BY M. H. WILCOXON

Forward by the webmaster:

A friend introduced this publication of Abraham Lincoln’s vow against the Catholic Church, a hard to read PDF file. It has a lot of insights which inspired me to convert it to an easier to read format. I added some emphasis in bold but the emphasis in ALL CAPS is in the original document. There may be some errors I may have missed, but overall I think it’s much better than the PDF file I got it from. Any corrections to the text are welcome.

Mr. MEMBER OF CONGRESS,
Washington, D. C.

Sir: In my letter of April 9th, I endeavored to show you particularly the cope of the scheme of the Catholic Church and the American Medical Association to secure augmented political power through the movement for a National Department or Bureau of Health.

I wish to quote again to you the language of Lincoln, and quote further some interesting matter which may reasonably be held to account for his utterances and his “great purpose.”

Lincoln to 164th Ohio, August 18, 1864:

Lincoln to the Evangelical Lutherans, May 6, 1862:

What did Lincoln mean in saying to the 164th Ohio in 1864, when the war was almost over; when the turning point has been surely passed: “I wish it might be more generally and universally understood WHAT the country is now engaged in. . . . There is MORE involved in this contest than is realized by every one. . . . I say this in order to impress upon you, if you are not already impressed, that no small matter should divert us from our great PURPOSE.” And to the Lutherans in 1862: “. . . not doubting that, if it shall please the Divine Being who determines the destinies of nature, this shall remain a united people, and they will, humbly seeking the Divine guidance make their prolonged national existence a SOURCE of new benefit to themselves, and their successors, and to all CLASSES and CONDITIONS of MANKIND.” What was Lincoln’s great PURPOSE—the form of the thank offering to the Almighty for National preservation, that should spring from the war as a SOURCE of new benefit to themselves, and their successors, and to all classes and conditions of mankind?

In a little book of some 320 pages, “The Engineer Corps of Hell,” compiled and translated by Edwin A. Sherman, 32d degree (late 33d, I understand) of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, a copy of which was, upon April 10, 1909, in the Congressional Library, I find an account of the defense by Abraham Lincoln of Rev. Father Chiniquy, in 1856, in the court of Urbana, Ill., in which the Catholic Bishop of Chicago was involved, and which came before Judge David Davis. On page 140 Mr. Sherman writes: “When she read the paper (Chicago newspaper) she said: ‘Chiniquy is innocent. and I know it.’ ‘I heard the whole thing as it was planned in the Priest Le Belle’s house by him with his sister, and he promised to give her two eighty-acre tracts of land if she would swear that Chiniquy had made dishonorable proposals to her and attempts upon her person.’ ‘At first she refused, and denied positively that Chiniquy had ever done anything of the kind, and that she would be guilty of perjury and damn her own soul, if she should swear to anything of the kind, for it was absolutely false. After much urging and pressing on the part of the Priest Le Belle, and she still refused, he said: ‘Mr, Chiniquy will destroy our holy religion and our people if we do not destroy him. If you think that the swearing that I ask you to do is sin, you will come to confess to me and I will pardon it in the absolution I will give you.’ ‘Have you the power to forgive a false oath? replied Mrs. Bossy to her brother. ‘Yes,’ he answered; ‘I have that power; for Christ has said to all his priests: “What you shall bind on earth will be bound in heaven; and what you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”’ Mrs. Bossy then said: “If you promise that you will forgive me that false oath, and if you will give me the 160 acres of land that you promised, I will do what you want.’ The Priest Le Belle then said: ‘All right.’

“When Narcisse Terrien heard this from his wife he said, ‘If it be so, we can not allow Mr. Chiniquy to be condemned. Come with me to Urbana.’ But his wife being quite ill, said to her husband, ‘You know well that I can not go, But Miss Philomena Moffat was with me then; she knows every particular of that wicked plot as well as I do. She is well, go and take her to Urbana. There is no doubt that her testimony will prevent the condemnation of Mr. Chiniquy.’

Upon that her husband and Miss Moffat started at once, and arrived in the night at Urbana, sought Mr. Lincoln and revealed to him the whole diabolical plot, of which he went immediately and informed Chiniquy. In the meantime the priests watched the trains and examined the hotel registers and found that Mr. Terrin and Miss Moffat had arrived. The Priest Le Belle met her coming from Mr. Lincoln’s room, a colloquy ensued, and he offered her a large sum of money to leave immediately and return to Chicago and not appear in court. She positively refused, informed him that Mr. Lincoln knew all. Fearing the evil consequences that would result when the hellish scheme would be made public, he went and informed the other priests, and they left before daylight the next morning. The suit was withdrawn by consent of the court and counsel, but not until Mr. Lincoln, with words of burning eloquence and melting pathos, described the long and malicious persecution of his client by his enemies, and with the most bitter invective that the human mind can conceive or the tongue can utter, denounced the infernal machinations of Bishop O’Regan and his accomplices, and rising to his full height, declared: ‘THAT WHILE AN ALMIGHTY RULING PROVIDENCE PERMITTED HIM TO SEE THE LIGHT OF DAY AND BREATHE THE PURE AIR OF HEAVEN, AND SO LONG AS HE HAD A BRAIN TO THINK, A HEART TO FEEL AND A HAND TO EXECUTE HIS WILL, HE WOULD DEVOTE THEM ALL AGAINST THAT INFERNAL POWER THAT WAS THE ENEMY OF ALL FREE GOVERNMENT AND OF THE FREE INSTITUTIONS OF HIS COUNTRY, THAT POLLUTED THE TEMPLES OF JUSTICE WITH ITS PRESENCE AND ATTEMPTED TO USE THE MACHINERY OF THE LAW TO OPPRESS AND CRUSH THE INNOCENT AND HELPLESS.’ ”

“He hated wrong and oppression everywhere, and many a man whose fraudulent conduct was undergoing review in a Court of Justice has writhed under his terrific indignation and rebuke.”—Judge David Davis Nicolay.

Lincoln had a powerful example of how, through the buying and selling of indulgences, by pardoning of crime committed in the interest of the church, there was practically no safeguard for the reputation or the life of a man who menaced the interests of the church. To such a man as Lincoln such action must be as odious and great a menace as treason itself. I believe if a priest had originally been a citizen of the United States, he was divested of that citizenship and became an alien, surrendered his conscience and his future action, spiritual and political, to the direction of the Pope— became a religious bigot, an intriguer and spy for the Pope the moment he subscribed to a priest’s oath. That no man having taken such or a similar oath can be naturalized within the spirit of the Constitution.. Whether the Government recognizes the temporal pretensions of the Pope or not, the priest does and makes his binding allegiance to it.

“. . . Urbana, May 23, 1856. Due A. Lincoln fifty dollars, for value received.” (p. 178.

(Page 189): . . . Mr, Lincoln, as he had just finished writing the due bill. turned round to him and said: ‘Father Chiniquy, what are you crying for? You ought to be the most happy man alive. You have beaten your enemies and gained a glorious victory,, and you will come out of all these troubles in triumph.’

Said Father Chiniquy: ‘Mr. Lincoln, I am not weeping for myself, but for you, sir, and your death; they will kill you, sir. What you have said and done in court, holding them up in derision and making the declarations you have in court, and defeating them in ignominy and shame, there will be no forgiveness for you, and sooner or later they will take your life. And let me say further, that were I a Jesuit, as they are, and some one of them been in my place and I in theirs, it would have been my sworn purpose to either kill you myself or find the man to do it, and you will be their victim!’

At this Mr. Lincoln’s countenance changed to a most peculiar visage, expressing determination, and with a sarcastic smile accompanying it, said: “Father Chiniquy, is that so?”

‘It is,’ answered Father Chiniquy.

‘Then,’ said Mr. Lincoln, as he spread out the due bill for my signature, ‘please sign my death warrant.’ Father Chiniquy signed the due bill, which he shortly afterwards paid, and kindly loaned to us in the year 1878, still in our possession, and which we had laid on a lithographic stone by Wm. T. Galloway & Co. of San Francisco, and several thousand certified copies of it struck off for our brethren and friends. It eventually proved to be the death warrant of Abraham Lincoln, as we shall endeavor to show in the following chapters, and that, as previously stated in Part First: ‘In whatever place of the Catholic world a Jesuit is insulted or RESISTED, no matter how insignificant he may be, he is sure to be avenged—and this we know.’”

With a man of the fidelity of Abraham Lincoln to justice, humanity, his oath to his countrymen, and his promise to an “Almighty Ruling Providence” to devote his powers “against that infernal power that was the enemy of all free government and of the free institutions of his country, that polluted the temples of justice with its presence and attempted to use the machinery of the law to oppress and crush the innocent and helpless,” is it strange that he had a “great purpose?” Would it be strange in such circumstances, that he would have an ambition that the war—‘That singular and unnecessary intestine collision, . . . at the mystery of which leading secessionists were so much puzzled that they declared it to be the effects of a general lunacy, was nevertheless in perfect harmony with the profound and. masterly policy of the Roman See which comprehends in its toils the events of ages, and from the first projection of a plot to its final consummation, shapes every intervening circumstance to the fulfillment of its grand design;” that, that war which he understood and we never did, should be the “SOURCE of new benefits” to us, our successors, and all classes and conditions of mankind.

Out of a personal experience which had inspired such a solemn dedication, the war practically closed, four years of opportunity for service to his country and humanity, opportunity ‘such as had not been had and appreciated since Jesus Christ, that he would have supinely allowed the buying and selling of crime, in and out of the courts of a people who had his solemn oath to uphold the fundamentals of their government, confided to him in the highest trusteeship on earth.

Lincoln belonged to no church; in fidelity to all that goes to make a Christ-like character, he towered above churchmen, Cardinals, Archbishops, Bishops, Preachers and laymen. Lincoln was God Almighty’s rebuke to American Protestants before his day, and the monument to their shame today. A man whispering the sentiment of Lincoln’s vow today, is branded as an intolerant bigot by Protestant and Catholic @like, and it was left for an individual then occuping the office of President, dignified by Lincoln, to rebuke a citizen of the United States who protesting against a Roman Catholic for President, “can be influenced by such narrow bigotry.”

We crowd the public service at home and abroad with adherents to the institution stigmatized by Lincoln as an “enemy to all free government,” insulting Lincoln’s memory while we hypocritically laud him and bnild monuments which belie us and belittle him, The Catholic ridicules the Protestant’s religious sincerity, and mocks him when he says: “In self-defense, Catholics must become independent, and vote for those only who will not deny them their rights as citizens because of their religion. The rights of conscience are more important than protection or free trade.”—Catholic Review.

With the Protestant, protection or free trade are more important, because exercising the rights of conscience is bigotry.

“Then, one of the twelve, called Judas Iscariot, went into the chief priests and said unto them, What will ye give me and I will deliver him unto you? And they covenanted with him for thirty pieces of silver. . . . Then Judas, which had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought again the thirty pieces to the chief priests and elders, saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed innocent blood, and they said, what is that to US? See THOU to that.”

