CHAPTER I. CATHOLICISM A POLITICAL ORGANIZATION

Produced by David Widger

MONKS, POPES, AND THEIR POLITICAL INTRIGUES

By John Alberger

"Like lambs have we crept into power; like wolves have we used it;

like dogs have we been driven out; like eagles shall we renew our

youth."--St. Francis Borgia.

"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty."--Washington.

In One Volume

Baltimore 1871.

PREFACE.

The object of the present work is to show the political nature of the

Catholic church, and its treasonable designs with regard to the American

republic.

In the course of the following pages the author has endeavored to show

that the Catholic Church is intrinsically a gigantic conspiracy against

the liberties of the world; ingenious in its construction, opulent in

its resources, extensive in its ramifications, and formidable in its

character. In proof of this assertion he submits to the consideration of

the reader a mass of irrefragable authority, and indisputable historical

incidents. The authorities on which he chiefly relies are papal bulls,

briefs, and encyclical letters; the canons of Catholic councils;

Catholic periodicals under the supervision of priests, such as the

_Civita Cattolica, Bronsoris Review, the Boston Pilot, the Toilet, the

Rambler, the Shepherd of the Valley, the Paris Univers_; also the works

of Dens, the author of the Catholic system of Divinity; of Llorente,

the secretary of the Spanish Inquisition; of Bellarmine, the celebrated

Catholic controversialist; of Ferraris, the author of the Catholic

Ecclesiastical Dictionary; of Fra Paola, the Catholic ecclesiastical

historian; of St. Thomas Aquinas, entitled by the church "_the Angelic

Doctor" "the Angel of the School," "the Fifth Doctor_" of St. Bernard,

called "_the Honeyed Teacher_" and his works "_Streams from Paradise_;"

of Labbeus, of St. Liquori, of Moscovius, and of a host of other oracles

of Catholicism.

By means of these authorities the veil of piety which conceals and

decorates the papal church is partly drawn aside, and her monarchial

character, political organization, despotic nature, ambitious designs

and treasonable principles, are distinctly presented to view.

The author pretends to no originality. The diction and logic are, of

course his own, but the facts and principles upon which he bases his

charges are the avowals of the church, the records of history, and the

official affirmations of civilized nations.

The Infidels, as faithful sentinels on the watch tower of liberty, have

often uttered the cry of warning; the Protestant pulpit has at intervals

startled from its drowsy slumbers, and echoed the same alarm; but

neither the one nor the other has been able to arouse the people from

their profound slumber. Gavazzi has lectured, Hogan, Colton, Hopkins

have written, but so profound and death-like is the torpidity which

holds the senses of Americans in indifference, that the warnings of

writers and speakers have died away with the tones in which they were

uttered. But Americans must awake--they will awake--if not soon

enough to avert the impending doom overhanging their country and their

posterity, yet soon enough! alas, too soon! to weep in despair over

their present apathy and indifference, amid the ruins of their republic.

JOHN ALBERGER.

Baltimore, Md. July 4th, 1871.

MONKS, POPES, AND THEIR POLITICAL INTRIGUES

CHAPTER I. CATHOLICISM A POLITICAL ORGANIZATION

Guizot, speaking of the Christian Church, says: "I say the Christian

Church, and not Christianity, between which a broad distinction is to be

made." (Gen. Hist. Civilization, Lecture 11, p. 48.) The Catholic Church

has little except the name of Christianity, while it is secretly a

political organization to establish "the supremacy of the Pope over all

persons and things," which, according to Bellarmine's view, "is the main

substance of Christianity."

If we have recourse to the lexicon to ascertain the signification of

the term religion, we may arrive at a definite conclusion respecting

its classical use: but if we are guided in our inquiry by the popular

acceptation, we will discover that its definitions are as numerous as

the inhabitants of the globe, and as various as their features. We have

Natural religion, Pagan religion, Hindoo religion, Jewish religion,

Christian religion, and Mahometan religion. Among Christian sects some

believe religion to consist in individual feeling, some in baptism, some

in reverence for the clergy, some in problematical creeds and dogmas,

some in observances of church ordinations, some in rhapsodies, and some

in a species of sentimentalism.

