Old propaganda becomes mythologised. When a claim is invented and it appeals to a mindset it joins that fabulous tableaux. I live in a waspish culture. So it is their cache of tropes I was immersed in. My misfortune is, I have no comfort in it. Several of the tropes are utterly false, while others are highly debatable and suspect. Yet, they are resistant to change. Several of these show up, and rattled off in, even, college history survey courses. They are so accepted, that they have become proverbial. They have become successful, so successful that, even, those whom they are directed against believe them. The following are certain, anti-catholic chestnuts. Now, there are other believed fictions in the non-religious sphere also; they are frequent in fields where opposing camps have divided themselves, such as in politics*. When factual corrections, and logical, even irrefutable, evidence is given, the false position, often, withstands the assault of reality.
angels on a pin's head, or needle's point
Isaac D'Israeli (1766-1848), the father of premier Benjamin Disraeli, wished to ridicule Thomas Aquinas and other scholastics and he, not they, brought forth this argument. He may have been familiar with a handful satires written between his time and Thomas' time. He is the author of this fiction. Saint Thomas tells us that angels are non corporeal, so the question never was his.
mediæval flat earth
The man who invented Rip van Winkle, and Ichabod Crane, invented this one. Washington Irving wrote a book on the voyages of Columbus. Salamanca, the spanish university, in 1486 had a discussion on the circumference of the spherical earth, not whether the earth was spherical. The american 'mediæval' mind created this theory in 1828.
adam's belly button
Some people, fundamentalist protestants, are upset with Michelangelo's Sistine painting of Adam. Adam has a navel. This was neither a renaissance, nor mediæval dilemma. God created man (Adam) completely and perfectly intact. Before people read the Bible, in certain protestant manners, and thought processes, this issue was unthinkable.
bibles were kept locked and chained to prevent reading
Bibles, and other books, were chained, in part, for the same reasons some reference books in twentieth century libraries, telephone books in booths, registry books in guard shacks and hotels were--so that people didn't walk off with them, and that the next person could use them. Also some of these mediæval tomes were very valuable, and artworks in themselves. Further, before movable type and the printing press, literacy rates were lower. Further, access to cheap books for a mass public was a nineteenth century phenomenon, as was still greater rates of education and literacy. The rationale depicted in this myth is easily demonstrable as ridiculous, but its true purpose is to project a successful slander.
luther's theses
Luther and the church door posting is a fiction, that, Luther in his own time denied. It is a dramatic, theatrical invention to trumpet his rôle.
spanish inquisition
In some versions 50 million or more were executed. Spain has not that population now in a far more populous world. Where did the bodies come from?
The spanish inquisition went on for centuries. Many real historians would cite the number of executions from one to ten thousand. This is part of the black legend that elizabethan propagandists used to slander, and libel, the spanish enemy. The tudor queen had an extensive terror, torture, and killing operation. A chief difference, between the two, was that the spanish institution allowed for legal defenses for the accused, while much of the english persecution was secret, and extra-legal, confere the tactics of the busheviks.
galileo
Galileo was under a condition of house arrest, not torture, nor execution.
mediæval burning of witches
The greatest number of witch trials were during the age of reason. The first english witch was executed in Elizabeth's reign. The scots first executed a great number of supposed witches beginning in 1590, in North Berwick. They were tortured and burnt. James VI was the instigator. Even greater numbers (a few thousand) during the seventeenth century. Calvinists, on both side of the Atlantic, hunted witches. Twenty were executed (nineteen hanged, one crushed) and five died in detention, all in Salem of Massachusetts Bay Colony, during 1692-3. In November of 1688 the irish, catholic, gaelic speaking, ex-slave, Mary Glover was hanged in Boston. Cotton Mather judged her guilty for all that she was as proof of being a witch.
dark ages
In this, supposedly, ignorant span of centuries the church created the university and the hospital as institutions. As a corrective one can read Régine Pernoud († 1998). Her quick, enjoyable read is available in english translation, Those Terrible Middle Ages (1997). Pernoud points out many historical fallacies, including the mussulman civilising influence, protestantism as liberating (in great contrast to a recent guest, Serene Jones, on the most recent Bill Moyers Journal, where she propagandised on Calvin as I turned on, and then off the set; usually Mr. Moyers has more accurate and credible guests), modernity as freedom and so on.
___________________________
*Republican talk radio is substantially of this nature, as is Fox television. John McCain had to tell a disbelieving woman that Obama was a christian, and not what she had heard. The false issue, that doubts his citizenship is of like nature, but this has always been the modus operandi of the Republicans. Oft told lies, especially appealing lies, are convincing.
Showing posts with label american anti-catholicism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label american anti-catholicism. Show all posts
Sunday, July 5, 2009
Monday, February 16, 2009
Crucifixes disturb bigots
In 2003, Adel Smith a mohammedan, living in Italy, made a public campaign against the crucifix, first at his son’s school. He convinced one judge, and then lost to the next. He threw a crucifix out of a hospital room. He has been a frequent guest on italian radio and television. He began Unione dei musulmani d'Italia, and outside of recent albanians, it has few members. He is largely unsuccessful and is more of a carnival act. Very few people, including other mohammedans, support his goals.
Recently, Boston College has re-introduced crucifixes and icons into all of its classrooms. In Italy it was, also, institutes of the state, that displayed crucifixes. Boston College is not a state facility. It is a catholic school. In a campus paper and its electronique mail, The Observer, at least three chemistry professors objected. One says, he is a practicing anglican, and objects to the display of “religious art” [his repeated use of quotation marks], he expected such behavior from Notre Dame, but not there. Chemistry professor Amir Hoveyda has been particularly aggrieved and has been quoted in a few different papers. Most of the professors, who have publicly complained, have confessed to not being catholic.
Other remarks whine: bait and switch, intolerance, false pretenses, forced imposition. I doubt there is any law, in effect in Boston, that demands governmental flags to be displayed in private institutions. I have never been to Boston, I am sure there are such flags in all sorts of private institutions, and I do not believe there are individuals raising a hue and cry about it. These doctors are employees of a jesuit school, catholics pay them to work in a catholic school. I doubt, that, an employee of General Motors objects to GM logos in the workplace.
The Boston Herald ran an informal internet poll, 94% of 3804 responses found no cause for disapproval. The tail wants the dog to wag.
I went to a catholic grade school, which, at the time of my graduation, catholics were a minority; they were soon to be a rarity. I had fellow classmates, whom, objected to religion class. Some classmates were taught anti-catholic propaganda and bigotry at home. Some shared their thoughts with me. At Boston College it is mostly professorial staff that have objected. Most catholic colleges and universities hire non-catholics, there are schools ran by other faiths that demand signing statements, that guarantee religious conformity, and they are not restricted to theology faculty. Catholic schools have been guilty of being overly accommodating, not under accommodating to non-catholics.
Many people have religious objects in their homes. What guest has the right to object ? how many have the gall to do so?
Recently, Boston College has re-introduced crucifixes and icons into all of its classrooms. In Italy it was, also, institutes of the state, that displayed crucifixes. Boston College is not a state facility. It is a catholic school. In a campus paper and its electronique mail, The Observer, at least three chemistry professors objected. One says, he is a practicing anglican, and objects to the display of “religious art” [his repeated use of quotation marks], he expected such behavior from Notre Dame, but not there. Chemistry professor Amir Hoveyda has been particularly aggrieved and has been quoted in a few different papers. Most of the professors, who have publicly complained, have confessed to not being catholic.
Other remarks whine: bait and switch, intolerance, false pretenses, forced imposition. I doubt there is any law, in effect in Boston, that demands governmental flags to be displayed in private institutions. I have never been to Boston, I am sure there are such flags in all sorts of private institutions, and I do not believe there are individuals raising a hue and cry about it. These doctors are employees of a jesuit school, catholics pay them to work in a catholic school. I doubt, that, an employee of General Motors objects to GM logos in the workplace.
The Boston Herald ran an informal internet poll, 94% of 3804 responses found no cause for disapproval. The tail wants the dog to wag.
I went to a catholic grade school, which, at the time of my graduation, catholics were a minority; they were soon to be a rarity. I had fellow classmates, whom, objected to religion class. Some classmates were taught anti-catholic propaganda and bigotry at home. Some shared their thoughts with me. At Boston College it is mostly professorial staff that have objected. Most catholic colleges and universities hire non-catholics, there are schools ran by other faiths that demand signing statements, that guarantee religious conformity, and they are not restricted to theology faculty. Catholic schools have been guilty of being overly accommodating, not under accommodating to non-catholics.
Many people have religious objects in their homes. What guest has the right to object ? how many have the gall to do so?
Sunday, November 2, 2008
Tarring and feathering a Jesuit
Father Johannes Bapst S.J., (*La Roche, Fribourg, Switzerland 1815, †2 November, 1887, Mount Hope, Maryland) did what the Jesuits were famous for, missioned in distant, hostile lands, taught and ran schools, preached the Gospel, administered the Sacraments, and courted martyrdom. He was a missionary amongst civilised, north american indians (Passamaquoddy and Penobscot), irish immigrants, and was berated and tortured by yankees.
On the last day of 1846, he was ordained in the old country. In 1848, he was in Old Town, Maine, ministering to indians, whom had been without a priest for twenty years. In 1850 he went to Eastport. He had missions about the state, and brought converts to the faith. He was pastor in Bangor from 1853-1860 and was known about the state.
Now, at the time, one of the opposition (to the Democrats) parties called itself, the American party; people of the time, and posterity, knew them as the Know-Nothings. They were one of the constituent parts of the future Republican party. They were an one issue party. They were extremely opposed to catholicism, catholic immigration and catholic schooling. In Ellsworth, Bapst and the catholic community protested against forced, protestant, bible study in school.
On the 3rd of June 1854, the residence, where he was staying in Ellsworth, was attacked. The 5th of June, the town council ordered him to be stripped, tarred and feathered, and ridden on a rail to the woods, if he were to remain or be found in town again. That happened on the 14th of October. In addition, he was relieved of his wallet and watch. Now, sometimes the hot tar causes death, sometimes that was the intention. The feathering is for added mirth to the torturers and crowd. The riding on the rail, is both for physical pain and a diabolical, extension of performance art. If the victim survives the severe burns, he is permanently scarred, physically, emotionally and mentally. The next day, Sunday, he said mass twice. He would return to Bangor. Some papers referred to the event as the Ellsworth Outrage.
Father John Bapst did survive. He was the first president of Boston College from 1863 to 1869, and became the jesuit superior of Canada and New York. His success and achievement began to fail. His mind became unclear, he screamed awake from nightmares, that, attackers were coming through the windows. He was instituitionalised.
This is why torture is such a great and insidious evil. The experience is so humiliating, painful, alienating and devastating. A few moments, or minutes, are carried by the victim for the rest of his life, effecting and affecting, not only himself, but, also, those he encounters. For those who have families, the pain is shared and transferred. Anyone who allows, tolerates, advocates, enjoys or inflicts torture is a moral monster.
Saturday, August 23, 2008
Sébastien Râle
Well might the traveler stop to seeThe border of what came to be the maritime provinces of Canada, and New England, was not fixed until 1842*. The first half of the 18th century, the territory was disputed between french l’Acadie and english Massachusetts, and of course there were the aboriginals. There is the high school history question, “Who won the French and Indian War†?” Well, those were not the competitors, but the allied opponents of the british empire, of which the colonies, which were to form the United States, were a part.
The tall, dark forms that take their way
From the birch canoe on the river shore,
And the forest paths, to that chapel door;
And marvel to mark the naked knees
And the dusky foreheads bending there,
While in coarse white vesture over these
In blessing or in prayer,
Stretching abroad his thin pale hands,
Like a shrouded ghost the Jesuit stands.
—Mogg Megone, John Greenleaf Whittier
In that territory, the french and the indians were united in faith. That faith, was the ancient faith that, was demonised by the calvinists of Massachusetts. Because of the valuable timber and furs that were coveted, and the fear of enemies that the english had, there was always a war looming.
Nanrantsouak/Norridgewock‡ was the principle village of the Abenaki/Wabanaki/Abernaquois on the Kennebec. The christian, catholic, identification of the area’s indians began with the Passamaquoddy in 1604, and later with the Penobscot and Abenaki. Sébastien Râle§ S.J.*1652, came to Quebec in 1689, and to the Abenaki in 1695 where he founded a chapel (to replace a previously burned church) and school, which the english first burned with the village in 1705. L’Acadie was lost (when the War of Spanish Succession, ended with the Treaty of Utrecht 1713), and english settlement approached the Abenaki.
It was, specifically, illegal to be a priest in the colony of Massachusetts, the repeated presence was a capital crime. More than one expedition was made to execute the law, on Father Râle. Samuel Shute, governor of Massachusetts, discharged the expedition to take care of Râle, when the english made war|| on the Abenaki, in 1722. It was the first war, in which, an american government offered a bounty on scalps. The english and their colonists always feared, and entertained conspiracies of indians, frenchmen, spaniards and catholics, and hated all of them, and coveted their possessions. Râle was a frenchman, a catholic, a priest, a jesuit (the most hated and feared of catholics) and a major figure amongst the indians. All these earned him martyrdom. On August 23rd, 1724 the Massachusetts militia caught their prey. The accounts differ widely based on partisanship, but his scalp was a prized trophy, along with other items. The oldest account, includes that, he was shot dead, in front of an outdoor cross. Forty years later, the english provided another account.
When the survivors returned, they found his grossly, mutilated body and buried him, where the altar had been. A ‘fama sanctitatis’ began among the Abenaki, concerning Râle, and remains. The requirements, to be recognised, as a martyr are, that he willingly risked life, with fervor for the faith, to those ‘in odium fidei’. Father Râle’s cause was entered in 1941, with 115 other martyrs, by Dennis Cardinal Dougherty of Philadelphia.
______________
*Webster-Ashburton Treaty
†In the colonial period, wars were often named after the opponent (King Philip’s War 1675, Father Rasle’s War 1724-1726, French-Indian Wars 1754-1763) or the ruler of the time (King William’s War 1689, Queen Anne’s War 1702); similarly, to-day, it would be the Second Iraqui War 2003- , or george bush junior’s war 2003- .
‡The english settled in 1773, the town incorporated in 1804, and is now Madison, Maine.
§the circumflex a (â), in french orthography, suggests a, sometimes missing, following ‘s’, hence: Râle, Rasle, Rasles
||Dummer’s, Father Rale’s, Greylock’s, Lovewell’s, Three Years, or the 4th Indian War (1722-1725).
Monday, July 21, 2008
Respecting the beliefs of others you reject
The last president de jure, that we had, and his wife, Hillary received Communion in Africa, and I was in askance, that, the press did not question the propriety. Now, recently, the sometimes atheist, Sally Quinn* has discussed receiving Communion in a manner of droit de dilettante. She admitted, that, this was the first time she transgressed the Catholic Sacrament. Somewhere the supporting views of several ‘religious figures’ were provided . I recognised only the name, Deepak Chopra, the semi-hindoo charlatan; none appeared to be catholic or orthodox. They all seemed in agreement of an, inclusive, non-doctrinaire, new age Christ, Whom, they approve of, and who they allow to confirm their views.
Now, the catholic and orthodox world share the belief of the actuality of that Sacrament. We believe the words of Jesus in the Gospels, Matthew, and at length in John; not as some christians [read protestants] who disbelieve and transform their teachings into Scripture. The latin west uses the term ‘transubstantiation’ for the mystery, the orthodox east believes in the same mystery, but do not use the language.
We are a voluntary association, we welcome new members, but people who are not members can not, reasonably, expect us to bend to their whims and dictates. Everyone is free to join, and accept, or not. You are free to believe what you will, we are free to believe what we believe. If you can not behave civilly towards us, it is to your discredit, and shame, not ours.
In the early generations of the protestant heresies, Mary was not attacked, and many, other, current, american, protestant, hang ups were not much mentioned. In France, most of the printed attacks were on the celebration of the Eucharist. What, turned the monarchy against the movement, of prétendus réformés, was the gall and audacity, of the wording, on the placarding of France. Luther, never posted on a door; but the proto-huguenots did. They posted on the king’s door, and throughout Paris, and four other cities, on the night of 17/18 October, 1534. They posted the most abusive language: blasphemous, and designed to cause outrage. This is the “Affair of the Placards” in the history of France.
The item that most perplexed me, concerning the Republican side show, of the persecution, of Bill Clinton, was his statement, “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.” It dumbfounded me. This was the origin of that absurdity. Did Jesus mean, what he said? or not? Here is where the ‘sola scriptura’ crowd and ‘bible believing literalists’ obfuscate and prevaricate. Is means is; an identity redundancy; a tautology. Any clever game of invented semantics is false.
*of the Washington Post and Newsweek, self styled master of theology, and friend of Jon Beacham, self conferred doctorate of theology and american history.
Now, the catholic and orthodox world share the belief of the actuality of that Sacrament. We believe the words of Jesus in the Gospels, Matthew, and at length in John; not as some christians [read protestants] who disbelieve and transform their teachings into Scripture. The latin west uses the term ‘transubstantiation’ for the mystery, the orthodox east believes in the same mystery, but do not use the language.
“For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise we have been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.” — Justin Martyr †165, First ApologyThe Sacrament, in both churches, is equally valid. The Orthodox do not find it licit for Catholics to receive. I had a priest, at the cathedral, answer my question, in this manner: you recognise the validity of another man’s marriage to his wife, you do not honor that Sacrament by partaking of his wife. It is a scandal, that, we are not in communion; may God, in His mercy, end this millennium of separation.
“They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again. Those, therefore, who speak against this gift of God, incur death in the midst of their disputes. But it were better for them to treat it with respect, that they also might rise again.”— Ignatius of Antioch, †110, Epistle to SmyrnaeansNow, what the protestant, and non-christian world believe about their counterpart to Our Sacrament, or about Our Sacrament, is irrelevant for us. It is incumbent on their exercise of good will, to respect the beliefs of others, that, they reject. Yet, they seem not only ready to ridicule and denigrate, but to dictate and act out. It is wonderfully remarkable, that, in the US, that, all are free to criticise Catholicism. It is not publicly respected, that, catholics are to defend themselves, and their beliefs.
We are a voluntary association, we welcome new members, but people who are not members can not, reasonably, expect us to bend to their whims and dictates. Everyone is free to join, and accept, or not. You are free to believe what you will, we are free to believe what we believe. If you can not behave civilly towards us, it is to your discredit, and shame, not ours.
In the early generations of the protestant heresies, Mary was not attacked, and many, other, current, american, protestant, hang ups were not much mentioned. In France, most of the printed attacks were on the celebration of the Eucharist. What, turned the monarchy against the movement, of prétendus réformés, was the gall and audacity, of the wording, on the placarding of France. Luther, never posted on a door; but the proto-huguenots did. They posted on the king’s door, and throughout Paris, and four other cities, on the night of 17/18 October, 1534. They posted the most abusive language: blasphemous, and designed to cause outrage. This is the “Affair of the Placards” in the history of France.
The item that most perplexed me, concerning the Republican side show, of the persecution, of Bill Clinton, was his statement, “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.” It dumbfounded me. This was the origin of that absurdity. Did Jesus mean, what he said? or not? Here is where the ‘sola scriptura’ crowd and ‘bible believing literalists’ obfuscate and prevaricate. Is means is; an identity redundancy; a tautology. Any clever game of invented semantics is false.
And whilst they were at supper, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and broke: and gave to his disciples, and said: Take ye, and eat. This is my body. And taking the chalice, he gave thanks, and gave to them, saying: Drink ye all of this. For this is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many unto remission of sins.— Matthew xxvi. 26-28.________________________
*of the Washington Post and Newsweek, self styled master of theology, and friend of Jon Beacham, self conferred doctorate of theology and american history.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Massachusetts and the exercise of religion
On the 17th of June 1700, the law of Massachusetts’ was proclaimed to the world, that, the presence of a Catholick priest in Massachusetts merited death by the state. Such was the spirit of love, freedom and godliness in John Winthrop’s city on the hill, the pure protestant Jerusalem. Soon New York had the same statute.
