Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1892-11-03
OUR MAIL POUCH.
The Rev. Mr.. Williams and the Encyclopedias
Britannica Answered as to Alleged Jes-
nit Maxims-Kindly Close of a Contro :

| The Rev. Mr.. Williams and the Encyclopedia
Britannica Answered as to Alleged Jes-
uit Maxims-K Kindly Close of a Contro :
versy.
| To the Editor of The Dispatch:
see in to-day's issue what purposes to be
| an answer by Mr.. Williams to my question
| put to him some days ago in regard to his
assertion that the Jesuits taught the prin-
ciple, 'The end justifes the means" His
| words were eve are not accustomed to act
on the Jesuit maxim, The end justiles the
means" 1 requested the gentleman to
kindly name the Jesuit who taught this,
and the book and page where it was to be
found. He fails to do this in his reply, and
repeats the charge on the authority of some
| unknown writer in the Encyclopedia
Britannica" who bases his opinion on some
principles found in the writings of the Jes.
uits and others. These will be examined by
and by. Let me say right here, that the
question. 1 am satisfied Mr.. Williams
is better informed than the man who
wrote that article in the "Britannica," and
far less prejudiced against the Catholic
Church. Mr. Williams says he ought not
to notice my question because it
was anonymous I gave my initials,
r: X. What more does the
britannica" writer give at the end OF the
| (R. +. L.) thank Mr.. Williams for his kind
words about the saint of the Catholic Church
and beg to assure him that nave none but
the kindest feelings for my non-Catholic
| friends and fellow citizens. Now TO his
answer: He says that in making the asser-
tion which denied 81 used u popularity cur
rent phrase" SThere is just where MIR. Will
ianis made the mistake. There have been
'populaTly current phrases" from remote
times, such as "CHn anything good come out
OF Nazareth?" and, like this phrase, they
just as this phrase helped to prejudice the
Jews against our Lord. 1t is the duty of
O public teacher and scholar to sift such
phrases and see what is in them, chaf or
wheat.
To show that what he asserted was cor
rect Mr.. Williams refers me to "an un-
doubted authority" the "Ency yclopedia Brit
annica." Now, as far as this matter is con-
cerned, the Britannica's authority is no
more and no less than the unknown Ito mel
writer OF that article on the Jesuits, and, as
the writer is evidently pref udiced against
the Church and Jesuits his authority is not
"undoubted." In this article-Jesuits-we
read, for instance, "Two causes have been
at work to produce the universal failure
Of the great company in all its plans and e;-
forts. And first stands its lack of powerful
intellects." Ye gods! "a Daniel come to
judgmentp What will the illustrious
alumni of the Jesuits say of the powerful
intellect" which conceived that judgment?
l ask is R. T. L. 'undoubted authority" on
the Jesuits after that? Well, let us hear him
as quoted by Mr.. Williams: "The result of
dispassionate examination OF these and
kindred works IF. Curry, Ligourf and
Scavini) is that the three principles
OF proDabilism, of mental reservation, and
of justification of means by ends are
recognized inaxims of the society" Merely
stating that Ligouri was not Jesuit but the
Founder of the Redemptorists, and that the
question is not about "proba bflism" or
mental reservation" let US see what proof
the learned encyclopedias gives tor assert
Ia;niStS luStlneS
the means"
Busembaum is quoted: "Cum finis est
licitus etiam media licita"-"When the ond
is lawful, the means are lawful" Are we to
understand this to be the same as "the end
justifies the MEANS" In the maxim quoted
from Busembaum there is no question of
justifying means. To justify means neces-
sarily implies that the means are unjust, as
means good or Indifferent in themselves
need no justification. Busembaum does not
speak here OF unlawful means Why try to
make him say what he does not? Again,
from the same: "Cui licitus est fnis etiam
licent media"-'fTo whom the end is lawful
the means are lawful also" Does Mr. Will
Jams deny this? Ii it be lawful tor him to
raise corn in his field, for instance, is it a
crime to say that it is also lawful for him to
till the field, procure the seed, plant it and
cultivate it? Deny this principle in its
clear and obvious sense, and you deny that
a man can ever realize any lawful end
similar reasoning applies to the two other
principles quoted-but nowhere does K. F.
'The end justifies the means"
Now, let me refer Mr.. Williams to the
work of one of the Jesuits mentioned in the
e: b. article, Curry, and give him the title
of the wo' and the page, so he may get his
informa tion al "fiI st hands," The work is
compendium Theological Moralis," fourth
Curry, S. J. Pars l. ''De Actibus Humanis,"
page ). Curry, treating on this subject, says:
Parro nunquam fas est nahum. quantum Wis
leve, ad bonum quodcumque procurandum;
m ne " a m q Y 81
de promptum (Rom. iii, 81 nunquam sunt
Hacienda mala ut eveniant bona. "sic men
saI1andam sal, aod anon eeS aWherefore % M saws Gnpy lit
is never right to do evil, however slight,
to procure any good whatever. for, accord
ing TO the aellknown axiom of the
apostle (Rom., 8, s): EVIL things are never
to be done that good may come" "Thus,'
continues Curry. sit is not lawful for thee to
lie even to save mans lffe." Now, Mr..
Editor, is not this the very opposite of the
principle "The end justifies the meansf"
Certainly to save human life would be
good end; but this Jesuit, Gury, says it is
have to lie to do it. why9 Because Curry,
s. j., holds with st. Paul and the whole
Catholic Church that "evil must never be
done that good may come" In the lace OF
Jesuits teach "the end justities the means?"
The Jesuits have been accused of many
things, but 1 think their worst enemy will
hardly accuse them of stupidity. But
stupid indeed would they be if they ia ught
those two opposite principles--"The end
justifies the MEANS" and ''evil is never to
be done that good may come" The doc
trines of faith and morals held and taught
by the Jesuits are simply the doctrines of
the Catholic Church. They are in the front
rank OF her faithful and loyal sons.
Mr.. Williams complains that l did not
give my name to the public. My reason was
and is that dislike notoriety, and besides,
my name is of small moment to the public.
Y ou Mr.. Editor may, if you please, give my
name and address to Mr.. Williams if he
deign to ask them, but please continue to
keep them from the public for the reasons
1 gave. 1 agree with Mr.. Williams in his
dislike for controversy, and state positively
this ends the dispute as far as am con-
cerned.
And now 1 beg the gentleman to forgive
any seemingly unkind word 1 may have |
written, assuring him set down naughJ in
malice. l again thank him for his kind |
words ABOUT the saints OF the church and |
its members in general. never saw Mr.. |
Williams to my knowledge, and may never |
meet him on this side the grave, but do |
hope with all my soul that he and will be |
at the right hand Of the Master on the Last |
Day. +. X.
PITrsBURG, November l, 1892