Ping!
I have found the series to be quite good so far. How many more parts will there be?
Had this been a motivating factor, then the colonists would not have erected a federal government far more tolerant of the Catholic faith than the mother country's. After independence, Catholics had more religious freedom in Protestant Georgia than in Catholic Quebec.
And why would the colonists have made common cause with Catholic France against Protestant England?
Or included Maryland in their alliance?
John Adams' personal moral flaws were not the basis for the independence movement.
Was Adams wrong about Catholicism? When did the Roman Catholic Church ever stand for freedom? Even in the 20th century, it aligned with Mussolini, Hitler, and Franco. Certain courageous Catholic thinkers like Father John Ryan and John Courtney Murray tried to reconcile Catholic doctrine with freedom and democracy, but they were reprimanded by the hierarchy. In Adams's era, the Catholic Church was anti-Enlightenment and invoked natural law instead of the idea of natural rights--the first demanding obedience to authority, the latter the duty to resist it if rulers violate the social contract. Edmund Burke, defending the American cause before Parliament in his famous "Speech on Reconciliation," told the British that the colonists would not yield because they were "Protestants," and he spelled out what that meant: protest, resist, defy.
Adams, to be sure, had his moments of ethnic bias. In his summary defense in the Boston Massacre trial, he claimed that the British soldiers had every reason to be afraid of the crowd, "a motley rabble of saucy boys, Negroes and mulattoes, Irish teagues [pigs], and outlandish Jack Tars." Abigail, tell your man that he is referring to my ancestors.
The third part of the series went beyond the opening two in the beautiful New England photography; the appropriate and telling dialogue--especially Adams telling French aristocrats that he must work hard so his children and grandchildren may later enjoy poetry and music; the musical score with some fiddles in the orchestra; and the wrenching separation for so long of John and Abigail, and even John Quincy going off to St. Petersburg at the age of 14. Duty and sacrifice came naturally to these heroic founders.
The story takes Adams away from the Revolution, but viewers ought to know that things were going bad militarily in the first years of the Revolution. Word got to Adams that some leaders wanted to have George Washington removed, having lost some battles and with the capitol Philadelphia captured by the British. General Knox made a visit to Adams to sound him out on this move, and Adams made a valiant defense of Washington.
The film makes no mention thus far that Adams was the founder of the U.S. Navy; he believed in naval superiority as essential to any victory and pressed that upon the French. Jefferson thought America could get along with small one-gun vessels. But thanks to Adams, America had a reliable fleet with which to face Britain.
Many students and some professors think Adams was the prude in Paris and Benjamin Franklin was the charming playboy, even as a doddering senior citizen. But Franklin accomplished little and the film makes clear that he didn't seem to realize what Adams did realize--that France needed America as much as America needed France. Adams's negotiation of the substantial loan from the Dutch was one of America's first diplomatic achievements and it helped win the Revolutionary War.
Franklin was witty and in many ways wise, but he was also complacent--and his idea of never pressing things to a conclusion is not the best mentality for a diplomat. To Adams, hard negotiation was what international relations was all about, and he could discern the difference between a gesture and a real commitment.
Watching the third episode of this series reminded me of how much the French supported the American Revolution. In our times, when there has been a lot of anti-French sentiment due to the Iraq War, we perhaps should remember this French contribution, which had Pierre Beaumarchais raising money, Admiral de Grasse sailing his fleet to eastern port cities to take on the British navy, and Rochambeau and LaFayette fighting valiantly with Washington. Viva La France!
Unfortunately the evidence some 200 years later shows he had a good point... the Protestant countries came much much sooner to a republic.
The link talks about Grant's book and mentions this topic.
Ping
Every November, Boston celebrated "Pope's Day" when effigies of the Pope and the devil were burned. I kid you not.
Colonial New Englanders were Cromwell's children, and attitudes towards Catholics were similar to what they were in Protestant Ulster or Scotland.
More here.
But you've only got to go back fifty years or so to see that Protestants and Catholics weren't alway's pals in the US or the rest of the world. Heck, some of the threads in the religion section might give you a clue about that.
Nor was anti-Catholic feeling confined to benighted conservatives. Paul Blanshard, the leading anti-Catholic of the day had been a socialist and an editor at the Nation magazine.
These topics were discussed at the time of the founding and were many times referred to from Bible scripture. Had America been pro Catholic, we would see more references to the papal edicts and other Catholic writings. What Catholics seem to have trouble with is the differences people seem to find in the Bible, with the structure of the Catholic church. Just by definition, if America was founded on Catholicism, we would have to pay some homage to the pope or Vatican. The facts are that the Catholics had NOT supported ANY REPUBLICS at this time. The Catholic church would never have willingly given up it's power any more than the Anglican church would have with King George.
We didn't have Catholics fleeing from Europe to America for freedom, you see Puritans and Pilgrims fleeing persecution from Europe to worship as they please in freedom away from the kings of Europe that had their own "national church". Catholics, by default believe you are going to burn in hell if you don't convert and the wars of the period were many times just to "quell" the rebellion in the Catholic Church. The "national" religions at the time held power the same way the Catholic church did, by kingly proclamation.
I'm sure there was fear and frustration with Catholics as our founders were trying to be free from what the Catholics and other "national religions" believe was heresy. Compared to today's news cycle, it almost like Black Liberation theology spouting their consternation that they were slaves 200 years ago. Much has changed from then to now and much of America thinks it's time to get over it.
At the time of the founders, to be pro freedom was to be anti Catholic. The founding of America was based on the Christian faith as found in the Bible, not the beliefs on any one denomination. To see Catholics praying to idols and kissing rings was as repugnant as seeing Muslims chop off heads today. There can be no doubt that America was founded on Christ, but no one denomination will dictate the laws of the republic. That is what we call "freedom of religion".