The morning star and Catholic messenger., 1878-08-25

to revolve in his present stylen when be latelJ
made bis first raid or foray into science and
| theology for, in bis fTss attack the names oil
Almighty God and Holy Church occurred, in
the aggregate, ssveu times while the pronoun
''I,D representing himself, appeared bnt once
This showed great zeal and self-denial. by
explanation" has how revolved him com.
Ipletely around; for his last bristles with nc
less than seven pronouns "I," while Almighty
God and the Church are we'll nigh forgotten
Hs, ha. hal Sanrs qsi peut
would, if could. warn D. P. 8. that there
is no royal road to learning, and that if be
wants to be able to quote the Fathers and dis
cues theology, etc., be must study, or st least
read, one or two books on the sutj .ct. 4 priori
reasoning is not the proper means for arriving
at the doctrines or opinions Of the Fathers.
Their ''pu bHshed opinions" mpst be read AID
even studied-sfter proper preparation.
1t was neglec. of this warning that rendered
him capable of claiming Cardinal wiseman as
'eI tirely otjscting" to the fEurative days.
The learned Cardinal did not hing of the kind.
He states the view in full, and although our
amateur theoloeian leads people to think that
the great man disapproves It. that impression
8 produced by q saPpressio Teri. Anybody who
reads the 5:h lecture will see thst Cardinal
Wiseman approves and dtf.nds it against
Croly. If D. P. 8 were punished severely for
his theological raid every tody would dpprore
it. Jet melody, 1 hope, will adrocate it. So it
is with Cardinal Wiseman he evidently ap
prores the view, bnt does not take interest
enough in it exclusively. to adeocate it yet
observe, he defends, just ss defend it now.
Here is what he's says in the note tt page 1871 :
do not adv ocate the prolongation of the
dsys to periods; bat think it very wrong to
call men 1nfidels for doing 30, when only such
erroneous grounds are given to the contrary i"
The Cardinal is defending the fgurative days
agairst this "Dr. Croly," apparently an intem
perate sectarian. The part of the above sem
tence which D. P. 8, suppres ,ed was aimed so
directly at him too that he fslt obliged to omit
il "in honor Of the initials" of course. More
over, on page 195 the Cardinal says 81 have
no personal prediction for any system" No.
thing more plain.
Thus it is evident that il D. P. 8, had read
and understood properly, the authorities to
whom he so recklessly referred me in his frat
attack, that attack would never have been
written or publis he'd, for there is An amusing
difference in tone and doctrine bet weeu his two
letters In his frst be "entirely" if you ples ,,
"eutirely objected" to periods; they were ICON.
trary to Holy Writ" and invented by il fidels, {"
and C. Jr, mu.t be dupe or an iguoramns.
But in the second attack the ''entirely" is omit
ted and the adwissibility of the doct1ioe is
proclaimed. Once he admits that good Catho.
lie may hold that those days were hsurative
hs stulti6es him sslf; for, IL was only on the
opposite supposition that his first attack was
st all justifi able. In both letters be tells us
that the infdels invented the periods, but be
afterwards forget, that, and says they were
invented by weak-minded Christians! And
have shown him to be wrong in beth supposi-
tions; for unfodDded suppositions they Ger.
tsiuly were.
He may believe if he wishes that the days
were Of twenty four hours but what main
tanned all along. IS everybody knows is that
the belief In fgurative dsys is at least equally
reasonable. and certainly equally sound Catho.
licity and the able tbeologians whom have
quoted, we'll az the Saints and Fathers of
the Church, referred TO II peatedly, completely
sustain my views
Now 1 want to know what does D. P. g
wAnti What is be driving att Does be
know himselff
He charged me with propoundiuga heresy
invented by infidels.
replied explaining clearly that it was no
hsresy and could not have been invented by
iufdels,
Wbereupon he comes at me sgain, iusinu-
ates that my explanation" was poor one,
yet admits that as held by me, the doctrine is
not contrary to Holy Writ and may safely be
accepted by Q Catholic contradicts himself
O couple of times prAtes about the inst Aptane.
ous orestion Of ell matter and other things
foreign TO the subject; and informs us that
MoSes made all his measurements of time by
the sun and the earth, OF by their revolutions
or somethingl
What is the bearing of all this on the sub
ject under discussion
Now here is foil extract from his second
attack:
"The creation of the world by Almighty
God is an article of faith to which every Catho-
lie must assent, but the. time and manner Of cre-
aion is not so"
And he adds unwillingly in refut ation of his
own previous claim: