The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1892-02-18
THE CATHOLIC CONGRESS.
The Action of the Bishops Criticised by a
Layman.

ST. LOUIS, Feb. 17-After an effort,
/ whose extent embraces both the Old and
the New World, the Associated Press is
| enabled to lay before the public letter
showing that serious divisions have arisen
! in the Catholic world between influential
laymen and the clergy. The letter which
is given below explains itself:
MY DEAR PALLEN-YOu see dispatches
from St. Louis (written in Chicago giving
/ the program of papers or subjects for
discussion in the next Catholic congress,
/ as making no mention of the temporal
power and education, and the impression
/ is thus created land generally accepted)
! that those subjects were not adopted by
! the arch bishops. | have not yet received last
weeks paper; sol do not know if you have
corrected the lie. So | am going to make
| a stat cement. Though most of it may not
/ be new to you, some of it may:
"First-Our lay committee was appoint
| ed by the last congress, the highest lay
authority in the matter. The bishops par
| ticipated with US in the congress, and, to
that extent, recognized the lay action and
| the legitimacy aud propriety of it.
"Second-Our first meeting was held in
! Boston in July, 1890, and convened there
because the archbishops were to have a
conference there at that time. They met
with US, and overruled my motion to in
struct the subcommittee on organization
tion first on the list
"Third-The second meeting of our lay
| committee met in New York, on Oct. 80
! and received report of our subcommittee
on organization. After a hard fight
succeeded in having the temporal power
and education recognized as subjects that
might be discussed. Then, instead of
adopting the report, it was agreed to refer
it to the archbishops assembled at st.
Louis for them to settle the program.
"Fourth-The cardinal was informed of
that action, and was asked at what day at
st. Louis they would meet our COMMITTEES.
The cardinal fixed II o'clock a. M. Dec l.
thus again recognizing our lay committee.
"Fifth-On tlat day the archbishop
sent Archbishop Ireland, as secretary OF
the meeting of archbishops, to consider
our subcommittee report on program
He addressed our chairman and read to
him from paper he had in his hand re-
port of the archbishops: First, that the
word shall be substituted for the word
might in the discussion of the temporal
power and education; second, that the
archbishops would cooperate with our
committee only on condition that the
cardinal should name nine bishops and
archbishops, who would be aggregated to
our committee, have equal voice with us
on the floor in discussing and in voting on
measures but should also have the right
of absolute veto on all action finally car
ried in the Joint committee, If they chose
for the reason that if they joined with us,
they would be held responsible, and they
must have a veto.
archbishop Ireland refused to hand
the paper to the secretary to file, on the
plea that it was not in regular form, and
that he would fix it up and hand it to the
latter. All of this was another recogni-
tion of our committee and this time one
in (Which & rph hi hon fraIa nd niy4SaIf tool
a part. Our committee then and there
Immediately voted TO accept the conditions
required by the archbishopS, and notified
Archbishop Ireland that our committee
would meet to receive aud act with the
nine bishops and archbishOps to be APP
pointed by the cardinal.
''SiXth-The next day, at 10 o'clock a.
m. the joint committee met in the rooms
OF our committee at the Southern hotel,
with Major kiley in the chair as chair
man of our committee. Archbishop Ire
land moved that Archbishop Williams be
made chairman of this meeting Mr.. Far
reilly Of New ork, OF our committee, an
sWered that we had n chairman already
duly elected. Archbishop Ireland replied
that this was n new committee altogether.
appointed by the chbishops TO conduct
the business of the next congress, to be
compGsed OF nine prelates appointed by
the cardinal and such laymen as they
choose 70 aggregate to themselves, and
that they would recognize no other organ
iZation aS now existing, and again called
on Archbishop Williams TO take he chair
Oar meu stubbornly asserted their rights,
always addressing Major kiley. The row
lasted from 10 10 y, and then the prelates
Left for luncheon, and our committee form
ally took recess until o'clock.
"Seveuth-In this melee, of the nine
Bishop Spaulding OF Peoria WIS the only
Hfa f-4a
lands motion, ana al. he said was that he
did not think IL was treating the lay com
mlttee properly. At O'Clock D. IN. all
assembled again, and this time Archb bishop
Ireland carried his point Archbishop
Williams being absent. be tIrelandi nomi-
mated Archbishop teehaR, who took the
chair. Our committee, that l., kiley,
Fnrelly, Harson, Fanster aud Spaunhorst
II am not sure as TO the latter, cAucused
and came TO the conclusion that they
would not tight the archbishoDs: that Il
they wanted TO take the congress and run
it, they might Il 50. They would have all
the responsibility aud our commit ts.e
would be tree from ali further duty Be
sides, cur committee had already given it.
self UP by granting them full veto power,
and, therefore. even If we remained. could
do nothing against their wishes. -, II
they wished 20 take control they could DO
so Therefore, they offered no further op-
position.
'Eighth-Archbssheo Fseban then took
the chair, and they asked Major hiley 20
acl Gheir secretary and he sild 30. Iney
then voted that the laymsu present be in
vited 10 act with tie meeting They did
50 Then this next meeting controlled by
Archbishop Ireland, appointed an exrcts-
tive committee 10 take charge of every
thing. with Archbishop Feeaau a. ch4ic-
man ard Ac. Onahan a. secretary.
The four mela begs uf CIR comDli Tee
held u meeting and decided 70 make Dah.
lie report of thls matter All thss j. - *