THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CLERGY OF AMERICA ON PROHIBITION.

White Ribbon, Volume 25, Issue 290, 18 August 1919, Page 7

THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CLERGY OF AMERICA ON PROHIBITION.

Ihr Catholic Prohibition 1 Lei k > It-*'* w fiu on jetord in resolutions ,i> demanding definition by Congress of intoxicating li(iUor, as .ill beveiage- containing any percentage of alcohol, and the election to public- of he os of only candida'cs who are total abstainers.

“We deprecate all attempt, to toment lawlessness against the- Prohi lj it ion amendment as alien to Catholic loyalty t() constituted authority and the best traditions of the* C atholic Church.”

“Piohibitioni t> may expect en couragement from Pope benedict \\ Of his two immediate picdcc essoi s, I.co Xlll. approved the third Council ol Baltimore*, urging .ill Catholics to ct out of the* licpior business in the* battle against ;rleoholism.” “Catholics will stand with the n lei low-citizens, for Prohibition,’ - said Ibshop Canevin.

“The community has as much ngh' to take* the pledge as the individual.” bishop Carroll, of Helena.

“It is unthinkable that we should ever go bac kto the saloon. \rch bishop Dowling. “If 1 could cause the* earth to open and swallow up even saloon in the world, I would feel that I was doing hum.min a blessing. Archbishop Keane.

“Regulation of the saloon is like putting the devil on his good Ix*haviour— it lias alwa>s failedv to accomplish the pur|M)se intended.” Bishop Mi Covetn. of Cheynne.

“ The advocates of Prohibition are messengers «>f peace* and patriotism, and are lighting a bloodless batde for humanity.” bishop Lcnihan, «>f (inat Kails.

Al SI KAMA SPKAKS. \ Roman Catholic clergyman wntcs to * (irit” concerning Archbishop Redwood’s manifesto re Prohibition. He asks whether the Archbishop’s words were official or not, and says the an swer to this question is the key to the- Catholic vote. The matter turned on a single point, was the exemption of sacramental wine a stable and teal exception or not? Prohibition could affect a Divine law only in a single way, mainly by prohibiting the sacri tice of the Mass. Hence on any Prohibition measure which does not im peril the Mass, the Church can have # no official view. If the New Zealand

Bill genuinely safeguards the Mass, tlun the Archbishop’s utterance was not official; it was in no sense the word of the Church, and had n<> weight with Catholics beyond the weight of the- Archbishop as a man. If, on the othei hand, the exemption of altai wine was illusory, then, with out doubt, lie voiced the' Church, and it was the duty in conscience of every Catholic to vote against tlu* Bill.

The letter goes on: “Catholics are not backward in desire of good government. They are not in love' with boo*c, bu f they are in love with the Mass. Phis is tin* whole key t<> the riddle. Safeguard this, and ye; will find Catholics vote ‘dry at h a t as numerously as any other section u the community. ’’