Saturday, December 15, 2018

The Invaders series - Part 28


THE JESUITS -- 27. THE JESUITS THE "Society of Jesus," commonly called "the Jesuits," is a secret order of the Roman Catholic Church, founded August 15, 1534, by the Spaniard, Ignatius Loyola, and sanctioned by Pope Paul III, September 27, 1540. Loyola had received a military training, and when he later became an extreme religious enthusiast, he conceived the idea of forming a spiritual militia, to be placed at the service of the pope. The Jesuit T. J. Campbell says: "They are called the Society or Company of Jesus, the latter designation expressing more correctly the military idea of the founder, which was to establish, as it were, a new battalion in the spiritual army of the Catholic Church." - The Encyclopedia Americana, art. "Jesuits." Organization And Rules Of The Society Loyola organised his Company on the strictest military basis. Its General was always to reside at Rome, supervising from his headquarters every branch scattered over the world. Theodor Griesinger says: "Its General ruled as absolute monarch in all parts of the world, and the different kingdoms of Europe, Asia, Africa, and America lay at his feet divided into provinces. Over each province was placed a provincial, as lieutenant of the general, and every month it was the duty of this provincial to send in his report to his General. . . . From these thousands of reports the General was in possession of the most accurate information regarding all that was going on in the world. Moreover, by means of the Father Confessors at the various Courts, he was initiated into all the secrets of these latter. [The officials] had to be careful to report nothing but the exact truth, [for] each one of them was presided with an assistant who was also in direct communication with the General, [who checked the reports of the one against the other.]" - "History of the Jesuits," p. 280. London: 1892. The Abbate Leone, after personal investigation, writes: "Every day the general receives a number of reports which severally cheek each other. There are in the central house, at Rome, huge registers, wherein are inscribed the names of all the Jesuits and of all the important persons, friends, or enemies, with whom they have any connection. In those registers are recorded . . . facts relating to the lives of each individual. It is the most gigantic biographical collection that has ever been formed. The conduct of a light woman, the hidden failings of a statesman, are recounted in these books with cold impartiality. . . . When it is required to act in any way upon an individual, they open the book and become immediately acquainted with his life, his character, his qualities, his defects, his projects, his family, his friends, his most secret acquaintances." - "The Secret Plan of the Order," with preface by M. Victor Considerant, p. 33. London: 1848. Similar registers are also found in the offices of the provincials, and in the "novitiate houses," so that when one Jesuit follows another in office, he has at his finger tips the fullest knowledge of the most secret lives of those for whom he is to labour, whether they are friends or foes. The Abbate Leone says of his secret investigation of this fact: "The first thing that struck me was some great books in the form of registers, with alphabeted edges. "I found that they contained numerous observations relative to the character of distinguished Page 168 individuals, arranged by towns or families. Each page was evidently written by several different hands." - Id., p. 31. Those who enter the Jesuit society spend two years of "noviceship," and then take the "simple vows." After several more years of intensive training, they take the fourth vow, by which they pledge themselves under oath to look to their General and their Superiors as holding "the place of Christ our Lord," and to obey them unconditionally without the least hesitation. The Jesuits being a secret order, they did not publish their rules. How then can we be absolutely sure about these regulations? Dr. William Robertson says: "It was a fundamental maxim with the Jesuits, from their first institution, not to publish the rules of their order.1 These they kept concealed as an impenetrable mystery. They never communicated them to strangers, nor even to the greater part of their own members. They refused to produce them when required by courts of justice." But during a lawsuit at Paris, in 1760, Father Montigny committed the blunder of placing the two volumes of their "Constitutions" (the Prague edition of 1757) in the hands of the French court. "By the aid of these authentic records the principles of their government may be delineated." - "History of Charles the Fifth," Vol. II, p. 332. (See also "History of the Jesuits," Theodor Griesinger, pp. 435-489, 474-476) The author was so fortunate as to have the privilege of carefully reading "The Constitutions of the Society of Jesus." He saw a Latin edition of 1558, and an English translation of it printed in 1838, together with the three Papal Bulls: 1. The Bull of Pope Paul III, given September 27, 1540, sanctioning "The Society of Jesus." 2. The Bull of Clement XIV, abolishing the "Society," July 21, 1773. 3. The Bull of Pius VII, restoring it, August 7, 1814. We shall now quote from "The Constitutions," thus presenting first-hand evidence of their Rules: “It is to be observed that the intention of the Vow wherewith the Society has bound itself in obedience to the supreme Vicar of Christ without any excuse, is that we must go to whatever part of the world he shall determine to send us, among believers or unbelievers.” – “ Constitutions,” pp. 64, 65. "Displaying this virtue of obedience, first to the Pope, then to the Superiors of the Society . . . we . . . attend to his voice, just as if it proceeded from Christ Our Lord; . . . doing whatever is enjoined us with all celerity, with spiritual joy and perseverance; persuading ourselves that everything is just; suppressing every repugnant thought and judgment of our own in a certain obedience. . . . Every one . . should permit themselves to be moved and directed under divine Providence by their Superiors just as if they were a corpse, which allows itself to be moved and handled in any way. . . . Thus obedient he should execute anything on which the Superior chooses to employ him." - Id., pp. 55, 56. It is this corpse-like obedience, required of all its members, that has made the Jesuits such a power in the world. Rene Fulop-Miller in his book: "The Power and Secret of the Jesuits," commended by Father Friedrich Muckermann, leading Jesuit writer of Germany, and Father Alfonso Kleinser, S. J., and the Deutsche Zeitung, Berlin's leading Catholic organ, says: "The Society of Jesus represented a company of soldiers. Where 'duty' in the military sense is concerned, as it is in the Society of Jesus, obedience becomes the highest virtue, as it is in the army. 1 “The Constitutions” - was preserved only in handwritten manuscripts. And allowed only to a few select members of the Society; and when these books finally were printed, they were not for the public. Page 169 The Jesuit renders his obedience primarily to his superior . . . and he submits to him as if he were Christ Himself." - "The Power and Secret of the Jesuits," pp. 18, 19. "So the Jesuits seek to attain to God through 'blind obedience.' "Ignatius requires nothing less than the complete sacrifice of the man's own understanding, 'unlimited obedience even to the very sacrifice of conviction. "' - Id., pp. 19, 20. He taught his Jesuit members by a complete "corpse-like obedience" to be governed by the following principle: "'I must let myself be led and moved as a lump of wax lets itself be kneaded, must order myself as a dead man without will or judgment." - Id. p. 21. "It was the obedience of the Jesuits that made it possible to oppose to the enemies of the Church a really trained and formidable army." - Id. p. 23. "For, within a short time after the foundation of the order, the Jesuits were acting as spiritual directors at the courts of Europe, as preachers in the most remote primeval forests, as political conspirators, disguised and in constant danger of death; thus they had a thousand opportunities to employ their talents, their cleverness, their knowledge of the world, and even their cunning." - Id., p. 26. Jesuits Decide On Their Mission Loyola first planned to convert the Mohammedans of Palestine, but finding himself entirely unprepared for that work, and the road blocked by war, and finding, after his return to Paris, that the Protestant Reformation was turning the minds of men from the Roman church to the Bible, he resolved to undertake a propaganda of no less magnitude than the restoration of the Papacy to world dominion, and the destruction of all the enemies of the pope. The Jesuit T. J. Campbell says: "As the establishment of the Society of Jesus coincided with the Protestant Reformation the efforts of the first Jesuits were naturally directed to combat that movement. Under the guidance of Canisius so much success attended their work in Germany and other northern nations, that, according to Macaulay, Protestantism was effectually checked. In England . . . the Jesuits stopped at no danger. . . . and what they did there was repeated in other parts of the world. . . . The Jesuits were to be found under every disguise, in every country. "Their history is marked by ceaseless activity in launching new schemes for the spread of the Catholic faith. "They have been expelled over and over again from almost every Catholic country in Europe, always, however, coming back again to renew their work when the storm had subsided; and this fact has been adduced as a proof that there is something iniquitous in the very nature of the organisation." - The Encyclopedia Americana, sixteen-volume edition, Vol. IX, art. Jesuits." 1904. Loyola's plan of operation was to have his emissaries enter new fields in a humble way as workers of charity, and then begin to educate the children and youth. After gaining the good will of the higher classes of society, they would, through their influence, secure positions as confessors to the royal families, and advisers of civil rulers. These Jesuit Fathers had been skilfully trained to take every Page 170 advantage of such positions to influence civil rulers and direct them in the interest of the Roman church, and to instill in them, that it was their sacred duty to act as worthy sons of the Church by purging their country from heresy. And when war against "heretics" commenced, the Jesuits would not consent to any truce till Protestantism was completely wiped out. At the time Loyola and his "knights" took the field, the Protestant Reformation had swept over the greater part of Europe, and one country after another was lost to the Papacy. But in a short time the Jesuits had turned the tide. The Netherlands, France, and Germany were swept by fire and sword till the very strongholds of Protestantism were threatened. The Protestant countries were finally forced to combine in the Thirty Years' War to save themselves from being brought back by force under the papal yoke. (See "History of the Jesuits," T. Griesinger, Book II, chap. 2) The Abolition Of The Jesuit Order As long as this war of extermination was waged against Protestantism, the assistance of these daring "knights" was accepted, but when they continued to meddle in politics, and to gather the civil reins in their own hands, the Catholic princes at length became aroused to their danger, and complaints began to pour into the Vatican from various heads of Catholic states. Finally, Pope Clement XIV, after four years of investigation, felt compelled to abolish the Jesuit Order. In his "Bull of Suppression," issued July 21, 1773, he wrote, that repeated warnings had been given to the Society of "the most imminent dangers, if it concerned itself with temporal matters, and which relate to political affairs, and the administration of government." It was "strictly forbidden to all the members of the society, to interfere in any manner whatever in public affairs." Clement then cites eleven popes who "employed without effect all their efforts . . . to restore peace to the Church" by keeping the Jesuits out of "secular affairs, with which the company ought not to have interfered," as they had done "in Europe, Africa, and America." The Pope continues: "We have seen, in the grief of our heart, that neither these remedies, nor an infinity of others, since employed, have produced their due effect, or silenced the accusations and complaints against the said society. . . . In vain [were all efforts.]" - "Bull of Clement XIV," in "Constitutions of the Society of Jesus," pp. 116, 117. London: 1838. "After so many storms, troubles, and divisions the times became more difficult and tempestuous; complaints and quarrels were multiplied on every side. In some places dangerous seditions arose, tumults, discords; dissensions, scandals, which weakening or entirely breaking the bonds of Christian charity, excited the faithful to all the rage of party hatreds and enmities. Desolation and danger grew to such a height, that . . . the kings of France, Spain, Portugal, and Sicily, found themselves reduced to the necessity of expelling and driving from their states, kingdoms, and provinces, these very companions of Jesus; persuaded that there remained no other remedy to so great evils; and that this step was necessary in order to prevent the Christians from rising one against another, and from massacring each other in the very bosom of our common mother the Holy Church. The said our dear sons in Jesus Christ having since considered that even this remedy would not be sufficient towards reconciling the whole Christian world, unless the said society was absolutely abolished and suppressed, made known their demands and wills in this matter to our said predecessor Clement XIII - Id., p. 118. "After a mature deliberation, we do, out of our certain knowledge, and the fullness of our apostolic power, suppress and abolish the said company. . . . We abrogate and annul its statutes, rules, customs, decrees, and constitutions, even though confirmed by oath, and approved by the Holy See. . . . We Page 171 declare the said society to be for ever annulled and extinguished." - Id., pp. 119,120. "Our will and meaning is, that the suppression and destruction of the said society, and of all its parts, shall have an immediate and instantaneous effect." - Id., p. 124. “Our will and pleasure is, that these our letters should for ever and to all eternity be valid, permanent, and efficacious, have and obtain their full force and effect. . . . Given at Rome, at St. Mary the Greater, under the seal of the Fisherman, the 21st day of July, 1773, in the fifth year of our Pontificate.” - Bull for the Effectual Suppression of the Order of Jesuits." Quoted in "Constitutions of the Society of Jesus," p. 126. We now respectfully ask: Can any Roman Catholic doubt that the pope is telling the truth about the Jesuits? If he is telling the truth, can we be blamed for feeling that there is a Jesuit danger, after that society has been reinstated and has laboured incessantly for more than a century, and is unchanged in principle? When we reflect upon their past history, and remember that the Jesuits have been expelled from fifty different countries, seven times from England, and nine times from France, and from the Papal States themselves, there must be a reason why civil governments, Catholic as well as Protestant, have found it necessary to take such steps. Only in countries such as the United States, where they are allowed to carry on their work peaceably, we hear little of them. But some day Americans may wake up to find our present generation completely Romanised, and our boasted "liberty" a thing of the past. The prophet declares: "And through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; . . . and by peace shall destroy many.” Daniel 8: 25. Any one desiring to know the historical facts should read the “History of the Jesuits,” by T. Griesinger, and “The Roman Catholic Church,” by F. T. Morton, pp. 167, 168. "The end justifies the means." This maxim is generally attributed to the Jesuits, and while it might not be found in just that many words in their authorised books, yet the identical sentiment is found over and over again in their Latin works. Dr. Otto Henne an Rhyn quotes many such sentiments from authorised Jesuit sources. We quote from him the following: "Herman Busembaum, in his 'Medulla Theologiae Moralis' (first published at Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1650) gives this as a theorem (p. 320): Cum finis est licitus, etiam media sunt licita (when the end is lawful, the means also are lawful); and p. 504: Cui licitus est finis, etiam licent media (for whom the end is lawful, the means are lawful also). The Jesuit Paul Layman, in his 'Theologia Moralis,' lib. III., p. 20 (Munich, 1625), quoting Sanchez, states the proposition in these words: Cui concessus est finis, concessa etiam sunt media ad finem, ordinata (to whom the end is permitted, to him also are permitted the means ordered to the end). Louis Wagemann, Jesuit professor of moral theology, in his 'Synopsis Theologiae Moralis' (Innsbruck and Augsburg, 1762) has: Finis determinat moralitatem actus (the end decides the morality of the act)." - "The Jesuits," pp. 47, 48. New York: 1895. "But the mischief is that the whole moral teaching of the Jesuits from their early days till now is but a further extension of this proposition, so redoubtable in its application." - Id., pp- 49, 50.2 Rene Fulop-Miller says of the Jesuits: 2 See also “The Power and Secret of the Jesuits,” - Rene Fulop-Miller, pp. 150-156; and The Secret Plan, - the Abbate Leone, p. 155. Page 172 "In actual fact, the Jesuit casuists deal with two forms of permissible deception: that of 'amphibology' and that of reservatio mentalis. 'Amphibology' is nothing else than the employment of ambiguous terms calculated to mislead the questioner; 'mental reservation' consists in answering a question, not with a direct lie, but in such a way that the truth is partly suppressed, certain words being formulated mentally but not expressed orally. "The Jesuits hold that neither intentional ambiguity nor the fact of making a mental reservation can be regarded as lying, since, in both cases, all that happens is that 'one's neighbor is not actually deceived, but rather his deception is permitted only for a justifiable cause." - "The Power and Secret of the Jesuits," pp. 154, 155. The Jesuit Gury gives examples of this; among others he says: "Amand promised, under oath, to Marinus, that he would never reveal a theft committed by the latter. . . . But . . . Amand was called as a witness before the judge, and revealed the secret, after interrogation. “He ought not to have revealed the theft, but he ought to have answered: 'I do not know anything,' understanding, 'nothing that I am obligated to reveal,' by using a mental restriction. . . . So Amand has committed a grave sin against religion and justice, by revealing publicly, before the court, a confided secret.” – “The Doctrine of the Jesuits,” translated by Paul Bert, Member of the Chamber of Deputies, Professor at the Faculty of Sciences (in Paris), pp. 168, 169, American edition. Boston: 1880. Alphonsus de Liguori, the sainted Catholic doctor, says in Tractatus de Secundo Decalogi Praecepto," on the second [third) precept of the decalogue: "One who is asked concerning something which it is expedient to conceal, can say, 'I say not,' that is, 'I say the word “not”; since the word 'I say' has a double sense; for it signifies 'to pronounce' and 'to affirm': now in our sense 'I say' is the same as 'I pronounce.' "A prisoner, when lawfully questioned, can deny a crime even with an oath (at least without grievous sin), if as the result of his confession he is threatened with punishment of death, or imprisonment, or perpetual exile, or the loss of all his property, or the galleys, and similar punishments, by secretly understanding that he has not committed any crime of such a degree that he is bound to confess. "It is permissible to swear to anything which is false by adding in an undertone a true condition, if that low utterance can in any way he perceived by the other party, though its sense is not understood." - The Latin text, and an English translation of the above statements are found in "Fifty Years in the Church of Rome," by Father Chiniquy, chap. XIII, and in "Protestant Magazine," April, 1913, p. 163. Violations of the sixth, seventh, eighth, and ninth commandments are justified by many leading Jesuit writers, according to many quotations from their books, cited in "The History of the Jesuits," by Theodor Griesinger, pp. 285-304, 478-488, 508-616, 670, 740; and in Gury's "Doctrines of the Jesuits," translated by Paul Bert; and in "The Jesuits," by Dr. Otto Henne an Rhyn, chap. V. Theodor Griesinger quotes from eight prominent Jesuit authorities, who advocate that it is permissible to kill a prince or ruler who has been deposed by the pope. Here are a few samples: "In the 'Opuscula Theologica' of Martin Becan, at page 130, the following passage occurs: Page 173 “ ‘Every subject may kill his prince when the latter has taken possession of the throne as a usurper, and history teaches, in fact, that in all nations those who kill such tyrants are treated with the greatest honor. But even when the ruler is not a usurper, but a prince who has by right come to the throne, he may be killed as soon as he oppresses his subjects with improper taxation, sells the judicial offices, and issues ordinances in a tyrannical manner for his own peculiar benefit.’ “ "With such principles Father Hermann Buchenbaum entirely agreed, and, in the 'Medulla Theologia Moralis,' permission to murder all offenders of mankind and the true faith, as well as enemies of the Society of Jesus, is distinctly laid down. This 'Moral Theology' of Father Buchenbaum is held by all the Society as an unsurpassed and unsurpassable pattern-book, and was on that account introduced, with the approval of their General, into all their colleges. "Imanuel Sa says, in his aphorisms, under the word 'Clericus': 'The rebellion of an ecclesiastic against a king of the country in which he lives, is no high treason, because an ecelesiastic is not the subject of any king.' 'Equally right,' he adds further, 'is the principle that anyone among the people may kill an illegitimate prince - to murder a tyrant, however, is considered, indeed, to be a duty.' "Adam Tanner, a very well known and highly esteemed Jesuit professor in Germany, uses almost the identical words, and the not less distinguished Father Johannes Mariana, who taught in Rome, Palermo, and Paris, advances this doctrine in his book 'De Rege' (lib. i., p. 54), published with the approbation of the General Aquaviva and of the whole Society, when he says: 'It is a wholesome thought, brought home to all princes, that as soon as they begin to oppress their subjects, and, by their excessive vices, and, more especially, by the unworthiness of their conduct, make themselves unbearable to the latter, in such a case they should be convinced that one has not only a perfect right to kill them, but that to accomplish such a deed is glorious and heroic.' . . . "But most precise are the words of the work, so highly prized above all others by the Roman Curie, 'Defensio Fidei Catholicae, et Apostolicae [Defence of the Catholic and Apostolic Faith]' of the Jesuit Suarez, which appeared in Lisbon in the year 1614, as therein it is stated (lib. vi, cap. iv, Nos. 13 and 14): 'It is an article of faith that the Pope has the right to depose heretical and rebellious kings, and a monarch dethroned by the Pope is no longer a king or legitimate prince. When such an one hesitates to obey the Pope after he is deposed, he then becomes a tyrant, and may be killed by the first corner. Especially when the public weal is assured by the death of the tyrant, it is allowable for anyone to kill the latter.' "Truly regicide could not be taught by clearer words. . . . The sons of Loyola . . . declared that a more learned, or God fearing book, had never appeared. . . . Indeed, from this time forth no Jesuit professor whatever wrote on moral theology, or any similar subject, without adopting the teaching of Suarez." – “History of the Jesuits,” pp. 508-511. Can any one doubt that the Jesuits have faithfully carried out this "Article of Faith," wherever they thought it advisable, when he reads of the many attempts upon the life of Queen Elizabeth of England; of the "Gunpowder Plot" to murder James I, and to destroy the "Houses of Parliament" in one blast; of the assassination of William, Prince of Orange; of the attempts upon his son, Maurice, Prince of Orange, and upon Leopold I of Germany, by agents of that Society? We could refer to the "Holy League" of 1576, sponsored by the Jesuits, for the purpose of uniting Catholic Europe to crush Protestantism, and the assassination of Henry III and Henry IV of France in the interest of that scheme. Page 174 "The Jesuits were, indeed, the heart and soul of the Leaguist conspiracy." - Id., p. 210. See also pp. 508-608. If the political activities of the Jesuits, of which Pope Clement XIV complained so pathetically, are not a serious problem to civil governments, then why were the Jesuits expelled from so many states, Catholic as well as Protestant, as the following table shows? Francis T. Morton, Member of the Massachusetts Bar, gives the following: "JESUITS EXPELLED FROM “Saragossa 1555 Touron and Berne 1597 La Palinterre 1558 England again 1602 Vienna 1566 England again 1604 Avignon 1570 Denmark, Venice, etc 1606 Antwerp, Portugal, etc. 1578 Venice again 1612 England 1579 Amura, Japan 1613 England again 1581 Bohemia 1618 England again 1584 Moravia 1619 England again 1586 Naples and Netherlands 1622 Japan 1587 China and India 1623 Hungary 1588 Turkey 1628 Abyssinia 1632 Transylvania 1588 Bordeaux 1589 Malta 1634 The whole of France 1594 Russia 1723 Holland 1596 Savoy 1724 Paraguay 1733 Saxony 1831 Portugal 1759 Portugal 1834 France 1762 Spain again 1835 France 1764 Rheims (by the people). 