The national Republican. [volume] (Washington City [D.C.]) 1866-1870, 1869-12-25

q reply. Ho still adhered to his rule on the
ground that he had but little time for extra
work outsIde hls parish duties, and much
-. ,aI...-., ..,,o,.. %, -, nohoav an.
s,''. n ~. "u'n no'oI' ~
substance Of ~Ss. nigh, BE- 5. .ais, which VIII III
sov ofYs, ma, nv own IA, mn .,b,lIty ~ a
-, 800 ...,.,-, -. 49, : - Z n :
'Py .o'.o .'''.'o % " w. usI''',ou'
First, then, 1 say that DIT. SunderiAnd
ought to be worry much Obliged TO the writer
ar th,ss .Ytic,s fnr IN. sn,,ci,rds ~ az
:. III. s.sS.s.I. A.. Az. $500 ,ss.,,,
.nA,y ohp'es'es tut .ne uoc'o, "e''.
earned reputation as learned divine and
eloquent preso her, /" ard, as he IL an appre-
an. s..,,... M. ,,-,, .s..,,,....' - ~
.euJ 'es''Ae' 'us ".su oouph.'on' auu sa's
deep concern 'or a" reputation, ana
espsulally whom the expression Of it IL slg-
n.li,ra ), caIlIuv Ala doceo,,s ,,I.oou,.. "a
,,..a. 1870, m. p.,.,.. ..,..o ,--7e
'''.e. &C., Nv $500 ..u'
But Wnsn me ~n.sr says taAa tno doc.
tors Sermon "ia remarkable spccimen OF
great iudussry ana learned elaboration sx-
pV'14 W. " ~ a.. $500,
carcs 70 nm ia afyunsnes uiii nna 'aas 'asy
pruvs noehing thst be sperta, and disprove
uothipg that he attacks he 10 assuming
to say Just . little more than the facts IN
the case VIII warrant. For certainly tfiore
are rssslfs, sod The very ilrst result has besh,
% the provcrb goes, ITO raise CAIN" or
Kane, among the Rousnists, and next the
production o.. this attempted reply 70 The
thst euosher and more extended reply BY
Rey. DE-. Whifs yin coon DO focthcom'sk.
Perhaps these are no very great rssssits; ept
still, such q. they arc, they are ''resqlts.", e
Then, as Or. sunderlands main object N
this discourse seemed 10 Do to bring out the
ososfsss OF TRADITION oy presenting Dr.. White's
ritnessss In their dirsct and oros4-eIsmina-
ton, IL seems hardly fair ior this anonymoes
writer 70 say that the evidence or the "axu..
DR.. Whits neither pros nor dt.proVs any-
thing. This compliment 70 Dr.. Whites
Judgment 10 selecting his Witnesses 10 ser-
tainly equivocal.
Nor Is u really quite the thing for Mr..
Anoaymous (vhosver he may be 10 rspre-
sent that DR.. g., amer avlng marshallsd ''An
array Of twelve arguments substantistlng
us denial, 70 then content 70 LET the issue
rest upon the tUslfsA argumeut-the verdict
Of IN ditise,n when be b plainly told INA Il
is only for. want Of dms that the discussion
10 confined In this discourse TO tho argument
from tradition.
But the ssatsmsut that "such respectable
Witnesses VIII not contradict themselves"
will be taken for what Il 10 worth, whom IL
appear that Tertulllan says In one place
that "Peter was styled the rock on which The
Church was 10 DO built" and In another place
that "Cbrist Is the ono foundation" That
origen says In one place Peter on whom
the Church OF Christ 10 built" aud In another
place, aFor the petra is every disciple of
Christ" = los.
Thai Cyprian ssys IN one place Zone
Church founded by Christ the Lord upon
Peter" aud In another place "the other
apostles were IN truth what Peter was"
| That James Of Nisibls saws In one place that
| Peter was made "the rock of the edifice OF
the Church" and In another place one ais
set upon Q hrm rock, which 10 our Lord
Jesus Christ himself" That Cyril calls
Peter "the foremost Of tho apostles" but
does not say that he ID the foundation Of the
/ Church, especially that Church which he
predicts a. anti-C Christ.
That Hillary says 10 one place that CIT
was Peter on whom the Church was to be
ouilt, "aud In another that ait was the faith
dation." -. ~ q
That Gregory OF Syssa says 10 one place
"Petsr IL that uubroteu and most Arm rock
4 on which our Lord built his Church." and
In another plaza, hs says upon this rock
will build my Church, namely upon Peters
confession Of Christ," and that Gregory OF
NaseanKum says In one place that Peter sls
called . rock and comprehends In his faith
the foundAtlous Of the Church" but he doss
refer and Paul while he Is called !.
christian, name derived from Christ. h.
ceived that all but two Of those "resnec,a M IN.
! Witnesses" OF DR.. White, upon tbe Ron,.s
hypothesis, do natly coptradIct tbsmsalva..
| and the two who do not Contradict theu,
selves arc Cyril, OF Jerusalem. and Greonr,
Of Nazeanrum, pelthsr of whom testiss ~
The papacy In this case by calling Petep H.
foqndAtior of the Church.
| II IL really quite amusing to see how mn,
~ ~. augustine Is treated BY Mr.. Anonymous.
homish Church, and was first brought upon
sne STAND ~ Dr. White, as "perhaps tho
IN, nnost learned among the doctors Of the prim-
nve onurch," TO testify that she would moi
Senere "a une gospel " the authority of the
oA,nonc Chureh did not compel him TO do
ana yet Mr. Anonymous Kicks him ont
=, eours a. "a non-committal witness who
po'e mummy
% pretty point Just here with ref
with right Jesuitlcal astuteness, and tbas
nice little insinuation that there il really
no difference In the ideas whether the Church
may DC said to DO founded upon Peter, or |
oam oy Peter. But Il must appear that they
are very different, when We reject upon the |
nature OF the subject. II the Idea be that
reser tneI sole foundation OF the Church 4
s ~ tue eic,uslon o. the other apostles and |
o .s inca Of course he cannot share |
VIE otnsn the building OF 1t, which Is al |
~ sset " eon,rary 70 the fact. But II the idea
N ms.1 nv, ~ ipounasuon Is 90 explained a.
:. ~ mean that feter labored In ihe construc.
". on Q. .ae Ghurch, then he would naturally
a on uoi.er Win his brethren the other
sdr e'i .a ana believers, all Of whom God sent
tSs i.s, rGo, IN ~ building up his Church; and
tn.s is..er me Idea Of Tertulllan, but not,
u seems, o. M. Anonymous.
T ,S We the object Of DR.. Sunderland,
=. &C.,, tno eross examination OF this DR.. Whites
=. ,e,,, 20 disproye the statement which
he Rou,,.s , s, oat simply to show that
'pon wnnout making the witness contra
~, n ~ Ins homanist may take either
III. VI sns ausmmA. Their witness Ii
- h H. J..