As Rome Sees Things by C. M. S.

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Jan 15, 1914

As Rome Sees Things

By C. M. S.

THE Jesuit journal America, in its issue of January 3, takes up all the countries of the world and discusses the prevailing conditions in each as they relate to the program of the Roman hierarchy. Its résumé of the year's developments is interesting, both as to its admissions and as to its point of view. Under the head of "Rome" we find this interesting comment:—

The apathy of the Italian, and especially the Roman people, with regard to the sovereign pontiff and his rights and dignity, which are continually assailed and infringed, have been several times adverted to by the Holy Father, and their unconcern about foreign missionary work has been severely censured. A syndicate of five Catholic papers had to be warned because of their dangerous utterances, and in March a discourse of Bishop Bonomelli, of Cremona, was a cause of anxiety.

It seems a kind of enigmatical paradox that if the Roman Church is the true church of Jesus Christ, the reverence of the people for its visible head should be in inverse ratio to their nearness to that head; that their reverence should grow less as their nearness increases. It was not so with Jesus himself. They who were nearest to him had greatest reverence and affection for him. They were at his grave in the gray dawn, and they gazed with sad eyes and sorrowing hearts into the heavens as the cloud received him out of their sight. But America says it is the "Roman people"—the members of the Pope's congregation, we judge—who especially manifest this "apathy," this lack of regard for his "rights and dignity," this "unconcern" over the extension of the hierarchy's program in other lands. Perhaps they are close enough to see things as they are instead of judging them to be what they are not. This declaration carries the mind back to the report made by the Philippine commission, headed by Hon. William H. Taft, in which it was declared that the morals of the people grew worse the nearer one came to the cathedrals.

Adverting to the Italian government and its attitude toward the Roman Church, America says:—

The government was evidently sure of its position from the very beginning of 1913, for it made no secret of the anti-Catholic nature of the legislation it proposed to enact, even to the extent of insisting upon civil marriage and of introducing a law of divorce. In April, Giolitti frankly declared that in the ecclesiastical policy of the government the state was to be supreme. Later on, in October, when the elections had been won, the king gave utterance to the same sentiment. Nor did the occurrences of the year weaken this sense of security.

The legislators who are passing these laws obnoxious to the Roman Church, and the king and premier who are maintaining the same attitude, are all nominal Catholics, have all been educated under ecclesiastical influences, and know the Roman system and the fruit of its activities far better than Americans know them; and the action they are taking and the attitude they are maintaining are the direct fruit of that knowledge. Ought not this fact to be an object lesson of the most tangible character to Americans, and especially to American legislators and public officials?

Concerning Spain, America says:—

On January 14 [1913] the king signed the royal decree appointing an ambassador to the Holy See, and on February 5 Senor Calbeton y Planchon, named in that document, presented his credentials to the Pope. The post had been vacant since 1910, when Canalejas withdrew his government representative. . . . This concession to Catholic sentiment was not followed up by the further conciliatory policy a Catholic people had the right to expect.

The government has refused to repeal what the church designates as the "obnoxious padlock law," which restricts the establishment of religious houses, such as nunneries, monasteries, and what are known in America as Houses of the Good Shepherd. "The minister of instruction gave no satisfactory indication of his policy regarding the teaching of religion in the state schools," and it is even proposed that ecclesiastics be summoned "to serve in the army." And this is Catholic Spain, the paradise of the Inquisition! Spain has its National Reformers also, who are striving to turn the nation backward and are opposing every move toward civil and religious freedom. But the government, in the face of tremendous odds, is striving to extricate itself from the tentacles of a remorseless hierarchy.

Quoting a Catholic correspondent of a London paper concerning Portugal, America says:—

Portugal remains very much where it was when the revolution took place. Indeed, the country has gone backward. . . . It was announced that there would be "scrupulous insistence" on the enforcement of the antireligious laws passed since the revolution of three years ago. Following this, pastors who had remained loyal to the church were cited to the courts, and scarcely a day passed without robbery or profanation of some church. In schools and colleges a strict watch was put on professors, and severe punishment followed the introduction of religious teaching. The premier, in his furious opposition to the church, prohibited the circulation of certain papal documents. . . . Where his demands were not complied with [in reference to forming associations of worship], he ordered the closing of the churches.

And Portugal is a Roman Catholic country, and has been dominated by that church for many centuries! Portugal knows what Romanism means and stands for, and what the fruits of its workings are. The people have risen against the system, and are determined to have freedom from ecclesiastical dominance in civil affairs. They are therefore handling the Roman Church in the only way they know how to handle it—by force; but that is the way the church has handled the people of Portugal for centuries, and would handle all the world if it could have all the world where it has had Portugal so long. America believes Portugal, because it has thrown off the Roman yoke, to be "the reproach among the nations." The correspondent from whom it quotes declares that "the chaotic and hopeless condition of affairs in this country could not be paralleled even in Stamboul." We have seen frequent declarations in the public press to the effect that Portugal is on the brink of ruin, and may be expected to collapse completely at any moment. It is very apparent that these reports are of Catholic origin, and that the wish to have it so is the real heart of the prognostication, and must be interpreted as a desire instead of a piece of news.

In reference to France, America says:—

The birth rate is declining alarmingly; and the treasury deficit is $40,000,000. In brief, Poincaré's first year has not been one of glory.

One naturally inquires, What has Monsieur Poincaré's administration to do with the birth rate of the country? Does it mean that a restriction of the church's program restricts the birth rate? If so, one would be justified in making inquiry into the character of the birth rate where Roman activities are unrestrained. Continuing, America says:—

Meantime the government does not relent in its persecutions of the Catholic citizens of the republic.

And France, a Roman Catholic country, whose legislators were educated under the spiritual tutelage of the Roman Church, a country that has long been known as the "eldest daughter of the Church," turns from and turns against the system that has held her in its grip so long.

America continues:—

The closing of Catholic schools [in France] continues, adding to the 400,000

or 500,000 suppressed by preceding administrations, which easily explains the twenty-two per cent illiteracy of the army recruits, and in spite of common sense the ministry obstinately refuses to treat with the Vatican.

The World Almanac for 1914 gives the illiteracy of the French army recruits as three and three-tenths per cent; of the general population over ten years, fourteen and one-tenth per cent; and of those contracting marriages, four and one-tenth per cent. America seems to have added all these percentages together and credited the army recruits with the sum total. But if the secularizing of the schools of France causes an illiteracy of three and three-tenths per cent, what is the cause of the fifty-eight per cent of illiteracy in Spain, where Roman influence is still dominant? or the seventy-three per cent in Portugal who cannot read? or the eighty-two per cent in Bolivia? or the eighty-five per cent in Brazil? All these are under the dominance or influence of Rome. True, Portugal cast off the yoke a few years ago; but the figures given show her illiteracy before she did it, and it is probably too soon to look for much change.

The article throughout shows that the unqualified dominance of Rome in all the countries of earth is the unchanging aim of the Papacy; and in America's criticism of conditions in other nations the fundamental principles of Americanism and human liberty are criticized and condemned. The article further shows that when this country is brought into the condition which Rome designs, it will be a place of less tolerance than Italy, Spain, Portugal, or Austria. Americans ought to keep this ever in mind.