1838 Spain, Sicily 1767 Lucerne 1842 Naples 1767 Lucerne again 1845 Parma and Malta 1768 France again 1845 All Christendom 1773 Switzerland 1847 Sardinia 1848 Bavaria and Genoa 1848 Russia 1776 Vienna 1848 France again 1804 Austria 1848 Canton Grisons 1804 Several Italian States 1859 Naples again 1810 Sicily again 1860 France again 1816 Spain again 1868 Moscow, St. Petersburg 1816 Guatemala 1871 Canton Soleure 1816 Switzerland 1871 Belgium 1818 German Empire 1872 Brest (by the people) 1819 Mexico (by the viceroy). 1853 Russia again 1820 Mexico (by Comonfort). 1856 Spain again 1820 Mexico (by Congress) . 1873 Rouen Cathedral 1825 New Granada since 1879 Venezuela 1879 Belgium, schools 1826 Argentine Republic 1879 France, 8 colleges closed 1828 Hungary 1879 Britain and Ireland 1829 Page 175 Brazil 1879 France again 1831 France again 1880.” - “The Roman Catholic Church and Its Relation to the Federal Government,” pp. 167,168. Boston: 1909. Those who feel that the foregoing facts constitute no danger to American civil and religious liberty, would do well to remember that the Jesuits carry on an extensive educational program in this country, and that, according to their textbooks, their principles of civil government are diametrically opposed to the American ideas of separation of church and state. See their "Manual of Christian Doctrine, by a Seminary Professor," pp. 131-133. Philadelphia: 1915. The author has stated the foregoing facts, not because of any enmity towards Jesuits as individuals, nor to Catholics in general, but only from a feeling of responsibility to enlighten the American people regarding a public danger. We can truly love the persons, while we warn people against their dangerous tendencies. If we did not sincerely love everybody, we would not be true Christians. (Matthew 5: 43- 48) Jesus loves the sinner, while He hates his sins; and we must have the mind of Christ. (Philippians 2: 5; 1 Corinthians 2: 16) To those who wish to study this subject further we recommend the careful reading of the following books, besides those referred to in this chapter: "History of the Jesuits," by Andrew Steinmetz, London, 1848; "History of the Jesuits," by G. B. Nicolini, London, 1854; "Secret Instructions of the Jesuits," translated from the Latin by W. C. Brownlee, D. D., New York, 1841; "The Footprints of the Jesuits," by R. W. Thompson; "The Jesuit Enigma," by E. Boyd Barrett; "The Programme of the Jesuits," by W. Blair Neatby, London, 1903; "Provincial Letters,." by Blaise Pascal, New York, 1853; "History and Fall of the Jesuits," by Count Alexis de Saint-Priest, London, 1861; "Political Life of an Italian," by Francesco Urgos, Battle Creek, Mich., 1876; and "The Jesuit Morals, collected by a Doctor of the College of Sorbonne in Paris," translated into English, London, 1670.

Saturday, December 1, 2018

The Invaders Series - Part 27


26. Americanism Versus Romanism ROME says: What of it! Are not Roman Catholics as good as Protestants? Yes, certainly they are. As individuals there is no distinction before the law, and as neighbours they are loved and respected. We, however, are not speaking of individuals, but of a church organisation that claims certain rights of jurisdiction in civil affairs. Whose avowed principles are diametrically opposed to liberty of speech - liberty of press, and religious liberty in general, as understood by the founders of this republic and incorporated into its fundamental laws. This we shall now prove (1) from official Catholic documents, (2) from the actual application of their principles to civil governments. Official Catholic Documents Pope Leo XIII, in an encyclical letter, Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885, outlines "the Christian constitution of states," by saying that "the state" should profess the Catholic religion, and that the Roman pontiffs should have "the power of making laws." "And assuredly all ought to hold that it was not without a singular disposition of God's providence that this power of the Church was provided with a civil sovereignty as the surest safeguard of her independence." He says of the Middle Ages: "[then] church and state were happily united." - "The Great Encyclical Letters of Pope Leo XIII," pp. 118, 114, 119. Benziger Bros., 1903. "Sad it is to call to mind how the harmful and lamentable rage for innovations which rose to a climax in the sixteenth century, . . . spread amongst all classes of society. From this source, as from a fountainhead, burst forth all those later tenets of unbridled license. . . . "Amongst these principles the main one lays down that as all men are alike by race and nature . . . that each is free to think on every subject just as he may choose. . . . In a society grounded upon such maxims, all government is nothing more nor less than the will of the people . . . . "And it is a part of this theory . . . that every one is to be free to follow whatever religion he prefers, or none at all if he disapprove of all. . . . "Now when the state rests on foundations like those just named - and for the time being they are greatly in favour - it readily appears into what and how unrightful a position the Church is driven. . . . They who administer the civil power ... defiantly put aside the most sacred decrees of the Church .... "The sovereignty of the people . . . is doubtless a doctrine . . . which lacks all reasonable proof." - Id., pp. 120-123. The theory "that the church be separated from the state," Pope Leo further calls a "fatal error," "a great folly, a sheer injustice," and "a shameless liberty." - Id., pp. 124, 125. In his next encyclical letter, of June 20, 1888, he calls it "the fatal theory of the need of separation between Church and state," "the greatest perversion of liberty," and "that fatal principle of the separation of Church and state." - Id., pp. 148,159. In his letter of January 6, 1895, he says: "It would be very erroneous to draw the conclusion that in America is to be sought the type of the most desirable status of the Church, or that it would be Page 158 universally lawful or expedient for state and church to be, as in America, dissevered and divorced. . . . She would bring forth more abundant fruits if, in addition to liberty, she enjoyed the favour of the laws and the patronage of the public authority." - Id., pp. 323, 324. Among the many authorities that could be cited, we have chosen that of Pope Leo XIII, because he is not a medieval, but a modern, exponent of papal doctrines, which no Roman Catholic would deny. Any one familiar with the phraseology of the Declaration of Independence and the Federal Constitution cannot help but see in the expressions of Pope Leo a declared opposition to the fundamental principles upon which our government is founded. He urges his followers not to be content with attending to their religious duties, but "Catholics should extend their efforts beyond this restricted sphere, and give their attention to national politics." - Id., p. 131. "It is the duty of all Catholics . . . to strive that liberty of action shall not transgress the bounds marked out by nature and the law of God - to endeavour to bring back all civil society to the pattern and form of Christianity which We have described. . . . Both these objects will be carried into effect without fail if all will follow the guidance of the Apostolic See as their rule of life and obey the bishops." - Id., p. 132. "Especially with reference to the so-called 'Liberties' which are so greatly coveted in these days, all must stand by the judgment of the Apostolic See." - Id., p. 130. In his encyclical letter of January 10, 1890, on "The Chief Duty of Christians as Citizens" (id., pp. 180- 207) he urges all Catholics to put forth united action in politics in order to change the governmental policies so as to bring them into harmony with papal principles. He says: ''As to those who mean to take part in public affairs they should avoid . . . leading the lives of cowards, untouched in the fight. . . . Honour, then, to those who shrink not from entering the arena as often as need calls, believing and being convinced that the violence of injustice will be brought to an end and finally give way to the sanctity of right and religion." - Id., pp. 199-201. They are urged to support (in elections) only those men who will stand by the principles of union of church and state: "The Church cannot give countenance or favour to those whom she knows to be imbued with a spirit of hostility to her; who refuse openly to respect her rights; who make it their aim and purpose to tear asunder the alliance that should, by the very nature of things, connect the interests of religion with those of the state. On the contrary, she is (as she is bound to be) the upholder of those who are themselves imbued with the right way of thinking as to the relations between church and state, and who strive to make them work in perfect accord for the common good. These precepts contain the abiding principle by which every Catholic should shape his conduct in regard to public life. In short, where the Church does not forbid taking part in public affairs, it is fit and proper to give support to men of acknowledged worth, and who pledge themselves to deserve well in the Catholic cause, and on no account may it be allowed to prefer to them any such individuals as are hostile to religion. . . . "Whence it appears how urgent is the duty to maintain perfect union of minds." - Id., p. 198. "Union of minds, therefore, requires, together with a perfect accord in the one faith, complete submission and obedience of will to the Church and to the Roman Pontiff, as to God himself." - Id., p. 193. Page 159 "The political prudence of the Pontiff embraces diverse and multiform things; for it is his charge not only to rule the Church, but generally so to regulate the actions of Christian citizens. . . . The faithful should imitate the practical political wisdom of the ecclesiastical authority." - Id., p. 202. "But if the laws of the state are manifestly at variance with the divine law, containing enactments hurtful to the Church, . . . or if they violate in the person of the supreme Pontiff the authority of Jesus Christ, then truly, to resist becomes a positive duty, to obey, a crime." - Id., p. 185. "If, then, a civil government strives . . . to put God aside, it deflects woefully from its right course and from the injunctions of nature. Nor should such a gathering together and association of men be accounted as a commonwealth, but only as a deceitful imitation and make-believe of civil organisation." - Id., p. 181. These are the exact statements of Pope Leo XIII, taken from his authentic records, published by the Catholics under the seal of the Church; and they show that the Papacy stands for the same principles today as it did in the Dark Ages. How truthfully the Pontiff says: "And in truth, wherever the Church has set her foot, she has straightway changed the face of things." - Id., p. 107. A letter from the Vatican outlining the plans of Pope Leo XIII respecting the United States was published in the New York Sun, July 11, 1892, and contains the following significant statement: "What the church has done in the past for others, she will now do for the United States. . . . He [the pope) hails in the United American States, and in their young and flourishing church the source of new life for Europeans. . . . If the United States succeed in solving the many problems that puzzle us, Europe will follow her example." - "New York Sun," July 11, 1892; quoted in "Liberty," 1907, No. 4, p. 10. How remarkably this coincides with the prophetic prediction: "His deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast." Revelation 13: 3. Yes, it is true that "as America, the land of religious liberty, shall unite with the Papacy in forcing the conscience and compelling men to honour the false Sabbath, the people of every country on the globe will be led to follow her example." - "Testimonies," Vol. VI, p. 18. This country led the world from despotism to liberty, and it will lead the way back. The doctrine of Pope Leo XIII is the doctrine of the Catholic Church, and it is taught in her schools in the United States. One of their schoolbooks, "Manual of Christian Doctrine, by a Seminary Professor," printed by J. J. McVey, Philadelphia, 1915, and carrying the sanction of the Catholic Censor and the seal of the Church, has this to say concerning the "Relations of Church and State": "Why is the Church superior to the state? "Because the end to which the Church tends is the noblest of all ends. "What right has the pope in virtue of his supremacy? "The right to annul those laws or acts of government that would injure the salvation of souls or attack the natural rights of citizens. "What then is the principle obligation of the heads of states? "Their principle obligation is to practice the Catholic religion themselves, and, as they are in power, to protect and defend it.” "Has the State the right and the duty to proscribe schism or heresy? Page 160 "Yes, it has the right and the duty to do so. "May the state separate itself from the Church? "No, because it may not withdraw from the supreme rule of Christ. "What name is given to the doctrine that the state has neither the right nor the duty to be united to the Church to protect it? "This doctrine is called Liberalism. It is founded principally on the fact that modern society rests on liberty of conscience and of worship, on liberty of speech and of the