Protestant Principles Condemned by W. W. Prescott

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Mar 21, 1912

Protestant Principles Condemned

By W. W. Prescott

An organization called the “Guardians of Liberty” has recently been formed in New York City, with the avowed purpose of preserving civil and religious liberty in this country. The leading promoters of this organization are former Congressman Charles D. Haines, of New York; Charles R. Skinner, former superintendent of public instruction in the State of New York; and former Congressman Thomas E. Watson, of Georgia. The principles of this organization are thus stated:—

We stand unalterably for the complete separation of church and state.

We unite to protect our country and its free institutions from the efforts of any religious-political organization which may attempt to manipulate or influence the political or social development of our country.

We concern ourselves with no religious faith, but we take issue with any church or other organization interfering with established American institutions and civil government.

We maintain it to be the right of the state to give free education and public instruction, but the religious instruction of children we hold to be the exclusive duty and prerogative of parents.

We are opposed to the use of public funds, local or national, for any religious purpose whatever.

We maintain it to be inconsistent with, and destructive of, free government to appoint or elect to political or military office any person who openly or secretly concedes superior authority to any foreign political or ecclesiastical power whatsoever.

These are sound principles well stated, although we would suggest that before the word authority in the last paragraph the word political might be inserted, in order to avoid any possible ambiguity.

Special attention has been recently directed to this organization by the publication in the New York and Washington papers of articles of some length, calling attention to the fact that Lieut.-Gen. Nelson A. Miles, U. S. A., retired, is a member of this organization. In a published interview General Miles said that he did not read the principles closely before becoming a member, and that he was unaware, till his attention was called to the matter, that these principles contained several alleged attacks on Roman Catholicism. But there is no attack on Roman Catholicism in these principles, unless Roman Catholicism stands for un-American and unchristian doctrines.

In an interview with a newspaper correspondent, Cardinal Gibbons, of Baltimore, condemned in strong terms the Guardians of Liberty, and declared that “this order is plainly nothing more than an attempt to revive the bigotry of the A. P. A., which was presumed to have died of inanition.”

According to a despatch from Rome this statement was authorized by the Vatican, and it may therefore be regarded as an official utterance. It is in perfect harmony with the Vatican’s policy to answer any opposition to Rome with the cry of bigotry, but what is there in these principles of the Guardians of Liberty which savors of bigotry? The mere fact that they are condemned at Rome is weighty testimony as to Rome’s attitude on these questions.

One paragraph from the interview of Cardinal Gibbons is worthy of special attention:—

In his spiritual affairs every Roman Catholic owes allegiance to a foreign ecclesiastical power, namely, His Holiness the Pope. But it is only in his spiritual affairs. In matters concerning his civil welfare or that of his country, every Roman Catholic is as free as any other American citizen to act as his wisdom and conscience dictate.

Whether Roman Catholics do it freely or not, it is evident that the time is rapidly approaching when Roman Catholic voters will be expected to act in a solid body under the guidance of their spiritual superiors, for the purpose of defending by political means the tenets of their faith. That this is admitted by Roman Catholic authority is plainly shown from an extract from an editorial in the Catholic Universe (Roman Catholic), quoted in the Literary Digest of March 9, 1912:—

The great body of Catholic voters are slowly but surely coming face to face with a condition where they will have to be one thing or the other, either loyal to their faith or recreant to their duty, accordingly as they choose their political alinement. It may not come for twenty years, or for fifty years, and it may come in ten. But it is coming, and a little practise of practical Catholicity now in their political relations will be an excellent preparation for the fight that is prophesied by events.

To those who hesitate to carry their religion into politics the editor, in the same article, gives this frank advice:—

Those who timorously recoil even now from any suggestion that Catholics should take an active part in public affairs, with a saving thought always of their Catholicity, will do well to have gone to their reward before that struggle comes, for it will be one in which there will be no quarter asked or given and no compromise possible.

The Roman Catholic idea of civil government is so absolutely at variance with the Protestant idea, that if a Roman Catholic is loyal to the teachings of his own church, he must of necessity cast his influence and his vote in favor of establishing the Roman Catholic view to the exclusion of the Protestant view. A basic principle in the republican form of government is that authority is derived from the people, but this principle is absolutely condemned by Pope Leo XIII, in his encyclical letter Libertas Præstantissimum, issued June 20, 1888. To quote:—

For, when once man is firmly persuaded that he is subject to no one, it follows that the efficient cause of the unity of civil society is not to be sought in any principle external to man, or superior to him, but simply in the free will of individuals; that the authority in the state comes from the people only; and that, just as every man’s individual reason is his only rule of life, so the collective reason of the community should be the supreme guide in the management of all public affairs.—“The Great Encyclical Letters of Pope Leo XIII,” New York, Bensiger Brothers, Printers to the Holy Apostolic See, page 145.

