Rev_3:17
Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of
nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and
blind, and naked
The truth of the
following is only more realized in our day.
The mingling of
religion and politics is very common, especially when you have a leader of a
church constantly influencing worldwide politics- an undeniable truth.
FACTS OF FAITH By Christian Edwardson
Chapter 26
Americanism Versus Romanism
(256) Some say: 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 neighbors they are loved and respected. We, however, are
not speaking of individuals, but of
a church organization that
claims certain rights of jurisdiction in civil affairs,
and 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, Nov. 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. 113, 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
fountain-head, 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....
(257) "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 favor - 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 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 favor 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.
(258) "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 endeavor 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....
"Honor, 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 favor 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....
(259) "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.
"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 organization." - 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.
(260) 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." Rev. 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 honor 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.
(261) "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?
"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 Romanized 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 schismatical
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.
(262) 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 on 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 mediaeval times." -
"Encyclical Letter of Our Most Holy Lord Pius X," quoted in
Supplement to "The Tablet,"
June 11, 1910, p. 950. London. England. (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. I, chap. 7, Parts I, II.)
APPLICATION
OF PAPAL PRINCIPLES TO CIVIL GOVERNMENT
The Jesuits in this country endeavor 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
(263) 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
favor, such an one as shall bind himself by unquestionable obligation to carry
out the measures we have indicated." - "Records
of Civilization 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 oxhide, and
the guides dragged [it] the whole way." At last they arrived at Canossa,
where the pope temporarily abode.
(264) "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 '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 woolen
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 harness 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 in not an isolated case.
(265) "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 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:
(266) "It
is not in defense 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 had 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 devoted its energies to the
upbuilding 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.
Pg. 267
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.'...
"In accordance with these principles it was determined
to constitute at once a Committee to multiply organizations 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 Brodeaux, 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 of 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.'
(268) "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. '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 programme. This time they should unite on behalf of the
interests of religion. Now more than ever before united action is
necessary sub vexillo Christi...[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, as 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.
(269) 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, Dec. 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:
"'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 organizations, 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.
(270) 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 co-operation 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
semi-official 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.
(271) 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 favorable 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.
"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. Nor 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 pretense - 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 favor the worst adversary of this most noble and
desiring 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.
No comments:
Post a Comment