The Protestants are Christianizing the world outside of the United States, and selling their votes to Rome for the prosperity to raise the money. Rome takes the money from the offices and appropriations the Protestants give her, furnishes more government situations for converts, until a standing inducement of Rome to a convert is prospect of a Government position.

Said President Lincoln: “Archbishop Hughes, I have invited you here as the chief representative and episcopal dignitary of the Roman Catholic Church in the United States, for the purpose of a conference with you, the result of which, I trust will be of benefit to the country and satisfactory to ourselves. . . . These Protestant religious societies, both clerical and laity, are purely local, and with no foreign spiritual head or Church government to direct or control them, and their pastors are chosen and accepted by the popular voice from among themselves. To a great extent, however, though they have gone in a wrong direction in national affairs, but they have followed out the American idea of self-government, and nine hundred and ninety-nine per cent out of a thousand in numbers are native and to the manor born, and in no portion of the United States, as you are no doubt well aware, is the prejudice against the foreign-born population so great as it is in the South. Yet throughout the South, and in a great many places in the North, as I am reliably informed through authentic sources and in the public press, the bishops and priests of your Church, acting under an implied if not direct authority from the Pope, whose declared sympathy is with the Rebellion, have absolved all Roman Catholic citizens from their allegiance to the United States Government, encouraged them in acts of rebellion and treason, and have consecrated the arms and flags borne by the insurgent troops which have been raised to fight against the Union. Bishop Lynch of Charleston, South Carolina, Fathers Ryan of Georgia, and Hubert of Louisiana, and others, have been particularly active and conspicuous in this work. I have sent for you chiefly on the score of humanity. I do not want this war, which has become so wickedly begun for the destruction of the Union To BECOME A RELIGIOUS ONE. It is bad enough as it is, but it would become tenfold worse should it eventually TAKE THAT SHAPE, and its consequences no one now living could foresee. There is an apparent coalition between the Pope and Jefferson Davis, at the head of the rebel government, and the acts of his bishops and priests in the South and elsewhere confirm this opinion. And if such be the ease, the others in authority and the laity in the North must naturally be influenced and governed in their actions by what is sanctioned and directed by their Spiritual Head at Rome. Their loyalty to the Government of the United States would NATURALLY wane; they would become neutral and passive if at last they did not become active sympathizers with the Rebellion, and they soon take up arms as auxiliaries against the Union. Your Church is a unit with.a supreme head and not divisible. Its chief is a temporal sovereign, who wields the scepter over the States of the Church in his own country, and so far as he can do so by concordats, treaties, or otherwise, enforces the establishment of the Roman Catholic Church as the religion of the State, with other powers where he is able to, and looks with a jealous eye upon all governments where he does not command the secular arm, or where his authority in temporal affairs is disputed. Now, what I desire to state to you is, the definition of the rights of an American citizen as towards his government so far as they aDAy to the matter in question, A native-born American citizen has the inherent right of revolution within his own country. If he does not like to obey the laws of his government or wants to set up a new government by exciting revolt and takes up arms to overturn it, he has the inherent right to do so within the limits of the territorial boundaries of his government, but not to destroy or segregate any portion of his common country from the rest, and he must take his chances of his treason and rebellion in the success or defeat of his object. Not so, however, with the naturalized foreign-born citizen; HE HAS NO SUCH RIGHT. He can not become a President or Vice-President under our own Constitution, and he is not accorded the same rights and privileges under the rebel government that he enjoys under that of the United States. Every naturalized citizen is bound by his oath in his RENUNCIATION OF ALLEGIANCE TO EVERY OTHER POWER, PRINCE, OR POTENTATE ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH, AND IS SWORN TO SUPPORT AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION AND GOVERNMENT of the United States against all its enemies whatsoever, either domestic or foreign… Now, after having taken that oath, he can not renounce it in favor of any other government within its territorial limits, and if found to be giving aid and sympathy or encouragement to its enemies, or is captured with arms in his hands fighting against the government which he has sworn to support, he is liable to be shot or hung as a perjured traitor and an armed spy, as the sentence of a courtmartial may direct, AND HE WILL BE SO SHOT OR HUNG ACCORDINGLY, AS THERE WILL BE NO EXCHANGE OF PRISONERS. If a naturalized citizen finds that he can not comply with his oath of naturalization, he must leave the country or abide the consequences of his disaffection and disloyalty. The position in which the bishops and priests of your church in the South have placed the naturalized citizens belonging to their faith, AS WELL AS THEMSELVES, is a perilous one, AND THEIR ACTS MUST BE RECALLED AND ANNULLED BY THE POPE, or they and their followers must abide the results of their perjured and treasonable action.

“Archbishop Hughes, nominally a Union man, and necessarily, for policy’s sake, if nothing else, compelled to be so from his official position in that church as ete man in the North, and himself a naturalized citizen, saw the status of himself and others in like condition, and feeling the full force of President Lincoln’ss argument, agreed to do what he could by his influence with the Pope to have the acts referred to annulled by the Pope, and this with other matters to prove his own loyalty and sincerity, went to Europe for that purpose as well as others with which he was entrusted with a special mission by President Lincoln, which he performed satisfactorily and received his personal thanks, .

“The effect”was a simulated neutrality, but the evil had been done already, and as the war had to be fought out to the bitter end, there was that which could not have been the result of accident, but rather of design, among Roman Catholic troops who were engaged on both sides, and in battle, as a general rule, they were not, as organized bodies, arrayed against each other, In northern cities they resisted the draft, created riots and performed acts of outrage, robbery and murder, which at last had to be suppressed by veteran troops sent from the field for that purpose. But the war had to come to an end, The original plan of the Jesuits and the Pope, both in the United States and Mexico, was to end in ignominous failure—the union cause to triumph and the Republic of Mexico to be restored. Protestant blood on both sides had caused to flow’ in rivers and drench the mountains and the plains, while the places of the victims of the internecine strife were to be filled with importations from Roman Catholic populations from abroad.

“During the long night of four years of sorrow and tears and death which swept every heartstone in the land, Abraham Lincoln, ever trusting and ever confident of the coming dawn of liberty, of peace, and the suctess of the cause of the Union, was in receipt of constant threats of assassination, In July, 1864, on being reminded that right must eventually triumph, admitted that, but expressed the opinion that he should not live to see it, and added, ‘[ feel a presentiment that I shall not outlast the Rebellion. When it is over, my work will be done’ But that the great crime of his assassination might not be fixed upon the real Jesuit conspirators and murderers, the South was to be made to unjustly bear the stigma of the horrid deed, which was to forever rankle as a festering thorn in the restored Union and keep alive the smouldering embers of sectional hate between the North and the South, and to keep Protestant Americans forever apart, while the balance of power should be augmented and retained in the hands of the Papal hierarchy, a sword whose blade Should be everywhere, but with its hilt at Rome.’” (pages 200-204.)

How many of the following principles. indulged and practiced by the Papacy,.endorsed as Christian doctrine by Protestants by their votes, accepted as patriotic by every party and public man who makes an alliance with Roman Catholicism, and licensed in return for votes by every party in municipal or National control, would have been sanctioned by Lincoln?

“It is a certain and a common opinion among all (Catholic) divines, that, for a just cause, it is lawful to use equivocation, in the modes propounded, and to confirm it (equivocation) with an oath.”—St. Liguori, Less I 2, ¢ 41, n, 47.

“The Pope is the proper authority to decide for me whether the Constitution of this Country is or is not repugnant to the laws of God.”—O. A. Brownson.

“Ecclesiastics sin not mortally in violating the laws of secular princes, because they are not directly bound by such laws.”—Escobar Theol Mor.

“The rebellion of an ecclesiastic is not a crime of high treason, because he is not subject to the king.”—Emmanuel Sa,

Lincoln told Archbishop Hughes he would not be bound by such a law, and such ecclesiastics would be SHOT OR HUNG. This was heresy, and Mr. Lincoln came under condemnation. McKinley said April 11th, 1898, “The only hope of relief and repose from a condition which can be no longer endured, is the enforced pacification of Cuba. In the name of humanity, in the name of civilization, IN BEHALF OF ENDANGERED INTERESTS WHICH GIVE US THE RIGHT AND THE DUTY to speak and act, the war in Cuba must stop.” Again: “Without abandoning past limitations, traditions and principles, but by meeting present opportunities and obligations, we shall show ourselves worthy of the great trust which civilization has imposed upon us, Thus far we have done our supreme duty. Shall ‘we now, when the victory won in war is written in the treaty of peace and the civilized world applauds and waits in expectation, TURN TIMIDLY AWAY FROM THE DUTIES IMPOSED UPON THE COUNTRY BY ITS OWN GREAT DEEDS? And when the mists fade and we see with CLEAR VISION, may we not go forth rejoicing in a strength which has been employed SOLELY for humanity and always been tempered with justice and mercy, CONFIDENT OF OUR ABILITY TO MEET THE EXIGENCIES which await us because confident that our COURSE is one of DUTY and our CAUSE that of RIGHT?—Atlanta, Dec. 15, 1898.

Again. in Senate Document No. 190 of the 56th Congress. 2d session. at page 2, I read from a report of the Secretary of War, dated February 19, 1901, to President McKinley, from which I quote: ‘The policy of the Executive to be pursued in dealing with titles to the lands held in mortmain or otherwise for ecclesiastical or religious uses in the Philippine Islands was declared in your instructions to the Philippine Commissioners, transmitted to them through me on the 7th of April, 1900, as follows: ‘It will be the duty of the commission to make a thorough investigation into the titles to the large tracts of land held or claimed by individuals or by religious orders; into the justice of the claims and complaints made against such land holders by the people of the island, or any part of the people, and to seek by wise and peaceable measures a just settlement of the controversies and redress of wrongs which have caused strife and bloodshed in the past.’

“In the performance of this duty the commission is enjoined to see that no injustice is done; to have regard for substantial rights and equity, disregarding technicalities so far as substantial right permits, and) to observe the following rules: That the provision of the treaty of Paris pledging the United States to the protection of all rights of property in the islands, and a: well the principle of our Government, which prohibits the taking of private property without due process of law, shall not be violated; .». . that no form of religion and no minister of religion shall be forced upon any community or upon any citizen of the islands; that upon the other hand, no minister of religion shall be interefered with or molested in following his calling, and that the separation between state and church shall be REAL, ENTIRE, and ABSOLUTE.’” Following which the Secretary of War says: “No one has, in behalf of the Government of the United States, entered into any obligation, other than that set forth in the late treaty with Spain, in regard to the disposition or maintenance of any alleged titles to such lands, nor has any other policy to be pursued in dealing with such titles been declared or announced.”

Upon September 6, 1901, President McKinley was shot by a Roman Catholic, and on September 14, 1901, he died. The Vice-President immediately succeeded to the Presidency.

