Golden Age, May 19, 1937
Download: PDF — Golden Age, May 19, 1937
The Golden Age
A JOURNAL OF FACT HOPE AND COURAGE
in this issue
PROCESS SERVERS OF THE GREAT JUDGE
THE PERFECTION OF CUSSEDNESS
EXPOSED
PETITION FOR AN END OF RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION IN GEORGIA
RESTORE FREEDOM OF WORSHIP IN MASSACHUSETTS
FATHER, SON, AND HOLY SPIRIT
every other WEDNESDAY
five cents a copy
one dollar a year
Canada & Foreign 1.25
Vol. XVIII - No. 461
May 19, 1937 CONTENTS
JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES—AMBASSADORS FOR GOD AND HIS KING—PROCESS SERVERS OF THE GREAT JUDGE—ANNOUNCING THAT JEHOVAH'S KINGDOM IS HERE 515
Why All the Sudden Concern? 516
Disorderly to Criticize Hypocrites 516
Witnesses Bestir Themselves 516
Prohibiting Attack on Race or Religion 517
Genesis of the Bill 517
Other Attempts at Gag Rule 518
Scourging Patriotism into Children 519
Hierarchy Has a Definite Program to Control America 520
Legislative Action Is Imperative 521
TIME TO QUIT JAILING CHRISTIANS 521
THE PERFECTION OF CUSSEDNESS 522
COPY OF ANOTHER INTERESTING AND INSTRUCTIVE DOCUMENT 523
WHERE WAS ARCHIBALD? 526
STRIVING TO RETURN TO DARK AGES 527
MASSACHUSETTS APES HITLER THE MAD 527
SEDITION TO STUDY THE BIBLE 527
RESOLUTION PASSED BY PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE OF THE FEDERATION OF SOCIAL AGENCIES OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY, APRIL 23, 1937 528
CLOVEN-HOOFED CORRESPONDENCE 528
EXPOSED (E) 529
IN DARKEST NEW JERSEY 530
WHEN JUDGES ARE HONEST 530
PLAIN SPEECH TO JUDGE HARTSHORNE 531
NUTLEY GETS ITS POUND OF FLESH 532
PETITION FOR AN END OF RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION IN GEORGIA 533
Who Are Jehovah's witnesses? 533
What Is Their Mission? 533
Why Do They Engage in This Work? 533
Their Work Is the Scriptural Mode of Worship 533
Opposition to the Work of Jehovah's witnesses 534
PASTOR PROTESTS LAGRANGE ARRESTS 535
Georgia Ku Klux Klan Very Proud 535
RESTORE FREEDOM OF WORSHIP IN MASSACHUSETTS 536
Purpose of the Law 536
Savage Results of Forced Patriotism 536
Position of Jehovah's witnesses 537
Inconsistent Position of the Commonwealth 537
Massachusetts: There She Stands 537
Ulterior Motive Back of the Law 538
FATHER, SON, AND HOLY SPIRIT 539
"Jehovah" Prominent in Scriptures 539
The "Trinity" 540
"One Lord" 540
The Holy Spirit 541
Published every other Wednesday by GOLDEN AGE PUBLISHING COMPANY, INC.
117 Adams Street, Brooklyn, N. Y., U. S. A.
Clayton J. Woodworth President Nathan H. Knorr Vice President
Charles E. Wagner Secretary and Treasurer
FIVE CENTS A COPY
$1 a year, United States; $1.25 to Canada and all other countries.
NOTICE TO SUBSCRIBERS
REMITTANCES: For your own safety, remit by postal or express money order. When coin or currency is lost in the ordinary mails, there is no redress. Remittances from countries other than those named below may be made to the Brooklyn office, but only by INTERNATIONAL postal money order.
RECEIPT of a new or renewal subscription will be acknowledged only when requested. NOTICE OF EXPIRATION is sent with the journal one month before subscription expires. Please renew promptly to avoid loss of copies.
SEND CHANGE OF ADDRESS direct to us rather than to the post office. Your request should reach us at least two weeks before the date of issue with which it is to take effect. Send your old as well as the new address. Copies will not be forwarded by the post office to your new address unless extra postage is provided by you.
PUBLISHED also in Bohemian, Danish, Dutch, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Japanese, Norwegian, Polish, Spanish, Swedish.
OFFICES FOR OTHER COUNTRIES
British 34 Craven Terrace, London, W. 2, England
Canadian 40 Irwin Avenue, Toronto 5, Ontario, Canada
Australasian 7 Beresford Road, Strathfield, N. S. W., Australia
South African Boston House, Cape Town, South Africa
Entered as second-class matter at Brooklyn, N. Y., under the Act of March 3, 1879.
The Golden Age
Volume XVIII Brooklyn, N.Y., Wednesday, May 19, 1937 Number 461
Jehovah's witnesses—Ambassadors for God and His King—Process Servers of the Great Judge—Announcing that Jehovah's Kingdom Is Here
(Part 1)
(A brief account of some experiences of true Christians in various parts of the United States, Canada, Germany, Italy, Rumania, South Africa, Syria, Palestine, Egypt and other lands in [and as a consequence of] their fearless and thrilling denunciations of the clergy of the Devil, the politicians of the Devil, and the financiers of the Devil, beginning with the great Keystone State of Pennsylvania, U.S.A.)
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness. Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers! how can ye escape the damnation of hell?—Matthew 23: 27, 33.
These words constitute an attack on the preachers of nineteen centuries ago. The tendency of this language would be to create hostility and hatred of such preachers because of their religion. It would make them appear ridiculous in the minds of the honest. There are plenty of the clerical group of today just as crooked and hypocritical as those of Jesus' day. Yet if Jesus came back to earth in person and in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania should utter such condemnation of the religious crooks He would come within the purview of proposed legislation of the Commonwealth which would subject Him to imprisonment and fine.
"I say unto you, that he will avenge them speedily." —Luke 18: 8, A.R.V.
Pennsylvania has enjoyed the blessings of free speech and free press for many years. People have been able to freely speak, write and print on any subject, and have been greatly benefited thereby. But now a program is under way to choke off these liberties and control the people in medieval inquisitional style. The padlocks on free speech in the shape of proposed legislation are ready. The laws have been introduced, and if the General Assembly of the Commonwealth will follow the bidding of these enemies of liberty the people will soon know what it is like to live in the Hitleristic mode.
Examine this 1937 style of muzzle of free speech. Here is Bill Number 164 introduced by Mr. Elpern, of Westmoreland County.
"It shall be unlawful for any person to print or disseminate or distribute or cause to be printed or disseminated or distributed within this Commonwealth any writing, pamphlet, printing, cut, cartoon or utterance which shall contain any attack on any race or religion, or which shall tend to produce violence or riot or incite any person to commit any overt act or to do or attempt to do any personal injury or harm to another. Any person violating any of the provisions of this act shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be sentenced to pay a fine of one hundred dollars and to suffer imprisonment for sixty days."
Evidently Mr. Elpern was dubious about his bill and later introduced Number 1875, which is similar and makes it unlawful to print, disseminate or distribute printed matter which "shall in language or otherwise urge, create or tend to create hatred, ridicule, violence or hostility against any group or persons resident in the State because of their race, color or religion".
But this was not sufficient. The boys, or girls, or both, who are back of this movement to guillotine the people's liberties had Messrs. David Weiss and Samuel Weiss introduce No. 1611 to the General Assembly, which would make it a misdemeanor to print, disseminate or distribute printed matter, cartoons, etc., "containing any malicious attack on any race or religion . . . and which would tend to produce harm or violence".
Why All the Sudden Concern?
Why all this sudden concern over protection of religion, race or color? Why is there such great desire to jail and fine people who criticize some religious outfit at this day? What emergency is there that would impel the surrender of fundamental liberties of freedom of speech and press in order to protect (?) religion, race or color?
It was the scathing truths uttered by Jesus against the religious hypocrites of His day that impelled them to crucify Him. Priests and clergy of today who fatten on the ignorance of the people, fearing the exposure of their iniquities, would make Pennsylvania safe for hypocrisy by the insertion of gag laws in the statute books.
By way of illustration: The Roman Catholic clergymen teach that many of the dead go to a place called "purgatory", and that their sufferings can be eased and terminated through payment of money by their friends and relatives to the priests for masses in their behalf. The "purgatory" theory is false, and the securing of money for the "release of souls" in "purgatory" is clearly the case of securing money under false pretenses. It constitutes a graft and a racket by religious leaders. Presenting the truth on the "purgatory" matter to the people arouses hostility to priests. It creates enmity against them by people who have been hoodwinked. If these measures are enacted into law one could be fined one hundred dollars and jailed for sixty days for telling the people the truth on the subject. And that is the reason why these bills are presented to the legislature. The religious leaders cannot justify their false position, and therefore they would stifle criticism by legislative enactment.
Disorderly to Criticize Hypocrites
In Millvale, Pennsylvania, recently one of Jehovah's witnesses presented to residents of the village some books which contained Bible proofs that Catholic teachings are not true. He was arrested. A priest by the name of Fabre appeared at the trial to assist in jailing the defendant. The priest claimed that it was disorderly conduct to call at a house and present a book which criticized the Catholic church or its priests. The court did not agree with him and the prisoner was released. At many other places the priests have instigated "disorderly conduct" charges against Christian people for presenting Bible truths to them. The courts will not uphold them on such charges, and therefore they come to the legislature to make the way easier for them.
And wouldn't they be in fine shape with these nice bills made into law? Their way would be made smooth. The circulation of any printed matter criticizing the Catholic church, no matter how truthful the matter was, would be cause for jailing someone. The priests could wail: "We are attacked. This is malicious. They are arousing enmity and hostility against us." Give the Catholic machine this kind of equipment, and in due course judges and police officials of the state will be turned into pontifical inquisitors to hunt up "heretics" and jail them. Liberty of speech, press and conscience will be choked, gagged, throttled, padlocked and suppressed while that foreign power takes over control of the Commonwealth.
Pennsylvania Witnesses Bestir Themselves
Such things as happened at Millvale get under the hide of true Christians, especially if they are true Americans, and not lickspittle toe-kissers. And so the witnesses of that state, by C. R. Hessler, of 907 Middle St., Pittsburgh, addressed a memorandum to the Members of the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, entitled “The Gag on Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Worship, Freedom of Conscience”, which reads as follows:
In the interests of preservation of the civic rights and liberties of the people of this Commonwealth your attention is called to the following quotations from the Constitution of this State, and to the statement of facts in connection therewith.
ART. I, SEC. 3. “All men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences; . . . no human authority can, in any case whatever, control or interfere with the rights of conscience; and no preference shall ever be given, by law, to any religious establishments or modes of worship.”
ART. I, SEC. 7. “. . . The free communication of thoughts and opinions is one of the invaluable rights of man; and every citizen may freely speak, write and print on any subject, being responsible for the abuse of that liberty. . . .”
Pennsylvania was one of the leaders in blazing the way for complete religious liberty in America. Its constitutional declaration means that one has the right to believe what he pleases, and act in accordance with that belief, provided he does not violate the laws of morality or property or infringe on personal rights. He has the right to disseminate such beliefs, even though they may conflict with the beliefs of others or attack the creeds of others. With a couple of centuries of history behind it in favor of complete freedom of worship it would be indeed unfortunate if this Commonwealth should reverse its position and follow the pathway of Germany, Italy and other benighted areas of Europe.
For, be it known unto you, members of the General Assembly of Pennsylvania, there is a present and immediate danger of loss of your civic and religious liberties. Religious intolerance has reared its ugly head and is proceeding to take over the Commonwealth. A powerful religio-political organization is quietly and insidiously working to gain control, not only of Pennsylvania, but of the United States and of the entire world. It instigated and supports the rebellion against Spain that it may rule that country. It controls some countries of Europe, notably Germany, Austria and Italy. And now it covets wealthy and free America. It would grab control of the entire country and suppress all information of its interest and activities while the process is going on. The foreign power which would thus take control is the Roman Catholic Hierarchy. By this we do not mean the honest-hearted people who make up what is called “the Catholic population”. We do refer to the ruling body which is the Catholic Church and which directs its activities. That organization is not only religious, but political, and its subversive activities are being manifested in all places.
