The Great Reunion of 1913 at Gettysburg

My late brother Steven was a Civil War history student; he lived in Pennsylvania for several years and went to Gettysburg often, taking our father there once at least. We discussed the Ken Burns PBS program often and talked about the Civil War books he read (often those family members gave him as gifts).

So this off-blog-topic post is in memory of him as we prepare to celebrate Independence Day, always a great family holiday. We had an additional reason: our parents met on a blind date on the Fourth of July!

One hundred and eleven years ago, from June 29 through July 4, Civil War veterans from North and South met on the 50th anniversary of the Battle of Gettysburg. One of the highlights was the re-enactment of Pickett's charge and then the handshake pictured above, after the echoes of the famous Rebel yell had faded. 

President Woodrow Wilson spoke on July 4, 1913--not as long as Edward Everett and not as briefly as President Abraham Lincoln on November 19, 1863--and concluded his remarks with this:

How shall we hold such thoughts in our hearts and not be moved? I would not have you live even to-day wholly in the past, but would wish to stand with you in the light that streams upon us now out of that great day gone by. Here is the nation God has builded by our hands. What shall we do with it? Who stands ready to act again and always in the spirit of this day of reunion and hope and patriotic fervor? The day of our country's life has but broadened into morning. Do not put uniforms by. Put the harness of the present on. Lift your eyes to the great tracts of life yet to be conquered in the interest of righteous peace, of that prosperity which lies in a people's hearts and outlasts all wars and errors of men. Come, let us be comrades and soldiers yet to serve our fellow-men in quiet counsel, where the blare of trumpets is neither heard nor heeded and where the things are done which make blessed the nations of the world in peace and righteousness and love.

May God bless the United States of America and all "the nations of the world in peace and righteousness and love"!

Happy Independence Day!

Image Credit (Public Domain): Now the "Friendly" Angle One of the most affecting sights witnessed during the present reunion of Confederate and Federal veterans at Gettysburg is depicted in this photograph. Across the stone wall, which marks the boundaries of the famous "Bloody Angle" where Pickett lost over 3,000 men from a force of 6,000 these old soldiers of the North and South clasped hands in fraternal affection / / International News Service, 200 William St., New York.

Three Things about July 4th

First of all, it is our country's Independence Day, celebrating our Declaration of Independence from Great Britain as first published on July 4, 1776:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. . . .

We the people, with our Constitution, our local, state, and federal governments, our actions, our causes, and our blood, have been living out these words, struggling to fulfill them, fighting over what they mean, and uniting again around those ideas expressed 243 years ago.

Happy Independence Day!

Second: On July 4 in 1603 Philippe de Monte, a Spanish composer died; on July 4 in 1623 William Byrd, an English composer, died. They had collaborated, long distance, on a setting of Psalm 136. Gallicantus made a CD of the music and the ideas that brought de Monte and Byrd into collaboration:

The connection that brings together the music of William Byrd (c1540-1623) and Philippe de Monte (1521-1603) is a most unusual one: a very rare documented instance of two composers from distant parts of Europe engaging in a personal musical exchange. According to an 18th-century manuscript in the British Library, de Monte had come to England in 1554 as a singer in the choir that accompanied his employer, the Spanish king Philip II, as he contracted a dynastic marriage to Mary Tudor. It seems that de Monte may have made contact with the young William Byrd, for some 30 years later he sent him the eight-part motet Super flumina Babylonis, and the following year, Byrd responded with his own eight-part Quomodo cantabimus, whose words are drawn from verses of that same psalm, No 136. Exactly what occasioned this musical transaction is not known, but the words must have held particular resonance for Byrd at that time, as this famous psalm of captivity and exile would surely be interpreted as a barely veiled allusion to the dangerous situation that he and his fellow recusant Catholics were facing under a Protestant regime in England at a time when political tensions were aggravating the existing religious ones; perhaps word of these developments had reached de Monte, either in Prague or via his benefice at Cambrai, near the Catholic English College at Douai.

Third: on July 4, 1594, one Catholic priest and three laymen were executed under Queen Elizabeth I's penal recusancy laws in Dorchester: 

Blessed John Cornelius, SJ priest and martyr

Blessed Thomas Bosgrave, martyr
Blessed John Carey, martyr
Blessed Patrick Salmon, martyr

They were all from Ireland! They are numbered among the Chideock Martyrs.

On July 4, 1597, one Catholic priest and three laymen were executed under Queen Elizabeth I's penal recusancy laws in York: 

Blessed William Andleby, priest and martyr
Blessed Henry Abbot, martyr
Blessed Thomas Warcop, martyr
Blessed Edward Fulthorp, martyr

More about these eight martyrs here. As Robert Hugh Benson asked in the title of one of his novels, "by what authority" did Queen Elizabeth I execute men for being Catholic priests and other men for helping Catholic priests? Only by the power and authority of "absolute Despotism"!

