Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1882-07-23
THEOLOGICAL VIEWS.


Bishop Trei0nd's Recent Lectures on P02,al
supremacy ReUie,Ued.
To the Editor of the Globe.
Some fifteen months ago Bishop Ire
land delivered, in the Cathedral, in this
city, series Of discourses with the
avewed object Of proving that the
Roman Catholic Church is the only true
Church.
After the close Of these discourses l
ventured TO address a communication
TO the newspaper in which they
had been reported for the purpose Of
pointing out what seemed to me to be ar
entire failure on the part Of the learned
prelate in these discourses to establish
the proposition which he had avowed as
the object of his. discussion, viz: That the
Roman Catholic church is the only true
church.
OF course assented without reserva-
ton to Bishop Ireland's position that our
Lord, just prior to his ascension, had in
corporated the eleven apostles and their
associates and successors into body
ecclesiastic 10 be the witness and custO-
dian of his word, and to eXer-
else the powers and dispense
the benefits Of his kingdom
on earth until his second coming-com-
uniting to this body the work of making
disciples of all nations, and of inducing
all nations into his kingdom by the holy
sacrament Of baptism, and at the same
time solemnly assuring this body that He
IS with them always even unto the end Of
the world.
4 h hAH a4A
under this commission and this promise,
must necessarily be infallible in its official
and corporate acts.
l unhesitatingly asSented therefore to
Bishop Ireland's position that the Apos-
tollc church was infallible. But pointed
out that the Bishop in his discourse had
wholly failed to offer any proof whatever
that the Roman Catholic church of to-
day is the only true successor of the
Apostolic church; and that he had con-
tented himself in his argument in this
behalf with very evideDt petite pri7a-
ctpaS in alleging that, because (as he said)
the Roman Catholic church is the only
church of to-day which claims to possess
the attribute of infallibility, therefore it
is the only church which does in fact
possess that attribute.
That such an argument, especially when
addressed to those outside the Roman
Catholic communion, is utterly worth
less, is too apparent to need calculation.
l then called the learned prelate's atten-
ton to the obvious fact that the pivotal
question upon the solution of which
hinged the determination of the claim of
the Roman Catholic church to be the only
trueSsuccessOr of the apostolic church,
and consequently the only true church, is
he question of Papal supremacy--that
$, the validity of the claim of the bishop
OF Rome to be the Supreme Teacher and
Ruler of the whole church of Christ.
Bishop Ireland while still insisting
with singular tenacity upon the impor-
lance of the iHconsequential argument
to which L have above alluded, admitted
III his reply to my communication that
discussion of the exclusive pretenslons
of his church would not be complete
without treating the question Of Papal
Supremacy and he promised that upon a
future occasion he would deliver a series
of lectures on that subiect--a promise
which be redeemed during the last
spring.
1t was my misfortune to be i'll at the time
and thus TO be deprived Of the pleasure
of listening to this eloquent and very
able and ingenious divine in his treat
ment of this subject.
Fortunately my loss was not total
one, for the lectures have been published
in convenient pamphlet, which now
have before me.
L hope l am not too late in offering
through your columns some observations
on the matter of these lectures,
To my mind the importance Of the
question treated by Bishop Ireland in
these diseourses cannot be exaggerated.
If the claim of the Pope of
Rome to be the supreme teacher
and ruler of the whole Christian church
is valid, all bodies of Christians not
in communion with and subject to the
pope are unquestlonably schismatics. If
on the contrary his claim in this behalf
is invalid, the pope is simply an usurper.
If our Lord appointed st. Peter to be
the supreme teacher and ruler of the
church, and that apostle transmitted all
his power and authority in that regard
to successors, occupying the see of Rome,
ii IS the duty of every Christian to sub
NIT to the pope, and accept his teaching
without question. But if our Lord gave
no such power or authority to st. Peter,
individually; or if such power and au-
thority being given to this apostle in
dividually he did not transmit them
to successors occupying the Roman See,
then the claim of the occupant of that
See to be the supreme teacher and ruler
OF the Christian church should be re-
sisted by every Christian without ceas-
ing. If our Lord bestowed any such
extraordinary function upon St. Peter in
dlvidually we shall certainly find this
apostle distinctly exercising it, and
his fellow apostles unequlvocally recog-
nizing it; and there must be ample and
indubitable evidence thereof in the acts
OF the apostles and in their epistles.
Ii We do not find there such
evidence, we may safely dismiss the claim
that St Peter was appointed by our Lord
10 be supreme teacher and ruler of the
church as wholly unfounded; for St. Pc
ter was not the man to hesitate to exer-
else his legitimate power and authority,
nor would his fellow-apostles have
thought for moment of disregardlng in
the smallest particular the will of their
blessed Lord; nor is it possible that St.
Peter should have exercised the office of
supreme teacher and ruler of the church
during his lifetime without there being
abundant evidence of the fact in the his
tory of his time.
And so if the Bishops who occupied