The Catholic bulletin. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1911-1995, 1912-06-08

own specific spiritual sphere, outside
the special province appertaining to
it as a Church-claims supreme au-
thority over men and nations?" It's
marriage laws regard solely its inter
nal life and rule. To the State it
leaves the legal right to say at it's
will to what marriages it accords legal
recognition and legal rights. The
Catholic Church speaks exclusively to
the consciences of it's own members
that and nothing more. To Caesar the
things of Caesar: to the Church the
things of the Church.
But, it may be asked, should not the
Catholic Church, even in its own laws,
even in its appeal to the conscience
of it's members, even in it's marriage
rulings, adapt itself to the laws of
Caesar-holding itself subject in it's
intimate life to the will of Caesar,
changing as Caesar changes, condemn
ing or approving as Caesar condemns
or approves. Methodism may do this,
| if it so wishes. The Catholic Church
cannot: else it repudiates it's claim to
be the Church of Christ. Without quot
| ing other instances in the teaching of
Christ, I refer to His ruling with re-
gard to the indissolubility of the mar
riage contract. Caesar had decreed
that marriage was dissoluble for
little or no cause. Christ, having
His own Kingdom in mind, made the
proclamation: What, therefore, God
hath Joined together, let no man put
asunder. ...... .Whosoever shall put
away his wife for another committeth
adultery against her. And if the wife
put away her husband and be married
to another, she committeth adultery"
Christ in matters of His own Kingdom
rules irrespectively of Caesar. The
Catholic Church does today as Christ
did nineteen hundred years ago.
Mixed Marriages.
Again the Conference: when in
the name of God it (the Catholic
church, grants dispensations for the
marriage of a Catholic with a Prot
estant on condition that the offspring
be trained in the Roman Catholic
faith, it assumes to legalize in return
for a stipulated advantage to itself
what it has on sacred grounds forbid
den, and creates a grave doubt as to
the sincerity of it's concern for the
sacredness of the marriage relation"
So far as those words imply that the
Catholic Church, in granting dispense
tons for mixed marriages, has in
mind, in any shape or form, an ad-
vantage to itself arising from such
marriages, or in any shape or form
considers such marriages to be an
advantage to itself, they are absolute
ly untrue, and entitle the speaker to
be without further ado candidate
for Methodist club, to be named
after a certain other club famed UNI
der late presidency in political cir
Giles. The Catholic Church, undoubt-
eddy, exacts as a condition for it's
tolerance of mixed marriage the
promise that the offspring shall be
brought up in the Catholic faith. But
to the granting of the dispensation:
even when this promise is given, the
Catholic Church depreciates the mixed
marriage and to the last moment does
what is possible to prevent it from
taking place. The sole inducement
to the granting of a dispensation
apart from certain well-marked con-
siderations of persons or families, is
the fear, in case of a refusal, of a
greater evil-for instance the attempt
ed ratification of the marriage out
side the ministry of the Church, and
the peril of subsequent total per-
version of the Catholic party.
Let the Methodist Conference make
against the Catholic Church charge
after charge: it is entitled to do SO.
But for goodness sake, let there be in
the charge some scintilla of truth.