The New Orleans crescent. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1866-1869, 1868-01-05
THE IMMAoULATE ooNcErTIox.

/ TIC ucN uOBmd Oh lne UdcQl1Le OO1cepGOQ
of the Blessed Virgin" which are calculated,
think, to do much harm. For example: In the
CRESCENT Of the 18th inst, under the head Of
" Religious Items" there is a short article con-
tanning the following statements: "And although
this solemn teaching ii. e. Of Immaculate Concep-
ton Of Blessed Virgin Nary was not promulgated
until far in the nineteenth century of the exist
ence of the church, it was alcays piousy be.
lieved from the earliest days" Again, the writer
says, writing Of councils we have explained
what it is that Catholics mean by declaring in
these ages. that certain dogmas hitherto received
or rejected st will, are of faith, have been re.
vealed to The church, and cannot be rejected
without a ship1crecs Of faith. They do not
| thereby introduce new doctrines which had
| not been known before, but their repre-
stntatives, the pastors, declare "what is,
and eUa' has been the faaA of the
! Church. This is what has been done in the case
| of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception
| and that, too, with an unanimty truly remark.
/ able" These. Mr.. Editor. are grave statements,
| and if they be true, administer a severe and de-
| served rebuke TO that portion of the Christian
world which does not bold the truth of this dogma
| VIII you permit me, in kindness aud charity, TO
| give to these statements brief examination?
! The first statement is. that the Immaculate Con-
cepton of the Blessed Virgin" was dl,odys pous.
'piously believed " mean, | suppose, piously be-
lieved q truth not truth essential 10 sdlcd-
ton it was, of course, never held essential 10
SGUdtiOn, until so declared in 1854. Was IT, then
"CllrGyS piously believed from the earliest days?r
propose 10 give some quotations from dIstin.
| gUlshed Roman Catholic bishops now living or
living short time prior 70 1884, who wrote letters
| to Pope Pins TX touching the decree which he
| then contemplated and has since promulgated.
] These bishops Oct me say) did themselves hold
| the "pious belle" that the immaculate Concep-
ton of the Blessed Virgin is true. These bishops
therefore. can hardly be charged with want of
First, then, l quote from Louis. archbishop Of
| Rouen:
| al consider that this belief is not clearly con.
| tanned in the deposit Of the HOly Scriptures. |
consider that tradition in this respect is counting
| in precision and unanimity. Had the tradition
been clear. could St. Anselm, St. Bonaventura, St.
Thomas, Ballarmine and many others have
been ignorant of it? consider that the belief of
| the Immaculate Conception does not reach, in
| way at GHerpltct or imposing, Adore the eleUeRh
century," A little further on he says: What
for instance, will the English theologians, so well
veTstd in the study of ecclesiastical antiquity, do
| or say when they shall see the holy see define as
| point of faith, matter which so many ages
! haze scarcely had glimpse Of, which so many
holy persons and great doctors have either denied
| or been ignorant Of Will they not think that
the church at this day holds cheap that principle
! Of St Vincent Of Serius, so certain aud venerable,
guOd unique, qltod SeEper. qUOd 40 ODlHtbIsy''
lDOw quote from j. a. Paredis, apostolic ad
| m'nstrStOr OF LimbuTg. He states that "the
nnDd Of all bishops, ETC., in this matter has been
/ sought" he fdrorS the publishing Of the dog
| matte definition, bat at the same time frankly
! states what was alleged against it. He says:
! "lst. The question was too much agitated
| formerly without any fruit TO souls. "a. Both
sides have been defended by persons above all ex
ception-nay, saints. Sd. Those who denied or
! opposed it were devoted to the Blessed Virgin
| Mary, and yenerated her as much as those who
| defended il,
! Does it not seem, Mr.. Editor that these dis
| tii guisbed writer's had read history some what diff
feTently from the author above quoted? But listen
| again. quote from " The Bishop of Adria " "
