The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1893-01-01
Ecclesiastical Liberty.

Father McGLYNN's restoration to the
full functions of a priest in the Catholic
church is one OF the topics of the times.
When he was suspended, and refused to
go to Rome in obedience to orders from
the Vatican, it was expected that he would
be unfrocked if not accommodated.
But time passed on and the turbulent
priest" remained insubordinate. He in
timated in very significant terms that he
knew too much OF certain affairs at Rome
to fear extreme measures in his case. And
now he goes back to his ecclesiastical
duties in full faith and fellowship.
There were two things on which Father
McGLYNN took direct issue with his SUI
perior officers in the priesthood. He pro-
claimed himself in favor of the education
of children in the public schools, when
they could not obtain it conveniently in
the parochial schools. And he insisted
upon his liberty to engage in political
affairs as a citizen according to his own
free choice. These were different from
the views of his Archbishop and led to his
''rebellious'' conduct and suspension.
The result has been his triumph in
both cases. His position on the educa-
tional question is not very different from
that which is assented to now by the Cath
Ole authorities, though there is yet some
difference of opinion among them on the
subject. His stand on the political ques-
ton is scarcely assailable, unless the
Catholic church undertakes to direct and
control it's members ands priesthood in
politics.
II the church does not assume the con-
troll which has been charged to it., then
all its members must be free from its die
tation in such affairs, absolutely and
without any pretense or double meaning.
If the church takes the ground that it has
the right to direct in politics it should
make the declaration fairly and without
concealment. In publicly proclaiming
that it does not interfere, it leaves all its
members Independent and cannot Justly
bring any one under censnre for exercis-
ing individual freedom.
But has priest consecrated to the
service of the church the right to engage
in political affairs at all? AS a priest, if
we understand the Catholic position,
correctly, he may not do so in
the United States, where church
and state are legally separate. He
must not use this priestly Office to in
duce or compel any one to act politically
in any special direction. But this does
not deprive him OF his rights as a citizen.
If he may not talk politics in private ca
pacity, then he may not vote, for the
same reason. Ii he may act as a citizen
at all in politics it must be as free citi-
zen in every sense OF the term. Father
McGLYNN has taken that position and he
seems to have maintained it with success.
1t cannot be denied, however, that there
is danger, when eminent ecclesiasts en-
gage in party controversies or become ac-
tive in any party cause, of the association
OF the sacerdotal with the political SO in
timately that they appear to be united as
one And when party zeal animates a
man, it is difficult to divest him of such
authority as his priestly Office clothes him
with, and either to others or to himself to
refrain from exercising it in efforts to for
ward the cause he advocates. For this
reason men high in ecclesiastical power
are considered out of their sphere when
engaged in party strife, and those who
respect them most shrink from the sight
when they appear in the role of partisan
gladiator. The church is supposed to oc-
cupy a higher plane than the political
aerna.
The American idea is to keep the church
and the state as distinct in their several
spheres as is possible with due regard to
the liberties of all. But though the Am
erican sentiment will not tolerate the
stroug grasp with which the church in
centuries past has held and controlled
political affairs, and viii resent any ap-