Knoxville weekly chronicle. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1870-1875, 1871-08-09
FATHER FINNEGANs ADDRESS CON-
sIDERED.


great prominence in the Romish church
controversy in considering Father Finne-
gan's address on Tuesday night, as a reply
to certain articles on the relation of Ro-
man Catholicism to American liberty,
that have appeared in the CHRONICLE
Indeed, the call made upon the Father
leaves no doubt as to the objective point of
his address. In that call, the President of
the Irish Association goes out of his way
and volunteers an attack upon the CHRoN-
ICLE i'm the rather remarkable charge that
las much has been lately said, to n'y Ot0n
knowledge ut least, grossly false by ono of
our city papers regarding the Catholic
Church, etc, I have been requested by
many influential citizens to invite you to
lecture on some subject that will putan
end to their false ideas" etc The Faith
er's address, therefore, we are warranted
in presuming was intended to expose our
false assertions and ideas, and to show
that the Romish Church of to-day Is not
antagonistic to civil and religious liberty,
hut on the contrary, " the hope of RepuO-
licau institutions.
We listened attentively to the address,
expecting to hear this question discussed,
but were greatly disappointed. Instead
of addressing himself to the issue, the
Father went vigorously to work to knock
down several men of straw put up by
himself. The address in this respect IL
lustrates the character of the contest the
Hon,S".n Church wages. There were nj
least hundred Catholics present on
Tuesday night that do not read Tie
CHRoNICLE. and who know nothing
of what we have said save as the Father
construeS 1t TO them. Every one of those
men, listening to that address, We're led to
believe from the Fathers reply, that we
had made war upon them rs Foreigners, rs
ignorant, cowardly, dishonest and worth
less men. These were the charges he dwelt
upon and to minds that could not or had
not or dared not read our articles, the real
Issues made were never understood. Was
this an oversight or by design? Was it in
tended that our position should be misun-
derstood and that the Fathers flock should
go away, believing that an unjust war was
being made upon them? Is this speci-
men of the information impaired to them,
and the means usually resorted to, in order
to prejudice their minds against those who
and fairly differ with them? We
do not intend that intelligent reading Irish
men shall labor under such an impression.
We make no war upon them as foreigners,
no war npon them as Irish citizens. We
make no question as to their bravery or
honesty or intelligence, for we know many
very good citizens who are 1rishmen.
Their Priest misrepresents us when he
makes this impression upon them. In
this, as in many other questions affecting
their interests, he keeps them in ignorance
Of the real issues and fights upon imagin
airy ones. The cry of Il Know Nothing war
in this matter, rs against us, is supremacy
in view of the fact that one of
Gle must look over the ocean to Prussia to
3 e the home of his parents.
The Issue we make is, and we want to
make it SO plain that the Father can not
or dodge it, that the ROmish |
Church, as nor constituted, with the In |
dogma forced upon it, against !
the protest of its most learned and liberal |
minds is hostile to the spirit of our insti
tutiOns. To support this position we have
heretofore shown that the dogma of Infall-
blity, if it does not rest upon the supreme
temporal as well as spiritual power of the
Pope, is mere chimera without founda
ton and significance. But we demon
strated from CdthOiic doctrine that the
Pope claimed supreme authority over tenn
poraL Princes, and insisted that "while
the State has rights, she has them only IN
uirtie and by the permission of the Stlpc-
riOr authority, and that authority can only
be expressed through the Church.n Upon
this basis we argued, that whenever the
Church and State como in conflict, as they
may do very SOON in such places as New
York, Catholics are bound, according to
the teachings of their Church, to '.frst
listen to their Church and Priest" This
was the point Father Finnegan was to an
swer. Did he do it? In his hours adj
dress he once alluded to it, and then an
swered 1t by saying that "those who made
such charges do not understand the doc
trines of our Church, they are Ignorant
newspaper men," If he is content with
such an answer we certainly are. The fact
that Irish Catholics fought bravely in our
revolution, and on both sides in our civil
war, tchen there tcds no confct tCith their
Church, proves nothing material to this
question, for the gist of the whole
controversy is what would they do IL
their Church and their eirft rulers came
IN conflict. We say again, we do not make
war upon Irishmen, or charge them with
being less honest than other citizens, or as
being cowardly, but we do oppose their
church as now dOmineered over by priests
and Pope, whose object and teaching is
to raise up the standards of their religion
as claiming their first homage and allie
glance. We oppose their church, for it
assumes supreme dominion over them, not
only in their religion but in their eCucd-
ton, in their social duties, and above all i'm
their duties as citizens owing supreme al
legiance TO their civil rulers. The efforts
OF their priests to keep them in ignorance
OF the real issue in this controversy, and
TO prejudice them against us 10y all sorts of
Misrepresentation, ought to show them