The Sun.
London, England, 1868-05-26 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, MAY 26, 18i8

THE "CHURCH TIMES" AND THE
CA2 HOLIC CII URCH.

The Church Times, one of the two ritualist
organs in England, in an article itself contain-
inc, eight distinct false charges against the
Catholic Church, states " that the Ultramon-
tanes are not fair controversialists." This is
like the pot calling the kettle black. We have
no doubt that these eight charges are made by
the Church Times not in bad faith, and therefore
not unfairly, but in ignorance—an ignorance
which, however, is so gross as to be culpable.
Can our readers imagine that a writer who is
engaged in the stupendous task of teaching a
new, and, we readily grant, a better theology
to the Church of England than it has ever
before been possessed of, should be so ill-
informed as in good faith to make the following
propositions concerning certain facts and doc-
trines in the Catholic Church:-Ist, that the
Catholic Church elevates private crotchets to
the rank of inspired revelation ; 2nd, that the
ITltramontanes have alienated the educated
laity from the Church in every continental
land without exception ; 3rd, that if the doc-
trine of the Immaculate Conception be true,
then St. Augustine, St. Anselm, St. Bernard,
and St. Thomas died in heresy ; if it be not
true, then it is heresy to force it on the Church;
4th, that in the country parts of France and
Italy it is matter of routine for the clergy in
their sermons to attribute greater efficacy to
the scapular than to the Blessed Sacrament ;
sth, that it is a fact positively established by
ecclesiastical history that the Pope is not in-
fallible ; 6th, that Pope Leo 11. anathematized
the memory of his predecessor, Honorius, as
a heretic who tried to subvert the faith ; 7th,
that the heads of the Catholic Church in Eng-
land declare that every statement made by .the
successor of St. Peter is of divine authority;
ar,d lastly, that the clergy of Paris have come
_ _

to the decision to take no notice of the Sylla-
bus, and not to refuse absolution to those who
deny several of its leading provisions ?
How is such an undigested mass of unsup-
ported assertions to be dealt with ? To meet
these eight distinct charges—for every one of
these propositions, in the sense put forward
by the writer, contains a falsehood either as to
fact or doctrine—with a direct negative is
unsatisfactory, for there must be something in
the writer's mind, some error, or misconception,
or confusion, which prompted him to bear un-
wittingly false evidence against the truth.
Let us endeavour to help him to discover the
root from which these various errors as to fact

or doctrine spring. We do not impute, as we
said before, to the writer in the Church Times
bad faith or the heretical spirit which delights
in error for its own sake. When, therefore,
we ask for proof for any one of the above
propositions, or expose their inaccuracy, we
do so in the belief—for, otherwise, we would

not enter upon a controversy alien to our habit
—that the writer in question, if he have no
proof at hand, will not attempt to construct
one on an afterthought or in a controver-
sial spirit, but simply rejoice with us in re-
moving a misconception which has acted as a
barrier, at least in one honest mind, to the
real union of Christendom, which we all alike
desire. Let us begin, then, by separating in
these eight propositions matters of fact from
matters of doctrine, for then we shall be better
able to deal with the various errors. In some
instances, we hope a few words will suffice ; in
others we can only point out the source of the
error and leave, we will not say to our oppo-
nent, but to our fellow labourer in the dis-
covery of the truth to pursue at leisure inves-
tigations which a patient and candid temper
of mind under higher influences can alone bring
to a successful issue. The greater number of
the writer's objections to the Catholic Church
refers to facts which either do not exist or
which do not operate in the way he describes.
Two only of the propositions may be classed
as doctrinal objections, viz., the first proposi-
tion in our list and the third, and they need
not detain us long. By " the uplifting of
private crotchets to the rank of inspired re-
velation " we understand, making allowance
for his somewhat inflated style, the writer in

the Church Times to mean the sanction which
the Church bestows on popular devotions.
Now the real question is, are these popular
devotions obnoxious to Catholic doctrine, or
only to the peculiar refinement of taste cora-

mon to English Protestants of every shade
of opinion ? We cannot even guess against
what doctrine these devotions offend, and
therefore, until some proof is offered, we must
put down their obnoxiousness to want of fami-
liarity on the part of the ritualistic writer
with the devotional life which is the natural
result of Catholic teaching. When the ritual-
ists become more at home in the Catholic
doctrines they have adopted, they will learn
to appreciate the value of the popular devo-
tions which now offend them because their
taste has not yet been wholly purged of its
Protestant leaven. This objection may be
safely left to time and humility.
The other objection, which makes out St.
Augustine, St, Anselm, St. Bernard, and St.
Thomas to be heretics, is a more absurd error,
and is another proof how ignorant Protestants
are of even the first elements of Catholic theo-
logy. We 'should have thought, however, that
the ritualists by this time ought to have known
that heresy is the wilful denial of a dogma
defined as of faith by the Church. The dogma
of the. Immaculate Conception, however, was
only defined in the present Pontificate ; con-
sequently, the rash and illogical assertion of
the Church Times that St. Augustine, St.
Anselm, St. Bernard, and St. Thomas died
in heresy falls to the ground, since there is no
obligation imposed by faith on any Christian
to accept any doctrine as an article of faith
until it has been solemnly defined and pro-
mulgated by the Church. Had these great
saints and doctors of the Church accepted Pomo
doctrines and rejected others proposed to their
acceptance by the authority of the Church,
then only would they have been guilty of
heresy. We will not retort upon the ritualists
that this culpable eclecticism which they so
rashly impute to canonized saints is the main

error of their own position, for we candidly
believe that even the most advanced of this
school have not as yet emancipated themselves
from the thraldom of the prime principle of
Protestantism ; and, therefore, their conduct
is not fairly amenable to the test of Catholic
principles. When, like the saints whom the
Church Times has dishonoured, they fully re-
cognize the authority of the Church as superior
to private judgment, then only could such
eclecticism as they now practise be fairly de-
scribed as formal heresy. _ _

Bt from the objections against
Catholic doctrines
ctrines or devotions, to the facts
advanced by the ritualistic writer against the
Church, let us again separate facts alleged to
be positively established by ecclesiastical his-
tory from contemporary facts, asserted with a
like degree of assurance. The defection of
science from Christianity in most countries of
Europe, but more especially in Protestant
Germany, in France and England, and a false
intellectualism more or less widely spread, are
grave questions, not to be treated in the flip-
pant and off-hand style adopted by the Church
Times, which imputes with singular want of
discernment, the alienation from faith of the
educated classes, to the effects of Catholicism.
In our " Sketches of Catholicism " we will
endeavour to account for the partial revolt of
science and philosophy from religion ; in the
meantime, we may safely state, from evidence
already carefully prepared, that where educated
thought is not Catholic it is not Christian.
Secondly, it is abundantly clear that where
philosophy has ceased to be Christian, it is
owing not to the teaching of the Catholic
Church, but to the presence of the rationalistic
philosophy of Germany—the natural result of
Protestantism—which has gradually pene-
trated like a poison into the intellectual sys-
tem of Europe. Protestantism, indeed, as a
school of thought, has ceased to exist, both in
Germany and in England. In either country
there are to be found a few philosophical apo-
logists for Christianity, but too few to con-

