EIPS WCF CD-ROM
 
Menu Items
Start Page · Search
Rome In the News
Answers (Q&A)
Audio Sermons
Photo Gallery
Our Guestbook
Articles
Errors of Rome
Caustic Comments
History Lessons
Rome & Politics
Contemporary
Sword (Bible)
How To Witness
EIPS Lectures
Other Interest



Monday, June 26, 2017
Date Posted:
1/18/2000

Contents
Rome and WCC
Pope Ratzinger
Paisley Given Freedom
My Farewell To Europe
Europe Constitution 5
Europe Constitution 4
Europe Constitution 3
Europe Constitution 2
Europe Constitution 1
A White Flag?
Surrender Birthright?
Clamour for Referendum
Paisley Slams 'Deceit'
Making Void God's Law
Be the Soul of Europe
Hitler’s Pope Pius XII
Dare Call It Treason
DUP In Europe
Law Threatened by EU
'October Revolution’
Political Claims
European Union - IV
European Union - III
European Union - II
Vacant Seat 666
European Union - I
EU and Ecumenism - II
EU and Ecumenism - I
The Task Before Us
Rome's Crimes
Of Bonfires
EU Conspiracy
Intrigue and Expansion
USA Debt To Ulster
Mentality of Deceit
Eames
Vatican Cover-Up
Ignominy At Ten


The Political Claims and Social Aspirations of the Papacy


With explanatory notes and footnotes by Professor Arthur Noble
Rev. Canon O'Connor

[The following is an address delivered at the fifth National Protestant Congress held in Edinburgh between October 15 and 18, 1894. A century later it still provides such a valid, precise and accurate description of the unchanged strategy being pursued by the Church of Rome that we reproduce it here in full. Whether a century or a millennium passes, the same Scarlet Whore continues to lurk and plot behind the different mask that she presents to each succeeding generation. – The latter part of the address is of particular significance to the present intrigue by the Church of Rome in Scotland aimed at the destruction of the Coronation Oath and the Declaration against Popery. It is a poignant and most eloquent call for recognition of the Biblical basis of real Scottish patriotism, which is not inimical to England, but to Rome. We commend this address to all Scots who love their country. – The National Protestant Congress was organised in 1890 under the motto: "Stand fast in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the Gospel"; its watchword was: "The Bible, the whole Bible, and nothing but the Bible." – In opening the Congress, the Acting Secretary, Rev. William Paterson, commented that on the platform "no one can tell who is Episcopalian, or Presbyterian, or Congregationalist", and added: "If the Pope should choose to turn his eyes to us he will see that amid outward diversities, in spirit we are all one. (…) We here furnish the proof that as Protestants against the heresies of Rome WE ARE ONE." If only he could have foreseen the tragedy that would be brought about a century later by the dupes and theological simpletons of ecumenism who have renounced their solemn vows to uphold the principles of the Reformation, betrayed the Gospel and their congregations, and thrown themselves consciously and willingly into the arms of the Mother of Harlots in order once again to embrace her false dogmas and her worldly aims. – I have not altered the original text, but I have divided it into sections and added suitable headings for ease of overview, as well as adding a number of explanatory footnotes. – A. Noble.]

Changing methods in pursuing unchanged blasphemous aims

[…] I heartily endorse the statement that our hostility is to a system, not to its votaries; that our grand justification for special hostility to the Papacy lies in the fact that she alone sets herself up, not only as a rival Church, but also as a rival Government. Nor, on this score, is there a Roman Catholic country but has had to protest, often with arms in hand, against her arrogant usurpations in State as well as in Church. England herself as a Roman Catholic power frequently assumed such attitude, notably in the days of Edward III [1]. Since then much has changed, even with the Church of Rome; but, through all, her boast "semper eadem" remains true of her. "Another Pope, but the same Papacy," said Döllinger [2] on Leo XIII's [3] accession. Her power has been and is being reduced, yet to-day she occupies in some respects a position of vantage such as she could not boast of through all the preceding centuries.

We Protestants are too apt to see in the decree of 1870 [4] only the latest of a long roll of blasphemous assumptions certain to call down God's vengeance on an accursed system, and to remember that in that same year the last of the Pope's temporal possessions were wrested from him, but to overlook the fact that there is another side to this question also. The long, internal struggle between Pope and Council for the prize of infallibility, and so of supremacy, is at an end. All the world over, Councils and Synods, bishops and priests, wait on an serve but one voice as being the voice of God. Even the Gallican liberties [5] are a thing of the past. National Churches can never more be heard of. The harlot that pretends to be the bride has at last set fairly on her usurped crown the latest of her counterfeit jewels, and poses before the world with much show of justice as the city that is at unity with itself. Everywhere floats high the banner of a rigid ultramontanism; which means that the Pope is the world's supreme and infallible ruler, and canon law the world's supreme and infallible code, and that all duty consists in perfect obedience to these two.

