The morning star and Catholic messenger. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1868-1881, 1873-01-26

Augustine meant. 2nd, ~ to the qoiopie
that "Apostoliea Scdes" meant an Apostohc
See instead Of tho Apostolic Sec, We lnn- I
mated then and soy now that any schooi t
boy ought to be ashamed Of it. 1t 10 wife
the greatest difficulty that We constrain
ourselves to suppose that it is put forward
in GOOD faith. Tho instances that we cited
from other passages of st. Augustine, where |
he used the same expression in sense that
could not possibly be construed otherwise
than as the Apostolic See, have not oeen
noticed by our opponent. The expression
is found in his writings probably several
tho usands of times, and we defy our oppo-
nent to show that it is ever used otherwise
than as applied to the Roman See, unless
perhaps in rare instances where another
See is mentioned by name as being OF Apos-
tolic origin. Then the universal use OF the |
term as a distinctive title of Rome by the |
writer's Of that day, of previous ages anu
ever since; the same use Of the phrase ny
Emperors and public officials, showing that
. they always meant Rome and Rome only
, and not ono among number OF Apostolic
: Sees; all this, which cannot be unknown to
J any student of history, must have dam
aging effect upon the reputation for learn
Q ing of any one who seriously makes tho
D childish mistake of denying that Rome was
a known then, as much ms now, by the title,
t the Apostolic See.
But is it made seriouslyi Or 10 it de-
d liberate bubble used to bolster up fail
;. ing argument and rob the truth of its vic
a tory among the unlearnedf Spiritual
,, guides,-conductors of souls-ought to be
d careful how they mislead 30 glaringiy, so
= frivolously as this. t,a.a.. Jig -.a-4~--
J. All the rest of the Presbyterians article,
y instead of considering the evidence ad-
g. vaneed by us in favor of Infallibiiity, 'is
r devoted to malignant attack upon the
~ Jesuits, upon us, and upon the Popes, al
y though entirely foreign to the question at
pa pa issue, we pause moment to notice its ut
II, ter unreasonablenes.
GU THE JEsU1Ts. The allusion to these holy
re and learned in a little discussion
Az among laymen, like this, and in the tont
;or used by our opponent, is simply imperti
ne mont and insolent. To drag these gentle
Ie, men into q publicity to which they hav'
no not consented, to apply to third parties wh'
a uy have nothing to do with the discussion, ep
,al lthets and language breathing such rance
", and bristling with sucl, insults, shows NO
in only Ii-blood but ill-breeding. Truly on
oi opponent must be hard pressed and griev
in ously vexed, to give way 30 unguardedi
en- en- to the public exposure of wicked and un
,ai, christian feelings.
ers The reference to Father Weniger is mos
In. unjust. Archbishop kenrck may have sal
what ia attributed to him, though we bav
grave doubts of it as we'll as Of other quo
of tatioas from him heretofore given by th
Prssbyterian, but even if genuine, We pui
mo remember the Archbishop has since COZ
IL fessed that he was wrong and Father WEI
the iger right. AS to Pere Crafty, an appeal
,re- his testimony is simply ridiculous.
fin OURSELVES. We are accused this time
ed having stolen and this 10 in the larl
ex- "Caps of the Presbyterian, which q
late frigbtfully big. Stolen from whomf Fro
h it the came Father Weniger. This is rath
og- incon sistent after having just before gu
we ted from our article Of the 18th August o
and declaration that we did not get the mos.
tive our citations direct from the Fathers,
to from responsible commentators. Now ali
ten this candid admission why accuse us
TENT stealiDg-eXcept from haolt Oh @ecusin
,nts, We have recourse to variety OF aathol
gina and not knowing in advance to how ma
ugh We shall be under obligations, we must
fer our Acknowledgements till the clio
res We confess indeed partially for Fatt
find Weuiger's tabular form OF statement,
YER division of the subject and his concisene
has So liberal Las been our use OF his wo
as in that we have made standing joke amo
and our friends of the fact that we intended
at make the Presbyterian publish Jes
the work in it's own columns before we
out through.
east All these are personal considerations
we which the public can have no interest, a
the are highly improper to have thrust upon
? to attention. If we really had sinned, the