Skip to main content

View Diary: Christian War On TX Gays Sustains Collateral Damage: Cops, Fireman (304 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  No (21+ / 0-)

    Flatten colorado out, and make Texass the 3rd largest state...

    The man who knows and knows he knows not is a wise man

    by OpherGopher on Tue Jan 04, 2011 at 07:48:55 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Lots of dialog in the paper... (8+ / 0-)

      We are all familiar with the evangelical movement's cultural reaction.But Catholics here have joined in the fray. Example in today's LTE's. Timeless truths are endlessly quoted. Unbeknownst to many of these hatemongers are the church's longstanding oppression of the marginalized and opposition to liberal Western enlightenment principles like the "will of the people." One example in our history would be the church's siding with the Confederacy in the Civil War.

      "I'm up on a tightrope/One side's hate and one is hope" --Leon Russell

      by turdraker on Tue Jan 04, 2011 at 09:12:46 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Is this true??? (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        boofdah, Philpm, kafkananda, Lujane, Ana Thema

        One example in our history would be the church's siding with the Confederacy in the Civil War.

        I'm not disbelieving you.  It's just that this is one particular atrocity I've never heard about, and as a lapsed Catholic, I try to keep up.

        Maladie d'Amour, Où l'on meurt d'Aimer, Seul et sans Amour, Sid'abandonné

        by FogCityJohn on Tue Jan 04, 2011 at 09:20:08 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  It would be doubtful (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Philpm, Lujane

          The Catholic Church as a general rule never takes sides in war--for much the same reasons that Mark Twain laid out in his famous "War Prayer."

          •  I know they don't these days . . . (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            mrkvica, homogenius, Philpm, Lujane

            but obviously that hasn't always been true.  I'm just wondering what the basis of the statement is.

            Maladie d'Amour, Où l'on meurt d'Aimer, Seul et sans Amour, Sid'abandonné

            by FogCityJohn on Tue Jan 04, 2011 at 09:50:50 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  The Pope at that time (Pius IX) (15+ / 0-)

            Wrote a letter to Jefferson Davis, recognizing him as "the President". Supposedly the only foreign leader of any kind to "legitimize" the Confederate States. He later sent sympathy, and a hand woven crown of thorns, to Davis when he was imprisoned after the war.

            •  Wow. (6+ / 0-)

              That's pretty amazing.  Just one more reason for me to stay lapsed.

              Maladie d'Amour, Où l'on meurt d'Aimer, Seul et sans Amour, Sid'abandonné

              by FogCityJohn on Tue Jan 04, 2011 at 10:46:22 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  Sources, please? (0+ / 0-)

              I've not heard this scenario before either. That said, I'm not sure that even if it's true, it really says all that much beyond a simple recognition of an existing fact. Like it or not, Davis was president of the Confederacy--and as such, the Church was going to have to deal with him on matters regarding Catholics living within its borders. The Church also signed a Concordat with Hitler for exactly the same reason--doesn't mean they agreed with each and every one of his policies, as Pius XI made abundantly clear in his 1937 encyclical (written four years after the Concordat was signed), Mit brennender Sorge.

              •  Sources (0+ / 0-)

                The letter was written. There is certainly room to debate what the Pope's intent was in addressing Davis with that formal title.

                Whatever his intent, the South made quite a big deal of the apparently official recognition.

                On further exploration, it does also seem that the crown of thorns story was exaggerated, with the Pope sending only a picture and message (the crown may have been the creation of Davis' wife)

                [F]amily Bible, given by Jefferson Davis to his wife Varina Jefferson Davis, with his written indorsement to that effect, and one from Mrs. Davis, presenting it to Memorial Hall; pciture of Pope Pius IX (framed), with an autograph and a Latin sentence inscribed on it by his holiness, bearing his seal, and certified to by Cardinal Barnabo Pref. (The Pope sent this picture to Jefferson Davis while a prisoner at Fortress Monroe.  Accompanying the picture is a crown of thorns, made by Mrs. Davis, that hung above it in Mr. Davis’s study[.]


                •  Um, yeah (0+ / 0-)

                  Total mischaracterization on your part.