PROHIBITING ATTACKS ON RACE OR RELIGION
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES BILL No. 164 is a measure which, if passed, will be very useful to this great religious corporation. This bill would make it unlawful to print, disseminate or distribute, or cause to be printed, disseminated or distributed, any writing, pamphlet, printing, cut, cartoon or utterance that would contain an attack on any race or religion, or that might make someone angry enough to start a riot or commit some overt act.
On the surface this measure looks like a noble-hearted attempt to protect religious and racial groups from slanderous and scurrilous attacks. But it goes much further. An attack would mean any criticism of any church, doctrine, creed, or organization. It would open the door for a powerful religious organization, working with political groups, to grab control of governmental forces and be safe from criticism or exposure while so doing.
GENESIS OF THE BILL
This measure originated in Monessen, Pennsylvania. One James C. Gold is mayor of this town and for some months there has been controversy between him and Jehovah’s witnesses.
Jehovah’s witnesses are Christians who preach the gospel to the people by calling on them at their homes. The Roman Catholic Hierarchy has carried on a vicious campaign to destroy the work of these people. The reason for its opposition is that Jehovah’s witnesses have exposed to view the false teachings of that organization and its wrongful actions.
Early in 1936 Jehovah’s witnesses established a private school in Monessen. This school was operated in accordance with the laws of Pennsylvania governing such. In due course of time Mayor Gold discovered its presence. He claimed it was Communistic, and sent the police chief to close the school. The chief of police closed the school, arrested and incarcerated the teacher, and took away the Bible, two American flags, and a book called The Harp of God as ‘evidence of its Communistic character’. No charges were preferred against the teacher, but he was held two days incommunicado and released. The school was opened again, but was padlocked by the police, until the court issued an injunction restraining the mayor and police from interfering with it.
On May 24, 1936, a number of Jehovah’s witnesses called on the people in Monessen with a petition against the unlawful acts of Monessen officials in closing this private school. Mayor Gold sent his officers forth, and arrested 146 of these Christian people and jammed them into prison cells. The next morning, without any semblance of a trial, and with absolutely no evidence of wrongdoing against any of them, he found them all “guilty of disorderly conduct” and fined them five dollars each. Jehovah’s witnesses in turn exposed these unlawful and malicious acts by publishing the facts and presenting them to the citizens of the community. Later, when they were engaged in regular work of calling on the people with their Biblical message Gold caused 41 of them to be arrested and sentenced to various terms in the county jail. Appeals were taken on most of these cases to the Quarter Sessions Court of Westmoreland County and the convictions were reversed. In that decision the judge of the Quarter Sessions Court held in effect that the work of calling on the people to tell about the Bible did not constitute disorderly conduct, and that it was not disorderly conduct to disseminate among the people literature exposing and criticizing the unlawful and malicious acts of the mayor, his police officers, and his ecclesiastical associates.
Now this religious and political copartnership of Monessen comes to you with a request to enact a law which will enable them to throw Jehovah's witnesses into jail and keep them there for sixty days at a stretch. It is the priests of Monessen, with their right-hand associate, Mayor James C. Gold, that are sponsoring BILL No. 164. It is not designed to protect religious groups. On the contrary, it is designed to give a bunch of priest-led politicians the opportunity to throw their critics into jail. It is aimed primarily at Jehovah's witnesses. It might just as well have the name JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES blazoned across the front of it. It will be used not only against Jehovah's witnesses, but against all who interfere with the program of the Roman Catholic Hierarchy to control and operate all things in its own behalf. If this measure becomes a law there will be no more free communication of thoughts and opinions. There will be no more free speaking and writing on all subjects. Freedom of conscience will be kicked into a condition of innocuous desuetude, and dictatorial, intolerant methods will prevail. Any newspaper that criticizes a preacher’s sermon would do well to count the cost before going to press. Any bookdealer must needs examine the contents of his wares closely before putting them on sale. For instance, he would have to eliminate some of the writings of the beloved Mark Twain from his stock. Any librarian would of necessity have to remove some of Shakespeare’s works from the shelf in order to protect herself from a hundred-dollar fine and a sixty-day jail sentence. And what a wholesale gathering-in there could be of newsboys, news agents and newspaper publishers who publish the facts concerning the part the Roman Catholic Hierarchy now plays in the affairs of Spain, Germany, and other European countries.
A dictatorship cannot be established in this country unless the honest lovers of liberty are gagged and muzzled while the work is in progress. Europe is a shining example of gag rule where church and state work together. Duplicity and covert action is not needed there. The dictator makes the rule, and woe be unto him who says anything against it. In America, where freedom of religion and freedom of press and speech have abounded these many years, the more subtle and crafty methods, exemplified in this measure, have to be used. If the General Assembly of Pennsylvania enacts this measure (BILL No. 164) into a law the people will in due time find themselves in a trap and their freedom gone like the wind.
OTHER ATTEMPTS AT GAG RULE IN PENNSYLVANIA
In spite of constitutional guarantees, there has been much interference with religious freedom and freedom of speech in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania during the past year. Here 440 Christian people have been arrested, in various parts of the State, whose only "offense" has been that they have busied themselves carrying to the people the gospel message as contained in the Bible. They have been assaulted and beaten by mobs. They have been railroaded to jail without the faintest semblance of a legally conducted trial. Priests have conspired and schemed with mayors, police and judges to keep them from carrying the message of truth to the people. Children have been tortured in medieval style. Boycott threats have been made. Special legislation against them has been proposed and enacted. Police and courts have acted without regard to law or order to carry out the wishes of the ecclesiastical powers.
These are not rash and reckless statements. Proof can and will be presented of every one of the above charges at such time and place as the General Assembly may desire. We demand an investigation of the intolerant and malicious acts that have been carried on against Jehovah's witnesses, in order that subversive influence may be completely exposed and the people's rights protected.
We cite a few specific instances for your information.
MONESSEN, in whose dark and murky depths this mischief-framing legislation has come to birth, has been mentioned. Only a small part of the story has been told. At the instigation of priestly powers there has been a denial of the right of freedom of worship, freedom of petition, freedom of speech, equal rights, and taking of property without due process of law. "Your presence in this town constitutes disorderly conduct," was the dictum of the miniature Hitler that bosses this burg. Because the presence of Jehovah's witnesses disturbs the peace of the mayor and shocks the susceptibilities of his priestly partners, 188 of Jehovah's witnesses suffered unlawful arrests and imprisonment during the past year. The full story of the operation of this inquisition in Monessen should be unfolded before a committee of this General Assembly.
NEW PHILADELPHIA is another community where liberty has been overshadowed by ecclesiastical rule. On some date prior to July 12, 1936, the Catholic priests of the city warned the members of their churches against Jehovah's witnesses and directed the officials of the city to run them out of town when they called. On July 12, a group gathered at New Philadelphia for the purpose of calling upon the people to present to them the Bible message. In addition to house-to-house missionaries, they had with them three cars with sound equipment thereon for the purpose of presenting short Bible lectures and musical programs. Two representatives called on the burgess, who is also chief of police, to present him a letter identifying themselves, and explaining the purpose of their mission. The burgess refused to accept the letter.
In a few minutes after their arrival the town was in an uproar. Jehovah's witnesses were assaulted and beaten; their literature torn up and scattered through the streets; and their cars and sound equipment damaged. The police made no effort to prevent the malicious and unlawful acts of the mob, but cooperated with them and encouraged them to make further depredations. Forty-four of Jehovah's witnesses were arrested without warrant or cause and thrown into prison. Thirty-six of them were released later in the day, and the other eight were charged with "disorderly conduct" and held for trial.
At the trials not one single item of evidence was presented showing any of the defendants guilty of disorderly conduct. The officers admitted they were orderly and well-behaved. The only reason given for the arrests was that the chief of police had previously ordered them to stay out of town and that the people did not want them in town. This same chief admitted that the priests had ordered them to run Jehovah's witnesses out of town. All but one of the defendants were "found guilty" and fined five dollars each. These convictions were reversed on appeal.
This is how church and municipality united suppresses freedom of worship and speech in the Stygian darkness of New Philadelphia. Is it desirable that the entire Commonwealth be submerged in similar blackness by means of the proposed measure?
MAUCH CHUNK has disgraced itself to the extent of incarcerating 30 persons for the "offense" of preaching the gospel in the community at various times during the year. The police admitted that the clergy had instigated the arrests.
ALIQUIPPA has at least one policeman who realizes that for his own welfare it wouldn't be proper to arrest a Christian just because a priest asked him to. He was heard to advise some complainant over the telephone concerning Jehovah's witnesses, "The next time they come, try to antagonize them, so that they will use hostile language, and then we can hold them for disorderly conduct."
LOCUST GAP. A Catholic priest came up to one of Jehovah's witnesses, who was lawfully and orderly presenting a Biblical lecture by means of sound equipment, and ordered him to leave town, saying that he was pastor there. Encouraged by this priestly action a mob thereupon attacked the operator of the equipment, damaged his machine, and forced him to leave the town.
COATESVILLE is an illustration of the extent to which a church and state partnership will go in its campaign to suppress freedom of speech and freedom of worship. It is not a great and burning zeal for enforcement of law and upholding of the due process of law and order that actuates them. On the contrary, it is a rabid and overheated desire to suppress, censor and prohibit the dissemination of truths which shock the susceptibilities of the clerics of the community. Coatesville tried about everything they could think of to keep Jehovah's witnesses out of town. Its mayor announced the official mandate that "Jehovah's witnesses must stay out of town". A "holy gestapo" was put in action to carry out the decree. Jehovah's witnesses have been arrested in mass lots. They have been charged with violation of peddling ordinances. Charged with disorderly conduct. A State law regulating soliciting of contributions was invoked against them. Finally they passed an ordinance specially aimed at them, forbidding the distribution of handbills and printed matter. Were it not for the fact that the upper courts of Pennsylvania are still upholding law and order, religious freedom would be as extinct as the long-tailed dinosaur, in Coatesville. We have no doubt that the church and state copartnership in Coatesville will rejoice greatly if BILL No. 164 becomes a law.
Many other communities have joined in this hue and cry against Christian people. Time and space will not permit the listing of all of the wicked and unlawful acts perpetrated in the efforts to suppress freedom of worship and freedom of speech in the State. We present to you the roll of dishonor for the year, showing the communities and the number taken into custody in each place:
Alden 10
McAdoo 22
Uniontown 2
Norwood 15
North Belle Vernon 45
Monessen 188
Washington 3
Bloomsburg 10
Mauch Chunk 30
Ambridge 1
Coatesville 4
Greencastle 2
West Hazleton 14
Scranton 12
Wilkes-Barre 1
Brookville 1
Brownsville 7
Belle Vernon 14
Lehighton 12
New Philadelphia 44
SCOURGING PATRIOTISM INTO CHILDREN
In Germany and Italy the population does homage to their pontifex maximus by the salute and "Heil Hitler" or "Viva il Duce". This is compulsory upon all. Yes, exceedingly so. The one who for conscientious reasons, or for any reason, refuses to render obeisance to the nation's ruler is sent to prison or concentration camp and tortured in regular Inquisition style.
The United States is being worked up to it through the compulsory flag salute, teacher’s oath, and other forms of regimentation by law. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is well up in front in this form of inquisition. Approximately one hundred children have been expelled from the public schools of Pennsylvania because they conscientiously refused to salute the flag. And yet the Constitution of this State prescribes that “no human authority can, in any case whatever, control or interfere with the rights of conscience”. These children are not disloyal. They are not enemies of the country, and are not trying to destroy it. They merely hold to the well-established principle recognized by the courts, that where there is a conflict between the law of God and the law of man, they must obey the law of God. For such adherence to principle they not only have been expelled from school but have been beaten, choked, taunted and jeered at, sent home from school with black-and-blue marks of beatings and welts on their backs, discriminated against, called names, and ostracized in fashion that is a disgrace to any place calling itself civilized.
