Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1881-06-27
THE TWO FAITHS.
CLOSING LECTURES BY BISHOP IRE
LAND and REV. s. g. SMITH.

| CLOSlNG LECTURES BY BISHOP IRE
LAND AND REV. s. G.. SMITH.
Structures on the Sacrament-the CathO-
lie Doctrine-The Syllabus s-Protestan-
tism Religious Communism-FO Foreign
Born Catholics vs.. Methodist Elders
Rev. Smith Treats of the Foundations OF
the Catholic Church ch-Interpretation OF
the Word "Rock"-False Claims as to the
Infallibility of the Pope-The Catholic
Claim to Antiquity.
Some Popular Objections against the
| Church.
| Bishop Ireland closed his series of four
lectures at the cathedral last evening. Fol-
Lowing is his discourse in full:
| began this series of lectures when / had
supposed that Mr.. Smith had completed his
series on the Pretensions of Romanism, and
announced that would demand your kind at
tention for four Sunday evenings. After an
interruption of two weeks Mr.. Smith took up
| again his subject, and, for all 1 know, may
continue for several weeks yet will not de-
part from my first announcement, and this
evenings lecture will complete my series.
Nor, indeed, will it be necessary that should
speak again unless, ,perhaps,a "a reply be attempt
| ed to the lectures which Ihave already given.
Mr. Smith may or mayl not speak on other
specific points of faith or practice in the Cath
olic church. HIS objections will be of the
same nature as those which he has advanced
against the points propose at this present
moment to review, and reply to one of his
lectures will be sufficient reply to all
| that he may hereafter say, and / may
add, in truth, to all that any Protestant con-
| troversialist may say against the church. The
grounds of Mr.. Smiths objections, sum up
in two words Mr.. Smiths private views of
| scripture texts and his misstatements of Cath
| olic teaching and practice.
| teaching on the Holy Eucharist, confession,
| and her relations to civil liberty.
THE HOLY EUCHARIST
| The Catholic church teaches that the words
| spoken by our Lord at the last supper, are to
be taken in their literal, obvious meaning:
''This is my body" 'This is my blood"
"Do this for a commemoration of me-" In
virtue of Christ's institution we believe that
| when in the mass the priest pronounces over
| the elements of bread and wine the solemn
| words of conservation, the substances of the
bread and wine are changed into the adorable
body and blood of the Savior, nothing remain
ing of the bread and wine but the
forms and appearances. How the
change is effected l know not; it
| surpasses my poor mind. 1t is possible to
| God, and I have Gods word that it takes
place. rest satisfied in my faith. Ihave, 1
| say, Gods word for it: "This is my body; this
is my blood" The infallible church assures
| me that these words are 10 be taken in their
plain, obvious meaning, and even if there
seemed some possible room for second inter-
probation, the church's declaration preponder-
ates above all my private views or opinions
This is the Catholic doctrine; this its solid,
| immovable ground. To overthrow the doc
trine, the sole logical process is to prove that
| Christ did not institute an infallible church.
Until this is done, all objections derived from
our own ideas of the dogma, or our own views
of scripture, are to no purpose; they do not,
cannot prevail against what am infallibly
| taught is Gods institution.
| Mr.. Smith says: "The doctrine rests upon
| an absurd and unphilosophical basis, 4
the exploded notion of the middle ages, that
| to body there were certain accidents which
could remain after the body was essentially
changed" +" "The worlds thought" he contin-
ues, "has no place to-day for any theory of
absolute accidents i he philosophical basis
of the dogma, beg to tell Mr.. Smith, is the
power of God, and trust that in Mr.. Smiths
mind the world to-day has place for Gods
power. The church teaches that the Euchar-
| ist is Christ's body, although to my eye 1t
may seem bread; and have no doubt but that
God may produce the optical sensation that
does occur, without the instrumentality of the
/ substance of bread.
"The theory may be scientifically proven to
be false. Il believe the chemist and not
the priest" There is no question about be-
leving the priest, but about believing God
and Gods infallible church. Scientifically
false! Singular language for a Chris
tian! Why the unbelieving Jew
could have said on the same ground, of
the incarnation, that it is scientifically false.
The Godhead was entirely concealed, and
lever through faith in Christ's
words. Mr.. Smith will allow no miracles ex-
| cept those which can be substantiated to the
senses, which would be not draught upon
| faith but confirmation of it. He forgets
that there are miracles of both kinds. Mira
cles substantiated by the senses were needed
| to establish the divine mission of Christ.
This much once done, we believe his word,
| and when he tells of wOndrOus acts of his
omnipotence, totally veiled from our senses,
we accept his word, because it is his word.
| In this way we believe the incarnation, the re-
demption, the creation, the holy Eucharist.
STANCE to say, having asserted that the Eucha-
rist may be scientifically shown to be false, he
himself upsets his objection by adding: 81 say
we do not discuss the question of absolute
possibility" That's the the whole question,
and that much admitted, there is nothing left
to discuss.
| He then denies that the words of scrip
ture do warrant the real presence. When our
Lord said "This is my body" he meant, This
is u figure Of my body. On strict pOlemical
principle, there is no room for discussion here.
The church, declaring herself infallible, gives
one Interpretation. Mr.. Smith, protesting
/ l. niu Tn xuhi
| depreciation am to trust? This is all that is
needed for strict argument. Imay add that
if Mr.. Smiths Interpretation of Christs
words were correct, then our Lord spoke to be
misunderstood. So clear are his words in this
matter that large body of PrOtestants admit
the real presence. The Lutherans are firm
believers in it, and in the Episcopal church the
Ritualist and High church party, in great
portion, admit the Catholic doctrine. We
read in st. Matthew: "Take ye
and eat; this is my body" "Drink ye all OF
this, for this is my blood of the new testa-
ment which shall be shed for many unto the
remission of SINS" Nothing here suggests
that our Lord is speaking by metaphor; the
emphasis put upon the words-my blood
which shall be shed:for many-excludes the
metaphor. These words of the institution
must be read in connection with those OF the
promise in st. John, 81 am the bread of life.
If any man eat of this bread he shall live
forever; and the bread that will give is my
flesh for the life of the world" !" The Jews
murmured, and Jesus repeats: ''Amen, amen,
/ say unto you, except you eat tie flesh OF
the son of man and drink his blood. you shall
not have life in you." His later words: ut
is the spirit that quickeneth: the flesh pro-
fiteth nothing" 1.-THE words that have
spoken to you are spirit and life"-simply
mean, as numerous similar words elsewhere
in scripture show. that the carnal
man without Gods quickening grace does not
understand divine things. The mystery re-
mained, since many walked no more with
Christ because of the hard saying. and the
apostles themselves remained with Him