As in mother England, catholicism was a capital offense. The tragically, repetitively, unfortunate Anne (nicknamed Goody, an appellation given to women in Massachusetts then) Glover was hanged on 16 November 1688. In a 1689 book, Memorable Providences, Cotton Mather, who interrogated, tells of her witchcraft. Anne, had survived Cromwell’s massacres, at Drogheda and elsewhere, he chose to dispense with further genocide, only because of the logistics, and deported or sold other irish. She was sent, as a slave, to Barbados, then, as a ‘servant’ to Massachusetts. She was accused by children. By test, though she could recite the Our Father, in latin and gaelic, but not in english, she was a proven witch. During the ‘trial’, Mather referred to the ‘hag’ as “a scandalous old Irishwoman, very poor, a Roman Catholick and obstinate in idolatry”. Our Lady of Victories Eucharistic Shrine, Boston, has a plaque to Ann Glover as the first catholic martyr of Massachusetts. She was the first ‘witch’ hanged in America, and the last woman hanged in Boston.
Sebastian Râle was a Jesuit missionary in the disputed territory of l’Acadie/Massachusetts in, what is now, Maine. There were several attempts on his life. On August 23rd, 1724 the Massachusetts militia caught their prey. His scalp was displayed triumphantly in Boston.
A hundred years ago at the college of the Holy Cross, the new archbishop, soon to be cardinal, William Henry O’Connell spoke at length to commemorate the hundredth anniversary of the Boston diocese. O’Connell. He was the eleventh child of potato failure parents. He was a vain glorious, powerfully arrogant, prince of the church, who enjoyed splendor and ambition, and overlooked corruption. He was a militantly, triumphal, proponent of the one, true church:
That is how that establishment staggered, of course they still had the money, and they still do. But the despised, wretched, immigrants (this includes canadiens, poles, italians, litvaks, greeks, latinos) had the bodies. This is why the Republican party has always wanted to suppress the vote, and spread fear and hatred of immigrants. But the worst thing of these immigrants was their religion. Attempts to americanise, the newcomers, always was to de-romanise them*. In the case of the irish, this had failed until the last generation, and in Boston, there were self-inflicted wounds. There is still a lingering catholicism in Massachusetts, but it is not triumphant or strong, it is bickering, beleaguered, weak and weary.
______________________________
*and now they are attempting to de-democratise the remaining catholics
postscriptum:† On the night of McCain’s acceptance speech, I watched Spencer Tracy; the line wasn’t in the movie, although a similar vein of material was present. I would like to re-encounter that film.
As in mother England, catholicism was a capital offense. The tragically, repetitively, unfortunate Anne (nicknamed Goody, an appellation given to women in Massachusetts then) Glover was hanged on 16 November 1688. In a 1689 book, Memorable Providences, Cotton Mather, who interrogated, tells of her witchcraft. Anne, had survived Cromwell’s massacres, at Drogheda and elsewhere, he chose to dispense with further genocide, only because of the logistics, and deported or sold other irish. She was sent, as a slave, to Barbados, then, as a ‘servant’ to Massachusetts. She was accused by children. By test, though she could recite the Our Father, in latin and gaelic, but not in english, she was a proven witch. During the ‘trial’, Mather referred to the ‘hag’ as “a scandalous old Irishwoman, very poor, a Roman Catholick and obstinate in idolatry”. Our Lady of Victories Eucharistic Shrine, Boston, has a plaque to Ann Glover as the first catholic martyr of Massachusetts. She was the first ‘witch’ hanged in America, and the last woman hanged in Boston.
Sebastian Râle was a Jesuit missionary in the disputed territory of l’Acadie/Massachusetts in, what is now, Maine. There were several attempts on his life. On August 23rd, 1724 the Massachusetts militia caught their prey. His scalp was displayed triumphantly in Boston.
A hundred years ago at the college of the Holy Cross, the new archbishop, soon to be cardinal, William Henry O’Connell spoke at length to commemorate the hundredth anniversary of the Boston diocese. O’Connell. He was the eleventh child of potato failure parents. He was a vain glorious, powerfully arrogant, prince of the church, who enjoyed splendor and ambition, and overlooked corruption. He was a militantly, triumphal, proponent of the one, true church:
The Puritan has passed. The Catholic remains.The city where a century ago he came unwanted he has made his own .... The child of the immigrant is called in to fill the place which the Puritan has left.James Michael Curley, was at different times: congressman, governor and mayor. He was a scion of the starving time emigrés too. Many irish at the turn of the twentieth century, had great positions in the church and the state, in the new world. Perhaps, Boston was the easiest example. In 1914 he said:
“The day of the Puritan has passed; the Anglo-Saxon is a joke; a new and better America is here.”In a novel, in 1956, and a movie, in 1958, The Last Hurrah, Edwin O’Connor writes of a similar character. Spencer Tracy plays Frank Skeffington. That and All the King’s Men are the two american political novels. La Dernière Fanfare is the french, hurrah, has a different caché. I do not have in front of me the script, but if memory serves, and my copy of the book is 457, or so, pages and I can’t find the passage now. But, O’Connell was the eleventh child, James Michael Curley had seven children. And the line, which is in some other movie†, is something like, “We have eight, or ten children, they (the Puritan/Anglo-Saxon/Yankee/Brahmin/Wasp) have small dogs.” That is how democracy, and demographics, can displace bigotry and entrenched, monied interests.
That is how that establishment staggered, of course they still had the money, and they still do. But the despised, wretched, immigrants (this includes canadiens, poles, italians, litvaks, greeks, latinos) had the bodies. This is why the Republican party has always wanted to suppress the vote, and spread fear and hatred of immigrants. But the worst thing of these immigrants was their religion. Attempts to americanise, the newcomers, always was to de-romanise them*. In the case of the irish, this had failed until the last generation, and in Boston, there were self-inflicted wounds. There is still a lingering catholicism in Massachusetts, but it is not triumphant or strong, it is bickering, beleaguered, weak and weary.
______________________________
*and now they are attempting to de-democratise the remaining catholics
postscriptum:† On the night of McCain’s acceptance speech, I watched Spencer Tracy; the line wasn’t in the movie, although a similar vein of material was present. I would like to re-encounter that film.
Saturday, May 10, 2008
Damien of Moloka‘i
Here I am a priest, dear parents, here I am a missionary in a corrupt, heretical, idolatrous country. How great my obligations are! Ah! do not forget this poor priest running night and day over the volcanoes night and day in search of strayed sheep. Pray night and day for me, I beg You.There are seven habitable islands of Hawai‘i. Moloka‘i had a reservation for lepers. They received their first priest on the 10th of May 1873. He was a 33 year old fleming, neé Joseph De Veuster, the seventh of eight children of peasants from Tremeloo, Belgium. He had followed his brother, Auguste, into the Congregation of the Sacred Hearts of Jesus and Mary. In 1860, he became Brother Damianus. Damien was devoted to St. Francis Xavier, patron of missionaries. On Saint Joseph’s Day 1864 he arrived in Honolulu. Two days later he was ordained.
There were 816 souls in that colony, a fourth being of the Faith. Their health and poverty was fetid, rotting and truly wretched. Their was a harsh and depraved anarchy in the community. They were truly abandoned. Damien became a carpenter and physician and a true priest of God. He founded the Parish of Saint Philomena in Kalaupapa.
The lepers became Catholic. Father Damien began a perpetual Eucharistic adoration. Christ was to be with them always. At one time, catholicism was banned and catholics jailed in the Sandwich Islands. The government, the powered and moneyed elite were protestants, calvinists and some mormon. They held Damien, “the papist”, with enmity. Damien had troubles with his fellow priests, also. He suffered melancholy.
Walter Murray Gibson, a scoundrel of wonderful talent and remarkable exploits, was governmental minister of near everything and owner of The Honolulu Advertiser, and founder of The Nuhou . He had been a gun runner and world adventurer, a very high ranking mormon friend of Brigham Young and no friend to Damien in his governmental rôles . Damien was the only friend of these people for a long while.
After many years Damien contracted leprosy himself. His congregation realised this, when, one day, he began with the words, “We lepers”. He needed help in his mission and controversy made the world’s press. Ira Barnes Dutton (Brother Joseph) in 1886, Fr. Louis Lambert Conrardy, James Sinnett, and Franciscan sisters with Mother Marianne Cope* came in 1888. The bishop warmed and sent Damien more help, the mission to the lepers continued.
At the beginning of spring 1889 he was bedridden. April 15 he died, now Father Damien Day is celebrated in the islands on April 15. On June 4, 1995 he was beatified. A poll in Belgium, in 2005, voted him history’s greatest belgian. He is expected to be canonised this year.
When he died, it was news. Many recognised a saint and wanted to help Molokai. But there were those who hated him. A calvinist, Reverend C. M. Hyde† libeled him with calumny, to a Reverend Gage:
Dear Brother,— In answer to your inquiries about Father Damien, I can only reply that we who knew the man are surprised at the extravagant newspaper laudations, as if he was a most saintly philanthropist. The simple truth is, he was a coarse, dirty man, head-strong and bigoted. He was not sent to Molokai, but went there without orders; did not stay at the leper settlement (before he became one himself), but circulated freely over the whole island (less than half the island is devoted to the lepers), and he came often to Honolulu. He had no hand in the reforms and improvements inaugurated, which were the work of our Board of Health, as occasion required and means were provided. He was not a pure man in his relations with women, and the leprosy of which he died should be attributed to his vices and carelessness. Others have done much for the lepers, our own ministers, the government physicians, and so forth, but never with the Catholic idea of meriting eternal life.This was published in the Sydney Presbyterian and read by Robert Louis Stevenson who then visited Molokai, and famously, and successfully rebutted his co-religionist, with an open and lengthy letter, which began in part:
To do this properly, I must begin by quoting you at large: I shall then proceed to criticise your utterance from several points of view, divine and human, in the course of which I shall attempt to draw again, and with more specification, the character of the dead saint whom it has pleased you to vilify: so much being done, I shall say farewell to you for ever.In the eighth grade, Sister Mary Harold showed our class a short film on Damien. I think it was, The Great Heart (1938). The year before, John Farrow wrote a biography, Damien the Leper. I was surprised he was not declared a saint then. He was a missionary to the outcast. The medical community has renamed the feared malady, Hansen’s disease. As historically, and biblically, feared the disease was, those who suffered from it, suffered psychologically, socially and emotionally to a great degree. The leper saint is being called to intercede with a disease of our generation, hiv/aids.
