The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1889-04-15
DIR. STRONG CHNSURHD
BY Bishop Kain in his Last Lee
ture Of the Lenteu Course
FOR ALLEGED PERYERSION

AHNtAulNS NteSe'
ON "Our Countrywide bishop
Denounpes the FiNh Chapter
of that hook as False
Rt. Rev. Bishop Kaiu closed his
course of interesting Lepten lectures last
evening with a review Of the fifth chap
ter Of Rev, DR., strong's book, entitled
Our Country. The Bishop resented in
spirited language the impeachment oil
disloyalty made by the reverend author
against his Roman Catholic fellow Citi'
zens, His unjust attack, said the Bishop
has the implied endorsement OF the
Evangelical Alliance Of which DR.. Strong
is Secretary, and although sustained by
wholesale ~laIsifCations, it purPorts to be
made and circulated in the interests OIL
the Home Missionary Society,
Said the Rt, Rev. Lecturer; "Dr,
Strong pretendsto give his readers eleven
word'ior.word quotations from PapaI
EucycliCal Letters; for each OF these
eleven supposed quotations Is included
between inverted commas and yet moi
one OF these eleven quotations can be
found in any Papal EnCyclical Letter
Why such unblushing mendaCity?, Can
the Gospel cause be promoted BY
methods so unhoIyH
His first quotation he refers to an en-
cyclical Of Plus IN, dated August 10
1854; but there is no such enCyClical
Those words and the two next quota
tons are found partially in other Papa
documents, but they contain q very dit
ferent meaning from that into which DR.
Strong would distort them, The Popei
have repeatedly condemned lust as Goo
himself has condemned the liberty o,
singing; also religious inditIerentism
and unbrldled license In thinking
speaking and writing, The words o
Plus IL are "%etfranata Cogitandi, 10
quendi, scribendique licentia," Doe
DR.. Strong approve Of unrestricted
license in words and writings2 II so
he should advocate the repeal OF law
forbiddlng
DLAsplIEMY, TREASON, LIBEL,
the circulation Of indecent literature
etc. As a minister Of the Gospel, III
more probably agrees with the Pope IL
condemning, not the liberty Of con
science, but the abuse OF that liberty: |
not, he deserves no respect from thu
decent, law.abidlng citizens OF thu
country.
Why, continued the Bishop, does pr
Strong In pretending 10 quote TIN
ipsiSsimd rerba Of Catholic Bishops ant
Catholic papers, suppress the reference
necessary 10 verify those quotations
Is that honest? Thus he makes Bishol
O'Connor say: "Religious liberty i
merely endured until the opposite col
be carried into effect without peril TO tn
Catholic church," But Bishop 0'Con
nor repudiates the statement. sayinl
very correctly: "This Is a matter, on
would suppose, for which those VIII,
make the charge should account. Bu
they will do nothing Of the kind. TIL
calumny will serve their purpose, AM
that is all they care for.h (Letter y
Bishop Kahn, March 80, $780, But, Is
not q crying shame that even minister
OF the Gospel will resort to such cal
umnies to accomplish their unChristial
ends? Rev. DR.. Strong asserts tina
every Bishop Of the Catholic churcl
must swear
"To PROSECUTE HRRETIcs, ,
etc, to his standard" but no such words
having even tho appearance OF tina
meaning, are found in the oath Of conse
grafton taken BY American Bishops 70
over forty years. LSee translation o
this oath OF Office in first volume 0
Clarke's olives Of Deceased Bishops,
ad fnem.]
Or. Strong asserts that in the encyCli
cal Of Dec. s, 1854, Plus TX anathema
tized free speech and a free press" bu
the Bishop defed DR.. Strong or any on,
else to point out any such anathema Il
that encycliCal. Yet these base forgerie
are the only proof alleged by DR.. StroII
In support Of so foul a charge. Thesl
arc the words oil the pop6 (encyclica
Dec, s, 1861; here is what he brands a
the liberty Of perdition: ''The most un
limited liberty to manifest and declarl
openly and publicly, by speech ant
through the press or ina other way AM
nations (men) please, Independently O
all authority, civil or ecclesiastical ,is
right existing In every citizen" aThC
condemnation Of that proposition Rev
DR.. Strong would palm Off on his readerl
as a condemnation OF "free speech and
free pressl" What a gross p~eryersion 0
the truth! Rev. DR.. Strong would have
no laws regulating free speech and afret
press. He would undoubtedly side will
the Anarchists against the respectable
press Of our country, which itself a few
years ago recommended federal legisla
ton restricting these enemies OF society
in the circulation OF their i~ncendiarJ
and perniCious literature. Americana
want no such pretended
CHAMPION or THEIR hBERTIEg.
In answer to DR.. Strong's charge con
corning the hostility Of the Catholic
Church to free schools, the Bishop re
ferred to Ills lecture Of last Sunday tipor
TINT subject. He also affirmed that thu
quotations which DR.. Strong pretends tt
extract rcrbdtim II Merdtlm from thu
E~ncycliCal Of December s, 1904, are no
contained in that letter. The reason
for tiieS0 repeated falsiflCations, Dr.
Strong and bis friends must explain. Die
the learned and pious divine not meal
to credit them TO the SyldbuSl But
again, what monstrous distortionsl The
forty.6fth proposition Of the Syiidtu,
runs: "The entire government OF publI,
schoolsin which the youth of Christian
State Is educated, except Ito a certain OK,
tent in the case OF Episcopal Summaries
may and should pertain to The ciyi
power, and belong to 1t 80 far that nc
other authority whatsoever shall be
recognized as having any right To inter
iere In the discipline Of the school, The
arrangement Of the studies, the confer,
ring Of degrees, In the choice or ap.
proval Of the teAChers,N This proposi.
ton %isCensured, for II maniiestly violates
parental rights. Now, here is the man.
ler In which Rev. Dr.. Strong does moi
blush to put II before his readers, as The
very word for wordteaChing Of the Pope