The American Sentinel 10
February 28, 1895
“Babylon’s Triumph and Ruin” American Sentinel 10, 9, pp. 65, 66.
WE have in two previous articles replied at some length to certain strictures upon our methods and work by the Monitor. A few points yet remain to be noticed. Continuing to quote from us and commenting thereon, the Monitor says:— AMS February 28, 1895, page 65.1
That the pope is going to take possession of America is also prognosticated for the same reason. “It is on the authority of the scriptures of Revelation 13:8; Daniel 7:21, 22, and Revelation 18:7, that we know that the papal movement mapped out by Leo XIII. will certainly succeed.” We have no time to look up these references or we would explain how the thing is made out, but it must strike ordinary people as very foolish that the AMERICAN SENTINEL should go into a losing fight. AMS February 28, 1895, page 65.2
Lest the Monitor should still “have no time to look up these references,” we shall tell what they say, so that they can be seen at once. The first one cited says that “All that dwell upon the earth shall worship him [the beast], whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb.” The second one says that he “made war with the saints, and prevailed against them; until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High: and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom.” The third one shows that the kingdoms of the earth once more united in illicit connection with the papacy—Babylon the great—and live deliciously with her to such an extent that, instead of lamenting her widowhood and the loss of her power, as now she is doing, she glorifies herself and lives deliciously, and “saith in her heart, I sit a queen, and am no widow, and shall see now sorrow.” AMS February 28, 1895, page 65.3
Then it is also that she will be so pleased with herself as to exclaim, “I shall be a lady forever.” This, her day, is coming shortly. And when it does come—then, and “therefore shall her plagues come in one day, death, and mourning, and famine; and she shall be utterly burned with fire for strong is the Lord God who judgeth her.” No, no; the AMERICAN SENTINEL is not engaged in a losing fight. Ours is a fight for victory all the way along, and of triumph at the end; for when this Babylon, Rome, the papacy, thus sinks and is annihilated under the fiery judgment of the Lord, then also it is written: “I saw as it were a sea of glass mingled with fire; and them that had gotten the victory over the beast, and over his image, and over his mark, and over the number of his name, stand on the sea of glass, having the harps of God.” AMS February 28, 1895, page 65.4
The Monitor continues:— AMS February 28, 1895, page 65.5
Of course we have the comforting assurance that the pope’s visit to America will only be for one day. His voyage across the Atlantic will be fatal to him. This is proved by Revelation 18; and after that happy event there will be no use for the AMERICAN SENTINEL. AMS February 28, 1895, page 65.6
The SENTINEL has never said a word about the pope coming to America. This suggestion is altogether gratuitous on the part of the Monitor; for we have not only not said anything about the pope coming to America, but we have no said anything that could be fairly construed to mean any such thing. AMS February 28, 1895, page 65.7
It is true that when this Babylon sinks, when “the beast” is destroyed, there will be no use for the AMERICAN SENTINEL; but now, and for some time to come, there is, and is going to be, great use for the SENTINEL and for a number of other papers devoted to the same cause. AMS February 28, 1895, page 65.8
With the following attempt at wit the Monitor closes:— AMS February 28, 1895, page 65.9
Now, considering that all this is going to happen anyhow, and to happen soon, for the editor remarks, “We certainly expect to see it,” we can’t imagine why the AMERICAN SENTINEL is making such a noise. It would be a great deal more comfortable, for instance, if the editor should go to sleep until the event comes off. The only danger to suffering humanity is that he might talk in his dreams. If his utterances when awake are of such an inflammatory character, it is appalling to contemplate what he might say in his sleep. AMS February 28, 1895, page 65.10
Yes, we do certainly expect to see it, and that is precisely why we are “making such a noise.” It is the duty of a sentinel to make a noise at even a distant sign of danger; but when the danger is imminent, as this is, then he is not only to make a noise by crying out an alarm, but he is also to “fire off his piece.” The ruin of Babylon means the ruin of all who may then be in any way connected with her; and therefore the message from heaven now is: “Go out from her, my people: that you be not partakers of her sins, and that you receive not of her plagues. For her sins have reached unto heaven, and the Lord hath remembered her iniquities.” Revelation 18:4, 5. (Catholic Version.) AMS February 28, 1895, page 65.11
