The Birth of Secularism in the United States

During the birth of the United States, the Founding Fathers gathered all of the injustices that they experienced under England’s control, and took many steps to ensure that the same violations would never be experienced by the citizens of the new United States. With state sanctioned religions being common in Europe, the Founding Fathers recognized the need for the right to practice any religion you desire. This idea has now been interpreted to mean that faith and religion should be absent from government life and American culture. Based off of various sources from the Founding Fathers, this is clearly not what they intended. This paper will examine that they relied on their Creator for strength during the Revolutionary War and they felt that religion would need to remain strong in American society for the nation to grow and remain strong.

Colonial America was an eclectic blend of various faiths from all over the world. This led to a need to protect that right for each citizen to practice the faith they prefer or the right to not practice any religion at all. Thomas Jefferson was one of the most prominent authors of such legislation. He was the sponsor of a bill which established religious freedom for all Americans. In there, he created the right to where no person would be forced to attend or support a church. In that same bill, he defended the religious independence that each American has, which allows them to worship without persecution.

There was also a common fear that religion would be used as a means of retaining authority by the leader of the state. For thousands of years, rulers have given their authority some type of divine backbone which reinforces their claim to leadership. This was done in ancient times by claiming that the leader himself was a god. In eighteenth century England, this was done by making the King the leader of the Anglican Church. By this act, if anyone wanted to oppose the government, they would also be opposing the official state religion. By allowing freedom of religion, there would never be one official American religion and therefore, Americans would run less of a chance of one day being ruled by a tyrant.

Benjamin Franklin was one of the most outspoken members of the Founding Fathers when it came for the need for religion in government. He was quite influential compared to his peers because Franklin was an admitted deist. He was a Christian no doubt, but he never claimed ownership by an organized and established church. He believed in his Creator, but also believed that one could be virtuous and moral without belonging to an established religion. His idea of generic religion was very much American in the sense that everyone could share the same beliefs and still retain their religious heritage.

Even though Franklin separated virtue from religion, he did express that if religion ever failed, morality and prolific kindness would also diminish. Franklin, along with his fellow delegates prior to independence, was very reliant upon their faith to give them the courage to stand up to the throne. It was only then after the Revolutionary War had been won that there was debate in Philadelphia whether or not to allow the presence of religion into government activities. Franklin made a very bold speech in which he asked the Congress if they felt that they could continue without God’s help. He then addressed only the members who served with him in the Continental Congress prior to the Revolutionary War. He asked them if they had forgotten that “powerful friend.” He made it quite clear that his sentiment was that if they did not have their Creator on their side, they would not be in the state of liberty to which they had achieved. This request came after an objection to the practice of saying a prayer prior to the start of business of the delegation. His words were obviously powerful because even to this day, Congress begins every session with a prayer.

The drive for religious freedom in early America was largely because there were Protestants from England and German Catholics who were living side by side in the new nation. Many have experienced the violent religious persecution which was occurring in Europe at the time, and they didn’t want that to carry over into the new United States. The largest objection and the strongest part of the first amendment is the protection from a state sanctioned Church. This meant that no one person would be forced to pay taxes to help support a Church. Most were pretty tolerant of a different religious congregation in their community, but that could only be sustained by denying government funds to it.

These principles would establish a free and open society with a backbone of tolerance and religious intermingling. It would remain that way for nearly two centuries until secularism became a pseudo-synonym for religious freedom. The philosophy which stood for tolerance and freedom would be altered to satisfy an agenda of a group who feel, that because a small percentage of Americans do not believe in any Creator, the nonexistence of religion should be commonplace in today’s society. This notion would most definitely trouble Ben Franklin, who himself, never supported exposure to a certain brand of faith. He instead was a strong proponent of generic religion in which he advocated that one could be moral and a generally good person without being spiritual. His main argument was that being a good Catholic or Anglican follower doesn’t necessarily make you a good and virtuous person.

In contemporary America, secular progressivism is rapidly growing. We see an annual protest against religious festivals and mainstream Judeo-Christian conventions such as Christmas and Easter. This movement contradicts the very fundamental values of religious freedom and tolerance and the idea of republicanism which, among other ideas, encompasses the notion that the majority rules. These groups have given the majority vote to the small minority of Americans who, not only abstain from practicing any religion, see the need to suppress the freedom of religion for all Americans.

There is still a silent majority of Americans who enjoy their freedom of faith and carry on early American traditions in modern day America. We see this in Congress when, before each session, they begin with an opening prayer. This is done in traditional form in a sense that they pray not to any specific deity, but instead to their “Creator”, which allows interpretation of belief. The proliferation of Christian practices arises when we observe judicial proceedings, and those about to testify are made to swear an oath upon a Bible. This practice plays upon the respect that all Americans have for the Creator and the force which Benjamin Franklin would say “governs the affairs of men.”

Jonathan Mayhew, a Congregational minister, wrote centuries ago about the danger of men who use their liberty as a tool for their own gain. He might have well been looking into the future because he dictates that liberty is something which should be enjoyed and appreciated. He warns against using rights and freedoms as a “cloak of maliciousness” and expresses that if you are living under a just government, a good citizen would enjoy the leadership they have and not to engage in any attempt to exploit the liberties rarely seen in many governments. This has very strong relevance in contemporary times because we see all too often people claiming that they “have their rights,” although this phenomena is unique to only a select few governments in the world and it would most likely not even be present in North America is it weren’t for a small group of courageous and pious men who initiated the drive for freedom and independence.

One of the largest examples of religious tolerance today is the encounter American society has with moderate Muslim Americans. This occurrence has become rather sensitive in today’s world because the United States is waging war on two fronts against an enemy which shares a common heritage with this small population in the United States. The results thus far have been uniquely American, in the sense that with the exception of a few radical groups who seek to diminish tolerance, they have often been recognized as law abiding and patriotic Americans. Society has been able to establish a clear distinction between radical terrorists and peaceful moderate Muslims who seek a society based around tolerance and freedom to the same extent as previous Americans.

