A CATHOLIC PLEA FOR THE DEATH PENALTY UPON HERETICS.
By E.
There was a spirited discussion recently in the German Reichstag in the matter of Catholic teaching upon the question of the right of the church to put dissenters to death. The discussion was brought into the Reichstag in consequence of the arguments of the Jesuit clergyman, Father de Luca, who, says the Kreuz Zeitung, of Berlin, “advocates, as is well known, the punishment of heretics by death.” The Catholic party had been defending one of its measures in the Reichstag, when one of the opposing legislators introduced the teachings of de Luca. Dr. Spahn, a Catholic senator, replied that he did not believe Father de Luca’s book contained any such teaching. The Catholic paper, Kölnische Volkszeitung, responds: “Dr. Spahn’s doubt is not well founded, for Father de Luca categorically advocates punishing heretics with death;” and then proceeds to quote from de Luca’s book the following:— (1) The secular power, upon the church’s order and authority, must inflict the death penalty upon heretics, from which penalty they may not be exempted after having been handed over to the secular arm; (2) this penalty is incurred, not only by those who abandon the faith when adults, but even by those who are baptized, yet grow in heresy with their mother’s milk and persist in it; (3) this penalty, where received, is to be extended to all the lapsed, or, if they wish to return to the faith, then to all who are pertinacious after an admonition. This is plain, unequivocal, and does not admit of being explained away. It has reference to “heretics” in our own day. It does not have reference to the past, but to the present, and the expounder of this doctrine means that it shall be applied now to those who may be adjudged heretics; for this same German Catholic paper goes on to say:— Father de Luca, however, advocates the death penalty for heretics even in our own day, as he emphatically states in another place (page 142). The Kölnische Volkszeitung, tho a Catholic paper, does not approve of the Jesuit’s teaching, even tho this Jesuit draws that doctrine from an earlier Catholic theologian. It says: “We could wish, in the interests of the Jesuit order, that Father de Luca had met with adequate criticism in the Civiltà Cattolica, or some other organ of the Jesuits. It must be clear to friend and foe that the Jesuit order does not stand for such doctrines and does not tolerate them in its bosom.” But the writings of Father de Luca did not meet with criticism in the organ of the Jesuit order, and that order continues to tolerate in its bosom the one who has given voice to the doctrine of “death to the heretics.” It is, therefore, evident that this is their faith and would be their practise had they the power now. Concerning this same question, the Roman Catholic paper, Tablet, published in London, quotes a passage from the writings of Thomas Aquinas, “the illustrious Roman Catholic scholar and saint,” as follows:— With regard to heretics two elements are to be considered, one element on their side and one on the part of the church. On their side is the sin whereby they have deserved, not only to be separated from the church by excommunication, but also to be banished from the world by death. For it is a much heavier offense to corrupt the faith, whereby the life of the soul is sustained, than to tamper with the coinage which is an aid to temporal life. Hence, if coiners and other malefactors are at once handed over by secular princes to a just death, much more may heretics, immediately they are convicted of heresy, be not only excommunicated, but justly done to die. But on the part of the church is mercy in view of the conversion of them that err, and, therefore, she does not condemn at once, but “after the first and second admonition,” as the apostle teaches (Titus 3:10). It should be said in passing that the verse referred to in Titus says nothing whatever in regard to the corporal punishment of men for unbelief. God has nowhere put into the hands of men any such authority over the beliefs or opinions of men. To Him alone they must render account, and he who attempts to exercise any such function is attempting to usurp the prerogatives of God, attempting to put himself in the place of God, as the apostle tells us the “mystery of iniquity” would do. That is the teaching which is being brought to the attention of the world at the present time by these discussions in public places and public prints. Just what the purpose of its promulgation is at the present time we are unable to state. But the world is drifting faster and faster toward the principles of Catholicism. They are coming more and more to dominate the affairs of men and nations. There are some spectacular setbacks, as seen in France; some energetic protests still, as seen in the “Los von Rom” movement in Austria; but the drift of the tide is toward the Vatican, in the circling whirl of whose great maelstrom the kings of the earth are yet to be grasped and held. Is it the purpose of God’s enemy to bring these doctrines before the world until the people cease to look upon them as the terrible and repulsive things they are? It may be; who can tell? The people are to come to that place where they will allow themselves to be dominated by that power, and where they will support that power in its war against the remnant who are left in the earth keeping the commandments of God. They will come to that place where they will “cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.” Rev. 13:15. They do not come to that place all at once; and the putting forth of these doctrines at this time may be one of the agencies Satan is to use in bringing that thing to pass. That is the doctrine held by that church to which the kings of the earth shall “give their power and strength” (Rev. 17:3, 4) in the last conflict against God’s kingdom and God’s children. It is a very appropriate doctrine for that church which the prophet saw “drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus.” Rev. 17:6. Do you not see any significance in its promulgation at the present time? E.