In a public document, being “Hearing before the subcommittee of the Committee on Indian Affairs of the Senate “Indian appropriation bill, 1905,” I find upon page 22, a copy of a circular by “W. C, Nohe, secretary Catholic Club, 931 F street, N. W.,” dated “Washington, D. C., June 15, 1902.” “Dated ahead of actual writing,” “Reverend and Dear Sir: Our club wishes to bring to your attention certain events which will prove of interest to Catholics in general. While it is evident that we have still some uncompromising enemies in both parties, the facts which I herein present will convince you that a GREAT CHANCE HAS COME OVER THE REPUBLICAN PARTY AS FAR AS ITS POLICY.AND ATTITUDE TOWARDS THE CHURCH IS CONCERNED. This church has made it its business to watch closely the general trend of legislation, the attitude of the Administration, and the disposition of individual members of Congress toward the church, regardless of their politics. . . .

The plan of the Administration of buying out the friars and turning the money received for their lands over to the church is in line with policy of the church and the recognition of the Pope by this Government, by sending a commission to Rome to deal with his Secretary or STATE, and is by far the greatest step ever taken toward a peaceful solution of the Philippine question. The adoption of the Fairbault plan in the public schools of the Philippines is another instance of the enlightened policy of the Administration and of Congress. By this plan Catholic priests may teach a certain period of each school day the DOCTRINES of the CHURCH in any of the PUBLIC SCHOOLS of the islands.”

“Manila, P. I., June 4.—The entire educational system of the islands has been put under the charge of General James F, Smith, a devout American Catholic. The place on the Benes court of the archipelago, from which he was promoted, has been filled by Judge McDonough, of Albany, giving the Catholics a majority, counting the natives, on that tribunal. The number of American Catholics holding prominent places here in civil and commercial life is notably large; they will help to settle the religious question.”—Lincoln’s Letter to Boston Transcript.

So the United States already has one Federal Supreme Court where a majority are Catholics, which has*handed down one opinion as follows: .“The complaint alleged the title in the Roman Catholic Church. The defendant in his answer denied such ownership and alleged title in the province of Laganoy. That province being given permission to intervene, filed its pleading in intervention, alleging that it owned the property in question.” The court said: “We have said that it (that is, the municipality of Laganoy) could have no such title of ownership even admitting that the Spanish Government, was the owner of the property and that it passed by the treaty of Paris to the American Government. But this assumption is not true. As a matter of law, the Spanish Government at the time the treaty of peace was signed was not the owner of THIS property or of any other property LIKE IT\ situated in the Philippine Islands.”

“Gregory of Valentia: Commentariorum Theolicorum Tomus iii. Iutetiae Parisiorum, 1609 (Lut. Par., 1660, Ed. Coll. Sion), Without respect of person, may a judge, in order to favor a friend, decided according to any probable opinion, while the question of RIGHT remains undecided? . . . .

For the sake of his friend, he may LAWFULLY pronounce sentence according to the opinion which is more favorable to the INTEREST of that friend. He may, moreover, with the intent to serve his friend, at one time judge according to one opinion, and at another time according to a contrary opinion, provided only that no SCANDAL results from the decision.”

It is a very pertinent, a very material question, whether the allegiance of a majority of the Supreme Court is to the Pope, or to the United States. Whether Church law, or United States law is supreme, and may not be the ONLY question involved.

“Peter Alagona: S. Thomas Aquinatis Summae Theologiae Compendium (Lutetiae Parisiorum, 1620), ‘By command of God it is lawful to kill an innocent person, to steal, or to commit fornication; because he is the Lord of life and death and all things; and it is due to him thus to fulfil his command,” —Ex-prima Secundae, Quaest, 94.

“Charles Anthony Casnedi: Crisis Theologica. Ulissypone, 1711. So far from being false, I hold it to be most true, that a man sins not, when he does that which he consipers to be right, without any REMORSE or SCRUPLE of conscience.”—Tom. i, Disp. 7, sect. 3, § 2, n. 149.

“What is the seal of the sacramental confession? It is the obligation or duty of concealing those things which are learned from sacramental confession,” “Can a case be given, in which it is lawful to break the sacramental seal? Answer: It cannot; although the life or safety of a man depended thereon, OR EVEN THE DESTRUCTION OF THE COMMONWEALTH; nor can the supreme pontiff give dispensation in this; so that, on that account, this secret of the seal is more binding than tle obligation of an OATH, a vow, a natural secret, etc.; and that by the positive will of God.” “Dens, vol. vi.” “We shall find this strong language to mean that the priests keep the secret or-not, as it promotes the interest of the Church!” “What answer, then, ought a confessor to give, when questioned concerning a truth, which he knows from sacramental confession only? Answer: He ought to answer that he does not know it, and, if necessary, to confirm the same with an oath. Objection: It is in no case lawful to tell a lie; but that confessor would be guilty of a lie, because he knows the truth; therefore, ete. Answer: I deny the minor, because such a confessor is questioned as a man; but now he does not know that truth as a man, though he knows it as God, says St. Thomas, and that is the free and natural meaning of the answer; for when he is asked, or when he answers OUTSIDE confession, he is considered as a man.” “What if a confessor were directly asked whether he knows it through sacramental confession? Answer: In this case he ought to give no answer; reject the question as impious; or he could even say, absolutely not relatively to the question, I know nothing; because the word I restricts it to human knowledge.” Dens. “But if any one should disclose his sins to a confessor, with the intention of mocking him, or of drawing him into an alliance with him in the execution of a bad design? Answer: The seal does not result therefrom, because the confession is not sacramental, Thus, as Dominick Soto relates, it has been decided at Rome, in a case in which some one went to a confessor with the intention of drawing him into a conspiracy against the Pope. In fine, all things are reduced indirectly to the seal, by the revealing of which the Sacrament would be rendered odious, according to the manners of the country and the changes of the times; and thus Steyart observes, that some things are at one time opposed to the seal, which at another time are not considered as such.” Dens. “So, we find, that while the seal would prevent a Romish priest from disclosing a conspiracy, which was designed against the lives of the citizens or Government of the United States, he is free to violate it at any time, when the Pope or interests of his church require it. Hence a papist can enter a confession of his intention to take the life of a particular individual, either by assassination or poison, in our country, and return after the commission of the deed, make a confession of the fact, and be absolved from the crime!”—Delisser.

“Thomas Aquinas, the leading theologian of the Church of Rome, teaches that: ‘It is much more grievous to corrupt faith which is the source and life of the soul, than to corrupt money, which only tends to the relief of the body. Hence, if coiners and malefactors are justly put to death by the secular authority, much more may heretics, not only be excommunicated, but put to death.” —“St. Thom., 2nd 9, «i, art. 3.”

“A man proscribed by the Pope must be put to death everywhere; for the Pope has one jurisdiction indirect to the least, over the globe, even to the temporal.”—Musenbaum.

“Whatever man of the people, not to have other remedy, we can kill him who tyrannically usurps power; for he is a public enemy.”—Emmanuel Sa.

“Evidently it is lawful for any man to assassinate a tyrant, if having become powerful at the summit of power and not having other means by which we can cease the tyranny.”—Andrew Delrio.

“For we do not esteem those homicides who, burning with zeal for their Catholic mother against excommunicated persons, may have happened to slay any of them.”—Pope Urban.

“I shall never consider that man to have done wrong, who, favoring the public wishes, should attempt to kill him, who may deservedly be CONSIDERED as a tyrant. To put them to death, is not only lawful, but a laudable and a glorious action.”—De Rege et Regis Institutione Libri Tres Moguntiae 1605, (1640 Ed Mus Brit.)

“Subjects are by no authority constrained to pay the fidelity which they have sworn to a Christian prince who opposeth God and his saints, or violateth their precepts.”—Urban II.

“By advice of this venerable lady and holy prioress, on whom many of the wives of our National representatives, and even graye senators, looked as an example of piety and chastity, she cut her hair, dressed her in a smart looking waiter’s jacket and trousers, and with the best recommendations for intelligence and capacity, applied for a situation as waiter in Gadsby’s Hotel, in Washington City. This smart and tidy looking young man got instant employment. . . . ‘Those senators on whom he waited, not suspecting that he had the ordinary curiosity of servants in general, were entirely thrown off their guard, and in their conversations with one another seemed to forget their usual caution. Such, in short, was their confidence in him, that their most important papers and letters were left loose upon the table, satisfied by saying, as they went out: “Theodore, take care of my room and papers.’ . . . Now it was know whether Henry Clay was a gambler; whether Daniel Webster was a libertine; whether John C. Calhoun was an honest but CREDULOUS man. . . . In fact this lay sister in male uniform, but a waiter in Gadsby’s Hotel, was enabled to give more correct information of the actual state of things in this country, through the general of the Jesuit order in Rome, than the whole corps of diplomats from foreign countries then residing-at our seat of Government.”—Hogan-Alberger.

“It will be lawful for an ecclesiastic, or one of a religious order, to kill a caluminator who threatens to spread atrocious accusations against his religion.”—Tom. ii, Lib. viii, c. 32, n. 118.

“If you endeavor to ruin my reputation. . . . And I can not by any means avert th’s injury of character, unless I kill you secretly, may I lawfully do it? Bannez asserts that I may.

“Still the calumniator should first be warned that he desist from the slander; and if he will not. he should be killed, not openly, on account of the SCANDAL, but secretly.”—Cens., pp. 319-320.

It is a peculiar fact that the slayer of McKinley is denounced as and proven an anarchist and on. the trial he admitted he was educated in a Catholic school, Through the teachings noted, we have anarchy regulated by the church through the confessional.

We must not be too sure that the “know nothing” campaign of 1856 did not inspire and develop the immortal Lincoln, upon whose moral stamina and fidelity the Republican party went into power.

“In 1855 the Florence Gazette, an Alabama paper, thus addressed its readers: ‘And. pray, who are these hypocrites? Most of them are neither Episcopalians, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Baptists, Methodists, nor Congregationalists—men of no religion, who have no church (Lincoln had none), who never say their prayers, who do not read their Bible, who live God-defying lives every day of their sinful existence. We say these are the men, with faces as long as their dark lanterns, with the whites of their eyes turned up in holy horror at the Catholics, while they prate all sorts of nonsense about Protestant America.’ ”

Again: “Men who have never before on the face of God’s green earth shown any interest in religion, or taken any-part with Christ or His Kingdom —men who are the Devil’s own, belonging to the Devil’s church, These are the defamers of Catholicism, and the champions-of Protestantism.”—Chapman.

(“. . ,. The journals, the religious organizations, and the political parties, were all immeasurably subservient to the Slave Power.”—Greeley.)