This version of acceptance has been present since before the United States was even created. Integration of faiths and tolerance was first experienced on a large scale in North America through the Quebec Act. This was an Act of Parliament which was a way of dealing with the culturally diverse Canadians which were acquired through the Treaty of Paris at the close of the Seven Years War. This allowed them to continue practicing their Catholic faith and they were able to pledge their loyalty to the King of England, but did not have to pledge their loyalty to the Protestant faith. This would ultimately deny the colonists Canadian support during the Revolution, but it did set a precedent for integration of faiths into society, and we see it more and more as the years progress.

It is very common and widely accepted that our nation is great because we respect everyone else’s beliefs and traditions. It is not as well known, however, that those traditions are at risk because they are stifled under the banner of liberalism. The same core principles which made our country the great moral leader that it is, is the same principles which omitted the recognition of any particular deity, thus allowing people from all walks of life to unite in America and relate the same virtues. The Founding Fathers intended to create a nation where everyone, especially the majority, would be afforded the right to publicly express their religious affiliation, but the same rights are being used to stifle the expression of mainstream ecumenical philosophy. By this practice, religious freedom is not being provided, but is instead trading one set of rights for another. Societal norms of this nature are not conducive to a free nation, but rather instill resentment among the majority and foster the desire for, not a state sanctioned religion, but one that is recognized by our government as the dominant faith, which would no doubt turn back the clock on social progress.



Source:

Thomas Jefferson, A Bill for the Establishment of Religious Freedom, January 19, 1786, The Founder’s Library, http://www.founding.com/founders_library/pageID.2182/default.asp, (Accessed May 12, 2008).

David Morgan, Benjamin Franklin: Champion of Generic Religion. The Historian, 2000, http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb3498/is_200006/ai_n8289990, (accessed May 10, 2008).

Benjamin Franklin, Constitutional Convention Address on Prayer, delivered Thursday, June 28, 1787, http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/benfranklin.htm, (accessed May 11, 2008).

Jonathan Mayhew, A discourse concerning the unlimited submission and non-resistance to the high powers, 1750, The Founder’s Library, http://www.founding.com/founders_library/pageID.2299/default.asp, (accessed May 11, 2008).

Parliament of Great Britain, The Quebec Act of 1774, The Avalon Project at Yale Law School, http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/amerrev/parliament/quebec_act_1774.htm, (accessed May 13, 2008).

The Life of Quiren Groessl

“I must have been in a state of shock from the wound. I didn’t seem to be concerned about bleeding and I realized that I was beyond the aid of our troops which were at least a hundred or more yards behind me.” –Quiren Groessl May 27, 1918

Wisconsin has produced some great Americans throughout its history and some are better known than others. Wisconsin lays claim to architect Frank Lloyd Wright, actors Chris Farley and Willem Defoe, and even controversial individuals such as Robert Lafollette and Joseph McCarthy. Whether it be hero or villain, nearly everyone is familiar with prominent Wisconsinites. However, there are many remarkable people with incredible stories who slip under the radar of the media and small-town gossip. One of these individuals spent his entire life serving Northeast Wisconsin only after serving his country in France during the Great War. This man is Algoma resident Quiren Groessl.

Quiren was born on January 11, 1896 . His family was originally from Germany, as are many of the families in Wisconsin. He grew up in Algoma, just east of Green Bay. One of four brothers, Quiren had responsibilities at home, and school, albeit important, weighed lightly against the day to day tasks required by his family. Quiren was successful in his academics and achieved something rarely seen in turn of the century Wisconsin, an acceptance letter from the University of Wisconsin at Oshkosh. He enrolled as a freshman with the desire to study electrical engineering.

He began school at a time when war was raging across Europe. There was much unrest in Washington D.C. as part of the country wanted to maintain neutrality and others wanted to enter the war on our own terms, not as a means of retaliation. Quiren was a great admirer of Floyd Gibbons, who was a reporter for the Chicago Tribune. Gibbons published an article after he survived the sinking of the Lusitania which instilled in Quiren to desire to leave school, take up arms, and fight for his country.

On June 29, 1917, twenty one year old Quiren Groessl enlisted in the United States Army. He was assigned to Company F of the 5th Wisconsin Infantry Regiment. He spent several weeks between Camp Douglas in Wisconsin and Camp MacArthur in Texas. He trained for the trench warfare to come and endured an intense drilling curriculum designed to imitate the stresses of war as accurately as possible. In February of 1918, Groessl moved to an embarkation camp called Camp Merritt. This camp was along the Hudson River and was greeted by Quiren as a large improvement over the quarters that he had previously inhabited. Camp Merritt had metal beds with mattresses and was housed in wooden barracks. From here, he would be ferried across the submarine infested Atlantic Ocean into a war torn France.

Quiren was boarded on the ship days before the rest of his unit. He and a few other selected soldiers were given the task of becoming familiar with the layout of the ship and it was their responsibility to lead their unit to safety in the event of a submarine attack. He left the United States with the 128th Infantry Regiment and headed to France. He described the sight of the Statue of Liberty fading over the horizon as one of the most sobering moments of his life. Like many other soldiers in the same situation, he wondered if he would ever see it again.

Corporal Quiren Groessl arrived in Brest, France early March of 1918. He and others were greeted with open arms by the appreciative French. They quickly boarded a train and headed near the western front. They began intensive training for weeks and used some of their off time at night to write home, gamble, sit around the campfire and talk of home, or check out the local nightlife. It wasn't until March 11 of 1918 that they received word that their Company would be broken up and they would be re-organized into the 28th Infantry Regiment of the First Division. This was done to replenish the ranks of the 28th Infantry after suffering many losses. This was a bittersweet moment for Quiren because he felt that his unit operated like a well oiled machine due to the intense training they endured, however many of the soldiers in his Company were from the same area and this way there wouldn't be large casualty reports flooding the small-town of Algoma, Wisconsin in the event of a defeat.

Due to this reassignment, Quiren was assigned to Company E, Second Battalion, 28th Infantry regiment. He was welcomed by the other men, much of whom had previous combat experience. His unit was deployed to the Beaumont area near the town of Toul. He was exposed to constant bombardment from German shellfire and it was at this point that he was able to view the horrors of war. He saw dead and wounded Americans being transported back and lived in fear, as many did, day and night. He quickly came to the realization and acceptance that "wars were started by old men, and fought by young men."

