Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1879-04-10
PAPIsT LIFTS THE CUDGEL,
And BelabOrs Luke" for the
WantOnness of His Assertions.
Correspondence of the Register


Does the name Luke correctly reflect
the evangelical character of your cores
pOndent who assumes that nom de plume
Can any Christian gentleman, or one
who has ever aspired TO the office OF an
Evangelist, be guilty OF publicly insult
ing the largest body of protesting Chris
tians in the world, by branding them
all "abject slaves?" The writer must be
sorely at a loss for a rejoinder to Bishop
Kain's arguments when he descends to
such coarse abuse. But an intelligent
public can and does discriminate be-
tween sense and spleen. No wonder
the Bishop disdains to notice such an
adversary. Were he to engage in a
mud-hinging contest his magnificent
robes" might suffer, whereas the 'leath-
ern belt" of his obscure foe could be
bespattered without being injured.
His attack on Bishop Kain is as weak
as it is unmanly and unchristian. He
charges the Bishop with using forced in
terpretatiOns Of Holy Scripture, but he
does not cite a solitary instance. The
Bishop stated that as Judas held the
last, so ~. Peter always held the first
or prominent position among the ApOs-
ties. There is nothing forced in that
statement. He quoted: Feed my
lambs, feed my sheep" and argued that
i'm this charge Of Jesus Christ to Peter,
is contained Peters appointment to the
office of Chief Shepherd of Christ's
flock. Is this Interpretation strained?
What then would be the natural mean
ing? lie placed the plain simple slgnl-
ticatiOn implied in the words on this
declaration OF Christ 10 Simon Peter;
Il have prayed for thee that thy faith
fail not; and thou being converted,
confirm thy BRETHREN" and also on this
text: Thou art Peter &c. From the
Acts he quoted the inspired declaration
without further comment, that when
Peter spoke, all kept silent, whereas he
fore there mad been much disputing.
What is there forced in all this? Did
Luke weigh the force of his own Ian
guage. OF was he writing reckless Ot all
meaning?
IL is strange how men can SO loudly
proclaim the Bible their only guide, and
vet boldly reject its plainest teachings,
simply because they do not agree with
their preconceived notions. But it mil
lions upon millions OF Roman Catholics
i'm the world conscientiously believe that
the Bible eniOrres obedience To the doc
trinal teachings of their church, why
should they be so berated by Luke for
following the very Rule of Faith Tor
which he So zealously contends? The
Bishop honestly breaches and inculcates
the principle Of his religion; Luke on
the contrary is absurdly Inconsistent
He teaches a principle, and then stout
IN vilihes people for acting on It, His
boosted rule of faith, therefore, means
simply this and nothing more. Read
the Bible, and believe as YOU please, AZ
long as YOU believe what (the intalll-
BILE Evangelist think Is right" This Is
the sum total of his religious and civil
liberty buncumbe: Give me liberty,
or give me DEATH
10th To accept out and out Paganism,
Luke" admits that there is in the
world a witness and Conservator of the
truth. What Is it, The Bible? ON:
no; 1.-The whole body of Christs faithful
people" Then, "out of thy own mouth
/ condemn thee, thou wicked servants;
Tor the vast majority OF Christ's faithful
followers deny the Protestant principle.
one little question | wish to ask:
Will Luke" prove the book he calls
the New Testament 10 be the word
of God without calling ON the authority
of the Church Of Rome PArIsr.
Whssling, .ipri Oh, 1879.