Romanism in America

Preface

Rome is always the same. It makes its boast of its unchangeableness, and with great truth. Not that in itself it is consistent as to doctrine, beliefs, or church ceremonies, for it contains within itself the widest differences and contradictions.

" No faith with heretics " is still its doctrine. The fires of persecution into which it once cast the noblest men in Europe, are still consonant with the fierce bigotry it displays, and are restrained only by its impotency or its policy 5 the unchangeable church is the one whose Pope issued the medal approving the massacre of St. Bartholomew. What it is as to tyranny, and what are the results of its control either in letters, science, or social life, the present state of its own immediate territories declare, — improvements checked ; literature dead j industry paralyzed ; a nation of beggars and begg|r priests 5 a Pope kept on his throne only by foreign bayonets, and, of necessity, so grossly misgoverning, as to draw upon himself the remonstrances of the neighboring princes even of his own church. By its own claim, unchangeable, it admits no improvement -, it remains corrupt and poisonous, and ruins the land which yields implicitly to its rule.

In issuing the present work, a present want is met. From the beginning of its foothold, as the following pages will show, Rome has steadily advanced in the United States. Wily as ever, it in general adopts a more courteous policy than abroad j it appears meek and shorn of its hideousness ; but circumstances show that it only hides its aim. Occasionally a feeler is put forth, or an imprudent priest heedlessly reveals its purposes. Recent events in our own midst, where a single foreign priest has introduced anarchy into one of our public schools, and with characteristic impudence has endeavored to ride over the rights and laws of Americans, not only illustrates the spirit of Rome, but calls attention anew to this arch enemy of the Republic.

To summon again the spirit of national freedom, and to remind American citizens of the spirit and object of Roman tyranny and superstition these pages are now given to the public.

Boston, March 22, 1859.

Contents

Chapter page

I. — ORIGIN AND PROGRESS OF ROMANISM, 5

II. — FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF POPERY, 26

II. Fundamental Principles Of Popery

" Let no man deceive you by any means ; for that day shall not come, except there come a falling- away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition ; who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is callld god, or that is worshipped, so that he, as God, sitteth in the temple of God."— 2 Thess. ii. 3,4.

Having briefly considered the rise and progress of the Romish apostasy, we proceed to examine some of its fundamental principles. A system which has acquired such power as this, which has survived so many changes in the political and religious world, which at this hour holds under its sway so many millions of the human family, must have some constituent elements which impart to it its prodigious strength. Nor have we any difficulty in deciding what these elements are. The canons of councils, the decrees of popes, the writings of standard Catholic authors, and the practices of the church afford us the most abundant materials upon this subject. And the first glance at the distinctive features of Romanism reveals the marked contrast which this system presents to the purity and simplicity of the Christian faith. Instead of one spiritual head, to whom alone worship is rendered, — instead of a few simple rites, a single ecclesiastical order, freedom of conscience, and gospel principles applicable to all classes of men, and inculcating reverence, humility, and love, — we find the Romish system made up of a pope, cardinals, bishops, orders of monks, friars, and nuns, doctrines of infallibility, celibacy, and purgatory, indulgences, worship of the saints and images, mitres, crosiers, holy water, and a variety of superstitions and practices adapted to the character and circumstances of its victims. The Christian confesses his sins to God, the Romanist to his priest. The former makes the Bible his only rule of faith and practice ; the latter depends upon the decrees of councils and the traditions of the fathers. The former is actuated in the discharge of his religious duties by love, the latter by fear. The Protestant or Christian clergy throw open every doctrine to the free discussion and research of the people. The Catholic clergy demand only faith, leaving no room for the exercise of reason. The former exhort ; the latter command. The former seek to educate and enlighten the peo-

ROMANISM IN AMERICA.

pie, that they may appreciate and love God's truth; the latter keep the people in ignorance, that they may believe and cling to the dogmas of the church. The former would bring the whole world into the liberty of the gospel ; the latter \^ould bring the whole world under the dominion of the pope. The two systems therefore, in many of their elements, are directly opposed to each other. They cannot harmonize ; 'they cannot compromise. As well attempt to mingle truth and error, light and darkness, the spirit of Jesus and the spirit of Satan. The principles and essence of Popery, as it now exists^ are embraced in the canons of the famous Council of Trent, the last of the nineteen general councils held by the Romish church. Trent is a city in the north of Italy, delightfully situated on the banks of the Adige, and commanding a view of the beauties and grandeurs of the Alps. Here, in December, 1545, the council commenced its sessions, and, after protracted discussions, the doctrines of the church were decided upon. Subsequently, Pope Pius IV. drew up, with the sanction of the council, a summary of its decrees, which constitutes the basis of the Romish faith, and which every pope, cardinal, bishop, and priest is bound to subscribe.

