The morning star and Catholic messenger. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1868-1881, 1874-06-28
That Troublesome Doctrine.

That Troublesome Doctrine
The Republican, in commenting on tn
splendid effort of Mr.. Semmes at the de
monstration of last Sunday evening, take
issue with him on some important points
but we must say that this is done in ton
much more tolerant and respectful, thai
has marked some of the articles of tha
paper in previous numbers. 1t finds faul
principally with the following passage:
But the Church has always maintained tina
if the civil power commands something wrong
| in itself, we are not bound to obey it nor are
we bound to obey the civil power in matters
not included within its domain.
The principle of the Independence of the
spiritual power, which the Church has always
maintained, has, by its existence at all times,
| served to remind men that there are limits to
the civil power, that there are things beyond
its province, cases in which n man may say, II
will not obey"
To this the Republican says:
If the courts decide that an act is legal,
which may not be in accord with the individual
standard of morality, the crime Of immortality
must be answered by the tribunal, it does not
attach to the individual who has agreed to
remit his doubts of legality to an agreed tri-
In such a case. and in all contestable cases, it
is the duty of the American citizen to obey
Tue law aS eApOunQeo ny Tue courts Oh Tue
last>resort. He can interplead no scruple of
conscience; still less can be file in arrest of
Judgment the rescript of any foreign authority.
The citizen m,ust obey the law which he has,
as citizen of q republic, promised to obey.
Thus, if the law says: "Thou shalt wor
ship Basl,', the law must be obeyed. If
the Courts say a divorced man may marry
again, he need have no scruple the sin is
upon the Courts.
The proposition simply puts the State in
the place of God. 1t says: No matter what
God has commanded, if the State commands
the contrary, you must obey the State.
Yet the Republican piques itself on it's Pro.
and We doubt not the honesty
of it's claim.
"But," says the Republican, " does not Mr..
Semmes perceive that these paragraphs leave
unsettled the question rho is to decide what
matters are included within the domain of the
civil power, and also what are the in
which q man may lawfully say, will not
obey"
And does not the Republican perceive
that there must be precisely tribunal to
decide these very points 2 Certainly the
Almighty would hardly give men positive
commands which they must obey at every
hazard, in obeying which they may be
brought in direct conflict with the laws of
the State, and yet leave them without any
means Of obtaining positive certainty as to
their actual duty under such moment Gus
circumstances. He would hardly leave
this higher law " to the caprice of every
dolt or fanatic.
But there comes in the Republicans dread
and horror of everything foreign. The
laws of morals are not the same in Italy
and the United States. French nature is
not human nature. Itsays:
This ecclesiastical adherence and allegiance
of o spiritual corporation in this country to q
supreme religious corporation in another is
something unusual, and we may state, SO far
as we now believe, wholly without example in
the United States 1t is q very troublesome
doctrine. 1t involves the difficulty of draw
ing the line where the political obligation of a
citizen to his own government ends and where
his paramount and spiritual obligation to an
other and o foreign domination begins. 1t is
one phase of this difficulty that has for many
months past agitated Germany.
Foreign again! Is Gods Church foreign
any where7 or must he perforce have a
separate Church for every separate nation
Would it be forbidden to him to organize
a universal, or Catholic, Church because
it's central power would have to be located
somewhere, and that somewhere would be
" foreign" to all other placesi 1t may be
a very troublesome doctrine to those who
do not want to obey God and prefer giving
their allegiance to the World, but Pro-
testant by birth " ought TO know that it is
said "Give unto Caesar that which is
Caesars and unto God that which is Gods"
Now who shall decide where the line of
separation is drawnf Shall it be Cesar,
or God7 CAESARS people, or God g people Z