New-York tribune., 1874-11-19

| Rooms this evening, to consider the questions
raised 10 the controversy between Mr.. Gladstone
| and Archbishop Manning. Speeches were made de-
nouncng the imputations and assumption in tho
recent pamphlet on the Vatican DEGREES and reso-
luton was unanimously adopted declaring that the
civil loyalty of Roman Catholics is in no wise af-
fected by the decree of Papal Infalibility.
Mr.. GLADSTONE ON THE VATICAN DEGREES,
! :. SUMMARY OF HIS RECENT PAMPHLET-THE CLAIM
| OF THE ROMAN COURT TO ABSOLUTE OBEDIENCE
THE STRIFE LIKELY TO ARTsE-MR GLADsToNE's
| DECLARATION OF HIS OWN POSITION.
| FRoN THE REGULAR CORRESPONDENT OF THE rRIBUsE.l
! LONDON, Nov. 7.-Since the appearance Of Air.
Gladstone's paper on Rtualsm in The Contemporary
Rereu for October last, it has longer been pos
sibe for any honest man to repeat tho stupid
caumny that the late Prime Minister of Protestant
England was a secret convert to the Roman Church.
Certain passages in that article reused the fury of
Roman Catholic writers to an unusual pitch. The
! attacks made by them on Mr.. Gladstone have led
| him to reply in a pamphlet which viii be out on
| Monday, aud thenceforward MI Gladstone will
have assumed the position of one OF tie most con-
| spicuOus antagonists of the Court Of Rome. Not,
should say at once. the position Of enemy to Ro-
man Catholics. assahant OF their religion az
such, but Of the resOlute opponent Of that wild
| ambition which at Rome-not from the throne, but
| from behind the thrOne-promDts the movements of
| tho Vatican" OF the Pope himself be speaks al
ways with respect and kindness. and of the great
body of Roman Catholics with brotherly love and
| charity.
The forthcoming pamphlet, to be published by Mr..
Murray bears the title, The Vatican DEGREES, in
their bearing on Civil Allegiance: Political Ex-
postulation" Mr.. Gladstone oddly denOminates it o
Tract, and devOtes the first twelve pages of it to an
explanation of its Occasion and Scope. In The Con-
temporary Reriec he was discussng-at the mo-
ment-the question whether a handful of the In
glish clergy not engaged in an utterly
hopeless and visionary effort to Ronaaize tho
| Church and people of England ard this was his
| answer:
At no time since the bloody reign OF Mary has such
scheme been possible. But IL II hal been possible in
the seventeenth eighteenth centuries 1t would still
| have become impossible in the nineteenth when Rome
has substituted Tor the proud boast of Seper cade
policy OF violence and change IN faith when she has
IefuIbislcd and paraded anew every rusty tool she
fondly thought to have dsu9ed; when no one can
become her convert without renOunoing his moral and
mental freedom and placing his civil loyalty and ny at
the mercy of another; and when she has equally rcpu
dated modern thought and ancient history.
WHY Mr.. GLADSTONE WROTE HIS PAMPHLET.
This was what provoked the attacks to which he
thinks it proper to make some answer Bat he in
ssts that both the assertions and his present answer
are defensive, not aggressive; that neither the
abetOrs of the Papa chair nor writers from Papal
point Of view have right to demonstrate with the
world at large but it is the world at large that has
the fullest right to demonstrate =" first with His
| Holiness, secondly with those who share his pro-
cecdings, thirdly even with such passvely allow
and accept then.' And the pamphlet is, in sub
stance what he calls it, political expostulaton, ad-
dressed mainly to English Roman Catholics, calling
upon them to show how, after the recent d, claraons
by the supreme authority Of their church, they can
reconcile their allegiance to that church with the
purify and integrity of their civil allegiance; aud
setting forth, with singular clearness and power,
the claims put forth by Rome to override the Obliga
tons of civil allegiance. In doing this, Mr..
Gladstone eSchews not only religious bigotry
but theological controversy With theology
as such he declares he has nothing to do.
1t is only in Roman theology tlrustlng
itself into the temporal domain that he recognizes
topic of political discussion. This fact-thc fact
that the Pope of Rome is trespasser on ground
which belong to the civil authority, AID that he
affects to determine by spiritual prerosaiye ques-
lions of the civil sphere-s the whole and sole cause
| of the mischief. No other Christian body makes any
| such pretenson. All others "contentedly and
thankfully accept the benefits of civil order; never
pretend that the State is not its own master; MAKE
no religious claims to temporal possessions cradyan-
tages and consequently, never are in perlous coll
lison with the State" OF the mass of Roman
Catholics. individually, lie would say the same
thing But not so with the leaders. 1t has ever
been made matter of boast that the Roman Church
| is the only Church or community protesting TO be
! Church which does not submit or obey or hold its
peace when the civil governors Of the world COM
| mandn and the boast is by TO less ;erSon than
! Archbishop Manning And the pretensions Of tho
| Church are not diminishing but increasing. In the
middle ages Rome claimed universal monarchy. The
| Rome of to-day has abandoned nothing, retTac:ed
| nothing.
By cOndemning will be seem those who, Ike Bishop
DOYLE in is &C. charge the medieval POpes with aggscs
slon she uncond!li)nally, even If coycry. maintains
what the medieval Popes maintained. Bu: this is
not the worst by far IS that whereas, in tho
national churches and communities Of the Middle Ages,
there was brisk, vigorous, and constant opposition 10
these outrJ geOus claims, an opposition which soutly
asserted its orthodoxy which always caused ltset
TO be respected aad which even sometne' gined tho
uppor hand; now, in this nineteenth century OF ours
aud while II Is growing old this same opposition mas
been put out OF court and uticiay eX,DgGished within
the Papal Church. BY the recent decrces OF the Vatican
And il is impossible for persons accepting those DEGREES
ius.Iv 10 complain when such documents are sublcted
IN good fah a strict examination as respects their
comnotlty with civil right and the obedience OF sub
jects. 49, .,.,
1t is impossible therefore, urges Mr. Gladstone, for
pcrsops accepting those decIees TO complain when
such documents strictly examined as to their
compatibility with civil right and the obedience Of
subjects In defending his language respecting
them he alters nothing but divides the incriminated
massage into four separate numbered propositions
viz: