The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1843-04-18

/
man Church of st, Louis, in Buffalo, we have come
to the conclusion that the contradictions which we
pointed out a few days since, between the state
ments in the Bishops letter in the Commercial Ad-
certis and the facts OF the case as developed in his
| correspondence with the members Of his flock at
Buffalo, were more apparent than real The imper-
fectons OF language in conveying with absolute pre-
csion, the ideas and sentiments intended to be ex-
pressed, and perhaps little dialectic play upon
words, have been, we can now perceive, the causes
OF that seeming conflict of statement and opinion
which we deemed worthy of exposure. We, there
fore, withdraw all imputaations upon the Bishops
"veracity," and shall consider him above any such
| reproach hereafter
| Ihe simple facts OF the case are these: Bishop
Hughes promulgated, some time since ecclesias-
cal statute to the effect that all the church property
throughout his diocese, instead of being hereto
lore held and administered by trustees elected by
the people should be held and administered by the
clergy. 1t is at least highly probable that this
| movement was agreed upon at the General Council
| held at Rome some years snce-whch Bishop
| Hughes attended-was afterwards adopted by the
Provincial Council of the Catholic clergy at Balti
more, and is accordingly now in process of enforce
| ment in this diocese. The characteristic sagacty
of the church is very apparent in this policy. When
fully carried into effect the popular antiepscopa ten
dency OF our republican institutions will be complete
ly excluded from operating dsadvantageously on
the power of the Catholic clergy: The good people
of st. Louis, however, rebeed against the mandate
of the Bishop calling on them to submit to the new
ecclesiastical discipline. They held public meet
ing and passed series of resolutions, expressive OF
their determination to adhere to the old system of
administering the church property which they had
themselves contributed. And here we come to the
explanation of the apparent contradictions Of Bishop
Hughes. 1t is quite true that he did not set terms
insist that the church properly should be taken from
the trustees, and vested in his own hands; and the
Bishop quite ustifable in giving to this assertion
fiat denial But it is perfectly true that the Bishop
directed and ordained by the statutes of the diocese,
that, no body of lay trustees, or lay persons, by
whatever name called, should be permitted to ap-
point, retain or dismiss any person connected with
the church-to make any secular use of the church
property-to expend any money fact to take any
part IN the management of the property without
the express consent of the clergy 1t is equally true
that the Bishop in his celebrated Pastoral Letter,
explicitly declares" One of the first and most ex-
picit DEGREES of the Provincial Council in Balti-
more, directed and enjoined on the Bishops of this
province, that they should not thenceforward, con-
secrate any church therein, unless the deed had been
previously made, in trust, ITO the Bishop thereof"-
Well, this has at least some approximation to the
idea that the Bishop desired the church property to
be vested in his hand. And SO the people of st.
Louis appear to have regarded ii when they resolved
that although they might entertain the highest re-
spect for the present Bishop, and place the greatest
confidence in his integrity and equity yet it was not
to be expected that they should entertain the same
good feelings towards his unknown successor, and
that they therefore thought proper to retain the
administration of their own property.
The Bishop denies that he called away the Pastor
from the church of ST. Louis. The fact, as he has
il, is, that he withdrew his request that Mr. Pax
should remain" 1t can scarcely be expected that
we should enter into such verbal nicetes; such dis
tincton without a difference. According to the
oest or our understanding, the power which the BIZ
shop to enforce the statutes' is a species of
what tive call the veto power in the American 60
vernmen, or stopping the supplies in English his
tory. The Bishop does not ask the Trustees to as
sign the property to hm-he states what the ecclesi
astcal law is and if the trustees do not understand
and obey it, of their own accord, he exercises the
veto power upon their souls stops the supplies of
salvation, by permitting the clergyman toswithdraw
quietly and peaceably.
Whilst, therefore, we are free to admit that in all
his correspondence with the people of the church of
st. Louis, Bishop Hughes has been uniformly con-
ssten and that his veracity remains in all that orr
ginal integrity which none have been more ready
than we to acknowledge, we cannot help thinking
that in his attempted explanations of his conduct in
relation to them, and in the general carrying of
that line of policy to which reference has already
e. IL 1z.. l. - i
at evasion, or blinking of the real question, which
are as unnecessary, as they are imprudent. What
necessity is there 10 shrink from the open and cam
did acknowledgment that the Provincial Council in
Baltimore resolved to secure to the church. that is,
to the clergy, the entire management, control and
possession of the property contributed created by
the members of the flock? In England the property
of the Established Church belongs to the Church.
70 france 1t belongs to the State-in this country,
where there is no monarch, and no established reli-
gion the question arises, in whom shall be vested the
property of the Church The Provincial Council
of Baltimore has answered-not in the hands of the
people, but in the Church tits certainly most i'm
portant question. We have very little hesitation in
expressing our opinion that if the claim Of the clergy
should be universally resisted, vast inroads would
soon be made in the power of the ecclesiastical
thority and the very existence Of the Church put in
jeopardy. Indeed, this danger is pressed home on
the minds of the faithful with great vigor and elo-
quence in the Pastoral Letter of the Bishop. "One
of the most perpexing questions" says the Bishop,
connected with the well-being OF religion, is the
tenure and administration of ecclesiastical property
A system growing, perhaps, out of the circumstan-
of the times has prevailed this country which is
,otho parallel in any other nationor the ,chole
bjsforU off the roTLoI,r Church That W.
ing ecclesiastical property under the management
OF laymen, who are commonly designated trus
tees We do not disguise, that our conviction of
the system is that it is altogether injurious to re-
gion." The Bishop even goes far in his holy
horror of this new SYSTEM" as TO hint the posi-
biity that the Almighty, in order TO manifest his