Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The American. (Omaha, Nebraska) 1891-1899 | View Entire Issue (Dec. 21, 1894)
TH AMERICAN. THE POPE'S LAST VETO.! Will the People SuUin It, or Will Thy Run the Country? ! Able Artlele by lie. Jinn It. Dunn, I. IK, SeorrUrf nhi (wBlttw .f (hie lltintlml f Ilituu. In an article printed In the :ishm JWy .Wmfiwrof September 27, relative to the American Protective Association, Jaima H. Dunn, In speak ing of tho aim of the Roman hierarchy lo make America Catholic, atd: "I know all thU 1 denied by many- adherent of tho church of Home, but fact are alubkrn thing, and It it a fact that Dr. Brownson In Ul VuthttUc fleeter aald: 'Undoubtedly it is the in tention of the pope to poes Ihl coun try, and In thl Intention he U aided by the Jesuit and all theCutholle prelate and Driest. And It la a fact that the Roman Catholic hierarchy, assembled lo Baltimore In 1HT.2, cent out to the American people this declaration, that the mission of their church In thU country was to make It Catholic. 'The United State,' they said, 'must become a Catholic country.1 It Is also a fact that Archbishop Ireland, In the Roman Catholic congress at Baltimore In 1SS9, exclaimed In a burst of enthusiasm Our work is to make America Catho- llo, And to aid In carrying out this mission of making America Catholic was the Cathollo Truth Society estab lished. To crown all, Pope Leo XIII., In an encyclical letter Issued Novera ber, 1885, says that 'All Catholics should exert their iowor to cause the constitutions of states to be modeled on tho principles of tho true church.1 " lie also quoted from an encyclical is sued by Loo XIII., at Rome, January 10, 181K), aud published in Roman Cath ollc paper. In New ork, February 12, 18lK),and In the I'M, of Boston reb- ruaryl5,1800 In that encyclical the ponuil enjoins ivoiunn vntuuues. "Even In politics, always to serve first tho interests of Catholicism, and to submit themselves in obedience to tho will of the pontiff a to God Him self, and that the civil laws are binding on them only so long as they are con formablo to the Roman Catholic re ligion. In that samoj encyclical the pope say. is . uuvy w ....... . , 1. 1.. iA aini,tVlni AiwInMlif ItW f hll ., UUBUi , ..,H.K V... ""- church, ana a crime 10 ooey to obey them, These being the facts, Is It not quite certain that whatever his prlvato or personal opinion and feelings may be as an American citizen, every good Roman Cathollo must support the church as against the stAte." Rev. John O'Brien, Roman Catholic priest of East Cambridge, in an aricle In the papers claims that the quotations from this encyclical, as woll as the statements and Inferences drawn from It, are false, and in direct opposition to the teachings of the encyclical as a whole. And In order to test the matter and set it fairly before the public, he would refer the same to a commission of six gentlemen whom he himself has been at the pains to select. To this proposition tho writer of this article replies by suggesting that Mr. O'Brien have the whole 'encyclical printed in the Boston newspapers The public can read. It can also form a judgment on the meaning of plalnEnglish words, without extraordinary assistance. This Mr. O'Brien will not do, as he tays: "The pubUo would never read In and oN those, who Idld read few would understand It properly and fully, The encyclical Is not like a sermon in tbe People's church, but Is addressed to Intelligent persons not to the stu:)ld or to those .who.' wilfully misunder stand." Therefore, this review of the pope's encyclical which -was (first printed In April, 1890, fand of which over 70 000 copies have been .published, is now re. printed with! this: Introductory fctate- ment. The encyclical iis on tbe subject of church and state, .and defines the posl tlonof the good; Romanist toward his religion and hlscovntry. But let the pope speak for.hlmt.elf, as he proceed: "To deicribe more exactly the duties of the Catholics to restore the principles, and practices of ChrlS' tlanity in private life and In ail parts of the social organism." Coming tothe state,' he says "That cases happen -in which the state demands oneubing from the cltl zen, and religion Jtbe opposite from Christians, and this undoubtedly f )r no other reason than that the heads of the state pay no regard to the sacred power of the church.londeilre to make It sub- ject to them. No one, however, can doubt which Is to receive tbelr prefer ence." Since "It is an impious deed to break the laws of Jesus Christ for .the. purpose of obeying the magistrates, or to trans. gress the laws of the church under the pretext of observing the civil law." Vicar General Byrne, of the Boston diocese, in a sermon preached in that city, March 16, 1890, while explaining this encyclical of Leo XIII., and claim ing for Romanists loyalty to govern ment, said: "No doubt there are times when the state demands of us a line of conduct manifestly contrary to tho dictates of our religion. This only happens when the civil ruler for the time being over aWp their true aphcre, or aeek to make the aacred power of the church aub aeivlent to their own end. Tbe good cltlarn will refuse to obey an Immoral