The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1874-11-24

following propositions, all the holders of which
during his own generation, and especially
within the last II or 10 years.
l. Those who mail tain the liberty OF the press.
2. or the liberty ofconscience and of worship
3. OR the liberty of speech.
a Or who contend that Papal judgments and
DEGREES may without sin, be disObeyed or dli-
fered from, unless they treat OF the rules Soog-
& or who assign TO the state the power OF de-
fini, the civil rights 0ura) and province OF the
8. or who hold that Roman Pontiffs and
CEcumenical Councils have transgressed Inc
limits of their power, and usurped the rights OF
7. Or that the church may not employ force.
g. Or that power, not inherentin the ofhce OF
she b but '1 nom ~ Il at the d
cretion OF that authort y.
9. Or that the lmmunltasl clvli immunity mum 3i VI
the church and its ministers depends upon civil
10 Or that, in the conflict of laws civil and &C.
clesfastical the civil law should prevail.
H. or that any methcd of Instruction OF
youth, solely secular, may be approved
= i2 or that knowledge of things philosophical
and civil may and should decline 10 be guided
by divine and ecc esiastical authority. ..
1S Or that marriage is not ia It's essence sac
IA. OR that marriage, not sacramentally con-
tracted, has binding force; .o,.,.,ro, ,,o,,,o,
of the popedom would be highly advantageous
to the church.
religion may be established by state.
IL. or that in countries called Catholic the
free exercise of other religions may laudaDiy De
IS Or that the Roman pontif ought to come to
terms with progress, liberalism, ana hiooerh
These condemned propositions lthe holders of
them also condemnedl are from the Ency clcals
OF Gregory XVI, in 1881, and of Plus IN IN !oo4
and from the "Syllabus" Of 1861. The original
text of each is given in the appendix, with refer
ences. With regard 10
THE MEANING AND EFFECT
of the propositions, Mr.. Gladstone remarks: alt
hat
the infiicuon of penalty in life limb, liberty, or
goods or on disobedient members ofthe Christian
Church, nor the title to depose sovereigns and
release subjects from their allegiance, with
all its revolving consequences, mas Oeen
here reaffirmed. In termss there is no mention of
grieve to say they are beyond doubt included
For 1t isnotoIous tnat they nave .epoDee Deen d
councils: oar and the stringent ccondemnations of
pOpes and papal councils declared OecumenicaD
have transgressed he just limits OF th- ir power
or nsqEPed the rights S 0d sboHt
tion / need hardly say and indeed the right to
employ physical force is even here undlsguis-
Plainly, however, is the third proposition which
has the greatest practical importance OF all, and
the greater part of The pamphlet is occupied IN
| convert without renouncing his moral and mem
| al freedom, AMI placing his civil loyalty and
| duty at the mercy OF another" Mr.. Gladstone
reminds us that those who. not being converts,
but lifelong Cathohcs, reius assent 10 .Iat tne
| OF accommodation. Among them was 1.-THE
most famous and learned living theologian of
| the Roman communion, DIR. Won Dolllnger, long
| the foremost champion OF his church" He en-
dured his sentence with temper undisturbed and
in Germany - the country IRON which
| Luther blew the mighty trumpet, that
even now echoes through the land"
main OF ofconscience.' Else where, the fermentation
has in but few instances come to the surface.
i The mass of men can not examine such matters
for themselves, and even for the leaders "a
change of religious profession is, under all cir
cumStancee,
GREAT AND AWFUL THING
Much more is the question, however between
conflicting or apparently conflicting duties ar
duous. when the religion of a has been
changed for him, over his head, and with
out the very least of his participation" !"
| Hence Mr.. Gladstone does not hold the
members OF the Roman UhIreh IN genera
| they submit 10 them, but he calls upon En-
| glish Roman Catholics 10 replace themselves
eipsTfon iH isS When the question was DEBATED
| of admitting Catholics 10 parliament, their op-
ponents rested mainly on the allie CATION that no
| Roman Catholic could give an entire allegiance
n1eno UthoIitV in vii rpsfters Rni th biSb
| est Roman Catholic authorities in this country
| were appealed to for information. They were
asked, Did the pope claim temporal Jurisdiction,
and answers in abundance were obtained,
| tending TO show that these doctrines were obso-
lete beyond revival. But something more was
wanted. The state was strong enough to be at
ease about individual loyalty, but it had right
TO know to what demands from the pope Eng
lish Catholics were liable. For, "The theory
which placed every human being, in things
spiritual and things temporal, at the feet of the
Roman Pontih, had not been an idolum specus,
| q mere theory of the chamber. Brain power
never surpassed in the political history of the
| world had been devoted for centuries to the sin
|
! ChTisendom; had in the West achieved for an
impossible problem partial s1cce;s and had in
| the church by that Latin conquest OF Constan-
linople, which efteetualy prepared the way for
| tablishment of the Turks in Europe"
IL was essential then to ha an answer to
| such questions as these: "Did the pope claim
| infallibility? Or did he, either without infali-
| bility or with 1t land II with IT so much the
| worse), claim an universal obedience from his
flock? Aud were these claims, either or both,
i affirmed in mis- church by authority which even
the least papal of the members of that church
| The first two, luckily, were covered by the
last, for practical purposes Tor to the first Two
no SATISFACTORY ANSWER
could be given. The popes had claimed iogmatic
infslllbility for nigh a thousand years, and
| claimed obedience from the baptized members
of the church, but neither claim had been uni
/ verselly admitted by the churchs The GaIIican
Church had denied 1t, councils had failed to at-
firm 1t, and Gown to the close of the last centurg
| the prevailing opinions OF C1Salpine churches
| had been against both claims. The leaders of
| Roman Catholic opinion in Great Britain spoke
out brSvely in the same sense. bishop DOYLE
/ able and eminent who more than other
preIate then represented his church, said in 1875:
THE Catholic processes TO obey the pope in mat
tezs which regard his religious fai h, an in
those matters of ecclesiastical discipline which
have already been defined by The competent
authorities" And again, being asked. "Does
that Justify the objection that Is made to Catho-
lies that their allegiance is divideds" he an
swered: al do not think II does in any vay.
We are bound to obey the pope In those
things that 1 have already mentioned
But oar obedience to the law, and the allie
glance which we owe the sovereign, are com
plete, and full, and perfect, and undivided, in
asmneh as they extend TO all political, legal and
civii rights Of the king OF his subjects. L
think the allegiance due TO the king and the
allegiance due TO The pSpe are as istinct and as
divided in their nature as any two things can