“It is a well-known fact that the national platforms of the Democratic party, 1848 and 1852, are precisely the same on the question of slavery, with the exception that the latter connects itself with the compromise measure of 1850, During the presidential contest of 1848, Mr. Yancey, of ALABAMA, published an address to the people, in which we find a startling disclosure. Let it be remembered that fe was a member of the National Democratic Convention of 1848, and a member of the committee on the platform. He states in the address that it was proposed in this committee to amend the resolution which denies to Congress any ‘power over slavery in the States, by inserting-after the word States the words, ‘or Territories,’ so as to make the resolution deny, unequivocally deny, the power of Congress over slavery either in the States or Territories; but the amendment was rejected in committee, by a vote of seventeen to ten. We have. therefore, the authority of Mr. Yancey for asserting that the platform committee of the National Democratic Convention of 1848, actually voted against a resolution denying the power of Congress over slavery in the Territories. But this is not all. Mr. Yancey states that, failing to procure so important an amendment in the committee, he offered, in open convention, the following resolution, which was deliberately rejected, by a vote of two hundred and sixteen to thirty-six, to-wit: ‘Resolved, further, That, the doctrine of non-interference with the rights of property of any portion of the people of this confederacy, be it in the States or Territories, by any other than the parties interested in them, is the true Republican doctrine recognized by this body.’—Flag of the Union.” “If we could believe the assertions and interpretations of the anti-American party respecting the American platform on slavery, we would be compelled to conclude that the Democrats knowingly stood on notoriously unsound platforms in the days of their glory. Come, gentlemen, be honest, though you may be able to secure pardon for your manifold sins at the feet of the Pope, in whose service you now make war against the best interests of the religion of your fathers and the land of your birth. The platform of the AntiAmerican members of the* Thirty-fourth Congress, mis-called Democratic, LEAVES AN OPENING FOR THE NORTHERN MAN TO ADVOCATE A CERTAIN OPINION AND THE SOUTHERN MAN THE OPPOSITE. Does it say, we deny to Congress any power over slavery in the States or Territories? Not a word of the kind. Their resolution runs thus: ‘Resolved, That the Democratic members of the House of Representatives, though in a temporary minority in this body, deem this a fit occasion to tender, their fellow-citizens of the whole | Union their heartfelt congratulations on the triumph, in the recent elections in several of the Northern, Eastern, and Western, as well as Southern States, of the principles of the Kansas-Nebraska bill, and the doctrines of civil and religious liberty’ Will not this make the people appear as natural sons of Solomon? How instructive! Pray, what are the principles of the KansasNebraska bill? The resolution does not so much as name one. What is called squatter sovereignty is advocated in the North, and that which is the opposite in the South, and both may lustily talk on, for the resolution is as silent as death on the character of the principles of the bill. In short, the whole is designed to deceive; to let the Northern man believe this, and the Southern man that. Such is the corruption of the Anti-American members of Congress.” (Here, two years before the Lincoln-Douglas debates, a suggestion by a Southern Know-Nothing, the essence of the very question which Lincoln propounded to Douglas, split the Democratic party, and made Lincoln President.)

“If individuals, however, derive pleasure from being the dupes of political knaves, we have no inclination to rob them of their happiness. If Southern men believe that the Congress platform is sufficiently explicit, their faith afford them as much satisfaction as if it were founded on sober reality.” “Having shown how the leaders of the Democratic party disposed of the relation of Congress to the territories on the slavery question in 1848, and noticed the silence of the anti-American Congress platform of 1855 on the same subject, we are now ready to review a portion of the first resolution ‘of the Democratic and anti-Know-Nothing party of Alabama’ persuaded that it is an outrage on truth, a disgrace to the. originators, and a clap-trap for FOREIGN INFLUENCE. We are informed that ‘the proceedings of the Alabama convention were remarkably harmonious; that the Georgia platform. was adopted; and that the delegates were instructed, in case the National Convention fails to adopt an equivalent platform, to retire from that body.’ Mr. W. L. Yancey has the honor of offering the resolution. The first reads thus: ‘The perfect equality of privileges—civil, religious, and political—of every citizen of our country, WITHOUT RETERENCE TO THE PLACE OF HIS BIRTH.

. . ..’ What an untruth! ‘The perfect equality of civil privileges’ is at War with the Constitution of the country. Can a foreigner by birth sit in the Presidential chair? No. The fifth section of the Constitution, Article II, reads thus: ‘No person, except a natural-born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President.’

“Can a foreigner by birth become Vice-President of the United States? No. The third article, ‘Amendments to the Constitution, article xii, Laws of the United States,’ speaks as follows: ‘No person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President, shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.’ In the 1st article, 2d section, No, 2, we are thus informed: ‘No person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the age of twenty-five years, and have been seven years a citizen of the United States.’ Well may we here ask, is ‘the perfect equality of civil privileges’ entitled to the merit. of an ingenious conceit? But we are not surprised! Men who can afford to play the part of traitors to their country and Protestantism, for the sake, ‘the glorious sake, of maintaining a corrupt organization by the aid of the lowest class of the foreign population, can very easily afford to humbug, or at least try to do so, the uninformed citizen by birth. What next? This: ‘The Democratic and Anti-Know-Nothing’ Sanhedrim declares itself ‘in favor of the perfect equality of religious privileges.’ The Mormon will not record any particular objection to this; and as to the Romanist, he will look on the declaration as a clear endorsement of his right to embrace in his creed the.canon law, the decisions of the councils, and the claim of the Pope to depose rulers, and break up the oath of allegiance. The canon law speaks thus of the Holy Father: ‘He has plentitude of power, and is above law.’—Gilbert, 2, 103. And this is sanctioned by ‘the Democratic and Anti-Know-Nothing party of Alabama.’ The third General Council of Lateran, in its sixteenth canon, unequivocally styles ‘an oath contrary to ecclesiastical utility, not an oath, but perjury.—Labbeus, 13, 426. And this is sanctioned, too, by ‘the Democratic and Anti-Know-Nothing party of Alabama!’ Pope Gregory says: ‘Ever bearing in mind, the universal Church suffers from every novelty, as well.as the admonition of Pope St. Agatho, that from what has been regularly defined nothing can be taken away—no innovation introduced there, no addition made—but that it must be preserved untouched as to words and meaning.’—P. Greg, XVI, Epistola Encyclica, ad omnes, Patriarches, Primates, Archiepiscopos et Episcopos, anno 1832. A bishop of the Romish Church in the United States, in virtue of the decision of the Council of Trent, excommunicated the trustees of the St. Louis Church, State of New York, because they would not violate the laws of their State, and tamely submit to the teaching of the Council of Trent, The Archbishop of Mexico, in the year 1855, refused to submit to the civil law until he should hear from the Pope—thereby giving the clearest evidence possible that allegiance to a foreign power was above that which he owed to Mexico. Roman Catholics, However, by the decision of the ‘Democratic and Anti-Know-Nothing’ Sanhedrim at Montgomery, Alabama, are at liberty to believe all this, and to show their faith by their works. Nor is this all; the delegates are instructed to retire from the National Convention, should it fail to sanction such privileges to Roman Catholics. A little more of this, and we would not give a jews-harp-for the glory of Protestantism in the United States. Suppose the Methodists, Presbyterians, and Baptists should unite, and declare oaths of allegiance perjury, if in conflict with the ecclesiastical policy of the North on the subject of slavery—should declare all slaveholders heretics, and record their determination to hang, imprison, or exterminate them at a suitable time; would Southern ‘Democratic and Anti-Know-Nothing’ meetings instruct their delegates to leave a National Convention, provided it should fail to acknowledge such religious privileges, O, no; their Anti-Know-Nothing skill would at once enable them to see that such an organization, with such an object and faith, ought not to be tolerated. When honest men, with elear spectacles, read that which precedes and that which follows, we think that they will heartily endorse every word of our representation. The language of the RAMBLER is: ‘You ask, if he (the Pope) were lord in the land, and you were in a minority, what would he do to you? That, we say, would entirely depend on circumstances, If it would benefit the cause of Catholicism, he would tolerate you; if expedient, he would imprison you, banish you, fine you, possibly he might even hang you; but be assured of one thing, he would never tolerate you for the sake of the glorious principles of civil and ‘religious liberty.’ We propose that all the members of the various Protestant Churches who are acting with the Anti-American party, send delegates to the National Convention, under positive instruction to leave if it should fail to put in the first article of its platform all manner of privileges for Roman Catholics—such as that of talking as they please, writing as they please, and acting as they please. Verily the old man at Rome has wonderful influence in this country! In a word, the resolution of the Democratic and AntiKnow-Nothing party of Alabama declares that the privileges allowed to one Church must be allowed to all—a perfect equality must be encouraged. The Romish Church claims the right to interfere in civil matters; and when we read of a Northern Protestant Church doing so, we hope, for the sake of common consistency, that the Anti-Americans of Alabama will allow the Americans to talk, and hold their tongues as if in a house of death. The Northern Methodists claimed.the right a few years ago to put their fingers on civil affairs; and because of this, the Methodists of “Alabama unanimously protested; and now more than a few of the same generation of Methodists vote against men who are contending for the principle on which they stood when the Church was divided. If true to the meaning of the resolution before us, and determined to vote the Anti-American ticket, they ought to ask pardon at the hands of the North, and gracefully return. In closing this chapter, we must be allowed to say, if we should live to see some of the children of the Anti-Americans punished according to the plan of St. Dominic, we are certain we would not shed a tear on account of the glorious deeds of their fathers. To say more, would be to indulge in cruelty; and so we close our review of a portion of the first resolution of a ‘Democratic and Anti-Know-Nothing meeting, held in MonTGoMERY, ALABAMA,’ and with it the chapter.”—Chapman.

President Pierce traded the Postmaster Generalship for Catholic votes, and fastened the Catholic vote upon his party. The opinion in the Dred Scott case was rendered by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, a Catholic, and was concurred in by Mr. Justice Campbell, a Catholic from Alabama, “Justice Nelson, of New York, concurred also in the conclusion of the court, and favored an astonished world with the following sample of judicial logic: ‘If Congress possesses power, under the Constitution, to abolish slavery in a Territory, it must necessarily possess the like power-to establish it. It can not be a one-sided power, as may suit the convenience or particular views of the advocates. It is a ores if it exists at all, over the whole subject.’ But the power against which Mr. Nelson is contending is a power to prohibit by legislation certain forms of injustice and immorality. If, then, according to his reasoning, Congress should, by law, prohibit adultery, theft, burglary, and murder in the Territories of the Union, it would thereby affirm and establish its rights to reward and encourage these crimes.” Not unlike the way the Confessional works.

Mr. Justice Curtis of Massachusetts, in his dissenting opinion, says: “Where else can we find, under the laws of any civilized country, the power to introduce and permanently continue diverse systems of foreign municipal law for holding persons in Slavery.” Exactly what the Catholic Church were then trying to engraft on the United States, for which this would have been an ample precedent. “Mr. Justice Curtis cites Mr. Justice Gaston of North Carolina: “According to the laws of this State, all human beings within it, who are not slaves, fall within two classes. Whatever distinctions may have existed in the Roman laws between citizens and free inhabitants, they are unknown to our institutions.”