know that the gates Of hell cannot prevail against
this rock founded by Christi must be ware lest
we give occasion to our enemies, that it should be
sssailed with Eew wars, which will, am horribly
sirsid, be the case If the Church, after so many
centuries, exhibit TO the faithful TO be believed
| ne,g mystery, Of which we fad no testimony in
| the Scriptures or Holy Fathers. il We except
many GuCgCTieS spoken Of the E'ernsl Wisdoml"
| Permit me TO give one more quotaton, and that
| y long enc, and | will leave the author of the
| newspaper article to reconcile, as best he may,
| his statement with those of the right reverend
| fathers in his church. quote from the letter of
! The Bishop of Cervia If turn TO weigh what is
the rigorous import Of a solemn. and that direct
! declaration Of any dogma, as de tde, no slight
difficulties float clouds over my mind and do
| not in any way ascertain what opinion | ought to
prefer. That saying of st. Vincent Of Seri1s
| must move me, received as rule by all theOl0-
| giaDs, and constantly observed, whenever it was
| the question Of distinguishing or defining dOgmas
! Of 'faiih 'rtGt res Gil1Gls, Everywhere, by dH
! receired a dogma Of tditl, and has been
| beiaCed TIL nor! Every Catholic dogma,
being a fact manifest to US by Divine
revelation, can neither be known nor proved save
! by the word of God, written or handed down;
and since God could, either expressly or implicitly
by scripture or tradition, reveal truth unattai1-
/ able by human intellect or reason, the Ch1rch
! BeU6T proposes any truth as a dogma to be re-
| oeved and believed by ALL under pain of
| anathema or heresy, unless be contained er-
! plicity or at least implicitly, in the word Of God
written or handed down. But some theOlogans
contend that this could scarcely be affirmed as to
! the proposed truth for had it been expressly or
! implicitly revealed in scripture or tradition, hour
! should Older fathers and doctors, heOlOgldas
| and The lrh0le order Of tie D0mipic1HS ard the
! JrlO'e school Of IhOmtSts. not only be ignorant
! Of IL, Jtd venture lrW all their might and CeteneId
! abundance Of argument 10 assault The supreme
! pOntlBS cOHniriDg, or at least not condemnlng
| as heretIcs those who for many ages opposed
| with their whole strength the Conception immac.
| ulate at The first instant On what ground was
! that most wise, and above ALL the O'Ecum 9nlcal
| councils held in the church, the most learned
council Of Trent, unwilling 10 define this truth
! pressly, bat left il in is oven possession and
! S'0tU quo, yet with tba. prudence aGd precision
! OF words that grave and reverent weight should
be added TO establish and strengthen 50 piJus aud
Catholic a truth, yet not 10 advance it to the sub
! bimiiy of dogma BY Judgment and uall,era.
! be decree There was a deep silence as to this
truth az NE FIRST centuries; ia subsequent CEN
| tuIies it was cOnhOCerted, which would not have
been. il in dny Of The above ways the church had
o1rrCd it, eitEer as expressly or implicitly re-
| Vesled.n
So much for the Roman Cathoi, bishop of
! Cervia. Every word Of the above quotations is
! fIom the pen Of devOut Roman Catholics. The
| trauslstions are by Rev. Dr. Pussy, and are pub
| lsh6d in his work entitled, " An EirenicOn." |
| think it must be evident, that within our day,
| learned bishops IN the Roman Catholic Church
not only thought that the Immaculate Conception
| Of Blessed Virgin WAS not "piously believed" or
| believed at all, "from the earliest days." bat
also, that it has not ever been q. e., suppose,
/ O'lcGyS been,) the faith Of the Church.
I intended giving You the views Of many other
! Roman Catholic bishops, not only upon the
! authority OF this teaching of the Immaculate
| Conception and its scrptural and traditional
! authority, but also upon the very important ques-
ii n, mentioned in the letter of the late archbishop
of Paris, as an inquiry If the tkeol0g8ns, his
! counselors, viz: Whether, according to the
| principles of sound theology. the doctrine Of the
Iumsculate Conception Of the most Holy Virgin