PROTESTANTS AND CATHOLICS.
June 5 we reprinted, from the Christian Advocate, an editorial on “The Church of Rome and Protestantism,” which closed with the following excellent words:— If the twentieth century obliterates distinctions between Protestants and Roman Catholics, the latter will swallow up individual Protestants in ever-increasing numbers; while at the other extreme, agnosticism will flourish, and many of the most spiritually minded Protestants, distracted, will react into various forms of fanaticism; and worse, though different, forms of confusion than those that have marked the well-defined conflicts of the past will leave a large majority of the population of adult years drifting into worldliness or agnosticism, protected from suspicion and unpleasant embarrassment by a politic silence. This is not prophecy, but conclusions based upon an “if.” To say that if dynamite is ignited, there will be an explosion, is not prophecy, but truth. These words are worth reprinting again for the truth which they contain; and this especially in view of what further we have now to present; for the Christian Advocate is pre-eminently the church paper of the Methodist denomination. The Methodist General Conference always prints a Daily Christian Advocate, giving full proceedings of the Conference. The editor of the Daily Christian Advocate is chosen by the General Conference, at each session. At the late session of the Conference, Levi Gilbert, D. D., was editor of the Daily Christian Advocate. By the Conference he was also elected editor of the Western Christian Advocate, an official paper of the denomination, for the Cincinnati district. In the Daily Christian Advocate of May 28, there is an editorial on “Protestants and Catholics.” This editorial is written with reference to the statement of Justice Brewer, and of the New York Sun in commenting upon it, which we reprinted June 5. After referring to the statement of Justice Brewer, and the article of the Sun, the editor of the Daily Christian Advocate says:— But the true position of religious bodies, either in their relation to the truth, to the age, or to each other, can never be learned accurately from an examination simply of their dogmas. Pastors in the field can better report the practical situation. They know that there is a better entente cordiale [French for “cordial understanding”] between the two great sections of Christianity than there was fifty years ago. The old bitterness and rancor is somewhat subsiding. There is, perhaps, owing to a larger and more sympathetic study of history, a better understanding of each others’ position and a better appreciation of the great work being done by each. At least this is so in the Protestant pulpit. It is true that the Protestant minister still thinks that Rome has very much superstition and misleading ceremonialism to eliminate before she can become a truly apostolic church; but he no longer identifies that church with the “scarlet woman” or thunders against Babylon. Rather he sees very much good working with and underneath the evil,—the good overbalancing the evil,—and he prays that more and more that great church may free itself from abuses and errors, and come, purified, into a clearer faith. He fraternizes not infrequently with Catholic priests. He is glad to sit side by side with them in public meetings, such as those conducted by the Anti-Saloon League, and to speak on the same program. He welcomes the growing spirit of Americanism shown by their great prelates, like Keane, Ireland, and Gibbons. He reverences the memory and deeds of such brave and good priests as Father Malone and Dr. McGlynn and Father Damian. He is glad to admit that the Church of Rome to-day is not what Luther found it; that Pope Leo is not another Borgian, but a leader of high395character, piety, and intellectual genius; that the church in the United States is not what it is in Spain and Mexico—that it is involuntarily affected by the atmosphere and institutions of freedom, and this process will go on wherever liberty spreads in the lands of absolutism. From this it is plain that even in the Methodist Church there are influential persons who are “obliterating distinctions between Protestants and Roman Catholics,” and so are helping forward the time when the Catholic Church “will swallow individual Protestants in ever-increasing numbers.” It must be borne in mind also that all of this “better understanding” and “better appreciation” is on the side of the Protestants. And what is peculiar about it is that these Protestants think they know more about Rome than Rome herself knows: they insist that Rome is better than she used to be, while Rome herself insists that she is not—that “Rome never changes.” They declare that “the Church of Rome to-day is not what Luther found it,” while the Church of Rome herself declares that she is to-day exactly what she was before “the so-called Reformation.” To any one who observes and thinks, it will be perfectly plain where the change is really taking place.