Blessed martyrs of England and Ireland, pray for us!

The End of the Fortnight for Freedom

Three years ago, I reviewed a book by Russell Shaw on this blog:

American Church: The Remarkable Rise, Meteoric Fall, and Uncertain Future of Catholicism in America surveys recent history as a personal memoir, analyses the efforts of late nineteenth and early twentieth century Church leaders to chart a path for Catholics in America, and provides some ideas to strengthen Catholic culture in America, ideas which build on movements and efforts already in place. The first several pages of this book presented some confusion as evidently Ignatius Press had changed the title of the book sometime after the text was printed and bound. The original title was "The Gibbons Legacy" and therefore the Foreword by Archbishop Chaput and the Introduction kept mentioning that title. . . . 

I presume Ignatius and Shaw changed the title because of concern no one knows who "Gibbons" was--James Cardinal Gibbons, the ninth Archbishop of Baltimore (from 1877 to 1921). . . . Shaw's book traces the path of assimilation of Catholics in American culture--and as that culture became more and more secularized, then Catholics on that path became more and more secularized. Then he addresses, often from personal experiences, the effects of the implementation of the "spirit of Vatican II", changes in Catholic higher education, reform movements in the episcopacy--and he uses his personal recollections well, without falling into the trap of becoming anecdotal. . . .

Overall, the story Shaw tells is sad--how the Church lost its influence on American culture because it tried to assimilate too much into American culture. Shaw's hope for the restoration of that influence is in the development of a Catholic subculture, which I think exists--EWTN, Catholic bloggers, the Fellowship of Catholic Scholars, the youthful pro-life movement--and I think will remain small. Primarily, I think Shaw is correct that it is the formation of the laity, as inspired by the documents of the Second Vatican Council that is most important--instead of pursuing "ministries" inside the Church, we should be working to influence our culture--exactly through the sub-culture Shaw outlines. Perhaps the institutional Church should not aspire to the great influence of former days as it may come at the same cost of assimilation or accommodation. Thought-provoking, to say the least.

Now he has followed up on that book with Catholics in America: Religious Identity and Cultural Assimilation from John Carroll to Flannery O'Connor and he writes about this new book for The Catholic World Report (adapted from the Introduction):

A collection of fifteen profiles of prominent individuals, it can be read simply as a set of introductions to people who in various ways made significant contributions to American Catholicism and American society. But a more complex rationale is also at work—the hope to stimulate an overdue dialogue on an urgent matter: Can we really be fully Catholic while also being fully American in American secular terms?

As it stands, many Catholics take for granted their assimilation into the values and behavior patterns of the surrounding society. But for a significant remnant of believing, practicing Catholics, it’s a different story. Finding themselves increasingly alienated from the secular society, they are deeply concerned to know what to do about it. They may find some help in this book.

Several themes are at work here. For example: Archbishop Carroll and Cardinal Gibbons—the assimilation option as it has been accepted and promoted by leaders of the Church in the United States; St. Elizabeth Seton, Father McGivney, and Al Smith—anti-Catholicism and the Catholic response; Archbishop Hughes and St. Frances Xavier Cabrini—the immigrant experience; Cardinal Spellman—hyper-patriotism as an assimilation mode; Dorothy Day, Archbishop Sheen, Flannery O’Connor—the ambiguities of American culture; Orestes Brownson and Isaac Hecker—the feasibility of evangelization; John Kennedy and John Courtney Murray—resolving the tension between church and state.

It’s important to say this is not an unpatriotic book. “My country, right or wrong”—words linked to the American naval hero Stephen Decatur and later repeated, with disastrous results, by Cardinal Spellman—expresses an unassailably correct sentiment, provided the sentiment is understood to be: “No matter how foolishly or unjustly my country may act, it’s still my country.” But acknowledgment of national filiation does not excuse patriotic citizens from criticizing their country when it acts foolishly or unjustly, and trying their best to get the country to stop doing that. Criticism in these circumstances is an expression of patriotism—indeed, one far more useful than blind acquiescence.

I always think of "love of country" or patriotism as being like the love I have for my parents. I know they were not perfect parents or people (my father has been dead six years and my mother is in a nursing home) but I also know they gave me life, loved me, and raised me and I love them. 

Happy Independence Day! By the way, my parents met on the 4th of July on a blind date and there were fireworks because it was love at first sight!

1776: The Musical

Turner Classic Movies broadcast 1776 on Independence Day. I missed some of it on Saturday but I have seen it before. Of course I know we should always be careful of taking our history from dramatizations like this and we have to grant that they may or may not be attempting to depict history accurately, but this movie and the musical play on which it is based is very disappointing.