When Quiren had some free time, he would learn combat arms techniques from some very patient French instructors. The Americans came to fight with very little, so they relied for much of their weapons on the French. He was exploring a makeshift French workshop and came across a French soldier who was crafting a trench knife. These were common among frontline units, although they were not general issue. The French would make these by taking a standard field knife or bayonet and welding a steel hand guard around the knife and welding small, very sharp, metal studs to the guard, essentially fabricating spiked brass knuckles to the knife. Quiren, as did other American soldiers, bought one of these knives since it seemed like a simple and deadly weapon. He concealed it in his trousers and went back to his unit. This would be the most important purchase of his life.

After some training with French hand grenades and open warfare training, which signaled the end of trench warfare and the assumption of an upcoming offensive, Quiren and his comrades were then to endure a forced march back to the frontline. He became increasingly proficient in telling how far he was from the fighting by measuring the destruction a village endured from artillery attacks. Throughout the entire forced march, the soldiers had outrun the rolling kitchen which traveled behind them. This left them to consume their field rations which were not only unappetizing, but were reserved for emergencies. This also rationed their food, forcing them to skip dinner after a long day of marching. It wasn’t until they reached Raquencourt that the Army cooks finally caught up with them and Quiren and his unit were able to get a hot meal.

On May 27, 1918, Quiren Groessl’s life would be changed forever. His unit was back in the trenches trying to retake Cantigny. Just after first light, the German artillery opened up with a barrage which swept the American lines. Quiren surveyed the battlefield and saw no one. He then looked to his flanks and quickly noticed that all of his comrades were dead. It was then that he was tackled to the ground. A German soldier ripped the rifle from his hands and one of the Germans in charge ordered “Rouse mit em.” Quiren was released from his enemy’s tight hold and he found himself facing the business end of three German bayonets. He was ordered out of the trench and toward the German lines roughly one hundred yards away. It wasn’t until they were halfway there that he could see several German helmets moving back and forth. He hesitated slightly, but was quickly motivated by a bayonet point in the back. Soon after, he felt his warm blood run down his back and quickly made the decision to resist capture.

Before they departed the American lines, Quiren was relieved of any visible weapons, but was not searched. The Germans failed to find the trench knife he had purchased earlier from the French soldier at Beaumont. Thinking fast, he saw a shallow hole formed by shellfire and he pretended to fall into it. This allowed him to lower his arms and since they were so close to German lines, his captors had no reason to suspect anything. At that moment, American artillery screamed overhead. The Germans threw themselves to the ground in an attempt to find cover and before they could return to their feet, Quiren took action. He removed his trench knife from his waistband, spun around, and slashed the throat of one of his captors, killing him instantly. His knife was now lodged into the body of the dead German, so he grabbed the rifle of the dead German and rammed the butt of it into the face of the other German, knocking him to the ground.

Now facing an even match, Quiren made the near fatal mistake of dropping the rifle he had just used instead of using it to take out the remaining German, whom he hated for cutting him with the bayonet. As he spun around, the German came in with a bayonet thrust which should have killed him instantly. However, with the way Quiren was postured, they bayonet missed his vital organs, but he suffered a slash across his neck, shoulders, and spine. With his upper back split wide open and nerves exposed, Quiren fell to the ground in agonizing pain. Barely breathing and paralyzed, he lay there as the German attempts a finishing thrust to kill Quiren for good. At this lifesaving moment, an unknown rifleman from the American lines takes aim and shoots the German soldier dead. Letting out a grunt, he fell right next to Quiren.

He laid there for some time before he started to piece together what had happened to him. He found himself all alone with the important task of returning to his comrades, who didn’t even know he was alive. He spent the rest of the day drifting in and out of consciousness all the while trying to slide his way across the battlefield without the use of his arms. His back and shoulders were throbbing in pain. Pleading to God for help, he continued his path toward the American lines in the utmost silence to keep from alerting the Germans. The leg he had most use of was his right one and by pushing his right foot against the ground he was able to roll himself onto his back and then again onto his stomach. Yard by yard, inch by inch, he moved himself this way until he was just approaching the American lines. The Americans in charge of observation ordered covering fire and his comrades leaped out and quickly pulled the wounded Quiren into the safety of the American trenches.

Medics quickly came to his aid. They used every resource they had to stop the bleeding and get him in good enough shape so he could be moved to a Battalion First Aid Station. He was covered with blankets and quickly evacuated to the rear. Once he arrived at the Aid Station, which was located in the basement of a bombed out church, he was inspected by the doctor and once the doctor noticed how bad of shape he was in, prescribed a cigarette while he waited. They changed his dressing and he was again evacuated. After a brief stop at an American hospital, he was taken to a French field hospital where he would be operated on.

He was only at the hospital for thirty minutes when he was taken into the operating room. After being put under general anesthetic, the French doctors went to work, repairing everything they could with the resources they had. He awoke in the post-op ward surrounded by French soldiers. On May 29th, 1918, he was moved to a French hospital near Beauvaix. Although a French hospital, it was staffed by American doctors and nurses. He was placed in one of the wards so he could be examined and that’s where he heard a soldier screaming to a nurse about getting a shot. It was George Gulligan, a friend of his from Algoma who served in Company F. George asked to be moved next to Quiren since they were old pals from back home. While he was at the hospital, he received special attention from a nurse’s aid name Marjorie Talbot. She was always very kind to him, more so than to the other soldiers. She would sit at his bedside as he would dictate a letter to his family back in Wisconsin.

On June 7th, he was transported to the American Red Cross Hospital #1 at Neuilly, France which was near Paris. He was wheeled into Ward #160. He would soon develop some close friends and fond memories in the ward. Soon after arriving, Quiren experienced another life altering, although less serious event. The head nurse approached him and said, “Where are your medical records, Big Boy?” It was later discovered that the nurse called him Big Boy because she could not pronounce his name. Nevertheless, the other men in the ward found it to be hilarious and from then on, he would be referred to as Big Boy by those closest to him.

On June 25th, Big Boy was met by another soldier from his company. The man approached him and gave him the bayonet which was used to wound him earlier. The soldier had retrieved it from the dead German’s rifle when his unit went on the offensive the next morning to take Cantigny. The soldier explained that he was the one who killed the German and saved Quiren’s life. He was aiming for several seconds, but during the short fight which ensued, the man did not want to accidentally shoot Quiren. A few days later on June 28th, a familiar face entered Ward #160. It was one of Quiren’s biggest idol, Floyd Gibbons. Floyd was not there as a visitor, however, but as a patient. He was an embedded journalist attached to the 5th Marines who charged across the legendary wheat field at the Battle of Belleau Wood. He lost an eye during the fight and was shot through the elbow and shoulder.

Quiren experienced an unfamiliar feeling that day when a small group of women came in to visit the wounded. The group of four ladies purposefully denied Quiren any attention once they viewed on his chart that he was from Wisconsin, or as many called it then, “The Black Eye State.” Wisconsinites were under much suspicion of being German sympathizers since many residents of the state were either German immigrants or descendents from Germans. The event which knocked Wisconsin into a world of ridicule was when Senator Bob LaFollet gave a speech on the floor of Congress which strongly opposed war with Germany and even voted against going to war.

Quiren’s prognosis looked grim and the doctors were brutally honest when they told him that he would never regain the use of his arms again. It wasn’t until the next day that his medical records, which were lost on the train ride over, were found. The American doctors were able to see what operations were done and saw that the French doctor did an excellent job and they told Quiren that although he would be disabled, they were confident he would regain the use of his arms. He entered surgery once last time where his wound was cleaned up and closed. On July 24th, Quiren was told that nothing more could be done at that hospital and he would be shipped out. His friend Floyd Gibbons was sent back home the day before to start a lecture tour and now Quiren had to say goodbye to all of the friends he had made at Ward #160 American Red Cross Hospital #1.

He arrived at Base Hospital #20 for only a brief stint. The doctors decided to send him back to the United States since they needed every bed they had for soldiers who could return to the frontlines. On August 20th, Quiren would board a ship and say goodbye to Europe. He received exceptional quarters on the top deck for the voyage back. The ship zig zaged its way across the Atlantic and during the twelve day trip, there was only one submarine scare.

On September 2nd, Quiren experienced an emotional moment when he saw the Statue of Liberty as they approached American soil. He and the other troops on the ship endured a two week layover on Ellis Island and once any communicable diseases were ruled out, they were escorted to mainland America. Quiren was admitted to Hospital #11 on the Jersey shore at Cape May. He was allowed to be wheeled out onto the beach and watch the ocean for brief periods of time. He would look out over the Atlantic horizon and think about what he had gone through and what might be happening over there right now.

Then on one afternoon of sitting on the beach, he was cautiously approached by a young woman who began to ask him questions about his wound. He answered her and asked why the locals are so afraid to visit the wounded soldiers. Unlike the hospitals over in Europe, the locals in Cape May never came to visit the wounded and show their appreciation. She was surprised to know that the hospital was for wounded veterans, because everyone in Cape May was under the impression that it was for soldiers who contract venereal diseases. It was quickly sorted out with the townspeople and the wounded received regular visits from supportive Americans and Quiren and the young woman named Marion spent many afternoons going out on drives together and spending time with some of her friends. The doctors noticed a steep improvement in Quiren’s health due to the friendship he was receiving.

The color returned to his arm and he began to petition for a trip back to Algoma. His doctor had told him that he won’t be going home so soon and that the Army had other plans for him. He was to join the 4th Liberty Loan Drive; a touring group of veterans who will travel the United States and help promote the sale of war bonds. He was rather upset at this news because now that he was back in America, he wanted nothing more than to return to his family. He gathered up his belongings, said goodbye to Marion and left.

He arrived in Lexington, Kentucky on September 27th. He was to attend a rally in front of several thousand people. He was worried to find out that he would be the one to give a speech. Quite nervous he went to his hotel room to prepare some notes and indulged in a bottle of whiskey. At 7:00 pm he took the stage in front of thousands of patriotic Americans who came to support the military. Words started to spew out of him like the great orators of ancient times. He eventually grew tired and the next day he was greeted by many people who told him that his speech really touched them. The men at the Liberty Loan headquarters loved his speech and wanted him to give the same talk, but shortened down to 45 minutes. He confessed to being drunk while giving his speech and was then told that he spoke for an hour and fifteen minutes. He later explained that it felt like only a few minutes.

Quiren made several stops in every corner of the nation, giving speeches and meeting people along the way. He was never allowed the time he needed to visit his family in Wisconsin. On October 22nd, Quiren went A.W.O.L. (Absent without Leave). He was to report back to Cape May, but instead boarded a train bound for Green Bay, Wisconsin. His trip home grew even more important when he found out that his family received notice that he had been killed in combat. For every second Quiren was away from his family would grow more depressed. Quiren returned home only to be welcomed by a parade and cheering townspeople. He was then able to greet his parents and catch up on everything that had happened while he was gone.

On October 30th, the Liberty Loan Committee, who had heard Quiren was in town, quickly recruited him to help sell war bonds. Many of the townspeople were happy to contribute what little they had for the war effort. It wasn’t until he and the Committee ventured out into the countryside where many of the poorer farmers reside, that Quiren experienced first hand what had been happening on the home front. They approached a farmer in his driveway who happened to be of German heritage and he was introduced to Quiren. The Committee tried to sell the man war bonds, but he had no spare money to give. They quickly turned to threats, saying that his barn would be burned down and he would be run out of the country. Quiren, who you would never call shy, outright condemned the Committee for treating the farmer in that way. He later wrote that he was disgusted by the way Americans were treating their neighbors.

Realizing that he was in much trouble with the Army, Quiren returned to Cape May on November 21st. Armistice had been signed over in Europe while he was visiting family in Algoma. He was ordered to report to his Commanding Officer the next morning. He was screamed at by his C.O., not because he was absent for several weeks, which could have put him in jail, but they were simply worried about him. He had proven to them that he had convalesced enough to be discharged. On January 5th, 1919, Corporal Quiren Groessl received his discharge from the United States Army along with 100% disability and a Silver Star.

Soon after his discharge he wrote a letter to Marjorie, the nurse’s aid from Beauvaix. He thanked her for all of the help that she had given him while he was recovering. He was surprised to get a letter in return so quickly. Marjorie was delighted to hear that he was back in the United States and was doing well. She decided to tell him something that she couldn’t back in France. She was showing him extra special attention because the doctors there were almost positive that he wouldn’t leave the hospital alive. He was shocked because the greatest of his worries back then was the fear of amputation, not death.

