The clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1883-1888, 1886-02-10
Reloinder to Rev. L. A. Quito, Rec
tor ST. Peters.

MR. EDITOR /. Father Quito may say
that utterances OF 10 years ago, quoted
rom memory VIII not be received as an
argument in a doctrinal discussion. The
question pending is not Of doctrine, 1t j.
one of fact. viz "Does the Roman Catholic
Church teach that marriage as performed
by Methodists Is true matrimony p A
living witness solemnly avers that he heard
4 priest say in Roman Catholic Church
that the only true marriage is that per-
formed by the Catholic Church. This
witness is corroborated by the memory OF
other persons now living. So Father Quito
must either impeach the witnesses, or
allow that Romish priests contradict
themselves in expOunding the doctrineS
of their church. Ii he fails in both of
these he must admit his error. The boast
of the Romish Church Is that it is unit
in all its deliverances from the Pope down
10 the priest, and the Bible says, 'out of
the mouths OF two or three witnesses shall
every word be established.
?. My second argument to prove that
Roman Catholics taught that marriage
solemnlzed by Meihodists was not true
matrimony, was based upon the fact tha,
in two alleged cases marriage was re-
s0lemnized by priests of parties who had
been married by a Methodist minister
Father Quito replies to this; Although l
am lar from saying that every marriage
even OF Catholics, by Methodists is null
and void, nevertheless, ] refuse to consider
his argument because il Is not TO the
point" But, Father Quito, | will hold
YOU 10 the point, and all men shall see
the pertinency of the argument whether
Won consider it or not The argument IL
based upon fact, Romish priests did alb
soluieiy require parties to be remarked
w no were married by a Methodist Miuister
Now. il this did not indicate that The iorm-
er marriage was not a true one, what in the
name Of reason did il indicate? Account
for il AZ ou please, the fact stares you in
the face that the only thing which rendered
these marriages untrue, and required them
to be performed over again, was, that they
had been performed by Methodist Min
lister.
Father Ditto attaches importance TO the
fact that the parties in each of these cases
were of the Romish faith. Well ii Meth.,-
dist Ministers cannot perform true marri-
age for people of the Romish faith, can
they do 50 for people Of Methodist faith /?
| Would Father Quito teach by this idea
that while almost any sort of marriage.
even that performed by me, might do we'll
enough for Methodist people, still for peo-
pie of Romish faith different kind would
be demanded. | would resent more hearth
/ ly this impntation than the other one: |
/ might admit that Father Quito vas suueri
or TO rue In education and in other points
OF view, but would Indignantly DENY that
the members Of his church were worthier
If true marriage than those who belong to
mine.
). Father Futto seems to think that INV
best argument is the one taken from the
Council OF Trent. and the only escape he
| finds from its inevitable conclusion Is ssbe.
cause the accepted opinion of Catholic the
ologians is that the contracting parties
themselves are ministers of the sacrament
Of matrimony and not the officiating priest
who is simply an official witness 10 The
nnpliaI contract Is this true2 Can il
be possible that after al we have heard
about the sanctiiy OF marriage in
the Roman Catholic Church, tha,
they absolutely admit that unnrdain.
ed lips can solemnize il. and tha,
the priest occupies about the same relation
to the transaction that the Circait Cour,
clerk does, simply ian official witness.p Il
Father Duties Bishop does not nnfrocl
him for his utterance as untrue, then thi,
inevitable conclusion follows viz: thar J
bad man and bad woms lsuch do some.
times marry and an herelical minister faij
4 Protestant ministers are branded herr,ir,
BY the Romish Churchl can perform ,
sacrament, YES q sacrament which q 4
the same sacred list as the sacra
ment Of the Lords Supper. Aiasl hox