Religious Persecution

[leftyhunter]

I hope this discussion continues

So far no proof that either side had either an official policy against it's soldiers having a particular religion. Nor any evidence that there was widespread unofficial religious persecution of soldiers of a given religious domination.
Leftyhunter

 

[James B White]

I haven't read this book, but souds like it might be relevant.

Excommunicated from the Union: How the Civil War Created a Separate Catholic America
by Kurtz, William B.

Though surely not at the price on that page, but here's part of the review:

http://www.cwbr.com/civilwarbookrev...e=yes&record=full&searching=yes&Submit=Search

Here he highlights the work of the religious sisters who "did more to rehabilitate the church in the eyes of Protestant Americans than did the actions of Catholic chaplains or soldiers" (p. 68). Kurtz argues that despite their often exemplary service, the war fostered resentment for soldiers, chaplains, and sister nurses, especially as their sacrifices were not always valued.

In his final chapters, Kurtz turns more specifically to the causes of Catholics' marginalization in the postwar North, including their opposition to the Emancipation Proclamation and what they viewed as more radical war aims. By 1863, Catholics' increasingly saw the war as "unholy" and gruesomely bloody, waged by an "activist federal government seemingly bent on disrupting their lives and infringing on their civil liberties, religious freedoms, and local ways of life" (p. 110). Here the author charts a resurgent anti-Catholicism in the 1870s and 1880s, especially Catholics' conflict over school funding and Bible reading. In the final chapter, Kurtz dissects the creation of Catholic memory of the war, which was ultimately a failed project: "The service of Catholics alongside their Protestant neighbors during the war had not united Catholic and non-Catholic alike in 'the same baptism of precious blood'" (p. 128).

 

[Terence MacManus]

I am reading "The Harp and the Eagle", about Irish American experience during the Civil War. There was certainly anti-irish bias among many in the officer corps, particularly from those of the upper crust of society, though no official policy existed. This, of course, is not surprising considering the Know Nothing popularity of the previous decade.

 

[kevikens]

While religious antagonisms and suspicions pre-existed the war, when it came to putting troops onto a battlefield it seems that Americans, North and South, had few objections to accepting the enlistments of anyone willing to shoulder a musket regardless of religious convictions or the lack of any. I suspect heathens, pagans, skeptics and free thinkers were as welcome as any confirmed believers. Even if there were a few outright atheists in the foxholes they were probably converted just after the shooting started.

 

[TFSmith121]

Remember that persecution isn't limited to killing and bloodless doesn´t mean that no harm is done.

True, but in the context of the mid-19th Century, "persecution" that didn't end with someone at the end of a rope was somewhere in the middle of the spectrum.

Compared to the Trail of Tears and chattel slavery, the worst of Protestant/populist mob rule aimed at (for example) the LDS and/or any other dissenter or other religious group was "relatively" bounded.

Obviously, there was plenty of brutality to go around, and definitely not trying to minimize things, but sometimes, historical perspective is worth considering.

Best,

 

[TFSmith121]

US forces led by Gen Albert Johnson.
You are correct, the Mormons were harassed from Illinois and Missouri fled to Utah, religious persecution, tolerated and made public policy by Buchanan.
Then on to my second point, religious persecution of a totally different kind, one in which religion was used to endorse the persecution of the Africans brought here as slaves, and manipulated by pro slavery supporters to reinforce the belief that the black man had no soul, was nothing more then a beast of burden, given to the white man by no less than God himself.
So we focus our indignation on US Grant, for his one order, which was never enforced, was rescinded and who in fact was a few years later not only forgiven by the leaders of the Jewish community in America but was endorsed by them in his bid for the White House.

Don't disagree; it was a brutal era ... But the spectrum of such action deserves consideration.

And this is pretty far afield from the OP question about social history on these questions within the ranks of the fighting force, loyal and rebel.

Best,

 

[TFSmith121]

The American Catholic church took a neutral position in the civil war...

On the eve of the Civil War, as citizens were taking sides, and taking up arms, leading Unionists questioned where the Church stood on the issues of slavery and secession. In May 1861, the Third Provincial Council of Cincinnati attempted to clarify the Catholic position on the crisis. The Council stated that the "spirit of the Catholic Church is eminently conservative and while her ministers rightfully feel a deep and abiding interest in all that concerns the welfare of the country, they do not think it their province to enter the political arena." It further elaborated on the Catholic "unity of spirit" that recognized "no North, no South, no East, no West." Yet historian Mark Noll states that the American Catholic position, while not as "fully developed domestically as they were abroad" created a theological challenge to prevailing American beliefs. Catholics challenged the Protestant notions that linked democracy and Christianity, capitalism and Christianity, and the individualism Protestants interpreted from scripture. Noll stated in his book The Civil War as a Theological Crisis that the Catholic position "amounted to a fundamental assessment of prevailing beliefs and practices that American protestants, whose main principles were so closely intertwined with the nation's dominant ideologies, could not deliver." Northern theologians could not understand Catholic misgivings about the abolitionist movement, with its willingness to break the law for its goals, and Know Nothing roots, while Southern radicals could not abide the Church's sympathy for and identification with the plight and suffering of slaves. Furthermore, while Protestant denominations split along sectional lines and theological interpretations of slavery, even to the point of advocating war, the Catholic Church seemed maddeningly united and suspiciously neutral during the secession crisis.


Here is the link it goes into more detail.... http://www.acton.org/pub/religion-l...d-catholic-soldiers-catholic-church-during-am

It's worth noting that Archbishop Hughes of NYC, the most senior Catholic clergyman in the US at the time, undertook what amounted to a diplomatic mission to Europe on the behalf of the US in the winter of 1861-62, and Catholic support for the war effort was made manifest by men that ranged from the Shermans to Rosecrans to Meagher to Kryzanowski, along with the men who filled innumerable loyal regiments.

Best,

 

[TFSmith121]

I am reading "The Harp and the Eagle", about Irish American experience during the Civil War. There was certainly anti-irish bias among many in the officer corps, particularly from those of the upper crust of society, though no official policy existed. This, of course, is not surprising considering the Know Nothing popularity of the previous decade.

If you're speaking of what passed for the Old Guard in NYC, Boston, Philadelphia, perhaps, but even in the 1860s those were diminishing.

In the Middle West, Catholics with "roots" were part and parcel of the power structure, as witness the Shermans.

Best,

 

[damYankee]

Religion was very much as large a part of life as politics, perhaps more so, during the 1800s there was a fervent religious movement that swept across much of the US.
As today it was politicized.

 

[leftyhunter]

At the risk or reiteration no one yet has shown that religious persecution was an official policy of either army or widespread and or tolerated by officers in either army. Not to say it didn't happen just like school bullying and sexual harassment in the modern work place but no poster has given a metric to determine what the scale of religious persecution was .
Leftyhunter

 

[JPK Huson 1863]

Found this on the Brethern, have snippets from several websites- not just one.

" Christians who opposed the war on religious grounds were often persecuted. The Brethren eventually were allowed to be exempted from military service if they paid $500, but most suffered for their stance. For example, John Kline, moderator of the Brethren Annual Meeting, became distrusted because he provided medical aid to soldiers from both armies. Once he was jailed for two weeks, without cause, and in June 1864 he was ambushed and murdered. "

http://www.christianitytoday.com/hi.../christianity-and-civil-war-did-you-know.html

" Elder John Kline was so loved and respected by the Brethren that he was chosen four times to serve as moderator of annual meeting at the time of the Civil War (1861, 1862, 1863, and 1864). The last three of those meetings were held in the North, and, even though he was from Virginia, while the war was raging, Elder Kline attended and presided. He constantly worked to preserve the unity of the brotherhood and the Brethren did not divide as many denominations did in that period. Because Elder Kline was completely dedicated to serving Christ and the church, he refused to heed warnings of danger for his life. As he neared his home following the 1864 annual meeting at the Nettle Creek Church in Indiana, he was shot by ardent confederates. Even while knowing the dangers that surrounded him, he steadfastly determined to follow his calling to serve his Lord and his church. "

http://johnklinehomestead.com/johnkline.htm

" John Kline did well among the mountain people to the west of his home. His real battle was to the east, in the flat lands of the coastal plain of Virginia. Here were the rich and politically powerful slaveholders.

" In 1782, about 15 years before John Kline was even born, the Brethren had declared themselves firmly against slavery. The minutes for the 1782 Annual Conference begin with these words:

It has been unanimously considered that it cannot be permitted in any wise by the church, that a member should or could purchase Negroes, or keep them as slaves.
Decide the question as to what the churches here in the slaveholding States should require of any slave owner desiring to come into the church. A very delicate matter to act upon in the present sensitive[5] condition of public feeling on slavery. But it is the aim of the Brethren here not to offend popular feeling, so long as that feeling does not attempt any interference with what they regard and hold sacred as their line of Christian duty. Should such opposition arise, which I greatly fear will be the case at no distant day, it will then be seen that it is the fixed purpose and resolve of the Brotherhood to "obey God rather than men." It was decided in council that every slaveholder coming into the church must give up his or her slaves as property; and yet not turn them off houseless and homeless, but allow them to remain, and labor, and be fed and clothed as usual, until suitable and lawful provisions can be made for their complete emancipation.
"Flee rather than disobey God." It was this simple dedication to the will of God that made the Brethren strong. God gives grace to those who are willing to bear the cost of following Jesus—cost what it may. But to those who only have a form of godliness, with no surrender to do the will of Christ, grace will not flow to them.

On top of the little ridge, two men, Jake Acker and Joe Riddle, waited in the woods. Jake had been chosen to fire the first shot. After John passed by, Jake raised his gun for a moment, then lowered it. He could not bring himself to shoot the innocent old man in the back. "I can't shoot that man!" he told Joe.

"You ain't no soldier!" returned Joe.

And a shot rang out. White-haired John Kline fell off of Nell. Joe approached John, and seeing that he wasn't dead yet, he fired another shot at point blank range, so close that it left powder burns on John's clothes. Their dirty deed finished, the two men escaped.
http://ephrataministries.org/remnant-2011-09-he-died-at-his-post.a5w



John's letters and pleas paid off. The recipients of the letters were moved to write in a conscientious objector exemption in their draft laws. However, there was a $500 fine,[6] plus a tax of two percent of the value of the goods of the person seeking exemption.

The brothers set to work collecting the payments of those affected, and when some of the young men could not afford the fine, others in the Brotherhood helped them out. John Kline himself put up some of the money for the fines.

 

[Rebforever]

I haven't read this book, but souds like it might be relevant.

Excommunicated from the Union: How the Civil War Created a Separate Catholic America
by Kurtz, William B.

Though surely not at the price on that page, but here's part of the review:

http://www.cwbr.com/civilwarbookrev...e=yes&record=full&searching=yes&Submit=Search

The War for Southern Independence split the Presbyterian Church. A few years back it rejoined.

 

[leftyhunter]

Found this on the Brethern, have snippets from several websites- not just one.

" Christians who opposed the war on religious grounds were often persecuted. The Brethren eventually were allowed to be exempted from military service if they paid $500, but most suffered for their stance. For example, John Kline, moderator of the Brethren Annual Meeting, became distrusted because he provided medical aid to soldiers from both armies. Once he was jailed for two weeks, without cause, and in June 1864 he was ambushed and murdered. "

http://www.christianitytoday.com/hi.../christianity-and-civil-war-did-you-know.html

" Elder John Kline was so loved and respected by the Brethren that he was chosen four times to serve as moderator of annual meeting at the time of the Civil War (1861, 1862, 1863, and 1864). The last three of those meetings were held in the North, and, even though he was from Virginia, while the war was raging, Elder Kline attended and presided. He constantly worked to preserve the unity of the brotherhood and the Brethren did not divide as many denominations did in that period. Because Elder Kline was completely dedicated to serving Christ and the church, he refused to heed warnings of danger for his life. As he neared his home following the 1864 annual meeting at the Nettle Creek Church in Indiana, he was shot by ardent confederates. Even while knowing the dangers that surrounded him, he steadfastly determined to follow his calling to serve his Lord and his church. "

http://johnklinehomestead.com/johnkline.htm

" John Kline did well among the mountain people to the west of his home. His real battle was to the east, in the flat lands of the coastal plain of Virginia. Here were the rich and politically powerful slaveholders.

" In 1782, about 15 years before John Kline was even born, the Brethren had declared themselves firmly against slavery. The minutes for the 1782 Annual Conference begin with these words:

It has been unanimously considered that it cannot be permitted in any wise by the church, that a member should or could purchase Negroes, or keep them as slaves.
Decide the question as to what the churches here in the slaveholding States should require of any slave owner desiring to come into the church. A very delicate matter to act upon in the present sensitive[5] condition of public feeling on slavery. But it is the aim of the Brethren here not to offend popular feeling, so long as that feeling does not attempt any interference with what they regard and hold sacred as their line of Christian duty. Should such opposition arise, which I greatly fear will be the case at no distant day, it will then be seen that it is the fixed purpose and resolve of the Brotherhood to "obey God rather than men." It was decided in council that every slaveholder coming into the church must give up his or her slaves as property; and yet not turn them off houseless and homeless, but allow them to remain, and labor, and be fed and clothed as usual, until suitable and lawful provisions can be made for their complete emancipation.
"Flee rather than disobey God." It was this simple dedication to the will of God that made the Brethren strong. God gives grace to those who are willing to bear the cost of following Jesus—cost what it may. But to those who only have a form of godliness, with no surrender to do the will of Christ, grace will not flow to them.

On top of the little ridge, two men, Jake Acker and Joe Riddle, waited in the woods. Jake had been chosen to fire the first shot. After John passed by, Jake raised his gun for a moment, then lowered it. He could not bring himself to shoot the innocent old man in the back. "I can't shoot that man!" he told Joe.

"You ain't no soldier!" returned Joe.

And a shot rang out. White-haired John Kline fell off of Nell. Joe approached John, and seeing that he wasn't dead yet, he fired another shot at point blank range, so close that it left powder burns on John's clothes. Their dirty deed finished, the two men escaped.
http://ephrataministries.org/remnant-2011-09-he-died-at-his-post.a5w



John's letters and pleas paid off. The recipients of the letters were moved to write in a conscientious objector exemption in their draft laws. However, there was a $500 fine,[6] plus a tax of two percent of the value of the goods of the person seeking exemption.

The brothers set to work collecting the payments of those affected, and when some of the young men could not afford the fine, others in the Brotherhood helped them out. John Kline himself put up some of the money for the fines.

Interesting history.On the other hand the OP is about religious persecution as a policy of either military. It does not appear that either the Union or Confederate military approved or condoned the above murders.
Leftyhunter

 

[James B White]

The War for Southern Independence split the Presbyterian Church. A few years back it rejoined.

Same for the Methodists, and the Baptists too, though they never rejoined.

The Presbyterians were split into Old School and New Schol, not primarily over slavery, and each of those sections did then split over slavery, if I recall correctly.

From Wikipedia:
"Later, both the Old School and New School branches further split over the issue of slavery, into southern and northern churches. After three decades of separate operation, the two sides of the controversy merged, in 1865 in the south and in 1870 in the north, to form two Presbyterian denominations (PCUS and PC-USA, in the South and North respectively)."

There's more detail and a complicated little chart there at the link.

 

[TFSmith121]

Found this on the Brethern, have snippets from several websites- not just one.

" Christians who opposed the war on religious grounds were often persecuted. The Brethren eventually were allowed to be exempted from military service if they paid $500, but most suffered for their stance. For example, John Kline, moderator of the Brethren Annual Meeting, became distrusted because he provided medical aid to soldiers from both armies. Once he was jailed for two weeks, without cause, and in June 1864 he was ambushed and murdered. "

http://www.christianitytoday.com/hi.../christianity-and-civil-war-did-you-know.html

" Elder John Kline was so loved and respected by the Brethren that he was chosen four times to serve as moderator of annual meeting at the time of the Civil War (1861, 1862, 1863, and 1864). The last three of those meetings were held in the North, and, even though he was from Virginia, while the war was raging, Elder Kline attended and presided. He constantly worked to preserve the unity of the brotherhood and the Brethren did not divide as many denominations did in that period. Because Elder Kline was completely dedicated to serving Christ and the church, he refused to heed warnings of danger for his life. As he neared his home following the 1864 annual meeting at the Nettle Creek Church in Indiana, he was shot by ardent confederates. Even while knowing the dangers that surrounded him, he steadfastly determined to follow his calling to serve his Lord and his church. "

http://johnklinehomestead.com/johnkline.htm

" John Kline did well among the mountain people to the west of his home. His real battle was to the east, in the flat lands of the coastal plain of Virginia. Here were the rich and politically powerful slaveholders.

