough time of it. --Stewart king (talk) 22:52, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

--- In fact, this wikipedia entry downplays the impact ancestry had on the Healys' lives. The African ancestry of Sherwood and James Healy was well known in their South Boston parish and overcoming this was one of James Healy's triumphs. The move of the Healy children to Holy Cross College and Massachusetts from New York was sparked by race issues. Their schooling in New York had been unpleasant because of their second class status and the fugitive slave laws were a threat. Michael Healy ran away from Holy Cross more than once because of taunting by his schoolmates; his brother Patrick then a prefect at the college regretted not doing more to stop it. A chapter in James Healy's biography is titled "The Bishop is a [N-word]" and discusses bigotry that Healy encountered and overcame as Bishop of Portland. James Healy only acknowledged one identity: "We are all one in Christ." Michael Healy's problems during his unhappy later years in the Coast Guard were tainted with racial animus. Moreover: the Healy family has been a part of widely known public history at least since Michener wrote about Michael Healy in Alaska back in 1988. -- Jim McManus — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.3.41.151 (talk) 16:16, 6 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Healy was predominately white. He said that his mother was octoroon, meaning one-eighth black. Since his father was white Irish, Healy and his siblings were 15/16 white and 1/16 black or African, not 1/4. If they had been born free and not into slavery, which was understood as a racial caste of African-descended people by the time of their births, regardless of proportion of white ancestry, they would have been considered legally white in most southern states, as Jefferson's 7/8 white children by Sally Hemmings would have been. In fact, the one-drop laws were passed in the early 20th century.Parkwells (talk) 22:39, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is correctly that Healy was mostly white by bloodline. However, white and black in the South (and larger US) during Healy's life were not always so clear-cut, as you mention. The Racial identity section of the article goes into detail about Healy's precise ancestry and the social conventions of the time regarding racial classification. The lede section summarizes that section. It is true that there would most likely be differences between what people generally regarded his race at the time, in the early-mid 20th-century, and today. The vast majority of contemporary sources do not definitively say one way or the other, but simply describe the historical classification and the claim that he was the first Black American to do several things.  Ergo Sum  23:24, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your note. I was just trying to be clear that he was predominately European in ancestry and had forgotten what was said in the Lead.Parkwells (talk) 17:43, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Religious Title
Wikipedia pages for other Catholic priests sometimes have their titles and religious order given in the first sentence--i.e. 'The Most Rev Patrick Francis Healy S.J. was the 29th president"--I'm wondering if that's appropriate here?

Also, I think given his stature, it would be appropriate to have his ordination information and dates in his infobox--I'm not sure where to get that info though. Jx242 (talk) 18:11, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Patrick Francis Healy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131215170533/http://www.library.georgetown.edu:80/dept/speccoll/pfhealy.htm to http://www.library.georgetown.edu/dept/speccoll/pfhealy.htm

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 09:48, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Needs citation
"Healy was at first unable to find a school in the north that would accept his children, resulting from anti-Catholic and anti-Irish bigotry."

This needs a proper reference as it sounds absurd. St. Peter's Parish School was founded in lower Manhattan in 1800. St. Patrick's Cathedral School was opened in 1817. By 1850 there was an entire system of Catholic schools in NY City.Jonathan f1 (talk) 06:38, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
 * That was a holdover from the pre-overhaul version of the article. I meant to find a source for it, but cannot at the moment, so I've removed it. Thank you for the astute, if brusque, observation.  Ergo Sum  18:50, 28 September 2020 (UTC)