
Dr. John H. Rice, with the intuition of a great mind,
warned Presbyterians against a renewed prevalence of popery
in our Protestant land.
This was when it was so insignificant among us as to be almost unnoticed. Many were surprised at his prophecy, and not a few mocked; but time has fulfilled it. Our leaders from 1830 to 1860 understood well the causes of this danger. They were diligent to inform and prepare the minds of their people against it. Hence General Assemblies and Synods appointed annual sermons upon popery, and our teachers did their best to arouse the minds of the people. Now, all this has mainly passed away, and we are relaxing our resistance against the dreaded foe just in proportion as he grows more formidable. It has become the fashion to condemn controversy and to affect the widest charity for this and all other foes of Christ and of souls. High Presbyterian authority even is quoted as saying, that henceforth our concern with Romanism should be chiefly ironical!
from: The Attractions of Popery
by R.L. Dabney, Presbyterian Quarterly, April, 1894.
A veritable potpourri of Popery:
Boettner
Rogers
IMAGE: Study after Veláquez’s Portrait of Pope Innocent X (1953) by Francis Bacon
♗♗♗♗♗♗♗
;)
LikeLiked by 1 person
♗☭☠☺
LikeLike
That little conflict is really the complete epitome of very much ado about less than nothing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
A tempest in the global teapot?
(I know it sounds silly to an atheist ☺)
LikeLike
It sounds very silly even to an intelligent believer in a deity.
LikeLike
So you don’t have reason to critique Popery? The Presbyterians who wrote that stuff in the 1800’s were anything but silly (in my subjective opinion).
But I do understand how obscure the critique sounds to unbelievers and certain believers as well.
LikeLike
Objectively, both sides make a fuss about aspects which are of no real consequence. Ergo: silly.
LikeLiked by 1 person