What’s wrong with this article?
PolishNews recently reprinted an article by Daniel Pogorzelski originally published in the July 2009 edition of the Northwest Chicago Historical Society’s Newsletter (see page 14). The article is quite interesting, and covers the history of Avondale and Chicago’s Polish Village.
Nestled between the stately Greystones of Logan Square and the weathered Victorians of Old Irving, Chicago’s Avondale community area, is filled with some of the Northwest Side’s most unique architecture with its characteristic mix of steeples, smokestacks and two-flats.
While today Avondale is chiefly associated with the famous “Polish Village” along Milwaukee Avenue centered around St. Hyacinth Basilica and St. Wenceslaus Church in the district’s western half, diverse ethnicities have contributed over time to the area’s rich narrative.
Avondale’s history begins as part of the quiet prairie area surrounding Chicago in what would be incorporated as Jefferson Township in 1850. Two of the old Native American trails through the area were planked, becoming the Upper and Lower Northwest Plank Roads, routes traversed largely by truck farmers en route to sell their goods at the Randolph Street Market. Known to us today as Milwaukee and Elston Avenues, these two diagonal thoroughfares break up the monotony of the city’s ever-present grid…
Well enough. Wondering what is wrong with the article? Here it is:
By 1894 St. Hyacinth’s Roman Catholic Parish was founded for Poles in an attempt to pre-empt the establishment of a schismatic parish by the Polish National Catholic Church.
While such a statement would be perfectly acceptable in a Roman Catholic publication, because it does represent the Roman Catholic point-of-view, it does not belong in a historical study or essay. What should a reader infer, especially in this day and age when fewer and fewer even understand the meaning of “schismatic?” This is, after all, supposed to be a history, not a discussion of Church politics, polity, or theology. Further, the article discusses other Parishes established in the area, including the Allen Church (an African-American congregation and the oldest church in the area) as well as German and Swedish Lutheran congregations. The article is conspicuous in not taking those congregations to task for the Reformation…
The article might have discussed the Kozlowski movement in Chicago, the fact that the Roman Catholic Church reacted to the PNCC by appointing the first native Pole as a Suffragen Bishop in Chicago in 1908, that in response to Bishop Hodur’s consecration in 1907, or any amount of historical data that might help a reader to understand the religious and political environment in the neighborhood.
From looking at the Historical Society’s mission statement, no where can I discern that this is a sectarian organization. As such, its newsletter and publications, if they are to reflect history, should be edited more carefully. In the alternative, articles should be labeled as personal opinion, or as biased sectarian histories.
The PNCC has had its role in the history of this neighborhood, and a proper historical exposition on the neighborhood should reflect balance while avoiding sectarian pejoratives.
I researched the dictionary meaning of the word “schismatic” in the
article.
Definitions of “schismatic” on the Web:
* of or relating to or involved in or characteristic of schism;
* schism – division of a group into opposing factions;
* schism – the formal separation of a church into two churches or the withdrawal of one group over doctrinal differences
While “schismatic” has been and can be used in a “pejorative” manner,
in the article it was used in a historical sense, that is, St. Hyacinth’s
Roman Catholic Parish WAS founded for Poles in an attempt to preempt the
establishment of an “opposing” or “separate” parish by the Polish
National Catholic Church. Could and should a better word such as
“independent” have been used? YES. However, unless and until we know the
author’s religious affiliation, we cannot accuse him/her of bias.
In fact, the PNCC and Roman Catholic Church ARE in schism (formal
separation) with each other.
Thomas,
I agree on the definitions and on the better choices for words – exactly what I was getting at. In a history, especially one that really isn’t of a religious nature, but more directed at the neighborhood itself, the use of “schismatic” is ill advised. I understand that each writer has his/her own affiliations and beliefs, but that should be held in check when writing a history for a much broader audience.
I think that a major problem, in schools and in certain types of writing, is that we (as a society) allow a teacher or writer to inject their personal beliefs, trumping the purpose of the teaching or writing. It becomes all about: “Well everyone has a right,” rather than “Everyone has a duty.” Because of that, we get teachers spouting off about crusades and the inquisition without any real or factual evidence to back up their claim. Thus history is changed from a study and a science to an agenda. We as a society are much poorer and much more ill informed for exactly this reason.