“Col. Benton, himself a life-long slaveholder and upholder of slavery, thus forcibly refutes, from a conservative and legal standpoint, the CalhounYancey dogma. ‘The prohibition of slavery in a territory is assumed to work an inequality in the States, allowing one part to carry its property with it— the other, not. This is a mistake—a great error of fact—the source of great errors of deduction. The citizens of all the States, free and slave, are precisely equal in their capacity to carry their property with them into territories. Each may carry whatever is property by the laws of nature; neither can carry that which is only property by statute law; and the reason is, because he can not carry with him the Law which makes it property.” The analogy with the Alabama resolution “the perfect equality of privileges— civil, religious and political—of every citizen of our country, without reference to the place of his birth,” can hardly be mistaken.

Mr. Justice Curtis said: “On so grave a subject as this, I feel obliged to say that, in my opinion, such an exertion of judicial power transcends the limits of the authority of the Court, as described by its repeated decisions, and as I understand, acknowledged in this opinion of a majority of the Court.”

“The New York Herald, Dec.9, 1860, has a Washington dispatch of the 8th relative to a caucus of Southern Senators then being held at the Capitol, which said: “The current of opinion seems to set strongly in favor of a reconstruction of the Union, without the New England States. The latter States are supposed to be so FANATICAL in their views as to render it impossible that there should be any peace under a government to which they were parties.”

“And Gov. Letcher, of Virginia, in his message of January 7, 1861, after suggesting ‘that a commission to consist of two of our most intelligent, discreet, and experienced statesmen,’ should be appointed to visit the Legislatures of the Free States to urge the repeal to the Personal Liberty bills which had been passed, said: ‘In renewing the recommendation at this time, I annex a modification, and that is, that commissioners shall not be sent to either of the New England States. The occurrences of the last two months have satisfied me the New England Puritanism has no respect for human constitutions, and so little rovers for the Union that they would not sacrifice their prejudice, or smother their resentments, to perpetuate it.”

“Wm. H. Russell, of the London Times, in his ‘Diary, North and South,’ writing at Charleston, April 18, 1861, says: . . . . Again, eropping out of the dead level of hate to the Yankee, grows its climax in the profession, from nearly every one of the guests, that he would prefer a return to British rule to any reunion with New England. . . . . It is not only over the wine-glass—why call it a cup?—that they ask for a Prince to reign over them, I have heard the wish repeatedly expressed within the last two days that we could spare them one of our young Princes, but never in jest or in any frivolous manner.”

On the fall of Fort Sumter, the Roman Catholic bishop of Charleston ordered a Te Duem, and later absolved Catholics from their allegiance to the United States.

The Pope, in writing to Mr. Jefferson Davis, on December 3, 1860, acknowledging “letters dated the 23d of the month of September last,” says: “And from the same most clement Lord of compassions we entreat that He will illuminate your Honor with the light of His Divine grace, and join you to us in perfect charity.”

“The Pastoral letter sent out to be read in all the Roman Catholic Churches by the Fourth Roman Catholic Provincial Council, which met at Cincinnati’ on March 20, 1882, reviews the progress of religion, and holds that all men are not created equal, but some should obey others.”

“When the Secession Convention of the Southern Confederacy met at Montgomery, Ala., Dec. 9, 1860, Mr. Memminger presented two flags in each of which was the cross, to take the place of the stars and stripes. One of them being sent by some Roman Catholic young ladies from Charleston, South Carolina. In his remarks he said: ‘But, sir, I have no doubt that there was another idea associated with it in their minds—a religious one; and, although we have not yet seen in the heaven the “in hoe signo vinces” written upon the labarum of Constantine, yet the same sign has been manifested to us upon the tablets of the earth; FOR WE ALL KNOW that it has been by the AID of revealed religion that we have achieved over FANATICISM the victory which we this day witness; and it is becoming, on this occasion, THAT THE DEBT OF THE SOUTH TO THE CROSS SHOULD BE THUS RECOGNIZED. This was the Latin or Papal cross, with the stars of the rebel States upon it, which had swallowed them all, the cross in blue, upon a field of blood. The objection to such a flag from Protestant and Jews caused them for awhile to adhere to the ‘stars and bars,’ copied after the ‘old flag’; but the secret compact and alliance of the chief conspirators with Rome must be kept, and the cross must be in the flag somehow, and the stars on the cross must be retained; but to silence the murmurings and objections of the Protestants and Jews the cross was made diagonal—a St. Andrew’s cross—with the intention in the future to restore the Latin or Papal cross to its original place. It was this flag that was presented to the rebel army by Beauregard, the Roman Catholic General, and that floated at the masthead of the ‘Alabama, when commanded by the Jesuit, Raphael Semmes, which was sunk by the Kearsarge.”—Edwin A. Sherman.

“In 1857, among other questions in which that of intervention or nonintervention on the part of Congress in the Territories was discussed, was that of subduing the ‘Mormon rebellion.’ Mr, Douglas was in favor of ending the difficulty by annulling the act establishing the Territory of Utah. Mr.. Lincoln took issue with him on that point, and declared himself in favor of COERCING the Mormon population into obedience to the United States Government and its laws, which declaration a few years afterwards found force in executive statement, when President, in December, 1864. He said: ‘WHEN AN INDIVIDUAL, IN A CHURCH OR OUT OF IT, BECOMES DANGEROUS TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, HE MUST BE CHECKED.’ He understood the Mormon hierarchy in its governmental organization and its attitude towards free government of the people and the national authority to be precisely like that of Rome.”—Sherman.

Congress prohibited polygamy in Utah, then a Territory, and in the test case before the Supreme Court, Mr. Chief Justice Waite, in the opinion of the court, said:

“Laws are made for the government of the actions, and while they can not interfere with mere religious belief and opinions, they may with PRACTICES,

“As a law of the organization of society under the exclusive dominion of the United States, it is provided that plural marriages shall not be allowed. Can a man exercise his practices to the contrary because of his religious belief? To permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself, Government could exist only in name under such circumstances.”

Under this decision of the Supreme Court we may not take away the Roman Catholics’ religious opinion or belief that the Pope, Cardinal, Archbishop, Bishop or Priest, can license murder, treason, perjury, and other crimes, or forgive the same subsequent to commission, if not already licensed; but because treason, murder, and perjury happen to be crimes in this country. we can prohibit all sects from PRACTICING such licensing and forgiveness.

With the knowledge that such practices are carried on here, under the excuse that is a part of their religion, we simply have been licensing it until we may find the Roman Catholic Church claiming a prescriptive right, a rght existing and practiced in this country at the time of forming of this Government, and thus our Constitution was made subject to these practices then existing as a conceded personal right.

If this be their theory and through the confessional they license a man to kill, or absolve him from guilt for assassinating any or all of our Presidents who may in any way menace their institutions or the least of its interests, we never having in any way complained of or sought to stop such practices, where have we any right to complain? We bargain with them for votes to elect our Presidents. If we do happen to get a patriot instead of a politician, and he don’t suit them, why haven’t they under the license and the political bargain we have made with them, presumably to deliver value received for their votes; why haven’t they as a matter of practical politics, .and that is the basis we are now on as a nation; why haven’t they a right to rescind the contract by assassinating the President who does not represent their end of the bargain? If I kill the President, I am subject to the criminal statute or the common law, not having availed myself by joining the Catholic Church, of the seal of the confession, by which the Priest can effectually shield me. The law held higher than our law AND RECOGNIZED LOGICALLY BY US AS SUCH.

What then was Lincoln’s Great Purpose? What comfort is there in the classic of Gettysburg for the Roman Catholic Church? “It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the GREAT TASK REMAINING BEFORE US, that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they here gave the last full measure of devotion; that we here highly resolve that these dead SHALL NOT HAVE DIED IN VAIN; that this Nation under God, shall have a NEW BIRTH OF FREEDOM, and that GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE. AND FOR THE PEOPLE SHALL NOT PERISH FROM THE EARTH.”

In the Providence of the Almighty, on the 4th day of July. Luther disputed to his Popish antagonist, the Divine right of the Pope. In the Providence of the Almighty. on the 4th day of July the United States disputed the same pretension. Just disputed it. Then the United States and her Protestants went to the ballot-box with the Pope and commenced trading offices and power for votes, Out of the first big trade they got the civil war, and the death of Lincoln. The flower of the North and the South gone to bloody graves, and the Democratic party wrecked for fifty years. We are in the second big trade now, where they are entrenched in the Republican party as they were in the Democratic party at the beginning of the war. McKinley, the second great menace to the Church, sleeps at Canton, and within a year “a great change has come over the Republican party as far as its policy and attitude toward the Church is concerned.” McKinley’s death was necessary to secure that change.

Lincoln outside the church; stricken in a theatre; his country’s unity menaced by the open hostility of the Pope, rang true to the Divine purpose. He did not think it “cheapened” the Almighty to put upon onr coins. “In God We Trust,” and in his Administration it was done. Today Americans, patriots and hypocrites alike, laud him.

It remained for a Protestant churchman to take from our coins “In God * We Trust,” and be heralded as a “prime favorite of one Cardinal, several Archbishops, and a cLoup of Bishops.” Does not Protestant America owe to Abraham Lincoln the place Abraham Lincoln gave to Washington on February 22d, 1842? “Washington is the mightiest name of earth—long since mightiest in the cause of civil liberty; STILL MIGHTIEST IN MORAL REFORMATION. On that name no eulogy is expected. It can not be. To add brightness to the sun or glory to the name of Washington is alike impossible. Let none attempt it.

“In solemn awe pronounce the name and in its naked, deathless splendor leave it shining on.” At that time he little dreamed that civil and religious liberty in this country had not been achieved, and that within twenty years the Almighty would commission him to take the place he had accorded to Washington. That he did not accomplish that mission was no fault of his. That it has not been accomplished by us as the monument we owe to him, is a fault of ours.

Under the Pierce and Buchanan policy, patriots had to choose between the church and war. If the Republican party continues the Roosevelt policy with reference to the Catholic Church, patriots will have to choose between the Church and Socialism. The Church helps to make the industrial situation tense as both a capitalist and a potent influence upon the labor agitator and the individual laborer. She continually menaces the stability of our form of government through agitation calculated to show that republican institutions are not a success. It was her policy which brought on the war. It is her policy which propogates Socialism.

In the great hard coal strike intervened in by President Roosevelt. it was within the power of the Church to incite the strike, secure one of her Prelates on the Commission to assist in settling it, and take great publie credit for her influence in settling such difficulties. .