The Boston Pilot says: "There can be no religion without an

Inquisition;" but Thomas Paine, with nobler philosophy, thinks

"religious duties consist in doing justice, loving mercy, and

endeavoring to make our fellow creatures happy." The diversity and

discordance which have arisen respecting the import of this term,

originate from its compound nature adapting it to designate one idea,

or a variety of ideas. But while we rarely encounter two persons exactly

concurring in an opinion of what is religion, we find all readily

admitting that it essentially consists in just principles and correct

conduct. Principles are the fountains of thought and feeling; to be

just, they must be formed in accordance with truth and reason. Conduct

to be correct must be in harmony with the rights of others, and

the principles and designs of the human organism. According to this

definition, religion may exist with or without ceremonial observances.

All forms are merely external appendages, unessential to the nature of

religion, and as distinct from it as the casket is from the gem, or the

body from the vital principle. If this definition should be construed

into a definition of mere morality, it cannot invalidate any objection

founded on it to Catholicism, as every such objection will then become

demonstrative proof that the Catholic Church is not only destitute of

religion, but even of morality.

The signification of a corporate organization is well understood, but

how shall we ascertain its principles and designs? Not from the tenor of

its professions; but from the nature of its constitution, the tendency

of its measures, the sanctions which it has given, the recognitions

which it has made in its official capacity; and above all, from the

avowals it has uttered, under such a prosperous condition of affairs as

made disguise unnecessary. In courting popular favor, an organization

concocted to subvert the rights and interests of the people, would, from

motives of policy, be prompted to conceal its nature and design; but

when wealth and power had sufficiently fortified its security to enable

it to scorn and defy public opinion, it would then as naturally unfold

its latent principles, as a summer's sun would hatch an innocently

looking cluster of eggs into a nest of poisonous asps.

If among the members of an organization, which professes to be of

an exclusively religious character, men should be found who are

unquestionably religious or moral, this fact would no more prove it to

be a religious or moral institution, than would the membership of

the same persons to a railroad or municipal corporation prove such a

corporation to be a religious and not a secular organization. But if

at periods in its history, its most irreproachable and credible members

should denounce it as a political power, and labor to transform it into

a purely religious institution, and for such a "damnable heresy" were

burnt alive, and their ashes thrown into a river to prevent the people

from worshipping them, what would be the legitimate inference from such

facts? Would it not be that it claimed to be a political organization?

that it was high treason in its estimation to question its right to

this character? and that to utter such a question in its domains was

to provoke its heaviest penalty? Did not all these facts occur in Home

respecting Arnold of Brecia? And in Catholic history have not similar

facts, from his time down to the Reformation, been incarnadined in human

blood too deeply for audacity to deny or time to obliterate?

But what is a religious organization? If religion is moral goodness,

a religious organization must be an embodiment of its principles, a

practical exemplification of its maxims, and a scheme in measures and

policy adapted to extend the observance of its obligations. Such an

organization must be consistent with itself, and in harmony with the

natural principles of man. In integrity it must be invulnerable; in

adherence to right inflexible; in hostility to wrong, uncompromising.

It must be the champion of the rights of human nature; the friend of

freedom, equality and liberality; the enemy of bigotry, intolerance,

and despotism. Its claims must be commended by truth; its measures

sanctioned by reason and conscience; its triumphs won by argument

and persuasion. Its hands must be unstained with blood. It must never

perpetrate a fraud, nor descend to intrigue, nor dissemble, nor cherish

malice, nor slander an opponent, nor traffic for self-aggrandizement,

nor prostitute its principles to political objects, nor accommodate

itself to the vices of any age or country. Amid general corruption

it must always be pure, amid bigotry it must always be tolerant, amid

oppression it must always advocate the cause of justice, and amid

ignorance the cause of education.

Such are some of the essential characteristics of a religious or moral

organization. Any departure from them in an institution, proves its

secularism. No church in which they form not a distinguishing feature,

has any claims to be a religious or moral corporation.