command of the atate, and peacefully accept the penalty." The church declare, In the language of BUhop McQuald, In Boston, reb- ruajy 13, 1870, that: "Tbe atate ha no right to educate, and when the atate undertake the work of education It U usurping the powera of the church." Hence the conflict that U now being waged all over the land. I the church or tho state supreme In the education of the child After having thus elevated the law of the church to an equality with the teaching of God, and above the law of the land, the oio proceed: 'Hut If the law of the atate are in open contradiction with the Divine law, If they command anything prejudicial to the church, or are hostile to tho du ties Imposed by religion, or violate in the person of the supremo pontiff the authority of Jesus Christ, then Indeed It I a duty to resist them and a crime to obey them a crime fraught with Injury to the state itself." This mean In plain Anglo-Saxon that when any law is parsed, or any action taken by any government which the proper Romauiat authority deems prejudicial" to the Interest of the 0p affw.tlng tbe wrmn 0, the supremo pontiff," resistance becomes a duty, obedience a 'crime. And this, mark you, la not the teachings of Ilildo- brand and of the middle aires, but of Leo the Xillth, and the Nineteenth century. 'And what;Leo hero Indicates as possible, has happened. Topes have declared tho laws of nations null and void, and absolved Romanists from al legiance to such 'governments. Our readers cannot have forgotten how the pontiff took upon' himself In 1803, to do. J buU anJ jM ,n ,s M e the laws of New 85(1 the laws of laws of Sardinia; In tho same year the laws of Spain, and the laws of Piedmont; In 1802 the laws of Austria; and In every case, the laws which he pronounced null, are essential parts of the American constitution, and of our common law. Shortly after the present pontiff's recovery from his 111 ncss In 188(1, after establishing all the privileges and Immunities of tho Jes- , fa U8ued j d jQ whlch ' IIS occurs this sentence: The judicial functionaries must re fuse obedience to the state and to the laws of the country which are In con traillctlon with ltoman Uathoilc pre- oepts." What Is this but preaching down right rebellion, not only in Italy,where It means civil war, but In every country where Roman Catholics hoi I any ju dicial function? ' There is required "Perfect submission and obedience of will to the church and the sovereign pontiff, as to God Himself. In fixing the limits of olcdlence, let no one think that It Is due te the authority of bish ops, ana especially the Koman pontui, merely in matters of dogma." Oh, no; this perfect submission and obedience Is all-sweeping covering the private and public life and acts of the Individual, his civil, political and re ligious duties and the claim of the pope to perfect submission and obedi ence on the part of the members, Is recognized and acknowledged by Ro man Catholic leaders In this country. Fathor Bodfish, a Roman Catholic priest, at a hearing at th state house, Boston, last winter, said Roman Catholics were bound to re ceive, believe and disseminate the In struction received from the pope as the vicar of Christ." To ex-Gov. Long's question, "You said you are bound to rtcelve, believe and disseminate the word of the pope, am I right?" Answer, "Yes, sir." Vicar-General Preston, of New York, while on the witness stand in one of the courts in that city a little over a year ago, when asked if Roman Catholics must obey their bishops, whether right or wrong, replied i es." i nis excitea amazement In the court, and the ques tion was repeated, and again Monslg nor Preston answered, "They must obey, right or wrong." In this the vicar-general spoke the truth. It is "obedience," first, last, and all the time." This same Vicar-General Preston, in a sermon preached in New York, Jan uary 1st, 1888, gave utterance to these significant words: 'Every word Leo speaks from his high chair, Is the voice of the Holy Ghost, and must be obeyed. To every Catholic heart comes no thought but obedience. It is said that politics is not within the province of the church, and that the church has only jurisdic tion in matters of faith. You say, will receive my faith from the pontiff, but I will not receive my politics from him.' This assertion is disloyal and untruthful. You must not think as you choose; you must think as Catholics. The man who says, 'I will take my faith from Peter, but I will not take my politics from Peter,' is not a true Catholic. The church teaches that the supreme pontiff must be obeyed because he Is the vicar of the Lord, Christ speaks through him." And this is all in keeping with the claims of the pontiff, who Is to be obeyed in all matter of faith and moral. Cardinal Manning, In ol. Ill of Ecclesiastical Sermon, page 83, aayt: Why ahould the holy father touch any matter in politic at all? For this plain reason, because politic are a part of morals. Politic are moral on the widest scale. " In hi encyclical tbe pope proceed to deny tbe rights of private judgment In civil matter, or indexed, any. 