Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1881-07-17
Req. Mr.. smiths Misquotations.

Req. Mr.. Smiths Misq,aotations.
To the Editor of the Globe.
Permit me to say few words in reply
to the letter of Rev. S. G.. Smith which
appeared in last Sundays GLOBE.
Mr.. Smith is evidently believer in the
principle that audacity insures success.
In no other hypothesis can account for
the positive and bold assertions, so con-
trary to facts, with which he fills up his
lectures and his letters. If assertions
were arguments Mr. Smith would un-
doubtedly be the victor in every discus
sion. Unfortunately for him the nearer
or the reader weighs the assertion before
he accepts it.
had accused Mr.. Smith of misquoting
and mutila.ing passages from Catholic
writers. Of course Mr.. Smith indignant
ly denies the charge. ~ have quoted
Roman Catholic authorities" he says in
his letter, ''with scrupulous care, and
have examined the declarations of their
own theologians, that L might give their
own presentment of the case, believing
most firmly that the more clearly and &C.
curately the Roman Catholic position is
stated, the more easily 1t is seen to be
false Here is very positive as
sertion of candor and innocence on the
part of Mr. Smith, and those who would
only read his letter, believing him to be a
truthful gentleman, would be sure that
he never misquotes, or mutilates, or
garbles authorities He is himself the
innocent and the injured party, he gives
us to understand; it is his opponent who
has all the guilt to bear. In another part
of the same letter he says: 81 write to
call attention to his Bishop Ireland's)
renewed charge of misquotation of Car
dinal Manning by which he seeks to di-
vert attention from his own offenses of
that kind. should not ever do this, but
for the fact that the bishop has been guilty
of one of the well-known tricks of pro-
fessional controversialists by which they
hope to overcome plain and straightfor-
ward men. The bishop is too polished a
gentleman, and of altogether too frank
and sincere o spirit to have done this
thing, and when less closely pressed and
in less dangerous position he would I'M
doubtediy haye made more honorable
defense But must proceed to expose
him.
If assertions were arguments, repeat,
Mr.. Smith-thc 'splain and straightfor-
ward' Mr. Smith-would be all right.
But, alas! assertions do not always, GER
tainly not in Mr.. Smiths case, accord with
facts "But must" he says, "proceed to
expose him. And he proceeds-in very
singular way for ga PLAIN and straight
forward man.
Mr. Smiths most serious mutilation
of a Catholic authority occurred
in his treatment of Cardinal Bellarmine.
He cut up, twisted around, turned upside
down, sentence of the cardinals until
he got out of it what the cardinal, and all
Catholics with him, believe to be a hor-
rid impiety, viz: "That if the pope could
or should so far err as to command the
practice of vice and to forbid virtuous
actions, the church were bound to be-
lieve vices to be good and virtues to be
bad" This was quite performance, and
Mr.. Smith was not unmindful of his sue
cess ~ commend" he added, "this
choice bit of literature to the careful and
prayerful consideration of Bishop Ire
land'' In my last lecture brought home
to MIR. Smith this fearful fraud upon Car
dinal Bellarmine. What has he to say
about it in his letter-in this letter which
promises to expose me? Nothlng-abso-
lutely nothing. He writes, in concluding
his letter, the words already referred to:
III have quoted Roman Catholic authori-
ties with scrupulous care" Now, Mr..
Smith, say something to us about "this
choice bit of literature and tell us in the
style of a ''plain and straightforward"
man how you fabricated it.
l had also accused him of misQuOting
and garbling Cardinal Manning in two
instances, and from these accusations he ]
strives to defend himself in his letter. l
will review his defense The first
charge was that he had translated into
ssfacts Of history' what Cardinal Manning
had called difficulties of history" This
charge MI Smith denied in his lecture
June 26. "Well If this aoere true it would
have been proper" THE italics are
mine.) In his letter last Sunday, as far
as have been able to understand him, he
admits the fact charged, but declares it
legitimate inasmuch as according to him
difficulties of history" mean "facts of
history" With this explanation, Twill not
say that Mr.. Smith was conscious Of per.
petrating fraud upon the cardinal. But
in fact, he did perpetrate upon him an
egregious fraud as the cardinals mean
ing is entirely changed and he is made to
say something which he could not en-
dorse, by the translation of his words,
difficulties of history" into "facts Of
history"
The second charge was that in quota
ton from the cardinal, Mr.. Smith left
out words, the omission of which was a
material mutilation of the cardinals SEN
tence and a complete change of his mean
ing. The cardinals sentence is: "But
against the one nor the other Of these
things can human histories aoritten By men
not inspired By the spirit Of God, not seldom
inspired By G'ay other than the spirit Of God
prevail The words in italics
are those which Mr.. Smith omitted.
Mr.. Smiths reply to this charge
is that the quotation, with the omission,
was taken from the Pioneer Press report
of May Is, which was only an abstract of
his lecture, that in the full report of his
sermon of June 26, he states that he had
previously read the full passage to his
congregation, and then gives the passage
again, in which the Italicized words occur.
This explanation given, he adds: "And
yet Mr.. Ireland has the indecency to ig-
more the complete quotation in the full
&c I, l. - IL.