A Vindication of Christ By a Catholic Priest Roman Catholicism Capitulating Before Protestantism BY G. V. FRADRYSSA Doctor of Philosophy and Theology ; Lecturer on Sacred Scriptures ; Synodal Examiner TRANSLATED FROM THE SPANISH SOUTHERN PUBLISHING COMPANY MOBILE, ALABAMA 1908 Copyright 1908, by Southern Publishing Company Mobile, Ala. Entered at Stationers' Hall, London, England 1908 All rights reserved Issued from The Cumberland Press, Nashville Stack Annex F75 CONTENTS. PROLOGUE ------ ._...____ v ii INTRODUCTION ----- ______ x i CHAPTER I. DISCUSSION OUTLINED. ENUMERATION OF THE FUNDA- MENTAL PRINCIPLES ADMITTED BY BOTH THE PROTEST- ANTS AND THE CATHOLICS .._..___ i CHAPTER II. DISCUSSION AND OUTLINE OF THE MEANS OF KNOWING CHRIST 8 CHAPTER III. THE ONLY SURE WAY OF KNOWING CHRIST AND His CHURCH Is THROUGH THE GOSPELS ------ 18 CHAPTER IV. ARE THE GOSPELS SUFFICIENT IN ORDER TO KNOW CHRIST AND His CHURCH? 26 CHAPTER V. THE SUBJECT OF THE PREVIOUS CHAPTER CONTINUED - - 37 CHAPTER VI. IN THIS CHAPTER WE CORROBORATE THE SAME DOCTRINES OUTLINED IN THE PRECEDING ONE, BY THE CONDUCT AND WRITING OF THE APOSTLES, AND ALSO ANSWER THE MAIN OBJECTION OF THE ROMANS - - - -51 CHAPTER VII. THE CHURCH ACCORDING TO THE GOSPELS AND THE WRIT- INGS OF THE APOSTLES ----------- 62 CHAPTER VIII. DID CHRIST ESTABLISH AN OFFICIAL JURISDICTION? AND IF so, DID HE GRANT IT COLLECTIVELY OR WAS IT AS- SIGNED BY HIM TO SOME MEMBERS OF THE WHOLE? - 75 (iii) IV CONTEXTS CHAPTER IX. Is THE FOURTH THEORY ADMISSIBLE, WHICH DECLARES AN INFALLIBLE PAPACY OVER THE EPISCOPATE? - 85 CHAPTER X. Do THE ACTS OF PETER AND THE CONDUCT OF THE OTHER APOSTLES AFFIRM OR DENY THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE? - - - - - - 108 CHAPTER XL DlD THE SUB-APOSTOLIC FATHERS BELIEVE IN THE POPE*S INFALLIBILITY? - 125 CHAPTER XII. WILL IT BE POSSIBLE FULLY TO EXPLAIN THE PRIMACY AND PONTIFICAL INFALLIBILITY BY SIMPLE REFERENCE TO THE GENERAL LAWS OF LIISTORY? - 140 CHAPTER XIII. BEWILDERING AND FATAL CONDITION OF THE ROMAN CHURCH, SUBSEQUENT TO THE PONTIFICAL INFALLI- BILITY ---------------- 159 CHAPTER XIV. CAN THE TEMPORAL POWER OF THE POPES BE UPHELD IN THE MlDST OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY? - - - - 173 CHAPTER XV. NOTES OF THE CHURCH -------190 CHAPTER XVI. SANCTITY OF THE ROMAN CHURCH ...._--. 200 CHAPTER XVII. UNITY IN THE ROMAN CHURCH - -----218 CHAPTER XVIII. ECCLESIASTICAL CELIBACY - -, - - - - 244 CHAPTER XIX. THE INQUISITION AND ROMANISM ------- 257 CHAPTER XX. JUSTIFICATION, ITS CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES - - - - 283 CONTENTS V CHAPTER XXI. THE SACRAMENTS - ------- 305 CHAPTER XXII. PURGATORY AND THE MASS - .._.__ 321 CHAPTER XXIII. THE ROMAN DOCTRINE AND MAN IN His TRIPLE ASPECT RELIGIOUS, SCIENTIFIC AND SOCIAL ------ 334 EPILOGUE - _-__.. $32 APPENDIX - __--__ 354 ERRATA - .__-_____ fo PROLOGUE. INDULGENT READER : You may never have had the opportunity of read- ing an author (a Roman Catholic theologian) whose purpose was to defend Christ and his Church, while refuting official Romanism. While this statement may appear somewhat para- doxical, I believe that with your indulgence and pa- tience, it can be made plain and comprehensive. At the outset, however, it must be stated, that if antagonistic to the Roman Catholic doctrine, and as one of its enemies you expect to find mention here of the many scandalous historic calumnies, the effective and plausible sophistries frequently directed against that Church, you will be bitterly disappointed and seek in vain, for all such mention has been scrupu- lously avoided. On the other hand, if a Romanist, and you hope to find in this work a defense of many of your doctrines and even dogmas of your present Pontiff, you will likewise be disappointed. The Pope's pretended monopoly of the correct interpretation of the Bible, his authority, temporal power, infallibility and many other important and serious historical and theological questions are herein clearly set forth against Romanism. Should, there- fore, such conclusions prove odious to you, it is hoped that you will place the blame where it belongs, namely : (vii) Vlll PROLOGUE. in their own Philosophy, Theology, Exegesis, and also their own Apologetics. In fact, by carefully following the work you will satisfy yourself that in all my references the most renowned and conspicuous authors in their respective fields have been selected. For example : On Philoso- phy I refer to Cardinals Gonzalez, Zigliara, etc. ; on Theology, many quotations are taken from Billuart and Cardinal Noris, who are recognized as the most dignified and noblest representatives of St. Thomas' and St. Augustine's schools ; supporting the above theologians I refer to such authorities as Hurter, Per- rone, Bertier; on Canon Law, giants of such promi- nence as Bouix, Cardinal Vives and others are named ; on Ecclesiastical History, Eusebio, Baronio, Rohr- bacher, Rivas and Hergenrother are cited; on Apolo- getics I quote Moigno, Hettinger, Jaugey ; on Exe- gesis, Comely, Vigouroux, Patrizi, etc., have been noted. Thus you will see that the references are from the most learned, most profound and distinguished authors. During the course of this writing frequent occa- sion has been found to refer to the memorable work of His Eminence, Cardinal Gibbons, from whose teachings I often dissent. I, therefore, may be par- doned for appropriating to myself the words of that distinguished prelate, who says: "I have imbibed her doctrines (Roman Catholic) with my mother's milk," as to that doctrine ; I have also consecrated not only my early days, but practically all my life has been lived in Romanism. By that Church I have been deemed worthy, and PROLOGUE. IX from it I have received ample applause and honorable distinction. As a priest and a gentleman I can sol- emnly assure you under oath, that I possess and hold valid, ample and perpetual ministerial faculties from more than twelve prominent prelates, and other spe- cial authorities direct from the Pope, which authori- ties are not ordinarily granted to bishops, much less to priests. In conclusion, I desire to say that no pecuniary self- interest has guided me in this work, since I volun- tarily abandon and renounce my brilliant ecclesiastical future in exchange for an humble and burdensome manual labor. Neither has rancor nor any other igno- ble passion prompted me in my writing. Far from being discharged of the Roman Community, I am leaving it of my own free will, after refusing exceed- ingly remunerative offers. To be able to live at peace with my conscience, and to proclaim the whole truth, is the only inducement that prompted me in this work, which I submit to your generous consideration. G. V. FRADRYSSA. INTRODUCTION. To THE thoughtful and analytical observer, the mod- ern religious movement of the vast Christian family when comprehensively viewed, seems to embrace two apparently opposite tendencies. On the one hand, there is a tendency towards decentralization, where centralization has been the dominant factor, while on the other hand, there is a strong and growing sentiment toward unification, where heretofore independence of thought and asso- ciation has been the prevalent idea. In Latin and Catholic Europe there are springing up, from time to time, each time with greater force, keener longings for religious expansion. A new spirit of criticism invades the seminaries, colleges and convents; thoughts tending toward dogmatic decentralization vibrate everywhere. In the face of old tradition, and of a dry and narrow scholasticism, a stream of dar- ing theories in every direction flows counter to the old standards. In fine, a torrent of new ideas threat- ens to overflow, producing an inundation in the realm of religion, similar to the reform of the sixteenth cen- tury. Whoever wishes to assure himself of the truth of this fact needs only to cast a rapid glance at what the present Pope has just condemned under the name of "Modernism." To his surprise, he will there see this tendency (xi) Xll INTRODUCTION. clearly outlined : that starting from the biblical exege- sis, it has spread over every branch of human knowl- edge, until it now constitutes a distinct doctrine. 1 Among the Anglo-Saxons and European Protestants, on the contrary, the tendency to a more complete and far-reaching centralization in religious affairs, makes itself more and more manifest. The various efforts to establish a Central Authority, which shall assume ev- ery right, are more noticeable in religious surround- ings. The aim to establish a supreme judge, from whom there shall be no appeal, who shall silence all doubts, harmonize all discordant rights, become the founda- tion and center about which every religious sect shall be coordinated, and establish its fundamental princi- ples, sparkles in every controversy on modern the- ology, reflects itself in the new rituals and conciliatory assemblies, and sheds light upon the oft-repeated at- tempts at approximation, which nowadays are so fre- quently made by the Protestants. 2 In a word, while the Latin races, in a somewhat covert but energetic 1 The Pope's bull against Modernism may be consulted on this subject; also the explanation of this matter given to the Pope by various Italian priests, and an amplified translation of the same in English also by clergymen; various articles published by the American review, The Catholic World, im- mediately after the issuance of the Encyclical. The Spanish reviews entitled, Razon y Fe (Reason and Faith) and La Ciudad de Dios (The City of God), may also be consulted. 2 See as to this point the work entitled, "Losses and Gains," by the converted Protestant, Newman. Read the letters of Fr. Faber, also a renowned convert. "The Diary of a Prot- estant Clergyman," published by The Catholic World. Con- sult the minutes of the last Protestant meetings. Read the declarations of the Episcopal ministers who have just been converted in Baltimore and those who are being converted in Chicago. INTRODUCTION. Xlll manner, approach the older form of Protestantism, in a latent but none the less pronounced way, the Anglo- Saxons are coming nearer to modern Catholicism. How are we to explain this double and antithetical movement? How can we find a common cause for this twofold divergence of ideas? The loyalty, learning and virtue of the champions of either standard cannot be questioned. They are un- excelled for their integrity, are most profound in their scientific attainments, and are of the noblest of man- kind in their lofty purposes and their simple demand for liberty of thought. Such is the character of those who lend their weight against either tendency, or stand in the forefront as a vanguard of both of these com- mendable and glorious armies. How, then, can it be explained, that such conspicu- ous soldiers aspire to the salvation of their respective churches, by proclaiming doctrines so antagonistic, and practicing such contradictory evolutions? This modest work is intended partly to draw aside the curtain which envelops this phenomenon, the more so as we note with sorrow, that Protestants and Catho- lics alike often overreach themselves in their assertions. While the former too frequently heap against the Catholics crimes and abuses (not always confirmed by history), the latter are wont to represent Catholi- cism as a serpentless Eden, as a society without dis- cord, and as a people without blemish, all of which is also far from the truth. Between these two ex- tremes, science walks serene. Let us then exhibit to the Protestants the internal and actual state of Catholicism, analyze its princi- XIV INTRODUCTION. pies, lay bare its institutions and methods, unfold its doctrines, and make public the condition of its col- lective conscience. I undertake this laborious work because the Catho- lic pamphlets that have come into my hands are not always well authenticated, not always truthful in ex- plaining the Catholic standards, but, on the contrary, are deficient in many cases, and incomplete in others. 3 Only by disclosing the truth, the whole truth, can the Protestant, with a full understanding of the facts, decide whether it is advantageous or prejudicial for him to abandon his own religious hearth for that of a stranger. Thus, and only thus, can he honestly and conscientiously determine, whether, in these critical moments, he ought to lend his aid with Christian loyalty to the Catholic uplifting already begun, by paralyzing his own. I have said critical moments, because there can be no room for doubting, that Romanism is just now passing through one of its most trying crisis. The time-worn "Magister dixit," invoked by the old scholasticism as the supreme judge in the decision of all controversies, has disappeared, to make room for the scientific investigation of doctrines and facts. The absolute and unqualified respect for authority, as the chief regulator of the individual and public conscience, has been replaced by a freedom of inquiry, by the tribunal of enlightened reason, by the conclusions of unerring science, by the evidence of findings of an irrefutable historic light. We refer preferably to the popular ~book~ entitled, "The Faith of our Fathers," by H. E. Cardinal Gibbons. INTRODUCTION. XV The longing to embrace as genuine brothers, those who were formerly believed to be dangerous heretics, palpitates in the vast majority of Catholic hearts. An irrepressible impulse to proclaim as legitimate reform- ers, those who heretofore were designated by the de- grading epithet of Protestants, animates most minds. The expansion of the Bible, and the teachings of the Saviour, by fusion of all creeds into one single creed, and of all congregations into one single congre- gation, professing the same faith and receiving the same sacraments, is the aim and the idea that is irre- sistibly subjugating the most renowned Catholic per- sonages. And in case this universal and fraternal em- brace should become a reality, in what nation couM it be attempted with greater probability of success than in the colossus of the modern world, vast and highly civilized North America? Here, as nowhere else in the world, one lives in a vivifying atmosphere at once religious and tolerant. In Old Europe, all discussion on religion arouses the passions and awakens sectarianism. Religious preju- dice has, so to speak, become crystallized in the con- science of the masses, and everything is looked at through its dangerous mirage. The man and the sect hover like darkening phan- toms overshadowing truth and reason, passion flashes before impartiality illumines, satire and sarcasm take the place of reason and deduction, the controversial criticism becomes hermetically sealed ere the sun of science can throw upon it the light of its resplendent rays. Here, on the contrary, sympathetic reception is accorded to every constructive system, let it come 2 XVI INTRODUCTION. whence it may; here is adopted ever} elevating idea by whomsoever asserted; here all honorable institu- tions and all legitimate rights are held equally sacred, while befitting respect is paid to human personality. Here the frequent communication between citizens of every clime, and between believers of every form of religion, has smoothed all bitterness and created a deep current of human civilization. It is only here that the synagogue by the side of the temple, and the humble Protestant chapel by the side of the sumptuous Catholic cathedral, can camp in the wide avenues without one or the other arousing in the passer-by, either angry protests or passionate affec- tion, because here also more freely than elsewhere, the bishop side by side with the rabbi, and the minister side by side with the priest, move in society without scandalous clashes, and even with mutual respect. To you, then, most excellent American people, I dedicate this humble work. It may not be profound, but it is honest ; it may not be always scientific, but it is inspired by a deep desire to proclaim the truth, and dictated by a yearning for the betterment of the people. Roman Catholicism Capitulating Before Protestantism. CHAPTER I. DISCUSSION OUTLINED. ENUMERATION OF THE FUNDA- MENTAL PRINCIPLES ADMITTED BY BOTH THE PROTESTANTS AND THE CATHOLICS. IN order to proceed systematically and with some hope of success in a most serious and intricate re- ligious problem, we must first determine whether there be any fundamental principle which is admitted alike by Protestants and Catholics, or any dogmatic truth which is professed and believed by both of these religious denominations. Not to do so, would be to stray from the question at the very outset. To ac- knowledge principles which would be admitted only by the Catholics, would be to decide in advance the question in their favor, and against the Protestants. To proclaim truths which would be believed only by Protestants, would be equivalent to deciding the mat- ter in their favor, and against Catholicism. Our discussion, therefore, should be based on these principles and truths which are believed and admitted by adherents of both of these denominations. Will this be possible? Is there in the multitude of Chris- tian churches any principle common to all? Will it be possible to find a general basis in which that whole 2 ROMAN CATHOLICISM series of institutions, apparently so heterogeneous and contradictory, may claim to be founded? Will it be possible to discover in that mass of assertions and denials, of codes and sacraments, of usages and cus- toms, a central truth toward which all the others con- verge, and from which they spring? Fortunately we can say that such a principle, such a truth, such a general basis common to all, does exist. We may add, we may even affirm, that the primary truths and principles of the entire Protestant Chris- tion Church are identical with the principles and truths of Roman Catholicism. The differences and divisions appear afterwards, in the secondary prin- ciples and in later issues. Let us begin the argument. First assertion: Catholicism proclaims, 1 and the Protestant believes, that Christ is God and. the Son of God. Second affirmation: The Protestant believes, and Catholicism proclaims, that Christ accomplished the redemption of man ; that He is the only mediator be- tween earth and Heaven, between sinful humanity and the Supreme Being. 2 The third assertion is so fundamental ana compre- hensive, that both religious denominations agree. 3 The Catholic and the Protestant alike teach, that Christ 1 Read the Confession of Augsburg and Concilium Triden- tinum De Fide (Concilium of Trent; title, On Faith). 'Read same authorities as citation No. I. * See the Confession of Faith of any Protestant denomina- tion. Jaugey: Diccionario Apologetico de la Fe (Dictionary Apologetic of Faith), s. v. Jesucristo, Iglesia. Regla de Fe, Revelation. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 3 proclaimed truths which must be believed, formulated commandments which must be obeyed, and instituted sacraments which must be received, if we wish to be saved. 4 The name of "Master" is given to Christ in such a way, that Romanist and Protestant both agree that He is the only teacher of the dogma, the only lawgiver of ethics, the only author of the sacraments. 5 Both further agree in according to Christ exclusively the power to proclaim dogmas, to formulate com- mands, and to institute sacraments. It follows from this, that in the Catholic as well as in the Protestant theology, any sacrament not instituted by Christ him- self and not originating with Him, is not a sacrament at all, but a false and damnable institution. A dogma which does not spring from Christ's teachings, is not a dogma at all, but an arbitrary human imposition not to be tolerated. Fourth affirmation : Christ as a man was transitory and mortal, and redemption was to be permanent, everlasting and universal. Redemption is not confined to a certain people, but is intended for all men; it is not limited to a specific era, or to a certain race, but *Read the same testimonies mentioned in citation No. i. 6 Read the same authorities mentioned in citation No. I and also: The Protestants are referred to the Encyclopedia Britannica for titles as follows : Luther and Lutherans, vol. XI, pp. 71 to 86; Calvin, vol. IV, pp. 714 to 720; Presbyte- rian, vol. XIX, p. 339, and vol. XXVIII, p. 479; Protestant Episcopal Church, vol. XX, p. 339, and vol. VIII, p. 493; Baptists, vol. Ill, p. 353, and vol. XXV, p. 353; Methodists, vol. XVI, p. 185, and vol. XXVIII, p. 79. Catholics may consult Bertier's Compendium Theologicum : titulo, De Reve- latione et Doctrina Ecclesise ; Perrone et Hurter : the same titles; Jaugey: Diccionario Apologetico de la Fe (Dictionary Apologetic of Faith), s. v. Jesucristo, Revelacion, Iglesia. 4 ROMAN CATHOLICISM it embraces all times and all peoples. It was neces- sary, then, that Christ should establish His Church in such a way, that it might become the depository, at once dogmatic and ethical, of His true doctrine; that it might be the guardian of His true worship, and the administrator of His own sacraments. This is the reason why Catholics as well as Protestants acknowl- edge the existence of a Church, founded by Christ, 9 which shall be at once the synthesis and the prolonga- tion of His sublime work throughout the centuries and for all peoples. But for Catholics as well as for Protestants, the Church is not greater than Christ, nor should its work and mission go so far as to inter- polate or modify His teachings. It should be solely and exclusively the true echo of the sovereign voice of Christ, and the dispenser of his mercies. 7 Christ, and Christ alone, is the splendid sun from whom pro- ceed, like luminous rays, the truths which the Church shall teach. Christ, and Christ alone, is the only supernal fountain from whom shall emanate, like liv- ing streams, each and every sacrament which the faithful receive. Christ, and Christ alone, is the mystic tree implanted in the midst of humanity, and from whom shall come forth, like branches, all the churches and all the ecclesiastical institutions. Behold, then, how, amid that tangle of difference which actually separates one creed from another, yet both acknowledge the same fundamental principles. ' Perrpne : De Vera Religione. P. Fernandez : Teologia Dogmatica ; same head. 'Confession of Augsburg. Concilium Tridentinum; De Fide et Revelatione (Concilium of Trent; Of Faith and Revelation). Perrone: De Vera Religione. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 5 Behold, then, how, in that mass of curses and bless- ings, of denials and assertions, of hates and loves, which constitute the actual character of the Catholic and Protestant, both at the same time proclaim Jesus as their Lord and Master, His Church as a legitimate association, and the depository of His dogma and ethical teachings. And who would believe it, if it were not recorded on the pages of history in charac- ters of blood, that the very men who confessed Jesus as their Lord, and His Church as the legitimate Church, waxed wroth with one another as if the true doctrine of Christ meant nothing? In the name of Jesus and in the name of His Church, the stakes of the Inquisi- tion were set aflame, and in indescribable torment thousands of the best men perished who proclaimed Christ as their Lord, His doctrine as a divine doctrine, and His Gospel as the only Gospel leading to salvation. 8 In the name of Jesus and His Church, the gallows was raised in England, as the stake was blazing in Spain. 9 In the name of Jesus and His Church, Calvin decreed that the immortal Servetus should die, as in the name of Jesus and His Church, Alexander VI signed the death warrant of the great Savonarola. 10 In the name of Jesus and His Church, desolation and death, curses and execrations, anathemas and excom- munications, bitter quarrels among men and factional fights among cities, filled the land. 11 8 Capa : La Inquisicion Espafiola. "La Fuente: Spanish Histories of the sixteenth and sev- enteenth centuries. Robertson (Scottish historian) : His- tories of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. 10 Rivas : Historia Eclesiastica ; title, Siglo XVI. 11 Castelar : Revolucion Religiosa, vol. II, chap. ii. 6 ROMAN CATHOLICISM I have briefly referred to these unhappy occurrences for the reason that the subsequent chapters cannot be studied to advantage, if we do not view the subject dispassionately, and set aside our inherited prejudices. If we seek Christ faithfully and sincerely, it is impos- sible that His doctrine which, as we shall see later, is eminently a doctrine of universal love should sepa- rate us one from the other. It is impossible that our hearts should not beat in unison, and that we should not all be fused in one great universal Church. Let us weigh well in our minds the fundamental principles applicable to all: The divinity of Christ and the legitimacy of His Church. At the same time let us not diminish the power of Christ nor magnify that of His Church. Let us not reject any of the authentic teachings of Christ, nor deny any of His precepts, nor belittle any of His sacraments. To do so would be to separate ourselves from Him, to turn away from His spiritual body, to deny the divine efficacy of His splendid mission. And let us not un- duly exalt His Church, nor concede to it greater powers than rightfully belong to it. To do this would be to elevate the Church at the expense of Christ, to proclaim the Church a God, and Jesus Christ a man. By merely noting these two fundamental principles, our discussion will be to some purpose, harmony will become possible, and we shall be able to arrive at our convincing conclusion. For, as will be shown in the succeeding chapters, all the differences that have arisen are due to the modification of the one or the other of these two principles : namely, conceding to the Church on the one hand, prerogatives which Christ CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 7 himself did not concede to it; and supposing on the other hand, that institutions which are of purely human origin, are derived from Christ. Let us be careful to distinguish the divine from the human, the fundamental from the accessory, the transi- tory from the permanent ; and in order to accomplish this, let us examine from time to time Christ and His Church ; and let us never admit any doctrine as divine, unless coming from Christ himself; let us concede nothing to the Church which Christ would not have conceded to it. CHAPTER II. DISCUSSION AND OUTLINE OF THE MEANS OF KNOWING CHRIST. WE have seen in the preceding chapter that our only Master is Christ, that all our institutions and sacraments connected with the spiritual life should have their origin with Him. But we have not had the ineffable happiness of being called personally to His apostleship; the inexpressible consolation of hear- ing from His adorable lips, His splendid and divine doctrine of salvation, has not been vouchsafed to us. How, then, shall we be able to receive the light of the Gospel? How may we know its dogmas in order to believe them? How find its true teachings in order to follow them? How distinguish its true sacraments in order to receive them? How recognize the true Church in order to embrace it? Here we have the fundamental questions, the answers to which are of vital interest alike to Catholics and Protestants, to believers and unbelievers. What means has divine Providence provided for humanity to enable it to know Christ and enter His Church, and become a member or part of His spiritual body? If Christ and His Church were not within the reach of every human being, then the advent and the re- demption of our adorable Saviour would have been in vain. What avails it to proclaim the divinity of Christ and the efficacy of His redemption, the purity (8) CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 9 of His precepts and the infallibility of His doctrine, if, after all, we should remain unenlightened as to His person and His Church ? The one affirmation is the complement of the other. If the Eternal One sent His Divine Son to save man- kind; if His Divine Son saved and redeemed man- kind, and as a continuation of His adorable mission, established His Church, it was necessary, it was indis- pensable, that there should be a simple and easy way to know and find Christ, to know and find His Church, to know and find His doctrine, His precepts, His sacra- ments. To affirm the first, without affirming the sec- ond, would be to imply a deficiency in His divine work; but this is a blasphemy which would involve the denial of the divinity of Christ Himself, the de- struction of Providence, and, the annihilation of all religion, both revealed and positive. Therefore, as we affirm the existence and divinity of Christ, the exist- ence and indestructibility of His Church, we should also affirm, that there are simple and universal ways of knowing Christ and His Church. But what are these ways? Which is the safe road? What course shall we take in order that we may definitely say, "At last I have found Christ. I have found His Church"? In attempting to answer this most serious question we come upon the points of opposition between Catholics and Protestants; differences between the two begin to appear. But in seeking a veritable and sincerely Christian criterion, fortified by sound theo- logical reasoning, and calling to our aid clarified his- torical testimony, we confidently hope to remove and IO ROMAN CATHOLICISM solve all the difficulties in our path to the satisfaction of both the religious denominations. Let us hear first the answer of the Roman Catholic theology. It begins by affirming the priority, saying to the believer : x "I am the only Church founded by Christ, and for that reason the only true one. I pos- sess the divine prerogative of infallibility, and for that reason, I only can guide you to Christ without devia- tion and without error; I can show you His dogmas as they are; His ethical teachings without mystifica- tion; His sacraments truly and without addition. Hear me, for whoever hears me, 2 hears Christ; obey me, for whoever obeys me, obeys Christ; follow me, for whoever follows me, follows Christ." This, in brief, is the answer of Romanism. 3 Let us explain this more fully. The answer to be given to the above questions should be universal and general in nature ; it should be applicable to all times, to all peoples, and to all classes of society. If it is not applicable to a given epoch in history, 4 if it is not 1 Bertier : Compendium Theologicum ; De Vera Ecclesia. Casanova: Theologia Fundamentalis ; De Vera Ecclesia. 2 Hettinger : Theologia Fundamental ; De la Iglesia Ro- mana, Spanish translation. Jaugey: Diccionario Apologetico, s. v. Iglesia. 8 1 will say right here that notwithstanding my title of Doctor of Theology, notwithstanding that I have studied and taught this great and perspicuous science, I have never been able to find this answer sufficient and adequate ; I have never considered this affirmation effective and rational ; nay, more, I have always regarded it as a "begging the question" and an obvious contradiction to other clear and definite doctrines of the Church. 4 Jaugey: Diccionario Apologetico; s'. v. Razon, Revela- cion, Conocimiento Religioso. Moigno: Esplendores de la Fe. (The Spanish translation of both of these works.) CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. II applicable to any given people, if it is not applicable to each and every person individually, then it is not a legitimate procedure, and hence the answer is false and should be rejected as inadequate and contradic- tory. Now let us suppose, that instead of giving the an- swer in this twentieth century, we should have been asked to give it in the Middle Ages, the most critical period of Romanism, when there were three Popes : 5 one in Spain Benedict XIII; another at Avignon Clement VI; and the third in Rome Gregory IX. Each of them had a large following in the Church; each one had his cardinals who had elected him and proclaimed him to be legitimate; his doctors of the- ology who defended him, kings who obeyed him, and saints since canonized, who believed in him. 6 To which of these three Churches, then, should we send the man who wants to believe? For it must be borne in mind that according to the Roman Catholic theology the faithful without the Pope are a little less than nothing, while the Pope without the faithful is the Church, the whole Church. Let us suppose that all the nations should renounce the Pope, that all the faithful should turn away from him, then he alone would constitute the entire Church, all-sufficient and adequate in him- self ; 7 and all the faithful and all the nations would be as nothing but error and heresy. Don't imagine 5 Rohrbacher and Baronio: Historia Eclesiastica ; Cismas de Occidente. "Alzog: Historia Eclesiastica; Cismas de Occidente. Rivas : Lecciones de Historia Eclesiastica ; same title. 7 Jaugey: Diccionario Apologetico de la Fe; title, Papa, Iglesia. Maistre : Del Papa. Pio IX : Enciclica a los P. P. del Vaticano. 12 ROMAN CATHOLICISM that we are inventing doctrines ; we are merely stating the most essential and positive tenets of the Roman theology, as anyone may see who will look up the authorities to whom we refer in our notes. If, then, the Pope without the faithful is the Church, the whole Church, and the faithful without the Pope cannot of themselves constitute a Church, to which of the three Churches should we send the faithful, at the time of the three Popes? If, then, we could not accept that answer in the period of the Middle Ages, neither can we accept it now, for do not forget, that according to the Roman- istic theology, the answer, in order to be a valid one must be universal and applicable to every period of time; for if there be found any period which this an- swer does not cover and to which it does not apply, then the answer is not a valid one, but is false. 8 Hence, if it did not apply to certain specified circum- stances in the Middle Ages, neither does it apply now, and therefore it is not general ; if it would have been inadequate and contradictory then, it is inadequate and contradictory now ; therefore it is not universal. Fur- thermore, who can assure the Roman Catholic that, as schisms rent the unity of Romanism in past times, so schisms may not rise to disturb the Church in times to come? In case this should happen and it is not outside of the limit of probability how should we answer the man who wants to believe? to which Church should we send him? And in the interreg- num between the death of a Pope and the election of 8 Abate Moigno: Esplendores de la Fe. Jaugey: Demos- tracion Religiosa. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 13 his successor, what shall we say to the man who comes to us for advice ? Shall we say to him in this case : 9 Now we are in a period of transition, at this moment we are without a head ; we lack the most fundamental and constitutive part of the Church; and while this transitional period lasts, we cannot give you any definite advice, because we are not infallible; we shall be so before long, and then we will guide you calmly and without danger ; for the present keep your faith in abeyance and restrain your desire to join us, for soon, very soon, we shall have among us our infallible Pope and then we shall be a whole and complete society. Is there anyone who does not perceive the absurdity of this reasoning? If the conclusion is absurd, then the premises from which it derives are equally absurd, and consequently such antiquated affirmations can no longer be supported in this, our twentieth century. And again there is brought forward a great soph- ism, known as a "begging the question," referring back to the scholastic philosophy, which is the official philosophy of Romanism. To what kind of arguments has Romanism recourse, on which it seeks to base its claims of being the legitimate Church, and on which it seeks to found the many prerogatives it attributes to itself? Who are the teachers that say to Roman- ism, It shall be thus? Whence does it derive the assertion that it rests on solid foundations, that its dogmas are unerring, that its ethical teachings are pure, and that its sacraments are genuine? From "Famosisima carta de Pio IX a los P. P. del Concilio Vaticano. (Famous letter from Pius IX to the P. P. of the Vatican Concilium.) 14 ROMAN CATHOLICISM the Divine Word, 10 from the authority of Christ. Nothing that is not contained in this Word, says the theologian, may claim to be infallible, nothing that does not proceed from the authority of Christ may claim to be divine ; u man, individually and collect- ively, shall receive and venerate the doctrine of Christ such as He taught it, and yield obedience such as Christ demanded it, and there is no human power on earth, be it called a believer or a priest, be it called a bishop or a cardinal, be it called a king or a pope, be it called nation or concilium, which may alter one iota of that which Christ has taught or imposed. 12 This is a theological doctrine common both to Catho- lics and Protestants. For this reason, therefore, the Church must continually seek in the Bible for each and every one of her dogmas, each and every one of her sacraments, each and every one of her preroga- tives. If she must admit to us, then, that she holds nothing that has not been commanded by the Bible and by Christ, why not go directly to Christ and His Gospels? If she believes in her own affirmations, if she admits that they are all derived spontaneously from the infallible doctrine of Christ, why this out- cry, when the faithful study for themselves those same Gospels, and seek with the light of their own under- standing for that which the Bible teaches, and which 10 Perrone : De Vera Religione. Bertier : De Doctrina Ecclesiae. Jaugey: Diccionario Apologetico de la Fe, s. v. Iglesia, Biblia. 11 Concilium Tridentinum et Vaticanum; De Fide (The Conciliums of Trent and of the Vatican; sections of the Faith). Sacra Scriptura et Revelatione. 12 P. Fernandez : Theologia Dogmatica De Doctrina Eccle- sise. Hettinger : Theologia Fundamental De Sagrada Escritura. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 1$ is so clear and self-evident? This outcry 13 is not rational or justifiable ; this anxiety to keep the Gospels from the believers injures her grievously, instead of working to her advantage, because it creates a prejudice against her, for the believer says to himself : You affirm that you are the one legitimate, the only true Church, because the Gospels and Christ proclaim it thus, and then you command me : Do not read the Gospels except under my tutelage; do not seek to know Christ except under my authority. But who will guarantee me that your tutelage is the legiti- mate one? Who will assure me that your authority is incontrovertible? This rejoinder is one that may rise to the lips of any believer who reflects, and if to this reflection is added some knowledge of ecclesiastical logic, then he may say further: You affirm that you are the only legiti- mate Church, because Christ and His Divine Word teach it so; you affirm that Christ and the Divine Word proclaim it so, because you teach it so, because you interpret it so. Thus you beg the question and you fall inta a vicious circle, because you derive the validity of one principle from the validity of another that you have taken for granted, without having previ- ously proved the rationality of either of the two, which might serve as the basis and point of departure. This is precisely what in your own philosophy 14 is called 18 Leo XIII : Enciclica sobre los estudios biblicos. Reglas del Indice, by the same Pope, in which the reading of the Bible is forbidden under penalty of severe punishment, unless it be read under the conditions imposed by the Popes. 14 Cardenal Zigliara : Philosophia Escolastica, Logica ; De Sophismatibus. Cardinal Gonzalez : Filosofia Tomista ; same title. 3 l6 ROMAN CATHOLICISM the sophism of the begging the question, the soph- ism of the vicious circle. This certainly may deceive the ignorant old woman whose stock of reasoning does not go beyond her breviary. But take a person of education who knows Christ and His Gospels ; who has passed from them to the apostles and the men of the apostolic age; has then studied the first centuries of Christianity and the lives of the first believers, with their primitive reunions, the foundings of the first congregations, with their divisions and conciliums; passing thence to the quarrels and schisms of the Middle Ages and through the Vatican down to the dawn of the modern era; listening to the Fathers assembled at Basle and Constance ; 15 and turning from them to the prelates congregated at the present time at the Council of the Vatican to proclaim off- hand and as if by the way, to such a man, moderately well versed in such studies, the existence and indefecti- bility of the Roman Church, and to rear up on this statement that whole religious system, is like the at- tempt to erect a grand edifice without a foundation, making it stand insecure at the very outset; it is equivalent to undermining his faith and driving him into the most crude rationalism. Finally, the conduct of the Roman Church is not logically consistent with itself and is contradictory to the latest definitions that have just been laid down by the Council of the Vatican. This Council condemns the philosophic system called Traditionalism, and pur- 16 Rivas : Historia Eclesiastica ; Concilio de Constanza y Basilea (Conciliums of Constance and Basle). Rohrbacher: same title. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. IJ suant to its condemnation it proclaims, that reason unaided is able to arrive at the demonstration of the existence of a personal and infinite God ; that unaided, it can demonstrate the divinity of Christ ; 16 that reason unaided can investigate and determine with certainty, which among all the religions is the true one. If reason unaided can arrive at those fundamental and self-evident conclusions, then why forbid it to examine these questions except under the authority of the Church ? Why proclaim, on the one hand, that reason is, so to speak, of age and capable of self-guidance, and then immediately affirm its incapacity and declare it to be still a minor and under the tutelage of the Church? Is not this an obvious contradiction? If the authority of the Vatican Council is upheld, why not also uphold the truths of its utterances? If the Romanists, leaning upon the Council, proclaim the infallibility of the Pope, on what grounds do they forbid other Catholics, who lean upon the same Coun- cil, to proclaim in their turn the sovereignty of reason in finding Christ and His true Church? Summing up this long chapter, then, we affirm that the ancient criterion of the Roman Church, which in- sisted on taking the believer by the hand and leading him into the knowledge of Christ and His Church, can no longer be accepted in this twentieth century, for it meets with the opposition of the Catholic phi- losophy and theology, the history of the Church, and the Council of the Vatican. 16 Concilium of the Vatican ; De Ratione et Fide. CHAPTER III. THE ONLY SURE WAY OF KNOWING CHRIST AND HIS CHURCH IS THROUGH THE GOSPELS. THE principle of authority having been dismissed in the previous chapter, we have no other ration- al and adequate means of knowing Christ and His Church, except in the Word of God, the Bible. We do not believe that this way is free from difficulties; still we may say, that they are less than in the Roman system, and that Protestantism, in setting the Bible above the Church and giving it preference to the Church, has taken a step forward instead of going backwards, and has instituted a beneficial reform in- stead of a dangerous practice. We beg the Catholic who has not been fully convinced by the reasons which have been brought forward, to follow us further with patience, for in the succeeding chapters he may per- haps see how one after the other all the objections of Romanism on this point will disappear. At the same time he will come to see that the Protestant reason- ing is better adapted than the Roman system, to de- fending the catholic faith and checking the steadily growing advance of rationalism. But in order that we may not be accused either of a diffuse or incom- plete statement of the question, we will here remind the reader of the limits that we have set ourselves in the beginning. We are addressing Catholics as well as Protestants, both of whom believe in the divinity (18) CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. IQ I of Christ and in the infallible efficacy of His rule. 1 Therefore we shall not stop to prove what they already concede to us as articles of their faith. Both Catholics and Protestants uphold the existence of a Biblical canon, and as this canon, in the New Testament, hardly differs in the two denominations, we admit it as valid, with the restrictions imposed by Protestantism. The Catholic, in following the unfold- ment of the doctrine, will see that there is nothing alarming in this slight concession. But let not the reader expect us to stop and enter into historical disquisitions in order to determine the legitimacy of the canon. Why should we take up time with questions which both denominations already concede to us ? 2 Since Catholics as well as Prot- estants believe in the divine inspiration of all the books included in the canon, we shall similarly not touch upon the numerous exegetical questions on this point discussed in both of the denominations. 3 Our discussion admits and regards as valid all the theories, from the most restrictive to the most liberal ; from the theory which would confine the divine inspiration, to those passages only which deal with the dogma, with ethics and with the sacraments, to the theory which holds that each and every one of the sentences, words, 1 The Augsburg Confession : Concilium Tridentinum et Vaticanum; De Christi Magisterio et Fide (Trent and Vatican Councils; Christ's Magistery: On Faith). 2 Read any Protestant author on the subject. For Catholics, consult : Patrizi : De Inspiratione. Vigouroux : Manual Bib- lico; same title. * Consult Comely : Manual Exegetico y Hermeneutico. Also Vigouroux : where all the theories are expounded. Jaugey ; s. v. Interpretacion biblica (Biblical interpretation). 2O ROMAN CATHOLICISM accents and commas is inspired. Without passing judgment upon any of these theories, without favor- ing or condemning any one of these schools, we say that the most restrictive, and on better grounds still, the most liberal theory suffices for our discussion. Nor shall we refer to the Old Testament in our dis- cussion. As we are not required to demonstrate the divinity of Christ nor the divinity of His Church, why should we appeal to the Old Testament when all its virtue and efficacy consist chiefly in being the preamble and annunciator of the New Testament? Why appeal to the ancient symbolism, when we pos- sess the living reality? Why question the prophets regarding that which Christ might say, when we pos- sess the same Christ speaking for himself? Why seek light from the forerunners, when we possess the Messiah himself, speaking clearly in his own voice? To go to the Old Testament would be equivalent to saying, that the symbol is clearer than the reality symbolized, that the prophet is more explicit than the thing about which he has prophesied ; in other words, that the penumbra is brighter than the light, that the dawn is more brilliant than the splendid sun from which it proceeds. Therefore we admit and need for our demonstration the testimony of the apostles and the apostolic writings. Why should we not do so, if the first churches were established before the redaction of the Gospels ? 4 Why not, if in the first days of Christianity the apos- 4 Following authors : Rohrbacher, Baronio and Rivas : His- toria Eclesiastica ; Fundacion de las primeras Iglesias (Ec- clesiastical History; title, Foundation of first Churches). CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 21 ties were the living Gospels, the incorruptible wit- nesses of the Word of Christ, and those who, finally, under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, committed that Word to writing in the four Gospels and in their many epistles, well along in the first century? To set aside the testimony of the apostles would be equiva- lent to setting aside the Gospels themselves, and de- molishing the fundamental basis of the Divine Word. Here we have, then, the aggregate of the books that will enable us to know Christ and His Church: the four Gospels and the Epistles of the apostles. Here we have that which will serve us as a standard, as an infallible guide. Oh, how our spirit is calmed ! How our heart is pacified! How our anxiety is removed! No, do not let us remain at the mercy of that which resolves itself into a human personality. Do not let us run the risk of having our dogmas changed or extended, of having additions or modifications made in our moral code; of having our sacraments sup- pressed and new ones instituted. If our confession of faith is fixed once and for all, it will remain the same throughout the centuries; it will be attainable alike by all men and all nations ; it will always remain whole in the midst of all perplexities and disturbances. What will it matter to the believer, then, that there are divisions and apostasies? What will it matter to the believer then, that there are one or two pontiffs in the chair of Peter? What will it matter to him, that many priests are losing their faith, that public morals are corrupted, that the scribe and the Pharisee are stand- ing in the pulpit? Safe above all and beyond all, the august voice of Christ shall then be ever heard; the 22 ROMAN CATHOLICISM voice of Christ in accents of thunder unceasingly pro- claiming His Gospel "These are my precepts which will not change, though the centuries may change ; this is my dogma which may not be altered, though the customs may alter; these are my sacraments, which will not be increased or diminished, though my fol- lowers may increase or diminish." There is no doubt but that on this point Protestant- ism has taken a better stand than Catholicism, and that its position is more clear and unassailable than the tortuous and vacillating position of Romanism. Who can assail it? Can it be said that the Gospels may perish or be adulterated ? What ? Is this in any way possible, with their innumerable editions and in- contestable copies? 5 If such a thing is not likely with works of lesser importance, as for instance those of Cicero or other authors that are hardly known, how should this be possible with the Word of God, which is in the hands of all men, which has been translated into all languages, and of which all people possess codices ? And if there really should occur a general mistake among men, how can we believe in a Divine mistake ? Did not the Holy Ghost, while inspiring those books, impose upon himself at the same time the sacred obli- gation of watching over them with His adorable Providence? If human means should be insufficient, a supposition that is repugned on moral grounds, then the omnipotence of the Holy Ghost would come to B Both authors, Patrizi and Comely : Sobre la Imposibili- dad de perderse 6 adulterarse los Librps Santos (On the Im- possibility of either losing or adulterating the Sacred Books). CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 23 their aid and supply the deficiency. If men could not and would not watch over their preservation and purity, then He who never sleeps would watch over them, He who is all-powerful would take care of them ; their falsification would be prevented by Him who, being infinitely wise, could never mistake their true meaning. In brief, God aids humanity, so that it may never lose His divine and inestimable treasure. Note, then, the most signal difference between Ro- manism and Protestantism. The first says : Jesus Christ spoke, I do not deny that; but for you His word is an unprofitable riddle, unless I solve it for you. 6 Jesus promulgated dogmas which every faithful one shall believe, gave commands which every man must obey, established sacraments which every believer must re- ceive. All these were laid down in the Bible, and although they were committed to writing by order and under the inspiration of Heaven, do not weary yourself with reading them, for you will find nothing in them if I do not guide you ; you can know nothing with certainty, if I do not add my own sanction to the sanction of the Holy Ghost, if I do not add the authority of earth to the authority of Heaven, and if the word of the Pope is not joined with the Word of God. For Romanism, Heaven and earth are entirely sub- ject to the will of the Pope ; Heaven has no means of communicating its commands except through the Pope, and earth has no way of receiving them except 'Leo XIII: De Studiis Sacrse Scripture (Encyclical on the Holy Scripture). 24 ROMAN CATHOLICISM as interpreted by the Pope. 7 And the more false these printed monstrosities are, the more firmly they must be believed. In order that the reader may see for himself, a bull by Pius IX is quoted in the footnotes for the benefit of anyone who will read it. 8 Protestantism, on the contrary, says: Here you have the fundamental code of your beliefs, precepts and sacraments; receive it with respect, for it is divine ; read it with veneration, for it came down from Heaven. Do you wish to believe? Seek, and here you will find your faith. Do you wish to do right? Search and here you will find your code of ethics. Do you waver? Do you doubt? Do not seek human aid but implore Heaven, and the same Holy Ghost who inspired and dictated to those who wrote these books will likewise inspire and dictate to your con- science. What a notable difference we have here! Roman- ism circumscribes the activities of the Holy Ghost and T Pius IX: Enciclica ad Vatican Conciliarios P. P. (Letter to the P. P. Councilors of the Vatican). Leo XIII: De In- terpretatione Sacras Scripturae. 8 Pius IX : Pope's Bull : Obitus Rom. Pont, durante Concilio. Pius IX in Litt. Ap. "Cum Romanis Pontificibus" ait "De apostolicae potestatis plenitudine declaramus, decernimus atque statuimus quod. . . . Nos decedere contingent, idem existat, illico et inmediate suspensum ac dilatum intelligatur, quemad- modum per Nostras has litteras illud nunc, pro tune suspen- dere atque in tempus infra notandum differre intendimus, adeo ut nulla prosus interiecta mora cessare statim debeat a quibuscumque conventibus, congregationibus et sessionibus, et sequibusvis decretis seu canonibus conficiendis nee ob qualem- cumque causam, etiamsi gravissima et speciali mentione digna videatur ulterius progredi donee novus Pontifex a sacro Car- dinalium collegio canonice electus suprema sua auctoritate Concilli ipsius reassumptionem et prosequitionem duxerit in- timandam. Idem Pontifex mandat quod certam stabilemque normam in simili rerum eventu perpetuo servandam. . . ." CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 25 places itself like a barrier between God and man; Protestantism removes all obstructions and establishes a constant and most ample communication between Heaven and earth, between God and man. The objection that Catholicism opposes to Protest- antism will be met in the next chapter and will be refuted. CHAPTER IV. ARE THE GOSPELS SUFFICIENT IN ORDER TO KNOW CHRIST AND HIS CHURCH? HERE we frankly and succinctly formulate our answer. Since the Gospels comprise the writ- ings of the apostles, they should contain all that is necessary to believe, to do and to receive, in order to be saved; and they should state this so clearly and self-evidently, that with the assistance of the Divine cooperation, the mere reading will be sufficient to com- prehend it, as both denominations suppose and admit. Let us see if it is so. These books, dictated by the Holy Ghost, contain the genuine Word of Christ. Who wrote them? Two of the evangelists, Matthew and John, were eye- witnesses; the two others, Mark and Luke, wrote in conjunction, the one with Peter, also an eye-witness, and the other with Paul, who admitted that he had received the Gospel from Christ himself, through reve- lation ; 1 moreover it must always be borne in mind that the four wrote under the direct and all-sufficient inspiration of the Holy Ghost. What results there- from? We must collate and synthesize the doctrine of our Saviour; determine once and for all the true teachings of Christ, and at the same time refute the apocryphal writings, which were even then appearing everywhere, serving as the basis for the first heresies. 1 Galatians i. 12. (26) CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 27 Very well, then. According to St. Thomas and the entire school of Romanism 2 if we wish to know God and deduce His attributes, we must begin with the created beings and ascend from them, conceding to God whatever of beauty, perfection and wisdom we find in creation; with this proviso, however, that in creation all perfection is found to be mixed with im- perfection, while in God all the perfections are found entire and pure. In creation we see the perfections divided among the different classes of created things ; some we behold shining in the things not endowed with sensation, others appear resplendent in the living creatures; and the most marvelous ones scintillate in the chief being, the crown of creation, the synthesis of the universe, the compendium of the miracles of God in Man: but in God they are all summed up in their highest potentiality and with fundamental unity and simplicity, in one single Being. In creation all beauty and virtue, all perfection and holiness, is al- ways accompanied by some bounds and restrictions, all is finited and limited ; but in God all these perfec- tions are infinite and immense, without term and with- out limits. Hence, we see God, as it were, mirrored in creation, but we must never forget that the mirror is the finite while the image is infinite, that the mirror is cloudy and obscured, while the image is clear and magnificent, that the mirror is imperfect and inade- quate, while the image is absolutely perfect in all its proportions. Hence there have been deep thinkers who have 8 St. Thomas : De Deo. S. Dionysius : De Divinis Nomini- bus. 2 ROMAN CATHOLICISM held that this world, being the work of God, must needs be the most perfect of all the possible worlds ; 3 for if it were not it would lack something, hence it would be imperfect, hence it would presuppose imper- fection in the Supreme Artificer who made it. St. Thomas, and with him the entire Catholic school, since they could not concede to creation the attributes of infinity and immensity, 4 which would be equivalent to proclaiming the simultaneous existence of two infinite beings a supposition that involves an obvious contra- diction in philosophical reasoning and since they felt obliged, on the other hand, to admit the full perfection of the works ad extra, as God is absolutely perfect ad intra, tried to compromise by saying: If you ask us whether this world is the most perfect that God could create, we say roundly, No. God can create an in- finitude of worlds more perfect than the existing one ; an infinitude of beings more beautiful, more grand, more sublime than the existing ones ; but in view of the end that Gpd proposed to himself in creating this world, in view of the gradations of glory that He de- sired to see sparkling in creation, this world is the most perfect of all the worlds, this creation is the most adequate of all the creations. Not to affirm this, continues St. Thomas, would be to suppose a lack of proportion between the Artificer and His work, to proclaim a deficiency between the Creator and His creatures, which would be equivalent to denying the 8 Leibnitz : In his philosophy, which is perhaps the most profound work of Protestantism, and one of the wisest -works of humanity. See also the works of Cardinals Zigliara, and Gonzalez's Cosmologia. De possibilitate creationis eternse. * The same testimonies as cited on No. 3, CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 29 infinite wisdom of God and the harmony of Provi- dence. 5 In expounding our thesis, we go back, as the Roman Catholic believer will see, to the most fundamental doctrines of the Roman philosophy and theology, we appeal to the testimony of its deepest thinkers, of its most renowned and tried theologians; this will show that we have undertaken to write a rational work making for harmony, and not a work appealing to sectarian prejudices. Let us, then, turn the light of those doctrines upon the question in hand, let us apply the philosophic and theologic reasoning of Romanism to the work above all others divine, the redaction of the Gospels. Here we have clearly an object proposed by God the collation of the doctrine of Christ ; 6 we have also the means chosen by the same God 7 the writing of the Gospels. Is there due proportion between the end and the means, both chosen by the same God? Then the result is a complete work. Is there no such pro- portion? Are there shortcomings in the Gospels? Was the object in view not attained? Then they are 5 The same testimonies as cited on No. 3. 8 Consult the Gospels, The Acts of the Apostles, and the Epistles of the apostles, where both of these truths are re- peatedly stated. It is sufficient to read the beginning of the Gospels in order to see how the evangelists viewed Christ's doctrine. St. John begins with the Divine generation and ends with the Resurrection; St. Matthew and St. Luke begin with the human genealogy and reach, the first, as far as the Resur- rection, and the second, as far as the Ascension; St. Mark begins with the public appearance of Christ and goes as far as the Ascension. See especially the first verses of St. Luke, and St. John xx. 30, 31 ; also Acts i. 2. 7 Consult same testimonies as cited on No. 6. 30 ROMAN CATHOLICISM not a divine work, then the theory of inspiration falls to the ground. Then good-bye to the Gospels! This reasoning is not rational; it is not philosophic nor theologic within the limits of the scholastic philosophy and theology. It undermines the founda- tion of the entire Christian revelation. It is equiva- lent to proclaiming the most destructive exegetic doc- trine where we should find the most humble submis- sion, the most profound respect, the deepest reverence for the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. May we not say, rather, that in the Creation all is harmonious and proportionate ; that the stone as it falls, the river as it runs, the star as it shines, the plant as it grows, the beast as it roars, and man while he thinks are harmonious and proportionate, are fin- ished and perfect, each in its class and species, because they all respond adequately to the concept which the Supreme Artificer has formed of them, making them completely and entirely perfect, each in its way ? 8 May we affirm all this of the Creation and then when we come to the work which is above all others the work of God, to the work of redemption, the redaction of the Gospels, which are the indispensable means for the continuation of this redemption when we come to the chief work, I say, which is the foundation and basis of Catholicism and of humanity, shall we then declare : This is a deficient and incomplete work, this is a work which does not correspond to the end it pro- posed? For it proposed to expound the doctrine of 8 See Jaugey : Diccionario Apologetico de Fe ; Creacion, Providencia, Perf eccion del Mundo. Consult also Granclaude : Filosofia Escolastica, Cosmologia. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 31 Christ, and it does not expound it; it proposed to reflect all His dogmas and it does not reflect them ; it proposed to set forth all His precepts and does not set them forth ; it proposed to establish all His sacra- ments and they have not been established ; it proposed to describe the constructive elements of His Church and they have not been described ; this work remained incomplete, remained deficient, although the apostles redacted it, with the aid of the infinite wisdom of the Holy Ghost ; therefore we must complete it by seeking the assistance of the first Churches, we must add to it by seeking human testimony, we must go to tradi- tion for support. 9 Is this rational? Is this conceiv- able? This is the greatest of philosophical and theo- logical absurdities imaginable, from the point of view of scholasticism, the official doctrines of Romanism. We shall further demonstrate this fallacy by taking up another line of reasoning, and we appeal to the reader's patience if we propound and solve this great question somewhat diffusely. For it is a question that is not only of the utmost importance in itself but is also a fundamental one for the discussion in the fol- lowing pages. We cannot proceed with our subject without having answered it, for we should meet with doubts and stumbling-blocks at every step ; but if it has once been cleared up, then we can easily meet and overcome each and every one of the obstacles that we shall find on our way. The apostles were the first true followers of Christ. I take it for granted that there is no Romanist, how- * Bertier : Compendium Theologicum. Perrone, Casanova : De Traditione. 32 ROMAN CATHOLICISM ever irreverent he may be, who will not concede, that they believed in the entire Christian dogma, that they practised all its moral precepts, that they received each and every one of the Divine sacraments, that they lived within the true and legitimate Church. To doubt any one of these affirmations would be equivalent to doubting the foundations of ecclesi- asticism. 10 Very well, then. Let us suppose for a moment that they were not prompted by the Holy Ghost, let us consider them for a moment as mere historians, as men of integrity and sincerity. How would they have to proceed in order to record the true doctrines of Christ? They would have to question their own in- telligence on the supposition that they believed in each and every one of His dogmas; they would have to seek counsel from their own will, provided that they fulfilled each and every one of His precepts; they would have to reflect the experiences of daily life, provided that they received and administered each and every one of the sacraments; they would have to de- scribe the events happening around them, provided that they were living within the true Church. Then if we suppose that they were men of integrity and truth (and to doubt that would be blasphemy for a Romanist 11 ), we must further suppose that they were capable and perfect men ; as according to all reports they possessed the necessary knowledge and integrity ; I therefore say that they were true and perfect Chris- 10 Pope S. Leo: Petri et Pauli Sermo (Sermons on St. Peter and St. Paul). The unanimous testimony of the Roman Church. 11 Consult the same testimonies as cited on No. 10. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 33 tians. 12 Among historians every eyewitness is admit- ted as a credible one, who possesses adequate knowl- edge of that which he recounts, undoubted integrity in recounting it, and absolute veracity. To deny this standard of criticism is to destroy the records of his- tory, and to grope about in the dark regarding the past; it is to assert that historical accuracy is im- possible. Therefore, according to our reasoning, the apostles must have been perfect in their Gospels, and if we add thereto the Divine aid, proclaimed and be- lieved in by both the religious denominations, 13 then we arrive at a degree of certainty that is not human but divine ; then we have evidence not based on scien- tific grounds but evidence that is absolutely infallible. Let us examine the Roman theology somewhat more closely. For God, time does not exist. 14 Seated on the summit of eternity, He encompasses in one single present idea that which was, that which is, that which shall be, and that which might be. Before anything at all existed, He saw within His divine Essence all that which had to be, and how it would come to be. Hence the development of His Church was clear and visible to Him since eternity. Before the heresies ap- peared in time and among men, He beheld them rise up out of the depth of His infinite wisdom. He be- 12 Balmes : El Criterio. Granclaude : Logica ; Criterios de Verdad. Mendive: Logica; Criterios de Verdad (Criteria of Truth). 18 Concilium Tridentinum et Vaticanum : De Canone Sacrae Scripturpe. The Biblical Canon of any Protestant ritual, and the Biblical Canon of the Councils of Trent and the Vatican. u Hurter : Theologia Dogmatica de Scientia Dei. P. Fer- nandez : Same title. Perrone, Casanova, Genicot, Gotti : Same title. 34 ROMAN CATHOLICISM held scandals and schisms disturbing and defiling His Church before they actually arose. He beheld vice and sin passing triumphant from century to century, from society to society, from people to people; He saw that no class of society remained exempt; He beheld their impure stigma on the forehead of the people as well as on the crowned head, on the car- dinal's hat as well as on the Pontiff's tiara; and He beheld all these things at the moment when He was inspiring and dictating to His apostles. Is it within the bound of reason to believe that, having the power to establish the word of His adorable Son in an in- controvertible and indubitable way, He should instead entrust it to the volubility and wavering of this same humanity, which He beheld so much inclined to falsify and adulterate it, in order to cloak therewith their vices and crimes ? No, a thousand times no ; God had to choose the best and most adequate way, that which was the least open to mystifications and abuse, in order that the Gospels might condemn for all time the sins of the Pontiff as well as the sins of the faithful, the sins of the king as well as the sins of the people. Our affirmation appears still more categorical as we turn to the last one of the dogmas proclaimed by Romanism, the infallibility of the Pontiff. According to the Catholic theology, 15 inspiration as the general source of authority ceased with the apostles. The body of the doctrine was then entirely complete, and no one is empowered to add to it or take away from 15 Melchor Cano : De Locis Theologicis. Jaugey: His work above mentioned ; Revelacion, Inspiracion, Infalibilidad. Ber- tier, Perrone, Cardinal Vives : De Infallibilitate ; Ecclesise. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 35 it. 16 Consequent upon this affirmation that theology further holds that if the Holy Ghost continues to com- municate with His creatures by means of voices, vi- sions and other mystical manifestations that abound in the lives of the saints, this does not affect humanity at large, but concerns only those individuals who re- ceive such communication. 17 It holds furthermore, in regard to the personal infallibility of the Pontiff, that this is neither revelation nor inspiration, but means merely preservation from error ; 18 and in defining its powers it says: he can originate nothing and add nothing; the only thing he can do is to indicate to us the true meaning of that which has already been re- vealed. We, therefore, stand justified in our point of view, for both Romanism and Protestantism affirm alike that the entire Christian doctrine is contained in the Gospels and the writings of the apostles; we are certain, therefore, that neither in the apostolic tradition nor in the words of the first disciples of the apostles do we find anything, nor can we find anything, that we may not find in the Gospels or in the writings of the apostles themselves. Let us sum up in a few words the doctrine as ex- plained in this somewhat lengthy chapter. Protestant- ism holds that the Bible, being the Word of God, is complete; being inspired by the Holy Ghost, it is in- fallible ; reflecting the teachings of Christ, it contains the articles of our faith, the exemplar of our conduct, " Same testimonies as cited on No. II. 17 Scaramelli : Obras Misticas (Spanish translation). Jau- gey: His work above mentioned; Revelacicn. 18 Schouppe : De Inf allibilitate. Hurter and Hettinger : Same title. 36 ROMAN CATHOLICISM the summary of our sacraments. Since Christ is our one and only Master, Him only shall we hear and obey. 19 Romanism holds that although the Bible is the Word of God, still it is not complete, and does not contain the entire Christian doctrine. 20 Although it is inspired by the Holy Ghost and therefore infallible, yet its meaning is so hidden and difficult to under- stand, that it requires further authentic and infallible interpretation, that of the Pope. 21 While Christ is our only Master, yet we need a man to guide us to him, we need the Pope to go with us. Let the reader examine and decide impartially which of these two theories is the more rational, the more theological, the more human and the more divine. 10 Consult any Protestant ritual on Articles of Faith. 20 Tridentinum et Vaticanum de Traditione et Fide (Coun- cils of Trent and the Vatican). Perrone, Casanova: Same title. "Leo XIII: De Studiis Biblicis (Encyclical on Biblical Studies). Jaugey: His work above mentioned on Exegesis. CHAPTER V. THE SUBJECT OF THE PREVIOUS CHAPTER CONTINUED. WE have asserted in the preceding chapter, not only that the Christian doctrine is contained in the Gospels and the Epistles of the apostles, but also that the language of these works is so clear that it may be understood by any person who is in possession of all his faculties. As the Romanist may see, we have thereby answered one of his gravest charges against Protestantism. The other objections consequent upon the acceptance of tradition and in- volving the view that the Gospels do not contain the entire doctrine, will be the subject of the following chapter. We say this here, in order that he may con- vince himself that we are aware of the number and the force of his objections. One of the most conspicuous facts confirmed both by history and tradition, is the charming simplicity of the language used by Christ. 1 It would not have been judicious in Him to do otherwise. The first and most rudimentary rule for every orator is to accom- modate himself to the social status of the people he is addressing, so that he may be accessible to the ma- jority of them. Not to do so would be to speak in 1 Chrysostomus : De Humilitate et Simplicitate Christi (On the humility and simplicity of Christ). The Venerable Bede on the same subject. The entire tradition of the fathers of the Church, corroborates this statement. (37) 38 ROMAN CATHOLICISM vain, to move the air and not the souls, as St. Paul graphically says. Very well, then ; who were the peo- ple that for the most part composed the audience of our adorable Saviour? Simple fishermen and humble countrymen of Galilee, the illiterate and poor people of Palestine. 