FACTS OF FAITH
By Christian Edwardson
(The closing chapters)
Chapter 
23
(216) God knows the future, and He has a set "time there for every purpose and for every work." (Acts 15:18; Ecclesiastes 3:1, 17.) He has also pledged Himself to "do nothing" that vitally concerns this world "but He revealeth His secret unto His servants the prophets" beforehand (John 15:14, 15; Psalm 25:14; Amos 3:7), and then He holds His servants responsible for warning the world (Ezekiel 33:1-8). They are watchmen on the walls of Zion, who should be able to read the signs on God's prophetic clock, so they can tell the time and give the warning at the hour of crisis (Isaiah 21:11, 12; 2 Peter 1:19; Romans 13:11; Matthew 16:2, 3); and when God's hour strikes, He has His agencies in readiness to carry His message to the world.
Before the world was destroyed by the Flood, Noah warned the people for one hundred twenty years (Genesis 6:3-13, 22; 2 Peter 2:5); before the destruction of Sodom, Lot gave the warning message to that wicked city (Genesis 19:12-14); and before Christ's first coming, John the Baptist heralded the coming of the Messiah (Luke 1:13-17). Then why should not so important an event as Christ's second coming be given proper notice, and a warning message be sent to prepare the world for its final destruction?
It is true that the world in general has never received favorably any of God's warning messages in former ages, and Christ declares that His final warning will not be heeded any more than His warnings sent through Noah and Lot. (Luke 17:26-30.) Yet the message must be given though there are but few who receive it. Here is Christ's message for our days:
"I Jesus have sent Mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches." Rev. 22:16. "Behold, I come quickly: blessed is he that keepeth the sayings of the prophecy of this book." V. 7. Here we see that the message to be given just before Christ's second coming is found in the "book" of Revelation. This is specifically given in chapter 14, verses 6-14. Here is presented "the everlasting gospel," connected with the warning that "the hour of His judgment is come," and an appeal for a return to the loyal worship of the Creator, combined with a warning against the worship of the "beast and his image," and against taking "his mark." Those who receive this message are characterized by the fact that they "keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus." Rev. 14:6-13. The very next scene is the Son of man coming on the cloud to reap the harvest of the earth, and "the harvest is the end of the world." Verses 14-16 and Matt. 13:39.
(217) The people who give this message to the world must therefore know what is meant by "the beast," "his image," and "his mark." This we find clearly presented in Revelation 13. Let us study this chapter.
John "saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns." Rev. 13:1. The fact that it had "ten horns," the same as the fourth beast of Daniel 7:7, 23, 24, identifies it as a Roman power (see pages 34, 35), The next question to settle will be whether this is Rome in its pagan or its papal state. The ten horns represent the ten European kingdoms into which the Roman Empire was divided between A.D. 351 and 476. On this beast the horns are crowned (Rev. 13:1), showing that the empire had been divided. The beast of Rev. 13:1-10 therefore represents papal Rome.
The dragon with ten horns (Rev. 12:3), which represents pagan Rome, gave to the beast "his power, and his seat, and great authority." Rev. 13:2. The "seat" of the Roman Empire was the city of Rome. How was this given to the Papacy? Francis P. C. Hays (Roman Catholic) says:
(218) "When the Roman Empire became Christian, and the peace of the Church was guaranteed, the Emperor left Rome to the Pope, to be the seat of the authority of the Vicar of Christ, who should reign there independent of all human authority, to the consummation of ages, to the end of time." - "Papal Rights and Privileges," pp. 13, 14. London: R. Washbourne, 1889.
Alexander C. Flick, Ph. D., Litt. D., says:
"The removal of the capital of the empire from Rome to Constantinople in 330, left the Western Church practically free from imperial power, to develop its own form of organization. the Bishop of Rome, in the seat of the Caesars, was now the greatest man in the West, and was soon forced to become the political as well as the spiritual head." - "The Rise of the Mediaeval Church," p. 168.
"And meekly stepping to the throne of Caesar, the vicar of Christ took up the scepter to which the emperors and kings of Europe were to bow in reverence through so many ages." - Rev. James P. Conroy, in "American Catholic Quarterly Review," April, 1911.
But let us consider the other marks used by the Holy Spirit to point out this power. It cannot be a local government, confined to a certain country, for "all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him." Rev. 13:8. and it must be a religious, rather than a civil, power; for it concerns itself with the "worship" of the people. V. 4, 8. "There was given unto him a mouth speaking great things," and he was "to make war with the saints, and to overcome them" (Rev. 13:5, 7), just as the "little horn" of Daniel 7:8, 21, 25. (See pp. 34-48.) All this could apply to no other power than the Papacy.
THE NUMBER 666
The Scripture gives us still another earmark of this power. We read: "Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six." "The number of his name." Rev. 13:17, 18. The note below the eighteenth verse in the Douay, or Catholic, Bible says: "Six hundred sixty-six. The numeral letters of his name shall make up this number."
CATHOLIC AUTHORITIES
(219) In our examination of this subject we shall first consult Roman Catholic authorities to ascertain what sacred title they apply to the pope to denote his official position and authority. Any one at all familiar with authentic Catholic authors knows that their paramount and constant claim for the pope is that Christ appointed St. Peter to be His vicar, or representative on earth, and that each succeeding pope is the lawful successor of St. Peter, and is therefore the "Vicar of the Son of God" on earth. This official title in Latin (the official language of the Catholic Church) is "Vicarius Filii Dei." We find this title used officially in Roman Catholic canon law, from medieval times down to the present. In the earliest collection of canon law we read:
"Beatus Petrus in terris Vicarius filii Dei videtur esse constitutus." - "Decretum Gratiani," prima pars, dist. xcvi. Translated into the English this would read: "Blessed Peter is seen to have been constituted vicar of the Son of God on the earth." - "Decretum of Gratian," part 1, div. 96, column 472, first published at Bologna about 1148, and reprinted in 1555. Translation by Christopher B. Coleman, Ph. D., in "The Treatise of Lorenzo Vallo on the Donation of Constantine," p. 13. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1922.
The Catholic Encyclopedia says of Gratian: "He is the true founder of the science of canon law." - Vol. VI, art. "Gratian," p. 730.
The same Catholic authority says: "The 'Decretum' of Gratian was considered in the middle of the twelfth century as a corpus juris canonici, i.e. a code of the ecclesiastical law then in force." - Id., Vol. IV, art. "Decretals," p. 671.
(220) It further states: "It must be admitted that the work of Gratian was as near perfection as was then possible. For that reason it was adopted at Bologna, and soon elsewhere, as the textbook for the study of canon law....While lecturing on Gratian's work, the canonists labored to complete and elaborate the master's teaching." - Id., Vol. IX, art. "Law, Canon," pars. "D" and "E," p. 62.
Different popes added their own decrees to the collection of Gratian, as the following quotation will show:
"Thus by degrees the Corpus Juris Canonici took shape. This became the official code of canon law for Western Europe during the Middle Ages, and was composed of six books, namely, the Decretum of Gratian (about 1150), the Decretals of Gregory IX (1234), the Sextus Of Boniface VIII (1298), the Clementines of Clement V (1313), the Extravagantes of John XXII (about 1316), and the Extrabagantes Communes, which contained laws made by succeeding popes." - 'The Papacy," Rev. C. Lattey, S. J., page 143. Cambridge, England: 1924.
After the Council of Trent, Pope Pius V had this "Canon Law" revised.
"Pius V appointed (1566) a commission to prepare a new edition of the 'Corpus Juris Canonici.' This commission devoted itself especially to the correction of the text of the 'Decree' of Gratian and of its gloss. Gregory XIII ('Cum pro munere,' 1 July, 1580; 'Emendationem,' 2 June, 1582) decreed that no change was to be made in the revised text. This edition of the 'Corpus' appeared at Rome in 1582, in aedibus populi Romani, and serves as examplar for all subsequent editions." - Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. IV, art. "Corpus Juris Canonicci," pp. 392, 393. It was reprinted verbatim in 1613 and 1622.
This is the standard text of canon law for the whole Roman Catholic Church. Pope Gregory XIII wrote July 1, 1580, in his preface to this corrected edition:
"We have demanded care in rejecting, correcting, and expurgating....The Decree itself, without the glossae, exists now entirely freed from faults and corrected,...as much the one without the glossae as the entire one with the glossae...all recognized and approved...this body of canonical law firmly grounded and incorrupted according to this model printed at Rome by Catholic typographers....We wishing to proceed opportunely, so that this canonical law thus expurgated, may come restored to all the faithful...kept perpetually integrid and incorruptible, motu proprio, and from our certain knowledge, and from the plenitude of the apostolic power to all and singly in the dominion of our sacred Roman Church." - Preface to Corpus Juris Canonici, Gregorii XIII, Pontif. Max. Auctoritate; in editions of 1582, 1613, 1622, and 1879.
(221) Of this corrected "Corpus," or canon law, "published in 1582...by order of Gregory XIII," and established by his authority, we read:
"The text of this edition, revised by the Correctores Romani, a pontifical commission established for the revision of the text of the 'Corpus Juris,' has the force of law." - Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. IV, art. "Decretals, Papal," p. 672, par. 3.
Notice that this revised edition of canon law "has the force of law." In this canon law, which Pope Gregory XIII had corrected by "the plenitude of the apostolic power," so that it is "entirely freed from faults," we find the same statement: "Beatus Petrus in terris vicarius Filii Dei esse videtur constitutus." - "Corpus Juris Canonici, Gregorii XIII, Pontif. Max. Auctoritate," Distinctio 96, Column 286, Canon Constantinus 14, Magdeburg, 1747.
"Moreover, custom has even given to several apocryphal canons of the 'Decree' of Gratian the force of law." - Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. IV, art. "Corpus Juris Canonici," p. 393.
In "Corpus Juris Canonici Emendatum et Notis Illustratum Gregorii XIII. Pont. Max.," "Lvgdvn, MDCXXII," or "the Canon Law of Pope Gregory XIII, of 1622," with the Pope's own "Preface," in which he assures us of its being without flaw, we find the same: "Beatus Petrus in terris Vicarius filii Dei esse videtur constitutus." Column 295.
We cannot see how any consistent Catholic can deny the authenticity of this title without denying the infallibility of the pope. What more authority can they desire?