Did our limits allow, we should be glad to give a history of this council, and show what unfair means were used to prevent free discussion, secure the supremacy of the pope's influence in its deliberations, and crowd down those who were anxious that abuses might be reformed and the truth triumph. It should, however, be distinctly understood, that, notwithstanding the efforts of the advocates of Popish intolerance and tyranny, the votes of the council were far from being unanimous. On many points every inch was strenuously contested, and some doctrines were carried through only by the force of Papal authority and chicanery. Doctors were arrayed against doctors, argument against argument, — showing that the idea of the unity of the church was a mere phantom.

The creed of Pope Pius IV., which imbodies the results of this council, is a mixture of truth and error, of wisdom and folly, that is calculated to deceive the unwary and superstitious. There is first presented the Nicene creed, consisting of twelve orthodox articles prepared by the bishops, who, in the year 325, met in the Council of Nice. This document is one of the most interesting and valuable productions of the primitive church. " Never," says an able writer, " did Constantine, the first Christian emperor, appear so truly great as when he took part in the council of Christian ministers he 3*

ROMANISM IN AMERICA.

had summoned from every province over which his sceptre extended. Including bishops and presbyters, not less, perhaps, than six hundred met at Nice. They were in many cases poor ; and some, like veteran soldiers, could exhibit the marks of the wounds they had received when fighting the battles of the cross in the days of paganism." To the sentiments of this creed we can cordially subscribe. But then follow the articles that contain, in a condensed form, the very essence of Popery — articles which constitute the basis of the literature and devotional books of the Papal church, and are now yielding their poisonous fruits in every community over which the Papacy has extended its power.

The first of these propositions, which is the thirteenth article of the whole creed, is as follows : " I most steadfastly admit and embrace the apostolic and ecclesiastical traditions, and all other observances and constitutions of the same church." In this article we have the corner stone of the whole Papal superstition. Upon it may be built every form of error which the wickedness, pride, or ambition of man may devise. While the Protestant takes the Bible as his only rule of faith and practice, the Romanist rests upon traditions. It is true that there is a feeble acknowledgment of the Scrip-

FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF POPERY.

tures, but it is a mere formality; as the manner in which the Bible has been uniformly treated by Catholics abundantly proves. The acknowledgment is made in the next article of the creed, in these words : "I do admit the Holy Scriptures in the same sense that holy mother church does, to whom it belongs to judge of their true sense and interpretation; nor will I interpret them otherwise than according to the unanimous consent of the fathers." You will observe that the Scriptures are simply admitted, while traditions are mostly steadfastly admitted and embraced. The former are barely recognized, evidently under the fear that their entire omission would be noticed, and subject the church to censure, while the latter are most cordially welcomed. Besides, the Scriptures are admitted with such glaring and positive qualifications as to deprive them of their life-giving power.

Instead of the reader's exercising his own reason and judgment in interpreting the language of the sacred volume, — instead of searching the Scriptures for himself, as a free, intelligent moral agent, accountable to his God alone, — he binds himself by an oath, or vow, to adopt the meaning given by the mother church. Whatever grounds or arguments may exist for differing from her teachings, to what-

ROMANISM IN AMERICA.

ever extent she may pervert the language of inspiration to suit the designs of profligate popes or wicked priests, the Romanist is bound to admit the whole. He virtually yields up his reason and conscience to others, without reserving to himself the privilege of inquiring into the foundation of the doctrines which he is taught to believe. Nor is this all. In the latter clause of the article he binds himself to interpret the Scriptures only according to the unanimous consent of the fathers. But what is to be done if the fathers themselves are not unanimous in their interpretations ? What is to be done when councils are arrayed against councils, and popes against popes, in their decrees respecting the teachings of the Bible ? The idea of the unanimity of the fathers or of the ecclesiastics of the church is the merest chimera that can be imagined. Even the members of single councils were not agreed among themselves. " The requisition of unanimity would in fact," says Edgar, " explode the majority of all the eighteen general councils. A few, indeed, have been unanimous, but many divided. The Nicene, Byzantine, Ephesian, and Chalcedonian synods contained factions that favored Arianism, Macedonianism, Nestorianism, Eutychianism, and Monothelitism. * * * No assembly, civil or ecclesiastical, ever showed less unity than the Council of Trent. Theologian opposed theologian, and bishop withstood bishop, in persevering impertinence and contention. The Dominican fought with the Franciscan in a provoking war of rancor and nonsense. The French and Spanish encountered the Italians, with inferior numbers, indeed, but with far superior reason and eloquence. The bishops, learned in general in the law, but unskilled in divinity, were utterly confounded by the distinctions, scholasticism, and puzzling diversity of opinion which prevailed among the theologians. The discord of the Trentine fathers became, in the French nation, the subject of witticism and mockery.