2 Let us glance briefly at the degree of culture of this people, that we may thereby gain some insight into this important question. As the immortal Balmes 3 says, one of the rules most necessary to observe for the good historian, but which, unfortunately, is too often forgotten, is that he should set aside for the moment his own state of civilization and his own theories, when he is studying the ancient civilizations. Living as we do in a social environment entirely different from that of Palestine, it is very dif- ficult for us to form an adequate picture of that people. We may, however, get some idea, in following the principle of exclusion, and guided by the few histori- cal records which we possess of them, and although the picture may not be a complete one, it will suffice to demonstrate our thesis. The people of Palestine, at the epoch when Christ appeared among them, selecting them as the sole re- cipients of His religion, were living isolated in the midst of the stream of Hellenism and Romanism which at that time was spreading all over the vast Roman empire. 4 The proud and hypocritical Phari- sees considered the study of Greek and Latin as de- *The Gospels and Apostolic Writings: In almost every chapter, for instance, Matt. xi. 25. *E1 Criterio: Modo de estudiar y escribir la historia (Man- ner of studying and writing history). 4 Talmud of Jerusalem : Megillath Taanith. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 39 grading as the eating of unclean animals. 5 One of these pompous doctors, on being asked the age on which a boy might begin to acquire the profane culture, replied: "At the time when there shall be neither day nor night, for Moses commanded that both the day and the night shall be given to the study of the Law." Schools were few in the land. 6 Their teachers were the same scribes who devoted themselves to the interpretation and explanation of the Holy Books. The course of study was confined to learning to read those Holy Books in a mechanical routine fashion. Nothing that could be called gen- eral culture was taught in the schools or could be acquired in social intercourse. Any branch of learn- ing that was not directly or indirectly derived from the Holy Books was denounced as profane and dan- gerous, and despised and abhorred as impious and heretical. If such was the culture of the upper classes, we may imagine the state of the lower classes, of the working people. Gaume says correctly, 7 that the low- est classes of our modern society would appear as great scholars and men of encyclopedic wisdom in comparison with the ignorant and humble masses of the Palestine people who heard and followed Christ. 8 No one who has looked into profane history and knows the historical records to which the historians 5 Talmud of Jerusalem : Pe'ah. "Renan: The Life of Christ, chap, iii (Spanish translation). 'Gaume: Folleto, Credo (Spanish translation). Josephus: Using his own words : "I am an unusual, cultured man." Philo, another Jewish rabbi of that period, was educated out- side of Palestine. "Fleury: Costumbres de la Palestina (Palestine Customs). 4O ROMAN CATHOLICISM refer in regard to this people can deny that at the time of Jesus Christ the intellectual level of the peo- ple of Palestine was much below the intellectual level of the people of our time, of our working classes. This people, then, most humble in its origin, illiter- ate and simple because of its lack of instruction, is the congregation that Christ chiefly addresses; and the people listen to Him and understand Him; thou- sands from all over the country follow Him with reverence and enthusiasm. And why should this not be so, since there is nothing so clear as the sublime preaching of Christ ? 9 In His exposition He adopted the form most easily understood by the masses. There are no profound discussions, no forced inter- pretations, nothing that is not lucid as the light, clear as day, true as the people surrounding Him were true. 10 He uses the symbol, the parable, the fable, metaphor and allegory; but these oratorical artifices serve only to make His thought more vivid, His teach- ings more clear. He not only seeks to impress the in- telligence of His audience but to appeal to their feel- ings, to move their imagination; because this simple people (and the Saviour addressed by preference the simple people) cannot grasp pure ideas and abstract reflections if they are not garnished and simplified by homely similes and vivid imagery. To deny this fact is to deny the historical personality of Christ, to deny His divine and august mission. To believe that His Gospel was written only for the 9 See any of the sermons of Christ; in the Gospel of St. Matthew, for instance, v. 1-12; also xiii. 10 See the parables of Christ in all the Gospels, especially Matt, xiii, and Luke viii. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 4! leading classes to read ; to suppose that only the upper and illustrious classes could grasp its meaning, to affirm that only those who have previously mastered auxiliary sciences can profit by its reading and inter- pretation, is to contradict the Gospel itself, to asperse and disfigure its divine simplicity, its immaculate beauty, its incomparable tenderness. 11 Poor and sim- ple are those who first approach Jesus, women and children are the first who hear His doctrine of salva- tion ; and Jesus Christ never forgets the condition of His hearers, in His sweet and tender exposition, His candid speech and His enchanting parables. Let us, therefore, go to the Gospels, with the pro- found conviction, that plain, common sense is sufficient to understand them; away with all attempts at pro- found criticism, all search for recondite meanings and deep mysteries, all endeavors to get hold of them with the aid of absurd suppositions and strained and far- fetched interpretations. That which we shall believe and do and receive we find here stated with self- evident clarity without effort or straining of any kind ; and we find it expounded and affirmed as Christ ex- pounded and affirmed His doctrine: with frankness, for the people who listened to Him were frank ; with simplicity for the people who heard Him were simple ; with transparent clearness, for only thus could the people who surrounded Him understand Him. 12 Un- less the Roman Church thinks that our people are in- ferior in knowledge to the absolutely ignorant people 11 See the Gospels, especially Matt. v. 1-12. "Fleury: Costumbres de la Palestina, Renan: Life of Christ; chaps, ii, iii, iv. 42 ROMAN CATHOLICISM of Palestine, that our society is inferior in culture to the illiterate society of Judea, she may never affirm that we require a tutor or an interpreter in order to hear and comprehend that which was heard and easily comprehended by the poor fishermen of Galilee and the simple women of Nazareth. Since this is a question of life or death for the Romanist; since the denial of the absolute necessity of an authoritative interpretation means the downfall of the great majority of the air castles reared within the shadow of this fantastic power; since the ad- mission of a more liberal interpretation might lead liberal reasoning to cast down the many bugbears which have been gathered around the central Roman power, encouraged by authority and false tradition, since Romanism foresees this inevitable catastrophe, it clings more and more closely to its favorite theory. Let us hear its reasoning. 13 If we did not admit the necessity of a single cen- tral authority, whose interpretation shall be equally obligatory upon all, the Sacred Books would be a nest of discord instead of being a center of unity ; a ground for dissensions instead of a basis of unity. 14 Human standards are so varied and numerous, the likes and dislikes of men are so diverse and heterogenous that it would be morally impossible to arrive at a common understanding, and the precepts, the dogmas, the sac- raments, all the constitutive elements of the true 12 Leo XIII : Studies in the Sacred Writings, Conciliums of Trent and of the Vatican. De Sacra Scriptura. "Jaugey: His only work mentioned in this book: Inter- pretacion Biblica; Autoridad de la Iglesia. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 43 Church, would be multiplied or diminished accord- ing to the individual likings. Such is in brief the strongest argument of the Roman Church. To this we may at once reply: Do you believe in the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, in the redaction of the Holy Books? Do you believe that the Holy Ghost is constantly and directly active in elevating those who sincerely implore Him, in the supernatural order of faith? We believe, they say to us, in these things. And we believe more; we believe that without Divine aid human reason is incapable of entering into the su- pernal world of faith. We affirm that neither the clearest and keenest intelligence nor the most pro- found exegetical studies, neither the most accurate knowledge of history nor the infallible authority of the Church itself can introduce the simple mortal man into the supernal world of faith and redemption ; that this 15 is the free gift of Heaven, that this is a favor exclusively bestowed by the Holy Ghost; and we affirm at the same time that He denies it to no one, that He concedes it to all who sincerely ask for it, and who do not knowingly place any obstacle in the way of the divine impetus. 18 According to your own confession, then, the faith- ful who sincerely seek for the truth in the Sacred Books can never find therein any cause for perturba- tion and error. Whence should come error and per- turbation? Out of the Bible? That is impossible, for 13 Concilium of the Vatican ; De Ratione et Fide. 16 The attention of the reader is called to : James i. 5. Matt. vii. 7; xxi. 22. Mark xi. 24. Luke xi. 9. John xiv. 13; xv. 7; xvi. 23. 44 ROMAN CATHOLICISM according to your own confession it is divine. From the impetus of the Holy Ghost? No, for you believe that he is infallible. From the weakness of the faith- ful? No, for you affirm that the Holy Ghost himself aids them. Hence, according to your own theologic doctrine, the faithful can go direct to the fountains of revela- tion, if only he goes sincerely, invoking the divine aid. And if, notwithstanding these conditions, di- versity of opinion should arise among the faithful, bless it, for this diversity would be due to the very f ruitfulness of the Word of God ; it would be a sign of life and not of death, a signal of progress and not of regression. 17 The countless number of nebu- lae and constellations, of stars and planets, have been produced out of one single cosmic matter and this di- versity is the source of its sublime and incomparable beauty. 18 One vegetative life has produced the har- monious gradation of plants and flowers, and its di- versity is brilliant with the wonders of nature. 19 One single, living breath animates the fish in the water, propels the bird through the air, gives breath to the beast in the field and in this very diversity resides the majestic and overpowering beauty of creation." The power of judgment is the specific attribute of man, and what a diversity of races and people, of "Renan: El Porvenir de la Ciencia (Spanish translation) (The Future of Science), first chapters. 18 Sechi: De los Astros (Spanish translation). Palmiere: Cosmplogia. "Zigliara: De Vita Vegetativa. Mendive: De la Vida Vegetal. " Cardinals Gonzalez and Zigliara ; Filosofia : Del Principle Racional. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 45 philosophic systems and literary theories, of political institutions and other human creations, and above all these tilings how beautiful appears humanity in its ceaseless, majestic march toward progress, toward its entire and complete perfection ! 21 Diversity within unity is the sign of harmony, of progress, of life. Centralism within unity is the sign of usurpation, of decadence, of death. Perhaps the Romanist will reply here: But your theory applies only to the good among the faithful, only to those who sincerely seek for the truth, implor- ing Heaven to aid them, and applies by no means to all. We grant that; we speak only of those among the faithful who seek in the Holy Books before all and above all for their creed and their rule of con- duct, not of those who interpret the Scriptures so as to palliate their vices and cloak their sins. Does Romanism believe Protestantism to be so ignorant and unsophisticated as to think that the Sacred Books, aside from being the guide to the creed and the rules of conduct of the sincere believer, are of such nature that the wicked and perverse cannot make wrong use of them? Protestantism is aware and Romanism knows that the insolent can falsify and adulterate the Holy Books according to his caprice, with or without a free examination, with or without the authority of the Roman Church ; but it does not follow from this that the truly faithful may not reap a rich harvest in reading them. Here we have one of the most crafty sophisms of "Renan: El Ppryenir de la Ciencia (The Future of Science) ; chaps, ii, iii, iv, v. 46 ROMAN CATHOLICISM Romanism. Seeing that among those which it arro- gantly calls sects there are some who make a wrong use of the Scriptures, it exclaims with indignation : 22 Here you have the fruits of free examination; here you have the results of not believing in one central authority that shall determine the interpretation. The reader will pardon me if scholastic terms are made use of in replying, for it must be admitted that in treat- ing of Romanistic matters this language is very often precise and to the point. 23 According to your ethics, when a thing is good in itself and evil by accident, it is permitted and commendable if the good is in- tended, and it must never be condemned and prohibited in general. 24 Should anyone suggest that many go to confession and partake of the communion sacrile- giously and that therefore these sacraments should be suppressed, you reply, You talk very extravagantly. We do not deny that there are many, very many sacri- leges, but this is by accidence ; the sacraments in them- selves are good and not to be forbidden, for good men derive benefit from them. Here, then, you have the an- swer, my Roman theologic gentlemen: if some men make wrong use of the Scriptures, this is by acci- dence, and there are, on the other hand, many, very many men who find in them the sure rules of their conduct. Do you attempt to deny it ? Then you deny history. And if you affirm that the defects by acci- dence are sufficient ground for refusing the interpre- M Jaugey: His work mentioned. Protestantismo, Biblia. M Elber: Theologia Moralis; De Actibus Humanis (Human Acts). Sporer and Lenkhul: The same title. 14 S. Alfonso Ma. de Ligorio: De Sacramentis. Cardinal Vives: Same title. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 47 tation of the Scriptures, then you suppress your chief sacraments. What do you reply to the Protestant when he says: The papal authority is bad because it gives rise to schisms and heresies? You hasten to answer that this is by accidence, and it is thereby corroborated by the true faithful. And Protestantism answers you back with the same argument, based on the same terms. The free interpretation of the Bible gives rise to evils by accidence ; 25 and is thereby fortified and corroborated for the true believers. If the argument is sound in the one case, it is also sound in the other case, for true philosophy is neither Romanist nor Protestant the truth is the same for all. Let us now demonstrate the same affirmation by following a line of reasoning that is perhaps more exegetical and philosophical. In exegesis, when ques- tions referring to divine inspiration are under discus- sion, men not well versed in such matters are con- fronted with serious difficulties. 26 If it is the Holy Ghost who has inspired the Sacred Books, why have they been written in diverse idioms and diverse styles ? Why were some written in Hebrew, some in Greek, some in Syrio-Chaldseic, and some in Latin? Why is the Hebrew of Moses not like the Hebrew of Job ? Or that of the Greater Prophets not like that of the Minor 25 Authors cited on the citations Nos. 23 and 24. For the scholastic and technical terms, consult Perujo: Dictionarium Scholasticum ; s. v. Per se, and Per accidens. 29 For all the exegetical questions, consult Comely, Patrizi and Vigouroux, who are the most authoritative. For the question under discussion, 5: will be sufficient to read Manu- ale Biblicum et Hermeneuthicum ; Inspiration and Its Ex- tent. 5 48 -ROMAN CATHOLICISM Prophets? Why is the Greek of St. Paul 27 not like the Greek of St. Luke, or the Greek of St. Mark like the Greek of St. John? Why, if there is only one principal author, the Holy Ghost, has every one of the special authors his own style, his favorite phrases, his own vocabulary? I know your answer, and I accept it as a good one ; for Protestantism must also accept it as a good one, on the supposition that it is rational, philosophical and the only one that can maintain currency. 28 These differences of idiom and style are due to the fact that the Holy Ghost, while in the act of inspiring the writ- ers, accommodated himself to the laws of the language obtaining at a given epoch; these divergencies arose because the divine act combined with the natural mode of expression peculiar to each author before the mo- ment of inspiration and in the course of inspiration. The divine act prompted the holy man to set down the truth and preserved him from falling into error; but it left him free to express his thoughts and choose his words as any profane author might do. A fine confession! An admirable mode of reasoning! If the Holy Ghost accommodated himself to the gen- eral laws of the language of each given epoch, if the holy men in writing the Sacred Books proceeded as any other author would, except that they were prompted to set down the truth and were preserved from error, then the rule of grammar, some idea of philosophy and the rudiments of history, or in brief, **, ^The authors cited and also, Moigno: Esplendores de la Fe; Milagro de Josue. Jaugey: Diccionario Apologetico de la Fe (Spanish translation) ; Inspiration. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 49 the general laws of criticism, are sufficient to inter- pret those books. That which is adequate and suffi- cient to interpret any profane author is also adequate and sufficient to interpret the Bible, since the Revealed Writings do not differ in their morphological struc- ture from profane works. You yourself therefore admit that the Protestants are justified in maintaining that anyone can interpret the Holy Books. Finally, Romanism is at great pains to demonstrate that without a central authority the canon cannot re- main fixed and that it is not possible to arrive at a common understanding in the knowledge of the Bible, and both of these things are not only desirable but indispensable for the true Church. 29 Very well; then the first churches and the first believers, who did not have this canon and this central interpretative au- thority, were not of the true Church? 30 Then you were not the true Church until the time of the Council of Trent, which determined the present canon? Therefore the Roman Church was lacking in something during the sixteen centuries which preceded the Council of Trent ; she lacked this precious and in- dispensable thing which you now proclaim to be so necessary. It seems incredible that Romanism should not perceive how it is standing in its own light by ex- aggerating and insisting on such determinate affirma- tions. While imagining that it is cutting the supports 29 Leo XIII: Encyclical on Bible Study. Jaugey: On his work above mentioned; Interpretacion de la Biblia (Bible Interpretation). Bertier, Perrone, Casanova: De Auctoritate Ecclesiae. 80 Vigouroux ; Comely : Their mentioned works : History of the Biblical Canon. Jaugey: Diccionario Apologetico de la Fe; Same subject. 5O ROMAN CATHOLICISM away from under other roofs, its own roof is insecure and leaky. Further on we shall see that the so much bepraised authority was not able then, nor is it able now to conserve the unity of doctrine and interpreta- tion within its own house. It follows from all these arguments that the Catho- lic philosophy and theology, dogma and exegesis, tak- ing them in conjunction and interpreting them ra- tionally, proclaim the Protestant doctrine as regards the interpretation of the Bible, and refuse the monopo- lizing central authority which Romanism arrogates to itself on this point. CHAPTER VI. IN THIS CHAPTER WE CORROBORATE THE SAME DOC- TRINES OUTLINED IN THE PRECEDING ONES, BY THE CONDUCT AND WRITINGS OF THE APOS- TLES, AND ALSO ANSWER THE MAIN OB- JECTION OF THE ROMANS. WHEN the short, but admirable, life of Christ is looked into; when it is considered that the apostles 1 came before the people not with a doctrine of their own, but with one emanating from Christ direct; and that in order to silence the existing doc- trines and prevent future ones from appearing, 2 the apostles endeavored to draw up and to explain the genuine doctrines of Christ; 3 when all these consid- erations based upon irrefutable historical testimony, are connected together; though we should even mo- mentarily abstract the divine assistance, we arrive at the certain conclusion that nothing that was funda- mental and necessary to the true Church of Christ, could have been left to tradition. Many of the writings of the New Testament were drawn up at a time when heresy and schisms were 1 St. Paul : In nearly all his epistles. Read especially Gal. i. 12. 2 St. Paul: I Cor. iv. 1-5; xi. 18-26. II Cor. xi. 17. Mark xiii. 22. 8 Eusebius : Ecclesiastical History, First Heresies, and the same authorities mentioned in citation No. 2; also consult the Acts of the Apostles, chap. xv. (51) 52 ROMAN CATHOLICISM already tearing asunder the dawning Christian Church. 4 There existed already believers who denied the divinity of Jesus Christ, and believers who re- jected His human nature. There were already diver- gences of opinion upon the authority of His disciples, and upon the reception of His highest sacraments. The same Gospel speaks to us of the false evangel- ists and the false Christs, 5 who would attempt to de- ,ceive the people by erroneous doctrines and spurious sacraments. St. Paul unhesitatingly states that from among his listeners there would arise false prophets, who would endeavor to cheat the masses, by pervert- ing the true doctrine of Christ, and tarnishing the purity of His Church. Since the apostles knew and foresaw these things, since they witnessed on every side the sprouting of error 6 and of mystification ; since, for the purpose of unmasking this treacherous class and strengthening the faithful in their creeds they drew up their writings and their history of the life of Christ, is it reasonable or admissible so far as the human judgment is concerned, that they would have omitted anything fundamental, anything neces- sary or anything of a constructive nature? Is it con- ceivable that they should have left dogma, morals, sacraments, their very Church itself, in uncertainty? Was not this more like an occasional cause of the coming heresies and future errors? To write a part *St. Paul: I Cor. i. II, and iii. 4; also xi. 13. Gal. i. 7. B Matt. vii. 15; xxiv. u; xxiv. 23, 24. Mark xiii. 22. Rom. xvi. 17, 1 8. Eph. v. 6. Col. ii. 6. II Peter ii. 2, 3. The Acts of the Apostles xx. 29, 30. 9 Same testimonies as citation No. 5, and also I Cor. xi, from v. 1 8 on. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 53 of the dogma and to omit another; to speak of some moral precept while keeping silence on others; to proclaim certain specific sacraments, and overlook others, was not that to open a wide breach to error and to doubt? Was not that equal to befriending the very evil-doers whom they purposed by their writings to banish from their Church? The soundest his- torical judgment rejects so monstrous an aberration. Could it be believed that they have delivered up to the crowd some portion of their sacred trust, when they well knew that from the masses would arise the adulterations? Besides, that was opposed to the very teachings of Christ upon tradition. 7 Jesus Christ knew, and they could see, that by means of tradition the former synagogue had falsi- fied and prevented the true laws ; 8 Jesus Christ knew, and they could see, that thanks to tradition, the syna- gogue had created an organization and a code other than the right ones ; hence, the reason why Christ arose against tradition, accused it of forgery, used severe language towards it and against its followers, and rejected it as an injurious doctrinal teaching. 9 Since Jesus condemned the old tradition, and the apostles knew of His prohibition, as well as of the great evils that the former was causing, can it be ad- mitted, can anyone explain, for what possible reason they should have committed to the care of tradition any portion of their dogmas, of their morals, or of 7 Consult Matt. xv. 1-9. Consult Mark vii. 5, 6. Consult Col. ii. 8. Consult Luke xii. I. 8 Matt, xxiii. Luke xi. 39, 40, 41, 42. Mark vii. 4-14, "Luke xiii. 15, and also citation on No. 8. 54 ROMAN CATHOLICISM their sacraments? 10 If both Jesus and the apostles looked upon it as a wicked tradition of corruption and prevarication, how can we believe that they would intrust to it any one of the things necessary to our salvation? Does not this assumption involve a most evident contradiction? Would not this be equivalent to an act of approval, of that, which they so strongly condemn in their writings ? Would not this be lacking in sincerity and honesty? Since we are reasoning according to human judg- ment, let us advance a few historical considerations that bear out our contention. Suppose for a moment that after the death of the immortal hero, Washington, some criminally disposed person had written pamphlets libeling his wonderful mission to this great nation; that some should pre- sume to discredit his military genius, misrepresenting his most important feats of arms; that others should deny him his political ability, mutilating and pervert- ing his principles, that still others should try to im- pugn his public and private character, by inventing and divulging atrocious calumnies! Suppose that an intimate friend of this immortal hero, contemporaneous with him, and knowing all and every one of his deeds, comes to his defense by writ- ing his true biography. Would you understand such an author as likely to omit knowingly any important fact relating to the public and private life of his exalted subject? Can "Acts of the Apostles and the Gospel already cited; also I John iv. 1-4. Eusebius: Ecclesiastical History; Heresies of the First Century. Rohrbacher: Same head. Jaugey: First Century of the Church. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 55 you conceive that he would neglect to write some- thing on all indispensable circumstances such as would tend to make his life shine in the heaven of history, as the sun shines in our planetary system? And if consciously he did omit something absolutely neces- sary to successfully dispel the calumnies so made pub- lic, would not such a historian be guilty not only of lese-majeste (high treason) but assist also in promul- gating the calumny? Apply then, this reasoning to our case. Ever since the first century atrocious and frightful calumnies have been launched against Jesus Christ. 11 His -divine mis- sion is either denied or ignored, as is His human na- ture; His doctrine is distorted; His sacraments are falsified, 12 and the apostles, Christ's intimate friends, and ear-witnesses of His preaching, thoroughly ac- quainted with His doctrine, come out in His defense, compiling it and writing it up. Can you understand their omitting anything fundamental, anything con- structive? And if they should knowingly omit some- thing, would not that show the apostles as being at times the means and cause of propagating error and heresy? Such an omission would be inconceivable to Human judgment. 13 Only those having a preconceived interest in the subject would be able to grasp its meaning; but in the mind of impartial thinkers and clear reasoners, everything must have been left recorded. 11 St. Paul : Epistle I to the Corinthians, especially chap, xi ; also read citation No. 10. a Same authorities as cited on Nos. 8, 9, 10 and n. 13 Balmes : Criterion : Rules to Judge History. Granclaude : Same heading. 56 ROMAN CATHOLICISM Here is the main argument of Romanism : looking into its Gospel, St. John declares: "And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written." St. Paul in his first epistle to Timothy, remarks: "The traditions received from me," Rom- anism says then: "Not everything was left written, therefore we must heed tradition." St. John teaches the first, St. Paul orders the second. Pause, Roman- ist, for within your own and more commendable exe- gesis, Protestantism can find a satisfactory answer. Let us proceed in order as taught by your scholasticism. We are dealing with a grave question, and it is worth while to look into it minutely and conscientiously, in order to deduce from it the only rational agree- ment. Let us see what St. John says, what Roman- ism affirms, and what Protestantism denies. Only by connecting these three points shall we be able to reach a positive result, and one conformable to bib- lical exegesis. To begin with: It seems to us that no Romanist would venture to take literally the passage quoted from St. John, 14 because the world is very large, and Jesus' public life, although astound- ing and admirable, is too short to provide sufficient matter for so colossal a number of books, as not to find room in space. We do not suppose anyone so foolish as to dare to believe so much, and, therefore, we must interpret that passage with mica salts (with a grain of salt) as some of your scholastics would 14 St. John : Gospel, last chap., last v. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 5/ say. Such words must be taken as hyperbolical, in the language of rhetoric. 15 That passage, reduced to its logical term by exe- gesis and rhetoric, would mean that neither were all and every word spoken by Christ copied, nor were all and every one of His miracles recorded. But what will you have gained by that wonderful discovery? From where have you deduced that Protestantism believes that all and every one of Christ's words, and all and every one of His deeds were recorded in writ- ing? 18 Do not confound the terms: The only thing that Protestantism asserts is, that everything that must be believed and practised, everything that must be ac- complished and received, was left written. That is their affirmation. And is there, perchance, any contradiction between the Protestant dogma and the words of St. John? Read over carefully the pas- sage, apply it as prescribed by your own exegesis and enlightened reason, and you will see that said passage is more opposed to Romanism than to Protest- antism. Does St. John say that among the innum- erable words uttered by Christ, that he did not copy, and among- the uncountable deeds that Christ per- formed that he did not record, there exist any new precepts, any new dogmas or any different sacraments ? And since St. John says nothing, because it was im- possible, because it would have been contradictory, of what use is it to you to invoke testimony that means 15 Colonnia : Rhetoric. 18 Encyclopedia Britannica ; Luther and Lutheranism, Cal- vin and Presbyterian. 58 ROMAN CATHOLICISM nothing, unless it is that the Protestants are right? Because since St. John writes the life of Christ, of His dogma and of His morals, do you not understand that if he omits something it is on account of its ir- relevancy to those morals and to that dogma? Can you not see that he himself proclaims it thus, since he gives no directions on the subject? If, on saying that he omitted part of Jesus' preachings and of His miracles, St. John had added that such a portion as he did not copy carried within itself new teachings that must be followed, embodied different moral precepts, separate sacraments which were indispensable to re- ceive: then only could such words give cause for doubt. But as nothing of the kind is said, you cannot deduce anything in your favor. It is only the Prot- estants who can profit by that passage, since it shows the difference between a fundamental doctrine and that which is auxiliary. 17 But it is desirable that a more exegetic answer be given you, a reply in ac- cordance with your own doctrine. In studying some of the allusions contained in the sacred writings, espe- cially the Old Testament, it is quite evident that some of the inspired books were lost. 18 Such is the opinion of many holy Fathers 19 and of not a few expositors, 20 but they all unanimously agree in asserting, that in that case, either they did not contain any dogmatic truths or moral precepts, or that if they contained them, neither the one nor the other would be indispensable "John xx. 30, 31. 18 Read Comely on this question. 19 St. Augustine, St. Jerome and others on this subject. "Vigouroux, Patrizi, Lobera and Caminero. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 5Q to salvation, as the contrary would be repugnant to the economy of divine providence. We are, therefore, in the same identical case : every- thing that it pleased Jesus Christ to teach as dog- matic, everything that He wished to impress upon humanity as a teacher, all remained written. Let us illustrate this most weighty doctrine with some ex- ample that may, so to speak, render it more percepti- ble. Suppose that a very learned man wrote a vo- luminous work, and that later on some one else, in fewer words, were to extract synthetically a com- pendium of all the principles therein formulated and all the truths therein demonstrated. If such a com- pendium reproduced all and each of the truths, all and each of the principles contained in the main work, would it cease to be complete because it was smaller and did not contain all the words of the original work? Certainly not. Our case is absolutely similar. The author of the great work is Christ in His divine life and infallible preaching; the writer of the compen- dium is St. John 21 and the one who comes out vocif- erating "that the compendium is not complete because it does not embrace all the preaching of Christ" is the Romanist. But in turn Protestantism rises, and with its usual good sense reaches a masterly solution by saying : "it is 22 complete as regards the substance and the doctrine; it is incomplete in that it does not contain all the words of Christ, nor all His miracles ; 21 Consult St. John and connect his Gospel with his last chapter and verses. 22 Encyclopedia Britannica; Luther and Lutheranism, Cal- vin and Presbyterian. 6O ROMAN CATHOLICISM this last I present to thee as an ornament, for I have more than enough with the first." Still more obvious and simple is the answer to the argument based on St. Paul's words. 23 He explains to Timothy principally the precepts to be observed by the head of a Church, and incidentally touches upon the obligations inherent in a Christian; but as Timothy frequently accompanied St. Paul, and often by the latter's orders, wrote some letters to the faithful, St. Paul took occasion to remind him, not to forget either. It was like saying to him: "What thou knowest al- ready by other letters written by thyself, and what I now tell thee, thou must observe to be perfect." Let Romanism seek the light in the Gospel in the writ- ings of the apostles, for it will never find anything to favor tradition as it proclaims it. The very force- ful language used by Christ 24 in rejecting the Judaical tradition was still buzzing in the ears of the apostles ; they still remembered those severe words, those sar- castic and steel-like epithets which he applied to the wicked scribes and Pharisees who, standing on tradi- tion, 25 had outraged the law and perverted the dogma. How, then, could they be so disrespectful to their Master and so short-sighted as to knowingly promote abuses with lamentable consequences so much deplored by themselves? Tradition, then, in the spirit that Romanism takes it, is indefensible; it is opposed to the character of 23 St. Paul : II Tim. i. 13 ; ii. 2. ** Matt, xxiii. 13-36 ; Luke xii. i ; also xi. 39-42. " Same authorities cited on the last two citations. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 6l Christ, to the nature and epoch when the gospels were written; it is contrary to divine inspiration and the economy of God's providence; common sense rejects it, exegesis combats it, and critical judgment repels it as irrational. CHAPTER VII. THE CHURCH ACCORDING TO THE GOSPELS, AND THE WRITINGS OF THE APOSTLES. HAVING adopted the New Testament as the standard for our discussion, it must be the one to decide, as the supreme judge, upon all the ques- tions at issue between Protestantism and Romanism. These may be reduced to five different questions, namely: First, Constitution of the true Church; sec- ond, Characteristics it should possess; third, Number of Sacraments, and the essential elements necessary to their integrity; fourth, Worship and the form to be adopted; fifth, What, if any, innovations exist? Whoever examines the Gospels, hoping to find in them a close and compact doctrinal body, similar to a modern treatise, will be grievously disappointed. 1 Christ expounds His doctrine by means of apho- risms and parables, in which there does not exist any kind of methodical inference. According to the cir- cumstances of the moment, the quality of His hearers, the objections of His opponents, does He proceed, sometimes explaining a precept, at others correcting some vice, or again speaking on a sacrament; but *Read the Gospels, and the truth of this assertion will be seen. Only that in St. John's Gospel and in some of St. Paul's Epistles there appears some method. (62) CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 63 without His teachings ever conforming to any studied or systematic method. In order to properly grasp His doctrine, it is necessary to follow His every step, from one people to another, from one parable to an- other, from one aphorism to another. It is necessary to connect the passages in the Gospels and to seek, as it were, the resultant. 2 Then it becomes clear that His dogma is reduced to a very few fundamental truths; that His precepts are not numerous but most important; that His sacraments are very simple and clear. Then it appears also 3 that there exist in His dogma and in His morals, certain points that He favors most; some, He never tires of repeating and inculcating on His hearers, 4 while others He only touches upon incidentally. On no point, perhaps ex- cepting the clearness of His exposition, does Christ insist more often in His Church, than upon its founda- tion. Similes, parables, apologies, allegories every- thing, 5 in fact, is used by Christ to illustrate to us His establishment and His organization. We will not dwell at length upon the establishment of the Church. Since it is our purpose to limit ourselves only to the differences between Protestantism and Romanism, and to determine which are better grounded in the sacred Books, we will not delay in proving the existence of 'Read Camunero: Manual Isagogicum (Biblical Manual); General Rules of Exegesis. 8 See same author : Synthesis of Christ's Doctrine. 4 See St. John's Gospel, and it will be seen how frequently he inculcates charity. In all his Gospels he insists numberless times on meekness, modesty, etc. * See Matthew, chapters xiii and xv, and the other Gospels, in the respective paragraphs dealing with the same parables. 6 64 ROMAN CATHOLICISM the Church, inasmuch as both these professed religions believe in such existence. 6 The discussion will arise afterwards, when we come to assign to the "True Church" its properties and characteristics, its function and organization. Anyone wishing to convince him- self that Christ did establish the Church, has but to peruse the chapters and verses quoted in the margin. 7 In them he will find a complete demonstration that Christ presupposed collectivity in the .Church, for sometimes he uses the expression, "God's kingdom," at others, the "coming of God's kingdom," and some- times the concrete word, "Church." Now He com- pares it to a field of rye and good wheat growing together; again to a net catching good and bad fish; still again to a mustard seed, which, although it be the smallest of grains, yet produces one of the most luxuriant of plants. But where the difficulty arises is not in confessing the existence of the Church, whereon both Protestants and Catholics are agreed, but mainly on its organiza- tion. Should it be democratic or aristocratic? That is the question, the answer to which separates Protest- ants from Catholics, and disunites both from their own organizations, because neither do all 8 the Catho- lics consider it absolute, however much they may pro- 6 Confession of Augsburg. Read Luther and Calvin in En- cyclopedia Britannica. Also read all the Roman theologians. 7 Matt. xvi. 18; xviii. 17. Mark iv. John x. Acts v. n; viii. 3; v. 27. The exclusion with which they sometimes con- demn the heretics and scandalous proves the same; for in- stance: Rom. xvi. 17. I Cor. v. 9. II Thess. iii. 6, 14. II John 10. 8 Read Cardinal Gonzalez : Address on the organization of the Church. Declarations of the Gallican clergy. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 65 claim it as monarchical, nor do all 9 the Protestants agree in proclaiming it either democratic or aristo- cratic. Let us see whether, through systems so intricate and tortuous, we can discover the light and establish the true system, the one that unequivocally proceeds from the Divine Word, from Christ's own august authority. This is precisely a point that at once strikes the eye of whoever reads the New Testament without bias. There is perhaps no more oft-repeated doctrine, and none stated with greater clearness and energy, than the doctrine referring to the organization of the Church. There are teachings showing us how Christ does not wish it to be, and others ordaining how it should be. He sets and establishes it, as the scholastic would say, in the negative and in its positive sides. In order to understand the mind of Christ concern- ing the organization of His Church, it is very neces- sary to bear in mind the two kinds of organized powers that ruled Palestine in those times : First, the theocratic, represented by the synagogue ; and second, the civil, represented by the Roman delegates. To Christ's most humble eyes, both forms of or- ganization appeared monstrous and repulsive. Far from inspiring Him with esteem or respect, 10 both awakened in Him only indignation and profound con- tempt. No, He does not wish indeed that His Church should imitate either of the two, He does not wish it 9 See heads in Encyclopedia Britannica : Presbyterians, Episcopalians, Baptists. 10 Read Matt. x. 6. Mark viii. 15. 66 ROMAN CATHOLICISM to have the least resemblance to either, but He does wish, that the organization of His Church be the liv- ing and obvious denial of those organizations, and that where they said yes His should say no. This is the thought that seemed to absorb the mind of Christ ; which we see referred to in all the Gospels; and which some of the Evangelists repeated thrice, such was the insistence that Jesus laid upon it in His teach- ings. 11 The crowned heads of earth, says He, reside in royal palaces, like to have numerous servants, and domestics to wait upon them, in all their acts love to make a show of power and dominion over others, in- sist on being called lords, eat and feast sumptuously at splendidly served tables, and live in grandeur and magnificence. Such is a characteristic example of civil power, in describing which He omits nothing; He speaks of its internal working, of its external manifestations, such as might and authority, luxury and pompous show ; He speaks of its public and private displays luxury of servants, submission and hom- age from others, of the stately appearance in dress and speech; and speaking of the private side, He enumerates the palaces, the attendants and their treat- ment. Jesus Christ shows the well-marked purpose to determine with precision and minuteness the con- stituent elements of civil power, so as to better elimi- nate all of them from the organization of His Church. Let us now see how He characterizes the theocratic or religious power of His time : 12 The scribes and 11 Matt. xx. 25-28 ; xxiii. 8-12. Mark x. 42-45. "Read the chapter mentioned and also Matt. xv. i-n. Mark vii. 1-13. I Peter v. 3. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 67 Pharisees like to be called fathers and masters; they expect from others the consideration and obedience due to such ; they choose the foremost seats at public functions; they dress with show and walk with arro- gance; they interpret the law according to their own convenience and impose upon others heavy penalties from which they are exempt; they are harsh and haughty toward the meek and humble, while they flatter the rich and powerful; they enjoy appearing in showy religious garbs; but within, they are hun- gry wolves, putrid sepulchers, depraved souls. There we have another minute description, lacking in noth- ing to enable us to form a complete idea of that haughty and hypocritical body that monopolized all religious teaching during Christ's epoch. We almost see those two Powers photographed in their respective characters. And what judgment does Christ pass upon them? To His apostles, says He: "Beware of the leaven of the Herodians (Roman Or- ganization) and of the leaven of the Pharisees (theo- cratic Power). Throw away from you as a deadly poison everything transcending to either of those Powers. See ye here how I wish my Church to be, and how the duties pertaining to it must be allotted and performed. In the Powers before mentioned there is one to command and one to obey; not so amongst ye, who must all obey each other recipro- cally ; 13 in the said Powers there are lords and serv- ants ; not so in my Church, which must contain only sons and brothers, since there exists as father only 13 Read Matt, xviii and Mark ix. 35. 68 ROMAN CATHOLICISM your Heavenly Father, and as master your God; therefore take great care never to call any one 'lord/ nor 'father,' nor 'master/ lest ye give offense to your only Heavenly Father and to your only master, God ; take great care that none amongst you arrogate to himself the title of 'lord' or 'father' or 'master/ lest he become an infractor of my doctrine and an enemy to God. Sons of one only Father, you are equally brothers; vassals of the same God, you are equally free. Let not one of you wish to preside over the others. 14 He who thinks himself greatest is the smallest and must wait upon the others. He who humbles himself most shall be more exalted, and he who is proudest shall be the most humbled and con- fused. Let modesty and meekness excel in your words and deeds. 15 Flee from the gaudy luxury of outside show as not proper to my Church. By lowliness you will subdue human pride ; by modesty subdue luxury ; by simplicity conquer malice; be, in short, gentle lambs among wild wolves and you will triumph over the world. Let nothing frighten or terrify you, for I will be with you till the end of time. Where two or three of you congregate 16 there will I be to preside over and help you. My spirit and my power, my wisdom and my love will accompany you everywhere, and the same as I triumphed over the world, so shall you triumph; the same as the world hated me, so it will hate you ; but above the power of the world there is my power, which I will communicate to you; over 14 See the three foregoing notes. 15 Read nearly all the chapters of the Gospel. 16 Matt, xviii. 19, 20, CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 69 the world's learning the wisdom that will be granted to you by the Holy Ghost, and over the world's per- secution there is my help omnipotent, that can do all." And wishing these principles to remain deeply en- graved in their minds, carved, so to speak, in their hearts, on the eve of His glorious passion, on the most memorable date of His august life, at the moment of the supreme mysteries (according to the Catholic Church), at that everlasting hour, after He had syn- thetized as a basis of His moral teaching, the holiest precept of universal charity ; of His dogma, the procla- mation of His divinity; and of His institutions, the Eucharist, as the final coronation of His august work, as a last legacy, in His Testament, He returns to the constitution of His Church, and gives to His disciples the most astonishing example of humility practised during His life. He commands 17 everyone to sit down, orders a wash basin with water to be brought, kneels at the feet of His apostles and washes the feet of them all. And when His disciples had scarcely recovered from their profound amazement that so un- expected an act had caused in them, Christ exclaims as follows, in a voice at once magnificent and impos- ing: "You call me lord and master, and you mistake not, for I am such. For if I, who am truly your lord and master, humble myself to wash your feet, so with greater reason must you humble yourselves toward one another, and as I did just now must you do al- ways. 18 Away from you, all idea of command and authority all thought of exaltation and pride, away from you all imperial distinction, all semblance of "Tghn xiii. 1-24. 18 The same. 70 ROMAN CATHOLICISM superiority. Humbleness must be the basis of my Church, charity its summit, and I condemn and abomi- nate everything that may tend to pollute it." O sover- eign, magnificent and divine democracy ! Thou wert the fruitful dawn of true liberty! Thou wert the legitimate beginning of universal brotherhood ! Thou wert the mighty germ of a harmonious equality! O blessed Christian democracy! Thou didst overthrow the narrow and proud synagogue, felling to the ground its proud and senile priesthood; O a thou- sand times venerable and worshiped Christian de- mocracy ! 19 Thou didst demolish the great mountain of the despotic pagan empire, and where before existed the odious distinction between freemen and slaves, between masters and servants, thou didst pro- claim liberty to the sons of God, and not a degrading subjection to man, but to the authority of reason, to the laws of justice. Those who in future may have the power to command, shall no longer do so wanton- ly, nor despotically and tyranically, but in accordance with reason and justice, and if besides occupying a high rank, they are also Catholic, they will have to be servants of servants, who obey them. Oh! if as Thy Gospels have endured through the centuries Thy meek and life-giving spirit had also been preserved! Oh! if as Thy first apostles and disciples, impregnated with Thy divine teachings and powerful examples, estab- lished the first congregations of the faithful, on the grounds of humility and charity, 20 those who pride "Monsabre: Conferences upon Christ's Doctrine. 20 Castelar: Revolucion Religiosa (Religious Revolution); Book III. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 7! themselves on being their successors had only followed in the same wake, how many black pages that stain ecclesiastical history would never have been written; how many bloody furrows that are an affront to hu- manity would never have been filled ! How many dis- turbances, desolations, drawbacks that have hindered and vitiated our civilization would have been avoided ! But, no! most meek and gentle Jesus, the first to trample under foot Thy humble spirit, are those who pride themselves on being the sole depositories of Thy doctrine. Thy commands were that preaching and mildness should be the channels of Thy teaching, but they will construct the dungeon, 21 they will raise the scaffold, they will fire the stake to the unbeliever. Thy command to Thy followers was to avoid all showy servitude, but he who calls himself the successor 22 to the poor and humble fisherman, will reckon his serv- ants by the thousand, and even his menials must be the great and the noble. Thou didst say that those who were Thine should not dwell in regal palaces, as that was contrary to Thy humble doctrine ; but the successor to the meek fisherman inhabits 23 a palace so vast and sumptuous, so showy and regal, that the residences of the great on earth, the palaces of the kings and emperors throughout the world, the build- ings Thou didst see with horror and didst indignantly abominate, are as nothing compared to this vast palace; they are even as the humblest huts, as the poorest shelters beside its magnificence. Thou didst "Read Father Richard Gapa: Spanish Inquisition. 82 See Manual and Manners of the Vatican, and list of servants. 28 Anyone can become convinced by merely seeing it. 72 ROMAN CATHOLICISM say that not one of Thine should assume any power or authority over others, but the successor to poor Peter s * takes upon himself such jurisdiction, that the might of the Roman empire, so much despised by Thee, were not even a shadow compared with the power attributed to the Roman Pontiff. The em- perors styled themselves divine, but were considered as men, and believed their decrees liable to revocation and amendment; but he who calls himself Thy suc- cessor, calls himself irrefutable, unimpeachable, 25 in- fallible. Thou didst say that he who believed himself greater should bow to the smaller, but he who appro- priates Thy representation in Rome will shut his door 20 to the poor and the humble, and when the noble or the rich succeed in being received by him, they will have to bend the knee 27 and prostrate themselves as before a divinity, they will have to kiss the sandal as to a God. 28 Thou didst say to be simple in treat- ment and dress, but he who claims to be Thy visible head on earth will appear cloaked in the richest garbs ; loaded not with poverty as Thou dost prescribe, but with precious stones, and seated on a throne 29 as a divinity of the pagan Olympus. Thou didst feel in- Z4 Read Cardinal Vives : Compendium Juris Canonic! de Juribus Pontificum (Compendium of Canonical Law on Pon- tifical Rights). 25 Same author and heading. 26 Anyone can become convinced by attempting it without money or without being a noble. Some exception is some- times made to heretics. 37 The same Vives. We prefer quoting this author because he is considered an oracle among Romanists. 28 The same Cardinal Vives : Names given to the Pope and conduct to be observed in his presence. 19 Same authors mentioned before. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 73 dignant against the hypocritical Pharisees who mo- nopolized the law for their own benefit and to the detri- ment of others, who at their pleasure issued new pre- cepts, the fulfillment of which they exacted from others, while considering themselves exempt ; but Thy sovereign Pontiff 30 centralizes all the power in his despotic hands, he is the only source of jurisdiction and command, the only legislator, the only judge, and he declares himself exempt from all laws, free from judgment. And all that monstrous show, all that gather- ing of arbitrary proceedings and crushing monopoly, they endeavor to base on Thy humble doctrine, on Thy redeeming teaching. If Thou shouldst appear anew in visible form, Thou wouldst find a synagogue and an empire, prouder and more despotic than the former synagogue and the former empire. Thou wouldst also need now as formerly, to grasp the whip and throw out of Thy Church the traffickers in Thy doctrine. (We beg the writer to peruse the marginal notes, to see that we do not make any statement not based on trustworthy and irrefutable evidence taken from reliable Romanist authorities.) One need no longer be surprised at the following Italian saying: "Roma viduta, fide perduta" (Rome seen, faith lost), having become popular in Latin Europe, although it should be modified by saying that "when Catholic Rome is seen and studied, all faith in Romanism is lost." 80 Cardinal Vives : Compendium Juris Canonici de Juribus Pontificum (Compendium of Canonical Law on Pontifical Rights), 74 ROMAN CATHOLICISM But as Christ energetically proclaims, that He did not wish the power of jurisdiction perpetuated in any of His followers, He proclaimed as energetically against the power of the order or office. Here is the question that impartially and with abundance of data, we are going to expound in the next chapter. Let not the two questions get mixed, for as the reader will see, they are separate and distinct. CHAPTER VIII. DID CHRIST ESTABLISH AN OFFICIAL JURISDICTION? AND IF SO DID HE GRANT IT COLLECTIVELY, OR WAS IT ASSIGNED BY HIM TO SOME MEMBERS OF THE WHOLE? THIS is one of those most intricate questions which has divided and continues to divide the ranks of both Catholics and Protestants. We will clearly and sincerely expose that which in our opin- ion we consider justified, but in doing so we do not propose to confine ourselves exclusively to this opinion. Consequently, with our harmonious and tolerant judg- ment, we would never venture to consider as beyond the pale of the great Christian family, nor beyond the spirit of Christ, those who, while not openly contra- dicting any of the evident evangelical or apostolic truths, endeavor nevertheless to ground their theories on the New Testament. On this question, more than on any other, we must guard ourselves against all idea of exclusivism, and remember Christ's tolerance, as well as the apostles' ample indulgence. 1 The apos- tles in their evangelistic excursions met another man, who without being sent by Christ, was also preaching and expelling demons, and they begged of Christ to forbid him doing so; He answered: "I will do noth- *Mark x. 38, 39, (75) j6 ROMAN CATHOLICISM ing of the kind, for that one also honors me." When St. Paul expounded some doctrine about which he had not received any special instructions from Christ 2 he would say : "I understand this to be for the best, but I do not condemn anything contrary to it; each one can have his own feeling and opinion." Upon this standard we must also model our conduct. Is it evident and clear? Let us bow to it, never forgetting that, however great the probability may be, it does not exclude error from our opinion nor certainty in that of another. 3 Is it doubtful or confused? Then let each one freely elect whatever he thinks best. Not to do so would be to contradict the very spirit of the Gospel and to fall into the same narrow and despotic ways charged against Romanism. If the allegations adduced were not sufficient to in- spire in us a charitable and eclectic judgment, im- piety's own example should prove enough to do so. Can we not see how all the elements of ungodliness group themselves to combat the supernatural ? * Can we not see that within their organization there is as much room for the pantheist as for the materialist, for the rationalist as for the positivist? Dost thou deny the supernatural? Then thou art ours, no mat- ter what thy arguments and thy theories may be. The argument based on hypnotism, which presupposes a psychic principle, is as good for us as the one deduced 2 1 Cor. vii. 25. 3 Granclaude : Philosophy on Probability. Mendive : Phi- losophy ; Characteristics of Probability. Zigliara : Philoso- phy; Conflicting Probabilities. 1 Haeckel : By-Laws of the Anti-Religious Society recently established in Germany. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 77 from the eternity of matter, that denies all vital prin- ciple. The ideal pantheist, who denies the super- natural on the ground that there is nothing real in the universe, but only a mere representation of our subjective ego, is as admissible to us as the material- istic pantheist for whom everything is mere substance, without any accident or ideality. Let us, then, join the opposite army. Dost thou proclaim the divinity of Christ and His Gospel? The efficacy of His redemp- tion and the mission of His Church? Dost thou not exclude anything that is clear? Nothing of what is self-evident in the Bible? Then, come in, thou art one of us. Welcome to thee, whichever thy congrega- tion may be. This will have to be the language and the conduct of the great Christian community if it aims to successfully stem the inroads of impiety, and defend its own existence. No energy must be wasted on discussions that we might call domestic, or contro- versies with those at home, but on the contrary, hus- band it, to fight and resist the onslaughts of outsiders and enemies. This bright thought attributed to St. Augustine, must be our motto: "In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas:" "In things necessary, unity; in things doubtful, liberty; in all things, char- ity." And in support of this very thought, after ex- pounding our opinion, we will also shortly give the foundations of those contrary to ours. The questions that head this chapter have been met by four affirma- tions. 5 All of them suppose that Christ established an official jurisdiction and made a difference only in the 1 See Encyclopedia Britannica ; head, Church. 78 ROMAN CATHOLICISM assignment of such jurisdiction. The first, which is the most radical of the four, supposes that Christ es- tablish no difference between clergymen and lay- men ; all faithful are also ministers and priests, if the masses appoint and delegate their authority to them. For the upholders of this theory, the official jurisdic- tion resides with the collectivity, and the latter alone can delegate it to individuals, either permanently or temporarily. The second theory attributes to divine origin, the designation of the ministers, and, there- fore, supposes that Christ and the apostles had previ- ously divided the masses into two classes, namely: Clergymen and laymen. 7 But what kind of ministers did Christ select? What are their powers? In the answer given to these questions, the three theories that admit divine origin for the distinction between clergymen and laymen, differ. The Presbyterians say : The priest exists only from divine source. 8 All the sacraments to be administered, all the services to be performed in the Church, can, and must be done, by the priest, considered in his individual or his col- lective capacity. These are followed by the Epis- copalians who say : 9 Two kinds of priests are of di- vine source: those with limited authority who can only administer the sacraments, but who cannot dele- gate their powers to others to do likewise ; those with limited powers also, but who beside themselves ad- * Same ; head, Baptist. 7 Same ; head, Presbyter and Presbyterian. 8 Same ; head, Calvin and Calvinism. We prefer quoting this work because beside considering it as one of the soundest and most serious, it is recommended by such enlightened Romanists as Cardinal Gibbons. 8 Same work ; head, Episcopate and Episcopalians. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 79 ministering the sacraments, can delegate others to do so. We incline to this opinion, believing it to be better establish on apostolic history, and follow- ing it most closely. The fourth 10 affirmation is that of the Romanists, who suppose that besides the dis- tinction between laymen and clergymen, beside the ex- istence of inferior priests and superior priests, called bishops, there exist lower degrees styled deacons, sub- deacons, and still lesser degrees known as ostiaries, Gospel readers, exercisers and acolytes, and over all of them a degree superior to that of bishop, which supersedes them all, the Pontiff; This is the theo- retical hierarchy, the one defined in the councils, be- cause practically there is another " intermediary de- gree between the bishop and the Pontiff, namely car- dinal, a dignity superior to the bishop's in the honor it confers, and yet in the order of power and jurisdic- tion it is inferior to him and even to the priest's, since it can be granted to a simple deacon. There is no room to doubt that Christ 12 selected the twelve apos- tles and granted to them faculties not granted to the masses. He orders them during their life to go and preach to the nations the kingdom of God, He be- stows upon them the power to heal the sick and to expel the evil spirits, He explains in advance to them the parables that He expounded before the people, 10 Cardinal Vives : Compendium Theologicum de Hierarchia (Theologicum Compendium on Hierarchy). Casanova: Fun- damental Theology. Bouix: Jus Canonicum (Canonical Law) ; same head. "Cardinal Vives, Bouix: same head. Ferrais: Canonical Dictionary; same head. "Matt. xvi. 19; xvii. 18; xxviii. 19, 20. Mark xvi. 15. Luke xxiv. 47. John xx. 21, 23. 7 80 ROMAN CATHOLICISM: He holds the Last Supper with them and charges them to do the same in His memory, upon them He confers the authority to bind and to loose, to forgive and to condemn. Therefore, there can be no doubt that they appear as separate from the common people, that the distinction between clericals and faithful appears well defined and as emanating from the Lord. But, were the apostles priests only, or were they invested with episcopal dignity? If we are guided by the Gospel alone, we cannot reach any certain conclusion, because the word priest is sometimes taken as synonymous with bishop, and the word bishop synonymous with priest. 13 However, some indications appear to demon- state that they were different. St. John writes to the seven Churches of Asia Minor. We must for the start believe that there were many priests and that the designation of the seven who were at the head of each one of those Churches, seems clearly to indicate that they ranked higher than the other priests. When 14 the discussion about circumcision crops up St. James appears to address the priests as though he were a superior over them. When St. Peter walks miraculously out of prison he orders St. James to be informed first and the other brothers afterward, as if St. James were at the head of them all. 15 St. James decides as judge and teacher over all outstanding questions. When St. Paul arrives in Jerusalem he 13 Connect these passages together : Acts viii. 29 ; x. 19 ; xi. 12; viii. 2; xxv. 28; xxvi. 6, 7; xix. 21; xx. 23. "Acts, chapter 15. 15 Consult and connect these passages : Acts xiv. 23 ; xii. 17; xv. 13, 19; xviii. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 8l visits St. James first. St. Paul says that he visited and spoke with St. James, Peter and John, whom he calls pillars of the Church. 16 All these indications ap- pear to demonstrate that already there existed from the time of the apostles a distinction between priests and bishops. But that distinction is only found well marked at the time immediately contemporaneous with the apostles and emanating from them. 17 In Asia Minor we can see already how bishops supersede the priests who are the immediate successors of the apos- tles. There appear St. Polycarp, St. Papias, St. Igna- tius, St. Irenaeus. In St. Ignatius' epistle, admitted by many as authentic, the differences between priest and bishop are clearly conspicuous. The same thing is noticeable in the letters from Clement of Rome, and let it not be forgotten that those authors can be looked upon as immediate successors to the apostles, especially St. John, to whom history and tradition grant an extraordinary longevity. 18 To this it must be added according to the testimony of St. Polycarp, St. Ignatius, Clement of Alexandria, Origen and Ter- tullian, that the constitution of the bishops was estab- lished by St. John himself. As the reader can satisfy himself by reference to the biblical records, and the testimonies adduced, the rea- sons put forward by the Episcopalians are very earnest ones and if they do not convey an absolute certainty, 18 See Gal. i. 19 ; xi. 9, 12. 17 See Encyclopedia Britannica, under head, Church. See Clement of Rome : Letter to the Corinthians. Hefele : St. Ignatius' letter and St. Irenaeus against Heresies. 1S Besides the heads mentioned, see Encyclopedia Britannica, under Episcopate. 2 ROMAN CATHOLICISM they give rise to a most firm probability. 19 To this may be added an endless number of old and contemporane- ous historical testimonials and the statements of emi- nent theologians. Nevertheless, we are going to give the basis of the two other theories. According to the Baptists, Christ did not establish 20 any difference either in the ministerial power or jurisdiction. Christ says: "Let there be among you neither greater nor smaller than the other. Whoever claims to be greater must be the smaller. Whoever leaves his all behind and follows me, is equal to the apostles." Christ says unequivocally that no one is to be called lord, master or father, because He alone is the only superior, mas- ter and father. He Himself 21 promises to stay among His faithful followers till the end of time, and if this is so it was no longer necessary to leave behind Him any constituted authority. He offers that wherever any two or three of His disciples congregate He will be with them as president or head. If He presides, any other dignitary or minister is superfluous. A col- lective body may appoint whom it deems suitable to perform this office, and can also withdraw such ap- pointment. 22 (Anyone desiring further information may obtain the same by referring to the Encyclopedia Britannica, under the headings in the footnotes.) 10 Besides the works mentioned, read those of the Protest- ants Bilson and Cotterill. For the Romanists see Baronio, Rohrbacher, Hergenrother, Natal Alexander and Rivas. * Matt. xx. 26 ; xxiii. 8, 9. Mark ix. 25. Luke xxii. 25. John xv. 2. 21 Matt, xviii. 20. 21 Read the historians : Neander, Rev. I. H. Ross and Mr. Morrison, also Encyclopedia Britannica: Under Baptist. CAPITULATING BEFORE 1'ROTESTANTISM. 83 The second theory has to support it, some serious arguments and powerful reasonings. It may at once be asserted that nearly all the reformers were parti- sans of this theory. So thought 23 Luther, and thus be- lieved Melancthon, Bugenhagen and especially Calvin. They say, and they are not without reason, that as many passages as may be invoked in defense of the episcopate, as coming from the Gospel and the apos- tles, just as many can be adduced to demonstrate that there are only priests. 24 And, in effect, those writings show the two offices performed by priests. See the same passages above mentioned and those we are adding here. Add also the powerful testimony of St. Jerome. No one doubts that this learned author was one of the best informed on ancient times. Driven east- ward to prepare his translation of the Bible and to investigate every known code, as well as to interro- gate the most learned, his decisions may be taken as oracles. That author affirms in the most unquestion- able terms that between bishop and priest there is no distinction whatever as coming from the teachings of Christ or His apostles. Read the letter mentioned in the footnotes. 25 Resuming, we declare that our in- clination is toward the episcopal theory, but that we do not consider it so certain as to justify the rejection of the others, especially the Presbyterian, 26 and when 28 Melanchthon's Writings. Calvin's Theology. "Connect the following passages: Acts viii. 29; x. 19; xi. 12; viii. 2; xxv. 28; xxvi. 6, 7; xix. 21; xx. 23. 25 Collection of St. Jerome's letters, No. 146. 20 See Encyclopedia Britannica : under Luther, Priest and Presbyterian, Calvin. 84 ROMAN CATHOLICISM viewed strictly by the Gospel, it appears that the theory of the Baptist is the most well-founded. The reader who may feel interested in acquiring a more exhaustive knowledge of the subject is referred to the several authors mentioned. CHAPTER IX. IS THE FOURTH THEORY ADMISSIBLE, WHICH DECLARES AN INFALLIBLE PAPACY OVER THE EPISCOPATE? IN answer to this question Romanism has three groups of arguments: (a) Biblical and socio- logical arguments (theological reasons) ; (b) Apos- tolic and sub-apostolic testimonies; (c) Arguments properly called historical. 1 We propose using these same three sources for the purpose of demonstrating that such theory is purely an arbitrary one. But upon this point more than on any other question, we would beg our readers to dismiss all prejudices, and to be as sincere and impartial as possible. So weighty is this question as to make it worth while for us to concentrate all the energy of our mind, for the purpose of making it clear. The consequences attending a solution one way or the other, are so transcendental, that nothing should be omitted from, nor be added to, what Christ taught His apostles to believe, on the penalty of incurring the most horrible and lamentable results. Let us listen to Romanism 1 Jaugey: heads, Church and Infallibility. Hettinger: Apology of Religion; Church and Pope. See also Cardinal Gibbons : The Faith of Our Fathers, referring to the Pri- macy and Infallibility of the Popes. As the reasons on which Pontifical Primacy are based are often the same as those adduced to establish Infallibility, we understand that after the latter has been refuted, the former meets the same fate : for that reason we say nothing on the Primacy, (85) 86 ROMAN CATHOLICISM through the mouthpiece of H. E. Cardinal Gibbons. His book, "The Faith of Our Fathers," summarizes with a fair degree of accuracy, the arguments invoked by the school he represents. We will make only one remark considered, if anything, favorable to that authority. To devote two chapters in order to demon- strate the infallibility of the Church, seems to us some- what unbecoming at this time, and even liable to make the faithful fall into error. According to the brand- new Roman theology, since there is only one head, there cannot be two infallibilities, but only an ex- clusive one, that of the Pope. 2 The manner of exposi- tion adopted by H. E. Cardinal Gibbons is rather of the epoch preceding the Vatican Council. The Fa- thers assembled at 3 Basle and Constance conceived an infallible Church and believed in it, without making any direct mention of the Pope's infallibility. 4 Gal- licanism, so rigorously condemned by the Vatican, thought and believed the same; but he who now- adays would venture to uphold an infallible Church, and in addition an infallible Pope, would break away from the doctrine of the Church. That dualism has constantly been rejected by Romanism. It was after the Vatican Council that the Pope, by his own decree, 5 became the whole Church, sufficient and adequate, and the Church without the Pope, nothing, absolutely noth- * Bertier : Compendium Theologicum de Infallibilitate. Car- dinal Vives : Same head. Casanova : Theologia Fundamen- talis; same head. 8 See canons of both councils by Robracher, Baronio, Rivas and Alzog. *Gallican: Articles attributed to Bossuet, Declarations of the Gallican clergy. "Jaugey; heads, Church and Infallibility. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 8? ing. There exists only one infallibility, that of the Pope, and from him it is communicated to others ; the episcopate, considered collectively, is also infallible in so far as it shares the pope's infallibility by teaching its doctrine and assenting to it. Let His Eminence read the beautiful encyclical of Leo XIII on the unity of the Church. I call it beautiful because the. style could not be more elegant nor the Latin more classical. Would His Eminence have another irrefutable testi- monial that infallibility is a thing of the past, if not taken as the papal infallibility? .Here it is: the first pope to enjoy infallibility as an obligatory dogma furnishes the clearest and most complete one. The Vatican Council was ecumenical, was it not? In it was represented the whole Church. Is not that so? Well, then, please read Pius IX's bull herein trans- lated but reproduced in the appendix in Latin. 7 "If I should die during the celebration of the Council, let the Council be adjourned at the very moment of my death, let all discussion be suspended, let nothing be done, nothing be resolved; and from now, if such an event should occur (my death) by these presents I adjourn the Council. Only after a successor has been elected and he deems it proper, shall the fathers composing the Council resume its labors." The text, as Your Eminence can see, is still more energetic and ample. And in order that no one should believe that such an act referred to that Council only, the Pope ordered that the same 8 be observed always and in per- 6 Leo XIII: Encyclical; De Unitate Ecdesiae (Of the Unity of the Church). 7 Pius IX : Encyclical to the fathers of the Vatican Council. 8 Same Pius IX : Encyclical. 88 ROMAN CATHOLICISM petuity. Now, that was a legitimate and ecumenical Council, that is to say all the Church. In case of death it was not to be said that the Council parted from the Pope, nor that it got away from its spirit and in- structions, for notwithstanding, as Your Eminence sees, it leaves the whole Church, although legitimately as- sembled, entirely incapacitated to resolve anything whatsoever, absolutely nothing, however weighty or urgent the case might be. There is, consequently only one sole infallibility, the single and exclusive one of the Pope. If Your Eminence is not convinced, there is another obvious and very rapid way to proceed. Address to Your Eminence's colleagues, the cardinals, the following question : Besides the infallibility of the Pope, can the Church be considered as infallible? Your reputation and good name being well known in Rome, and your brothers of the hat being most at- tentive to their confreres, they might even answer by telegraph. It may be safely wagered, however, that they will not reply in the sense in which infallibility appears explained in Your Eminence's book. But if you say that in speaking of the infallibility of the Church you mean the personal infallibility of the Pope, then one of the two chapters would be superfluous, and Your Eminence would commit a redundancy that might occasion lamentable misunderstandings, for some might believe that beside an infallible Pope there is also an infallible Church. We have ventured on this remark not only because we think it necessary, but also because it is essential to prosecute the discus- sion within definite limits. When we say that we con- 9 Same Pius IX : Encyclical. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 89 sider the papal infallibility as arbitrary and mislead- ing we refer exclusively to the Pontiff's own person- ality, and in no manner whatever to the Church, con- sidered as an universal collectivity. Whether the Church is or is not infallible, we neither admit nor reject in this work: what we do reject and do not admit is the individual infallibility of the Pope. Syn- thetically, these are the arguments adduced by Roman- ism : 10 Matthew xvi. 16, 17, 18: "And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. "And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." Luke xxii. 31, 32: "And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat : "But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not : and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren." John xxi. 15, 16, 17: "So when they had dined Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs. 10 See Cardinal Gibbons : The Faith of Our Fathers, re- ferring to Primacy and Infallibility of Peter and the Popes. 9O ROMAN CATHOLICISM "He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs. "He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said to him the third time, Lovest thou me ? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things ; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep." Let us examine each and every one of the argu- ments. In the first, a most energetic one, it is most noticeable that although all the evangelists quote the same passage, one only, namely, St. Matthew's, adds the statement mentioned. 11 Connecting the Gospels together it may be deduced as a general rule, that the necessary and fundamental portions are not only re- produced by all the evangelists, but that at times such portions are repeated in the same Gospel. See for instance: The Eucharist, the command to preach the Gospel, the powers granted to the apostles; baptism; the precept on charity; the divinity of Christ. It may at once be asserted, that in all things fundamental to the organization of the Church, we shall find all the evangelists as one, and we shall find many passages on the Divine Word repeated. 12 However, dealing as 11 Compare Matt. xvi. 16 and following, with Mark vii. 29 and following, and Luke ix. 20 and following, and John vi. 69 and xi. 27 and following, with Matt, xvi, before mentioned. "Read the four Gospels, looking up in them any of the points mentioned, and the truth of what we affirm will become evident. For instance : On the Eucharist : Matt. xxvi. 26, 27. Mark xxv. 22 and following. Luke xxii. 19 and following. John vi. 51, I Cor. xi. 23, 24, 2. Qn The Preaching of the CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. QI we are doing here with this most important dogma of the organization of the Church, it is truly surpris- ing to find only one evangelist making reference to so great a doctrine, and that he should be, not Mark, who writes in association with St. Peter, but Matthew. And the surprise increases still more, when we con- sider that all of them relate the dialogue between Jesus and Peter. In all of them Christ inquires concerning the mission that the people attribute to Him ; in all of them Christ questions His apostles as to .what they think of Him, and in all of them Peter answers: "Thou art the Son of God." And while three evan- gelists conclude the passage without adding anything more, one only proclaims the most important of the dogmas. 13 Anyone who reads the Gospels carefully and connects and compares the substantial portions of them, must see in this exception an inexplicable anomaly. 14 It is not surprising that some commenta- tors notwithstanding their faith in the infallibility and inspiration of the Bible, believe that there has been some subsequent interpolation here. 15 We do not venture so far and would rather admit the authenticity of the passage; but the fact that only one evangelist repro- duces it leads us to believe that it is not worthy of the great significance attached to it by Romanism, for if it had such Importance, it seems that all the evan- Gospel: Matt, xxviii. 19. Mark xvi. 15. Luke xxiv. 47. On Baptism: Matt, xxviii. 19. Mark xvi. 16. John iii. 18, 36. Acts ii. 38. On Charity: John xiii. 34. Matt. xxii. 37, 38, 39. Luke x. 27. Mark xii. 35. 18 Read the four Gospels in the places named. 14 Make a test by reading and connecting the Gospels in any important matter. " See Encyclopedia Britannica : Heads, Church and Papacy. 92 ROMAN CATHOLICISM gelists should mention it, as they do the other dogmas and things fundamental. Let us analyze the text: Christ calls Peter blessed, because he confesses His divinity, and that only the Eternal Father would have inspired that confession in him, and as a consequence of such a profession of faith, Christ offers to estab- lish His Church upon Peter (synonym of stone) and adds, besides, that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. One cannot believe that anyone would interpret these words so materially as to suppose that Christ promises to establish His Church upon the Apostle Peter, as an ordinary individual like anyone else, but in whom He has discovered something super- natural and divine. If this is not so the passage has no meaning. It is necessary to connect Peter's con- fession with the subsequent promise made by Christ. The latter is the result of the former, and that is the basis of this. The meaning appears, therefore, to be as follows: "Blessed art thou, Simon, son of Jonah, because the flesh and the blood did not reveal to thee that I am the son of God, but my heavenly Father, and to thee I say that because thou art believing in that truth thou art a hard rock, and upon it I will establish my Church." Which would be clearly equiv- alent to meaning that Christ promises that the founda- tion upon which He shall raise His Church is the explicit confession to His (Christ's) divinity. 16 He does not refer to anyone personally, only that Peter's confession gives Him an opportunity to expound the foundations on which He will cement His Church, and the reward He wishes to grant to His believers. "Matt. xvi. 17 and following. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 03 This distinction can be seen much more clearly if we pay attention to the words that follow. From them Peter's personality disappears altogether and is sub- stituted by the Church. Christ promises indefectibility not to the person of Peter, but to His Church. 17 The gates of hell shall not prevail against the Church, not against Peter. Therefore, concerning the personal infallibility of the Pope, far from establishing it, this text shows that the usurpation of it by the popes, as a private and exclusive attribute, is arbitrary and absurd. That the Church does not and cannot possess it, according to the Papacy, is clearly affirmed by Pius IX in the letters quoted above, because, if the Church assembled in General Council could be infal- lible, why render it unfit to discuss, resolve and de- cide? Let, then, this text be carefully examined, and it will be seen that He says nothing about the per- sonal infallibility of the Pontiff, and that the only thing He affirms is that His Church, not the Pope, shall be: that is to say, that Christ granting infalli- bility to the Church, and Pius IX wresting it from the Church in order to concentrate it in the hands of the Papacy, are in flagrant contradiction. Another interpretation can still be given which is attributed to Origen. 18 It is not easy to explain how Christ could establish His Church on any one person but His own, on His own omnipotence and unfailing divinity. Now, when for the first time and most energetically, Peter acknowledges the divinity of Christ, the latter "Same: Chap. xvi. 17, 18. 18 See the work entitled Extract from the Doctrine of Origen and Tertullian, by a Franciscan Father. 94 ROMAN CATHOLICISM avails himself of the occasion to disclose his doctrine. According to this theory the meaning would be : Thou art stone and I, Christ, also, and upon my divinity I will establish my Church. At first sight this inter- pretation seems strained, but when properly analyzed it will be found to be the most correct, since it is the most grammatical, and when it becomes necessary to deduce a probative argument, one has not to seek the mystic nor the accommodating sense, which of them- selves, prove nothing, but confine the question, as far as possible, within the grammatical and the literal sense. According to syntax, if Peter were the stone upon which Christ intended to build His Church, He should have said : upon that stone, and not, upon this stone. The word "this" can only be applied in correct syntax as referring to Christ himself. - The meaning, there- fore, would be: Thou art a stone and I (Christ) am also a stone and upon this (Christ pointing to himself) I will build my Church. In this manner only can be properly explained the use of the pronoun this and not of the pronoun that which is the corresponding one, if the foundation stone of the Church were Peter and not Christ. 20 Read the Vulgata Latina, the only one authentically approved by the Council of Trent, and in which will be found a more exhaustive treat- ment of this question. The following additional con- sideration is well worthy of notice. While the apos- tles do not draw any inference from the nickname "Stone" attributed to Peter, and one would think they would have done so, if it had the meaning subse- 19 See Matt., chapter and verse already mentioned. 20 See the same chapter and verse of the Vulgata Latina. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 95 quently put upon it by Romanism, yet from the date of that dialogue, there has existed a kind of unwhole- some desire to call Christ the foundation stone, 21 the angular stone, the corner stone, the stone of contradic- tion, the smashing stone. All this seems to lead those who sincerely search for the truth to believe that so much eagerness to dub Christ in so many ways as a stone is due to the fact that in that most important passage Jesus referred to Himself and not to Peter. It is worth while to take into account an interpretation backed not only by exact construction, but also cor- roborated by the oft-repeated language and symbol- ism of the apostles. But it is useless to longer dwell on this point since it is as clear as noonday that Christ does not refer in any way to the person of Peter, but to His Church. 22 The last words spoken by Christ to Peter namely: "To thee I will give the keys of the kingdom of heaven and everything thou dost bind," etc., have no probative force whatever because "quod nimis probat nihil probat" (too much proof proves nothing) is true according to Roman philosophy. Christ says those same words, with the same fullness of meaning, to the other apostles : therefore, if they do not prove in the apostles that Christ grants to them an infallibility transferable to others, they must not prove either that He granted it to Peter; and if on the con- trary they should prove it, good-bye to papal infalli- bility. Perhaps, we will be told there is something He grants to Peter that He does not give to the others : n Matt. xxi. 42, 44. Mark xii. 10. Luke xx. 17. Acts iv. II. Eph. ii. 20. I Peter ii. 6, 7. 22 See Matt. xvi. 17, 18, 19. 8 96 ROMAN CATHOLICISM yes, the keys ! 23 Cardinal Gibbons furnishes the an- swer. The keys, says he, are a symbol of authority, they are a testimony that the authority given is most ample. Therefore, if speaking of Peter he means the symbol and the thing symbolized, and if when speaking of the apostles He grants the thing symbol- ized without the symbol, He neither takes away from the other apostles, nor does He add anything to Peter, for the symbol by itself is nothing, it is the thing sym- bolized that is effective. (St. Matthew, chapter xviii. 1 8.) Perhaps it may be said, Peter alone is spoken of in this case and not the others. The same passage answers itself because Peter was the only one on that occasion to acknowledge the divinity of Christ. 24 If under those circumstances Christ had intended to re- fer to all, He would not have mentioned anything about a corresponding reward, such as He wants to make evident in this case. Thou art the first to acknowledge me as the son of God, to thee first I grant that which in the same manner and on diverse occasions I will grant to the others. On the other hand it is dangerous to strain individual indications. Following that theory we should find in the same chapter that Peter is the worst among the apostles, and comparable to Satan. Follow the maxim wisely set by scholasticism that "quod nimis probat nihil probat" (too much proof proves nothing) and we shall then be able to coordinate individual exclusiv- isms that otherwise would create fatal errors, 25 24 Read Cardinal Gibbons : The Faith of Our Fathers ; chap- ter on Primacy and Infallibility of the Pope. "Read Matt. xvi. 13-19. 26 See Peru jo's Dictionary, ecclesiastical terms and phrases. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 97 Let us, then, discard the first text as a contradiction of proof of the papal infallibility, and see it rather as a great obstacle than a firm support. That was clearly seen by the Vatican Council 26 which attempted prin- cipally to establish the pontifical infallibility in an- other text by the words spoken by Christ: "Simon, Simon, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat : but I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not : and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren." What a poor opinion must anyone form of certain personalities, who examines this passage with greater fear of error than of ecclesiastical cen- sure; with the irrevocable longing to proclaim the truth, rather than flatter somebody, be that somebody the chief Pontiff ! To invoke this text for the purpose of laying the whole foundation of the papal building, seems to us the grossest absurdity and the most fla- grant contradiction. The papal infallibility is a nega- tive and external prerogative, not an internal and posi- tive one ; it means only that while the Pope teaches the world as a universal doctor, he cannot communicate 2Z error. This is so much so that the majority of theolo- gians 28 suppose that infallibility may be compatible with an internal infidelity of the Pope ; that is to say, a Pope may be an occult heretic and yet continue be- ing Pope and infallible, since that is an outward privi- lege and one beneficial to the Church: consequently, 38 See Vatican Council: De Fide (Faith). "Jaugey^: Heads, Infallibility, Pope. Cardinal Gibbons: Book mentioned, chapter referring to Infallibility of the Pope. 28 St. Alfonso Ma. de Ligorio : Theologicals, chapter the Pope. Apologetic Dictionary of Faith, under heads already mentioned. 98 ROMAN CATHOLICISM infallibility is incompatible with an external loss of faith. Outwardly, the Pope cannot teach error. Now, can that passage mean such a thing? When does Christ utter those words? 29 Doubtless long before His most cruel Passion. Did Christ then, promise to Peter that external faith should not fail him? In that case His promise proved false, for did not Peter deny Christ? and was not his denial an act of infidelity? It does not avail to say that internally he continued to believe, because this only entangles and complicates the question for the Romanists themselves. Have we not agreed that infallibility is external and not internal? Do you not affirm that the Pope can break faith internally but not externally? Do you not say Christ granted to Peter that external pre- rogative when He uttered those words? Therefore, one of three things must be evident : either this state-, ment was made after the Passion, which amounts to contradicting the evangelists, who distinctly claim the contrary ; or Christ made a mistake, which is blas- phemous ; or those words must have another meaning. This is an example of the inexplicable proceedings of the Romanists to get into the good graces of their papal idol, by whom they seem to be possessed: they do not hesitate to make Christ contradict Himself. To deny that Peter was unfaithful to Christ would be heresy ; to affirm that Christ made a promise to Peter that He did not keep would be blasphemous; there- fore, no room is left for any other meaning, than the literal and obvious one, but not the contradictory and a * See Luke xxii. 31 and following. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 99 arbitrary one of the Romanists. 30 Christ foresaw Judas' apostasy, Peter's denial and the other apostles' scandals; He saw Judas horror-stricken at his crime, dying in despair, and Satan trying to plunge Peter into the same abyss and to confuse the other apostles ; but Christ prays for Peter and succeeds in saving him from utter loss that he may repent and live ; and as he better than anyone else was to feel the truth of His prophecy, and the sweetness of His mercy, recommends him to strengthen the others. Let us translate the passage on antecedents and consequents : "Peter, Peter, Satan hath desired to have thee, that he may sift you as wheat ; he has succeeded with Judas and thou hast run great danger, but I have prayed for thee and although thou wilt be unfaithful to me, thou shalt not be altogether lost, but shall become converted and do penance for thy sin ; when this happens thou better than anyone else shalt feel that what I am saying is the truth; for my prophecy shall be accomplished in thee; endeavor to strengthen the others that walk astray and hesitate." What is there in this translation not clear, well established and in harmony with the literal sense, given the antecedents and consequents? Therefore, why throw doubt upon the infallibility of Christ's promise if not to infer as a consequence the personal one of the Pope? The second argument is thus thrown out of the discussion, because to interpret it as the Romanists do, would be heresy or blasphemy. That which "nlmis probat nihil probat" proves, then, 80 Read the Gospels, ch'apters referring to the Passion, and connect them with each other. See also John xyii. 9 and fol- lowing, and it will be seen how He prays in a similar manner for all His apostles and disciples, IOO ROMAN CATHOLICISM nothing as to personal infallibility. We will now ex- amine the third and last biblical text. Christ after His resurrection in conversing with Peter and the apostles, spoke in this manner: "Simon, lovest thou me?" etc. Says Romanism: Here Christ by recommending to Peter to tend His lambs and His sheep, places faith- ful and bishops under his pastoral jurisdiction. The former are represented by the lambs, and the latter by the sheep.? 1 It is probable that Cardinal Gibbons has not forgotten that the mystic meaning is an excellent one to edify the faithful, an admirable one to display oratorical talent, and to write brilliant discourses, but extremely poor and insufficient for the deduction of demonstrative argument. 32 Only in case another in- spired writer deduces and determines the same, can the mystic types have any demonstrative efficacy. And where has Cardinal Gibbons discovered that by lamb is to be understood the merely faithful, and by sheep the bishop? In which passage of the Gospel does he find the classification and separation of those types? Which apostle determined it in his writings? Let him not say to us that that is so understood by the Roman Church, because such an answer to us would be equiva- lent to saying nothing. That would be begging the question which we are not disposed to admit. We need an inspired passage, some authentic testimony. 33 That Christ may be called shepherd and His Church a 81 See Vigouroux : Biblical Manual, Rules of Exegesis. Pat- rizi, Schouppe: same head. Comely: Biblical Meanings. Lobera : same head. 82 Add to the authors named the Apologetic Dictionary of Faith, under head, Exegesis. 83 John x. 14. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. IOI sheepfold, we do find in St. John. But that for lamb must be understood the merely faithful, and by sheep the bishops, we have not found anywhere. What we have found in St. John is that sheep is synonym with the merely faithful. 34 "I have other sheep that it is necessary to bring to the fold." Here Christ speaks of the faithful in general, and let not Cardinal Gib- bons forget it He calls them sheep. 35 The shepherd that tends one hundred sheep and loses one leaves the ninety-nine behind and goes in search of the stray one. Here He speaks of the sinner in general and also calls him sheep. Where, then, is the passage in which he says that by sheep must be understood bishop, and not the merely faithful? Wherefore seek for ab- struse meanings, when the literal translation is so clear and so evident? Thou lovest me, Peter, there- fore preach my gospel, convert the people and by that means show me thy love. Thou thinkest to love me more than the others, preach then more than they do, for love is in the deeds, not in good words. But it may be asked, Why that preference in ad- dressing Peter and not the others? Because Peter by his impulsiveness, by his years, appears perhaps more conspicuous. That may also be the reason why Christ's reproaches are addressed to him. 36 If the second circumstance demonstrates nothing against him, neither does the first prove anything in his favor. None of the three "biblical arguments bears out the claims of Romanism: the first because it refers to its 84 John x. 1 6. S5 Matt. xvii. 12. See also Matt. x. 6 and xv. 24. 30 Matt. xvi. 23. IO2 ROMAN CATHOLICISM Church and not to Peter; the second because it is based on a false supposition, the third because it is an allegory that demonstrates nothing. Your Eminence can see that the free interpretation of the Bible is good for something. It serves at least to undermine and to demolish the shaky foundations on which it is sought to implant that of the Vatican. Against the doctrine of the despots of old, there was only one set- back, revolution; against Roman despotism there is only one barricade, namely: Biblical revolution, free interpretation of the Divine Word assisted by the help of Christ so many times promised to the faithful until the end of time. 37 This is the last means left to save religion. That centralism proclaimed by Your Eminence as a divine panacea, as an unequivocal proof of life and progress, is looked upon (and an effort made to demonstrate it in another chapter) as an in- dubitable sign of ruin, as a sure mark of approaching death. As a rule, centralization and tyranny are the last conclusions of decayed and senile power. Well understood liberty and independence are, according to reason, the dawn of all progressive and lasting civiliza- tion. Let us look into the sociologic theological argu- ments : These may be considered as Cardinal Gibbons' favorite themes. 38 If we are not mistaken in our reckonings, he has thrice adduced the same argument on the necessity of a central power, of a supreme authority, final, similar to any human assembly or 37 See Matt., last chapter and last verse. Read also Matt, vii. 7, 8; xxi. 22. Mark xi. 24. Luke xi. 9, 10. John xiv. 13, 14. James i. 5, 6. 38 Cardinal Gibbons : Chapter already mentioned. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. IOJ government. This argument is unquestionably sensa- tional, of a kind to appeal to the irreverent masses; and forsooth to the literary classes as well, if they should not possess a deep philosophical and theological foundation. On the other hand this argument boasts the glorification of a most astounding success. 39 At the last lamentable sitting preceding the vote on in- fallibility, the last speaker was the then Bishop of Cuenca, H. E. Sr. Paya, and his most eloquent dis- course is precisely based on variations upon the same theme that Cardinal Gibbons so much likes to handle. If he should publish another edition of his popular book, we would recommend it to His Eminence. 40 The most trustworthy chroniclers of Romanism say, that it called for embracements and even kisses from the Pontiff. History adds that he passed from Cuenca, one of the poorest and smallest dioceses in Spain, to the vast and prosperous Santiago, in Galicia, where later he received the capels, and died as Primate of Spain. I might say as much of the famous and im- mortal Dupanloup, and many more things concerning the impartiality and liberty in which Romanism left its defenders and accusers. But let us not touch super- ficially on a subject to which we intend devoting an entire chapter. What we wish to assert at this time, is that the testimonies before mentioned are taken from the rabid Romanist, the indefatigable controvert- ist, the lasher of liberals and Protestants in Spain, the illustrious priest, Mateos Gagos, on whom we rely 39 Read Address of H. E. Sr. Paya : On Infallibility. 40 Read Father Mateos Gagos : Chronicle of the Vatican Council, IO4 ROMAN CATHOLICISM principally for our history of that eventful and turbu- lent council. Listen, Cardinal Gibbons ! he appears to say : Why do you wonder at the central power of the Vatican? 41 Why are you smitten with the infalli- bility of the Pontiff? Have you not a president in every republic? Have you not a king in every mon- archy? Have you not in every well organized gov- ernment, supreme courts, whose decisions are final? Why then refuse to the Church, that is a most per- fect social organization, what other societies possess, whatever their degree of imperfection might be? Let us proceed slowly, as the scholastic would say. Your Eminence will permit me to state that in good exegesis, allegorical argument demonstrates nothing trustworthy ; 42 in good philosophy and sound theology, arguments of similitude and analogy throw light upon, illustrate and corroborate what has already been proved, but do not demonstrate what has to be proved. By whose authority does Your Eminence deduce, that because civil governments have central powers and supreme courts, the Catholic Church should also pos- sess them? Have you received some inspiration or mandate from heaven to make such a proclamation? If the Baptists, taking the Gospel as their standpoint, would reply: Jesus Christ knew the Roman organi- zation and the Hebrew organization; He knew that the empire and the synagogue had supreme courts, and yet when He speaks to His apostles of the organi- 41 See Cardinal Gibbons : Chapter mentioned. 42 See Melchor Cano: Lugares Teologicos (Theological Places). See Casanova: Teologia Fundamental, Introduc- cion (Fundamental Theology); Jaugey: Apologetic Diction- ary of Faith; head, Proof, CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. TO5 zation of His Church He says to them: 43 "Beware of the leaven of the Roman and of the leaven of the Pharisee, your society must be different; in the im- perial, and the synagogical, there are haughty persons and masters, in mine I do not wish for any such." 44 If the Baptists argued thus, I say, what answer could be made to them? For their argument has the ad- vantage of being biblical, while Your Eminence has the disadvantage of being antibiblical. But let us gratuitously assume that the comparison is good, that the Church is a society identical with the civil society, and that since the latter has a central authority, the former must also have one, and that if the latter has supreme and final courts, the former must also have them. Should we then have advanced anything towards the personal infallibility of the Pope ? Alas ! Cardinal Gibbons ! must we forget the logic which we learned in our school days ? 43 One of the most important rules of syllogism, is that the con- clusion must never be greater than the premises. The only possible consequence would be this: that there must, therefore, exist a central authority and a su- preme tribunal identical with those existing in the civil powers. But Your Eminence has seen that some of these powers, although called final, assume the pre- rogative of infallibility. Has Your Eminence ever known a president so foolish, or a king so stupid as to 43 Mark vii. 15. Matt. xvi. 6. 44 Connect together the following passages : Mark ix. and following, and Matt. x. 43; xx. 26, 27, and xxiii. u. 45 See Cardinal Zigliara : Filosofia Tomista (Thomist Phi- losophy) ; book I : Rules of Syllogism. Gonzales : Same head. 106 ROMAN CATHOLICISM say : "I am infallible because there is no appeal from me?" Does not Your Eminence believe that both presi- dent and kings are liable to error, although there is practically no appeal from them ? Does not Your Emi- nence believe, that if after pronouncing a judgment, they became fully satisfied, by the evidence, that they had committed a mistake, and that their mistake might have fatal consequences, they would not correct their mistake and alter their decision? Have we not the recent example of France? Now if Your Eminence considers infallibility identical with finality, and nothing more, then Your Eminence is one of us, and I would at once proclaim Your Eminence Pope, and kiss as a sign of submission, not your sandal, which I would consider humiliating, but your pas- toral ring. That a certain kind of argument only is permitted in Rome, where Vaticanism exercises a paramount in- fluence over ecclesiastics; that another kind of argu- ment cannot be published in Latin Europe, where Roman excommunication, like the terrible Hercules' club, still presses down in a horrible manner upon the conscience and the human intelligence, one familiar with the conditions there existing, can understand and explain to himself. But here in this country of true freedom, an essentially progressive and expanding nation, a state where all legitimate and rational inde- pendence is looked upon with approval, instead of fear or apprehension, a region where the "ensemble" of doctrines has given rise to the ecclesiastical term "Americanism," redeeming synthesis of modern reli- gious societies j here, be it said, one cannot under- CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. IO7 stand or explain the exposition of certain doctrines. Still "Unusquisque in sensu suo spondet" (Let every one do as he pleases). Let it be recorded that neither the Bible, nor so- ciologic theology, demonstrates the personal infalli- bility of- the Pope. Can this be demonstrated by apos- tolic or sub-apostolic testimony? This will be the sub- ject of the next chapter. CHAPTER X. DO THE ACTS OF PETER AND THE CONDUCT OF THE OTHER APOSTLES AFFIRM OR DENY THE INFALLIBILITY OF THE POPE? IN order to avoid useless digressions, it is well to clearly establish at the outset, the meaning involved in the double title of this chapter. If Christ granted infallibility to Peter in a solemn manner and in the presence of the other apostles, Peter should be the first to be persuaded of that ex- traordinary prerogative. His words and acts must therefore harmonize with that persuasion. This must be applied and understood in such a way, that if we should find any passage in which Peter had to exer- cise the said privilege, but failed to do so, we should at once have a most powerful argument for denying his infallibility. For, merely an erroneous definition coming from one Pope, would demolish the infalli- bility of all of them, according to the Romans them- selves. 1 And so also in any single passage, in which Peter spoke and acted, as if he did not possess such a valuable gift, it would be more than sufficient reason to deny, or at least to question, the infallibility of *Read Jaugey: Infalibilidad (Infallibility). Read Casa- nova : Fundamental Theology. Read Perrone : De la Verda- dera Religion (True Religion). Read The Church and the Pope. Read Hettinger: Same head. Any of the Roman theologians will confirm this statement. (108) CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. ICX) Peter, whenever we are dealing with cases or oc- casions in which he should invoke his said infallibility, to determine or decide them. The apostles would act in like manner, since they are the ear-witnesses to the concession and magnificent privilege granted to Peter by Christ. They must, therefore, be the principal be- lievers in the said infallibility, they must be the first to respect and revere it, they must be the first teachers to convey it to the new people. If they did not act thus, and we should find that in their preaching and behavior they proceeded as though they knew noth- ing of such a privilege, we would then have sufficient cause to question its existence. And if we should find only one passage, only one word, only one act on the part of the apostles contrary to such infalli- bility, then we would not only be justified in doubting such infallibility, but also in roundly denying it. Either of these three declarations, if not admitted as good by our opponents, places them in contradiction either with the most fundamental rules of sound criti- cism, or with the main principles of their history and theology. 2 The Romanists must never forget that they have always to prove, on every necessary occasion, that infallibility did accomplish and does accomplish everything ; and that to us, on the contrary, one single word from the apostolic times, one single act of the apostles contradicting that prerogative, is more than sufficient reason to demolish it. In return, we admit, and this will show the sincerity of our arguments, that if Peter and the other apostles spoke and acted as if 'Jaugey: Head, Critics and its Principle. Read the his- torians Rohrbacher, Rivas, etc. IIO ROMAN CATHOLICISM such infallibility did exist, then we would be the first to respect it, because being moved as they were by the Holy Ghost in all their acts, the idea of their erring would be conflicting. 3 A similar consideration must be applied when dealing with the immediate success- ors of the apostles, with only this exception: that the arguments based on sayings and acts of the latter, would carry divine and irrefutable authority, whereas the arguments of the others would carry only human and controvertible authority. The question being thus put with all loyalty and frankness, we will now ex- amine it, beginning with the conduct observed by Peter himself. We select precisely the same Chapter xv of the Acts of the Apostles ; and with deep regret we must again invite the attention of the most learned primate or pontifical delegate of North America. We may, perhaps, be mistaken, but the manner in which Cardinal Gibbons narrates what happened at the cele- brated Jerusalem Council may lead into error those who have not read the whole of Chapter xv, but are contented with the mutilated portion of it, as presented by Cardinal Gibbons. 4 Reading the passage as stated by H. E. the Cardinal, there would appear to have occurred some discussion before Peter spoke; that Peter alone rises to speak, and that after listening to him, they all remain silent, and Peter's motion is car- ried in his sole name, and under his exclusive re- sponsibility, without anyone else speaking. Now, Your Eminence, when a Romanist of your rank de- clares in your own words, that you imbibed her doc- 'Jaugey: Head, Revelation. * Cardinal Gibbons : Faith of Our Fathers, p. 127. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. Ill trine with your mother's milk, and made her history and theology the study of your life, and present to us, as proof of infallibility a garbled chapter, when that chapter taken in its entirety, states exactly the con- trary, the stock of proofs must be very scanty indeed, else you would not have recourse to such deficient and contradictory means. I presume your Bible to be as complete as mine. Let us, then, continue reading from that celebrated chapter. Then (after Peter spoke) all the multitude was silent and listened to Barnabas and Paul (two others who spoke after Peter), who related all the miracles and marvels per- formed by God through them, among the Gentiles. And after these had spoken the multitude becomes silent again, in the same manner as they did when Peter spoke; St. James (a third apostle, who speaks, and who does seem to be the true Pontiff, by the tone of his language, unlike that of the humble Peter's) answered by saying: "Men and brethren, listen to me," etc. (we will later copy his doctrine in full). As Cardinal Gibbons can see, it is not Peter alone who speaks, but also Barnabas, Paul and St. James, who, speaking later, do not suppose the matter entirely settled by Peter. Now, according to a prudential maxim of canonical law, in great councils and col- lective decisions, in order that the junior dignitaries may not appear as though restrained, and may express their opinion with entire freedom, they are granted the privilege of speaking and deciding first, for if they did so after the seniors, the prestige of the latter might curtail the independence of the former. 5 According to 'Read Bouix: Canon Law (De Jure Canonico). Read 9 112 ROMAN CATHOLICISM this maxim, Peter appears of minor importance, hav- ing been the first to speak, while St. James, who spoke last, is favored. When we examine the language of the two, we shall arrive at the same conclusion. For that reason we cannot recover from our astonishment at the fact that a man of Cardinal Gibbons' character, an American prelate of his reputation and prestige, and one possessed of his vast enlightenment, should employ the same methods of demonstrating infalli- bility, .as those used by the fictitious and decadent Romanists. What a disenchantment the reading of his book has been to me! What a bitter disillusion! What a blow to the belief that in America I would find prelates of the tenacity of the immortal Cardinal New- man, who, notwithstanding the declaration of infalli- bility, dared to face the wrath and storm of the Vatican by denying such documents of Pius IX as "The Sylla- bus," which document is recognized as one of the most important of the Romanists'. 6 Imagine, as I say, my disappointment and disenchantment in coming to America from Europe, where one sees everything in religious circles corroded, where decay invades all, from the tiara to the village curate, where senility and moral looseness adorn themselves with the showy drapery of submission and virtue, where prevails an eagerness to praise and flatter individuals rather than telling the truth, the whole truth, thereby being able the better to enjoy the power of mere sordid wealth to find, alas, in America, the far-famed home of true Bouix: De Jura Regulari (Regular Law). Read Bouix: Head, Reuniones Defmitoriales. "Jaugey: Head, Syllabus. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 113 liberty (where the enlightened pioneers who conceived and systematized the doctrinal compendium termed "Americanism," 7 must be of another way of thinking), that the classical book on religion, the one authorized by the signature of the greatest prestige, is not only an echo of the most rabid Romanism, but one not pos- sessing even the merit of the crafty art, and seductive cunning of European Vaticanism. But let us return to the subject. What is the teaching that springs in the clearest manner from Chapter xv of the Acts of the Apostles ? To anyone reading it carefully and im- partially, that which strikes the eye without even seek- ing, is that all those blessed pioneers believed in every- thing, excepting in Peter's infallibility ; everything was conducted and everything was determined upon, as if Peter had been one of their number, nay, even, as if Peter had been in fact inferior to St. James. Let the Bible speak for us, since its language is most clear and convincing. ''And certain men which came down from Judea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. When, therefore, Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question." Pray observe, Car- dinal Gibbons, that Paul and Barnabas go to Jeru- salem not to see Peter alone, but also the apostles and elders. To proceed: "And being brought on their way by the church, they passed through Phenice and Samaria, declaring the conversion of the Gentiles: 7 Read Encyclical of Leo XIII about Americanism. 114 ROMAN CATHOLICISM and they caused great joy unto all the brethren. And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the church, and of the apostles and elders, and the,y declared all things that God had done with them." Pray, listen to it, cardinal : they were received not by Peter alone, but by the Church and by the apostles and by the elders. Let us continue: "But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses. And the apostles and the elders came together for to consider of this matter." Let not Cardinal Gibbons forget: they assembled to resolve upon a question, not with Peter alone, which sufficed had he been infallible, but with the apostles and the elders. Proceeding: "And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us : And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. Now, therefore, why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? But we believe, that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they. Then all the multitude kept silence." Pray notice, Cardinal, the tone in which Peter speaks, explains, relates and enquires like anybody else; he neither decides, nor judges, as he should do if he him- self had believed in his own infallibility. Let us read CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 115 further. "Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring what mir- acles and wonders God had wrought among the Gen- tiles by them. And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and brethren, hearken unto me: Simon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. And to this agree the words of the proph- ets; as it is written, After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down ; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things. Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gen- tiles are turned to God : But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every Sab- bath day." This apostle does speak the language proper to the future Roman Pontiff : and while Peter, enquires and explains, he judges and decides ; while the humble and weak Peter (does not Your Eminence feel offended at the treatment given to Peter by the same Holy Ghost through Paul's lips?) 8 does not de- cide or rule upon anything definite, St. James rules and determines that those of Antioch must be written to, and dictates exactly the sense in which to write 8 Read Galatians i and ii. Il6 ROMAN CATHOLICISM to them. Well, now ! "Aliquando bonus dorm it at Ho- mcrus" (The wisest will commit mistakes). To quote Chapter xv as a proof of the Pope's personal infalli- bility is, Your Eminence, as ridiculous, as if I were to quote Louis XIV's bon mot, "L'Etat c'est moi" (I am the state), to substantiate the principles of the French Revolution ! Let us close the chapter because the whole of it is the most explicit condemnation of the individual infallibility of the Pontiffs. "Then pleased it the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas ; namely, Judas sur- named Barsabas, and Silas, chief men among the brethren." Let Cardinal Gibbons comment upon these words: Peter, as the infallible, does not appear at all; it is the apostles, the elders, the whole Church of Jerusalem, who resolve to send ambassadors to Antioch. Here follows a copy of the resolutions : "And they wrote letters by them after this manner ; The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia : "Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, sub- verting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law; to whom we gave no such com- mandment : "It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men unto you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul : "Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 1 1/ "We have sent therefore Judas and Silas, who shall also tell you the same things by mouth. "For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these neces- sary things ; "That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from for- nication : from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well. "So when they were dismissed, they came to An- tioch: and when they had gathered the multitude to- gether, they delivered the epistle : "Which when they had read, they rejoiced for the consolation." What conclusion does Your Eminence reach, con- sidering that Peter, as the infallible one, should have been the man to head and sign the letter, but instead, it is headed and signed by all ? While the Holy Ghost, according to Romanism, should have become asso- ciated with Peter only, it joins the whole, and the name of Peter appears nowhere. When it should have been Peter's doctrine copied in the letter, it is the doctrine decided upon and chosen by St. James that is transcribed and sent. Can a greater denial be given to the infallibility of the Popes than that thrown out by the Jerusalem Council? Let us summarize the doctrine scattered over preceding pages. If infallibility were a gift made by Christ to Peter, in a solemn manner, and in the presence of the apos- tles, they and Peter should have been the first to be- lieve in it, and on the solemn occasion of that first council, it should have appeared and shone resplendent Il8 ROMAN CATHOLICISM as the sun, clear as the light of day. But in that council the said infallibility effectually suffers a first and total rebuke. Peter instead of playing the char- acter of the infallible, explains and enquires, speaks first instead of speaking last ; contra, St. James, instead of speaking as the inferior of Peter, speaks as if he were the true teacher and judge : it is he who decides what has to be done and how it is to be done. Finally, instead of Peter alone confirming the resolution, as he should do by virtue of his infallible authority, they all sign together as equal judges, possessing equal power and jurisdiction. There is nothing, therefore, in Chap- ter xv of the Acts of the Apostles to demonstrate or corroborate the individual infallibility of the Popes, but much and a very great deal to deny it in the clear- est and most negative manner. If anyone after read- ing the whole chapter referred to in its entirety, still believes that it contains any proof, by which the pre- tended pontifical prerogative of infallibility can be de- fended, he should not be surprised at his believing also, any day, that the Pope is not a human being but some divinity, a belief already entertained by a few, according to Cardinal Gibbons, a statement which does him so much harm. We consider the first more irra- tional and illogical than the second. But to continue : we have two letters from St. Peter himself, three from St. John, one from St. James, yet another from Jude, and also the Apocalypse. Do those writings say any- thing concerning that important prerogative ? Is there any passage in them intimating to the faithful that Peter and his successors possess the extraordinary grace of infallibility? Is it not evident to Your Emi- CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. nence that that well designed silence speaks most elo- quently against it? They apprehend and even see be- fore them, the coming heresy, that with its machina- tions and arguments, it may upset everything; but if they believed that in the "Apostolic See" 9 there would always be a trustworthy oracle of the Holy Ghost, does not Your Eminence think they were under the obligation to say to their followers: "Though error and schism supervene, fear not, because when that happens you will have a sure means, the surest chan- nel, toward the truth ; you will need only to look to the 'Roman See' and there find always a luminous beacon that through wrecks and disasters can guide you to a safe port; consult and follow the Roman Pontiff: by doing so, you will imitate the doctrine of the Holy Ghost"? If such a prerogative was known to them, was it not a crime not to teach it, when they could, at one stroke and forever, have killed all controversy among the truly faithful, by simply proclaiming the infallibility of the Pontiffs? If this had been a heav- enly gift, was it not their most sacred duty to make that fact known, for the good of the Church? Your Eminence's exclamation, made in the midst of the twentieth century, must have been also the apostles' exclamation. Oh! what great happiness for Catholi- cism to have an infallible tribunal ! 10 always at hand and for all necessary purposes ! To be always certain that by following it, we are on the path of truth ! Is "Acts xx. 29, 30. Matt. vii. 15; xxiv. 5, II, 24. Mark xiii. 22. Rom. xvi. I/. Eph. v. 6. Col. ii. 8. Peter ii. i, 2, 3. 10 Read Cardinal Gibbons: The Faith of Our Fathers, the Supremacy and Infallibility of Popes, specially; page 162. I2O ROMAN CATHOLICISM it possible to obtain greater consolation or greater happiness ? That should have been the first and fundamental teaching of the apostles, since it was a most neces- sary one to preserve the unity and to destroy every heresy in its cradle. Therefore, if they remained silent, that was a terrible argument against infalli- bility. But if, in exchange, the other apostles say nothing against infallibility, we have St. Paul, whose language and behavior are uniformly against it. Let us see. Here, again, we must draw Cardinal Gibbons' atten- tion to the point ; but let him not think that we say so for oratorical effect. In Europe we entertained such a high opinion of his practical knowledge and lofty attainments; we heard such encomiums from author- ized spokesmen, so daring, according to the best inter- pretation of this adjective, that on our way here, we imagined we were going to find in his writings the needed light, solace and encouragement to undertake our great work of demolishing the Vatican idol, our profound conviction being that either he must be wiped out, or the Latin Church will disappear, swallowed up by him, in the same way as, according to the Bible, Moloch used to swallow up his victims. For that reason we feel truly vexed in having to impeach the man whom we previously admired and applauded. But our axiom is the one so frequently adduced in scholasticism, namely : Amicus Plato sed magis arnica veritas (a friend to Plato but a greater friend to truth). Says Cardinal Gibbons: "It matters little that Peter should think different from Paul, on a ques- CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 121 tion that was finally settled by the Church " in favor of the latter and against the former, because this be- ing a disciplinary matter, Peter might make a mistake and Paul's censures mean nothing." May we ask, What can Cardinal Gibbons understand by disciplinary questions? We are fairly acquainted with the cur- riculum, and our opinion is, that the matter under dis- cussion was something more than a disciplinary one. The first verse of the famous Chapter xv does not assume that that question was limited solely to the circumstantial act of circumcision, but it comprises also the fulfillment of the entire old law. When Peter speaks of it, one understands also that he refers to the obligation of keeping, or not, all the old law. Paul explicitly states that the circumcised undertake to keep the whole law. 12 Let Your Eminence read the passages mentioned and you will see how evident this is. And that great question of whether or no 13 the entire law must be kept. Your Eminence simply calls that ques- tion a mere disciplinary one ! A fine way of evading the point, indeed ! By the same proceeding, any Ro- manist could soon find arguments to prove that the majesty of the Most Holy Trinity is purely and sim- ply a matter of worship, a subject of discipline. But let us suppose that the question is nothing more than a disciplinary one. Does Your Eminence expect with that to untie the Gordian knot of the objection? Not so, Your Eminence. The question remains standing. Is Your Eminence aware that on matters of general dis- 11 Read Cardinal Gibbons : Same book, page 128. 12 Gal. xv. 3. "Acts xv. i, 10. 122 ROMAN CATHOLICISM cipline the Pope must also be infallible ? 14 Please refer to the Romanist authors quoted in the notes, the flower and the cream of Romanist theology, and you will see how the infallibility of the Popes includes also every question on general discipline. And what point more general can there be, than to determine if all and every Christian must keep, or need not keep, the law of Moses ! Can Your Eminence imagine any other more general disciplinary doctrine? Therefore, even on the hypothesis of being a disciplinary question, which we do not admit, according to Roman theology it would come under the jurisdiction of the pontifical infallibility, and for that very reason, a single mistake made by any one Pope could be enough to destroy the entire structure raised to uphold it. Now what does the Bible say on this disturbing controversy? Listen 15 to Paul, the oracle of the Holy Ghost. "Paul, an apostle (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead). "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed." Let us see what Paul, inspired by Jesus Christ, says about poor Peter. "But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. "For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ. 14 Read Schouppe : Compendium Theologicum de Inf allibili- tate. Read Cardinal Vives : Same head. Read Casanova and Hettinger: Same head. Read Jaugey: Head, Infallibility. 16 Galatians. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 123 "For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I per- secuted the Church of God, and wasted it : "And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in my own nation, being more exceedingly zeal- ous of the traditions of my fathers. . . . "But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. "For, before that certain came from James, he did eat with t'he Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. "And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him ; in so much that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation. "But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?'* Poor Peter! What hast thou come to with all the infallibility laid on thy shoulders? Thou art being whipped round like a top. On the one hand the impetuous and acrimonious Paul resists thee, 15 and even injures thee ; and on the other, fearing the censure of St. James, notwithstanding thy infallibility, thou goest about crestfallen and timorous. Without doubt thy infallibility must have been different from thy suc- cessor's, Pius IX, for while thou goest about subdued by opposite factions, thy successor, adapting a famous 15 Gal. ii. 11-14. 124 ROMAN CATHOLICISM phrase, says : "I am the Church, 16 without me you are nothing." While thou, Peter, didst now listen to some, then to others, acknowledging the right of everyone, thy sublime successor, Pius IX, without consideration of any kind, as Cromwell dismissed the English Par- liament, says to the full council of venerable heads of the Church : "If I die, close the doors and go to your homes." 17 It seems incredible that Cardinal Gibbons should take seriously the other indications as to Paul consulting Peter, when in the same epistle and almost in the same breath he emphatically says, that he con- siders as three pillars of strength, not St. Paul alone, but also St. James and St. John, that is to say, that for Paul there was nothing in Peter, that St. James and St. John did not have. Let us conclude this long and tedious matter, by stating what is evident, that neither Peter nor the apostles knew anything of what is now a dogma of faith in Romanism, under the name of papal infallibility. 18 Read Encyclical of Pius IX to the Fathers of the Vatican Council. 17 Read the same as cited on No. 16. CHAPTER XL DID THE SUB-APOSTOLIC FATHERS BELIEVE IN THE POPE'S INFALLIBILITY? ACCORDING to Romanistic theology, the truth of the revelation was entirely closed and termi- nated with the death of the apostles. 1 From that time no one can add the smallest thing to the revealed doctrine. The only thing that can be done is, to de- velop and illustrate the revelations, to corroborate and synthetize them by reasoning and compilations; but whoever should venture to add to the truths revealed, would become guilty of blasphemy and heresy. The Pope himself, notwithstanding the divine prerogative of infallibility attributed to him by Romanism, holds no higher rank in this question than the most ordinary man. 2 Neither the common people nor the learned teachers nor the venerable bishops, nor the Ecumenical Councils, nor the sovereign Pontiff can increase the ensemble of the principles revealed. Having been de- termined for all time by the apostles, so they shall re- main until the end of the world. As a consequence of this most important doctrine, the following evident 1 Read Cardinal Gibbons : Chap. II. Read Schouppe : Theologia Dogmatica De Revelatione. Read Cardinal Vives : Same head. 2 Cardinal Gibbons : Chap. II. Hettinger : Theologia Fun- damental. Casanova : Same head. Jaugey : Revelacion y Doctrina de la Iglesia. (125) 126 ROMAN CATHOLICISM conclusion can be deduced: Suppose that all the Fa- thers together, in a clear and unequivocal manner, proclaim the infallibility of the Pope ; that by the end of the first century and the beginning of the second, this belief were admitted and recognized by all and everyone; would that be any gain toward proclaim- ing the infallibility of the Pontiff? No, none what- ever. On the assumption that the apostles themselves did not believe in such a prerogative, they could not have transmitted it to their immediate successors, the Fathers, therefore, on the latter teaching, a purely human doctrine, instead of a divine one, that teaching could not be added to the truth of the revelation, since the latter, by unanimous consent, came to an end at the very moment of the apostles' death. 3 Consistently with those shining and fundamental principles, we might consider the question of infallibility as closed with the last words of the preceding chapter. We might say, and our argument would be most correct, according to Roman theology, if the apostles, far from believing in the infallibility, ignored it and acted as if willing to reject it, this was because it did not exist, and would never have existed. We would rather, however, out of courtesy to Cardinal Gibbons, accom- pany him in his investigation through the centuries and question the Fathers with him. We will listen to what those venerable heads have to say concerning so singular a privilege. We will enquire into whether those enlightened teachers are more considerate toward 8 Read same author as above and also Melchor Cano : De Locis Theologicis de Ecclesia. P. Fernandez: Same head. Hurter : Same head. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 12? infallibility than were the apostles, who in truth had for it neither regard nor respect. S. Clement I, fourth Pope and third successor of Peter, is the first witness who appears worthy of serious consideration, since he is a wise and holy Pope. I recall that in my school- days I used to look on this renowned head almost as an apostle ; with simple faith I believed that his testi- mony concerning papal infallibility was most im- pressive and irrefutable. How my views have changed since reaching mature age ! How many bitter disillu- sions have I not suffered every time I have had to apply, instead of the false Roman doctrine, the reason and conscience given to all by God Almighty, and according to which we shall be judged ! How many wasted illusions ! How many hopes defrauded ! How many and what painful shocks to coordinate what conscience taught in a positive manner, with what the Roman faith proclaims as infallible ! What a horrible disenchantment, when, notwithstanding the most su- preme efforts, I beheld issuing forth one with the other and growing larger and larger every day the incompatibility on papal questions! What desolating conflicts, when there was no other option but to choose one or the other ! What rending perplexities to realize that it was necessary, compulsory even, to reject one of the two, under penalty of losing both! Alas! he who has not experienced this kind of torture, does not yet know what it is to suffer! He who has not faced spiritual battles knows not the most fruitful source of pain and bitterness ! I would rather a thou- sand times disappear from existence than to be seared again with such a horrible Calvary. For that reason, 10 128 ROMAN CATHOLICISM every time mention is made of Clement the Roman, there rushes to my brain in furious confusion a tor- rent of pricking memories. It was the first pillar to be demolished at my feet, and in his fall I saw the whole Roman structure totter to the ground. That is to say: the spiritual home, in which I had grown and studied, in which I hoped to remain until the coming of the Lord, in which I had concentrated all my tenderest affection, and in which I had placed all my consolation and all my ambitions ! The expa- triated suffers nothing in comparison to the anguish experienced when I was compelled to say : "Loves of former times, away with ye, ye are not legitimate. Hopes of former times, ye are false. Joys of yore, ye also are fictitious." The fate of the shipwrecked mariner is not sadder for losing his chart and com- pass, and being engulfed, than was mine, to see the previously shining beacon of pontifical infallibility, vanish before the advancing darkness which was to surround and absorb me ; to feel the abyss yawn at my feet, myself on the brink of plunging into the bottom- less chaos of despair! God Almighty, Thou knowest that I prevaricate not, nor exaggerate. Thou didst see more than once the burning and terrible tears of distress bathe my cheeks ! Thou didst witness that during whole weeks I went about disconsolate, like a man deprived of reason, without the sustenance of life or restoring sleep! Blessed be Thou a thousand times, for Thy help and comfort during that fearful battle ! Blessed be Thou a thousand times because Thou didst bring solace to my spirit and peace to my con- science ! Blessed be Thou a thousand times for teach- CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 129 ing me to live in Thy universal Church, without any need of Romanism ; to invoke and believe in Thy name and Thy doctrine, without the fabulous Romish stories! And you, kind reader, forgive this short digression and come with me to listen to Clement the Roman. What does this enlightened Pope say? Does he proclaim the personal infallibility of the Roman Pon- tiff? Your Eminence should not forget, that for the testimony to be admissible, it rs necessary for it to bear directly on the papal individuals, and that it de- clare that infallibility belongs to them, and will re- main with them, in perpetuity to the end of the world. In accordance with sound judgment, as we go back- ward to the first centuries, we should find that pre- rogative more clearly and brilliantly defined; just as we get nearer to the spring, the water should be more transparent and pure, and as we go away from it, it should be more turbid and less pure. Appealing to your loyal impartiality as an American, and to your frank sincerity as a writer, I ask, Is this general law of history and of judgment observed where infallibility is concerned? Are the primitive testimonies more ex- plicit or clearer than the secondary, and these in turn more so than the last ones? And if the opposite is exactly what does happen (and I do not believe Your Eminence would venture to deny it), is this not an almost certainty, that infallibility is one of the many ecclesiastical myths created by history, and centralized by the papacy? When the testimony of the Fathers is taken as a whole, in harmony with the general laws of historical evolution, we find in it a perfect accord, I3O ROMAN CATHOLICISM and we arrive at the evidence that infallibility is purely of ecclesiastical origin. St. Clement is the first witness to this true theory. Neither Catholic conscience, nor Catholic intelligence, was yet prepared to receive the enormous weight of a personal infallibility. The ex- ample of the apostles was too fresh in the mind of all, to be openly falsified. For that reason Clement the Roman, 4 disciple of Peter, acts and speaks like that apostle. Like him, he addresses the Corinthians in humble language, not with any attitude of authority, as befitted an infallible Pope, but advising and ex- plaining, instead of ordering and excommunicating. Let Your Eminence read any of the modern papal bulls, and compare their style to that of Clement. In the former you will see flashing the wrathful rays of infallibility; in the latter the simplicity and humility of a wise man seeking the truth, which he thinks he possesses, and while so thinking transmits it to others. But Your Eminence will see nothing that appears as infallible. Lastly, and this is convincing to Roman- ism, the latter is headed and signed not as if an in- dividual Pontiff were speaking, as he should do if he believed in personal infallibility, but as an expression from the whole Roman collectivity, as an echo from the Roman Church. I ask Your Eminence, can a clear proof be adduced that personal infallibility was not believed in in those times? If the first Pope, in a public document and as we might say now, ex cathedra, instead of resting on his * Read Clemens Romanus : Letters to the Corinthians, by Hefele. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 13! own infallibility, rests on the collectivity of his own Church, is this not clear proof that he did not believe himself infallible? St. Clement's testimony proves nothing in favor of Romanism, but a great deal against it. Let us examine the second, 5 St. Ignatius. This Father did realize what he was doing. His testimony could not bear out our theory with greater force. He is already formulating, not the Roman infallibility, which is still too near the apostles, but the first firm step of the episcopacy. How very unfortunate are the Romanists who invoke his testimonies ! To intro- duce the letters of St. Ignatius for the purpose of demonstrating the personal infallibility is for the Ro- manist to commit ecclesiastical suicide. Read care- fully, and it will be seen that he grants the first place to the Roman Church, not over the whole world, but over Italy and perhaps over the Occident. In the eyes of St. Ignatius the episcopacy is developing toward the metropolitan, and to each metropolitan he makes the same concession as to Rome. Poor pontifical infallibility! How badly you come out of the hands of a writer, who believes there are so many superior and infallible ones as bishops, prin- cipals or metropolitans ! Away, then, with his testi- mony, since it says nothing about the personal infalli- bility of the Popes, but on the contrary reduces the Pontiff to a mere patriarch. Closely following these two, comes St. Irenaeus. This writer appears some- 5 Read St. Ignatius' letter, by Hefele. Read Encyclopedia Britannica : Head, Popedom. 8 Read Migne : Patrologia, writings of St. Irenaeus. 132 ROMAN CATHOLICISM what contradictory: on the one hand, he praises the Roman See (not its infallibility, for on that we know nothing as yet) : on the other, he assails the Popes and St. Victor rather furiously and roughly, accuses them of incompetence in passing on matters of general dis- cipline, that is to say, on matters that come fully within infallibility. Then St. Irenaeus, far from admitting it, denies it. The fourth witness is Bishop Hippolytus, of Ponto. 7 He seems like the new Paul of the first centuries. In what bitter language does he censure the Pontiffs, Zephyrinus and Calixtus ! He calls them weak, loose, ignorant and ignoble. He threatens them the same as a modern bishop would any village priest. It seems to me that when he used such lan- guage and took such liberties with the Popes men- tioned, he must have been far from considering them as cloaked with the ineffable gift of infallibility. Those who can reconcile such a behavior with the belief in an infallible Pontiff, could also, we might say, reconcile the Koran with the Gospel. One marvels at the little importance given to such language by Cardinal Gibbons. Why dispute about things that he can see for himself? Let Your Eminence venture, by way of trial, to censure any modern Pope, and let him do so, not with the roughness employed by St. Irenaeus against Victor, nor the barbarous discourtesy of Hip- polytus against Zephyrinus and Calixtus, but in meas- ured language and with studied courtesy, and Your Eminence will soon see appear in the horizon the pon- tifical thunder and lightning, will very promptly be 7 Read Migne : Patrologia, writings of St. Hypolitus, Bishop of Ponto. Encyclopedia Britannica: Head, Popedom. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 133 deprived of hat and see, and as promptly Your Emi- nence's ecclesiastical destruction will follow. If the pontifical power, after having been so much abused, still continues to throw out anathemas as objects of terror, what explosions it would not have caused in the first centuries when at that time it was buoyant and young? How in chorus with these holy Fathers two others appear, who without being holy, are also apostolic Fathers, and certainly among the most im- portant, one oriental, the other- occidental, and both quoted by Romanism as the strongest pillars of the Church Tertullian and Origen. The first ener- getically reproves the Roman bishop for arrogating to himself the ostentatious title of chief pontiff. 8 If he had believed him infallible, would he have been guilty of the contradiction of denying to him a title that in some way referred to his authority? But the one to feel acrimonious and scoffing is the immortal Origen, the most learned encyclopedist of Christian- ism, the one who best understood how to defend it against the rationalist attacks of that epoch; the man to whom the Church is most indebted on account of his monumental writings, and for his inconceivable labors in its defense. This learned man and apologist, one of the greatest in the world, notwithstanding his vast knowledge about ancient times, notwithstanding his having known how to defend the Church, as no one better, was in ignorance of what Romanism now proclaims as its basis and foundation, namely: in- fallibility. And not thinking it important to deal gravely with a question so arbitrary, he addresses 8 Read Tertullian: De Pudicitia. 134 ROMAN CATHOLICISM himself to the Roman Pontiff, and in somewhat jest- ing language, exclaims : 8 "If you suppose that Christ founded His Church on Peter alone, what role do you assign to the other apostles? What do you concede to St. James and to St. John, whom Christ also sur- named 'sons of thunder/ to indicate their great im- portance ? " We will close this paragraph by stating, as no impartial person will deny, that the sub-apostolic Fathers knew nothing and said nothing about infalli- bility. And the councils? Let us follow Cardinal Gibbons in the profitable investigation. The very existence of the councils is the most obvious denial of that of in- fallibility. Why perform such long journeys and take upon oneself such painful troubles, when the Holy Ghost considered everything settled by a simple pon- tifical definition? If those wise heads had then be- lieved in what is now an article of faith of the Roman- ists, why grow excited over burning disputes, and waste so much energy battling against each other, since by merely exhibiting a simple formula to the Pontiff, the latter determined the question in a trice with the sanction of the irrefutable Holy Ghost? Ccme, Cardinal Gibbons, let us reason like men and not like Romanists. It is axiomatic in all argument of a scientific and human order that when an end is sought and there exist channels of obtaining it, one long, difficult, laborious and unsafe, the other quick, easy and secure, every sane man adopts the latter, and only the mad and unbalanced one inclines to the former. The essence of this identical principle is 9 Encyclopedia Britannica : Head, Popedom. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 135 translated in natural and sociological sciences as "the line of least resistance ;" 10 in the philosophical, that beings must not be multiplied without necessity ; " in the theological, that one must not have recourse to supernatural forces, while the natural elements are sufficient. But our conscience and our spirit are so impregnated with this principle, that' always and on every occasion we decide what we believe easier in difficulty; we choose the safe against the unsafe, the surest against the doubtful. Even when we make a mistake we keep the law, because our error consists always, in that we believed we had chosen the easiest, and it turns out afterward to be otherwise ; but if we asked our spirit why it inclined in a given direction, rejecting others, it will always adduce the principle named as the reason. To deny this principle, would be to deny human rationality and wisdom. Let us then apply this truth to the question under discussion, not with a preconceived judgment, but with the pur- pose of discovering the truth. The Fathers, and the common people of the earlier centuries, worked to an end, namely: to define the true Catholic doctrine. They were facing two channels : the one long, difficult and unsafe, otherwise the councils, but in this way they saw the councils assembled repeatedly, and the heretics and their heresies increased ; the other channel was simple, quick, and safer, to appeal to the Pope. If those Christians had believed as the Romanists of the twentieth century believe, in papal infallibility, was 10 Read any scientific work on the subject. 11 Read Cardinal Gonzalez : Philosophy ; and any other author on this subject. P. Fernandez: Teologia Dogmatica; and any other theologian on the subject. 136 ROMAN CATHOLICISM it not a veritable madness and truly a crime not to make the appeal? Could not one single Roman decree have silenced all disputes, as it would now silence them to the believers in infallibility? If, then, infalli- bility would now be fully and completely efficacious to the believers, does not Your Eminence see as clear as noonday, that if in bygone times it was not invoked or had recourse to, it was because in truth there was not any belief in it? If in the twentieth century in- fallibility suffices to prevent the disruption of the doctrine (as your own statement), 12 how was it not sufficient or enough during the centuries nearer to Christ, when it should have been more vivid and re- splendent? If from Christ down to us the Church, the whole Church, 13 has believed in infallibility, how is it that in later centuries it can decide and judge, with entire submission from the people, whereas in the ear- lier centuries it is neither invoked nor respected in the manner now practised by Romanism ? If there should crop up in America divisions in the faith, would not Your Eminence as the pontifical delegate, apply to the Roman See in preference to any council? Then, why did not the old Fathers do as Your Eminence would do, except because those Fathers did not believe in what Your Eminence believes? This argument be- comes still stronger when we take into account that between the fourth and the fifth centuries, such a state of confusion was reached that St. Jerome himself is responsible for the assertion that the world was dumb- 12 Read Cardinal Gibbons: Chaps. VIII, IX, X and XL 13 Cardinal Gibbons : Same chapters. Jaugey: Infalibilidad (Infallibility). CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 137 founded, at having gone to bed Catholic and awakened Arian, wise and holy men having been drawn into error by the semi-Arians. If that happens, why did not the Popes get up and by virtue of their infalli- bility, proclaim such clear and convincing judgments as those of Pius IX in the Syllabus, of Leo XIII against Americanism, and that of Pius X against Modernism? How was it the bishops and the people did not see that shining beacon that remained burn- ing on the Vatican, according -to the Romanists, as an infallible token ? u Those not impressed by these arguments, can be classed in the same category as the Mahometan, who believes in all innocence that his prophet took in the moon by his right sleeve, and brought it out by the left, and when told that the moon is too large and the sleeve too narrow, exclaims : "Oh! Allah is great!" But let us drop the first councils, since we must bring them up again when dealing with the unity of the doctrines, and let us now touch upon the worthy councils of Constance and Basle. The Romanist ser- vility was never more odious and deserving of eternal censure than when we see it treating with contempt those two famous and most important councils, in order to flatter the Popes. 15 What assemblies ever did more good to Christendom than these two vener- able councils? Who saved Latin Europe from Chris- 11 Cardinal Vives : Compendium Theologicum Dogmaticum ; De Infallibilitate. 15 To become acquainted with the state of the Church, read Baronio, Rohrbacher, Hergenrother : Ecclesiastic History, centuries XIII and XIV; also Cesar Cantu, on his General History on the Condition of the Church, centuries XIII and XIV. " 138 ROMAN CATHOLICISM tian bankruptcy, if not Constance and Basle? While Christianity was divided among- these Pontiffs, the most subversive, the greatest of all scandals among ecclesiastical powers, was the order of the day. From Peniscola, residence of Benedict XIII, came excom- munications against Avignon and Rome, the respective residences of Clement and Gregory. These, in turn, sent back with interest the anathemas to the stubborn one at Pefiiscola. 16 In the midst of all this frightful confusion the peo- ple knew not to whom to look. The College of Car- dinals, the universities, the episcopate kingdoms, re- ligious communities and the common people lived in complete subversion. The wicked applied first to one Pope, then to another, in their endeavors to profit from all. To some universities and religious com- munities there were three rectors and three superiors. The Pontiffs, in their eagerness to proselyte, trafficked in the benefices and ecclesiastic patronages. Coming down from the heads, corruption carried gangrene everywhere, over all the ecclesiastic body. All de- scription pales before such a state of things, in Latin Europe. Yet, the council that terminated such dis- orders, the assemblies that halted those terrible calami- ties, are looked upon with contempt by the proud and servile Romanist! Even if Romanism had not been guilty of a more despicable sin than its scornful con- tempt towards those venerable councils, that alone was enough to remain branded with ignominious stigma, like Cain. Far worse than a fratricide is he who condemns to death those who gave us life, and who "Read same authors and also Rives and Alzog. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 139 freed us from the inevitable religious hecatomb. And all, for what reason? For nothing more than because when those respectable Fathers saw that the Popes intended to establish themselves as supreme, and in- fallible over the ecumenic council, they declared the sovereignty and infallibility of the latter over the former. 17 But the most wondrous is that while deny- ing and affirming the authority of those councils, Ro- manism has caught itself in a- blind alley. If the council was not above the Popes, how could it dis- miss them, and appoint another that is unanimously considered by Romanism as legitimate? If on the other hand it was superior to the Popes, how coordinate this affirmation with Pius IX's bull already quoted several times? Of this hieroglyphic, we hope Cardinal Gibbons may favor us with a deciphering, while we continue to affirm that to all sincere and impartial minds, the councils, as well as the Fathers and the apostles, deny personal infallibility. 17 Read Acts of the Council, already mentioned. CHAPTER XII. WILL IT BE POSSIBLE FULLY TO EXPLAIN THE PRIMACY AND PONTIFICAL INFALLIBILITY BY SIMPLE REFERENCE TO THE GENERAL LAWS OF HISTORY? WE have seen from the preceding chapters that the apostles, sub-apostolic Fathers and the first councils were far from believing in the centralization of authority now attributed by Romanism to the sov- ereign Pontiff. How is the origin and development of this mighty prerogative to be explained ? By whom and how was that stupendous power established and consolidated? This is a point well cleared up by the progress of history. In so doing, it not only takes away from Romanism the probability of the divine origin, which has so far been entirely left out of all discussion, but also the pretext for establishing an authority and a power that is merely human. The same general law has been followed with the pontifical, as with any other similar power. The pontificate ap- pears as all other human institutions do, step by step, and by successive additions, energetically preserved and enlarged by the despotism of the Popes. History teaches how the gceat human empires and monarchies appear, and disappear, are consolidated and are swept away, solving the question which certainly has nothing mysterious or divine about it. (140) CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 14! The first Church to appear is that at Jerusalem. Its foundations are most liberal and highly demo- cratic ; mutual charity and respect for the apostles are the only canons which rule that poor and humble con- gregation. 1 The apostles dream not of draping them- selves with that show of majesty, nor of exercising that sovereignty that later will be the ostentatious features of those calling themselves their successors. In the first council we see assembled the apostles, the elders and the common people. The democratic or- ganization still prevails over the aristocratic. The second church to come forth is that at Antioch. 2 Already a new, though slow and insignificant, step is made; an advance takes places as a result of its dis- putes: the Church of Jerusalem creates the first visit- ing inspectors. This looks like a first step between elders and elders, that is to say, between priests and bishops. There will yet come a period when those two titles will serve to express one same and sole dignity, consequently said dignity will frequently be called by the two names. The distinction is not yet clear, but the idea is progressing and it will soon take shape and crystallize. We will find clear evidence in the last days of St. John, that the bishops are leading and acting like the heads of their respective churches. The name of angels applied to the seven chiefs of the churches of Asia, 3 clearly indicates that there existed already some priests over other priests. The episco- 1 Read Acts, first chapters. Read Edw. Gibbon : Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, last chapter of the first vol- ume. 2 Acts, first chapters, and Chapter xv. *Read the first verses of Revelation. 142 ROMAN CATHOLICISM pate is already advancing ; the first step that will later carry us up to the pontifical summit is already taken. Soon a second will be added, then a third and a fourth, and the lofty mystic ladder of the pontificate will be completed. But to compare the first bishops with the present ones, would be a sad mistake. The latter are now assuming aristocratic ways ; neither the com- mon people, nor even the canonic, ever take part in their decisions or resolutions. 4 Occasionally, out of mere formality and respect for old age, the latter are allowed a hearing, but without any obligation to fol- low their counsels : it is the latest theoretical remainder of the old democracy, practically meaning nothing, since the bishops retain their fullest liberty to act against their advice. The original bishops were, on the contrary, the first aristocratic element to be seen in the midst of an entirely democratic environment. The first bishops are the echo of their church ; priests and common people participate in their councils and have a voice in their election. 5 The original bishop is a chief, but he is withal democratic and comes of a democratic community. The second century will come, and in it St. Ignatius will make a decided step toward the emancipation of the episcopate, and will sow the first ideas of the metropolitan, the second step of the pontifical ladder. 6 According to him, the episcopate is already a thing apart, ranking above priests and common people. He will soon appear as a teacher and judge, capable of * Bouix : De Jure Canonico ; De Episcopes. 6 Encyclopedia Britannica : Head, Episcopacy. 6 Read St. Ignatius' letters, by Hefele ; also Encyclopedia Britannica : Head, Episcopacy and Bishop. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 143 deciding by himself all questions that may arise in his community. But we are still very far from Roman centralism. We already have aristocratic forms to rule the congregations, but these are entirely of a federal character. Each bishopric will govern itself, without one being subject to the other. The bishop is the supreme chief of his congregation and is not under the jurisdiction of any other chief. There may be churches more or less important than others, ac- cording to the character of their founders or the num- ber of their followers, but each of them will be gov- erned entirely independent of the remainder. It is the most federative aristocracy that reigns in this epoch of the Church. Soon, however, that federative character will par- tially weaken to make room for the monarchic. 7 The sees, in respect to their founders, or the city where they are established, appear more worthy of respect or more suitable to treat ecclesiastical matters, will claim individual privileges or will consider themselves above the others, and almost simultaneously the metro- politan and the patriarch appear. Already we have another link in the great chain that is to encircle the vast Christian family. In the mystic ladder of the pontificate, the third step will appear in place. The fourth, and the most important one, will be still easier to establish. Anyone believing that the metropolitan and patriarchs appeared clothed in all the privileges which they enjoyed later, would fall into error. 8 Just 7 Read Eusebius : Ecclesiastic History ; Metropolitans and Patriarchs. 8 Darwin: Evolution of Species. Read Father Arintero: The Evolution of the Species, and Philosophy. II 144 ROMAN CATHOLICISM as in their natural evolution, the species preserve some atavic traces of their subordinate and lower kinds ; so also human institutions develop, the larger keeping the privileges of the inferior, and being equally restricted by them. But as in nature the traces of the lower species become lesser and lesser, while the high dis- tinctions predominate and become more and more typical, so also in historical order, the high dignitaries, who in the beginning appear almost equal to their im- mediate subalterns, soon become distant from them, throw off their restrictions and destroy their priv- ileges. For this reason the metropolitan and patriarch, who appeared as an equal among equals, and who filled a presidential chair, as respectable as it was honorable, will soon declare their supreme dignity and greater jurisdictional power. The same thing hap- pens in respect to conciliar assemblies. While the first Jerusalem Council appeared entirely democratic, the later assemblies, through the predominance of priests and bishops, asserted their aristocratic tendencies. At an epoch so far advanced as that of St. Cyprian, in which the bishops and the metropolitan were already well defined, the Church had not yet been able to en- tirely shake off the democratic element, for the com- mon people had still a voice in the provincial coun- cils. 10 The sketch is now drawn. The Church will not go back, and just as from democracy it passed on to aris- tocracy, as represented by the bishops, then to mon- 9 Acts xv. Eusebius : First Councils. 10 Edw. Gibbon : Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, last chapter of the first volume. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 145 archy, as reflected by the metropolitans and patriarchs, it will go on ascending till it reaches the imperial Caesarism systematized by the Roman Pontiffs. The mission of the Popes becomes easier and simpler. The patriarchs have reduced difficulties by taking the bishoprics under their care, while in turn the bishoprics have absorbed the priests. The patriarchs being now monopolized, the whole Church is centralized, and Roman Caesarism can appear. No great astuteness is needed to predict the victory for Rome. No Apos- tolic See contains the moral or historic prestige, or the social elements that seem to surround Rome since the fourth century, that is to say, from the time the patriarchate flourishes. If in such conflict Rome were not victorious, history would contradict itself, but would fail in its general and evolutive principles. Let us examine the question through the fairest critics, and it will be seen that the balance will incline towards Rome, rather than to any other patriarchate. At that time the Roman See appears to the eyes of all believers as sanctified and fecundated by the blood of innumerable victims, especially by the venerable blood of Peter and Paul. It is believed that a congregation taught by such sublime heads must preserve better than any other the trust of the revelation ; that in it must be found purer traditions, holier examples. At that time Rome appears like a new Jerusalem. Had not this sacred city been destroyed, had not the com- mon people so often dispersed from it, Jerusalem could have disputed the primacy with Rome. For there also reposed the ashes of the illustrious Stephen ; there ran also the venerable blood of St. James, and 146 ROMAN CATHOLICISM again there remained the memory of the coming of the Holy Ghost, the meeting of the first council, and ever so many other not-to-be-forgotten traditions. But Jerusalem was almost destroyed by the war, and when she tried to raise herself she found herself preceded not only by the Roman patriarchate, but also by the Oriental patriarchs themselves. There remained, con- sequently, only Rome, and in respect to moral and his- torical prestige, she was in a better position than any other patriarchate. Which among them could have shown the tombs of two such venerable apostles as Peter and Paul ? Which among them could head and sign their writings with these august words : "Thus received by us from Peter and Paul"? On questions of dogma and morals, what other words, or what other names, could be more eloquent? But here we must determine the scope of our words. When we speak thus it is not because we believe that the question of whether Peter was in Rome or not has been entirely settled. After having read, as we think, everything of any importance written by the Catholics on this obscure subject, after having visited every place supposed to have been sanctified by Peter, and after having prayed before a venerable tomb, we do not believe that question so entirely exempt from doubt as to say that it can be assented to as altogether certain. In speaking thus, we limit " ourselves to the opinion prevalent at that epoch and that century, which can be affirmed as positive, namely, that at that time every one believed that Peter had been in Rome, and there "This was the belief of St. Jerome, St. Augustine, St. Basil, St. Chrysostom, etc. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 147 died. If any Romanist believes there is any contra- diction between this categorical affirmation and our own doubts, we would reply to him: Go to Spain, compare the most ancient and venerable traditions, ex- amine all their historians from the beginning to the end of the Middle Ages; examine foreign historians of those same times, and you will find them all as one, in affirming that St. James the Elder was there a long time. The history of Spain, its edifices, its re- ligious worships, are alike saturated with said tradi- tion, and yet what historian would venture in the midst of the twentieth century, to give out as a certainty the going of St. James to Spain and his staying there? 12 One may state a tradition generally believed of some known epoch, yet the principle on which it is based may nevertheless be doubtful ; but for our pur- pose we are satisfied that it was so admitted, and in effect it was so believed in those times. To this moral and historic prestige, in itself very worthy of con- sideration, must be added another very potent social reason. With or without the emperors 13 Rome con- tinued to be the head of the empire. There was situ- ated the Roman consulate and the imperial magistracy. From there the laws emanated. There, converged all the important means of communication. Rome was the supreme city in all those centuries. 14 This is so 12 Read Natal Alexander : Ecclesiastic History. Baronio, Rohrbacher, Hergenrother : Ecclesiastical History, about St. James. 18 Gibbon : Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. "Read Gibbon: Same heading, about Constantine and his close successors. 148 ROMAN CATHOLICISM potent a reason that she alone in the long run could determine centralization. Look, for instance, at Con- stantinople. Her see does not possess the moral or historic prestige of Rome. No apostle ever established it, and it was only because the emperor of the Orient habitually resided there, that Constantinople carried the other sees immediately after her, and proclaimed herself superior to the other patriarchates. Add to Rome this same reason, and you will appreciate that it was logical and conformable with the general laws of history that centralization should appear in Rome, and the patriarchal sees should there by preference become consolidated. To these two most weighty causes a third must be added, namely, the question of the appeals. Starting with the third century, the Orient lives in a continu- ous theological agitation. Dogmatic disputes multi- ply with astounding rapidity, and as a consequence, excommunications and removals from office follow each other in great number. 15 There are historical epochs in which patriarchs and bishops live entirely in constituted parties, one against the other, bishops and patriarchs excommunicating and removing from office each other with frightening ease. Confusion and dis- order invade everything in the Orient, and yet the Bishop of Rome, the Patriarch of the Occident, is en- joying the peaceful possession of his pontificate. In the Occident there were fewer and much less important heresies. Everything turned toward Rome as a much 16 Eusebius : Ecclesiastic History ; First Centuries. Fleury, Rohrbacher and Rivas : Ecclesiastic History about the First Centuries. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANT ISM. 149 more impartial and venerable center. Consequently the appeals to Rome became very frequent. Taking this circumstance as their standing ground, the Roman- ists claim to base upon it their most powerful argu- ment in defense of the Papacy. 18 We have already said that this could in no way prove the divine origin of such primacy, and we might, therefore, pass on: nevertheless, we prefer to dispel the reasons which, as we have seen, do not emanate from the apostles, and, therefore, do not exist, but are pretexts. Only through ignorance of history and lack of theological acumen can Romanism have attached so much importance to a circumstance that is merely a historical phenomenon like any other, purely human. A falling man clings to anything he can, to recover his footing. In the Orient the fallen ones were so numerous, had so little faith in their claims at home, because those that could help them were their opponents, that one cannot wonder at the great num- ber of their appeals to Rome. As an evident proof that what we are stating is the truth, the same phenomenon produces the same effects in the Occident, although on a smaller scale, because the occasions are less frequent. 17 Rome condemns Felician and Nova- tus, and these appeal from Rome to Carthage. St. Cyprian is condemned in the Occident by the Patri- arch of Rome, and Cyprian, the great Cyprian, whom 16 Read Cardinal Gibbons : Faith of Our Fathers ; Su- premacy, Infallibility of the Popes. Also consult such au- thors as Rohrbacher, Rivas, about the epoch of heresies of Occident and their insignificant importance. 17 Edw. Gibbon : Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire ; last chapter of the first volume. I5O ROMAN CATHOLICISM some Romanists consider as one of their own, does not scruple to appeal to the Orient against the Occi- dent. As may be seen, the phenomenon is general, and for those who know how to read history, it has no more meaning than that the fallen look to recover themselves, no matter how. On the other hand here is a consideration that we venture to submit to the profound theological learning of Cardinal Gibbons; examine the spirit of the appeals and consultations, and the admissions and answers of the first Popes, and it will be seen that what principally moves both, is the belief that the Roman Church keeps less corrupt the doctrines of the apostles. It seems as if the ex- istence of their memorable bodies was looked upon as a kind of mystic preserving salt. 18 More than the personality of the Pope there appears the Roman col- lectivity, the doctrine professed in Rome, the Roman religious atmosphere. It is not their belief in the ex- istence there, of a person endowed with infallibility, which belief will take shape much later, but that in Rome, owing to the apostolic example, and to the apos- tolic teachings, error becomes less likely. Let us illus- trate this doctrine by some examples. Even now when the Franciscan desires to revive his spirit he has re- course to Assisi and to Alvernia. He must believe that there, the surroundings are filled with the spirit of his patriarch; that those fathers living where their chief lived, that those houses inhabited in former times by him, those craggy grounds over which Francis walked, those meadows trod by him, that heaven con- 18 Read St. Athanasius of Alexandria: St. Ignatius, Patri- arch of Constantinople. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 151 templated by him, in short, that everything must con- tribute to keep purer and more genuine their spirit. The Jesuit still repaires to the holy cave of Manresa to the novitiate of Loyola, and listens with ecstasy to the marvels related to him of his illustrious father, by his brothers who live there. He questions and con- sults them, believing that there, better than elsewhere, must be reflected the legitimate Ignatian spirit. It may be said that the Franciscan and the Jesuit be- lieve that their brethren are endowed with some ex- traordinary privilege. No, what they do believe is that in those places better than in others, on account of the local conditions, it is more difficult to falsify or lose the genuine spirit of their founders. Our case is simply analogous. Rome is applied to, not because it is believed that the Roman Patriarch possesses any personal virtues that others do not pos- sess, but because the circumstances attending the first differ from the circumstances surrounding the sec- ond. 19 As anyone can see, these two questions are very distinct: One, to apply to Rome, because there the true doctrine is believed to be kept; the other, to apply to Rome, because there exists a Pontiff who is believed to be gifted with the divine prerogative of infallibility. To mix up the two questions, and to pass from one to the other, will be easy to the be- liever, but to the learned, this is prohibited by logic and by history. Looking into history impartially and minutely, it is understandable and explainable how the centralization of power should take place in Rome 19 Study the body of this chapter on the appeal to Rome in the first centuries, where this affirmation is well denned. 152 ROMAN CATHOLICISM and under the safeguard of the Occidental patriarch and for his own benefit. Even more, if there had not occurred any disagreement between the German Empire and the Papacy; if the scandalous schisms of the Occident, that so greatly weakened Roman prestige, had not issued forth when they did, then infallibility would have been reached in the fourteenth century, instead of in the nineteenth. 20 Without these two circumstances, everything would have been bet- ter prepared for it then than in later times, because of a perfectly accomplished centralization. The mod- ern doctrine about the Pope, being due to the issuance of the False Decretals, and especially to the writings of St. Thomas 21 and St. Bonaventure, were success- fully taught everywhere. But these two facts mili- tated so deeply against Roman prestige, especially the schisms, that not even in the nineteenth century was it possible to arrive at a peaceful and universal agree- ment. Anyone knowing well what occurred at the Vatican Council, will have still another proof of how very human was the said prerogative, and how true are the principles that led us to combat it. For the common people, who generally know by halves or not at all, the things ecclesiastical, the Vatican Council conceives something like a pastoral idyl, similar to the Apostles' Cenacle when the Holy Ghost descended ; and as if in the most solemn moments, given to voting and defini- 20 Read Rohrbacher, Baronio, Rivas, Alzog, in reference to the schisms of Occident and differences between the Empire and the Papacy. 21 St. Thomas and St. Bonaventure : About the Pope ; spe- cially the latter. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 153 tion, there supervened a terrible storm, the thunder sounded with a crash and clamor seldom heard in Rome, and as the lightning with its sinister brilliancy illumined the timorous and pallid faces of the reverend members of the Council, they have claimed to see an- other proof that that was a manifest symbol of the visible presence of the Holy Ghost. 22 How many clergymen believe it was so ! In our numerous ex- cursions about towns and villages, we have heard such tales narrated with sincere candor and enjoyment by wearers of the cassock. History relates that when John Huss 23 found himself close to the blaze in which he was to die, he saw coming a poor old woman panting and hurrying to throw a small bundle of wood on the flames. That unfortunate man, worthy of a better name, then exclaimed: O sancta simplicitas! (O holy simplicity!) That is what the true historian should answer to those innocent enthusiasts, in their earnest- ness to see in the lightning and in the thunder the beneficent presence of the Holy Ghost. If it were said that the outer storm were symbolical of the storm within; if it were said that the atmospheric com- motions were but a pale reflection of the moral con- vulsions that inwardly agitated the members of the Council, one would have not perhaps a historical con- clusion, but a rhetorical figure to depict graphically the eventful, turbulent and stormy Vatican Council ! 24 As history goes, the bishops might be classified by M Mateos Gagos : Chronicles of the Vatican Council. Cua- drado: About the Vatican Council. 23 Castelar: Revolucion Religiosa; Ejecucion de St. Juan de Huss. M Mateos, Gagos and Cuadrado : Same heads. 154 ROMAN CATHOLICISM nationalities. 25 The Germans opposed definition with all their strength. They were followed by more than half the Austrians and Hungarians. All the French, without exception, not only avoided the definition but headed the opposition and organized the fight against it. As an ornament to this great army there were the American prelates, who also were unanimous in their resistance to dogmatic definition. The Spaniards, to a man, were in favor of it. Though it may not be very flattering to say so, the love of truth in the Spaniard is above false patriotism. How different was the Spanish Episcopate of Trent from the Vati- can ! 2<J That episcopate, with a fortitude that does it honor, with a profound and piactical wisdom that ennobles it, faces the Vaticanists and tells them : Your abuses and exaggerations are the cause of the Protest- ant reform. Our principal task must be to correct you, and mend you first, and afterward to resolve the dogmatic questions. And so great was the persistence of the Spanish episcopate, and so great the resistance of the Vaticanists (of whom it may be said in pass- ing that it flatters them greatly to correct others, but they never submit to self-correction), that the Council of Trent was near breaking away and producing a schism. What a great change for the worse has taken place in the language of the Spanish episcopate at the Vatican, compared with the language employed by the immortal Bishop of the Canaries, Melchor Cano." 26 Same authors and heads mentioned. 28 Rivas: Lecciones de Historia Eclesiastica (Ecclesiastic History's Teachings) ; the same head. Hergenrother : Same head. 27 Read the manuscripts referring to Philip II, National CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 15$ He was the illustrious author of the best modern theological treatise, the first who knew how to pre- sent religion in a systematized form, the science of history, philosophy and theology. 28 This author, who was also one of the most learned theologians of the sixteenth century, used to say to the king, Philip II, one of the most fervent and pious of monarchs : "We cured Babylon, but she did not heal (Curavimus Baby- lonem et non est sonata}. Let us give her up!" "Babylon" is the Vatican; reform is the cure at- tempted at Trent; the result is that the Vatican re- mains as before. And, continued that learned author, in his official report "The Vatican could only be cor- rected by famine. Its epicurean dignitaries are more sensitive to physical pain than to the evils of the faith. Let no one send one cent of money to Rome. Let the monarchy take the proceeds of the annats, or yearly income, benefices, patronages, and so forth, and Your Majesty will see how promptly Rome softens and enters on the right road." And he would still add something by saying that the Pope without his cap on, could also be slapped. 29 Many other weighty declarations are made in the same report by that most energetic of bishops and wisest of theologians of the sixteenth century to the greatest believer and most pious of kings. What a difference between the language of one and that of Library of Spain ; also can be read, Menendez Pelavos : Heterodoxos, which is a complete extract. 28 Menendez Pelayo : Lugares Teologicos, which is the first of its class. 28 These and other affirmations can be read in the same author and book cited on 28. 156 ROMAN CATHOLICISM the other, between one's conduct and the other's, and why not say it? between one kind of learning and. the other! The Spanish bishops were followed by nearly all the Italians, the South American, and by small numbers from other places. 30 So that on one side, sound independence is represented by the Ameri- cans ; historic and exegetical theology by the Germans ; sociological philosophy and practical sense are mir- rored by French and Austrians; and facing them servile Italians, poorly educated Spaniards, and hum- ble people from the south and other places. Alas! Had not Jesuitism played so important a role, had not that Jesuitism, which never bends before the Pope, nor before Congregations when they resolve anything against it, displayed so much energy, we should not have yet an infallible Pope ! And to those who are incapable of divining the diabolical Jesuitical machinations their conduct must appear false and con- tradictory ; but it was highly practical for the purposes they have conceived, and constantly pursue, namely: absolute predominance over the other orders, and vengeance against the episcopate, that did them so much harm by their expulsion. 31 They began by re- 80 Mateos Gagos: Cronicas del Concilio Vaticano (Chroni- cles of the Vatican Council). 81 Concerning this point see report of the Spanish Episco- pate, opposed to the Jesuits in answer to some questions of Minister Aranda. Some portions of it may be seen in the Spanish Heterodox, by Mr. Menendez Palayo. In the nu- merous disputes that Jesuitism had with the Papacy, the for- mer always ignored the latter. For instance, on the all-impor- tant question concerning the venerable Palafox, Rome decided in favor of the latter, but even now Jesuitism continues vili- fying him. On the abominable and scandalous questions be- tween St, Joseph, of Calazans, and Father Piedra Santa, CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 1 57 stricting the time of the meetings, to limit the duration of the addresses, so that the opposition had only the shortest time possible at their disposal. The flattery of the Papists, and promises to them became visibly conspicuous, as did the scorn and hidden threats against the opponents : 32 rumors went the length of saying that the Pope was willing to decree infallibility with the council or without it; it was even said that if infallibility was not voted for, by a certain date, a papal bull would be issued proclaiming it, and dis- solving the council. What was the opposition to do under those circumstances? Proclaim the schism? Declare itself in open rebellion? That would have caused an immense evil. There was no other deco- rous remedy, but an energetic, though dumb, protest, and such a step was taken. 33 The more conspicuous members of the council commenced to depart one by one, so as not to soil their hands by affixing their signatures to what was contrary to their convictions, and they awaited the event in their respective dioceses, announcing to them the fmalization of the catastrophe. Jesuit, Rome decided in favor of the former, but even now Jesuitism seeks to pall the judgment by endeavoring to be- atify a man who acted as a veritable monster of iniquity. On the memorable questions of idolatrous worship, and that of Cardinal Noris, notwithstanding Benedict XIV's threats of excommunication against the obstinate Jesuits, the latter even now claim to have right with them. In the last political con- troversies among the Spaniards the General of the Jesuits deceived Leo XIII by agreeing to and signing a public docu- ment which he afterward commanded his subordinates to disobey. Consult The Jesuits at Home, by the learned ex- Jesuit, Father Mir; Beatification and Canonization Process, by St. Joseph of Calazans, and Crisis of the Order of Jesuits, by Pey Ordeix. 32 Mateos Gagos' previously mentioned work. M Same author and head. 158 ROMAN CATHOLICISM Three other bishops raised a protest after the act had been signed, by saying that they could not believe in a dogma that seemed to them false, but their protest was not heard, not respected. The Pope approved what had been done and thundered the most tremen- dous excommunications against those who had not im- mediately submitted to the infallibility. 34 There you have, kind reader, the historical and ecclesiastical origin of what is called infallibility. In the next chapter you will see explained the dangers it contains for the Church itself. In this chapter you will have seen that it is a thing entirely human, commenced by social necessities and consummated by the uncon- trollable eagerness of the Popes to command, trampling under foot the independence of the conciliar Fathers, and the liberty of the Church, in order to obtain it. 14 Pius IX : Bull promulgating the Council. CHAPTER XIII. BEWILDERING AND FATAL CONDITION OF THE ROMAN CHURCH, SUBSEQUENT TO THE PONTIFICAL INFALLIBILITY. AS His Eminence Cardinal Gibbons can see, by the title of this chapter, far from believing that the infallibilty is of any advantage to the Church, we consider it not only anti-biblical and anti-historical, as demonstrated in the preceding chapters, but also anti-social and rash in the highest degree. Such rashness can destroy all the religious edifice, and de- molish at one stroke the whole of religion. We are aware of the weight of such an assertion, and without the potent reasons in our possession mak- ing it possible to demonstrate such an assertion, we certainly would not venture to launch it forth. The Pope is as much subject to human infirmities as any plain mortal. 1 Sin may invade his conscience, as any other Christian conscience. Now, among the sins that a Pope may commit, is the sin of heresy and infidelity : that is to say, a Pope can be as heretical as any other Christian. 2 I know there are authors who deny 3 such 1 Read Cardinal Gibbons : Faith of Our Fathers. Hettin- ger and Casanova : Fundamental Theology ; head, Infalli- bility of the Popes. Perrone, Schouppe, Hurter : Theology ; same head. * S. Alfonso Ma. de Ligorio : Pope. Cardinal Vives : Com- pendium of Canon Law, on the election of Pope. Jaugey : Same work; head, Pope. "Augustine P. Fernandez: Teologia Dogmatica, about the 12 (159) l6o ROMAN CATHOLICISM a possibility, but they are few in number and of little importance. The apotheosis of the Pontiff has not been reached yet, although, as we shall see later, the road has already commenced to be opened. However distasteful this may appear to Romanists, the flower and the most select Roman authors proclaim, that heresy may be incurred by any Pope, and also that a Pope may be unfaithful. And if such a case super- vened, Cardinal Gibbons, what means has Romanism to avoid total ruin and self-destruction ? The Roman- ists are wont to answer with charming candor, with astounding simplicity : "Ah ! in such a case he would cease to be Pope, in such a case he would be ex- pelled from the Church." 4 But how can he be ex- pelled and by whom? According to your doctrine the Pope is unimpeachable ; 5 neither a bishop nor an assembly of bishops ; neither the cardinal, nor a meeting of cardinals ; neither the Church singly nor an ecumenic council of churches, can resolve anything about the inviolable person of the Pontiff. If the whole of them are something with him, without him they are nothing, absolutely nothing. Can nothing- ness rise, and judge him, who is something? If the Pope is a heretic, and as such, wishes to destroy the Infallibility of the Pope. The Romans thought so much of this work that they published a special edition and recom- mended it very strongly in Spain. 4 Read S. Alfonso Ma. de Ligorio. Cardinal Vives: On the subject of the Pope. " Cardinal Vives : Compendium of Canon Law. Bertier : Compendium of Theology ; the Pope. Vives : Dogmatic The- ology; The Pope. 9 Read Encyclical of Pius IX to the Fathers of the Vatican Council. Also read Casanova, Fernandez, Jaugey, speaking of the Pope. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. l6l Church, by what means does Romanism expect to save itself from the final catastrophe? We do not know whether Your Eminence has ever pondered over this serious question ; but we can assure Your Eminence, that it occurred to us at the moment we had thorough- ly grasped the subject of infallibility and its conse- quences, and found no satisfactory answer. To expect the intervention of Providence by some miracle, may be a very simple matter for the illiterate believer; but this is anti-rational and anti-theological for anyone who looks upon things with impartial and scientific judgment. God might answer to afflicted Romanism: "Fearest thou the idol thou didst raise without my consent shall fall on thy shoulders? Fearest thou that its fall will crush thee? Thou shouldst have thought before, as thou couldst have done with the help of my Holy Books and thy own reason." It is anti-theological because theology bars the miracle, if there is no need of it. And again we ask, If such a case supervenes, what means has Roman- ism to avoid its total ruin? To believe that the Church can throw off the Pope, is the greatest of absurdities and contradictions. 7 To suppose that this Pope wishes to go of his own accord, before he is thrown out, is the most foolish simplicity and a con- tradiction of history. 8 Why, there is no one who clings to his home as does the Pope to his See. Ex- 7 Besides the latter authors, read Ferraris, Bouix : who dem- onstrated that not a legal way could be found. 8 Read Rohrbacher, Baronio, Rivas and Cesar Cantu, regard- ing the schisms of the Occidents, and you can see how hard the great many antipodes fought for their See. The old saying of John Huss is well applied here, in which he states "They look like three mad dogs fighting for a bone." l62 ROMAN CATHOLICISM cepting one who history tells us was deceived, and abdicated, and expiated his foolishness in a dungeon where his successor lodged him, otherwise a Pope to be removed would have to be swept out of the Vatican as is done with obnoxious insects. But who would be the first to hold the broom and dare say: "At him!" There exists a fable well known in all civilized nations and translated almost in every language, that fits our case. Wishing to be freed from the butchery caused by a cat, among certain rats it occurred to a very old rat who knew the cat well, that the best thing to do would be to attach a bell to the cat. All thought the idea excellent. They received the sugges- tion with frantic rejoicing ; but when a third rat reap- peared with the bell, and put the question, "Which one of you dare attach the bell to the cat ?" they all with- drew sad and crestfallen, with the final result that the cat ended by exterminating them all. That is also the question in the hypothesis, that the Pope falls into heresy. Who will dare attach the bell to the cat? Who will dare cry out : "The Pope is a heretic ! Out with him"? None of the rats in the fable dared, be- cause it meant certain death; none of the common people will dare, because each one of them knows that his moral death will immediately be decreed, and that if the Pope enjoyed temporal power beside excom- munication, he would expiate his insolence at the stake, as happened to Savonarola 9 for denouncing as he did the crimes of a Pope which were an affront against humanity and well known to the general public. Granting, therefore, infallibility, Romanism 'Read Rivas about Savonarola. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM 163 has no remedy but to perish, if ever a heretic Pope should occupy Peter's chair, and as this is possible, the danger of destruction which threatens Romanism since the passage of infallibility is also probable. Again, no Pope 10 is exempt from human infirmities ; among these, there is partial insanity and there is total madness. If this supervenes, what is to be done with an insane or mad Pope? Shall he continue managing and governing the Church ? Can Your Eminence con- ceive the holiest and greatest institution in the hands of a madman? Is it understandable that the supreme head of the whole Church, who appoints cardinals and bishops, who binds and unbinds, according to justice and charity all the weightiest questions, can perform so complex, grave and august a mission, being mad, insane or decrepit? And if that accident happens 11 and you gentlemen, including Your Eminence, under- stand and admit such a possibility, what must be done with an insane and mad Pope ? He shall be dismissed and another shall be elected. But how and by whom? Have you not raised the Pope above all human judg- ment? Why appeal afterward to that very Church that you have tied hand and foot, and delivered to the Pope, as if it were a plain thing that he can un- make and dash to pieces ? 12 In such cases there is 10 Read any of the authors mentioned on the subject of In- fallibility. 11 Read the authors above mentioned, and specially Cardinal Antonelli, on his written statement to Pope Pius VI. He clearly states that Clement XIV was insane. Cardinal Paca was of the same opinion, and he adds that Pius VII was also in danger of becoming insane. This was also the opinion of Cardinal Gonsalbi. 12 Read Encyclical of Pius IX to the Fathers of the Vatican Council. 164 ROMAN CATHOLICISM no remedy whatsoever, according to your doctrine, except to stand by the insane Pope, and put up with his madness. To say anything else would be to con- tradict yourselves, and to demolish what it has cost you so much to construct Therefore, infallibility, instead of being so inesti- mable a boon as Your Eminence believes, is a most grave danger, it is the sword of Damocles forever threatening to fall upon Romanism and to kill it. Let us suppose another thing, that the Pontiff be stricken with a general paralysis, which unfits him for per- forming any rational act. What is to be done then with the Pope? Would he have to be sent to some papal infirmary while another is put in his place? Would he be given, as is done with the Bishops, an assistant? But how and by whom? Where 13 is there record of the Church possessing such privileges since it has entirely capitulated before the Pope, since the latter has wrested from it all the rights it might in- voke ? Let us go further : Imagine that the Pope, as happens sometimes with some prelates, lives to such an age that it may become physiologically impossible for him to think and reason sensibly and rationally, or that he enters his dotage. What must we do with him ? Shall his ramblings be respected as mandates from heaven? Who will dare deny that any of these com- mon accidents may overtake the Pope, especially the last accident? Some evil tongues say that in his last days, Leo XIII had already commenced to be irrational, as generally happens to old people at his age. If "Comment: The Encyclical of Pius IX and the canon of the Vatican Council. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 165 heresy supervene, madness, paralysis or dotage, what will be done with the prerogative of infallibility? Shall we continue believing that a heretic who is out of the Church, must manage the Church? That a madman who is incapable of performing any rational act, can be at the head of the most universal and com- plicated government? That a paralytic, with general paralysis, unfit to perform any act, can guide the greatest and most difficult of human government? Shall we quietly trust to one who raves on matters as delicate as are those of our conscience, and the weightiest questions as are those of our faith? And if the thought alone of this arotfses us, we ask again: What means has Romanism to deliver itself from the immense and irrefutable evils that an accident of this nature, a probable one according to Romanism's own 1 * teachings, may bring to it? We believe we know the best Roman theologians and canonists, and we answer frankly that there is no ade- quate reply to this question. We respectfully chal- lenge Your Eminence to give us a satisfactory one if it exists. If there is none, we repeat, What shall we reply to heresy, and to error, when we find ourselves in any of these conditions, as unfortunate as they are probable? Shall we cross our arms (before heresy and error) and say to them: "Alas! now that our Pope has turned heretic, or become insane, we cannot infallibly disprove thee; but wait until there rises a faithful Pope or a sane one and then thou shalt be punished with the most terrible excommunications; M Read the authors already mentioned on the subject of the Pope. l66 ROMAN CATHOLICISM then we shall have the sanction of the Holy Ghost, and with this thou shalt be attacked and vanquished by the supreme Pontiff?" If during any of these periods great conflicts and important cases should come up, matters entirely assumed by the pontificate, 15 will the litigants dare trust their business to a raving maniac? Because according to Romanism the lower dignitaries are forbidden, under severe punishments, to decide grave questions. Would the party losing the case submit and consider the judgment as binding, if he has the knowledge that his case was decided by an irrational person? Ah! that would be the greatest of absurdities, that would be to ignore the human heart, that would be to entirely forget the history of mankind! And let it not be forgotten, that just as the Pope is liable to each and all of those accidents, he may remain afflicted by them for years and years ! How many times have we not seen paralytics in that lamentable condition, who lived for ten or fifteen years and even longer ! How many times have we not seen madmen passing the greatest part of their lives in that horrible condition? How often has not an old man lived many years after having entered his dotage ? What, then, shall the Church do during all that time? Shall it live in continual anarchy ? Shall it learn to do without infallibility? And what about the grave cases that may come up, the heresies that may arise, and other matters requiring immediate attention? Who will take a leading place in the Church to decide them ? 18 Leo XIII : Encyclical on the Unity of the Church. Car- dinal Vives: Compendium on Canon Law; head, Rights of the Pope. Bouix : Canon Law, volume, Pope. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 167 Who will venture to decide matters demanding an urgent solution? Alas, Cardinal Gibbons, Cardinal Gibbons! Infallibility may appear at first sight an excellent recourse; but looked into profoundly and minutely, it is a frightful and terrible calamity that may destroy everything. Do not believe that these words come from a sectarian ! They come from a deeply afflicted soul, that sees the Church rolling down to the abyss ; they come from a mind profoundly con- vinced that those who defined infallibility as a gift from heaven, digged the grave in which to bury the Roman Church, and woe to us if we do not hasten to fill the hole! If we do not soon, and that with all energy of our spirit, it will be too late when one of those accidents occurs. We are now going to present a fact that will demon- strate to Your Eminence how the complete power granted to the Pontiffs by infallibility, is not only censured by the lukewarm Catholics and denied by the heretics, but that it causes also the constant worry of the wisest and purest men of piety. Does Your Eminence doubt that one of the Catholic bodies, most worthy of consideration for its wisdom and piety, is the German Center ? 18 Which of the world's political Catholic bodies has accomplished more victories in be- half of the Church than the German Center? Which other body has worked more wisely in defense of the Catholic faith ? 1T Anyone knowing something about Theology, Exegesis, History, Canonical Law, Apolo- 18 Read the work translated from German into Spanish ; namely: German Center and German Catholics. 17 You can find this by consulting any modern Catholic Bib- liography. l68 ROMAN CATHOLICISM getics, Sociology, etc., is aware that nearly all that is best, originate from Germany, and from members be- longing individually to the German Center. Aye, with- in that Center, the flower and the cream of Catholic wisdom, there was formed a secret society composed of the best and most praiseworthy of that excellent group. And is Your Eminence aware of the principal aim of that secret society, and the weightiest oath the members of it took? Well, let Your Eminence won- der, for their principal aim, their weightiest oath was an undertaking to restrict and to disable the power granted to the Pontiff by the definition of infallibility. We are dealing with a most grave matter, necessary to be corroborated by undoubted and trustworthy testi- mony. The journal that conveyed to astonished Europe the news that such a society existed was El Osservatore Romano, written in the Vatican under the direction and inspection of the Pope. That journal asserted that personages of the highest lineage, both civil and ecclesiastical, praiseworthy for their wisdom and virtue, were the parties compromised, and it went on to say that Pope Pius X was so grieved in making sure of the existence of that society, and becoming acquainted with some of its members, that he sickened and took to his bed! That editorial was reproduced in Spain by such inspired reviews as Razon y Fe of the Jesuits, and La Ciudad de Dios of the Augus- tines. This occurred about the middle of the year 1907. 18 Read the reviews, Razon y Fe and La Ciudad de Dios. In the numbers previously indicated you will find the citation of the Roman observatories. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 169 Let Your Eminence add to this the example of Car- dinal Newman, 19 who circumscribed infallibility to the extent of denying it to documents like the Syllabus. Add also the example given by yourselves with your "Americanism," 20 a chapter of which sought to re- strict the practice of infallibility as much as possible, showing profound tact and foresight. Take into ac- count the recent petition from a large portion of the Italian, English and French clergy against the last condemnation of Modernism by Pius X. Connect all these facts and manifestations and you will see how infallibility, instead of bringing about the much de- sired peace and unity, is a veritable cause of anxiety and horror. If it were our purpose to write a work of scandal we could adduce many more declarations on the sub- ject from the highest ecclesiastical dignitaries and many other references from most important person- ages. Your Eminence would then see how in the soundest Catholic conscience there exists a genuine yearning to correct by any possible means this Vati- canist error. Alas, if you would but approach nearer to the center ! If you would but hoist the flag of res- toration! What an immense good you would do to Christianity! The black clouds already closing over our heads would at once disperse, and you would pave the way to facilitate the fraternal union of all Chris- tian societies and congregations ! Not only are there difficulties relating to personal infallibility with the infirmities inherent to all human "Read Jaugey: Head, Syllabus. K Leo XIII : Encyclical on Americanism. I7O ROMAN CATHOLICISM beings, but there are also worse evils, when we con- sider the papal election in the same connection. Let us suppose that the friction between the Vatican and the Italian government should become more acute, that the socialist party which is rapidly gaining ground, should rise into power, that it should take possession of the Vatican, and close the doors on the death of any Pope. Which cardinals would elect the next Pope? The Spanish in their country? The French in theirs ? Would the others accept an election made by their fellow-collegians at any other place outside of Rome and Italy? If this did occur there is no doubt that Christianity would go back to the sad days of scandalous schisms of the Occident. And who, knowing the onward march of societies and peoples, would venture to deny that this may occur? Let us take yet another hypothesis : that the cardinals, tired of carrying on their shoulders the enormous weight of the Papacy, decided not to elect a Pope, either because they could not agree or because the majority were of the opinion that no Pope should be elected, how would the Church stand in such a case? According to the bull of Pius IX we should have no Church competent to decide the most insignificant question, except as to his successor, and on the hy- pothesis we are discussing we should have no Pope. What remedy should we have under those circum- stances, except to submit to the insult and mockery of outsiders and bow with shame, to lower our heads and say: "We made a mistake; we thought that by infallibility we could save the Church, instead of which infallibility kills it ; we thought that with that privilege CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 17! we protected it against the inconstancies of time, the onslaughts of the wicked, but, alas ! our dream has vanished like smoke before the wind, and its disap- pearance leaves us in a situation a thousand times worse than before, in a danger incomparably sadder" ? Let Your Eminence examine the numerous contingen- cies that may arise, compare the examples presented and connect the whole without regard to persons, ex- cepting Christ and the truth, and Your Eminence will see how much more dangerous our situation has be- come since the passage of infallibility, than the liberal and democratic situation of the Baptists, who in the midst of divisions and subdivisions will always have the Gospel to guide them, and to be their standard and beacon, as a center and basis of future unions. For them it will always be of little moment, if part of them should go astray and be lost; Christ's great federation will always subsist; but with us once the supreme head is removed through any of the con- tingencies mentioned, we have lost everything forever. Therefore, instead of our Caesarism and centralism being a thing of envy, it is our greatest evil and our greatest danger. Against the abuses of liberty, is liberty itself; against the abuses of a despot, there is no other remedy but revolution a lasting revolution until those abuses are demolished and the Church re- stored to its primitive liberty, true life and independ- ence. And though such a revolution were not called for, by the dangers that infallibility itself contains, we should be forced into it by the captious assaults of Romanism. Let not Your Eminence think that infallibility is the 172 ROMAN CATHOLICISM end. 21 It is already rumored that in extreme cases the Pope may elect his successor. 22 Other cardinals go further and say that he may do so in ordinary cases. We are also assured by some eminent theolo- gians 23 that not only "ex-cathedra" but whenever he opens his mouth he is infallible. Pray refer, Cardinal Gibbons, to the footnotes and you will see by the references that this matter is a serious one. If the flag of protest is not raised soon, and energetically, when we least expect we shall awake under an heredi- tary Pope, impeccable and divine, possessing all the attributes and perfections of a deity. May God inspire His Church and save her from the most ignominious of deaths despotism! 21 Read Suarez : On the Pope. He and S. Alfonso both claim that in extreme cases the popes can elect their successor and such election would have to be recognized. 22 Read Cardinal Vives, who is considered as the Roman contemporary oracle, who states that if the Pope can elect his successor in extreme cases, then he can do likewise in ordi- nary cases. 28 Read P. Fernandez : Del Escorial. This author maintained already that the Pope is infallible always, in every one of his words, and that he cannot even be in error in a single con- versation. CHAPTER XIV. CAN THE TEMPORAL POWER OF THE POPES BE UPHELD IN THE MIDST OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY? IN order to give an adequate answer to the question that heads this chapter, it is necessary to explain some theories concerning the origin of public govern- ment. In this way only, shall we keep on the straight path and arrive at conclusions of undoubted legal cer- tainty. It would matter little to allege the antiquity of the temporal power of the Papacy, the legality of its acquisition, the honesty of its administration, if all these reasons had no meaning in the new theories on law, and if the Papacy should so understand it, when deciding international questions analogous to its own, by taking into account only those new theories on law. We shall not therefore, in our exposition of this weighty question, follow the road taken by Cardinal Gibbons, because we consider antiquated and useless any demonstration of the legality of that power; but we shall bear in mind his reasons for deciding whether that power should be restored or not. Here is a sketch of the synthesis of our reply: Modern public law denies temporal power to the Papacy; if the Papacy tried to claim it, the Papacy would be guilty of abuse and tyranny; this doctrine can be corroborated by doctrinal resolutions of the Holy See. On the other hand history demonstrates in a clear manner that the (173) 174 ROMAN CATHOLICISM exercise of that power causes the most serious evils to the Church, which it should oppose even in the im- probable case that the people wished to be ruled again by the Pontiffs. We shall conclude by answering the reasons alleged by Romanists. In ancient and modern times two theories have been, and still are, the fundamental basis of public government: the divine right of kings or chiefs of states, and, the sovereignty of the people. 1 In the times of the great European monarchies, the first theory prevailed to such a degree that to oppose it was considered high treason. Two schools sprang up advocating the first theory; one entirely Caesarist in character and almost des- potic, which maintained that the power of the kings was transmitted to them directly and immediately from God, without any intervention whatsoever of the people, nor authority on the part of the people to add to the power of the kings or to take anything from it. 2 According to the authors of this theory, the king's power was equal to the present power of the Popes, the only difference being that the former had to gov- ern a nation temporally, while the latter governed the Church spiritually. Both authorities, however, were equally sovereign and of immediate divine origin. Neither sovereign could be removed by the people, and both were abso- 1 Read the famous Italian Jesuit Taparelli, his fundamental books : Representative Governments and Natural Law. " Read the immortal Spanish philosopher Balmes, his monu- mental book: Protestantism compared with Catholicism, chapters on the Origin of the Temporal Power. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 175 lute and independent in their governments. Accord- ing to the authors of that theory the people had no standing and could not take any part in settling gov- ernmental questions. The persons and the property of the nation were in the nature of a gift from God to the kings, as a complement of the power granted to them to be used as they considered just and com- formable with the common good. 3 Another theory supposed that the power was divine but indirect, through the election and intervention of the people. According to this school, God conferred His divine power upon whomsoever the people elected. The designation was not an immediate one from God, but was through the choice of the people. 4 So far as concerns the scope of the power granted by God to the kings, and the keeping of the people in bondage by the king or chief of states, the two theories became identical. For both, the king commanded in the name of God, and not as a delegate of the people ; for both, the king was master of the lives and properties of the people without having to render account of his acts to anyone, except to God, whose delegate he was. For either, it was sacrilegious to rise against the kings, although the latter might be monsters of wick- edness and tyrants of the people. Any further knowl- edge required on these theories and schools can be had by reading the authors and books mentioned in the footnotes. 8 Read Mendive: Natural Law. Zigliara and Gonzalez: Ethics and Natural Law. Jaugey: His work already men- tioned, head, Origin of Power. * Read Balmes : Book and head mentioned before. Jaugey : head, Autoridad, Rey, Origen del Poder, 13 176 ROMAN CATHOLICISM In the sixteenth century, a Jesuit, the illustrious and learned Father Mariana, was the first within the Catholic school to raise the standard of national sovereignty. 5 His short work produced a general commotion. It was condemned by the University and by the Parliament of Paris. It was burnt in public by the executioner, and the author would have met the same fate, had they come upon him. The Jesuits, who were always the staunchest defenders of the theory of divine rights, 8 on seeing that their irrational theory had been substituted for the more harmoni- ous and philosophical one of national sovereignty, and beholding the Catholics scorn their old theory as anti- humanitarian, and anti-social, and themselves take refuge under the contemporary theory of national sovereignty, endeavored to exhume Father Mariana from the oblivion to which he had by them been relegated, in order to come out as the first supporters of so popular and triumphant a doctrine. 7 If within that powerful order of Jesuits there existed that his- torical code of honor and shame, proper to every honest organization, it should remain silent and en- dure its defeat with resignation and in secret. As the Augustines say, speaking of Luther, He came from amongst us, but he was not one of us, so it may be said of Father Mariana concerning the Jes- 6 Read the famous work of Mariana : De Rege et Regis Institutione. 6 For over a century they were the confessors of nearly all of the royal families of Europe. You can also read Suarez, Bellarmine, and Sanchez, on this doctrine. 7 The Jesuit P. Garzon: Title, La Democracia and Father Mariana. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 177 uits, He came from amongst you, but he was not one of you. How could he be one of you, since you, unable to stifle his spirit, or weaken his iron will, imprisoned him like a criminal to end his life? 8 How could he be one of you, since he was the first to denounce you before the world as hypocrites and deceivers? How could he be one of you, since he was the first to declare that yours was the most de- testable religious order, that your morals were those of the brothel, that your government was worthy of Nero ; that from your commercial aspiration, you were not a holy order, but a company of mun- dane traders; that for your fraudulent bankruptcies, many of you deserved to be in irons and in prison, etc. ? 9 And mind, he knew well ! Having been re- ceived personally by your own father and founder, he well knew what your illustrious head taught and what your actions were; he knew, as no one, better, what the famous order of Jesuits should be, and what you already were, when you took charge of your famous Father C. Acuaviva. 10 No, a thousand times no! That illustrious head was not one of you; he was of us, he was a member of that phalanx which 8 Read the Jesuits' History on that epoch. * P. Mariana : Title, Defectos y Enfermedades de la Com- pania de Jesus (The Defects and Diseases of the Order of Jesuits) at that epoch. You can also read the information of the Jesuit F. Ribadeneira, which is kept in the archives of the Spanish Academy of Languages. 10 More recent information regarding the Order of Jesuits can be obtained by reading the eminent Jesuit M. Mir: title, Los Jesuitas por dentro y un Barrido hacia fuera (The Jesuits inside and a sweeping outside). It will be very appropriate to read also the famous editor and Catholic priest Pey Ordeix: title, Crisis de la Compania de Jesus (Crisis of the Order of Jesuits). 178 ROMAN CATHOLICISM is always ready to fight against all inhuman despot- ism ; to unmask every trafficking hypocrisy ; to banish every degrading doctrine, though it may bear the stamp of the fisherman or the signet of a crown. Father Mariana was then the first to establish within Catholicism the national sovereignty in the face of the despotism of the so-called divine right of kings, But in order to avoid confusion, we must explain the idea of national sovereignty according to the Catholic thesis. The authors on modern law under- stand by sovereignty that the people must not only elect their own governing heads, but that the people are themselves the source of all law, and the ones to determine by their enactments or statutes, what is licit and what is illicit, what is just and what is un- just. Non-Catholic authors understand that human reason and human liberty are self-sufficient, and are in no need of any connection with another superior reason, or of any regard for another law transcendent to human nature. 11 Catholics cannot proclaim such a kind of sovereignty without contradicting them- selves. 12 They believe in a King of kings, in a sover- eign of whom all other sovereigns are subjects God. They believe that this King has impressed in our con- sciences a universal law called the eternal law of God. They believe that neither kings nor people can attempt anything against the sovereignty of God, nor against His eternal law; that this is the standard to which all laws must conform ; that no law that is not founded 11 Read Azcarate : Lecciones de Derecho Publico. Kant : Practical Reason. Ahrens, and Olozaga : on Public Rights. 13 Cardinal Zigliara and Cardinal Gonzalez : Ethics. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 1/9 directly or indirectly on the eternal law of God can have any compulsory force, and that it ceases to be law if it contradicts the eternal law of God. It is evident that national sovereignty as understood by Catholics, and as understood by non-Catholics, pre- sents fundamental differences concerning its origin, its scope, and its finality. But for our purpose it is necessary only to elucidate the point bearing upon the election of a form of government. On this question both theories agree: the two proclaim that a nation can choose the form of government it deems best ; 13 both affirm that the nation is above the government, and that it is free to alter its form and even to change it. Consistently with these principles, they consider that a government is the more legitimate the more distant it is from the people, or the more it wants to govern the people against the national will. This doctrine, already generally taught in universities and Catholic schools, is the one that has inspired the latest international relations between the public government of Europe and the Pontificate. 14 Practically the latter has already given up all historic questions on legiti- macy. It has declared the present governments of France and of Spain good, according to the state- ment of those nations by their collective will. The Pontificate has done something more, thereby calling for praise: it has succeeded in killing the legitimist 13 Read Taparelli : His work above mentioned. Jaugey : Diccionario Apologetico de la Fe. 14 Read several encyclicals of Leo XIII to the French and Spanish on this subject. Read Leo XIII on his numerous pil- grimages preceded by Cardinal Sanz Fores, and Cardinal Sancha, then Archbishop of Valencia. Read the later pam- phlet approved by Rome. ISO ROMAN CATHOLICISM pretensions of both nations, by teaching them the theory of national sovereignty, and by practicing it, going even so far as to consider as rebellious those opposing it. 15 Pius IX himself went the length of proclaiming this doctrine, convoking parliaments to govern the Patrimony of St. Peter. Therefore, it may be affirmed as incontrovertible that at the present time all questions of public domain must be decided by the sovereign people, and that this doctrine has not only the support of the Catholic schools, but also the sanction of the sovereign Pontiffs, who by their teach- ing and example inculcate it in the Catholic nations. Having thus established the question, and it must not be established otherwise, Cardinal Gibbons, what should be asked is not whether that domain of the Pontiff is really very ancient, whether it was initiated by Constantine and consummated by Pepin and Char- lemagne; whether the Popes were or were not de- fenders of the Roman region ; and whether they called in or sent away the barbarians ; all those reasons and many other similar ones should be set aside, by such a good ecclesiastic philosopher, by merely answering, Extra questionem vagaris (You are wandering from the questions). What should be asked is this: Do the Italian people wish now to be governed by the Pope, or not? If so, then the House of Piedmont would be a tyrant ; if not, the Pontificate would be a despot for claiming the power. 