Against ancient Babylon, the Lord by the prophets, denounced judgment even unto her utter ruin. See Jeremiah 50 and 51. Many of God’s people were held in captivity there; and to escape the doom of Babylon which was certainly fixed, they must flee out of the midst of her. And so it was written: “Go out of the midst of her, my people: that every man may save his life from the fierce wrath of the Lord.” Jeremiah 51:45. And that every one might know that this ruin was so near that he must certainly leave her if he would save his life, the Lord told them that there would come two rumors in the land, and the rumors would be a year apart. And thus is was written: “A rumor shall come in one year, and after this year another rumor: and iniquity in the land, and ruler upon ruler.” Verse 46. When that second rumor should come, then every one who respected this word would flee out of Babylon and so escape the destruction that came with her fearful fall. AMS February 28, 1895, page 65.12
Accordingly, in the spring of the year 539 B.C., the Medo-Persians armies started from Ecbatana under the command of Cyrus. Then the first “rumor” spread to Babylon; but any one could take his time to leave the doomed city, as the danger was not pressing till the second rumor should come in another year. At the river Gyndes Cyrus tarried with his army until the next spring, and then again took up his march toward Babylon. The second rumor spread rapidly to Babylon. This meant her utter destruction. This was the token which God had named; and now every one must flee and escape from Babylon if he would escape the ruin that was certain to fall upon her and that quickly. (Daniel the prophet of the Lord remained in the city, and for a purpose: see Daniel 5.) AMS February 28, 1895, page 65.13
Now this is a type of the situation as it now exists with respect to this latter “Babylon, the great, the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth.” God would have healed her: but she would not be healed. Therefore her doom is fixed, and her ruin is certain. By the prophecies the word of the Lord has gone forth upon her. Long ago this was settled. And, as in the case of ancient Babylon, there were to be two rumors of the fall of this Babylon—not one year, nor any particular set number of years apart. The first of these is recorded in Revelation 14:8, and the second and last one is this one in the 18th chapter, which we have already referred to—“Go out from her, my people: that you be no partakers of her sins, and that you receive not of her plagues. For her sins have reached unto heaven, and the Lord hath remembered her iniquities.... She saith in her heart: I sit a queen, and am no widow: and sorrow I shall not see. Therefore shall her plagues come in one day, death, and mourning, and famine, and she shall be burnt with the fire: because God is strong, who shall judge her.” AMS February 28, 1895, page 65.14
The first of these two rumors was sounded, and was heard, some time ago. The second and final rumor is now being sounded through the earth with a loud voice; and it means that the everlasting ruin of Babylon, mother and daughters, is near and hasteneth greatly; and whosoever would save his soul alive and escape from the fiery judgment of the Lord upon Babylon, must separate from her and all that is connected with her in any way. AMS February 28, 1895, page 66.1
This is why the AMERICAN SENTINEL “is making such a noise.” And we are not going to stop the “noise” till the work is done; for it is written: “Upon thy walls, O Jerusalem, I have appointed watchmen all the day, and all the night, they shall never hold their peace.” Isaiah 62:6. Whether the people will believe and escape is for them to decide: ours is to sound aloud the rumor. “Again the word of the Lord came unto me, saying: Son of man, speak to the children of thy people, and say unto them: When I bring the sword upon a land, if the people of the land take a man, one of their meanest, and make him a watchman over them: and he see the sword coming upon the land, and sound the trumpet, and tell the people: then he that heareth the sound of the trumpet, whosoever he be, and doth not look to himself, if the sword come, and cut him off: his blood shall be upon his own head. He heard the sound of the trumpet, and did not look to himself, his blood shall be upon him: but if he look to himself, he shall save his life. And if the watchman see the sword coming, and sound not the trumpet: and the people look not to themselves, and the sword come, and cut off a soul from among them: he indeed is taken away in his iniquity, but I will require his blood at the hand of the watchman.” Ezekiel 33:1-6. AMS February 28, 1895, page 66.2
We do not deny that it would indeed “be a great deal more comfortable” for the Monitor, for Catholicism, and for the papacy—for Babylon and the beast—if the SENTINEL and all others who are bearing a like testimony “should go to sleep until the event comes off.” But this cannot be; for now and upon this subject, it is as it was that time before—“If these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out.” And in that case it might be indeed “appalling to contemplate” what would be said. But in any case it is certainly appalling to contemplate the situation of the world under the impending ruin, and the listlessness and unbelief of the people in the presence of the solemn warnings so fully given in the prophecies of the Word of the Lord. AMS February 28, 1895, page 66.3
“True and False Theocracy” American Sentinel 10, 9, p. 66.
UNDER this heading, we showed last week that a theocracy can exist no more in this world until the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. This is the plain teaching of the Word of God. The disciples understood, after the Saviour’s resurrection, that the promise of a kingdom had reference not to this mortal state but to the everlasting immortal kingdom, and they were content to bide their Lord’s time; but it was not so with the selfish, designing men who came into the church in later years. These reasoned that of right all power belonged to Christ. He was not personally present to claim it, but were they not his representatives? and could they not, year, should they not, exercise not only ecclesiastical but civil power as well, in his name and for his glory and the upbuilding of his kingdom in the earth? To ask the question was, in their minds, to answer it as well—hence the theocratic theory which began in the third century to be quite general in the church, and hence also the grasping after civil power to replace the loss of spiritual power due to apostasy from the true faith, and to corrupting alliances with the rulers of the world. AMS February 28, 1895, page 66.1
The Saviour sent his disciples forth into a hostile world under the commission: “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.” Matthew 28:19, 20. The only guarantee of success given the apostles was the promise of the presence of their Lord by his Spirit; and by the power of that Spirit they went forth making converts not only without the aid of the civil power but in the face of the most bitter persecution. AMS February 28, 1895, page 66.2
But the power of the Spirit of God could be used only in harmony with the mind of God. The Lord Jesus Christ made no provision for self-seeking among his followers. On the contrary, when on one occasion certain of his disciples sought preferment for themselves, he said:— AMS February 28, 1895, page 66.3
Ye know that they which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and their great ones exercise authority upon them. But so shall it not be among you: but whosoever will be great among you, shall be your minister: and whosoever of you will be the chiefest, shall be servant of all. For even the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many. Mark 10:42-45. AMS February 28, 1895, page 66.4
And again we have these words of our Lord:— AMS February 28, 1895, page 66.5
But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ. But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted. Matthew 23:8-12. AMS February 28, 1895, page 66.6
But these injunctions were not obeyed. Even in Paul’s day the “mystery of iniquity” was at work as the apostle declared in 2 Thessalonians 2:7. Unconsecrated men, like Simon the sorcerer, joined themselves to the church for self-aggrandizement; but the power of the Spirit of God was not for such as they. Power, however, they would have, and so they sought it by usurping authority over their fellows. The humble office of elder, bishop, or overseer—for the terms are in the Scriptures used interchangeably, and all mean the same thing—was magnified, or perverted, rather, so that ambitious men instead of being servants of the church became “lords over God’s heritage.” AMS February 28, 1895, page 66.7
But position was not power, and power they would have. And as it was to be had from the Lord only by those who would use it to his glory, these false shepherds sought it at the hands of civil rulers. At first they simply bartered ecclesiastical influence for political power; but subsequently they claimed that the power belonged to them of right. Of the progress that had been made in this direction in the fourth century, Neander says:— AMS February 28, 1895, page 66.8
There had in fact arisen in the church ... a false theocratical theory, originating not in the essence of the gospel, but in the confusion of the religious constitutions of the Old and New Testaments, which ... might easily result in the formation of a sacerdotal State, subordinating the secular to itself in a false and outward way. AMS February 28, 1895, page 66.9
The result was the full-grown papacy with the bishop of Rome as “Vicar of Christ,” claiming power to depose kings and to set up kings; and following this in natural order, the history of the long and bloody persecution in which over fifty millions of people perished—sacrificed on the altar of popish ambition. Only evil came of an attempt to establish a theocracy then; only evil can come of such an attempt now. AMS February 28, 1895, page 66.10
“‘The Catholic Clergy in Politics’” American Sentinel 10, 9, pp. 66, 67.
UNDER the above head the American Ecclesiastical Review for January contains a most significant article. The Review is an authorized organ of the Roman Catholic Church in the United States and is “devoted to the diffusion and interpretation of practical theology, more especially in its bearing upon church administration in the United States. It deals with questions of the day only in their principles and special application to the priestly and pastoral function.” AMS February 28, 1895, page 66.1
The reason given for the discussion of this topic at this time is as follows:— AMS February 28, 1895, page 66.2
Recent occurrences brought about by the elections in the United States have directed public attention to this subject, and thus render its discussion particularly opportune at this time. AMS February 28, 1895, page 66.3
The Roman Catholic Church in the United States has hitherto professed non-interference in politics. Of course everybody knows, or ought to know, that, notwithstanding this profession, the church has had a tremendous influence in American politics. This influence, however, has not been openly exerted, as in Germany for instance, but has been exercised through the wire-pullings of the individual priest, the organized lobby, and the Catholic Indian Bureau at Washington. AMS February 28, 1895, page 66.4
But in the opinion of the prelates of the church, as voice in the American Catholic Review, the time has now come when it is opportune to take a more active part in American politics. AMS February 28, 1895, page 66.5
To prepare the way for this change the Review sketches briefly the attitude of the pope and the Catholics of other countries toward the subject under discussion as follows:— AMS February 28, 1895, page 66.6
Considering the fact that the present attitude of the Catholic clergy toward national politics differs very widely in various countries, it may seem at first sight impossible to find principles, universal, and founded alike in reason and faith, which would justify apparently opposite forms of action. For, at the very time when a stinging protest is sent forth from the altar by a respected American bishop 1 against the intervention, in purely political matters, of another no less popular prelate, 2 we find bishops of other countries raise their voice to arouse their clergy and people to the exercise of their political rights. Nay, on this very point we see Leo XIII. in Italy, directing what might seem two opposite courses of political action. In regard to the Chamber of Deputies and the Legislative Assembly of the Kingdom established since the spoliation of Rome, the holy father advises clergy and people to maintain the political principle laid down by Pius IX.—Ne eletti ne ellettori, that is “we neither vote nor stand as candidates for election.” At the same time the pontiff strongly counsels Catholics to take active part in the municipal elections, and he encourages the clergy to exercise their influence in behalf of the establishment of conservative regime in the large towns, and particularly in Rome.... AMS February 28, 1895, page 66.7
Everybody knows the history of the “Catholic Association” in Ireland at the beginning of this century, and what a stand the bishops and clergy, individually and collectively, have taken in the struggle for emancipation, a struggle which has been carried into our own days with the sympathy of every lover of justice and freedom. Here, too, whilst we find Leo XIII. counseling the clergy to be watchful lest the claim of rights in the political order would interfere with that of the moral order, we see him approving their zeal for liberty, and thus indorsing their activity in behalf of political rights. AMS February 28, 1895, page 66.8
In England, too, the Catholic clergy have had repeated occasions since the restoration of the hierarchy to assert their influence in the domain of politics, when there was question of obtaining equal rights with the members of the Established Church, especially in the matter of elementary education. AMS February 28, 1895, page 67.1
The “Kulturkampf” period in Germany is fresh in the memory of the present generation, and the French Abbé Kannegiesser, in his lately published instructive work, “Les Catholiques Allemands,” has taken particular pains to point out to his countrymen that the success of the “Centre” party in Germany during the religious struggle of the last twenty years was due as much, if not more, to the exertions of a patriotic clergy, than to the noble leadership of such men as Reiehensperger, Mallinckrodt, and Windthorst. The parliamentary party in Germany has always counted a considerable number of the ablest clergy among its ranks, and at this present moment there are more than a dozen priests following as members of the Reichstag in the footsteps of the late Mgr. Ketteler, Archbishop of Mayence, or the present Archbishop of Posen, Mgr. Stablewasky. AMS February 28, 1895, page 67.2
In the Austria-Hungarian empire select members of the national hierarchy and mitred abbots have long since enjoyed the right of a seat in the Upper Chambers of Vienna and Budapesth. If under the present administration the Liberals have gained the ascendency [sic.] in the actual government of the country, the cause may be sought to a great extent in the lack of interest and activity, partly forced, partly voluntary, of the clergy. This circumstance is openly regretted by the truly conservative element in the Austrian empire, and the clergy may have learned some useful lessons from the bitter experience which the Catholics of Hungary have but recently met with through the liberal and laissez-faire methods of some of their spiritual leaders. AMS February 28, 1895, page 67.3
But of all countries in Europe, Belgium has best demonstrated the beneficial results of a judicious, courageous intervention on the part of the clergy in its national politics. Ever since the establishment of the kingdom, the clerical element has been strongly represented in the “Constituante.” The celebrated Canon de Haerne did not cease to the last days of his active life to urge upon the legislative body of the country the necessity of granting “true liberty for all” in conformity with the constitution, amongst the signers of which his name will always be honorably remembered. The Abbé Pottier received but a short time ago the grateful testimony of popular confidence by a proffered candidacy to the Chambre, whilst the valuable services rendered to the national cause by a simple country priest, the Abbé Keesen, were publicly recognized by his election as a senator of the kingdom in the Catholic province of Limbourg. There can be no doubt that the overwhelming victory of the Catholic party in the late general elections is mainly due to the exertions and loyal vigilance of the clergy, who, in the political crisis of the time, proved to be equal to their social duties. Moreover they did not fail to exercise the right of the so-called vote plural, established by the late legislature, in virtue of which nearly all the members of the clergy are accorded a triple vote, viz.: as citizens, as representatives of the learned professions, and as tax-payers. AMS February 28, 1895, page 67.4
Let us here mention the neighboring kingdom of Holland, which, like Belgium, small in territorial extent, enjoys more constitutional liberties than any other State of Europe. If, in this Protestant land, the Catholic minority has succeeded in exercising so marked an influence upon the laws passed within the last few years, the credit is mainly due to the Rev. Dr. Schaepman, whose reputation not only as a poet and orator but as a member of Parliament, has gone far beyond the limits of his native land.... AMS February 28, 1895, page 67.5
As for our neighboring country, Canada, everybody knows that the clergy are recognized as a potent factor in legislating for the two million Catholics among its inhabitants. If Canada possesses to-day, perhaps, the best educational system and institutions of varied learning supported by the State, it is entirely due to the exertions of an intelligent priesthood interested in the common welfare of their people. AMS February 28, 1895, page 67.6
From the rapid and imperfect sketch of the foregoing facts regarding the participation of the clergy in politics under circumstances widely different in character, we are enabled to draw several important conclusions: AMS February 28, 1895, page 67.7
1. The members of the clergy enjoy the political rights accorded to every other citizen. AMS February 28, 1895, page 67.8
2. Generally speaking—that is to say, abstracting for a moment from particular places, times and circumstances—the character and profession of the priesthood, is not obstacle to the exercise of the political rights accorded to every citizen; on the contrary the moral and intellectual advantages secured him by reason of his profession, give him a distinct title to fulfill his social mission by the salutary exercise of his political rights. This exercise gives to his efforts in behalf of the common good the mark and seal of true patriotism. AMS February 28, 1895, page 67.9
3. There are places, times and circumstances when the assertion and exercise of his political rights becomes a positive obligation on the part of the priest. He may even, as the legitimate guide of his people, take an active part in purely political movements when their results affect the temporal as well as spiritual welfare of the flock entrusted to him. In this case, it is needless to say, his conduct must be guided by the law of prudence. AMS February 28, 1895, page 67.10
4. This same virtue of prudence, looking above all things to the methods best calculated to promote the salvation of souls, which is the principal object of our holy ministry, may, on the other hand, oblige the priest, under certain circumstances, to use his political right with discretion or even to abstain wholly from its exercise. AMS February 28, 1895, page 67.11
Following this summing up, the Review concludes with the promise “to examine in detail these different conclusions” in future issues. AMS February 28, 1895, page 67.12
From all this the careful observer of the signs of the times will expect to see the Roman Catholic priest in the United States take a more open and “active part in purely political movements when their results affect the temporal as well as spiritual welfare of the flock entrusted to him.” And since the “temporal as well as spiritual welfare of the flock” requires that the Government continued its appropriations to Catholic Indian schools, commence to divide the public school fund,—in short, requires that the church, as Pope Leo puts it, “enjoy the favor of the laws and the patronage of public authority” “in addition to liberty,“—we may expect to see the church in the near future enter upon open and aggressive political action. AMS February 28, 1895, page 67.13
But why not? Have not the popular Protestant churches and societies already done so? Have they not publicly combined and boycotted legislators into giving them the legal power to compel all men to submit to their interpretation of the fourth commandment? If Roman Catholic priests follow their example in the interests of their church and beat them at their own game, as they surely will, they will have no one to blame but themselves. AMS February 28, 1895, page 67.14
But between the upper and nether millstone of Roman Catholicism and apostate Protestantism what will become of “the land of the free”? AMS February 28, 1895, page 67.15
“A Delaware Sunday Bill” American Sentinel 10, 9, p. 67.
IN the legislature of the State of Delaware on Wednesday last an “Anti-Sunday-Work Bill” was introduced, the representative presenting it stating that he did so at the request of the Wilmington branch of the International Plasterers’ Association. The bill is so sweeping in its provisions that we give it in full:— AMS February 28, 1895, page 67.1
SECTION 1. That chapter 131 of the Revised Code of this State be amended by inserting the following between the first and second paragraphs of section 4, and immediately after the word “hours:” “If any person, corporation, or firm engaged in business of any kind shall carry on or operate the same, or shall attempt to carry on or operate the same on the Lord’s day, commonly called Sunday, or shall engage, employ or hire any person to carry on or operate the same on the Lord’s day or Sunday, he, it or they shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall pay a fine of $100 and costs of prosecution for each and every such offense and may also be imprisoned one month in addition to such fine and costs. And any person, corporation, or firm engaged in business as aforesaid that shall carry on or operate the same clandestinely, or that shall lock or fasten up the entrance or means of ingress thereto for the purpose of concealing their operations or work, or shall compel or coerce their employés by threats or suggestions of discharge or other disadvantage, injury or loss because such employés refuse or decline to work on the Lord’s day, shall be guilty in like manner and punished accordingly. And besides and in addition to such prosecution such offender shall forfeit and pay a fine of like amount to any one who may within one year sue for the same either before a justice of the peace or in the superior court.” AMS February 28, 1895, page 67.2
Never before in our nation history has there been such a universal demand for more rigid State Sunday laws as there is this winter. By general agreement the church agitators for national Sunday legislation have practically abandoned Washington and are now engaged in a State crusade. With a view to concealing the religious character of legislation demanded, much work has been done among labor organizations with a view to enlisting their coöperation. This is the published plan of Dr. Crafts’ “Sabbath Reform Committee in Affiliation with the National Bureau of Reform,” under the sub-heading “Securing Coöperation of Labor Unions;” and the plan is succeeding. AMS February 28, 1895, page 67.3
Since the above was written we have learned that the proposed bill was defeated at its second reading on motion of Representative Pyle who introduced it. Now Mr. Pyle may expect to be boycotted by a certain religious element which is the real “power behind the throne” of all such measures. AMS February 28, 1895, page 67.4
“Sunday, the Saloons, the Priests, and the Preachers” American Sentinel 10, 9, pp. 68, 69.
THERE are two bills pending in the Senate of this State and five in the Assembly, the purpose of which is to legalize the sale of intoxicating liquors in New York and Brooklyn on Sunday. AMS February 28, 1895, page 68.1
Four of these bills provide for the sale of liquors during certain hours of the day and evening, presumably at such hours as might be suppose to interfere least with attendance at church services; and all of them provide that the front doors must be closed and the blinds drawn. AMS February 28, 1895, page 68.2
One of these bills provides that “there shall be no noise or disorder permitted therein calculated to disturb the quiet and peace of the Sabbath day.” And it is such examples of pious cant that should open the eyes of everybody to the impropriety of all Sunday legislation. AMS February 28, 1895, page 68.3
Of course the popular preachers are up in arms against all these bills. The churches are almost with one voice demanding the defeat of the proposed measures. And strange as it may seem to some, a large number of Catholic priests are opposed to the contemplated legislation. AMS February 28, 1895, page 68.4
But strange as it may seem, it is only what might be expected. Sunday is an institution of the Roman Catholic Church, and of course Rome will honor her own. Sunday evening, February 10, a “Catholic pastors’ meeting” was held in this city to consider this subject, “Rev. A. P. Doyle of the Paulist Fathers,” presided. “The meeting,” says the World of Monday, “was a remarkable one. Although announced only yesterday, every seat was filled long before the hour of opening, and hundreds of late comers were compelled to stand. It was an enthusiastic audience, too, and heartily applauded the vigorous language used.” AMS February 28, 1895, page 68.5
The World, to which we are indebted for the facts, continues:— AMS February 28, 1895, page 68.6
Seated on the stage with Father Doyle were the Very Rev. Joseph F. Mooney, Vicar-General; the Very Rev. A. V. Higgins, Provincial of the Dominicans; the Rev. Father Monselli, of the Order of the Pious Missions, pastor of the Italian Church in Harlem; the Rev. P. F. McSweeney and the Rev. Father Drain, of St. Brigid’s; the Rev. John G. McCormick, of St. Monica’s; the Rev. Father Hartigan, of the Dominicans; the Rev. John Hughes, Paulist; the Rev. Father Flood, of St. John the Evangelist’s; the Rev. P. Ennis, of the Franciscans, and Jeremiah Fitzpatrick, the President of the St. Vincent de Paul Society of this city. AMS February 28, 1895, page 68.7
Letters and telegrams were also received from the Revs. Cunnion, of St. Raphael’s; Colton, of St. Stephen’s, and Murphy, of old St. Patrick’s, the Fathers of the French Church of St. John the Baptist and of the Mission of Our Lady of the Rosary at Castle Garden, and others, all expressing the heartiest approval of the objects of the meeting. AMS February 28, 1895, page 68.8