It's disappointing in part because the musical numbers are so dull compared to my favorite musicals. Then all the historical inaccuracies pile up--John Adams was not the irritating man he's depicted to be; Martha Jefferson never came to Philadelphia that summer; James Wilson was certainly not the non-entity his character wants to be, and Caesar Rodney was not an old man when the Continental Congress was meeting etc, etc.

The inaccuracy--through omission not commission at least--that irritated me the most was leaving Charles Carroll of Carrollton out among the signers at the end of the movie/play, which were I know only representative of all the signers. Since he was the only Catholic and the last surviving signer of the Declaration of Independence, passing him over seems dramatically and historically foolish.

Turner Classic Movies did make up for this lackluster musical offering with Meredith Wilson's The Music Man later Saturday night. It has clever, rousing, poignant, and beautiful songs, including counterpoint numbers. Even though it's not about Independence Day, it is about brass bands, small-town America, and love. You know, of course, that Marian's song Goodnight, My Someone" is just "Seventy-six Trombones" in waltz time.

Charles Carroll and Independence Day

On the Acton Institute blog, Noah Barger reminds us of Charles Carroll of Carrollton:

This weekend marks another celebration of America’s birthday of Independence from our colonial rulers. It is typical to praise the founding fathers for what they did in 1776 and the subsequent years to lay down the foundation for this country. Very often, when people talk about the founding fathers they are referring to Washington, Franklin, Adams, Jefferson, or one of the many currently well-known statesmen of the Revolution. This year though, when people sing the praises of the Founding Fathers, I would urge them to think of one more man, Charles Carroll of Carrollton.

All the men that joined together to sign to the Declaration of Independence took a great risk in putting their name on that document. However, not many took as a great a risk as Charles Carroll, a representative from Maryland at the Second Continental Congress. Carroll’s prominence was well known throughout the colonies, and he was considered to be the wealthiest colonist at the time of the signing, as noted by Samuel Gregg is his book Tea Party Catholic. With that wealth brought distinction for his ideals, stemming from his education in Catholic schools and his Catholic faith. By signing the Declaration he risked not only his life, but his entire family fortune as well.

Here's more background on Samuel Gregg's comments about Charles Carroll in Tea Party Catholic ( I have not read the book). Note that Charles Carroll was the last surviving signer of the Declaration. He died in 1832 at the age of 95. Happy Independence Day! My husband and I are getting out of the "big" city to attend Mass and go to a small town Independence Day parade! God bless the United States of America!

Happy Independence Day!

From The Wall Street Journal, by David Dubal:

The best Fourth of July celebration I could give myself would be to play through (even sloppily) Louis Moreau Gottschalk's dazzling display of fireworks, "The Union: Concert Paraphrase on National Airs." It's a terrific concoction of approximately eight minutes of American patriotic tunes, where Gottschalk weaves together "Yankee Doodle," "Hail, Columbia" and "The Star-Spangled Banner," the last not yet the official anthem of the United States. Composed in 1862, Gottschalk (1829-1869) dedicated "The Union" to his favorite Union general, George B. McClellan.

The composition begins with a brilliant cannonade of octaves followed by a downward right-hand cadenza, as the composer leads to an exposition of the "The Star-Spangled Banner" marked malinconico, or melancholy. He then proceeds with trumpet calls and echoes on the piano, followed by droll drum rolls heard no less than 76 times in the left hand deep in the bass while playing "Hail, Columbia" in the right hand. Gottschalk is now ready to combine "Yankee Doodle" in the right hand with "Hail, Columbia" in the left in deft counterpoint. More trumpet calls follow, and then a blast of triple fortissimo octaves, Con Furia, plunging from the key of B-flat into a plush E-flat major, and once more joins "Yankee Doodle" with "Hail, Columbia," this time in glorious chordal pomp. It all ends grandioso, in triumph.

I cannot let the celebration of Independence Day go by without reminding you of the issues of religious liberty that we face in the U.S.A. today. The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops has issued a letter, joined by signatories as diverse as the Krishnas, the Church of Scientology, the Southern Baptist Convention, many Catholic university presidents, the Anglican Church in North America, many other Evangelical Christian organizations, etc, etc, all "Standing Together for Religious Freedom."

And just a couple more reminders about the colonial efforts to promote religious freedom in Maryland with my two part review of Papist Patriots: The Making of American Catholic Identity by Maura Jane Farrelly, here and here. And don't forget that I wrote about Maryland's contribution to religious freedom in OSV's The Catholic Answer Magazine earlier this year.

God Bless America!