Friday, October 19, 2012

When St. Brigid's dared to have a picnic

I was doing some research about St. Brigid's on Avenue B and found this post on McNamara's Blog ... with a repost of an article from The New York Times circa July 22, 1869 BW (Before Woo)...


It is well known that the Roman Catholic Church in this country has forbidden picnics. The ordinance against them was issued last year, and this was the first season for putting it into practice. The origin of the prohibition was the great number of abuses which were found to prevail at these festive gatherings.

With one exception, no Church picnic has taken place this year — at least in connection with the Roman Catholic denomination. The clergy of that faith have exerted themselves vigorously in enforcement of their Church ordinance. They have denounced fairs and picnics from the altar, interdicted them by special mandate, and used all their influence in their several parishes for their suppression. And very effectually so far, with one exception, as has been said.

The people have, in general, yielded with docility to the voices of their clergy in the matter, and at some sacrifice of enjoyment have quietly foregone the annual festivity which was customary. The exception alluded to was the picnic held yesterday by the Total Abstinence Benefit organization in connection with the Roman Catholic Church of St. Bridget, Avenue B and Eighth Street.

Father Mooney is the pastor of said church, and when he heard of the contemplated picnic immediately denounced it and assailed its promoters. It was even announced in some of the papers that it would not take place, in consequence of being forbidden by the priest. But it did take place yesterday in Jones’ Wood, and, considering the ecclesiastical opposition it encountered, was a very successful thing its way.

The Brotherhood marched to the ground in the forenoon, and all day streams of people continued to flow in through the gates, even though the price of admission was fifty cents a head. The picnic was a quiet and orderly affair, held by temperance men and conducted on temperance principles. There was good music and much dancing, and by 8 o’clock in the evening all had departed for their homes. It would scarcely have been worth distinguishing from similar affairs of its class but for the collision between clergy and laity that took place in connection with it.

I know, I know. If you don't like picnics, then move back to...

9 comments:

  1. Picnics are the devil's work!

    ReplyDelete
  2. And we are sill paying for their sins with the cost of a plague of rats!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Poor Brigid, a goddess reduced to such a lowly state by curmudgeons.

    ReplyDelete
  4. If one had ever gone to a Knights of Columbus picnic in the 80’s you would totally get the 19th century RC upper management practice of the banning of picnics.
    “temperance men and conducted on temperance principles.” Yeah, sure. Hah!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thanks for the link to the Jones' Wood history. It's pretty dense, but kind of fascinating. Possibly my favorite reference is to "the 'Monster Irish Festival' at Jones's Wood on August 29, 1861 . . . ." No clarification is given, so judgment could go any which way.
    It's also the mark of an astoundingly different era that "The Brotherhood marched to the ground in the forenoon . . . ." That was a fair bit of a hike.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Two words: San Gennaro

    ReplyDelete
  7. When did Bridget become Brigid?

    ReplyDelete
  8. The spelling differential is just a function of the translation from gaelic.

    ReplyDelete
  9. To be fair, Brigid was the woman's name. And even that's not entirely true, as it would be Brighid if the Celts were still running the show. And it was their church, as much as F. Xavier was on W. 16th was and as much as Our Lady of Pompeii never was across town. But I know what you mean, all the Bridgets are gone....

    ReplyDelete

Your remarks and lively debates are welcome, whether supportive or critical of the views herein. Your articulate, well-informed remarks that are relevant to an article are welcome.

However, commentary that is intended to "flame" or attack, that contains violence, racist comments and potential libel will not be published. Facts are helpful.

If you'd like to make personal attacks and libelous claims against people and businesses, then you may do so on your own social media accounts. Also, comments predicting when a new business will close ("I give it six weeks") will not be approved.