Is this true?

  • Thread starter Thread starter petesgottheseat
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

petesgottheseat

Guest
The following quote is from another board, and my history is not that great so I’m not sure how to respond to this:

“To me, the sad part is, everyone is all about “preserving our history”, but few seem to want that to involve what our country was TRULY founded on - freedom from the Roman Catholic church so that they can pursue other faiths.”
 
I don’t know who came up with that one. I totally disagree.

It is hisrorically inaccurate as well.
 
Let’s see

MA - Puritans escaping the church of England
RI - Baptists escaping Puritans in MA - First colony with total religious freedom.
MD - Roman Catholic colony
PA - Quakers escaping England

Any other takers?
 
Thank you for your reply. I belong on another board, and I happen to come across that post. I didn’t think what she said was true, but I didn’t know how to rebuttle. Anyone can help me out?
 
Bill of Rights-

Congress cannot establish a religion. (States were left free to have established religions). Establish church persisted in MA until about 1840.
 
No evidence. Just that statement. When I read it, I was taken aback, but didn’t want to post anything.
 
petesgottheseat said:
The following quote is from another board, and my history is not that great so I’m not sure how to respond to this:

“To me, the sad part is, everyone is all about “preserving our history”, but few seem to want that to involve what our country was TRULY founded on - freedom from the Roman Catholic church so that they can pursue other faiths.”
Click to expand...
Actually the first colony with a freedom of religion was overseen by Lord Baltimore… a CATHOLIC! LOL

americanhistory.about.com/od/biographiesaf/p/biobaltimore.htm
 
petesgottheseat said:
The following quote is from another board, and my history is not that great so I’m not sure how to respond to this:

“To me, the sad part is, everyone is all about “preserving our history”, but few seem to want that to involve what our country was TRULY founded on - freedom from the Roman Catholic church so that they can pursue other faiths.”
Click to expand...
While it is true that many of our American forefathers fled all forms of religious tyranny, it was not centered on fleeing “Catholicism” but ALL forms…and in turn became the “persecutors” of religious minorities once established in the Colonies…my ancestors on my mom’s side came to Virginia the latter part of the 18th century…fleeing Catholic persecution of Huguenots in France.

On my dad’s side, some Friends fled persecution from Ireland against the tyrany of English Protestantism…Anglicans, Baptists, Presbyterians, Puritians etc were all invloved against the People called Quakers in the late to early 17th/18th centuries. They settled not in Pennsylvania…but in Rhode Island and the Carolinas…eventually moving West…I have one “convinced” Friend ancestor who was involved in the Underground Railroad.

While those who fled religious tyanny were among those involved with the founding of this nation…there is some debate if the primary reason for the founding of America WAS due to religous persecution of some of our earliest settlers.
 
Publisher said:
While it is true that many of our American forefathers fled all forms of religious tyranny, it was not centered on fleeing “Catholicism” but ALL forms…and in turn became the “persecutors” of religious minorities once established in the Colonies…my ancestors on my mom’s side came to Virginia the latter part of the 18th century…fleeing Catholic persecution of Huguenots in France.

On my dad’s side, some Friends fled persecution from Ireland against the tyrany of English Protestantism…Anglicans, Baptists, Presbyterians, Puritians etc were all invloved against the People called Quakers in the late to early 17th/18th centuries. They settled not in Pennsylvania…but in Rhode Island and the Carolinas…eventually moving West…I have one “convinced” Friend ancestor who was involved in the Underground Railroad.

While those who fled religious tyanny were among those involved with the founding of this nation…there is some debate if the primary reason for the founding of America WAS due to religous persecution of some of our earliest settlers.
Click to expand...
Yes, I had some Puritan ancestors who left England for ostenibly religious reasons and were early settlers in CT. It is probable that among the first actions they took in CT was to eliminate the Pequot Indians. Not much tolerance there.

Other colonies were founded for non-religious reasons, Virginia and New York come to mind.
 
Because Florida wasn’t one of the original 13 colonies. (it achieved statehood later, in the 19th century.)
 
“To me, the sad part is, everyone is all about “preserving our history”, but few seem to want that to involve what our country was TRULY founded on - freedom from the Roman Catholic church so that they can pursue other faiths.”

North America, generally, was originally explored by the Spanish and French…Catholics.

Not that that would cut any ice with one so historically misinformed.
 
petesgottheseat said:
No evidence. Just that statement. When I read it, I was taken aback, but didn’t want to post anything.
Click to expand...
Well, then you must insist they back up their statement with supporting facts, or it becomes just a bigoted opinion. Plenty of evidence to the contrary already stated in this thread.
 
SDA2RC said:
Actually the first colony with a freedom of religion was overseen by Lord Baltimore… a CATHOLIC! LOL

americanhistory.about.com/od/biographiesaf/p/biobaltimore.htm
Click to expand...
Yes, the article you refer to does say that Lord Baltimore (Sir George Calvert) was Roman Catholic, but the article also says “The Calverts were Roman Catholic, a religion which most inhabitants of the New World were prejudiced against.”

Maybe the origin of the statement that started this thread was inspired by a similar comment from a history book somewhere. Isn’t it true to some extent the reason there are so many history books is that the way things are presented are based on the author’s opinion or interpretation of history? Doesn’t make their particular brand of history true.

Hope
 
T_Hope said:
Yes, the article you refer to does say that Lord Baltimore (Sir George Calvert) was Roman Catholic, but the article also says “The Calverts were Roman Catholic, a religion which most inhabitants of the New World were prejudiced against.”

Maybe the origin of the statement that started this thread was inspired by a similar comment from a history book somewhere. Isn’t it true to some extent the reason there are so many history books is that the way things are presented are based on the author’s opinion or interpretation of history? Doesn’t make their particular brand of history true.

Hope
Click to expand...
Wiki gives a more detailed explanation. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maryland
 
As I understand the laws originally passed concerning the freedom of religion, they were to secure two things:

a. that a person was free to choose any religion

b. that the governmental bodies (local, state, federal) could not dictate the practice of any one religion - which in that day they were referring to Christian worship - Church of England, Calvinism, Catholicism, etc. There would be no state run religion - which is still very common in Europe today.
 
Barbkw said:
As I understand the laws originally passed concerning the freedom of religion, they were to secure two things:

a. that a person was free to choose any religion

b. that the governmental bodies (local, state, federal) could not dictate the practice of any one religion - which in that day they were referring to Christian worship - Church of England, Calvinism, Catholicism, etc. There would be no state run religion - which is still very common in Europe today.
Click to expand...
Summary on state churches in North America on wiki

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top