HON. REVERDY JOHNSON ON CATHOLIC CITIZENS.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume III, Issue 135, 3 December 1875, Page 14

HON. REVERDY JOHNSON ON CATHOLIC CITIZENS.

The Hon. Reverdy Johnson presided at the Democratic Conservative Macs Meeting held in Baltimore on the 15th inst., and in his address made strong allusion to the existence of the new Knownothing order in Maryland, which he dismissed by saying, " There is an innate strength in a virtuous purpose that in the end proves too much for "the corrupt trickster." Referring to the nomination of Mr. John Lee Can-oil' for Governor of Maryland, Mr. Johnson said : — "The particular objection to Mr. Carroll is, that he is a Catholic. " His fitness for the office of Governor, unless this makes him unfit, no one questions or can question. His "blood, like his faith, descends from one of the immortal signers of the Declaration of Independence, who was from the first to the last universally respected and esteemed, and who died revered and beloved by the good of every religious denomination. No man was so stupid or intolerant as to object to him on account of his faith. If, when he was attaching his name to the great charter of American liberty, any member of the body had objected to his right to do so, because he was a Catholic, the objection -would have been treated with scorn and detestation. No such objection was interposed, and his nnion with the other of those great and pure men, was receired with joy and approval, as tending to strengthen the great cause on which they had embarked. Is it nofc marvellous, that in this age of the world, and particularly in this country, such an objection should be countenanced by any sane man ? I say especially in this country, because our ancestors were so impressed with the duty and necessity of not interfering politically with any man on account of his religious faith, that in one of the first amendments to the Constitution, that were coeval with it, they provided that " Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. 5 And it is believed that a like provision is contained in every State Constitution. " But have we had no Marylander besides Charles Carroll of Carrollton, whose life, character, and services speak aloud against this intolerance ? Yes, we have had one in the person of the late Chief Justice, Roger B. Taney. His whole career, professional, legislative, executive, and judicial, proves how gorss would be the wrong done the ceuntro if we acted upon any such unconstitutional and wicked folly. " But what is the religious faith whose followers some would consign to political servitude ? It is the religion of Jesus. " Every Roman Catholic believes in it as firmly as any one belonging to other religious sects. They have a different mode of worship. So hare other sects. But the essentials of the faith are oommon to all. They believe in the Divinity of Jesus, in the Trinity and in the Atonement. What is the most reasonable mode of worship men may and do differ about, but all Christians believe ih these essentials of the faith. Have Catholics ever failed to be good citizens ? All the duties of life, public and private, they discharge as fully as all other Christians. During the war of our Revolution and the one of 1812 with England, and that of 1846 with Mexico, they hazarded life and fortune to maintain the principles which produced the first, and to maintain the rights of our Government in the two last. They stood shoulder to shoulder with Protestants on every battle field, which was often literally mired with their common blood. " This exclusion from political rights for many long years prevailed in England to her dishonor and disgrace. It continued for n long time in consequence of the insane obstinacy of Georo-e 111. But better counsels now prevail. The enlightened men of the present day in that country, have seen the injustice of such an exclusion, and have removed the shackles which enforced it. One of these statesmen, however, a gentleman of rare ability and consummate scholarship, the Right Honorable W. E. Gladstone, is waginoa if ar of pamphlets vfith Roman Catholic Bishop*, which is calculated to revive to some extent the political intolerance of the past. I have no doubt that he thinks he is doing what will promote the interests of his country and secure its safety. His doctrine is that the civil and political allegiance of the Catholic is due first to the Pope rather than to the government tinder which he resides and is protected. This, in my judgment, is a gross error as applied to the present century. There may be found in some ef the publications issued from the Vatican, passages which, taken literally by themselves, will sanction the view of Mr. Gladstone, but the history of England pi-ores that the Catholic subjects of the crown have never failed, in peace or in war, to assert and maintain the rights and honor of England. They constituted a considerable portion of the army with which Wellington succeeded in overcoming Napoleon, and were ever in the van of those who achieved the glorious victories up to the crowning one of Waterloo. And thjs these Catholics did to preserve Protestant England against Catholic France, nine-tenths of whose people were Catholics. But if Mr. Gladstone is right, that Catholics sincerely believe that their paramount civil allegiance is to the government of Rome, he ought to maintain the necessity of resorting to the measures, which were the disgrace of England for so many years, their exclusion from all political plac«. For holding such an allegiance makes them aliens, and like other aliens they should not be suffered to participate in the government of England. That this is the seqxience of his doctrine no logician can doubt, and Mr. Gladstone is a logician of the highest cast. And yet, so far, he does not propose such an exclusion. "Considering all these things, I should think that the American, aware of them, when proposing to exclude the Catholic from political office because of his religion, would blush scarlet from very shame. But in addition to what 1 have said, every theological studcut knows that the truths of Christianity have nova- been more

ably maintained than by Catholic writers, nor have its beauties been more charmingly or effectively presented, to the human heart than by Catholic Chateaubriand in his ' Genius of Christianity." Christianity itself is at -war with all such intolerant doctrines. It has been well and truly said, that, 'by inculcating the precept of universal love of mankind, it raised the narrow spirit of patriotism to the extended f eeling of general philanthropy,' and ' laid the foundation for the peace of the world., through the doctrine of reconciliation of men with God and with each other.' The doctrine of the infallibility of the head of that Church, recently brought prominently before the public, is not a new doctrine, the whole meaning of it, as I understand it, is that the members of the Church assume as true the reb'gious doctrines pronounced from time to time by its governing head. Most of the other religious sects have forms of Church government, and take their doctrines from what they are declared to be by such governments. But there is nothing in this which shows a want of true Christianity, and then, too, how sadly weakened would be the glorious army of Christians, without the Eoman Catholics. They constitute a number far greater than that of all other sects combined. In conclusion, then, on this head, 1 hope for the honor of our State and the reputation of our people, that no citizen will fail to support Mr. Carroll, only i because of his religious faith.