Larger font
Smaller font

The Rights of the People

 - Contents
  • Results
  • Related
  • Featured
No results found for: "".
  • Weighted Relevancy
  • Content Sequence
  • Relevancy
  • Earliest First
  • Latest First
    Larger font
    Smaller font


    In a previous chapter there has been pointed out how completely the principle of this decision is the papal principle only. The Papacy herself sees this, and is making great use of it. It would be surprising if she did not.ROP 181.2

    In the discussions which led up to the making of the national Constitution with the specific exclusion of religion from the notice of the national government, it was not without reason that our fathers pointedly inquired, “Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other religions, may establish with the same ease any particular sect of Christians in exclusion of all other sects?”-P. 98.ROP 181.3

    They knew full well that, as certainly as “Christianity” were established as the governmental religion, so certainly some particular sect of “Christians” would worm, or crowd, itself into the place of recognition and authority as theChristianity” recognized and established, and this to the exclusion of all other sects, because it would be in some way decided by “authority” that that particular phase of “Christianity” was more in harmony with the intent of the law than any other.ROP 181.4

    Thus they saw that any recognition of “Christianity” would inevitably bring forth a decision of some kind as to “what is Christianity,” and what form of the profession is most entitled to the name and the favor of the government, as contemplated in the act of establishment or the form of recognition. And knowing this, they further and truly said that “it is impossible for the magistrate to adjudge the right of preference among the various sects that profess the Christian faith, without erecting a claim to infallibility, which would lead us back to the Church of Rome.”-Pp. 86, 87.ROP 181.5

    They saw that the domination of Rome must be the sure result of any governmental recognition of religion. It was clearly the intent of the makers of the national government to save this country from the domination of Rome. It was, therefore, to accomplish this, as well as from love of the right of the people, that in their establishment of the national Constitution they did it with the positive prohibition of any recognition of religion, and particularly “the Christian religion.”ROP 182.1

    The Papacy still lives. She still lives, and is as thoroughly ambitious of governmental power as she ever was, and even more so, if such a thing were possible. And as the government of the United States has done the very thing which the makers of the government said that it were impossible to do without leading back to the Church of Rome, it is proper to look about us and see if there are now any signs of this result from this action on the part of the government.ROP 182.2

    As the Papacy still lives, as it is true that the Papacy “learns much and forgets nothing,” and as it is her boast that she never changes, it will be instructive to glance at what she did once in such a case.ROP 182.3


    In the beginning of the fourth century, in the Roman Empire, the Catholic Church was a powerful ecclesiastical organization, the leaders and managers of which were “only anxious to assert the government as a kind of sovereignty for themselves.” 40Eusebius, “Ecclesiastical History,” Book VIII, chapter 1. Constantine and Licinius, as joint emperors, issued the Edict of Milan, reversing the persecuting edicts of Diocletian, and granting “liberty and full freedom to the Christians to observe their own mode of worship,” granting, “likewise, to the Christians arid to all, the free choice to follow that mode of worship which they may wish;” “that each may have the privilege to select and to worship whatsoever divinity he please;” and commanding that the churches and church property which had been confiscated by Diocletian should be restored to “the whole body of Christians,” “and to each convention respectively.” 41Id., Book X, chapter 5.ROP 182.5

    This was all just and proper enough, and innocent enough, in itself and on its face, if that had been all there was to it; but behind it there by this ecclesiastical organization, ambitious to assert the government as a kind of sovereignty for itself. This ecclesiastical organization, the Catholic Church, claimed at that time, as ever since, to be the legitimate and only true representative and depositary of Christianity in the world. And no sooner had the Edict of Milan ordered the restoration of property to the Christians than it was seized upon by the church leaders and made an issue by which to secure the imperial recognition and the legal establishment of the Catholic Church.ROP 183.1

    The rule had long before been established that all who did not agree with the bishops of the Catholic Church were necessarily heretics, and not Christians at all. It was now claimed by the Catholic Church that, therefore, none such were entitled to any benefit from the edict restoring property to the Christians.ROP 183.2