                  From your link, the following is clear:

                  1. The letter from the pope is a reply to a letter sent to him by President Davis.
                  1. It can in no realistic sense be characterized as a "recognition" of the Confederacy.
                  1. It follows letters previously written by the pope to the bishops of New York and New Orleans, apparently (judging from comments made in both Davis's letter to the pope, and the pope's reply) encouraging them to encourage their respective peoples--and, presumably, governments--to work toward the end of the war.

                  A transcript of the pope's letter:

                  Illustrious and honorable president: Salutation.

                  We have just received, with all suitable welcome, the persons sent by you to place in our hands your letter, dated twenty-third of September last. Not slight was the pleasure we experienced when we learned, from these persons and the letter, with what feelings of joy and gratitude you were animated, illustrious and honorable President, as soon as you were informed of our letters to our venerable brothers, John, Archbishop of New-York, and John, Archbishop of New-Orleans, dated the eighteenth of October of last year, and in which we have, with all our strength, excited and exhorted these venerable brothers that in their episcopal piety and solicitude they should endeavor, with the most ardent zeal, and in our name, to bring about the end of the fatal civil war which has broken out in those countries, in order that the American people may obtain peace and concord, and dwell charitably together. It is particularly agreeable to us to see that you, illustrious and honorable President, and your people, are animated with the same desires of peace and tranquility which we have in our letters inculcated upon our venerable brothers. May it please God at the same time to make the other peoples of America and their rulers, reflecting seriously how terrible is civil war, and what calamities it engenders, listen to the inspirations of a calmer spirit, and adopt resolutely the part of peace. As for us, we shall not cease to offer up the most fervent prayers to God Almighty that he may pour out upon all the peoples of America the spirit of peace and charity, and that he will stop the great evils which afflict them. We, at the same time, beseech the God of mercy and pity to shed abroad upon you the light of his grace, and attach you to us by a perfect friendship.

                  Given at Rome, at St. Peter's, the third of December, in the year of our Lord 1863, of our Pontificate 18.

                  Pius IX.

      •  Let's not borrow the broad brush, okay? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        cappy, liberaldemdave, Lujane

        It is inaccurate to paint religious people in general as on the wrong side of the Civil War.  I don't know about the Catholic Church specifically, but religion in general was a crucially important force at stopping, first the slave trade, and finally slavery.  There have always been sincere practitioners along with the confused.  John Newton's epiphany, for a famous example, took the religious form one would expect in a day when belief in God was so wide-spread.  For another example, abolitionists in the North were overwhelmingly grounded in religion.

        He who blesses the poor, shall himself be blessed.

        by geomoo on Tue Jan 04, 2011 at 10:44:14 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  God, religion and the Bible have been used by (0+ / 0-)

          all sides throughout history to justify their side. While many, if not most, abolitionists looked to the Bible for evidence of the moral opposition to slavery, just as many Southern slaveholders used it to defend slavery. The biblical arguments for slavery were among the strongest and most enduring.

          People read out of their religion texts what they want to read out of their religious texts.

          •  Yes, therefore it is mistaken to blame religion (0+ / 0-)

            for war or slavery.  Religion is no different from any other human endeavor.  People don't usually blame the Constitution for the country's drift away from democracy; neither should they blame the bible for the fact that in religion, as in all things, human nature finds a justification for its lower tendencies.

            He who blesses the poor, shall himself be blessed.

            by geomoo on Tue Jan 04, 2011 at 03:36:15 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  I'm curious if your understanding of this issue (0+ / 0-)

            extends to your own cherished belief system or guidelines.  It is universal human behavior, as demonstrated by scientific study, to form conclusions on the basis of involuntary, unconscious processes while adding the rational justification later.  Religion is no different in this regard than any other system of thought.  I find it ironic, however, that most popular religions offer practices which can help ameliorate this human tendency toward hubris even though religions are most commonly taken to task for this tendency, which is present in every human endeavor.

            He who blesses the poor, shall himself be blessed.

            by geomoo on Tue Jan 04, 2011 at 03:58:28 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site