The Supreme Court of the United States has solemnly decreed that “this is a Christian nation” (Church vs. U.S., 143 U.S. 457). Can the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania be said to be acting in accordance with such decree if it authorizes such barbarous treatment upon children because they are earnestly endeavoring to follow and practice the dictates of Christianity?
HIERARCHY HAS A DEFINITE PROGRAM TO CONTROL AMERICA
Many honest members of the Catholic population, and many Protestants, doubt if the Hierarchy is a political institution and has a program to capture this country. Alfred E. Smith while campaigning for president made this statement: “I believe in the American doctrine of the absolute separation of church and state.” This has been called “Smith’s Credo”. In due course of time Pope Pius XI issued an encyclical “Casti Connubii” overruling “Smith’s Credo” as being contrary to established Catholic doctrine. We quote from the “Casti Connubii”:
“This [the Vatican-Mussolini pact] might well be a striking example to all of how even in this our day, in which, sad to say, the absolute separation of the civil power from the Church, and indeed from every religion, is so often taught, the one supreme authority can be united and associated with the other without detriment to the rights and supreme power of either, thus protecting Christian parents from pernicious evils and menacing ruin.”
Dr. E. Boyd Barrett, for twenty years a Jesuit priest, in his book Rome Stoops to Conquer, states very clearly and concisely its program for this country. We quote from pages 265-267:
“Who can place a limit to the Catholic objective in this country? Re-open diplomatic relations with Rome? Though gratified by such a concession, why should Catholics be content with that? Accord to them the exclusive right of censorship over books, plays, amusements and the press! The Church would accept such office without giving thanks for it; for she would regard it as her exclusive right to enjoy it. Amend the Constitution so as to allow State Legislatures to apportion public moneys to the support of Catholic schools and institutions? The Church would grudgingly admit that a long-delayed obligation was being met by the country. Go further and amend the Constitution so as to recognize the jurisdiction of her Ecclesiastical Courts and establish the Catholic Church as the official church of America? At this point the church would begin to relax and smile with content. But still she would demand more and more of us. She would have charge of the departments of philosophy and history in all our universities; she would have large sections of her Canon Law incorporated into the State Laws; she would insist on being empowered to exercise certain essential inquisitorial rights . . . not, of course, Torquemada stuff . . . but a modernized and civilized Holy O.G.P.U. She would not ask for any measures to be taken against Protestants so long as they did not criticize her or cross her path or encourage Freemasonry or officially endorse eugenics and birth control. Protestant sects would be tolerated and treated in a kindly way subject to what she would consider necessary and reasonable restrictions.”
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES BILL No. 164 would be of great aid to the Hierarchy in carrying out its program. She is religious, and any criticism or exposure of her aims, purposes and devices would be construed as an attack on religion. The person who thus served his country would find himself in the toils of the law, subject to a fine of one hundred dollars and imprisonment of sixty days. The press, the pulpit, and all public-spirited citizens would be gagged and muzzled just as they are throttled and choked in European countries today.
REMEDIES
We recommend the following as some measures which you have the opportunity to take to remedy the situation disclosed:
I. DEFEAT HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES BILL NO. 164.
It is a vicious attempt to suppress freedom of speech and of the press in defiance of Constitutional guarantees. No person who has any belief in preserving the Bill of Rights should for one minute support the measure. If you feel that out of consideration for the priests of Monessen the bill should be passed, then amend it and make it complete. Prohibit all people from making any attacks or criticisms of fraternal orders, political parties and clubs, women’s clubs, professional associations, World War veterans, luncheon clubs, associations of commerce, and individuals. Protect every one. Keep them all safe from criticism or attack. Make the Commonwealth safe for taciturnity.
II. INVESTIGATE INFRINGEMENTS OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM.
A mere skeleton of the encroachments on freedom of worship, freedom of conscience, freedom of the press and speech, is presented in this statement. We stand ready and are willing to produce an abundance of evidence showing the subversive attempts to suppress civic rights. A committee of investigation should be appointed. Open hearings should be held and the entire matter thoroughly probed.
III. PROHIBIT COMPULSORY FLAG-SALUTING.
Children have "rights of conscience" guaranteed to them under the Constitution, the same as adults. Brutal attempts to force a child to salute a flag, when such child conscientiously believes the salute to be a violation of God’s law, will not foster patriotism and love of country in the heart of the child. It will either teach hypocrisy or induce a sullen resentment against the government that so abuses one who obeys the law of Almighty God. A measure should be passed by this General Assembly prohibiting the governing body of any school district from requiring the flag salute of any child who has conscientious objections thereto.
IV. LIMIT POWER OF MUNICIPALITIES TO INFRINGE ON RELIGIOUS FREEDOM.
Under priestly dictation the authorities of boroughs, cities and villages are prone to apply commercial ordinances of peddling, handbill distribution, etc., to the work of preaching the gospel from door to door. The matter can be remedied if this General Assembly enacts into law a measure providing that no such measures shall apply to any person who in obedience to the command of Almighty God is engaged in bringing to people information concerning God’s Word, whether such information be given verbally or by printed page.
Time to Quit Jailing Christians in Pennsylvania
JESUS and the apostles called on the people at their homes for the purpose of informing and enlightening them on the Word of God. Jehovah’s witnesses of today call on the people at their homes for the same purpose. During the past year 444 Christian people were arrested and jailed in Pennsylvania for engaging in such beneficial activity. “Canvassing” and “soliciting” ordinances and “disorderly conduct” statutes were applied to their work.