16 Here Cardinal Gib- bons, with ingeniousness that from the lips of an "Read Balmes: Pamphlet on the measures taken by Pius IX. 16 Cardinal Gibbons : Faith of Our Fathers, head, Tem- poral Power of the Popes. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. l8l American savant is astounding, exclaims: "A plebis- cite that took place under the bayonets of Piedmont cannot be good." " Are we to understand that if it had taken place under the bayonets and anathemas of the Vatican it would have been more spontaneous and free? Come, Cardinal Gibbons, let us be impar- tial and follow the example of Christ: what is, is, 18 and what is not, is not, fall who may. Would Your Eminence have a convincing example of the Italian people's affection for government by the Church? Please read the result of one of the last elections. From the Pope down to the youngest acolyte, they all worked like heroes. Cardinals, archbishops, bishops, curates and friars went from place to place, wrote and worked, promised and threatened, and what was the result? that of the Latin fable "mons parturient?' and the "ridiculus mus." 19 They obtained nothing, Your Eminence. Anyone who has walked from one end of Italy to the other, anyone who has taken the opinion not only of the public but of many clergymen, bishops and even cardinals, comes to the profound conviction that they would rather have the Sultan of Morocco rule them than the Pope. For the purpose of strengthening his thesis, Cardinal Gibbons has re- course to an unusual theory. He says : 20 Since the papal patrimony comes from all the Catholic peoples, the vote should be asked of all those peoples. Ad- mirable, Cardinal; only, if your argument has any 17 Cardinal Gibbons : Same book, same head. 18 Matt. v. 37. James y. 12. 19 Read any of the Italian Catholic newspapers regarding the last Italian elections. 80 Read Cardinal Gibbons as above, 1 82 ROMAN CATHOLICISM force, it is not aimed against Piedmont, but against the Vatican. Let us assume the reason alleged to be a good one, that in effect every Catholic has a voice and a vote in what concerns and belongs to the patrimony of St. Peter, that said patrimony is not tangible without the universal approval of Catholics. Alas ! Cardinal Gib- bons! Does Your Eminence forget ecclesiastical his- tory? Is Your Eminence unaware that the Pontifi- cate always played ducks and drakes with St. Peter's patrimony, now selling, now exchanging, sometimes giving away portions of it, without ever consider- ing that particular right of the Catholic Church? 21 Therefore, if such a right did exist, those to trample upon and annul it were the Pontiffs, who, during a period extending over many hundreds of years, never allowed the universal Church to interfere. That argu- ment, therefore, instead of injuring the House of Piedmont, hurts only the Pontificate, for it covers it with the most odious of ridicules, with the ridicule of despotism. It remains then demonstrated that, ac- cording to the contemporary doctrine taught by Cath- olic doctors and practiced by the Pontiff in encyclical addresses to Frenchmen and Spaniards, the people have the right to elect any sovereign they please ; and for that reason, the present sovereign being an Italian elected by the people, the duty of the Pontiff is to keep silent and confine himself within the Vatican until called out by the people. If he did or attempted to do anything else, he should be condemned by his 21 Read Baronio, Hergenrother, Rohrbacher, Natal Alex ander, about the Popes, centuries XIV, XV, XVI. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 183 own doctrine and example as a despot and a tyrant. 22 And we are already entering on the second point. Let us suppose that the Roman people should again call on the Pope to govern them. Would it be ex- pedient for the Church to allow the Pontiff again to be temporal king ? Here indeed would we invoke the universal vote of the Church and ask for its in- terdict. Here indeed would we call to mind the sad teaching of history, for all to shout in one mighty blare : We do not wish any Pope to be king, for he would cease to be Sacred Pontiff and become a mun- dane prince. The scholastics say that "contra facta 11 on valent argumenta" (against facts there is no ar- gument) ; authentic facts of history show that tem- poral power has always been fatal to the Church, theoretical arguments count for nothing. We shall see later that they are futile and unsubstantial. The effects of temporal power have resulted in : Loose- ness of habits in 23 the Vatican ; scandalous schisms that have perverted Europe ; bloody wars between princes and princes, between these and the Papacy; scandalous sales of ecclesiastical property, or the ces- sion of it to spurious sons or to nephews of ques- tionable legitimacy ; degrading nepotism, an affront of the Papacy to all of cultured Europe; the perpetua- tion of schism in the Orient and of separation from the Reformationists ; and finally, the sight of some Popes riding 24 at the head of their soldiers, ordering 22 Read the Encyclical already mentioned of Leo XIII. 23 Read the Catholic historians, such as Rivas, Alzog and Cesar Cantu, on the subject. 2 * Read any of the many authors on the Pontificate of Julius II. 184 ROMAN CATHOLICISM bayonet charges, and scaling walls like any private. All the things that have scandalized the Roman Church since the cession of Pepin, have been caused entirely by the temporal power, or it has been their strongest contributing cause. I would respectfully challenge His Eminence to mention a single epoch, a single century in which that cursed power has not done more harm than good. And if this is true and to deny it, amounts to deny- ing history why attempt the restoration of an order of things that is so calamitous to the Church? Only for two causes would I, as a clergyman, take up arms: to defend my country in case of invasion by the foreigner for I believe the man is a degenerate who does not love his country; and to defend my Church, for I believe that not to do so would be equivalent to not loving the Church. And before replying to the reasons, I venture to make one or two remarks concerning two hints, thrown out by Car- dinal Gibbons. In speaking of Constantine, he appears to suggest that the latter went away from Rome in order to leave to the Pope greater freedom in his jurisdiction. 25 This is contrary to history, 26 which mentions two causes for that step : the first, to be nearer to the bar- barians in order to prevent their continuous incur- sions, the second, to get away from Rome, whose revolts, especially those of the Pretorian soldiers, filled him with terror. In this he followed the ex- 85 Read Cardinal Gibbons : Faith of Our Fathers. 29 Edw. Gibbon : Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, epoch during the empire of Diocletian and Constantine, CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 185 ample of his predecessor, the diplomat Diocletian. To add the reason that it was to leave to the Pope greater freedom may be very flattering to Romanism, but history denies it. Rome was under a civil gov- ernment during Constantine's empire and under those of his immediate successors. The Pope enjoyed re- ligious liberty, as did the pagan Pontiff; but that he exercised any civil dominion over the city, we have not seen in any author worthy of credit, and we do not believe in the existence of any such testimony. We hope Cardinal Gibbons will kindly refer us to one. His second hint would have caused us immoderate hilarity, if we were not dealing with such a serious subject. Says Cardinal Gibbons: 27 The Pope is sin- gle, he has no sons, his office is not hereditary, and he has no interest in making any person rich. It requires some simpleness to utter such words right in the twentieth century and amidst the American people. The extent of historical culture which the Catho- lics of America may possess, is not known to us, al- though our sacerdotal ministry has been exercised in this country. Sufficient data to form any judgment whatever on this point have not been obtained, for it is but a few months that we have resided in this region. But we can assure you, Cardinal Gibbons, that your words, spoken with such honest simplicity, would cause universal sneering in Europe and even in Rome. Those who have studied canon law are familiar with a Latin saying which may be translated thus : "God deprived clergymen of sons, but the devil 87 Read Cardinal Gibbons, already mentioned. 1 86 ROMAN CATHOLICISM gave them nephews." No doubt the ecclesiastical history read by Your Eminence has omissions not made in mine. In that way only can we understand the false statement made with so much simplicity. Are we to believe that Your Eminence has not read in every serious ecclesiastical work that nepotism, 28 more or less legitimate, is one of the stains that most sully the aspect of the Pontiff? Have not your ears ever been struck by the illustrious names of the Farneses, the Colonnas, the Medicis, and others, around which there multiply and dance a countless number of nephews and nieces, who live and aggrandize at the expense of St. Peter's patrimony; who are trans- formed from mere laborers or merchants into counts, marquises, dukes, princes and even queens, and all that, thanks to their more or less legitimate uncles, the Pontiffs? Are we to believe that Your Eminence is not aware that Paul IV, 29 not to mention many others, risks the patrimony of St. Peter, involves him- self in a war with Spain for the only purpose of hav- ing one of his nieces, the notorious Catherine de Medici, reach the throne of France? Are we to be- lieve that Your Eminence thinks that the Borgias had neither sons nor nephews, nor had to impair the patri- mony of St. Peter to enrich them? Are we to believe that Your Eminence is not aware that Alexander VI 30 the shrewdest of the Borgias, boasted of having chil- 28 Read on this subject any of the above mentioned authors. 29 Read Castelar : Historia de la Revolucion Religiosa, Pon- tificate of Paul IV. This author maintains that said niece was his own daughter. 30 Jaugey : Diccionario Apolpgetico de la Fe, head, Alex- ander VI. A famous and brilliant investigation on this Pope. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 187 dren, that he did not conceal their relationship behind the false one of nephew, 'and that to leave them as princes he thought St. Peter's money and the pontifi- cal estates were not enough? Many still more strik- ing scandals might be quoted, but it is so repugnant to lower oneself to such polemics, especially when the foregoing is more than sufficient to prove again how calamitous is the temporal power, and how ridiculous it is to use certain arguments, under cover of ap- parent candor and simplicity. Such proceedings ex- pose one to universal mockery. Let us now hear the arguments alleged in favor of temporal power. The Pope, says Cardinal Gibbons, 31 must be free to receive his faithful ; he must be free to communicate with them: this is incompatible with the Pope being the subject of another power, there- fore he must be king. Let us examine the efficacy of these two arguments. We are dealing with a theoretical question, not with a practical one, and we must look to history for an answer. If the argument were true for the future, it must have been true in the past. If in the past it was not sufficient, we must not invoke it under equal or worse conditions, nor must we invoke it as certain for the future. What does history say? That the most degrading slavery for the Church commenced with temporal power. That then less 32 than ever could the Pontiff live con- tented in Rome. That he was expelled and impris- oned on innumerable occasions, on questions arising 81 Read Cardinal Gibbons: Faith of Our Fathers, head, Temporal Power. 33 Read any of the historians above cited. 1 88 ROMAN CATHOLICISM out of his temporal power ; 33 that first the Holy Ro- man Empire, then the most Christian princes of France, again the Catholic kings of Spain, kept him moving from place to place, all on account of the temporal power; and that his much-dreamed-of liber- ty does not show anywhere. 34 If then, in a thousand years we have seen that the temporal power instead of bringing about pontifical liberty rather complicates it, who would venture reasonably to invoke it? If, at the time when emperors and kings gloried in their belief in Christ's religion, the temporal power was a bait to enslave the Pontiff, does Your Eminence be- lieve that he would be left in peace, now that kings and princes take little stock in religious questions? Besides, when the Papacy has had temporal power, it has found it nearly always necessary to ally itself with some particular prince, as history witnesses, 35 and is not this contrary to that liberty and independ- ence so much longed for? If during the glorious time of the American independence the Pope had ap- peared as the ally of England, and had helped her, how would the American Catholics have received his doctrine and his mandates? For the Church, ever since she possessed temporal power, was nearly always allied with some, while she appeared as the enemy of others. 36 Sometimes she appeared allied with the German Empire, and then the Church was looked upon with disfavor by the Italian States; on other occasions she was allied with the latter, and then the disfavor came from Germany. Just as soon as she ss s SB 36 R ea( j t h e same authorities mentioned above. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 189 appeared the friend of France, the Spaniards looked on the Pope as their enemy; and when she appeared friendly to Spain, France ignored the Pope and in- sulted him. We might adduce many other reasons to prove the same thing; but those we have men- tioned are sufficient to proclaim that now in the twen- tieth century neither can the Pope claim any right to temporal dominion, nor should the Church favor his acceptance of it, were it offered to him. CHAPTER XV. NOTES OF THE CHURCH. IN the first chapters of this work, we have shown the way to become acquainted with the doctrines of the Church, and in later chapters we have ex- pounded its organization. We shall now examine the characteristics that should be exhibited by that Church to distinguish it as legitimate and Divine. In our exposition, we shall adopt the Catholic theory. We shall explain those characteristics as Romanism explains them; we shall next apply them to the Ro- man Church, and it will be seen once more that either those attributes are without meaning, or that if they have any, the so-called Protestant sects possess them the same as the Roman Church, and some of them to better advantage and with more reason than Roman- ism. The latter in this matter, adopts a captious mode of arguing, and ambiguous language. It proclaims 1 its notes as it believes to have found them right in the twentieth century, it examines its own present condi- tion, and then, proudly addressing the other Christian groups, says: You are not one like myself, you are not holy as I am; you are not apostolic like me; you are not visible as I am: therefore you are either schismatic or heretical; you are not the true Church, 1 See Bertier : Notes of the Church. Cardinal Vives : Same head. Jaugey: Same head. (190) CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. IQI this I alone can be, I who possess exclusively all the characteristics, all the distinctive notes, and the true ones. We could at once dispute to Romanism the efficacy it attributes to that collection of character- istics chosen by itself as a distinction from the others, and as proclaiming itself true and Divine. We could reply by asking: Where, and in what part of the evangelic or apostolic writings, hast thou found that the Church should possess those visible attributes, and that they should have the importance thou dost assign to them? We have the profound conviction that a discussion based on this ground would leave Roman- ism in a very bad plight. But our procedure will be different; we are going to reply to Romanism: We admit thy characteristic notes as good; we are going to examine thee on those very notes, and if thou dost not appear cloaked in the robes of those fascinating distinctive marks which thou deniest to the others; if thy notes are not fulfilled in thyself except approxi- mately as they are fulfilled in the others ; if this should happen, then thou wouldst have no right to call thy- self the only true one, nor to dub the others with the insulting epithet of false. We will observe in our dis- cussion an inverse order to the one mentioned above. There we begin with unity and end with visibility; here we will begin with visibility and end with unity. Should the Church be visible? The Roman answers, Yes, 2 a large number of Protestants answer, No, 3 3 Consult the authors mentioned, also Hettinger, and Casa- nova's Fundamental Theology : Head, Characteristic Notes of the Church. Hurter, and Perrone : Same head. 8 Read Encyclopedia Britannica : Heads, Calvin, Presbyte- rians, Luther, Lutherans. 14 192 ROMAN CATHOLICISM but if we determine the meaning of the affirmation of the ones, and of the negation of the others, it will be seen that both affirm the same thing: the visibility denied by Protestantism is also denied by Romanism, and the visibility admitted by the former is identical with the latter's, in strict theology. If the ones affirm and the others deny, it is because the question is badly put, and when affirming the Catholics refer to a point different from that denied by the Reformists. Let us analyze that visibility and it will be seen how they agree. Let us ask the Reformists, Why do you deny that the Church is visible? They answer, Because it is the meeting of the elect, and no one knows their number except God. 4 Let us ask the Catholics, Does anyone know the number of the elect, and they also answer, No. 5 Nobody knows them, nobody sees them, therefore both give the same answer. Let us follow this concordant process. Ask a Catholic, What principally constitutes the Church? And he will an- swer you, The soul 6 which lives in the grace and friendship of God, in vivifying union with Christ. Put this question to a Reformist, Of what does the Church principally consist ? And he will answer you 7 the same: In living within the restoration produced by Christ and incorporated with Him by justification. Upon these two affirmations, ask from both, Is the Church visible? and you will hear with pleased aston- ishment both the Roman and the Protestant answer 4 See Encyclopedia Britannica under heads mentioned. B Consult any Roman theologians mentioned above, under head : Number of the Predestinated. 6 Same Catholic authors, heads, Soul, and Church. 7 See Encyclopedia Britannica : Heads, Luther, and Calvin. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 193 with one mind that it is not. 8 The Roman says that nobody knows or sees the number of the elect; no- body knows or sees what principally constitutes the Church, the grace and the union with Christ ; because nobody can affirm without incurring heresy whether it is odious or lovable. Then to what is visibility re- duced ? Why, answers Romanism, it becomes reduced to an outward manifestation of faith and to the re- ception of the sacraments. Ask a Reformist to define the Church 9 and you will observe with pleased sur- prise that his definition agrees with the visibility claimed by the Catholic. Let it not be said that the Catholic adds, "and obedience to the Pope," because he answers this, when he is asked about the constitu- tion of the Church, not when speaking of its visi- bility ; 10 for he knows, if he is well read, that many times, and during long years it has not been known which of the many anti-popes was the legitimate one, and, as in the present and in coming centuries the same thing may happen as in the past, he has to limit his visibility to the same thing defined by Protestant- ism about the Church. You see then that while one denies and the other affirms, both, when properly questioned, confess belief in the same truth. On the other hand although this question is theological, the Roman does not look upon it as dogmatic. If he should maintain that the Church is not visible, he 8 See Catholic theologians before mentioned, head, Grace. * See any of the definitions of the Reformed Churches, espe- cially of the Anglican Methodists and Episcopalians. 10 See Catholic authors already mentioned under Definition of the Church. 194 ROMAN CATHOLICISM would not be guilty of heresy, 11 since this doctrine has not been defined as dogmatic. It does not make, therefore, a marked line of separation between Protestants and Romans: consequently, in accordance with the principles previously laid down, we must not delay longer on this question. There is another note, Apostolicity. This, according to some Roman theologians, covers two things: that the doctrine of the apostles is taught, and that the sacerdotal and episcopal orders come without interruption from the apostles. 12 In the chapters referring to the Pope, and to the Bible, we have seen that Romanism is already getting away from the apostolic doctrine; we shall see the same thing in speaking of many sacraments and of many Roman precepts. Just now we shall deal only with the second proposition, that of apos- tolic succession. We have never been able to understand the efficacy attributed by Romanism to this characteristic note, because if it were as great as they claim, instead of helping them it would go against them, and be in favor of the Oriental Church. Which is the only apostolic Church that according to tradition conserves Romanism ? Rome alone. The Orientals keep a large number : 13 Jerusalem, Antioch, Ephesus, Samaria, Athens, etc., etc. Is apostolic succession as important as you say ? In that case, capitulate before the Greek u See Catholic authors already mentioned under Visibility of the Church. 13 See Catholic authors already mentioned under Apostolic- ity, and consult also Schouppe and Casanova. 13 Consult the historians : Baronio, Rohrbacher, Hergen- rother, Natal Alexander and Rivas : About the Apostles. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 195 Church. You have only one Church, while the Greeks possess them without number; you possess your or- ders as coming from Peter and Paul, and they pos- sess theirs as coming from Peter, Paul, St. James, St. John, etc., etc. Is that characteristic a token of security and certainty? Then, why do you condemn the Greek Church? Is not that characteristic a token that the Greek Church is legitimate and true? In that case it helps you less. If apostolic succession from the Twelve is not enough, according to you, for the Greek Church to call itself apostolic, how can the succession from two out of twelve be suffi- cient for you to contentedly call yourselves apostolic? Is not the whole larger than a part? Do you not realize that to exaggerate these things is to uncover your weak point, and to prove that the schismatics are more a true Church than yourselves? But let us put aside not only the reasons of the Romanists which we have shown not to have any foundation, but also even the most insignificant pretext. Say they: our orders come to us from Peter and Paul by an un- broken chain, therefore they are apostolic. I do not suppose there is any Catholic so simple, nor so illiter- ate, as to believe that it is the apostles in person who at the present time ordain and consecrate, therefore those words mean that, now nearly one thousand nine hundred years ago, the apostles ordained their disciples, and these their successors, and so on till Pius X. Now, then, who sent the missionaries to the nations that are at present separated from Rome? The bishops, the apostles' successors. Who ordained them? The episcopate, successor to the apostles. 196 ROMAN CATHOLICISM Therefore on this side the linking takes place in an identical manner. The ones are as apostolic .as the others. Perhaps some inveterate Romanist may say: But according to a bull of Leo XIII 14 priestly orders are null among Protestants, because there was an in- terruption later. In the first place it may be answered that the document is not infallible, even for Catholics, it is simply another opinion in the matter, it is the testimony of a doctor in theology, that may be worth something according to the weight of the reasons al- leged, and no more. Without claiming by our hypo- thetical affirmation, to deaden in any way the ordina- tion of Protestants, we will assume the Romanists' reason to be good, and we will ask them this : Then, according to your doctrine, if a Greek or Roman bishop who suffered no interruption ordains the Protestants a second time, would the latter become as apostolic as yourselves? In that case strange is the note you invoke to declare yourselves sole and true, when at any moment they fancy they can prove to you that, even on the face of your own doctrine, they are equally apostolic with you. But some one may reply: but from the moment there was an inter- ruption, there was an apostolic break, impossible to repair. Misfortune seems to follow in the wake of Romanism in choosing its objections. Then during the schisms that at one time or another lasted one hundred years, what became of your apostolic tradi- tion? If all the Popes ordained, which among them was the legitimate successor of the apostles? If the ones excommunicated the others which of them was "Leo XIII: Encyclical on Protestant Orders. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 197 the mysterious ring that linked with Peter? And when the Council of Constance removes them all, which was the link that continued the chain? There- fore if those interruptions did not destroy your apos- tolicity, how are we to suppose that it is destroyed in the others? But why tarry over a question that in substance can mean nothing- to them, since it exists more nearly without interruption in the Churches that Romanism confesses not to be the true ones? There- fore according to the Roman doctrine, the question of apostolicity is like Bernard's sword, that neither pricks nor cuts : it is a scarecrow to frighten the un- wary and fascinate old women. But for anyone ac- quainted with ecclesiastical history, it is an amphi- bology without sense. Let us see if they are more fortunate in catholicity. Here Romanism does look happy, just like a child wearing new shoes. It examines its latest statistics, consults maps, and on seeing that its followers are reckoned by the hundreds of millions ; on considering that its missionaries are traveling over all the seas, and that its priests are celebrating their high functions in all parts of the world, filled with arrogant satis- faction it exclaims : You see that I am Catholic, that is to say universal; you see how my doctrine is professed by the subjects of every nation, by the people of every race. Roman theologians, we have agreed that catholicity is a distinguishing note of the Church, and not alone in the twentieth century, but also in the first centuries. Are we to believe that in the first centuries you had ministers in China, in India and in Japan? Are we to believe that your famous 198 ROMAN CATHOLICISM missionaries, before the discovery of America, had already evangelized it? Are we to believe that Oceania was already your patrimony before it be- longed to England? Here is the captious way the Romanist answers : Ah ! you are a set of ignorants ; 15 my catholicity in strict theology does not mean that ever since the first centuries my religion was preached all over the world, but that my doctrine is of so ex- pansive a nature that it possesses efficacy and poten- tiality to diffuse and spread itself everywhere. An admirable deduction ! A portentous discovery ! Then that prerogative has made a fine show! If by cath- olicity we are to understand that you are in power and possess the necessary efficacy to have your dogma and your morals believed and practised all over the world, you may take that characteristic off your standard v as a distinctive mark, because any congre- gation, even any secret society, like Free Masonry for instance, possesses that potentiality and efficacy. Protestantism is of yesterday compared with your an- tiquity, but it has translated the Bible into more lan- guages than you have. It reckons scarcely a few centuries of existence, as a separate organization, yet it has missionaries and churches in almost every place where you have them. That is to say, in these hun- dred years it has covered the road that it has taken you the trifle of twenty centuries to cover. Therefore the effectiveness and its probability have turned out to be more energetic and far-reaching than yours. They therefore also show themselves more Catholic thai? 15 See Hettinger, and Casanova under head, Catholicity Jaugey: Same head. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 199 you. To be quite frank, it becomes wearisome arid dull to speak on such empty nonsense. Let us close this insipid question by proclaiming that visibility, in- voked by Romanism as a distinctive mark of the true Church, does not help in any way, because in strict theology its visibility is identical with the Protestant visibility; that the other note dubbed apostolicity, if it proves anything, should prove, not that they are the true Church, but . that the Orientals are such ; that catholicity instead of being the exclusive mark of Ro- manism is an attribute general to all assemblies of honest men, professing a doctrine and understanding that its diffusion is for the good of mankind. It re- sults, then, that such notes do not in any way prove that Romanism is the true Church. We have only two notes left, sanctity and unity. These are well worthy of serious treatment and for that reason we will devote to them the following two chapters. CHAPTER XVI. SANCTITY OF THE ROMAN CHURCH. THIS is one of the prerogatives that the Roman Church invokes with greater show of truth than any other. With what an innocent satisfaction it contemplates its churches, overflowing with saints! With what triumphant cheerfulness it acknowledges its flock of holy men, and proudly exclaims: There you have our people, our family, there you have our order! What sect can boast of evangelical apostles like the seraph from Alverna, St. Francis of Assisi? What religious congregation can present such meek and penitent prelates as Charles Borromeo, or as the wise and sweet Francis of Sales? What Christian profession can exhibit men as illustrious and quiet as St. Alfonso Ma. de Ligorio, and a St. Philip de Neri ? * In what other group of Christians take place the marvels and divine gifts that each century, each season and every day we see in the great Roman community? On the other hand, there is no grant so captivating and sweet as this one, nor one more in- tensely seductive than this sublime prerogative. It might be said, that ninety per cent of the Protestants recently converted to Roman Catholicism have been 1 See Jaugey : Head, Sanctity of the Church. See same text in Hettinger's and Casanova's Fundamental Theologies. Also same text in Hurter's and Father Fernandez' Dogmatic Theologies. (200) CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 2OI dazzled into conversion by that charming ornament. Read the 2 writings of the two illustrious Protest- ants, Cardinal Newman and Father Faber, at the time of their conversion, and also of the three important groups recently converted here in North America, and it will be seen that in reality what most impresses and moves them is the so-called sanctity which they believe glitters in the Roman Church. We can assert that what principally induced us to write this short work was our desire to clear up this view. It was to sound a cry of warning to the Protestants, not to be misled by such fleeting gleams nor take for genuine, divine light that which is only a mere will-o'-the-wisp, and which, moth-like, perishes by being burned in its false blaze. Here more than in any other discussion we shall endeavor to take our stand on the most genuine Romanist doctrine ; here with greater severity than anywhere else, will we draw aside that halluci- nating curtain to enable the Protestant to realize the sad and degrading littleness of the sanctity -in which the Roman Church lives. We feel sure that the kind reader who peruses this work will be horrified and un- willing to enter a society in which, if anything appears true according to Romanism, it is that damnation and hell are the final end of the Christian people. We feel certain that the most decisive argument concerning the error in which Romanism lives and into which it has plunged its followers, is to invoke and falsely to 2 Read the life of Father Faber ; also the writings of Car- dinal Newman immediately before, and after his conversion. Letters from the Celibate Congregation converted this year to Catholicism. Letter signed by some Episcopalian ministers, on becoming converted to Catholicism, this year at Baltimore. 2O2 ROMAN CATHOLICISM assume a sanctity that does not exist except in the most rare and questionable cases, while the masses and the large majority of Roman Christians, if their doctrine is true, live in a state of damnation and are manifestly wicked. There is no point on which the harsh language of Christ can be better applied to Ro- manism than this specious question of sanctity, when He said, speaking of the Pharisees: "Whited sepul- chres without, but within, bones, decomposition and corruption." 3 Fear not, most excellent Cardinal Gib- bons, that in order to demonstrate our thesis we may have to descend to the mud of scandal. Our aim is to write a serious work, and we wish to keep within the august serenity of ideas and the honest field of reason. And pray do not believe that we should be lacking in abundant and trustworthy material if we wished for any. Your Eminence, who knows the inside of the Church, will be able to determine whether I, who have acted as apostolic missionary during many years, who have been judge on ecclesi- astical questions, instructing counsel in numerous sensational ecclesiastical trials, visiting clergyman of various convents of friars and nuns, who have pre- pared for spiritual exercise some two thousand clerics, many prebendaries and some bishops Your Emi- nence, I repeat, who must know the ins and outs of the Church, will be able to deduce whether or not I possess an intimate acquaintance with the Roman conscience and its collective form, whether or not I know of scandals to bring the blush to the face of the greatest libertine, and crimes enough to write a book 3 Matt, xxiii. 27. Luke xi. 44. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 203 as entertaining and voluminous as the work of the famous observer and police chief of Paris, Goron! Your modest eyes, unaccustomed to read about the celibacy of the Popes, and your chaste ears, accus- tomed to hear that they had neither sons nor nephews, will have no reproach to address to me. 4 I will apply to your theology, to your morals, to your statistics, to substantiate my thesis. To him who came away from his own home, where he could float on plenty, but now lives almost in penury, who has scorned lucrative ecclesiastical offices in Spain and in America and would prefer hard manual labor, and the scanti- ness of poverty rather than betray his loyalty to his conscience, the role of scandalous libeler would be most ill-fitting even though he could prove the scan- dal. I live very far apart from Roman fanaticism and from the calumnies of many sects ; my ambition is to proclaim the truth at any cost; my aim is to find out if it be possible to bring about harmony and peace among the numerous Christian congregations, depriv- ing Romanism of its inveterate haughtiness and its traditional hypocrisies; and the final result will be to say to the crowd of European clergymen that I have next to me, the famous words of Melchior Cano : 5 "Curavimus Babylonem et non est sanata, derelin- quemus earn" (We cured Babylon but she did not heal, let us give her up). Let us abandon her and endeavor to join our brethren to fight the big battle against Romanism; and if as I hope, the Reformists * Cardinal Gibbons : Chapter on Temporal Power of thp Popes. e MS. report of Melchior Cano: Preserved in the National Library at Madrid, under heads: MS. referring to Philip II. 2O4 ROMAN CATHOLICISM receive my words in all sincerity and sympathy, then Your Eminence will see how my voice, instead of preaching in a desert, will be the voice to call in hun- dreds, and probably thousands, who are anxiously waiting for one courageously to raise high the stand- ard, to surround and follow him. 6 Let us, then, take up our subject. The Roman doctrine divides the Church into two groups, the body and the soul. 7 By the body of the Church is meant those who having once entered it through baptism, have not left it on account of any anathema or notorious heresy. It calls the soul of the Church, those who live in a state of grace, and who being free of mortal sin, are clothed in supernatural charity. It is evident that when the Church speaks of sanctity, it refers to the latter and not to the former. In the Roman doctrine anyone living in mortal sin is a dead member, and everything he does while in that lamentable condition is entirely useless in the eyes of heaven. Furthermore, all his good deeds performed before sinning die with his sin and are lost, with only this difference, that whatever good he did before sinning and lost with the sin, is not entirely dead but only dulled, and can revive (we trust the reader will pardon the expression, which is classical within Romanism), whereas what is done while in sin, however great, remains dead for ever. 6 Read the works of the famous Catholic priest Pey Ordeix, and it will be seen that in Spain the number of secular and regular clergymen who are anxious to leave Romanism is very large. 7 Consult the following theologians : Perrone, Hurter, Het- tinger, Casanova, Bertier, Schouppe, Cardinal Vives, under text, Body and Soul of the Church. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 2O5 Let us illustrate this doctrine by a few examples. 8 Suppose a most austere man, having spent all his life in the most complete innocence, who has done much penance, but who in the last years of his life takes a fancy to eat meat during one of the days of vigil, or fasting, imposed by the Church. Well, that man lost all he did. If that man does not confess, and is not absolved of his sin, he will be as much damned as a man who spent all his life steeped in vice. Nothing would it avail him to have passed many years in angel-like innocence; his long fasts will not save him, nor his trying privations, however keen and numerous. One single mouthful of meat on days prescribed by the Church as fasting days effaces all, kills every- thing, leaves him in the lamentable situation of a reprobate. Take another case : if one fails to observe any of the countless minutiae ordered by the Church, though he gives alms liberally to the poor, dresses in haircloth, shuns the world, and shuts himself up in the most isolated deserts ; or devotes his life to the wellbeing of mankind, either attending to the sick in hospitals, or teaching it avails him nothing. Do- you think it would help him in any way? Well, in Catholic theology he has done nothing, absolutely nothing, neither toward reaching heaven nor to free himself from hell. 9 All his deeds are entirely fruit- less, entirely dead, in the supernatural order. So as to understand the gravity of these assertions, and 8 Read any of the innumerable works on Catholic Morals, under Mortal Sin. 8 See Gury : Head, Moral Cases, and the works on Morals by Elbel and Esporer: Head, Practical Cases of Mortal Sin. 2O6 ROMAN CATHOLICISM the deplorable condition in which the Roman Catho- lic remains, as regards the Protestant, it is necessary to go over, if only slightly, the almost countless ac- cumulation of precepts that Romanism has added to those imposed by the Gospels. The Roman Catholic has so many individuals to reckon with, who can fling him to hell with as many injunctions as superior hierarchical officers can dictate. 10 To the truths and precepts of Christ and his Apostles, may be added the so-called commandments of the Church, and the constitutional encyclicals and addresses of the Popes; then comes an endless series of resolutions from the so-called Sacred Congregations ; these are accompan- ied by the dogmatic and moral decrees of the uni- versal councils; and as part of a given diocese, the Church has to obey what the bishop orders in his pastorals, what he prescribes in his synodical laws. 11 And if this were not enough, one must still listen to the moralists, who with a spirit entirely rabbinical and with minutiae of details quite pharisaical, will investi- gate the inmost thought, 12 the slightest emotions, the most innocent social recreations, to find out every- where the cursed germ of sin, the motive, to condemn. But what most appals and degrades the unfortu- nate Catholic people, is the knowledge that all this compels them under penalty of eternal punishment. 10 Consult any of the canonical works under head, Legis- lators and Superiors. On Canonical Law, Bouix may be con- sulted and on Morals, Cardinal Vives. 11 Same authorities. 12 See any of the works on Morals approved by Romanism and their exhaustive exaggeration will become apparent. We recommend especially Concina's Moral Theology. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 2O/ Anyone eating meat on Friday runs the same risk of condemnation 13 as one denying the mystery of the Holy Trinity. He who does not attend mass on days of precept is in the same danger of reproba- tion as if he denied the divinity of Christ. He who reads the Bible translated into his own language is guilty of a mortal sin, 14 that can plunge him into hell just the same as if he had committed the most heinous crime. While speaking of this question we must ask our kind reader to allow us to correct some of Cardinal Gibbons' words. In the chapter quoted in the footnote, 15 this prelate speaks as if all the faith- ful were allowed to read the Bible. We cannot get over your unspeakable simplicity, Cardinal Gibbons. Is Your Eminence unaware of the innumerable pro- hibitions issued by the Roman Pontiffs? Is Your Eminence unaware of the latest rule of the Index published and sanctioned by Leo XIII? Is Your Eminence unaware of rules V, VI, VII and VIII of said Index, 16 by which it allows theologians only to read the Bible? and even these under certain condi- tions? Is not Your Eminence aware that the simple, faithful person who reads a Bible not approved and annotated by the Church commits a grave sin accord- ing to the Roman doctrine? Do the American Catho- lics enjoy, perhaps, some special privilege? If this exists, why does not Your Eminence mention it ? And 18 All the Catholic moralists without exception on Absti- nence. l * By-laws of the Index, promulgated by Leo XIII under the gravest of censures. 15 Cardinal Gibbons : Faith of Our Fathers, chap, viii, espe- cially pages 116 and 117. 111 By-laws of the Index, already mentioned. IS 2O8 ROMAN CATHOLICISM if it does not exist, why does Your Eminence speak in a manner likely to lead the faithful into error, and non-believers into mistakes? But to continue. It has been shown that Roman Catholics, in order to attain their salvation, must ob- serve an almost indefinite ensemble of precepts that the Roman Church has added to the easy, simple and pure morals of Christ. 17 It has also been shown that the Pope over all the Church, the bishops in their respective dioceses, 18 and even the simple su- perior in all his community, and the common abbess among her nuns, are invested with a power to con- demn, similar to that of Christ. They all think themselves authorized to say to poor humanity: If thou dost not obey my commandments, the redemp- tion will not avail thee anything ; if thou dost not ful- fill the smallest of my precepts, the blood of Christ is useless to thee. 19 Can any slavery be more appal- ling? Can any greater aberration be conceived than to suppose that the first puppet can add anything to the divine law of Christ, and frustrate His universal and complete redemption? The Gospels relate that when Christ saw the innovations added to the law by the scribes and Pharisees, and on contemplating that the unfortunate people could not carry so heavy "All the Romanist canonists and moralists without any exception. 18 In Mexico, for instance, the bishopric reproves as a very grave and reserved sin, fathers sending their sons to gov- ernment schools. Read the synodal by-laws of the diocese of Puebla, and Leo Kill's encyclical condemning the non- Catholic schools. 19 Any of the Catholic canonists or moralists before men- tioned. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 209 a load, He turned to them in holy ire and exclaimed: Race of vipers, hypocrites, you have made the ob- servance of my holy law impossible. You wicked men, under cover of your human traditions, you have in- validated the divine law. 20 Anyone reading the Ro- man moral law and familiar with its rabbinical minu- tiae; anyone capable of comparing the teaching of the Synagogue with the teaching of Romanism, will see that Christ's words are applicable to the latter with even greater reason than to the former, and that the deplorable consequences which this has pro- duced are identical in both congregations. As the Israelites did not observe the law because they could not, so in the same way the Catholics do not and cannot observe the laws imposed by Romanism. We are now on the capital point of our discussion, and we beg the reader to examine our reasons with all possible impartiality and seriousness. One of the most fundamental precepts of Roman- ism and one of the practices most indispensable to sanctification and salvation is the annual confession. It may be affirmed according to Romanism that any- one not observing this precept is outside of sanctity, and is in imminent danger of damnation. Now then: what do ecclesiastical statistics say concerning the reception of this sacrament ? 21 We will limit our- selves to Spain, and to two dioceses whose statisti- cal data we take from such a reliable authority as 20 Read Matt. xv. 3-15. Mark vii. i-n. Luke xi. 38, 46. Matt, xxiii. 21 Anyone may consult for pleasure any of the private sta- tistics in the dioceses where they are kept, on this subject. It will be seen that the reality is still sadder. 2IO ROMAN CATHOLICISM Cardinal Sancha, the present Primate of that coun- try; we will add to these data many others belong- ing to many important peoples and dioceses. Let it not be forgotten that Spain is considered as one of the most godly nations on earth. Anyone traveling it from north to south and east to west; anyone counting the number of its convents of nuns and com- munities of friars; anyone contemplating the num- ber of its cathedrals, sumptuous temples, venerable sanctuaries, devout and pious crosses planted in val- leys and on hilltops, in villages, towns, and cities, will understand that the mother of Teresa de Jesus and Ignatius Loyola, Domingo de Guzman and St. Joseph of Calasanze, is not in vain called the pious and fervent Roman. Therefore the statistical data gathered in Spain may be applied to other Latin countries with the certainty that in the latter they will not be found more favorable, but entirely the contrary. Look, then, at the information collected by Cardinal Sancha in Madrid and in Valencia, in which dioceses he was prelate. 22 In Madrid, the number of men who confess annually does not reach five per cent, and in Valencia they do not exceed twelve per cent. Although the north of Spain is somewhat bet- ter than the center and the east, we have against these the south and the west, which are still worse than the east and the center. In some large cities like Barcelona and Alicante the figures are still lower. 23 There are dioceses like Cadiz where the men scarcely ever confess. 24 Comparing and connecting 22 Statistical information by His Eminence Senor Sancha. 2324 Consult the prelates and clergy of the mentioned city. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. .211 all the data and endeavoring to favor rather than to diminish the figures, it may be reckoned that at most ten per cent confess annually. Supposing that they all make good confessions, which, given the numer- ous rules imposed by Romanism, is a moral impossi- bility, 25 we should find that barely ten per cent enter the soul of the Church, if only momentarily, and remain, if but for a few days, in a state of grace and are in a capacity to be sanctified. But as the ma- jority of them, say without exaggeration ninety per cent, will not confess again for another year, and within a few short weeks will have once more in- curred mortal sin, and will be dead members of the Church, we shall be compelled to deduct from that ten per cent living habitually incorporated with Christ and in a state of grace, another nine, who having incurred mortal sin for failing to keep some of the innumerable precepts of the Church have lost their communication with Christ, and their share of the divine grace which is supposed to be deposited in the Church. Anyone having acted as missionary and lenten confessor knows that the data given are rather exaggerated in favor of Romanism, than against it. Taking this broad information as a basis, let us suppose that all the Catholic countries in the 25 Read the numerical and specific distinction of sins, and it will be seen how it is almost morally impossible for the faithful to confess properly. Consult Elbel, and Gury, under Practical Cases, in this matter. From this doctrine it is de- duced that ordinarily speaking Christians not only live in a state of mortal sin, but that the majority of them commit millions of grave sins in the course of the year. Just for pleasure, reckon up on the basis of the Roman doctrine, and it will be seen there is no exaggeration. 212 ROMAN CATHOLICISM world can be equalized to Spain, by which we do not think we do any harm to Romanism, since the majority of nations are in a more deplorable condi- tion. Let us add up the numerous millions of Ro- man Catholics, and let us suppose that they reach two hundred and fifty million, which would be in favor of the number. According to our information and the Roman Morals, two hundred and forty-eight mil- lion five hundred thousand live in a habitual state of reprobation, are dead members of Christ, do not ordinarily share in the gifts of grace. Only one million five hundred thousand live with probabilities, not of extraordinary sanctity, but of probable salva- tion. For the others it is not wise to hope, because according to Roman authorities those who habitu- ally live in sin are certain to be condemned. Is it not then the greatest of sarcasms for the Church to call itself holy? Is it not the greatest falsity to apply to itself the mark of sanctity, when according to its own morals ninety-nine per cent live in a state of condemnation, are members of Satan and future citi- zens of hell? What matters it that now and again there appears an enlightened head noted by his vir- tues, if all around him there exist hundreds of mil- lions of reprobates and future damned ones? Will the sands of Sahara cease to be called arid deserts, though now and again we may meet a small oasis? Can you call a garden flowery in which one million five hundred thousand rose bushes show small buds by the side of two hundred and forty-eight million five hundred thousand decayed and dried-up rose- bushes? Would you call a nation wholesome, where CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 213 side by side with one million five hundred thousand healthy ones there lay devoured by leprosy two hun- dred and forty-eight million five hundred thousand wretches? Would you venture to call a nation civil- ized containing one million five hundred thousand who can read and write and two hundred and forty- eight million five hundred thousand who can neither read nor write, nor are even on the way to learn? And would you dare to call your congregation and Church holy when according to your own doctrine the proportion between good and bad is one million five hundred thousand of the first, against two hun- dred and forty-eight million five hundred thousand of the second? Do you intend to sneer at logic and mankind? Have you lost all points of honor and shame ? Some Roman may perhaps reply : The calculations are badly made: thou speakest of men only, and in the Church there are also women and children among whom the same proportion should not be adopted. We attempt the correction; but even that does not alter thy deplorable and appalling situation. Dost thou, pharisaical Roman, ignore that from twelve on the child, according to thy strict doctrine, ordinarily lives in mortal sin more frequently than mature man? And between that age and his cradle, is his innocence perchance the fruit of thy doctrine? the effect of nature? Are there not also children in other con- gregations innocent and good children according to thy doctrine? Therefore thy correction does not help thee, because thou proclaimest a distinct sanc- tity from that existing in all the other Christian sects, 214 ROMAN CATHOLICISM \ and this is common to all. Let us suppose that through the greater frequency of the sacraments, the proportion is trebled in women. Does that enable thee to modify to any appreciable extent thy scan- dalous and appalling figures? Would the addition of another million five hundred thousand individuals to the figure given destroy the frightful disproportion that should make thee blush if thou hadst any sense of shame in thee ? But let us generalize further. Ac- cording to the Romanist not only those who habitu- ally live in mortal sin, are separated from Christ, but the Greeks and Protestants, the unfaithful and idolaters, all those who do 1 not belong to his con- gregation and Church are on the road to damnation. It is true that some theologians now and then ven- ture timidly to proclaim that good faith may save them; but those who make the assertion surround their statement with so many conditions, and are so reticent, that it may well be affirmed that according to Romanism only from among themselves must come the chosen of heaven. 26 Can a greater mock- ery of Christ's redemption be conceived? So that out of the one thousand four hundred million souls, ap- proximately, that live in the world, about three to four millions only would be saved ! Is not that equal to proclaiming that the coming of Christ has been in- jurious to mankind? Could it not be asserted that in the ancient Synagogue the number of the elected was greater than in the great Christian family? Is not this a diminishing of Christ and a ridicule of His holy work? To proclaim that Christ is God and 20 Bertier, Perrone, Vives : De Vera Religione. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 215 the Son of God, that He descended from heaven and took human nature to save mankind, and to make out later that only your hypocrites and a few saints are saved and that the thousands of millions of the earth's inhabitants must go down to hell, is not that placing Christ's work at the feet of Belial, and pro- claiming that the creation of the world is the great- est mistake, the most awful crime? Even if Ro- manism did not have fifty thousand weak points, would not this affirmation be more than enough to condemn it as absurd and ridiculous? The Roman may argue that if only in friars and monks, clergy- men, bishops and cardinals there exists a number incomparably greater, how can the proportion be so low? Dost not thou grant sanctity even to these? he may say. When we speak of ecclesiastical celibacy, we will adduce sufficient data to qualify the sanc- tity of these venerable heads, and the famous Roman sanctity will appear stained in blacker colors. And if to theological guilt we wished to add social wick- edness, what nations present criminal statistics more appalling than the Latin countries, ordinarily Ro- man Catholic? In what 27 countries does public mo- rality occupy a higher level than among the Saxon peoples, ordinarily Protestant? Whence come the majority of assassins of presidents and kings if not from holy Romanism? What society appears, ac- cording to statistics, involved in revolution and in- capable of self-government, of an honest existence 27 Consult the work recently published by the learned Ital- ian anthropologist and sociologist, Julio Ferri, entitled: De- cadence of the Latin peoples and its causes. 2l6 ROMAN CATHOLICISM or of showing the mutual regard due to others, if not Romanism? In what countries is opposition to the principle of authority proverbial, the same as venality in the administration of justice, and corrup- tion among high officials, if not within Romanism? In what nations can it be almost declared that pub- lic justice is a lie, the law a myth and wealth and nobility synonymous with impurity and looseness, if not in the holy society of Romanism? We should obtain the same result if from theological death, symbolized by sin, and from social wickedness, rep- resented by public insubordination and corruption, we wished to pass on to physical and intellectual mis- ery. What a scandal! What a shame! The Anglo- Saxon people, as we might say, freed themselves only a few centuries ago from the Roman Church, it is scarcely three hundred years since they trod down their degrading tutelage; when they realized this great act, they were, in the eyes of Romanism, in- ferior to us. Let their culture and ours be exam- ined 28 now, their healthiness and mortality, and our healthiness and mortality, their intense progress in all the orders of civilization compared with our frightful decadence. There is only one Latin nation that can with decorum stand side by side with the Anglo-Saxon, and that is France ; but alas ! in that nation, before the Vatican Council, the clergy was the standard-bearer against Vaticanism. It is more than one hundred years that the governments of that nation have been righting hard against the Papacy. It may be said that the profession of Romanism is a 23 The same as the last preceding reference. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. sure stigma of ruin, decadence and death. When we come to the Inquisition and religious liberty, we will expound these opinions. Let us finish, therefore, by declaring that the note of sanctity fits Romanism as the note of civilized nations fits Morocco, as the note of health would fit a lazaretto, and that the Protes- tant who should leave his congregation in search of Roman sanctity, would be as stupid as the American who left his country in search of a greater civiliza- tion, and went to look for it among the Riff tribes, CHAPTER XVII. UNITY IN THE ROMAN CHURCH. THE unity within her fold is the feature on which the Roman Church most insistently prides her- self, in order thereby to reproach the Protestant con- gregation as being false, at the same time proclaim- ing that she is the only true Church. There are no words that rise more frequently to the lips of Ro- manists than the famous sentence of the great Bos- suet, who, speaking of Protestantism, said: "You change, therefore you are not the truth, because a truth is one and immutable." * How self-complacently Romanism looks upon its pretended unity, while eyeing askance what it arro- gantly terms the variations and subdivisions in the Protestant Church. 2 The Romanist speaks here as if his victory were assured, entire, and complete. There is no Roman theologian who does not point to this unity as the touchstone whereby to distinguish the false from the true. 3 The Romanists are so com- pletely fascinated by the splendors of their pretended unity, that they believe themselves to be a kind of angelic choir, which has always sung the same 1 Bossuet : History of Protestant Changes. 3 Jaugey : Apologetic Dictionary of Faith, head, Notes of the Church. Cardinal Gibbons : Unity of the Church. Per- rone, Schouppe, Bertier, etc., etc. : Same head. * Hettinger, Casanova : Fundamental Theology : Unity of the Church, (218) CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 21$ praises to the Almighty, from Adam to the patriarchs, from the patriarchs to Moses, from Moses to the Synagogue, from the Synagogue to Christ, from Christ to the feudal castles, and from the feudal cas- tles to Pius X. 4 The infatuation of victory blinds them so that they do not see themselves as they ac- tually are. Ignoring history, they do not understand that that which they now call unity, was in former times a state of chaos and diversity ; 5 that their doc- trine, far from having been an unbroken, harmoni- ous symphony, so to speak, has been, is now, and will continue to be, a medley of discordant and inhar- monious notes; that their so highly vaunted preroga- tive is neither more nor less than the consummation of a law of sociology and evolution which has found its fulfillment within Romanism, 6 as it is fulfilled in every social organism; with the exception that Ro- manism, with its exaggerations, has falsified and per- verted a movement, which if rightly directed would have been the fruitful source of true progress, the perdurable basis for a true Christian federation. Let us now consider the question more closely. If, given the Roman doctrines, you understand by unity the absorbing centralism of the Vatican, then we will let you enjoy this precious gift; keep it for yourself, for sooner or later it will end with you. As, for the Romanists, 7 God contains in an eminent * Balmes : Protestantism Compared with Catholicism. Au- gusto Nicolas : Study on Christianism. 6 History of the Church, by Eusebius. Ideas of the early centuries, by Rivas. Edw. Gibbon: Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, book i, last chapter. 7 Jaugey: Head, Pope and Church. 220 ROMAN CATHOLICISM degree all things within himself, and as Christ is the entire Redemption, so the Papacy contains in an emi- nent degree the Church, and is, in case of necessity, the entire Church. Such a unity, far from being recommendable, is pernicious and retrogressive. 8 As in the Roman empire one of the principal causes of its dissolution and downfall was imperial centralism; as in the great European monarchies, Spain and France, decadence was chiefly brought about by kings like Louis XIV, who went so far as to say, "I am the state," and Philip II, who set aside laws so decen- tralizing as those of Aragon; therefore centralization as found in the Roman Church, is the sign of an im- pending downfall. We, for our part, prefer a union in decentraliza- tion as found in the United States of America, a union which, while opposing undue disintegration, lays no hands on the prerogatives peculiar to each one of the states ; a union as we find it in the apostolic college, 9 where the members were free to believe each in his own way, in that which had not been laid down by Christ, 10 although they all believed in the same Christ and in the same Gospel; a union like that which was observed in the primitive apostolic churches: though they all formed one Church, as re- gards the body of the doctrine, they had, neverthe- less, each a certain sovereignty, and were in a sense like a federation. 11 8 History of Spain under Philip IT, by La Fuente. * Acts of the Apostles, especially chapter xv. 10 St. Paul's Epistles, especially that to the Galatians. 11 Epistles of St. Ignatius Martyr. Fleury: History of the Church in the Early Centuries. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 221 And now see how the first equivocation of Roman- ism appears. Contemplating itself in this our twen- tieth century, seeing itself in possession of a body of doctrines firmly welded together, a well defined hier- archy, a multitude of conclusions and the fruit of time and experience; forgetting the turbulent days of its infancy, the changes through which it passed in its childhood, the extravagances of its youth, and utterly regardless of the laws of history, it derides reformationism because it sees therein precisely the same phenomena which accompanied a historical evo- lution. Protestantism may ask, in order to dampen the ju- bilation with which Romanism is filled over its vaunt- ed unity: Did you possess the body of formulated doctrines as you have it now, in the first centuries of your existence ? 12 Was your unity established and confirmed in those centuries in which saints like St. Irenaeus believed, and died believing, in the millen- nium? Was your unity of doctrine clearly defined in those centuries when your masters and wise men were Clement of Alexandria, Origen and Tertullian, 13 whom you subsequently condemned? Was your de- lightful unity defined and established in that epoch when saints were warring with saints, and when St. Jerome said that the Catholic world was astonished to see itself Arian? Did your unity appear as com- plete as now in those days when Polycarp and Cyp- 12 History of the Church, by Eusebius. 13 Read the historians Hergenrother, Baronio, Rohrbacher, etc., etc., on Origen and Tertullian. 222 ROMAN CATHOLICISM rian resisted their Popes, the first courteously and the other rudely, but both with freedom and energy ? 14 If, then, you required centuries and centuries, in order to arrive where you stand now, why do you forget your own history, demanding that Protestant- ism shall be undivided when in the first centuries you were rent by as many doubts and divisions as we show now? When Protestantism shall have lived as many centuries as you have, it is very possible that we shall have the true Christian unity, without hav- ing arrived at your Caesaristic centralism. From this evidence cannot Protestantism with equal grace and force ask Romanism the famous Bossuetian question, "Have you not changed? therefore you are not the truth, because the truth is one and immutable." Protestantism is all the more justified in so speak- ing, if we remember that in history the great unified bodies appear subsequent to the partial disinte- grations. 15 The great monarchies, centers of national unity, were founded upon feudalism, the basis of na- tional disintegration. The beginning of unity fol- lowed as a necessary social reaction upon the exag- gerated defects of division. We are firmly convinced that sooner or later all the Christian congregations will become united in the evolution of Protestantism. The important point here is that when this concen- trative movement begins, Protestantism should be careful not to imitate the absorbing centralization 14 Read the historians mentioned, on the dispute on the cele- bration of Easter etc., between St. Polycarp and the Roman Pope, and disputes between St. Cyprian and Pope St. Stephen. 15 Consult any well-known European historian on the forma- tion of Monarchies. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 223 of the Roman Church, but should seek its inspiration in the grand example of the American social order. And here is one of the reasons that upset the entire prestige of the great Roman unity. It is worth the trouble that we examine it closely, for it is one of the points on which Romanism pretends to found its le- gitimacy, and to justify its condemnation of Reform- ism. And in order to make our point clearer we shall examine the insidious conduct of Romanism. Romanism, when addressing those that it calls sects, refers to its unity as a thing not only complete and consummated, but also indispensable for sal- vation. Such is the language it uses with outsiders ; but, as we shall see, its speech is entirely different when addressing those within the fold. In order to define our thought more clearly in regard to this all-important question, we shall refer to two histori- cal examples, both recent and well-known. Before the Council of the Vatican, Gallicanism had a legiti- mate existence of its own. 1G Who would dare to con- demn such eminent men as Bossuet, Fenelon, Massil- lon, Dupanloup and others? Yet these men did not believe in the Roman unity as it is laid down by the Council of the Vatican. If the unity had been com- plete and necessary for salvation, such as the Church proclaims it in the twentieth century, these men, and with them all France, would have been living with- out the Church, and would have condemned them- selves. Who would dare to say that they did ? Hence 18 Read the work attributed to Bossuet, Chapters on Decla- ration of the French Church; also Fleury: History of the Church. 16 224 ROMAN CATHOLICISM this unity is neither a complete thing nor is it nec- essary, as Romanism holds it to be. Take the other instance. Pius X has just condemned Modernism. This condemnation extends to a number of doctrinal conclusions which were believed by men eminent in letters and high dignitaries of the Church. 17 It is enough to mention only one, Cardinal Newman,, who held such divergent views, according to his opponents. Shall we say that all these writers and pious men were living without the Church? Far from it; it would be extreme and irrational. The only thing we can say in the face of these facts, is that the unity of the Church is an edifice in construction and not a finished product. There- fore the Roman Church, if she were not so proud, should say at any given date of history: This is my unity at the present moment, but who knows if to- morrow I shall not be obliged to condemn many of the opinions now held by my children, in which I find at this moment nothing reprehensible? Hence unity is a variable thing, which increases and dimin- ishes in the course of time. Perhaps the Romanist does not find the word "diminishes" logical but we shall demonstrate that it is legitimate. The Romanist has a body of doctrine which is com- posed of tenets that are definitely defined as dogmas, and others which, although not defined, yet form a part of its unity, if they are universally taught and 17 Petitions of many Italian clergymen to Piux X relating to Modernism. Same petitions translated into English and presented to the same Pope by many English Catholic clergy. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 225 believed by all the Romanists collectively. 18 If we can show that many of these tenets, after having been professed by the entire Roman congregation as doc- trines of the Church, ceased to be believed, it could be said with the strictest logic that the object of the unity was diminished. Many facts could be cited in support of this contention, but we confine ourselves to three concrete instances : one Biblical, one canoni- cal and the third moral. In the Middle Ages, 10 and at the time of Peter the Lombard, St. Thomas, Bonaventure and Scotus, any person who did not believe that the first chapter of Genesis recorded a historical fact, and that when God spoke of days, He meant a period of twenty-four hours, would have departed from the unity of the doctrine. And the same may be said as regards the Deluge, the Tower of Babel and other Bible stories. Yet these tenets 20 did not pertain to the unity of the Church, and now most, if not all, of the theolo- gians interpret them differently from the ancients. Let us now take the second example. Anyone who in the beginning of the Middle Ages did not believe that the Pope had absolute and direct power over the princes, would have departed from the unity of the doctrine. 21 Yet Bellarmine, in the 18 Bertier, Cardinal Vives : Theology, head, Of the doctrine of the Church. Hurter, Schouppe : Same head. 19 Read any of the expositions by reputed authors of those times, especially St. Thomas and St. Bonaventure. " Consult Genesis, by the most learned Dominican, Father Arintero, where he expounds the numerous modern theories and speaks on the ancient ones. 21 Consult on this point St. Thomas and St. Bonaventure. 226 ROMAN CATHOLICISM sixteenth century ~ 2 dared to deny this direct power ; and although his work gave rise to factions and was considered scandalous because it attacked beliefs and affirmations 'then current, yet his opinion gradually gained ground and is now one of the most current among the canonists. 23 And finally, the third instance: it was held to be an axiom of morals that every person who had to partake daily of the communion should abstain from venial sins, it being considered disrespectful to the sac- raments that persons ordinarily indulging in certain venial sins should have permission to continue their practices during that period. A glance at the classi- cal codes of ethics of Romanism, 24 will show that this was a doctrine of the universal Roman Church. But according to the latest decrees of Pope Pius X on frequent communion, there is now no obligation either to believe in or to practice this doctrine. 25 Thousands of other instances like these might be cited in the course of the evolution of the doctrines of the Church. There is no doubt that now the principle of unity is applied more strictly than formerly, for the Roman of the twentieth century, who is obliged to believe in the Immaculate Conception, the infallibility 88 Cardinal Bellarmine : Of the Pope. 28 Bouix : Of the Pope. He expounds the ancient and mod- ern theories concerning the power of the Pope. 84 Consult Benedict XIV, St. Alfonso Ma. de Ligorio, Bil- luart, Elbel, Esporer, etc., etc. : On Frequent Communion. a Documents emanating from the Sacred Congregation and approved by Piux X: On Frequent Communion; The Com- munion of Children and of the Sick. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 22/ of the Pope, and other dogmas that were disputable and attacked in the nineteenth century. 