The 8th December, 1854, Pope Pius
IX. was sitting on his throne; a triple crown of gold and diamonds was on his
head; silk and damask- red and white vestments on his shoulders; five hundred
mitred prelates were surrounding him; and more than fifty thousand people were
at his feet, in the incomparable St. Peter's Church of Rome. After a few minutes
of most solemn silence, a cardinal, dressed with his purple robe, left his seat,
and gravely walked towards the Pope, kneeled before him, and humbly prostrating
himself at his feet, said:
"Holy Father, tell us if we can believe and teach that the Mother of God,
the Holy Virgin Mary, was immaculate in her conception."
The Supreme Pontiff answered: "I do not know; let us ask the light of the
Holy Ghost."
The cardinal withdrew; the Pope and the numberless multitude fell on their knees;
and the harmonious choir sang the "Veni Creator Spiritus."
The last note of the sacred hymn had hardly rolled under the vaults of the temple,
when the same cardinal left his place, and again advanced towards the throne
of the Pontiff, prostrated himself at his feet, and said:
"Holy Father, tell us if the Holy Mother of God, the blessed Virgin Mary,
was immaculate in her conception."
The Pope again answered: "I do not know; let us ask the light of the Holy
Ghost."
And again the "Veni Creator Spiritus" was sung.
The most solemn silence had a second time succeeded to the melodious sacred
song, when again the eyes of the multitude were following the grave steps of
the purple-robed cardinal, advancing, for the third time, to the throne of the
successor of St. Peter, to ask him:
"Holy Father, tell us if we can believe that the blessed Virgin Mary, the
Mother of God was immaculate."
The Pope, as if he had just received a direct communication from God, answered
with a solemn voice:
"Yes! we must believe that the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mother of God,
was immaculate in her conception. * * * There is no salvation to those who do
not believe this dogma!"
And, with a loud voice, the Pope intoned the Te Deum; the bells of the three
hundred churches of Rome rang; the cannons of the citadel were fired. The last
act of the most ridiculous and sacrilegious comedy the world has ever seen,
was over; the doors of heaven were for ever shut against those who would refuse
to believe the anti-scriptural doctrine that there is a daughter of Eve who
has not inherited the sinful nature of Adam, to whom the Lord said in His justice:
"Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return!" (Gen. iii. 19),
and of the children of whom the God of Truth has said, "There is none righteous;
no, not one: for all have sinned!" (Rom. iii. 10, 23).
We look in vain to the first centuries of the Church to find any traces of that
human aberration. The first dark clouds which Satan had brought to mar the Gospel
truth, on that subject, appeared only between the eighth and ninth centuries.
But, in the beginning, that error made very slow progress; those who propagated
it, at first, were a few ignorant fanatics, whose names are lost in the night
of the dark ages. It is only in the twelfth century that it began to be openly
preached by some brainless monks. But then it was opposed by the most learned
men of the time. We have a very remarkable letter of St. Bernard to refute some
monks of Lyons who were preaching this new doctrine. A little later, Peter Lombard
adopted the views of the monks of Lyons, and wrote a book to support that opinion;
but he was refuted by St. Thomas Aquinas, who is justly considered by the Church
of Rome, as the best theologian of that time. After that, the celebrated order
of the Franciscans used all their influence to persuade the world that "Mary
was immaculate in her conception;" but they were vigorously opposed and
refuted by the not less celebrated order of the Dominicans. These two learned
and powerful bodies, during more than a century, attacked each other without
mercy on that subject, and filled the world with the noise of their angry disputes,
both parties calling their adversaries heretics. They succeeded in driving the
Roman Catholics of Europe into two camps of fierce enemies. The "Immaculate
Conception" became the subject of burning discussions, not only between
the learned universities, between the bishops and the priests and the nuns of
those days; but it divided the families into two fiercely contending parties.
