Newspaper Page Text
ROMAN CATHOLIC “PRINCES”
ARE ON THE RAMPAGE.
Furious Because of Their Failure
to Re-enslave Mexico.
(continued from page one.)
in morals, the accomplice of the murderers,
by aiding and abetting Huerta to hold the
fruits, of his fearful crime.
It is truly popish for Keily to side with
Huerta, as Blenk, Gibbons, O’Connell, Far
ley and Schrembs have done.
In the eyes of such Roman prelates, mur
—■ der is virtuous when it advances the inter
ests of the hierarchy.
President M ilson's mistake in backing up
Admiral Mayo s silly demand for a salute
to our flag, did not weaken Huerta. On the
contrary, it strengthened him.
The causes of Huerta's failure and abscond
ing, originated in his criminal seizuiV of
power: his murder of the members of Con
gress; his apparent attempt to murder his
accomplice, Felix Diaz; his utter failure to
adopt a policy save that of reaction and
assassination, and his cowardice in refusing
to go out and fight the Constitutionalists.
Bishop Keily and his brother “Princes*’
should thank President Wilson for the pres
ence of U. S. troops at Vera Cruz: but for
them, such plotters as Archbishop Mora
would never have escaped Mexico alive.
Bishop Keily probably knows that when
the Constitution is re-established, the Mex
ican authorities may put Mora on trial for
treason and murder.
Bishop Keily says that “the Mexican peo
ple are uttterly unfit for such government as
we have in these States.”
Really ? Then how many more centuries
of Catholic rule would it require, to fit them
for Home Rule?
The priests have had full control of the
Mexicans for nearly 400 years.
When Cortez and his brigands conquered
the country, and delivered it to Spanish ad
venturers and Roman priests, it is claimed
that Mexico was a highly civilized country.
Cortez and his chaplain, and the bishops
who followed, left gorgeous descriptions of
Mexican wealth, Mexican architecture. Mex
ican agriculture. Mexican palaces, Mexican
refinements, &c.
The historians Prescott. Bancroft. Helps
and others, exhaust the vocabulary in describ
ing the splendors of Mexican civilization.
Does Bishop Keily wish us to understand
him as admitting that the’' Catholic conquer
ors and the Catholic Church degraded this
once-civilized people?
If the Catholics are not responsible for
their present condition, whatever it is, who
are?
The Catholics have been the keepers of the
people: no heretic was allowed to live in the
land.
The torture chamber of the Inquisition, and
the burning stake set up in the public square
were employed with ferocious energy’ to
maintain the monopoly of Catholic faith.
So late as 1895, the burning of “heretics”
was a public spectacle.
Can any people get ready for good govern
ment while such horrible conditions exist?
What else degraded Portugal Spain, Italy,
Central and South America, Cuba and the
Philippines, except this diabolical rule of a
pagan church which—whenever it has the
power—benumbs the mind, enchains the body,
gags the mouth, and controls the pen, abolish
ing liberty and progress, true religion and
morality?
No stronger indictment can be drawn
against the Roman Catholic system, than
Keily has unwitting drawn.
He virtually says that the results of 400
THE JEFFERSONIAN
years of Roman Catholic ascendancy over
the Mexicans has rendered them utterly un
fit to enjoy the same freedom that we enjoy
in these States.
What right, then, has he to quarrel with
President Wilson for leanting to try another
system?
Bishop Keily accuses General Carranza of
“the atrocities" of Villa's soldiers. Is that
just?
M here has Carranza ever shown himself
other than a high-minded gentleman, an
astute leader?
He refused to walk into the Papal trap,
the A. B. C. Mediation, and of course his
refusal angered the American prelates; but
events have fully justified his cautious avoid
ance of that recognition of the right of out
siders to dictate to Mexico.
General Carranza manfully stood for the
independence of his country and her right to
settle her own affairs.
What makes the American “Princes” so
furious is. that Carranza goes into power un
hampered by any degrading compromise with
Rome.
As The Christian Index well puts it:
The Constitutionalist Government of Mexico
proposes to strictly enforce the principal laws
enacted previous to iB6O, which were passed at
the time for the purpose of stripping the Roman
Catholic Church of its temporal power. These
three laws are: Separation of church and State,
incapacity of the church to possess landed prop
erty, and the abolition of convents. These laws
have been ignored by the Catholic Church, which
comprises ninety-nine per cent, of the population
of Mexico. Under the present government all
the denominations will enjoy equal rights and
privileges, and at the same time none of them
will bo permitted to own landed estates. The
prospects are that Mexico has entered upon a
new era of prosperity, provided the clergy’ of the
Roman Catholic Church will become law-abiding
citizens, INSTEAD OF ANARCHISTS, as in the
past.