Vicar-General Mooney was the first speaker. He read from the decrees of the Third Plenary Council of Baltimore, in which Sunday liquor-selling is severely condemned, and then said:— AMS February 28, 1895, page 68.9
That is our platform, the platform laid down by the bishops of the church in this country and approved by the holy father himself. We take our stand on the broad grounds of public morality and good citizenship on this most burning and vital question. We care not what political promises or election pledges were made which it is now proposed to redeem; we protest against any scheme for the Sunday opening of the saloons. We want the Lord’s day kept holy, and we want no interference with the laws designed to bring about this most laudable end. We demand this as Catholics, as Christians, and as citizens of this Republic. AMS February 28, 1895, page 68.10
The Vicar-General makes no bones about telling just why Roman Catholics are opposed to Sunday liquor-selling; it is because “we want the Lord’s day kept holy.” He is equally explicit as to the real purpose of Sunday laws. Notice the sentence: “We want the Lord’s day kept holy, and we want no interference with laws designed to bring about this most laudable end.” If the so-called Protestant advocates of Sunday laws were as candid we would hear less about “the civil Sabbath.” AMS February 28, 1895, page 68.11
“Father” Higgins, Provincial of the Dominicans, declared:— AMS February 28, 1895, page 68.12
This Sunday opening means the effacement of the father from the family. It means the effacement of thoughts of God from the hearts of men on his own day. It means more drunkenness, more immorality. Therefore we are performing a duty to Christianity and to the sanctity of the home by this demonstration here to-night. We protest against any legislation that would make Sunday anything else than a day of peace and church-going and rest. Therefore we denounce this most unwise, most immoral and most irreligious movement to open the saloons on the Lord’s day. AMS February 28, 1895, page 68.13
After several other speeches of a like character, the following resolutions were adopted:— AMS February 28, 1895, page 68.14
Resolved, That as Catholics, we enter our earnest and emphatic protest against the proposed desecration of a day especially consecrated to religious devotion and observances, a day which we are commanded by the law of God to “keep holy,” and that we would be unfaithful to our high and solemn sense of duty as Christian citizens of our free Republic if we failed at such a juncture to give public expression to our utter detestation and abhorrence of legislation that, instead of lessening, must inevitably increase the evils of the Sunday liquor traffic. AMS February 28, 1895, page 68.15
Resolved, That, entertaining the highest respect and reverence for the decision of the Third Plenary Council of Baltimore in reference to this particular matter, we earnestly hope, in the language of its decree, “that Sunday laws will not be relaxed, but more rigidly enforced,” and that “those who are engaged in the traffic should abstain entirely from the sale of liquor on Sunday.” AMS February 28, 1895, page 68.16
Resolved, That we solemnly protest in the interests of our holy religion and of public morality, in the name of afflicted humanity, for the true welfare of society and the maintenance of law and order, against the proposed violation and desecration of the Christian Sabbath for the benefit of any class and especially for the benefit of a trade that, while it is more exacting in its demands than any legitimate business, is more objectionable and obnoxious than any other on account of its gross abuses and great evils which attend even on its restricted and licensed prosecution. AMS February 28, 1895, page 68.17
Resolved, That we are in full and hearty accord with all bodies of our fellow-citizens who are engaged in the truly laudable and timely movement to abate the evils of the liquor traffic and who have publicly and indignantly, protested against the iniquitous, unreasonable and intolerable legislation demanded in the interests and for the exclusive promotion of this peculiarly absorbing and exacting business. AMS February 28, 1895, page 68.18
Resolved, That a printed copy of these resolutions, signed by the chairman and secretary of this meeting, be sent to each member of the Senate and Assembly of the Legislature of this State. AMS February 28, 1895, page 68.19
It is noticeable that the first resolution takes distinctively anti-Roman Catholic grounds upon the question of Sunday sacredness. The Roman Catholic doctrine is that the law of God does not require the keeping of Sunday, but of the seventh day, and that Sunday observance rests entirely upon the authority of the church. A “Doctrinal Catechism,” by Rev. Stephen Keenan, Imprimatur, John Cardinal McCloskey; Excelsior Catholic Publishing House, 5 Barclay Street, New York, 1876, page 174, has this question and answer:— AMS February 28, 1895, page 68.20
Q. Have you any other way of proving that the church has power to institute festivals of precept? AMS February 28, 1895, page 68.21
A. Had she not such power she could not have done that in which all modern religionists agree with her;—she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday, the first day of the week, for the observance of Saturday, the seventh day, a change for which there is no scriptural authority. AMS February 28, 1895, page 68.22
A like testimony is borne by “An Abridgment of the Christian Doctrine,” by Rev. Henry Tuberville; Imprimatur, the Right Rev. Benedict, Bishop of Boston; Excelsior Catholic Publishing House, 5 Barclay Street, New York, 1833, page 58. This work says:— AMS February 28, 1895, page 68.23