Now when we see an institution, professing to be of an exclusively

religious character, organizing its departments upon a financial basis;

enjoining on its members the vow of unconditional obedience, in order to

subject them to its despotic domination; the vow of absolute poverty, in

order to enable them more successfully to administer to the increase of

its wealth; the vow of celibacy, in order to prevent them from having

legitimate heirs, to divert the ecclesiastical possessions from the

church; when we see it establishing schools to select and mould to its

designs the most promising among youth, instituting universities to

enrich itself by the sale of their honors, absolving sins for money,

selling indulgences for the commission of premeditated crime, erecting

missionary stations among Pagans for the purpose of traffic and

emolument, manufacturing evidence, committing forgeries, and corrupting

and interpolating the text of ancient authors, denouncing reason,

crushing liberty, circumscribing knowledge, anathematizing those who

disbelieve in its arbitrary dogmas, torturing those who question its

supreme authority, burning those who oppose its pretensions; having

a national cabinet, ministerial offices, accredited ambassadors,

maintaining a standing army, a naval force, religious military orders

to extend and enlarge its domains, carrying a national banner, wearing

a political crown, declaring war, concluding national covenants, coining

money, and exercising all the rights of an acknowledged independent

monarchy, it is more than credulity can admit, to concede that such

an organization is not a corrupt, cruel, despotic, and political

institution. That such is the constitution of the Catholic Church is a

fact, attested by the existing Papal Government, and by the spirit and

acts of its past history; and that it is now what in the past it has

been, is established by the unanimous testimony of its acknowledged

expounders. Simplicity has been amused by modern Catholic apologists,

who assert that the Papal monarch has resigned his former pretensions

to universal temporal sovereignty, and that he now merley maintains his

right to supreme spiritual authority. But this subterfuge can mislead

only a superficial, ignorant mind. As spiritual sovereignty is absolute

dominion over reason and conscience, it unavoidably involves temporal

sovereignty; nay, temporal sovereignty of the most despotic and

unlimited authority reason and conscience lay at the foundation of

all political power; and if Catholicism is adapted to govern them, it

transcends in despotism the most ingeniously contrived monarchy that

tyranny has ever elaborated, or by which the faculties of man have

ever been enthralled. Spain, Russia, or any other government is less

tyrannical in its constitution than is the Catholic Church. He who would

establish the contrary opinion, must first obliterate the Papal bulls,

the decrees of the Councils, and the authorities of the Catholic Church;

he must go to Rome and convert the present Pope and his college of

Cardinals; nay, he must attend the coming Ecumenical Council and induce

it to annul the canons of all the previous Councils, and to declare

that all the preceding Popes were "damnable heretics," and have them

accordingly excommunicated. These preliminary steps must be taken before

he can avoid absurdity or the imputation of wilful prevarication.

But the Papal See has never resigned its preposterous claim to universal

temporal sovereignty. The bulls and canons asserting this pretension

have never been annulled. They still form the canon law of the Church.

No official declaration has announced an abrogation of them. The

Pope's reiterated and blasphemous claim to infallibility precludes the

possibility of such a sensible act. Infallibility is inconsistent with

change of principle or error of conduct, and when the Church of Rome

arrogates such a divine attribute, she avers that her past history

indicates her present character and future intentions. In this opinion

all her authorities concur. Bishop Kendrick says: "All doctrine of

definitions already made by general Councils and former Pontiffs _are

marks which no man can remove_." (Primacy, p. 356). Brownson says: "What

the Church has done, what she has expressly or tacitly approved in the

past, is exactly what she will do, expressly or tacitly approve, in the

future, if the same circumstances occur." (Review, Jan. 1854). Again:

"The Catholic dogma, in regard to every subject whatever, has always

been the same from the beginning, remains always unchangeably the same,

and will always continue in every part of the world immutable." (Review,

Jan., 1850). Again: "Catholicity, as long as it continues Catholicity,

cannot be carried to excess. It will be all or nothing." (Review, Jan.,

1854). The editors of the _Civilita Cattolica_, the Pope's organ at

Rome, say: "From the darkness of the catacombs she (the Catholic Church)

dictated laws to the subjects of Emperors, abrogating decrees,

whether plebeian, senatorial or imperial, when in conflict with Catholic

ordinances. To-day, as in all time, the Church commands the spiritual

part of man; and, in ruling over the spirit, she rules the body,

rules over riches, over science, over affections, over interests, over

associations--rules, in fine, over monarchs and their ministers." The

Dublin Tablet, Feb. 24,1865, the accredited organ of Romanism in

the British realm, says: "The Pope is at this moment interfering in

Piedmont, defending one class of citizens against the government; and

in the House of Representatives of the United States, a Christian, Mr.