stitute a philosophical system. Catholicism,
therefore, is the only intellectual and philo-
sophical opponent of infidelity. To the false
systems of philosophy in Germany, France,
and England, it opposes Christian philosophy.
The only safety for the educated laity in
Europe is the Catholic faith; because it alone
affords a rational defence against the Pantheism
of Germany, or the Positivist philosophy of
France and of England, where of late years
the disciples of Comte are occupying the
ground vacated by Protestantism defunct.
How then it can be asserted that Catholicism
has alienated the educated laity, we are at a loss
to understand. On this point also we deside-
rate from our ritualistic contemporary expla-
natory evidence.
Another charge which we have to meet is of
too grotesque a character for serious refutation.
It belongs to the category of Protestant delu-
sions common to " the saints of Clapham,"
among whom the tradition used to be kept
up that the Catholics of France adored the
Pope, worshipped idols, and wore wooden
shoes. For the ritualistic writer in the Church
Times to assert that it is a matter of routine
for priests in the country parts of France and
Italy to teach in their sermons that the scapular
possesses greater efficacy than the Blessed
Sacrament, only shows the profound affinity
which exists between every section of Pro-
testants. None but a Protestant, familiar with
Protestant traditions, and unable to realise
Catholic doctrine concerning the Blessed Sac-
rament, could conceive so monstrous an ab-
surdity or make so offensive a charge. On this
point no more need be said.
Like too many of our Protestant contem-
poraries, the Church Times does not appear to
be well-informed on Continental Catholic mat-
ters, or otherwise it would not have made a
statement concerning the Paris clergy, which
is the direct reverse of the truth. It states,
and apparently in good faith, that " the clergy
of Paris have just come to the decision to take
no notice of the Syllabus, and not to refuse
absolution to those who deny several of its
leading propositions," whereas the fact is that
the clergy of Paris, in one of their accustomed
Conferences, in Februarylast, with the sanction
of the Archbishop of Paris, arrived at the con-
clusion that a confessor is bound, before giving
absolution, to require the penitent to reprobate,
not only the errors condemned by the leading,
but also those condemned by the lesser propo-
sitions of the Syllabus. If the Church Times
is betrayed into such gross errors on matters
of contemporary history, which a reference to
Catholic sources of information would have
obviated, how can we do otherwise than mis-
trust its equally positive assertions about
established facts of ecclesiastical history, when
these facts, like the charges which we have
just exposed, are intended to damage in the
eyes of its readers the character and authority,
of the Catholic Church ? This keen, con-
troversial spirit, which in its heat or reckless
haste snatches at every weapon which may
serve to weaken the iu,fluence of the Catholic
Church, has already exposed more than one
of these Anglican writers to the charge of a
want of truthfulness. The Eirenicon was a
notorious 'example of this spirit. Since the
exposure by Dr. Newman,.by the editor of the
Dublin Review, by the works of Mr. Rhodes,
Mr. Allies, and Father Harper, of the mis-
statements and perversions with which that
unfortunate work abounds, we had indulged
the hope that a spirit of fairness in contro-
versy, and of strict and careful truthfulness
would have been the leading principle of the
ritualist school, for such a spirit only can con-
duce to the reunion of Christendom. We trust
that the writer in the Church Times, whose
charges we are examining, will acknowledge
the necessity we were under, as a Catholic
journalist, not to allow statements which we
know to be incorrect, to be circulated without
an immediate contradiction. _ _ _

In a future L4,---1;e;i11 refer to the facts
asserted by the Church Times to be positively
established in ecclesiastical history, viz., that
the Pope is not infallible, and that in a formal
letter Pope Leo 11. ,anathematized his pre-
decessor Honorius as a heretic who tried to
subvert the faith ; and, finally, we will briefly
examine the singular assertion made by the
same writer, that the heads of the Catholic
Church in this country declare that every
statement made by the successor of St. Peter
is of divine authority.—Westminster Gazette.

TIIE DISESTABLISHJIENTI OF 711 E
ANGLICAN CHURCH.

In the principle enunciated in the first re-
solution moved at the Protestant meeting,
in support of the Irish Establishment, held
in the City on Monday last, we completely
and cordially concur ; the only difficulty we
experience is in its application to the Estab-
lished Church in England. This important
resolution declares—" That this meeting, be-
lieving the highest duty of a State to be the
maintenance of true religion and virtue,' is of
opinion that our present constitution of Church
and State ought to be upheld, as affording
the best means for the promotion of Chris-
tianity amongst the people, and as important
alike for the welfare of the State and for the
efficiency of the Church." That the main-
tenance of true religion and virtue ' is the
highest duty of the State is a Catholic prin-
ciple enforced by the Encyclical and Syllabus
of Pius IX. on the attention of Europe ; but
that our present constitution of Church and
State affords the best means, under actual
circumstances in England, for the promotion
of Christianity among the people is a matter
of grave doubt. Of course Catholics are bound
by the principles of their religion to support
in every country the union of the State with
true religion, with the Catholic Church ; but
they are not bound, in the same manner, to
support " Our Protestant constitution of
Church and State "—the position, that is,
of the State to the religion established by
law in England. It is important at this junc-
ture, when so many strange theories are afloat
even among Catholics, that this distinction
should be rightly understood. It might be our
duty, in obedience to Catholic principles, not
to attack the union of Church and State in
England if we considered that, under existing
circumstances, it tended to preserve the rem-
nants of Christian dogmas among the Pro-
testants of England. But is this union of
the State with the Protestant Church likely
to subserve the interests of Christianity ?
That is the question. The impending disestab-
lishment of the Irish Church, which has not a
shadow of justice, not a pretext of even in.
directly serving any good purpose in its
favour, has undoubtedly raised, not only
amongst Liberals and opponents of State
Churches, but amongst the supporters of the
religious principle in Government, the ques-
tion of the disestablishment of the State
Church in England. It is out of no hostility
to the Anglican Church, out of no love to re-
ligious Liberalism, that we enter upon the
consideration of this question, which cannot
fail in the course of the next few years to
press for a solution.
It is now become unfortunately too trite
a remark to make that religious thought among
the governing classes in England is in a state
of decomposition. Men's minds are under-
going a rapid change ; in the Anglican Church
itself neology is making terrible inroads. Given
these two conditions, the growth of infidelity
in the State, using the word in its most compre-
hensive sense, and an easy compliance on the
part of the authorities of the Church to re-
form at the bidding of the State its creeds
and formularies, how far would the continu-
ance of the Established Church in England act
even as a breakwater, to make use of a cele-
brated simile, against the inroads of infidelity ?
If it fail even in this negative god ; if it can.
neither confer a religious character on the
State nor preserve the remnant of Christian
dogmas which it still possesses to the Protest-
ants of England, why should we desire, far less
labour, to maintain it ? In such a case can we
do otherwise than say—Let it go ?
Mr. Disraeli has
declared, with singular can-