(222) Before going further let us apply the rule laid down in the Catholic Bible for counting the number of his name. It says: "The numeral letters of his name shall make up this number." - Note under Revelation 13:18. In Bible times they did not use figures. we can still see on dials of old clocks, in numbers given above chapters in the Bible, and in dates inscribed on cornerstones, certain numerical values given to some of the letters. In Latin, I stands for 1, V for 5, X for 10, L for 50, C for 100, D for 500, and M for 1,000. Originally we had no U, but V was used for U, and V is often used for U today on public buildings, such as "Pvblic Library," and our W is still written as a double V, not as a double U.
V……………………………………………………………………………………5
i……………………………………………………………………………………..1
c…........……....………………………………………………………………….100
a…………………………………………………………………………………….0
r……………………………………………………………………………………..0
i……………………………………………………………………………………..1
u…………………………………………………………………………………….5
s…………………………………………………………………………………….0
F…………………………………………………………………………………….0
i……………………………………………………………………………………..1
l………...…….........………………………………………………………………50
i……………………………………………………………………………………..1
i……………………………………………………………………………………..1
D………........……………………………………………………………………500
e…………………………………………………………………………………….0
i……………………………………………………………………………………..1
[This totals] ……………………………………………………………………...666
The next Catholic authority we shall quote is F. Luccii Ferraris, who wrote "a veritable encyclopedia" in Latin, of which several editions have been printed by the papal church at Rome. The American Catholic Encyclopedia says of Ferraris's great work that it "will ever remain a precious mine of information." - Vol. VI, p. 48. From this unquestionable Catholic authority we shall first quote its Latin statement, and then give the English translation:
"Ut sicut Beatus Petrus in terris vicarius Filii Dei fuit constitutus, ita et Pontifices eius successores in terris principatus potestatem amplius, quam terrenae imperialis nostrae seremitatis mansuetudo habere fidetur." ("As the blessed Peter was constituted Vicar of the Son of God on earth, so it is seen that the Pontiffs, his successors, hold from us and our empire the power of a supremacy on the earth greater than the clemency of our earthly imperial serenity.") - "Prompta Bibliotheca canonica juridica moralis theologica" etc., Vol. VI, art. "Papa," p. 43. Printed by the Press of the Propaganda, Rome: 1890.
(223) Henry Edward Cardinal Manning of England, an extensive Roman Catholic writer, of high esteem in his church, applies the same title to the pope, only using it in its English translation. He says of the popes:
"The temporal power in the hands of St. Gregory I was a fatherly and patriarchal rule over nations not as yet reduced to civil order. In the hands of St. Leo III it became a power of creating empires. In the hands of St. Gregory VII it was a scourge to chasten them. In the hands of Alexander III it was a dynasty, ruling supremely, in the name of God, over the powers of the world....So that I may say there never was a time when the temporal power of the Vicar of the Son of God, though assailed as we see it, was more firmly rooted throughout the whole unity of the Catholic Church.
"It was a dignified obedience to bow to the Vicar of the Son of God, and to remit the arbitration of their griefs to one whom all wills consented to obey." - "The Temporal Power of the Vicar of Jesus Christ," pp. 231, 232, second edition. London. Burns and Lambert, 1862.
The same year, this book was translated and published in Italian, with the sanction of the church attached to it. The title "Vicar of the Son of God" appears on pages 234, and 235 of that edition.
Philippe Labbe, "a distinguished Jesuit writer on historical, geographical, and philological questions" (Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. VIII, pp. 718, 719), in his historical work "Sacrosancta concilia ad regitionem exacta," Vol. I, page 1534 (Paris: 1671), uses "Vicarius Filii Dei" as the official title of the pope.
Coming down to our own times, we shall call to the witness stand a modern advocate of the Roman Catholic cause. Our Sunday Visitor, of Huntington, Ind., in its issue of April 18, 1915, gives clear testimony in this case. We quote it in full:
"What are the letters supposed to be in the Pope's crown, and what do they signify, if anything?
"The letters inscribed in the Pope's mitre are these: Vicarius Filii Dei, which is the Latin for Vicar of the Son of God. Catholics hold that the Church which is a visible society must have a visible head. Christ, before His ascension into heaven, appointed St. Peter to act as His representative. Upon the death of Peter the man who succeeded to the office of Peter as Bishop of Rome, was recognized as the head of the Church. Hence to the Bishop of Rome, as head of the Church, was given the title 'Vicar of Christ.'
(224) "Enemies of the Papacy denounce this title as a malicious assumption. But the Bible informs us that Christ did not only give His Church authority to teach, but also to rule. Laying claim to the authority to rule in Christ's spiritual kingdom, in Christ's stead, is not a whit more malicious than laying claim to the authority to teach in Christ's name. And this every Christian minister does." - "Our Sunday Visitor," April 18, 1915, thirteenth question under "Bureau of Information," p. 3.
Later, when Roman Catholic authorities discovered that Protestants were making use of the foregoing statements to identify the Papacy with the antichristian power of Rev. 12:18, they attempted to repudiate the contents of their former article. But that article was not written by some contributor to their paper; it appeared in the "Bureau of Information," for which the editorial staff was responsible. And on page two of that paper appeared sanctions for the editor from Pope Pius X, dated May 17, 1914; from the Apostolic Delegate, John Bonzano, dated April 27, 1913; and from J. H. Alerding, Bishop of Fort Wayne, Ind., dated March 29, 1912. If statements made under such high authorities are not trustworthy, we would respectfully ask if their present denials are any more so?
To one versed in Catholic teaching and practice, there is nothing uncommon in such denials, where the interest of the Church is at stake. Cardinal Baudrillart's quotation on pages 64 and 245 of this book shows that some Catholic authors "ask permission from the Church to ignore or even deny" some historical facts, which they "dare not" face; and we read in "History of the Jesuits," by Andrew Steinmetz, Vol. I, p. 13, that their accredited histories in common use, 'with permission of authority,' [are] veiling the subject with painful dexterity." - London. 1848.
(225) We shall here refer to one other similar denial. In the Roman Catholic paper, Shepherd of the Valley, there appeared an article by the editor, in which he stated: "If Catholics ever attain, which they surely will, though at a distant day, the immense numerical majority in the United States, religious liberty, as at present understood, will be at an end." A Protestant lecturer, who made use of this quotation, was bitterly arraigned in a double-column front-page article in the Catholic Standard and times for his false statements regarding Catholics; for, it pointed out, if he had finished the quotation with the words which followed, "so say our enemies," it would have reversed its meaning. The incident would have passed off at the expense of the Protestant lecturer, had not the Western Watchman of July 24, 1913, continued the quotation still further, declaring:
"The whole quotation should read: 'If Catholics ever attain, which they surely will, though at a distant day, the immense numerical majority in the United States, religious liberty, as at present understood, will be at an end. so say our enemies; so say we.'" - Quoted in "Protestant Magazine," October, 1913, p. 474.
Why those who tried to deny their former statements should leave out the words, "so say we," is very evident. But what can we think of those who publicly deny facts to screen their church from unfavorable public opinions, unless they act from the motive that "the end justifies the means," and that "heretics" have no moral right to facts which they would misuse. (See also pages 64 and 65 of this book.)
We shall therefore continue to believe that the editors of Our Sunday Visitor, in its issue of April 18, 1915, page three, were perfectly honest and well informed on the subject, and that the later denials are of the same class as those mentioned above.
(226) Our Sunday Visitor in the aforementioned quotation makes use of Vicarius Filii Dei and "Vicar of Christ" as synonymous terms, and Cardinal Manning does the same in his book, "Temporal Power of the Pope." It cannot, therefore, be maintained, as some do, that Vicarius Christi is the only mode of spelling used as the title of the pope, although the shorter rendering is used more often for brevity's sake. In fact Vicarius Christi is composite in its origin, Vicarius being Latin, while Christi is Latinized from the Greek. It would hardly seem probable that learned Romanists would adopt such a composite title to the exclusion of the pure, dignified, Latin title, Vicarius Filii Dei, which has been in use among them for centuries.
Of late, Catholic apologists have argued that the "name of the beast in Rev. 13:17, 18 is a person name of a single individual, such as Nero, and not the official title of a series of men as that of the popes would be. But this would be entirely out of harmony with the context, for how could one man make war with God's people, and overcome them in every country, so that he would have power "over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations"? Rev. 13:7. Then, too, that power was to continue forty and two months (v. 5), which those apologists claim to be literal. But how could one man accomplish such a world task in forty-two literal months?
These forty-two months are twelve hundred and sixty prophetic days (Rev. 11:2, 3), and in prophecy a day stands for a year (Ezekiel 4:6). (Even Catholics acknowledge that a day in prophecy stands for a year. See note under Daniel 9;24-27 in the Douay Bible. Father Reaves says: "The prophet's weeks are, by all interpreters of the Holy Scriptures, understood to include years for days." - "Bible History," p. 345.) The forty-two months, or twelve hundred and sixty days, of Revelation 13:5 are therefore twelve hundred and sixty years, during which this power was to continue. But would not that period be quite a long time for one man to live? This attempt made by Roman apologists to screen the Papacy from being detected as the antichristian power of Revelation 13 appears too shallow to be seriously asserted by men who have made a thorough study of Bible prophecy.
TESTIMONY OF EYE-WITNESSES
(227) That the title, Vicarius Filii Dei, has been employed elsewhere than in Roman Catholic canon law is also asserted by Rev. B. Hoffman:
"To Whom It May Concern:
"This is to certify that I was born in Bavaria in 1828, was educated in Munich, and was reared a Roman Catholic. In 1844 and 1845 I was a student for the priesthood in the Jesuit College in Rome.
"During the Easter service of 1845, Pope Gregory XVI wore a triple crown upon which was the inscription, in jewels, Vicarius Filii Dei. We were told that there were one hundred diamonds in the word Dei; the other words were of some other kind of precious stones of a darker color. There was one word upon each crown, and not all on the same line. I was present at the service, and saw the crown distinctly, and noted it carefully.
"In 1850 I was converted to God and to Protestantism. Two years later I entered the Evangelical Church ministry, but later in life I united with the Presbyterian Church, of which I am now a retired pastor, having been in the ministry for fifty years.
"I have made the above statement at the request of Elder D. E. Scoles, as he states that some deny that the pope ever wore this tiara. But I know that he did, for I saw it upon his head."
"Sincerely yours in Christian service, (Signed) "B. Hoffman. "Webb City, Mo., Oct. 29, 1906." - "Review and Herald," Dec. 20, 1906.
