Do contemporary US Bishops agree with the Know Nothings?

It is interesting to consider the implications of the bishops' present attempts to influence the American political process in light of the history of the acceptance and/or opposition to Catholic political participation in American life.

Mid 19th Century - The Know-Nothing party

The Know Nothing was a movement by the nativist American political faction of the 1850s, characterized by political xenophobia, anti-Catholic sentiment, and occasional bouts of violence against the groups the nativists targeted. It was empowered by popular fears that the country was being overwhelmed by German and Irish Catholic immigrants, who were often regarded as hostile to republican values and controlled by the Pope in Rome.

Although Catholics asserted that they were politically independent of priests, Protestants alleged that Pope Pius IX had put down the failed liberal Revolutions of 1848 and that he was an opponent of liberty, democracy and Republicanism. One Boston minister described Catholicism as "the ally of tyranny, the opponent of material prosperity, the foe of thrift, the enemy of the railroad, the caucus, and the school."[5][6] These fears encouraged conspiracy theories regarding the Pope's purported plans to subjugate the United States through a continuing influx of Catholics controlled by Irish bishops obedient to and personally selected by the Pope.

(Know-Nothings)

Mid 20th Century - 1960 election

A key factor that affected the vote for and against John F. Kennedy in his 1960 campaign for the presidency of the United States was his Catholic religion. Catholics mobilized and gave Kennedy from 75 to 80 percent of their votes.[40] Some Protestant spokesmen, such as Norman Vincent Peale, still feared the Pope would be giving orders to a Kennedy White House.[41] To allay such fears, Kennedy kept his distance from church officials and in a highly publicized confrontation told the Protestant ministers of the Greater Houston Ministerial Association on September 12, 1960, "I am not the Catholic candidate for President. I am the Democratic Party's candidate for President who also happens to be a Catholic. I do not speak for my Church on public matters – and the Church does not speak for me."[42] He promised to respect the separation of church and state and not to allow Church officials to dictate public policy to him.

(Anti-Catholicism)

21st Century - 2012 election

While the bishops have said they aren't telling anyone for whom to vote, some seemingly have given Catholics few, if any, options./br>
Citing the Democratic Party platform plank supporting "safe and legal" abortion, Bishop Thomas Paprocki of Springfield, Ill., told Catholics in his diocese that their salvation was in "serious jeopardy" should they vote for that plank./br>
........

Archbishop John Myers of Newark, N.J., warned Catholics that disagreement with the church's official teaching on same-sex marriage "seriously harm[s] their communion with Christ and His Church."/br>
"I urge those not in communion with the Church regarding her teaching on marriage and family ... sincerely to re-examine their consciences," Myers wrote in a 16-page pastoral statement Sept. 25. "If they continue to be unable to assent to or live the Church's teaching in these matters, they must in all honesty and humility refrain from receiving Holy Communion until they can do so with integrity."/br>
(National Catholic Reporter)

.............

The issue of abortion, (Philadelphia) Archbishop Chaput says, “really is a big issue today.” And the issue “requires of Catholics” a “loyalty to the Church prior to their political party,” he says.

“We are Catholics before we are Democrat, we are Catholics before we are Republican, we are even Catholics before we are Americans,” Archbishop Chaput emphasizes, “because we know that God has a demand on us prior to any government demand on us.”

(see National Review)