David Yeagley is the great-great-grandson of Comanche leader Bad Eagle. 
The faith of the fathers, the American fathers, is long passed in the country of their descendents. Americans today have little idea of what religion meant in the 17th and 18th centuries. We do well to remind ourselves of the truth in the matter of the Western religious practice of Christianity.
The English Puritans (later known as White Anglo-Saxon Protestants) were severely persecuted in Europe, as were all such protestants. They fled their homeland. In 1620, they undertook the arduous and dangerous journey to the New World, where no comforts were afforded them save the initial generosity and kindness of the first “savages” who met them.
These “pilgrims,” these early American colonists, eschewed European Christianity. The Roman Catholic Church, and its first-born daughter, the Church of England, represented everything wrong with religion. Romanism was the pith of pageantry and pretense, in the eyes of the English Puritans. It was utterly prop-oriented, with grave and cumbersome visual aids on every hand. It was some ancient Etruscan tradition, bent on processions and parades. It depended entirely on august ceremony, elaborately uniformed clergy, and seemed to embody all that was artificial in the way of religious sentiment. There was a certain slavery to the senses involved. It was, in fact, a system of idolatry, plain and simple.
Their objections were not new, either. The Iconoclastic Controversy of the 8th and 9th Centuries (726-843) in Byzantium was all about Emperor Leo III and his campaign to rid the church of idols. The early American protestants abhorred all that smacked of Romanism. Perhaps they were extreme, but they lived in extreme times, and drove themselves into extreme circumstances in the wilderness of the New World. In this radical environment, psychologically and sociologically, the “Shakers” and the “Quakers” developed. The Shakers are known for their simplicity of style and intensely unadorned dress, architecture, and furnishings. The Quakers are known for their purposeful absence of liturgy in religious service. The “Friends” had no use for ceremony. Freedom of worship, freedom of informed conscience, this was all to which the word “religion” applied. Both groups were popularly characterized by a “spirituality” which involved personal emotion manifest in their public meetings. (Perhaps it was their own New World version of mysticism.)
A simple “Shaker” styled spice box.
This, of course, is the antithesis of all that is Roman Catholic. The Church had dealt with schism and revolution for centuries in Europe, from John Huss and the Bohemians to these new English Puritans. (And, yes, that little dispute between King Henry VIII and Pope in 1534 was a personal matter, not really pertaining to religious sentiment or its idolatrous modus operandi. Globalist always go Catholic, if with a little competition.)
Most of the papal encyclicals anathematizing freedom of conscience, freedom of the press, etc., were all generated by the circumstances of Europe at the time. Pope Gregory’s encyclical of August 15, 1832 (see pars. 14 and 15) reflects the concerns posed by the American Revolution, the French Revolution and their aftermath, and the violence in Germany, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Poland, Belgium, and Holland. It was an age of great social change. It was the beginning of Industrial Revolution. (And Communism was coming soon.) The Churches authority was passing, or so it seemed. Some deadly wound abode.
How it is today that the Church of Rome has come to hold such a central position in American government and society is a mystery which needs desperate attention. That a country whose very principle of existence was antithetical of Rome should come to be dominated once again by that same Rome, is irony beyond acquiescence.
Historically, we might look at the pre-Civil War era, and the massive immigration of Irish Catholics to America. They all settled north of the Mason Dixon line, and all voted Democrat. Michael F. Holt, in The Political Crisis of the 1850′s (1963) implies the idea that this new Catholic population counted for the North, and installed more representatives in Congress, thus upsetting the balance of power. The Southern states saw no alternative but secession. They were simply out-numbered.
“Devout Catholic,” Nancy Pelosi.
Add to this the later Italian immigrations, and American society, at least in the East, was powerfully Catholic. Europe had followed the English Puritans to the new land of opportunity. The Church rebuilt itself.
But the American Catholic is not always the submissive sheep as in the old Medieval European breed. American Catholics can be quite unruly, in fact. One Nancy Patricia D’Alesandro Pelosi is a classic example. She absolutely defies the Church’s position on abortion. She believes in it, and openly, loudly advocates “free choice.” The Church officially condemns it. She thinks it is the woman’s right, and it is the only compassionate thing to do–as far as the woman is concerned. (Never mind the unborn child.) She feels the Church is hung up on its own tradition or social image. Moreover, Pelosi feels that the Church’s public position does not reflect the ambiguity of its own dogma.
We can’t take Nancy Pelosi’s “conscience” issue too seriously, other that as an example of the constitutional contradiction of Rome’s historical profession and practice. The “devout Catholic” (her own profession) says the Church has “this conscience thing” that won’t allow them to have compassion on women who need (or want) abortions.
The fact is, Rome, on the world scene, apparently faces the issue of abortion in different social circumstances. Massive abortions in Africa, for example, legal or illegal, are related to extensive famines. More people born mean more people suffer and die. Though the Church issues a continuum of condemnation for abortion, the United Nations continues to urge it upon all Third World countries. The Roman Church as yet seems to have inadequate influence in the U.N. The Vatican’s non-voting ambassador to the U.N., Archbishop Celestino Migliore prays:
At the initial rite of reconciliation, I bring before the Lord my sins and those of the U.N. family in its slow response that penalizes the poor, in its verbosity, in its smoke-screening and delaying tactics during certain debates that result in nonaction, in its impertinence, at times, of wanting to substitute itself for God in many ways.
But the moral judgement of the Church is confused in the face of death, disease, and unwed mothers. If extra-marital sex, en mass, produces hordes of bastard children, most of whom will die of starvation and disease before they reach their teens, which is the greater evil–abortion or ‘adultery’? Which course is more compassionate?
The answer is probably mass sterilization, but, that’s too Hitlerian for most people with “conscience” to consider. But why? Is it less moral to relieve or prevent suffering than to insure it?
The Puritans had a solution: abstinence. That is true religion. Abortion v. “choice” is an utterly superficial issue, affording but great fodder for fake moralists and other politicians.
If there is a draw-back of capitalism, it is the marketing of ideas in the grand bazaar of politics. If there is a fault in “equality” it is the idea the everyone can vote. If there is a failure of America, it is the fact that too many people do not adhere to the values of the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant fathers. Too many people don’t even know what those values are.
Freedom has been abused. Liberty is prostituted. Equality is manipulation. Conscience is confused. That’s where were are, Wednesday, November 22, 2011.
8 responses so far ↓
1 Pamela K. // Nov 22, 2011 at 5:28 pm
” In 1620, they undertook the arduous and dangerous journey to the New World, where no comforts were afforded them save the initial generosity and kindness of the first “savages” who met them.”
- David Yeagley
Yes. but it was those “savages” who taught the Puritans about native crops like cranberries and blueberries, about how to use willow bark (aspirin) as an effective pain-killer; how to plant corn and sweet potatoes in order to survive their first years on this soil, but, more importantly, the Indians showed them how to use fish guts as a powerful fertilizer in their vegetable gardens! Today, fish emulsion liquid is still used as an ideal food for vegetables and flowers, said to be even better than Miracle-Gro! Just be careful not to splash any on yourself!
“But the American Catholic is not always the submissive sheep as in the old Medieval European breed. American Catholics can be quite unruly, in fact. ” – David Yeagley
Fifty-three percent of all Roman Catholics in America voted to elect staunchly pro-abortion Barack Obama to the presidency in 2008. So much for the pro-life stand of Rome.
When I was a senior in Gloucester Catholic High School in the early 1980′s, the priest who was the principal was also my psychology teacher. One day, Father MacIntyre, affectionately called “Father Mac” by his students, stood up before the class and announced, “The greatest moral challenges facing your generation in the future will be abortion-on-demand and euthanasia.” He was right!
The anti-life position of politicians like Nancy Pelosi are confirmation of his words. She claims that she supports ” a woman’s right to choose” and while this is true, with politicians like her and Senator John Kerry, another self-professed Catholic who is also pro-abortion, their support for ” a woman’s right to choose” goes one step farther. With them, it’s not only about having the power to make unchallenged decisions over other peoples’ lives, but more importantly, it’s all about the real god they worship, money.
According to this recent report, John Kerry, who played a key role in shaping the monstrosity known as Obamacare, has raked in millions of dollars through personal investments in healthcare companies:
http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-11-16/politics/30404758_1_kerrys-massachusetts-democrat-obamacare
Kerry once said. “We’re going to say yes to science. We’re going to listen to the scientists”
I have to wonder how many of these companies are doing “scientific research” with infant stem cells harvested from the bodies of dead babies, murdered through abortion, and especially those aborted as full term infants through the heinous procedure known as a “partial birth abortion?”
In regards to the UN’s policy on reproductive rights of women, abortion definitely tops the list as an effective means to control the earth’s population, especially in much of the nations of Africa and Asia.
Meanwhile, Vice President Joe Biden ( yet another professed Catholic!) thinks forced abortion is a great idea. He recently told a Chinese audience,
” Your ( One Child) policy has been one which I fully understand — I’m not second-guessing — of one child per family,”
His carelessly flung words brings to my mind another startling proclamation:
“But I tell you, on the day of judgment men will give an account for every idle and worthless word they speak. By your words, you will be justified and acquitted, and by your words, your will be condemned and sentenced.”
Matthew 12:36-37
2 JollyGreen // Nov 22, 2011 at 6:48 pm
As a former Roman Catholic, I can add these comments based upon my own beliefs and experience; that is: That Catholicism, like most denominationalism, is a cultural, more than a spiritual thing.
One can be a “cultural” Catholic without adhering to the “Doctrines and Dogmas” of the Church….I could even argue that most Catholics do not have a clue about what the church teaches or believes, however, I believe this to true for most Protestant as well.
Most human attempts at “religion” usually find the adherents simply assimilating into a religious culture (denomination) with which they can feel “accepted,” as well as to find a group of people that they can also “live with.” This arrangement is what drives the “search” for the “perfect church” in church-hopping America. If you examine the facts, it is not usually the doctrines that send people into a search mode, it is the lack of “assimilation” with the people (especially among Protestants…the Catholic Church still holds the threat of “excommunication” over the heads of its members who would stray elsewhere).
One prominent, howbeit deceased, Adventist theologian, Samuele Bacchiocchi, said that most Catholics only go to church three times in their lives…1) When they are hatched, 2) When they are matched, and lastly, 3) When they are dispatched. However, they are still considered “good Catholics.” Some priests attempt to deal with this “lukewarm” attitude by parishioners, but some have been sued. The priest in the attached article is now attached to my sister’s parish in Rio Rancho, NM.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/19/us/beliefs-dead-man-s-family-sues-archdiocese-saying-priest-funeral-called-him.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm
As for myself, I find myself only bound to Christ. Yes, I am a member of a Protestant denomination, however, I have never “assimilated” into that culture. I am there by “conviction,” and not by “choice.” They simply have the most Biblical doctrines I can find. The “people” however, can prove to be difficult to live with.
Let’s be thankful for Christ and Him alone. No denomination or “church” can secure our eternal salvation….Only Jesus can do that.
3 Thrasymachus // Nov 22, 2011 at 7:35 pm
“Frank quotes an Episcopalian bishop who acknowledges defeat [of the WASP population], but isn’t much concerned: “tracking the ups and downs of socioreligious groups like WASPs [is] no longer relevant: ‘That kind of calibration of ‘what members of my team are on the front lines’ seems to me to be an antique kind of thing to do.’”
That’s the kind of broad-minded, liberal thinking that got the WASPs into trouble in the first place.There was always a tension between the WASPs as a clubby, snobbish elite cemented by family connections and their very liberal, broad-minded world view stemming from their New England base.” — Dr. Kevin MacDonald
“The Yankee sense of ethnic superiority often competed with their belief in universalist liberal ideology — equality, liberty and human rights. One way that worked itself out is that non-Yankees could aspire and acculturate to the Yankee norm and ideal — by gaining entrance to their schools primarily, but also by joining their churches, appreciating their art forms and imbibing their ideas, adopting their aesthetic.” — Gregory Rodriguez
And, of course, now we have new contenders to deal with, besides Catholics and Jews:
Islam in the USA (Islam in the United States of America)
4 Asaph // Nov 22, 2011 at 8:02 pm
Catholicism and culture for sure. Italian Catholics, Irish, Polish, Spanish, French (my background), all with their own spin on their faith. In some lands where paganism is rampant, many Catholics just modify their religion according to their culture.
American Catholics are now “Americanized.” That cultural influence has distorted true Catholicism in this country. That is actually somewhat good. It stalls Rome’s intentions somewhat, but a totally weak and distracted Protestantism, as well corrupted by the culture, joins hands with Rome towards political ends. Not a good thing. Protestants know not what they do, at least rank and file.
5 Thrasymachus // Nov 22, 2011 at 8:17 pm
I see that more was added to the title of the video than I had anticipated! Don’t know how that works.
6 David Yeagley // Nov 22, 2011 at 9:46 pm
I fixed it. Thanks for posting it. This is all some profound social pathology or weakness of some kind.
7 Asaph // Nov 23, 2011 at 6:18 am
There is also a point that should be made about the dangers of Catholicism in American politics as it pertains to its own people. As noted above Pelosi and Kerry are well outside Catholic doctrine and faith. MOST Catholic politicians are. Why is it a church which claims to be the only true church on earth, the mother of all churches, over one billion members, cannot or will not faithfully remove from its membership prominent people such as Pelosi and others who literally wage war against Catholic doctrine in no less a way than true Protestants? Because Catholicism, the Vatican, has plans. Those plans, those aims are to make America “Catholic.” Considering the RCC is the epitome of a union of church and state, it is important for her to gain more and more state influence, and then state power.
Like OWS to Democrats, Rome is not averse to having “useful idiots” at its disposal to gain any and all influence and power it is able to.
8 David Yeagley // Nov 23, 2011 at 6:55 am
Interesting. I was going to bring up the matter of “excommunication.” “Disfellowship,” protestants call it. When you kick someone out of your group. When you ban someone, or bar their membership. Church is not a blood line, but a group of fellow value holders. If you don’t hold those values, you’re out. That’s the simple view.
But, as you say, the leaders have to weigh the tactic. I don’t know when the last time Rome has excommunicated anyone, for anything, at any level. This is an historical oddity.
They used to burn people at the stake, after torturing them.
You must log in to post a comment.