dour, that the probable effects of disestablish-
ment will be to split the Anglican Church
into sects and schisms, soon to be absorbed by
the traditions and disciplines of the. Church
of Rome. Be this as it may, and God grant
that it may be so ; at all events it is clear that
three different religions at least would arise out
of the ruins of the Establishment. The broad
Church party would pander to the false in-
tellectualism of the day, and gain the sup-
port of the educated classes, whilst the ritual-
ists and those who believe in sacramental
efficacy and the Apostolic succession, freed
from the bondage of the State and of the
bench of bishops, might endeavour to form
themselves into a new Church, in which as
much of Catholic doctrine and practice as
approved itself to the private judgment of self-
appointed leaders might be -safely borrowed
from the ancient Church ; but the bulk, after
all, of the members of the defunct Establish-
ment, who did not give up the outward
profession of religion altogether, would relapse
into a deeper evangelical Protestantism, or
swell for a time the ranks of dissent. Would
such a state of things, with all its confusion of
ideas and conflict of religions be worse than
the maintenance of the Established Church,
from which the rationalism of the State and
the growing infidelity of the governing classes
would too probably eliminate all dogmatic
teaching ? Great as are the evils of a godless
State, and dangerous as they are to society, still
would these evils to any great extent be
averted by a State Church which is the creature
of Parliament, and the law of whose existence
is submission to the Royal Supremacy? Would
the connection of Anglicanisni with the State
be able to save the country from a secular
system of education, or preserve the religious
character of the universities? These are tests
as to the efficacy of the connection. But if
the Establishment be powerless for good ; if it
can no more hinder secular education than it
did the dissolution of marriage ; if it be con-
tent to submit at the hands of the State to a
gradual elimination of distinctive dogmas, what
good purpose can the , existence of such an
Establishment subserve ? In the view of com-
ing changes, those of the High Church party
who are not committed to party politics, look
forward, not without satisfaction, to eventual
disestablishment. Even the cautious Guar-
dian observes, speaking of the present agi-
tation, that there are many greater evils that
might befal the Anglican Church than dis-
establishment. Disestablishment might pre-
serve in a section of the Anglican Church at
least dogmatic teaching ; at any rate it would
bring prominently before the English people
the grave question of religious truth. The
greatest obstacle to the conversion of the
English people to Catholicism is the clinging
to old associations—to a national religion ; but
the break up of the Established Church would
not only set people thinking on religion, but
leave them comparatively free to act up to
their convictions. The artificial barriers which
Elizabethan Protestantism created, and which
a wholesome Conservative tendency, as well
as ignorant prejudice, have so long kept up
against Catholicism, would at last be swept
away, and the ground at least be left clear for
the Catholic Church to reclaim again the in-
telligence, and win back the heart of a people
so long estranged from the religion of its fore-
fathers.—Westminster Gazette.