Father of mercy, in Blessed Damien you have given a shining witness of love for the poorest and most abandoned. Grant that, by his intercession, as faithful witness of the heart of your Son Jesus, we too may be servants of the most needy and rejected.We ask this through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, One God, for ever and ever. Amen.______________
*Blessed Marianne of Moloka‘i as of 14 May 2005.
† Charles McEwan Hyde, not the Edward Hyde in Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde 1886.
POSTSCRIPTUM: On 16 February 2009 the Vatican announced that on 21 February 2009 Damien will be recognised to be canonised. He will be formally, infallibly recognised as a saint, one who shares the beatific vision of God on 11 October with pomp and ceremony.
postscriptum: Damien was canonised, along with four others, in Rome on 11 October 2009.
Friday, March 28, 2008
“Catholic Schoolgirls Against The War” *
In Rome, on Easter morn, the Pope spoke about Iraq in his “Urbi et Orbi”. He spoke thusly on, “especially the Holy Land, Iraq, Lebanon and finally Tibet, all of which I encourage to seek solutions that will safeguard peace and the common good”. While the first latin high mass was celebrated, in more than a generation, at Saint Stephen, Cleveland on Easter morning, and in Chicago, at Holy Name, mass was interrupted by a demonstration, by a group calling themselves, the silly yet provocative, “Catholic Schoolgirls Against The War”. They squirted simulated blood, on themselves and others, and raised a ridiculous ruckus. The mass continued.
If they had hung nooses outside a black church, or spray painted swastikas on a synagogue, it would have gotten more notice and more disapprobation, malediction, and opprobrium and yet would have been of a less serious nature. A mass is to be continued, after beginning, even if under military fire. This is more than insult or vandalism; it is sacrilege. These people identify themselves as catholics? they act as if they were virulent anti-catholic bigots. For peace activists, they can very well be 1920s KKK crackers or any other group which hates catholicism. I was going to post on this, but after Easter week, and then I was sent a communiqué by electronique courier. Committing sacrilege at an Easter mass, is misguided, counterproductive, irrelevant and hateful. This was not advocating peace!! This was a hate crime. Some may applaud them, not I. I question if they are Catholic. To some only ex-Catholics are representative or worth notice. I am wary of people who identify themselves as christians, when I see them acting not in a christian manner.
If Cardinal George is, as they accuse, supporting bushjr, then a protest at the chancery or his residence would have been appropriate. This war BELONGS to bushjr and his cabal. To refer to the one honest and worthy statement that Colin Powell made to bushjr, when bushjr began his war machinations, "you break it, you own it". All protests should, be at least in some way, directed at bushjr. There has to have been a federal office building in downtown Chicago, in walking distance from the cathedral; but there would have been a police force there.
The Catholic Church in America has virtually no political power in the country. To push at the Catholic Church, so as to influence bushjr, is practically like pushing at an apple orchard to influence bushjr. It would be proper for the Catholic Church to denounce, in clear terms, this wretched war and the vile architects and “deciders”, though, how productive would it be? Still it might be necessary. It is doubtful, that bushjr would set up a Dachau or Gitmo for the Catholic hierarchy in his, supposed, last year of usurpation. The international church has shown when pressed by bushjr and rice, that they were against the war. The US came to Rome and pressed hard, and was rebuffed, rebuffed, although not by distinct denunciation. The point was: the US through bushjr and rice wanted a blessing†‡, and got squat, while, perhaps, most catholic americans sided with bushjr, the church, the universal church, did not!
_____________________
*The name of the group sounds reminiscent to some mocking, queer, parading groups. It is doubtful, that, many of them had been to mass any time recently, if at all. It was a group that anyone could join, anyone who disliked catholicism. I am sure it was not a closed group.
†John Paul the Great, when the words spoken are released, must have thoroughly disagreed and probably censured our american tyrant. To spare public scandal, those words said to that vacuous warmonger, that conversation is not known to us.
‡Rice, more recently, could not get an audience with Benedict. The deafening papal silence in favor of this war adventure is witness to their opposition, as was Thomas More’s to Henry VIII.
If they had hung nooses outside a black church, or spray painted swastikas on a synagogue, it would have gotten more notice and more disapprobation, malediction, and opprobrium and yet would have been of a less serious nature. A mass is to be continued, after beginning, even if under military fire. This is more than insult or vandalism; it is sacrilege. These people identify themselves as catholics? they act as if they were virulent anti-catholic bigots. For peace activists, they can very well be 1920s KKK crackers or any other group which hates catholicism. I was going to post on this, but after Easter week, and then I was sent a communiqué by electronique courier. Committing sacrilege at an Easter mass, is misguided, counterproductive, irrelevant and hateful. This was not advocating peace!! This was a hate crime. Some may applaud them, not I. I question if they are Catholic. To some only ex-Catholics are representative or worth notice. I am wary of people who identify themselves as christians, when I see them acting not in a christian manner.
If Cardinal George is, as they accuse, supporting bushjr, then a protest at the chancery or his residence would have been appropriate. This war BELONGS to bushjr and his cabal. To refer to the one honest and worthy statement that Colin Powell made to bushjr, when bushjr began his war machinations, "you break it, you own it". All protests should, be at least in some way, directed at bushjr. There has to have been a federal office building in downtown Chicago, in walking distance from the cathedral; but there would have been a police force there.
The Catholic Church in America has virtually no political power in the country. To push at the Catholic Church, so as to influence bushjr, is practically like pushing at an apple orchard to influence bushjr. It would be proper for the Catholic Church to denounce, in clear terms, this wretched war and the vile architects and “deciders”, though, how productive would it be? Still it might be necessary. It is doubtful, that bushjr would set up a Dachau or Gitmo for the Catholic hierarchy in his, supposed, last year of usurpation. The international church has shown when pressed by bushjr and rice, that they were against the war. The US came to Rome and pressed hard, and was rebuffed, rebuffed, although not by distinct denunciation. The point was: the US through bushjr and rice wanted a blessing†‡, and got squat, while, perhaps, most catholic americans sided with bushjr, the church, the universal church, did not!
_____________________
*The name of the group sounds reminiscent to some mocking, queer, parading groups. It is doubtful, that, many of them had been to mass any time recently, if at all. It was a group that anyone could join, anyone who disliked catholicism. I am sure it was not a closed group.
†John Paul the Great, when the words spoken are released, must have thoroughly disagreed and probably censured our american tyrant. To spare public scandal, those words said to that vacuous warmonger, that conversation is not known to us.
‡Rice, more recently, could not get an audience with Benedict. The deafening papal silence in favor of this war adventure is witness to their opposition, as was Thomas More’s to Henry VIII.
Wednesday, December 26, 2007
Blair, Huckabee, Christianity & Politics
Tony Blair, Mike Huckabee, Christianity and Politics
The rôle of religion in the pursuit of political power is quite an intrigue. Tony Blair has entered into the catholic faith after the end of his political career. He attained and maintained the highest political office in his land. Mike Huckabee is attempting to obtain the highest political office in his land. Huckabee is a Baptist minister and has used those arrows in his quiver a plenty.
Blair entered the church AFTER it could signify anything in his work, either to advance the faith in his land or, to suffer for it from public opposition. Huckabee is utilizing, as adroitly as he possibly can, any advantage christianity, in the public sphere, can gain him. The political use of the pulpit in protestant churches is part and parcel of the political life of the United States.
In Britain there has been a steady trickle of individuals into the Catholic Church since the emancipation (1829). Some of the finest minds in the land, men who would be cardinals: Newman and Manning; writers: Greene, Sitwell, Hopkins, Waugh, Thompson, Muggeridge ... There has been relatives of the queen, who need special dispensation, and thereby, remove themselves from succession. These people are referred to as crossing the Tiber or having "poped".
Recent news reports have confirmed, what many knew, that on Sunday there are more Catholics in church than Anglicans. Many are of irish and polish nationality and other non sassenach extraction; but still, those from either the high end or the low end of social prestige are free to be Catholics. In the Daily Mail, Katie Grant has the succinct :
Tony now joins the church militant at Christmastide. For an Anglican, has already been baptised as a christian, all he needed was to give a good confession in the private secrecy of a confessional, but in such a public life should not a public accounting be à-propos?
As a couple of quotations more than amply suggest that public use of religion in British life is discouraged in today's Britannia.
Very recently, Huckabee went to San Antonio, Tejas; not to the Cathedral of San Fernando, but to the megachurch of John Hagee. Outside of certain circles, this name means nothing. I have read and heard people say that he is a television evangelist. He has been profiled on 60 Minutes as a christian zionist. He fancies himself a published historian. What can be quickly gleaned, is that he, Hagee, is a cheerleader for Armageddon, and a lying, anti-catholic bigot. Since these two positions are so disgusting, and must ought be so outré, that it is difficult to gage his sanity or sincerity. Yet, Mike is there, immediately before Christmas, in a state that will reliably vote Republican, in a city where its culture, to a significant degree, is pre-anglo, pre-wasp; and all this importunes what in the Iowa campaign?
Huckabee has given sermons in his former career. These are not available, now, to the public. Huckabee was a radio and television broadcaster. I have met, worked with, evangelicals who offer me recordings of their pastors' talks. They encourage me to listen to them on local a.m. radio. They have played them for my edification at work. I was passive to this, and did not take up their offers, and they were not particularly interested in my views. I have met several of his co-religionists, in the course of my life, and to say, that, they have been hostile to catholicism is an understatement. The kindest were dismissive, the more assertive were unpleasant. Historical fact meant nothing. They share a created legend of history and, not only do they have an interpretation of their beliefs, they have one of mine. They expound with cheney like certainty on catholics and catholicism.
