DID POPE LEO XIII. BLUNDER?
By John Harvey Kellogg
Not long since the assertion was made in an influential Nonconformist paper in London, that the Pope made a blunder when he issued his decree to his spiritual subjects in Ireland. So it appeared, no doubt, to those who had not studied well the sure word of prophecy and the signs of the times. It is true that there was a spirit of restlessness engendered in Ireland by the decree—an apparent desire to resist the interference of the Pope in political matters, where so much seemed at stake; where the people so deeply felt that their rights were involved. And what made the matter more humiliating, yes, more irritating, to the Irish people, was that the leading dignitaries of the church in Ireland had made efforts to secure the influence of the Pope in behalf of their people in their controversy with the Government. But the pontiff “made no sign.” On the occasion of the Pope’s Jubilee, the queen quite nearly outraged the feelings of her own church people, as well as those of her Nonconformist subjects, by sending to the Vatican the costly vessels for the service of the mass,—a service which she is in duty bound, according to the principles of the church of which she is the head, to regard as superstitious, and even blasphemous. This was followed by a cordial acknowledgment from the Pope, with the assurance that it was his earnest desire to open friendly diplomatic relations with England; and this again was followed with a visit to “his holiness” from a high official of the crown. Then the Protestant papers of England, as well as many secular papers, declared that the Government had gone over to the Pope—that the throne of Great Britain had prostrated itself before the triple crown of Rome. The readers of the Present Truth may remember that, in an article on the positions and aims of the Papacy, published at the time when the Pope was solicited to interfere for Ireland, we said that the time had not yet come for the Pope to speak on Irish affairs; that Leo XIII. was a diplomatist of far too much shrewdness to throw away his opportunities; that he would speak whenever by so doing he could bring the British Government to feel under obligation to him; and that he would no doubt preserve his silence until he was requested by the British crown to speak. In due time Leo spoke, and he spoke just as we expected that he would speak. And then the Protestant papers were jubilant over the idea that the Pope had blundered; that he had ruined his influence for all time in Ireland. One paper, which assumes considerable foresight into political affairs, claimed that the action of the Pope was sufficient proof that the Papal system was sinking into insignificance, and that it was on a rapid decline. Indeed, if we had trusted their prognostications, we should have thought that Leo XIII. was destined soon to be considered one of the weakest men that had ever occupied the chair of St. Peter. But we did not read the future of the Papacy through their glasses. We looked upon Leo as one of the most crafty men that ever ruled in Rome, and we have not changed our mind. We did not think he had lost any prestige by his decree. To the contrary, he had gained great influence just where he had been seeking it—with the Government of England. He could have no fear of any great or permanent loss in Ireland. Roman Churchism is the strongest and severest despotism now existing on the face of the earth. As a certain Catholic writer said: “The Pope is not a foreign prince to a true Catholic in any part of the world.” And his subjects believe that his jurisdiction is not only paramount and supreme in this world, but carries the same authority into the world to come. The loyalty of the “true Catholic” to any other Government on earth, is secondary to his loyalty to the Pope; his devotion to any other interest is always in direct reference to the interest of the Pope’s church. Leo well knew that he could control the bishops and the priests, and with their united aid he could sway the laity at his will. They may feel that they are aggrieved, injured; but with a threat of being deprived of priestly intercession, the threat of a church curse, and the loss of Christian burial, which means much more than purgatory to their ruined souls, the downtrodden masses dare not assert their rights, or whisper their convictions. What had the Pope to fear from the frowns of such subjects? A short time has passed, and how do matters now stand? People are beginning to realize that the Pope has not ruined his influence, either in Ireland or anywhere else; that he is not losing prestige among the great powers. A work recently published in Paris—or announced to appear—gives the following view of matters:— “Lord Salisbury is bound to confess to himself that measures of coercion, however sternly carried out by Mr. Balfour, break down before Irish tenacity. The Government of England, renouncing all those principles of liberty which are indisputable in Great Britain, may, on the other side of St. George’s Channel, prosecute and suppress newspapers, prohibit meetings, imprison according to its whim, send members of Parliament to lie in the gaol side by side with thieves and murderers, scour the country with soldiers and constabulary; it may spread over it a sort of stillness and gloom, but the fire is smoldering, feeding upon all the anger, the resentment, the thirst for vengeance, that such oppression excites.” After this statement of the conscious inability of the British Government to deal with the trouble, by ordinary means, the author notices how the Government turns to the Pope, as the last resort, to give a peaceful solution of the matter:— “The policy of Leo XIII. is to give himself out as the incarnation of the conservative party of Europe. He is the main-stay of every Government that represents the principle of authority. He feels that the fate of the Holy See is bound up with theirs, and he537wants to show that he is necessary to them. To be sure, he has achieved successes that may well have flattered his pride, showing, as they have, that he has imparted a new luster to the Holy See. Prince Bismarck, who had sworn never to go to Canossa, went and asked him for his help to deal with the German Catholics. Lord Salisbury, representing the old traditions of Protestant England, comes begging in his turn to help him subdue invincible Ireland. Leo XIII. has let himself be tempted by Lord Salisbury, and he has done for him what he has done for Prince Bismarck.” But a strange blindness seems to have stricken the wise of the world. The same writer proceeded to build a hope on the apparent determination of the people of Ireland to resist the decree of the Pope, and he anticipated a triumph for the people. But Leo spoke a second time, and directly to the bishops of Ireland. The same paper that some time ago rejoiced over the Pope’s blunder, and prophesied his speedy decline, now speaks as follows:— “Not only is Leo XIII. energetically demonstrating against the Italian Government, but he continues to intervene in the current of Irish affairs. His attitude is that of a Pope who intends to be obeyed, and he has made this clear in a letter addressed to the Catholic bishops of Ireland. In this letter he declares that he cannot disguise that the tidings which have recently come to him from Ireland have deeply pained and grieved him. . . . His duty forbade him to suffer that so many Catholics, whose salvation must be his first care, should pursue a hazardous and unsafe course, leading rather to disorder than to the relief of distress. The bishops are enjoined to let the people seek to advance their lawful interests by lawful means, and most especially, as is becoming in Christians, without prejudice to justice or to obedience to the Apostolic See—virtues in which Ireland has in all times found comfort and strength.” In his dealing with the difficulties that sprung up between the Government of Prussia and the Catholics of that country, Leo apparently struck at the best interests of his church, in a manner calculated to repress the zeal of his people. But what has been the result? Bismarck has been quietly led to Canossa; not, indeed, barefoot and in sackcloth, but smilingly, and adorned with a Papal decoration. But the victory of the Pope is complete; Prussia is governed quite in reference to his pleasure, and his people have learned to place implicit confidence in his management. The triumph of Leo XIII. over Bismarck is as complete as was that of Gregory VII. over Henry IV., and of more real value to the Papal See. And Leo’s management with the crown of England is of the same nature, and directly tending to the same result. It must be highly gratifying to Leo to have secured the friendship of these two Governments—the great representatives of Protestant national religion in Europe. And their friendship is not merely complimentary; in both Germany and England the principles and practices of the Catholic Church are not only being strengthened in its own circles, but are fast finding their way into the highest circles of the established churches. Well may the writer quoted above say that Leo has achieved successes that may well flatter his pride; he has, indeed, added new luster to the Papal See. And his conquests in Europe are not confined to England and Prussia. He is strengthening his influence in France, in many places having created the greatest enthusiasm. He has succeeded in every move that he has made; at first his success was altogether owing to his craft and shrewdness. His popularity is now so great that success is assured before he moves. Of his policy and its fruits in France we may speak hereafter.