Catholic Federation Seeks Political Influence in United States
By L. A. S.
THE Catholic Church in politics,—not secretly so, while professedly keeping aloof from it, but openly and avowedly in politics for Catholic ends,—this is the point that has now been reached in the history of the Roman Catholic Church in the United States. There is to be a Catholic political federation, taking in all Catholic societies in general. It will not put a separate ticket in the field—just yet, but will “advise” the other parties in their choice of candidates, reminding each of these parties that the Catholic Church holds the balance of power in State and national elections. Here is the account from which we gather these statements. We take it from the Chicago Tribune of May 14:— AURORA, ILL., May 13.—[Special.]—Steps were taken to-day by the convention of the Federation of Catholic Societies toward the organization of a “powerful combination to attend to national and State politics.” The object of the combination is to prevent legislation derogatory to the influence of the institutions of the Catholic Church and the enactment of measures by the national or State governments calculated to limit the liberties granted under the Constitution. It is proposed to effect this “combination” through the unification of the Catholic societies of all nationalities on a political basis. The resolutions, which were introduced by Father Hagan, of Belleville, instruct the chairman of the vigilance committee, Theodore B. Thiele, to place himself in communication with the various Catholic societies all over the United States with a view to effecting the proposed organization in the early future. As the best means to accomplish this end, the resolutions recommend the union of the chairmen of the vigilance committees of the various State organizations into an executive committee, which shall be vested with unlimited powers. The proposed political organization will not nominate tickets, but will advise the platform makers what planks are agreeable or offensive to Catholics. It was declared in the convention that such a powerful defensive and offensive federation could bring success or defeat to either party. It is anticipated that before the next national election the reins of government will be controlled by the federation. It was not denied by some of the leaders that if satisfaction could be obtained from neither party, eventually a Catholic national party would nominate a presidential ticket. And now how long will it be before the Protestant churches of the country will follow suit? SHALL the Jews of this country cease the observance of Saturday, and substitute in its place the observance of Sunday, in harmony with the custom of the Christian churches? This would be a startling innovation upon the time-honored religion of the Jews; yet the question is one that was seriously considered at the Jewish Central Conference of American Rabbis, recently in session at New Orleans. The reason for advocating the change was that the observance of the Sabbath had almost ceased among the male Jews, the congregations on the seventh day being composed almost wholly of women and children. The inconvenience of opposing the general custom of first-day observance, involving as it does considerable financial loss, has led the Jewish tradesman to look upon the keeping of the seventh day as a practice attended with almost insuperable difficulty. That very many Jewish tradesmen already sacrifice the Sabbath in preference to their Saturday trade, is well known by all, including the rabbis; hence the proposed innovation would involve, in very many cases at least, a change in profession rather than a change in practice. Religious sentiment exerted no influence whatever, what religious sentiment was shown in the conference touching this question being against the change, on the ground that the observance of Sunday might be construed as a token of Jewish allegiance to Christ. The change to first-day observance, if made, will be for convenience purely. Should this change be made and become universal among the Jews, what, we might inquire, will become of the “Jewish sabbath”? Evidently there would then be no longer any foundation for this pet expression of those who oppose the keeping of the seventh day. Christian seventh-day keepers could no longer be stigmatized as Jewish, since the similarity will then be on the side of those adhering to the first-day institution. Let the churches of this country take note that Christian Sabbath keepers have no thought of raising the question whether it may not be best to go over to Sunday observance, to save trouble, by siding with the majority. If they were Jewish, as their opponents represent, this is just what they would be now proposing to do. But because they are Christians, they have no thought of doing such a thing. They have no thought of sacrificing the Sabbath for any worldly consideration whatever. The really Jewish tendency to-day, as now demonstrated, is to observe the day which is most popular and convenient, which is the first day of the week. It is “Jewish” to be influenced more by popular custom, convenience, and financial gain than by the literal words of Jehovah’s law. Allegiance to the seventh day is not Jewish. L. A. S.