Rome and the Republic

Pacific Press Publishing Company · Oakland, California · Nov 13, 1889

FromThe American Sentinel, Vol. 4, No. 42.

“Rome and the Republic.”

HON. WILLIAM J. ARMSTRONG, of Washington, D. C., who last winter had the honor to be invited by all the leading members of Congress to deliver one of his lectures before that body, lectured recently in the First Methodist Episcopal Church of this city, on “Rome and the Republic.” Mr. Armstrong prefaced his remarks by saying that it was not his purpose to assail the followers of the Roman Catholic faith. That would be shamefully un-American, and altogether too much like a revival of the middle ages. What he objected to, and would make the essence of his theme, was the attempt of the head of the Roman Catholic Church to inculcate the infallibility of the pope, and that all the temporal affairs of man must subserve his religious belief. When the Catholic Church suffers its followers to worship without restraint according to their own convictions, let there be no interference. But when the church attempts to teach that the pope is mightier than God, and would have this doctrine made the prevailing element of all civil law, then it is time for a liberty-loving people to object.

The Roman Church, said the speaker, has demanded for a thousand years, and does to-day, the subordination of citizenship to its temporal power. That church has always maintained that whatever is for man’s best welfare should rule; religion is of greatest importance to him, therefore religion should rule. In short, the church first, the citizen afterward. This has been the argument that has filled an ignorant, groping world with so much human suffering.

After considering the papal theory and its consequences, Mr. Armstrong contrasted it with the American doctrine of total separation of Church and State. “Washington,” remarked the speaker, “said the State should not legislate on matters concerning the conscience of man. Pope Leo XIII. says we should make all civil laws conformable to the church, and to regulate religious thought. Here we have the authority of Washington and the pope on a very important question. It is needless to ask which Americans will accept. Against the interference of the church in all civil affairs, the State, clothed in the white garment of religious freedom, has set its face forever and forever.”

He argued that the government has no business to interfere with religion. It is only one step between a religious government and the religious Inquisition.

Mr. Armstrong then quoted the Catholic Review, and Cardinal Manning, to show that Rome is the sworn enemy of republican institutions. “But,” he added, “the pope of Rome and the Catholic Church are not the only dangerous enemies of our government. “There sits in the Senate of this nation an old, straight-laced, narrow-minded, bigoted, theocratic Puritan who represents one of the New England States, but in spirit represents the mediæval ages. He has no vices, but he is one of that kind who would burn a soul to save it. At a late session of Congress he introduced an amendment to the Federal Constitution to establish a system of free schools in which should be taught the common branches and the ‘principles of the Christian religion.’ The amendment also provided that Congress should have power to enforce that amendment by appropriate legislation.”

The speaker said that right in the wake of this remarkable amendment that was proposed there was formed what is known as the National Reform Association, advocating the establishment of a common and uniform religion, to be woven into, and become, in fact, the substantial part of, the organic law. This was to be brought about by a convention of all the creeds in the nation, which the speaker characterized as a motley, loveable gathering of harmony let loose.

“This, my countrymen,” thundered Mr. Armstrong, “is Protestant Romanism, and, if anything, it is more infamous than Catholic Romanism. This is the same way that religious persecution was planted in the fourth century, and saddled on Europe for more than a thousand years. Right here to-day, under the shadow of the American flag, there is an attempt to establish a Protestant Rome. Think of it!

“And there are thousands of misguided cranks outside the National Reform Association who are supporting the movement.”

Here the speaker referred particularly to the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union. He told of their late National Convention, how they got into a passion for passing resolutions, and among other absurd things passed a set of resolutions approving of the sentiments and course of the National Reform Association, and also a resolution that the religion of Christ should be the fundamental element of our civil law.

“Poor, misguided creatures,” said he, “they are victims of misplaced zeal. With their resolutions they are worse than the curse they pretend to wage war against. Just one taste of a silly resolution, like the red flame in the cup, gives them a burning desire for more, and they seldom stop short of a regular debauch, that, if it don’t destroy the soul, at least destroys common sense. They are a body who doubtless mean well, but are, like all other cranks, stirred and impelled by conviction instead of intelligence. My advice to them is to stop imbibing resolutions and go home. Let the affairs of State alone, at least, and, if they must do something, let them continue their warfare against King Alcohol.”

Jonathan Edwards he characterized as a religious fanatic. Edwards said, and adhered to it, “We want a State religion and we are going to have it.”

All these circumstances, the speaker thought, were like the realities stepping out of one of the mediæval pictures, life size, into the present time. He thought, however, it would be some time yet before the changes threatened would come to pass.

Altogether the lecture was a masterly arraignment of both Roman Romanism and Protestant Romanism, and of all who are aiding and abetting the schemes of the National Reform Association.