press. "Why is Liberalism to be condemned? "Because it denies all subordination of the state to the Church." - Pp. 131-133. We respectfully ask: With such avowed principles taught in Catholic schoolbooks, would it be safe to allow Romanised textbooks to be used in our public schools? Pope Paul IV sets forth this same papal doctrine. We read: "On February 15, 1559, appeared the Bull Quum ex apostolatus.officio of which the most important heads are these: "(1) The Pope as representative of Christ on earth has complete authority over princes and kingdoms, and may judge the same. "(2) All monarchs, who are guilty of heresy or schism, are irrevocably deposed, without the necessity of any judicial formalities. They are deprived forever of their right to rule, and fall under sentence of death. If they repent, they are to be confined in a monastery for the term of their life, with bread and water as their only fare. “(3) No man is to help an heretical or schismatic prince. The monarch guilty of this sin is to lose his kingdom in favor of rulers obedient to the Pope." - "Life and Times of Hildebrand, Arnold Harris Mathews, D. D., p. 288. London: 1910. Later papal encyclicals show the same attitude toward Protestants. Here is a sample from the encyclical of Pope Pius X. Speaking of the Reformation of the sixteenth century, it says: "That tumult of rebellion and that perversion of faith and morals they called reformation and themselves reformers. But, in truth, they were corrupters, for undermining with dissensions and wars the forces of Europe. They paved the way for the rebellions and the apostasy of modern times, in which were united and renewed in one onslaught those three kinds of conflict, hitherto separated, from which the Church has always issued victorious. The bloody conflicts of the first ages, then the internal pest of heresies, and, finally, under the name of evangelical liberty, a vicious corruption and a perversion of discipline unknown perhaps in medieval times." - "Encyclical Letter of Our Most Holy Lord Pius X," quoted in Supplement to "The Tablet," June 11, 1910, p. 950. London: England.1 1 For further evidences that the Papacy claims the right of interfering with the affairs of civil governments, see "The Middle Ages,- Henry Hallam, LL.D.. F.R.A.S.. Vol. 1. chap. 7. Parts I, 1I. Page 161 Application Of Papal Principles To Civil Government The Jesuits in this country endeavour to make us believe that it is not within the pope's domain to ''meddle with the civil allegiance of Catholics" or to interfere with a ruler's governing of his subject and that, should any pope "try such interference, he would be going beyond the limits of his proper authority; Catholics would be under no obligation to obey him - nor would they obey him." - "The Pope and the American Republic," by J. E. Graham, p. 3. But it is understood that this is only "mission" literature written for the American people, who can best be won by such sentiments, and that it does not apply to Catholic countries; nor will it apply to our own when conditions here can be changed. King Henry Iv Versus Pope Gregory Vii We do not suppose that such writers have forgotten the claims of so many popes that civil magistrates are not exempt from the rule of Christ, or from the governing power of His Vicar, and that "the church never changes." Nor can any well read man have forgotten that Pope Gregory VII on the twenty second of February, 1076, excommunicated Henry IV, "forbade him to govern Germany and Italy, dispensed all his subjects from the oath of allegiance they had taken to him, and forbade every one to obey him as a king' - "Life and Times of Hildebrand," A. H. Mathews, D. D., p. 109. London: 1910. Pope Gregory VII wrote the following letter on September 3, 1076: "To All the Faithful in Germany, Counselling them to Choose a New King: "Gregory . . . to all the . . . bishops, dukes, counts, and all defenders of the Christian faith dwelling in the kingdom of Germany . . . Henry, king so-called, was excommunicated . . . he was bound in bondage of anathema and deposed from his royal dignity, and that every people formerly subject to him is released from its oath of allegiance. . . . "Let another ruler of the kingdom be found by divine favour, such an one as shall bind himself by unquestionable obligation to carry out the measures we have indicated." - "Records of Civilisation Sources and Studies," edited under the auspices of the Department of History, Columbia University," Vol. XIV, pp. 105-107. Any person who had any dealing with the excommunicated king became thereby himself excommunicated. If the king did not secure release from this "band" within a year, he was to lose his kingdom and be put to death, or if he repented after the year passed he would be imprisoned in a monastery, and fed with bread and water till his death, and this finally became his fate. Henry had to set out across the dangerous Alps in midwinter. "The cold was intense, and there had been heavy falls of snow, so that neither men nor horses could advance in the narrow road alongside precipices without running the greatest risks. Nevertheless, they could not delay, for the anniversary of the King's excommunication was drawing near." The men walked, and the queen was placed in "a kind of sledge made of ox hide, and the guides dragged [it] the whole way." At last they arrived at Canossa, where the pope temporarily abode. “Then, in the penitent's garb of wool, and barefoot, the King appeared before the walls of the fortress. He had laid aside every mark of royalty, and, fasting, he awaited the pleasure of the Pope for three days. The severity of the penance was enhanced by the coldness of the season. Bonitho speaks of it as a Page 162 very bitter winter, and says that the King waited in the courtyard amid snow and ice. Even in the presence of Gregory there were loud murmurs against his pride and inhumanity.” – “Life and Times of Hildebrand,” pp. 126-128. At last through the intercession of others the pope admitted the king and released him of the excommunication, January 28, 1077. Pope Gregory VII himself acknowledged the whole proceeding with evident satisfaction in a letter to the princes of Germany, dated January 28, 1077, in the following words: "At length he came in person with a few followers to the town of Canossa where we were staying. Not a sign of hostility or boldness did he show. All his royal insignia he laid aside, and, wretchedly clad in woollen garments, he stood persistently for three long days with bare feet before the gate of the Castle. Constantly and with many tears he implored the apostolic mercy for help and consolation until he had moved all who were within hearing to such pity and depth of compassion that they interceded for him with many prayers and tears. They expressed wonder at the unusual hardness of our heart, and some even insisted that we were exercising, not apostolic severity, but the ferocious cruelty of a tyrant." - "Parallel Source Problems in Medieval History," F. Duncalf, Ph. D., and A. C. Krey, M. A., p. 89. New York and London: 1912. And yet the pope had the audacity to extract from the humiliated king the promise of a meeting among the princes of Germany, where "the pope as judge" was to decide whether Henry was to be "held unworthy of the throne according to ecclesiastical law" or not. (Id., p. 51) And finally the pope excommunicated Henry the second time, March 7, 1080, and a new king, Rudolph of Suabia, was elected, the pope sending him a costly crown. Civil war ensued, which deluged Germany in blood, and Rudolph, the king of the papal party, was slain. This is not an isolated case. "When, in the year 1119, Calixtus excommunicated Henry V, the Pope also solemnly absolved from their allegiance all the subjects of the Emperor." - "Life and Times of Hildebrand," p. 284. Other Popes Meddle In Politics On May 24, 1160, Pope Alexander III excommunicated Frederic Barbarossa, "and released his subjects from their allegiance." Pope Innocent III "deposed and reinstated princes and released subjects from their oaths" as if he were a universal ruler. In 1208 he placed the whole kingdom of England under "interdict," excommunicated King John in 1209, and deposed him in 1212, releasing all his subjects from their allegiance to him, and invited King Philip of France to occupy England in the name of the pope. John was finally forced to surrender the kingdom into the hands of the pope, to be returned to him as a fief. The barons, displeased with such transactions, forced the king to sign the "Magna Charta," a document of liberty. But the pope declared it null and void. "The Emperor Frederick II was excommunicated by Gregory IX; his subjects were released from their allegiance, and he was deposed by Innocent IV [in 1245]. Boniface VIII, who meddled incessantly in foreign affairs, [explained the pope's] two swords [to mean, that the temporal sword of] the monarch is borne only at the will and by the permission of the Pontiff." - Id., p. 286. Modern Rulers Walk The Road To Canossa One more example of a later date may be of interest. For centuries France had been under the controlling power of the Page 163 Papacy, and in the Revolutionary period she attempted to shake off the shackles. But, the fetters were so strong and the chains so heavy, that she found herself unable to do so, till finally the Association Law of 1901 and the Separation Law of 1905 granted religious liberty to all denominations alike. Rome, however, does not want liberty, but sole control, and so her thunderbolts were hurled against the "injustice" of France, till the impression was created that Rome was fighting for "liberty." It is the same old story. The Papacy always feels oppressed where it is not given a free hand to control. F. T. Morton (member of the Massachusetts bar) says: "It is not in defence of religious liberty the pope is attacking the French republic, but because the republic has placed all religious bodies alike under the regime of religious liberty, equality, and toleration, and this he calls the law of oppression." - "The Roman Catholic Church and Its Relation to the Federal Government," p. 110. Boston: 1909. See also "Papal Attack on France," in the Nineteenth Century Magazine, April, 1909, and "Papal Aggression in France," in Fortnightly Review, October, 1906. In a Catholic booklet, Rev. J. T. Roche, LL. D., says of the French law: "Three hundred million dollars' worth of property has been swept away by a single legal enactment, because the French laity did not have an influential, efficient, and vigorous press to protest against this colossal injustice. The Cardinal Archbishop of France a few weeks ago made the statement, that if one tenth of the money put into churches and religious institutions, had been expended on their Catholic press, this property would never have been confiscated. This utterance has been well borne out by the results already achieved in Germany. That country today has over two hundred Catholic daily papers, and a great number of weekly and monthly periodicals. It has a great lay society, the Volksverein, which devotes its energies to the up building of the press. . . . From end to end of the country, the people are kept in touch with what is going on in governmental as well as church circles. There is unity of thought and action. . . . It has become a universally accepted axiom amongst us, that the church in any country is no stronger or weaker than its official press." - "The Catholic Paper," pp. 9, 10; printed by "Catholic Register and Canadian Extension." Toronto, Can.: 1910. Attorney F. T. Morton quotes the following from newspaper clippings concerning a mass meeting of nearly 8,000 Catholics, held in Brooklyn, N. Y., Feb. 3, 1907, to protest against the Separation Law of France: "Even Bismarck had to pass on his way to a metaphorical Canossa." - "The Roman Catholic Church," p. 114, Boston: 1909. The Roman Catholic weekly, The Tablet, of London, March 21, 1914, pp. 440, 441, has an article on "French Catholics and the General Elections," which we wish we had space to copy in full, as it shows the way leaders in the Roman church instruct her people, and marshal them in mass in times of elections. We quote: "Catholics have had their duty in this matter long ago placed before them by the Pope: to unite together under their Bishops on the platform of religion.' . . . "' Catholics above all things' was to be their motto. "The only purpose was to form a vast association of Catholic citizens to act together for ends which he summed up as follows: - 'What we want is religious peace (1) by the revision of the laws which have attacked our liberties, and (2) by an understanding between the State and the Head of the Catholic Church.' Page 164 "In accordance with these principles it was determined to constitute at once a Committee to multiply organisations which would group Catholics together for this work, and that action should be taken as far as possible in the forthcoming electoral struggle. "The call to united action thus sounded finds a strong re-enforcement in the pastorals of the Bishops. Thus Cardinal Andrieu, Archbishop of Bordeaux, has reminded his flock that they should use their votes, and that in doing so they are bound in conscience to vote only for those candidates who shall have promised to respect the rights of God and the Church. 'Those,' declares His Eminence, 'who decline to make this promise are undeserving of your confidence, and if, from fear or from self interest, you vote for them, you make yourselves responsible before God and men for the harm that may be done by their sectarianism to our religion and to our country.' "Cardinal Dubillard, Archbishop of Chambery, has written in the same sense. Even still stronger is the note struck in a Joint Pastoral issued by the six Bishops of the Province of Bourges. They open by declaring that with the elections in view it is their right and their duty to speak about them to their people, who are under an obligation, not only to vote, but to vote right. 'To vote is not an indifferent, because it is a political, act, for politics cannot escape from Christian morality or claim independence seeing that conscience is binding in public as well as in private life.' . . . "Catholics have gone to the ballot as individuals, disunited and without a program. This time they should unite on behalf of the interests of religion. Now more than ever before united action is necessary sub vexillo Christi. . . . The Bishops proceed to lay down the line of conduct to be followed by Catholic electors: to refuse to vote for all candidates who shall take their stand on the laws described as secular and intangible; to vote unhesitatingly and without arriere pensee [mental reservation] for every Catholic candidate - Republican, Royalist, or Imperialist - because he is a Catholic, and determined above all to defend and demand the rights of God and of the Church; to vote for those Liberal candidates who give a satisfactory pledge to support the Catholic claims. From this it will be seen that the laymen's movement is in full accord with the directions of the Bishops." - Pp. 440, 441. Now, m the Roman Catholic Church rests one of its main propositions on the fact that it is the same the world over, and never changes, and seeing that it is governed in every country by the same rules of the Roman Curia, with the pope at its head, we know that the same regulations apply to the United States as to the Republic of France. As an illustration of this fact we find that, when the Poles of Milwaukee, Wis., in their city election of 1912, voted the Socialist ticket, the Roman Catholic paper, Western Watchman, of April 11, 1912, commented thus: "We are sorry for the Poles. It is a shame that their clergy have them not under better control." - Quoted in "Protestant Magazine," December, 1913, p. 568. When Mr. T. J. Carey of Palestine, Texas, in a letter to Archbishop John Bonzano, the Papal Delegate, of Washington, D. C., dated June 10, 1912, asked: "Must I as a Catholic surrender my political freedom to the Church?" the Archbishop answered in a letter dated June 16, 1912: "You should submit to the decisions of the Church even at the cost of sacrificing political principles." - Frontispiece in "Protestant Magazine," August, 1913. Many other incidents could be cited if space permitted. Let no one, therefore, claim that the Catholic Church is not active in politics. As a sequel to this Catholic Action in France, we read in the Minneapolis Journal, December 7, 1920, in the report of a sermon by Dr. P. B. Donally, O. M. I. (Catholic) of London, England, preached at the Pro-Cathedral in Minneapolis, the following significant words: Page 165 "'The Church, Christ's Masterpiece.' . . . Amid the universal crash of nations, thrones, and doctrines, she is the one moral force that remains standing. "Protestant England sends its ambassador to the Pope of Rome. Lutheran Germany, through her representative at the Vatican, seeks light and counsel from the Vicar of Christ. And the infidel government of France has walked the road to Canossa." We have seen the reason why the Republic of "France has walked the road to Canossa"; namely, through the activities of Catholic bishops, and their organisations, in elections. As sure as that same power is operating in other countries, they too will walk the road to Canossa. What a delight it seems for the leaders of the Roman church to look back to the grand scene at Canossa, and see a mighty king standing with bare feet in snow and cold for three days, begging the pope to allow him to rule his own country. This is the Roman ideal, it appears. We could continue this subject by relating Rome's fight against government officials of Spain, Mexico, etc., bringing its activities in politics up to date, but space forbids. To sum up: Rome is unchanged in principle, and will do today what it did in the Middle Ages, whenever opportunity offers itself. The World War gave the Papacy a new hold on the nations of Europe. Mr. Michael Williams, an eminent Catholic editor, says: "Before the World War . . . there were few national representatives at the Vatican." But now "a spiritual movement such as the world has not seen since the Crusades or the conquest of the Roman Empire by the earlier members of the same church [has taken place]. In that movement the laity are participating in close cooperation with the ecclesiastical leaders." - "Current History Magazine," Aug., 1926. And what a change has taken place! "A total of thirty-one countries now maintain official diplomatic relations with the Vatican. . . . To this number it is expected here both France and the United States will be added.... "As a consequence the Vatican is today in diplomatic relations not only with all of the great Catholic countries of the world and most of the Protestant nations, but it has succeeded in entering into semiofficial relations with several of the great nations with other religions, such as Turkey, Japan, and China." - By mail from Rome, printed in Minneapolis "Tribune," April 10,1921. Such pressure was brought to bear on the smaller nations not having diplomatic relations with the Vatican, that Latvia felt the need of having a "pull" there too. "The papal authorities agreed to extend their recognition to Latvia and to make Riga the seat of a Roman Catholic archbishop, provided the government of Latvia would turn over to the archbishop the Cathedral of Riga. Though the cathedral had been in the continuous possession of the Lutherans for more than three hundred years, the government accepted the condition of the Vatican." - Bishop Edgar Blake, in New York "Christian Advocate," Sept. 23, 1926. Now the Vatican is strongly urging the United States to begin diplomatic relations with the Holy See. We read in a New York Herald-Tribune - Minneapolis Journal cable for April 15, 1934: "Rome, April 14. - The 'preparation' by President Franklin D. Roosevelt of a favourable public opinion now appears to be considered at the Vatican . . . of a resumption of diplomatic relations between the United States and the Holy See. . . . The Roosevelt administration has progressed from a merely friendly attitude to a definite willingness to dispatch a minister to the Holy See as soon as the American public - and especially Congress - can be put into the frame of mind to accept the step. Page 166 "The frequent and amiable contacts of the President and Archbishop Cicognani, Apostolic Delegate to Washington, are said to have done much to prepare the ground, but at the Vatican the greatest hope is pinned to the clear-cut assurance which Postmaster General James A. Farley gave the Pope when he was received last August." - Minneapolis "Journal," April 15,1934. What this diplomatic relation will cost this country in concessions to the Vatican, time alone will tell. We venture to say that it will be of a different nature from that of Latvia, and infinitely greater in its consequences! But Protestants seem to be so fast asleep that they do not even dream of danger. Dr. Samuel Hanson Cox says: "Our greatest national dangers arise from our lamentable apathy; as this arises mainly from our ignorance. While men slept, says our Saviour, the enemy sowed tares. And if 'the price of liberty is eternal vigilance it ill becomes the heirs of such a boon, from such ancestors as ours, to lose or even to peril the freedom which was purchased by them at the cost of blood. Not will any thing like indifference suit the occasion. America expects every citizen, as Christ every Christian, to do his duty. And to omit this on any pretence is criminal. It is suiting and serving the enemy. It is servility and subserviency to the common foe. Sleep on, says Rome, and we will have you! We need do nothing, but only omit to do our duty, and we act for him; and our ruined posterity may remember only to accuse us, only to execrate our memories. Shall we then be indifferent, and so abet the interests of Antichrist? What could we do more truly to favour the worst adversary of this most noble and desirable nation? " - "The History of the Popes to A. D. 1758," Archibald Bower, Esq., with Introduction by Rev. Samuel Hanson Cox, D. D., p. xi of Introduction. Philadelphia: 1844

Saturday, November 24, 2018

The Invaders Series - Part 26


25. Making America Catholic THE Roman hierarchy knew that the older Protestants, who had read about the persecutions of the Dark Ages, and who knew some of the inside workings of the papal church, would never become Catholics. Rome's hope lay in capturing the younger generation. If the Papacy could cover up those dark pages of its history, when it waded in the blood of martyrs, and could appear in the beautiful modern dress of a real champion for liberty, as a lover of science, art, and education, it would appeal to the American youth, and the battle would be won. The Jesuits, who through years of experience in Europe, have become experts in moulding young minds, are now establishing schools everywhere, that are patronised by thousands of Protestant youth. They have also undertaken the delicate task of Romanising the textbooks of our public schools, and books of reference, in order to cover up their past, and to whitewash the Dark Ages. That Romanists desire to cover up their past record of bloody persecution is acknowledged by that honourable Roman Catholic author, Alfred Baudrillart, Rector of the Catholic Institute of Paris. After giving a frank statement of the many persecutions of which his church is guilty, he says in the words of Mgr. d'Hulst: "'Indeed, even among our friends and our brothers we find those who dare not look this problem in the face. They ask permission from the Church to ignore or even to deny all those facts and institutions in the past which have made orthodoxy compulsory."' - "The Catholic Church; the Renaissance and Protestantism," Alfred Archeveque Cardinal Baudrillart, pp. 183, 184. Romanizing Textbooks In the first place, all general histories used in our public schools and high schools had to be revised to eliminate every trace of the objectionable features from their pages. Plain historical facts of the Middle Ages, - such as the popes' interference with public government (as in the case of Henry IV, Emperor of Germany, A. D. 1077, and King John of England, A. D. 1213); the persecution of Waldenses, Albigenses, and Huguenots; the Inquisition; the sale of indulgences; and the Reformation, - all had to be eliminated or rewritten so as to exonerate the Papacy, and brand its opponents simply as political offenders and revolutionists, who suffered at the hand of the civil government, instead of being persecuted by the Church for their religion. Such radical changes could never have been accomplished so quietly if Protestantism had not been asleep. At times it became necessary to create public sentiment against a certain textbook through newspaper articles written by some learned Catholic professor, and then pressure was brought to bear on school boards to eliminate it, substituting for it a Romanised book. Thus Swinton's "Outlines of History" was thrown out of the schools, and "Anderson's History" was black listed, but later revised according to Catholic wishes, and brought back to take the place of Swinton's. Myers's "Medieval and Modem History" was also censored. At first the author refused to change it, claiming "history is history," but later it was revised and came into quite general use for a time. Not all of this was done in the dark. As one example of protest we refer the reader to Senate Document on Public Hearing before the United States Committee on Education and Labor, Friday, February 15, 1889, and Friday, February 22, 1889, on "Senate Resolution No. 86.1 Proposing an Amendment to the Constitution of the United 1 "liberty." Vol. V. No. 3. Third Quarter. 