The author of this book has photostats of the papal passport held by Rev. B. Hoffman, and of a signed letter from him stating the same facts as are given in the above statement. His testimony is confirmed by that of M. De Latti and others.
(228) Statement of M. De Latti to D. E. Scoles. - "M. De Latti...had previously been a Catholic priest, and spent four years in Rome. He visited me when I was pastor in St. Paul, Minn....He stated that he had often seen it [the crown with this inscription] in the museum of the Vatican, and gave a detailed and accurate description of the whole crown....
"De Latti...said the first word of the sentence was on the first crown of the triple arrangement, the second word on the second part of the crown, while the word Dei was on the lower division of the triple crown. He also explained that the first two words were in dark-colored jewels, while the Dei was composed of diamonds entirely." - D. E. Scoles, in "Review and Herald," Dec. 20, 1906.
Statement of Thomas Whitmore. - "'Some time ago, an English officer happening to be at Rome, observed on the front of the mitre which the pope wore at one of the solemnities, this inscription: "Vicarius Filii Dei." It instantly struck him - perhaps this is "the number of the beast." He set to work: and when he had selected all the numerals, and added them up, he found, to his great astonishment, that the whole amounted to precisely six hundred and sixty-six. What stress is to be laid on this I cannot say.
"'Vicarivs Filii Dei
V………...5 I……......1 D…...…500
I……….…1 L…...…50 I…..…...…1
C…........100 I...…....…1 [totals] 501
I……….…1 I.……......1
V…………5 [totals] 53
[totals] 112
[This totals] 112 + 53 + 501 = 666
"Thus it will be seen, that by taking from the title 'Vicarivs Filii Dei' [Vicar of the Son of God], the letters which are commonly used as numerals, they make up the number of the beast." - "A Commentary on the Revelation of St. John the Divine," p. 231. Boston. 1856.
(229) Testimony of Dr. H. Grattan Guinness. - "An English officer of high rank, who in the year 1799, by a special favor, was given the opportunity, while in Rome, to get a close view of the Pope's jewels and precious things, discovered thereby, that the papal tiara bore this inscription: 'Vicarivs Filii Dei.'
"When you take out the Latin letters, which have numeral value, and which still are used to represent numbers, and which are: V, I, C, L, and D, these letters form the number given below. In these Latin words there are two V's, which letter denotes 5, six I's denoting 1, one C, which denotes 100, one L, which denotes 50, and one D, which denotes 500, thus: V, V = 10; I, I, I, I, I, I, = 6; C = 100; L = 500, the sum 666." - "Babylon and the Beast," p. 141; quoted in "Kyrkans Strid och Slutliga Seger," Professor S. F. Svensson, pp. 126, 128. Stockholm. 1908.
OTHER PROTESTANT WITNESSES
Robert Fleming, V. D. M., wrote a book entitled "Apocalyptical Key. An Extraordinary Discourse on the Rise and Fall of the Papacy." It was published in London, 1701, 1703, and 1929. In the 1929 edition, p. 48, we read that an "explication may be found in the title which the Roman pontiff has assumed, and which is inscribed over the door of the Vatican, 'Vicarius Filii Dei' (Vicar of the Son of God). In Roman computation this contains the number 666, as will be seen below.
V…………5 F..……0 D……500
I………….1 I...……1 E… ……0
C……...100 L…....50 I…..…….1
A……....…0 I……...1
R…………0 I…...…1
I………….1
V…………5
S…………0 In all 666."
TESTIMONY OF R. C. SHIMEALL
(230) "It is to be observed as a singular circumstance, that the title, vicarivs filii dei (Vicar of the Son of God), which the Popes of Rome have assumed to themselves, and caused to be inscribed over the door of the Vatican, exactly makes the number of 666, when deciphered according to the numeral signification of its constituent letters, thus:
Vicar of the Son of God
V I C A R I V S F I L I I D E I
5-1-100 1-5 1-50-1-1 500 -- 1
Added together thus:
V…………5
I……….…1
C...........100
A……........0
R……........0
I…….........1
V.……........5
S…........….0
F…….........0
I……...........1
L…….......50
I…………...1
I…………...1
D……....500
E………….0
I…………...1
[totals] 666" -"Our Bible Chronology, Historic and Prophetic, Critically Examined and Demonstrated," R. C. Shimeall, p. 180. New York: a. S. Barnes and Co., 1867.
Appended to the above is a footnote, giving the author's reply to a correspondent:
"Answer to a Querist....
(231) "Sir, - In answer to your observation and queries, permit me to say - the things I have asserted are stubborn, clear facts, not mere suppositions or fancies.
"The inscription in question, was actually written over the door of the Vatican at Rome, in express Latin words and characters, as inserted in this publication, viz., VICARIVS FILII DEI; and those Latin words and characters contain Latin numerals to the amount of 666, exactly corresponding with the number of the beast.
"With respect to the supposition you have conjured up, that the Pope might be called Vicarius Christus, or Vicarius Christus Filii Dei (a sort of gibberish that is neither Latin, German nor English), it is a matter I have nothing to do with. Mr. D. may adopt these or any other fancies to amuse himself, and to screen the head of his holiness, but when he has done all, this question will still remain to be answered: Have those inscriptions ever appeared over the door of the Vatican at Rome?
"As to Mr. D's attempting to obscure the number of the beast 666, contained in the numerals of the words VICARIVS FILII DEI, by objecting to a V; however the Pope or his emissaries may be obliged to him for his kind exertions on their behalf, yet I presume neither of them will condescend to appear his humble fool in Latin, for the sake of sheltering themselves under his ignorance of the Latin alphabet and the ancient inscriptions." - Id., p. 180.
Dr. S. T. Bloomfield gives us the following rule for finding the number:
"It means the number which is made up by reducing the numeral power of each of the letters of which the name is composed, and bringing it to a sum total." - "Greek Testament with English Notes," Note on Rev. 13:17, Vol. II, p. 175.
Samuel Hanson Cox, D.D. - "Can they [Protestants] accord to the present dominant Gregory, the pompous titles which he claims - VICARIUS FILII DEI, Vestra Sanctitas, Servus Servorus Domini, with other profane and blasphemous appellations without end?" - Introduction to Bower's "History of the Popes," Vol. I, p. x. Philadelphia: 1847.
(232) The fact that some may have seen a crown at the Vatican which did not have the above inscription does not disprove the statements of the men who saw the crown that has the inscription; for according to a copyrighted news report from Milan, Italy, dated December 11, 1922, and published in the Des Moines (Iowa) Register, December 12, 1922, the pope has five crowns, the last one made being decked with two thousand precious stones. The important part is not that the inscription Vicarius Filii Dei is on the pope's tiara, but that it is the official title of the popes, that it designates their official position, and is given to them at their coronation, just as the head of the United States government is called "President," without it therefore being necessary for him to wear that title on his hat.
Mr. H. S. Weaver, of Baltimore, Md., wrote to James Cardinal Gibbons, of the same city, under date of January 18, 1904, inquiring:
"Does the inscription, 'Vicarius filii Dei,' appear on the crown or mitre of the pope, or has it at any time in the past appeared on the crowns or mitres of any of the popes?"
"Yours sincerely, (Signed) "H. S. Weaver."
To this the Cardinal answered through his secretary:
"Baltimore, Md., Jan. 26, 1904.
"Mr. H. S. Weaver., Dear Sir:
"In reply to yours of 18th inst., I beg to say that I can not say with certainty that the words, 'Vicarius filii Dei,' are on the pope's tiara. But the words are used by the cardinal who imposes the tiara at the coronation of a pope.
"Yours truly, (Signed) "Wm. T. Russut, Secretary."
-"Bible Footlights," pp. 210, 211, edition of 1907.
The New Catholic Dictionary says:
(233) "Tiara, papal crown....It is placed on his head at his Coronation by the second cardinal-deacon, with the words: 'Receive the tiara adorned with three crowns and know that thou art Father of princes and kings, Ruler of the world, Vicar of our Saviour Jesus Christ.'" - The New Catholic Dictionary, art. "Tiara," p. 955.
We have already seen that Catholics have several free translations into English of the Latin title, "Vicarius Filii Dei." Some try to find in the Greek word Lateinos, or the Latin Empire of the Papacy, a fulfillment of Revelation 13:18 (see "Bishop Newton on the Prophecies," pp. 548-550), but there is no need of going to the Greek. For while it is true that the apostles used mostly the Aramaic and the Greek, Latin was the official language of Rome, the world empire at that time. The Romans everywhere used Latin, all their laws were written in that language, and Latin has remained the official language of the Papacy to this day. The apostle was prophesying of a strictly Latin power, whose language was in use in his day, and it is quite common for Bible writers to borrow foreign words and phrases belonging to the subjects of which they are speaking. (John 19:20; Revelation 9;11; 16:16.)
Then, too, the power represented by Revelation 13:1-10, 17, 18, must not only have the name indicated, but must also fulfill all the other specifications in this prophecy, and the Papacy does this. M. James Durham, Professor of Divinity in Glasgow (1658), says:
"He that hath all the characters of Antichrist's doctrine, and hath a name which, in the numeral letters, makes up 666, he is Antichrist. But to the Pope both these do agree." - "A Commentary Upon the Book of Revelation," Rev. 13:18, p. 491. Glasgow. 1680.
Chapter 24
A BEAUTIFUL PICTURE
(234) 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 11. 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" (Rev. 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 Rev. 13:1, all came up from "the sea," which in prophecy means "peoples, and multitudes" (Rev. 17:15), the second beast of Rev. 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.
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, 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 Rev. 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. 635. 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.
(236) 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 there are, written in Independence Hall. "Within that temple was born a nation, in whose destiny were wrapped the interests of Liberty and of Civilization to the end of time." - Id., p. 31.
(237) 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:
"If I could have entertained the slightest apprehension that the Constitution framed by the convention where I had the honor 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 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."
(238) In the prophecy this beast "had 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.
(239) 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." Rev. 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. (Rev. 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." Rev. 12:17. And he has "great wrath, because he knoweth 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 lawmakers and people to produce this sad change. We have already seen that "the first beast" of Rev. 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 was 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, Nov., 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.
(240) 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 XIII 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" (Philadelphis), Nov. 3, 1894; quoted in "Protestant Magazine," Oct., 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 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 Romeward 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. McMarthy."
(241) Now the "Catholic Action" is focused on America, not in an antagonistic way, but quietly, in wisely planned, systematically organized, 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, Nov. 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 organization numbering millions all over the world, will be marshaled 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 modernized - 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.
