The Fremont weekly journal. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County, Ohio) 1867-1877, 1873-03-21

them Is therefore supreme, ana us
declarations must be received as the
claw Of God" from which there is
no appeal. Again, its creed says;
81 promise true obedience to the
Bishop Of Rome, successor Of Saint
Peter, Prince OF the Apostles, and
Vicar of Jesus Christ"
All Of which would only prove
the reverend genLlemau's question
true when applied to the denomina-
ton he represents. Hut it was not
in a religious but a political sense,
in which Bishop Gilmour made use
of the Objectionable sentence, and
hence drew out criticisms at which
he and his associates take nmbrage.
Rev. o'Calleghan may smooth over
its obnoxieus features by assuming
it to have meant "Christian FIRST and
Citizen next" but the Bishops ar
gument clothes it in political char
acter, and leaves it unchanged. 1t
would have been as Objectionable
had it read "Episcopalian, Presby-
terian, Methodist or any other first,
and citizens next" We give the
Bishops argument:
Resistance to law is the order Of
the day; revolution is triumphant;
and under the gnise of progress, in
fidelity and disobedience is the reh-
vion Of the hour. Liberty, which
now means license, disorder, robbery,
is in every ones mouth, while God
and truth are forgotten.
Under the specious plea of zeal
for education, unless We make bold
stand for our rights, we shall soon
see the child taken from the parent
and compulsory education inaugu-
rated. We must be
mp and doing, and shoulder to
shoulder mees the enemy. Never
was there time when Catholics
needed unity more, or when they had
q more dangerous enemy to meet;
dangerous because he comes as an
angel of light. = = x y There
must be less petty jealousness
amongst us, natiOnalities must be
made subordinate to religion, and
we must learn that we are Catholics
first, and citizens next. Catholicity
does not bring us in conflict with the
State, yet it teaches that God is above
man, and thee Church above the State.
At present we have
nothing to hope from the State. Yet,
we must not therefore cease to insist
upon ourrights, and if needs be, at
the polls demand them. We're Cath
olies alive and united on the school
question; were they to demand from
every man who asks their vote, a
pledge that he would vote for our
Just share of the school fund, legis-
lators would learn to respect the
Catholic vote, and give us our just
rights.
If this does not prove the political
character of the Bishops, "Catho-
lies first, citizens next" it must so
closely identify their religious and
political claims, as to render them
inseparable. And either in the one
case or the other it is equally objec-
tionablc to the American mind.
"Yet, if understand you rightly,
you seem to maintain that the law Of
the land must override every convic-
tion of religion and crush into sla-
very every sacred principle Ofcon7
science" 7ae odI
You certainly have strange
method of arriving at conclusions,
and can only have done SO by ignor-
ing the character of the argument,
and assuming it to have been directed
at the religious rather than the polit
ical character Of the pastoral. Hence
your argument is wasted.
yet it seems you would have US
obey the law Of men first, the law of
God next, and if there happened to
be conflict between both codes you
would obey man rather than Cody
the Apostle, ActS ", holds differ
ent opinion, and says we ought to
obey God rather than man. y
We presume the reverend gentle
man will not question the assertion
that the "Bible is the Law of God,"
although IS such it is not given to
the body Of his church, whose creed
asserts the right of the church to
determine, for the individual, the
sense in which it shall be received.
Let us take the Bible, therefore and
examine this matter, and see if we
can ascertain from it, what are its
requirements. Start, if you please,
with the fifth chapter of acts. Peter
and his associates had become OBJ
noxious to the high priest and the
sect of the Saducees (not the law,
good sir, and they put them in
prison; afterward they were brought
before the council, and the high
priest commanded they SHOULD not
teach in this name" Then the
Apostles answered "l0e ought to obey
God rather than men," And WhyS
Because they, the high priests, al
though powerful, were only men, and
did not represent the state. Again,
for a more important reason eve are
his witnesses of these things" and,
moreover, the command lay upon
them especially, "Go into all the
world and preach the gospel" This
then was not case such as the rev.
ercnd gentleman would apply to it
nor had il anything to do with the
Jurisdiction of the law, On the con-
trary, we have the law of the State
recognized, its power admitted, its
a63o;anov o1rtoliad and obadianea Tn