" In 1782, about 15 years before John Kline was even born, the Brethren had declared themselves firmly against slavery. The minutes for the 1782 Annual Conference begin with these words:

It has been unanimously considered that it cannot be permitted in any wise by the church, that a member should or could purchase Negroes, or keep them as slaves.
Decide the question as to what the churches here in the slaveholding States should require of any slave owner desiring to come into the church. A very delicate matter to act upon in the present sensitive[5] condition of public feeling on slavery. But it is the aim of the Brethren here not to offend popular feeling, so long as that feeling does not attempt any interference with what they regard and hold sacred as their line of Christian duty. Should such opposition arise, which I greatly fear will be the case at no distant day, it will then be seen that it is the fixed purpose and resolve of the Brotherhood to "obey God rather than men." It was decided in council that every slaveholder coming into the church must give up his or her slaves as property; and yet not turn them off houseless and homeless, but allow them to remain, and labor, and be fed and clothed as usual, until suitable and lawful provisions can be made for their complete emancipation.
"Flee rather than disobey God." It was this simple dedication to the will of God that made the Brethren strong. God gives grace to those who are willing to bear the cost of following Jesus—cost what it may. But to those who only have a form of godliness, with no surrender to do the will of Christ, grace will not flow to them.

On top of the little ridge, two men, Jake Acker and Joe Riddle, waited in the woods. Jake had been chosen to fire the first shot. After John passed by, Jake raised his gun for a moment, then lowered it. He could not bring himself to shoot the innocent old man in the back. "I can't shoot that man!" he told Joe.

"You ain't no soldier!" returned Joe.

And a shot rang out. White-haired John Kline fell off of Nell. Joe approached John, and seeing that he wasn't dead yet, he fired another shot at point blank range, so close that it left powder burns on John's clothes. Their dirty deed finished, the two men escaped.
http://ephrataministries.org/remnant-2011-09-he-died-at-his-post.a5w



John's letters and pleas paid off. The recipients of the letters were moved to write in a conscientious objector exemption in their draft laws. However, there was a $500 fine,[6] plus a tax of two percent of the value of the goods of the person seeking exemption.

The brothers set to work collecting the payments of those affected, and when some of the young men could not afford the fine, others in the Brotherhood helped them out. John Kline himself put up some of the money for the fines.

So here's an instance of rebel soldiers' "persecution" of a civilian religious leader to the point of the clergyman being shot in the head.

Thanks. Good to know.

Best,

 

[leftyhunter]

So here's an instance of rebel soldiers' "persecution" of a civilian religious leader to the point of the clergyman being shot in the head.

Thanks. Good to know.

Best,

To be fair to the Confederate Army was the soldier who murdered the good Parson acting under orders or was he just acting on his own? Individuals in any organization from time to time commit horrendous acts.
Leftyhunter

 

[JPK Huson 1863]

I don't know- pushing a chosen group around and creating the climate of hate towards them ( imposing the 500 buck fine certainly gives awfully clear evidence some folks were not happy with them ) - where it was clear this persecution was to be tolerated and even encouraged, does it matter if anyone was given an order to shoot?

This conversation really should not degenerate into Confederate v Union. It misses the point. Neither organization was blessed with universal tolerance.

 

[TFSmith121]

To be fair to the Confederate Army was the soldier who murdered the good Parson acting under orders or was he just acting on his own? Individuals in any organization from time to time commit horrendous acts.
Leftyhunter

True, but given it was brought up as an example, it's worth pointing how which army's men pulled the trigger.

Best,

 

[TFSmith121]

Presumably official, although with "deniability."

Good source is:

Neff, Ray A. Valley of the Shadow. Terre Haute, Ind.: Rana Publications, 1987.

Kline was arrested by the rebel army as early as 1862 on suspicion of being a Unionist; the soldiers who killed him from ambush in 1864 were members of the Linville Partisan Rangers, so they were irregulars, but they were certainly under orders - they were not simply criminals.

Here's a website that gives some detail:

https://sites.jmu.edu/peaceandwar/character-studies-of-neff-and-kline/

Best,

 

[leftyhunter]

Presumably official, although with "deniability."

Good source is:

Neff, Ray A. Valley of the Shadow. Terre Haute, Ind.: Rana Publications, 1987.

Kline was arrested by the rebel army as early as 1862 on suspicion of being a Unionist; the soldiers who killed him from ambush in 1864 were members of the Linville Partisan Rangers, so they were irregulars, but they were certainly under orders - they were not simply criminals.

Here's a website that gives some detail:

https://sites.jmu.edu/peaceandwar/character-studies-of-neff-and-kline/

Best,

I just checked the link and it states that CSA irregulars killed Kline. So far I would have to give the CSA a pass on religious persecution at least on an official level. Not to say they didn't murder Indian civilians which to be fair and balanced so did the boys in blue. Not that the AnV didn't kidnap free blacks in Pa but fair is fair the CSA didn't seem to go out of their way to persecute other religions at least so far as evidence as been presented.
Leftyhunter