American Revolution and Freemasonry
#11
(01-26-2012, 01:46 AM)Crusading Philologist Wrote: I don't have any good source, but I have been thinking lately that even if most of the traditionalist Catholic arguments directed against the American Revolution are true, the whole mythos surrounding it might serve as a sort of noble lie. I mean the reverence toward the Founding Fathers is inherently conservative. So, from a more conservative point of view, it might be best to avoid criticizing the Founders too much, even if they really deserve it in some cases.
I agree. It's all smoke and mirrors. What can we expect from guys who broke their solemn oaths to the King of England?

Hey, an interesting fact about King George III:

While some of our Founding Fathers defended or ignored the Reign of Terror, King George was singular in fighting against the French Revolution. He granted refuge to thousands of Catholic clergy and laity, and he later cooperated with the Holy See in opposing Napoleon.
Reply
#12
I was just reading about how one philosopher, whose name eludes me at the moment, thought the majority of the population could never choose to do something morally wrong.

The popes approved of and said positive things about the American Republic, but at that time this nation was nominally deist/Protestant. In those days, we agreed with Protestants on most moral issues (Remeber, all Protestants opposed contraception until Lambeth, 1930.) The situation has clearly changed.
Reply
#13
(01-25-2012, 08:43 PM)Someone1776 Wrote: Pope Pius VI, the reigning pontiff during the American Revolution, never condemned the Revolution (nor Louis XVI for supporting it). 

Pope Pius VII, said that the United States "had done more for the cause of Christianity than the most powerful nations of Christendom have done for ages."

Blessed Pope Pius IX donated stone to help construct the Washington Monument and stated his desire to visit America. 

Pope Leo XIII believed the founding of the American state did not "take place without some design of divine Providence. Precisely at the epoch when the American colonies, having, with Catholic aid, achieved liberty and independence, coalesced into a constitutional Republic the ecclesiastical hierarchy was happily established amongst you."  He further praised America's religious laws for "the Church amongst you, unopposed by the Constitution and government of your nation, fettered by no hostile legislation, protected against violence by the common laws and the impartiality of the tribunals, is free to live and act without hindrance."

When Leo XIII condemned Americanism he was condemning the belief in an inherent right to separation of Church and State, not separation of Church and State in all cases.  Separation of Church and State was good in America because it allowed Catholics to practice the faith.  Leo XIII did express concern that Americans might accept the principals of an inherent right to separation of Church and State.  However, he was more concerned that Catholics in Europe would want to adopt the American model.  As Leo explained:
Quote:It would be very erroneous to draw the conclusion that in America is to be sought the type of the most desirable status of the Church, or that it would be universally lawful or expedient for State and Church to be, as in America, dissevered and divorced. The fact that Catholicity with you is in good condition, nay, is even enjoying a prosperous growth, is by all means to be attributed to the fecundity with which God has endowed His Church, in virtue of which unless men or circumstances interfere, she spontaneously expands and propagates herself; but she would bring forth more abundant fruits if, in addition to liberty, she enjoyed the favor of the laws and the patronage of the public authority.


Saint Pope Pius X also praised America and expressed his desire to visit America as he believed the future of the Church lay in America.

Agreed
Reply
#14
Thanks, you guys have certainly given me food for thought.  I knew one or another of the popes had said positive things about the work of the Church in America, but I'm a bit concerned about the people behind the Revolution itself.  When I get the chance, I'll read that chapter from Puritan's Empire.  It should serve as a good balance to my required reading for history. 

At least I know most of the Fathers weren't Masons, but their defending/ignoring the Reign of Terror, which was unleashed with a special hatred of the Church, is still disturbing.  I'll have to keep looking into this. 
Reply
#15
George III also refused to consent to the marriage of his son and heir George to Maria Fitzherbert, a Catholic.
Reply
#16
(01-26-2012, 12:08 PM)SimplyCatholic Wrote: Thanks, you guys have certainly given me food for thought.  I knew one or another of the popes had said positive things about the work of the Church in America, but I'm a bit concerned about the people behind the Revolution itself.  When I get the chance, I'll read that chapter from Puritan's Empire.  It should serve as a good balance to my required reading for history. 

At least I know most of the Fathers weren't Masons, but their defending/ignoring the Reign of Terror, which was unleashed with a special hatred of the Church, is still disturbing.  I'll have to keep looking into this. 

Many of the founders were terrified of the terror and very upset at what happened to the Catholic Church. You see a shift in the writings of Washington where he begins to talk much more openly about the need for religion in a democracy. John Adams and Alexander Hamilton were also staunchly opposed to the French Revolution. 

Jefferson and Madison turned a blind eye toward the terror though, and this would lead to the creation of the two party system. Democratic Republicans supported the French Revolution.  Federalists opposed it.
Reply
#17
Washington stresses the need for a religion. It's similar to the Glen Beck "Restore Honor" rallies. Just religion. Not a Protestant sect, let alone our True Religion. That is why I think the American Experiment was bound to be where we are now, since there isn't a fundamental set of beliefs that the nation could look to. The moral hegemony found before 1965 or so was simply because on moral issues, almost everyone was united. With a national, collective morality destroyed, nothing could stop liberals.
Reply
#18
(01-26-2012, 12:54 PM)Crusader_Philly Wrote: Washington stresses the need for a religion. It's similar to the Glen Beck "Restore Honor" rallies. Just religion. Not a Protestant sect, let alone our True Religion. That is why I think the American Experiment was bound to be where we are now, since there isn't a fundamental set of beliefs that the nation could look to. The moral hegemony found before 1965 or so was simply because on moral issues, almost everyone was united. With a national, collective morality destroyed, nothing could stop liberals.

I agree supporting religion in general is rather weak but what else did you want him to say. Americans didn't agree at all on religion.  His comments on the importance of religion was an important statement at the time many were attacking religion in general. Our religious divisions is one of the reasons Popes have been okay.with the American model.  Establishing the Church as the official religion here has never been remotely possible. 
Reply
#19
Do you think that if a Protestant sect had been the established religion here the Popes would not support the US political model.

I agree. Unless we can convert a majority of the people, the Church won't be established. I am just fed up with Catholics who think religious liberty, separation of Churh and State, and the fact that the US is not a Catholic nation are "good" or "ideal." The ideal is a Catholic country. Not necessarily a monarchy.
Reply
#20
(01-26-2012, 01:06 PM)Crusader_Philly Wrote: Do you think that if a Protestant sect had been the established religion here the Popes would not support the US political model.

I agree. Unless we can convert a majority of the people, the Church won't be established. I am just fed up with Catholics who think religious liberty, separation of Churh and State, and the fact that the US is not a Catholic nation are "good" or "ideal." The ideal is a Catholic country. Not necessarily a monarchy.

Yes, Leo XIII said America would be even better off if the Church was the official religion. But, he recognized this wasn't practical and praised our system as good for us since we're a religious minority in America.

We don't have to hate our country until it becomes Catholic.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)