TEST-OATH
538
TEST-OATH
latter as more suitable for our day. There can be
no really passive virtue. All virtue implies power
and action, and every virtue is suitable at all times. Christ, meek and humble of heart or obedient unto death, is a model in every age, and the men who have imitated Him in these virtues have been powerful helps to religion and the State. Fourthly, the vows taken in religious orders must not be considered as narrowing the limits of true hberty, or as of httle use for human society or for Christian perfection. This view is not in accord with the usage and doctrine of the Church. To assume the obligations of the coun- sels, in addition to those of the commandments, is not a sign of weak-mindedness, nor unprofitable, nor hurtful, nor injurious to liberty; rather it is a way to the fuller hberty by which Christ has set us free. The history of the Church, particularly in the United States, is a testimony to the alacrity and success with which the religious orders work ever>T\-here, by preaching, teaching, and by good example. Whether in active ministration, or in contemplative seclusion, they all merit well of human society, and their prayer propitiates the majesty of God. And the congregations that do not take vows are not to magnify their manner of hfe above that of the reUgious orders. Finally, as for methods of dealing with those who are not Catholics, it is not prudent to neglect any method which has proved useful in the past. Should the proper authority approve of other methods such as, for instance, preaching, not in (he church, but in any private or proper place, or by amicable conferences rather than by disputations, let this be done, provided that the men devoted to this task be men of tried knowledge and virtue.
The Letter concludes with a brief exhortation for unity, as against a spirit that would tend towards developing a national Church. The term American- ism is approved as applying to the characteristic quahties which reflect honour on the American people, or to the conditions of their commonwealths, and to the laws and customs prevaihng in them; but as applied to the opinions above enumerated it would be repudiated and condemned by the Bishops of America. "If by that name be designated the char- acteristic quahties which reflect honour on the people of America, just as other nations have what is special to them; or, if it implies the condition of your com- monwealths, or the laws and customs pre^•aihng in them, there is no reason why we should deem that it ought to be discarded. But if it is to be used not only to signify, but even to commend the above doctrines, there can be no doubt that our venerable brethren, the bishops of America, would be the first to repudiate and condemn it, as being especially unjust to them and to the entire nation as well. For it raises the suspicion that there are some among you who conceive and de- sire a Church in America different from that which is in the rest of the world."
This Letter put an end to a bitter controversy which had been agitated for nearly ten years, particularly in the Cathohc press. In expressing their adhesion to the Holy See and their unqualified acceptance of the teachings set forth in the Letter, the bishops of the United States made it clear that whatever departures from the same might have occurred in this cotmtry they had not been either widespread or systematic as they had been made to appear by the interpretation put upon the "Lifeof Father Hecker" in the prefaceto the French translat ion. (SeeHECKEn, Is.\ac TnoM.^.c;.)
Elliott, The Lift of Father Ilecker (New York. 1894), Fr. tr. Klein (Paris, 189S); Maioxen, Le Phe Ilecker, esl-il un sainlf (Rome and Paris, 1898); Delattre, Un Catholicismc Americain (Namur, 1898); Klein, Catholicismc Am^icain in Revue Fran- (aised'EdinbouTO (Sept.-Oct., 1897); Schell, Die neue Teit und der aUe Glaube; Coppinger, La PoUminuc FranQaiac sur la Vie du pire Hecker (Paris. 1898); Barrv. The French Life of Father Hecker in Catholic Times and Catholic Opinion (Liverpool, 9 Dec. 1898).
CoNDi; B. Fallen.
Test-Oath, Missouri. — In January, 1865, there
assembled in St. Louis, Missouri, a "Constitutional
Convention" composed of indi\'iduals, most of whom
were unknown outside of the locaUties in which they
claimed to reside. They had been chosen by a frac-
tion of the voters, as people of voting age were gen-
erally in either the Confederate or Federal army,
or in the guerrilla companies then abounding, or
were fugitives from their homes, in order to save their
lives. The "Constitution" made by this conven-
tion was put in force on July, 1S6.5, no one being al-
lowed to vote on it unless he first took the test oath
it provided. A reign of terror, accompanied by
arson, robbery, and murder, in many parts of the
state followed. Certain classes of persons, including
bishops, priests, or other clergj-men "of any religious
persuasion, sect or denomination", and teachers in
any educational institution, were by the provisions
of this Constitution allowed sixty days, after 4 July,
1865, in which "to take, subscribe and file", the oath
prescribed by it. Those who failed to file it, and con-
tinued to preach, solemnize marriage, or teach, were
subject to fine and imprisonment. The terms of
the oath, according to Justice Field of the Supreme
Court of the United States, required amongst other
things, the affiant to deny, not only that he had ever
been in armed hostility to the L'nited States, or to the
lawful authorities thereof, but that he had ever "by
act or word", manifested his adherence to the cause
of the enemies of the United States, foreign or domes-
tic, or his desire for their triumph, over the arms of
the LTnited States; or his sj-mpathy vrith those en-
gaged in rebellion, or had ever harboured, or aided, any
person engaged in guerrilla warfare against the loyal
inhabitants of the L'nitcd States. About the last
of July, 1865, a pastoral letter, in Latin, of which the
following is a translation, was sent lay the Most
Rev. Peter Richard Kenrick, Archbishop of St.
Louis, to every priest in his diocese, which was then
coextensive with the state.
St. Louis, July 28th, 1865.
Reverend Sir: Since under the new Constitution, a certain oath is to be exacted of Priests, that they may have leave to announce God's word, and officiate at marriage, which oath, they can in no wise take, without a sacrifice of ecclesiastical hberty, I have judged it expedient, to indicate to you my opinion In the matter, that you may have before your eyes, a rule to be followed, in this extraorcUnary matter. I hope, that the civil power will abstain from exacting such an oath. But, should it happen otherwise, I wish you to inform me of the particular circumstances of your position, that I may be able to give you counsel and assistance. I am. Reverend Sir, Your servant in the Lord, Peter Richard,
Archbishop of St. Louis.
The state officials ignored this letter, but their party newspaper organ in St. Louis referred to it, "at^ important in view of the large number of persons whom the Archbishop of St. Louis in one sense, may be said to represent; and further because of the fact that at least three-fourths of such persons, have, throughout the war, been disloyal men". The op- position press was almost silent.
At that time. Rev. John A. Cummings, a young priest, was in charge of St. Josei)h's Church at Louisi- ana, Pike County, Missouii. He had not taken the oath, and he .said M.iss :ind prea<-hed ,ns usual, on Sun- day, S September, 1865. The court having jurisdiction of crimes conunitted in this county was held at Bowling Green some twelve miles distant, and con- vened with its accompanying grand jury on Monday, 4 September. Father Cummings was indicted by a grand jury composed of men who had taken the. in-