A bill has been introduced in the General Assembly of Pennsylvania which would prohibit the application of such ordinances and laws to the work of preaching the gospel. The General Assembly can do much toward restoring freedom of worship and freedom of religion by enacting the measure into law. A copy of the bill follows:
AN ACT
For the protection of persons engaged in enlightening people on the Word of God, prohibiting political subdivisions from enacting or enforcing certain ordinances and voiding existing ordinances:
V. RESTRICT POWER OF THE MAGISTRATES.
Many of the magistrates of the Commonwealth are men totally devoid of knowledge of law, and influenced by local politicians and priests. They wield considerable power. Many of them in the cases of Jehovah’s witnesses are prosecutor’s courts, i.e., courts in which the prosecutor always wins. It is the duty of the State to protect its people from unlawful acts of magistrates as well as from robbers, thugs, and other lawbreakers. As the matter now stands these magistrates do not appear to be subject to any higher authority. They should be subjected to punishment for willful miscarriage of justice. The present method of appeal is archaic. It is subject to the approval of the higher court, and is expensive, and in some cases impossible to secure. The one convicted who is poor of purse has no remedy, no matter how innocent he may be.
LEGISLATIVE ACTION IS IMPERATIVE
This Commonwealth is at the crossroads. Will it remain loyal to American ideals? Will it support and maintain fundamental principles of liberty, justice and freedom? Or will it supinely permit a foreign power to continue its program of trampling on people’s rights? You are now called upon to have a prominent part in determining whether the residents of Pennsylvania will retain the blessings of liberty.
Section 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in General Assembly met, and it is hereby enacted by the authority of the same, That no ordinance of any political subdivision of this Commonwealth which has been enacted for the purpose of regulating or prohibiting canvassing, soliciting, distributing or calling from house to house shall be construed to apply to any person who calls upon or solicits people for the purpose of enlightening them on the Word of God, whether such information be conveyed to them orally or in written or printed form. No political subdivision shall hereafter have power to enact or enforce any ordinance contrary to the provisions of this act, and all existing ordinances contrary to the provisions of this act are hereby voided.
Section 2. All acts and parts of acts inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed.
The Perfection of Cussedness
FOR pure and undefiled perversity and meanness, some portions of the great Commonwealth of Pennsylvania take first prize. This general “cussedness” is done in the name of patriotism. It comes as a result of the vicious operation of bad rules and regulations.
The attorney general of Pennsylvania ruled that compulsory flag-saluting in public schools was proper, legal, and very beneficial in teaching patriotism and love of country. As a result of this bad opinion a train of evils has come upon the children of the state which should cause decent people to hang their heads in shame. A hundred pupils have been denied school privileges because they declined to disobey God’s law. Teachers have been fired from their positions. Children have been beaten, choked, taunted, jeered at and ostracized. Their parents have been arrested and subjected to heavy penalties. A private school has been padlocked and its windows smashed. Mass arrests of innocent people have been made. Private property has been destroyed. Mobs have beaten and assaulted innocent people. All of this has been done in the name of patriotism and comes as a direct result of an illegal opinion by the attorney general of the state.
But this is not all. It is merely some of the rough methods used by the hundred-percenters to jam reverence and devotion to the flag down the throats of people. That kind of business is bad. It shouldn’t occur in polite circles, and it will not bring credit to the cause of patriotism. But it isn’t the worst that has been committed. In addition to these rude, riotous and rowdy lessons in 'love of country', there has now come to view some of the more refined, unctuous and oily villainy by those who would not stoop to the uncouth methods of the common variety of ‘patriots’.
Consider the following example of cultured and decorous cruelty:
In the vicinity of Gates, Pa., some forty children were expelled from the public schools for refusal to salute the flag. The expulsions were accompanied by the usual beatings, torture, arrests of parents, and other forms of ‘patriotic’ observance. Jehovah’s witnesses then dug down into their pockets, bought land, contributed labor and materials, built a fine school, hired a teacher, and in every way complied with requirements of the law for education of the children. In course of time they organized a corporation to hold title to their property and carry on the school activities. Application was made to the court in Fayette County for a corporation charter. Testimony was given to the court showing conclusively that the purposes of the corporation were legitimate and proper and in no manner inimical to the state. The court refused to grant the charter because they considered it improper for Jehovah’s witnesses to conduct their own school.
There is no doubt that the Devil could think up and do more perverse things than this, but he would need to take time off and work hard. The Commonwealth expels the children from the public schools. It arrests and jails the parents if they do not furnish education for the children equivalent to that of the public schools. Then it withholds from them the means of furnishing such equivalent education at their own expense. That is legalistic perversity gone to seed. That is the apex of cussedness. Hitler, Mussolini and Ambrose are bad, but, dearest Annabelle, they have good imitators over here.
The General Assembly of Pennsylvania can remedy much of this disgraceful condition of affairs by enacting into law the following bill, introduced by Representative Albert Tronzo, of Pittsburgh:
AN ACT
For the protection of teachers and pupils of the public schools who conscientiously object to saluting the American flag or to take the oath or pledge of allegiance to the United States:
Section 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in General Assembly met, and it is hereby enacted by the authority of the same, That where any board of school directors shall establish and put in effect any rule or regulation requiring the teachers or pupils or both to salute the American flag or to take the oath or pledge of allegiance to the United States such rule or regulation shall be construed not to apply (a) to any teacher who conscientiously believes in Jehovah God and Christ Jesus and who conscientiously holds and believes that the saluting of any flag, object or image or thing is and would be a violation of God’s holy law as set forth in the Bible or (b) to any pupil who furnishes to the teacher conducting such school a written request that the pupil be excused therefrom signed by his parent or guardian and stating that such parent or guardian has conscientious scruples against his child or ward saluting the flag or reciting the pledge as aforesaid.
No board of school directors shall have power to avoid any of the provisions of this act.
Copy of Another Interesting and Instructive Document
IN THE
United States District Court
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
WALTER GOBITIS, individually, and LILLIAN GOBITIS and WILLIAM GOBITIS, minors, by WALTER GOBITIS, their next friend,
Complainants,
vs.
MINERSVILLE SCHOOL DISTRICT: BOARD OF EDUCATION OF MINERSVILLE SCHOOL DISTRICT, consisting of DAVID I. JONES, DR. E. A. VALIBUS, CLAUDE L. PRICE, DR. T. J. MCGURL, GEORGE BEATTY, THOMAS B. EVANS and WILLIAM ZAPF, and CHARLES E. ROUDABUSH, Superintendent of MINERSVILLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS,
Defendants.