(242) "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 organizations in the large cities, like 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 reorganization of personnel and propaganda methods has been undertaken. The whole world-wide net of Catholic organizations and sub-organizations 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 reorganization. He toured the United States "in a chartered airplane." 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."
Chapter 25
(243) 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 of 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 molding young minds, are now establishing schools everywhere, that are patronized by thousands of Protestant youth. They have also undertaken the delicate task of Romanizing 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 honorable 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.
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 simple as political offenders and revolutionists, who suffered at the hand of the civil government, instead of being persecuted by the Church for their religion.
(244) 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 Romanized book. Thus Swinton's "Outlines of History" was thrown out of the schools, and "Anderson's History" was blacklisted, but later revised according to Catholic wishes, and brought back to take the place of Seinton's. Myers's "Medieval and Modern 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, Feb. 15, 1889, and Friday, Feb. 22, 1889, on "Senate Resolution No. 86: Proposing an Amendment to the Constitution of the United 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.
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 Romanized 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.
(245) 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 counterreform, 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 Romanized 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
(246) 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 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: I "absolve thee...from all thy sins, transgressions and excesses...and I restore thee...to that innocence and purity which thou possessedst 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.
(247) 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 mold 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 Oct. 28, 1905, tells of how the publishers of that Encyclopedia co-operated 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 Romanized features. Its molding 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 Romanized. 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.
(248) 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 labor, 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?
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 Romanizing 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 realize 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 Romanized textbooks, without any protest!
(249) 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 organization 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 Romanized, 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 Romanizing propaganda began, will discover the fact that the Romanizing 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.
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...mold[s] the thought and influence[s] 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.
(250) 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:
"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 realize, 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 organizations parade their great number of adherents and bring pressure to bear on the press, threatening nonsupport if the other side appears in its columns, while they monopolize them with their own propaganda, such organizations lose the respect of thinking people.
CAPTURING THE PUBLIC LIBRARIES
(251) 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 emphasize 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.
Mr. Michael J. F. McCarty, 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:
(252) "Many Protestant authors are forced to speak favorably 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 favorable 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.
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.
(253) "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.
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." (See "Romanism and the Republic," by Isaac J. Lansing, pp. 221-223. Pope Benedict XV, on March 25, 1917, transferred this work to the "Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office." - "Index of Prohibited Books," p. xxxi.) 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.
(254) "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, 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 organizations 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, (The Register (Roman Catholic), Denver, Colo., April 3, 1938, announced the formation of the United Catholic Organizations' Press Relations Committee, to keep vigilant oversight over newspapers and magazines.) 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 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 organizations of her enemies and make this an era of Catholic manhood." - "America," August 31, 1912, p. 486, article by M. Kenny, S. J.
(255) As a result of this organized effort no newspapers in the United States will accept any news that reflects unfavorably on the Catholic Church or its propaganda in this country, while news unfavorable to Protestants is printed.
Chapter 26
(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.
......(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.
Chapter 27
(273) 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, Sept. 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 organized 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 provided 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.
(274) The Abbate Leone, after personal investigation, writes:
"Every day the general receives a number of reports which severally check 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 on 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 labor, 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 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.
(275) 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. ("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.) 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. 435-439, 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.
(276) 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. 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
(277) 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 organization." - 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 Jesuits Fathers had been skilfully trained to take every 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.
(278) 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 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:
(279) "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. They 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 fulness of our apostolical 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 declare...the said society to be for ever annulled and extinguished." - Id., pp. 119, 120.
(280) "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 labored incessantly for more than a century, and in 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 Romanized, 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 authorized 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 authorized Jesuit sources. We quote from him the following:
(281) "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 (Munish, 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. (See also "The Power and Secret of the Jesuits," Rene Fulop-Miller, pp. 150-156; and 'The Secret Plan," the Abbate Leone, p. 155.)
Rene Fulop-Miller says of the Jesuits:
"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.
(282) 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 be 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.
(283) 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 had been deposed by the pope. Here are a few samples:
"In the 'Opuscula Theologica' of Martin Becan, at page 130, the following passage occurs:
"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 ecclesiastic 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.'
(284) "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 not 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 comer. 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 German, 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. "The Jesuits were, indeed, the heart and soul of the Leaguist conspiracy." - Id., p. 210. See also pp. 508-608.
(285) 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
La Palinterre…..........…………………………………………………………………..………………...1558
Vienna…………………...………………………………………………………….…………………….1566
Avignon………… …………………………………………………………………….………………..1570
Antwerp, Portugal, etc………….......................………………………………………………………….1578
England……………….....………………………………………………………………………………...1579
England again.................………………………………………………………………………………....1581
England again............….…………………………………………………………………………………1584
England again……………...........………………………………………………………………………..1586
Japan………………....……………………………………………………………………………………1587
Hungary and Transylvania…................................………………………………………………………..1588
Bordeaux……………………....………………………………………………………………………….1589
The whole of France…........................…………………………………………………………………...1594
Holland…………………….......…………………………………………………………………………...1596
Touron and Berne........................………………………………………………………………………….1597
England again.............…………………………………………………………………………………….1602
England again.............…………………………………………………………………………………….1604
Denmark, Venice, etc.........................…………………………………………………………………… 1606
Venice again..............……………………………………………………………………………………...1612
Amura, Japan..............……………………………………………………………………………………..1613
Bohemia….......…………………………………………………………………………………………….1618
Moravia……........…………………………………………………………………………………………..1619
Naples and Netherlands..............................……………………………………………………………….1622
China and India...................………………………………………………………………………………..1623
Turkey.........…………………………………………………………………………………………………1628
Abyssinia............…………………………………………………………………………………………...1632
Malta......…………………………………………………………………………………………………….1634
Russia.....……………………………………………………………………………………………………1723
Savoy.....…………………………………………………………………………………………………….1724
Paraguay........………………………………………………………………………………………………1733
Portugal....................………………………………………………………………………………Sept. 3, 1759
Prohibited in France............................……………………………………………………………………..1762
France again................……………………………………………………………………………………..1764
Spain, colonies, and Sicilies and Naples.........................................................…………………………..1767
Parma and Malta.........................…………………………………………………………………………...1768
All Christendom, by bull of Clement XIV.................................................................................……July 21, 1773
Russia...........………………………………………………………………………………………………...1776
France again..................…………………………………………………………………………………….1804
Moscow, St. Petersburg, and Canton Soleure..................................................................………………..1816
Belgium............………………………………………………………………………………………………1818
(286) Brest (by the people).........................………………………………………………………………...1819
Russia again..................…………………………………………………………………………………….1820
Spain again..................……………………………………………………………………………………...1820
Rouen Cathedral (by the people).................................................………………………………………….1825
Belgium, schools...........................………………………………………………………………………….1826
France, 8 colleges closed....................................…………………………………………………….……1828
Britain and Ireland...............................……………………………………………………………….……..1829
France again..................……………………………………………………………….……………………1831
From entering Saxony..................................…………………………………………………….………….1831
Portugal...............……………………………………………………………………………….…………...1834
Spain again......................……………………………………………………………………………..…….1835
Rheims (by the people)......................................…………………………………………………………....1838
From entering Lucerne......................................………………………………………………………….....1842
Lucerne again......................……………………………………………………………………...………….1845
France again.........................………………………………………………………………………...……...1845
Switzerland...................…………………………………………………………………………...…………1847
Bavaria and Genoa.............................………………………………………………………………...……1848
Papal States, by Pius IX, Sardinia, Vienna, Austria..........................................................................…….1848
Several Italian States............................…………………………………………………………………….1859
Sicily again..............…………………………………………………………………………………………1860
Spain again.............…………………………………………………………………………………………1868
Guatemala.............…………………………………………………………………………………………..1871
Switzerland..............…………………………………………………………………………………………1871
German Empire.....................……………………………………………………………………………….1872
Mexico (by the viceroy).................................……………………………………………………………….1853
Mexico (by Comonfort)..................................………………………………………………………………1856
Mexico (by Congress)................................……………………………………………….………………..1873
New Granada since...........................………………………………………………………….…………...1879
Venezuela.............…………………………………………………………………………………………...1879
Argentine Republic.............................………………………………………………………….…………...1879
Hungary..........………………………………………………………………………………..………………1879
Brazil......…………………………………………………………………………………………..…………1879
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.
(287) The author has stated the forgoing 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 do 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. (Phil. 2:5; 1 Cor. 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.
Chapter 28
(288) In Revelation 13:16 the Apostle John has penned these significant words: "And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads." What is this mark? It must be of great importance to understand this, for Jesus gives us a solemn warning against receiving the mark. (Rev. 22:16; 14:9, 10.) Some claim that it is the mark of the labor unions; but the "small" cannot belong to them, neither are the "rich," or capitalists, members of labor organizations. Others say this prophecy refers to the peculiar "handshake" of the Freemasons; but the "bond," or salve, and the "small," or children, cannot become members of that organization; and yet all these will receive the mark of the beast. (Rev. 13:16.)
This mark must belong to religion, for it has to do with "worship" (Rev. 13:12), and it must have originated with the Papacy, for it is "his mark" (Rev. 15:2), and yet it must be something both Catholics and Protestants agree upon, for "all" will receive it (Rev. 13:12, 16). It is something in which not only the people but also "the earth" on which they dwell, can show obedience. (Rev. 13:12.) There is but one thing that answers to all these specifications; namely, Sunday-keeping. Sunday is a religious institution that originated with the Catholic Church, and yet Protestants agree to keep it, and we shall now show how the earth can have a part in receiving the mark.
God required "thy manservant," "they stranger," and "thy cattle" to rest on His holy Sabbath (Ex. 20:10); that is, no work should be allowed in a field of which we have control. And because the Jews did not obey this, the Lord declared: "I will scatter you among the heathen,...and your land shall be desolate....Then shall the land rest, and enjoy her Sabbaths;...because it did not rest in your sabbaths, when ye dwelt upon it." Lev. 26:33-35. And so the Jews were taken into captivity to Babylon for seventy years. (Jer. 17:27; 2 Chron. 36:20, 21.) Generally speaking, the people of this world have not allowed the earth to rest on God's holy Sabbath for six thousand years, therefore He will lay it desolate for one thousand years, to give it the rest man has denied it. (Jer. 4:23-25; Rev. 20:1, 2.)