Quiren returned home to Algoma that January and picked up life where he left off. He spent the remainder of the school year teaching the Eighth Grade in Algoma. The following September, he decided to go back to school and obtain his degree. He was always very strong in his academics, but this time, he was not the same man who was in school years ago. His physical strength was not like it was and he quickly found the fast paced lifestyle of a college student to be a little overwhelming. Quiren collapsed while at school and would spend the next year and a half in a hospital bed , all the while engaging in rigorous physical therapy.

Quiren spent the next several years in Algoma with his family. He became very active in the American Legion, as most Veterans were, eventually becoming a Life Member. He attended regular meetings and would travel annually to the American Legion Convention, which was hosted at various cities across the country. There he would reunite himself with his old friend, Floyd Gibbons. He and Floyd would write each other often, but would never have the chance to meet and share stories about Ward #160 except at the American Legion Convention.

It was then on September 19th, 1927, approximately ten years since American entered the Great War, Quiren made a trip across the Atlantic to France. The American Legion held its Ninth Annual Convention in Paris. He looked forward to seeing Floyd Gibbons, who was now the Foreign Director for the Chicago Tribune in Paris and Berlin. Quiren was given the chance to meet the French surgeon who saved his life and properly thank him. He was also able to re-visit the field where he was wounded. Quiren was happy that the Convention was being held in Paris of all places because when he was on the troop train and even when he was wounded, he was only taken along the outskirts of Paris, but was never introduced to the city itself.

He, his friends, and younger brother Joe made their rounds visiting cemeteries where fallen American soldiers rested. They would say a silent prayer and pay their respects. Floyd Gibbons was nice enough to provide Quiren with a map and list of the American cemeteries all around France. He spent the remainder of the trip showing those closest to him the places where he had been and telling them stories of his service days.

He had met with villagers who gave him a hero’s welcome once they discovered he was an American who fought for their freedom. They were greeted by all the locals and Quiren made his way to where the front line had been and made a reference that it was still as depressing as it was when he was there. After the Convention, he returned home to Algoma. Prior to his departure he was studying to be a Licensed Pharmacist. He studied through the months of May, June, and July and eventually passed his examination. He purchased the Rexall Drug Store in 1922 and spent four years training along side Ed Nesemann, a Registered Pharmacist. Once he received his credentials as a licensed Pharmacist, he would be able to become more active in the business he owned.

In 1928, he married Estelle Buettner of Kewaunee, Wisconsin. They would go on to have four children, Bill, Peter, Julie, and Jack and eventually eight grandchildren. Quiren and Estelle began their lives together while in Algoma. Quiren spent the next eight years running Rexall Drug Store. It was then in 1936, he decided to assume a new undertaking. He studied and took the exam for the position of Postmaster of Algoma. He took the exam with twelve other applicants and passed with the highest score. He was appointed to the position of Postmaster and he then sold half of his interest in Rexall Drug Store to Ed Nesemann. Quiren would retain the other half until 1960.

Quiren continued work as usual until September 23, 1939 when he received sobering news. His long time friend and idol Floyd Gibbons died of a heart attack. This was especially hard for Quiren to take because it was because of something as common as a heart attack. You see Floyd was not a soldier, yet he endured many of the most horrific experiences anyone can imagine. He was part of the most historic moments of American history such as the sinking of the Lusitania and the Fifth Marines charge across the wheat field near Soisson, France at the Battle of Belleau Wood. He lived through all of these moments in which he could have easily become one of the Americans killed and therefore a statistic, but he survived them all.

In 1948, Quiren received his license to operate an Amateur Radio, or more commonly called a Ham Radio. He would spend hours on end in the basement of his Cleveland Avenue home talking with people from all corners of the world. He had friends from the Army who owned one as well and they used this as a primary means of correspondence. Quiren had even made mention of a time that he was in a conversation with someone living in the South and they had talked for nearly an hour when he realized it was a man from the 128th Infantry, whom he served with in France.

In 1956, Quiren and his family were stricken with grief when they received word that their youngest child, Jack had drowned. He and a friend were on Lake Michigan fishing and their boat capsized. The pain that he and Estelle felt would never go away, but it did strengthen the bond between them and their children whom they already loved dearly. As with many parents in the same situation, Quiren decided the best thing to do would be to simply remain busy. He and his family were regular attendees to St. Mary’s Catholic Church in Algoma. Quiren had also volunteered his time as the Grand Knight of the Chairman of Algoma Community Chest. This organization was the predecessor to United Way. Their main function was to collect donations from local businesses and channel it into public works projects.

He sold his remaining share of Rexall Drug Store in 1962 and on December 27th, 1965, Quiren Groessl entered retirement. Leaving his position as Algoma’s Postmaster, he would spend his hours volunteering with many local organizations and many evenings in the basement on his radio. He took on more civil service positions such as being President of the Board of Education. He was also very active in initiating the Algoma Savings and Loan Association. This was a Credit Union of sorts which specialized in savings deposits and mortgage loans. Quiren would remain very active in helping this organization grow until he retired as President in 1978.

Quiren would spend several years on the Board of Directors of the Algoma Memorial Hospital. This was a small government funded hospital which, although limited in its care capacity, could tend to the many needs of the residents of Algoma and the surrounding area. Quiren would leave his seat on the Board once his age progressed and his mobility became difficult. This would be the last service that he would give to his community. Quiren Groessl passed away on Monday August 8th, 1983 at the age of 87 at St. Vincent Hospital in Green Bay. His wife Estelle would survive him by just over twelve years, passing away on January 20, 1996.

Towards the end of a man’s life, one often asks himself whether or not they have made a difference in the world. They become concerned about the impact they made on their community and the welfare of their family. I don’t believe Quiren Groessl ever had this dilemma. This man remained humble throughout his entire life. Even after becoming wounded in service to his country, owning a successful business, and even raising a family anyone would be proud of, Quiren remained modest in his accomplishments. The idea which can be largely attributed to this is that he never stopped being that young adventurous “Doughboy” in the trenches near Cantigny. He carried his same virtues and work ethic with him throughout his entire life. This was a man who has held many titles; Husband, Father, Corporal, Postmaster, but I feel if you were to speak with him today, he would ask you to just call him Big Boy.