No. ..... In Equity:
TO THE HONORABLE JUDGES OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
BILL IN EQUITY
The petition of WALTER GOBITIS, of Minersville, in Schuylkill County, Pennsylvania, individually, and as next friend of LILLIAN GOBITIS and WILLIAM GOBITIS, respectfully represents:
I. That Walter Gobitis is the father of Lillian Gobitis and William Gobitis, who are minors, and is a natural-born citizen of the United States and of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and resides at 15-17 Sunbury Street in the city of Minersville, Pennsylvania, and brings this petition individually, and as next friend of Lillian Gobitis and William Gobitis, minors.
II. That Lillian Gobitis, age 15 years, and William Gobitis, age 12 years, are minors and residents of Minersville School District of Minersville, Pennsylvania, and have resided there continuously for many years.
III. That the Minersville School District is a public school district embracing the City of Minersville, Schuylkill County, Pennsylvania, and adjacent territory, under and by virtue of the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; that the defendants David I. Jones, Dr. E. A. Valibus, Claude L. Price, Dr. T. J. McGurl, George Beatty, Thomas B. Evans, and William Zapf are now and at all times material hereto constitute the duly elected, qualified and acting Board of Education of such school district and as such are a body politic and corporate in law and have the management and control of the Minersville Public Schools; that the defendant Charles E. Roudabush is the superintendent of the Minersville Public Schools and acts as such under the direction, supervision and order of said Board of Education; that all of the defendants are residents of Minersville, Pennsylvania, and citizens of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and of the United States.
IV. That the aforesaid Minersville Public Schools were and are free public schools and are under the supervision and jurisdiction of the said Board of Education.
V. The court has jurisdiction of this suit for the following reasons:
1. The suit is to redress the deprivation, under color of a regulation of the Board of Education of the Minersville Public Schools of rights, privileges, and immunities secured to complainants by the Constitution of the United States.
2. The value of the right for which petitioners seek protection, to wit, the right of his children to obtain an education in the public schools of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and in the school maintained by the Minersville School District is a valuable personal and property right to the complainant Walter Gobitis, and the right to obtain and receive such education is a valuable personal and property right to said minor complainants, and the denial to complainants of such right has and is causing them damage in excess of the sum or value of $3000.00 exclusive of interest and costs, and the controversy arises under the Constitution of the United States.
VI. The complainant Walter Gobitis is now, and was at all times material hereto, a resident and taxpayer of said Minersville School District, and his said children Lillian Gobitis and William Gobitis, being likewise residents of said district and within school age, are eligible to and have the right to attend said Minersville Public Schools, and are entitled to all of the benefits of education and training taught in and provided by said schools; that being desirous of having his said children obtain an education, complainant Walter Gobitis placed his said children in the said Minersville Public Schools at the beginning of the scholastic year 1935-1936. Complainants further allege that said children at all times during their attendance at said schools conducted themselves in accordance with the rules and regulations applicable to said schools, were not disqualified in any way from attending the same, and were obedient pupils and industrious scholars, applying themselves to their studies to the best of their ability.
VII. Complainants further allege that heretofore, to wit, on the 6th day of November A.D. 1935 at a regular meeting of the said Board of Education of the Minersville Public Schools there was adopted and entered on the minutes of such meeting a school regulation in words and figures as follows, to wit:
"That the Superintendent of the Minersville Public Schools be required to demand that all teachers and pupils of said schools be required to salute the flag of our country as a part of the daily exercises. That refusal to salute the flag shall be regarded as an act of insubordination and shall be dealt with accordingly."
VIII. Complainants allege that they are members of an unincorporated association of Christian people designated as Jehovah’s witnesses; that each and every one of Jehovah’s witnesses has entered into an agreement or covenant with Jehovah God, wherein they have consecrated themselves to do His will and obey His commandments; they accept the Bible as the word of God, and conscientiously believe that a failure to obey the precepts and commandments laid down therein will in due time result in their eternal destruction. Complainants and all of Jehovah’s witnesses sincerely and honestly believe that the act of saluting a flag contravenes the law of God in this, to wit:
1. To salute a flag would be a violation of the divine commandment stated in verses 4 and 5 of the twentieth chapter of Exodus of the Bible, which reads as follows, to wit:
“Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; “Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them . . .”,
in that said salute signifies that the flag is an exalted emblem or image of the government and as such entitled to the respect, honor, devotion, obeisance and reverence of the saluter.
2. To salute a flag means in effect that the person saluting the flag ascribes salvation and protection to the thing or power which the flag stands for and represents, and that since the flag and the government which it symbolizes is of the world and not of Jehovah God, it is wrong to salute the flag, and to do so denies the supremacy of God, and contravenes His express command as set forth in Holy Writ.
IX. Complainant Walter Gobitis alleges that he has at all times endeavored to instruct and inform his said children in the truths set forth in God’s Word, the Bible, desiring to educate them and bring them up as devout and sincere Christian men and women, all as it was his right, privilege and duty so to do; that said children have been so instructed from an early age and are now and have been at all times material hereto sincere believers in the Bible teachings and have faithfully endeavored to obey the commandments of Almighty God as set forth therein.
X. Complainants allege that they are American citizens and that they honor and respect their country and state, and willingly obey its laws, but that they nevertheless believe that their first and highest duty is to their God and His commandments and laws, and that true Christians have no alternative except to obey the Divine commandments and follow their Christian convictions.
XI. That at the meeting of the Board of Education of the Minersville Public Schools held on November 6, 1935, as aforesaid, and immediately after the passage of the regulation set forth in paragraph VII of this complaint, the defendant Charles E. Roudabush, acting under the direction and authority of said Board of Education aforesaid, as complainants are informed and believe, publicly announced, “I hereby expel from the Minersville Schools Lillian Gobitis, William Gobitis and Edmund Wasliewski for this act of insubordination, to wit, failure to salute the flag in our school exercises.”
XII. That the said Lillian Gobitis and William Gobitis did not and were conscientiously unable to salute the flag because their religious beliefs and manner of worship forbade such salute, and the giving of such salute was in contravention of and in conflict with the commands of Almighty God, as they sincerely believed.
