The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1855-02-22
1.-THE DEFENCE OF ROME"
-, Pa, FEB. Is, 1855.
To the Editor THE National Era:

To the Editor of the National Era:
Your course with regard to the Ki16rs Moth
ing principles has pleased me very much until
within the last week or two. But is it necessa-
ry for you to take Rome your shoulders, IN
order to get rid of this secret society? Surely
it can't be policy to identify the Anti-Slavery
cause with the defence of Rome. Yet, have
you not done this in publishing Mr. Chambers
speech, and in giving it at least quasi en-
dorsement?
Do you not know that the church is Sfty fold
more ultra-montane now than she vas fifty
years ago? That, even in France, taere are
only some twenty-six Gallicans out O. nearly
ninety Bishops? That Chandlers speech cuts
the throat of all history? Yours, very aruly,
Our highly respected friend must have over
looked an essential fact In the discussion of
the principles and aims of Know Notbingism,
we had been met by the assertion that the
Catholic Church in this country is a political
body, owing and acknowledging allegiance to
the Pope in civil as well as spiritual affairs.
The truth of this being admitted, the clear,
practical inference is, that the members of that
church ought not only to be excluded nom Of
fee, but from citizenship; for if they ssknowl-
edge personal allegiance to the Pope, o foreign
Potentate, in civil affairs, they cannot 'e loyal
citizens of the United States.
This position was taken by several cores
pondents of the Era, and argued at lsagth in
our columns. We denied it, submitted the
| arguments which conducted us to INHERENT
| conclusion, and really felt pleased, aen Mr..
Chandler made his speech, at presetting to
our readers what might be considered.a semi
| official statement of the position of the Cath
Ollie Church in this country in relatio., to the
point in discussion. That speech contain
ed general "defence of Rome ",-no de-
fence of the usages, ceremonials or dogmas OF
Catholicism-no defence of its general polity
1t was confined chiefly to an examination of
the charge everywhere made, by new and
powerful Political Party, that the Catholic
Church is political body, and owes sid owns
paramount allegiance to foreign Pstentate
We were glad to see such an array of evidence
presented by an American Catholic % repel
this charge, and felt that it was due to our fell
lowcitizens of that body, to the intelligent cor
respondents who had urged this accusation in
the columns of the Era, to our readers gener-
ally, and to the cause of Religious Liberty and
Liberality, to give it place in our paper. Be-
cause we recognise the right Of class of reli-
gionists, whose loyalty is impeached to vindi-
cate themselves in our columns, do we there
fore become the apologists or endorsers of their
faith? Do we undertake the defence of
Rome" because we permit Rome II deny a
certain accusation which she processes - believe
false?
We never form an opinion upon IL parte
statements, nor do we wish our reade,s to do
SO. Hear both sides-then Judge It is of
the essence of injustice and despotsm t. accuse
man, and reject his defence Popular clamor
and sectarian intolerance have no tersors for
us. There was time, when the term, Abo-
litionism, was so odious, that the editor who
gave place to an Aboltionist to correct mis-:
statement, or repel an injurious attack, was
denounced as sympathizer, and threatened
with loss of patronage. Not to believe that
Abotionists were incendiaries, was, "a itself,
presumptive evidence of Abolitionism.,
AS an Abolitonst, we have gone through
the whole struggle for the Freedom of Discus
sion. We have been mobbed; we ave lost
divers presses; We have been punished by foes
and friends. 1t is too late to call us an ac-
count for maintaining, in all their full ess, the
rights of Discussion. We have curse YES suf
fered too often, from intolerance and ,>roscrp-
tion too often been denied the right OF defend
ing ourselves against what we regarded as cruel
accusations, to practice similar intolers hce and
prescription towards any class of men, no mat
ter what their offences, real or supposed.
For one, we rejoice to hear the Catholics
of this country so generally and empkaticaly
repudiating the idea of allegiance to The Pope
in civil affairs. Should the Pope eve: claim
their allegiance, and attempt to absolte them
from their obligations as citizens of the United
States, there will be very short method Of
dealing with the question. The Cath'aic, ac-
cepting and recognising sech absolutior, would
be a traitor, and should be dealt with life other
traitors; and the Pope, an enemy, and should
be dealt with like other enemies.
A little common sense, not a jot or title of
Know Nothingism, is needed for the protection
of our liberties. AS to the rest, Protes antism
should blush to ask for other instrume taities
against Catholicism than such as are Fl 'nished
from the armory of its Faith. 1t has Il E Bible
and Common Sense; and it, with these, il cannot
prevail, God help us-we need anott sr Ret.
orp,at;on