The morning star and Catholic messenger. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1868-1881, 1869-07-11
The Saturday Review and the taadatioa |

The above periodical, on the'oceasionof
reviewing a late publication ON the Inquisi-
tioky took the opportunity in its usual
-slabbing style, OF attacking the London
Isg5set It had no cause TO plume itself on
the result. The following is the concluding
Tsrtion Of the reply -, WA,
The Saturday 7eeUieio resorts to the old,
DID maneuvre. In aJannafy and july
1867, the Dublin. tRenies9 proved +? Demon
StxatiOn that, even upon the testimony OF
Eeaious Protestant authors, the facts had
been over and over again! most gross
Ay=Rxaggerated Asa alnst- The 1nQnlsl=
ton, and that the, mereitp sinteFp9slti2r OF
the RomAn P$htiHs m the Ae affafs, faF from
being a cause of reproach, is justly held to
be one of the glories Of the Catholic Church.
And now the Saturday, unable to meet the
\ Dublin on the fair field of historical
research and trustworthy testimony and
lsound reasoning, reiterates the antlquated
calumnies, and says that no one ne, can. can ex-
no great friend to Christianity in any shape,
had candor enough to say, in reference to
Liniborch's LibeT iSeRteDtiSTam, that the
Holy Office had been icalumniated, and that
"of a list of criminals which fills nineteen
| folio pages, only fifteen men and four
women were delivered to the secular arm"
The Inquisition itself was in fact instituted
by the Church To temper the seventies Of
the State in the suppression OF an obscene
sect, which was in such fragrant rebellion
| against human nature itself that even TO
particularize it's tenets and practices would
be an offence. That the Spanish lnquisi-
I ton was the affair of the State and not of
the Church, is not, as the Saturday asserts,
| ga subterfuge, originated by De Malstre,
but an incontrovertible truth; under Phlup
| ii. it extended to matters of trade, war, and
finance, and even the sale OF horses TO the
French came under its cognizance.
I Besides imputing to us u general want OF
reputation for accuracy, our reviewer
| accuses us of having made ourselves very
merry the other day on the ground that
1Ito the Ultramontane mind hereto burning
is one of the liveliest topics of amusement;"
and he states that Torquemada burnt I'M
mense numbers of them. Our adversary
is unlucky in this instance; Torquemada
was in direct opposition to Pope Sixtus
| w. and to Pope Alexander vi, and a
| Catholic who supports the pretentions OF
! the State against the authorities OF the
Church is not at all what is understood by
| an Uitramontane; he answers rather 90 our
! reviewers own definition of Liberal
Catholic.' Had we lived in the days of the
| Spanish Inquisition, we U1tramontanes
should have unquestionably been found
ardent advocates of obedience to the See
Of Rome, and stern opponents of the en-
croachments of secular power. Literally,
| We nave Ourselves GG S6pSEio1Go u siSISsiS-
burning, but we are free to confess that,
| when We find an opponent bringing forward
1 old blunders as new weapons, and dis
playing even more shallowness than
I maiignity, we do experience certain
satisfaction in the operation, metaphorical-
| ly, of roasting a reviewer. If we might
| venture, just for once, to attempt to initiate
| the inimitable, and to follow--Loago tan,en
interrallo - the half-philosophical, half
scriptural style of our opponent, we would
suggest, with the utmost respect and
Difference, that in writing on Catholic
4 history the "camels which he evolves
| from. the depths of his own "interior
| eonsciousnessn bear q really remarkable
resemblance to the canards of French
teutltetonistes, and are indeed, upon the
whole, very fearfully and wonderfully
made" Or, as the oracle says in another
i place, they are something like compost
| tions only suited for Protestant ladies'"