Sources:

Quiren Groessl, Big Boy, in the Library of Congress, http://lcweb2.loc.gov/diglib/vhp-stories/loc.natlib.afc2001001.00296/pageturner?ID=pm0001001, (accessed March 3, 2008)

http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~wikewaun/newcemgl-gy.htm

Matt Groessl, e-mail message to author, April 29, 2008

Neville Public Museum Collection. Jacket File 2007.11

Library of Congress. Veteran’s History Project. http://lcweb2.loc.gov/diglib/vhp/story/loc.natlib.afc2001001.00296/

Press Gazette Article by Rita Schlise, date unknown, Neville Public Museum Collection. Jacket File 2007.11

Quiren Groessl Obituary, date unknown, Neville Public Museum Collection, Jacket File 2007.11

One and the Same: Benjamin Franklin and Pope John Paul II

Society during the Early American Republic and today has its share or differences, but fundamentally we still face the same challenges. The United States and the western world in general, have had to balance secularism and deism within their own culture to equalize the share of influence they have over public policy. Benjamin Franklin knew this when he advocated that morals and virtue could be practiced without being a member of any organized religion. We see this centuries later when Pope John Paul II emphasized how important family was in the overall good of society. This paper will examine that even though both of these men have fundamental differences relating to organized religion, they believe that virtue and spirituality are divine and therefore trump any man-made convention.

Benjamin Franklin grew up in a time when there was a wave of secularism across the British colonies. During this same period, there was a common convention sweeping Europe which mandated that every subject’s faith would be that of the ruler. This meant that if the King of France was Catholic, every French citizen was therefore Roman Catholic. If the King of England was Protestant, every English subject would therefore be Protestant. This was one of the principle ideas which encouraged the spread of deism throughout Europe and later the British colonies.

Franklin was a practicing deist and it strongly influenced his philosophy. He was a product of the Enlightenment and believed that virtue can be obtained by practicing high moral standards rather than relying on an orthodox church. This made Franklin a leading proponent in the idea of anticlericalism during the later part of the Eighteenth Century. He and others with similar views were afraid that England would send over a Bishop of the Anglican Church to oversee the spiritual guidance of the Colonies. By this time, the Colonists were accustomed to praying directly to their Creator without the intermediary of the Clergy. This was the fundamental drive behind the thought of most deists.

Franklin was unique in his thought, however, in that he still correlated religion with a moral lifestyle. Deists carried a very vague sense of God and believed that there was some sort of higher power in control, but it was really more of an abstract presence rather than an empirical form. Franklin still asserted his beliefs that virtue and morality was separate from religion, but did recognize that if religion were to disappear from society, that virtue and morality would lessen as well.

Franklin would exercise his philosophy in an attempt to fuel revolution with the other founding fathers. Just prior to independence there was a very diverse population of colonists. Franklin appealed to the large Protestant population to rally around the concept of liberty and unification of the colonies. Protestants were familiar with rebelling against authority. It was in their culture at the time to despise any sort of hierarchy which weakened the autonomy of the individual. He would carry these same principles that were practiced in the religious sense and adapt them for political gain.

Franklin knew how important morality and virtue was in American society. During the period of Independence he and his fellow delegates were actively reliant upon the Supreme Being that they worshipped, without citing one specific deity of a religion. It was only later during the Constitutional Convention that many of the delegates wanted to weaken the presence of God and religion in American society. Franklin, still a deist, saw the implications that a lack of religion would have on the moral well-being of the blooming nation. He reminded the Convention of the all-powerful ally that they had once relied upon and asked if they felt that they could continue without that divine guidance.

Benjamin Franklin was well-known as being a supporter of all religions. This progressive stance made him appealing to the established Churches of the western world. He was seen as being an enlightened man in an un-enlightened world. Prior to Benjamin Franklin, the Colonies were not seen as being enlightened or as having a philosophy of their own. Franklin used his eclectic influence as a diplomat from various European countries to play upon his newfound celebrity by legitimizing the ambitions from the British Colonies.

Franklin was the leading advocate of justice and human rights. In his autobiography, Franklin outlines several virtues in which he emphasizes justice. His efforts mainly consisted of the pursuit of liberty and rebellion against the tyrannical King of England. Later in his life once independence was established and the American republic was up and running he focused his influenced as one of the nation’s most prominent abolitionists. In a letter he wrote in 1789, Franklin called slavery “an atrocious debasement of human nature.” His philosophic influence would later be revived at a time when it would be needed the most, in the twentieth century.

Two hundred years after Benjamin Franklin, Pope John Paul II would emerge as an unlikely advocate to the enlightenment principles of the past. Pope John Paul II was a product of the Second Vatican Council. This assembly recognized the changing times and noticed that if the Church was to survive, they would need to adapt as well. Pope John Paul was present at this event and assumed a new philosophy composed of family value and genuine morality.

He recognized and understood modernity and how it would relate to the spiritual well-being of his constituents. Pope John Paul II would emerge as one of the leading advocates of human rights in the twentieth century, largely because he lived through the atrocities committed by the Nazis in Poland during WWII. He would make this his primary objective during his religious career and during his reign as Pope. During this time, he would speak about the importance of equality and freedom as it relates to modern society.

His philosophy would circle around the need for greater acceptance and toleration between interfaith relations. He acknowledged the idea that we all worship the same deity, just in different ways. His first action in this effort was during the Second Vatican and it encompassed a worldwide appeal to Catholics to stop the oppression of Jews. This included verbal and physical acts, as well as the way they are portrayed in the media. Over the course of his papacy, he would travel all over the world and visit with leaders of various faiths and talk about the rights of the person.

The key idea in Pope John Paul II’s message for human rights is that all people are created in God’s image and that human beings should be treated as such, not as objects. In addition to human rights, he was a leading figure in support for the rights of nations. In his 1995 address to the United Nations General Assembly, he argues that because of artificial divisions during the Cold War, human beings were under the control of foreign powers that were unfamiliar with the necessities of their local demographic. He cited the document that the United Nations passed in 1948 relating to the list of Human Rights that every human being had. Pope John Paul argued that these rights could be practiced on a larger scale and benefit the health of nations.

He warns against the dangers of utilitarianism. This, he says, is when morality is described as something beneficial to a certain group, not necessarily something which is good. Because of this idea, morality takes on a false sense of importance and loses its appeal to those seeking a virtuous society. Morality becomes a political tool to sway public opinion and not as an ideal to which all people should try to obtain.

