Americanism Contrasted with Foreignism, Romanism, and Bogus Democracy in the Light of Reason, History, and Scripture;: In which Certain Demagogues in Tennessee, and Elsewhere,; are Shown Up in Their True Colors — John Shaqi
Americanism Contrasted with Foreignism, Romanism, and Bogus Democracy in the Light of Reason, History, and Scripture;: In which Certain Demagogues in Tennessee, and Elsewhere,; are Shown Up in Their True ColorsBrownlow, William Gannaway
Religion
Americanism Contrasted with Foreignism, Romanism, and Bogus Democracy in the Light of Reason, History, and Scripture;: In which Certain Demagogues in Tennessee, and Elsewhere,; are Shown Up in Their True Colors
Brownlow, William Gannaway
American Party; Campaign literature, 1865 -- American; Tennessee -- Politics and government; United States -- Politics and government -- 1853-1857
"If Wesley were alive, what would he think of your midnight
plots, and open tirades against Papists? But a letter of his
has been going the rounds of the newspapers, which the Know
Nothings obviously think gives the sanction of that good man to
their movement. Not so. Mr. Wesley was not the man to write as
inconsistently as their version of this letter makes him
write."
Why, sir, Mr. Wesley goes much further in his political opposition to
Roman Catholics than the American party have ever proposed to go. The
American party say only that they will not vote for Catholics, or put
them in office, because their principles are antagonistic to the spirit
of Republican institutions. Mr. Wesley lays down the comprehensive, but
_true doctrine_, in this very letter, that "_no government not Roman
Catholic ought to tolerate men of the Roman Catholic persuasion_." And
to show how fully and clearly he sustains this position, I quote from
his letter at length. You will find the letter in Vol. 5, page 817, of
Wesley's Miscellaneous Works, dated January 12th, 1780. It was
originally addressed to the Dublin Freeman's Journal. Here is what Mr.
Wesley says, in the very letter you seek to _deny out of_:
"I consider not whether the Romish religion is true or false:
build nothing on one or the other supposition. Therefore, away
with all your common-place declamation about intolerance and
persecution for religion! Suppose every word of Pope Pius's
creed to be true! Suppose the Council of Trent to have been
infallible; yet I insist upon it that no government not Roman
Catholic ought to tolerate men of the Roman Catholic
persuasion.
"I prove this by a plain argument--let him answer it that
can--that no Roman Catholic does or can give security for his
allegiance or peaceable behavior. I prove it thus: It is a
Roman Catholic maxim, established not by private men, but by
public council, that 'No faith is to be kept with heretics.'
This has been openly avowed by the Council of Constance; but it
has never been openly disclaimed. Whether private persons avow
or disavow it, it is a fixed maxim of the Church of Rome. But
as long as it is so, nothing can be more plain than that the
members of that Church can give no reasonable security to any
government for their allegiance and peaceable behavior.
Therefore, they ought not to be tolerated by any government,
Protestant, Mohammedan, or Pagan. You say, 'Nay, but they take
an oath of allegiance.' True, five hundred oaths; but the
maxim, 'No faith is to be kept with heretics,' sweeps them all
away as a spider's web. So that still no governors that are not
Roman Catholics can have any security of their allegiance.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account