1910 pages 30-32. Page 150 States Respecting Establishment of Religion and Free Public Schools," which unmasks some of this work. We shall now point out two of the vital changes made in our textbooks: (1) The Catholic Church will never acknowledge the Reformation of the sixteenth century as a reform, but brands it as a “revolt" against the authority of the pope, and as a "revolution." A sure earmark, therefore, of all Romanised textbooks is the fact that they never speak of the Reformation as a work of reform but as "the Protestant Revolt," "the Protestant Revolution," "the so-called Reformation," or "what is called the Reformation." Let any one look it up in the schoolbooks used by his children, and see for himself. To give the readers who may not have seen the textbooks used in our schools today an idea of what the Protestant children are taught, we shall take the "History of Western Europe," by Professor J. H. Robinson, as an example. It has the following chapters on the Reformation of the sixteenth century: chapter 24, "Germany Before the Protestant Revolt"; chapter 25, "Martin Luther and His Revolt Against the Church"; chapter 26, "Course of the Protestant Revolt in Germany"; chapter 27, "The Protestant Revolt in Switzerland and England." Chapter 25 says: "As Luther became a confessed revolutionist, he began to find friends among other revolutionists and reformers." p. 393. Chapter 28 takes up the effort of the Catholics to destroy the Reformation by a counter-reform, by the work of the Jesuits, and the bloody persecution of Protestants in Spain, in the Netherlands, and France. This chapter is entitled. "The Catholic Reformation," and yet it comes the farthest from deserving the title of reformation of all the above-mentioned chapters. In these Romanised textbooks the historical facts of the Middle Ages are entirely reversed. The way the last-mentioned chapter extols the Jesuits shows who has put their stamp on the book. Senator Thomas E. Watson truthfully says: "In the public schools the Catholics have stealthily introduced textbooks written by Jesuits, and your children are being taught that the Roman church was misunderstood in the past; that its doctrines are not fatal to humanity and gospel religion; that its record is not saturated with the blood of innocent millions, murdered by papal persecutors, and that there never was such a monstrosity as the alleged sale of papal pardons of sins. "Educate youth in this Catholic way, and the consequences are logical." - "Roman Catholics in America Falsifying History and Poisoning the Minds of Protestant School Children," p. 5. Thompson, Ga.: 1928. Sale Of Indulgences Histories used in the public schools in the United States up to the year 1900 were opposed by the Roman Catholic Church on the ground that they were not stating the truth about "indulgences." These histories simply stated that Martin Luther began the Reformation by opposing Tetzel's sale of indulgences, which is a historical fact. "An Introduction to the History of Western Europe," by Professor J. H. Robinson, says: "It is a common mistake of Protestants to suppose that the indulgence was forgiveness granted beforehand for sins to be committed in the future. There is absolutely no foundation for this idea."- p. 391. Ginn and Co... 1903. This statement is copied on page 311 in 'A General History of Europe," by Robinson, Breasted, and Smith, a textbook quite generally used of late. We shall leave it with the reader to judge whether such Page 151 statements actually represent the Protestant conception of "indulgences," or whether they are part of a program to cover up historical facts; and we would respectfully ask: Are not American youth entitled to know the unvarnished facts of history? The historical facts about "indulgences," gathered from unquestionable sources, are found on pages 162-172 of this book. It is here shown that the idea of "indulgences" had so degenerated between the eleventh and the sixteenth centuries, that they were actually sold for money. Tetzel's "Indulgences" read: 1 "absolve thee . . . from all thy sins, transgressions and excesses . . . and I restore thee . . . to that innocence and purity which thou possessed at baptism; so that, when thou diest, the gates of punishment shall be shut, and the gates of the paradise of delight shall be open." - Coxe's "House of Austria," Vol. I, p. 385. London: George Bell and Sons, 1906. Revising Books Of Reference The next step in the papal plan was to revise all books of reference, such as encyclopedias, dictionaries, and larger historical works, so as to mould the minds not only of pupils but also of teachers and of preachers. An example of this is seen in the revision of the New International Encyclopedia. The editor of the Catholic Mirror (at that time the official organ of Cardinal Gibbons), in a lengthy editorial, dated October 28, 1905, tells of how the publishers of that Encyclopedia cooperated with the Jesuits in revising it. He quoted the following letter from the Rev. Thomas J. Campbell, S. J., which he had just received: “Dodd, Mead and Co. sent their representatives to us, and not only expressed a desire to avoid misstatements in their encyclopedia, but asked for some one to excise whatever might be offensive. . . . Mr. Conde B. Pallen took the matter in hand, and was afforded full liberty to revise and correct not only the topics which dealt professedly with Catholic subjects but those also which might have even an indirect bearing on them. . . . The firm has done all in its power to make it acceptable to Catholics.” - Quoted in "Liberty," Vol. V, No. 3, pp. 34, 35. Washington., D. C., 1910. After this was done, every effort was made to get this New International Encyclopedia into the hands of all Protestant ministers in this country, who were unaware of its Romanised features. Its moulding influence was soon seen in the striking similarity in viewpoint (on many subjects) between the Roman theology and that of the Protestant pulpit and press, and this is becoming more so now after practically all encyclopedias have been Romanised. Even Webster's Dictionary has not been allowed to speak its old familiar truths any more. We read: "Time was when complaint was common that injustice was done to the Catholics in 'Webster's Dictionary.' There is no room for such a thing in the new 'Webster's International Dictionary,' issued by G. and C. Merriam Co., Springfield, Mass., because Vicar-General Callaghan, of the diocese of Little Rock, has revised and edited everything appertaining to the church." - "Freeman's Journal" of New York, May 28,1892. Since then a Catholic official has been regularly connected with the editorial staff, whenever a new revision was made, as can be seen in the preface of later editions. Suppose, in the next encyclopedia, we ask brewery officials to edit everything pertaining to temperance and the liquor question, and ask the officials of Wall Street to edit all that pertains to capital and labour, would we then get a more correct and unbiased representation of these subjects? We ask why, then, should Roman Catholic officials edit everything pertaining to the Protestant controversy with Rome? Page 152 At the First American Catholic Missionary Congress, held at Chicago, November 17,1908, Dr. William McGinnis outlined the program of the International Catholic Truth Society for making America Catholic: (1) by Romanising our schoolbooks, (2) by revising our books of reference, (3) by controlling the daily press, (4) by capturing the libraries. He said in part: "A few years ago the publishers of an encyclopedia in twelve volumes entered the office of the Truth Society and said: 'We realise there are many misstatements and errors regarding things Catholic in this work, but we put the whole edition in your hands and will accept every correction you make and every addition which you wish to insert.' . . . So, likewise, one of the largest publishing houses of the United States, a house that supplies perhaps one third of the textbooks used in the public schools of America, asked that certain books might be examined and erroneous statements and unjust charges against the Church be corrected. . . . And we are happy to say that in practically every case these misrepresentations of the Church that otherwise would have gone into the minds of millions of children were courteously corrected by gentlemanly authors." - "The Two Great American Catholic Missionary Congresses," pp. 427, 428. Chicago: J. S. Hyland and Co., 1914. Many Protestant parents would not send their children to Catholic parochial schools, but they will allow them to be taught the same thing from Romanised textbooks, without any protest! We ask, What made the afore-mentioned publishers so anxious to have the Catholics revise the public schoolbooks and encyclopedias, which they intended to publish? Why did they not go to some Protestant organisation to have the books revised? Was it because Protestants are not educated? Certainly not! But these publishers knew from experience, that, unless the books were Romanised, Catholic societies would stir up such opposition against their use, that it would result in financial loss to the publishers. Dr. McGinnis tells the secret when he relates how he had urged the Knights of Columbus to "wake up" and "form a committee," to examine the "histories of education in use in high schools and normal schools." He says: "The spirit of Knighthood was not dead in that Council, the subject was investigated, the book I had quoted from was the textbook of the class, and, after much discussion, it was removed from the curriculum of the school." - Id., pp. 423, 424. Any one who will take the trouble to examine the textbooks used in our public schools before 1900, and compare them with those used after this Romanising propaganda began, will discover the fact that the Romanising features have been introduced gradually into a series of textbooks. The one taking the place of the other as fast as the public could assimilate the Catholic sentiments and phraseology, and the same is true regarding books of reference. Muzzling The Public Press Dr. McGinnis also spoke of their plans regarding the daily papers. He said: "We may consider briefly the program of the International Catholic Truth Society in reference to two great agencies in the formation of the minds and hearts of the great American people, - the press and the public libraries. "Our daily press . . . moulds the thought and influences the will of the country . . . . We do demand that the great Catholic Church, in her saving doctrines and in her marvelous activities, should be brought more prominently before the American public." Id., p. 419. Dr. McGinnis further stated that arrangements had been made with the Vatican for Catholic reporters all over the world to furnish material for the "Truth Society" to be used in the daily press, and then he says: Page 153 "With a membership of two or three thousand scholarly, zealous priests and laymen, and the headquarters of the Society acting as a clearing house, calumnies would not remain unanswered, misstatements of doctrines would be corrected." - Id., pp. 420,421. "We realise, moreover, that refutations and corrections, valuable though they be, are not sufficient. We want to carry the campaign a little farther. We want to make of the press of this country a positive agency in the dissemination of Catholic ideas. . . . We are now furnishing on the first and third Sundays of each month one column or a column and a half of positive Catholic matter to daily papers. . . . But the 'Notes and Comments' . . . deal with such topics as the conversion of some distinguished scholar, the life work of a recently deceased Catholic who was eminent in the domain of physical science, archeological discoveries bearing upon Christian doctrine, important congresses abroad. . . . If the demands of our people prove that the new feature is appreciated, the 'service' will become weekly, and it will bring light and sympathy for things Catholic to many millions of readers." - Id., pp. 421, 422. "The demands" must have proved successful, for instead of this "new feature" appearing weekly, articles and notes seem to appear almost daily. Though it is legitimate for religious denominations to make use of the public press, for them to muzzle the freedom of the press is not legitimate! When large religious organisations parade their great number of adherents and bring pressure to bear on the press, threatening non support if the other side appears in its columns, while they monopolise them with their own propaganda, such organisations lose the respect of thinking people. Capturing The Public Libraries At the before-mentioned Catholic Congress plans were also laid for making the public libraries agencies in their propaganda. Dr. McGinnis says: "Another force, second only to the school and the press in shaping the thoughts of the nation, is the public library system of the United States. . . .I ask why, in the name of the God of truth, is the great Catholic Church excluded from the shelves of the public libraries of the United States? . . . Create a strong, legitimate demand for Catholic literature, and the public libraries will meet the demand." - Id., pp. 422, 423. But how did that Congress propose to "create" this strong “demand” for Catholic books? Here is their scheme: They will supply their people with lists of books to be asked for at the libraries, and when several hundred or thousand people have called for the same books, it will create a demand. "The demand for such literature must be brought to the public libraries. We wish to emphasise the fact that the demand must be made in good faith - the books are called for at the library because the man wants to read them. The International Catholic Truth Society will supply general and special lists of books, and the Spiritual Director . . . will . . . designate