Huckabee is not a candidate of the Republican establishment, that would be Romney and Giuliani. A great deal of his programme I can agree with. Sam Brownback had some, similar positions, and worked Iowa from neighboring Kansas -- he gained no traction amongst Iowa's evangelicals and was easily dispatched. But, there are some unspoken, but fully understood, positions that, I, never could affirm, agree, accept or in anyway be a part of either as a democrat or a Catholic. This appearance with Hagee implies comfortability with dominionism.†
____________
*This is also the case amongst mohammedans.
†An evangelical protestant fascism.
The rôle of religion in the pursuit of political power is quite an intrigue. Tony Blair has entered into the catholic faith after the end of his political career. He attained and maintained the highest political office in his land. Mike Huckabee is attempting to obtain the highest political office in his land. Huckabee is a Baptist minister and has used those arrows in his quiver a plenty.
Blair entered the church AFTER it could signify anything in his work, either to advance the faith in his land or, to suffer for it from public opposition. Huckabee is utilizing, as adroitly as he possibly can, any advantage christianity, in the public sphere, can gain him. The political use of the pulpit in protestant churches is part and parcel of the political life of the United States.
In Britain there has been a steady trickle of individuals into the Catholic Church since the emancipation (1829). Some of the finest minds in the land, men who would be cardinals: Newman and Manning; writers: Greene, Sitwell, Hopkins, Waugh, Thompson, Muggeridge ... There has been relatives of the queen, who need special dispensation, and thereby, remove themselves from succession. These people are referred to as crossing the Tiber or having "poped".
Recent news reports have confirmed, what many knew, that on Sunday there are more Catholics in church than Anglicans. Many are of irish and polish nationality and other non sassenach extraction; but still, those from either the high end or the low end of social prestige are free to be Catholics. In the Daily Mail, Katie Grant has the succinct :
Yet Mr Blair did not convert when it would have been hard, he converted when it was easy.Blair in Parliament, took anti-Catholic positions on many issues, including abortion and, perhaps, the greatest being -- toadying Britain in support of Bush, in his imperial invasion, in a war of aggression. Both, the arrogant buffoon, Bush, and Tony Blair tried to have the papacy, in the person of John Paul II, a man who lived under both german and communist occupation, either support or countenance war. Naturally, this did not happen.
Tony now joins the church militant at Christmastide. For an Anglican, has already been baptised as a christian, all he needed was to give a good confession in the private secrecy of a confessional, but in such a public life should not a public accounting be à-propos?
As a couple of quotations more than amply suggest that public use of religion in British life is discouraged in today's Britannia.
Alastair Campbell, Blair's press secretary -- 'We don't do God.'"But in protestant America, the charlatan, huckster preacher is ubiquitous; also the preacher has been a responsible community leader and spokesman in the negro [now black], and in the southern milieux. These two have often combined. In the anti-catholic, and anti-papal, propaganda the ever present charge, IS, that the priest, the pope dictate everything to the mindless catholic congregant. Yet, this is exceedingly rare. A mass is not interrupted to present a politician! In homilies, a priest may speak at length on certain issues and causes that a christian, and especially a catholic christian, ought to concern himself with; some of his congregation will agree whole-heartedly, but silently; others will be annoyed and vexed to the point, that they will complain to the bishop. Some catholics, too distinctly, separate their sacred lives from their public lives. This is in great contrast to the evangelical protestants, in particular.*
Blair, himself -- "You talk about it in our system and, frankly, people do think you're a nutter."
Very recently, Huckabee went to San Antonio, Tejas; not to the Cathedral of San Fernando, but to the megachurch of John Hagee. Outside of certain circles, this name means nothing. I have read and heard people say that he is a television evangelist. He has been profiled on 60 Minutes as a christian zionist. He fancies himself a published historian. What can be quickly gleaned, is that he, Hagee, is a cheerleader for Armageddon, and a lying, anti-catholic bigot. Since these two positions are so disgusting, and must ought be so outré, that it is difficult to gage his sanity or sincerity. Yet, Mike is there, immediately before Christmas, in a state that will reliably vote Republican, in a city where its culture, to a significant degree, is pre-anglo, pre-wasp; and all this importunes what in the Iowa campaign?
Huckabee has given sermons in his former career. These are not available, now, to the public. Huckabee was a radio and television broadcaster. I have met, worked with, evangelicals who offer me recordings of their pastors' talks. They encourage me to listen to them on local a.m. radio. They have played them for my edification at work. I was passive to this, and did not take up their offers, and they were not particularly interested in my views. I have met several of his co-religionists, in the course of my life, and to say, that, they have been hostile to catholicism is an understatement. The kindest were dismissive, the more assertive were unpleasant. Historical fact meant nothing. They share a created legend of history and, not only do they have an interpretation of their beliefs, they have one of mine. They expound with cheney like certainty on catholics and catholicism.
Huckabee is not a candidate of the Republican establishment, that would be Romney and Giuliani. A great deal of his programme I can agree with. Sam Brownback had some, similar positions, and worked Iowa from neighboring Kansas -- he gained no traction amongst Iowa's evangelicals and was easily dispatched. But, there are some unspoken, but fully understood, positions that, I, never could affirm, agree, accept or in anyway be a part of either as a democrat or a Catholic. This appearance with Hagee implies comfortability with dominionism.†
____________
*This is also the case amongst mohammedans.
†An evangelical protestant fascism.
Friday, December 14, 2007
Huckabee and the Catholic
As a Catholic and a democrat, I would be of no party to a Republican primary or caucus or anything. As a human being, I could support no one who does not publicly admit that Bush and his war are gravely wrong, and that is about the mildest expression of the obvious I will accept.
Giuliani, Tancredo and Thompson all fall into the continuum of wacky and despicable. McCain who was savaged by the bushevik-rove campaign has not come out against Bush; he did valiantly try to stop torture, but it was unconstitutionally overruled by a "signing statement". What is that device? It is similar to an edict or an ukase, which are the personal dictates of an emperor. Precisely for this reason anyone who does not denounce Bush is no democrat.
Romney is an ambitious opportunist. This is quite common for both businessmen and politicians. People have questioned his religion. The Constitution forbids this. Whatever his beliefs are, in that area, are not germane to his candidacy, it could only be if he were trying to implement his religion to control the government and this is not the accusation against him.
He is trying to get his party's nomination and that party is over represented by evangelical protestants, whom are bothered by a non-christian candidate. They more vociferously attacked Al Smith in the1920s and John Kennedy in 1960. Smith, "the happy warrior", responded repeatedly, firmly and well against the bigots, especially against the Klan and Senator Cotton Tom Heflin of Alabama.* Kennedy went in front of a sanhedrin of protestant ministers in Houston Texas and affirmed separation of state and religion.
In Romney's wafflely speech, he mentioned mormon once; Kennedy, in his speech, said Catholic nineteen times. Romney, in this regard was evasive and did not endorse separation of church and state. Kennedy, in this conceded too much, Smith nothing. The Klan, which then was in both parties, but in the south, very much more in the Democratic party stopped Smith's nomination in '24 and the country chose the Republican Hoover as president by a great margin in '28. Since the 1960s those who voted with the Klan and their descendants have migrated to the Republicans.
Huckabee was involved in radio evangelism and is an ordained Southern Baptist minister. I am familiar with the low regard Baptists have for Catholics. They have created a Catholic strawman they love to burn. Brownback was in the race in Iowa. Brownback is a convert to Catholicism, there was an underground campaign, that had come to light, to discredit him and to guide evangelicals to their proper candidate -- Huckabee. Huckabee did not denounce this.
Huckabee is using the slogan "christian leader". In an interview with Newsweek he's asked about Mormonism:
People can believe what they wish. It is within the right of the state to inflict capital punishment. It is a function of justice. Some crimes are capital. Some actions deserve death in response. But, in America the meting out of justice is not done justly. Governor George Ryan, a Republican recognized that this was the situation in Illinois. He suspended the use, when it was proven that several condemned men were innocent. Governor Ryan is now an inmate himself (usual Republican graft and corruption). Leonel Torres Herrera's execution was permitted in Texas by the US Supreme Court, even, though the courts and the state knew he did not commit the crime. Scalia, with Thomas concurring, wrote that there was no legal error in the case, so subsequent knowledge meant nothing.§
So, we have little, equitable and fair justice in this land enough. The imposition of a capital sentence is too often dubious in this country. IF things were done honestly in this country, then the death penalty would be appropriate. But, it would not, ever, be the christian response.ll
Huckabee might govern better than the rest of his Republican comrades, but I can not trust or support him. Any democrat over any Republican in Iowa or elsewhere. If a decent candidate would emerge amongst Republicans, he would still bring in a nefarious crew. Republican fraud, corruption and willful transgressions against the Constitution should disqualify their party in the minds of the electorate.
Any Democrat will do. I prefer John Edwards, yes, even though his campaign briefly employed two, troublesome ex-Catholic bloggers, one whose views were insulting repulsive, but, also as a southern protestant, Edwards must have been raised in the same religious milieu as Huckabee, Heflin, Carter, Bill Clinton and millions of others. There is no history of any public bigotry that has come to knowledge. His campaign manager is David Bonior, a Michigan Catholic, and former congressman, whose district was gerrymandered away. In the 2004 Ohio primary I voted for Edwards and I would again to-day and to-morrow.
_________________
*Heflin ultimately supported Hoover and left the Democratic party. The phrase "yellow dog Democrat" was created to mean, yes I would vote for Smith or any other Catholic, if he's the Democrat, "Hell, if they ran a yellow dog, I'd vote for him". Heflin's other claim to fame was that he shot a negro on a streetcar as a member of Congress in '08, which he was pleased to regale about while campaigning.
†Mr.Huckabee is at least mistaken and inaccurate.The 325 date refers to the first Council of Nicaea, the canon was not the purpose of that meeting. Pope Damasus at the Roman Council in 382 proclaimed the present canon of 73 (and the primary question was over the New Testament's 27 books, not the Old Testament's 46), this was confirmed at the Synod of Hippo in 393 for the entire church. It was repeatedly confirmed at other councils, including the Second Council of Nicaea in 787. The 66 books are the general protestant count of post 1517. The seven books Huckabee forgets are: Tobias, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, Machabees I, and Machabees II.