XIII. That since the 6th day of November A.D. 1935 the said Lillian Gobitis and William Gobitis, as a result of said order of expulsion, have been unable to attend and have not attended their respective classes in the aforesaid Minersville Public Schools.
XIV. That the sole reason for the said expulsion and their subsequent inability to attend classes at the said school was the alleged refusal by the said Lillian and William Gobitis to salute the flag as required by the regulation of the Board of Education hereinbefore referred to.
XV. That under the school laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania the said Walter Gobitis is required to cause his children, the said Lillian and William Gobitis, regularly to attend the public schools of the school district in which the said Walter Gobitis resides, or to attend a private school in which there is given instruction equivalent to that provided in the public schools for children of similar grades and attainments.
XVI. That the said Walter Gobitis is financially unable to have his said children Lillian and William Gobitis attend a private school in which there is given instruction equivalent to that provided by the public schools for children of similar age and attainments, or to obtain for them equivalent instruction elsewhere than at the said public school.
XVII. Complainants have no adequate remedy at law to prevent the aforesaid injury and damage.
XVIII. The regulation of the Board of Education hereinbefore referred to and set out in full in paragraph VII of this petition is unconstitutional, null and void under the due process clause of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States for the following reasons, to wit: It denies liberty and rights of property without due process of law; denies to complainants equal protection of the laws; and denies freedom of worship of Almighty God in accordance with the dictates of conscience.
XIX. The regulation aforesaid, if valid on its face, is unconstitutional, null and void as applied to the complainants Lillian Gobitis and William Gobitis under the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States for the following reasons, to wit:
1. It unreasonably restricts the freedom of religious belief and worship and the free exercise thereof, of said complainants.
2. It unreasonably restricts the freedom of speech of said children by subjecting them to the penalties of dismissal from school and of juvenile delinquency, solely because they are conscientiously unwilling and unable to salute the flag.
3. It discriminates against children in the public schools by requiring them to salute the flag whereas it does not make such a requirement of the rest of the population, and thereby denies the said Lillian Gobitis and William Gobitis the equal protection of the laws guaranteed them by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal Constitution.
XX. The regulation aforesaid and the proceedings thereunder as applied to the complainants Lillian Gobitis and William Gobitis are unconstitutional, null and void under the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States in that cruel and unusual punishments are inflicted on said complainants, to wit, excluding them from the Minersville Public Schools and subjecting them to the penalties of juvenile delinquency solely because they are conscientiously unwilling and unable to salute the flag.
XXI. The regulation, if valid on its face, is unconstitutional, null and void as applied to the complainant Walter Gobitis under the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States for the following reasons, to wit:
1. It unreasonably restricts the liberty of Walter Gobitis in his choice and direction that his said children be educated at free public schools.
2. It unreasonably restricts the liberty of said Walter Gobitis by subjecting him to penalties of prosecution and punishment under the compulsory school attendance laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, not for his own conduct, but for the conduct of his children in failing to salute the flag.
3. It unreasonably restricts the liberty of said Walter Gobitis freely to impart to his said children Bible teachings and a manner of worship.
ship according to the dictates of his own conscience.
4. It denies the said Walter Gobitis of the property right to have his children, the said Lillian Gobitis and William Gobitis, educated in the free public school of the city of Minersville, without charge.
XXII. Complainants further allege that the acts, conduct and decisions of said defendants aforesaid cannot be justified under the police power in that the failure and refusal to salute the flag on the part of said minor complainants does not and cannot affect the public interest or safety or the rights and welfare of others.
WHEREFORE, your complainants, being without remedy save in a Court of Equity where such matters are properly cognizable, pray:
1. That the regulation of the Board of Education of Minersville Public Schools set out in the petition be declared and decreed to be null and void as violative of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States as claimed in the petition.
2. That its application to petitioners be decreed to be violative of the rights of petitioners under the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, as claimed in this petition.
3. That the said defendants, and each of them, and all persons acting under their authority and direction be enjoined and restrained, from doing the following acts:
(a) From continuing in force the expulsion order expelling said minor complainants from school and prohibiting their attendance at said schools.
(b) From requiring and ordering said minor complainants to salute the flag during the course of the patriotic exercises conducted at said schools, or at any other time while in attendance at said schools.
(c) From in anywise hindering or molesting or interfering with the right of said minor complainants to enjoy full religious freedom in the manner dictated by conscience.
(d) That complainants may have such other and further relief as to the court may seem just and proper.
H. M. McCAUGHEY,
Attorney for Complainants.
O. R. MOYLE,
Of Counsel.
Where Was Archibald?
THE Rev. Archibald F. Fulton appears to be the pastor of the United Presbyterian church of Monessen, Pa. It also appears that he is executive secretary of the American Protestant Defense League. This League is supposed to be engaged in upholding the “Constitution of the United States and Protestantism”.
There isn’t much virtue in upholding a corpse; so they might just as well retire from the business of upholding Protestantism. But if they have sufficient intestinal fortitude they can be very useful in upholding the Constitution. There are plenty of villains around trying to destroy its beneficial principles. The Holy Church (?) would very much like to have it sent to the abyss. There is plenty of fighting, if they want to be in it.
But the Constitution is going to be in a bad way if it depends on Archibald for support. Remember Monessen. Remember how the constitutional rights of Jehovah’s witnesses were sandbagged, bludgeoned, and trodden upon by Mayor Gold and the priests of Monessen.
Where was Archibald then? Did he rise to the occasion and uphold the Constitution? Did he protest against the abrogation of constitutional rights in Monessen? No, not he. Not a squawk from Archie. Not a bleat of protest. He was silent as King Tut.
The Right to Religious Freedom
AFTER saying, “The right to religious freedom is a right, not a privilege,” the Lowndes County (Ga.) Tribune went on to say:
Jehovah’s witnesses are entitled to the protection of the constitution, which safeguards religious liberty in this nation and in this state. They are entitled to equal protection of the laws. There is enough crime, of a serious nature, to keep officers busy with enforcement without their seeking to suppress men and women who desire to worship God in accordance with the dictates of their conscience.
…