'It must be considered a duty by Christians to bo ruled and guided by the authority and leadership of the bishops, and especially of the apostolic see. Man auiies, wnai ne ougui w believe and what he ought to do, Is by divine right laid down by the church and In the church by the supreme pon tiff. Hence It Is that the pontiff ought to judge with authority what is con tained In revelation, what is consonant, and what disagrees with it; and for the same reason it is incumbent on bim to point out what is moral and what Ira moral: what is necessary to do and what to avoid, in order to attain salvation.', This last quotation Is from the Cath olic Woild, July, 1870. "The finger of the pope, like the needle in the compass, invariably points to the pole of eternal truth; and the i.ilnd of the sovereign pontiff is as cer, tain to retlect the mind and will of God, as a mirror at one end of a submarine cable to Indicate the electric signal made at the other." Cardinal Manning, in one of his ser mons on Ecclesiastical Subjects, in speaking of the pope's claim to inde, pendency aud supremacy, says: "I acknowledge no civil superior; I am the subject of no prince; and I claim more than this. I claim to bo the su preme judge on earth, and director of tho consciences of men; of tho peasant that tills tho field, and the prince that sits on tho throne; of the household that lives In the shade of privacy, and the legislature that makes laws for kingdoms. I am the sole last supreme judge on earth of what is right ard wrong." That there may be unity of action, Leo XIII. announces of Christians (Ro man Catholics) that "They rocelve from the church the rule of their faith; they know with cer tainty that in obeying Us authority and allowing themselves to be guided by It, they will bo placed in possession of the truth. We must receive en tirely and with tho same assent all things and everything ascertained to have beon revealed by God. The in togrity of the church would suffer if a doubt were entertained that the church alone has been Invested with this power ot governing souls to the absolute ex elusion of the civil authority; for it was nottoCtesar, but to Peter that Jesus Christ gave the keys of the Klngdora,of Heaven. From this doctrine with re gard to the relations between politics and religion follow Important conse quences." Its application to politics Is made In the following terms: "Furthermore, in politics, which are Inseparably bound up with the laws of morality and religious duties, men ought always and In the first place to serve, as far as possible the interests of Catholicism. As soon as they are seen to bo in danger, all differences should cease between Catholics. Sin e the fate of states depends principally on the disposition of those who are at the head of the government, the church cannot grant Its patronage or favor to men whom It knows to be hostile to It who openly refuse to respect Its rights who seek to break the alliance estab lished by the nature of things between religious interests and tho Interests of the civil order. On the contrary lis duty Is to favor those, who, having sound Ideas as to the relations between church and state, wish to make them both harmonize for the common good, These principles contain the rule a& cording to which every Catholic ought to model his public life " This is but a reiteration of what Pope Leo said in an encyclical letter of No vember 7, 1885, reported by cable to the New York Herald: "Every Catholic should rigidly ad here to the teachings of the Roman pontiff, especially in the matter of modern liberty, which, already under the semblance of honesty of purpose. leads to destruction. We exhort all Catholics to devote careful attention to public matters, and take part in all municipal affairs and elections, and all public services, meetings and gather ings. All Catholics must make them selves felt as active elements in daily political life in countries where they live. All Catholics should exert their power to cause the constitutions states to be modeled on the principles of the true church." The treatment of this subject is very full, and cannot be misunderstood. every case it means no personal free dom, but direct rule from Rome. He says: "The civil prudence of Individuals seems wholly to consist in faithfully executing the precepts of legitimate authority." This Is fully set forth as the authority of the priests, bishops and pontiff, who says of himself that "In effect he has to order and regu late the actions of Christian citizens in view of tho realization of tbir eternal salvation. It will be thus sjen how in- ispensable It U that beside the per fect concord which ought to reign In their thought and action-, the faithful should alway religiously take as the rule of their conduct the political wis dom of the ecclesiastical authority." Thl therefore follows: "Now the Roman pontiff is the su preme ruler of the church. The union of minds then requires perfect submls- lon of will to the church and the sov ereign pontiff AS TO GOD HIMSELF. Should any of the bishops lay himself open to criticism either In his conduct or In the opinions he main tains. It docs not belong to any in dividual to arrogate to himself in his own regard the office of judge confided by our Lord Jesus Christ to the