Thus it comes that though in 1870 her last shreds of direct temporal dominion were rent from her, yet since 1870 the Church of Rome possesses a oneness of nature, a compactness of organisation, a unity of policy, a power of prompt and simultaneous action which were not hers in the proudest days of her Innocents and Gregorys and Benedicts. (That her temporal power did not vanish in 1870 with her hold on a few impoverished acres of Italian soil [6] is plain from the fact that not a Cabinet in Christendom dares to-day to overlook her possible attitude in respect of any question its members come together to decide. Take your own Imperial Parliament – that of Protestant Britain, remember. Need you be told how directly those eighty Catholic votes influence the utterances of our leading politicians on both front benches?) Towards this grand consummation Rome has been tending and striving since her grievous wounds of the sixteenth century, since the French Revolution more especially. Thus, from some standpoints, we confront another Rome to-day than that our fathers confronted; for, whilst her aims remain ever the same, her methods change with the changing times. The Protestantism she assails – its principles are also immutable; but its methods of defence, if the defenders are wise, will vary with the varying attack. Rome's two grand claims of mediaeval ages meet us everywhere to-day in the spheres of religion and politics. Our answer must be the same given 300 years ago by the Reformers in every land: (1) No Pope between subject and Sovereign; and (2) No priest between the conscience and Christ.

No Pope between Subject and Sovereign:

Unchanging political claims…

My special business tonight is with the first of these. And first let us glance at the claim (temporal power) that does not change. And what does this amount to? For answer you must refer to canon law, in which you find it absolutely set forth that the Pope's spiritual authority governs all temporal matters which concern duty. But duty comes into every affair of human life. And the conclusion is not left to implication at all – e.g., "The Bishop of Rome may excommunicate emperors and princes, depose them from their State, and assoil their subjects from their oath of allegiance to them." The truth of Mr. Gladstone's [7] sum-up cannot be questioned: "That the claims asserted by the Papacy are such as to place civil allegiance at his mercy; that the unhappy man who delivers his obedience to the potentate of the Vatican has no allegiance to offer the monarch of Great Britain." If this be true, canon law is not a thing of the dark ages, but of to-day; and in any case the doctrine of infallibility for ever fixes it as part and parcel of the Papal system. Besides, as lately as 1864, Pius IX re-published a compend ex cathedra of canon law, respecting which the present Pope [8] has said: "There they (the faithful) will find a rule for the direction of their mind and works." But, some one asks, How does all this apply to Protestant Britain? I ask back, Has not Cardinal Manning [9] told you something about an ambition to subjugate an imperial race? In 1851, when the Papal rescript established the Roman hierarchy in England, did not Cardinal Wiseman [10] declare such a step necessary "to give effect to the canon law in this country"? And still yearly the Pope anathematises all heretics, sovereigns included, just as surely as he excommunicated Elizabeth 300 years ago! A very little consideration will tell us what this means for sincere Roman Catholic subjects as regards their duty to such anathematised princes and governments!

… but changing "operations" in furthering them

So much for the unchanging political claims; and now for a brief glance at the changing "operations" in furtherance thereof. To-day Rome cannot push her demands by means of the sword, the dungeon and the stake, by Inquisition or massacre. Other times, other methods. A great French writer has remarked that in order to create a revolution you must first find a telling phrase, and then work it well. Such a cry in our modern history has been "Religious equality!" [11] Cabinet after Cabinet has conjured with it, but somehow the spell has not worked. Some immediate purpose, such as retention of office, may have been effected, but Roman Catholic countries, and peoples, and provinces, and towns, remain still, as ever, behind Protestant; for, as understood by agitators and politicians, the cry is a false one. Religious equality! They have begun at the wrong end: they should try to make the religious equal first. But this is what they cannot do, and this is why they fail, must fail. You cannot make Protestantism and Romanism equal, no matter how you try. You cannot abolish Protestant ascendancy, no matter what laws you pass – its ascendancy in virtue, in enterprise, in progress and prosperity, which are ever found everywhere Protestantism makes her home.