“A work is in the British Museum, called ‘Formulae Provisionum diversarum: a G. Passarello, summo studio in unum collectae,’ printed at Venice in 1596, There is a copy of these ‘Secret Instructions’ in manuscript, and at the end of it is this significant mandate: ‘Let them be denied to be the rules of the Society of Jesus, if ever they shall be imputed to us.’ . . . Chapter II treats of the way to become familiar with the great in any country. They are told to manage to get the ear of those in authority, and then. secure their hearts, by which way all persons will become our creatures, and none will dare to give the society disquiet. The priests are to wink at the vices of the powerful, and to encourage their inclinations, whatever they may be; but this is to be done with generals, always avoiding particulars.” Section 4: “It will further us in gaining favor, if our members artfully worm themselves by the interests of others into honorable embassies to foreign courts in their behalf, but especially to the Pope and great monarchs. Further, great care must be taken to curry favor with minions of the great, who, by small presents and many offices of piety, we may find means to get faithful intelligence of the master’s inclinations and humors, and thus be better qualified to chime their tempers. How much the society has benefited from their engagements in marriage treaties, the houses of Austria, Bourbon, Poland, and other kingdoms, are experimental eyidences. Wherefore, let such matches be with prudence picked out, whose parents are our friends, and firmly attached to our interests. . . .” Ladies of quality are easily gained by the influence of the women of theirebed-chamber. By all means pay attention to these, for thereby there will be no secrets in the family but what we shall have disclosed to us. . . .” “In directing the consciences of great men, our confessors are to allow the greater latitude that the penitents may be allured with the prospect of such freedom, will depend upon our direction and counsel. Princes, Prelates, and all who are capable of being of signal service must be so favored as to be made partakers of all the merits of the society.” “Let it be cunningly instilled into the people, that this society is entrusted with a far greater power in absolving, in dispensing fasts, with with paying and demanding debts, with impediments in matrimony, than any othet.. They will then have recourse to us, and thereby lay themselves under the strictest obligations. It will be very proper to give them handsome entertainments, to address them in a complaisant manner, to invite them to hear orations, sermons,” etc. “Let proper methods be used to get knowledge of the animosities that arise amongst great men, THAT WE MAY HAVE ‘A FINGER IN RECONCILING THEM; AND GRADUALLY BECOME ACQUAINTED WITH THEIR SECRET AFFAIRS, . . .” etc.

The corresponding section in the edition used by Mr. Sherman is given thus: “12. It will be very convenient to take to our care the reconciliation of the great, in the quarrels and enmities that divide them; then by this method we can enter, little by little, into the acquaintance of their most intimate friends and secrets; and we can SERVE OURSELVES TO THAT PARTY which will be most in favor of that which we present.”

“We must inculcate this doctrine with kings and princes, THAT THE CATHOLIC FAITH CAN NOT SUBSIST IN THE PRESENT STATE, WITHOUT POLITICS; but that in this, it is necessary to proceed with much certainty. Of this mode, we must share the affection of the great, and be admitted to the MOST SECRET COUNSELS.”—Chap XVII, 3. Sherman.

“It will be no little advantage that will result, by secretly and prudently fomenting dissensions between the great, ruining or augmenting their power. But if we perceive some appearance of reconciliation between them, then we of the society will treat and act as pacificators ; that it shall not be that any others will anticipate to obtain it.”—XVII, 5. Sherman.

“But if we do not hope that we can obtain this, supposing that it is necessary that SCANDALS shall come in the world, WE MUST BE CAREFUL TO CHANGE OUR POLITICS, CONFORMING TO THE TIMES, AND EXCITE THE PRINCES, FRIENDS OF OURS, TO MUTUALLY MAKE TERRIBLE WARS THAT EVERYWHERE THE MEDIATION OF THE SOCIETY WILL BE IMPLORED; that we may be employed in the public reconciliation, for it will be the cause of the common good; and we shall be recompensed by the PRINCIPAL ECCLESIASTICAL DIGNITIES; and the BETTER BENEFICIARIES. 9. In fine, that the society afterwards can yet count upon the favor and authority of princes procuring THAT THOSE WHO DO NOT LOVE US SHALL FEAR US.” —Chap. XVII, 8-9.

“Forasmuch there will be opportunity and conductive notices at repeated times, that the distribution of honors and dignities in the REPUBLIC is an act of justice; and that in a great manner it will be offending God, if the princes do not examine themselves and cease carrying their passions, protesting to the same with frequency and severity, that we do not desire to mix in the administration of the State; but when it shall become necessary to so express ourselves thus, to have your weight to fill the mission that is recommended, Directly that the sovereigns are well convinced of this, it will be very convenient to give an idea of the virtues that may be found to adorn those that are selected for the dignities and principal public changes; procuring then and recommending the true friends of the company; notwithstanding, we must not make it openly for ourselves, but by means of our FRIENDS who have intimacy with the prince that it is not for us to talk him into the disposition of making them.”—Chap. IV, 2, Sherman.

“Among the peoples where our fathers reside, we must have PHYSICIANS FAITHFUL TO THE SOCIETY, WHOM WE CAN ESPECIALLY RECOMMEND TO THE sick, and to paint under an aspect very superior to that of other religious orders, and SECURE DIRECTION that WE shall be called to assist the POWERFUL, PARTICULARLY IN THE HOUR OF DEATH.” “That the confessors shall visit with assiduity the sick, particularly those who are in danger, and to honestly ELIMINATE the other fathers, which the SUPERIORS will PROCURE, when the CONFESSOR sees that he is obliged to remove the other from the SUFFERING, to REPLACE and MAINTAIN the sick in his good INTENTIONS, Meanwhile we must inculcate as much as we can with PRUDENCE, the fear of HELL, &C., &c., or when, the lesser ones of purgatory; DEMONSTRATING that as water will put out fire, so will the same ALMs blot out the sin; and that we can not employ the ALMS better, than in the maintaining and SUBSIDIZING of the persons, who, by their VOCATION, have made PROFESSION caring for the SALVATION of their neighbor; that in this MANNER the sick can be made to PARTICIPATE in their MERITS, and find. SATISFACTION FOR THEIR OWN SINS; placing before them that CHARITY covereth a multitude of sins; and that also, we can describe THAT CHARITY Is A NUPTIAL VESTMENT, WITHOUT WHICH NO ONE CAN BE ADMITTED TO THE HEAVENLY TABLE. In fine it will be necessary to move them to the citations of the Scriptures, and of the holy fathers, that, according to the CAPACITY of the sick, we can judge what is MOST EFFICACIOUS to MOVE them.”—Chap. IX, 14 and 15. Sherman.

“This code of Jesuit laws is not to be made known to every class of Jesuits. They have bold, daring, infamous men, ready for desperate deeds, by steel, bullets or poisoned chalice. These know what others do not. They have disguised agents in mask. These “know something peculiar to their work, They have crafty, shrewd, courteous, polished men, who associated with the distinguished and powerful; they have instructions, unknown to others. They have decent, serious, moral men, sent out to ensnare the moral serious and unsuspecting. These teach that their vow is one of poverty, that they have nothing to do with politics or wealth; their sole object being to put down heretics. Hence, all classes swear, that they know no ‘Secret Instructions.’ ’—Delisser.

Now can you see how the physician is a most valuable ally to get the rich widow, widower, old maid or bachelor to a Catholic hospital?

Now can you see why the growing disposition to remove, under any reasonable excuse, a case to a hospital, using the fear of bacteria complication; exploited largely in my opinion to secure this end?

Now can you see why, that the allopathic system descended from Catholic Monks, is claimed World-wide as the “regular” system of medicine? Regular through apostolic succession.

Now can you see why, partaking from its Mother, it has been a system of professional and social proscription, augmented and for many years made effective through monopolistic privilege with the Army, Navy, and Public Health and Marine Hospital Service, to the prejudice of the people, against the spirit of our institutions, and by political power rather than merit?

Now can you see that in Catholic Hospitals, “Institutions of Public and Private Relief, Correction, Detention and Residence,” the allopath is practically the only man admitted to favor and practice, and his monopoly of the practice of medicine must be secured through a National Health Department to control or obliterate other systems, or that valuable arm of the Catholic Church must fail her?

Now you can see that the allopathic system of medicine directed through the American Medical Association has been one of the masks behind which of the Catholic Church, and the allopathic being the only system of medicine secured National and State appropriations?

Now can you see that the allopathic system of medicine being a child of the Catholic Church, and the allopathic being the only system of medicine used in the public service, the United States being a member of the American Medical Association, and by detail sitting in the legislative body of that Association, there is as a matter of fact and law, to that extent a union of Church and State in this country?

Now can you see that the augmentation of that relation through a National Health Department to the 140,000 or more physicians organized for co-operation, and co-operating with the Catholic Church in every township in the United States is a serious menace to our moral and physical health, the National, and every State treasury, and the Nation itself?

Now can you see that having corrupted both our morals and bodies, and through more intimate association preparing to augment that work, we may more nearly come to RELY for RELIEF for BOTH upon the institutions which has corrupted both?

Now can you see that the ostentatious announcement of medical theories engaging instantly the World’s attention; Heralded to the hope, to end in disappointment, could be only the devices through which our lives and health were played with; that our hopes and fears could be used to the political professional, and financial aggrandizement of these Institutions; mother and child?

Now can you see the vaccination of Jenner, established against the best medical attainment of the day; established solely by political power and political favor: through political power, and ONLY through political power has been upheld, to the cowing of the proficient in the profession, and the applause of those unable to rise above the low standards of instruction of this system. that by its own competents, are branded as “parrots” and “murderers;” a by-word to their betters, and a menace to society, “for he carries his DEVILISH CONCEIT and PRETENSE into homes already devasted by sorrow and affliction.”

Now can you see how the germ theory, and germ chasing, may not only he another scheme to MAGNIFY and GLORIFY the allopathic interest; to hold the public eye; to educate the public confidence; to secure the public boost into a National Health Department?

Now can you see, that in the Pure Food and Drugs Act, Congress might have been played for position, to put the National Health Department scheme through?

Now can you see why Dr. Harrington said: “The National Food and Drug Act, I repeat, is not primarily a health law and from the standpoint of health it was not needed. It is rather a law against misbranding and fraud, but those who clamored for it THOUGHT they were Saving their Lives when they succeeded in forcing its passage?”

Now can you see how allopathic medicine, its theories exposed and exploded by those who dared its medical and political power; the “modern treatment!” Osteopathy, Christian, and Mental Science, and the “constant and reproachful object-lesson of homoeopathy,” today faces annihilation, unless rescued by legislation of Congress?”

Now, can you see how the suffering of the continued existence of the American Medical Association, by the State, is a great moral and physical menace to the people?

Now can you see why true to the instinct and tutelage of its Mother, the Catholic Church, the allopathic interest almost from the foundation of the Government up to and including today, has fought Nationally. and in every State and Territory, for laws giving it an advantage professionally, and in the control of appropriations. and Institutions?

Can you see that the “regular” more properly Apostolic physician is an integral part of the economy of the Roman Catholic Church. “often necessary to man’s spiritual progress.” “. . , a means of carrying out her laws and discipline.” “The physician’s authority is recognized in many of her most important laws.” “In her laws the physician is specially honored” (and they don’t recognize any as “regular” but their own apostolic. True. The American Medical Association since 1903 has recognized Homopathists and Electric. Electric have been using them to help get the Cabinet office to crush “heretical” medicine —a departure from means, justified by the ends sought. Just a smooth game.

“It is sometimes impossible for the candidate for holy orders to receive them without the authority and aid of the physician.” “On the physician, therefore, AS MUCH AS ON THE Bishop or Pope, frequently DEPENDS the RIGHT to be a priest of the Catholic Church.”