Chandler, in his speech, Jan., 1865), denies the right! Governments may

and do prohibit good works, and the Pope interferes. They also commit

evil, and the Pope interferes; and good Christians (Catholics) _prefer

the Pope's authority to that of the State_. The godless (non-Catholic )

colleges of Ireland, the troubles of Piedmont, all bear witness against

the unchristian opinion." The Paris _Univers_ says: "A heretic examined

and convicted by the Church, used to be delivered over to the secular

authority to be punished with death. Nothing has appeared to us more

necessary. More than 100,000 persons perished in consequence of the

heresy of Wickliffe, and a still greater number for that of John Huss;

and it would be impossible to count the bloodshed caused by Luther, _and

it is not yet over_." De Pratt, formerly an Abbe of the Pope, says: "The

Pope is chief of 150,000,000 of followers. Catholicism cannot have

less than 500,000 ministers. The Pope Commands more subjects than any

sovereign--more than many sovereigns together. These have subjects only

on their own territory, _the Pope commands subjects on the territory of

all sovereigns_" (Flag of the Union.) But the testimony is voluminous,

and I forbear further quotations on this point.

To understand, then, the past history of the Catholic Church, is of

paramount importance to every freeman. What is it? It is the development

of her nature. It is the unfolding of her treason to the world. It

is uncovering the cruelty and despotism concealed under her religious

profession. It is the revelation of her animosity to the rights of

men, to the progress of society, and to the exercise of reason and

conscience. It shows her to be a secret political organization,

skilfully constructed for the acquisition of supreme political power,

and hypocritically disguised under the semblance of religion. If in

her infancy she did not always avow her ambitious designs, she always

secretly cherished them; and, if in her adversity she has moderated her

tone, she has not her natural thirst for secular power. As she grew in

strength, she grew in arrogance and despotism; and when, by a system of

artful intrigues and bold usurpations, she had created a colossal power

that overawed the united monarchies of Christendom, she unsheathed the

double sword, the symbol of ecclesiastical and political power, and

asserted her right, as Vicar of Christ, to rule with or in preference

to Princes, invaded the rights and liberties of independent nations,

crowned and uncrowned monarchs, destroyed freedom everywhere,

anathematized, shackled, tortured and burnt all who opposed her

monarchical pretensions. Her triumphal processions have been the most

magnificent when her hands were the bloodiest, and her _Te Deum_ was

chaunted with the most fervor when the smoke of her stakes ascended in

the thickest volumes, and the gore shed by the double sword streamed in

the broadest and deepest currents.

When Time, the avenger, hurled her from her despotic throne, she

supplicated, because she could not command, and moderated her

pretensions, because she dare not assert them. But if she presumes not

now to tear the crown from the head of the mighty, who would annihilate

her for her audacious attempt; if she does not now absolve subjects from

allegiance to their governments, whose artillery, to avenge the insult

would be marshalled against her; if she does not now attempt to burn at

the stake those who reject her absurdities, and who would burn her for

an attempt--the reason of the extraordinary change in her infallible

holiness is palpable. It is not because she has discarded the doctrines

consecrated by so many bulls, battles and treaties, but because she

cannot carry them out without peril to her existence. But let Brownson,

whom Pope Pius IX., in a letter dated April 29, 1854, blessed with an

apostolic benediction for services rendered, solve this point. He

says: "_The Church, who possesses an admirable gift of discretion_, has

prudently judged that she would not declare all things explicitly from

the beginning, but at a given time, and in suitable circumstances,

would bring into light something which was hitherto in concealment, and

_covered with a certain obscurity_." (Review, January, 1854).

Monks, Popes, and their Political Intrigues · 第 1 / 16 章