The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1881-02-09
For the Central Presbyterian.
Rome and Liguori.
1Concluded.1


MesSrS. EaitorS,-In my last letter
reviewed that part of Bishop Keanes long
communication which had reference to
Oaths and testimony before courts show
ing that even in the light of all the Bish-
ops ingenious explanations, the system of
Liguori Is not relieved of single one of
its repulsive features 1t still teaches
that under certain circumstances a wit
ness may swear to deliberate falsehood
"a thing utterly unknown to our courts
of justice, as well as to the Word of God.
1t makes the witness himself, or his con-
lessor, judge of the circumstances, under
which this may be done, and thus puts
the civil court in the power of the eccle-
slastical which rules the mans conscience.
1t not only teaches that truth may thus
be suppressed by mental reservation,
equivocation, and concealment of what is
occult" but that an oath which is taken
with all the forms of solemn admiration,
may, by the secret purpose of the swearer,
be rendered nugatory and void so that
whilst the administrator, and all the wit
nesses understand him. to have bound
himself, he is not bound, simply because
IN his secret purpose he did not intend to
d bind himself.
Let any man consider the bearing of
these principles upon our courts OF JUS
tlce, faith between man and man, affidavits
and testimony before courts, etc, and he
will see that my paragraph" of which
Bishop Keane complains, was not unduly
violent and infammatory." 1t is i'm
possible to keep down indignation when
Bishop Keane's seminary textbooks pro-
pose for our youth such system as this.
Let any man look at the history of civil
liberty in Spain, Austria, Italy, Mexico,
and in fact wherever this system of Lii
guori has prevailed, and he will see that
the evils foreshadowed by me have but
too widespread existence outside of the
fertile imagination and charitable heart
of DR.. Witherspoon.
pass now to consider that portion of
the Bishops letter which has reference to
the subject of rights of property.
8. He quotes my translations of Liguori:
1t is certain that one in extreme want may
steal the property of another to satisfy his ne
cessities," and "a nobleman who is ashamed to
beg or work may steal to supply his wants if he
is poor"
He objects to my use of the word steal
And says Liguori does not say "may
steal. y [ beg the Bishops pardon, but
he does. He says ahenuna Sw1%ipere-
and the word surripere, not only means
to steal, as any Lexicon will show, but it
is the very word used in that proposition
condemned by Innocent XI, to which
Bishop Keane afterwards refers, where
not only did Innocent XI understand
SurT9pere to mean to steal, but the Bishop
did too, because he says, "This PROPOSE
ton being rejected switch would open
the a0ay to thieving," etc. By the Bish-
ops own commentary, therefore, Smr5-
1ere means to steal, or as he expresses it,
ITO There; perhaps the Bishop knows
some occult" difference between steal
ing and thieving in the technical Ian
guage of Moral Theology"l
If Liguori had said take, openly and
above board, instead of steal: if he had
confined this taking strictly to cases of
extreme necessity, and if he had said that,
while the obligation to make restitution
is suspended as long as the man continues
ere ct Spe pauper," yet this obligation
cannot be ert51gutshed, and will reassert
ITS binding force, as soon as the man is
IN circumstances to pay back what he
has taken of another's; no one would OBJ
ject. The case would then be fairly
under the rule the Bishop refers to. But
Liguori uses Sarripere which carries in it
the idea Of something stealthy and under
handed. Bishop Keane says he does not
use furari, and even says "non f,1ratur."
Of course, furari would involve tech
nical confession Of guilt. He beats the
bush little and says 8urY5pere, as men
beat the bush now, and say, "embezzle
ment," breach Of trust, etc., but it is
stealing nevertheless.
Bishop Keane calls my attention to the
words ertren1a necessita8 which he en-
Phasises. But his sin against the con-
text here is greater than any he has
charged against me: for Liguori goes on
to say, IN the same connection, that the
same decision is given by the Doctors Of
the Church where the case is "prorinaa