It was discussed, attacked and defended, not only in the chairs of universities,
and the pulpits of the cathedrals, but also in the fields, and in the very streets
of the cities. And when the two parties had exhausted the reasons which their
ingenuity, their learning, or their ignorant fanaticism could suggest to prove
or deny the "Immaculate Conception," they often had recourse to the
stick and to the sword to sustain their arguments.
It will appear almost incredible today, but it is a fact, the greatest number
of the large cities of Europe, particularly in Spain, were then reddened with
the blood of the supporters and opponents of that doctrine. In order to put
an end to these contests, which were troubling the peace of their subjects,
the Kings of Europe sent deputation after deputation to the Popes to know, from
their infallible authority, what to believe on the subject. Philip III. and
Philip IV. made what we may call supreme efforts to force the Popes, Paul V.,
Gregory XV., and Alexander VII. to stop the shedding of blood, and disarm the
combatants, by raising the opinion in favour of the Immaculate Conception to
the dignity of a Catholic dogma. But they failed. The only answer they could
get from the infallible head of the Church of Rome was, that "that dogma
was not revealed in the Holy Scriptures, had never been taught by the Apostles,
nor by the Fathers, and had never been believed or preached by the Church of
Rome as an article of faith!"
The only thing the Popes could do to please the supplicant kings and bishops,
and nations of Europe in those days, was to forbid both parties to call the
other heretics; and to forbid to say that it was an article of faith which ought
to be believed to be saved. At the Council of Trent, the Franciscans, and all
the partisans of the "Immaculate Conception," gathered their strength
to have a decree in favour of the new dogma; but the majority of the bishops
were visibly against that sacrilegious innovation, and they failed. It was reserved
to the unfortunate Pius IX. to drag the Church of Rome to that last limit of
human folly. In the last century, a monk, called Father Leonard, had a dream,
in which he heard the Virgin Mary telling him: "That there would be an
end to the wars in the world, and to the heresies and schisms in the church,
only after a Pope should have obliged, by a decree, all the faithful to believe
that she was 'immaculate in her conception.'" That dream, under the name
of a "celestial vision," had been extensively circulated by means
of little tracts. Many believed it to be a genuine revelation from heaven; and,
unfortunately, the good natured but weak-minded Pius IX. was among the number.
When he was an exile in Gaeta, he had himself a dream, which he took for a vision,
on the same subject. He saw the Virgin, who told him that he should come back
to Rome, and get an eternal peace for the church, only after he should have
promised to declare that the "Immaculate Conception" was a dogma,
which every one had to believe to be saved. He awoke from his dream much impressed
by it; and the first thing he did when up, was to make a vow to promulgate the
new dogma as soon as he should be back to Rome, and the world has seen how he
has fulfilled that vow.
But, by the promulgation of this new dogma, Pius IX., far from securing an eternal
peace to his church, far from destroying what he is pleased to call the heresies
which are attacking Rome on every side, had done more to shake the faith of
the Roman Catholics than all their enemies.
By trying to force this new article of faith on the consciences of his people,
in a time that so many can judge for themselves, and read the records of past
generations, he has pulled down the strongest column which was supporting the
whole fabric of his church; he for ever destroyed the best arguments which the
priests had to offer to the ignorant, deluded multitudes which they keep so
abjectly tied to their feet.
No words can sufficiently express the dignified and supreme contempt with which,
before that epoch, the priests of Rome were speaking of the "new articles
of faith, the novelties of the arch-heretics, Luther, Calvin, Knox, ect., ect!"
How eloquent were the priests of Rome, before the 8th of December, 1854, when
saying to their poor ignorant dupes: "In our holy Church of Rome there
is no change, no innovations, no novelties, no new dogmas. We believe today
just what our fathers believed, and what they have taught us; we belong to the
apostolical church, which means we believe only what Apostles have believed
and preached." And the ignorant multitudes were saying: "Amen!"