But, surely (the objection is made), it is not religious equality to have certain high offices of State shut away from certain subjects of the realm because solely of their religion? No; it is because the Romanism they profess is not only a rival creed, but a rival government; because, as Mr. Gladstone proves, a loyal subject of the Pope cannot be a loyal subject of the Queen. What body of shareholders would elect on their directorate men who, while having an interest in their concern, have yet larger, immeasurably larger, investments in a rival and hostile firm? So, we admit Roman Catholics fully as shareholders in all the rights and privileges to which they were born as British citizens, but so long as they have larger investments – body and soul – in that rival establishment which for centuries has been our bitterest and persistent foe (so that, as Mr. Gladstone says, if they are honest investors in that firm "their civil loyalty is at the mercy of another", and "they have no allegiance for the monarch of Britain"), so long must we deny their just claim to place on the directorate of that Imperial concern in which all our interests are bound up.

Warnings sounded by Great Men

This doctrine is not peculiar to us who might plausibly be decried as mere bigoted partisans, Protestant zealots. I have here, ready to hand, quotation after quotation from such writers as Hume [12], Locke [13], Blackstone [14], Lord Bacon [15], Adam Smith [16], Robertson [17], and others who view this question as jurists, philosophers, historians; all maintaining that subjects of the Pope should be excluded from the Government of our country on the grounds that the Church of Rome is a policy as much as a religion. Adam Smith says: "[The Church of Rome is] the most formidable combination that ever was formed against the authority and security of civil government, as well as against the liberty, reason, and happiness of mankind." Another change in Rome's methods is suggested by the fact that, as Dr. Wylie [18] puts it, "she allies herself no longer exclusively with governments, but identifies herself with the masses. She is a nihilist in Russia, a Slavist in Austria, a Fenian in Ireland." Said Abraham Lincoln: "The true motive power (of America's troubles) is secreted behind the thick walls of the Vatican, the colleges and schools of the Jesuits, the convents of the nuns, and the confessional boxes of Rome." [19] Bismarck [20] quoted to the German Parliament, 5th December, 1874, the Papal Nuncio's words to the Minister of Wurtemburg [sic, for Württemberg]: "The Roman Church has to look to revolution as the sole means of securing her rightful [!] position."

The weapons of 'education' and 'charity'

Two of Rome's chief weapons to-day are also 'education' and 'charity' in the hands of her monastic and conventual institutions; but time forbids my more than glancing at this part of my subject. I can only suggest that it may well not be considered bigotry on our part if we question Rome's motives in pushing the people's education today wherever such education would go on, on other lines, without her, when we remember that during the long centuries of her mediaeval supremacy the village school was an institution unknown, and when we look at the fearful ignorance in which every country lies, as witness Spain, that remains under her control, even in this nineteenth century. So, also, as regards her works of benevolence, when we have the founder even of the St. Vincent de Paul Society itself speaking thus: "Our chief object is to keep them steadfast in the Catholic faith, and to propagate it amongst others by means of charities." (Works of Ozonoam, Vol. VIII, p. 43.) So, also, in respect of lesser "operations" in connection with social functions of various kinds. "From one learn all." Of Cardinal Manning his fellow-pervert, Orbey Shipley, has declared that in public and private he was always working to "resubjugate England". "To the same end, again, the Cardinal was accustomed to use private social calls and claims, and semi-public duties and engagements of daily life on behalf of our Mother Church in England."

The Ruin wreaked by Rome

Ladies and Gentlemen, my time closes. I wish just one glance at the results of Rome's operations, unfailing and universal, wherever they have succeeded, and in proportion to their success. First look back, and then look round. Look back on no less a field than the wide Europe herself during the long, long centuries of Rome's unchallenged domination, and everywhere peoples and princes crouched helpless at her feet. What was Christendom's presentment in those mediaeval times? The answer is found in the very name by which those centuries are universally spoken of to-day – The Dark Ages! Here, I need not go into detail. Rome, the ages of thy mastery in Christendom are pre-eminently the Dark Ages of History, so recognised by all, even thine own most devoted votaries! It is an indictment of but one count, yet, what does it not include! "There!" says some one, "You are back to the Middle Ages again, and we are in the nineteenth century!" But I find no cabalistic charm, no magic spell, in that phrase, "The nineteenth century", or "Twentieth" either. I say that even in this last decade of the nineteenth century in proportion as any country you travel through is governed by subjects of the Pope, in that proportion you find yourself back in the ages of darkness again.

