Religious Liberty Department by Claude E. Holmes

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Apr 1, 1915

Religious Liberty Department

By Claude E. Holmes

C. S. LONGACRE - N. Am. Div. Secretary

Relation of the United States Government to the Vatican

ENGLAND recently appointed a representative to the Vatican. It seems to be the general belief that this move was made in order to gain a prestige that would be of advantage when the present war has terminated. But it is not kindly viewed by many Protestants of the United Kingdom. Protests by the thousand are rolling in upon the officials of that nation. The London Council of Protestant Societies, representing sixteen different organizations and other bodies in sympathy with it, sent the following resolution to Sir Edward Grey, prime minister:—

"We strongly condemn the action of the government in advising His Majesty the king to appoint and dispatch a special envoy to Pope Benedict XV. We condemn and reject the specious and unsatisfactory excuse set forth in the White Paper as reasons for the dispatch of the envoy, and we hereby declare our intention publicly to oppose to the utmost of our power, in such manner as time and circumstances may require, the continuance of this mission."

In sending this ambassador to Rome a precedent of four hundred years' freedom from papal affiliation was broken. The history recorded for many years during that time has persuaded the non-Catholics of England that the empire is better off in every way when Catholicism is unable to use its power. The binding up of the broken relationship between England and the Roman hierarchy is a precursor of future trouble for that Protestant country.

The United States and France are the only nations of importance that do not have representatives at the Vatican. This country had one at the Pope's court from 1848-70. From the debates held in our national Congress at the time the first ambassador was sent, it is evident that it was intended that he should merely look after the commercial affairs in our business with the Papal States, while the Pope had his temporal sovereignty.

No Recognition of the Head of the Catholic Church

Mr. Jacob L. Martin was the first chargé d'affaires of the United States to the Papal States. Before entering upon his mission he was given definite instruction by the State Department regarding America's relation to the Catholic Church and its head, the Pope. The Secretary, Mr. Buchanan, wrote:—

"There is one consideration which you ought always to keep in view in your intercourse with the papal authorities. Most, if not all, of the governments which have diplomatic representatives at Rome are connected with the Pope as the head of the Catholic Church. In this respect the government of the United States occupies an entirely different position. It possesses no power whatever over the question of religion. All denominations of Christians stand on the same footing in this country; and every man enjoys the inestimable rights of worshiping his God according to the dictates of his own conscience. Your efforts therefore will be devoted exclusively to the cultivation of the most friendly civil relations with the papal government, and to the extension of the commerce between the two countries. You will carefully avoid even the appearance of interfering in ecclesiastical questions, whether these relate to the United States or to any other portion of the world. It might be proper, should you deem it advisable, to make these views known, on some suitable occasion, to the papal government, so that there may be no mistake or misunderstanding on this subject."

A similar statement was made by the State Department in 1871:—

"In the United States, Christianity is not prescribed by statute, and the government, as such, is not and cannot be interested in any form of religion. . . . "If, therefore, the United States, as such, exerts no influence upon the religion of its citizens concerning questions of faith and of individual opinion, in the formation of which the government neither has nor can have any voice, it would seem to follow that the United States, as such, should take no greater interest in the propagation of the Christian faith in foreign lands than it does in the development and growth of religious denominations within its own territory; that is to say, the United States cannot well be a party to missionary enterprise in the sense that the missionaries are in any way clothed with an official character, or that they may be granted greater rights and privileges by virtue of their sacred calling than other American citizens engaged in lawful pursuits. . . . "It is a fundamental principle in the United States that all persons, of every sect, faith, or race, are equal before the law. They make no distinction in favor of any ecclesiastical organization. Prelates, priests, and ministers can claim equal protection here, and enjoy equal rank in the eye of the civil law."

Catholics claim that the Pope is preeminently a spiritual ruler. The government of the United States is absolutely a civil commonwealth. There is nothing in common between the two powers. The United States recognizes and protects the liberties of all—religious and nonreligious. The Vatican concedes freedom to none but those of her own communion; and that freedom is merely the privilege to bow implicitly to the dictates of the Pope.