appropriate works for individual members. From this widespread bona fide demand for Catholic works at public libraries three results will follow. [It will help the members.] Their work will be instrumental in placing these books within the reach of the great non-Catholic American public, who will thus have some opportunity to find out what the Church's doctrines and practices really are, and finally the increased circulation of such literature will be a well-deserved and much-needed stimulus to Catholic writers." - Id., p. 424. See also "Catholic Digest," March, 1937, pp. 126, 127, and "America," September 13, 1913, pp. 547, 548. Page 154 Mr. Michael J. F. Mc Carty, of England, gives us some interesting facts regarding a similar work done by Jesuits in England. He says that they suppress books of Protestant authors, and bring to the front those of Catholics, and as a result of this systematic work, he says: "Many Protestant authors are forced to speak favourably and kindly of Romanism. . . . The publication of books containing friendly allusion to Protestant Christianity has almost ceased in England, [while the other kind of books] floods the country." - "The Jesuits and the British Press," p. 52. Edinburgh and London: 1910. But, in addition to this, the Jesuits always have a man, either a priest or a layman, on the committee of almost every public library in Great Britain. "The Jesuits' man comes provided with two lists, a black list, which includes every well-known book, ancient and modern, adverse to Romanism; and a white list of new books especially favourable to Romanism which he submits beforehand to the librarian, and eventually succeeds in getting placed in the library." – Pp. 50,51. It is quite evident from our investigation of the facts that the Jesuits are the same in America as in England. Besides this, the few remaining books from the days when it was not so unpopular to state the unvarnished facts about medieval history have been diminishing in number by being worn out or purposely destroyed. Censorship Of Books Those who write histories today have more source matter on ancient history, but less on medieval, than historians had four hundred years ago; for after the Reformation had fully aroused the papal church to action, her emissaries, especially the vigilant Jesuits, searched out and destroyed every evidence that was damaging to her. When Bishop Gilbert Burnet, D. D., prepared to write his "History of the English Reformation," he became surprised, while searching among court records and public registers, to find so much missing, till he finally discovered the cause. He says: "In the search I made of the Rolls and other offices, I wondered much to miss several commissions, patents, and other writings, which by clear evidence I knew were granted, and yet none of them appeared on record. “But as I continued down my search to the fourth year of Queen Mary, I found in the twelfth roll of that year, a commission which cleared all my former doubts, and by which I saw what was become of the things I had so anxiously searched after. We have heard of the expurgation of books practiced in the Church of Rome; but it might have been imagined that public registers and records would have been safe. Yet lest these should have been afterwards confessors, it was resolved they should then be martyrs; for on the 29th of December, in the fourth year of her reign, a commission was issued out under the great seal to Bonner, Bishop of London, Cole, Dean of St. Paul's, and Martine, a doctor of the civil law, [which commanded the destruction of] divers compts, books, scrolls, instruments. . . . "When I saw this, I soon knew which way so many writings had gone.” - “History of the Reformation of the Church of England,” 2-vol. ed., Vol. I, Preface, p. xiii. London: 1880. Let no one, therefore, say that statements in older histories are not true because we cannot now find sources to prove them. Page 155 The reader may not know that back of all this activity stands the Roman Curia. One department of which is the Sacred Congregation of the Index, which meets at Rome on stated days to decide what books are forbidden, and to make lists of them, called "The Index of Prohibited Books."2 The writer has examined two editions of this "Index," one early edition, and their latest one of 1930 by Pope Pius XI. Some books are permanently forbidden, while others are forbidden until certain corrections are made in them, which explains the revisions of our schoolbooks, for the "Index" says: "Can. 1396. Books condemned by the Holy See are prohibited all over the world and in whatever language into which they may have been translated. “Can. 1397, Sec. 1. It is the duty of all the faithful, particularly of clerics, or those holding high positions and noted for their learning, to denounce any book, they may consider dangerous, to the local Ordinaries, or to the Holy See. . . . "Sec. 3. Those to whom such denunciations are made are bound in conscience not to reveal the names of the accusers. "Sec. 4. Local Ordinaries, either directly themselves, or through the agency of capable priests, are in duty bound to keep a close watch on the books that are published, or sold, within their territory. . . . "Can. 1398, Sec. 1. The condemnation of a book entails the prohibition, without especial permission, either to publish, to read, to keep, to sell, to translate it, or in any way to pass it on to others. "Sec. 2. A book which has been prohibited in any way may not be republished, unless, after the necessary corrections have been made." - "Index," of 1930, pp. xvi, xvii. Vatican Polyglot Press. The Catholic Encyclopedia has this to say about the "Censorship of Books": "In general, censorship of books is a supervision of the press in order to prevent any abuse of it. "The reverse of censorship is freedom of the press."-Vol. III, p. 519. This "supervision of the press" extends also to articles written in magazines and newspapers, and among the special organisations working in this field is the International Catholic Truth Society, and the Catholic International Associated Press. Reporting the Louisville federation convention of the latter, Michael Kenny, S. J., in America (a Jesuit weekly) for August 31, 1912, says of their Catholic Press Bureau: "We have it in our power to compel our papers, the thinking machines of the people, to tell the truth and refrain from transmitting slanders on Catholic matters. We can prevent the wells at which the people drink from being poisoned. We can, following the lead of the Austrian Catholic Congress, establish a Catholic International Associated Press,3 and to accomplish this object every Catholic of the right spirit, reading in the daily papers calumnies of our religion and the most brazen justification of the robber bands who drive our religious from their homes and confiscate their property, should be willing 2 See "Romanism and the Republic." by Isaac J. Lansing, pp. 221-223. Pope Benedict X on March 25 1917 transferred this work to the “Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office.” – “Index of Prohibited Books,” p. xxxi. 3 The Register (Roman Catholic), Denver. Colorado, April 3, 1938. announced the formation of the United Catholic Organisations' Press Relations Committee to keep vigilant oversight over newspapers and magazines. Page 156 to contribute a tithe of his possessions. All this and more can be accomplished by federated action. . . . Marching shoulder to shoulder with the spirit of soldiers on the battlefield at the call of the Church, we can successfully combat the organisations of her enemies and make this an era of Catholic manhood." - "America," August 31, 1912, p. 486, article by M. Kenny, S.J. As a result of this organised effort no newspapers in the United States will accept any news that reflects unfavourably on the Catholic Church or its propaganda in this country, while news unfavourable to Protestants is printed.

Saturday, November 17, 2018

The Invaders Series - Part 25


-- The United States In Prophecy -- A Beautiful Picture WE HAVE now seen that "the first beast of Revelation 13: 1-10 represents the Papacy, and that it received its "deadly wound" in 1798, when the Papal States had been abolished, Rome declared a republic, and Pope Pius VI taken a prisoner into France where he died in "captivity," August 19, 1799. (Revelation 13: 3, 10.) The prophet then sees "another beast coming up." Verse ll. Knowing that a "beast” in prophecy represents a "kingdom" (Daniel 7: 23) we must conclude that a new nation was to come up about 1798. In 1754 John Wesley, in his "New Testament with Explanatory Notes," applied the beast of Revelation 13: 1-10 to the Papacy, and then wrote the following note under the eleventh verse: "Another . . . beast. . . . But he is not yet come, though he cannot be far off; for he is to appear at the end of the forty two months of the first beast. And he had two horns like a lamb-a mild, innocent appearance." - p. 427. In locating this new nation let us notice the following points in this prophecy: (1) When the prophet saw the papal beast go "into captivity" (Revelation 13: 10), he "beheld another beast" "like a lamb" "coming up." Verse 11. A lamb is not full grown. This nation, therefore, would be coming up, and not be full grown in 1798, when the papal beast went into captivity. (2) While the four beasts of Daniel 7: 3, and the first beast of Revelation 13: 1, all came up from "the sea," which in prophecy means "peoples, and multitudes" (Revelation 17: 15), the second beast of Revelation 13: 11 came "up out of the earth," indicating that, while the former kingdoms arose in countries populated with peoples and multitudes, this latter nation was to rise in new territory, not formerly occupied. (3) The dragon of Revelation 12, and the first beast of Revelation 13, both had crowns, but this beast had none, which would indicate that it was to be a republic, having no crowned head. (4) It would exercise its power "before" the papal beast (verse 12), showing that it is not a Catholic nation, nor counted as part of the papal confederacy, therefore it would naturally be a Protestant nation to begin with. (5) It would be a great nation, for it was equal in power to the Papacy. Verse 12. (6) And yet its principles were to he lamb like, mild (verse 11), or as the Danish and German have it: "Like the lamb," - Christlike. And Christ advocated two great principles: First, separation of church and state. He said: "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's." Luke 20: 25. That is, keep the two separate. Second, religious liberty. He said: "If any man hear My words, and believe not, I judge him not." John 12:47. "Judge not, that ye be not judged!' Matthew 7: 1. It is evident that only one nation answers to all these specifications: the United States of America. It became an independent nation in 1776, and was not full grown in 1798, having only thirteen states, Page 144 compared with forty-eight now. Its peaceful growth and principles of liberty answer also to the predictions of this prophecy. The words "coming up" used in Revelation 13: 11 mean to spring up, as plants." - T. S. Green's Lexicon, p. 9. And G. A. Townsend says: “The history of the United States was separated by a beneficent Providence far from this wild and cruel history of the rest of the continent, and, like a silent seed, we grew into empire.” - "The New World Compared with the Old," p. 685. Hartford: 1870. The principles of Romanism had taken such deep root in the human heart that although the Puritans had come to this country to seek liberty of worship for themselves, they soon established a state religion, and persecuted dissenters most bitterly. In several of the Colonies good citizens were put in the stocks for not going to church on Sunday; they were mercilessly whipped, or even put to death, for differing from the established religious belief. Many of the nobler minds had grown tired of political tyranny and religious bigotry, and determined to throw off both yokes in one stroke. On June 7, 1776, Richard Henry Lee introduced a resolution in the Continental Congress at Philadelphia, Pa., declaring, "That these United Colonies are and of right ought to be free and independent States, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain is and ought to be totally dissolved!' A committee, consisting of Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, Roger Sherman, and Robert R. Livingston, was appointed to draft a formal Declaration, which was penned by Mr. Jefferson, and on June 28, Congress proceeded to consider it. The discussion that followed was a tremendous struggle. On July 2, Lee's resolution was voted, and finally at 2: 00 P.M., July 4, 1776, the Declaration of Independence was voted, and the bell in the tower of Independence Hall, where they were assembled, rang out the joyful news. This bell bore the now prophetic inscription, "Proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof." Leviticus 25: 10. "In all the colonies, indeed, the Declaration was hailed as the passing away of the old world and the birth of the new." - "Great Events of the Greatest Century," R. M. Devens, p. 29. The noble men who framed the Declaration did not ask for