26 It has therefore been sufficiently demonstrated that the unity proclaimed by Romanism is not a perma- nent and complete entity, but an entity in the proc- ess of construction, which is increased or diminished. And we have thereby demolished its chief affirmation, that it is now what it always has been, and that it will be to-morrow what it was yesterday, and is now. And its grandeur based on this identity of perma- nence will vanish like a mist. For this vaunted unity is neither more nor less than a step in constructive evolution, analogous to that which is seen in every Christian congregation ; with this sole difference, that Romanism is already ancient and stands with the fruits of an experience of two thousand years behind it, which has, however, not always gone to the mark; while Protestantism still in the enjoyment of evan- gelic and apostolic liberty, stands in the midst of con- genial and vital expansions of a youth brimful with life. We might end our chapter here, since according to the logic of theology, if the unity is not perma- nent and identical with itself, it cannot prove any- thing in favor of Romanism, or against Protestant- ism. But we shall further upset, not some reasons, since none of these can any longer be maintained, but every argument brought forward by Romanism. We shall do with Romanism what the eminent and 2 * Consult any Dominican writer on the first, and any French author on the second, of the beginning of last century. 228 ROMAN CATHOLICISM learned Father Mir did with Jesuitism ; 27 prove that it is Romanism within, and a turning about, outside. The material here is most abundant, but we shall con- fine ourselves to the chief point, and then the reader may see for himself that the so-called unity is the most exceeding of falsehoods, and the most crafty of hy- pocrisies. Let us glance briefly at the Roman phil- osophy, its dogmatic theology and code of ethics, its canonical law, and its sacred books, and it will ap- pear as clear as daylight that its specious unity shines by its absence. Let us begin with the first. 28 Philosophy is a body of affirmations on the universe, man and God. Let us see what Romanism believes on these three points and what the nature of its be- lief is. Can the universe be eternal? Yes, say the Thomists. 29 No, reply the Scotists, scandalized. 30 Don't you see, say the Thomists, that God is eternal and God could create from the time that he was, that is to say, from eternity? Don't you see, argue the Scotists, that with such affirmations you yield ground to materialism, and cut the support from under the demonstration of a personal God ? The Church hears these polemics, and is silent. First break in the unity ! What are the constitutive elements of bodies? 37 The work of this learned Jesuit is entitled, Jesuitismo por Dentro 6 tin Barrido hacia Fuera (Jesuitism at Home, or A Cleaning Out). 28 For the benefit of readers, it may be said that the follow- ers of the School of St. Thomas, are called "Thomists," and those of the School of Franciscans and others are known as "Scotists." 29 Cardinals Zigliara and Gonzalez : Cosmology : Metaphys- ical Studies on St. Thomas by the latter. 30 Duppascheir and Frassen: Cosmology. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 229 Scholasticism replies : 31 matter first, and then sub- stantial form. Tongiorgi, 32 Palmieri, and with them countless number of Romanist philosophers reply: atoms of distinct shapes and dimensions. Don't you see, says scholasticism, that with this view you resus- citate the doctrines of Epicurus and Democritus, and yield ground to degrading materialism? Don't you see, reply the others, that without this theory the Catholic doctrine cannot be harmonized with the ap- proved conclusions of modern chemistry? The Church hears them and is silent, and we have the second break in the unity. We come upon the same controversies, as regards the principle of individualization, 33 the concept of extension, and so forth, 34 all questions in which both parties hurl at each other the gentle epithet of here- tic. 35 But let us pass on to the next point. What is the single form of man? The rational soul, says Thomism. 36 Scotism replies, the corporeal form first, and then the rational soul. 37 Don't you see, argues Thomism, that this theory upsets the unity of man? Don't you see, replies Scotism, that your view con- tradicts the discoveries of the science of biology ? The 81 Constitution of the Bodies : Cosmology, by Cardinals Zigliara and Gonzalez. 32 Constitution of the Bodies : Cosmology by Tongiorgi and Palmieri. 83 The Thomist school against the Scotist on these questions. 84 The Cartesian school denies extension. M Cardinal Gonzalez and others affirm the facts about Car- tesianism, which denies extension as an essential property of bodies. 38 Cardinals Zigliara and Gonzalez : Man's Form. 37 Frassen and Duppascheir : Bodily Form, 230 ROMAN CATHOLICISM Church hears them and is silent, and the confusion increases. What constitutes the independent personality of man? All the schools reply, that which is presup- posed, or the hypostasis. But is this hypostasis some- thing positive, or is it purely negative? It is some- thing positive, 38 cry the Thomists at the top of their voices. That cannot be, the Scotists reply furiously. Don't you see that negation cannot produce anything ? say the Thomists. But don't you see, that if the thing presupposed is something positive, reply the Scotists, Christ was not a complete man, like the rest of mankind, because He lacked one perfection, every time that the presupposition of human was not given to him ? Here again they hand out to each other the Christian epithet of heretic, and the Church hears them, and is silent, and the confusion continues to increase. 39 We might add the intricate questions of the soul and its attributes, 40 which some differentiate, while others regard it as one and the same thing, and they caress each other's ears with such affectionate words as: You are pantheists, and, You are rationalists. Let us end the philosophical part of the discussion with the following question: What is the metaphysi- cal constitutive element of God? The Thomists say, Trassen and Duppascheir: About Hypostasis. '""The Scotists are wont to affirm the Thomists' theory heretical, because the latter deny something to Christ. '"Consult both the Dominican and the Scotist authors, be- cause the first assume a real distinction, and the second only a formal one. Here Cardinal Gonzalez qualifies the Scotist doctrine as Pantheistic. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 23! perfect intelligence. That is not so, reply the Scot- ists, it is the quality of existing of Himself. Can God be demonstrated by reason, without recourse to faith? Yes, says Thomism. 41 No, replies Scotism. 42 And in the midst of this idle talk they bandy about the epithets atheist, rationalist, to the point of ex- haustion. .We might add a whole string of other plihosophical theses, in the discussion of which the in- ternal dissensions of Romanism are entirely mani- fest ; but the examples cited above are more than suf- ficient to show, that if philosophy consists in defining the three terms, Universe, Man and God, and there be such discrepancies in the answers of the Roman- ists, then they do not possess a unified philosophy. The Church hears and is silent. The break in unity is complete. Let us pass now to dogmatic theology. How many entities are there in the mystery of the Holy Trinity ? Four, say Suarez 43 and some other theologians ; three, say Thomism 44 and Scotism. Don't you see, say the first, that if you do not sup- pose that the Divine Essence has an existence apart, you cannot distinguish the reality of the persons? Don't you see, reply the second, that to admit four entities is almost equal to saying that there are four persons, which is heretical? So between flinging the edifying epithets of irrational, and heretic, the mys- 11 See the Dominican authors already mentioned, under Theodicy. 42 Consult Scotus : Quolibetical Questions. * 8 See Suarez. u Consult any Thomist author of repute, and compare with any Scotist writer. 232 ROMAN CATHOLICISM tery of the Trinity is up in the air, and the Roman unity lies prone on the ground. What distinction is there between the contrasting attributes and the persons, and what between the latter and the Essence? Only a virtual one, says Thomism. 45 No, sir, it is real, exclaims Scotism. 46 Don't you see, the Thomists protest frantically, 47 that to admit real distinctions is to suppose that God is a composite being, but composition excludes simplicity, and a God who is not simple would not be a God at all? Don't you see, the Scotists reply furiously, that not to admit these distinctions is to suppose that the mystery of the Holy Trinity is a compound of contra- dictions, and irrationalities? And between the dis- cussions of one, and the apostrophes of the other, and the silence of the Church, the unity disappears in mysteries as deep as that of the Trinity. Is there such a thing as predestination? There is, they all answer unanimously, and it is eternal. 48 How does God verify from eternity the predestination of his chosen ones? in looking to their merits, or irre- spective of them? In looking to their merits, says Jesuitism. 40 Irrespective of them 50 says Thomism, together with nearly all the other Romanist theolo- gians. Don't you see, say the first, that you thereby 45 See Billuart, under Thomist Theology: Divine Attri- butes. 48 Frassen, and Sgambatti : Dogmatic Theology ; Divine Attributes. " Compare Billuart with Frassen and Sgambatti, on the same theological question. 48 Any Roman theologist, for this truth is a dogma of faith. 49 Consult the famous Jesuit, Father Molina : On The Science of God; and Tournely, on the same title. 50 Billuart and Cardinal Noris : On Predestination. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 233 turn predestination into an arbitrary, irrational, and even unjust act? 51 Don't you see, reply the others, that to suppose that predestination is dependent on the merits of the chosen is to suppose that the infinite is to depend on the finite, and that the creatures are the impelling cause of the knowledge of God, which would be equivalent to denying God ? 52 And here the reader may listen to a string of edifying civilities. You are Pelagians, says Thomism to Jesuitism. 53 You are Calvinists, the latter replies. The Jesuits in their audacity go so far as to condemn even St. Augustine and St. Thomas; in serious books approved by their authorities, and hierarchies, they make such bold statements as this : If I should follow St. Augustine I should be more of a Calvinist than Calvin. 54 We beg the reader to read some of the books we have in- dicated in the footnotes, and he will see with what a Christian charity they call each other heretics. But let us go on. How is predestination effected? By means of suf- ficing grace, which man makes efficacious by his co- 61 Consult Molina and Tournely : On Predestination. 62 Billuart and Cardinal Noris: Same subject. 53 Billuart : On Answer to the Objections of the Jesuits. "We recommend a small book entitled Historio de las Ideas Regalistas (History of Regalist Ideas in Spain), by the learned Augustine, Father Miguelez. In this book will be found many testimonials of the readiness with which the Jesuits condemned as heretical the Augustines and Domini- cans. There it will be seen that they entered Cardinal Noris in the Index, flatly ignoring the positive and oft-repeated formal orders from Benedict XIV. This is the kind of obe- dience frequently practiced by Jesuitism when it is not to its advantage to obey. 234 ROMAN CATHOLICISM operation, says Jesuitism. 55 False, and false again, replies Thomism; predestination is effected by means of grace physically predeterminate and practically ir- resistible. 50 That view is immoral, argues Jesuit- ism, it is fatalistic, it is to proclaim the Koran and Mohammed. 57 And your view, replies Thomism, is anti-Biblical, anti-rational and atheistic, because it denies the wisdom of God, which is perfect in itself; because it supposes that the immutability of the Di- vine decrees is relaxed in favor of human contin- gencies and human variableness. 58 How does God know future acts performed by free will? Because He sees them in themselves, as if they were actually present, says Jesuitism. 59 Untrue and error, replies Thomism. 60 God sees them in his own Essence, be- cause He determines that they shall be, and in virtue of this determination they are, and He so knows them. This is to deny human liberty, Jesuitism cries furiously. 01 And your view denies the Divine Wis- dom, Thomism answers angrily. 62 And in the midst of this infernal quarreling, which has now lasted more than three centuries, this rubbish of affirmation and negation, history demonstrates with the clarity of daylight, that on the most fundamental dogmas of revelation the supercilious Romanist possesses neither 55 See Molina and Tournely. See documents referring to the Congregation of "Auxiliis." 58 Billuart : On Predestination. 67 Read Father Miguelez' short work. "Billuart: Answer to the Objections, etc. ** Molina and Tournely : On the Science of God. * Billuart : Same head. 41 Tournely: Answer to the Objections. 2 Billuart: Answer to the Objections. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 235 a well-defined doctrine, nor a complete unity. We should come upon the same strictures should we ex- amine the substance and form of confession, 83 the sacrament of marriage, and so forth. But the above references are sufficient to show that there is no unity, as regards the principal tenets of the Roman theology. Is there unity in the Roman code of ethics? What a jumble of conflicting answers this topic calls forth. There is hardly a question in connection with it, which does not give rise to a multitude of opinions. Take up almost any Catholic book on ethics, and open it at any chapter you please, and you will always find this same refrain: This is the doctrine of St. Alphonsus, 64 but St. Bonaventure, or St. Thomas, up- holds the opposite view; Billuart thinks thus, but El- bel is of another mind ; this is condemned by some as a grievous sin, but others deny it to be so. 65 The con- fusion of Babel is as nothing compared with the con- 03 Discussions between Thomists and Scotists on this point. On dogmas so well established as eternal punishment in hell, there is no unity. Many notable writers maintain that the punishment of the senses is not eternal. The reader can as- certain this for himself by reading the study of the best re- puted Romanist orator of that time, Father Monsabre, on this subject : "Father Monsabre's conferences" : Hell and the Eternity of Its Punishments. 84 Read, for instance, Concina on Moral Theology, Cardinal Vives : Head, Systems, where it will be seen that the trifling number of seven is required, namely : Absolute Tutiorism, Moderate Tutiorism, Probabiliorism, Equiprobabilism, Simple Probabilism, Moderate Probabilism, Laxism. " For instance, whether or not a minor under seven years is subject to the laws of the Church. Some affirm that he is under penalty of a grave sin if he has sufficient knowledge, and others deny it, even if he has such a knowledge. Those over sixty years are in the same case as regards fasting and abstinence, with the same diversity of opinions. 236 ROMAN CATHOLICISM fusion rioting within the Roman code of ethics. 68 And it has given currency to the following highly significant proverb: "If you lose your purse pray to God that it may not fall into the hands of a moralist, for if this should happen he would find grounds for keeping it and soothing his conscience." As this di- versity of opinions on moral questions is evident both to Romanists and Protestants, we shall pass on to the canonical law. He who does not believe us may read some of the authors we have quoted, and he will see for himself that there cannot possibly be a greater division and confusion of opinion than that found in the Roman code of morals. The lamentable thing about all this is, not that there are diversities of opinion, but that this should happen in the science which for Romanism is the one that points the way to heaven and to hell ; 67 and the poor, faithful one is often and often perplexed and fright- ened, because at every step they say to him: Don't go there, because that way leads to hell. Never mind what he says, advises another teacher ; that way leads surely to heaven; and where the believer least ex- pects it, a third moralist comes up to him and says, 68 In matters so grave as restitution, there are cases in which some compel under penalty of a grave sin, what others approve as licit, for example : Thou hast positive doubts as to whether thou didst give or not the compensation due? Then according to St. Alfonso thou art no longer compelled to make restitution, but according to other authorities like Concina, Billuart, etc., thou art compelled under penalty of mortal sin. 87 Besides the above named, let us read the following au- thors : Gury, Lenkhul, Alcina, Genicot, Salmaticenses, Elbel, etc., etc. Look up any section, and in all of them the reader will find an infinity of opinions, many of them condemning as grave sin what others declare to be lawful or right. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 237 The other two are deceiving you, 68 for this road leads neither to heaven nor to hell, but to purgatory. 69 You may imagine the state of mind of the simple believer, in the midst of this jumble of advice, leaving him not knowing where to turn. If we had in mind to write a humorous book or to create a scandal, what a wealth of material we should find in Roman ethics! But let us pass on to the canonical law. Is there unity in the canonical law? As little as elsewhere. Ask if the bishops receive their power directly from Christ or from the Pope, and some will tell you one thing and others the opposite. 70 Ask what kind of power the Pope has over the princes, and some will say that it is absolute and direct, and others that it is restricted and mediate; while there are still others who will say, that it is neither of the two. Ask if the Pope has any obligations toward the Concordats, in the manner of a bilateral contract, and you will meet some who say that the Pope is un- der no obligation, while others consider him as being semi-obligated and others who say that he is as much obligated as the temporal princes, 71 and so forth. 68 Cardinal Vives : Compendium on Morals, "Introduction." 69 In cases so grave as to whether absolution must be given or not. For example : In the case of a sin of a certain nature (if the penitent ignores the privacy of same) he may be absolved by any clergyman, according to some, and accord- ing to others, he cannot be so absolved unless the priest is authorized to make the reservation, the bishops and Pope being the sole authorities. Read St. Alfonso and Cardinal Vives on "Reservation." 70 Bouix : Of the Bishop. 71 Bouix : Canonical Law: Of the Pope, under Concordats. Also Cardinal Tarquinius, Caballari and Craisson, same head. 238 ROMAN CATHOLICISM Hence we find as little of the famous doctrinal unity in the canonical law as elsewhere. Is there unity in the way of interpreting the Sa- cred Books? Here, as in ethics, there is an astound- ing diversity of opinions, which contradicts the pre- tended unity of which the Roman Church is so proud. Of what does inspiration consist? Some say that it is something positive which moves the writer. 72 Oth- ers, say, no, that is not so, it is solely something pre- servative, simply the approbation of the Holy Ghost, the writer being as free in redacting his books as any profane writer. What does inspiration cover? It cov- ers each and every one of the things 73 contained in the Scriptures, say some. It covers solely the pas- sages referring to dogma or to ethics, say others. That is not so, protests a third group of interpreters, it covers each and every one of the sentences. No, sir, add yet others, it covers each and every one of the words, and even the accents and commas, if there are any. 7 * And after all this jungle and confu- sion of opinions, which argues a condition far from the precious unity held out by the Roman Church, all these learned interpreters say to the bewildered reader: "But do not apply our words to any of the versions which we possess. 75 When we speak of in- spiration and what it implies, we are referring ex- clusively to the primitive text, that which was writ- 72 Read Jansen: On Inspiration. Vigouroux: Biblical Manual. Comely : Lessons on Exegesis ; same head. 78 Same authorities and heads. Also Jaugey : Apologetic Dictionary of Faith, heads, Inspiration and Exegesis. 7 * Same authors and heads. Also Patrizi and Lazaro. 78 Same authors and heads. Also Leo XIII : Encyclical on the study of Holy Scripture, CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM . 239 ten and dictated by the inspired men; and as we do not possess any of these precious texts, you may im- agine that we have said nothing; you may believe that we are talking foolishness, until one of these genuine primitive codices shall come to light." And since they know, and the reader is not ignorant of the fact, that it is morally impossible that this should happen, the result is, that after all this mess of opin- ions, after all this trouble taken in listening to the Roman doctors, it all goes up into smoke, and we are finally left even without the Sacred Books. For as they are talking solely of texts, and books which do not exist, and are not referring to those which we now possess, the reader may exclaim, in examining the latter: Oh, if I only knew that this text were identical with the primitive text, I should have the assurance that what it contains has been revealed in some way, that is, in agreement with the multiplicity of opinions indicated above. But who will assure me that the translator is not erring? Who will assure me that the copyists are not making mistakes? The Roman is therefore confronted with a cleverly wrought fabric of exegetical doctrines, but is, strictly speaking, without a Bible to which to apply them. Perhaps, objects the Roman, you are exaggerating; here you have the version called the Vulgate, which was declared authentic at the Tridentine Council. 78 Therefore we have a Bible, and therefore you are ex- aggerating. But softly, Mr. Roman, we shall soon examine the authenticity of your Vulgate, according to your own and most sane doctrine, and then you 76 See Trent Council : Biblical Canon. 17 24O ROMAN CATHOLICISM will see that our assertions are unassailable, and we can prove to you that with all this noise and confu- sion, the Bible has slipped away from our hands, and we have been left without the divine Word. You say that the Vulgate was declared authentic. Very well. Let us see what your Popes, your cardi- nals, your bishops, your theologians and your exe- getes say about this alleged authenticity. Listen to them. This authenticity refers solely to the Latin versions, that is to say, that this version is the least faulty among all the Latin versions. But is it genuine and truly exact ? 77 Why ! No ! Don't you see that since that Council it has been revised and emended by the Pontiffs? What, then, is the meaning of this pretty word "authenticity"? You know very well, that it is the least faulty of the Latin versions, and you may also consult the Greek versions, especially the Septuagint, which is more accurate in many pas- sages than our Vulgate. 78 And we can at least go to our Vulgate with the assurance of not finding any error there. If that were so, it could not have been corrected, and yet it has been corrected and continues to be corrected. But will the ambiguities at least be of slight importance? There are some. Hear what the best exegetes think about this. Some say there is no error in the Vulgate in all the passages that refer to dogma and to morals. Others, more cautious, assure us: there is nothing false in our Vulgate in 77 Comely : Compendium of Exegesis : under theory about the Vulgate. Apologetic Dictionary of the Faith, under Vul- gate. See especially, Cardinal Gonzalez' work : La Biblia y la Ciencia (The Bible and Science), on the Vulgate. 78 Same authors and heads. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 24! the passages referring to dogma and to morals, but there may be deficiency and inexactitude. Let us ex- plain these terms, as they are weighty. Take the case that in the original text there was a dogma presenting two aspects, and that the Vulgate speaks of the one and not of the other. 79 Or that in the original text there are indicated more motives and reasons, which are not all touched upon in the Vulgate. Hence it may be deficient and inexact, not because it includes a falsehood, but because it has omitted something. Then come other exegetes still more cautious, who say, that there are scientific er- rors in the Vulgate, relating to astronomy, history, sociology and so forth, and you may therefore deny that it is authentic. And finally there is the most radi- cal and most implacable fraction of exegetes, which includes cardinals as eminent in exegesis as Vercel- lone, who say, in the coolest way imaginable, that there are scientific, moral, and dogmatic errors in the Vulgate. 80 And so we are enlightened! This is the limit of mockery and sarcasm. We laugh boisterously at the divisions within Protestantism, while we ourselves, with our distinctions and heterogeneity of opinion, have arrived at the point of practically denying that the Bible, which is the basis of all that is spiritual, is genuine. We deride the Protestants because some confess and others do not ; because some are bap- tized in one way and others in another; because some 79 Comely : Work and head mentioned. 50 Consult especially The Bible and Science of Cardinal Gonzalez. 242 ROMAN CATHOLICISM adore the Sacrament and others deny this adoration; while we ourselves, with our divisions, practically deny the authenticity of the Bible, which is the only basis for baptism, confession and the Sacrament. Is this not the height of hypocrisy, of inconsequence, and of stupidity? Oh, if Romanism were not so haughty, if it were at times a little more humble, since it cannot preserve unity, neither in philosophy nor in theology, neither in liturgy 81 nor in the canonical law, and not even in the Sacred Scripture! Instead of loudly vaunting itself of that which it does not now possess, has not possessed, and will never possess, it should unfold the banner of union, not on the strength of its fictitious unity, which does not exist, but on the strength of that which Protestantism also proclaims, namely, on the basis of the fundamental dogmas; because it has all the more reasons for doing so as Protestantism is proclaiming this up to a certain point. Ask it: what things shall a Christian believe, in order that he may be saved ? And it answers : In the existence 82 of a personal God who rewards the good and punishes the bad; in the mystery of the Holy Trinity; in the Di- vinity, the Incarnation and the Redemption of Christ. Nothing more, nothing less. This, then, is the banner, the fundamental banner 81 See Cardinal Gibbons, article on "Liturgy," Encyclopedia Britannica. We would rather not add anything to lengthen the chapter, but read the article mentioned, and it will be seen that more serious differences exist among Catholics, than be- tween Romanists and many Protestant congregations. 82 St. Alfonso : On what must be known of the means to salvation. Cardinal Vives, Bertier, etc., are of the same opin- ion. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 243 of true unity. Here we have the program of union, the device of the new crusaders. Here we have the truths which should serve us as our watchwords, to fight, not among ourselves, but against advancing im- piety, against rationalism which is invading every field of thought, against anti-Christianism which is threat- ening to take hold of us. History tells us that the Greek emperors were more interested in discussing minute questions of theology than in providing for the defence of their empire, and when they least thought of it the Turk came and planted the standard of the Crescent above the standard of the Cross. Far be from us that which has become proverbial, the Byzantine questions; far be from us domestic theo- logical minutiae. The Turk stands at the gates; his terrible artillery is rumbling in the air; his light cav- alry is appearing everywhere; the body of his army is advancing with the trumpets of attack. He who en- rolls under the standard we have indicated is of us; if he call himself a Greek, he is of us ; if he call him- self a Russian, he is of us; if he call himself a Prot- testant, he is our brother; and if he wishes to be a Roman, he is also our brother. Sweet Jesus, save us, because we perish. Inspire us with Thy charity and union, that we may be one single fold, all Thy sons with one single pastor, Thy divine and sovereign authority. CHAPTER XVIII. ECCLESIASTICAL CELIBACY. IN taking up the subject of ecclesiastical celibacy, we must clearly outline our thesis, so as not to carry confusion into the examination of this most im- portant point We will say right here that the mandate of celibacy is not of Divine origin; that the free choice of celibacy is recommendable in many cases ; that the obligation of celibacy, as a precept, should be abolished for the good of the Church itself. But we shall not stop to prove the two first assertions. They are so self-evident that merely to explain them will carry conviction to the minds of our readers. Let Cardinal Gibbons say what he will x of the example of Christ and His Apostles ; of the practice of the men of apostolic periods; of the testimony of St. Jerome and of thousands of others that could be brought forward: in this twentieth century we believe that the precept of celibacy is not divine, nor quasi-divine, as many believed in the Middle Ages, but is purely and exclusively of ecclesiastical origin. We will add to the many witnesses cited in the notes 2 a further 1 Cardinal Gibbons : Faith of Our Fathers, Celibacy. 3 Jaugey : Diccionario Apologetico de la Fe, head, Celibato Ecclesiastico. The American review, The Catholic World, April and May, 1908. Hettinger, Casanova, Cardinal Vives, etc., etc. ; among the canonists consult Bouix. (244) CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 245 reason that cannot be gainsaid by any Roman theolo- gian, not even by Cardinal Gibbons. What course does the Church pursue now, with reference to the priests of the Greek Catholic Church ? As Cardinal Gibbons admits, 3 it authorizes the pres- byter to live with his wife, and the children born of this union are as legitimate as those of any other mar- riage under the canonical law. Very well. If celi- bacy were a divine institution the Church could not authorize it without transgressing against her ortho- doxy. 4 Does she authorize it? Then it is evident that such authorization is within her province, and it is therefore a purely ecclesiastical precept. To deny either of these two affirmations would be heretical for the Romanist ; hence it is beyond a doubt that celibacy is of human origin. Our second assertion is equally self-evident. And on this point we agree heart and soul with the doctrine of Cardinal Gibbons. We believe that the celibate minister who can lead an immaculate, clean life can do infinitely more and better work than the married minister. A man who is truly a celibate, zealous and wise, can do wonders in converting souls, and can perform miracles in the moral uplift of nations. To deny this truth would be to deny history, and to mis- conceive the most fundamental laws of human nature. We do not believe that there is any noteworthy Protestant who will deny this truth. A Protestant minister, working for the salvation of souls, who is 3 British Encyclopedia Vol. 28, page 608, this article is signed by Cardinal Gibbons. *Jaugey; head, Potestad Dispensativa de la Iglesia, 246 ROMAN CATHOLICISM unmarried and of a truly immaculate life, can do far more, and achieve better results than his colleague. The father and husband must of necessity devote a great part of his life, both at home and abroad, to his children and his wife ; while the minister to whom Heaven has granted the gift of perfect chastity, will dedicate his life entirely to his flock and to humanity. The extraordinary sanctity with which some Roman men seem to be clothed is due chiefly to this angelic virtue. But this is not the question, Cardinal Gibbons. The question is whether an obligation shall continue to be imposed which is not fulfilled and which is the cause of numberless evils and of terrible scandals. This really is the sore and delicate spot. If we do not go into details here, we do not prove our state- ment ; and if we do go into details we shall be obliged to touch upon common street scandals, from which we flee so strenuously. We shall touch upon the mat- ter lightly, following the ancient maxim: "Intelli- genti pauca," and merely glancing at the most com- promising points. Is celibacy observed at the present time within Ro- manism? Let us see how the ecclesiastical vocation is determined in the Latin nations, which will give us a weighty argument to the contrary. More than ninety per cent of the future priests are the sons of parents in moderate circumstances. We speak of Europe, and chiefly of Spain. 5 Being the sons of pious mothers, the latter are ordinarily the first to 5 Please investigate facts about seminaries as I have done in many of them in Spain, CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 247 decide upon their son's future life and to suggest the religious vocation. 6 At the age of ten the boy, in- fluenced by his mother, is filled with the idea that there is no profession so worthy, so holy, so fruitful of results, and so easy as that of a priest. It must be remembered that the Latin boy is much more im- pressionable than the American boy. 7 At this age, when violent passions are unknown, when the physical development is far from being completed, the boy starts out upon the ecclesiastical career. He enters the seminary, and now the period of privations and sacrifices begins for his parents. During the first year the boy seems to prosper and to get good hold of his profession. The retirement, the silence, the prayers, and so forth, and above all, the latent condition of his passions and his complete ignorance of the world, bring it about that this choice of a profession, which began as a fixed idea on the part of the mother, has assumed the same character in the mind of the son, who now believes himself to be called to the priest- hood. But the boy soon meets with his first disillu- sionments, when he is between fifteen and twenty years of age. 8 The bad example of some companions, the first flutterings of the heart in this age of passion and love, the voice of nature which is awakening, calling the boy with a power that is superior to grace, all these things are whispering to the youth that per- * Investigate the origin of the vocation and the truth will become known. 7 Do not confound the boy of the Spanish Colonies with the boy from Spain proper (the climates are different). 8 According to my observations, such is the case in more than seventy per cent. 248 ROMAN CATHOLICISM petual chastity is very difficult. But what shall he do ? Turn elsewhere? This his directors counsel him to do, when he confesses freely to them. But how shall he go about it? At the first word his father says to him with an angry frown : "That is impossible, you shall die first. 9 Don't you know that for you we have mortgaged half our patrimony? Is it thus that you pay us for the sacrifices which we have made for you?" Then his mother comes, with tears and kisses, going to the length of throwing herself at the feet of her son, imploring him to persevere. 10 What shall this boy do in the face of this harrowing situa- tion? Many times he gives in, thinking that with a little more precaution he may be chaste; he thinks in good faith that he has reformed completely, and be- tween the caresses of his mother and the approbation of his father, he offers once again to continue in his sacerdotal career. Unhappy boy! Soon he will be convinced that his passions are stronger than his good intentions. But now he can no longer retract ; for al- though he has not yet taken his vows, the obligations made by his family are for him more weighty even than his vows. To be chaste is morally impossible; and it is equally impossible to retract. What shall he do in this grievous conflict? Ah, Your Eminence, Cardinal Gibbons, do not think that some sectarian is speaking to you. A man is speaking to you who has visited more seminaries than there are in North America ; who has lived more than 8 This is the most frequent and common language. "This is a very frequent act. In many cases I have been a personal witness, CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 249 twenty-five years among priests and seminarists, who has heard thousands of general confessions. See what ordinarily happens ; it is horrible, but it is true. The youth makes a compact with vice, and he makes it under the most horrible conditions, as a hypocrite and vow-breaker. For fear that his disorderly life may become known, he practises secret vices, he becomes the most crafty hypocrite. He goes to ordinary con- fessions sacrilegiously, fearing that otherwise he may be suspended by his order; and it is only when he meets with the monk, when he retires to some convent for spiritual exercise, that he dares to be explicit in his confessions. Our professional dignity forbids us to go more into details ; but we can assure the reader that there have been seminaries that were closed be- cause the majority of the inmates (there were about two hundred) had become contaminated with the plague of Pentapolis. And we know a number of seminaries, that should likewise be closed, because the vice of Sodom corrodes the majority of its inhabi- tants. Intdligenti pauca. What can be expected of youths who prepare them- selves under these conditions to take holy orders? What ecclesiastical or gentlemanly honor can be ex- pected of youths who enter the priesthood degraded as gentlemen, and sacrilegious as priests? We are morally convinced that if a society could be formed with the object of indemnifying the parents for the expenses they incurred for their boys, and that if some dignified office were given to the seminarists, ninety, per cent of them would abandon their career between 250 ROMAN CATHOLICISM the ages of twenty and twenty-five. 11 But as there is no such society, the youths enter the priesthood in the most detestable of conditions. Will the ordina- tion which they receive, in the majority of cases against the express mandate of their last confessor, make them any better? We will answer in a few veiled words. In our large and varied experience with multitudes of youths, we can swear as a priest and affirm as a gentleman, that the youths are not bettered. And on the same terms we can assure the reader that we have heard the same views expressed in intimate con- versations with many eminent Spaniards, Frenchmen, and Italians. 12 And whenever we have asked any Jesuit Father, any Franciscan or Capuchin, and other priests who have visited some dioceses, devoting their time to work among the priests, we have received the same answer. It may be said that among the priests there is no conviction so general and deep-seated as this. With the knowledge that we are handling fire, we will cite an example and give a reason which we think is overwhelming. Engaged in missionary work in one of the largest dioceses of Spain, 13 which is considered one of the best, we received various informations on u My long experience and over one thousand cases au- thorizes me to formulate such proportion. 13 1 can assure you as a gentleman that I can set forth over thirty testimonies of illustrious prelates, and more than fifty notable missionaries. 18 1 do not consider it proper to publish the name of the diocese, nor of the Provisor, but these can be secured by Cardinal Gibbons or any Catholic prelate, who takes the pains to write to the publishers, who will gladly produce same. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 251 the infraction of Benedict XIV's Bulla Sacramentum Poenitentiae. Returning twice consecutively to the same place to preach, we observed with a sorrowful surprise that this most grave of abuses continued, and that the Palace did not seem to take any note of it. Authorized and commissioned by one of the peni- tents to hand in a denunciation personally, and hav- ing complied with the ritual ordinances, we went upon our errand. The Provisor to whom we carried our complaint, and who honored us with his intimate friendship, answered us with tears in his eyes, as we will confirm under oath : "Oh, Father, I do not know what we shall do, for nearly, if not all, are doing the same thing; and on the other hand I have just re- ceived orders from Rome, that we shall be lenient on this matter." We stood dumbfounded at hearing such revela- tions: in the first place, although from our own ex- perience we could assert that celibacy was not ob- served, we had never come across the like of this de- grading and horrible corruption; and in the second place, if Rome understood that the abuse was so great as to call for a degree of tolerance, we knew that this was not the remedy, but something else much more emphatic. We went about for a long time pondering, doubting that such a monstrous order could have come from Rome, which is wont to be so cautious in such matters. We asked many bishops; they all gave us the same answer, and when Cardinals like Vives pro- mulgate such orders and such doctrine, then we ceased to doubt. 14 And now, Cardinal Gibbons, a brief com- " Cardinal Vives : Compendium juris Canonici. 252 ROMAN CATHOLICISM mentary, but in such a way that outsiders shall not understand it. The last thing the Catholic priest loses is the de- corum of the confessional. It may be said that he who once loses it there, thereby falls into the way of losing it habitually elsewhere. When abuses of the nature of those penalized by Benedict XIV become general, to the point that men like the Provisor to whom we have referred speak of them as he did, and when Rome issues orders like those we quoted with- out translating, 15 it may be asserted that celibacy has ceased to be a general custom among the priests. Anyone who examines this question and yet persists in believing the contrary, would, we verily think, per- sist in believing the priests to be chaste, even though he saw the vow of celibacy publicly broken in the streets and market places. What are the consequences of this most lamentable slackening of morals? Alas! for the priest they are the most sinister and deplorable. What peace can there be in the mind of the priest, who knows that he is committing a horrible sacrilege every time he absolves another, that he is committing the same sin every time he celebrates, and every time he admin- isters the Holy Communion? How can he speak of heaven when his conscience is smirched with sacri- leges which are not committed even in hell? How can he preach virtue when he knows himself to be a cesspool of horrible vices? How can he speak with energy and unction of God's justice and providence, 15 Prima vice vigiletur, secunda vigiletur attentius, tertia procedatur. (Edition, 1905.) CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 253 when he knows that if they exist, he is the first of evil- doers and reprobates? The final consequence of celi- bacy for the priest is hypocrisy, despair, or incre- dulity. We are so firmly convinced of these disinte- grating consequences that if Romanism must continue as it is now, we should prefer a thousand times that our beloved Spain would turn Protestant ; for in that case it would at least preserve the faith of Christ, which it has now very nearly lost. The people being thus abandoned, as it were, by the clergy, the decadence in faith and customs among them in consequence is frightful. To speak of Cath- olic progress among the Latin people is to betray one's ignorance of the state of their collective conscience. In Latin Europe there are inheritances and Catholic atavisms, but the Catholic individualities as such, are disappearing and coming to an end with a steadiness of progression that must cause the gravest appre- hensions. A nation like Spain 16 continues Catholic because its antecedents were such, because the national and family customs are such, but the Catholic spirit and the individual Catholic sentiment no longer exist. How can persons call themselves Catholic who do not go to confession or take the Communion even once a year? How can persons call themselves Catholics in the Roman sense, who do not fast or go to mass on the prescribed days, or believe in the infalli- bility of the Pope? who speak of priests, monks and nuns, only to deride them ? Does the reader want more data than those we have named? Look at the results obtained by Catholic 18 You can consult many of the Pastorales. 254 ROMAN CATHOLICISM work of a collective and national character. 17 Catho- lic congresses are convened, and adjourn without having arrived at any particular results. A Catholic periodical is launched, and it dies without having obtained any subscriptions. 18 Circles for Catholic work are organized, and they disappear without hav- ing achieved any results. A Catholic party is pro- jected, and it does not get any further than the elec- tion of a deputy, and so forth. 19 Does Your Eminence know why Protestantism does not progress there? Because, in addition to the national atavism, they are not very prudent in the election of persons, 20 generally placing in high posi- tion in their Church some convert from Catholicism who has been expelled for some gross scandal. The Catholic priest is quick to take advantage of this, and points to Luther's marriage with a nun, saying that this is not religion, but matrimony of monks and priests, and the poor faithful, one who does not know the first thing about Protestantism, believes it to be worse than his own religion, although he sees the abuses in his own Church and the scandals of his own pastors. On the day when Protestantism shall seriously undertake to discuss its doctrines, when the people shall see ministers as honorable as we have 17 Read Sarda and Salvany about this Congress. 18 The Catholic Movements. 19 Mr. Urquijo. 20 Compare the subscriptions of the non-Catholic newspapers such as The Liberal, The Impartial, Heraldo de Madrid, El Motin, Las Dominicales, etc., etc., with the Catholic ones, such as the Correo Espanol, Siglo Futuro, etc., etc., and you will find that for each subscriber of the latter the former has one hundred. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 255 seen them in this nation, congregations as serious as those we see established here everywhere ; on the day when the Spanish people can convince itself that Protestantism far from denying every religion, as the priest preaches, affirms the Divinity of Christ and not the infallibility of the Pope, the efficacy of the re- demption and not the indulgences, the invocation of Christ and not the cult of the saints on that day Romanism will disappear to a large extent from the most Roman nation of Europe. We know our peo- ple well enough to affirm this positively. Perhaps the Romanist will say: but with such a dispensation the Roman clergy will lose the aureole of its prestige. Why? Is this dispensation the same as the obligation? If the obligation to remain celi- bate is removed, and the priest be free to marry, then he can still elect to remain a celibate. And are not those who cannot practice this supernatural virtue, led on a more secure path by such a concession? Does not St. Paul tell us, that it is better to marry than to follow one's passions without it? Do you think that celibacy would cease with such a dispensa- tion? If so you would thereby admit that immorality within the Church is universal, and that this reform should be introduced. But do not fear that with this step, the few men who now by nature or by grace continue truly celibate will not remain so. And their example, besides edifying the others, would make it possible for the Church to castigate severely the guilty ones. Since, then, celibacy is not observed, and the Roman 18 256 ROMAN CATHOLICISM Church knows it, she should modify this law as she has modified many of her other laws, leaving the Roman priest free, just as she leaves the Greek priest free. She would thereby preserve celibate those who can now be so, and could compel those who indulge in abuses to live up to their obligations. CHAPTER XIX. THE INQUISITION AND ROMANISM. AS a writer and as a Spaniard I cannot remain in silence after reading Chapter XVIII of Car- dinal Gibbons' work. Either I cannot read, or Car- dinal Gibbons thinks that religious persecution had its home chiefly in Spain, and that its measures were hatched in the tenebrous courts of Austria. 1 My poor country ! How those who, in all decorousness, should defend you, mock at you for that which you deemed most sacred ! You were the manikin of Romanism, 2 and in its murderous attacks on liberty, you permitted yourself to be its hangman. Mockery and disdain are your reward. Ah ! you listened to the accursed siren of the Vatican ; you thought that her enchanting voice was the voice of Heaven; that her counsels and doctrine were beneficent and saving; to your own detriment you favored them and helped them to the limit of your ability. And those who formerly praised you, calling you the right arm of the Church, 3 now heap abuse upon you, in the same way and for the Cardinal Gibbons: Faith of Our Fathers, Chap. XVIII. 2 Encyclopedia Britannica : Head, Inquisition. You will see that the Catholic Kings obstructed and delayed all acts con- cerning those matters. Read Mariana and Fuente : On the Inquisition. Read Canovas del Castillo, the illustrious Span- ish statistician : His great book entitled Casa de Austria (The House of Austria). 3 Title given by many Popes to the House of Austria. (257) 258 ROMAN CATHOLICISM same things for which they formerly applauded you ! You listened obediently to the Pope when he said to you: In the name of God, whose Vicar I am on earth, arise and march against my enemies. And you unwarily did spill the blood of your children in torrents, and did squander the millions of your treas- ury ! * Oh, if you had only trodden Romanism under foot as England did, 5 had despised it as France de- spised it, 6 then perhaps your beautiful flag would still be flying over your vast possessions in America, over your beautiful European pearls, and perhaps you might have continued as one of the most powerful nations of the world! But you associated yourself with Romanism, and it wrought your ruin, and as if that were not enough, it now heaps upon you scorn and derision ! Take this lesson to heart once and for all time, my beloved Spain; cast away bravely this poisonous viper, which, winding around your body, has held you from exerting your full strength; rise up from the earth where you have fallen because of your excessive complacency to Romanism. Remem- ber what you once were, before Romanism took hold of _ you, for then you may again recover a great part of your fallen grandeur. No, Cardinal Gibbons, religious persecution is not really the product of Spain; this monstrosity could not have been brought forth elsewhere but in Rome. This terrifying tribunal could not be the work of any * Read La Fuente, Mariana, Gebhart, Canovas del Castillo : On the War of Germany, England and Flanders. 6 During the reign of Henry VIII. 8 Proclaiming the famous Gallican Liberties. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 259 one else but the Popes. I can never read Chapter XVIII of Cardinal Gibbons' work without being re- minded of an anecdote told of Leo XIII. It is said that after the death of the famous historian Cesar Cantu, 7 some blamed him for not always having de- fended the Roman Church, and Leo XIII replied energetically : "He did not always defend the Roman Church, but he always defended that which he be- lieved to be true, and that is his greatest merit, and," added Leo, with an air of disdain, "a group of Cath- olic historians is now appearing who if it had to re- dact the Gospels would suppress Judas' sale of Christ and Peter's negation, in order not to scandalize the faithful ; if calumniations deserve censure, it is equally reprehensible to conceal the truth, on the pretext of defending the Church." With all due respect to the Cardinal's scarlet, it seems to me that Chapter XVIII of Cardinal Gibbons' work should be signed not by an American cardinal, but by one of those prejudiced Roman writers whom Leo XIII derided. Neither the pontifical tiara nor the cardinal's hat authorizes the wearer to misrepre- sent facts or falsify history, in order that Romanism may be freed from the reproach of having been for good or evil, more or less instrumental in creating and upholding the tribunal of the Inquisition. To shift the consequences of this tribunal now upon the temporal rulers, seems to us as ridiculous and irra- tional as to lay the responsibility for the executions of the present day upon the hangmen who kill in the 'Anecdote referring to the European Newspaper. 2(X> ROMAN CATHOLICISM name of the law the victims handed over to them by the courts. What would be Your Eminence's opinion of a con- temporary writer who, in speaking of the rivers of blood shed during the Russo-Japanese war, should foolishly upbraid the poor soldiers, saying to them: Villains, evil-doers ! why did you take up your bayo- nets, why did you discharge your guns? It is you who have caused such desolation and ruin, not the Czar of Russia, nor the Mikado, because they re- mained quietly in their palaces. Would this be rational or just? Again we find the language of Your Eminence's in the following passages as irra- tional as that of the preceding chapter, when you practically say: "Why are you scolding the peace- ful and venerable shepherds of the Church? Why do you blame Romanism for the blazing stakes of the Inquisition? This was not their work, but that of the rulers, and more especially of the Spanish rulers. 5 ' To your assertion you could add without opening any book, Auctoritate qua fungor (By my authority). We reply that we will prove the contrary on historical grounds. The tribunal of the Inquisition is solely and entire- ly the work of the Popes. Through them it came to life, through them it grew and flourished. 8 They, not the rulers, pronounced the sentences ; they, and not the rulers, condemned to the stake and to death. The 8 See the end of this Chapter for a complete account, from history, of one of the Inquisition's autos da fe the public judicial announcement and execution of its sentences. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 26l rulers were neither more nor less than the hangmen and soldiers who executed the orders of the Popes. Nay more, the rulers, including those of Spain, in time refused this hangman's office. 10 For when the thunders of the Vatican lost their destructive force, when the rulers became convinced that the Roman excommunications might be set at naught like the impotent decrees of a decadent despotism, does Your Eminence know what they then did, against the out- cries of Rome? They suppressed this tribunal; and now the Inquisition, as such, exists only at Rome, to the shame of humanity and the confusion of Cardinal Gibbons. So that, Cardinal, the rulers had no part whatever in its glorious or ignoble establishment; all the glory of that belongs to Rome. And Rome had no part whatever in the praiseworthy or blam- able act of abolishing it; this is exclusively the work of the rulers. But let us come down to the facts. When did this so-called Holy Tribunal of the Inquisition appear and whence did it come? Not long ago the writer met aboard a steamer an Englishman, who, like Car- dinal Gibbons, held forth as follows : "Oh, cruel Spain ; there stood the cradle of the Inquisition, there num- berless men were burned." "Sir," I asked him, "what Spanish ruler was the father of this ignoble creature ?" "Philip II," he replied. "Oh, no, sir, you are mis- taken by not less than three hundred years." Con- fused by my answer, he said, "Then perhaps he abol- 8 Read the Jesuit Ricardo Capa : Head, The Spanish In- quisition. 10 Read Cadiz Cort, and Ferdinand VII : Decree. 262 ROMAN CATHOLICISM ished it." "Again you are mistaken, and by more than three hundred years." When I came to this country and read the famous Chapter XVIII, of Car- dinal Gibbons' book, I could not help thinking that this Englishman might very well be the disciple of Cardinal Gibbons. But this cardinal speaks so un- certainly, with so little regard to history, that any one who reads his Chapter XVIII might think that we are the originators of this horrible creature. No, Cardinal, the Spaniards are not the fathers of that ignoble thing. This sanguinary Roman matron had already attained to a good size when she came to our hearths. Her scythe and her stake had already mowed down and burned many thousands of un- happy Christians. Therefore we did not originate it, nor did we instruct her in her cruel artifices. Let us hear the testimony of history. The Inquisition originated in Languedoc " between 1200 and 1216. Its natural and legitimate, not adopted, father, was Pope Innocent III, who instituted the first inquisitors, Guy and Regmer, whom he authorized, by virtue of his all-inclusive power of binding and loosing, to seize the property of heretics, including presumably therein the Popes; to take away their es- tates from princes, and to behead and burn those whose beliefs were prejudicial to Romanism. His- tory tells us 12 that the first inquisitors were worthy 11 Read Encyclopedia Britannica : Head, Inquisition. Hef ele : History of the Inquisition. Before this epoch there were al- ready inquisitors, but they appear as episcopal functionaries, and as a part of the episcopal ministry; only since Innocent III does this tribunal appear as existing independently. ia Read Zorrilla : Historia de los Frailes y sus Conventos. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 263 of their name. Once, when they did not care to take the trouble of investigating the accusation brought before them, they ordered a general butchery, and when protestations were made that among the victims were true followers of Rome, they replied, as not the most sanguinary of the Roman emperors would have replied : "No matter, these will go to heaven." Your Eminence will see therefore that the father- land where stood the cradle of the Inquisition is not Spain; that its natural and legitimate father, whom we have surely traced, is not found among the Span- ish rulers. And history further tells us that when this tribunal was brought into Spain, it provoked riots among the people, 13 protests from the bishops, and even difficulties with the kings, who regarded the inquisitors as an invasion from Rome into their states. If only they had been less obedient to Roman- ism ! If only they had feared the poverty and depopu- lation of their states more than the pontifical thun- ders, then Spain would not be in the condition in which she now is. She would not have furnished any pretext for there are no just grounds, as we shall see further on for the haughty disdain with which Your Eminence is treating her now. Did the tribunal of the Inquisition change in char- acter when it was transplanted into Spain? Did it cease to be a pontifical institution, being transformed instead into a royal one? Anyone who has read ec- clesiastical history even superficially, or is but slightly 13 Mariana, La Fuente : History of Spain. Canovas del Castillo : Casa de Austria. Father Ricardo Capa : The Span- ish Inquisition. Encyclopedia Britannica : Inquisition. 264 ROMAN CATHOLICISM acquainted with the history of the Inquisition, can assert roundly and without hesitation, that this tri- bunal continued to be exclusively pontifical. Let us cite some facts which will no longer leave room for the least doubt. 14 Who appointed the inquisitors? The Pope, not the rulers. Who had power to restrict or to amplify their functions? The Pope, and not the rulers. To whom were the inquisitors subject in the exercise of their terrible power? To the Pope, and not to the rulers. And now the most convincing- proof : To whom could the poor victim appeal? To the Pope, not to the rulers. 15 Woe to them if they had listened to such appeals! Therefore a tribunal whose judges are appointed exclusively by the Popes, whose power is derived from the Popes, and the exer- cise of whose functions depends solely on the Popes, is entirely and absolutely a papal tribunal. If the kings could not intervene in anything, neither in the appointment of its officers nor in its jurisdiction, if they had no power to modify or to alter any of its workings, interfere with any of its sentences or listen to appeals from its judgment, how can anyone call it a royal tribunal? This is as illogical and irrational as it would be to attribute to the Spanish rulers the dictum of infallibility because their ambassadors were present at the Council of the Vatican. A little more " Besides the authors mentioned consult Emerie : Rules of the Inquisition Tribunal. Torquemada : Head, Instruction. All the above statements on this subject can be read in in- numerable briefs, in existence in different archives. Ours is a copy from the Sacraments Autos which took place during the reign of Charles II. w jaugey: Diccionario Apologetico de la Fe; head, Inqui- sition. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 265 impartiality, Cardinal, if you please, and a little more seriousness especially when it comes to a question of making statements that cast discredit upon a na- tion, whose greatest errors were committed not be- cause it was Spanish, but because it was Roman. If not for the sake of truth, which everyone who writes for publication should respect, then at least for the sake of gratitude Your Eminence should have been more exact and truthful. Perhaps some Romanist will say and Cardinal Gibbons seems to incline to such a view : We do not deny that the Inquisition in its origin and jurisdiction was a pontifical institution, yet it was not the Pontiff who sentenced and executed, it was the state and the rulers; therefore they, and not the Pontiff, must be held to account for the numbers upon numbers of un- happy men who perished through it. This second as- sertion is as anti-historical, irrational and illogical as the first. Let us now penetrate into the tenebrous, subterraneous workings of the inquisitorial courts, let us accompany the victims from the time that they fell into the claws of the Inquisition up to the mo- ment when they breathed their last sigh in the midst of the most horrible torments, roasted at the stake. As we have seen that this tribunal was a wholly pon- tifical institution as regards its powers and jurisdic- tion, so we shall now see that it preserves the same character as regards its sentences and their execution. Who opened and conducted the process? The in- quisitors, who were the ministers of the Pope, not public officials dependent on the king. Who heard the 266 ROMAN CATHOLICISM pleadings of the culprit 16 and the excuses he made in his own behalf? The inquisitor, judging in the name of the Pope, and not the magistrates judging in the name of the king. Who ordered the preliminary tor- ments in order to extract forced confessions? Who applied the torments of tongues, and burning candles, the iron collars and the rack? 17 Look at these, Car- dinal the inquisitors, in the name of the Pope, not the hangman of the nation, in the name of the king. Who carried out these inhuman orders ? The inquisi- torial officials, not the functionaries of the king. Where were the culprits kept imprisoned during their trial? In the prisons of the Inquisition, which were dependencies of the Pope, not in the royal prisons su- bordinate to the king. Therefore the person who opens and conducts the process, who attends to all the accessories and preliminaries of the case, includ- ing the extraction of confessions on the rack, is the Pope, through his ministers, and not the king through his functionaries. Who pronounces the sentence? We find over- whelming evidence in history to the effect that the passing of the sentence depended exclusively on the Pope and not on the king. Who absolved or con- demned the culprit? The inquisitors, 18 judges with papal jurisdiction, and not the secular judges under 16 Read Emerie ; also Torquemada : His rules and instruc- tions. Also the innumerable appointments given by Popes from Innocent III to Leo XII, and you will see how the inquisitors are always and in every case, functionaries of the Popes, from whom they take orders exclusively to judge cases. 17 Besides the authors mentioned on this subject, investi- gate -and read any Auto Sacramental process, in existence. 18 Read same authors cited in note 16. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 267 the king's jurisdiction. Who determined whether or not the property of the culprit should be confiscated, and whether such confiscation should be absolute or only partial? (Look at this question, Cardinal. 19 ) The tribunal of the Inquisition, which judged in the name of the Pope, not any secular tribunal depending on the king. Who decreed whether the punishment should be imprisonment or the galleys, whether it should be for a set period or for life? Tell us, Cardinal Gib- bons. The tribunal of the Inquisition, with the ap- proval of the Pope, not some tribunal subject to the king. And finally who decided whether the culprit should die by the hands of the hangman or should be burnt alive? Mark well, Cardinal. 20 The Inquisi- tion's ministers, functionaries and judges, in the name of the Pope, and not any person who obeyed the sig- nals or mandates of the king. Therefore the condem- nation to prison or rope, to the galleys or the fire was pronounced by the pontifical power and not by the royal power. 21 Very well, then. If the rulers had no power of intervention, neither at the beginning nor during the trial, nor any voice in the final judgment, how can the rulers be taxed with such monstrosities? Could the king perchance absolve anyone who had been condemned by the Inquisition? No, a thousand times no. Could the king commute or ameliorate the punishment which the Inquisition had imposed? No, a thousand times no. Could the king put off the pun- 19 Read, besides authors cited, History of Spain, by Gebhart. 20 Add to the authors cited, La Fuente: History of Spain. 31 Read any of the many Sacramental Autos. 268 ROMAN CATHOLICISM ishment which the Inquisition had inflicted? 22 No, a thousand times no. What, then, had the king to do with these cases? He was, as we have said before, the executioner who finally killed the victims which the court of the Inquisition handed over to him. When Your Eminence can demonstrate that the ex- ecutioners of to-day are responsible for the executions which they carry out by order and in the name of the law, then Your Eminence can also assert that the rul- ers and not the Popes are the ones who are respon- sible for the crimes of the Inquisition ; but since Your Eminence cannot demonstrate such a monstrosity, it is maintained that the Inquisition was a tribunal purely ecclesiastical in its origin, in its development, and in each and every one of its sentences. Whoever seeks sincerely for the truth will not fail to find such men and such witnesses. Is Your Eminence ignorant of the fact 23 that the Pope was king of a large part of Italy? Does Your Eminence not know, that in the Papal State also here- tics were hanged and burned? Did the Spanish rul- ers pronounce these sentences there? Were Giordano Bruno, Cagliostro, and the thousands of other vic- tims who were burned in the Papal State, also exe- cuted in Spain and by the Spanish rulers ? 24 No, Cardinal Gibbons ! Be a little more serious. No his- 22 Read any of the many Sacramental Autos. Only the Pope could delay any punishment and allow any appeals ; and many a time, according to the Jesuit Father, Ricardo Capa, a case was postponed if the accused was a rich man and will- ing to pay the Pope for it. 21 Read Rohrbacher, Alzog, Rivas: Ecclesiastical History. 24 Read any Roman historian, and add Caesar Cantu: Reli- gious Persecution in Italy. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 269 tory should ever be written except with the view of telling the truth, although it may be hard and may cost dear. He who does not possess the requisite strength of character had better be silent. In further proof of our assertion, history tells us that even after the tribunal of the Inquisition had been disestablished in all the other European states, it continued in Rome; when the temporal power dis- appeared, it still subsisted in so far and in such a manner as it could under the circumstances. 25 So that in this twentieth century there exists at Rome the Tribunal of the Holy Office; and if it does not now order heretics to be hanged or burned, this is not be- cause Romanism does not believe that it can hang or burn, and that such means are legitimate or conven- ient, but because no temporal power would support it in such insane and inhuman projects. But if Ro- manism should again come into its ancient prestige and power, then, as formerly, and to-morrow as yes- terday, it would decree these terrible hecatombs which now fill with horror the illiterate Romanists who at- tribute them to the temporal rulers, in ignorance or denial of history. We shall again refer to this point when we take up the Romanist thesis. And we will close this chapter now by asserting that all the glory or ignominy which belongs to the Inquisition must be attributed solely and exclusively to the gentle power and paternal government of the Roman Pontiffs. 