Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1888-03-13
ANorHER LETTER
From Rt. Rev. Bishop Kahn to Rev. NJ. F.
Dryden.

To The Editor Of he Register:
SIR:-I deem it altogether unnecessary
10 resent the diseourteous ~insinuation con-
tanned in the first paragraph of Rev: Mir.
Dryden's last letter. The reputation of
Catholic priests and prelates will not suffer
the estimation Of the good and the hon
if q comparison is instituted be-
tween them and Methodist ministers.
They will be found quite as cordial and in
every respect as gentlemanly as Wesleyan
ministers.
/ take the liberty Of reminding Rev. Mr..
D. that / am the most competent authority
as regards my Lenten theme. AS an
nounced over and over again, it is: why
has Professionalism rejected the doctrine Of
the real presence of Christ's body in the
Supper This is the theme l I'm
now engaged in discussing, and 1 presume
it is the question Rev. Mr.. ID. undertook
to argue when he entered the lists against
me.
Rev. Mr.. d. repeats his former assertions
that the Paschal Lamb and the mamma were
not figures of the Eucharist. Before
producing them as figures, I ave
the authority of the early Faith.
ers amongst my reasons for SO
doing. Thus st. John ~Chrysostom, the
golden-mouthed orator of Constantinople,
says in his Homily on the traitor Judas
mos. 5 and 6 Formerly, there was q
Jewish Passover, but it has passed away,
and there followed that spiritual passover
which Christ then delivered. For whilst
they were eating and drinking, having
taken bread, he troke and said: ''This is
my body which is broken for you for the
remission Of sins" He adds, referring to
the Discipline of the Secret: 1.-The in
lated understand what is said" Eusebins
has a whole treatise on the subject. Per-
hsps Rev. Mr.. D. has also q copy of that
Father. st. Basil, in his Homily on st.
John the Baptist, Gays: 'Moses, after
baptism, eat the bread o. angels; and thou,
if thou hast not first received baptism,
how wilt thou eat the living bread?"
Then he refers to Jno. VI. Now Mr.. Dry.
den these Fathers did not live in the six
tenth century. The latter lived in the
fourth, and the former in the early part
of the fifth; and both belonged TO the
oriental church.
But Rev. Mr.. D. has announced
q very summary process of dis
posing Of such troublesome witnesses.
I'VE" he says, ''claim the right to rule
out the testimony CT everyone that cor-
tradicts the teachings of Christ and his
holy apostles Who is it that speaks in
this ministerial tone? We claim the right
to rule out, etc! Who is going to exercise
this infallible authority? Not surely Mr..
Dryden, who speaks s contemptuCusly
of infal!ible teacher! Why, no doubt Mr.
ID. repudiates with scorn the very idea OF
such an imputation being cast upon him.
l rub my eyes-look again; yes, thereit is.
Rev. Mr.. d actually sets himself up as s
Methodist Pope. We claim the right TO rule
out, etc; we are going to decide infallibly
what accords with the teachings Of the
Bible, and what does not. 1t sounds very
presumptuous, and somehow it seems to
clash with his own boosted principle of the
right o fprivate Interpretation of the Bible,
Rev. Mr.. d. requoted Tertullian. Oae
word only: can MIR. d. tell me on what
subject Tertullian is writing, in the 10th
CuhDlST Vi ul5 lOullu DOCh dBdliSb II
hereto Marcion, from which he has
cited that passage? If he informs nae in
the next issue of the REGISTER, ! promise
him fifty dollars tor distribution in char
ity. But if he does not know the context,
he shows poor logic in quoting from an ar
ticle which, rs l shall prove next Sunday
week, contains adhesive argument in favor
of the Catholic doctrine. He tells the pub
lie he has a copy of ~lrenaeus. Well, the
public will have all the more reason to
wonder why, with the author before his
eyes, he referred me to chapter 81 for n
found in the 18Th chapter.
Rev. Mr. D. having stepped ont into the
public arena as the champion of the
Protestant doctrine on the Holy Eucharist,
/ put a very natural question to bim-the
word Jordan being of purse a mere slip of
the pen. / asked Of him a definition Of the
doctrine. In the synopsis OF
his sermon given in this mornings REGIS
TER, he not only himself admits the pro.
priety Of my question, but be quotes
Cicero to prove the necessity ofcomplying
with my request: Every argument should
from a definition, &c &c" In
declining to give a definition, Mr.. D. has
with c~ommendable tact, but with
poor logic. He sees breakers ahead. AS
the self constituted advocate Of the Protest
ant faith, he must define, not what MethO-
diSis profess to believe concerning the
of the Eucharist; bat what Protest
ants believe. Now l warn him to make his
definition broad enough and elastic enough
to comprise all the various shades Of
Protestant opinions on the subjsct-even
that ofthe fifty millions Of Lutherans, who,
my courteous Grafton antagonist has lately
atill believe with Martin Luther
in the Real Prestngs.
OF course, they must be included, for
surely Rev. Mr. ID. will not be bold enough
TO say that DR.. Martin Luther was not a
Protestant
And now, with my countenance beam
ing with cordiality, wish TO approach
Rev. Mr.. Dryden with q little syllogism in
my hand. / presume, Of eourse, that he is
not unfamiliar with dialectics. In fact he
has himself, on a late memorable occasion,
admitted the cogency Of syllogistc argu-
mentation by resortipg TO it himself to de-
an adversary. (Ses REGISTER
February 4 l feel like illustrating this
process of reasoning, not Of course for Rev
bIr. DIS benefit, but for The general read.
ars, who are not so we'll acquainted with
it. Bat | must not encroaGh unnecessarily
ON the REGISTERS space.
Rev. Mr.. Dryden will recognizs in my
first or major proposition, the fundamental
principal of ProtsstantiTp as elcquently
no 5oRht by himself last even
ing; consequently he cannot consistently
call the truth Of that proposition
into question. My second or minor pre-
position is but q particular application Of
that principle, and is therefore iucontesta-
BILE; whilst my conclusion is the necessary
and logical inference deduced fcom my
premises. If there is no flaw in my
syllogism, that conclusion must be admit
by Mr.. Dryden, and In fact By every
other consistent Protestant. Here then is
my Syllogism =
First-Whatever doctrine aRy Christian
conscieniiorsly believes to be taught in
the Bible, that doctrine he is bound to &C
cept GS Gods unCrriDg revelation.
Second-But the doctrine of the Real
Presence and Reconsideration is con-
believed by millions upon
Of Roman Catholics to be tsught
in the RiAle.