Racism/Civil War book/ and the Agenda of the early Catholic Church for America

From William A. Percy
Jump to: navigation, search

I thought of your project-book on slavery-when I saw an interview with some author on C-SPAN/Booktv. I forgot to write it down, but book had word flame or aflame in it and he says that while the Civil War was about slavery, it also involved anti-Catholic views of Evangelicals-immigrants for Ireland, and the south hated them as much as it does Muslims now.

The book came to mind when I accidentally glanced at another book, from 1989 I think, called Catholicism and the Renewal of American Democracy. I may be misunderstanding the aim of the book, but if i do understand it, it makes me have a different, negative view of the Catholic church and the hierarchy of those who came to America.

It confirms that they intended to take over the nation, strangely thinking they would "help the democracy. It is arrogant beyond belief since they assumed they could come take control of a good nation when by their own admission they came to a nation already started and not needing their input. The book implies that the best reason they could take us over was we already had a Constitution that guaranteed them freedom of religion.

The author, George Weigel, in the intro covers the lecture in 1889 by Archbishop John Ireland of St Paul,(in Baltimore I think)"more familiarly known as the 'Consecrated Blizzard of the Northwest.'" A few quotes might explain my concern.: "To make America Catholic." "To make America Catholic was both an evangelical and a patriotic imperative." He says the church would preserve, as no human power or human church can, the liberties of the Republic. This defies the whole idea that America was already a Republic and they were coming here to enjoy the fruits of others' labor. Our Founders had established a free nation already. It was from the people, not a church.

Ireland saw that America was the future. They wanted to bring for a new order???

"Ireland believed that the task of converting America would fit naturally with the dispositions of this new people, and would be made more compelling by the state of other religious communities. The American people had 'deep religious instincts.; Christian principles were 'rooted in their modes of thought and social practices.' Protestantism was in a 'hopeless dissolution, utterly valueless as a doctrinal or moral power.'"

Ironically the word modernism comes up, as it does today in discussing issues of Islam. "In the post-World War II period, American Catholics became increasingly 'mainstreamed,' as the sociologists say, ....As for the question of Catholicism and modernity, Catholics..now hold chairs at (various colleges.")

Some chapters attack the National Catholic Reporter, but in some cases I find the attack justified, as the quotes from it-which I do not see-make them fit the left-wing stereotype of blaming America for all the ills of the world. But it is stupid for the early Catholic leaders to think they were going to take over America for Catholicism and make us great when they were coming to the nation BECAUSE we were already great and clearly the future players in the world.

But in a sense this fear of Protestants of the Catholic "agenda" seems to have been justified, just as the glbt fear of religions is justified.

Personal tools