sole pastor whom ne has set over His lambs and sheep." Silent acquiescence in the decisions of the pOe and his representatives is n joined, and it Is taught that "The actions of superiors ought not to be struck at with tbe sword of speech, even when tbey appear to merit a cen sure." "Peter having thus spoken" to use the words of the Irish bishops- through Leo, the question Is settled It is the duty of every good Romanist In whatever land he may dwell, to obey the voice of the pope as pretended vice eerent of God, In preference to the commands of earthly rulers. The oath embodied In the profession of faith does not differ greatly in the material point of allegiance from that taken in the Mormen Endowment House, which the courts have recently decided renders those who take It Incapable of natural Izatlon. r nere It Is, as decided by the Romish council at Baltimore, in 1835: "I acknowledge the holy Catholic and .apostolic Roman church as the mother and mistress of all churches; and I pic dge and swear true obedience to the Roman pontiff, vicar of Jesus Christ and successor of the blessed Peter, prince of the apostles." Acta et Decreta t'oncilii Laltimorensis 111., page 53, Baltimore, 1880.) There is nothing reserved; no excep tion Is made of allegiance to the gov ernment under which the person who has taken this oath may live, and in the wide field of conflicting sovereignty the duty to obey the pope is imperative and absolute over the duty to obey the laws. This doctrine of supreme juris diction over 'all earthly powers and laws Is a doctrine the papal church in America has always taught as It holds: "Tho state to be only an Inferior court, receiving Its authority from the church, and liable to have Its decrees reversed on appeal, (Browm on's Essays, p. 282), and that, In the case of conflict ing laws between the two powers, the laws of the church must prevail over the state. While the state has rights, she has them only In virtue and by per mission of the superior authority, and that authority can only be expressed through the cnurch." Catholic World, page 43!t, July, 1870. This U tho doctrine taught In the pope's syllabus of 1804 j and In the pas toral letter issued by the Second Na tlonal council of the Roman Catholic church, held at Baltimore in 1800, we are told that, "In prescribing anything contrary to the Divine law" (as interpreted by the pope) "the civil power transcends Its authority, and has no claim on the obedience of the citizen," as the civil power is never absolute or independent, but tubjeel to the church. On page 278 of a book prepared for the use of the Roman Catholic colleges and schools, by the Rev. F. X. Schouppe of the Society of the Jesuits, and bear ing the Imprimatur of Cardinal Man ning, we are told that 'The civil laws are binding on the conscience only so long as they are con formable to the righfc of the Catholic church." And on page 279 that "Human laws are susceptible of dis pensation. The power to dispense be longs to the sovereign pontiff." This is plain language. It cannot be misunderstood. Civil laws are not binding when they conflict with the decrees of the pope. Thus the Catholic World of August, 1808, says that the pope, "As the head and mouthpiece of the Catholic church, administers its dls cipllne and issues orders to which every Catholic under pain of sin must yield obedience." Is it possible, it may be asked, that the Roman Catholic clergy and laity realize the full extent of what is in volved in these principles as laid down by the infallible head of their church? It is to be hoped that they do not; but that their leaders do is unquestioned. Bishop Gllmour, in his lenten pastoral of March, 1873. said: "Nationalities must be subordinate to religion, and we must learn that we are Catholics first and citizens next. God is above man, and the church above the state." The Catholic World, for August, 1S71, one of the ablest and most Influential of ltoman Catholic journals in this coua try, boldly affirms: "Every individual must receive his faith and laws from the church in which he Is a member by baptism, with unquestioning submission and obedience of the Intellect and will: we have no right to ask reasons of the church (the pope) any more than of Almighty God a a preliminary to submission." Again, read the following In the light of the encyclical: A Catholic must not only believe what the church now proposes to his belief, but be ready to believe whatever she may hereafter propose: be must therefore be ready to give up any or all of his prevlou opinions as soon as tbey are condemned and proscribed by com petent authority." Tbe same journal very tersely and very clearly defines Its position, ai fol low: "We are purely and simply Catholic, and profess an uoreacrved allegiance to the church, which takes precedence of, and gives rule to, our allegiance to the state." This sort of loyalty is scarcely what tbe enthusiastic American looks for, Cardinal Manning, in Donahue's Mag azine ol December, 1888, says: "It is an obligation to obey the civil ruler; but if the civil ruler shall make a law hostile to faith (Rome) we must then be Catholics first, and citizens afterwards." In view of such declarations