‡Interestingly enough, if there was ever an occasion for someone to have argued against the death penalty, I think Jesus could have done so on the cross and said, "This is an unjust punishment and I deserve clemency." -- Huckabee
§Rehnquist wrote, "presumption of innocence disappears". 25 January 1993, 6 to 3, the Supreme Court denied appeal in Herrera vs Collins.
llThe only people on earth who do not see Christ and His teachings as nonviolent are Christians. -- Mahatma Gandhi
Giuliani, Tancredo and Thompson all fall into the continuum of wacky and despicable. McCain who was savaged by the bushevik-rove campaign has not come out against Bush; he did valiantly try to stop torture, but it was unconstitutionally overruled by a "signing statement". What is that device? It is similar to an edict or an ukase, which are the personal dictates of an emperor. Precisely for this reason anyone who does not denounce Bush is no democrat.
Romney is an ambitious opportunist. This is quite common for both businessmen and politicians. People have questioned his religion. The Constitution forbids this. Whatever his beliefs are, in that area, are not germane to his candidacy, it could only be if he were trying to implement his religion to control the government and this is not the accusation against him.
He is trying to get his party's nomination and that party is over represented by evangelical protestants, whom are bothered by a non-christian candidate. They more vociferously attacked Al Smith in the1920s and John Kennedy in 1960. Smith, "the happy warrior", responded repeatedly, firmly and well against the bigots, especially against the Klan and Senator Cotton Tom Heflin of Alabama.* Kennedy went in front of a sanhedrin of protestant ministers in Houston Texas and affirmed separation of state and religion.
In Romney's wafflely speech, he mentioned mormon once; Kennedy, in his speech, said Catholic nineteen times. Romney, in this regard was evasive and did not endorse separation of church and state. Kennedy, in this conceded too much, Smith nothing. The Klan, which then was in both parties, but in the south, very much more in the Democratic party stopped Smith's nomination in '24 and the country chose the Republican Hoover as president by a great margin in '28. Since the 1960s those who voted with the Klan and their descendants have migrated to the Republicans.
Huckabee was involved in radio evangelism and is an ordained Southern Baptist minister. I am familiar with the low regard Baptists have for Catholics. They have created a Catholic strawman they love to burn. Brownback was in the race in Iowa. Brownback is a convert to Catholicism, there was an underground campaign, that had come to light, to discredit him and to guide evangelicals to their proper candidate -- Huckabee. Huckabee did not denounce this.
Huckabee is using the slogan "christian leader". In an interview with Newsweek he's asked about Mormonism:
Asked if he thought Scriptural revelations from God ended when the Bible was completed, Huckabee said: "I don't have any evidence or indication that he's handed us a new book to add to the ones, the 66, that were canonized in 325 A.D. … It was a careful process that adopted those books. That was something I did study in college and seminary … the process by which we ended up with those books. I don't know that there's any other books." †In a recent debate, Huckabee was asked about Jesus's view of the death penalty, “Jesus was too smart to ever run for public office”. In a recent Mother Jones article, there is recounted that, while governor in '97, he took an on air phone call about Jesus and the death penalty.‡ Huckabee's reading of the New Testament had Jesus's silence on the cross, as he was being executed as a confirmation for the use of the death penalty. Well, in the former, he is being tricky and successfully evasive, in the latter, his torturous exegesis is dumbfounding. Many, if not virtually all evangelicals and fundamentalist protestants, whether christian or not, preface there statements with, "the Bible tells me so". Here Huckabee is ignorant of the purpose of Christ's Passion. He understands that Jesus is innocent and that the state has the power to execute the innocent, but Jesus is the innocent sacrifice that redeems mankind. "By Thy Holy Cross Thou hast redeemed the world". "Behold the wood of the cross upon which the salvation of the world hangs." Jesus accepted this bitter cup for the will of the Father. He did not want to suffer. In Gethsemani he sweated blood in trepidation and in premonition. The scourging by the soldier was excessive in its execution and a torture prior to crucifixion. Christ did not undergo execution because it was just, but because it was unjust. The lamb went to the slaughter.
People can believe what they wish. It is within the right of the state to inflict capital punishment. It is a function of justice. Some crimes are capital. Some actions deserve death in response. But, in America the meting out of justice is not done justly. Governor George Ryan, a Republican recognized that this was the situation in Illinois. He suspended the use, when it was proven that several condemned men were innocent. Governor Ryan is now an inmate himself (usual Republican graft and corruption). Leonel Torres Herrera's execution was permitted in Texas by the US Supreme Court, even, though the courts and the state knew he did not commit the crime. Scalia, with Thomas concurring, wrote that there was no legal error in the case, so subsequent knowledge meant nothing.§
So, we have little, equitable and fair justice in this land enough. The imposition of a capital sentence is too often dubious in this country. IF things were done honestly in this country, then the death penalty would be appropriate. But, it would not, ever, be the christian response.ll
Huckabee might govern better than the rest of his Republican comrades, but I can not trust or support him. Any democrat over any Republican in Iowa or elsewhere. If a decent candidate would emerge amongst Republicans, he would still bring in a nefarious crew. Republican fraud, corruption and willful transgressions against the Constitution should disqualify their party in the minds of the electorate.
Any Democrat will do. I prefer John Edwards, yes, even though his campaign briefly employed two, troublesome ex-Catholic bloggers, one whose views were insulting repulsive, but, also as a southern protestant, Edwards must have been raised in the same religious milieu as Huckabee, Heflin, Carter, Bill Clinton and millions of others. There is no history of any public bigotry that has come to knowledge. His campaign manager is David Bonior, a Michigan Catholic, and former congressman, whose district was gerrymandered away. In the 2004 Ohio primary I voted for Edwards and I would again to-day and to-morrow.
_________________
*Heflin ultimately supported Hoover and left the Democratic party. The phrase "yellow dog Democrat" was created to mean, yes I would vote for Smith or any other Catholic, if he's the Democrat, "Hell, if they ran a yellow dog, I'd vote for him". Heflin's other claim to fame was that he shot a negro on a streetcar as a member of Congress in '08, which he was pleased to regale about while campaigning.
†Mr.Huckabee is at least mistaken and inaccurate.The 325 date refers to the first Council of Nicaea, the canon was not the purpose of that meeting. Pope Damasus at the Roman Council in 382 proclaimed the present canon of 73 (and the primary question was over the New Testament's 27 books, not the Old Testament's 46), this was confirmed at the Synod of Hippo in 393 for the entire church. It was repeatedly confirmed at other councils, including the Second Council of Nicaea in 787. The 66 books are the general protestant count of post 1517. The seven books Huckabee forgets are: Tobias, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, Machabees I, and Machabees II.
‡Interestingly enough, if there was ever an occasion for someone to have argued against the death penalty, I think Jesus could have done so on the cross and said, "This is an unjust punishment and I deserve clemency." -- Huckabee
§Rehnquist wrote, "presumption of innocence disappears". 25 January 1993, 6 to 3, the Supreme Court denied appeal in Herrera vs Collins.
llThe only people on earth who do not see Christ and His teachings as nonviolent are Christians. -- Mahatma Gandhi
Sunday, November 4, 2007
jack and fawkes
___________________________________
Guy Fawkes was 30th in the 2002 BBC 's list of greatest britons.
"The only man to ever enter parliament with honourable intentions".
General Orders for November 5, 1775 :
- Remember remember the fifth of November
Gunpowder, treason and plot...
- Rumour, rumour, pump and derry,
Prick his heart and burn his body,
And send his soul to Purgatory.
As the Commander in Chief has been apprized of a design form'd for the observance of the ridiculous and childish custom of burning the Efficgy of the pope - He cannot help expressing his surprise that there should be Officers and Soldiers in this army so void of common sense, as not to see the impropriety of such a step at the Juncture; at a Time when we are solliciting, and have really obtain'd, the friendship and alliance of the people of Canada, whom we ought to consider as Brethren embarked in the same Cause. The defence of the general Liberty of America: At such a juncture, and in such Cirumstances, to be insulting their Religion, is so monstrous, as not to be suffered or excused; indeed instead of offereng the most remote insult, it is our duty to address public thanks to these our Brethren, as to them we are so much indebted for every late happy Success over the common Enemy in Canada
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
The welcoming public schools
English speaking America, outside of Maryland, was primarily founded on protestantism and often extreme forms and one of its characteristics is continual splintering. This is not so much freedom of thought but the creation of new despotisms. We must remember, that other than the favored sect, most others were forbidden in a particular colony. Massachusetts prescribing death for habitual papists (and it was carried out). Freedom of thought was only for those who had the same thoughts.
Arthur Schlesinger Sr. once said to Msgr. John Tracy Ellis,"I regard prejudice against your church [roman catholicism] as the deepest bias in the history of the American people." In 1837 the Unitarians (who splintered so far from their Congregationalist past that they were no longer Christian) had overcome the Congregationalists in Massachusetts for control of the legislature. State mandated public education began in Massachusetts in 1837. In New York City, the Public School Society, a corporation of protestant ministers, gained control of the common school fund in 1840. Prior to 1826 New York state payed for denominational schools. A common-core or non-sectarian christianity was going to be taught just when the poor and catholic Irish began to emigrate, public schools began. The mold was set. This common protestantism would hold until the disturbances of the 1960s and their fallout. A greater secular retreat from christian beliefs became a new guiding philosophy, but old religious prejudices were not lost. There is this overwhelming structure of school and state that demands allegiance and obeisance, it may change platform but it continues its methods. It is always modern, always current, always claiming to be liberating and progressive and always really oppressive.
Back to the 1840s, heavy Irish immigration began and would continue along with Germans. The American Party (the Know Nothings), previously the American Republican Party, arose as a nativist party. The Irish were reviled by the Yankees and public accommodation and education would belittle them and others who came after. Their catholicism especially disturbed. Protestant bibles alone were to be used and catholic views were to be decried and presented as wicked or worse. The reaction to these immigrants drove them to found their own schools for their salvation of dignity, so in these urban areas of immigration there is the alternative parochial school system which continues to today.