(289) We have now seen that God wants the earth as well as the people to rest on His holy Sabbath. But the Roman Catholic Church has put herself on record as flatly denying God's claim. Father Enright declares:
"The Bible says: 'Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy,' but the Catholic Church says: 'No, keep the first day of the week,' and the whole world bows in obedience." - "The Industrial American," Harlan, Iowa, Dec. 19, 1889.
When our government, under pressure from the churches, shall by law enforce the papal Sunday in open violation of God's command, so that the people rest on Sunday, and work their land on the Sabbath, then "the earth and them which dwell therein" will yield obedience to the papal power. (Rev. 13:12.)
Some will ask how a day can be a mark in a person's forehead or hand. But we read in Exodus 13:3, 4, 9 that a day can be "for a sign unto thee upon thine hand, and for a memorial between thine eyes." But some one will ask how this "mark" can be received by some only "in their right hand," while others receive it "in their foreheads." (Rev. 13:16.) That is easy to see. Many people tell us: "We know that the seventh day is the right Sabbath, but we have to work on that day or lose our jobs." Such people have no Sunday-Sabbath in their mind, or forehead, because they do not believe in it; but their "hand" obeys it, and so they receive it in their hand. There are others who see the seventh day is the true Sabbath in the New Testament, but they love their old friends and their old ways more than the unpopular truth, and wish they did not have to obey it. Now, as God cannot accept unwilling service, He will no longer impress them with the importance of obeying it. God's Spirit is grieved away, and another spirit steps in unnoticed and leads them against the truth. "Because they received not the love of the truth,...God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie." 2 Thess. 2:10, 11. (We have an example of this in 1 Kings 22.) After rejecting the truth they become enthusiastic believers in the false sabbath, and thus they receive this mark "in their foreheads."
WHO RECEIVES THE MARK?
(290) On the other hand, people who have never heard the facts presented, but innocently keep Sunday, thinking it is the right day, are not receiving the mark of the beast by so doing, for God does not hold a person responsible for light that he has never had opportunity to hear or reject. Let us illustrate this fact:
An earnest Christian is the owner of a dry-goods store, and has sold a woman ten yards of cloth. Later she comes back with it, claiming that it is too short. He measures it again, and finds it full length, but, as she insists that it is short, he buys a new yardstick, and placing both side by side he finds his old one an inch short. In amazement he exclaims: "My grandfather was an earnest Christian, and he used this yardstick, and so did my godly father. They were unwittingly stealing, and died without repenting of their sin; they are lost!" He reflects a moment, then adds: "No! I saw them die triumphantly in Christ; they are saved. And I have had blessed seasons with Jesus during these twenty years I have used this old yardstick. If they could be saved using it, and I could serve God acceptably all these years, I will continue to use it hereafter!" But can he be saved while knowingly breaking one of God's commandments? He could have been saved, if his attention had not been called to it. But can he now continue to use the short yard measure and remain a true Christian?
Christ says: "If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloak for their sin" (John 15:22); and Paul declares: "The times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men everywhere to repent" (Acts 17:30). "Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin." James 4:17. Seeing that God's law is His measuring rod, or standard for moral conduct, and that the Papacy has cut off part of it, so people innocently have followed a faulty rule, and Christ has not attributed this sin to His people till they had opportunity to know better. But when His last message of mercy is being heralded to the world, all are given their choice as to whom they will serve, and those who refuse to listen to His message are as responsible as though they had heard it. (Rev. 22:14; 14:12; Luke 11:31; Proverbs 28:9.)
(291) All will admit that Christ has a perfect right to choose any "sign" He desires, and when He sets forth the Sabbath as the sign, or mark, of His authority and of His sanctifying power, we should accept it with pleasure. (Eze. 20:12, 20; 9:4-6.)
THE PAPACY SELECTS ITS FLAG
On the other hand the pope claims to be Christ's representative on earth, having authority to act in His name, so that "the sentences which he gives are to be forthwith ratified in heaven." - Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. XII, art. "Pope," par. 20, p. 265.
Any one who makes counterfeit money tries to make it as near like the genuine as possible. And when Christ has chosen the Sabbath as His sign, the Papacy, in selecting a counterfeit sign, would naturally choose one as near like the genuine as possible, and so it took the very next day. And after having changed the day of rest from the seventh to the first day, the Papacy would naturally point to such a vital change in God's law as evidence of its power; for no one could validly change God's moral law without being authorized to act in Christ's stead.
Hence if, after we have carefully searched the New Testament, and found no command there for the change of the day, we still rely on the custom of the church by keeping the Sunday, we thereby acknowledge the authority of the church that made this change. The Roman Catholic Church sees this point, and uses it as a challenge to Protestantism, as the following quotations from Roman Catholic authorities will show:
(292) Rev. Stephen Keenan says:
"Q.-Have you any other way of proving that the Church has power to institute festivals of precept?
"A.-Had she not such power, she could not have done that in which all modern religionists agree with her; - she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday, the first day of the week, for the observance of Saturday, the seventh day, a change for which there is no Scriptural authority." - "Doctrinal Catechism," p. 174. New York: P. J. Kenedy and Sons, 1846.
Rev. Henry Tuberville, D. D., says:
"Q.-How prove you that the Church hath power to command feasts and holy-days?
"A.-By the very act of changing the Sabbath into Sunday, which Protestants allow of; and therefore they fondly contradict themselves, by keeping Sunday strictly, and breaking most other feasts commanded by the same Church.
"Q.-How prove you that?
"A.-Because by keeping Sunday, they acknowledge the Church's power to ordain feasts, and to command them under sin: and by not keeping the rest by her commanded, they again deny, in fact, the same power." - "An Abridgment of the Christian Doctrine," p. 58. New York: Kenedy, 1833.
J. F. Snyder, of Bloomington, Ill., wrote Cardinal Gibbons asking if the Catholic Church claims the change of the Sabbath "as a mark of her power." The Cardinal through his Chancellor, gave the following answer:
"Of course the Catholic Church claims that the change was her act. It could not have been otherwise, as none in those days would have dreamed of doing anything in matters spiritual and ecclesiastical and religious without her. And the act is a mark of her ecclesiastical power and authority in religious matters."
(Signed) "H. F. Thomas, "Chancellor for the Cardinal." "Nov. 11, 1895."
(293) We will now let the Catholic Church tell when it changed the Sabbath day. Here is its answer:
"Q.-Which is the Sabbath day? A.-Saturday is the Sabbath day. Q.-Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday? A.-We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church, in the Council of Laodicea (A.D. 336), transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday." - "Convert's Catechism," Rev. P. Geiermann, p. 50. London. 1934. Sanctioned by the Vatican, Jan. 25, 1910.
"The Catholic Church for over one thousand years before the existence of a Protestant, by virtue of her Divine mission, changed the day from Saturday to Sunday." - "The Christian Sabbath," p. 29. Printed by the "Catholic Mirror," the official organ of Cardinal Gibbons, Baltimore, Md., 1893.
Kindly notice how often Catholic authors refer to the fact that there is no Scripture proof for Sunday, but that it rests solely on the authority of the Catholic Church. Rt. Rev. John Milner says:
"The first precept in the Bible is that of sanctifying the seventh day: 'God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it.' Gen. 2:3. This precept was confirmed by God in the Ten Commandments: 'Remember the Sabbath-day, to keep it holy. The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God.' Ex. 20. On the other hand, Christ declares that He is not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it. Matt. 5:17. He Himself observed the Sabbath; 'and, as His custom was, He went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day.' Luke 4:16. His disciples likewise observed it after His death: 'They rested on the Sabbath day according to the commandment,' Luke 23:56. Yet will all this weight of Scripture authority for keeping the Sabbath, or seventh day, holy, Protestants of all denominations make this a profane day, and transfer the obligation of it to the first day of the week, or the Sunday. Now what authority have they for doing this? None whatever, except the unwritten word, or tradition, of the Catholic Church." - "End of Religious Controversy," p. 89. New York. P. J. Kenedy, 1897.
(294) The Brotherhood of St. Vincent de Paul says:
"'The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; in it thou shalt not do any work.' (Ex. XX. 8, 9)....Such being God's command then, I ask again, Why do you not obey it?...
"You will answer me, perhaps, that ye do keep holy the Sabbath-day; for that you abstain from all worldly business, and diligently go to church, and say your prayers, and read your Bible at home, every Sunday of your lives.
"But Sunday is not the Sabbath-day, Sunday is the first day of the week; the Sabbath-day was the seventh day of the week. Almighty God did not give a commandment that men should keep holy one day in seven; but He named His own day, and said distinctly, 'Thou shalt keep holy the seventh day': and He assigned a reason for choosing this day rather than any other - a reason which belongs only to the seventh day of the week, and cannot be applied to the rest. He says, 'for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea and all that in them is, and rested on the seventh day; wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath-day and hallowed it.' Almighty God ordered that all men should rest from their labor on the seventh day, because He too had rested on that day: He did not rest on Sunday, but on Saturday. On Sunday, which is the first day of the week, He began the work of creation....Gen. 2:2, 3. Nothing can be more plain and easy to understand than all this; and there is nobody who attempts to deny it....Why then do you keep holy the Sunday, and not Saturday?
"You will tell me that Saturday was the Jewish Sabbath, but that the Christian Sabbath has been changed to Sunday. Changed! but by whom? Who has authority to change an express commandment of Almighty God? When God has spoken and said, Thou shalt keep holy the seventh day, who shall dare to say, Nay, thou mayest work and do all manner of worldly business on the seventh day; but thou shalt keep holy the first day in its stead? This is a most important question, which I know not how you can answer.
(295) "You are a Protestant, and you profess to go by the Bible and the Bible only....The command to keep holy the seventh day is one of the Ten Commandments; you believe that the other nine are still binding; who gave you authority to tamper with the fourth?
"We blame you not for making Sunday your weekly holy-day instead of Saturday, but for rejecting tradition, which is the only safe and clear rule by which this observance can be justified." - "Why Don't You Keep Holy the Sabbath-Day?" pp. 2-4, 8. London: burns and Oates. Found also in "The Clifton Tracts," Most Rev. John Hughes, D. D.
"That the Church has instituted the Sunday as the Lord's day instead of the Sabbath...shows forth her great power which she solemnly received from Christ." - "Manual of the Catholic Religion," p. 186.