    In other words, the Catholic Church disputed the right of any others than Catholics to receive property or money under the Edict of Milan, by disputing their right to the title of Christians. And by this issue the Catholic Church forced an imperial decision as to who were Christians. And, under the circumstances, by the power and influence which she held and by what she had already done with these in behalf of Constantine, it was a foregone conclusion, if not the concerted plan, that this decision would be in favor of the Catholic Church. Consequently Constantine’s edict to the proconsul, directing the restoration of the property, contained these words:-ROP 183.3

    “It is our will that when thou shalt receive this epistle, if any of those things belonging to the Catholic Church of the Christians in the several cities or other places, arc now possessed either by the decurions, or any others, these thou shalt cause immediately to be restored to their churches. Since we have previously determined that whatsoever these same churches before possessed should be restored to them.”ROP 184.1

    Nor was it enough that the emperor should decide that all these favors were for “the Catholic Church of the Christians;” he was obliged next to decide which was the Catholic Church. This question was immediately raised and disputed, and in consequence an edict was drawn from Constantine, addressed to same proconsul (of the province of Africa), in which were these words:-ROP 184.2

    “It is my will that these men, within the province intrusted to thee in the Catholic Church, over which Cæcilianus presides, who give their services to this holy religion, and whom they commonly call clergy, shall be held totally free and exempt from all public offices,” etc.ROP 184.3

    The party over which Cecilianus presided in Africa was the party which was in communion with the bishop of Rome. As these only were favored, the other party drew up a long series of charges against Cecilianus, and sent them to the emperor, with a petition that he would have the case examined by the bishops of Gaul. Constantine was in Gaul at the time, but instead of having the bishops of Gaul examine into the case alone, he commissioned three of them to go to Rome and sit with the bishop of Rome in council to decide the case. Constantine sent a letter, with copies of all the charges and complaints which had been lodged with him, and in this letter to the bishop of Rome, with other things he said this:-ROP 184.4

    “Since it neither escapes your diligence that I show such regard Catholic Church that I wish you, upon the whole, to leave no room for schism or division.”ROP 184.5

    This council of course confirmed the emperor’s word the Catholic Church in Africa was indeed the one over which Cecilianus presided. The other party appealed from this decision and petitioned that another and larger council be called to examine the question. Another council was called, composed of almost all the bishops of Constantine’s dominions. This council likewise confirmed the emperor’s word and the decision of the former council. Then the opposing party appealed from the decision of the council to the emperor himself. After hearing their appeal, he sustained the action of the councils and reaffirmed his original decision. Then the opposing party rejected not only the decisions of the councils but the decision of the emperor himself.ROP 185.1

    Then Constantine addressed a letter to Cecilianus, bestowing more favor upon what he now called “the legitimate and most holy Catholic religion,” and empowering him to use the civil power to compel the opposing party-the Donatists-to submit. This portion of his letter is in the following words:-ROP 185.2

    Constantine Augustus to Cœcilianus bishop of Carthage:ROP 185.3

    “As we have determined that in all the provinces of Africa, Numidia and Mauritania, something should be granted to certain ministers of the legitimate and most holy Catholic religion to defray their expenses, I have given letters to Ursus, the most illustrious lieutenant governor of Africa, and have communicated to him that he shall provide to pay to your authority three thousand folles [about one hundred thousand dollars]. 42The Catholic Church gets nearly four hundred thousand dollars annually, from the national treasury of the Untied States to-day.ROP 185.4

    “And as I have ascertained that some men, who are of no settled mind, wished to divert the people from the most holy Catholic Church, by a certain pernicious adulteration, I wish thee to understand that I have given, both to the proconsul Anulimis and to Patricius, vicar-general of the prefects, when present, the following injunctions: That, among all the rest, they should particularly pay the necessary attention to this, nor should by any means tolerate that this should be over looked. Wherefore, if thou seest any of these men persevering in this madness, thou shalt, without any hesitancy, proceed to the aforesaid judges, and report it to them, that they may animadvert upon them, as I commanded them, when present.”ROP 185.5

    Thus, no sooner was it decided what was “the legitimate and most holy Catholic Church,” than the civil power was definitely placed at the disposal of that church, with positive instructions to use that power in compelling conformity to the new imperial religion. Persecution was begun at once. The Donatist bishops were driven out, and Constantine commanded that their churches should be delivered to the Catholic party. Nor was this done at all peacefully. “Each party recriminated on the other; but neither denies the barbarous scenes of massacre and license which devastated the African cities. The Donatists boasted of their martyrs; and the cruelties of the Catholic party rest on their own admission; they deny not, they proudly vindicate, their barbarities; ‘Is the vengeance of God to be defrauded of its victims?’ they cried.”-Milman, History of Christianity, Book III, chapter 1, paragraph 5 from the end.ROP 186.1

