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
