Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1879-04-23
THE HEREsY OF THE POPEs
Further Discussed by Bishop
Kahn I'm Reply to Rev. Samuel

D - - ~
Further Discussed by Bishop
Kahn In Reply to Rev. Samuel
steele.
The only argument brought by Rev.
Mr.. Steele against the infallibility OF the
Pope, to which consider it worth while
to pay any attention, was his bold asser-
ton that certain Popes had taught
heresy. Two cases he has cited, one IN
third century, zephyrinus@ and Calls
tus; and the other in the seventh CEN
tury, Honorius /. ~ 5 H.3
l. Among the many early historians,
none can be found imputirg any heretl-
cal teaching to either of these Popes,
except Tertullian, who makes passing
remark, implying that Zephyrlnus was
inclined TO Montainism. His tes-
timony | have discussed. But Rev.
Mr.. Steele accuses both q. and Z.
of Noetism, and cites as author
ity the historian Hoppolytus,. as
translated by DIR. Wadsworth and ed
tied by Revs. Alexander Roberts, ID. D.,
and James Donaldson, Ii. D., and sold
by Scribner. New York. On Saturday
| 'teleg .aphed Scribner for the work, but
the book sent is a translation OF Hip
polytus, by Rev. ]. III. MacMahon, M.
A. and Rev. S. ID. +. Salmond, but edit
ed by Drs. Roberts and Donaldson. The
translators' preface tells of the recent
discovery of the Ms. (lS42) and their
first publication by NJ. Emmanuel Mil
Ter, Clarendon press (lS5l) and contin-
mes: "One generally acknowledged
mistake was committed by Miller in as
cribing the work to Origen. He was
right IN affirming that the discovered
Ms. was the continuation of the trag-
ment The PhiIosOphumerld, inserted in
the Benedictine copy of Origen's works.
In the volume, however, contain
ing the PhilOsOphu.nCnd We have
dissertations by Huet, in which he ques-
tons ORIGINS authorship in favor OF
Epiphanius. Heuman attributed the
Phiiosophumepd to Didymus OF Alex
ander, Gale to Etius; and it, with the
rest OF the Retaliation, Fessler and Baur
ascribed TO Cain, but the Able Jellabert
to Tertullian. In this state OF the con-
troversy, commentators turned their at
tention to HippOlytus."
Then follow names OF commentators
fayoring the opinion which ascribes the
said work TO Hippolytus. Among these
is the supposed author of Janus, DR..
Dollinger, the leader of the Old Catholic
Schism in Germany, of whom the Rev.
translators say: "The testimony OF DR..
Dollinger decides the question" Here
then is the Rev. Mr.. Steele's authority
for imputing heresy to two Popes-a re-
Gently discovered Ms, the author OF
which is unknown, but which
is referred by some commentators
to Hippolytus, and the re-
ference is mainly supported by the tes-
timony OF the man, whose mania has
been opposition to the infallibility OF the
Pope, and who was communicated tor
refusing to accept the dogmatic decree de-
6ningit an article of Catholic faith. Inow
call on my learned friend to prove that the
historian Hippolytus is the author OF
the PhilOsophumeRd. If he cannot trace
beyond question the said work to its
anthor, | ask the public to judge
whether Brother Steele has made good
his accusation against Zephyrinus and
Callistus.
3. From the authentic documents in
the case of Honorius, | have already
shown that that Pope did not approve
the MonOthaelite heresy. Mr.. Steele
has not attempted to refute my state
ment, for everyone knows that his quo
tations from the opinions of mode. n
writers have no weightwhen put by side
of the very documents bearing on the
case. Therefore Mr.. Steele has thus lar
utterly failed TO substantiate his rash &C
cusatiOnS