The attack on a fundamental principle of America—that we should be free to practice religion (or not), the principle that brought the original English settlers here, is bad enough
But if *I* were an immigrant, instead of a descendant of those Euro-Americans, I’d be doubly insulted by the claim that immigrants worship some secular liberalism
According to Pew, an approximately equal percentage of immigrants profess Christianity as we “Heritage” Americans, but they’re much more likely to attend services. Approximately ½ the share of immigrants profess no religious connection but what has Vance and the rest of the “Blood and Soil” crowd so upset is that a larger share of immigrants observe Biddhism, Hinduism and Gawd Forbid, Islam
So it seems perfectly clear: the justification for hating on immigrants is not for their failure to be religious, nor their failure to be Catholic or other Christians, but simply hatred of people who thought their sincere beliefs had a place in a confident, thriving America
A sobering article. The Protestant Christian Nationalist movement, that is the heartbeat of today's Republican Party, will be happy to exploit the political power of Catholic Integralists in order to dominate American politics in the short term. They can agree on issues like abortion, banning contraception, ending Gay rights, advancing Christian schools at taxpayer expense, and some other issues but the two movements are fundamentally contradictory and will come into conflict.
Protestant Christian Nationalism (which is regarded as a heresy by most Catholic theologians) believes that the State has the power to decide and regulate religion including Christianity. The state can legislatively pronounce what the Bible says and means and there by legislate laws accordingly. Some (Hegseth's pastor Doug Wilson) also believe it would be right to not allow Catholics and Orthodox Christians having public processions with statues and icons. Non-Christians (yes Catholics are considered non-Christians!) might be able to worship undisturbed inside their places of worship but not in public. Only state sponsored religious celebrations could be public.
Catholic Integralists would say that it is the Magisterium of the Church that determines what "the common good is" and that Catholics have an absolute duty to compel the state to legislate accordingly. The Pope is not a politician he only stands in the place of Peter and Christ and has infallible authority to declare what is true, right, moral and good.
Between the two I see Catholic Integralism as easier to moderate in a democratic Republic. Even the Papacy does not teach anything as extreme as Catholic Integralism being promoted in the US, Hungary and the dark recesses of other heretofore liberal democracies. The overwhelmingly "liberal"and transnational social doctrines of the Church have been developing in a continuous direction since 1891. The trajectory has been reaffirmed by progressive and conservative Popes and the Second Vatican Council. It is almost on an irreversible path.
The case of Chad Peckenhold is really alarming in that he is licensed to teach theology at a university that is directly accountable to it's Bishop Chancellor (McCrary) and he is accountable for the orthodoxy of the theology taught there to the Vatican itself. Professional lay theologians are expected to live lives consistent with their vocation and sacred responsibility of forming the sound conscience of the men and women they teach.
I am not sure hiring on as a salaried propagandist for the immoral, cruel and unchristian DHS/ICE is quite consistent with that expectation.
I'm unclear what a Heritage American is. For example, while Trump's grandfather first came to America in 1885 his mother's family was a 20th century arrival. Is he a Heritage American? Is Pecknold? His father's family came here in 1949. An overwhelming majority of Black citizens can trace their ancestry to pre-Revolutionary times -- are they Heritage Americans? I would certainly not lay claim to this title, although great-grandparents were all here by the 1880s. I think that if I tried to make that claim the people who use the term would refute it -- those grandparents were Jews.
It seems clear to me that the term, is a racial marker. Newcomers like Pecknold are Heritage Americans because their ancestors were white Europeans. As other commenters here have noted, only political opportunism has erased the critical distinction between Protestants and Catholics. In the KKK's second coming in the 1920s, the chief targets were not Blacks, who knew their place, but uppity Catholics and Jews. The Heritage American idea is very much like the KKK, updated to include a certain new type of revanchist Catholic who would have been at home in Vichy France. (JD Vance, who obviously claims Heritage status as a Hillbilly descendant, has adopted this type of Catholicism as the current answer to a long search for personal identity.)
"Revanchist American" would probably be a better title for this group, which would accommodate people like Vivek Ramaswamy and Usha Vance. It appears to blend the concepts of America as a racial nation and creedal nation, anchoring its membership in lineal descent from a White subset of the Revolutionary era population (excluding Blacks and Jews, although members of both groups were here in significant numbers and fought in the Revolutionary War) and accepting others regardless of race who espouse the particular reactionary creed proselytized by "Heritage Americans": people like Pecknold.
I think that basically these are well-educated people who have read Raspail's "Le Camp des Saints" and not been repulsed by its astonishingly open racism. Their popular followers couldn't make it through that awfully-written book, but have read or heard about the underground thriller, "The Turner Diaries," which has inspired millions of openly white nationalist group members.
They're not "postliberals", they're PRE-liberals. They're not against the social democracy of FDR and LBJ, they're against the democratic republic of Jefferson and Hamilton.
Everyone has to come up with some bullshit name for their tired project to roll back the enlightenment. People like this guy always think it's the existence of specific people just living their lives that's the problem.
This is very disturbing, especially considering the issues the Catholic church has undergone over recent years. Do you ever wonder why participation is dropping like a stone? Re-read this article.
Actually that is the scary part. While "mainstream" Catholics in America are participating less--- fanatical elements, influenced by these integralists, are seeing growth especially among young white men.
As a bona fide “heritage American,” these people make me wonder whether the anti-papists were right to oppose the mass immigration of Catholics into a fundamentally Protestant country. Jews and Buddhists don’t cause this kind of trouble. (Of course this is blaming all Catholics for a few bad jelly beans or Skittles .)
As a "Heritage American" it seems odd to see Catholics, traditional targets of bigotry up until 100 years ago, so willing to pour the same venom on others. I am proud that many of my ancestors fought in the Civil War to free the enslaved. Sadly some of my "Heritage American" ancestors also joined in the persecution of Catholics, Masons, Mormons, Catholics and Jews. I thought we had learned better. I guess not.
A story regarding Prof. Chad’s viewpoint: this morning we participated in the joy of the indy Alzheimer’s Walk. Our vast & varied community came together to raise funds, support each other, celebrate our loved ones. I really tried to think of some “group” that wasn’t present. Classified by age or race, by abilities or disability, by cultural heritage. Nope. Everybody was represented. Neighbors. Community. Americans.
Chad’s belief system is one of division. Jesus preached & practiced uniting. With God. With our sisters & brothers. I don’t need or seek a new god. I’ll do my best to follow the path Jesus walked. Chad can wander off on his own. I hope people choose wisely who they’ll follow
The attack on a fundamental principle of America—that we should be free to practice religion (or not), the principle that brought the original English settlers here, is bad enough
But if *I* were an immigrant, instead of a descendant of those Euro-Americans, I’d be doubly insulted by the claim that immigrants worship some secular liberalism
According to Pew, an approximately equal percentage of immigrants profess Christianity as we “Heritage” Americans, but they’re much more likely to attend services. Approximately ½ the share of immigrants profess no religious connection but what has Vance and the rest of the “Blood and Soil” crowd so upset is that a larger share of immigrants observe Biddhism, Hinduism and Gawd Forbid, Islam
So it seems perfectly clear: the justification for hating on immigrants is not for their failure to be religious, nor their failure to be Catholic or other Christians, but simply hatred of people who thought their sincere beliefs had a place in a confident, thriving America
I don't know whether the proper term is excommunication, or defenestration. But either, at least metaphorically, sounds appropriate.
A sobering article. The Protestant Christian Nationalist movement, that is the heartbeat of today's Republican Party, will be happy to exploit the political power of Catholic Integralists in order to dominate American politics in the short term. They can agree on issues like abortion, banning contraception, ending Gay rights, advancing Christian schools at taxpayer expense, and some other issues but the two movements are fundamentally contradictory and will come into conflict.
Protestant Christian Nationalism (which is regarded as a heresy by most Catholic theologians) believes that the State has the power to decide and regulate religion including Christianity. The state can legislatively pronounce what the Bible says and means and there by legislate laws accordingly. Some (Hegseth's pastor Doug Wilson) also believe it would be right to not allow Catholics and Orthodox Christians having public processions with statues and icons. Non-Christians (yes Catholics are considered non-Christians!) might be able to worship undisturbed inside their places of worship but not in public. Only state sponsored religious celebrations could be public.
Catholic Integralists would say that it is the Magisterium of the Church that determines what "the common good is" and that Catholics have an absolute duty to compel the state to legislate accordingly. The Pope is not a politician he only stands in the place of Peter and Christ and has infallible authority to declare what is true, right, moral and good.
Between the two I see Catholic Integralism as easier to moderate in a democratic Republic. Even the Papacy does not teach anything as extreme as Catholic Integralism being promoted in the US, Hungary and the dark recesses of other heretofore liberal democracies. The overwhelmingly "liberal"and transnational social doctrines of the Church have been developing in a continuous direction since 1891. The trajectory has been reaffirmed by progressive and conservative Popes and the Second Vatican Council. It is almost on an irreversible path.
The case of Chad Peckenhold is really alarming in that he is licensed to teach theology at a university that is directly accountable to it's Bishop Chancellor (McCrary) and he is accountable for the orthodoxy of the theology taught there to the Vatican itself. Professional lay theologians are expected to live lives consistent with their vocation and sacred responsibility of forming the sound conscience of the men and women they teach.
I am not sure hiring on as a salaried propagandist for the immoral, cruel and unchristian DHS/ICE is quite consistent with that expectation.
Griff - among your best work right here. Thank you
I'm unclear what a Heritage American is. For example, while Trump's grandfather first came to America in 1885 his mother's family was a 20th century arrival. Is he a Heritage American? Is Pecknold? His father's family came here in 1949. An overwhelming majority of Black citizens can trace their ancestry to pre-Revolutionary times -- are they Heritage Americans? I would certainly not lay claim to this title, although great-grandparents were all here by the 1880s. I think that if I tried to make that claim the people who use the term would refute it -- those grandparents were Jews.
It seems clear to me that the term, is a racial marker. Newcomers like Pecknold are Heritage Americans because their ancestors were white Europeans. As other commenters here have noted, only political opportunism has erased the critical distinction between Protestants and Catholics. In the KKK's second coming in the 1920s, the chief targets were not Blacks, who knew their place, but uppity Catholics and Jews. The Heritage American idea is very much like the KKK, updated to include a certain new type of revanchist Catholic who would have been at home in Vichy France. (JD Vance, who obviously claims Heritage status as a Hillbilly descendant, has adopted this type of Catholicism as the current answer to a long search for personal identity.)
"Revanchist American" would probably be a better title for this group, which would accommodate people like Vivek Ramaswamy and Usha Vance. It appears to blend the concepts of America as a racial nation and creedal nation, anchoring its membership in lineal descent from a White subset of the Revolutionary era population (excluding Blacks and Jews, although members of both groups were here in significant numbers and fought in the Revolutionary War) and accepting others regardless of race who espouse the particular reactionary creed proselytized by "Heritage Americans": people like Pecknold.
I think that basically these are well-educated people who have read Raspail's "Le Camp des Saints" and not been repulsed by its astonishingly open racism. Their popular followers couldn't make it through that awfully-written book, but have read or heard about the underground thriller, "The Turner Diaries," which has inspired millions of openly white nationalist group members.
They're not "postliberals", they're PRE-liberals. They're not against the social democracy of FDR and LBJ, they're against the democratic republic of Jefferson and Hamilton.
Everyone has to come up with some bullshit name for their tired project to roll back the enlightenment. People like this guy always think it's the existence of specific people just living their lives that's the problem.
This is very disturbing, especially considering the issues the Catholic church has undergone over recent years. Do you ever wonder why participation is dropping like a stone? Re-read this article.
Actually that is the scary part. While "mainstream" Catholics in America are participating less--- fanatical elements, influenced by these integralists, are seeing growth especially among young white men.
A literal Chad. He lives down to his name.
As a bona fide “heritage American,” these people make me wonder whether the anti-papists were right to oppose the mass immigration of Catholics into a fundamentally Protestant country. Jews and Buddhists don’t cause this kind of trouble. (Of course this is blaming all Catholics for a few bad jelly beans or Skittles .)
As a "Heritage American" it seems odd to see Catholics, traditional targets of bigotry up until 100 years ago, so willing to pour the same venom on others. I am proud that many of my ancestors fought in the Civil War to free the enslaved. Sadly some of my "Heritage American" ancestors also joined in the persecution of Catholics, Masons, Mormons, Catholics and Jews. I thought we had learned better. I guess not.
A story regarding Prof. Chad’s viewpoint: this morning we participated in the joy of the indy Alzheimer’s Walk. Our vast & varied community came together to raise funds, support each other, celebrate our loved ones. I really tried to think of some “group” that wasn’t present. Classified by age or race, by abilities or disability, by cultural heritage. Nope. Everybody was represented. Neighbors. Community. Americans.
Chad’s belief system is one of division. Jesus preached & practiced uniting. With God. With our sisters & brothers. I don’t need or seek a new god. I’ll do my best to follow the path Jesus walked. Chad can wander off on his own. I hope people choose wisely who they’ll follow