and. teachings, we ask, Can a good Roman ist be at -the same time a loyal Amerl can citizen? Many Romanists, no doubt, mean to be loyal citizens of the republic, and honestly think they are; yea, we are quite willing to believe that the great body of them have no wish to Interfere with the liberties and Institutions of America, and that if called upon to choose between serving our government and the power at Rome, think they would abjure Rome. But it must be remembered that they belong to a sys tem in which free agency is Impossible As we have seen, the Vatican claims absolute and supremo authority in all things, civil as well as spiritual, and every member of that church is bound to render to the pontiff absolute and unquestioning obedience. This being true, is it not quite certain that what ever his private or personal opinions and feelings may be as an American citizen, he must support the church as against the state? Yea, this position Is acknowledged not only by the Ro man hierarchy in this country, but by the representative Roman Catholic laymen in congress assembled at Balti more a few weeks ago, who quickly re sponded to the summons which Arch bishop Ireland gave when confronting the seething mass, he with fiery em phasis, exclaimed: "Go to your homes with the enthusl asm that you have here; spread it In every state In the union, and say there Is a new departure among Catholics in the United States. Tell then there Is a new mission open for laymen. The long expected day has come when Cath' olic bishop, priests and laymen rise up and say, Henceforth we will act as one man in accordance with our religion." The response to this call was given by that large representative body, in these words, to be found in the last paragraph of tlnlr platform: "We demand In the name of human Ity and justice, that this freedom (of the holy see) be scrupulously respected by all secular governments. We pro test against the assumption by any such government of a right to affect the In terests or control the actions ol our holy father by any form of legislation, or other public act to which his full ap probation has not been previously given, and we pledge Leo XIII.. the worthy pontiff to whose hands Al mighty God has committed the helm of Peter's bark amid the tempests of this stormy age, the loyal sympathy and unstinted aid of all his spiritual children in vindicating that perfect liberty which he justly claims as his sscred and inalienable right." For less treasonable utterances, men during the recent war, were sent to Fort Lafayette or fled the country Now, what are we going to do about it? In view of this un-American and treasonable declaration, and the fur ther declaration that "In performing their duties as citi zens, electors ana public onicers, llo- manists are always, and under all clr cumstances, to act simply as Catholics.' (See Catholic World, July, 1870.) We have no hesitation In affirming that tbe oath of allegiance to our gov ernment taken by Romanists and by which they have obtained the rights of the ballot, citizenship and office amounts to nothing if they are good Romanists and has no binding obliga tion where the interests of the church or the pontiff require it to be disre garded. Peter having thus spoken, and the position of Romanists in this country being clearly established, what is to be done? If the American people do not propose to surrender to the papal church their sovereignty, their honor and their rights, and undo what their fathers secured through the sacrifices of the revolution, then something will have to be done, and that speedily. We do not hesitate to say as a measure fo the nation s sell-protection, ithat no man who confesses primal allegiance to the pontiff in civil affairs, should be al lowed to participate as a citizen in either holding an office or casting a ballot. The Lmted States supreme court has decided that the law of one of our states, disfranchising Mormons, if con stitutlonal, on the theory that the man who takes the oath the Mormons are required to take, cannot be a good citi zen. Why should not this principle be pplled to those who confess allegiance to the papal hierarchy? How much longer will this flagrant violation of citizenship be permitted in America? Is it not high time for the nation to decide which is supreme, the church or the state to which authority citizen owe allegiance? Qow long would the nation allow one- eighth of her population to enjoy all the rights and privileges of American citizenship, while owning allegiance to any other foreign power, say Austria or Kutsia.' by permit this to be dune with those who own allegiance to the pontiff at Rome? ' Why should the privileges of citizenship be extended to men who not only do not uphold Amer ican Institutions, but who endeavor to drive those who uphold them awav from such allegiance through fear of eternal damnation? Romanism elevaVs the church above tbe state, and demands that the first allegiance of the citizen shall be to the church, and claims the prerogative of deciding what laws of the state shall be obeyed, and what laws disobeyed. Can any person who is loyal to Romanism be true t) ltcpumicamsm.' Can a Koman 1st be a good