One of his most revolutionary ideas is that he follows in the path of enlightenment thinkers and reinforces the notion that there is a difference between spirituality and religion. He argues that a person who attends church often might not necessarily be a good and virtuous person. He continues to reassert the duty of spiritual guidance to the individual. Unlike his predecessors, he makes it known in his philosophy that there is a direct connection between the person and God, and that relationship can thrive without an intermediary. In a letter that he wrote in March of 1985, Pope John Paul II stated that only God could be the fundamental source of everything good. This was essentially a deist statement, but now, hundreds of years later; this is simply a well accepted progressive stance.

The most influential effort by Pope John Paul II during his papacy was the definition of faith. This word had an elastic quality in that nearly everyone had a different interpretation as to what it meant. Pope John Paul II reasserted the moral authority of the Papacy by stating that faith was the teachings of Christianity which were explained by the Church. This practice standardized the very backbone that morality and virtue were structured around. He continues to explain that faith, pertaining to Catholics, is both intellectual and emotional.

He incorporates many enlightenment ideas into his defense of faith, as it relates to reason. In his encyclical Fides et Ratio, he explains that without reason, faith can be a dangerous attribute. He continues to explain that reason can, and often is subjective. He also explains that it can be influenced by environmental factors. He saw this first hand in Nazi occupied Europe, when the conscience of millions was altered by the common acceptance of brutality.

Pope John Paul II brought a more realistic philosophy to the twentieth century which strengthened the rights of many, both the individual and the nation. He recognized the importance of diversity and acknowledged the inner conflict we all have regarding the particular and universal factors that compose our identity. He defined truth as a relation between truth and reason which, depending on your individual identity, would determine the person’s sense of truth, which would usually change from culture to culture. All of these ideas were needed at a time when modernity carried a negative connotation, but because of Pope John Paul’s ideas, we were able to see and understand the source of good acts in today’s world.

Both of these men were confronted with a rising secular society with a larger influence than earlier secular efforts. During the time of Benjamin Franklin, there was a looming fear of a godless nation. This was a result of the first amendment of the Constitution which guarantees freedom of religion to all Americans. However, this was often interpreted as a need for God to absent from all social and political conventions.

As with most deists, Pope John Paul II saw that there was very little to contrast the various groups who followed Christianity. He, and Franklin, were active participants in outreach campaigns which bridged the gap between established Christian churches and smaller congregational parishes. Both men knew that the only difference was that of doctrine. Both men were influenced largely by political conventions which occurred during their lifetime. With Benjamin Franklin, he was living in the Colonies after the end of the Seven Years War. A result of the newly conquered land was the Quebec Act of 1774. Among all the provisions which established governing practices, there was a clause which made the pledge of allegiance for that area generic in theology. This meant that one would not have to swear allegiance to a Protestant religion in order to be loyal to their government. It also allowed Catholics to practice their faith freely. Pope John Paul II was present at a similar event which encouraged religious toleration, and that was the well-known Second Vatican Council.

Both of these men were not only advocates of human rights, they were custodians of human rights. They went about this in a unique way, by appealing to the spirituality of the masses. Benjamin Franklin used the wide influence of Protestant ministers, who regularly preached the notion of liberty and justice. He would also later correlate rebellion to a tyrannical king to being obedient to God. Pope John Paul II used his moral authority to establish rights for all people, regardless of their nationality, as well as rights for the nation itself.

Although Pope John Paul II retains the importance and overall authority of the office of the Pope, he does emphasize that you don’t have to be a good Catholic or a good Christian to be a good person. Both men are dynamic in their persistence that good works and morality can be regularly practiced without the presence of God and Christian teachings. Both do, however, recognize that without the presence of God and religion, morality and virtue would most likely suffer and be absent from most of society. Benjamin Franklin expressed in many letters that although he didn’t find religion necessary to be a good person, he could only hope that it never disappeared from American society.

Both men saw the emerging philosophy of republicanism as an important and necessary component of modern society. Benjamin Franklin saw the need for this political idea because it was directly affecting the providence of the burgeoning nation. Pope John Paul II coupled republicanism with his drive for human rights by insisting that liberty and justice are cornerstones of modernity and that a government only exists at the consent and wellbeing of the governed. This idea paired well with his drive for human rights on the world’s stage by insisting that everyone had certain inalienable rights which cannot be voted away or repealed by a ruling government, which is largely what republicanism encompasses.

In a way, both of these men needed to make certain concessions to secularism in order to adapt with the contemporary views and philosophy. Benjamin Franklin was founding a nation with strong religious ties to Europe and many would love nothing more than to establish a theocracy. Franklin, however, recognized the need for religious freedom, largely because he viewed most religions as the same. Pope John Paul II was rather progressive in his ideas as a result of the Second Vatican Council, but came under fire from critics as not being progressive enough. Yet in a way, the acts of Benjamin Franklin formed a series of events which would later be experienced by Pope John Paul II, mainly the difference between religious freedom and religious absence in the United States.

Normally one would compare the leading of the most established Church in the world with a man who viewed all religions as the same. The reason we see this comparisons is that in the twentieth century, as a reaction to grave injustices and atheistic proliferation, the definition of “traditional” carries a different meaning. Both men formed their philosophy based on what was needed during their own experiences with modernity. Both of these men had direct experiences with oppression and both assumed a duty to help on the global level to enlighten oppressive governments and advocate rights for all people. Both of these men used Christian principles to reinforce their message, which during both periods, proved to be largely successful.

The Difference Between Red and White

Throughout the history of colonization, there have always been questions raised about the differences between indigenous peoples and the colonizing nation. Historian Nancy Shoemaker gives a very concise, yet complete argument as to why the British and Indians had such a complicated engagement during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. In her book, A Strange Likeness, she examines how the similarities between the British and Indians were on a much more substantial and relevant level than the superficial differences they saw in one another. This paper will examine how real these similarities were and how many of the differences we study were manufactured by both groups in the encounter.

Shoemaker categorizes the broad spectrum of factors into several components. Some of the more essential ones are that of race, writing, gender, alliances, and land. She quickly acknowledges the existence of racial differences between both parties and this can be argued to be fabricated, at least by the Indians. The British had the idea that every Indian was born white and it was only because they were exposed to the environment more regularly and they lived closer to nature that their skin gradually took on a red hue. Whereas the Indians accepted the difference in race between the two, but in no way categorized it as factor in determining their right to the land.