" The contentions of the French synod of Melun, preparatory to that of Trent, afforded a striking prelude and specimen of the noisy and numerous altercations which were afterwards displayed in the latter assembly. The French king convened the Parisian doctors at Melun, for the purpose of arranging the dogmas of faith, which, on the assembling of the general council, were to be proposed for discussion. The Parisians, however, could agree on nothing. The time was spent in wrangling about things essential and non-essential, and the king was obliged to dissolve the council without their having arrived at any satisfactory conclusion.

A scene of equal dissension is not to be found in all the annals of Protestantism."

To rest therefore one's faith upon the unanimity of the fathers in their interpretation of' of the Scriptures is to rest upon that which has no existence. The claim of unanimity and infallibility is the greatest absurdity imaginable.

We pass on to notice the next article of the Roman Catholic creed. This refers to the belief in seven sacraments ; namely, baptism, confirmation, the eucharist, penance, extreme unction, orders, and marriage. Where the Council of Trent obtained their authority for these seven sacraments, we are not informed. Two of them, the eucharist, or the Lord's supper, and baptism, are obviously derived from the Holy Scriptures. The Savior distinctly required of the disciples to partake of bread and wine as the emblems of his body and blood ; and he commanded them to teach all nations, " baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." But what passages can be cited to prove that Christ instituted, as sacraments, confirmation, penance, extreme unction, orders, and marriage ? It is true that he required believers in him to make a public profession of their faith ; he called sinners to repentance ; he established the gospel ministry, and breathed upon the apostles the Holy Ghost; he was present at a marriage feast, and thus sanctioned the institution of marriage. But what evidence is there that he established these as sacraments ? We do not wonder that Romanists are required to understand the Scriptures as the holy mother church sees fit to interpret them, if such doctrines are to be promulgated. It is a very convenient way of getting over the want of evidence for any particular dogma, just to force upon the people an interpretation which suits the purposes of crafty bishops and priests. If the people are not allowed to investigate, nor even to understand, the Scriptures for themselves, — if they are at the outset required to throw aside, as utterly useless, their own reason, and the mental powers which the Almighty has given to them, — then they may be led to adopt the most palpable and gross errors, which the ambition or wickedness of their leaders may devise.

Under a deep conviction of the want of scriptural proof for these and other Popish dogmas, a distinguished advocate of the reformed church threw out to his antagonists this challenge : " I defy you to find Romanism in the Bible. I defy you to uphold it by the authority of the earliest interpreters of the Bible. I defy you to establish it by the consent of those who in primitive times bore witness to the truth." Such was the confidence of this earnest and learned divine in the strength of his own position, and the fallacy of the Romish doctrines, that he was willing to stake his cause upon this challenge. He saw clearly that the Popish superstition rested upon ignorance of the Bible and of the teachings of the early fathers, and that, with the premises laid down in this creed, the people could be easily led into every form of error and absurdity.

The next article of belief refers to original sin and to justification. But the fathers of Trent were greatly divided as to the import of the phrase " original sin;" and justification, in their opinion, was a medley of faith, good works, priestly absolution, and virtue imparted to the soul by the power of the church. To such an extent had the doctrine of human merit supplanted the efficacy of Christ's atoning sacrifice for sin, that the reformers felt called upon to lay particular stress upon this point. It constituted the main battle ground which the immortal Luther occupied. To the doctrine of justification by faith alone he clung with the greatest tenacity. The errors which robbed Christ of his glory — which led sinful man to believe that he could by his own merits secure the favor of God — which encouraged the expectation that a finite, fallen creature could secure the release of a fellow-sinner from the penalties of his transgressions — such errors Luther resisted with all his power.