In New York City, Bishop John Hughes objected to the protestant public schools and attempted to get a share for catholic education, instead the Maclay Bill of 1842 forbid all religious instruction in public schools and made no money available for other schools..When the bill was passed, Hughes residence was attacked and catholic churches had to be guarded from mob violence. Such was the beginning of the parochial schools.
Certainly, irish born Hughes who knew, first hand, english anti-catholic rule, was familiar with the hedge schools. The penal laws in Ireland began in 1691, amongst other matters, they forbid catholic teaching and catholic teachers. So the irish began illegal hidden schools, which were the only catholic acceptable schools till 1832 in the old sod. Alternatives to the state were possible and in America they did not have to hide.
Still crouching 'neath the sheltering hedge,
Or stretched on mountain fern,
The teacher and his pupils met feloniously to learn.. -- John O'Hagan
Between 1880 and the start of WWI ten million immigrants came to America from Eastern Europe while Anglo-Saxons and Protestants were few, in addition there were Italians and Irish and Jews who also were not waspish. There were many northeastern states and regions of the middle west that had majority populations of foreign born or the children of foreign born. The taunt, “rum, romanism and rebellion” would be used and others.
Senator Morrill of Vermont (of land grant colleges) wanted to send them back. Senator Henry Cabot Lodge (1895 Massachusetts) proposed a literacy test for immigrants. Congress had passed the Chinese exclusion Act of 1882 to protect the other coast. These objectionable peoples created a response of anti-immigrant organizations, such as The American Protective Association (1887) and the Immigration Restriction League. Educators such as Ellwood Cubberley described the newcomers as “largely illiterate, docile, lacking in initiative, and almost wholly without the Anglo-Saxon conceptions of righteousness, liberty, law, order, public decency and government.”
It was often said by many Americans “let’s load up the boats to send them back and then sink them at sea.” And this quip would still be uttered two generations later.
Daughters of the American Revolution and other groups sought out to Americanize them. Textbooks would tell them patriotic stories of this superlative land and civics classes and citizenship classes (this included the adults also) would indoctrinate them in being good citizens.
The Spanish American War (1898) further showed this braggadocio. Teddy Roosevelt would make the world fear and respect anglo-saxon americanism in his election win (1904). A Chicago newspaperman, Finley Peter Dunne, would write in 1898 in the words of his Mr. Dooley, “An Anglo-Saxon, Hinnissy, is a German that’s forgot who was his parents.”
Educators Terman and Thorndike could show how inferior these new immigrants really were by testing. Proper tracks could facilitate them. So, in looking at immigration in the period between 1840 and 1975 we can say immigrants were considered an unwelcome bother that needed to be solved to protect America and “americanizing” the newcomers was the remedial solution.
Arthur Schlesinger Sr. once said to Msgr. John Tracy Ellis,"I regard prejudice against your church [roman catholicism] as the deepest bias in the history of the American people." In 1837 the Unitarians (who splintered so far from their Congregationalist past that they were no longer Christian) had overcome the Congregationalists in Massachusetts for control of the legislature. State mandated public education began in Massachusetts in 1837. In New York City, the Public School Society, a corporation of protestant ministers, gained control of the common school fund in 1840. Prior to 1826 New York state payed for denominational schools. A common-core or non-sectarian christianity was going to be taught just when the poor and catholic Irish began to emigrate, public schools began. The mold was set. This common protestantism would hold until the disturbances of the 1960s and their fallout. A greater secular retreat from christian beliefs became a new guiding philosophy, but old religious prejudices were not lost. There is this overwhelming structure of school and state that demands allegiance and obeisance, it may change platform but it continues its methods. It is always modern, always current, always claiming to be liberating and progressive and always really oppressive.
Back to the 1840s, heavy Irish immigration began and would continue along with Germans. The American Party (the Know Nothings), previously the American Republican Party, arose as a nativist party. The Irish were reviled by the Yankees and public accommodation and education would belittle them and others who came after. Their catholicism especially disturbed. Protestant bibles alone were to be used and catholic views were to be decried and presented as wicked or worse. The reaction to these immigrants drove them to found their own schools for their salvation of dignity, so in these urban areas of immigration there is the alternative parochial school system which continues to today.
In New York City, Bishop John Hughes objected to the protestant public schools and attempted to get a share for catholic education, instead the Maclay Bill of 1842 forbid all religious instruction in public schools and made no money available for other schools..When the bill was passed, Hughes residence was attacked and catholic churches had to be guarded from mob violence. Such was the beginning of the parochial schools.
Certainly, irish born Hughes who knew, first hand, english anti-catholic rule, was familiar with the hedge schools. The penal laws in Ireland began in 1691, amongst other matters, they forbid catholic teaching and catholic teachers. So the irish began illegal hidden schools, which were the only catholic acceptable schools till 1832 in the old sod. Alternatives to the state were possible and in America they did not have to hide.
Still crouching 'neath the sheltering hedge,
Or stretched on mountain fern,
The teacher and his pupils met feloniously to learn.. -- John O'Hagan
Between 1880 and the start of WWI ten million immigrants came to America from Eastern Europe while Anglo-Saxons and Protestants were few, in addition there were Italians and Irish and Jews who also were not waspish. There were many northeastern states and regions of the middle west that had majority populations of foreign born or the children of foreign born. The taunt, “rum, romanism and rebellion” would be used and others.
Senator Morrill of Vermont (of land grant colleges) wanted to send them back. Senator Henry Cabot Lodge (1895 Massachusetts) proposed a literacy test for immigrants. Congress had passed the Chinese exclusion Act of 1882 to protect the other coast. These objectionable peoples created a response of anti-immigrant organizations, such as The American Protective Association (1887) and the Immigration Restriction League. Educators such as Ellwood Cubberley described the newcomers as “largely illiterate, docile, lacking in initiative, and almost wholly without the Anglo-Saxon conceptions of righteousness, liberty, law, order, public decency and government.”
It was often said by many Americans “let’s load up the boats to send them back and then sink them at sea.” And this quip would still be uttered two generations later.
Daughters of the American Revolution and other groups sought out to Americanize them. Textbooks would tell them patriotic stories of this superlative land and civics classes and citizenship classes (this included the adults also) would indoctrinate them in being good citizens.
The Spanish American War (1898) further showed this braggadocio. Teddy Roosevelt would make the world fear and respect anglo-saxon americanism in his election win (1904). A Chicago newspaperman, Finley Peter Dunne, would write in 1898 in the words of his Mr. Dooley, “An Anglo-Saxon, Hinnissy, is a German that’s forgot who was his parents.”
Educators Terman and Thorndike could show how inferior these new immigrants really were by testing. Proper tracks could facilitate them. So, in looking at immigration in the period between 1840 and 1975 we can say immigrants were considered an unwelcome bother that needed to be solved to protect America and “americanizing” the newcomers was the remedial solution.
Monday, August 27, 2007
Monday, 27 August MMVII
It seems to-day's big news is the resignation of Gonzales. I should comment later on this, but remember his crimes include:
Also, on the other side, the Louisiana Democratic Party is using a campaign of bigotry against the catholic republican candidate for governor, Bobby Jindal. I tried to send this post to the ldp and its chairman, Chris Whittington:
As a catholic democrat, I am very upset with my party attacking my faith. I have always seen this as a republican dirty trick. You are using foul bigotry. Do not attack Jindal in this false and disgusting manner.
Today is Saint Monica's day, she the mother of Saint Augustine. She questioned Saint Ambrose on a different religious practice in Milan than she knew in Africa. Ambrose answered:
“When I am here, I do not fast on Saturday, but I fast when I am in Rome; do the same and always follow the custom and discipline of the Church as it is observed in the particular locality in which you find yourself.”
This comes down to us as, "when in Rome do as the Romans do". When in politics, do not do what the republicans do. The end does not not justify the means, is this not what the Good Shepherd taught?
- torture advocate
- illegal wiretapping
- voter suppression
- lying to Congress
- turning the department of justice into a part of the republican party
Also, on the other side, the Louisiana Democratic Party is using a campaign of bigotry against the catholic republican candidate for governor, Bobby Jindal. I tried to send this post to the ldp and its chairman, Chris Whittington:
As a catholic democrat, I am very upset with my party attacking my faith. I have always seen this as a republican dirty trick. You are using foul bigotry. Do not attack Jindal in this false and disgusting manner.
Today is Saint Monica's day, she the mother of Saint Augustine. She questioned Saint Ambrose on a different religious practice in Milan than she knew in Africa. Ambrose answered:
“When I am here, I do not fast on Saturday, but I fast when I am in Rome; do the same and always follow the custom and discipline of the Church as it is observed in the particular locality in which you find yourself.”
This comes down to us as, "when in Rome do as the Romans do". When in politics, do not do what the republicans do. The end does not not justify the means, is this not what the Good Shepherd taught?
Saturday, August 11, 2007
fundamental principles of the republican party
1. Mammon
The republican party is the party of money, unrepentant greed, unalloyed capitalism and the pure worship of Mammon. Any rich man who is not a Republican is especially despised. Franklin Roosevelt was called "a traitor to his class" and, in a slightly more civil age, he was, with disgust and disregard, "that man". Louis Mayer, the head of MGM would not allow a picture or mention of Roosevelt in his studio films.
The venom spewed on the Kennedys or George Soros should prove the case. The Kennedys do not use the government to make themselves richer, look into the Bushes and you have another story. Remember the Colorado Savings and Loan scandal, for instance. That is just one example of one Bush being a miserable, greedy failure and, in which, the government had to throw a lot of money to fix. They want financial successes, fail and the government holds the checkbook. They are disasters, which are fully supported by us. The american people benefit in none of their adventures. Is that republican small government at work? George Soros has been vilified on republican radio for his political contributions. Has Rick Perry or Richard Mellon Scaife? The double standard, the republicans could not survive without it.
Being pro-business they are conversely anti everything that hinders the exercise thereof : anti-labor, anti-social justice, anti-environment and so on. As Christ logically taught we have only one master: it is God or Mammon.*
2. False patriotism
False patriotism has been a pillar of support since 1861. In the election of 1860 the south went democratic and left the union soon thereafter. The democrats were the party of rebellion and the republicans ran civil war officers for the rest of the century. After 1932 democrats were called communists and anti-american. Did not Nixon, Reagan, Bush, Bush junior and their supporters suggest all those against them were "the blame america crowd".†
The first Bush wanted to ban flag burning. Flags we all know, are meant to be waved and wagged. Flag burning has been considered the proper manner of disposal. Boy scouts have collected them, annually, for that purpose. Yes, I know, that was not Shrub senior's contention. When did you, personally, last see an american flag burned in america?
