Two Great Compromises by Editor

International Tract and Missionary Society · Oakland, California · May 28, 1885

FromSigns of the Times, Vol. 11, No. 21.

Two Great Compromises.

By Editor

Of the "little horn" or papal power, Dan. 7:26 says: "They shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end." But that does not indicate the consumption and destruction of the papacy itself. Of other powers the same chapter, verse 12, says: "They had their dominion taken away; yet their lives were prolonged for a season and time." The prolonging of their lives was necessary that Dan. 2:35 may be fulfilled, which says of these same powers, they were "broken to pieces together." Though the power of the papacy is consumed by the nations, the papacy itself is consumed by the brightness of the coming of the Lord. 2 Thess. 2:1-8.

Through the priests the papacy has had control, more or less, of the Governments of South America; but, in fulfillment of the prophecy, the consuming process seems to have reached the whole world. Even now we hear that these States are freeing themselves from the arrogance of the priests. The secular power is asserting its independence in its rule.

But amid all these changes, the people of these kingdoms, as in most of those of Europe, remain Catholic. And most of them recognize no other religion—they know no other religion. If we could realize this fact we would often have more sympathy for the irreligious of those countries. Their opposition to religion has largely grown from their intimate knowledge of the errors and senseless ritualism, the bigotry and intolerance, of the Romish system. Trained from their infancy to believe that this is the only religion that has any claim on our faith or reverence, they become infidels and often atheists. But on the subjects of Christian morals, and of faith and reverence, they are profoundly ignorant. They are still filled with blind superstition. The following will show the influence of the training to which they are subjected from infancy:—

Some years ago we became acquainted with an intelligent and educated gentleman from the continent of Europe. He was a graduate in eight languages, and at the time of our acquaintance was teaching four languages in a Catholic College. As we were under his instruction, and he attended our meetings, listening attentively to a series of our sermons, we had many conversations on religious matters. He confessed the truth which we preached; he found much fault with both the teachings and the practices of the priests, even in this land. When we urged him to embrace the truth of the Bible and to connect himself with us, his only reply was: "I cannot; I am a member of the Catholic Church." And we could not make him realize that it was possible for him to dissolve that connection. His judgment and his conscience would have led him to renounce Catholicism if he could have been brought to see that separation from "the church" was possible. Now if this man, intelligent and educated, having spent some time in the United States, every way dissatisfied with the papal church, could not break the chain of superstition which was woven around him from his infancy, what are we to expect from the masses who never had his privileges? They are taught to believe that their baptism made them life-members of that church, no matter where they are nor how they live. They can more easily dissolve their relation to fathers and mothers than to the church; that is a relation which cannot be severed in this life. The only door out of the church is that of death leading to endless perdition.

Now if through fear or coercion these masses of irreligious or indifferent people shall ever be led to embrace, to uphold any religion, what will it be? What can we reasonably expect of them? To this there can be but one answer. A few may accept the religion, the doctrines of the Bible; but that demands conversion and personal piety, of which the great majority in Catholic countries have no conception. They have never heard it taught or seen it exemplified by the priests. As religionists their only trust was in their baptism and the power to the priests to conduct them to Heaven.

The position of the papacy has long been anomalous. Professing to be the only true church, and the pillar and ground of the truth, it has persecuted the true church and hid the truth of God from the people. It has burned both the Bible and those who dared to read it and believe it. Professing to be the vicegerent of Christ and the sole representative of God upon the earth, it has degraded the worship of Christ, giving his office and his power to Mary, and exalted itself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped. And at this time, while the powers which have long yielded to the sway of the pope and to his prime officers, are breaking away from his despotic authority, the more enlightened nations, and especially the churchly influences within those nations, are drawing nearer to the papal church, and recognizing and paying more respect to his spiritual power. It was the knowledge of this fact which caused us to say that "the train is being laid for a return to the darkest phase of religious bigotry and intolerance."