The preceding quotations from the State Department are in harmony with our fundamental law,—the Constitution,—and the principles involved have been correctly interpreted by our officials, who have thus established a precedent that ought not to be broken by sending an envoy to the Vatican, as was done by England. To educate the people away from the idea of a separation of church and state, which is contrary to the dogmas of the Catholic Church, feelers are occasionally thrown out to the American people. As one illustration of this, we find the following in the Washington Post of April 13, 1910:—

"It is pointed out here [in Rome] that in the near future the United States will, peaceably or otherwise, find itself face to face with the whole of Latin America, where the influence of the Roman Catholic Church is unquestionable. Is it therefore possible, it is asked, that what may be very important interests for the republic should be left to the mercy of possible incidents due to misunderstandings such as that which marred Mr. Roosevelt's visit to the Eternal City? "What is the remedy? is again asked. And the answer comes that the only way to avoid such friction is to see that between the United States and the Vatican there is an exchange of diplomatic representatives."

Since England has filled the chamber reserved for her in the palace of the Pope, it is being suggested that this country should follow England's example. Perhaps this un-American suggestion was the cause for the introduction of the following joint resolution (H. J. Res. 420) into the last session of the Sixty-third Congress of the United States:—

A Bill Against Recognizing an Ecclesiastical Delegate

"Whereas, The government of the United States, as well as the State government of every member of the Union contemplates a complete separation between the affairs of the state and those of the church, it is in violation of the fundamental principles of this government to make the slightest departure from these original constitutions; and— "Whereas, Any encroachment, however slight, upon the basic idea of our government is insidious and dangerous, for the history of the world proves that these departures from principles which are tolerated create precedents which are used to excuse further encroachments, and these in turn become precedents for greater aggressiveness, until the evil primarily avoided comes back again to cause trouble, which has invariably grown out of the union of church and state; and,— "Whereas, Our government, being strictly secular, has no right to recognize and deal with a public functionary, envoy, delegate, or ambassador, if his business concerns religion; and,— "Whereas, No such ambassador, envoy, functionary, or delegate from any church shall ever be received by our government; therefore be it— "Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That it

is the sense of this Congress that it is no part of the duty of this government to send or receive ambassadors to and from any church whatsoever."

Manufacturing a Precedent

A Roman Catholic writer in this country has recently suggested the propriety of establishing diplomatic relations with the Pope. He referred to the trip of Mr. Taft, governor of the Philippines, to the Vatican to arrange for the purchase of the friar lands as a precedent. Mr. Taft's errand to the Vatican was purely a business one. It carried no more weight in favor of a diplomatic representative than if a government official should make arrangement with Cardinal Gibbons to buy a lot of the church in Baltimore. In fact, the position taken by the Catholic writer is squarely denied by the government. In a communication to Hon. William H. Taft, May 9, 1902, Mr. Elihu Root, Secretary of War, states this clearly:—

'Your errand will not be in any sense or degree diplomatic in its nature, but will be purely a business matter of negotiation by you as governor of the Philippines for the purchase of property from the owners thereof.'—Annual Report of the Secretary of War, 1902, page 235.

In order that Mr. Taft should thoroughly understand the situation, Mr. Root warned him to 'bear in mind' certain propositions, 'which are deemed to be fundamental, and which should be fully and frankly stated to the other side in the negotiations.' The first one of these propositions reads:—

'One of the controlling principles of our government is the complete separation of church and state, with the entire freedom of each from any control or interference by the other. This principle is imperative wherever American jurisdiction extends, and no modification or shading thereof can be a subject of discussion.'—Id., page 234.

Because our government will not recognize the Pope as a religious leader, is perhaps one reason why the Pope is so anxious for the restoration of his temporal power. It would be much easier to secure a representative from this country to the Vatican if it could be secured first for commercial reasons.

The less business of any kind that this nation has with Rome, the better off our country will be. The avowed business of Catholics is to make America Catholic. Before this can be done, all our principles of freedom and liberty will have to be destroyed. The work of breaking down these pillars is the business of this great ecclesiastical organization. If our government can be persuaded to join hands with Rome in this work, the ruin will come the quicker.

Let this nation heed the wise counsel of John Adams. On Aug. 4, 1779, he wrote the president of Congress:—

'The court of Rome, attached to ancient customs, would be one of the last to acknowledge our independence if we were to solicit for it; but Congress will probably never send a minister to His Holiness, who can do them no service, upon condition of receiving a Catholic legate or nuncio in return, or, in other words, an ecclesiastical tyrant, which it is to be hoped the United States will be too wise ever to admit into their territories.'—MSS., Department of State.