So far as Mexican “bandits" are concerned,
I fail to see where they ahev done worse
than is constantly occurring in this European
war: and I do not remember seeing anv evi
dence that Gibbons, O’Connell. Farley, Blenk
and Keily have belly-ached over the atroci
ties committed on Catholic Belgium, on
Catholic Poland, and on Christian Armenia.
And the responsibility for whatever out
rages have been committed in Mexico, rests
directly on those who plotted to overthrow
and murder the regularly elected President.
Madero.
For this hideous crime and all the bloody
aftermath, the Roman Catholic Church is di
rectly, primarily and most malignly to blame.
With the simplicity of a man who doesn't,
grasp the questions he seeks to handle, Bishop
Keily says:
“The way most commonly adopted in Mex
ico, in the settlement of political questions, is
to get up a revolution.”
At any rate that is the way adopted by the
the Roman Catholics, after Madero defeated
them at the polls.
They got up the revolution, financed it with
10,000.000 pesos of church money, killed their
man, set up his murderer, and even then lost
the game.
Too bad’ No wonder Keily and Blenk
are mad about it.
Doesn’t Keily seem to contend that Wilson
was inconsistent in that “he recognized Ma
dero, refused recognition to Huerta, &c.”
If Wilson had “recognized” Madero, what
would it have been but accepting the results
of a legal election?
As to Huerta, what would his recognition
have been, but the ratification of revolution
and assassination?
Bishop Keily is singularly obtuse, if he
does not realize that he and Blenk have done
an immense service to non-Catholic America
by furnishing incontestible evidence of
Rome's indention- to meddle in and control our
politics.
The Roman “Princes” did not protest
against President Taft's recognition of the
Republic of Portugal, which overthrew the
monarchy, after the assassination of the Cath
olic King.
They did not protest, when our Govern
ment recognized the new Kingdom of Italy,
which destroyed the Temporal Power of the
Popes.
They did not protest, when our Govern
ment recognized the new Republic of Brazil,
where the Catholic hierarchy were ditched,
just as Juarez ditched them in Mexico.
Nor did they protest, when our Government
drove the Catholic army of France out and
recognized the Presidency of Juarez, after
he had captured and executed the Catholic
“Emperor" Maxmilian.
Why are they now pursuing >o different a
course? Why are they badgering and insult
ling and threatening the President of the
United States?
It is because'they believe they can at last
throw off the mask, and act in accordance
with the real Law of Rome.
e
“The 4th Degree Oath of the
Knights of Columbus.”
'T'O meet the bluff and the falsehoods of
* those Americans who have foresworn
loyal principles, and have become oath-bound
subjects of a foreign power, I have carefully
prepared the above-named pamphlet.
The men who take that oath are traitors
to our government, and spies in our camp.
They are armed and drilled, as military
men, and kept in readiness to use their steel
swords, and their up-to-date rilles against
their fellow citizens.
Get my pamphlet, and study the facts for
yourselves. Priced ten cents.
This question of Popery is the most import
ant question now facing the people of
Americji.
New Edition of "Napoleon,” by Thos. E.
Watson. Just off the press. One volume,
$1.50. Handsomely bound, profusely illus
trated. This book is regarded as standard by
the French readers and scholars. The Jeffer
sonian Publishing Co.. Thomson. Ga.
_ e
The Jeffersonian, SI.OO per year; in Clubs
of Ten. 50 cents.
A Book All Young People Should Read
You hear so much about Caesar—
wouldn't you like a brief, up-to-date
sketch of his marvellous career, his
creation of the Roman Empire, his
murder and. his great funeral?
Wouldn’t you like to know about the
noble pair of brothers, the Gracchii?
And about Marius and Sylla? And
about the Great Insurrection of White
Slaves led by Spartacus?
Also the immortal love-story of
Antony and Cleopatra?
All this, and much more you will
find in
WATSON’S “ ROMAiRkETCHES”
PRICE, 25 CENTS
Jeffersonian Publishing Co.,
Thomson, Georgia.
PAGE FIVE
