Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The American. (Omaha, Nebraska) 1891-1899 | View Entire Issue (March 31, 1893)
AMERICAN I SHIM llMft. Voi.tMft HI, OMAHA, NKtlKAHKA, KlillUY, MAI; II 31, ivvl. THE FOR THE EDIFICATION Of ht ml! rrifi of Si Pr. mhkt FpUcer-al Church. Ar lHt ftm Historical faclt L'l tMor h Reading Public t Thu Timt mul in This VYar, Kv. Williams' comments on our article of IVb. 24th, appear on the second mgi i thin litie. It 1 fimply dchif o i f word. It contain not, a M'intilla of evidence, not a verified fact in oiMilion to what wo advocate. It Is filled with assertions, denials and charges, Mich ax any school Imy could jumble together, Incapable of nif. notoriously untrue, and absolutely mi loading. Denuded of all its sophistry I lev. Williams' article stands forth as the most amusing screed which ever onn tinted in a so-called Protestant brain. It certainly was not written in what we term calm and sober moments hut when his Catholic blood was at fever heat. But, before we go into a discussion of Rev. Williams' article wo desire to call the readers' attention to one prom inent thing in his little tut per. In the first column, on the first page, in what printers term the staff, set in nonpareil type, it is solemnly affirmed that the "Messenger is a parish paper with a Catholic purpose." We suggest that he change that line and make it read "The Messenger is a parish paper with a Roman Catholic purpose. " After reading his article wh ;h appears on the second page all will agree that the suggestion is timely. In the third paragraph of his effusion Rev. Williams' says: "THE Ameiji CAN politely but firmly declares of us that we are "a Jesuit in the garb of a Protestant minister." Rev. Williams was not mistaken when he penned those words ho simply, deliberately, stated an untruth. But that seems to be his strong point in writing. In a former issue of his paper he put words in our mouth that were never there, and shows ' the animus which ' prompted their use by saying in the last issue that it is "truo The American tries to crawfish." No man has yet seen an item in these columns that justifies Rev. Williams or any other man in the assertion that we "tried to crawfish." Ve understand the English language and a man, "though a fool," can under stand what we write. If wo make a mistake we correct it, believing a man can afford to treat his opponents with courtesy and fairness. And that is what Rev. Williams will get when we deal with him whether he accords us the same treatment or not. We do not object to Rov. Williams wearing any shoo that fits him, but ho must not say, in the hope of creating sympathy for his cause, that we have said something which we have not. lie must be honest. In the fourth paragraph ho says "For whatever sins may bo laid at the door of the Jesuits, no one can justly charge them with moral cowardice, or with the infamy of warring upon wo men, as is the case with those "Ameri can patriots" who are represented by such sheets as The American." What holy men they are who rob a destitute widow of her last dollar through the plea that the soul of her dear departed la suffering the torments of the damned in purgatory! What honest men who ' will forge correspondence between parent and child in order that the latter may bo Induced to sign away his In heritance for the benefit of the church! (llaffulle Ciocci Narrative pages 39 to 41.) What truthful men who will tell an untruth and confirm it with nn oath! (Father Garnet connected with the Gun powder Plot in England.) It is these beasts who believe "faith is not to bo kept with heretics," except in cases of "ecclesiastical utility;" who believe the Machiavellian policy "the end justifies the means," who believe the highest notch in christian perfection is attained when they become in the hands of their superior aB the "clay in the hands of the potter, as a corpse, or as a rod in the hands of an enfeebled, old man," (page 3030 of the Encyclo paedia Brltannica,) or when they subju gate independence and take pride in learning to OBEY. It is these crea tures, these slimy, crawling, creeping things, who teach that you must do wrong if your superior declares it right, (page 3030 of Encyclopaedia Brit annic;) for "ecclesiastical utility," whom Father Williams would choose for associates in preference to members of patriotic organizations. It is these men, whoso chief justifies the commis sion of any or every crime for the fur therance of Jesuit schemes, whom Rev. Williams would choose for companions In preference to an A. P. A. And it is ,.f It,..