toleration. They understood the fundamentals of true liberty, and declared: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed!' Sacred truths these are, written in Independence Hall. "Within that temple was born a nation, in whose destiny were wrapped the interests of Liberty and of Civilisation to the end of time." - Id., p. 31. The Federal Constitution, adopted September 17, 1787, and ratified by the several states between December 7, 1787 and May 29, 1790, has this statement in its preamble. "We, the people of the United States, in order to . . . secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." Still some friends of religious liberty, who had so long suffered persecution, feared that the Constitution did not sufficiently safeguard liberty of conscience, and they wrote to George Washington in regard to it. The following is his reply, dated August 4, 1789: Page 145 "If I could have entertained the slightest apprehension that the Constitution framed by the convention where I had the honour to preside might possibly endanger the religious rights of any ecclesiastical society, certainly I would never have placed my signature to it; and if I could now conceive that the general government might ever be so administered as to render the liberty of conscience insecure. I beg you will be persuaded that no one would be more zealous than myself to establish effectual barriers against the horrors of spiritual tyranny and every species of religious persecution. For, you doubtless remember, I have often expressed my sentiments that any man, conducting himself as a good citizen and being accountable to God alone for his religious opinions, ought to be protected in worshiping the Deity according to the dictates of his own conscience." - "History of the Baptists," Thomas Armitage, D. D., LL. D., pp. 806, 807. New York: 1890. A month later, September 23, 1789, the first ten Amendments to the Constitution, also called the Bill of Rights, were approved by Congress. By December 15,1791, they had been ratified by ten states, and were declared in force. The first Amendment reads: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." In the prophecy this beast "bad two horns like a lamb." Dr. Alexander Cruden gives many examples in his Concordance to show that "the Scripture mentions the horn as the symbol of strength." - Art. "Horn," p. 291. And the real strength of this republic has been its two great principles: civil and religious liberty - a state without a king, and a church without a pope. G. A. Townsend, speaking of the real secret of power in this country, says: “ ‘In view of this unparalleled progress and combination, what are the little toys with which we vex ourselves in Europe? What is this needle gun, we are anxious to get from Prussia, that we may beat her next year with it? Had we not better take from America the principle of liberty she embodies, out of which have come her citizen pride, her gigantic industry, and her formidable loyalty to the destinies of her Republican land?’” – “The New World Compared with the Old,” p. 462. The secret of our power at home, and our influence abroad, was the citizens' love for, and enthusiastic devotion to, their country, which guaranteed liberty to all, instead of oppression by taxation and religious despotism, as had been the rule in former ages. As the principles of liberty and the inherent equality of all men, enunciated in the Declaration of Independence, and in the first Amendment to the Federal Constitution, spread in Europe, people became awakened to their God-given rights. Mr. Townsend says: "Since America was discovered she has been a subject of revolutionary thought in Europe. . . . Out of her discovery grew the European reformation in religion; out of our Revolutionary War grew the revolutionary period of Europe." - Id., pp-462,463. The prophet saw these two powerful horns on the lamblike beast, and thinking men today have also caught the vision of their power in the world. Page 146 A Sad Change We wish we could close the picture here, and leave its unmarred beauty lingering in our minds; but, sad to say, there is another chapter to it that must be read. The prophet continues: "He spake as a dragon." Revelation 13: 11. A nation speaks through its laws. This prophetic statement, therefore, reveals that a great change in policy is to come over our beloved country. The "dragon" is a symbol of pagan Rome, that persecuted the early Christians during the first three centuries. (Revelation 12: 1-5, 11) And a similar persecution will be inaugurated against the "remnant" church, for we read: "The dragon was wroth with the woman [church], and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ." Revelation 12: 17. And he has "great wrath, because he knows that he hath but a short time." Verse 12. Here we see what is meant by speaking "as a dragon," and we also see upon whom this persecution will come; namely, upon commandment-keepers. This prophecy also reveals what influence will be brought to bear upon our law makers and people to produce this sad change. We have already seen that "the first beast" of Revelation 13: 1-10 represents the Papacy, and by reading the eleventh and twelfth verses we see that the effort of the lamblike beast will be to cause "the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound wag healed." That is: The whole trend is Romeward, therefore it must be Rome that is working in disguise to bring about such a trend. And now as to the facts in the case. We quote the following from Roman Catholic sources: At the Centennial Conference of American Catholics, held in Baltimore, November, 1890, Archbishop Ireland said: "Catholics of the United States are called . . . to make America Catholic. . . . The church triumphant in America, Catholic truth will travel on the wings of American influence, and with it encircle the universe." - "The Pope and the New Era," pp. 222, 223. London: W. T. Stead, 1890. A letter from Rome, dated October 14, 1894, says: "The United States of America, it can be said without exaggeration, are the chief thought of Leo XIII. . . . A few days ago, on receiving an eminent American, Leo XIII said to him: 'But the United States are the future; we think of them incessantly.' . . . That is why Leo X111 turns all his soul, full of ideality, to what is improperly called his American policy. It should be called his Catholic universal policy." - "Catholic Standard and Times" (Philadelphia), November 3, 1894; quoted in "Protestant Magazine," October, 1913, p. 441. The report of "the third Washington conference" says: "Our purpose is to make America dominantly Catholic." –“The Mission Movement in America,” issued from the Catholic University, Washington, D. C., June, 1909. "It seems to me that the main support of Protestantism comes from the United States and England. . . . If we put an end to this effort in England and the United States by making these nations predominantly Catholic, we will have removed the chief obstacle to the conversion of the world to the true faith. . . . A vigorous effort in the United States at this time will reduce the opposition to an insignificant condition. . . . In the course of another century, the [Protestant] sects will be a study for the historian and Page 147 antiquarian along with Arianism." - Extract from a letter in "The Missionary " (Roman Catholic), Washington, D. C.: May, 1910; quoted in "Protestant Magazine," Vol. II, p. 22. This Catholic movement has already made such progress in England, that, with a little careful manipulation, its leaders anticipate very little opposition in the future. (See " History of the Rome- Ward Movement in the Church of England," London: 1900, and "The Secret History of the Oxford Movement". London: 1899, both by Walter Walsh; and "The Oxford Movement in America," by Rev. C. E. Walworth, New York: 1895; also "The Jesuits and the British Press," by Michael J. F. McCarthy). Now the " Catholic Action" is focused on America, not in an antagonistic way, but quietly, in wisely planned, systematically organised, and well directed efforts along numerous lines, so as to gain favor among Protestants, and not to be suspected as propaganda. And, remarkable as it may sound, Protestant leaders and people are totally asleep on the Catholic question, even more so than the Huguenots were in France before the St. Bartholomew's Massacre. Dr. E. Boyd Barrett, for many years a Jesuit, and still a Roman Catholic, as far as the author knows, has the following to say about the plans of his church: “In theory, Catholic Action is the work and service of lay Catholics in the cause of religion, under the guidance of the bishops. In practice it is the Catholic group fighting their way to control America.” - “Rome Stoops to Conquer,” p. 15. New York: 1935. "The effort, the fight, may be drawn out. It may last for five or ten years. Even if it last for twenty - what is twenty years in the life of Rome? The fight must be fought to a finish - opposition must be worn down if it cannot be swept away. Rome's immortal destiny hangs on the outcome. That destiny overshadows the land. "And in the fight, as she has ever fought when battles were most desperate in the past, Rome will use steel, and gold, and silvery lies. Rome will stoop to conquer." Id., pp. 266, 267. In a communication from Vatican City, published in the Saint Paul Pioneer Press, November 4, 1936, we read: "Pope Pius feels that the United States is the ideal base for Catholicism's great drive. . . . "The Catholic Movement, Rome's militant organisation numbering millions all over the world, will be marshalled direct from Rome by Monsignor Pizzardo - next to Pacelli the Holy See's shrewdest diplomat and politician-instead of by the local bishops as before. The priest's education is to be thoroughly revised and modernised with special attention to modern propaganda methods. In addition there will be established in each country a central bureau, responsible only to Rome, to combat red agitation with every political weapon available. . . . The church must fight, and at once. "Coughlin has shown us the way of getting at the modern man. He has embarrassed us by showing and using the political power of the church so openly. . . . We know how to tackle America today, and that is our most important problem at the moment. "Pacelli is contacting the American cardinals and leading Catholic personalities . . . . to explain the Vatican's plan for the new crusade . . . . The Catholic political organisations in the large cities, like Page 148 Tammany Hall, will give the church a good lever. Those contacts are also being carefully inspected by the pope's minister. "The Vatican itself resembles a general staff headquarters preparing plans and arms for a big offensive. Since the time of the Counter Reformation, churchmen say, no such extensive reorganisation of personnel and propaganda methods has been undertaken. The whole worldwide net of Catholic organisations and sub-organisations is being contacted directly from Rome and cleared for action. The church is to be adjusted to modern political, social, and cultural conditions." - p. 10, col. 3, 4, used by permission. This article speaks of Eugenio Cardinal Pacelli, then papal secretary of state, coming from the Vatican to effect the above mentioned reorganisation. He toured the United States "in a chartered aeroplane." Christian Science Monitor says: "The visit of a high Roman prelate to the United States on the eve of an election is as unprecedented as it is delicate." - Oct. 2, 1926. This Catholic plan of conquest was well understood years ago. An illustration in Harper's Weekly of October 1, 1870, pictured the pope pointing to America as "The Promised Land." Page 149 25. Making America Catholic THE Roman hierarchy knew that the older Protestants, who had read about the persecutions of the Dark Ages, and who knew some of the inside workings of the papal church, would never become Catholics. Rome's hope lay in capturing the younger generation. If the Papacy could cover up those dark pages of its history, when it waded in the blood of martyrs, and could appear in the beautiful modern dress of a real champion for liberty, as a lover of science, art, and education, it would appeal to the American youth, and the battle would be won. The Jesuits, who through years of experience in Europe, have become experts in moulding young minds, are now establishing schools everywhere, that are patronised by thousands of Protestant youth. They have also undertaken the delicate task of Romanising the textbooks of our public schools, and books of reference, in order to cover up their past, and to whitewash the Dark Ages. That Romanists desire to cover up their past record of bloody persecution is acknowledged by that honourable Roman Catholic author, Alfred Baudrillart, Rector of the Catholic Institute of Paris. After giving a frank statement of the many persecutions of which his church is guilty, he says in the words of Mgr. d'Hulst: "'Indeed, even among our friends and our brothers we find those who dare not look this problem in the face. They ask permission from the Church to ignore or even to deny all those facts and institutions in the past which have made orthodoxy compulsory."' - "The Catholic Ch