3. Bigotry
One of the predecessors to the party, was the american party (know nothings)‡. They were anti-immigrant and anti-catholic. The nativists prided themselves and their ancestors in wresting the land from the original natives. The newcomers were no more welcome than the indians. Burning and blowing up catholic churches was a successful tactic.
The combination of 1&2 we get the military-industrial complex. Mars and Mammon worship. Listen to Dylan's Masters of War.
The combination of 2&3 with the blend of xenophobia, chauvinism and bigotry, along with the heavy calvinist influence of being irreducibly elect we get notions of manifest destiny or, as it is called now, american exceptionalism.
4. Hypocrisy
And the one overall unifying principle is an unending hypocrisy. We can see an example today over immigration. The nativists hate illegal immigrants. Mexicans and other latinos are heavily proselytized by protestants here, and missionaries are sent to their countries of origin to woo them from catholicism. Business interests want them for economic exploitation and to depress the cause of labor. Well, money will allow them to stay and they will be abused.
Another glaring hypocrisy is that practically everyone who lied this country to war were never warriors themselves, e.g. five deferment Gunner Cheney. How many young republicans or college republicans went to Iraq?
The elephant is too noble a symbol. The symbols à propos are vipers and scorpions.
____________________________
*No man can serve two masters. For either he will hate the one, and love the other: or he will sustain the one, and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon. -- Matthew vi. 23.
†Patriotism is the last refuge for a scoundrel.-- Samuel Johnson (April 7, 1775)
‡As a nation, we began by declaring that "all men are created equal." We now practically read it "all men are created equal, except Negroes." When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read "all men are created equal, except Negroes and foreigners and Catholics." Abraham Lincoln in a letter to Joshua F. Speed" (August 24, 1855)
The republican party is the party of money, unrepentant greed, unalloyed capitalism and the pure worship of Mammon. Any rich man who is not a Republican is especially despised. Franklin Roosevelt was called "a traitor to his class" and, in a slightly more civil age, he was, with disgust and disregard, "that man". Louis Mayer, the head of MGM would not allow a picture or mention of Roosevelt in his studio films.
The venom spewed on the Kennedys or George Soros should prove the case. The Kennedys do not use the government to make themselves richer, look into the Bushes and you have another story. Remember the Colorado Savings and Loan scandal, for instance. That is just one example of one Bush being a miserable, greedy failure and, in which, the government had to throw a lot of money to fix. They want financial successes, fail and the government holds the checkbook. They are disasters, which are fully supported by us. The american people benefit in none of their adventures. Is that republican small government at work? George Soros has been vilified on republican radio for his political contributions. Has Rick Perry or Richard Mellon Scaife? The double standard, the republicans could not survive without it.
Being pro-business they are conversely anti everything that hinders the exercise thereof : anti-labor, anti-social justice, anti-environment and so on. As Christ logically taught we have only one master: it is God or Mammon.*
2. False patriotism
False patriotism has been a pillar of support since 1861. In the election of 1860 the south went democratic and left the union soon thereafter. The democrats were the party of rebellion and the republicans ran civil war officers for the rest of the century. After 1932 democrats were called communists and anti-american. Did not Nixon, Reagan, Bush, Bush junior and their supporters suggest all those against them were "the blame america crowd".†
The first Bush wanted to ban flag burning. Flags we all know, are meant to be waved and wagged. Flag burning has been considered the proper manner of disposal. Boy scouts have collected them, annually, for that purpose. Yes, I know, that was not Shrub senior's contention. When did you, personally, last see an american flag burned in america?
3. Bigotry
One of the predecessors to the party, was the american party (know nothings)‡. They were anti-immigrant and anti-catholic. The nativists prided themselves and their ancestors in wresting the land from the original natives. The newcomers were no more welcome than the indians. Burning and blowing up catholic churches was a successful tactic.
The combination of 1&2 we get the military-industrial complex. Mars and Mammon worship. Listen to Dylan's Masters of War.
The combination of 2&3 with the blend of xenophobia, chauvinism and bigotry, along with the heavy calvinist influence of being irreducibly elect we get notions of manifest destiny or, as it is called now, american exceptionalism.
4. Hypocrisy
And the one overall unifying principle is an unending hypocrisy. We can see an example today over immigration. The nativists hate illegal immigrants. Mexicans and other latinos are heavily proselytized by protestants here, and missionaries are sent to their countries of origin to woo them from catholicism. Business interests want them for economic exploitation and to depress the cause of labor. Well, money will allow them to stay and they will be abused.
Another glaring hypocrisy is that practically everyone who lied this country to war were never warriors themselves, e.g. five deferment Gunner Cheney. How many young republicans or college republicans went to Iraq?
The elephant is too noble a symbol. The symbols à propos are vipers and scorpions.
____________________________
*No man can serve two masters. For either he will hate the one, and love the other: or he will sustain the one, and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon. -- Matthew vi. 23.
†Patriotism is the last refuge for a scoundrel.-- Samuel Johnson (April 7, 1775)
‡As a nation, we began by declaring that "all men are created equal." We now practically read it "all men are created equal, except Negroes." When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read "all men are created equal, except Negroes and foreigners and Catholics." Abraham Lincoln in a letter to Joshua F. Speed" (August 24, 1855)
Monday, July 23, 2007
bush & Christianity
I remember during the last presidential campaign being told by the "born again" crowd that bush junior was a Christian. By implication this meant he was the one to vote for and conversely other candidates were not either Christian or vote worthy. John Kerry and myself are co-religionists, so I saw this, naturally and inevitably, as anti-Catholic bigotry. When countering that bush's opponent was also a Christian and perhaps more so, I was responded with a stunned silence.
I am skeptical about bush's declaration of faith. Words and actions should have some congruence, some one to one correspondence. This is what Jesus taught. Read Matthew, read James, even though Luther would deny and discard James as would many Americans. Any charlatan, read Sinclair Lewis's, "Elmer Gantry", or fraud can mouth words, even if they sputter and trip off the tongue. And if such a maladroit sputterer can say it smoothly, it has been calculatingly practiced.
Here follows some biblical passages to consider:
Isaias x
1 WOE to them that make wicked laws: and when they write, write injustice:
2 To oppress the poor in judgment, and do violence to the cause of the humble of my people: that widows might be their prey, and that they might rob the fatherless.
3 What will you do in the day of visitation, and of the calamity which cometh from afar? to whom will ye flee for help? and where will ye leave your glory?
Shame on you! you who make unjust laws and publish burdensome decrees, depriving the poor of justice, robbing the weakest of my people of their rights, despoiling the widow and plundering the orphan. What will you do when called to account, when ruin from afar confronts you? To whom will you flee for help? (Isaiah 10:1-3) kjv
He that oppresseth the poor, to increase his own riches, shall himself give to one that is richer, and shall be in need. -- Proverbs xxii 16
He that oppresseth the poor to increase his riches, and he that giveth to the rich, shall surely come to want. (Prov 22:16) kjv
And I will come to you in judgment, and will be a speedy witness against sorcerers, and adulterers, and false swearers, and them that oppress the hireling in his wages; the widows, and the fatherless: and oppress the stranger, and have not feared me, saith the Lord of hosts. -- Malachias iii 5
And I will come near to you to judgment; and I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, and against the adulterers, and against false swearers, and against those that oppress the hireling in his wages, the widow, and the fatherless, and that turn aside the stranger from his right, and fear not me, saith the LORD of hosts. (Malachi 3:5) kjv
The fool shall no more be called prince: neither shall the deceitful be called great:
For the fool will speak foolish things, and his heart will work iniquity, to practice hypocrisy, and speak to the Lord deceitfully, and to make empty the soul of the hungry, and take away drink from the thirsty. -- Isaias xxxii 5-6
I am skeptical about bush's declaration of faith. Words and actions should have some congruence, some one to one correspondence. This is what Jesus taught. Read Matthew, read James, even though Luther would deny and discard James as would many Americans. Any charlatan, read Sinclair Lewis's, "Elmer Gantry", or fraud can mouth words, even if they sputter and trip off the tongue. And if such a maladroit sputterer can say it smoothly, it has been calculatingly practiced.
Here follows some biblical passages to consider:
Isaias x
1 WOE to them that make wicked laws: and when they write, write injustice:
2 To oppress the poor in judgment, and do violence to the cause of the humble of my people: that widows might be their prey, and that they might rob the fatherless.
3 What will you do in the day of visitation, and of the calamity which cometh from afar? to whom will ye flee for help? and where will ye leave your glory?
Shame on you! you who make unjust laws and publish burdensome decrees, depriving the poor of justice, robbing the weakest of my people of their rights, despoiling the widow and plundering the orphan. What will you do when called to account, when ruin from afar confronts you? To whom will you flee for help? (Isaiah 10:1-3) kjv
He that oppresseth the poor, to increase his own riches, shall himself give to one that is richer, and shall be in need. -- Proverbs xxii 16
He that oppresseth the poor to increase his riches, and he that giveth to the rich, shall surely come to want. (Prov 22:16) kjv
And I will come to you in judgment, and will be a speedy witness against sorcerers, and adulterers, and false swearers, and them that oppress the hireling in his wages; the widows, and the fatherless: and oppress the stranger, and have not feared me, saith the Lord of hosts. -- Malachias iii 5
And I will come near to you to judgment; and I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, and against the adulterers, and against false swearers, and against those that oppress the hireling in his wages, the widow, and the fatherless, and that turn aside the stranger from his right, and fear not me, saith the LORD of hosts. (Malachi 3:5) kjv
The fool shall no more be called prince: neither shall the deceitful be called great:
For the fool will speak foolish things, and his heart will work iniquity, to practice hypocrisy, and speak to the Lord deceitfully, and to make empty the soul of the hungry, and take away drink from the thirsty. -- Isaias xxxii 5-6
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