- it. t;tn It.. tti-.l IW tnf, Hit r'' l Ji 1.1 t'l I mj ',(1 y I.ie.n5," tiini j t tv t. t iit v lv'timi i'V, twthr t.ntii;n r rvitiiu', u niteMi ! te it Pnttint ami join any "ii t.ot.ti t ihnr h, fur thi Mike of acting mrv ffi'tnilv to itmb-rmine I rnlMtUm mil) le t l. ml hf power of the pa-y TheC l the 1I gtinittd to U-lU'Vf O.nt thu liiw !' done in the KnglUb. Pro- t.-stjint i liuivh on gnut ncale." It i thin cl whom Knitter Witiinmn would nuft In common ground, to nnh o commend. In the next loumJrMph he mvi "our itiifitlon if Mmi'lv Unit of clitlMiati iimiihtiod:" My tihl! Whither hrn chrUtiiuiiiy drifted? What plane liao mmihood reached? When a man w ho claim to U a Protectant Divine tua liens, cetmures and condcmnti a vant army of christian men ministers and laymen in order to cool his indignant Roman Cuthollc Hood? Surely these are those latter days when the man of sin stands revealed and the end of time haM come. He contin.'s: For every purMse of this delmto wo stand simply as a man and as a christian, utterly laying asid for the time every contention that may exist between Canterbury and Rome, just as wo would lay aside every con tention that might exist between Can' terbury and Geneva, if it were the Presbyterian church that was attacked by such anti-chrintian defamation as that with which The American as sails Roman Catholics week after week." Show your readers one case where we have defamed Roman Catho lics and we will apologize to them You term this a debate," then cite your authorities, produce your defamu tion; let us not deifr in assertions- but facts. ' ' , V ' . Nothing is to be gained by general denials, by indiscriminate charges or inuendoes. " This age is filled with reading, think ing, men and women, capable of judg ing between the merits and demerits of what we may write, and as they are our audience let us be candid." 'When and in what way have we defamed - Roman Catholics? .I'm But it is the next sentence where the Roman Catholic blood crops out in Rev. Williams' article. In it we find a posi tive renunciation of not only the claims of his own church but of every other Protestant church so far as it and they claim to bo truo churches of God. Hear him: "Wo are not in position to speak for the Roman Catholic church as an ecclesiastical organization whoso dom inating head sits enthroned at Rome, supreme by Divine riijht, orcr all chris tian and over all earthly powers." The next paragraph contains nothing deserving of notice being composed of thirteen lines of senseless drivel. But in the one that'follows it he reiterates his groundless charge that The Amer ican wnges an unmanly warfare on christian womanhood. Slate an in stance. Give us the date, volume and number of the paper in which the warfare occurs. This assertion ho follows with another equally as groundless and even more foolish. He says he stands "as a chris tian to denounce its infidel attack on principles that are common both to Catholic and Protestant Christianity." If Rev. Williams tells the truth and we presume he does since he has only twice, in as many months, credited us with saying things wo never uttered one of the best little mothers who ever raised a boy and taught him to honor, love and revere God and His Word must have felt greatly mortified when she saw it in our paper. And yet, Father Williams niiwtf bo in error. It has been less than two weeks since a leading Infidel was in our office, com plaining that there was too much God in it that thero was not a line in favor of Free Thinkers. Father Williams says "if Roman Catholics are plotting, 10,000,000 of them to destroy the civil and religious liberty of the other 00,000,000 of us, that should be susceptible of proof." It is susceptible of proof. But what will Father Williams accept as proof? Will he accept the late display of armed Hibernians on our streets on St. Patrick's day? Will he accept the fact that 500 Hibernians have lately been admitted to the state militia of Illinois, after drilling illegally with arras for nearly seventeen years? Will ho ac cept the declaration sent out from Rome loss than two years ago with the consent of the prisoner of the Vatican that the pope had set aside $5,700,000 for exceptional purposes, such as war, winch was puoiisuea in the Omaha Daily lice of Sunday, May 24, 1891. If he will not accept that what will he accept? Rov. Williams speaks of "landlord- cursed Ireland." We move to amend, by striking out "landlord-cursed" and inserting in lieu thereof 'priest-ridden." H, !r -'.! ti t lit') Oil Oit:ii lin n tilrmi' iwil bli ttiitn .!, t, ml !. 11 l l.tn.i 'l t.otfu '.A . ! . 1 HiH raitti'Mi tin' rs'iiit me ii t tin 111! of null tiH., We ivlaj mi!r !h liupivt,n Hint Mary Hur ruilt, Sjwr-iiUr, Atvrii, Homl.1 m.I 1'itvtie -iv It Wil mul cuti.ti'inmil to di-Mth. hU" IjMtgtilin wni lit. iunl Ui liupriiMioiii lit for lif at ln"d ln!r by a lawfully com.iitut-d eouil tnartUl. And thin U umvptlhln ui pennf. We Itavo iMinirliow pit il Intomirlnnd that the wm treatment wan aiwrdiMl to Guitau an to HiiithU i t a!., but accord lujf to 11, v. William, n nuixt W Itopo lcsly Ignorant of American lilMory. Hut, Mich Is our worthy opponent's argument. So subtle, mt convincing and at times no oarcaM ic. "Hut Roman Catholic arc aiming to bring America Into spiritual subjuga tion to the bixhop of Rome!" ho con tinues. That does not concern the A. P. A. or the Orangemen. They care not how, when or whero a man wor ships God. So far as they are con cerned thero w ill 1h no object ion raised to spiritual Rome. There will Iw ob jections raised however to political Rome and that is what we arc bound together to defeat. No man who be lieves the pope of Rome can absolve him from his oath of allegiance to this country ith'ould lie invested with citi zenship much less bo qualified to hold office. Probably you will say that the church does not teach that pernicious doctrine, and if you do wo can get the proofs to back up our chargo that that is a tenet of the Roman Catholic church. (Soe page 3"2, vol. Tll, Jiyiwr't Ardent. ) v. After considerable gush about the Jesuits, and a few concealed flings at the Orangemen, ho says if Bishop Seannell will permit, ho will stand in the place (probably meaning his place) and answer The American's question He takes up the first one, "does not the Roman Catholic church hold that all persons married outside tho iniliionco of said church those married by min isters of other denominations and by civil olllcerV are not legally married?" IlQ,answefs-.poHlHly no, and follows it "with' a" wWV-cto.,' attempting to justify One wrong by another. We say that is a doctrine of the infallible church. It was declared by Pius VII. in 1808, (Quarterly Register, Vol. III.', page 8!), quoted by Rev. J. G. White on page 13 of his tract "Facts for tho People") and reaffirmed by Pius IX. in 1855, Vatican Documents No. 51, in his allocution as to the government of Sardinia. To the second question, "Does it not hold that tho wives of all men so mar ried are concubines and their children "illigitimates?" he also says "no," nnd goes on with his attempt to justify one wrong by another. Wo answer, tho Roman Catholic church dors teach that very thing, and refer you to tho above mentioned allocution of Pius IX. He asks that the question "Do you not believe and tench that tho pope has power to absolve from all sins, and from oaths of allegiance?" bo divided, and makes answer as follows: When penitence intervenes between tho sinner and his sin the Roman church teaches that tho jmijhj can ab solve from all sins. Otherwise God Himself cannot absolve from sin, for it would be contrary to Ills justice and nature to do it. lie follows this with a declaration aH to what tho "ministerial attache of The American would do in similar cases, about which ho Is about as com petent a judge as ho Is a defender of the papacy. To tho second section of tho sentence ho says: "Ah to absolving subjects from their allegleneo, tho power to do that used to bo asserted by tho Kpo8." We will call to mind inconnectlon with this admission, without quoting his justification of ono wrong by tho cita tion of another, by saying that the Roman Catholic church is unchange able; that "what tho church has done, what she has expressly or tacitly ap proved in tho past that is exactly what she will do, expressly or tacitly approve in the future, If the same cir cumstances occur." (Orestes A. Brown son in his Roman Catholic Quarterly Iteview.) Brownson was tho foremost Catholic writer in this country and his words should re-echo through the Plicart of every true patriot, and put to shame such Protestttnt defenders of tho papacy as Rov. John Williams of St. Barnabas Episcopal church of this city. And that expression by Brownson is not so old, but what Rev. John Wil liams could have read it the day it was Issued had he been fortunate enough to have secured a copy of the Ikview. And, if we must admit it, we believe Brownson is a better authority on Roman dogma than Rev. John Wil liams can ever hojie to bo--as ho had the endorsement of the American papal bishops in 1854, and published, accord ing to his own words, only such articles as they approved. I; I 'ilKantk, (.11. mi!Ui all v.til Oi liivlc nyn And ft ! llh ltitftti lliolt . Harn lite )'tl i't'j.u ii I'M AMlHti N ltl, ) tlol In !