The morning star and Catholic messenger., 1878-09-08
rsT onLnANa aUMpAY. sFPTEMBERs IfTs
DAYS OF CREATION.
n tto' vAnquishod he could argue stiil."-3oLD :

to him proved that he did not understand
this snbi sct, and now, with peculiar persist
spcy he compels me to add another proof OF
the same fact He 10 determined to have it
shown that the subject wss beyond him In
every possible respect.
Before doing 80, however, must hasten 20
correct him in another matter, which regard
% very important. 1t IL that he represents m
rs sneering at Origen and st. Gregory He
does this on the untenable ground that tho
words "mserable choice" were aimed ct Orr.
gen. Bat Of course everyone snw that the word
miserable is an adjective, qualifying choice, and
therefore referring to the judgment Of the per-.
SON who made the choice, and net to quotation
or writer chosen. If D P 8, bad used vinegar
or worm wood Juice instead of ink, to write bis
letters with, his choice of q writing fluid.
whether appropriate or miserable, would reflect
On his own Judgment, IN making the selection.
If the vinegar or wormwood juice proved to be
o miserable writing fuid then d g would have
made o ''miserable CHOICE" even though 1t
might happen to be the very best vinegar or
very best juice in all the world when used for
its appropriate purposes. So it is with Origen.
He was o great defender of the Church and the
quotstions from his writings, used by d P g.,
may ubf0 DScu CASOiiobpS yOct 10 ~ oAuPiy
showed how carelessly my critic reads Catho.
lilo books, and as it proved nothing for him, 1t
ia obvious that the CHOICE was o miserable one
that is to say his choice of that quotation
showed bad Judgment. Speaking of Origen
reminds me that the portion Of his writings
which gave rise to the Nelt brian heresy, ao.
oording TO DIR. A'zog, were not eondeRned un.
ill more than three centuries after the death
of his eulogist, st. Gregory Thaumaturgus.
The eulogy, therefore, being premature, would
seem not to have carried conviction to the
minds of succeeding bishopn. 1t is to be re-
marked however that st. Gregory while giving
Origen we'll deserved praise does not indorse
u his opinions, as D. p. 8. would seem to i'm
ply.
Well, after rambling" as it were over the
whole subject, after attacking first one thisg
and then another, my unfortun ate critic maker,
at last, the specific claim that the following
sen benoes from my COZ ortributon on the eclipse
contain two distinct assumptions, rs he calls
them; and these, he adds, are CONTRARY to the
teaching Of the jewish and Christian Church.
es," as, he says, he originally claimed in his
hrst criticism.
Here ere the sentences:
'As far as the history of the sun is concerned
she fourth day. This 10 the more interesting
"a it shows that the fret four of the days ocou-
pied In creation could not be days Of twenty
four hours. Nor did the fact escape the atten-
tion of the Fathers Of the Church."
D P. g., gives Us to understand that he he's
exerted himself terribly in trying to make me
face that quotation. He, perhaps, grew red
aud perEpired. Yet it is astonishing that no
ono perceived lis Ssmpsonian tfforte in that
p8rttUatur direUtiou.
Now all this is tho more startling when we
reflect that there is no sssuml tion at all in
that quotation. Every word Of it is true.
Anybody who, in arguing with Atheists, etc
chooses as he has g right to do, the answer
founded on fsurative dsys, nust speak jast
about that way-if he understands the suhjact.
A Catholic bystarder who heard q fellow
Catholic talk that way, would, If he underst BOD
the subject, be the last person to essst the
Atheist In opposing it. And il he did not un-
derstapd the subject ard yet interfered, 1t is
obvious that no argument would be necessary
to prove him vain ard impertiDent busy-
body. -
For, with respect to the flrst sentence of that
quotation it 10 to be remarked that creation is
twofold, viz:
1. Creation Of substanoes, and
2. Creation of Jor1ns.
It is generally held that all Substances we're
created in the begiHaing, and that all the differ.
ont things. or Jorms ofmGtteT, were created dur
ing the six days. Therefore, when, depending
on the account given in Genesis, I said that
the sun was created on the fourth day, said
what anyone must recognize as the truth
according to Moses. A man is not expected
to define every word he uses In m
article. Webster or any other photographer
can do that, and the three meanings
which all of them give for the words create and
creation, would, If known to him, have prevent.
cd D S, from Misunderstanding what said
Besides, the formal creation of Adam took
place on the sixth day. Is it possible that D.
P 8, would maintain that Adam formally ex.
listed daring the whole six dsys7 On the first
we'll as on the SEVENTH 1t is every whit as
reasonable ss TO blindly hy in the face Of Moses
and say that the sun existed on the Rrst day'as
III