she throws in the immense weight of her followers, and bears down all opposition. Politicians laugh at our fears, and deride our assertions; yet these same men are courting that party whose influence they deny. Why is it that public men are so courteous to, and apologistic of, the Romish Church? It is because they know it to be an undivided power,--no two policies there, no factions, no North and South, but a party one and indivisible. Whigs and Democrats may contend, "isms" may come in contact, and a "National party" be rent by fanatics, but Rome is unchangeable. There are no divisions there; she commands, and countless thousands obey. No wonder, then, our public men are so deferential to such a power, though at the same time denying its existence to the country. Will America thus be treated by her representatives?

The oft-repeated assertion of the Papal See not claiming temporal supremacy, is one calculated to bring about the most disastrous results. Legislators in this, as in other countries, are unceasing in the propagation of this error; and even Romanists themselves assert a doctrine which is entirely opposed to the spirit and affirmation of their hierarchy. From the ninth century to the nineteenth-from Gregory VII. to Pius IX.—the doctrine of that Church has been, the elevation of the spiritual over the secular. This right is not asserted as a consequence of the spiritual power, but as of divine origin. Thus Hildebrand, in excommunicating Henry IV., uses the language, "Ex parte omnipotentis Dei." The same Pontiff asserts that "kings and princes are bound to kiss the feet of God's vicegerent. He has a right to depose emperors. His sentence can be annulled by none, but he can annul the decrees of all." Successive Pontiffs were unceasing in maintaining this doctrine, and constantly asserted that governments held their authority from the Romish See. Pope Boniface VIII. addresses Philip le Bel of France in the same arrogant language: "We would have thee to know that in things spiritual and temporal, thou art subject to us." In fact, throughout the whole range of the Papacy, from Hildebrand downwards, such has been the declaration of the so-called successors of St. Peter.

In A.D. 1414, the Council of Constance declares: "The laity have no jurisdiction and power over the clergy." And the Council of Trent, in 1545, asserts: "The exemption of clerical persons has been instituted by the ordination of God, and by canonical institutions." (Sess. 25, chap. 20.)

It was in the early ages of the Papacy that Rome found her most critical moments; and such decrees as the above were necessary, not merely to acquire additional power, but to retain what she already possessed. Many national Churches were almost independent of Rome, particularly that of France. Under the leadership of such men as Bossuet and Fenelon, backed by the enormous power of Louis XIV., France successfully resisted the encroachments of the Romish See, and even gave a name to all such opposition, namely, Gallicanism. But this independence of Rome is now only history; the Papal hierarchy of the present day is ultramontanist throughout, and the Church recognizes the Pope as infallible and, supreme in all matters. Even France herself owns to the annihilation of her national Church. The Count of Montalembert thus speaks, in 1852:

"Let us all labor, according to the measure of our meekness, to maintain her (the Romish See) in this dignity, in this sovereign independence. We are entering upon the age of the regeneration of Catholicism, which will console us for all the outrages, all the defections, it has had to endure since the revival of paganism, four hundred years ago."

The ultramontane doctrine, as enunciated by Bellarmine, and defended by the Jesuits, is now, in fact, the faith of the entire Romish clergy and Church. Bellarmine thus illustrates his position:

"The Pope, as Pope, although he has not any merely temporal power, hath, nevertheless, in order to a spiritual good, the supreme power of disposing of the temporal concerns of all Christians." (Bellarmine, chap. vi.)

Again:

"The clergy cannot be punished by political judges, neither be in

any way brought before the judicial chair of the secular magistrate... The Pope has redeemed the clergy from the obedience due to princes; therefore kings are no more the superiors of the clergy." (Bellarmine, chap. 28.)

Another of the Fathers of the Romish Church is even more explicit. Baronius, in speaking of the supremacy of the Papal power, ob

serves:

"All those who take from the Church of Rome, and from the See of St. Peter, one of the two swords, and allow only the spiritual, are branded for heretics." (Baronius, Ann. 1053, §14.)

Political partisans and unscrupulous demagogues may assert that the march of civilization has caused Rome to relinquish these claims, but there never was a time when her pretensions have found more numerous or abler champions than at present. The doctrine is triumphant throughout the entire Papacy, and in Protestant countries it is pertinaciously asserted.

To be convinced that this ultramontane power of the Popes is truly the belief of every faithful Romanist, we need only look to the writings of Brownson, in our own country. The opinions of his Review are endorsed by the Romish hierarchy throughout the States, and he therefore speaks the creed of his Church.

"There is, in our judgment, but one valid defence of the Popes, in their exercise of temporal authority in the middle ages over sovereigns, and that is, that they possess it by divine right, or that the Pope holds that authority by virtue of his commission from Jesus Christ, as the successor of Peter, the Prince of the Apostles, and visible head of the Church.". ...."As the denial of the spiritual authority soon leads to a denial of the temporal, so the denial of the temporal soon leads to the denial of the spiritual. When we found democracy even by nominal Catholics embraced in that sense in which it denies all law, and asserts the right of the people, or rather of the mob, to do whatever they please, and making it criminal in us to dispute their infallibility, we felt that we must bring out the truth against them, and if scandal resulted, we were not its cause. The re

sponsibility rests on those whose obsequiousness to the multitude made our opposition necessary.”

"The Pope has the right to pronounce sentence of deposition against any sovereign, when required by the good of the spiritual order." (Brownson's Review, vol. i., p. 48.)

"The power of the Church exercised over sovereigns in the middle ages was not a usurpation, was not derived from the concession of princes, or the consent of all people, but was, and is, held by divine right, and whoso resists it, rebels against the King of kings and Lord of lords." (Ibid., p. 47.)

"She (the Church) bears by divine right both swords, but she exercises the temporal sword by the hand of the princes or magistrates. The temporal sovereign holds it subject to her order, to be exercised in her service, under her direction." (Ibid., p. 60.)

"The spiritual is not only superior to the temporal, but is its sovereign, and punishes its law." (Ibid.)

We consider this the most open-mouthed, bare-faced assertion of the temporal supremacy of the Popes over free governments and universal suffrage of which it is possible to conceive, and this asserted too in a country which has separated Church and State, fearing the encroachments of the spiritual power. Has this man sworn to maintain the Constitution of the United States? Can Jesuitry reconcile his words with such an oath?

But this doctrine is developed in its utmost elaboration in the Eternal City. The Civiltà Cattolica is a journal published at Rome under the auspices of the Pontiff, and its views and opinions are received by the Romanists throughout the world as the effusions of the Holy See. In the course of a late article, this paper thus speaks:

"What are the limits of the power of coercion? There are but two, which, in fact, comprehend all others, namely, means and aim.... What then are the limits of the Church's means? There are none except the limits of human power, and of the divine assistance by which the Church is comforted. As the Church commands the spiritual part of man directly, she therefore commands the whole

man, and all that depends on man...... From the darkness of the Catacombs she (the Church) dictated laws to the subjects of the emperors, abrogating decrees, whether plebeian, senatorial, or imperial, when in conflict with Catholic ordinances..... Did the Christian emperors become insolent? The Church armed against them their very electors. To every rampant heresy the Church knew how to oppose the power either of the peoples or of their princes; and when these supports seemed at last to have been snatched from her by a universal rationalism, behold! there is a sudden turning back of both;of the nations, fearing an unbridled royal power, and proclaiming the necessity of a supreme spiritual power; of the princes, beginning to understand, at the light of a bloody communism, that the principles of the Church are a firmer foundation for their thrones than bayonets, which must always be intrusted to a part of the people.... The conclusion is, therefore, that there are no limits to the exercise of the coercive power of the Church, either in view of her means or of her aim." (Civiltà Cattolica, No. cxi., 2d Series, vol. viii., Nov., 1854, pp. 273-282.)

This, we take it, is proof positive of the assumptions of Rome in regard to the civil power, but lest our readers should suppose these would not be enforced, we will give a further extract from the same article:

"Petty politicians may conclude that the Church has lost her power, because she does not enlist artillery, cavalry, and infantry; but the truth is, that the artillery, cavalry, and infantry of the Catholics are in the hands of the Church, inasmuch as in her hands are the mind, the reason, and the power of every true Catholic." Cat., ibid.)

(Civ.

Such is the arrogance, such the declarations of the See of Rome in the nineteenth century; nor is it probable that she will surrender pretensions which have been successfully asserted through ten centuries. It was by this authority, Paschal II., in 1099, deposed Henry IV. of Germany; Innocent III., in 1210, deposed Otho IV.; Gregory IX., in 1239, excommunicated Frederick II., and absolved his subjects