(.' ttit a t ttie i nt limn,!. ct i n- aiv.n fSHil,! m i niftln tin m tt u r nirn'iiM aUiinttcv .i t,o,in Mif i. Mit mi n.nnl.m to iiduii fn-n tlnir in champion' Tito lrlh ! lojul lo thi ir ow n oxer Ut? TmtUn to tin ir qvinh I Yt ifinU! What iicut fluty ei-t II It l humlliitling to lime tin Oinnonmti i(h-toti their loyally, how cnifltlng then tlui IkMimny n( mii h n chtimcterl a lion by a mtiiHi a champion. If you iea4. To the ipimtttoti, "ii you not lu'lleve and leach that all w ho die without em bracing that religion are damned, and that the all go to hell?" he fay a "no" with another justification. Wo any "Yen" Ui that question, and you can find tho evidence In "Familiar Kxplatm tioim of Catholic Doctrine," n Romitn (.Ntholic work edited by Rov. M. Mul Icr, printed by Hen.lger Bros, in JHMS, liearlng the imprimatur of Cardinal Gtblxins and strongly endorsed by many Roman prelates. Your attention is also called to the following, taken from "Familiar Explanations of Christian Doctrine," Lesson xli: Question. Sineo tho Roman Catho lic church alono is the true church of Jesus can anyone who dies outsldo of the church bo saved? Answer Re cannot. Question. What do tho fathers of the church say about tho salvation of those who die out of tho Roman Catho lic church? Answer They all, without excep tion, pronounce them infallibly lost for ever. "Is It not a fact that your church is seeking to destroy tho efficiency of tho public schools?" Is the next question which Father Williams answers in "his own way." Just what he intends to say is not quite clear, lie may mean to convey tho Idea tha t tlioy arc not making such an attempt, or ho may mean to admit that they are. True it is, he says, after getting his second wind, that Roman Catholics are asking for a division of tho school fund. Ho Bio declares that they violate no law in making this request, and asks If it Is wrong to levy a tax for tho support of religion, why is it any less a wrong to levy a tax to support a system of education that is confessedly opposed to tho interests of their religion? The premises from which Rev. Williams argues in this instance aro manifestly absurd, and wholly wrong. He mis understands why Rome opposes tho public schools. It Is not because tho spiritual end of the corporation will Buffer for whatever of good thero is in it that cannot bo hurt by tho most im partial or indiscriminate study. Tho objection is made because political Rome will suffer. It Is political Romo not religious Rome which seeks tho destruction of tho public school system. That this is so oven Father Williams will not attempt to deny. "Why, then, should it bo a crlrno In Roman Catholics to claim tho right to educate their own children in their own faith, and to bo exempt from taxa tion for tho support of Protestant child ren?" ho continues. This question Is not ambiguous, but it is calculated to place Romanism and Protestantism In a false light in their relations to each other, and we believe it is done Inten tionally. In tho first place, no objection will bo made to Roman Catholics edu cating their children in their own private schools as far as that education relates to faith, but the government has the right to say what amount of education shall bo required of each of its citizens, and if the education ac quired by attending thoMo same private schools is ltelow tho standard sot by the law-makors of this country, every citi zen has a perfect right to object. They havo a perfect right to demand a halt, and as tho average intelligence In tho Roman Catholic church in these United States is far below tho minimum at the present time, it would not bo putting it too strong to say, "educate your children or we will educate them for you." In tho second place, even though they do pay taxes and refuse to send their children to tho public schools, thoy aro not contributing to tho sup port of Protestant children, as tho Roman Catholic church has billions of dollars worth of unimproved, untaxed property which should lie uon tho assessment rolls, tho revenue from which would more than off-sot what little papists contribute for the support of tho public schools. This Is susceptible of proof. The next question, "when was the edict of Pius VII. rescinded, which branded the wives of all Protestants as concubines and their children as illigi timates," is answered in Father Wil liams' "own way," namely, a justifica tion of ono wrong by another. He says: "Popes rarely rescind their own, or limit pcii, .