Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1872-11-11

III AQI0Il NG1OEtlLC UtIdCt. TIE
Gayoso, penned the 4" Fallen Banner.p
Her Sisters of Charity collect YOU or
phaus and tell Of the DAYS in which they
slaunched the wounds of their fathers
of the camp and hospital where they
wiped the death dew from the brow OF
your lover, your husband and your boy,
alas, your soldier boyl But if she thus
brings poetry to adorn the brOkon col
umn, and charity to Irvine amidst the
n music, her spirit moves as terrible as the
storm, in conscious justice, when she
!, points you to Archbishop Stephen Lang
don, a Catholic bishop, who, at the
e head of his barOns, wrung the charter
of the rights Of man from King John at
T hunymede. She fears neither king nor
5 people. She alone, from age
b to age, lifts up her voice for
= the right though the heavens fall
s She established the oldest republics in
= the world-San Marius, in Italy, and
AndOra, in Spain. She established all
, the free cities of Europe, before the Re
{ formation submerged them under the
: tyranny Of Kings; and she would re-
/ store to-day the government Of fore
fathers, but that the wickedness of men
~resists her appeals! Perhaps you would
ask-wOuld she restore slavery? l an
swer no, and she is not afraid TO tell you
: 50. She abolished white slavery in
! Europe
, AFTER AGES OF CONTEST
: with human interest, and lifted up her
/ voice against the introduction Of African
slavery, and finally, through the inhu-
ence Of Pope Benedict XIX, called
2 the council of statesmen, who abolished
; it. Hawthorne, the New England nov
elist and historian, tells us that the
{ preachers of Massachusetts advocated in
their sermons the introduction Of
4" BlackamoTes to till the land and learn
religion"
Sir John Hutchinson first brought the
f subject before Parliament, in the reign
Of Elizabeth, and thus gave TO Protes-
tant England and Protestant New Eng
land the glory of
ESTABLISHING SLAVERY,
after Catholicity had abolished it al
over Europe. You will probably AK
the question, did not Catholics own
slaves? No Catholic who lived up TO
his religion, and obeyed the church
could introduce slavery; but after it be-
came an established institution, in any
country, he could; and was obliged, by
the Council Toledo, to purchase slaves,
if he could, from cruel masters, and 10
81 treat them as BRETHREN This was all
the church allowed. True, there are bad
Catholics in every cOuntry-men who
obey neither the Pope nor the priest.
The church is not responsible for their
evil conduct. l am only showing
that while England and New England
in their highest religious capacity intro
duced slavery, the Catholic Church de-
nOunced it. Bishop Hopkins wrote a
book in favor of ii, and Parson Brown
low did the same; and l believe, as I
stand here, that if il were to the pecu-
mary interest of New England to rs-es-
tablish it, their preachers would soon
find sufficient argument from the Bible
to prove up its perfection and godliness!
While the Catholic Church, true to her
teaching for two thousand years, would
say to you, mo, no, my child, you can
not introduce slavery without sin, and
you cannot buy slaves except where the
institution has been fully established, or
at most where cargOes have been
launched on your shores, and are likely
to perish if you refuse, in this you may
be justified, if you treat them kindly"
Thus, in government, Catholicity has
always been IN the side of constitutional
liberty, always opposed to slavery, ready
to vindicate the rights of the poor!
JURISPRUDENCE.
When Catholicity had given emanci-
patton to fifty million slaves in Europe, +;
an evident necessity for q change in
Jurisprudence pressed itself upon his I
attention, an almost infinite ramifica-
ton OF human interest required the law Z
to prOtectit, and the meagTe codes which !
had been sufficient for nObleman and !
serf or slave, fell far short Of this new !
and great necessity. But Catholieity !
was equal to the occasion. The COM |
mon law was perfected by statutory en- |
actments, and the civil law, after a long .
struggle against prejudice, was so !
thorout ly introduced that neither =
Epglor I'd nor America can now '
dispose with those of its principles and
rules which still enter into our ehancerv
system. The PandeX of Justician being /
found at Amaphi, all Christendom had G
restored 10 it in the twelfth century the l
Catholic codes. The J%Ustinian and The /
OdOcian of the fourth and fifth centuries, l
so modified as to meet the great neees- l
sity TO which ] have adverted, and fifty g
million freedmen, as well as the gentry I
and mobiles, reposed in safety under its
protection. There had been no wal of
emancipation, and now, in reconstruct C
ing society, the Church inaugurated T
4ADc EhlLu ~ oAtAl0 Ol law WHICH DIO T.
tected Jur forefathers in America, and
to which we still look as our only hope l
for justice. Subsection of this will and I
judgment of individuals to the decision \
Of proper tribunals was one principle
without which there could be no legal Q
science and no approximation to justice. !
The priests, who were the only I
lawgivers, impressed this upon )
the liberated masses, and although !
u boosted age spoke of a "higher law !
under what u Stewards have carried on l
their bloody work, yet, thank God, in a
teiligent jurors may still be found, and 9
competent judges, who subject their pri- I
vate Interpretation to authority. This /
ave US from anarchy. But in religion ]
this principle is altogether ignored, ex- l
cept by Catholics, and nothing insults 7
our modern Christianity so grossly as to I
be told that each individual must sub q
jet his private opinion to the authority ..
which was appointed to decide all ques- L
tons Of doctrine. Do they suspect some I
book, or passage Of scripture, of being !
spuTious2 Authority points them to the
decisions of Hippo and Carthage, in 1894
and 397, which decided a raging contro- 0
Yersy on this subject, and gave us the d
books of the Bible, as you still find e
them in every Catholic Church Of the t
world; but our modern Christian rejects 2
this authority, and either rejects OF ac- '
cepts this or that book, because it either 7
agrees or disagrees with his notions Of 1
what it ought to be. {
Do they suspect some doctrine 0 fbeing b
erroneous, as the Divinity of our Lord, t
in vain do you tell them Of the Council 1
of Nine in 355, which decided the ques- a
ton. They will tell you calmly that a
Romanism had already corrupted Chris e
tianity, and that this was a new doc i
trine in the fourth century. Does he C
doubt the doctrine Of Transubstantia- e
ton, or the Infallibility Of the Pope, he a
has the same answer, and falls back on \
his private Interpretation in a style o
which would disgrace a crOss-road mag {
for the most ignorant sinner v
understands thanks TO Catholic juris- I
prudenee) that without subsection to the v
and that without su6jecting ones g
notions of law to competent au- b
anarchy would ensue. \
But " the children of this world are Ii
in their day and generation s.
than the children Of light.n You I
still follow the Catholic rule to v
decide controversies about a mess of d
pottage, but when it comes to some mys- b
ferrous doctrine On which your salvation C
depends you decide for yourselves, each d
having a different theory and all Of ne Z
wrong but one. Hence our anar- n
in religion, and hence the infdelity d
threatens the land; but still the +
Ivy, as | have suggested, entwines your {
of justice, and C~athOlicity in b
this principle Of subsection to authority I
them for a time. Il