Q. How prove you that the church hath power to command feasts and holy days? AMS February 28, 1895, page 68.24
A. By the very act of changing the Sabbath into Sunday, which Protestants allow of; and therefore they fondly contradict themselves, by keeping Sunday strictly, and breaking most other feasts commanded by the same church. AMS February 28, 1895, page 68.25
Q. How prove you that? AMS February 28, 1895, page 69.1
A. Because by keeping Sunday, they acknowledge the church’s power to ordain feasts, and to command them under sin. AMS February 28, 1895, page 69.2
Cardinal Gibbons has also spoken plainly upon this question. In “The Faith of Our Fathers,” page 111, he says:— AMS February 28, 1895, page 69.3
You may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of the Saturday, a day we never sanctify. AMS February 28, 1895, page 69.4
Such authorities might be greatly multiplied, but the testimony quoted is sufficient. Rome is changing her tactics upon the Sunday question only to catch Protestants. And it is significant that this turn is taken especially by the Paulist Fathers to whom is specially committed the work of making proselytes of “Protestants.” AMS February 28, 1895, page 69.5
Individual Roman Catholics are doubtless opposed to the liquor traffic on general principles. But Rome, as a church, is not opposed to the traffic, except on Sunday. A very large majority of liquor dealers are Catholics. Rome derives a great deal of support from liquor dealers. She dare not excommunicate the traffic and those engaged in it. The saloon may debauch and impoverish people, may beggar children and enslave wives, and murder husbands and fathers six days in the week and Rome is silent; but when it touches Sunday “the church” speaks, demanding that it remain “a day of peace and church-going;” and declaring: “We want the Lord’s day kept holy.” Rome can be trusted to care for her own, and in this thing she is not alone; the so-called Protestant Church is gone after her. AMS February 28, 1895, page 69.6
“To Increase the Fine” American Sentinel 10, 9, p. 69.
THE following petition is being circulated in Pennsylvania by the compulsory Sunday observance managers:— AMS February 28, 1895, page 69.1
To the Senate and House of Representatives of the State of Pennsylvania: AMS February 28, 1895, page 69.2
Your petitioners, whose names are hereunto signed, do most respectfully and earnestly request your honorable bodies to so amend the Sunday law of 1794 as to make the penalty for the violation of the first section of said act for the first conviction $25, for the second conviction $50, and an increase of $10 for each subsequent conviction. We earnestly protest against any modification or amendment of the said law, which will decreased said penalty or make it less effective to secure Sunday observance. AMS February 28, 1895, page 69.3
The writer attended the convention at which this petition was adopted, and the only reason why it did not ask for the penalty of imprisonment is because is was feared that it would be asking too much at one time. Imprisonment will come next and after that the whipping post. AMS February 28, 1895, page 69.4
“Back Page” American Sentinel 10, 9, p. 72.
THE manager of the Seventh-day Adventist publishing house in London, John R. Gibson, has been summoned to appear before the authorities to answer the charge of violating the factory law forbidding labor on Sunday. The employés in the publishing institution are Seventh-day Adventists, and rest on the Sabbath (Saturday). The prosecution of Mr. Gibson is nothing short of persecution. AMS February 28, 1895, page 72.1
THE Catholic World of July 18, 1870, in an article entitled, “The Catholics of the Nineteenth Century,” published this:— AMS February 28, 1895, page 72.2
The supremacy asserted for the church in matters of education implies the additional and cognate function of the censorship of ideas and the right to examine and approve or disapprove all books, publications, writings and utterances intended for public instruction, enlightenment or entertainment, and the supervision of places of amusement. This is the principle upon which the church has acted in handing over to the civil authorities for punishment criminals in the world of ideas. AMS February 28, 1895, page 72.3
Yes, this is the principle upon which the church has acted and acts to-day where she has the power. And we know of several “criminals in the world of ideas” that the church in the United States would be glad to hand over to the civil authorities for punishment. AMS February 28, 1895, page 72.4
THE Detroit Evening News argues thus regarding the question of taxation of church property which has been agitating the Michigan legislature:— AMS February 28, 1895, page 72.5
If the pecuniary burdens of the churches are increased by formal taxation, the community at large will have to foot the bill by sustaining double the number of strawberry festivals and oyster suppers it does now; and if this should fail, the voting ladies would have to take the lone oyster out of the soup to cut down expenses. AMS February 28, 1895, page 72.6
The News is right in concluding that church taxation would increase the number of shameful methods employed by the churches to support themselves in some other way than by self-denial, but every one would be left free to participate in these church-dishonoring methods or not, as he chose; but as the matter now stands all are indirectly compelled to support such churches, whether willingly or unwillingly. AMS February 28, 1895, page 72.7
THE Pennsylvania Sabbath Association’s call for the convention of this antichristian and un-American society held in Altoona Feb. 14, 15, was signed by sixteen pastors, five of whom are Lutheran ministers of that city. The following is a part of the call:— AMS February 28, 1895, page 72.8
