Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1878-03-04

4
was there contradiction of any Kind between
/ these Popes Each one in his own time was
| the supreme moderator Of church law, and had
i the same authority as his predecessors, whose
/ Jaws ne was tree to change, or continue, in all
and several cases. Dr. Pusey's profuse refer
ences to acts and decretals of Gregory, Innocent
ana alexander. led Mr.. Thomas to believe that
! ne was TINS time in possession of powerful
objection. would advise him to take for the
future no secondhand reference: he should see
| the originals for himself
second objection WAS st. Gregory the
GREAT 1nfalilble, when he said, ..the mediator
OF God and man is the rock from which Peter
received his name and upon which He said He
| would build His Church:'' An infallible Pope
| declaring that Peter is not the rock upon which
the Church is built Mr. Thomas thinks fin
lshes homanism. Most certainly, in this in
| stance, Pope Gregory was not infallible. He
was merely, when he said these words, preach
ing a sermon In one of the churches of Rome
speaking, Catholics would say, as private
| doctor. not teaching the universal church. Be
II right or wrong, what he said, an objection
derived from it against the infallibility, is
totally irrelevant.
| Though speaking, however, only as private
doctor G1egory was most correct in what he
SAID. christ, Of course. is the great, chief
cornerstone on which the Church is built; all
Catholics confess this doctrine Peter is the
foundation of the Church only inasmuch as he
Is united with the chief corner-stone, from
which alone he draws his own solidity. Peter
is but the secondary, the visible cornerstone:
tins is all that Catholics claim and Gregory has
in his sermons and writings again and again
| applied the words recorded in Matt. 18th chap.
to Peter. Mr.. Thomas nicely exercises in his
reading OF the Fathers his right of private in
| depreciation: he takes a passage, which by it
self has meaning favoring his views; but the
hundred passagesOf the same writer, which
clearly overthrow Professionalism, Mr. Thomas
quietly ignores.
Again-.Is it possible that Gregory was in
fallible, when he refused the title of universal
bishop: Alas, no; Gregory was not in this in
stance infalhble: he was refusing title, not
defining a doctrine. But neither from his
words as a private doctor, shall Mr. Thomas
take an argument against Papal supremacy.
/ Gregory explains why he refuses this title, be-
canse the word might convey to some that he
included III his own person the entire episco-
pate, thereby detracting from the dignity of
his fellow bishops. Mr.. Thomas knows that the
supremacy never had in past ages on the Roman
char more stern, incorporating advocate
of its claims than this same Gregory. 1t is he
| who as supreme pastor sent Augustine to con-
vert the Anglo-Saxons and who constituted
Augustine the metropolitan of the old British
bishops-a measure which Auglcans most
| heartily abhor.
But here is one, which Mr.. Thomas did not
take from DR.. Pusey. The church has APP
| proved the yulgate and in the vulgate there is
an interpolation-ah passage marked 9TH verse
9th chapter Of st. John. The passage Dlr.
| L homas says, is not found in the four great
nncial manuscripts of Europe. l wonld ask
MIR. Thomas, if he is sure that the absence of
text from the uncal manuscripts proves it an
inrerpolations Are there not other yet more
weighty, documents, through which its genu-
mess may be established? The uncials are not
| all the Greek manuscripts. Far more authors
tative than any class Of Greek manuscripts are
the versions into other ancient languages made
| hafn fhn date Sf fha al, bn,,%
most can be brought back only to the fourth
| century. The text in question is not only in
the old Latin, but in the Syriac, the Etheopic. the
Georgian, the Alemphitic, the Arabic, the Per
sian. The vulgate iaself is about as old as Mr..
Thomas uncials. Then he should not hug too
closely the Sinaitic, which includes with the
inspired books the writings of Barnabas and
Hermas. But does Mr.. Thomas forget that the
passage, which he terms Interpolation is
I printed as genuine in all Protestant bibles,
those books which with all ministerial zeal Mr..
Thomas has been for years holding up to his
several congregations the pure word of God !?
An Interpolation in the Protestant bible-the
sole rule of faith for Pedestrians! Why, there
may be other interpretations in it, his Profess
tant friends can well say, and what then, of
/ the entire system of the Christian religion,
which we have always rested on this sole book?
The vital question for st. Paul Protestants
must now be- what texts are in the uncials!
must despatch briefly Mr.. Thomas obiec-
tions against unity of faith among Catholics
They are all no less irrelevant than his objec-
tions against infalibility. BY unity of faith
among Catholics, you all understand, we mean
equal submission of all Catholics to the decs-
ions of the church in doctrines of faith and
morals The subjects of the court are of one
mind when the court has spoken. Now, Mr.
Thomas objections and questions under this
head OF unity of faith either refer to cases
where no decision had been given by the church.
| tn faif
morals Imagine MIR. Thomas asking me
whether belong to the liberal, to the agrees
slve, or to the lin statu quo" party in the re-
cent struggle in the vatican? Parties in the
certain European telegraphsts whom Mr..
Thomas takes as faithful opponents Of the
minds OF the cardinals, and what connection
such parties, if proved to have existed could
have with doctrines of faith
and morals for my life, l cannot see.
mr.. Thomas lays of course, great stress on the
"Gallican articles SO called, as a clear proof
against unity of faith in the church. Mr.
Thomas should have stated the whole case A
certain number Of French bishops did indeed
under the pressure of royal influence, in the
seventh century, sign the articles he quoted
These bishops simply made an egrcgious mis-
take: the church surely does not claim infalli-
bility for a local gathering of bishops. But no
sooner were the articles made public than they
were condemned by the Sovereign Pontif Of
|
other countries at once assented. The bishops
themselves, who devised the ARTICLES" re-
voked them, sued for pardon and sent q, letter
or recantatlon to Pope Innocent XII. When the
chief had spoken, there was obcdience-unity.
For a while yet after this event, factious
theological school, small in the numbers of its
followers, maintained that church doctrine
could be SO interpreted as to require the tacit
assent OF the episcopate, to give full force to
papal DEGREES. This assent being always practi-
cally given, without delay, the church did not
Tor time pronounce formal condemnation
against the opinions of the Gallican school, and
no formal pronouncement being made, its ex-
lstence was no proof against unity. The school
died out of itself; it was buried before
the Vatican Council assembled. do not hope
to convince Mr.. Thomas Of the fact. He has
ways OF his own of knowing what takes place
IN the Vatican, and he is sure that the bishops
who discountcnanced the late definition were
not inopportunists, hut genuine Gallicans. l
would not disturb his placid confidence in his
lnt or whoever they may be-Dr. Pussy,
instance, the true Episcopalian in disproving
the ecumenicity of church councils. If there
We're no. Gallicans in the council, he says 81
feel that the council was not ecumenical, even
In the Roman sense of the word" Well, there
were in the council no Gallicans; even an in
A: ~ 1869, bishops no longer in the land
Of the living, and SO Mr.. Thomas
Professionalism needs not to be disturbed by the
Vatican Council; it was not ecumenical.
Mr.. Thomas informants have told him that
ton and Holy Writ, by majority of three.
| Those who We're at the council have always
fancied-not having the same source of infor-
nation as the rector Of st. Paul's-that the ma
jority was over six hundred-the minority being
| two.
Outside of few dogmas like that of transub-
sanitation, the immaculate conception and
infallibility, there is no more unity in the
Roman Church than in the so-called orthodox