But, alas, for the poor priests of Rome today; those dignified nonsenses, those
precious and dear illusions, are impossible! they have to confess that those
high-sounding denunciations against what they call the new doctrines of the
heretics, were nothing but big guns loaded to the mouth to destroy the Protestants,
which are discharging their deadly missiles against the crumbling walls of their
Church of Rome. They have to confess that their pretensions to an unchangeable
creed is all mere humbug, shameful lies; they have to confess that the Church
of Rome is forging new dogmas, new articles of faith; they do not any longer
dare to say to the disciples of the Gospel: "Where was your religion before
the days of Luther and Calvin?" for the secret voice of their conscience
says today to the Roman Catholics: Where was your religion before the 8th of
December, 1854?" and they cannot answer.
There is an inexorable and irresistible logic in the minds even of the most
unlearned men, which defies, today, all the sophisms of the priests of Rome,
if they dare to speak again on their pet subjects: "The novelties and new
dogmas of the Protestants." There is a silent, but crushing voice, going
today from the crowds to the priest, telling him: "Now, be quiet and silent
on what you are used to call the novelties and new doctrines of the Protestants!
for, are you not preaching to us an awful novelty? As you not damning us today
for disbelieving a thing which the church, during eighteen hundred years has,
a hundred times, solemnly declared, by the mouth of the Popes, had never been
revealed in the Holy Scriptures, had never been taught by the Fathers, had never
been heard by the church herself?"
I will never forget the sadness which overcame me when I received the order
from Bishop O'Regan to proclaim that new dogma to my people (then all Roman
Catholics). It was as if an earthquake had shaken and destroyed the ground on
which my feet were resting. My most cherished illusions about the immutability
and the infallibility of my church were crumbling down, in my intelligence,
in spite of my efforts to keep them up. I have seen old priests, to whom I opened
my mind on that subject, shed tears of sorrow on the injury this new dogma would
do to their church.
The Archbishop of Paris, at the head of the most learned members of the clergy
of France, had sent his protest to the Pope against this dogma before it was
decreed; and he had eloquently foretold the deplorable consequences which would
follow that innovation; but their warning voice failed to make any impression
on the mind of the infatuated Pope.
And we, children of God, must we not acknowledge the hand of the Lord, in that
blindness of "the man of sin" (2 Thess. ii. 3). The days are not far
away that a cry of joy will be heard from one end of the world to the other:
"Fear God, and give glory to Him! Babylon is fallen! Babylon is fallen!
because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication"
(Rev. xiv. 7; xviii. 2, 3). For, when we see that "wicked one," "who
exalteth himself above all that is called God" (2 Thess. ii. 4), destroying
himself by the excess of his own folly and impurities, we must bless the Lord.
The proclamation of this new dogma is one of those great moral iniquities which
carry their punishment and their remedy in their own hands. When the Pope, in
the morning of the 8th of December, 1854, answered twice: "I do not know,"
to the question put to him, "Is the Virgin Mary Immaculate in her Conception?"
and then, a minute after, to the same question, he answered: "Yes! I know
it: the Holy Virgin Mary was Immaculate in her Conception," he proved to
his most credulous dupes that he was nothing but a sacrilegious comedian. How
would a jury of honest men deal with a witness who, being interrogated about
what he knows of a certain fact, would answer, "I know nothing about it,"
and a moment after would acknowledge that "he knows everything about it?"
Would not such a witness be justly punished as a perjurer?
Such is the sad and unenviable position which the Pope made to himself and to
his church, on the 8th of December, 1854. Interrogated by the nations of Europe
about what was to be believed on the "Conception of the Virgin Mary,"
the Church of Rome, during ten centuries, had answered: "I do not know."
And let everyone remember that she wants to be believed infallible when she
says she "knows nothing about the Immaculate Conception." But, today,
that same church assures us, through the infallible decree of Pius IX., that
she knows, and that she has always known and believed the Virgin Mary was Immaculate!
Has the world ever seen such a want of self-respect, such an unblushing impudence!
What verdict will the Christian world give against that great mother of lies?
What punishment will the God of truth administer to that great culprit who swears
"yes" and "no" on the same question? It is a fact, that
by the promulgation of this decree, Pius IX. has for ever destroyed his prestige
in the minds of millions of his followers.
