Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1881-07-05

".
Rer. Mr.. Smiths Last Lecture Retrieved by
BisItop Ireland.
Rev. Mr.. Smith, last Sunday evening, as you
are aware, attempted reply to my lectures.
This l deem a fortunate occurrence, as ] re-
ceive therefrom material assistance in the task
which have imposed upon myself of placing
before you the proofs of two vital facts.
First-Tnat no one positive argument can be
advanced in favor of the principles of Protes-
tantism. Second-That the claims of the
Catholic church repose upon the most solid
foundations in the history of our Lord and of
early Christianity. l am sure I will find in
your own anxiety to know the truth in all its
bearings my excnse for again demanding your
attention.
/ will be permitted to make some prelimi-
nary remarks upon
MR.. SMITHS PECULIAR MODE
of dealing with his opponent in the contro-
versy.
He accuses me of mutilating for purpose
an important text of scripture. "When
Bishop Ireland" he says, s'quoted the com
mission from Matthew. he adroitiy quoted
the first and last parts of the
text, and omitted the middle, thus
cutting out the command to baptize. Were I
convicted of thus mutllating scripture
should regard myself overwhelmed with
shame and confusion. Whas feeling Bishop
Ireland entertained when he introduced into
his argument this outraged corpse of text,
will not undertake to say. The curious will
find material here for an interesting physcho-
logical study" You will remark the words.
Whatever others may do, the guileless Mr..
Smith will never mutilate a quotation-he
would regard himself overwhelmed with
shame and confusion!
Mr. Smith knows that it is recognized as
NO MUTILATIoN OF A TEXT
to omit from it words, which right or wrong
one deems nnimportant to the discussion In
hand, provided that the omission Is indicated
to the reader. In the report Of my lecture in
the Pioneer Press, the commission of the
words "baptizing them in the name of the
Father, and of the Son and of the Holy
Ghost" is indicated by s'asterisks." In the
GLOBE report, in some way, the 'asterlsks'
were transformed into a"dash.'' 1t is clear
that Mr.. Smith was not fair in accusing
me of designedly mutilating the text, and the
severe censure which he sought to pass upon
me falls back with double weight upon him.
self.
While accusing me In this unfair manner
of having mutilated a text of Scripture, he
was himself under an accusation of having
mutilated passage from
CARDINAL MANNING's VATICAN COUNCIL.
The strong indignation to which he gave ex-
preston before my supposed mutilation Of
Scripture must have led his hearers at once to
believe himself most surely innocent of
the very shadow of such crime, and he con-
firmed their trust in him by a most bold denial
of the charge. Bishod Ireland he says &C
cuses me of misquoting Cardinal Manning.
This is serious charge, If trr.. But
deny and repel the statement. l quoted from
the author himself and read the complete pass
age" The curious, most assuredly, will find
material here for an interesting psychological
the Cardinal might in the first instance have
been on the part of Mr.. Smith
thoughtless and innocent act; it might have
been that while he was transcribing the pas
sage some words escaped his eye, or that he
had deemed these words of small consequence.
But when he is charged with the mutilation,
and charged in the right, then to stand up be-
fore his congregation, and plainly tell them
that the charge was untrue-well, ''there is
material here for an interesting psychological
study" 81 deny and repel the statement" he
says; 81 quoted from the author himself, and
read the complete passage" Now, here are
in parallel columns the Cardinals words, and
MIR Smiths quotation:
The Cardinals Words MIR. Smiths Quotation.
p. Lou. "But against neither
"But against the oneIthe one nor the other
nor the other OF thesel of these things-the
things can human his-ltwo elements Of tradi-
tories, wrttcm by men tion-can human his
not inspired by theItories prevail, because
spirit OF God, not sell against the church the
dom inspired by anygates of hell cannot
other thar the spirit ofIprevail.'
God, prevail, because
against the church thel
gates of hell cannot
prevail"
have put in italics the words omitte by
Mr.. Smith; words which claim to be most
important in the understanding of the
Cardinals meaning. Neither is there in Mr..
Smiths quotation an "asterisk," nor a
"dash, nor sign of any kind to indicate the
omission. In the same connection he says
HE, Bishop Ireland) says that translated the
expression, tsDifficulties of history" into Facts
of History! Well, if this were true it would
have been proper" eff this were true''-
he openly denies the charge. will again put
the case clearly before you.
Cardinal Manning's words Up. 1851 "When
then the church, out of the proper fountains
of truth, the word of God written or unwrit-
ten, declares any doctrine to be revealed, no
d.btcutttes gof human history can prevail
against it,
Mr.. Smiths Interpretation of the Cardinals
words: Gin other words and in plain English,
If, now there are any facts of history that
contradict our dogmas, so much the worse for
the facts
(The italics are my own Is there not here
fragrant change of words ? Difficulties of
History" are made s'Facts of History Nor
is the charge a small offence. "What are diff
ficulties Of History?" Mr. Smith asks.
"They must be either the statement of facts
which contradict some theory, or philosophy.
Difficulties of history must re-
late to facts and nothing else
from the nature of the ease."
Yes, they must relate to facts, or occurrences
of history; but they are not ''facts'' in the
meaning in which the word is taken oriinar-
ily-they are not undoubted, certain occur
rences. The church does not say as Mr.. Smith
would interpret her words, If facts are
against me, SO much the worse for the facts;
but in case of not fully explained occurrences,
liable to different interpretations, am to be
allowed the benefit of the doubt. This is not
all. Fancying he has cleared himself of all
offense by bold and reckless denial, he under
takes to throw upon his opponent the crime of
mutilating the Cardinals words. ssBut in this
attempt to convict me, he says "Bishop Ire
land is himself guilty of an outrageous fault.
He takes piece from the 125th page, and
piece from the 130th page, and quotes them
together as though they were consecutive, and
thus really forges passage, as though he
thought he could fix up case better than
Cardinal Manning How Mr..
0r1tfh nolyo CT fav,o - vxo1