“The ONLY authority in the diocese which the Bishop is BOUND to respect is the authority of his physician.”..“The Church will not canonize a saint without the sanction of the physician.” “Thus the physician very often makes the saint.” “Thus the physician is the Priest’s BROTHER.” —Rev. Henry A. Brarn, D. D., in Catholic World, Vol. 62.

Now, can you see that the American Medical Association is only the American mask of the priesthood of the Roman Catholic Church? “Regular,” because Apostolic medicine.

Now, can you see that every time a physician claims to be a “regular” he claims Apostolic succession, membership in the priesthood, and an integral part of the economy of the Roman Catholic Church—a living BROTHER of the framers, expounders, and enforcers of their theology and its APPLICATION GENERALLY. “Once in the Roman Catholic Church, always a part of the Roman Catholic Church.”

Now, can you see that every Commonwealth University teaching “regular” medicine is a union of the State with the Church, recognizing the Pope’s pretensions, and endorsing his theological teaching?

Now, can you see that every Protestant Denomination teaching “regular” medicine in its Universities, recognizes the Pope and his Church and the “regularity” of the Apostolic succession of their system of medicine, and the theological economy of which he is a part, and is turning out and _giving diplomas to physicians, accepted and commissioned by the Roman Catholic Church through their “regular” apostolic succession, and who, “as the representative of Christ and the CHURCH, purifies the soul of the babe from original sin and makes it worthy of angelic association.” In the sacrament of baptism the physician often takes the place of the priest and gives the sacrament when no one else could do so with propriety.”—Rev. Henry A. Brann, D. D., Catholic World, Vol. 62.

Now, can you see in the European situation of today: Russia having been the friend of the Union, while the Pope was plotting and aiding its destruction; the Roosevelt Administration markedly favorable to the Pope: “In defiance of all the rules of the diplomatic game as played for centuries” volunteering between Russia and Japan undoubtedly to Japan’s advantage, Russia’s resources allowing of the financial devastation of Japan in a prolonged struggle; William, neither an ally gr bondholder, applauding; applauding and aiding to the saving of Japan’s navy which he now seeks to utilize with his own; the Pope’s anticipation of William’s susceptibility before his coronation, in the arbitration between Spain and Germany as to the Caroline Islands wherein the Pope within a month, awarded as between the Roman Catholic Majesty of Spain and the Protestant Majesty of Germany, equality for commercial and industrial pursuit, and to the Protestant a NAVAL STATION, and freedom of navigation throughout the Archipelago; Austria through concordat being in bondage to the Pope; Austria’s recent breaking of the treaty of Berlin, and her backing by William to the humiliation of Russia, England and France; the present disturbance in France fomented by the Pope: the backing heretofore of the Sultan of Turkey by Germany; Emperor William “making an implicit alliance of the Vatican and the German schools in his anti-revolutionary policies;” the sending of Prince Henry to this country; the sending of gifts to America bv William; the particular friendship of Roosevelt with the late German Amassbador; Roosevelt’s friendship for the Pope, and the moral effect for him of sending our squadron around the world; the almost frantic attitude of Roosevelt in the California-Japanese incident; the weakening of the AngloJananese alliance. attributed to Germany’s ambassador to Japan; that the United States may have been used morally through he popular acclaim of Roosevelt, to the action of Austria and the Sultan; that such action may assist to bring about an alliance between Germany and Japan with an amalgamation of their navies, the Pope’s temporal power restored in Italy; England’s navy engaged by the alliance while William lands an invading jorce, and her navy beaten by the alliance in detail; the United States forced to aid England against such an alliance, or be ‘herself beaten in detail, not being able at the same time to hold alone, the Philippines, and enforce the Monroe doctrine, detested by William; the Pope firmly, and in the Bureau of Printing and Engraving and the Government Printing Office overwhelmingly entrenched; the other Departments and Army and Navy honeycombed, could, while William and Japan were engaging us on the outside, paralyze Government Adminstration and revenue internally, and if we resisted turn upon us his military organizations in every considerable town, armed, equipped and drilled; that the struggle in Constantinople is the pick: et fire of the final struggle inaugurated by the Pope against civil and religious liberty, with William and the Sultan, his allies, Franz Joseph his slave and Japan a prospective ally; and we have considerably aided our enemies and contributed to the massacre of Christmas, Can you see the value of Washington’s advice against the “insidious wiles of foreign influence,” “a reason of attempted centralization of power in very recent years, the piling up of expenditures, the multiplying of offices, and the wisdom of a tariff bill framed to meet a probably world’s conflict in which we will be involved?

Now, can you see that, in such an imaginary crisis, our foreign embassies filled with Catholics, owing their first allegiance to the Church, could aid despotism and repress liberty? As a matter of fact the Pope could rightfully command their allegiance, and if they were good enough Catholics to secure the positions because they were Catholics, they would be good enough Catholics to respond to the commands of the Pope. The analogy is thus shown: “The committee, consisting of Jefferson, Gerry, Read, Sherman and Williams, reported: Resolved, that it is inconsistent with the interest of the United States to, appoint any’ person, not a natural born citizen thereof, to the office of minister, charge d’affaires, consul, vice-consul, or to any other civil department in a foreign country, and that a copy of this resolve be transmitted to Messrs, Adams, Franklin, and Jay, ministers of the said States, in Europe.”

Now, can you see that there have been two kinds of Protestants in this country: Abraham Lincoln, who stood absolutely alone in his dedication, “that while an Almighty Ruling Providence permitted him to see, the light of day and breathe the pure air of heaven, and so long as he had a brain to think, a heart to feel and a hand to execute his will, he would devote them all against that infernal power that was the enemy of all free government and of the free institutions of his country, that polluted the temples of justice with its presence and attempted to use the machinery of the law to oppress and crush the innocent and helpless.” God gave to Lincoln, stricken in a theatre, the greatest dignity and honor of earth. God honored his cause but no church. No denomination. Through all of Lincoln’s life, from the tribute to Washington in 1842; through the debates with Douglas, and thru his Administration, in messages and addresses, God called to his followers through Lincoln. God accepted the dedication of Lincoln, and used him to the accomplishment of so much of the Divine purpose as he was permitted to fulfill. From the day of Lincoln’s death, no organization bearing the name of Christ, has caught the inspiration, or taken up the work of achieving his great purpose. What Lincoln stimatized, they court. What he declared an enemy of his country, they load with honors and appropriations. What he called the poluter of our courts of justice and oppressor and crusher of the innocent and helpless, they would deliver the care of the Nations’s moral and physical health to.

Today you see in the courts of this District a criminal action involving in disgrace the seller and buyer of Government secrets in land transactions, and a Japanese making sketches of our forts is treated as a spy, while the “formost Catholic layman in the United States,” is admitted to the secrets of the very weightiest questions of State. Neither can this gentleman, with all of his legal acumen, the Jesuitical sophistry, maintain that he can, at the same time, be a SINCERE PATRIOT and a SINCERE ROMAN CATHOLIC. He could not, I insist,, remain there claiming both, without being there as an actual SPY, compelled by his BELIEF and religious allegiance to admit to his confessor in the confessional’ his sin of participation in an heretical government, which, if carrying out the object of its institution, is the open, avowed an uncompromising enemy of his highest spiritual and temporal allegiance.

Read in the Washington Post of April 21st, the attitude of Rome to the Government of the United States as shown through Cardinal Kopp, the Catholic Bishop of Breslau. An ambassador of the United States, denied for his daughter a Protestant religious ceremony, even with a Catholic religious ceremony conceded to the Roman Catholic contracting party.

If Protestants of America where Rome can prevent it be denied a Protestant religious ceremony in the most sacred earthly contract they can make, then American patriots who have a spark of respect for their wives, and love their daughters, are stultified in their allegiance to any party which feeds a Roman Catholic at the public crib.

Yet we, the pusillanimous slaves of Rome’s Pope, will pick up no gauntlet of his slapped in our very face. Long since refusing to resent insults to our men, we are become so low, that we swallow insults to our daughters. Our franchise sold to him at the polls, our lives a sacrifice to his interests, we enrich him with licensed crime, muzzle our press to his deviltry, and will in due time deliver to him our soul which he may now rightfully claim, Republican France protects this daughter of America in a civil marriage. Rome, a foreign power, makes this condition for our daughters; she sets the example, makes the precedent. No patriotic American son or daughter but would willingly submit to both, a civil and religious ceremony, and we are justified in public policy in a ‘general law recognizing in our courts none but civil marriages. This has the further advantage of being a partial bar to our sons and daughters being coerced by Rome through the marriage contract, into bringing up the issue in the Catholic faith. This is of the highest public policy, Make the civil marriage fee nominal, that it be no impediment.

Thus our sons and daughters will be freed from one species of religious intolerance and coercion. Consider this humiliating protest of an Ambassador of the United nas to ies ge France: “Both my public and private life demonstrate my freedom from religious bias; but under the cireumstances, AND AS THE REPRESENTATIVE OF A COUNTRY EMINENT FOR ITS RELIGIOUS TOLERATION, ALTHOUGH PREDOMINANTLY PROTESTANT, I have decided not to attend the service at St. Joseph’s, the more so as there are several recent precedents for a Catholic ceremony and_one of another denomination.”

This Government, saved by Lincoln, dare not protest, and you will soon hear of a demand by. Rome for Ambassador White’s retirement to private life for daring to publicly utter such intolerant and bigoted sentiments.

“Paris, April 27. . The archbishop of Paris, it is understood, said that the Catholics in America were too liberal. AND THAT THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE AN EXAMPLE IN THE CASE OF THE AMERICAN AMBASSADOR SHOULD NOT BE NEGLECTED.” Washington Post.

Now can you see any significance from the following from Washington Times.

“Cleveland, Ohio, April 16—A national movement among the Knights of Columbus of America to secure the appointment of another member of President Taft’s Cabinet, to be known as the Secretary of Health has been started here.”

Now can you see how the obtaining of practically a PERMANENT Cabinet office through a National Health Department, and the establishing of the allopathic system as the State system of medicine, it would be a precedent for the establishing or further entrenching of religion upon the State?

Now, can you see why the Roman Catholic Church honors the physician and their version of the scripture praise him?

Now, can you see why in the Roman Catholic economy, in the sacrament of baptism, the “regular” physician, through his apostolic succession, “as the representative of Christ and the CHURCH, purifies the soul of the babe from original sin and makes it worthy of angelic association?”

Now, can you see that the United States being a member of the American Medical Association, it being the governing body of the allopathic system of_medicine, the allopathic physician being “regular” through apostolic succession to the Catholic Monks, and apostolically empowered to administer the sacrament of baptism, the said physician, to all intents and purposes an integral part of the Catholic priesthood; the allopathic interest enjoying monopostolie privilege in the Army, Navy, and Public Health and Marine Hospital Service; the United States as a matter of fact, and the several States of the Union are daily baptizing children into the Catholic faith and Church; and can you now see that one of the aims of this National Health Department scheme?