A few days after I had read to my congregation the decree of the Pope proclaiming
the new dogma, and damning all those who would not believe it, one of my most
intelligent and respectable farmers came to visit me, and put to me the following
questions on the new articles of faith: "Mr. Chiniquy, please tell me,
have I correctly understood the letter from the Pope you read us last Sabbath?
Does the Pope tell us in that letter that we can find this new dogma of the
'Immaculate Conception' in the Holy Scriptures, that it has been taught by the
Fathers, and that the church has constantly believed it from the days of the
Apostles?"
I answered, "Yes, my friend, the Pope tells us all those things in his
letter which I read in the church last Sabbath."
"But, sir, will you be so kind as to read me the verses of the Holy Scriptures
which are in favour of the Immaculate Conception of the Holy Virgin Mary?"
"My dear friend," I answered, "I am sorry to say that I have
never found in the Holy Scriptures a single word to tell us that Mary is immaculate;
but I have found many words, and very clear words, which says the very contrary
thing. For instance, the Holy Ghost, in the Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans,
v. 18. 'By the offense of one, judgment came upon all men to condemnation.'
This little, but inexorable 'all,' includes the Virgin Mary in the condemnation
and in the guilt. In the same Epistle to the Romans (ch. iii. 22, 23), the Holy
Ghost, speaking of the children of Adam Israelites and Gentiles says there is
no difference, they have all sinned and come short of the glory of God! and
in the 10th verse of the same chapter, the Holy Ghost, speaking of the Jews
and Gentiles, says, 'There is none righteous no, not one!' And the Lord has
never repealed in any part that I know of the Holy Scriptures, this awful 'no
not one!'" "Now, please tell me the name of the Holy Fathers who have
preached that we must believe in the Immaculate Conception, or be for ever damned,
if we do not believe in it?"
I answered to my parishioner: "I would have preferred, my dear friend,
that you should never come to put to me these questions; but as you ask me the
truth, I must tell you the truth. I have studied the Fathers with a pretty good
attention, but I have not yet found a single one of them who was of that opinion
in any way."
"I hope," added the good farmer, "you will excuse me if I put
to you another question on this subject. Perhaps you do not know it, but there
is a great deal of feeling and talking about this new article of faith among
us since last Sabbath; I want to know a little more about it. The Pope says
in his letter that the Church of Rome has always believed and taught that dogma
of Immaculate Conception. Is that correct?"
"Yes, my friend, the Pope says that in his Encyclical; but these last nine
hundred years, more than one hundred Popes have declared that the church had
never believed it. Even several Popes have forbidden to say 'that the Immaculate
Conception was an article of faith' and they solemnly permitted us to believe
and say what we please on that matter."
"If it be so with this new dogma, how can we know it is not so with the
other dogmas of our church, as the confession, the purgatory, ect.?" added
the farmer.
"My dear friend, do not allow the devil to shake your faith. We are living
in bad days indeed. Let us pray God to enlighten us and save us. I would have
given much had you never put to me these questions!"
My honest parishioner had left me; but his awful questions (they were really
awful, as they are still awful for a priest of Rome), and the answers I had
been forced to give were sounding in my soul as thunderclaps. There was in my
poor trembling heart, as the awful noise of an irresistible storm, which was
to destroy all that I had so dearly cherished and respected in my then so dear
and venerated Church of Rome. My head was aching. I fell on my knees; but for
a time I could not utter a word of prayer; big tears were rolling on my burning
cheeks; ;new light was coming before the eyes of my soul; but I took it for
the deceitful temptation of Satan; a voice was speaking to me; it was the voice
of my God, telling me, "Come out from Babylon!" (Rev. xviii. 4). But
I took that voice for the voice of Satan; I was trying to silence it. The Lord
was then drawing me away from my perishing ways; but I did not know Him then;
I was struggling against Him to remain in the dark dungeons of error. But God
was to be the stronger. In His infinite mercy He was to overpower His unfaithful
servant. He was to conquer me, and with me many others.