-!V rdli't. !tti'i;li t!u j itn time do, 1ml Mo V If-fjiH iii'y ptniiil Ibitti to ! In in 'IninnHMn ,1. ..i. in.t, ' l, il,,i , ),tif of I dm Still i itvnnn.1ttiv " "ItlHOI'lllliti llllHI. tii.l. " n net j,'!! II li tmd wild lln y fiviM til!) Midi lln'lll In lH Into ileciti tu.l.i hit KtiiMt aoitlil liaic In n jut fm jmiv, II rmt tulti a trill', A we mi U-fure Mtfd, Ihn rilicl of 1'iun VII m tvatlititml li.V Plus IX. la 1 V. whli h idton the IllH limitfe iitilihiia uf tl,o Human cot'imratiort, and hi ill),'" out III bold relief the Word of tli. !,. A. HrownwMi which wo ImVe quoted bIkivc. v, WIllinitiK know tlm IxuikI of the I tumuli liitiivh-that oho mil r changea flin l '! f riiift tit. This tut, unclirUtian and unmanly e)iarae,irliitioii of the wive atiit child ren of At. I, Proli'stantscan lie condoned and explained away by Roman sympath izers w hoitro proud of the fact that they havo Koimiii Catholic blood In their veins, but how heinous tho crlmo If a ProtcNtunt asks "Do not priests ask of females in the confesHlonal obscene and Immoral questions?" If this Is not Jesuitism what Is It? If this Is not attempting to tear down Protestantism and itp-build popery on its rums wo cannot read or understand tho English language. Out upon such Protestant ism! It deserves moro pity than con tempt for its ignorance, so thinly veiled by pretensions to much learning. To tho next question Father Wil liams returns a squaro-tood answer. "Priests often havo men and women confess to tlmm that thoy have perpe trated serious crimes." Ho also admits that they allow such criminals to do part without offering to turn them over to a policeman. As with other wrongs committed by Romo ho Justifies their action by saying lawyers and doctors do exactly tho same thing that all aro protected by law. To tho next question, "aro not tho Jesuits today exactly what they always have been tho worst enemies of tho governments which harbor them?" ho "presumes" they aro today what thoy always havo been, and, after throwing In ono of hit sarcastlc(?) assertions parenthetically, declares that ho "would give the palm, In that respect, to men who flaunt tholr orange banner in this froo land." How ho hates tho orange! But It's that Roman Catholic blood that national trait which will not down. Why, Rev. Williams, is it worse to flaunt tho orange in this free country than It is to flaunt tho green? Is an Orangeman a greater bigot than a Hibernian? Is It more a crime for us to assail Romanism than for you to assail Orangoism or A. P. A. Ism by Inuendo? By what process of reasoning do you arrive at tho conclusion that a Roman Catholic, who has committed tho most atrocious crimes, and has been hanged, goes straight to tho bosom of Christ, while Abraham Lincoln, who was mur dered by a I Ionian Catholic, goes to hell, and suffers unspeakable agony while time endures? Rev, Williams in answer to this question says It Is authoritatively denied that Booth was a Roman Catho lic. By whoso authority? By that of tho Roman Catholic church? Edwin A. Sherman, who took occasion to look this matter up, says Booth was a Ro manist; so does Gen. T. M. Harris, one of the memlters of tho court martial who tried Surratt, Payne, ct al., as does Rev. Chas. Chinlquy, and as do men who live In Omaha today, who knew Booth, Surratt, Pay no and Atzerodt. Will Rov, Williams glvo us just ono authority in support of his many asser tions? Ho says Booth's crlmo was com mitted by political feeling and not by religious conspiracy. And wo desire again to Inform Rev, Williams that that (tho political end) is what wo aro opposed to in Romanism. Wo care not ono iota how a man worships God. If ho does not believe as we bollovo It will not effect our standing when we appear beforo that "last, supreme judge God who will render to each man according to his works," Rev, Wil liams in the next paragraph says: Bishop Seannell arrives at no such conclusion as that propounded by THE American. Ho does not believe that a Roman Catholic convicted of, and hung for atrocious crimes goes straight to tho bosom of Christ; neither does he teach that Abraham Lincoln went straight or at all to hell, or that ho suffers, or will suffer unshakable agonies while time endures. That Is intended to bo another clever question to fire the American heart, but it is Intrn of utter ignorance of what the Roman church dm'B teach, either as to bad Catholics or to good Protestants. So you say. But we have long lx foro this proved you as ignorant of Roman dogma as you aro of the Intents and purposes of the A. P. A. and the Orange associations, and shall now prove that you do not know what you aro talking about when you mako that assertion. Tho Roman Catholic church does not distinguish any difference betwocn good and bad Protestants. There is but ono class according to its dogma the class that is born to be damned. Neither does it recognize d il,lil llifti i !' I liin Hum, Ixtihe a HMtt lh-Ititttmt! t loot h - II,. y all t'tt HkhUv ti aclt li'n n, ti II il t tint tihl ii ll.ilr tilmlim I. mil i i l lit. Ir U-l tjol'nr fn (' U , Milium lm