    And the government by becoming a partisan had lost the power to keep the peace. The civil power, by becoming a party to religious controversy, had lost the power to prevent civil violence between religions factions.ROP 186.2

    Nor was this thing long in coming. It all occurred within less than four years. The Edict of Milan was issued in the month of March, a. d. 313. Before that month expired the decision was rendered that the imperial favors were for the Catholic Church only. In the autumn of the same year-313-the first council sat to decide which was the Catholic Church. In the summer of 314 sat the second council on the same question. And in 316 the decree was sent to Cecilianus empowering him to distribute that money to the ministers of “the legitimate and most holy Catholic religion,” and to use the civil power to force the Donatists to submit to the decision of the councils and the emperor.ROP 186.3

    The Edict of Milan, March, 313, named “the whole body of Christians” as the beneficiaries, without any qualification or any sectarian designation. Before the expiration of that month, the provisions of the edict were confined to “the Catholic Church of the Christians” alone. In the autumn of the same year, when the emperor wrote to the bishop of Rome appointing the first council, he defined the established church as “the holy Catholic Church.” The following summer, 314 when he called the second council, he referred to the doctrine of the Catholic Church as embodying the “most holy religion.” And when it had been decided which party represented this “most holy religion,” then in 316 his letter and commission to Cecilianus defined it as “the legitimate and most holy Catholic religion.”ROP 187.1

    Nor was this all. While this was going on, also about the year 314, the first edict in favor of Sunday was issued, though it was blended with “Friday.” It ordered that on Friday and on Sunday “no judicial or other business should be transacted, but that God should be served with prayers and supplications, and in 321 Friday observance was dropped and Sunday alone was exalted by the famous Sunday-rest law of Constantine; all in furtherance of the ambition of the ecclesiastics to assert the government as a kind of sovereignty for themselves. In 323, by the direct and officious aid of the Catholic Church, Constantine succeeded in defeating Licinius and making himself sole emperor. No sooner was this accomplished than the religious liberty assured to “the Christians” by the Edict of Milan, like the provisions of the same edict restoring confiscated property to the Christians, was by a public and express edict limited to Catholics alone. This portion of that decree runs as follows:-ROP 187.2

    “Victor Constantinus Maximus Augustus, to the heretics:-ROP 188.1

    “Understand now, by this present statute, ye Novatians, Valentinians, Marcionites, Paulians, ye who are called Cataphrygians, and all ye who devise and support heresies by means of your private assemblies, with what a tissue of falsehood and vanity, with what destructive and venomous errors, your doctrines are inseparably interwoven; so that through you the healthy soul is stricken with disease, and the living becomes the prey of everlasting death....ROP 188.2

    “Forasmuch, then, as it is no longer possible to bear with your pernicious errors, we give warning by this present statute that none of you henceforth presume to assemble yourselves together. We have directed, accordingly, that you should be deprived of all the houses in which you are accustomed to hold your assemblies; and our care in this respect extends so far as to forbid the holding of your superstitious and senseless meetings, not in public merely, but in any private house or place whatsoever. Let those of you, therefore, who are desirous of embracing the true and pure religion, take the far better course of entering the Catholic Church, and uniting with it in holy fellowship, whereby you will be enabled to arrive at the knowledge of the truth....ROP 188.3

    “It is an object worthy of that prosperity which we enjoy through the favor of God, to endeavor to bring back those who in time past were living in the hope of future blessing, from all irregularity and error, to the right path, from darkness to light, from vanity to truth, from death to salvation. And in order that this remedy may be applied with effectual power, we have commanded (as before said), that you be positively deprived of every gathering point for your superstitious meetings; I mean all the houses of prayer (if such be worthy of the name) which belong to heretics, and that these be made over without delay to the Catholic Church; that any other places be confiscated to the public service, and no facility whatever be left for any future gathering; in order that from this day forward none of your unlawful assemblies may presume to appear in any public or private place. Let this edict be made public.”ROP 188.4

    Thus in less than eleven years from the issuing of the Edict of Milan, the Catholic Church stood in full and exclusive possession of the authority of the empire both in the rights of property and the right to worship under the profession of Christianity, and with a specific and direct commission to use that power and authority to compel the submission of “heretics.” Thus was made the Papacy—the beast of Revelation 13:1-10—and all that ever came in its career from that day to this has been but the natural and inevitable growth of the power and the prerogatives which were then possessed and claimed by the Catholic Church.ROP 188.5

    And it all came from the Edict of Milan bestowing governmental favors uponthe Christians.” No man can fairly deny that in the Edict of Milan and the religio-political intrigue that lay behind it, there was contained the whole Papacy. No man can successfully deny that the Edict of Milan, though appearing innocent enough upon its fact, contained the whole Papacy, or that the things that followed in the ten years, up to 323, which we have sketched, were anything else than the logical and inevitable development of the evil that lay wrapped up in that.ROP 189.1

    So much for the experience of the Papacy. And in view of this experience we may here ask a question that is worthy of the most serious consideration by the American people. It a thing appearing so just and innocent as does the Edict of Milan could so easily be made by the Catholic Church of that day to produce such a world of mischief in so short a time, and be a curse to the world forever after; then, under the hand of the Papacy as at this day, what must be the result of this decision of the Supreme Court of the United States which has not, in any sense, any appearance of justice or innocence?ROP 189.2


    It is proper now to inquire whether there are any evidences of a purpose to act now in this case as she did in the former. And in response to this inquiry it must be said that there exists a series of facts of which the very least that can be said is that it is dangerously suggestive. These lads shall be set down here, without any note or comment, in the order of their occurrence from the date of the Supreme Court “Christian nation” decision, up to the latest dates before this book goes to press. Here they are:-ROP 189.4

    1. February 29, 1892, the Supreme Court of the United States declared it to be the “meaning” of the Constitution of the United States that it is “the voice of the entire” people of this nation, speaking in “organic utterances,” that “this is a religious nation,” and that “this is a Christian nation.”ROP 190.1

    2. July 11, 1892, there was published in this country, in the New York Sun, a letter from the Vatican announcing the plans of Leo XIII. respecting the United States, and through this the world. In this letter it said:—ROP 190.2

    “What the church has done in the past for others, she will now do for the United States.... Like all intuitive souls, he hails in the United American States, and in their young and flourishing church, the source of new life for Europeans. He wants America to be powerful, in order that Europe may regain strength from borrowing a rejuvenated type.... If the United States succeed in solving the many problems that puzzle us, Europe will follow her example, and this outpouring of light will mark a date in the history not only of the United States, but of all humanity.”ROP 190.3

    3. In October, 1892, Francis Satolli, Archbishop of Leponto, was sent to this country as the personal representative of the pope, ostensibly to represent the pope’s interest in the Columbian Exposition, but in reality to be permanent apostolic delegate at the capital of the nation, with assurance under the seal of “the fisherman’s ring” that whatever he does shall be confirmed by the pope.ROP 190.4

    4. September 5, 1893, at the World’s Catholic Congress, Chicago, this same Satolli delivered to “the Catholics of America” the following message from Leo XIII.:-ROP 190.5

    “In the name of Leo XIII. I salute the great American republic; and I call upon the Catholics of America to go forward, in one hand bearing the book of Christian truth, and in the other the Constitution of the United States.... Bring your fellow-countrymen, bring your country, into immediate contact with that great secret of blessedness-Christ and his church.... Here you have a country which will repay all effort not merely tenfold, but aye! a hundred-fold. And this no one understands better than the immortal Leo. And he charges me, his delegate, to speak out to America words of hope and blessing, words of joy. Go forward! in one hand bearing, the book of Christian truth-the Bible-and in the other the Constitution of the United States.”ROP 190.6

    5. A few days later, September 24, 1893, 1893, Prof. Thos O’Gorman, of the Catholic University, Washington, D. C. having been announced in the published program to read a paper at the World’s Parliament of Religions on “The Relation of the Catholic Church to America,” changed the title to “The Relation of Christianity to America,” and declared that “by right of discovery and possession, dating back almost nine hundred years, America is Christian;” cited evidences in proof of “an acquaintance between America and the church in times when the only Christianity in existence was Catholic;” and declared that this is “a nation that shall find its perfection in Catholic Christianity.”ROP 191.1

