The record-union., 1894-11-27

himself from his parish aS the srcbbtSbon
o%sln aDoeieeo "a himself from his diocese 1t is no
80 GAouse 10 say that the Archbishop was work
ing in the interest of good Government. Every
Ut1ieL @ cleTlcal aspirant to political distinction
"ouio say the same.
1here is significance in these words
OF the irate Bishop that will escape the
auentlon of no thoughtful person. Nc
Quade would not have been heard from
had Archbishop Ireland given aid to the
radical Catholic party, represented by
Arch bishop Corrigan, which now makes
no concealment that its demand is for aid
70 church schools from public moneys.
Further on the Bishop says in his re-
markable address
During the last session of the New York
Legislature Archbishop Ireland of far-of
Minnesota busted himself writing letters TO
Aeadlng Repubilcan mem erS III favor OF the
candidacy OF Rev Mr.. Malone tor the position
/ OF Regent OF The university. 1t was noneof the
Archblshop's business 10 meddle with what
! dld not legitlmately concern HIM, but then he
knew the Archbishop of New YORK and his
! Suffagans desired the election OF O candidate
/ able and willing to protect the best interests
| OF Catholic schools and academies coming
under the control OF the Regents. They knew
| that priest VINO had declared that if he
could he would wipe out every parochial
scnool, and that the time has come TOR the
/ State to turn down the church in money mat
! tiers, was no fit representative OF the Catholic
! BODY. The priests language was forcible,
! though not elegant. Its sentiment was un-
American, It's spirit smacked OF persecution
! ana treason 10 the church, and but for its
! Stiffness and impotency would have been dan
! gerouS. Yet Archbishop Ireland, knowing OF
! these utterances of Rev. Mr.. Malone, and OF
ms publicly expressed contempt for the
! bishop, wrote letters private and confideu-
Ii1i, 10 members OF the Republican Legisla-
Uure IN favor of his candidate as against any
| one more acceptable to the Bishops OF this
/ State.
Here there is complete confession that
| to oppose the division of school funds
among churches, or at least to favor a
State policy that will turn down the
| ton or faith-in money matters" is
reckoned by the radical party in the
| Catholic Church as treason to the church.
We are very glad that these priests
have got at it in the open. American in
stitutions will be safe from ecclesiastical
assault or plotting when the priest leaves
the vestry and speaks his mind on these
matters in the forum of daylight and
publicity. They should be industriously
encouraged to such policy. 1t is better
for the church and safer for the State
On the heels of this Ducey Corrigan-
Northumberland ruction, comes Law
renee P. Mingey, Republican and a
Catholic, and addresses sharp letter to
Archbishop Corrigan, charging his defeat
for the Assembly from the Eighteenth
New York District to the action of the
priests of the church in that district, who
are under the control and direction of the
Archbishop, says Mingey. He alleges
that three days before the election his
Tammany opponent boasted that Min
gey's fate was sealed, and that his defeat
would be accomplished by the church.
Accordingly, the day before election, in
the Church of the Sacred Heart, in the
district in which Mingey was candidate,
the priests at each mass warned their par
ishioners to vote the straight Democratic
ticket, and to vote against any man run
ming on ticket with Republican; that
on the day of the election the Tammany
bosses boasted that their threat had been
made good. and that the church had ''done
for'' Mr.. Mingey.
Now, says this defeated candidate, in
effect, himself communicant of the
church that worked his defeat: what
have you to say to this, Arch bishop Cor
rigan? If, as you say, you did not affil-
! late with Tammany; if. as you say, your
robes would be soiled by touch with
| Tammany, why were your priests per-
mitted TO make the assault they did upon
me, and in a manner that amounted to
| command, so far as priest may assume
to command his parishioner to do or not
to do?'
Let these contentious 60 on. We enjoy
them, because we are convinced that out
of them the truth will come, and in their
stimulation is assurance that dangerous
friction between church and State will be
avoided. There is no danger. we repeat,
in open debate and open political
battling to either church or State
! 1t is when the priest on the one hand and
| the political boss on the other plot and
plan political schemes in secresy that hu-
man liberty may be said to be endar-
gered.
I