Ictitf mmim l f,vt IliU community ,j-y lest ted tunii t limw optftl.tM nil i(iii Ml. iti mul. r itU-cim-li'M , iii.v.uy fuf llietr RhSl ami )ilil.n Imi j ' m lt, tin h lm! If 1!hi former iiplnliuitk bale ! a tut rvltahtii an tlniftc hn m ixptvM t In I bin article, IhU community ban Ui'tt sadly lttiHHd iihiii, f Fnibt-r WH Haiti wlrt ct fi r lo a nUmlioil Itiminn Cat hoi hi wink referred to ele hem In this article, iiiiuiely, "Familiar Ex planation of Catholic ii hi tines," ho will find, on page l.'it tlitn declaration: "7b fw sipiirtiffil front Ihr ttt'inr nulhnr ity of the, tepr, is to lie )arnUit from 1mI, iitiif fit nor nn pfftfc in thr I tiiiifiatl oOirM." If Kev. Williams dis s not have Hint Utile hook in his library, lie can liiul the same words quoted on page Hi of "Our Country," by Rev. .loslah Strong, 1). D. In Ihn same Catholic Isstk, on page 101, he will II ml that It Is held that "all those, w ho wished lo bo saved, must die united to tho Catho lic church; for out of her there is no sal ni Vm," lie will also find it Is taught "that anyone ttoparated from her (the church) however praiseworthy a life he may think he leads, by this crime alono lo., by his separation from I ho unity of Christ, ho will Is; debarred from life eternal, and tho wrath of God will remain upon him," (Appendix page I).) By a reference to the allocution of Plus IX., December 17, 1817, ho will find this doctrine is sustained by tho pope, for ho says: "Quite recently wo shudder to say It certain men havo not hesitated to slander us by saying that wo share in their folly, favor that most wicked system, and think so benevolently of every class of mankind as to suppose that not only Vie sons of the church, but that the rest also, however alienated from Catholic unity, ore alike in the way of salvation, and may arrive at rverhisliwj life. Wo sro at a loss, from horror, to find words to express our detestation of this new and atlrO' cious injustice that is done, us." And so wo might continue quoting page after pti(;u of Rminin ttoirtrlnn which does not ( sustain what Rev, Williams has said, but what would bo the use? Were wo an older man than Rov, Williams, wo should advlso him to read, to study, and not write concern ing something his words prove ho knows nothing whatever about, or else that ho wilfully misrepresent tho caso to his readers, but as wo urn not ono half as old as tho priest of St, Barnabas wo shall not design to advlso our seniors. Itev. Williams believes Peter Dens' theology Is a standard work In tho Roman church. Of It ho says: Answer. Peter Dens' moral theology Is published In thu Latin tongue. It Is Intended only for priests, and for tho uk of students In moral theology, In preparation for the priesthood. A ttook dealing with tho sacred functions of life, or with the transgression of their rightful laws Is to bo considered obscene or otherwise according to tho moral purjtown of the writer, and the use to which tho writer Intend to have his book nit, Ho then take up tho "Kreutzer Sonata" which was excluded from the malison account of Its alleged obscenity, and says: "It was not an obscene book, for It earno from tho heart of Its author with a high moral purpose. If It were written by Zola It would doubtless 1sj obscene. Tho motive makes the differ ence," Ho then accuses Itev, J, O. White by Inuendo with having trans lated Dens' work Into two tongues in common use, and with having scattered It broadcast with malignant or mercen ary motives. It must seem a little strange to some of our readers, that this samo minister, Itev, Williams, can see tho purity of purpose In Tolstl's heart as ho writes and publishes a book which the Histnl authorities say Is otiscene, and a moment litter can look Into Rev, J. G. White's heart and soe tho damnable guilt, the mercenary motive which prompted him to try and open tho eyes of true and honest Roman Catholics to tho danger In which they were placing their families through that damnable Institution, tho confes sional! And now, to show you in a small way, what may lm exacted from tho Influence of that unholy institution, we quote from Rev. Ed ward Hoochor's "Papal Conspiracy Exposed," page 178, as follows: "It is because tho confessional has become the soul trap of Satan and tho well of all spiritual polutions that tho popular mind has revolted from tho system throughout Germany, and will revolt from It, finally, everywhere." On page 170 of the samo work tho author asks, "What, then, does Bishop Kcnrlck say as it regards tho uso of tho confessional as a means of priestly seduction?" and answers it In tho next sentence as follows: "Ho confesses, in express terms, that It has been so C'ontliiui'd on Fourth t'uife.