Now, can you see that a Children’s Bureau Bill, introduced for and advocated by the Committee of One Hundred on National Health, the tool of the Catholic Church, is only part of this Catholic scheme, to throw the weight of the Government in the direction of their own interest, either independently through such a bureau or it as a part of the National Health Department scheme?

Now, can you see that a Children’s Bureau Bill, introduced for and advocated by the Committee of One Hundred on National Health, the tool of the Catholic Church, is only part of the Catholic scheme, to throw to weight of the Government in the direction of their own interest, either independently through such a bureau or it as a part of the National Health Department scheme?

Now, can you see that the Pope, CLAIMING to be a temporal sovereign; CLAIMING sovereignty over the United States; having recognized the Southern Confederacy; having with and through it plotted and aided the attempt to disrupt the Union and overthrown its sovereignty; having by his agents, integral parts of his political and ecclesiastical economy; absolved persons claiming to have been naturalized citizens of the United States, from their oath of allegiance to the United States, and incited them to acts of warfare against the United States; and having in other and divers ways incited, encouraged and permitted acts of war against the United States during the Civil War; having by his agents, members of his spiritual and temporal armies, through such encouragement inciting and permission of acts of war, encompassed by force of arms, the death of Abraham Lincoln. the President of the United States; and having at the time of the war of the United States with Spain. given spiritual aid, comfort. blessing and encouragement to Spain. our enemy; having by his Archbishop of Manila, in a pastoral letter. in 1898, inciting his claimed subjects under such pastorates to acts of hostility, calling the flag of the United States. “the flag of the enemy,” saying in substance: “Dark days broke when the North American Squadron entered swiftly our brilliant bay, and despite the heroism of our sailors destroyed the Spanish ships and succeeded in hoisting the flag of the enemu on the blessed soil of our country.

“Do not forget that in their anger they intend to crush our rights: that the stranger tries to subject us to the yoke of the HERETIC: tries to break down onr religion and drae us from the holy family of the Catholic Church. I KNOW YOU ARE PREPARING TO DEFEND YOUR COUNTRY. You must all have recourse to ARMS and prayers; ARM, because the Spanish population, though attenuated and wounded, shows its patriotism when defending its RELIGION (WHAT AN AWFUL REBUKE AND DEFIANCE TO THE PROTESTANT); prayer, because victory always is given by God to those who have JUSTICE on their side. God will send his angels and saints to be with us, and to FIGHT on our side.” Having said through his confessionals in the Philippine Islands, and by his special and direct and ennobled agent Chapelle the following as stated before the Philippine Commission, Senate Document No. 190, 56th Congress, 2d Session, page 141, testimony of Senor. Don Felipe Calderon (lawyer), of Manila:

“. . .And even at the present time there is not the slightest doubt that they have said to the American authorities that all of the Filipind people were a lot of anarchists and insurgents who were conspiring to overthrow constituted authority, while to the people of the Philippines they say the American Government will place a chain around the waist of each of them; I do not make this assertion as an emanation from myself. I have seen it in writing. In the confessional they say to them: ‘How can you be in favor of the Americans when they are absolutely the enemies of our religion? And they Say that constantly to their secular clergy, adding that woe betides the poor Filipinos who deliver themselves over unconditionally to the American Government, and I have heard this from the very lips of Monsieur Chapatie ” (As an index of the moral health promoted by the Roman Catholic clergy in the Philippines, and as a recommendation for their Health and Children’s Bureau scheme, as made by a Commission of the United States Government, this document is commended to the careful perusal, and prayerful consideration, of Protestant clergymen who thirst to know just what an apostolic representative of Christ in the Catholic Church is, and will interest Protestant women who aspire to know just what the Children’s Bureau they petition for might turn out to accomplish . . . provided always this document is procurable.) Having by such acts of permission, incitement, and encouragement of enmity, encompassed the death of William McKinley, President of the United States; having declared war upon our form of government, and upon civil and religious liberty and seeking to extirpate the same; having first bound the binds, consciences and actions in allegiance of his adherents to his decrees and desires; having established in this country a system of espionage through the so-called confessional, from his Nuncio, Cardinal, Archbishops, Bishops, and Priests bound by oath to him, and each other of his adherents; having by and in these spies, secured in the administration of the Government of the United States itself, declared by him, his Councils, and representatives as their civil and religious enemy, and have so logically declared their enmity to’the United States, having in such espionage extending to the least of his adherents, at the Capitol as Washington, of said United States, approximately fifty per cent more or less of the administrative force of the said National Government; having head of the Bureau of Printing and Engraving, printing for the said Government the paper money and postage and other stamps used and for use in her, administration, with approximately seventy per cent of the skilled and other employees thereof adherent to said Pope and his commands, and absolutely subjecting our paper medium of exchange, postal carriage and internal revenue to paralysis in a crisis, upon attempt to enforce the said pretensions of the said Pope; having by his said agents and adherents offended, and now daily offending against the law of the land, assuming to license, and absolve from guilt of such’offenses, independently of and above such law of the land; having accumulated vast and valuable properties both improved and unimproved, and held largely through incorporation acts invoked to protect such property to said Pope, and used for the purposes of domicile, of plotting, teaching and revenue to secure the destruction of the said Government of the United States, which said artificial creature, having divested the said Catholic Church of property interest, and such artificial creature devoting said properties wholly to the purposes of subversion of the Government’ of the United States, the said incorporation for such purpose being against the peace, dignity and integrity of the several States and of the United States, stand at law abatable and contraband of war, independent of any claim by the United States as to the temporal or spiritual pretensions of the said Pope, and upon the claims of the said Pope, his councils and adherents alone, and so stand confiscate at the hands of the properly constituted authority, upon demand and possession. Can you imagine that of the essence of Lincoln’s “GREAT PURPOSE?”

Can you not see that such war is yet being waged; that the absolving of allegiance, the blessing and consecrating of flags of insurgents at home, and of enemies abroad, the assassination of Lincoln, the pastoral letter of the Archbishop of Manila, the assassination of McKinley, were the logical, legal circumstantial expression in overt acts, of the anarchistic teaching, as held in the opinion of Mr, Chief Justice Waite, in the Utah case?

Now, can you see that we have no moral right to object to the infraction of laws, when we license the infraction independent of our laws, and acknowledge a power of absolution upon the earth, in our midst, yet above the State?

When we take these Catholic authorities at their word, recognize that independent of our laws they license and regulate anarchy; when we realize that they are tolerated as a religious institution, for their votes, or other reason; we are partners in this traffic; that defying our own laws for the benefit of a foreign sovereignty, the blood of Lincoln and McKinley is upon our garments, as well as that of every person who falls by the hands of a Catholic subscribing to such beliefs; then by our acts we admit, that our rraise of Lincoln and McKinley is pure cant; that we are just what the Papists call us—a lot of heretics, nationally and religiously.

Let the Catholic keep and enjoy his religious belief and his religious opinion; he insists upon the removal of the Protestant bible from the public schools, ‘complains of their being “Godless” and wants “religion” taught there; let us then in full justice to them and to the State, make, if not in the public schools, in the State Universities that belief and opinion a part of the information imparted. Let it for the purposes of contrast and discussion be placed beside the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution of the United States. Bring to the light of day the Constitution and secret instructions of the Jesuits, the doctrines propounded by Councils and Popes, and the hidden exposition by their theological writers. Let this theology in plain English expound itself. Education ever has been, and must ever be our security. Hach State, as a patriotic safeguard, provides a University; put this information at the disposal of these students, we may trust the intelligence that we train. Whatever may be suggested, we owe it so long as the Catholic Church exists unchanged. to disseminate its hidden precepts and theology. To the voung man equipped and ambitious to serve his country in the Presidency, he should have the opportunity to know that its patriotic administration invites assassination, and its subservient administration to this Catholic form of government demonstrates treason. That in the humble and unnoticed walks of life, the enmity of this power means absolved perjury in our courts, and its implacable hatred knows no crime but scandal.

We may thus realize as the late Archbishop Spaulding of Baltimore declared in 1870: “That if the public schools were rigidly maintained in this country, and the public funds were withheld from parochial schools, and compulsory attendance laws were enforced, that Roman Catholicism would lose most of her people in one or two generations. UNLESS SHE HONESTLY ADAPTED HERSELF to the changed conditions.” Whatever Lincoln’s method may have been. in the light of his utterances. we can not doubt his “Great Purpose.” nor forget the obvious significance of his sacrifice. Consistent with our dignity; consonant with the spirit of our institutions; commending itself to every patriot and paralyzing every protest, we may thus educationally build to the glory of the immortal Lincoln a monument not appealing to the sensual sense, or an evidence of cant, but a living, virile force, potent alike abroad and at home, “and to all classes and conditions of mankind.”

Under the dome of the Capitol, in the hall dedicated to American patriots, Marquette, the Jesuit, was placed in marble, to the shame of Wisconsin and the National Congress; disputing the patriotism of Washington and his compatriots, the while life of Lincoln and the results of two wars for freedom. ‘There they stand in the Hall of Liberty, representing the two ex-extremest, and extremest types, of antagonistic allegiances of earth. “The one the com: mon right of humanity, and the other the divine right of kings. It is the same principle in whatever SHAPE it develops itself.’—Lincoln. From this time forth, may every member of Congress, until the Pope shall abolish Congress and throw out the statue of Lincoln from the Capitol, hear every time he passes through statuary hall or sees the features of Lincoln portrayed, the dedication of Lincoln, and see upon the Jesuitical garb of Marquette the blood of the man whose memory it insults,

“Dead, he speaks to men who now willingly hear what before they refused to listen Now his simple and weighty words will be gathered like those of Washington, and your children and your children’s children shall be TAUGHT to ponder the simplicity and DEEP WIspoM of utterances which in their time passed in party heat as idle words. Ye people, behold a martyr whose blood, as so many articulate words, pleads for FIDELITY, for LAW, for LIBERTY.” —Beecher.

From the popular and political odium which will come upon me for such utterances, I take refuge in the record and words of Lincoln and of Washington, and those who find political comfort and applause in an opposite course may reap their legitimate fruits.

“REAL patriots who may resist the intrigues of the FAVORITES are liable to become suspected and odious, while its TOOLS and DUPES USURP the applause and confidence of the people to SURRENDER THEIR INTERESTS.”—Washington’s Farewell Address.

Download a PDF file of this article.

Please follow and like us:

Related posts:

Abraham Lincoln’s views about Rome, the Pope, the Vatican, the Jesuits and their influence on American society Young Lawyer Abraham Lincoln Refuses Payment for his Services from Charles Chiniquy Rome’s Responsibility for the Assassination of Abraham Lincoln Young Catholic priest Charles Chiniquy stands up to the Bishop for his convictions against drinking alcohol Foreign Conspiracy Against the Liberties of the United States – By Samuel F. B. Morse The Roman Catholic Church – the Snow White Hiding Behind Governments “What is the Roman Catholic Church-State?” – By Darryl Eberhart Did God really tell Abraham to Sacrifice Isaac?