    6. October 18, 19, 1893, the jubilee of Cardinal Gibbons’ was celebrated at Baltimore. The night of the 18th Archbishop Ireland delivered a panegyric in which he exclaimed:-ROP 191.2

    “I preach the new, the most glorious crusade. Church and age! Unite them in mind and heart, in the name of humanity, in the name of God. Church and age! ... Monsignor Satolli, the church, and the age. Rome is the church; America is the age.”ROP 191.3

    And at the banquet the night of the 19th, the archbishop again spoke to the following purpose:-ROP 191.4

    “I do not know whether or not you appreciate the full value of the union you see typified here to-night,-the union of the Catholic Church and America; the fraternity between the church and the non-Catholics of the nation. The Vice President of the United States comes here and takes his seat alongside the cardinal. The spirit of fraternity between church and state thus typified, is the result of the work of our American Cardinal.”ROP 191.5

    7. September 21, 1894, a dispatch announcing the return of Bishop Keane from Rome gave the following words of an interview with him:-ROP 192.1

    “The policy of the pope, in view of the late overtures in Italy, is the union of the church with the great democratic powers of the future-that is, America, and France. This is his hope, and toward it all his remarkable energies are bent.”ROP 192.2

    Three days later, September 24, the newspaper dispatches stated that Bishop Keane was “the bearer of a rescript from Pope Leo XIII.;” of which the import was the following:-ROP 192.3

    “The papal rescript elevates the United States to the first rank as a Catholic nation. Heretofore this country has stood before the church as a missionary country. It had no more recognition officially at Rome than had China.... By the new rescript the country is freed from the propaganda and is declared to be a Catholic country.... The importance, not only to Catholics, but to all citizens of the United State, of this radical change in the relations to Rome of the church in America, can scarcely be overestimated.”ROP 192.4

    8. A letter from the Vatican, dated October 14, 1894, to the New York Sun, republished in the Catholic Standard (Philadelphia) of November 3, says:-ROP 192.5

    “The United States of America, it can be said without exaggeration, are the chief thought of Leo XIII. in the government of the Roman and universal Catholic Church; for he is one of the choice intellects of the Old World who are watching the starry flag of Washington rise to the zenith of the heavens. A few days ago, on receiving an eminent American, Leo XIII. said to him, ‘But the United States are the future; we think of them incessantly.’ ... This ever-ready sympathy has its base in the fundamental interests of the holy see, in a peculiar conception of the part to be played and the position to be held by the church and the Papacy in the limes to come.... That is why Leo XIII. turns all his soul, full of ideality, to what is improperly called his American policy. It should be rightly called his Catholic universal policy.”ROP 192.6

    9. In his encyclical of January 6, 1895, to the hierarchy in America, Leo XIII. himself speaks, and says:-ROP 192.7

    “We highly esteem and love exceedingly the young and vigorous American nation, in which we plainly discern latent forces for the advancement alike of civilization and of Christianity.” “The fact that Catholicity with you is in good condition, nay, is even enjoying a prosperous growth, is by all means to be attributed to the fecundity with which God has endowed his church; ... but she would bring forth more abundant fruits, if, in addition to liberty, she enjoyed the favor of the laws and the patronage of the public authority.”ROP 193.1

    10. The Catholic Mirror (Baltimore) of March 2, 1895, reported a sermon by “Father” Lyons, of that city, delivered Sunday evening, February 24, 1895, in which he said:-ROP 193.2

    “It is strange that a rule which requires a Supreme Court to give final decisions on disputed points in our Constitution, should be abused and slandered when employed by the Catholic Church. Citizens and others may read the Constitution, but they are not allowed to interpret it for themselves, but must submit to the interpretation given by the Superior [Supreme(?)] Court. The Bible is the constitution of the Catholic Church, and while all are exhorted to read this divine Constitution, the interpretation of its true meaning must be left to the Superior Court of the church founded by Christ. The decision of our federal Supreme Court is final; the decision of the superior court of the church is final also, and, in virtue of the divine prerogative of inerrancy granted the church, infallible. The church has not, does not, and cannot, permit the violation of God’s commandments in any case whatsoever.”ROP 193.3

