The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1892-12-18

Editor Psiien Scores the Archbishop and
Denies His Assertions.

Editor Psiien Scores the Archbishop and
Denies His Assertions.
ST. LOUIS, Dec. 1z.-Edltor Pallen, of the
Church Progress. who has made no secret
of his hostility to Archbishop Irefsnd's
school doctrines, was asked to-day to reply
to the interview with that prelate pub
lished this morning. Mr.. Fallen at first re-
fused to talk. being anxious to avoid the
appearance of seeking notoriety. He at
len 9Th spoke as follows:
Mgr. Ireland does exactly wnat he accuses his
opponents OF doing; that is, attempting to create
Q public opinion in their own favor. His whole
interview Is nothing more than an appeal to what
he calls the american mind" or, In reality. to
secular public opinion in this country. We
would like TO know what secular opinion in this
country has to DO with the settlement of the
school question by the church itself: Certainly
as to what should constitute Catholic edu-
cation will dominate in the settlement OF the
controversy. The liberals have all along made
q desperate appeal TO secular opinion as a
sort or jury In the case. But how they can Inn
agine that IL viii In any way become q govern
ing factor ia beyond the conception OF any Cath
ole acquainted with the constitution OF the
church and the precepts of CathOlic doctrine.
Secularism has always been in the history OF the
church an antagonistic factor, inasmuch as it
usually represents the opinion OF the world, and
we, may AZ lay Il do ,5n as a a f~un and ins axiom
are q triple alliance against the spiritual inter-
ests of the church.
Icannot conceive surer Indication OF the weak
ness Of q cause than to appeal from Christ To
Caesar. At the same time I am perfectly we'll
aware OF the legitimate sphere of the civil func-
sists that Catholic education shall be tainted
with the poison OF secularism, that implies
A. r@ r aasss0p of the either State 70 or the bos RTGR1
~ the spirit of American institutions.
But the secular mind is not capable of forming q
judgment upon the nature, character or exigen-
cle9 OF Catholic eduCafiCl. AT anDeal TO IL.
therefore, Is simply To appeal from the proper
court, where alone jurisdiction Is possessed to
the hasty and temporary opinion or the popu-
lace. 1t Is both uncatholic and unamerican to
appeal TO a prejudice which has no legitimate re-
l.tion to the question In dispute.
Notwithstanding Archbishop Ireland's state
ment that Mgr satolli is vested with plenlpoten-
tiary powers 70 settle the school question, We
have no evidence to that effect. On the con-
trary. both Archbishop Katzer and Archbishop
Elder have publicly declared that Mgr.
satolh has no such powers, and, moreover,
conference &C. refused 70 subscribe TO Mgr. Satolli's
views issvery clear evidence that those views
tna po Pes sapScIiss, If Dy they 5n9 had Te Ssan the Ss
ArchbisHops could scarcely have point blank re-
jected them. They might have deferred consid-
GRAFTON OF them under that superstition. but they
would not have so emphatically declared a
doctrine so opposite and repugnant to them
lutions reafirming their absolute and
unqualified adherence to the principles
and platform Of the councils of Baltimore. For
- Oo~o IoRONN' $1,000 NR5c
and definitely affirm that the secular or public
school education In this country is not only
but they demand Catholics to eschew it alto
gether and build their own schools IN order to
supply its fatal defect.
WHAT LEO ONCE SAID.
Archbishop Ireland's statement that to the
church belongs religious instruction only, and
% the state the right OF secular education, apart
from religious training, Il in radical opposition
public teaching OF Leo XIII on this subject. In
the ency clical letter of the present Pope to the
French bishops. IN 1884. he says:
"And first, indeed, in regard to domestic soci-
ety. 1t Is OF the greatest Importance that the
children sprung from Christian marriage should
early age; and that the studies in IN which Youth is s
accustomed 10 be educated be conjofned with
religious training. To separate the one from the
other 10 really TO wish that youthful minds
should remain neutral in their duties
20 God. This teaching Is false, and
sssPYss5ooSS d Ssssnss III In i sns early pa Years ,S of
way TO atheism and saps the foundation Of re-
iigion- Good parents should exercise the
they first begin TO understand. learn the truths
OF religion. and that there be nothing In the
school, nurtIai 10 the INTEGRITY OF the faith and
natural law that they exercise this dill
gence In the education OF their of
spring; nor can they for any reason
be released from the obligation of this law. Tru-
~, IL the church the guardian and vindicator OF
the integrity OF the faith, whose duty Ii is. by
virtue of the authority conferred on her by God.
her founder. TO call all peoples to Christian
knowledge. and TO likewise diligently see how
the youth subject To her authority are educated.
1t has always openly condemned what are called
neutral schools and again and again admon-
lshed parents IN a matter OF such great imp0r-
eance 70 avoid them with all their might"
How Archbishop Ireland reo0neiles this with
bis view OF the subject Is beyond conception:
that it Is repugnant TO Mgr. Satollf's published
address on the same question Is also apparent.
The assumption in Archbishop lreland's inter
view that his position on the school question is
also the position or the American Catholic mind
seems 10 be Enthusiastically Overstrained, for he
was the only one In the entire confer.
ence who wac ready TO subscribe
70 Mgr. sat0ln's school propositions.
And when IL Is remembered that each
archbishop not only expressed his own opinion
when he rejected them. but also the concordant
Judgment OF each OF hts suffragans. q more i'm
posing array OF American Catholic opinion
against that OF archbishop Ireland could net he
conceived. lie was the solitary minority In the
conference and may be. therefore. said not 10 rep
resent the American Catholic mind on this ques-
ti0l, but the very reverse. To O certain extent,
Archbishop Ireland's declaration that there is no
difference or opinion amongst tile hierarchy IN
tins matter Il true. IL We leave his own dissent
ing views out OF consideration. With this re-
strietion we may cay, indeed. that the American
hierarchy are q unit on the school Question. We
mar also admit that the controversy Is virtually
elosed. For the unanimous agreement or the
nicInrchy. always excepting himself, OF course,
makes IL very evident that the Faribault plan, or
AM other scheme - separate religious from sec