Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1878-02-18

o1u not reprove, who art thou that judgest
announcer mans servant? To his own master he
standeth Or falleth.'
Our Lord Matt. 23) severely rebukes the
scribes and Pharisees, "who, these are Mr..
Breeds own words-:'had the effrontery to tell
people on their own authority what to believe
and what to practice right and good.
st. Peter, lst epistle, chapter, reproves in
the clergy of the church, ambition, avarice,
severity of manner and domineering
repeat at every spiritual retreat.
Feed the flock of God, taking care thereof
not by constraint, but willingly according to
God; not for the sake of filthy lucre but vol
UNFAIRLY; neither is domineering, but being
made pattern of the fock.'
final instance is given when st. Paul gave
one day scolding to st. Peter. This is the
passage of scripture which Mr.. Breed declared
to be hard nut for Catholics to crack, upon
which Bishop Ireland once tried his teeth.) A
serious cause of difficulty in the early church
was the natural jealousy existing be-
from Notwithstanding like the spirit of
nationality that occasionally crops out in the
church to-day. The apostles needed to be very
cautious, lest they might appear to favor one
party above another. st. Peter, however,
welded a little too much to old times, when
orally with the Jews. St. Paul, who himself
leaned the other way, took Peter to task for
his Partially to the Jews. There was no ques-
ton under the sun of Peters authority to
govern teach the universal church. The late
Pope Plus the Ninth had cross old monk for a
confessor, who would sometimes scold him for
his shortcomings as man, and yet this old
confessor acknowledged the infallibiIity of Plus
as Pope. But what reference, you will say,
have all these passages of Scripture to the
points of issue tonight. Ask, rather,
MIR. Breed. I wish to place before you
his full argument. I have given you his
premises by which he has proved for himself
his right to liberty as against tyranny" Let
me now i've you what he offered to his audi
ence as conclusion from those premises.
DO you wonder, my friends, that the Roman
church forbids the people to interpret the Bible
for themselves while such passages as these are
in it? What palmer simpler, moro emphatic
denunciation OF its assumptions could be
given. Therefore, taking my stand upon these
words of Gods own book, denounce the as
symptoms of the Roman church. look with
great suspicion upon those who, to use PauPs
own words, come to spy out our liberty which
we have III Christ that they might bring us
into bondage" I will not tolerate him who
represents himself as the vicar of Christ, and
who, putting himself in Christ's place, dares
to command me to close my Bible and to re-
celve what he says is and interpret as the
truth. No; this is tyranny; this is despotism.
Against such despotism the Bible and civiliza-
ton together protest."
1t is a complete non-sequitur. The conclu-
sion violates all rules of logic. 1t is in no way
contained in the premises it does not follow
from them. And this is the character of Mr..
Breeds entire discourse: compilation of
Scripture text, in which somewhat similar
words happen to be used, no matter what
may be the precise meaning of the word in
each separate case may be- and then suddenly
one grand EXPLANATORY conclusion-with no
WORN ont ,c% 10 al IL. Il
rapid dow OF language, a seemingly dexterous
shutting to and fro of numerous Scripture
texts, together with frequent misstatements of
the Catholic position-all this at first hearing
strikes the unthinking as somewhat Of de-
tense Of his case but when the close logical
augmentation is sought out the defect is soon
perceived
Why, the Catholic church is the very soul,
the mother, the guardian of true spiritual
freedom. It is her own sacred inheritance.
The word liberty itself is nothing; it is in
the mouth Of friend and foe In the
days of the apostles, as Mr.. Breeds
texts show, liberty was at times
eel merely the liberty of the flesh. No persons
use the word more glibly than communists,
civil and religious. In the name of freedom
they speak, whom Mr.. Breed calls criminals
and fools, who declare the discipline of an Or
ganized church, bondage and subscription to
It's creeds ''serviity." Our Lord gives us the
meaning Of the word-''If the Son shall make
Whosoever committed sin is the servant
OF sin, you shall know the truth, and the truth
shall make you Free The truth shall make YOU
free. Spiritual freedom for man is the unim-
peded aspiration of his soul to it's destiny and
It's destiny is truth for the intellect and good
ness, which is but another aspect of truth for
the will. Adhesion to error, to sin and passion,
Is slavery. The Office of law is to direct the
soul in it's aspirations, to mark out for it the
path to truth and goodness, and hence, it be-
comes not merely the measure, but the very
condition of liberty.
Of course law, to be legitimate, must derive
from legitimate authority. God alone has the
right to command and He alone, being Himself
the fullness of truth and goodness, can direct
the aspirations of the soul towards their true
God. All authority to promulgate and execute
laws, consequently derives from Him. self
constituted legislator would be tyrant, a
despot.
Obedience to law affirms, far from destroying
liberty. ship on the sea, steering stra irl,t to
port, under the influence of the magnet, is .ne
soul obeying law. The crew are not slaves, be-
cause they are guided by the magnet. The
ship, without magnet, chart, or helm, tossed to
and fro by winds and waves-it is the soul
without lava condition of license.
MIR. Breed, himself, grants our principle.
Freedom, he says, must be governed by law,
and liberty ruled by authority, and license or
comm unism is a state wherein men are without
rule or restriction.
am sure no one of my hearers conceiyes
civil liberty possible without well-detined
laws and courts with power to interpret and
their solemn duty to abide by the decisions of
the courts, and they deem themselves no
slaves. They may, indeed, as the laws allow.
appeal from inferior courts to superior ones,
but when the last word is said, even if it be
against them, they submit without CRYING out:
This is tyranny; this is despotism; it binds
my will, my reason my ability to understand
the law for myself
Our Lord is the one who brought us spiritual
liberty. Yet remark how he enforced laws.
and required rigid obedience to his own de,
clslon and those of his courts. He that be-
heVeth not shall be condemned, He that
heareth not the church, let him be anathema-
These are few texts Mr.. Breed forgot to
quote. Our Lord allows no one to act or think
differently from himself, his church, his apos-
ties. Was this tyranny? By no means: for
supreme authority was vested in him: he
had proved his mission; his words were
truth, his law was the very condition of true
p poe1ty: Inc truth shall make you free. st.
Paul was no less positive in demanding sub
mlsslon-ln act, word and thought, to his teach
ing and laws. If an angel from heaven should
preach gospel beside that which we have
preached, let him be anathema Raveninu
wolves, he called those who set up opinions
of their own; never, said he, shall they enter
the kingdom of heaven, Who introduce sect
and schisms. Was this tyranny on the part of
Paul? Certainly not-he had established his
divine commission to teach-and his rulings
were law-the measure and the condition of
liberty.
Now the position of Catholics to-day towards
the church is precisely that of the first disciple
to Christ himself, and to his apostles.
Mr.. Breed would have proved his charge of
despotlsm against the church, had he disproyed
her claim to divine commission. But he
made no attempt even in this direction. The
simple fact, that we accept as final, as truth,
the rulings of the churcl-our religious su,