Now, let us look around. It is a common saying that every rule has an exception; but I'll give you a rule that has no exception; it is this: In proportion as any country in Christendom is under Papal domination and influence, in that proportion such country lags in the rear of human progress: in proportion as any country in Christendom has cast off the Papal yoke and surrendered itself to Protestant guidance and supremacy, in that proportion does such country take a forward place in the van of humanity's march. No exception, no exception whatever, to this rule! Look at England and Spain, Scotland and Italy, Ulster and Connaught, Belfast and Limerick!  Even from the standpoint of material progress alone, is not this thing called Protestantism worth maintaining and extending in the world? It is with such end in view that our National Protestant Congresses are yearly held. What is to come of this Congress in particular? Addressing in your famous capital an assembly such as this, great numerically, no doubt, but greater still in its representative character – representative of all that is noble and excellent, socially and intellectually, morally and religiously, in your Scottish nation; remembering, too, the compactness of your people at home, and your wide-reaching influence everywhere abroad – no place in which a Scot may not be found; no country, my own included, not the better for his coming.

An Appeal to the Scottish Nation

I ask myself the question, and beg you to consider it as you return to your homes, far and near: How would it not be for the world's benefit and advance were every child of the Scottish Reformation a witness at home and a missionary abroad of that Protestantism which came to you originally as a Spiritual possession; not, as to England, a prize of State; and which has been the source of all your blessing ever since? For, what were you, even you, before the open Bible came to Scotland? And you owe it as a debt of thankfulness for the past, as a duty to yourselves in the present, as a service to the world's fortunes in the future, that it should be so. "If but one angel spoke" – not "from Ararat", but from one of your own towering summits to-night, and offered me the indicting of his message to your people, what would the message be? Well, I think I should like to hear blown from that herald's lips the summons that I would fain give you to bear with you from this place to all parts of your native land, as you return home, bidding SCOTLAND, AWAKE!

By the untold benefits, by the priceless blessings, material and moral, intellectual and spiritual, Albyn's sons and daughters for so many generations owe to the genius of Protestantism – Scotland, awake! By the most sacred sorrows, by the most glorious triumphs in all the thrilling records of your patriotic story; by such names and memories as those of Patrick Hamilton [21], Wishart [22], James Renwick [23], and all that gallant host of holy souls, your race's contribution in the past to that "Noble Army", which of all the ransomed ones stands nearest to the Throne: by the unbending spirit, by the unswerving integrity, by the majestic manhood of your grandest of Scots – John Knox [24] – Scotland, awake! By the oath and the vow for Christ's crown and covenant sworn by your fathers above the ashes of their sires in Greyfriars Churchyard [25] – Scotland, awake!

And you, Scottish women, with Scottish babies at your breasts and Scottish bairns playing and praying at your knees, as you teach those infant voices to lisp the Sacred Name and spell the Sacred Page, and as you tell them their Redeemer's story from His cradle to His cross, see that you also tell them how, treading Scotland's soil, and breathing Scotland's air, and eating Scotland's bread, men and women, and boys and girls have lived, so filled with His Spirit, and so animated by His example, that, for love of God and man, they too were content to have no place to lay their head, and loved not their lives even unto death. And this also tell your children, that the Popery, whose records of those days is so ghastly and so cruel, still survives – the same, and not another; that the tiger, so to speak, which would to-day entice them to admire the vari-coloured beauty of its skin, the gracefulness of its steps, its shapely frame, even to stroke the velvet softness of its paw, is the same ravenous beast whose tooth and claw, in the days of its unrestraint, dragged strong men to awful doom in its dungeon-lair, and within whose dripping jaws were crunched the delicate frames of women loving as yourselves, and children lovable as your own. And tell them, furthermore, that of all the many proofs the world's later history affords, Scotland's story of the last 200 years is the crowning token – the witness absolute and indisputable – that the Protestantism then purchased for Scotland, and for humanity, with so great price, is, after all, but another name for Christianity itself – for that Godliness which hath promise of the life that now is, as well as of that which is to come.


[1] 1327-1377

[2] German historical scholar, prominent Roman Catholic theologian who refused to accept the doctrine of Papal infallibility.

[3] Pope Leo XIII, 1878-1903.

[4] This was the decree that declared the Pope "infallible".

[5] A complex of French ecclesiastical and political doctrines and practices advocating restriction of Papal power; it characterised the life of the Roman Catholic Church in France at certain periods. Gallicanism consisted of three basic ideas: independence of the French King in the temporal order; superiority of an ecumenical council over the Pope; and union of clergy and King to limit the intervention of the Pope within the Kingdom.

[6] i.e. the Vatican City

[7] British Prime Minister 1868-74, 1880-85, 1886, 1892-94.

