tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post7389657016562960130..comments2024-03-28T10:44:30.518-06:00Comments on American Creation: Catholic liturgical patriotism in the early RepublicBrad Harthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17669677047039491864noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-20704687459083607912009-09-18T00:29:56.066-06:002009-09-18T00:29:56.066-06:00Well, I'm certainly not going to get Francis S...Well, I'm certainly not going to get Francis Schaeffer's back, but at least he engaged a professional to research the parts of his argument he wasn't sure about.Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-22186742012402433102009-09-16T09:42:35.529-06:002009-09-16T09:42:35.529-06:00I think this also relates to the content of Mark N...I think this also relates to the content of Mark Noll's book "The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind."<br /><br />Noll is an evangelical himself; but Roman Catholics have Notre Dame (where he now teaches), top notch intellectuals and magazines like "First Things" (for which I published one tiny piece and for which Justice Scalia has written). And what do Protestant evangelicals have? Jim Bakker, Jimmy Swaggart, John Hagee, etc.<br /><br />As an intellectual, he's rightly embarrassed by them.<br /><br />I think it also relates to Noll's criticism of Francis Schaeffer. Noll noted Schaeffer was a top notch theologian; however he was not a "scholar," especially not of history. And Schaeffer got an attorney to research the parts of his work where he endorsed the "Christian America" thesis.Jonathan Rowehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04079637406589278386noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-6910192994338040502009-09-16T09:33:11.281-06:002009-09-16T09:33:11.281-06:00The Supreme Court's religious breakdown is as ...The Supreme Court's religious breakdown is as follows:<br /><br />1) Catholics: 6<br />2) Jews: 2<br />3) Protestant: 1<br /><br />This is a remarkable demographic shift in the Court. Within living memory, there was one "Catholic seat" on the Court -- William Brennan was appointed to that seat by Eisenhower. That was it. It was a quota -- one Catholic, and that was it. The same with Jewish appointees. There was a "Jewish seat" and that was that. Once it was filled, no more Jews needed to apply. Now, there is only a single Protestant on the Court -- John Paul Stevens. <br /><br />Looking at how the religious demographics intersect with the racial/ethnic demographics on the Court demonstrates that the presence of white ethnics and racial minorities on the Court has helped to further the rise of Catholics on the Court. Outside of the two Jewish members (Breyer and Ginsburg), all of the white ethnics on the Court are Catholic: Scalia & Alito (both Italian), Kennedy (Irish), Roberts (German-American). The two non-white members of the Court are also Catholic: Thomas and Sotomayor. <br /><br />Ironically, as the Court has started to "look more like America" (to borrow a phrase from former President Clinton), it has become disproportionately Catholic.Mark D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/05000893614655251587noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-90366374091265615522009-09-16T01:07:21.265-06:002009-09-16T01:07:21.265-06:00Oh, and foes again as European Catholics started i...Oh, and foes again as European Catholics started infecting the Protestant order with waves of immigration throughout the 1800s.<br /><br />The Know-Nothings, fer instance.<br /><br />Now 6 of the 9 justices on the Supreme Court are ostensibly Roman Catholic, including the black guy. And there's a Jew to boot!<br /><br />I love America.Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-86716036043589065752009-09-15T23:45:32.843-06:002009-09-15T23:45:32.843-06:00I had read about the prohibition on the Guy Fawkes...I had read about the prohibition on the Guy Fawkes celbration, but I hadn't seen the text of the actual order. Thanks for sharing!<br /><br />It is interesting American attitudes toward the French shifted both in the colonial period and in the early Republic. From foe to ally to friend to foe to ally again -- all within the space of a few decades.Mark D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/05000893614655251587noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1237087217187172116.post-24773687948578870442009-09-15T23:26:37.765-06:002009-09-15T23:26:37.765-06:00Fascinating, Mark. I just ran across similar stuf...Fascinating, Mark. I just ran across similar stuff the other day and it's in my posting queue.<br /><br />Once the French papists were allies of the revolution, Gen. Washington even forbade the troops observing the anti-Catholic Guy Fawkes Day!<br /><br />Order in Quarters, November 5, 1775:<br /><br /><i>As the Commander in Chief has been apprized of a design form’d for the observance of that ridiculous and childish custom of burning the Effigy 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 this 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 Circumstances, to be insulting their Religion, is so monstrous, as not to be suffered or excused; indeed instead of offering 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.</i><br /><br />Geo. Washington was a practical kind of guy. As are Americans as a whole...Tom Van Dykehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07121072404143877596noreply@blogger.com