It is true that this noble man has been charged with having indulged in a spirit of harshness and violence, unbecoming a true follower of the meek and lowly Jesus. But those who are so free to censure him, forget that the exigencies of the times, and the fearful corruptions of the church, demanded the greatest earnestness and zeal in those who would break down the existing superstitions, and sweep away the prevailing errors. We believe that Luther was naturally of a mild and loving disposition. Though by no means a perfect man, he was yet free from a sordid ambition, from selfishness, bigotry, and vindictiveness. He loved God's truth with an intensity which no waters or floods could extinguish. He mourned over the corruption of the times with a bitterness and sorrow that came from the depths of his soul. " At times," says one, " the word of God is as fire shut up in his bones. He is indignant at oppression and wrong. He longs to strike the hoary lust from its throne. His words, rough, vehement, jagged, tumultuous, are 'half battles.' They go burning and crashing amid the idols of superstition. He must be honest, 4 he must.be true ; and sometimes he must be vehement — fearfully vehement. And as he is only a man, sometimes he may be imprudent, and both say and do things which subsequently he regrets. But in the main he is honest — terribly, gloriously honest. Let him, then, speak out ; let him lay stunning blows on the head of despotic error and fiendish lust. Let him trample in the dust the mean arguments and meaner wiles of his opponents. Are they not the enemies of God and man? and has not the Almighty made him the battle axe to grind them to powder ? Men stood aghast when Luther burned the pope's bull ; but to us it is a magnificent sight. With what lofty disdain he tears it to atoms, and commits it to the flames, as a weak and worthless thing, which it behooves all honest men to despise! 4 Too much imprudence,' replied Luther to Spalatin, who had counselled him to sobriety, c is displeasing to man, but too much prudence is displeasing to God.'"

Such was the heroic reformer who thundered in the ears of priests, bishops, cardinals, and the pope the doctrine of "justification by faith." He had experienced in his own history the utter inefficacy of the requisitions and mummeries of the Romish church to satisfy the soul and afford a well-grounded hope for the future. He

FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OP POPERY. 39

had felt the blessedness of that faith which " worketh by love ; " and his aim was to establish the authority of this great principle, and sweep away the whole system of penances and human merit, whereby the pride of the heart was fostered and souls were deluded.

The next article in the creed to which the Roman Catholic subscribes contains the doctrine of transubstantiation, and is in the following words : " I also profess that in the mass there is offered unto God a true, proper, and propitiatory sacrifice for the living and the dead ; and that, in the most holy sacrament of the eucharist, there is truly, really, and substantially the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ, and that there is a conversion made of the whole substance of the bread into the body, and of the whole substance of the wine into the blood, which conversion the Catholic church calls transubstantiation."

This monstrous proposition, which sounds so strangely to Protestant ears, and which is so contrary to the Holy Scriptures and to human reason, is one of the cardinal points of the Papal system. By the celebration of the mass every Sabbath in the Catholic churches, it is constantly kept before the people, and their cordial and unqualified faith in it is demanded as the condition of church membership and of salvation.

When the priest holds up the wafer, or bread, consisting of flour and water, and pronounces the words, " Hoc est enim meum corpus" (for this is my body,) it is maintained that every particle of the bread is substantially and really changed into the flesh and blood, spirit and divinity, of Jesus Christ. It is adored by the priest, and the people kneel and worship it as the real Son of God. The priest then takes that which we know is nothing but flour and water, and offers it up to God as a propitiatory sacrifice for the living and the dead, teaching that it has the same efficacy to cleanse from all sin, as the atoning sacrifice which Christ made of his own body on the cross. Thus, throughout the seventeen hundred Catholic churches in these United States, there is, according to the teachings of the Romish church, an atoning sacrifice . every Sabbath made for the sins of the people. In this enlightened Christian land, a wafer, or a bit of bread, is by three millions of people worshipped as the Son of the most high God, and believed in as a propitiatory sacrifice for their sins.

And so tenaciously does the church cling to the superstitious dogmas involved in this rite, that a fearful curse is pronounced upon those who do not subscribe to them. The language of the first canon of the Council of Trent on the eucharist is, " If any man shall deny that in the sacrament of the most holy eucharist there is contained truly, really, and substantially the body and blood, together with the soul and divinity, of our Lord Jesus Christ, and so a whole Christ, but shall say that he is only in it in sign, or figure, or power, let him be accursed." Again, in the Tridentine canons on the mass, we read, " If any man shall say that in the mass there is not offered to God a true and proper sacrifice, let him be accursed." The third canon is, " If any man shall say that the sacrifice of the mass is only a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, * * * and that it is not propitiatory, * * * and that it ought not to be offered for the living and the dead, for their sins, &c, let him be accursed." And again : " If any man shall say that, by the sacrifice of the mass, blasphemy is offered to the most holy sacrifice of Christ accomplished on the cross, or that it is dishonored, let him be accursed." Such are the decrees of the Papal church upon this subject ; and that, in its official documents, it deals vastly more in curses than in blessings, and is ready to heap the most terrible anathemas upon those who will not swallow all their dogmas and superstitions, we shall have abundant

ROMANISM IN AMERICA.