This idea of the origin of authority in civil government, which is unsparingly condemned by this Pope, is by him declared to be the result of the Reformation of the sixteenth century, which he designates as a climax of “the harmful and lamentable rage for innovation.” Among the evil principles flowing from this source he classes the claim “that no man has any right to rule over other men,” and declares:—

In a society grounded upon such maxims, all government is nothing more or less than the will of the people, and the people, being under the power of itself alone, is alone its own ruler.—Id., page 120.

It is thus perfectly clear that according to the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church there is an authority from without which is above the will of the people, and there is a certain class of men who have an inherent right to rule

over other men. That this authority from without is the authority of the Roman Catholic Church is abundantly evident from the clear statement made by Pope Boniface VIII:—

One sword must be under another, and the temporal authority must be subject to the spiritual power; . . . whence, if the earthly power doth go astray, it must be judged by the spiritual power.—Extrav. com., lib. 1, title 8, cap. 1.

According to the Roman Catholic view of civil government, it is the duty of the state to enforce the Roman Catholic religion. As authority for this statement we quote again from “The Great Encyclical Letters of Pope Leo XIII”:—

Justice therefore forbids, and reason itself forbids, the state to be godless, or to adopt a line of action which would end in godlessness, namely, to treat the various religions (as they call them) alike, and to bestow upon them promiscuously equal rights and privileges. Since, then, the profession of one religion is necessary in the state, that religion must be professed which alone is true, and which can be recognized without difficulty, especially in Catholic states, because the marks of truth are, as it were, engraven upon it. This religion, therefore, the rulers of the state must preserve and protect, if they would provide—as they should do—with prudence and usefulness for the good of the community.—Pages 150, 151.

The separation of church and state, which is a fundamental principle of the American government, is stigmatized by Pope Leo XIII as a “fatal theory” and as a “fatal principle,” and he further declares:—

Many wish the state to be separated from the church wholly and entirely, so that regard to every right of human society, in institutions, customs, and laws, the offices of the state, and the education of youth, they would pay no more regard to the church than if she did not exist; and, at most, would allow the citizens individually to attend to their religion in private if so minded. Against such as these, all the arguments by which we disprove the principle of separation of church and state are conclusive.—Id., page 160.

The quotations which we have made are sufficient to show the irreconcilable antagonism between Roman Catholic and Protestant ideas of civil government, and that if a Roman Catholic citizen attempts to act upon the Protestant principle, he is untrue to the ex cathedra utterances of the Roman pontiffs, and for this reason there is good ground for the suspicion that in their political actions Roman Catholics are under the direction of a foreign power which really claims both temporal and spiritual jurisdiction throughout the world.

As copies of our two magazines, Liberty and the Protestant Magazine, had been sent to the headquarters of the Guardians of Liberty for free distribution, and were found there by a reporter for a New York paper, inquiry came to Washington for information concerning these magazines, and a representative of one of the papers interviewed the writer on this question. As a result there appeared in the Washington Post for March 12, the following paragraphs:—

At the national headquarters of the Guardians of Liberty in New York, copies of two magazines, the Protestant and the Liberty, both published in Washington, are being distributed. Both magazines contain much anti-Catholic matter. It has been ascertained that both publications are published by one concern, although edited by two separate editors. When asked to tell the purposes of the Guardians of Liberty, W. W. Prescott, said to be one of the editors, disclaimed any knowledge of the workings of the order.

“It has been only during the past few weeks that I have been aware of the existence of such an order,” he said. “Just what are its purposes or its religious beliefs I am at a loss to say.

“A number of copies of the Protestant have been sent to the Guardians of Liberty purely as a matter of courtesy. We send any number of copies of the Protestant to other patriotic orders throughout the country, and it was at the request of the officials of the Guardians of Liberty that we have been furnishing them free copies of the magazine.”

We shall follow with interest the future developments of this subject, as it is more than likely that the matter will be further exploited in the daily press.

W. W. P.