Catholicism and Americanism by L. L. Caviness

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Sep 18, 1913

Catholicism and Americanism

By L. L. Caviness

L. L. CAVINESS

In Archbishop Ireland’s address at the Catholic Federation on “Catholicism and Americanism,” printed in the Catholic Standard and Times, is this interesting paragraph:—

“Church and state cover separate and distinct zones of thought and action; the church busies itself with the spiritual, the state with the temporal. The church and the state are built for different purposes,—the church for heaven, the state for earth. The line of demarcation between the two jurisdictions was traced by the unerring finger of him who is the Master of both; the law of God is, ‘Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.’”

After quoting Pope Leo XIII to the same effect, the archbishop continues:—

“The position of the Catholic Church, consequently of Catholics, toward the nation or state, is defined in clearest terms by the highest authority of the church. What is to be feared from the Catholic Church? To priest, to bishop, or to Pope, who—I am willing to consider the hypothesis—should attempt to

rule in matters civil and political, to influence the citizen beyond the range of their own jurisdiction, that of the things of God, the answer is quickly made: Back to your own sphere of rights and duties; back to the things of God!”

We are led to query why the Catholic press rejoices to print such news as this, which is taken from America (August 30):—

“Some time ago the anticlericals of Brazil, in imitation of their congeners in Europe, succeeded in having all the crucifixes removed from the courts. Now there is a universal protest against the outrage, and Sao Paulo has already brought back the sacred emblem. So also has San Salvador. The archbishop and the governor took part in the ceremony which marked the restoration in San Salvador.”

Does Archbishop Ireland forget that Leo XIII also said in his encyclical letter Longinque oceani, Jan. 6, 1895:—

“The church amongst you, unopposed by the Constitution and government of your nation, fettered by no hostile legislation, protected against violence by the common laws and the impartiality of the tribunals, is free to live and act without hindrance. Yet, though all this is true, it would be very erroneous to draw the conclusion that in America is to be sought the type of the most desirable status of the church, or that it would be universally lawful or expedient for state and church to be, as in America, dissevered and divorced. . . . She [the church] would bring forth more abundant fruits if, in addition to liberty, she enjoyed the favor of the laws and the patronage of the public authority.”

The archbishop goes on to speak of our republican form of government:—

“America is a republic; the spirit, the form of government is democracy,—the government of the people, by the people, for the people. Is there not here, it is asked, at least a touch of conflict between my religious faith and my civil and political faith? I tread upon easy ground, so plain are the teachings of the Catholic Church in favor of the rights of the people in matters of civil and political government. . . . In America the government is the republic—the government of the people, by the people, for the people. With you, fellow Catholics, with you, fellow Americans, I salute the republic. I thank God that the people of America are capable of possessing a government of this form. The republic—it is the fullest recognition of human dignity and human rights, the fullest grant of personal freedom, that due respect for the rights of others and the welfare of the social organism may allow.”

Though the archbishop quotes Pope Leo XIII, he does not quote the following, which occurs in that Pope’s encyclical on Christian constitution of states:—

“The sovereignty of the people . . . is held to reside in the multitude; which is doubtless a doctrine exceedingly well calculated to flatter and inflame many passions, but which lacks all reasonable proof, and all power of insuring public safety and preserving order. . . . The opinion prevails that princes are nothing more than delegates chosen to carry out the will of the people; whence it necessarily follows that all things are as changeable as the will of the people, so that risk of public disturbance is ever hanging over our heads.”

Evidently the Pope would not care to live in a republic. It is also very clear that the teachings of the Catholic Church are un-American in two so fundamental matters as its separation of church and state and its form of government.