Saints of the Cities
Carter Brannon
Some medieval saints were invoked by Catholic writers in discussions about the history of American cities. Two 1915 articles in America discuss the connection between San Francisco and St. Francis of Assisi, and Boston and Sts. Botwulf and Patrick. I argue that these medieval saint references are an effort in balancing and reconciling national or regional identities with a Catholic identity. The identity or ownership of these cities is in question, and these discussions are part of that. There is also an effort to construct an American Catholic heritage that embraces both identities and informs American Catholics of it.
A May 8, 1915 editorial in America discussed San Francisco’s connection to St. Francis of Assisi, the thirteenth-century founder of the Franciscans. The editorial seems to be responding to a San Francisco newspaper claiming that San Francisco may be named after Sir Francis Drake, not St. Francis, and St. Francis’s connection to the city is remote. This appears to be in the context of a discussion about the erection of a statue of St. Francis. The editorial concedes the idea that “it was not the Franciscan spirit which rebuilt the city after the devastation by fire and earthquake... For the scriptural injunction ‘Sell all though hast and give to the poor’ is, of course, not symbolical of San Francisco.”
The editorial was discussing San Francisco’s identity as Catholic or not-Catholic, which would be English, American, Secular and/or Protestant. The distinction between these was largely unimportant to the Catholic writers. There appears to have been a debate about whether the city is named after a Catholic saint or an English sailor. While there may have been some genuine confusion in another publication, the etymology of the city’s name is not the most significant debate. Rather, the debate was over what each historical figure represents: Catholicism or English Protestantism. Further discussion of the Catholic identity of San Francisco is in the contrast of the reality of the American city with the medieval saint’s faith and values. Although I don’t think the editorial was suggesting the city of San Francisco sell everything, the American city was still being described as different from at least one expression of medieval Catholic Christianity.
The editorial continues that it is not relevant that the “Franciscan spirit” did not rebuild San Francisco because the Franciscans are important to the history of San Francisco and California’s history through their missions.
The editorial sought to develop an idea of an American Catholic heritage. It suggests that California’s colonial history is Catholic. Catholics and Catholicism have not only been present but a crucial part of California’s history since the founding of some of California’s most significant cities, so the legend goes. This colonial-era Catholic identity gives the contemporary Californian Catholics a certain relevance and identity. Even if San Francisco is not clearly a Catholic or Franciscan city in 1915, its history means San Franciscan Catholics certainly belong there. One could embrace an American or Californian identity that is completely compatible with Catholicism because this heritage shows that the two identities have relevance to each other.
But it is not only the colonial history that is relevant here. Francis of Assisi, the 12th-13th century Italian saint is as significant to the editorial as the Californian friars of the order he founded. By connecting the American Catholic heritage to medieval European saints, the Catholic writers sought to unite the American Catholic heritage with European Catholic heritage. While the American Catholic heritage only dated to the end of the 16th century, it could be extended much further with its connections to medieval Europe. It also offered a way for European immigrants to connect their heritage and national saints with their new American nationality.
Debates on San Francisco’s Catholic identity were not uncommon. These were also debates over the Latin American identity of the city over an English American one, and the Catholic identity of Latin Americans. Within America there is debate about how Catholic San Francisco is in 1915. In the November 6 issue, S. C. Burnett of San Francisco argues in a letter responding to a note from a month before that there is “no city on the earth where the government is more dominated by Catholic influence than San Francisco.” The note is about an account in the Herald and Presbyter of Social Hygiene Association counsel Bascom Johnson’s report on morality at the Panama Exposition, especially described prostitution in San Francisco. America associates this with “the effects of Romanism on Latin Americans, as portrayed in sundry missionary magazines” and expresses concern how the Protestant missionaries will seek to evangelize Latin Americans. Burnett writes, “If public opinion tolerates the indecencies mentioned by Mr. Johnson, it also tolerates open-air Mass, rosary processions in the streets, and suspension of public business on the day of a Catholic Archbishop’s funeral.” Although there is some ambiguity in whether it was immorality or Yankee Protestants that challenge San Francisco’s Catholic identity, the question was debated.
The May 8 editorial says that the newspaper article “concedes that much of the Franciscan spirit might be discovered in San Francisco: there is doubt, however, as to whether the average newspaper man would make quite the most successful discoverer.” Like many of the writers in the Council of Mâcon discussions, this editorial sought to sow skepticism of non-Catholic media and information, and to promote Catholic information. Catholics should read the Catholic press, trusting what Catholics have to say about their history and cities’ identity over non-Catholics, these Catholic writers proposed.
This theme of discussing cities named for saints continues further. In a November 13, 1915 article in America, Denis A. McCarthy first contrasted California, where he wrote that Charles Warren Stoddard said “reading the time-table of a certain California railroad was like repeating the Litany of the Saints” with New England, which “as everybody knows, has no such wealth of Catholic nomenclature.” Like in the discussion of San Francisco, cities named after saints demonstrate a Catholic heritage, while New England has a Puritan history, so it largely lacks the Catholic saint names. McCarthy nonetheless asserted New England’s Catholic heritage despite, or perhaps because of this Puritan history by pointing out that Boston, “New England’s chief city,” is in fact named after a saint. McCarthy explained that “Boston” is “St. Botolph’s Town.” The Puritans named the Massachusetts city after Boston, Lincolnshire, which gets its name from the Saxon saint.
McCarthy suggested other parts of Yankee Protestant Boston history were Catholic by connecting the Revolutionary War to a couple medieval saints. McCarthy pointed out that St. Botolph’s Day, June 17, happens to be a Boston holiday, as it is the anniversary of the Battle of Bunker Hill. More commonly known to the Boston Irish Catholics, Evacuation Day, the commemoration of the British leaving Boston in 1776 falls on St. Patrick’s Day, March 17.
McCarthy’s essay has two main purposes. The first was to inform Boston Catholics of their heritage. In addition to these medieval connections, McCarthy wanted to tell readers about other aspects of Boston Catholic history, such as where the first mass was said in Boston. The second purpose was to turn the Puritan heritage of Boston into something Catholics could be proud of. Both of these were arguments that Catholics have a place in Boston.
Endnotes
1 The editorials in America are unsigned. This issue lists Richard H. Tierney as the President of the America Press, Joseph Husslein as the Secretary, and John D. Wheeler as the Treasurer.
2 Because of the vague citation, it is unclear what article in a “metropolitan daily” the editorial refers to.
3 “Saint Francis and His City,” America, vol XIII, no. 4, May 8, 1915. 98. 98.
4 Ibid.
5 S.C. Burnett, “Communications: Public Spirit in San Francisco,” America, vol. XIV, no. 4, Nov 6, 1915, 83.
6 I here rely on the quote in America.
7 Note and Comment, America Vol. XIII, No. 25 Oct. 2, 1915, 623-624.
8 Burnett, “Communications: Public Spirit in San Francisco,” 83.
9 “Saint Francis and His City,” 98
10 Denis A. McCarthy, “Catholic Landmarks of Boston,” America, vol. XIV, no. 5, Oct 2, 1915, 623-24. .
References
Burnett, S. C. “Communications: Public Spirit in San Francisco,” America Vol. XIV, No. 4. Nov. 6, 1915.
McCarthy, Denis A. “Catholic Landmarks of Boston,” America Vol. XIV, No. 5. Nov. 13, 1915.
Note and Comment, America Vol. XIII, No. 25 Oct. 2, 1915, 623-624.
“Saint Francis and His City,” America Vol. XIII, No. 4, May 8, 1915.