[8] Leo XIII

[9] Associated with the Oxford Movement; ordained priest in the Church of England in 1833; defected to the Roman Catholic Church in 1851; became Archbishop of Westminster in 1865 and Cardinal in 1875. A vigorous builder of Roman Catholic schools, he was an extreme Ultramontanist, i.e. a strong believer in Papal authority and in centralisation of the Church.

[10] First Cardinal resident in England since the Reformation and first Roman Catholic Archbishop of Westminster; one of the chief architects of the 19th-century revival of Roman Catholicism in England.

[11] cf., at present, the Roman Catholic Nationalist parties' bogus "equality agenda" in Northern Ireland. Semper eadem!

[12] David Hume, 1711-1776, Scottish empiricist philosopher, economist and historian.

[13] John Locke, 1632-1704, English empiricist philosopher.

[14] Sir William Blackstone, 1723-1780, English jurist, noted particularly for his Commentaries on the Laws of England, which had a profound influence on jurisprudence in the U.S.A.

[15] Francis Bacon, 1561-1626, English philosopher, statesman and essayist; described the inductive method of reasoning.

[16] Adam Smith, 1723-1790, Scottish economist and philosopher, whose influential book The Wealth of Nations (1776) advocated free trade and private enterprise and opposed state interference.

[17] William Robertson, 1721-1793, Scottish historian and Presbyterian minister; regarded, with David Hume and Edward Gibbon, as one of the most important British historians of the 18th century; his major works include The History of Scotland during the Reigns of Queen Mary and of King James VI (1759).

[18] Rev. Dr. J.A. Wylie, author of well-known books including The History of Protestantism, and Jesuitism: Its Rise, Progress and Insidious Workings [London, no date].

[19] Abraham Lincoln, 16th U.S. President (1861-1865), murdered by the Jesuits.

[20] Prince Otto von Bismarck, 1815-1898, called the Iron Chancellor, Prime Minister of Prussia 1862-1890, united Germany and became first Chancellor of the German Reich in 1871. During the Kulturkampf Bismarck supported the churchmen led by Döllinger who refused to accept the dogma of Papal infallibility. The May Laws of 1873 restricted the disciplinary powers of the Roman Catholic Church and placed the education of the clergy under state supervision.

[21] Patrick Hamilton, Scotland's first Reformation martyr, burned at the stake by Archbishop Beaton in 1528.

[22] George Wishart, 1513-1546, an early martyr of the Reformation in Scotland who strongly influenced John Knox; tried for 'heresy' and then burned at the stake at St. Andrews.

[23] James Renwick, 1662-1688, last of the prominent Covenanter martyrs of Scotland, was largely responsible for the Apologetical Declaration of 1684, by which he and his followers disowned the authority of Charles II; hanged by the Papists.

[24] The great Reformer John Knox, 1514(?)-1572, dragged Scotland from Romish gloom and superstition into the enlightenment of the Reformation; Mary Queen of Scots declared that she feared his prayers more than a regiment of soldiers! In the year 2000 Rome (semper eadem!) is still plotting to return Scotland to the Dark Ages by attacking the Protestant Constitution of the United Kingdom: it should be remembered that the Scottish Act of Security was embodied in the Treaty of Union of England and Scotland in 1707 as "a fundamental and essential condition" of it; it establishes and confirms "the said true Protestant religion, which is to continue without any alteration to the people of this land in all succeeding generations".

[25] Greyfriars Churchyard in Edinburgh, where the solemn agreement called the National Covenant was inaugurated by Scottish churchmen on February 28, 1638. It rejected the attempt by King Charles I and William Laud, Archbishop of Canterbury, to force the Scottish Church to conform to English liturgical practice and Church governance. The National Covenant was composed of the King's Confession (1581), additional statements by Alexander Henderson (a leader in the Church of Scotland), and an oath. The Covenant reaffirmed Reformed faith and Presbyterian discipline and denounced the attempted changes, but it also urged loyalty to the King. It was signed by many Scotsmen.

Back to Top

http://www.ianpaisley.org
Email: eips_info@yahoo.co.uk
Return to EIPS Main Menu


Menu Items
- Start Page · Search - Rome In the News - Answers (Q&A) - Audio Sermons - Photo Gallery - Our Guestbook 
- Errors of Rome - Caustic Comments - History Lessons - Rome & Politics - Contemporary - Sword (Bible) 
- How To Witness - EIPS Lectures 
Site best viewed with Microsoft Internet Explorer 5.0 in 800x600 resolution.
© 1999 Ian Paisley. All rights reserved.