Are these things so? Look at the United States and at England, and answer. When Cardinal McCloskey returned from Rome, where he went to receive the right to wear the purple and scarlet (the adopted emblems of royalty and fornication), he was received as a prince, and more honor was given to him by public men than is accorded to ambassadors of the empires of earth. The Catholic Church receives largesses and privileges, especially in our chief cities, which are granted to no other church. But the most significant fact is that representative men of the various denominations are not only willing to affiliate with, but are seeking affiliation with the Catholics. Under the plea of liberality and Christian charity such men as H. W. Beecher have done what they could to break down the dividing line between Protestants and Catholics. It is true that the influence of Mr. Beecher has greatly waned; but his efforts in that direction were made when he had influence, and that influence still makes its impress on the public mind. One D. D. has gone so far as to say that the mission of Protestantism is ended. And if so, what need that Protestantism should longer have an existence? History is changed, mutilated, that it may not wound the feelings of the descendants of the Inquisitors. Everybody knows that the antagonism which has so long existed between the two parties is being softened down; that stirring denunciations of the mockery of forms, of indulgences and the confessional, of the power and immorality of the priesthood, are left to a few "converted Catholics," who receive but a small share of sympathy from their Protestant neighbors. Although there has been strong opposition raised in New York against the "Freedom of Worship" bill, which was introduced to favor the Catholics, yet it would be difficult to get any minister of high standing in New York, or in any other large city in this country, to utter the burning words of warning against the wickedness and the ambitious designs of the papacy, that are being uttered at this time in Rome by "Father Gavazzi"!

But while the dividing line between Catholics and Protestants is being broken down; while the two parties seem to be drawing nearer together, it is a fact that the process of breaking down, the drawing, is all on the part of Protestants; the Catholics have not yielded one jot or tittle. Not one word of conciliation has been spoken by a representative Catholic. They offer no apology for the acts of the church in past centuries. The works of the Inquisition are as just, the auto-da-fe is as sacred, in their eyes, as they were five centuries ago. That all may be assured on this point—that the church of Rome is not changed—we quote from the "Syllabus of Errors," issued by the authority of Pius IX., the infallible, in 1864:—

"Every man is free to embrace and profess the religion he shall believe true, guided by the light of reason."

If the last sentence separates the light of revelation from the light of reason, we, too, might regard the declaration as an error. But the following shows the extent of the definition given:—

"Protestantism is nothing more than another form of the same true Christian religion, in which it is possible to be equally pleasing to God as in the Catholic Church."

"Kings and princes are not only exempt from the jurisdiction of the church, but are superior to the church, in litigated questions of jurisdiction."

"The church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the church."

"In the present day, it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion shall be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other modes of worship."

"Whence it has been wisely provided by law, in some countries called Catholic, that persons coming to reside therein shall enjoy the public exercise of their own worship."

All these are condemned as errors; from which we learn: (1) That State and church ought by right to be united; (2) That the church has paramount jurisdiction; (3) That the religion of the State should be Catholic, to the exclusion of all others; (4) That a person coming to reside in a Catholic country shall not enjoy the public exercise of his own religion; (5) That Protestantism is not a form of the Christian religion, in which it is possible to be equally pleasing to God as in the Catholic faith. Another article places "Biblical Societies" in the list of "pests" which have been "frequently rebuked in the severest terms." When Protestants curry favor of the Catholics, they may as well understand that the complaisance is all on one side—the compliment will never be returned.

It has seemed necessary to take this space to show the relative position of the parties. The above extracts are from a publication of Pius IX. himself. The reader may think, if he has not examined the subject, that the second quotation only denies to the Protestant equal favor before God with the Catholic. But "approved" Catholic works show that more than this is intended. Keenan's Catechism, speaking of the saints in the Catholic Church (those acknowledged by all to be saints), says: "If he can be saved in the church, it must be the true church, and he can be saved in no other." And Mgr. Segur's "Plain Talk," says: "All Protestant sects acknowledge that salvation can be attained in the Catholic Church. On the other hand, the Catholic Church has unceasingly protested that she is the only true church, and that it is necessary to belong to her to be a child of God."

The leaning toward Catholicism is more strongly marked among the Protestants of Europe than among those of America. But this we must reserve for another paper.