    11. March 11, 1895, the New York Advertiser printed a dispatch of March 10, from San Francisco, as follows:-ROP 193.4

    “San Francisco, March 10.ROP 193.5

    “Private advices received here give an interesting and important communication from Mgr. Satolli to officials in Guatemala, concerning that country’s following the course of Nicaragua in sending to Rome an envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary.ROP 193.6

    “In the course of the document reference is made as to the propriety under the United States Constitution of official relations between Washington and Rome, and an interpretation given of that feature of the Constitution relative to the separation of Church and State. Mgr. Satolli’s letter was written while negotiations were pending about four months ago. It refers at length to difficulties in church administration in Guatemala, and suggests that certain changes desired by the government should be accompanied by an equivalent of serious advantage to render less burdensome the condition of the church in Guatemala. The document then adds:-ROP 193.7

    “The condition of the Catholic Church in the United States, in whose Constitution was inserted the article of separation of the State from any religion sect, cannot escape our consideration. I might almost say it causes no surprise. If up to date no official relations exist between the government and the holy see, it is because the great majority of the population is anti-Catholic. In the meantime the church here is attaining possibly greater development and liberty than in other States.’ROP 194.1

    “It is stated that this is the first time, so far as is known, that Mgr. Satolli’s mission has been extended outside of spiritual questions and has dealt with governmental subjects.”ROP 194.2

    Now can any man read over this string of facts an deny that there is being carried on by the Papacy in the United States a fixed purpose to crowd herself into place in the nation as the “Christianity” of “this Christian nation”? Can anyone fail to see that from the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Constitution to mean that “this is a Christian nation,” she has caught the cue, and not only holds to that as true, but has begun to take upon herself the interpretation of the Constitution as it relates to “Christianity, general Christianity”?ROP 194.3

    There is another fact to be set down here which will make this point yet more distinct. It is this: In the Catholic World for the month of September, 1871, there was printed a leading article, in which the Constitution of the United States was referred to in the following words:-ROP 194.4

    “As it is interpreted by the liberal and sectarian journals that are doing their best to revolutionize it, and is beginning to be interpreted by no small portion of the American people, or is interpreted by the Protestant principle, so widely diffused among us, ... we do not accept it, or hold it to be any government at all, or as capable of performing of the proper functions of government; and if it continues to be interpreted by the revolutionary principles of Protestantism, it is sure to fail.... Hence it is, we so often say that if the American republic is to be sustained and preserved at all, it must be by the rejection of the principle of the Reformation, and the acceptance of the Catholic principle by the American people.”-P. 736.ROP 194.5

    Contrast that now with Leo’s command by Satolli “to the Catholics of America” to “go forward” on their “hundred-fold” rewarded mission, “bearing in one hand the book of Christian truth-the Bible-and in the other the Constitution of the United States; “and inquire. What has caused this change of the attitude of Rome toward the Constitution?ROP 195.1

    The principle upon which the Constitution was founded in its total separation of religion from the notice of the national government, was definitely and intentionally the Protestant principle. In the discussions which led up to the making of the Constitution as it reads in this respect, and in the discussions upon the Constitution in the conventions which made it, we have seen that this point was especially dealt with and the Protestant principle was the one chosen and made the principle of the Constitution. In the documents of that time, and which are an essential part of the history of the Constitution, this, we have also seen, was the crucial point considered, and the Protestant principle was made the principle of the Constitution. In fact, it was plainly said not only that “it is impossible for the magistrate to adjudge the right of preference among the various sects which profess the Christian faith, with out erecting a claim to infallibility which would lead us back to the Church of Rome,“ but it was also said that “to judge for ourselves, and to engage in the exercise of religion agreeably to the dictates of our own consciences, is an unalienable right which, upon the principles on which the gospel was first propagated and the Reformation from popery carried on, can never be transferred to another.”ROP 195.2

    Therefore it is the undeniable truth of the only history on the question, that the Constitution of the United States was founded upon the Protestant principle. And while it was held so, no Catholic was ever commanded by any pope to take that Constitution in one hand and the Bible in the other for any purpose under the sun. On the contrary, they openly declared that so long as the Constitution was held to that principle Catholics did “not accept it,” nor hold this government “to be any government at all.”ROP 195.3