The conflict between the foes and friends of the Sabbath is fairly on and will admit of no compromise. The enemy is neither dead nor sleeping, and it is wisdom in the Christian people of the State to be on the alert and ready to guard against the loss of the legal protection of the Sabbath. AMS February 28, 1895, page 72.9
It would seem that the Lutheran Church is drifting with the rest back to papal methods,—back to the use of civil power to force obedience to the dogmas of the church. AMS February 28, 1895, page 72.10
JUST before going to press we received a letter from W. H. McKee, formerly associate editor of the SENTINEL, but now in Basel, Switzerland, informing us of the arrest of Mr. Henri Revilly, the book-keeper of the Seventh-day Adventist publishing house in that city, whom the authorities hold responsible for the Sunday work done by that institution in the absence of the manager, H. P. Holser, who, as the representative of the denomination’s interests in Central Europe, is attending their international conference now in session at Battle Creek, Mich. AMS February 28, 1895, page 72.11
Although Mr. Revilly is in no sense the manager of the institution he is so held and threatened with three months’ imprisonment. His trial was to occur February 16, and we await the result with interest. If he is imprisoned the work of the office will continue until all are arrested since each employé of the institution is his own boss: the manager, Mr. Holser, having said to them on leaving for America, “The house is open to you every Sunday. You can come to work or you can rest.” AMS February 28, 1895, page 72.12
The law under which the arrests were made is a factory law ostensibly in the interests of laboring people. But as the authorities know that each employé rests on the seventh day and thereby meets the avowed intent of the law, the prosecution is simply persecution. For years the authorities have understood the facts in the case and have not interfered. The reason they now interfere can be learned by reading Mr. McKee’s article on page 69 of this issue. AMS February 28, 1895, page 72.13
Our readers will remember that Mr. Holser was imprisoned for a term of twenty-one days in a Basel prison for permitting work to be done on Sunday in the publishing house. A sentence of forty days awaits him on his return. All this is occurring in the country of William Tell and the Reformation. This fact was brought to the attention of the people of Lucerne by a Seventh-day Adventist who was arrested for laboring on Sunday, in a pamphlet addressed to the citizens of his canton in which he said: “Fellow-citizens, you are at the present time raising a fund to erect a monument to William Tell. But while you are working to erect a stone monument to Tell, you have erected a living monument to Gesler.” AMS February 28, 1895, page 72.14
POPE LEO XIII., in an encyclical letter dated Nov. 1, 1885, exhorted Catholics “to take an active part in all municipal affairs and elections, and to favor the principles of the church in all public services, meetings, and gatherings. All Catholics must make themselves felt as active elements in daily political life in the countries where they live. They must penetrate whenever possible in the administration of civil affairs,” etc. AMS February 28, 1895, page 72.15
The Roman Catholics of New York City made haste to obey this command of the pope, and the city has been completely controlled by Roman Catholic politicians for the last ten years. In consequence there has developed a condition of unspeakable rottenness. Against this rottenness, which a priest of this city publicly declares was known to the church authorities, no voice was raised in protest. Now that it has been exposed and cannot be denied or evaded, the Catholic Review of this city, in its issue of Feb. 17, has this to say of the results of the last ten years of Roman Catholic activity in the “municipal affairs and elections” of New York City:— AMS February 28, 1895, page 72.16
Has its [New York’s] history in regard to the Catholics who have been appointed or elected to office been such as would be satisfactory to a requirement, that Catholics, as Catholics, should be fitly represented? Of course, there have been many brilliant exceptions, but, as a rule, have the Catholics of New York City reason to be proud of the career in public life of the men professedly Catholics who have, for instance, been elected for these many years past to represent the city in the State Assembly? Go over the list of them—a long list—during the last ten years. Look at the representation in Congress during the last twenty years, including an ex-prize fighter. Is it necessary, ten years after the decree of the Baltimore Council, that saloon-keepers shall dominate the “Catholic vote”? But they do it practically, and the man that denies this is either dishonest or ignorant. The saloon-keepers are a potency in the political organizations as the have been made up so far, and the mass of the “Catholic vote” has so far been following the dictates of one or the other political organization. Behind the saloon-keepers are the brewers, who hold chattel-mortgages from the saloon-keepers, and most of the brewers are now working together under some form of a “trust.” AMS February 28, 1895, page 72.17
The above is the fruit of the pope’s exhortation to Catholics to “make themselves felt as active elements in daily political life.” It is the “more abundant fruit” which has resulted from the Roman Catholic Church enjoying “in addition to liberty” the “favor of the laws and the patronage of public authority.” And yet the church proclaims herself the author, promoter, and preserver of civilization! AMS February 28, 1895, page 72.18