occasion to show. The fathers, so called, instead of manifesting the mild and persuasive spirit of their professed Master, seem, in their dealings with those who dissent from them, to be possessed with the passious of fiends. They rush upon them with a volley of curses, which threaten to annihilate every comfort that they possess in heaven or in earth. Let me give a single specimen, taken from Dr. Cumming's work on Romanism.

u Should a father in this audience have a daughter in a nunnery, whom he should attempt to rescue from the superstitious and polluting influences of such an institution, the following curse would be pronounced against him : ' By the authority of the omnipotent God, and of St. Peter and St. Paul, his apostles, we firmly, and under threat of anathema, enjoin that no one carry off these virgins, &c. If any one shall have presumed to attempt this, may he be cursed in his house and out of his house ; may he be cursed in the state (or city) and in the field ; cursed in watching and cursed in sleeping; cursed in eating and drinking; cursed in walking and sitting : may his flesh and "his bones be cursed, and from the sole of his foot to the crown of his head may he enjoy no health. May there light upon him the curse which the Lord sent in the law by Moses on the sons of iniquity. May his name be erased from the book of the living, and not be recorded with the righteous. May his portion and his heritage be with Cain the fratricide, with Dathan and Abiram, with Ananias and Sapphira, with Simon Magus, and with Judas the traitor, and with those who said to God, ' Depart from us ; we will not follow thy ways. ? May eternal fire devour him with the devil and his angels, unless he make restitution, and come to amendment. So be it.' "

Such is the amiable, heaven-born, forgiving spirit of Popery ! — a spirit that is the same to-day that it was a hundred years ago — that is the same in Boston and at Rome — the same in America as in Spain and Austria. It is the boast of the Romish church that it does not change, and that its doctrines and decrees are infallible, and of course its curses are infallible. And the men who utter these imprecations, the fathers, (Heaven deliver us from such a parentage !) profess to be the followers of the meek and holy Jesus. Over the head of a parent seeking to rescue a beloved daughter from the dangers and pollutions of a nunnery, they cause to be heard the thunder crash of this terrible, blasting anathema.

Not very long since, a young man, having by the study of the Bible become convinced that

Popery was not the religion there inculcated, renounced it, very much to the distress of his mother, who believed that no salvation could be found out of the pale of the Romish church. She accordingly requested two bishops to argue with him, which they did to no avail, until, weary of so fruitless a discussion, one of them, a man of commanding presence, slowly arose, and, lifting up his hand, said, impressively, " It must be done" and forthwith hurled upon him a terrible anathema. Amid the long string of imprecations, " the curse of a widowed mother " w T as invoked upon him, when the youth burst into tears, but made no reply until the whole was finished, when he said, " While you were speaking, I could not but think, is this the religion of Christ ? While your mouth was filled with cursing, I prayed that I might be enabled to fulfil the injunction, ' Bless them that curse you, pray for them that despitefully use you and persecute you, that thus ye may be the children of your Father in heaven.' "

This incident places in true contrast the spirit of Romanism with the spirit of Jesus.

But let us return to the mass, for dissenting from which we Protestants are pronounced accursed. It will be observed that there are two distinct points in this rite which should be considered separately — the changing of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ, and the offering of a propitiatory sacrifice. As the authority for the first, the Papists rely upon the sixth chapter of the Gospel of John, particularly the 53d and 54th verses. " 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." This language, the Popish fathers contend, must be taken literally ; and upon it they found the doctrine of transubstantiation. But in their definition of transubstantiation, which includes the soul and divinity of Christ, they are the first to violate the literal import of Christ's words, for these refer simply to the body, the flesh and blood.

There is obviously no authority here for including the spiritual nature of the Savior. Besides, the bread to which Christ refers in this chapter is the bread which came down from heaven. And he says, " Not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead ; he that eateth of this bread shall live forever." But did Christ's body, his flesh and blood, come down from heaven? What is to be done with the doctrine of the incarnation, and with the Virgin Mary, in this connection ?

There are still other points that perplex a

Protestant, common-sense mind. You observe that Christ says that " except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, ye have no life in you." But the wine which represents the blood is withheld from the laity, and drank only by the priest. In this way the people get only half a sacrament. How is this difficulty disposed of ? O, very easily ; the Catholic will tell us. The Council of Trent have attached to the article on transubstantiation the soothing and accommodating declaration, " I also confess that under either kind alone (the bread or wine) Christ is received whole and entire, and there is a true sacrament." A very convenient and satisfactory solution for ignorance and bigotry to receive, but not for those who are accustomed to give a reason for the faith that is in them ! Nor is it likely that we should be driven from the field of debate by that short and comprehensive argument employed by our opponents, " Let him be accursed." Such a sort of finality may be agreeable to. others, but it does not exactly suit American ideas of free discussion and independent belief.