26 25 Read the actual Rules of the Holy Tribunal of the In- quisition, or Santo Oficio; both names are applied to the same. 26 A TYPICAL AUTO DA FE. I believe that nothing can bet- ter demonstrate the permanent character of the horrible 27O ROMAN CATHOLICISM Romanist Tribunal of the Inquisition than the report we transcribe, literally translated, of one of its autos da fe. I beg the reader to peruse it carefully and sincerely, as it is enough in itself to prove to a certainty that the kings have nothing to do with the decisions or jurisdiction of the In- quisition. REPORT OF THE GENERAL AUTO DA FE HELD IN MADRID ON THE 3OTH DAY OF JUNE, l68o, ATTENDED BY KING CHARLES II AND HIS CONSORT DNA. MARIE LUISA DE BOURBON. "It being remembered by the king that he had heard that his august father, Philip IV, had attended with extreme delec- tation of spirit and Christian jubilation, the general auto da fe celebrated in this royal city in 1632, he had on many oc- casions signified to various persons of his esteem and con- fidence how much it would please him to witness a spectacle of this kind, the more so as he was recently married, and wished to provide to his young and beloved spouse, beside the worldly entertainments and pleasures which the kings of the world have to attend, the mystic enjoyments and moral amusements that our true and only religion provides to pure souls, that observe its precepts to become firmer each day in the sound foundations of faith. "The General Inquisitor of Spain and President of the Supreme Council of the Inquisition, Don Diego Sarmiento Valladares, Bishop of Oviedo, knowing from its origin the monarch's desire, said to him one day, that having on hand many finished cases and plenty of culprits already sentenced in the prisons, both of Toledo and of Madrid, the Council had decided to hold an auto da fe in the before-mentioned city of Toledo, and invited him to attend in order to, by this means, gratify his desire. The king having accepted the offer with effusion, declared to the inquisitor-general how much better it would be to hold the auto da fe as on previous occa- sions, in the Plaza Mayor (principal square) of Madrid, avoiding in this way the expense and the trouble that the journey must occasion to the royal person as well as to the humblest official taking part in the auto. The Supreme Coun- cil having met and become aware of His Majesty's desires, it was unanimously voted that the auto take place in Madrid. The inquisitor-general invited the Duke of Medinaceli to carry the standard of the Faith in the solemn procession of the Cruz Verde (green cross), and His Excellency accepted with pleasure, giving evidence of his religiousness and of his great love and respect for the Inquisition. "Preparations were therefore commenced for that impor- tant event by appointing special commissioners from among CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 27! the inquisitors, each charged with the different matters re- quired for the best order and brilliancy of the performance. The inquisition at Toledo was advised, so that eight days be- fore the celebration of the auto the inquisitors should come to Madrid with their officers and families and sentenced cul- prits. Notice was given to the high brother of the Congrega- tion of St. Peter the Martyr, and to the members of the Holy Office, to which all people belonged, from the highest nobility of Castile to the humblest workman, and whose attendance is so necessary for the better order of all public acts per- formed by the courts of justice. The Fraternity at once as- sembled and after a few sittings, everything that pertained to its office, was resolved and agreed upon. "On Thursday, the 3Oth of May, in the year 1680, the auto was published, and the beautiful standard of the Congrega- tion, which was of crimson silk richly embroidered in gold, was placed in the main balcony of the inn and residence be- longing to the very illustrious bishop and inquisitor-general in Torija Street. The front of the house was ornamented with elaborate bunting, and in the windows close to the bal- cony from which waved the standard, there had been placed kettle-drums and bugles, that from time to time announced in harmonious echoes the solemn function that was being pre- pared. Within a short time the officers of the Congregation of St. Peter the Martyr assembled, as well as the commis- sioners, notaries and constables from the court then convened, and between five and six o'clock in the evening, the procession started. The officers rode in pairs upon horses showily caparisoned, headed on the right by Manuel Ignacip Novalles, high constable of the Congregation, and by his side Marcos de Ondategui, a minister of the Holy Office, both carrying their wands raised. Behind the cavalcade followed the stand- ard of the Faith, carried by Juan de Navascue's minister of the Holy Office, and the oldest steward of the Congregation, while Luis Roman and Juan Romero, as being the oldest deputies of said Congregation, bore the tassels. Many devout people, though strangers to the institution, went along with the officers. Among them were some titled people and gentle- men of the Orders who considered themselves highly hon- ored by carrying over their vestments the insignia of the In- quisition; and the procession was closed up by Sebastian de Lara, knight of Santiago, high constable of the court of Toledo, and Caspar Peinado Tanega, oldest secretary of the Tribunal of this royal city. The first warning was sounded at the door of the Inquisitor-General by the town crier, who repeated what was being read to him from a paper previously prepared by Lucas Lopez de Moya, officer of the Holy Office, notary of the same, and a resident of this town. 19 2/2 ROMAN CATHOLICISM "The contents of the same were as follows : 'Know all residents and neighbors of this town of Madrid, royal resi- dence of His Majesty, existing in and inhabiting the same, that the Holy Office of the Inquisition of the city and king- dom of Toledo will celebrate a general auto da fe in the Plaza Mayor (principal square) of Madrid, on Sunday, the 3Oth of June, of the present year, and that all those who at- tend the said auto, or help in it, will be granted all the graces and indulgences given by the High Pontiffs, and this is hereby commanded to be made public, so that it may become known to everyone.' "The retinue started from the house of the Inquisitor- General toward the small square of Dna. Maria de Aragon, and passing through that of Encarnacion and the Tesoro Street, it went on to the Plaza de Palacio (palace square), in front of which the second cry was sounded, while their Majesties were at the glass window watching the procession with great satisfaction. (And here we must note a circumstance that speaks for the religiousness of the monarch, and it is that having gone to visit, as was his wont, his august mother in the Buen Retire, he advanced the hour of his return to the palace, so as to be present when the procession passed). The third cry was given near the Church of St. Mary, facing the queen mother's palace. The fourth was sounded at the gate of Guadalajara, and the crowd here collected of people, carriages, and horses, was so great that there were many crushings. The retinue was falling into such disorder that it had to be rearranged in the Calle Mayor (principal street), which occurrence brought about the promulgation of an edict, that on the day of any subsequent autos, to avoid a repeti- tion of the disorder, no carriages or horses should circulate about the streets through which the procession had to pass. "The fifth blare was sounded at the Puerta del Sol (Sun Gate), the sixth, at the small square of Anton Martin, the seventh at the Plaza Mayor (principal square) and the eighth, at that of San Domingo (Holy Sunday), the brilliant retinue continuing afterward by the Calle Ancha de San Barnardo (St. Barnard Broad Street), Flor Street, and Inquisition Street, passing in front of the royal tribunal and returning to the house of the Inquisitor-General, in order to put back the standard in the place from which it had been taken. "The inquisitor Fernando Villegas having been commis- sioned to erect an amphitheater on which the auto da fe was to be represented, entrusted the plans to Jose del Olmo, Grand Master of the city of Madrid, who immediately drew up the plans which he submitted to the commissioner. These having been approved, he applied to His Majesty for the let- CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 273 ter ordering the municipality to proceed with the construc- tion, as was in effect done, the king decreeing an order on June 6th commanding that the scaffolding stands and fenc- ings necessary for the occasion be erected without delay, and recommending great promptitude on account of the urgency of the case. "The municipality appointed two commissioners to do the work, and having agreed with the designer, Jose del Olmo, they proceeded to get the material, and to engage hands with all haste. It was a wonder that a building of such dimensions could be finished in so short a time, for it was commenced on June 23d and completed the 28th. "It is true that quite a number of workmen labored day and night, and by relays so that the work should not suffer any interruption, but it is also true that enthusiasm helped the numbers, for the workmen did not stop even to eat, and instead of complaining of fatigue, they encouraged one an- other by such exclamations uttered in the tenderest voice as : 'Long live God ! . . . Let us toil without rest to His honor and glory, and if there is not enough wood for the work, we will pull down our houses to supply it.' "While the work of constructing the amphitheatre pro- ceeded, the enlisting of the company of soldiers of the Faith was going on ; these soldiers were recruited from among mechanics, and enlisted only for these occasions, when they served under the Inquisitor-General, and only while the auto festivities lasted. The company consisted of two hundred and fifty men; Francisco Saludo was appointed captain, and Juan Dominguez ensign, the military drill being entrusted to Pedro de Castro, adjutant to the quartermaster-general of Spain. The company had its guardroom in the house of the royal tribunal, Inquisition Street. "The work was completed on the 28th day of June, and was by the grand master delivered to the town commission- ers, who found it right and conformable to law, and who in turn delivered it to the commissioners of the Inquisition, who also were satisfied. "On the evening of the said day of June 28th, the company of soldiers of the Faith marched in orderly fashion as far as the Puerta de Alcala (Alcala Gate). There the mayor, mar- quis of Ugena, had several bundles of dried wood ready; each soldier taking one, and shouldering it, marched back to the small square of Palacio, where they halted. The captain, taking up a small bundle, suitably adorned with ribbons and tinsel, placed it on his buckler; and going up to His Majesty's room, handed it to the Duke of Pastrana, for presentation to his sovereign, who taking it in his own hand showed it to the queen, tendering it back to the Duke, who in turn handed 274 ROMAN CATHOLICISM it to the captain, saying that the king commanded him to take it in his name, and to see that it was the first to be thrown on the blaze. The captain descended with the bundle of wood, as he had ascended, and facing his troop he placed it in his bungalow; the soldiers imitating him, hung their bundles on their lances and muskets and walked to the brazier, keeping separate the king's bundle in order to do as he had ordered; and leaving a sufficient guard behind to take care of it, they returned to their barracks. "In order to enjoy the sight of the performance, and par- ticipate in the graces, privileges, and indulgences granted by many chief Pontiffs to the brotherhood of St. Peter the Mar- tyr, many were the persons of all ranks and conditions who in those days joined the Holy Office. "At three o'clock in the afternoon of June 2Qth, all parties qualified, including notaries, councilors, familiars, and other ministers of the Holy Office were convoked in the church of the college of Dna. Maria de Aragon, in whose principal chapel were to be found the green and the white crosses, surrounded with lights and ornaments. The procession started at five o'clock, headed by Francisco Portero de Vargas, Mayor of Madrid; Andres Valenzuela, knight of Calatrava, and other gentlemen, all of them of the Holy Office. "The soldiers of the Faith were lined up in the square, and on the crosses coming out of the church, the ensign saluted by a waving of the flag, and the troop fired a salvo of musketry. The standard of the Faith was brought out by the Duke of Medinaceli; its tassels were carried by the Marquis of Cogollado, the first-born of His Eminence, and Melchior de Guzman, also first-born of the Marquis of Vil- lamanriqua. The standard was of double taffeta, crimson in color, with silver laces and gold tassels and cords, and bore on it, beautifully worked, the royal arms and those of the Inquisition, made expressly for this occasion, and paid for by the Duke, who later presented it to the Brotherhood of St. Peter the Martyr. After the crosses followed the reli- gious communities, to wit: Capuchins, Recollects, Trinita- rians, Carmelites, St. Augustine, St. Francis and St. Domingo. "Then the white cross was brought out accompanied by the ministers, familiars, and notaries, with their badges of of- fice on their breast, and carrying white wax candles with the insignia of St. Peter the Martyr in their hands, the eldest steward of the congregation carrying the cross. "The green cross, which was covered by a black veil, was carried alternately by the provincial Father of the Sacred Order of Preachers of the province of Spain, and the most reverend Prior of Atocha, assisted by six other religious CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 275 fathers. Ahead of them marched the musicians of the royal chapel singing the psalm of Miserere. "By order of Don Antonio Zembrano, eldest inquisitor of the royal court, assisted by Secretary Fernando Alvarez Valdes, the different classes of prisoners were separated and lodged in special compartments, excepting those condemned to be handed over to the criminal courts, who remained in their respective cells. "At about ten o'clock P.M., after the prisoners had been pro- vided with supper, the said Zembrano entered to notify the prisoners of their sentence of death, which read as follows : Brethren, devout and learned men have tried your cases and found your crimes so great and so wicked that as a punish- ment, and example, it has been decided that you must die: you are warned to get ready and be reconciled so that you may die in a becoming manner; I leave with you two godly men. "Twenty-three culprits were notified of the sentence of death ; two religious men and two familiars were allotted to each, and these kept guard throughout the night. As the plight of the ones was so bitter, and the work of the others so painful, the commissioners responsible for the unforeseen ex- penses supplied abundant provisions of chocolate, biscuits, sweetmeats and wines to help those who could not be other- wise consoled. "The Tribunal sat all night for the benefit of those wishing their services. Two women condemned to be handed over to the criminal court asked for a hearing; the Tribunal with its accustomed piety, granted it and ordered them to come up. Having heard their pleadings the execution of their sentences was suspended for the time being. "On June 30th, at three o'clock in the morning, the prison- ers began to be supplied with the white linen used on such solemn occasions, and by five o'clock they had all taken breakfast and were ready to leave. Two sealed papers were handed to each of the court jailers, Pedro Santos and Jose del Olmo. One contained the instructions to form the pro- cession, and the other the list by which the prisoners were to be called, and have the sentence read to them. "During the night all places were closed along the route to be taken by the procession of the condemned, and platforms and stands were erected on which the people took their places in great numbers, the more comfortably to see it pass. The attendance from the surrounding towns and villages, at- tracted by the report of the novelty, was very great. "The soldiers of the Faith began to come out at seven in the morning. After them came the cross of St. Martin's parish, covered by a black veil and surrounded by twelve 2/6 ROMAN CATHOLICISM clergymen in surplices, preceding one hundred and twenty culprits, men and women, each having two religious guards at their side. "Then came the images of thirty-four condemned culprits, some dead, others fugitives from the criminal courts. Some of those carrying the images wore cuirasses, and others had in their hands small urns with bones of the condemned. Only two wore the convict garments of the Inquisition, but they all carried on their breast placards bearing their names in large letters. "Eleven were guilty of recantation by lying, trickery, super- stitition, or because they had married twice, or celebrated mass without being priests, and other similar crimes. Some carried cone-hoods and others ropes around their necks, with as many knots as the lashes they were to receive, and all car- ried extinguished yellow wax candles in their hands. "Fifty-four were reconciled judaizants with convict gar- ments half crossed, and also extinguished candles. "Lastly there were twenty-one culprits condemned to be handed over to the criminal courts, wearing cone-hoods and capes of flames. Twelve of them who were obstinate, carried infernal dragons painted to represent the flames, and were handcuffed and gagged. These were condemned to the flames. The procession of culprits was closed by Sebastian Lara, head constable of Toledo. Then came the Tribunal, pre- ceding the Brotherhood of St. Peter the Martyr; two stew- ards from these carried each small coffers handsomely lined and locked, one of which contained the indictments, and the other the sentences, of the accused. "The town of Madrid, with all its officers and depend- ants, attended the function in a body. "Next followed the standard of the Faith, of crimson damask, with the arms of His Majesty and those of the Holy Office embroidered upon it, and the march was closed by the halberdiers of the Marquis Malpica, himself heading it on horseback. "The procession passed in front of the house of the inquisi- torial guard, Encarnacion Street, Canos del Peral (Peral Conduits), the small square of Santa Catarina de los Donados (St. Catherine of the lay brothers and sisters), the small Descalzas (barefeet) Square, St. Martin Street to St. Gines; Bordadores (embroiderers) Street, Calle Mayor (principal street), and Boteros to the main square, where the king and queen were already occupying the canopied throne on their balcony, while in stands were the councilors, tribunals, cor- porations, grandees, titles, and other invited noted persons. "Quiet was restored after a momentary disorder, the cul- prits were led by the soldiers of the Faith and the familiars CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 2/7 to their respective places, the statues were arranged on ele- vated points on the platform to enable everyone to see them. The general public and the actors occupied their respective places amidst a profound and religious silence, as the solemn act was commenced with His Majesty's assent. "The Inquisitor-General, wearing the pontifical robes and assisted by the corresponding clergymen, ascended the box of the king and queen to take their oaths, namely: that they would defend the Roman Catholic Apostolic religion, that they would not embarrass the clergy nor dispute the rights of the Holy Office, and that they ivould help with all their strength and powerful resources, to extirpate heresy, to pun- ish its authors and propagators, and never at any time permit mixture of worships, nor rites^ foreign to the true and indis- putable dogmas of the Catholic belief. "The king very readily and without reserve of any kind gave the oath that so well agreed with his own pious inclina- tions. "Descending from His Majesty's balcony, the Inquisitor- General, aided by his assistants and familiars, again approached the altar where everything was already prepared for the sol- emn high mass that he had to celebrate, dressed in pontifical attire, as he was then. He left the Gospel book on the side table near the altar and the august sacrifice was commenced : it was the mass of St. Paul's conversion, and it was cele- brated with as much devotion as it was heard. "When the hour for the sermon arrived, there ascended to the pulpit of the Holy Ghost to pronounce it, the Reverend Father Thomas Nayarro, of the Order of Preachers. "The sermon, which had for text the verse of the psalm : Exsurge, Domine, judica causam tuam (Arise, Lord, and judge thy cause) , was a brilliant apology of the Roman Catholic Apos- tolic Christian religion, the only true one, praising its beau- ties, its advantages, and the happiness that its observance pro- vides; and a condemnation of the idolatries, heresies, sects, and errors, of all times and of all peoples, which he exam- ined with rare erudition and knowledge ; and he wound up by exhorting the sovereign there present, upon the necessity of not permitting his faithful followers to have any kind of commerce or intercourse with heretics, not even as a measure of public utility, so as to avoid the great evils and troubles that have overcome other kingdoms, where truth and error are allowed to coexist. "At the conclusion of the sermon the very illustrious In- quisitor-General rang the hand-bell as a signal to begin read- ing the cases and sentences of the accused, which took place in the following manner : "On the two desks facing the cages for the culprits, the 278 ROMAN CATHOLICISM stewards of St. Peter the Martyr placed the two small cof- fers containing the cases and the sentences; two notaries from the Tribunal came up to read them and to make the sentences known, and another one went on calling the con- demned from the list given to him by Jose del Olmo. This last, and Pedro Santos, as jailer of the Holy Office, were there to bring and take away the convicts. On hearing the con- demned person's name called the jailers went to look for him on the scaffolding where they all were, and, making him get on the platform he was placed in one of the cages, and after reading to him the case and the sentence, he was taken out and returned to his place to make room for a new one. The number was very large, and in order to save time, one notary read the case and another the sentence. The convicts them- selves had lists in duplicate and it was arranged that before having done with one, they had the next ready and thus it was possible to finish in a shorter time than it could have been feasible by a slower process. "The first man to come out in public was Manuel Diaz, a native of the island of Sardinia, his offence being judaization. He appeared in the cage with his yellow cape and St. An- drew's cross. "After him, those indicted for judaization were dispatched in the briefest time possible, being condemned according to their crime to a longer or a shorter term of imprisonment, to perpetual confinement, deportation, the lash, public infamy, to rowing the king's galleys, or to wear the garments of peni- tent convicts, besides the confiscation of their property to meet the Tribunal's expenses. "Then came the turn of those condemned to be dealt with by the criminal courts, the obstinate and impenitent, both in person as in statue, and the nineteen condemned to die by the garrote or in the flames were also properly disposed of; because although they were twenty-one, while the cases were being read, a man and a woman belonging to the obstinate repented and wished to confess, begging through the religious man that ministered to them, to be heard : this being granted, they were taken down to the room intended for the purpose and were heard by the commissioner inquisitor, who, having found cause for so doing, suspended their sentence, sub con- ditione (conditionally) upon its being again examined into as to its merits. Ordering the convict garments to be removed from them, the commissioners returned again to the scaffold- ing without these convicts amid the acclamations of the peo- ple who rejoiced over acts of justice, and applauded any dis- play of clemency. "Having finished the reading of the case and sentence, to each convict, the latter returned to the place whence he had CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 2/9 come; but the impenitents who had relapsed into error were taken down to the place intended for a secret cell, where or- dinary justice already awaited them to carry out the execu- tion of the sentence. "When everyone had been disposed of, the commissioner in- quisitor whose duty it was 'relaxed' them, that is to say, de- livered them over to the sheriff and constables to take them to the place of execution, begging of them to show the convicts all possible mercy while carrying out the terrible ends of justice. "Immediately the mournful convoy started for the spot where the brazier awaited, taking the shortest way to the Fuencarral Gate. One-third of the company of soldiers of the Faith walked in front ; while the unhappy convicts surrounded by the constables, each accompanied by two godly men, followed them. The convicts were encouraged to die penitent, but without showing the least repentance the obstinate ones walked to the scaffold with altered features, high color and flashing looks, that appeared to throw out fire, sure signs of their eternal damnation, in great contrast with the meekness and repose of the reconciled ones, who went quickly forth to satisfy the public vengeance. The procession was closed by Don Fernando Alvarez Valdes, Secretary to the Tribunal, who had to testify to the execution of the sentences. A nu- merous crowd followed the convicts, moved as usual by curi- osity to witness that spectacle. "In good time the Tribunal had called upon ordinary jus- tice to have ready twenty stakes, and pillows, to apply the garrote, and a sufficient number of ministers and execution- ers to promptly perform that fatal duty; and justice ful- filled the order with so much haste that when the procession of convicts reached the burning place the twenty stakes called for were already in position. "Bound to them, and with the loops around their necks, those who were condemned to that penalty were suffocated, while the obstinate were set on fire and consumed to death, giving out visible signs of horror and despair. "On lighting the bonfire, the bundle of wood that the cap- tain and soldiers of the Faith had offered to His Majesty, and which the latter had ordered him to take in his name, was solemnly thrown into it. "When the executions were concluded, the bodies of the garroted were thrown into the flames to be consumed, but this operation was not over until nine o'clock the following morn- ing. "Meanwhile, the reading of cases and sentences continued at the Plaza Mayor, and when that was over the Very Illus- trious Inquisitor-General proceeded in person to receive of the 280 ROMAN CATHOLICISM convicts and now repentant practitioners of Judaism, the abjuration of their errors, admitting them once more within the fold of the Catholic Church. "Abjuration takes place in three ways: de Icvi, de ve- hementi, and in forma. The first is where against the ac- cused there are only some well-founded indications that he belongs to some judaical or Mohammedan sect, and that he observes their rites. The abjuration de vehementi is done when there exist against the party proved charges implying guilt, and the abjuration in forma is when the accused is fully ^ convicted of error or heretical apostasy but without sufficient cause to apply the death penalty, at least in what concerns crimes against the faith. "When the abjurations were finished, it was already late into the night, for which reason the square was illuminated, especially the royal balcony, with a multitude of large wax tapers; this was continued till they had burnt out, and then the musicians of the royal chapel sang a Te Deum, thus end- ing that solemn function at nearly nine o'clock at night. "Such was the conclusion of that celebrated day of tri- umph for religion and of horror for impiety, a day in which all vied with one another in Christian humility and religious enthusiasm. Even His Majesty the King, zealous defender of the Catholic faith, who because of his exalted position, is relieved from certain particulars, wished, as the least of his vassals, to spend the day in the complete practice of virtue, and remained with his royal family in the balcony from eight o'clock in the morning until nine at night, without partak- ing of food beyond some slight refreshments necessary dur- ing summer. "The very illustrious bishop and Inquisitor-General was so fatigued by that day's labor that he did not even want to take off his apostolic vestments, and dressed as he was, his famil- iars and servants took him home in his magnificent sedan chair, made of crimson velvet with beautiful gold ornaments, and lighted by his pages with numerous white wax tapers. "On their Majesties' rising to leave everybody did the same, and in a short time the square was emptied. The reconciled prisoners were taken back to their cells, where the pious Tribunal had an abundant supper awaiting them. The green cross was taken in procession to St. Thomas College, and there it remained between lights until the following day, when it was solemnly carried to the Convent of Santo Do- mingo, and placed against one of the pillars of the church. "After all the bodies of the convicts had been burnt, the soldiers of the Faith removed the white cross from its ped- estal and took it to St. Martin's parish, at whose gate the community was waiting. After visiting the cemetery where CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 28l a responsory for the souls of the reconciled dead was re- peated, the white cross was placed in the sacristy side by side with the one existing there, and whicii had been used in the auto of 1632. "On Wednesday, July 3d, the sentence of the Tribunal was carried out against several culprits, who had been con- demned to the lash, or to public degradation (several women among them), and on the fourth, there were taken in gal- leys to the home of correction at Toledo, those who had to suffer the penalty of temporary or perpetual confinement, and be instructed in the knowledge and practice of the Chris- tian doctrine. "The same day and over various routes, those sentenced to rowing on the king's galleys and to banishment from the kingdom, were taken to their respective destinations. "The object for which the company of the soldiers of the Faith had been called being now fulfilled, the company was disbanded, each one of its members receiving the gratuity that the Tribunal used to provide for such cases, besides giv- ing them, through the very illustrious Inquisitor-General, the episcopal benediction." As His Eminence Cardinal Gibbons can see, the kings of Spain, notwithstanding their absolute power in other matters, notwithstanding their prerogative over lives and property, under the Inquisition could not even decide for themselves the place where the auto da fe is to be celebrated. It is the pontifical Tribunal that resolves this. The first cry is not sounded before the royal palace, but before the house containing the Pope's delegate. Finally, I would venture to call Your Eminence's attention to the path demanded from the king not to interfere, nor to restrain in any way what- ever the jurisdiction of said Tribunal. Would royal func- tionaries and dependents on royal favor, venture to ask for such an oath? Anyone who cannot see in all this the Rom- anist character pure and exclusive, might as well deny the existence of the sun in full daylight. The words of such historians as Ranke and Hefele can be and must be understood only as applying to the intervention exercised by princes regarding the adjudication of property seized by said Tribunal, but anyone confusing one question with another, and believing that said Tribunal is a royal one, \vould as soon take bishops and curates for civil ministers, since they are in the pay of the government, and the latter appoints its controllers to make the payments. By that way of reasoning all public governments would soon be able to demonstrate that the Pope to the last curate, are mere civil functionaries rather than ecclesiastics. Concerning the other words that Your EraittsnfiQ says 282 ROMAN CATHOLICISM emanate from King Ferdinand, I cannot get over my aston- ishment at so enlightened an authority as Your Eminence venturing to make the statement. If I were to follow your example I could demonstrate that the Pope was the subject and slave of the German Empire. Is Your Eminence perhaps unaware that during many years the emperors exacted that the election of the Popes, to be legitimate, should first be approved by them? Does Your Eminence think that because a prince believes and says that certain rights are his, he can at once rest assured that it is so and that Rome agrees to it? Fine reasoning, indeed, is Your Eminence's. Pity the Roman Church if that were so. I cannot get over my astonishment at such method of discussing, nor at Cardinals of the Holy Romanism haying recourse to arguments so contradictory. No, Your Eminence, a thousand times, no. That kings may or may not claim supposed rights does not prove in any manner that such rights are royal, or that Romanism believes them to be so. Your Eminence might prove it, not by copy- ing words from kings, but words and writings from the Popes. Does your Eminence know of any bull, encyclical, decree, etc., by virtue of which the Pontiffs declare that they cede one atom of the jurisdiction of that Tribunal? I be- lieve I know something about the sanguinary and dark his- tory of said Tribunal, and up to the present I have found only excommunications, and threats of excommunication, against princes who forbade, or restrained, or did not help the said Romanist Tribunal, but I have found absolutely noth- ing by virtue of which they renounce, even now, that tre- mendously inhuman and fatal power. And as there is noth- ing I know of to the contrary, I should be wanting in truth, patriotism and loyalty, if I did not proclaim once more that said Tribunal was not strictly Spanish, but Romanist; not monarchical, but pontifical. CHAPTER XX. JUSTIFICATION, ITS CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES. THE subject of justification leads us into one of the most abstruse and intricate theological ques- tions. It not only stands as a dividing barrier be- tween Protestants and Romanists, but it is also the cause of discord among the Protestants as well as among Catholics themselves. And the most astound- ing thing in this burning dispute is, that when rightly considered, the opinions regarding it held by both these parties are identical. The Romanist in speaking of redemption and all that it implies, and in speaking of grace and all its effects, proclaims practically the same doctrine, which scandalizes him so much when promulgated by the Protestant. Let us examine it. Roman theology says, that the redemption of Christ was single, uni- versal, most abundant and all-sufficient. 1 They right- ly say, that one single act, one single tear of Christ, the most insignificant drop of His blood shed for us, contains efficacy sufficient to save not only the rational beings who inhabit this planet, but also thou- sands and millions of worlds that might be inhabited like ours, and which might even be worse than ours. 2 1 St. Thomas, Billuart, Casanovas, Hurter : De Deo Re- demptore. 2 The same authors mentioned, and add Cardinal Vives, Bertier: Compendio de Teologia, same head. (283) 284 ROMAN CATHOLICISM They all hold that the redemption considered by itself is single, universal, most abundant, and all-sufficient, hence Romanism and the great majority of the Re- formist congregations believe the same thing as re- gards the efficacy and abundance of the redemption. 3 Let us proceed further. Ask a Romanist if a man can arrive at justification by himself, by his own works and merits. By no means, they unanimously answer. 4 Justification, being a supernatural gift, comes from heaven, and is granted by Christ. For Romanism, man with all his works and merits is a complete nonentity, not meriting grace, nor able to obtain it. 5 It is God who must prepare him for it, who must actually aid him, and who only can justify and sanctify him. Pelagianism was condemned as a heresy, not only because it denied, strictly speaking, original sin, but because it held that man could rise to the supernatural order of justification and sancti- fication without the aid of inner grace. Semipelagian- ism was also condemned as being heretical, because it demanded only preparatory or initial grace, but not continuous or habitual grace. 6 For Romanism, man stands in the same relation to the supernatural grace of justification as a corpse stands in relation to the vital operations. What can a corpse do in the vital 8 Read Methodist Armor: On the Redemption. All the Protestants (except the Calvinists) support the same thesis. * The same Catholic authors above mentioned : Head, De la Gracia. Add Jaugey : Diccionario Apologetico de la Fe, head, Gracia. 5 Same Catholic authors mentioned : Heads, Gracia, and Merito. " Read Baronio, Rohrbacher and Rivas : On Pelagianism and Semipelagianism. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 285 human order? Nothing. So with man, who, while living under natural laws, is as powerless as a corpse to raise himself to the supernatural order of grace. Man, instead of being the coactor with grace, is merely as a receptacle in which grace works the won- ders of justification. This being a most grave ques- tion, it needs to be elucidated with proofs and ex- amples. Ask a Roman: What sanctifies the penitent? The fasting, disciplining, sackcloth, prayers, and so forth, or the grace that moved, and by virtue of which movement he conceived the thought of fasting, and continuing to fast, the thought of disciplining him- self, and thus continued to discipline himself, and so forth ? 7 You will see that they all answer without hesitation: grace, and not the fasting nor the dis- cipline, and so forth ; and in such a way, that if grace should depart from those exercises, everything would be fruitless and entirely useless. 8 Let us examine this question still more closely, and we shall find the only center for union, where both systems may con- verge and be coordinated. In justification and its derivations there appear, so to speak, two subjects, and also two classes of opera- tions: the former consisting of Christ, justifying, sanctifying and glorifying, and man receiving in him- self the justification, sanctification, and glorification; the latter consisting of the acts of grace, divine and supernatural and the acts of man, purely human and 7 P. Fernandez, Schouppe, Perrone : Heads, Merit and Grace. 8 Elbel, Esporer, Gury : On Mortal Sin. 286 ROMAN CATHOLICISM natural. To which of these two agents, and to which quality of operations, must be ascribed justification, sanctification and glorification? Solely to Christ and to His grace. To assert the contrary would be a philosophical absurdity, and a theological error, not only according to the Protestant doctrine, but also ac- cording to the Catholic doctrine. Romanism clearly and emphatically proclaims two tenets: justification is a supernatural gift not only quoad modum, as they teach, 9 but also quoad substantiam, and therefore jus- tification and its derivatives are operations transcend- ing human nature. But to suppose, on the one hand, that justification, sanctification and glorification are of a distinct order and at the same time superior to nature, and then to assert that among these orders (supernatural and natural) there is proportion and correlativity, would be a philosophical absurdity. If the first is superior and transcendent, the second could never influence, augment or diminish the amplitude or intensity of the latter. 10 When we speak of coopera- tion between two agents, or two orders of things, we must have in the first place, proportion and correl- ativity between them; and here we have neither: For on one side there is the infinite, Christ, and on the other, the finite, the creature; on the one side there is something supernatural, justification, and in the other, something natural, the work of man. But above all, it is a theological error. If man 9 Bertier : On Grace. 10 Perrone : On the Natural and Supernatural. Jaugey : Head, Supernatural Order. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 287 could bring it about, by his works, that justification were increased, then we could assert both that grace is not a free gift which is heretical and that grace does not proceed solely and exclusively from Christ, which is also heresy. We could also assert that some grace is obtained mediately, or through the coopera- tion of man, an assertion that would involve the de- struction of the fundamental principles of Roman theology. 11 Moreover, if we did not conceive faith to be the only basis of our justification, then we should fall into the Romanist absurdity. Faith, they say, is a divine and supernatural gift ; 12 but without works, it is formless and dead. They cannot deny that it is a supernatural and divine gift without falling into contradiction and heresy; and to suppose that it is formless and dead, is to assert that there are super- natural gifts which are dead gifts, and a supernatural grace which is formless grace. Let us examine this concept closely, for it demonstrates better than any other argument, the absurdity of the Romanist posi- tion. Every supernatural gift elevates man and brings him nearer to God ; 13 just as grievous sin lowers and removes him further from God. We speak according to Romanism. Very well, then. If faith is a super- natural gift, elevating man and bringing him nearer 11 Read any of the authors mentioned under head, Grace. They all affirm that grace is a free gift, which can only be granted by Christ. "Jaugey: Diccionario Apologetico de la Fe. Canon of the Yatican Council : De Fide. Any author of the above men- tioned, speaking on Faith. 13 Perrone, Hurter : On Faith. Add any of the mentioned authors when they speak on Faith. 20 288 ROMAN CATHOLICISM to God, and if, as they suppose, faith could be sin without works, then we have the proposition, that faith elevates and does not elevate, that it brings nearer to God and does not bring nearer to God. And further, that between God elevating man and bring- ing him nearer to Himself, and man not cooperating with works, man would have greater power to sep- arate himself from God, than God would have to draw man nearer to Himself. In order to understand the force of this argument we must bear in mind that we suppose man to be associated with the divine help, since we also suppose he is believing in and assenting to faith. Similarly we should have this monstrosity in the Roman doctrine : God communicating with man by means of supernatural faith, and man separated completely from God, since we suppose him to be in a state of grave sin; God conceding the majority of his virtues, and man receiving this virtue, and man nevertheless, as we suppose him to be in a state of grave sin, incapable of receiving either grace or any other divine gift. 14 Moreover, if we examine the num- ber of Biblical passages bearing on this point, we shall see that there is hardly any other truth which the Bible inculcates more often than this : that faith is suf- ficient for justification. "Whosoever liveth and believ- eth in me shall never die." "This is the will of him that sent me, that everyone which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life." "This is life eternal, that they might know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." "He 11 Read and study the above-mentioned authors under head, Faith and Mortal Sin, especially Cardinal Vives. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 289 that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned." 15 It may be said that there is no truth more frequently inculcated in the Gospel, than that faith justifies and saves. Let us hear what St. Paul says, Romans iv. 1-16: "What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to flesh, hath found ? "For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory ; but not before God. "For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. "Now to him that worketh is the reward not reck- oned of grace, but of debt. "But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. "Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, "Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are for- given, and whose sins are covered. "Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin. "Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumci- sion only, or upon the uncircumcision also ? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteous- ness. "How was it then reckoned? when he was in cir- cumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumci- sion but in uncircumcision. 1B John xi. 25, 26; vi. 35, 40; xvii. 3. I John v. 10-13. Mark xvi. 16. Acts xvi. 31, 32. ROMAN CATHOLICISM "And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised : that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised ; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also: "And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised. "For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. "For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect : "Because the law worketh wrath : for where no law is, there is no transgression. "Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace ; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all." Romans iii. 27, 28: "Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith." "Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law." Romans xi. 6: "And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace : other- wise work is no more work." We might cite many other passages to the same effect, but these are more than sufficient to prove that CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 29! according to the theology of the Bible faith justifies and saves, without the work of man. But the differences appear still more marked in practice. Here the Romanists exclaim, scandalized: The Protestant doctrine is demoralizing. 16 To pro- claim that works are not necessary for justification, is the same as to proclaim the glorification of vice; it is to place the evildoer alongside of the saint. And what especially excites the Romanist, is the words at- tributed to Luther : 17 Pecca fortiter et crede fortius (Sin grievously and believe more firmly). Here the Romanists close their chaste ears, and indignantly heap terrible imprecations upon the demoralizing Re- formist doctrine. If we were a Protestant we should reply as fol- lows : This doctrine is not ours, it is the doctrine of the Gospels, of St. Paul. 18 The Evangelists, and not we, proclaim these things; they are the ones who teach that faith justifies, that works do not justify; that faith saves, that works do not save. We merely echo their teaching; we are the echo of their divine voice, and if you call us demoralizing and subversive, you apply these terms to those from whom we learned, to the Book that taught us. You even call Christ Himself subversive; you call St. Paul a demoralizer; therefore you are heretics and blasphemers, accord- ing to your own Roman doctrine. But as we are not yet a Protestant, we will answer according to the scholastic theology, which is the of- 16 Bertier : On Justification. 17 Perrone, Hurter, P. Fernandez : On Justification. 18 Read the biblical passages cited in this chapter. 292 ROMAN CATHOLICISM ficial theology for Romanism. Does Luther's doc- trine scandalize you? Do you believe that it is de- moralizing and subversive, not to affirm the necessity of works for justification? Then permit us a few slight observations. Who are your favorite masters in questions of theology and of grace? St. Augus- tine, you answer, who is therefore called the "Eagle" among the holy fathers; St. Thomas, who is called the "Sun" among the theologians. They are our prin- cipal doctors, their systems are our systems, which are taught by preference in the Gregorian Univer- sity 19 under the immediate supervision of the Popes in Rome; in the ecclesiastical seminaries under the supervision of the bishops, and everywhere else. 20 And what do these eminent doctors teach in regard to predestination? Hear them: They say : 21 that God, from eternity, without re- gard to the merits of anyone, that is to say, with- out regard to their works, predestined for heaven those whom it pleased Him so to predestinate, with- out considering in any way either their merits or their works. They say that those whom God pre- destined were also sanctified by Him, and not by their (man's) works; and that those who were sanctified, by God, not by their works, were also glorified by His will and not by their works or merits. 22 He did 19 Consult the texts of the Gregorian University, Rome. " Please examine : The texts of the seminaries and re- ligious Orders (exception made of some Jesuits), on such questions as Grace and Predestination. The teachings of St. Thomas and St. Augustine are followed. ^Billuart: Teologia Dogmatica: De la Predestinacion. Cardinal Noris : Same head. 22 Same authors mentioned in 23, under the same head. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 293 not sanctify those that He did not predestine, and those that are not sanctified are infallibly condemned. 23 If your principal doctors teach these things, if this is the doctrine most general in your Church, why then are you scandalized by Luther's words? Well may the words of the Lord be applied to you : Hypo- crite, 24 you see the mote in your brother's eye and do not see the beam in your own. False physician, you who undertake to cure others, cure yourself first. Are your own theological doctrines perhaps less para- lyzing to every good work? May not some one say: "If God predestined me, He did it without consider- ing or looking at my good works, and if He conceded to me such a grace, then I may rest in peace, since I shall infallibly receive sanctification and glorification. And on the contrary, if God did not remember me, if I had no part in the sovereign and eternal election, then farewell forever all hope." It avails little that they say to me, that God will concede to me sufficient grace, if they assure me at the same time that He will irremissibly and infallibly condemn me. Such reasoning must confound the wisest mind, render in- sane the most saintly, and permit the greatest evil- doer to live in absolute tranquillity. While Luther's phrase, Pecca fortiter et crede fortius, may be under- stood in the most radical sense we think that it must be differently interpreted, as we shall show further on. You may sin on condition that your faith be greater than your sin ; but there is the relation of 23 Billuart and Noris, and in general all the Augustinian or Dominican authors. Read especially P. Fernandez for the first assertion, and for the second one, read P. Weis. 24 Matt. vii. 3, 4. Luke vi. 41, 42. 294 ROMAN CATHOLICISM comparative and superlative between fortiter and for- tius, while the Augustinian and Thomistic systems hold that neither the good nor the evil is of any influence in God's eternal election. When God pre- destines, His choice is not determined by good works, nor does He cast aside because of evil deeds. 25 He does this because it so pleases Him, and He is guided absolutely by his free volition. This view places the good and the evil on the same plane, and ranges the evildoer alongside of the saint. We beg the kind reader to look over some of the authors that we have cited in the footnotes, and he will see that we do not exaggerate, but state in even milder terms the Romanistic doctrine of Predestination. We think, however, that Luther's words must be interpreted dif- ferently. We believe that the interpretation which we Cath- olics give to the daring words of St. Augustine is that which should be given to Luther's words. St. Augustine says : 26 Ama et fac quod vcllis etiam peccatum (Love and do that which you like, even sin). Can these words be interpreted as being an invitation to sin? Not in the least. The saint means to say that the love of God is the principal thing, and it is so important, that he who loves would find it impossible to displease God; then if it were possible that he could sin while loving, the love would persist, while the sin would not be a formal, but a material offense. The saint says furthermore in another pas- 25 Consult any author above mentioned, and the reader will see how much they insist on this question. 26 Roman Breviary Lessons. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 295 sage : God so greatly abhors pride, and loves humility so much, that the latter pleases Him even when it sins, and the former displeases Him even in sanctity. 27 These words must be interpreted analogously to those above, namely: if it were possible that pride could consort with sanctity, this union would be blamable, while sin united with perfect humility would be esti- mable. In the same way we should interpret Lu- ther's words : not as an invitation to sin, but as a hyperbole exalting faith, as if we should say: Be- lieve more and more, for if you do so, then sin and faith may be made compatible, and the latter will triumph over the former. If we pass from theory to practice, from theology to morals, we come across a maxim of Christ, who says repeatedly: Do not look to the words but to the works, for the tree is known by its fruit. If this were done, then we should hasten at once to embrace Reformism. What were the present Reformist na- tions while they still were Romanist, with respect to the others? Who will gainsay that we were greatly superior to them in everything, 28 in literature, phi- losophy, theology, exegesis, social culture and so forth? And what has happened since then? The Romanist nations 20 have declined more and more, so that now many of them are spoken of as dead nations, while the Reformist nations are steadily advancing in knowledge, in morality and in general progress. 27 Roman Breviary Lessons. 88 Read Erasmus' Letters at the epoch when Spain was con- sidered one of the most cultured nations. 29 Julio Ferri: Decadence of the Latin Countries and Its Causes. 296 ROMAN CATHOLICISM For anyone at all acquainted with contemporaneous statistics, this is a terrible argument against Roman- ism and most favorable to Reformism. Oh, if only there were not so much sophism and prejudice! If these were not darkening the serenity of every re- ligious discussion, the progress of Protestantism in Latin Europe would be much more rapid and ef- fective. We may say, speaking of ourselves, that convinced of the falsehood of many of the Roman tenets, which we have set forth in this book, we began to study Protestantism with the eagerness of one expecting at any moment to come across terrible revelations of scandal and corruption. We had been accustomed to read and hear in books and conversations 30 of the abominable sacrileges of the founders of Protestant- ism, their corrupt lives, their dissolute customs, their lack of religion, and their open impiety. But we were astonished and agreeably disappointed when, on visiting some Protestant congregations, we observed the order and devotion of the people, the unction and fervor of their preachers, and above all, the love that many Protestants profess for Christ, and the fervent adoration with which they regard and read the Holy Books. Oh, how willingly we would exchange the whole mass of Romanist beliefs, and practices, for these two things only: love and faith in Christ, and respect and obedience to the Holy Books. These two things would be sufficient to restore faith in the super- 80 Read any Roman author when he speaks about Protest- antism, CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 297 natural, and all the other things combined could not prevent it from being lost entirely. We are astonished to see that Protestants are tak- ing the lead in questions in which Romanists ought to lead, judging from appearances. When we began to study the great question of the prohibition of the sale of alcoholic beverages in the several states, we re- member how forcibly we were struck to observe in how many of them Protestants had triumphed, and were about to triumph in others, over the passivity and even the opposition of Catholics. 31 Who would believe this ? we asked ourselves. If we should relate this in Europe, it would be held to be a calumny, and yet we read it in credible periodicals, that while all the Reformist preachers of cities as important as New Orleans were urgent in favor of prohibition, 32 declara- tions appeared by Cardinal Gibbons in favor of the continuation of the public sale of alcoholic beverages. Who would have thought such a thing, we exclaimed, that the representatives of error and of corruption of morals, according to Romanism, should rise up against the sale of alcoholic beverages, while the dele- gates of the Pope, and the representative of Roman- ism in America, should appear in its favor. To the reader we will say that on this question we confine ourselves to relating tendencies, without un- dertaking to judge of their respective merits. This is an intricate question, involving interests as great 81 An interview with His Eminence, Cardinal Gibbons, on the liquor question, was published by the Associated Press papers. 82 New Orleans newspapers. 298 ROMAN CATHOLICISM and complex as public morals, and the people's pros- perity, and we do not possess sufficient data to take the liberty, in however humble a way, of formulating a correct opinion. We simply and sincerely state the impression produced upon us by a controversy which, at first sight, appeared to us as though the roles had been changed. The relaxation of morals with which Romanism charges Protestantism is found neither in its social tendencies nor in its customs, but on the contrary the visible prosperity of the nations, in which they are more widely spread, is very apparent. And on the other hand, as we have seen above in its theo- ries, they appear biblical, and very similar to true Romanism in such fundamental questions as Justifi- cation. Closely connected with this question and as a corol- lary to it, we have another point of controversy be- tween Reformists and Romanists, namely, the invoca- tion and worship of saints. If we examine this ques- tion with strict regard to the Bible and to theology, the decision is in favor of Protestantism. While we have in the Holy Books passages which disapprove in no uncertain language of this practice, the allusions that appear favorable to it are obscure, and by no means as clear as is the emphatic denunciation of it. If we were a Protestant we could easily answer the series of witnesses in favor of it, brought forward by Cardinal Gibbons, as follows: His Eminence under- takes to demonstrate that the invocation of saints, and especially of angels, is clearly found in the Old Testament; 33 in another chapter His Eminence in- 33 Cardinal Gibbons: Faith of Our Fathers, Chapter XIII. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 299 clines to the belief that before the condemnation of Christ the Synagogue possessed 34 the gift of sure- ness, and a kind of infallibility like that which Roman- ism ascribes to the ruling Pope. Therefore if these passages mean anything, and the Synagogue pos- sessed this prerogative of sureness and infallibility, then saints and angels should have been made the ob- jects of public and official worship and invocation dur- ing the life of the Synagogue. As Your Eminence sees, the argument is legitimate ; both premises are from Your Eminence : the first, the texts ; the second, your statement in your book. Only the conclusion is ours, we admit ; but it may also be attributed to Your Eminence, since it is contained in your premises. And now we ask you : Does Cardinal Gibbons know the ritual prescriptions of the ancient Law? Has he read the worship offered to God in the great Temple? We ask, with all the respect due His Eminence if he will kindly indicate to us in what part of the Temple ap- peared, either in sculpture or paint, the images of angels or saints? In what ritual law is their invoca- tion prescribed? In what public acts or feasts did the people come together to implore their protection and aid? With our small knowledge of the Bible and of history we have found no indication of of- ficial and public worship such as Romanism practices. If we were a Protestant, Cardinal, we should reply to you: Your Eminence appeals to the Old Testament and the Synagogue. Very well. We also appeal to these witnesses, and we should be glad to have you M Cardinal Gibbons: Faith of Our Fathers, Chapters VII, VIII, IX. 3OO ROMAN CATHOLICISM prove to us, by the ritual practices of Judaism, that we are wrong. Now let us pass from the Old to the New Testa- ment, and we shall find that the invocation and wor- ship of the saints is both anti-evangelical and anti- theological. One of the most clearly and definitely defined en- deavors of Christ is to purify His new worship from the Jewish formalism, to remove all barriers between man and God, and to proclaim the direct invocation of God by every man, and the more intimate and spir- itual this invocation, the better. You will see this clearly, if you read His conversation with the Samari- tan woman. 35 He inculcated the idea that God is with us, that whenever we ask Him He gives, when- ever we knock at His door He opens, whenever we pray to Him He hears us. 36 And as if He had not sufficiently set forth His doctrine of intimate and im- mediate communication with God, and to leave no doubt whatever, He excludes every other interven- tion and invocation. Do not call anyone good or holy except God, because He only is good ; do not call any- one father, or master, or intercessor, except God, for He only is your intercessor, master, and father. 37 There are two ideas that stand forth in this teaching of Christ: direct communication between the faithful and God, and that such communication shall not be made with the noisy wordiness with which the Phari- sees sought God. 88 John iv. 21-24. 88 Matt. vii. 7. John xiv. 23. 37 Matt, xxiii. 8-10. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 30! This is the Christian thesis, and the Roman thesis has apparently taken upon itself the task of destroy- ing it, in both senses. We ask Your Eminence to look around in the Ro- man world ; count, if you can, the temples, sanctuaries and relics of the saints, and if this is not sufficient proof, then look at the Roman Missal and Breviary. And here it seems as if Romanism had undertaken to contradict Christ more brazenly than anywhere else. The worship and invocation of saints take up more than nine-tenths of its prayers, orations and worship; of its temples, sanctuaries and images. Count, if Your Eminence can, the multitude of prayers, peti- tions, litanies, rosaries, and so forth, which Roman- ism approves, encourages and rewards. If the loud prayers of the hypocritical Pharisees disgusted Him, 38 we believe that if He should enter now into some Roman congregation He would again take up the scourge, and drive out those who pretended with such practices to call themselves His sons and faith- ful. The invocation of saints appears still more ridicu- lous and absurd if we pass from the Gospels to the- ology and history. Roman theology teaches that there is no other mediator but Christ. 39 Because of our great respect for the honor and dignity of woman- hood, we have refrained, when dealing with the in- vocation of saints, from mentioning anything con- nected with the attributes given by Romanism to the 38 Matt. vi. 7. SB Hurter, Perrone, Billuart, Cardinal Vives : De Deo Re- demptore. 3O2 ROMAN CATHOLICISM life, mediation and power of Mary, Mother of Jesus. If there is no other, why then invoke the saints? Here the Romanists find themselves in a tight place. Seeking an analogy in political life, which is absurd and even blasphemous, they say: Although the king is the state, in absolute monarchies 40 he nevertheless has his ministers, as delegates, and very often it is easier to obtain something through the mediation of his ministers, than by going to the king himself. Let us examine briefly, this great and almost blas- phemous necessity. The king, being a person with human limitations, needs his delegates to help him. But is not God omnipotent? Is His omnipotence such that it can grow weary, or that it cannot deal with all things ? Do you not proclaim 41 that God is not only the creator and conserver of all things, but that He also works in them and with them, more than they can by themselves ? Does not your theology teach 42 that from the nebulae to man, God is the prime mover, and the chief cause, of all that happens in the uni- verse? Do you not say that God cooperates in the gravitation of inert bodies, vegetates in the plants, feels in the beast, thinks and desires in man, to such a point that all these movements are even more of God than of the creatures themselves, and therefore you call these latter, secondary causes? If then, 43 40 St. Alfonso Ma. de Ligorio: On the Invocation of Saints. 41 St. Thomas, Billuart, Hurter, P. Fernandez, Perrone : De Deo Conservatore. "Billuart, St. Thomas, Hurter, etc., etc.: Del Concurso Divino. Cardinals Gonzalez and Zigliara: Teodicia, Del Concurso Divino. "The Catholic priests when answering objections put to them, by unbelievers; read especially: Billuart and Perrone. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 303 you answer the impious, when he objects that it would be too much work for God to do all this, that far from being so, God does all this without the least trouble and with absolute facility, why do you have recourse to the theory of delegates in dealing with man and his salvation? Moreover, the king cannot always know the minds of his vassals, nor are the latter always sufficiently eloquent to plead their own cause; and besides, the king looks to the person, that is to say, he is partial. For all these reasons people find it convenient to go to his friends and favorites. But, my Roman friends, is your God as ignorant as many kings are wont to be ? Is your God also among those who let themselves be seduced by fine words? Is your God also an accepter of persons, partial and unjust? Don't you see that by appealing to this par- tiality as a good thing you blaspheme the other divine attributes? No, neither the intervention nor the wor- ship of saints finds a good support in good theology. Only from the point of view of history, we would admit, not the invocation and worship of saints, but the retelling of their lives, with due approbations, to serve as examples to later men. But this does not mean that temples should be built in their honor, nor pictures painted of them with aureoles, nor should they be invested with a power which is absurd and anti-theological. To commemorate them, it is suffi- cient to know their lives, and to preserve pictures of them and things that once belonged to them, but with- out ascribing to either of these a power and virtue which are contrary to faith. Respect, gratitude, and admiration are admissible, and great moralizing 21 304 ROMAN CATHOLICISM agencies; but invocation, adoration and worship cor- rupt the faith and are detrimental to the character of the worshiper. Do not confound one thing with another. Therefore the example cited by Cardinal Gibbons in his chapter seems to us very inexact. 4 * Does Your Eminence think that this secular respect and admiration are identical with the Roman cult and invocation? If this were so, we would beg to ask His Eminence to review his theological studies and reread the Roman Liturgy. Then he could refer to a multitude of acts and practices, he could speak of innumerable miracles and relics which are the great- est laughing-stock of the religion, and among its blackest abuses. 45 But as it is not within our design to tread the byways of scandal, we will end this chap- ter in proclaiming, that if faith is sufficient for justi- fication, then the worship and invocation of saints are neither necessary nor fitting to conserve it. "Cardinal Gibbons: Chapter XIV, pp. 215, 216. "Those wishing to read on this subject a very interesting book, full of historical testimonies, can secure the work of Roberto Roberts: Title, Cachivaches de Antano. CHAPTER XXL THE SACRAMENTS. IN agreement with the principles laid down, we shall discuss only two of the sacraments: confession and the Eucharist. We shall not speak of baptism, because both Protestants and Romanists recognize and observe it almost in the same way. Of the other four sacraments we shall say a few words at the end, in order to indicate the fundamental principles in which Romanism pretends to found them. The most important of all the sacraments, accord- ing to the Roman doctrine, is that of confession. There is none on the observance of which it insists with greater obstinacy, nor which it strives more as- siduously to deduce from the Gospels. Unfortunately for its endeavors, the more progress is made in the study of exegesis and antiquity, and the more closely the primitive witnesses cited by Romanism are ex- amined in the light of these studies, the more their testimony loses in value. 1 In order to interpret cor- rectly certain Biblical passages, we must bear in mind that the Hebrew people observed a kind of confession in their way. 2 "Confess your sins to God; be sorry 1 Jaugey: Diccionario Apologetico de la Fe, head, Auricu- lar Confession. Encyclopedia Britannica: Heads, Penance, Confession. 2 Matt. iii. 2, 6, 7, 8. (305) 306 ROMAN CATHOLICISM for them; rend your hearts by penitence," etc., etc. sentences like these occur frequently in the Bible. When our Saviour appeared, John the Baptist was preaching the baptism of penitence on the banks of the Jordan. 3 This desire to confess their sins to God and to repent of them was moreover a part of the ritual recognized by the mass of the pious Israelites. Jesus Christ then approved of and encouraged this regenerative impulse. What He says in regard to confession and repentance of sin must be understood as John the Baptist understood it, and therefore as in those days the pious Israelites understood it. 4 If Jesus Christ had intended any innovation in this mat- ter He would have so expressed Himself, clearly and forcibly, as He always does when He wishes to pro- claim doctrines that are new or not believed in by His contemporaries. 5 If no mention is made of it, this is a clear indication that on this point He did not teach or demand more than John preached and taught. This view is further supported by history. Had auricular confession been a divine precept, in the apos- tolic and sub-apostolic epoch, we should frequently find it recommended. Take the sacraments of bap- tism and the Eucharist : there is not an apostle or an apostolic father of the apostolic period who does not speak of them. But why are they silent as to auricu- lar confession? 8 Is this not the strongest possible argument against its existence? And the argument 3 Mark i. 4, 15. * Luke iii. 23. B Consult the Gospels as to Charity and Eucharist. "Jaugey: Diccionario Apologetico de la Fe, head, Auricu- lar Confession. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 307 is still further strengthened if we add that the first words which we find on confession refer to another kind, and not to auricular confession. 7 There are a multitude of witnesses with regard to public confes- sion, both in the Orient and in Europe, namely, the councils and the Fathers, in the first century, who tell us of confession; why, then, do we not find among them any clear and definite reference to auricular con- fession? Had it been general and obligatory, had it been observed by all the faithful, how could we ac- count for this premeditated silence? And that our authorities are silent on this point will be admitted by anyone who has made even a cursory study of the tradition and the history of the sub-apostolic period. 8 Moreover, the language of St. Augustine and St. Chrysostom shows beyond a doubt that auricu- lar confession did not exist in the first centuries. For if it had existed as a divine precept, the language of these holy Fathers would have to be interpreted as being opposed to it, a supposition that would be of- fensive and almost blasphemous. 9 It is therefore evident to every impartial historian, that confession, like celibacy and the doctrine of in- fallibility, is of pure ecclesiastical origin. And again, the Roman Church is contradicting herself. Roman- ism teaches that contrition wipes out the sins before 7 Same work, head, Public Confession. Read the Catholic historians Eusebius, Rohrbacher, Fleury and Rivas : On pub- lic confessioji. 8 Read Migne : Apostolic Fathers. Jaugey : Heads, Con- fession, Penance. 8 Encyclopedia Britannica : Heads, Confession, Penance. 308 ROMAN CATHOLICISM absolution by the priest. 10 Do not say to me here that this is conditional on the vow or the intention of confessing them; for the best and sanest theolo- gians do not hold such a vow to be explicitly made, 11 but reduce it to the simple intention of complying with some other condition imposed, and therefore they themselves proclaim that no such obligation as a divine precept exists, and that the simple confession or an expression of detestation of the sin, uttered be- fore God with true sorrow for having committed it, is sufficient. There being, as we have seen, no Divine precept such as the sacrament of confession, the Church would undertake a reform for its own benefit by abolishing this obligation. It is one of the most ob- jectionable practices for the faithful. The majority of those who separate from the Roman Church do so because of this humiliating precept. It may be ar- gued by the Romanist that those who. leave the Church because of confession do so because they wish to con- tinue in sin and could not do so if required to confess. In rebuttal it is enough to say that the vast majority who renounce the Church do so, because they are satisfied that the confessional is but another of the ecclesiastical sophistries for retaining power over the minds of the masses who do not investigate for them- selves, and are either content to remain in subjection or are made so through fear and superstition. And those who do not separate themselves do not comply 1() Jaugey: Heads, Contrition, Confession, Penance. Ber- tier: Theological Compendium, speaking about contrition. 11 Same authors and heads. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 309 with it, as we have seen in a previous chapter. It may be said in general that it has fallen into disuse. On the other hand it involves great dangers, where no benefits appear. The practice of confession is one of the most inimical to celibacy. The priest is not made of brass, as Job says, nor is he an angel, 12 as unfortunately we all know. And how could a man remain chaste, who by virtue of his office constantly hears the most inciting references, and is brought in contact with scenes most likely to inflame even the least ardent imagination ? On the part of the faithful no reform is to be seen. The Latin nations are on the whole more immoral than the Anglo-Saxons. When- ever the faithful shall accustom themselves to confess to God and to feel true repentance for their sins, then their desire to depart from evil will become more firm, and their repentance more effective and lasting. The false hope that sin is forgiven in the act of ab- solution, and the absurd assurance that it remains forgiven after the penitent has risen from kneeling before the priest, dull the pangs of conscience and kill the sorrow for sin. But when the believer, the true believer, finds God standing between his conscience and his sin, then he will feel that he is not forgiven until he has truly atoned for it, and a deeply felt sor- row has wiped it out. If we add to this argument the further statement that in some dioceses, and as far as may be seen, everywhere in general, in view of the latest doctrine of the Church, the confessional is in many cases a menace to honesty, not only the "Job vi. 12. 3IO ROMAN CATHOLICISM Church but even the governments ought to ask and work for its abolishment. The other sacrament in regard to which there are grave differences is that of the Eucharist. Speaking with the sincerity for which I have always striven, I may say that if the passages of the Bible referring to it are to be taken literally, there is no point in which Romanism is apparently more right than on this. Some passages seem to indicate definitely that we are not dealing here with symbolism or metaphor of any kind, but that the body and the blood of Je- sus Christ is received materially and bit by bit, not in a spiritual sense, but in a real and physical sense. But if we collate all those passages, if we bear in mind the general symbolism of the Bible, and above all, if we consider the contradictions and absurdities involved in such a doctrine, then we shall clearly see that they can be interpreted only in a spiritual sense. Let us begin with St. John. This evangelist reports as follows: Chapter vi. 35-61. "I am the living bread which came down from heaven : if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever : and the bread that I will give- is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. "The Jews therefore strove among themselves, say- ing, How can this man give us his flesh to eat ? "Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. "Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 3! I "For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. "He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. "As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me. "This is that bread which came down from heaven : not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever. "These things said he in the synagogue, as he taught in Capernaum. "Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying: who can hear it? "When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this of- fend you?" If this entire passage is to be taken literally, then we are asked to believe that from that moment the faithful were to eat of the flesh of Christ and to drink of His divine blood, because the Evangelist also speaks of the present in many of his affirmations: "This is the bread which came down from heaven" ; "whoso eateth my body, and drinketh my blood," etc. To interpret this passage literally would be contradictory to Ro- man tradition 13 and many other passages of the Gos- pels, and the Apostolic writings, which indicate that this sacrament was instituted on the night of the Last 18 Hurter, Schouppe, Bertier, Cardinal Vives : When they speak about the eucharistic institution. 312 ROMAN CATHOLICISM Supper. 14 Therefore we cannot give to that passage a strictly literal sense. Furthermore, St. John, among the Biblical writers, is the one most addicted to meta- phorical and symbolical language. He tells us that Christ calls Himself the Way, 15 the Life, the Shepherd, the Door, etc. If we consider the last words quoted from that chapter, we see clearly that he does not speak of His material body and blood, since he says that the flesh does not serve for anything, and further ; "My words are spirit and life." Hence we must un- derstand them as meaning something spiritual, and not material. Let us now turn to St. Paul. His words are those which are quoted by the Church at the feast of Cor- pus Christi I Corinthians xi : 20-30 : "When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper. "For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. "What ! have ye not houses to eat and to drink in ? or despise ye the Church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you in this? I praise you not. "For I received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: "And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and " St. Matthew, St. Luke, and St. Mark, when they speak about the Holy Supper. St. Paul, I Corinthians xi. 23, 24. 