Dr. Martin Luther and Melancthon felt the stinging force of this Catholic argument in proof of the power of the papal church, although they knew that the time had not then come for a Sabbath reform. Dr. Eck, disputing with Luther, said:
"If, however, the Church has had power to change the Sabbath of the Bible into Sunday and to command Sunday-keeping, why should it not have also this power concerning other days?....If you omit the latter, and turn from the Church to the Scriptures alone, then you must keep the Sabbath with the Jews, which has been kept from the beginning of the world." - "Enchiridon," pp. 78, 79. 1533.
Calling attention to this Roman Catholic assumption of authority, the Reformers said:
"They also point out, that the Sabbath is changed to Sunday, contrary as it seems, to the Ten Commandments; and there is no example over which they make more ado than the change of the Sabbath. Great, they assert, must be the power of the Church, when it can grant release from one of the Ten Commandments." - "The Augsburg Confession," art. 28, in "Book of Concord," p. 79. (Norwegian ed., printed in Christiania, 1882.)
(296) At the great Council of Trent (1545-1563), which was called to determine the "doctrines of the Church in answer to the heresies of the Protestants" (Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. XV, art. "Trent," p. 30), the question of the authority of the church over that of the Bible was decided in the following manner:
"Finally, at the last [session] opening on the eighteenth of January, 1562, their last scruple was set aside; the archbishop of Reggio made a speech in which he openly declared that tradition stood above Scripture. The authority of the church could therefore not be bound to the authority of the Scripture, because the church had changed Sabbath into Sunday, not by the command of Christ, but by its own authority. With this, to be sure, the last illusion was destroyed, and it was declared that tradition does not signify antiquity, but continual inspiration." - "Canon and Tradition," Dr. J. H. Holtzman, p. 263. ("Source Book," pp. 603, 604.)
After the Jesuits were expelled from England in 1579 they determined to recapture that country, and at their school at Rheims, France, they translated their New Testament from the Vulgate Latin into English in 1582. (Their Old Testament was printed at Douay, 1609, so that their whole Bible has come to be called the Douay version.) In their English New Testament, translated from the Vulgate Edition of 1582, printed in New York, 1834, we read on page 413, note on the Apocalypse 1:10:
"And if the Church had authority and inspiration from God, to make Sunday, being a work-day before, an everlasting holy-day: and the Saturday, that before was holy-day, now, a common work-day: why may not the same Church prescribe and appoint the other feasts of Easter, Whitsuntide, Christmas, and the rest? For the same warrant she hath for the one she hath for the other."
Thus we see that the Roman Catholic Church always and everywhere points to her change of the Sabbath as the mark, or evidence, of her having the power and inspiration from God to legislate in Christ's stead for His church on earth, and that this power is vested in the pope. Pope Leo XIII says: "We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty." All must yield "complete submission and obedience of will to the Church and to the Roman Pontiff, as to God Himself." - "Great Encyclical Letters," pp. 304, 193. And Pope Gregory says of the power of the pope:
(297) "Hence he is said to have a heavenly power, and hence changes even the nature of things, applying the substantial of one thing to another - can make something out of nothing - a judgment which is null he makes to be real, since in the things which he wills, his will is taken for a reason. Nor is there any one to say to him, Why doest thou this? For he can dispense with the law, he can turn injustice into justice by correcting and changing the law, and he has the fulness of power." - "Decretals of Gregory" (R. C.), Book I, title 7, chap. 3. Gloss on the Transfer of Bishops.
The Roman "Decretalia," an authentic work on Roman ecclesiastical law, says of the power of the pope:
"He can pronounce sentences and judgments in contradiction to the right of nations, to the law of God and man....He can free himself from the commands of the apostles, he being their superior, and from the rules of the Old Testament.
"The pope has power to change times, to abrogate laws, and to dispense with all things, even the precepts of Christ." - "Decretal, de Translat. Episcop. Cap."
"The Pope's will stands for reason. He can dispense above the law; and of wrong make right, by correcting and changing laws." - Pope Nicholas, dist. 96; quoted in "Facts for the Times," pp. 55, 56. 1893.
"THE MARK OF HIS NAME"
We have now seen that the pope claims to be the "Vicar of the Son of God" on earth; to have authority to act in His name. And as proof for this claim he points to the fact that he has changed the Sabbath into Sunday. How conclusive! He must be authorized as Christ's "Vicar" in order to validly make such a vital change in God's moral law. That is imperative! The Sunday-Sabbath is therefore the proof or mark of his 'vicarship"' it is "the mark of his name." Rev. 14:11. When once a person had become aware of the wording of this text (Rev. 14:11), it becomes impossible for him to exchange this explanation of either the "mark" or the "name" for some other. For the creation of the Sunday-Sabbath by the Papacy constitutes the mark, or proof, of the pope's being invested with authority to act as "Vicar of the Son of God." This "mark" and this "name" fit together as prepared by the divine hand of prophecy, and no others do. Catholics can therefore appeal to Protestants in the following way:
(298) Sunday-keeping "not only has no foundation in the Bible, but it is in flagrant contradiction with its letter, which commands rest on the Sabbath, which is Saturday. It was the Catholic Church which, by the authority of Jesus Christ, has transferred this rest to the Sunday....Thus the observance of Sunday by the Protestants is an homage they pay, in spite of themselves, to the authority of the Church." - "Plain Talk About the Protestantism of Today," from the French by Segur, p. 213. Boston. 1868.
While God did not attribute this sin to His people in former ages, when they had not been enlightened on the subject, we are now approaching the final struggle between Christ and the restored Papacy, and it behooves us to show under which flag we have decided to stand. For example: In times of peace, no serious results would come to an alien in this country, if, on his holiday, he should hoist his native flag. But if our country was at war with his homeland, and he then should tear down the "Stars and Stripes," and trample on it, while he hoisted his own flag, it would be an entirely different matter. And so now, while Christ and Antichrist face each other in the last deadly struggle, it becomes a serious matter to hoist the enemy's flag, while trampling on the blood-stained banner of Prince Emmanuel!
(299) The papal power was "to continue forty and two months" (Rev. 13:5), and, as the Bible reckons thirty days to a month, this period would be 1260 prophetic days (Rev. 11:2, 3). And a day in prophecy stands for a year. (Eze. 4:6.) Thus we see that the papal supremacy would continue for 1260 years. We have already seen that this period began in 538 and ended in 1798 A.D. (See pp. 52-60.) At that time the pope, who had for centuries driven God's people "into captivity," was himself to "go into captivity," the prophet declared. (Rev. 13:10.) And when the hour struck, to which God's prophetic clock had pointed for 1700 years, the pope had to "go into captivity." Rome was taken by the French on February 10, 1798, the Roman Republic proclaimed on the fifteenth, and on the night of the twentieth, Pope Pius VI was hurried off "into captivity," where he finally died at Valence, France, in 1799. Napoleon had previously given orders that no new pope was to be elected in his place. "No wonder that half Europe thought Napoleon's veto would be obeyed, and that with the Pope the Papacy was dead." - "Modern Papacy," Joseph Rickaby, S. J., p. 1.
But this prophecy also foretells its restitution. The prophet declares: "His deadly wound was healed; and all the world wondered after the beast." Rev. 13:3. (Compare 17:8.) A new pope (Pius VII) was elected March 14, 1800, and, as J. Rickaby further states:
"Yet since then, the Papacy has been lifted to a pinnacle of spiritual power unreached, it may be, since earliest Christian history." - Id., p. 1.
Especially since the days of Pope Leo XIII the healing of the "deadly wound" has been steadily progressing. On February 11, 1929, the pope once more became a civil ruler (a king). Some day he will attempt to assume his ancient authority over the nations of earth, and then the world will realize that the Papacy is unchanged in spirit, that it will do today just what it did in the Dark Ages.
(300) We shall now see what God will do for those who have been faithful to Him in this time of apostasy, and have not deviated from His word, while the whole Christian world has gone astray. But let all remember that we cannot follow what is easy and popular, and expect to stand under God's protection. It was the ark of Noah - the object of so much scorn and derision from the world - that finally became the means of rescue to all who stood faithfully by it under taunt and ridicule. And so now. (Luke 17:26.) God always uses unpopular truths with which to test His people and gather out the honest in heart, and He will protect His own in the time of trouble.
They "shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty," safe "from the noisome pestilence." As a hen protects her brood in a storm, so "He shall cover thee with His feathers, and under His wings shalt thou trust: His truth shall be thy shield and buckler. Thou shalt not be afraid for the terror by night [night raids by airplanes]; nor for the arrow that flieth by day; nor for the pestilence that walketh in darkness; nor for the destruction that wasteth at noonday. A thousand shall fall at thy side, and ten thousand at thy right hand; but it shall not come nigh thee,...neither shall any plague come nigh thy dwelling." Psalm 91:1-10.
God will reveal that He still lives and reigns, and the world shall yet see that He puts a difference "between him that serveth God and him that serveth Him not" (Mal. 3:18), just as He did during the plagues of Egypt (Ex. 8:22, 23; 9:4; 10:23; Isaiah 4:5, 6). "His truth shall be thy shield and buckler." Psalm 91:4. (Compare John 17:17; Colossians 1:5; Psalm 119: 142, 151.)
According to the new covenant promise, the Holy Spirit is to write the law of God in the heart of God's children. (Hebrews 8:8-10; 2 Cor. 3:3.) But it must be put "into their mind" before it can be written "in their hearts" (Hebrews 8:10); and as they have been looking at a mutilated law, the missing part must be restored before the Holy Spirit can write it in their hearts. And so the message comes to "bind up the testimony, seal the law among My disciples." Isaiah 8:16.
(301) While the nations are moving toward Armageddon, while angels are about to release the winds of war but have been admonished to hold a little longer, another angel comes with the "seal of the living God," saying: "Hurt not the earth,...till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads," so they shall be able to stand during the terrible time of trouble just ahead. (Rev. 6:17; 7:1-3). The Lord revealed the same scene to Ezekiel. He saw the destroyers coming, but a man clothed in linen (a symbol of purity, Rev. 19:8) went before them to "set a mark upon the foreheads of" God's people, after which the destroyers were told to "slay utterly old and young,...but come not near any man upon whom is the mark." Eze. 9:1-6. This mark, or sign, is the Sabbath. "I gave them My Sabbaths to be a sign between Me and them." Eze. 20:12, 20.
