Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1892-12-18
SATOLLI NOT SUPREME.
an EDITORS CONTRIBUTION TO THE
CATHOLIC CONTROVERSY.

He Says That Archbishop Ireland Was the
Only Prelate at the New York ConcIave
That Sided With the AbIegate- What
the Decision of the Meeting Means.
ST. LOUIS, Dec. 17.-Conde B. Pallen,
editor of the Church Progress, who has made
no secret of his hostility to Archbishop
Ireland's school projects, was asked to-day
to reply to the interview with the prelate
published this morning. He spoke as fol-
lows:
Mgr. Ireland does exactly what he accuses
his opponents of doing-that is attempting
to creite public opinion in his own favor.
His whole interview is nothing more than
all appeal to what he calls the American
mind" or, in reality, to secular public opin-
ion in This country. we NC, WOULD @ IKE to know
do with the settlement of the school ques-
tion by the Church itself? Secularism has
always been i'll the history OF the Church an
antagonistic factor, in as much as it usually
represents the opinion of the world; ana we
may lay down as a fundamental axiom, that
the world, the flesh and the devil are ever a
triple alliance i'll combination against tho
spiritual interests of the Church
Notwithstanding Archbishop Ireland's
statements that Mgr. Satolli is vested with
pen ipotentiary powers to settle the school
question, we have no evidence to that
effect. On the contrary both Archbishop
Katzer and Archbishop Elder have publicly
declared that Mgr SatOlli had no such
powers and, moreover the fact that the
ArchbiShops in their recent conference re-
fused to subscribe to Mgr. SatollTs views is
very clear evidence that those views were
not supported by the weight of the Pope's
AUTHORITY. 1: they had been, Arch bishops
could scarcely have point blank rejected
them.
The principles of the Council of Baltimore,
which they reaffrmed, especially the third,
explicitly and definitely declare that the
secular or public school education in this
country is not only dangerous to the integ-
ritv OF the Catholic faith, but they command
Catholics 10 eschew it alto. ether and build
their own schools. Archbishop Ireland'S
statement that to the Church belongs re-
ligiOuS instruction only, and to the State the
right of secular education, apart from re-
ligious training, is in radical opposition 10
the Councils of Baltimore. and to the re-
peated public teaching of Leo XIII.
The assumption in Archbishop Ireland's
interview, that his position on the school
question is also, the position of the Ameri-
can Catholic mind, seems to me fAntastically
overstrained, for lie was the only one i'll the
entire conference who was ready to sub
scribe to Mgr Satolli's school propositions.
To certain extent, the Archbishops dec
laration that there is difference of opinion
among the hierarchy i'll this matter, is true,
if we leave his own dissenting views out of
consideration. We may, also admit that
the controversy is virtually closed for the
unanimous agreement OF the hierarchy, al
ways excepting himself, OF course. makes it
very evident that the Faribault plan or any
other scheme TO separate religious from
secular education, is diametricaliy opposed
10 the convictions of the hierar chy in the
United States.