citizen of America? What is the duty or the government to those who, at the bidding of an alien power, are grossly misrepresenting and maligning the nation s most cherished and valued institutions the public schools and pursuing a policy towards them that Is expected to cripple them If not to destroy them, and who owe tbelr first allegiance to the pope? Let there be requirea of men ap pointed or chosen to fill offices of trust and power an oath of allegiance to the government as sti-ong as can be framed, permitting of no mental reservation. The constitution of Massachusetts, up till 1821, required the governor, lieutenant-governor, councillors, senators, representatives, as also every person appointed or commissioned to any ju dicial, executive, military, or other offices of the government, before enter ing on the discharge of the business qi his place or office, to take and subscribe the following declaration and oaths, or affirmations, viz.: "I, A. B., do truly and sincerely ac knowledge, profess, testify, and declare, that the commonwealth of Massachus etts is and of right ought to be, a free, sovereign, and independent state; and I do swear that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the said common wealth; and that I will defend the same against traitorous conspiracies and all hostile attempts whatsoever; and that l do renounce and abjure all allegiance, subjection, and obedience to the king, queen, or government of Great Britain as the case may be) and every other foreign power whatsoever; and that no foreign prince, person, prelate, state, or potentate, hath, or ought to have, any jurisdiction, superiority, pre-emin ence, authority, dispensing or other power, in any matter, civil, ecclesiasti cal, or spiritual, within this common wealth, except the authority and power which is or may be vested by their con stituents in the congress of the United States; wd I do further testify and de clare, that no man or body of men hath or can have any right to absolve or discharge me from the obligation of this oath, declaratian or affirmation: and that I do make this acknowledg ment, profession, testimony, declara tion, denial, renumlation, and abjura tion, heartily and truly, according to the common meaning and acceptation of the foregoing words, without any equ'vocation, mental evasion, or secret reservation whatsoever. So help me, God." 'See Chap. VI., Article I.) In 18-1 the Sixth amendment was adopted, requiring that instead of the foregoing oath of allegiance, the fol lowing only Bhould be taken: "1, A. H., do solemnly swear that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the commonwealth of Massachusetts, and will support the constitution there of. So help me, God." Is it not high time to return to "the faith of the fathers," and require the enactment In every Btate, and by some such statutes as the former? Let Romanists who would bfcorne citizens of the United States, be re quired, not only to take the oath of al legiance to the government, but to take an oath also renouncing all primal al legiance to the pope. This Is not a question of religious intolerance, nor is it one or antagonism to foreigners who are willing to homologate with us In accordance with tbe spirit of our Insti tutions, we would not cut down bv a single span the splendid proportions of national ireeaom; we would not abridge the liberty of party, sect or individual. But this is a question of self-protection and se f-preservation, and the law of self-preservation is supreme in all social and political organizations. We would guard and preserve our liberty from the hands of fate and the assaults of foes. Romanism is a political system. It Is a political power; as a political power it must be met, as a political force it must be treated when viewed in its re lation to our institutions. It does not make any difiVence whether the po litical power that assails our Institu tions is on the shores of the Baltic, on the shores of the British Channel, or on the shores of the Tiber, it must be met. We can have no divided citizen ship. No man should be allowed to participate In the political affairs of this country who Is the subject or ally of a loreign power that is at war with our national institutions. Noballot for the man who takes his politics from the Vatican. As the state assumes not to control the faith of the citizen, she will not per mit the church to control the politics of the citizen. Employers are prohibited under heavy penalties from influencing the votes of employees; prevent by penalties as heavy, ecclesiastics from influencing the votes of their parish loners, Any corporate vote, be it that of a church or railway company, is a men ace to a free sUte, because it is an m perium in imperio. In the face of these most explicitly avowed claims of the papal hierarchy as iterated and reiterated by popes, councils and bishops, who doubts that Romanism as a political system occupies the position of a deadly foe to all Ameri can Institutions, and that Its Intriguing interference with politics is a thousand times more perilous than the ships and armaments of other enemies to Ameri can liberties? If so, what are voupointr to do about it? v o o