As Christ viewed His people on the earth, and found them without "the seal of the living God," He commanded the winds of war to be held in check "till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads." Rev. 7:1-3. They were God's servants, but lacked the seal. In Eze. 9:4-6 and 20:12, 20 it is called God's "mark," or "sign," while in Rev. 7:1-4 it is called His "seal." God's "name" will be written in the foreheads of His people. (Rev. 14:1.) In God's law His name is found only in the fourth commandment. The fourth commandment, which enjoins the keeping of the seventh-day Sabbath, is the seal of God which the Holy Spirit places in the minds and hearts of His people.
The day of wrath is fast approaching. God's people will need a shelter during Armageddon. But God will not do miracles to protect the willfully disobedient. The Lord is greatly grieved over the situation, and complains that His watchmen are not preparing the people "to stand in the battle in the day of the Lord." Eze. 13:5. Compare Eze. 22:26, 30; Isaiah 58:1, 2, 12, 13; 56:1-5, 10, 11; Hebrews 10:26, 29. "But the Lord will be the hope of His people, and the strength of the children of Israel." Joel 3:16.
Chapter 29
EARLY EFFORTS TO UNITE CHURCH AND STATE
(302) In Holy Scripture Christ Jesus is repeatedly spoken of as the Lamb of God. Bible prophecy represents America by a similar symbol, which "had two horns like a lamb." The word of God informs us, however, that this peace-loving power, despite its lamb-like principles, eventually say "to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make and image to the beast [the Papacy], which had the wound by a sword, and did live." Rev. 13:14. The Papacy was formed by a union of church and state, which resulted in the persecution of dissenters. An "image," or "likeness," to the Papacy in America would be a union of church and state, or a co-operation between, as in the days of papal Rome. And, seeing it is to be "an image to the beast," it cannot be the beast itself, but must be an effort started among Protestants, who desire the aid of the state to enforce some of their dogmas. For nearly three quarters of a century Protestant churches and civic organizations have been at work to create just such a relation between church and state in the United States.
In 1863, representatives of eleven Protestant denominations convened at Xenia, Ohio, and organized a federation, with the avowed purpose of placing the name of God in the Federal Constitution. This National Reform Association declared in Article II of its constitution:
"The object of this society shall be to....secure such an amendment to the Constitution of the United States as will declare the nations allegiance to Jesus Christ and its acceptance of the moral laws of the Christian religion, and so indicate that this is a Christian nation, and place all the Christian laws, institutions, and usages of our government on an undeniably legal basis in the fundamental law of the land." - "American State Papers," William A. Blakely, p. 343. Washington, D.C.: 1911.
(303) Their official organ: The Christian Statesman, (1888) points out their reason for such an amendment to the Federal Constitution in the following words:
"We need it to correct our most unfortunate attitude under the First Amendment, which restrains Congress from prohibiting the free exercise of any false religion." - "Facts for the Times," p. 165.
That is, the First Amendment to the Federal Constitution, which safeguards religious liberty, must be made null and void by their proposed amendment, just as the eighteenth amendment was nullified by the twenty-first.
Rev. M. A. Gault, a district secretary of the organization, said:
"Our remedy for all these malefic influences is to have the government simply set up the moral law, and recognize God's authority behind it, and lay its hand on any religion that does not conform to it." - "The Christian Statesman," Jan. 13, 1887; quoted in "Facts for the Times," page 166.
Jonathan Edwards, another of their speakers, said:
"We want state and religion, and we are going to have it....So far as the affairs of the state require religion, it shall be religion, the religion of Jesus Christ....We use the word religion in its proper sense, as meaning a man's personal relation of faith and obedience to God. Now we are warned that to engraft this doctrine upon the Constitution will be oppressive; that it will infringe the right of conscience; and we are told that there are atheists, deists, Jews, and Seventh Day Baptists who would suffer from it. These all are, for the occasion and so far as our amendment is concerned, one class....What are the rights of the atheist?....I would tolerate him as I would a conspirator." - "Religious Liberty in America," C. M. Snow, pp. 266, 267.
The Lord's Day Alliance is another organization working for the same ends. In their "Lord's Day Papers" (Milwaukee, Wis.), No. 117, p. 4, they say of those who do not sanction their propaganda for Sunday laws: "That anarchistic spirit that tramples on any law that one does not like needs to be completely crushed."
JOINING HANDS WITH CATHOLICISM
(304) The Federal Council of Churches of Christ in America has also interested itself along the same lines, and has co-operated more or less with the other two organizations. November 21, 1905, twenty denominations met in New York, and invited the co-operation of the Roman Catholic Church to help solve these civic questions. Another meeting was held in Chicago, December 4-9, 1912, where representatives of thirty-two denominations, having a constituency of nearly 18,000,000 people, met in council. The Inter-Ocean of December 7, 1912, reported:
"FEDERAL COUNCIL OPENS ITS DOOR TO THE CATHOLICS
"WORD PROTESTANT IS STRICKEN FROM COMMITTEE CREPORT ON OBJECT OF ASSOCIATION OF CHURCHES.
"The Federal Council of Churches of Christ in America took one of the most important forward steps in its history when it adopted a resolution presented by the executive committee, and virtually threw down the bars and invited the Roman Catholic Church of America to join the council, and lend its titanic strength toward solving the common problems of the church." - Quoted in "Review and Herald," Jan. 9, 1913.
A strong resolution for the enforcement of Sunday laws by civil government was then adopted.
In forming the Papacy during the fourth and fifth centuries the Catholic bishops, in conjunction with the state, enforced the pagan Sunday as one of the first steps in uniting church and state, thus producing what prophecy terms "the beast." And now in forming "an image to the beast" the Protestant and Catholic clergy will again make Sunday laws the entering wedge in their attempt to enforce religion by law, because Sunday legislation constitutes the neutral ground for co-operation between Catholics and Protestants, and in this work they seek each other's assistance. Rev. S. V. Leech, a Protestant Sunday advocate, said in an address at Denver, Colorado:
(305) "Give us good Sunday laws, well enforced by men in local authority, and our churches will be full of worshipers....A mighty combination of the churches of the United States could win from Congress, the state legislatures, and municipal councils, all legislation essential to this splendid result." - "Homiletic Review," November, 1892; quoted in "American State Papers," William A. Blakely, p. 732. Washington, D.C.: 1911.
Rev. Sylvester F. Scovel, a leading National Reformer, says:
"This common interest [in Sunday] ought to strengthen both our determination to work, and our readiness to co-operate with our Roman Catholic fellow citizens....It is one of the necessities of the situation." - "Views of National Reform, Series One," Bible Students' Library, No. 3, pp. 85, 86. Oakland Calif." Jan. 15, 1889.
"Whenever they [the Roman Catholics] are willing to co-operate in resisting the progress of political atheism, we will gladly join hands with them." - "Christian Statesman," Dec. 11, 1884.
The Catholic Lay Congress, held in Baltimore, November 12, 1889, said:
"We should seek an alliance with non-Catholics for the purpose of proper Sunday observance." - Quoted in "Religious Liberty in America," C. M. Snow, pp. 283, 284.
When the great Federation of Catholic Societies was organized in 1906, they said:
"The Federation is a magnificent organization that is bound to root out prevailing and ruling national evils; a patriotic undertaking in which Catholic and non-Catholic may join hands." - "The Catholic Union and Times," Aug. 2, 1906; quoted in "Signs of the Times," July 8, 1908.
The following resolution was adopted by the Boston Archdiocesan Federation of Catholic Societies:
(306) "We are unalterably opposed to any relaxation of the Sunday laws. Sunday is a day of rest to be devoted to the praise and service of God. We hold the safest public policy at present is to adhere to the rigid observance of the laws now safeguarding the sanctity of the Lord's day." - "Boston Pilot," official organ of Cardinal O'Connell, March 16, 1912.
In 1910 forty-six Protestant denominations co-operated in an effort to reunite all the Christian churches in the world, and fifty-five commissions were appointed to attend a world's conference. They were to have been sent in September, 1914, to different countries to explain the plan, but the World War delayed it. Another effort was made in 1917, when delegates from "many denominations, including Protestant Episcopal, Baptist, Lutheran, and Presbyterian," met at Garden City, N. Y., where they received a letter from Cardinal Gasparri, Papal Secretary of State; and in 1919 three Episcopal bishops were sent to Rome to interview the pope on this question of church union, for Pope Benedict XV had already (1917) started a "move for reunited Christianity."
The daily papers reported in January, 1930, that a plan for a world federation of Lutheran churches was being worked on by a sub-committee of the National Lutheran Council at New York. Reports at that time stated the federated church would be headed by a world executive comparable in administrative respects to the Roman Catholic pope. Decorah Posten (Norwegian) for January 21, 1930, gives a similar report. So "federation" and "consolidation" are in the air.
EARNEST MEN SEE THE DANGER
God-fearing men in different denominations, who see the trend of the times, fear the consequences. Dr. A. C. Dixon says:
"The purpose of this 'Inter-church' movement seems to be to make a great ecclesiastical machine which will dominate all smaller bodies. It is an attempt to form a papacy without a pope; and, if evangelical truth is to be sacrificed or compromised, such a papacy without a pope will be no improvement upon the present ecclesiastical machine which has its center in Rome." - A front-page article in the "Baptist Messenger," June 23, 1920. Oklahoma City, Okla.
(307) Dr. George A. Gordon, Pastor of Old South Church, Boston, says:
"The church was united once, the holy Catholic Church throughout the world, and what was it? - An ineffable tyrant, denying freedom over its whole broad domain, and crushing the intellect and the spirit into a dead uniformity....Your one holy Catholic Protestant American Church would give me much uneasiness if it should come into existence tomorrow." - "Review and Herald," May 11, 1913.
How clearly these God-fearing men, and many others we could have quoted, see the trend of the Protestant church in forming "an image to the beast" and even seeking the aid of the Papacy in their efforts to form a "holy Catholic Protestant American Church," that could control the state as the papal church did during the Middle Ages!
As long as a church has a living connection with Christ, its true Head, and is loyal to His written word, she is supplied with divine power to do His bidding (Matt. 28:18-20; Acts 1:8; 5:32; Romans 1:16; John 1:12), and feels no craving for the power of the state to enforce its teachings. But when apostasy has robbed it of its divine power, and the power of love (2 Cor. 5:14) has been exchanged for the power of force, it usually seeks the aid of the civil arm. All attempts to secure the enforcement of religion by civil laws is therefore a confession of apostasy from apostolic purity.
