The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1880-09-08
CORRESPOND NOE.
Rome and the Altar.
PETERSBURG, VA, Sept. Sd, 1880.


MeSsrS. EdstorS,-,In the Catholic V5s-
itor of the 29th ult., Rufus gives his
reasons for withdrawing from the discus
sion with me. They are two, first, that l
"will not keep or be kept to the point,
and second, that prefer Father Muller
as an expounder of Catholic teaching to
Rufus" To the latter charge l plead
guilty, but to the former [ do not; and
whilst it would be ungenerous in me to
argue the case now that he declines to
correct me any more" will only remind
our readers that "the point, as distinctly
stated in my first letter, was to acquit
myself of the odious charge of garbling,"
which fellow-townsman had wantonly
brought against me in the public prints.
To this point have tried to keep myself,
by numerous quotations from the author
in question, to show that his teachings
were really what I had represented.
Rufus" has introduced many side issues
such as partizan stories about the Re
formers, etc., but / have steadily ignored
them and kept to my point. The public
may Judge whether or not he has made
good his offensive charge of garbling." :"
In closing the public discussion, he
gives me two challenges of private ma
ture, neither of which can accept. One
is to write to Father Muller and ask him
whether he and Rufus agree or not.
Rufus" is so accustomed to have a priest
decide everything for him, that this seems
to him a very natural course-but after
all the quotations / have made from both
eide, and have already decided, the whole
81. L Il
lenge is still more remarkable-that 1
shall write to him and give him "the
name of even one (Cathohc) received by
you during your ministry here of six or
seven years. Now / have received Cath
oics to the communion of my church
since l came to Petersburg, who are now
living amongst us, and any responsible
citizen who will come to me and give his
personal assurances that no improper use
will be made of their names, is welcome
to them. But to send them by mail to
an anonymous writer is to break over all
the safeguards of privacy that pastor
must respect in reference to the religious
convictions of his people.
l am sorry that in closing the CORES
pondence "Rufus" did not see fit to re-
tract any of his offensive language to-
wards me. He says, however, that IF
ne has said anything offensive, such was
not his intention" How can he use
the word if when he has accused me
Of garling," dishonesty, " falsifying
truth unblushingly," ETC.? If that lam
guage is not offensive what could be 9?
And "if such was not his Intention" why
did he not withdraw it like man? But
| Rof - l. .,
intention to be offensive, and in parting
with him, as l do now, assure him that
l shall not cease to pray for him that he
may be guided in the right way, and I
ask him to offer the same prayer for me,
only to be sure to offer it to our Heavenly
Father, and not to the Virgin Mary, so
that | may have some hope Of an answer.
And now that Rufus is withdrawn,
and the editor of the CathoEc Visitor
has entered the field, not only on his be-
half, but also as spokesman of Bishop
keane, there are few questions that /
have been anxious for long time to ask
the latter, and would be glad if the ed
ltor of the Visitor would answer them
Tor him, or get the Bishop, if he is not
700 busy to answer them through his
columns. In his sermon at Jarratt's De-
pot, Bishop K. used the following Ian
guage (see synopsis in CathoJjc Visitor of
July 3d) He explained that the altar
Is erected in every Catholic church for
the eucharistic sacrifice, and he called the
attention of his hearers to the declaration
oi St Paul (Heb. xiii 10), 1--WE have an
altar, whereof they cannot eat who serve
Ile tabernacle, and suggested to them
%hen next they would enter a Protestant
church to ask Where is the altar ? and