The morning star and Catholic messenger. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1868-1881, 1870-05-29
Rationalism. No. 7; or the Moral Law.

ibis subject, after parenthesis of 90,
. eral weeks, again arrests our considerable,
but only to be dropped a second time
matter of graver local Importance needs t
be discussed. Were this or that Arista,
chus we know to be believed, to agitate til
Question of rationalism in these columns
but to lose time, waste ink and paper, an
put their own intelligences to unnecessar
torture. We differ with them. Rationalisu
Is the universal heresy of all time. View j
as emanationism, or pantheism, or German
egoism, or in the Protean shapes it assume
to reflect the ever-varying forms of Pro
testant individualism, it is still the SAM
heresy-man asserting himself in place o
GOD. Rationalism, by whatever name yo,
choose to call it, either explicitly or i'm
plcitiy denies the fact of creation. Ac
cordlng to it this world is owned by man
and God had better mind his own busines,
In heaven, and not interfere with man..
management of his own property. Or
account of rationalism, and it's hermaphro
dlte Offspring, Gallicarism, the present
Council holds its sessions in the Vatican,
Ihls we stated in an earlier article. and it
Is with no little qualification we publish to
day the first DEGREES of that Council verify.
ing what we forecast. They are all aimed
at Rationalism: We would wish, however,
to treat this subject in a more popular
style, 30 as to be understood by all our
readers, but we beg our readers to bear in
mind that some subjects-conic sections
calculus, spherical trignometry, or theology
considered simply in its scientific aspect.
for instance-could never be popularized.
we write for all classes, among whom men
OF education, intellectual culture and dis
clplined minds, ought most assuredly not
to be overlooked. We would wish also tn
please all tastes, but the task is homeless.
In the first place, taste is one, is indepepd-
ent OF our appreciation, and can vary only "a
to degree; in the second place, the article
commonly labeled taste is mere prejudice
contraband. Our sole ambition is to edit a
Catholic paper, to represent Catholic life.
and to defend, as far as our ability will
enable us, Catholic faith and morality
Beyond this we deny any mans rightzor
power to drive US. When we need advice
and God help US we need it as much as any
of our fellow-sinners, we know where to
get 1t, disintereste6 and, at the same time.
o'se advice, interested and therefore fool
sh, we hope for the future never to be in.
1icted on us.
In the last two articles of ours on Ration. |
'ilsm, free will and affection were treated
u; and by the line of argument we had to
ollow in order to treat of them philesophi-
ally, we are necessarily led to the exami.
'atlon OF the moral law by which both are
be guided and directed. Free will. as
las been proved, has not its own law in
tseH affection, as was demonstrated in
No. 6, is simply an impetuous. head
'ng rush towards some extrinsic object,
y which it is attracted: neither is expli-
able, though both of them are the only
'undatlons on which Presbyterian and
lethodism can find foothold, without the
ltefvention of the understanding. The
understanding only can apprehend the OBJ
ctlve law, which governs free operations,
I'D can only apprehend it in the light ,
hlch that law sheds upon it. Understand
g Is nothing without something to be |
1derstood; and without this something '
'derstood understanding is simple DOS e
bility; thing which may be, but is not. o
Is only owing to the ineligible reality t
tside of US and independents of us, that we n
n know whether we exist at all, and as a
can attain to NO knowledge whatever a
thout the active concurrence of the b
Outstanding, OF mind, it is clear the mind it
ast have some objective reality extrinsic r,
it as the term or limit of its perceptions. W
Id as the mind is the arbiter by which a
freedom of choice is directed in its NJ
ectlon, our will also, endowed with this m
edom, must likewise have q limit to I'll
ep it within bounds. Only God, since it al
even by rationalists, as we have o.,
sslfed them, that such a being exists, sc
be his own limit: be to himself the fiji
ect and subject at once of his own cog wi
ions and operations, and therefore find on
his inmost being united in unity the an
st absolute, the subjectivity and object ii,
", the light of whose union with one mr.
ther beaming out on us reflects on MS tn
other light, in which we see the second tn
reality of things. The object which ST,
'acts our will, when our will is in it's bl,
NAL conditi on, is identical with the ulti- bo
e and immediate object of our thinking nj,
1ciple; we cannot will that which we SD,