A MIRACLE-WORKING POWER
Whenever God has sent a message of reform to prepare His people for some great crisis, the archenemy has always tried to counterfeit it. When Moses was sent to deliver Israel from Egypt, Jannes and Jambres withstood his message by counterfeiting his miracles. (Exodus 7:10-13, 22; 8:6, 7; 2 Tim. 3:8, 9.) And so it was when the message of Christ's first coming was given. In these last days God has promised to send a message in the power and spirit of Elijah to prepare His people for "the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord." Mal. 4:5.) The devil knows this, and so he will counterfeit this message. The prophet, in speaking of the United States, says: "He doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men [as Elijah did]. And he deceiveth them that dwell on the earth that they should make an image to the beast,...and he causeth all...to receive a mark in their right hand or in their foreheads." Rev. 13:13-16. Thus we see that this country was to become a miracle-working power.
(308) It was here in the United States that modern Spiritism originated in 1848. And it is working miracles. But what is the source of this miraculous power? We will let the leaders of Spiritism answer this question. In Spiritten [a Norwegian Spiritist periodical], for December 15, 1889, page 2, we read:
"Spiritism is the serpent in Paradise offering man to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil."
To understand this statement we must remember that God told man not to eat of this tree or he would "surely die," but Satan assured Eve: "Ye shall not surely die." Gen. 2:17; 3:4. And Spiritists have based their belief on the devil's words, claiming that people at death do not actually die, but simply pass into the spirit world. Moses Hull, a leading teacher and lecturer among them, makes this point clear. He says:
"A Truthful Snake....In answer to the question, 'Who, then, are we to believe - God or Satan?' I answer, The facts, in every case in the Bible, justify us in believing Satan, he has ever been truthful; that is more than can be said of the other one.....It was not the devil, but God who made the mistake in the Garden of Eden....It was God, and not the devil who was a murderer from the beginning." - "The Devil and the Adventists," pp. 15, 16. Chicago: 1899.
(309) I must ask pardon of the readers for quoting such blasphemous words, but the only fair way of revealing the true nature of Spiritism is to allow its followers to speak for themselves. In later years, however, Spiritism has changed its face, but not its heart, by professing Christianity; and in that garb has succeeded in getting into the churches. Some startling revelations have been unearthed of late years regarding the work of Spiritism in the different churches all over the world. Many in these churches have felt the emptiness of formalism, and have craved spiritual power, but have been unwilling to get it by the way of the cross. Humble confession, heartfelt repentance, and straightening up of wrongs done to neighbors is a road too narrow for many to walk; unpopular truths, which cut across their selfish path of ease, are unwelcome to them; but Spiritism in its Christian form offers the desired power without such sacrifices, and the easy road is accepted with eagerness by many. (Compare Mark 8:34, 38; Acts 5:32; Matt. 4:3-10; 2 Thess. 2:9-11; Matt. 24:24.) They mistakenly accept spiritual power and miracles as evidence of their being right with God (Matthew 7:21-23; Luke 9:55), but God's children cannot thus prove whether a movement is true or false, for the enemy can work miracles. Judge I. W. Edmonds, a noted Spiritist, says of his daughter:
"She knows no other language than her own native tongue, the English, except a little French she learned in the girls' school; and yet she has talked in nine or ten different languages, often a whole hour at a time, with the same ease as a native. Quite often strangers in their native tongue hold conversation with their spirit friends through her." - "Spiritualism Before the Judgment Seat of Science," p. 42.
In the near future Spiritism will influence people in America to form a union of church and state. When this is accomplished, the Papacy will step in and take charge of it. Thus every effort to form this union is helping the Papacy to power....
"THAT NO MAN MIGHT BUY OR SELL"
(312) "And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark." Rev. 13:17. We have seen that the Papacy has adopted Sunday as "a mark of her ecclesiastical power and authority," and the Protestant organizations have also adopted this mark, as the following quotations show:
"This day [Sunday] is set apart for divine worship and preparation for another life. It is the test of all religion." - Dr. W. W; Everts, in Elgin (Ill.) "Sunday Convention," November, 1887.
"When the people, through their representative, legalize the first day of the week as a day of rest and of worship for those who choose so to observe it, it is a sign of the Christian nation." - From a sermon reported in "Christian Oracle," January 12, 1893.
The Puritans in the United States made Sunday "a sign between them and the heathen world around, and, to a large extent, it has continued to be a mark of American religion to the present day." - Rev. J. G. Lorimer, in "Christian Treasury"; all quoted in "Signs of the Times," April 1, 1908.
When these large religious organizations, that are so vitally interested in Sunday enforcement, combine in their efforts, it is not remarkable that they should attempt to deprive dissenters of their natural rights of attaining their livelihood, for we have seen that this combination is making "an image to the beast" (Rev. 13:14-17); and the beast, or Papacy, did this very thing. At the Synod of Tholouse, A.D. 1163, it made the following decrees against Sabbath-keepers:
"The bishops and priests [were] 'to take care, and to forbid, under the pain of excommunication, every person from presuming to give reception, or the least assistance to the followers of this heresy, which first began in the country of Tholouse, whenever they shall be discovered. Neither were they to have any dealings with them in buying or selling; that by being thus deprived of the common assistance of life, they might be compelled to repent of the evil of their way. Whosoever shall dare to contravene this order, let them be excommunicated, as a partner with them in their guilt. as many of them as can be found, let them be imprisoned by the Catholic princes, and punished with the forfeiture of all their substance.'"
(313) Stirred by this decree, King Ildefonsus of Arragon banished all Waldenses in 1194. "He adds: 'If any, from this day forwards, shall presume to receive into their houses, the aforesaid Waldenses and Inzabatati, or other heretics, of whatsoever profession they be, or to hear, in any place, their abominable preachings, or give them food, or do them any kind office whatsoever; let him know, that he shall incur the indignation of Almighty God and ours; that he shall forfeit all his goods, without the benefit of appeal, and be punished as though guilty of high treason." - "History of the Inquisition," Philip Limborch," pp. 88, 89. London. 1816.
That the "image to the beast" will actually duplicate the work of the Papacy also in this respect is seen from the following utterances, among many others we could quote: Dr. Bascom Robins, in a sermon on the "Decalogue," preached in Burlington, Kansas, Sunday, January 31, 1904, said:
"In the Christian decalogue the first day was made the Sabbath by divine appointment. But there is a class of people who will not keep the Christian Sabbath unless they are forced to do so. But that can be easily done. We have twenty million of men, besides women and children, in this country, who want this country to keep the Christian Sabbath. If we would say we will not sell anything to them, we will not buy anything from them, we will not work for them, or hire them to work for us, the thing could be wiped out, and all the world would keep the Christian Sabbath."
God, who knows the end from the beginning, has foretold that they would do this very thing, so "that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark." Rev. 13:17. But will God forsake His faithful children in this trying hour? Oh, no! "He that toucheth you toucheth the apple of His eye." Zech. 2:8. As a loving Father He will step forward to the protection of His children. (Psalm 103:13.) And His enemies will find that "it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God." Hebrews 10:31.
(314) When the world refuses to permit God's people to "buy or sell," He will send drought and famine, so that the wicked will have little or nothing to sell, and will be unable to buy because their money will be worthless. the seven last plagues will be God's answer to man's challenge, as the ten plagues of Egypt were His answer to man's challenge, as the ten plagues of Egypt were His answer to the haughty challenge of a Pharaoh against His message in ancient time. (Exodus 4:22, 23; 5:2.) With men suffering from sores and fever, and no water to drink, while the sun is scorching them with great heat (Rev. 16:1-9), causing the most terrible drought the world has ever witnessed (Joel 1:10-20), the earth will be in a deplorable condition (Isaiah 24:1-6), and people "shall pass through it, hardly bestead and hungry: and it shall come to pass, that when they shall be hungry, they shall fret themselves, and curse their king, and their God" (Isaiah 8:21,22). And they will turn against the rich (James 5:1-5), who will "cast their silver in the streets" to appease the angry mob, but "their gold shall be removed" (Eze. 7:19). They hoarded millions, and cornered markets, while working people were suffering, till at last the storm has gathered around their well-filled palaces, and too late they make an attempt to save themselves from the long-pent-up wrath.
The laws that deprive God's people of their rights, and thus force them out of the cities, seem to them a calamity, and many surrender the truth to support their families. But what appears to be such a calamity is a blessing in disguise, for it drives them out of the cities in time to escape this terrible labor-revolution. Some day we shall find that no hardship comes to God's loyal children but what is absolutely necessary to their salvation. Those who make it their undeviating practice to put God's will first in all their plans and habits of living, can safely trust Him for the rest. (Matthew 6:33; Phil. 4:19; Isa. 43:2.) Driven from the cities, they flee to mountain fastnesses and solitary places, where angels supply their needs, as Elijah was fed. "Bread shall be given him; his waters shall be sure." Isaiah 33:16. Oh, we have a wonderful God. "Blessed are all they that put their trust in Him." Psalm 2:12.
(315) God's loyal children will be fed by angels, while the world is starving. The fondest hopes of God's people will be realized: "Thine eyes shall see the king in His beauty: they shall behold the land that is very far off." Isaiah 33:17, 18. No pen can describe that thrill of joy when we shall meet our dear Saviour and our loved ones, and be taken home to that beautiful land that knows no heartaches, no farewell scenes, no funeral trains. (John 14:1-3.)
The great question for each one of us to settle is whether we will have our citizenship papers in order when King Jesus shall come to claim His own. The reader might ask what papers are required for citizenship in that kingdom. To answer that question satisfactorily, we must remember that sin has caused all the anguish, sorrow, and trouble in this world, and that God's heart of infinite love has been wrung with pain for suffering humanity. He has therefore decided that sin, with all its trail of woe, shall not be permitted to enter His eternal kingdom, and that all who enter that blissful home must part company with sin.
But sin is inbred in man, and forms a part of his very character, so that he cannot, by his own efforts, extricate himself from its toils. (Jeremiah 13:23; Romans 7:15, 18-24.) Christ, however, stands ready to free us from our sins. He will deliver us if we will let Him do it. (Matthew 1:21; John 1:12.) But He will not use force, even in things that are for our own good, for He has created man a free moral agent, and respects his choice. (Isaiah 1:18; Rev. 22:17; 1 John 1:7, 9.) A complete surrender to Christ is therefore necessary, that He may change our desires, affections, and characters so we can enjoy the society of the pure and unselfish inhabitants of that happy land.