Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1882-12-24

later years. All the books now contained
in the vulgate were, from the time when
they were written, of equal intrinsic au-
thority, being inspired writings. In plac-
ing them in the canon or list of inspired
writings, the church officially authenticates
the fact of their inspiration. She adds to
their extrinsic, not to their intrinsic author
| ity. But, once such official Authorization
made, all books covered by it are of equal
As stated in my last letter, certain books
both of the Old and the New Testaments
did not during the early centuries of the
Christian era receive an official authenti-
! cation. They were placed in the Canon at
later date than other books, hence their
| title deutero-canonical, as the other books
| of the Bible are called proto- canonical.
This meaning of the word e'deuteros is
seen in the title of the fifth DO ok of Moses.
the Book of Deuteronomy-''th second
law" Deuteronomy is not of inferior au-
| thority to Exodus.
will not permit MI. Thomas to retrench
| himself back of Webster's dictionary, in
other ecclesiastical terms, is explained in
the common Protestant acceptation. Mr..
| Thomas, know, has pirate lean
ing for dictionary scholarship. But, of
| course, he would make of it no public use.
Il was aware" adds Mr.. Thomas. ''that
| Moehler and some of the broader men of
the Catholic communion spoke of the
Apocrypha as deutero-canonical, but by
what right never could understand" Not
! only Moehler, but every Catholic theolog-
| ian, uses the word deutero-canonical. when
speaking of certain books both of the Old
! and New Testaments, and I hope Mr..
Thomas now understands ''by what right
! they use the word.
Rev. Mr.. Thomas again says: Il confess
to considerable surprise that the bishop,
| after his defamation against the revision
| of King James Bible, should allow it pos
sible under any circumstances to revise
the vulgate." I had explained at length
| the difference between a revision such as
| we have had of the Protestant Bible, and
| revision such as we may have of the vul-
gate. ''There may be- I said, "some day
in the flu ture revision Of the vulgate.
But the revision will make no substantial
changes; it will not leave out whole pas
sages." The revision of the Protestant
Bible has made substantial changes. Mr..
Thomas should put my statements, as I
enunciate them, before his readers, and not
give as mine what is the very contrary of
my words. The same disingenuousness is
repeated where he says of Pope Clement,
| she really undoes the work Of the first six
tus)." I had explained clearly that the
changes from the Bible of Sixtus were in
minor matters, which Si1tus had never
considered to be perfect in his Bible.
As to the ''whittling down" of tho DEGREES
of councils by Catholic theologians, Mr..
Thomas is again grievously mistaken.
What Catholic theologians white down
| are the Misrepresentation which Protestant
controversialists set up to delude their peo-
pie, and by calling these misrepresentation
Catholic principles to keep them
| away from the old church. Mis-
representation is the only argument
Professionalism knows how to use.
| "Aftsr those admissions" Mr.. Thomas
concludes, sit is hardly worth while to point
out the historical inaccurscie. in which his
| (the bishop's) address abound Isl This is
mere effort on Mr.. Thomas part to wiggle
away from the battle field and by raising
dust to cover his retreat from the eyes of
his friends. As 1 have just shown, I made
no admissions at all, and as to my ''histo-
| rical inaccuracies" Mr.. Thomas should
point them out.
For the last eighteen months it has been
announced with flourish of trumpets most
loud that it would be proved that the Re-
l al IL,
faithful conservator Of holy scripture, and
it all comes to this, that Mr.. Thomas the
sis holds if am supposed to make certain
| admissions, which I do not make, and if
Mr.. Thomas convenient interpretations of
Catholic doctrine are permitted to pass for
Catholic doctrine.
troversy between him and me in regard to
the Latin vulgate is indeed virtually
ended.
It would please many. however, if before
his final withdrawal, Mr.. Thomas would
tell us, what his test is, whether or not a
book is inspired and ought to be admitted
into the scriptural canon. His contro-
versy with me has placed him in the pre-
dicament of excluding from the Old Tesla
ment certain books, while admitting as
inspired writings of the New Testament
large number of other books, that are in
no better way authenticated for Us.
bring home to Mr.. Thomas the charge OF
singular Inconsistency in his biblical
faith,
make, too, this further charge, that in
excluding from the canon the books
which he calls "apocryphal," he, with
Professionals in general, has mutilsted holy
scripture. By what right. in opposition
to the preponderating Christian tradition
of the the early ages, and the unanimous
consent of Christians since the fourth
century, does he exclude five or six books
from the canon? will await reply.
JOHN Ireland.
st. Paul, Dec. 90, 1882.
Trough on COrns."
Ask for Trough ON Corns.'' 15c. Quick re-
ief; complete, permanent cure. CONS, W ar