The Anti-Catholic Bias and American Politics |
The anti-Catholic bias goes back a long way in American politics. The Founders of this country justify, in part, in the First Amendment Separation of Church and State on the fear of the Catholic Church, and in particular its Head of State, the Pope. The Vatican was looked at as an independent entity, with a leader very much like a national head of state, a king or an emperor.
England’s Henry VIII broke from the Catholic Church and set up his own Anglican Church, not only because the Catholic Church would not approve of his marriages, divorces, and beheading of less than favorite wives, but also as a battle for control. European history is largely about the question as to who would rule the emerging nation states on the continent; the Church or the King?
Thomas Jefferson specifically wrote that a “priest-ridden people” would have difficulty “maintaining a free civil government.” Jefferson, who wrote his own Bible, considered the Church an institution which was despotic and would unquestionably suppress human liberty.
John Adams, along with Jefferson, the architect of this nation, had a strong anti-Catholic bias. All one has to do to understand John Adams and his view of Catholicism is to read his 1765 work entitled “A Dissertation on the Canon and the Feudal Law.” Adams also trumpeted the need for religious tolerance.
John Jay was the first Chief Justice of the United States. He strongly opposed the Catholic Church, especially as it pertained to public life. He even tried to have the New York Legislature ban Catholics from holding office. At the time, Jews were still not permitted to hold office in most of the colonies.
Thomas Paine, who is often credited with fomenting the American Revolution with his book “Common Sense” entitled Christianity a “Fable” in “The Age of Reason.”
Fortunately, George Washington, who doubtless had his own personal views of Catholicism, worked to suppress anti-Catholic conduct within the Continental Army. Washington was more interested in winning the war than hating Catholics.
Al Smith probably would have been elected President of the United States, prior to John Kennedy, had he not been Catholic. Kennedy, fortunately, broke the anti-Catholic sentiment when he defeated Richard Nixon in the 1960 Presidential election.
Aside from the United States importing the wars between Catholic and Protestant, the new nation was concerned about competition from the Pope, whom many of the Founders saw as a head of a very powerful state.
In modern times, both religious leaders and politicians have avoided attacking one another.
The battle between religious sects is certainly not limited to Christianity. Islam is broken into two major denominations, which continue to kill one another and blow up each other’s holy places of worship.
In Israel, which has only 8 million Jews, the rest having been murdered over the last 2,000 years, there are two Chief Rabbis representing the two major sects of Jews within the country. There is a Chief Sephardic Rabbi and a Chief Ashkenazi Rabbi. While they usually agree, there clearly are tensions which arise from time to time. The major issue in Israel today, after the basic question of survival, is what to do about Haredi Jews who will not serve in the military or do public service. That has caused a split in the country so deep that there are those who fear civil war between and among the Jews themselves.
Generally speaking, we have come to the conclusion in the United States that religious leaders should stay out of politics, and politicians should stay out of religion. While not everyone agrees, that is at the core of the very public dispute between American-Chicago Pope Leo and President Donald Trump.
Pope Leo, in many ways, is a representative of America. He is that outspoken, bright, and capable leader who is not ashamed of his views, particularly with respect to how nations should behave in war and peace. Donald Trump believes that he is competent to speak on any subject, regardless of how much he knows about it. One suspects that Trump knows very little about Catholicism and has even less understanding of the fidelity that even fallen Catholics have for the Church.
I grew up close to a Catholic school, had many Catholic friends, and went to a Jesuit law school. Nevertheless, I would never pretend that I know more about Catholicism than the head of the Catholic Church. Who, in their right mind, would pick a fight with a Church leader?
One of my heroes in life was Pope John XXIII, originally named Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli. He transformed the Church with the Second Vatican Council. Even so, for some he was controversial.
Not only did Pope John change Church Doctrine with respect to its view of the Jews, but he wrote the famous, compelling, and very moving Prayer of Forgiveness to the Jewish people. One would think that no one could dislike Pope John XXIII, and yet there are Catholics who disapprove of his changes and oppose those church reforms.
Any dispute, in modern times, between Church and State is bound to turn toxic. Pope Leo has every right to his views, and as a quasi-head of state, he is entitled to share those views with anyone. Does that mean that the Pope opens himself up to criticism, should he make public statements with which a head of state disagrees?
My family was a follower of the great Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson. He more than dipped his toe into the political waters, and not everyone was happy about it. When students, with whom I hung out, wanted to protest the treatment that the Soviet government was dishing out to its Jewish citizens, the Rebbe told us to refrain from agitating the Soviets. He believed that our public demonstrations would make matters worse for the Jews living in the Soviet State.
We did not agree with Rabbi Schneerson, we protested anyway, and the heavens did not cave in. In fact, we like to believe that our protests helped free the Soviet Jews. Nevertheless, the Rebbe still stands as one the great figures in the modern Jewish lexicon.
Respect for differences should inure to the benefit of the Pope and other religious leaders who have a duty to preach peace, even if the politicians appreciate that every once in a while, war is necessary.
No reasonable person could argue that the picture of Donald Trump in white robes presiding over war and peace was not intended to show him as a redeemer, a savior. Whoever came up with the idea was simply dumb and tone deaf to the American agenda which still separates Church from State.