    But as soon as the Supreme Court of the United States had interpreted the Constitution by the papal principle-the principle of “the establishment of the Christian religion”-as soon as the Supreme Court thus rejected “the principle of the Reformation,” and accepted “the Catholic principle”-ROP 196.1

    1. Then it was, and not till then, that there was published to the United States the purpose of Leo XIII., that what the church has done for other nations she will now do for the United States.ROP 196.2

    2. Then it was, and not till then, that Leo XIII., pope, sent his permanent apostolic delegate here in his name, to “call upon the Catholics of America to go forward, in one hand bearing the book of Christian truth and in the other the Constitution of the United States,” upon their hundred-fold rewarded mission to bring this “country into immediate contact with the Church” of Rome.ROP 196.3

    3. Then it was that, in the World’s Parliament of Religions, Professor O’Gorman, for the Catholic Church, claimed this country as Catholic, and which “must find its perfection in Catholic Christianity.”ROP 196.4

    4. Then it was that Archbishop Ireland could proudly point out the union of the Catholic Church and the United States typified in the Vice President sitting at the right hand of the cardinal.ROP 196.5

    5. Then it was that it could be announced as “the policy of the pope,” “toward which all his remarkable energies are bent,” to unite “the church and America.”ROP 196.6

    6. Then it was that Leo XIII. could officially declare the United Slates to be “a Catholic country,” and elevate it “to the first rank as a Catholic nation.”ROP 196.7

    7. Since that it is that the United States has become “the chief thought” in “the government of the Roman and universal Catholic Church,” in the carrying out of “his Catholic universal policy.”ROP 197.1

    8. Then it was that Leo himself could openly call for “the favor of the laws and the patronage of the public authority” to the Catholic Church.ROP 197.2

    9. Then it was, and merely the consequence, too, that the Papacy could set forth the doctrine that in interpreting the Constitution “the decision of the Supreme Court is final,” and that the people “may read the Constitution, but they are not allowed, to interpret it, but must submit to the interpretation given by the Supreme Court.”ROP 197.3

    10. And thus it is that Satolli can now take it upon himself to interpret the Constitution in its new relationship to religion, and set forth that the Constitution in its separation of government and religion meant only the “separation of the State from any religions sect”-the very doctrine of the Christian nation court and its decision.ROP 197.4

    As it is certainly nothing else than the Catholic Bible, which Leo through Satolli has commanded the Catholics of America to “take in one hand,” so certainly also is it nothing else than the Catholic Constitution of the United States that he has commanded them to take in the other hand. As “so long as that Constitution was interpreted by the Protestant principle the Catholics did not accept it,” and now they are all commanded to accept it and use it, equally with the Catholic Bible, in their mission to bring this country into immediate contact with the Papacy, it follows inevitably that to the satisfaction of the Papacy that Constitution has been interpreted according to the papal principle. And as they themselves say that the Supreme Court is the interpreter of the Constitution, and that its interpretation is final, this proves conclusively that the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States interpreting the Constitution to mean that this is a Christian nation, is the cause of this change in the attitude of the Papacy toward the Constitution, and is the foundation of this series of facts in the course of the Papacy in crowding itself upon the country as the “Christianity” of this “Christian nation.”ROP 197.5

    Thus does it stand as clear as though it were in letters of fire that in its decision that “this is a Christian nation,” the Supreme Court of the United States accomplished, to the satisfaction of the Papacy, precisely the thing that the Papacy had long demanded, viz., “the rejection of the principle of the Reformation, and the acceptance of the Catholic principle,” in the interpretation of the national Constitution.ROP 198.1

    Thus, in principle, the work of our governmental fathers has been undone. The barrier which they set up against the nation’s being led back to the Church of Rome has been broken down, and that church has already entered upon the consequential task of leading the nation back to that iniquitous goal.ROP 198.2

    The all-important question now is, Will the American people receive, or support, or submit to, this “rejection of the principle of the Reformation and the acceptance of the Catholic principle” as the principle of the interpretation of the Constitution of the United States?ROP 198.3

    Larger font
    Smaller font