This point was pivotal for humanity in general. Never before had a group of people, especially Europeans, identified themselves as “white.” Prior to this age of globalization, we have seen identities describes based on one’s nationality or religious affiliation, but never skin color. In North America, we see the tense coexistence of people of white, black, and red skin colors. Black people consisted nearly entirely of African slaves. The practice of this started in the Caribbean during the onset of the African slave trade in the Western hemisphere. This was adopted because it allowed anyone to identify a slave quite easily if they were to escape. Europeans of all religions and nations were self-labeled as white people, and the Indians were described as being red.

The spirituality of both groups can be factored into a number of occasions where the British deemed themselves as superior, simply because they were Christians. During this period of colonization and expansion, the word “civilize” became synonymous with converting a group of people to Christianity. The British saw it as their duty to help save the Indian people. Fundamentally, however, the differences were not as vast as predicted. It is revealed that both groups believe in the same supreme-being as their Creator.

Their spiritual beliefs had fundamentally influenced their societal norms by instituting very different policies for land use. The Indians practiced more of an animism philosophy where everything living and spiritual would be returned to the Earth. Because of this, there was greater respect shown for natural things. The Europeans believed in the Christian God; a God who reigned from Heaven and was the Creator of Earth, not its custodian. The Europeans were therefore more willing to cultivate, develop, and abuse the land they inhabited.

One of the largest contributing factors which ultimately put the Indians at a huge disadvantage was that of communication, specifically the art of writing. It was common for Indian tribes to pass down tradition and laws orally. When a peace deal would be brokered between two warring tribes, it was always an oral agreement, and this practice occurred for an unknown amount of time. The British however, followed the more European approach when it came to legal and diplomatic agreements, and that was to agree to something in writing and secure either the signature or seal of all parties involved on the document.

The Indians reluctantly followed the way of the Europeans and engaged in all diplomacy with written documents. This proved to be problematic, because although the difference in how both groups conduct diplomacy is rather unsubstantial as long as a mutually agreed resolution is concluded, the Indians and British had different meanings to their words. Both groups would speak and write in English, but the vernacular of words would produce two separate agreements as far as the Indians were concerned. This proved to be of little concern since they would only retrieve the written document from the council bag when they needed to challenge the British on their agreement.

The similarities between Indians and the colonizing British are in fact quite stunning. It is also quite interesting to see how the Indians adopted more European methods to counter the invading force of white men. The Indians had maintained a sense of primitive pride amongst their nations. They felt that their existence was to coincide with that of the Earth and that the land was to be respected, not owned. I believe that the Indians reserved their fundamental values in order to compete for the land that they had inhabited for ages. Although their similarities with the British were stronger than their differences, it was the latter that ultimately led to the suppression of Indian culture during the nineteenth century.


Sources:
Nancy Shoemaker, A Strange Likeness: Becoming Red and White in Eighteenth Century north America, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004)

Invented Traditions, Myths, and the Massachusetts Bay Colony

During the onset of American colonial history, there were many events which were sensationalized as the years went on. The events took on a new story and new meaning to accommodate various social causes or defend public policies. These events, or “invented traditions” were present in nearly every English colony, but was more prolific and enduring at the Massachusetts Bay Colony. This paper will examine how although these events in Massachusetts were later embellished into something extraordinary, they did possess real historical consequences that would play an important role.

One of the most used myths from American colonial history was that of the landing at Plymouth Rock by the Puritans. The Puritans were trying to escape religious persecution by the Anglican Church and sought after a territory out of reach from their bishops. They settled upon Plymouth Rock and later expanded out, eventually merging with the Massachusetts Bay Colony. They did not seek religious freedom for their people; they sought after freedom to practice Puritanism. This would later be transformed into the desire for religious freedom by those who wanted freedom of religion after the creation of the United States.

Articles of Confederation were denounced and the Constitutional Convention was formed, there was some discussion on whether or not to allow an established religion exist in the United States. This was greatly detested by those affected by the control over the Anglican and Roman Catholic Church. Thomas Jefferson wrote in a letter that there needs to be a clear division between church and state and, after a few decades, it became a precedent that no church would be publicly supported, nor would worship in any one church be mandatory for any American.

The Puritans were cited throughout early American history as the basis for the American system. The Puritans drafted the Mayflower Compact which contains much of the conditions and language seen in the American Constitution. This is evident because the conditions seen in the Mayflower Compact is utilized to maintain survival. This desired goal for continuity is paralleled in the Constitution. The government in Massachusetts that was formed as a result was obliged to rule at the consent of the governed. These settlers were described as writing down the founding principles of a Republican society and setup their community around the idea of independence and the strong avoidance of outside interference. This was merely done to ensure the cooperation of the congregation with the clergy. It set out the basis of organization which the American Constitution would later mimic, not the other way around since the Mayflower Compact was written long before the Constitution.

In contrast to Jamestown, the Puritans were seen as the first ones founding a new country, although that was not their intentions. Jamestown was regarded as a transplant of English society and culture, whereas the Puritans sought complete independence from England. There story was embellished to leave us to assume a divine basis for their settlement, and this idea would later be used during westward expansion and the idea of manifest destiny.

During the Antebellum Period, the Puritans were made a strong example of by the abolitionists. They saw themselves and their cause as a continuation to that of the Puritans. The Puritan colony was layered in freedom by the abolitionists’ quest for freedom from England and their peaceful interaction with the Natives. Abolitionists used the strong Christian faith exhibited by the Puritans to reinforce the idea that everyone was equal in the eyes of God and that slavery was immoral.

There is no doubt that the events we learned of in elementary school and beyond occurred, but there is no reason to assume that the cause and goal of the early colonies was anything but survival. These myths were simply used as a propaganda tool by those looking to advance their own social reforms and to further define what it means to be an American. Looking back in hindsight, it is easy to assume that they were looking to start a new country because of the way the events played out, but for the Puritans at least, it was simply the search for religious autonomy and the will to survive.



Sources:

Ann Uhry Abrams, The Pilgrims and Pocahontas, (Boulder: Westview Press, 1999)