15 John iv. 13, 14; x. 1-18; xi. 25; xv. 1-6. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 313 said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. "After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in re- membrance of me. "For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come. "Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. "But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. "For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eat- eth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. "For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep." At first sight it might seem that these words can be interpreted only in the Romanistic sense, since the Apostle affirms that he who eats and drinks unworth- ily, sins against the body and blood of Christ. But if this chapter is closely examined, we shall find that there is perhaps no passage which is a better denial of the Roman dogma of transubstantiation. From the context it appears that the primitive Christians came together to eat and drink, each one his own food and his own wine. And what caused the indignation of St. Paul was, not that they brought their food and drink into the Church, but that thereby they broke up equality and fraternity ; that they did not wait for one another, and that some ate much and well, while. 314 ROMAN CATHOLICISM others ate scantily and poorly, that some drank to the extent of becoming intoxicated, while others re- mained thirsty. If the sacrament had been previously consecrated by the priest, and if this primitive peo- ple had believed in transubstantiation, then such abuses would not have seemed likely, such a short time after Paul's preaching. This entire passage clearly indicates that in those primitive times, the Eucharist was in the nature of a meal in common, a token of unity and charity, in the belief that, through the promise of Christ, this meal had a spiritual grace, imparted to it by Him. This interpretation becomes still more clear if we read verses 16 and 17 of the preceding chapter. In these verses also St. Paul, while he affirms that the bread is the body of Christ, and the cup is His blood, at the same time indicates clearly that this must not be understood in a material sense, but as being symbolical of collectivity and union, body and congregation being here synonymous, as are body, bread and faithful. I beg the reader please to read carefully and impartially the passages indicated in St. John and St. Paul, and he will per- ceive that their signification is clearly spiritual and mystical, and not concrete and material. However, that which most forcibly induces us to believe that Romanism is in error, is the series of absurdities which follows upon the admission of the doctrine of transubstantiation. Let us examine this doctrine in the light of scholastic theology and phi- losophy. It is held as an axiom 16 among the Roman 16 Jaugey : Head, Mysteries. F. Camara's Answer to Drap- CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 315 apologists, that no mystery, however incomprehensible it may be for human reason, may involve any mani- fest contradiction with itself. Since the one God is the author of nature and of grace, both orders of truths proceed from the same origin, and it is there- fore impossible that they should contradict each other. 17 From this conclusion they deduce that ev- erything which clearly contradicts reason must be thrown out. Let us examine the doctrine of transub- stantiation in the light of this truth. According to Romanism, when Christ instituted the Eucharist, on the night of the Last Supper, He Himself gave the first communion to the apostles. 18 Both of these truths are believed without qualification by Romanism. Very well. Christ was then mortal, individual, and en- dowed with human feelings. If during this commun- ion the bread was transformed into the body of Christ and the wine into his blood, then they were of ne- cessity transformed into such material as Christ was composed of at that sublime moment; consequently the apostles had to eat and drink, each and every one of the living mortal and sensitive flesh and blood of this same Christ. The great and grave contradictions involved in this supposition will be apparent to every- one. God, notwithstanding His omnipotence, cannot make a thing to be one only, and at the same time per, chapter, Mysteries. Cardinal Gonzalez: The Bible and Science. 17 Father Mir : Head, Harmony between Faith and Reason. Father Mendive: Faith Indicated in the Natural and Super- natural Order. Canons of the Vatican Council : On Faith and Reason. 18 St. Matthew, St. Luke, St. Mark, and St. Paul, same chapter as mentioned in note 14 above. 310* ROMAN CATHOLICISM and under the same conditions two or more things also, for this involves a contradiction; and according to the theologians, a contradiction cannot be real- ized ; not because God has not the .power to bring it to pass, but the thing cannot be done, as it would involve its own annihilation. Let us elucidate this profound theological doctrine by analogous clearer doctrines. When Romanism speaks mystically of persons 20 who appear at the same time in two different places, it feels obliged to say in explanation that in one of these places this person is not present in reality, but the apparition seen is merely some moral image of it, since it is re- pugnant to reason that one single individual should resolve himself into two separate individuals at the same time. In speaking of the mystery of the Holy Trinity, 21 Romanism says that there is no contradiction, for, al- though it may appear that there are three and one, neither the word one as such refers to the three, nor the word three as such refers to the number one ; but the concepts in virtue of which we make our state- ments regarding the one and three, are different. In the case under consideration, however, this rea- soning does not apply: Christ was at that moment a man as such, like any other man, a single, definite in- dividual, and all his members held the same relation, "Read Cardinals Zigliara and Gonzalez: Teodicea, on the Impossible. Granclaude, Mendive: Teodicea, same head. Jaugey: Head, Impossible. 20 Escaramelli : Obras Misticas : De las Apariciones. 21 Perrone : On the Mystery of the Virgin Mary ; On the Answers to the Objections. Jaugey: Head, Trinity. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 317 as single, definite parts of his body. As a definite personality He did not have more eyes than we have, or more arms, more hearts, etc. If the transubstantia- tion took place at the Last Supper, how could all the apostles present receive him equally and completely? Do not point here to the omnipotence of God, for as we have seen above, God does not bring about contra- dictions, and therefore, would not make Christ at the same time into one and thirteen definite physi- cal personalities, even supposing that only the twelve apostles were present on that occasion to partake of the Last Supper. Furthermore, if the doctrine of Romanism be true, and Christ on that occasion was mortal and percep- tible by the senses, and His body not yet endowed with the glorious gifts it now possesses, then the apos- tles would receive His body and blood as Christ pos- sessed them at the time, that is to say, solid flesh ex- tended in space, as any other body ; for if Romanism says that they took it in a spiritual and supernatural way, and not the physical and external body before them, then Romanism capitulates to Protestantism, which holds that Christ is present morally and spir- itually, though truly and concretely. I beg the reader to examine carefully these arguments, and he will see that it is against reason to believe that the apostles could receive the material flesh and blood of Christ in that Holy Communion. The same objection, as leading to no conclusion, can be applied to the doctrine, after the resurrection and glorification of Christ; for although His divine body possesses the glorious gifts, it exists individually 318 ROMAN CATHOLICISM as one. The comparisons that some Romanists bring forward, as for instance, that the sun 22 although be- ing a single object, is yet seen by us all completely and entirely, and that the voice, although an entity, may be heard entirely by a multitude of persons, are not worthy of the consideration of anyone with even a small knowledge of philosophy. For those are ex- amples of vibration, where every wave leads back to an initial impulse ; but we are dealing with an entirely different question, of how a body existing as a physi- cal unity never forget that can be partaken of en- tirely and at the same time by millions of men. If this is not a manifest contradiction, then we do not know what may be called contradiction. We meet with the same difficulties when we con- sider the act and the disappearance of the sacrament. In the act there appears annihilation, 23 since the bread and the wine return to nothing, a supposition which contradicts the general principle that God creates or annihilates nothing; and it follows therefrom, ac- cording to Romanism, that the body and the blood of Christ disappear when the sacramental elements of bread and wine disappear. 24 So that these being mere accidences, determine the subsistence or disappearance of the body and blood of Christ. In order the better to see the series of philosophical absurdities to which this reasoning leads, it must be remembered that these 22 Father Manuel Malo: Eucharistic Manual. 23 Cardinal Vives, Bertier, Hurter, etc., etc. : On the Eu- charist. 24 Billuart, Perrone, P. Fernandez, etc., etc.: On Transub- stantiation. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 319 elements are not the subject in which the body 25 and blood of Christ is contained, since that body and blood are received with the corresponding supposition that they are Christ. Moreover, these elements remain without subject, and one of the most hotly discussed questions 26 in the Romanist theology is to assign the corresponding sub- ject to these elements. If this entire doctrine is ex- amined impartially and critically, it will be seen that such transubstantiation cannot be admitted either on Biblical, theological or philosophical grounds. About the other four sacraments it is hardly worth while to say anything. 27 Romanism bases the sacra- ment of marriage of the fact that Jesus was present at the marriage of Cana, and further by His words : Quo d Deus conjunxit, homo non separet (That which God hath joined together, let not man put asunder). But the various views held agree neither as to the form, nor the minister, nor even as to the constituent es- sentials, as some hold that Christ instituted it when He was present at the marriage of Cana ; others, when He uttered the above words, and others again after the Resurrection. The sacraments of confirmation and of extreme unction are based on those passages in the Acts of the Apostles, in which it is said that the apostles laid their hands on those who had already been baptized; and on the words of St. James, who 28 Cardinal Vives, Bertier, Hurter, etc., etc. : On the Eu- charist. 29 Billuart, Casanova : On the Eucharist. Jaugey : Head, Eucharist. 27 Cardinal Vives, Bertier, Hurter, etc., etc. : De Deo Re- demptore. 22 32O ROMAN CATHOLICISM commands the apostles to anoint and pray for the sick. But as these are not necessary for salvation, accord- ing to Romanism, they cannot be considered as a practical obstacle to the union of Romanists and Protestants. The sacrament of ordination being ad- mitted by Protestants as an ecclesiastical institution, at least in its main features, it would matter little to change the name in preserving the thing. CHAPTER XXII. PURGATORY AND THE MASS. AMONG the Romanist doctrines there is none, per- haps, which seems to have less foundation, either on Biblical grounds or for theologic reasons, than that of purgatory. Being as it is a purely ecclesiastical in- vention, it partakes of the qualities of its origin. It is a heterogeneous mixture of affirmations, so discor- dant and contradictory, even for Romanism, that it is sufficient to gather together the opinions of the prin- cipal saints and the foremost theologians in order to be convinced that not even Romanism knows what to make out of this dogma. 1 We shall first formulate here the dogma of purgatory, and then we shall refute the slight biblical grounds on which it pretends to found its existence. Is there a purgatory? Romanism proclaims as an article of faith it does exist, at the Councils of Flor- ence and Trent. 2 And here we come upon the first stumbling-block. Romanism admits that it can pro- claim as a dogma only that which is found clearly stated in the Bible or that which has been unwaver- ingly and unanimously handed down by Romanist tra- 1 Read Bertier : Theological Compendium ; head, Purga- tory. 2 Consult the Canons of said Council. (321) 322 ROMAN CATHOLICISM dition as a truth received from the apostles. 3 The slight biblical foundation, as we shall see, does not authorize Romanism to establish an entire dogma like that of purgatory. Is it authorized to do so by tradition? Tradition is very far from being unani- mous and unwavering on this point. A sub-apostolic father like St. Irenaeus denies its existence. As wise a Father as St. Augustine, living at the advanced pe- riod of the fifth century, speaks of the existence of pur- gatory as something admissible and probable but not an assured dogmatic truth. 4 And here we have one of the greatest inconsistencies of Romanism. It cannot but confess that the depository of revelation was closed with the apostles. 5 When accused by Reform- ism that it has introduced innovations, proclaiming dogmas which are not found in the Bible, Romanism says very self-complacently : Although they are not found in the Bible, we have received them as coming from the apostles through unanimous and uninter- rupted tradition. And when it is confronted with testimony to the contrary by men like Origen, Tertul- lian, St. Augustine and others on this and similar questions, it exclaims: Ah, if these men did not think as we do, there are others who did, and that is suffi- cient. We see here that the unity and uninterrupted- 8 Read Councils of Trent and Vatican, head, De Traditione. Perrone: De Vera Religione. Hettinger, Hurter: Theology, same head. *Read St. Augustine's comments on I Corinthians iii. 15. These are his words : "Such a belief (as the existence of ex- piatory purgatory) is not incredible, but its existence is cer- tainly discussable," (Incredibile non est utrum ita sit quaeri potest). 5 Jaugey: Head, Revelation. Cardinal Vives, Hurter, Per- rone, etc. : Same head. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 323 ness to which Romanism appeals is not the unity and uninterruptedness taught by logic and proclaimed by sane criticism, but a kind of puppet with a multiplicity of heads, which Romanism exhibits to its faithful, discovering to them now one face and now another, like the exhibits of a wandering showman. This pro- cedure is very convenient, but it is far from being rational and serious. Our statement gains further in strength, if we bear in mind that both St. Augustine and Origen were deeply versed in the entire Catholic doctrine. Who would dare to cast a doubt upon the profound knowl- edge of all matters pertaining to Catholicism of wise men like St. Augustine? Who was more at home in the Bible and in tradition than he? And if he, who knew so well both these sources of truth, did not pro- claim the existence of purgatory as something certain and dogmatic, this was a clear indication that the doc- trine of purgatory, as such, did not proceed from the apostles. And if it did not proceed from the apostles, how can an opinion like this develop and be trans- formed into a dogma? Here the Romanists are getting into a blind alley. They admit that infallibility is neither an inspiration nor authorizes an innovation. 6 This prerogative au- thorizes Romanism to promulgate as dogmas, those truths alone which are clearly contained in the deposi- tory of revelation, namely, the Gospels. How, then, can an opinion develop and be transformed into an un- 6 Cardinal Gibbons : Faith of Our Fathers, The Pope's In- fallibility. Casanova, Hettinger, Hurter, Perrone, Schouppe : Same head. 324 ROMAN CATHOLICISM assailable and dogmatic doctrine? On the promulga- tion of the infallible Pope? No, because infallibility is neither inspiration nor innovation. Through tra- dition? No, because witnesses as authoritative as St. Augustine hold that this doctrine is not a certainty but is merely an opinion. 7 Do not say to us here that other holy fathers believe in it as a certainty ; for aside from declaring thereby that the testimony of the others is better and worth more than that of St. Au- gustine a statement that could not stand before seri- ous criticism we should arrive at the admission that the tradition is neither unanimous nor continuous, a statement that would cut the supports from under the fundamental principles of the tradition. Therefore, if Romanism thinks that it is sufficient if some be- lieve while others may hold different views in or- der that the tradition may be called unanimous and uninterrupted, then it may happen that some day we may meet with a Pope ready to expound to us the dogma of millenarianism, since there were saints like Irenaeus who believed in it and held it to have been derived from the apostles. 8 Such a mode of argument is far from the seriousness demanded by true criti- cism, and the directness demanded by logic. This kind of weathercock tradition, which means one thing for one party and another thing for another, which is not one but many, which is continuous according to one concept and interrupted according to another, may serve to build card houses, but not to establish so 7 Same authority and head as note 4. 8 Read Baronio and Rohrbacher : On St. Irenaeus ; St. Irenaeus himself can be read in Migne. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 325 serious a matter as a dogma of faith. But let us pro- ceed with our discussion. What does Romanism know about purgatory? The kind reader may now prepare to witness a show of moving pictures, for I can find no better term to describe the heterogeneous mass of opinions regarding this unfortunate but lucrative dogma in the Roman theology. Let us examine it more closely. Is there a place in the universe for pur- gatory, distinct from hell and heaven? There is none, answer some, except that hell itself serves both for the lost and for the elect who there purge them- selves of their sins. 9 Yes, it does exist, answer others, and it is a place intermediate between heaven and hell. 10 That is not so, say yet others, since there is neither a heaven nor a hell, nor a purgatory. There is no special place except as it pleases God to appoint one where the soul shall suffer for its sins, and it might be that God would assign to the soul its own hearth and its own habitation as the place where to expiate its sins. 11 And between these conflicting af- firmations and negations the Romanist is more in the dark as to the location of purgatory, than is the Prot- estant, who does not weary himself with seeking for it, because he knows that it does not exist. What do souls suffer in purgatory? Oh, answer some, the most horrible punishments, the same kinds of punishment as the lost, but alleviated by the hope * S. Alfonso Ma. de Ligorio : Obras Dogmaticas, vol. vii, p. 266. 10 The majority of Roman Theologians agree that this opin- ion is called "common opinion." 11 St. Thomas, St. Francis de Sales, Sta. Catalina de Bo- Ionia are of the same* opinion. 326 ROMAN CATHOLICISM that they will come to an end in time. 12 That is not so, answer others, these are not the punishments of hell, but analogous to them, yet terrible. 13 It is neither the one nor the other, say the third disputants ; for the souls in purgatory there is no punishment of the flesh, there is neither fire nor any other sensible pain, but only the pain of being condemned, the unutterable longing to possess God. 14 Choose whichever opinion most appeals to you, for not only are they all Romanist, but also with each one you may say that Romanism knows as little about the kinds of punishments as it does about the place. What are the relations of the souls in purgatory to us? Oh, excellent, say some, as they can see us and we can see them, they can hear us and we can take them for our mediators with God. 15 Do not believe that, say others, they can neither be seen nor can they see. Do not call upon them, for since they cannot plead for themselves, neither can they plead for you. 16 Thus between the affirmations of some, and the de- nials of others, the believer does not get any definite information, theoretically. I say theoretically, for in practice all the disputants dwell on the benefits which the souls derive from their sufferings in purgatory, and how grateful these souls are to the faithful who pray for them, especially if such prayer takes the 12 This is the opinion of St. Alfonso Ma. de Ligorio and others. 13 This is the opinion of nearly all theologians. u St. Francis de Sales, Sta. Catalina de Bolonia, and the majority of Greek writers, are of this opinion. 15 St. Alfonso Ma. de Ligorio and others. 16 St. Thomas and others. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 327 form of responses and masses ; as these are generally paid for, they are the most beneficial and commend- able practices. And there we come upon the most knotty point of the question. What relation is there between the souls in purgatory, God, the sacrifices and prayers? For anyone well versed in Roman theology the answer is a kind of hieroglyphic which can hardly be deciphered theoretically as far as ideas are con- cerned; but practically and as regards actions it is a most abundant spring at which the thirsty Romanist may quaff in deep draughts. Roman theology teaches that death ends the period for performing meritorious acts. 17 The souls, there- fore, can do nothing meritorious; yet they practice in a heroic degree the virtues of faith, hope and char- ity. This means that although these most sublime virtues are practiced in a real way, such practice does not carry with it the reward which, Romanism teaches, elsewhere always accompanies every supernatural act performed through grace. 18 The souls can do nothing meritorious ; and yet, according to the strict rules of justice, they deserve that their sentence should end. 11 ' They can do nothing meritorious, and yet the merits of others may be applied to them. Anyone capable of coordinating this entire series of incoherencies could carry off the first prize in any international riddle contest. But let us go a step further and see how the 17 Casanova, Hettinger, Hurter, Perrone, Schouppe in their respective Theologies ; head, De Novissimis. 18 Any Roman author speaking of the souls in purgatory. 19 Read any Roman author regarding the satisfaction of the souls in purgatory. 328 ROMAN CATHOLICISM Roman doctrine not only blasphemes the justice of God, but also robs men of their worldly goods. Ask Romanism.: Do the sacrifices which the faith- ful pay to you in order that you may apply them for the benefit of the souls in purgatory, help them for certain or not? If they do then the wicked and the rich who have left many pious bequests before their death, or whose heirs pay for many masses and re- sponses, go quickly to heaven ; while the poor and the humble, who cannot leave anything for the benefit of their souls, are forced to remain for a longer time in purgatory. This is to say that the eternal justice of God is bought and sold as radishes are bought and sold in the market place. Can there be any greater blasphemy of the righteousness and impartiality of the infinite justice of the Eternal One ? And if the sacri- fices are of no special benefit to the individual soul for whom they are made, then why deceive faithful ones, impressing upon them the efficacy of particular inten- tions when applied to a special soul? Why insist so strongly that it is most helpful to say a mass for the liberation of one single soul? In both of these cases Romanism is again caught in a blind alley. In the first it tramples upon Divine justice, and in the sec- ond it deceives the faithful. It does not avail here to appeal to the doctrine of St. Thomas, 20 who holds that the sacrifices are applied as God wills it, for the diffi- culty is not thereby removed. If the individual sac- rifices benefit in particular the faithful in whose name they are made, then the rich are favored, and a slur 20 Read St. Thomas on this subject. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 329 is cast upon the justice of God. If they do not bene- fit the designated souls, then your sincerity and hon- esty with the faithful is at fault. Therefore instead of preaching- so much on the excellency of the sacrifice of the mass for the liberation of the souls, you should say to the faithful : You pay in order that the soul in which you are interested may be redeemed; but honesty compels us to say that the sacrifice in which you believe may not be applied according to your in- tentions. It may be applied elsewhere, for the divi- sion of the gift rests with God only. The doctrine of purgatory appears still more ridicu- lous if we examine the sacrifice of the mass itself. The Romanists say, that the sacrifice of Christ on the cross was sufficient for the redemption of this world and thousands and millions of other worlds. If that be the case, why repeat a sacrifice which has been sufficiently completed? Why assume that thousands and millions of priests repeat the sacrifice of the cross in a bloodless rite, when the first sacrifice was everlasting and sufficient and nothing can be added to it? Oh, if it were not for the stipend of the masses, if this sacrifice were not one of the most general and prolific sources of income of hungry Romanism, it certainly would not fasten upon a practice opposed to the Bible and to reason. Read St. Paul 21 and you will see that there is no other priest but Christ and no other sacrifice but that of His passion. But it was deemed expedient to have the faithful contribute the mass money, and so there was formulated an entire 21 Hebrews ix. 15, 35-27; vii. 27; x. 10. 33O ROMAN CATHOLICISM theology, dealing with the second redemption and the second sacrifice. And proclaiming that all and each of the masses have an infinite efficacy and therefore a single one of them is sufficient for the liberation of all the souls, 22 Romanism invented the series of three, seven and thirty masses to be applied to the liberation of a soul. And when asked for the reason of this con- tradiction, it replies that the application rests with God and is not within the power of the faithful nor the priest. 23 Let us examine for a moment the patent theological contradiction involved in this doctrine. According to the Romanists not only is the mass efficacious in it- self, but it is also infinitely extensive in application. Very well, then : if its entire efficacy applies, then one single mass would be an all-sufficient sacrifice for the liberation of all the souls. 24 And if God does not ap- ply it all, how can we reasonably explain why He pre- serves for Himself a part of its efficacy? What ra- tional or humanitarian objects are obtained by such restrictions ? Furthermore we come upon the following philo- sophical contradiction : Something infinite, from which a part is taken away, produces one of the two follow- ing alternatives : first, If after a part taken away from the infinite it remain still infinite, then, if the part taken from it is added again, we would have the in- finite plus the part added to it ; or second, if after you 22 Bertier, Vives, Schouppe and other Roman authors, when speaking on the sacrifice of the mass. 23 This is the opinion of nearly all the followers of St. Thomas' school. 24 Read Bertier on the sacrifice of the mass. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 331 take a part away from the infinite the remainder be- comes then finite, you will have the deduction that the infinite can be constituted by aggregating parts of finite thing, and neither of these two assumptions is admitted in good, sound, philosophical reasoning. 25 Nor will it avail to say that although the efficacy is infinite it can be applied finitely, since the capacity of the souls to whom it is applied is wanting. Such an affirmation leaves the difficulty unsolved, since the effi- cacy of one single mass completely absorbs, as we have said, the power of reception which the souls pos- sess. Let not the Romanist deceive himself. Be his answer what it will, purgatory and the mass appear, even within his own philosophy and theology, as a mixture of incoherencies and absurdities. Ah, if all the faithful would act as the author saw, not a year and a half ago, a simple Mexican Indian act, then this absurd business would soon cease. This Indian came with a serious face to a priest and asked him to say mass and make various responses for one of his relatives. The priest inquiring of what class he wished them, the Indian replied that they should be of the best. Then the priest, in anticipation of a good fee, solemnly chanted the mass and the re- sponses. When he had finished, the Indian came to him again and asked: "Well, Father, do you think that the mass and the responses have helped my rela- tive?" The priest, thinking that the more he exag- gerated, the larger the fee would be, extolled to him the infinite efficacy of the mass and the great good that 25 Cardinal Gonzalez and Zigliara: On the conception of the Infinite. Jaugey: Same head. 33 2 ROMAN CATHOLICISM was done by the responses. Greatly rejoiced to hear this, the Indian continued: "Then you think, Father, that my relative has gone to heaven?" "You may piously believe that," replied the priest. "In that case, Father, many thanks, and may all go well with you; for if he has left purgatory, it matters little if I pay you or not, and if he should return to purgatory he would be a great fool. So good-bye." With that he left, not paying a cent. 26 If those who pay should disappear, then those who take the money would soon cease to perform service. The following are the texts on which Romanism pretends to found the doctrine of purgatory. A pas- sage in Maccabees, where it is said that Judas Macca- baeus gave money to the temple in order that the priests might offer sacrifices for the soldiers who had fallen in one of his battles. Quando lex non distingiiit, neque nos distinguere debemus (If the law does not make a distinction, we cannot). The author who wrote those words did not apply them to purgatory, but to the general resurrection. He says distinctly that Judas Maccabaeus, in making his donation, showed clearly that he was really thinking of the resurrection. Therefore, even if Protestantism believed this passage to be inspired, it could interpret the same in a sense contrary to Romanism. The other passage is the one saying that certain sins cannot be forgiven, either in this or in the other life, and it seems incredible that Romanism should dare to cite it in favor of its doctrine of purgatory. Wtei? 8(5 This happened in the Diocese of Puebla, Mexico, whort I was present and witnessed the incident. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 333 this text is held up as contradicting the all-inclusive power of absolution to forgive all sins, Romanism re- plies : this text is a hyperbole, to indicate that there are some sins which are greater than others, and some the gravest of all ; it must not be taken literally. We admit this interpretation, and we think that it is a good one to support us in saying once again that no appeal to the Bible, or tradition, or theology, can demonstrate the existence of purgatory. CHAPTER XXIII. THE ROMAN DOCTRINE AND MAN IN HIS TRIPLE ASPECT RELIGIOUS, SCIENTIFIC AND SOCIAL. THERE are two general ways in which Roman- ism may be studied. One of these, which is partial and incomplete, we might call the Roman hy- pothesis. 1 This undertakes to conciliate Romanism with other creeds, rather than to expound fully and frankly its doctrine; seeking the limits to which it may go without too manifestly confusing the believer in his faith, and what in given and determined cases the nations may demand. The other method, which we might call the Romanist thesis, studies its doctrines in their entire extent and significance, expounding the aims and ideals of Romanism, its true spirit, its complete life and history. As the expositors of this doctrine, we should fall short of the truth if we did not proceed according to the second method. What, then, does the Roman thesis teach in regard to the religious, scientific and social liberty of a man? Far from agreeing with Cardinal Gibbons in his Chapter XVII, we think, on the contrary, that liberty in these directions is incompatible with the Romanist thesis, that the affirmation of the latter necessarily in- volves the negation of the former. And here is our answer in full: True religious liberty is incompatible with the Ro- man thesis ; scientific liberty is condemned by Roman- 1 Social Sovereignty of Christ, by the Jesuit Father Ramieri ; under Roman Thesis and Hypothesis. (334) CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 335 ism; political liberty is fighting openly with the Ro- manistic beliefs. We are fully conscious of the grav- ity of our three protestations, and we should never have dared to utter them, did we not believe that we could base them on testimony as indubitable as that of the first three Popes, who according to the Roman be- lief, as a dogma of faith, were infallible. Religious liberty means that everyone is free to choose that form of religion which his conscience dictates to him. This liberty presupposes the sacred inviolability of every individual conscience. What does Romanism think in regard to this innate and sovereign prerogative? All men may be divided into two classes : those who are faithful to Romanism, and those who are not. For both of these two groups the affirmations of the Roman Church are final and op- posed to liberty. That Church says in general, refer- ring to humanity at large : 2 "Liberty of conscience is an abominable liberty ; the liberty of each one to choose his own religion is a liberty of perdition. 3 Ev- ery man born on this planet has the sacred obligation of being subject to me. 4 I alone am the true one. I alone am divine ; outside of me there is no salvation. 5 2 Syllabus of Pius IX: Encyclical of Leo XIII, under Libertas. On account of the gravity of the matters discussed in this chapter, we consider it is our duty to literally copy many testimonials translated into English and which we will reproduce in Latin in the appendix. "We condemn the doc- trine that teaches that every man has the right to choose his religion and form of worship, and that the State must re- spect such a right" (Syllabus). 3 The same documents. 4 Jaugey: Heads, Religion, Church. Cardinal Gonzalez and Zigliara : head, Theodicy on Religion. 5 Bertier,' Cardinal Vives, Perrone : On the True Religion. 23 336 ROMAN CATHOLICISM As all men are obliged to seek their salvation, it is therefore the duty of all to obey me." When you dis- cuss the liberty of conscience with a Roman Catholic, be careful to speak in general terms, lest you fall into heresies. 6 When Romanists express themselves in these terms, they refer to the other religions and not to their own, nor to the obligation with which every man is born to profess Romanism. The Church says to the incredulous, to the heretic, and to the infidel: "You are free to leave your profession and to adopt mine." But if the incredulous, the heretic, and the in- fidel should ask: Are we, or are we not free to em- brace Romanism ? 7 the Church would answer : "You are not free, but you are under the obligation to be- lieve in me and to obey." Therefore in the Roman sense liberty to choose one's religion does not exist, but instead is the absolute obligation to become a Ro- man. Therefore, when you read in His Eminence Cardinal Gibbons' book, at the beginning of Chapter XVII, where he speaks of the sacred and inviolable character of the righteous conscience, you should sub- stitute the word Roman for the word righteous; and where he says that every act which infringes upon this liberty of conscience is called religious intolerance, you should understand him to mean, if that intoler- ance proceeds from the non-Romanists, for they may assail that conscience as we have said above, and will state again. Only thus may the words of His Eminence Cardinal Pius IX, Syllabus. 7 Cardinal Vives : On the necessity of Religion. Jatigey : Head, Religion. Bergier : On the True Religion. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 337 Gibbons be explained in an orthodox sense ; and if not explained thus, they would even be heretical, unless he has in mind physical liberty, which would be like taking up the radish by the leaves ; for if he is talking of physical liberty, then we are free to make ourselves into Moors, and he himself into a Jew, if he so chooses. But this sort of reasoning is not serious nor fitting for theologians. In theology, when we speak of religious liberty, we mean moral liberty, not that of the physical act. The Roman thesis, then, denies religious liberty to those outside of the faith, the mo- ment it proclaims that they were born, not free, but with the obligation to believe in the Roman Church and to obey her. For the faithful the slavery is much greater. On the one hand the Church concedes to reason the power to demonstrate the most fundamental truths ; 8 she proclaims again and again the rational and scientific character of her doctrine; but ill advised is he who should think that she would thereby concede any lib- erty to him. This is what she affirms : he who dares to doubt, or to think that he may independently inves- tigate the Catholic doctrine in order to find out whether he shall believe or not, according to the sci- entific result of his investigations, shall be excom- municated. 9 Moreover, among the faithful, the child is baptized within a few days of its birth, and there- fore the possibility of a free investigation is excluded. No investigation before baptism since that is impos- sible at that age; and none after baptism since that 8 Canons of the Vatican Council : On Reason and Faith. ' The same. 338 ROMAN CATHOLICISM would mean excommunication. To speak of religious liberty within Romanism under such circumstances, is the height of absurdity and the most biting sarcasm. And here history enters as a terrible witness. What caused the horrible butcheries of the Middle Ages, if not the negation of this truth? Who equipped the arm of Spain, the all-powerful ruler of that time, for its long and bloody campaigns in Germany and Flan- ders, if not Romanism, which denied that truth? What caused the butcheries on the night of St. Bar- tholomew, and the revocation of the Edict of Nantes, if not the Romanist doctrine regarding that truth? What lighted the fires of the Inquisition, and led the specter of death all over Europe, if not just that tenet of Romanism, that religious liberty does not exist? Therefore to proclaim in the twentieth century that Romanism believed or now believes in religious lib- erty is both anti-historical and anti-theological. Does scientific liberty exist? Here the Vatican claws advance still further in order to strangle human thought. It may be maintained that from Origen 10 to Bacon, 11 from Bacon to Galileo, 12 from Galileo to Darwin, from Darwin to Charcot 13 there has appeared no savant of any kind, nor any truly scientific system, which has not been anathematized by Romanism. As 10 One of the greatest savants of history of ancient times He was condemned by the Church. 11 This illustrious Franciscan was imprisoned and perse- cuted. Do not confound him with Bacon (Lord Verulam). 13 He was condemned by the Roman Inquisition. 13 Hypnotism was denounced many times as diabolical, by the sacred Congregations. See Cardinal Vives : Moral Com- pendium, under Hypnotism. Also Father Franco: Hypno- tism in Style. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 339 our object here is merely to set forth the kind of lib- erty which Romanism concedes to science at the pres- ent moment, we shall confine our illustrations to the latest Roman teachings. Is philosophy free to pursue its investigations ? No, the Syllabus condemns such liberty. Is geology free ? 14 No, Pope Pius IX has condemned such lib- erty. Are the sciences free to follow their methods and conclusions? No, for Romanism is afraid of them, and has condemned their independence and liberty. 15 The Romanist synthesis regarding science is as fol- lows : Philosopher, you may freely investigate phil- osophical problems, on condition that you never deny any of my conclusions ; for if that should happen I should condemn you. Geologist, you may penetrate in your studies into the recondite and mysterious se- crets of the earth and life, following the flight of the centuries, but only on condition that your conclusions should not be in opposition to mine, for if you do not succeed thus, I shall anathematize you. Savant, who- ever you may be, you are free to follow your chemical or physical or biological or psychical studies, but on condition that your chemistry and your physics and your biology and your psychology do not discredit the affirmations which I teach elsewhere in regard to these sciences ; for if you do I shall excommunicate you. Now you see, modern savant, what judgment awaits 16 you, if you do not resign yourself to be as 14 Read Pius IX : Syllabus ; and Pius X : Bull condemning Modernism, which condemns the doctrine which maintains that the Church must leave philosophy free to amend itself. 16 The same. " Same authors and heads. 34-O ROMAN CATHOLICISM an acolyte of Romanism, if you are not disposed to be a kind of page to the Papacy, if, in studying the fossil you are not ready to decipher its riddles in agreement with Romanism; if in taking up the bal- ances you do not make a profession of faith that you will not look for anything which may be at odds with Romanism; if in adjusting the telescope you do not direct it with the intention of passing by that to which Romanism is opposed; if in studying the great prob- lems of life and evolution you do not resign yourself to throw out all that Romanism throws out far from being free, your endeavors will be condemned as he- retical by Romanism. Can there be a greater degra- dation of scientific liberty? Does it not mean to take away his liberty, if the savant is compelled before proceeding with his scientific demonstration, to be- lieve in certain predetermined truths that have not yet been demonstrated? Is not science enslaved and shackeled in its august and humanitarian mission, if the scientist is compelled, before proceeding with his studies, to make profession of Romanist faith, and en- joined during his investigations never to lose sight of the Romanist canons, throwing out all that is opposed to them? Scientific liberty is incompatible with the present doctrine of Romanism. Who can doubt that, when he reads the two most important documents of the Papacy, the Syllabus of Pius IX and the bull of Pius X condemning Modernism? Is there, at least, political liberty? Here we meet with the most horrible tyrannies. Whoever knows in- timately the Romanist doctrine on this point, must be astonished that any people loving their liberty and in- CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM 34! dependence dare to profess Romanism. For Roman- ism there is only one sovereign Lord, entirely indepen- dent, namely God, the Supreme Maker of all things, and another Lord equally sovereign and independent, because he is His representative on earth, namely the Pope. 17 All the others, great and small, nobles and plebeians, kings and vassals, are subject to the Pope, who may rule over them with a power compared with which ancient Roman imperialism and the autocracy of the czar, are as mere shadows. We are aware of the gravity of our affirmations, and we shall demonstrate them. Romanism, in order to make itself entirely independent of every other ruler and power, reasons as follows 18 : That society is the most perfect, which has the highest aim in view and the most perfect means of attaining it. It so happens that I, Romanism, alone have the highest of all aims in view, and I attain to it by the most perfect and extraordinary means ; therefore I am the most perfect of all societies, and the most independent. No power or society of any kind can exist above me or beside me ; therefore they are all inferior to me ; there- fore I can rule over them all ; all are obliged to obey me, but I am not obliged to obey anyone. The first "Apologetic Dictionary of the Faith; heads, Pope, Church, and State. Bertier, Cardinal Vives : Compendium of The- ology and Canonical Law : Same heads. 18 Cardinal Zigliara: On Ethics of Society. Cardinal Gon- zalez : On same. Bertier, Cardinal Vives : On Rights of the Church. Just because the aim of the Church is supernatural and its power supreme, it follows that no other power can hinder or restrain the liberty, rights, privileges, etc., of the Church. Syllabus and Leo XIII Encyclical. Therefore, all the baptized, though heretics or schismatics, are subject to the Church by which they can be constrained. Cardinal Vives. 342 ROMAN CATHOLICISM conclusion to be drawn from its profession of abso- lute perfection and sovereign independence is this: my subjects are obliged to obey me before obeying any other power; my functionaries depend entirely on me and not on any other power. Let us examine both conclusions, because they both bear grave con- sequences. The Roman Catholic, be he American, French, Spanish, English, etc., is obliged, in case of a conflict between any of the powers and the Pope, to obey the latter and not his own native ruler. 19 If it were within the limits of possibility that a struggle could arise between the President of America, and the then ruling Pope, every Roman Catholic would be obliged to side with the latter against the former. The Ro- man Catholic can yield to his own ruler only condi- tional obedience, for absolute obedience he has already yielded to the Roman Pontiff, the head of Christi- anity. 20 Whenever it suits him he can release the Ro- man Catholic from his oath of allegiance to his own ruler, and can depose the latter, if a Catholic, and put some one else in his place. 21 Read the bulls quoted, "Cardinal Vives: Compendium of Canonical Law, Rights of the Church and of the Pope. Pius IX : Syllabus. Bertier : Compendium of Theology, Rights of the Church in relation to the State, and generally all Roman authors. "In case of disagreement or conflict, it is for the Church to resolve, and the State can do nothing against her." Syllabus. 20 Compendium of Canonical Law, Rights of the Church and of the Pope ; same Cardinal, compendium on Morals, under head, Liberalism. Sarda and Salvany: Under head, "Liberal- ism is a Sin" (approved by the sacred Congregations). 21 The best known bull, entitled In Coena Domini (The Lord's Supper), still in force. See Gregory VII's bull, which in part says : "Act in such a manner, I beg of you all [speak- ing of the Bishops], that the whole world shall know, that CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 343 and look into history. There is no nation in Europe which has not suffered numberless times from this papal invasion. England twice or three times before Henry VIII; Germany more than six times; Italy countless times in all its states ; France, on more than one occasion; the Spanish states numberless times, the sufferers being now Navarre, then Aragon, then Castile. 22 It may be said that this is one of the fa- vorite prerogatives of Romanism. If it does not exer- cise this power now, that is not because it has re- nounced it, but because it can no longer exercise it. 23 We challenge every Romanist to cite a single docu- ment contradicting this statement, and we refer in our notes to many that assume this power to be still in force. Accordingly, if Romanism, instead of being in a state of decadence, were progressing and acquiring fresh predominance, it would exercise, as formerly, its power of releasing its faithful from their oaths of allegiance to their own sovereigns, sowing insubor- dination and discord among the peoples whenever it suited the Church's convenience. We leave it to the good sense of the American peo- ple to judge of the consequences that follow from this truth: every nation where there are Romanists has if you can bind and unbind even in heaven, you can also do so on earth, take away and give empires, kingdoms, prince- doms, dukedoms, marquisates, earldoms and baronies, and that you can depose all of them, according to their merits, you can grant such dignities and honors to whom you may deem worthy." 22 The historians Baronio, Rohrbacher, Rivas, Alzog: On the Popes' excommunications of princes ; and it will be seen, that in numerous instances they exercised that tremendous and abusive power. 88 Leo XIII : Encyclicals. 344 ROMAN CATHOLICISM subjects who are more vassal to the pope than to their own kings or presidents. The consequences of the independence of the Roman functionaries are still more grave: they must not only be independent of every other power in the exercise of their ministry, but they also cannot be touched in any way. 24 The kings cannot insist on their fulfilling the duties of common citizens. Innumerable times the Popes have excommunicated princes who have sought to compel the clergy to bear the general burdens, or to do mili- tary service. 25 Complementary to this civic indepen- dence, Romanism has proclaimed the ecclesiastical edict, in virtue of which a cleric who has committed a crime of whatever nature, be it even adultery, robbery or murder, cannot be brought under the jurisdiction of the civil court. 26 The faithful who accuses him, and the magistrate who judges him, are both excommuni- 24 Pius IX : Syllabus. Cardinal Vives : Compendium of Canonical Law. Rights of the Church and of the Pope: "'The Church and the ecclesiastics enjoy privileges of exemp- tion or immunity that no civil authority can lessen or arro- gate to itself." Syllabus. 25 Same documents ; Compendium on Morals, by Cardinal Vives and Bertier : On Excommunications : Clergymen are exempted from military service. "We excommunicate anyone usurping _ any part of the property or rights belonging to ecclesiastics": besides read the nth and I2th of the most severe excommunications, called anathemas, reserved to the Pope. 29 Jaugey: Head, Ecclesiastical Privileges. Cardinal Vives: Works already mentioned. Ferraris : Same head. Canonical Encyclopedia : Same head. "It belongs to ecclesiastical privi- lege, to decide all cases, whether criminal or civil, concerning clerics. We condemn the doctrine that maintains that such privileges can be restrained or assumed by governments. Syllabus. We excommunicate by anathema anyone accusing a cleric before a civil tribunal, and the judge who will hear and decide the case." Standing excommunication by Pius IX. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 345 cated.- 7 And as if this degree of independence were not sufficient, it is also made to cover all ecclesiastical property, and the ruler, be he king or president, who should demand tribute, would be declared excom- municated as a usurper of ecclesiastical property. And then there is that famous right of refuge, in virtue of which the criminal who seeks the shelter of a church, or convent, cannot be judged by the civil pow- ers, however great his crime, and any person who should undertake to violate the sacred asylum, by dragging forth the criminal, would be excommuni- cated. 28 Let His Eminence Cardinal Gibbons tell us if this is not the pith and essence of Romanism; in the notes are cited proofs. But what kind of govern- ment is possible for the civic powers, with all these Romanist abuses and usurpations? If we examine the form of government adopted by Romanism, and the latitude allowed to it, the tyranny appears still more glaring. Romanism says : "As I am a society perfect in myself, I have the power to casti- 2T Read about excommunications in force in any Treatise on Morals. 28 Cardinal Vives : Compendium on Morals, under Excom- munications. Bertier : Same work and head. Bouix : Canon- ical Law, Rights of Asylum (Protection). Jaugey: Under Rights of Asylum (Protection). "All Churches, even though not consecrated, its porticos and aisles, nay, the spot on which the foundation stone is placed, the bishop's oratory, enjoy the privilege of refuge; the bishop's palace; the cu- rate's home and the clergy's as well as the belfries and the x cemeteries also, enjoy the same privilege if they are within thirty steps of the Church. When the Host is being carried through the streets, the procession also enjoys the privilege of refuge or asylum. The civil powers cannot deny nor even curtail such privilege, and this now must be considered as standing, though the liberal sects may protest against it." Cardinal Vives. 346 ROMAN CATHOLICISM gate, not only with spiritual castigations, but also with temporal punishments." 20 The power called by them that "of the sword," cannot be denied to the Church, and according to that power, it can not only present the victims to the arm of the secular law, but it can also imprison, exile, and kill them through the power which it possesses. We cite some documents for the benefit of Your Eminence. 30 And in virtue of the latest Romanist utterances the Pope is, in case of necessity, the entire Church. The Pope may imprison, exile and kill, and his de- crees are unalterable and without appeal. 31 As, ac- cording to Romanism, the Pope stands above the ec- clesiastical laws and procedures, he may imprison, exile and kill, without regard to the laws of the Church, for he stands above them; without regard to any rules of procedure, for he stands above them; without any regard to natural rights, for he alone is the authentic interpreter, and no one can interfere 28 Bertier : Compendium of Theology of the Church. Car- dinal Vives : Compendium of Theology and of Canonical Law, same head. 30 Bertier: Of the Church. Cardinal Vives : Rights of the Church and of the Pope. Ferraris : Canonical Encyclopedia : Under Church, and Pope. Bouix : Canonical Law, on the Church and on the Pope. St. Thomas and St. Bonaventure: On the rights of the Pope and of the Church. Bull, In Coena Domini (The Lord's Supper), and Gregory VII's bull. 31 Cardinal Vives : Compendium of Canonical Law, Rights of the Pope. The Church can by herself impose temporal penalties, as deportation, imprisonment, etc. Bertier. Further- more, she can inflict the death penalty, but such a preroga- tive is invested only in the Pope and in the General Councils. According to Tarquin and many other doctors of divinity, anyone venturing to deny it would incur the gravest censures. CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 347 with him. 32 Can anything more horrible and atrocious be imagined? His Eminence Cardinal Gibbons need not say to us, that although the Popes have such a power, they will never do these things, for history tells us that more than one Pope has been a close second to the abom- inable tyrants. 33 Moreover, for a philosopher, it is sufficient that the doctrine is derogatory to human dignity, in order to denounce it. See to what state our liberty has been reduced, when the despot of the Vati- can, if he so chooses, has power to imprison, exile and kill us, without regard to human or divine law. And this power is all-inclusive, reaching from Your Emi- nence, Cardinal of the Holy Church, down to me, her simple priest ; 34 from the most powerful monarch down to the most humble subject. The state of slavery is still more absolute, if, instead of considering ourselves as individuals, we consider ourselves as communities and nations. There cannot be anything more sarcastic and hypocritical than the amphibologous language in which Leo XIII promises sovereignty to the secular princes. In the first place the Pope 35 is very careful not to renounce any of the ecclesiastical prerogatives indicated above, such as the privilege of decrees, the right of refuge, exemption from taxation of Church property, and from civic du- 32 Bertier : Compendium of Theology, under heads, the Church, and the Pope. 33 Read the life of Alexander VI by Jaugey, in his Apolo- getic Dictionary of Faith. 31 Cardinal Vives : Compendium of Canonical Law, under Rights of the Pope. 36 Leo XIII: Encyclical Immortale Dei Libertas Sapientiae Christianae. 348 ROMAN CATHOLICISM ties on the part of functionaries of the Church, where- by he considerably curtails the sovereignty of the states. He has further been careful not to declare annulled the right of releasing subjects from their oaths of allegiance, nor has he renounced the power to depose the kings, in a case of necessity, their power thereby remaining conditional and not being sover- eign. We see how the small power conceded to princes is still further shorn by Romanism, so as to make it laughable and ridiculous. Romanism affirms that the individuals not only as such, but also collec- tively as nations, shall believe in the Roman faith. 30 Governments are, with respect to the Pope, like any single one of the faithful. Similarly the kings are, according to ecclesiastical laws, nothing more than vassals, simple believers. Romanism further says that while the ecclesiastical legislative power is abso- lutely free and sovereign, the secular power must submit to it, 37 and this means the downfall of legis- lative sovereignty. Romanism proclaims, 38 that the instruction of the people is one of the first necessities 36 Pius IX : Syllabus. Cardinal Vives : Works mentioned above. "We condemn the doctrine that denies that nations and kings are not amenable to ecclesiastical jurisdiction." Cardinals Zigliara and Gonzalez : Ethics of Society. 37 Cardinal Vives : Compendium of Canonical Law, Rights of the Pope, and of the Church. Pius IX : Syllabus. On questions of jurisdiction and morals, and on mixed questions, it is for the Church, and not for the State, to decide them. 38 Same authors and heads. "We condemn the doctrine that teaches that the State is free and independent to organize public education in Schools, Institutes, and Universities. The drawing of plans, the selection of text-books and of pro- fessors, arc things belonging to the Church, and not to the State. The bishops, even at the risk of contradicting the governments, must watch over and correct the doctrines and CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 349 of the state, and as the Church believes herself to be the depository of all truth, she claims the monopoly of instructor, and demands, not only the liberty of teach- ing the clergy in her seminaries, but also the exclus- ive liberty of organizing, as she sees fit, the public schools, institutions and universities. According to Romanism, the instruction of the people is the duty, not of the state, but of the Church. It is not the prov- ince of the state, but of the Church to make the plans and programs. 39 Romanism is drawing its chains of iron tighter and tighter, saying to the secular princes, in regard to moral and mixed questions : I, as the su- perior, must decide them. 40 And as the Church, in virtue of her sovereignty, claims the power to decide what questions are mixed and what are moral, all other powers must therefore be under her jurisdic- tion. 41 And in order that there may be no escape, either for the simple faithful or for the prince, Ro- manism condemns the doctrine of the separation of Church and state, and also of the free Church within the free state. 42 the professorships. The bishops must ask the teachers for an account of their opinions and doctrines, even though by so doing they go against the public authorities." Syllabus. 39 Same authors and heads. See Bertier on the rights of the Church, and Hurter, on same head. In Mexico the bishop even considers it a reserved sin to send children to government schools. See the Council of Pueblo, where re- sides Archbishop Ibarra, reputed as the most learned man in the neighboring republic. 40 Same authors previously mentioned. Leo XIII : En- cyclicals previously mentioned. 41 Same authors already mentioned. "It is not for the State to dictate to the Church, but for the Church to dictate to the State which of the laws are just and which unjust." Syllabus. 4 " Pius IX : Syllabus. Cardinal Vives : Rights of the 35O ROMAN CATHOLICISM It proclaims that the state and the Church must live together, for thereby, on the grounds stated above, the state will remain entirely subject to the Church. Per- haps some candid reader will exclaim with astonish- ment : That is impossible, that is not done, either in America or in Europe. But let me tell you, Romanist, be you American or European, all this is so much the doctrine of the Roman Church, that if you should dare to deny any of the rights here mentioned you would fall into a grievous sin, and would be excommuni- cated by Romanism. Do you know why these things are not tolerated in any state? Because they are so absurd, so contrary to the sovereignty and liberty of nations, that there is hardly any ruler, who with or without the permission of the Pope, with or without the papal excommunication, has not trodden under foot such exorbitant rights, which legally or illegally are found in the Roman hypothesis, not the Roman thesis. But do not forget, Roman believer, that you, as a faithful one, must believe in the Roman thesis, must believe in the illimitable sovereignty of the Pope ; that he has the power to depose rulers; to release their subjects from their oaths of allegiance ; that these functionaries are exempt from public charges and of- fices ; that the churches and convents shall be places of refuge where criminals may seek shelter, in order to escape from the secular law ; that the Church, and not the state, shall take charge of the instruction of the Church. "We condemn the doctrine that teaches that the State must be free within a free Church. We condemn the other doctrine that teaches that the State must live separate from the Church or the Church separate from the State." CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 351 people, etc. You must believe all these things, for Romanism teaches them and demands them as the fundamental rights of its society. And as you must believe this, since it is the Roman thesis, we say to you, supported by evidence clear as noonday light, that neither the sovereignty of the nations nor civic liberty are compatible with the degrading Roman thesis. 24 EPILOGUE. Having reached our journey's end, we can now cast a retrospective glance upon this work as a whole and summarize it in the following few brief clauses : 1. Official Romanism attempts to interpose itself like a mischievous penumbra between heaven and earth; between God and man; treading on the most rudimentary principles of sane criticism ; spurning the most general laws of good exegesis; usurping facul- ties with which neither the Bible nor apostolic his- tory is endowed, and proclaiming that the Sacred Scripture is an enigma incumbent upon it alone to decipher. 2. The first step having been taken by imposing the interpretation of the Sacred Writings, it has promul- gated new dogmas which, like those of purgatory and infallibility, are repugnant to the Divine Word and to apostolical and early church history ; it has instituted such sacraments as auricular confession and the Eu- charist, which were neither believed in the first cen- tury nor should be believed as taught now. It up- holds the mass, obligatory celibacy, and an infinite number of other obligations which are abusive dis- turbers of the general conscience and the chief cause of the decadence of religion. Finally, it has concen- trated in the hands of the Roman Pontiffs a power so unlimited, so anti-biblical, so irrational and so anti- social that, besides entirely nullifying the Church, it (352) CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 353 has made it incompatible with scientific and civil lib- erties, as well as with the sovereignty of the people. Union, therefore, with official Romanism as a basis, would be neither practical nor beneficial. Would it not be possible to erect an arch (such as I have at- tempted to outline in this book) or upon some foun- dation more evangelical, rational and humanitarian? Although I, alone, formulate the question, I feel that I am echoing the sentiments of thousands and millions of Romanists who, not daring to face the ire of the Vatican, think in silence as I think in public, and hope, as I hope, that there will arise a safe formula which, in some manner, will unite us against official Roman- ism and impiety in the defense of Christ and his Church. 25 APPENDIX. CATHOLIC DOCTRINE ON FREE RELIGIOUS THOUGHT, CONSIDERING MAN AS AN INDIVIDUAL AND AS A SOCIAL BEING. The Syllabus condemns : "Libertatem conscientise et cultum esse propium cujuscumque hominis jus quod lege proclamari et asseri debet in omni recte con- stituta societate et jus civibus inhaere ad omnimodam libertatem nulla vel ecclesiastica, vel civile auctoritate coarctandam quo suos conceptus quoscumqtie sive voce sive typis sive alia ac declarare valeant." Car- dinal Vives, one of the most renowned Romanists, commenting' on the encyclical of Leo XIII says : "Er- go damnanda indifferentia politica quoad cultum di- vinum. . . . Igitur indifferentissimus civilis per ab- surdum est deliramentum et pessima machinatio." Have you heard the above, American people ? For the Romanists your august Constitution, which declares for free religious liberty, is an absurd and detestable one. Let us now hear the Vatican Council: "Si quis dixerit . . . tit catholic! justam cau<am habere possint fidem qtiam sub Ecclesia magisterio jam insceperunt, assensu suspense in dubium vocan- di donee demonstrationem scientificam credibilitatis et veritatis fidei absolverint, anathema sit." The Ro- manists, not satisfied with denying the moral liberties in their individual and collective aspects further pro- (354) CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 355 claim compulsory religion. Let us hear again the Romanist echo, Cardinal Vives : "Catholicis certum fixumque est, tolerandos non esse homines a Catho- lica veritate alienos, eosque meritis quoque poenis esse coercendo. Ecclesia ipsa potest poenas inflixere et de facto inflixit bonorum proscriptiones, flagcllationes exilium carceres etiam per episcopos qui habere sua tribunalia et suos carceres." Vide Syllabus prope 31 Imo Ecclesia potest sicut quaecumque societas per- fecta uti gladio temporali. . . . Ea potestate uti possunt sunt Papa et Concilium Generale. . . . "Juxta car- dinalem Tarquinium non desunt doctores qui gravis- simam censuram infligunt his qui hoc jus denegant Ec- clesise." Bertier. We hope that Cardinal Gibbons will coordinate his affirmation mentioned in Chapter XVII of his book, regarding religious liberty, with the above passages, in which the Romanists so emphatically deny it. ROMAN DOCTRINE ON THE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE STATE. Romanism proclaims itself above and superior to any government. Hear Cardinal Vives: "Cum finis Ecclesise sit supernaturalis et potestas ejus suprema, sequitur nullam humanam potestatem Ecclesiae liber- tatem jura praerogativas impedire aut minuere posse." Also Leo XIII's Encyclicals. The first step being taken, they consider all of their functionaries exempt from any obedience to the civil power, as follows : "Ecclesiae et personae ecclesiastical jure propio immunitatis privilegio gaudent, quod numquam a jure civili ortum habuit. Igitur, absque naturalis juris aequitatis violatione nequit abrogari ea 356 ROMAN CATHOLICISM personalis immunitas qua clerici ab onere subeuncke excrcendsequc niilitiae eximuntur: nee progressus prse- textu nee forma liberioris regiminis in societate con- stituta jus habet laica potestas postulandi immunita- tis ecclesiastics abrogatione." Syllabus. Notwithstanding the above statement, they still claim the stupendous asylum privilege, as follows : "Ecclesise omnes, etiamque consecrate non sunt, earumque porticus et atria, quin et locus in quo, primo lapide jacto, ecclesia sedificanda est, itemque oratoria Episcopi, auctoritate constituta, asyli jure fruuntur: idemque episcopi palatium et domus in qua parochus habitat, et domus canonicales et sodalitiorum, quse eo- rum ecclesiis conjuncte sunt, turris campanaria quse intra passus triginta ab ecclesia distat, xenodochia et coemeteria eodem jure fruuntur. Processio in hono- rem S. S. Eucharistise gaudet jure asyli; ibi enim est Ecclesia, ubi est Christus Jesus." Cardinal Vives. (Edition, 1905). They advance and subsequently deny the legislative sovereignty : "Potestas ecclesias- tica potestati civili, non vero civilis ecclesiastics in- dicare potest quid justum vel injustum in suis legibus, vel decretis." Syllabus. The civil law contrary to the ecclesiastical should be considered void : "Consti- tutiones contra canones, et decreta prsesulum romano- rum, vel bonos mores, nullius sunt momenti." Car- dinal Vives and others. With more and more restric- tions they yet claim that on mixed and legal ques- tions the Church should be the judge: "In quaes- tionibus jurisdictionis inter ecclesiasticam et civilem potestatem dirimendis, nequaquam principes et reges ct rerumpublicarum, presides superiores sunt Eccle- CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 357 siae ; sed ipsse a Sancta Sede Romana sunt definiendae." Syllabus and Encyclicals of Leo XIII. Going still further by denying to the state the right of teaching, let us now hear what the Syllabus condemns : "Totuni scholartim ptiblicarum regimen, in quibus juventus Christianas alicujus Reipublicse instituitur, episcopali- bus dumtaxat seminariis aliqua ratione exceptis, potest ac debet attribui auctoritati civili, et ita qui- dem attribui, ut nullum alii ctiicumque auctoritati recognoscatur jus immiscendi se in disciplina schola- rum, in regimine studiorum, in graduum collatione, in delectu aut approbatione magistrorum." "Immo Status civilis non habet jus, quando aperit scholas eligendi magistros, prsescribendi methodos et doctrinas, sed jus istud competit Ecclesiae quse sola habet jus erigendi per S. Pontificem Universitates studiorum." Bertier. Romanists persist in denying to the state the right to separate from the Church : "Ecclesia a Statu Status- que ab Ecclesia subjugandus est." The Syllabus has condemned this doctrine. In conclusion the Church claims to itself the abusive right and stupid preroga- tive of releasing subjects from the oath of fidelity, and also the right to depose rulers. Let us hear the theologians and Popes: "Pontifex Romanus . . . in onines reges christianos habet potestatem indirec- tam jure divino, ita ut possit illos non pro libitu, sed necessitate finis spiritualis attingendi, poenis coercere et etiam deponere, ut defacto deposuit anti- quitus. Ouidam non attribuunt Ecclesias nisi po- testatem directivam, qua possit solvere casus consci- entiae turn principum, turn populorum; sed hasc sen- tentia deserenda videtur. Alii plures cum BellarminQ ROMAN CATHOLICISM tuentur Pontificem non habere dirccte et immediate illam potestatem temporalem sed solam spiritualem ; tamen ratione spiritualis habere certain indirecte po- testatem quamdam eamque summam in temporalibus. "Quae Bellarmini opinio de indirecta potestate Rorrue segre tune audita fuit." Cardinal Vives. "S. Grego- rius P. P. VII in fini Const. Beate Petre 7 Martii 1080, qua Henricum Imperatorem deposuit, B BB. Apos- tolos Petrum et Paulum invocans concludit: "Agite nunc quseso patres et principes sanctissimi, ut omnis mundus intelligat et cognoscat, quia si potestis in ccelo ligare et solvere, potestis in terra imperia, regna, principatus, marchias, ducatus, comitatus, ea omnium hominum possessiones pro meritis tollere unicuique et concedere. Vos enim patriarchatus, primatus, archie- piscopatus, episcopatus frequenter tulistis pravis et in- dignis, et religiosis viris dedistis. Si enim spiritualia judicatis, quid de ssecularibus vos posse credendum est? Et si Angelos dominatis omnibus supervis prin- cipibus judicabitis, quid de illorum servis facere potes- tis? Addiscant nunc reges et omnes sseculi principes, quanto vos estis, quid potestis ; et timeant parvipendere jussionem Ecclesiae vestrae et in praedicto Henrico tarn cito judicium vestrum exercete ut omnes sciant, quia non fortuita sed vestra potestate cadet. Confundan- tur utinam ad pcenitentiam ut spiritus sit salvus in die Domini." If notwithstanding the statements and evidences shown throughout this appendix, there still remain some credulous enough to believe that the religious freedom as well as the sovereignty of any nation could not be impaired under Romanist beliefs and CAPITULATING BEFORE PROTESTANTISM. 359 rules, such, then, in my opinion could believe the most extravagant narratives regardless of their absurdity. Possessing, as I do, such an exalted opinion of the legal and ethical sentiment of this country, I feel mor- ally convinced that Providence has designed to this greatest of nations the august mission of not only es- tablishing the sovereignty of true liberty upon such a solid basis as she has, but also of assisting others less fortunate than herself, in securing their legitimate emancipation. So certain I am of this that when the true Americans awaken, and realize the great danger of losing their civil and religious liberties, they will rise in their might and vigorously and energetically protest against the pernicious advance of Romanism, of which every step forward is an encroachment upon their civil liberties. ERRATA AND ADDENDA. Chapter VIII, page 77, line 7: For "join" read "imitate." Chapter XI, page 132, footnote 7 : For "St. Hypolytus" read "Hippolytus." Chapter XIII, page 168, footnote 18: For "Roman ob- servatories" read "Osscrvatorc Romano." Chapter XIV, page 187, lines 18, 19: In the clause, "We are dealing with a theoretical question, not with a practical one," transpose "theoretical" and "practical," and read, "We are dealing with a practical question, not with a theoretical one." Chapter II, page u: When I speak about three Popes at the same time, each claiming to be the true head of the Church, it should be added that the epoch during which this condition was most marked was in the days of Gregory XTI, Benedict XIII and Alexander V. UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY A 000318068 4