New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1893-07-07
DIR. M'GLYNN AND THE BISHOP
THE PRIEST SEEMS TO BE A STORM CENTRE.
TROUBLE BREWING OVER BISHOP M'DoNNELLS
REFUSAL TO ALLOW HIM TO SAY
MASS PUBLICLY IN HIS
DIOCESE.

|
sacerdotal functions, Is again plunged into contro
Noisy In the language OF the Meteorological Bureau,
| he seems to carry about with him an area Of low
| barGmetrlcnl pressure. with welldevcoped storm
| centre lie Is now In Chicago visiting the World 5
| Fair. hut told in The Tribune Yesterday he has
said CROUCH between times out there TO set prominent
members of two doccses in cCntrotersial array The
dispute while hanging apparently on the question Of
why Or. McGlynn has not publicly celebrated mass
| since he made his peace with the Vatican, resolves
Itself ultimately into phase Of the alleged dsa gree
ment In policy between Archbishop Corrgan and the
American Apostolic Delegate. Monsignor eatoH.
As stated yesterday. DR.. McGynn has been allowed
10 celebrate only twice since his reinstatement
once on Christmas Day, when he said mass In II.
Johns chapel, Brooklyn. in absolute privacy which
means that only Dr. McGlynn himself was present,
and again Easter sunday when his sister and
| her children were allowed 10 attend. This the
utmost he could attain after two applications TO
bishop Mcdonnell. Of the Brooklyn diocese. of
which, al least. made with the consent and in
| Iorsement the Apostolic Delegate. I'm this, y
said DR.. McGynn-and it was the significant sentence
| Of his talk on the subiect-"the Bishop showed how
much he is under the influence Of Archbishop CORR
can, for 1t was direct refusal to comply with the
clear wish OF Monsignor saol, and he will probably
hear from The ALLOCATE on the subject
The controversy stirred up immense amount Of
talk in Catholic circles yesterday.
THAT Father McGlynn had any idea Of embarass-
ing Bishop Mcdonnell by his request cannot he true
said the Rev. Thomas J. Duccy. He made his re-
quest with the approval and sanction OF Monsgnor
Satoli. and, coming with such Endorsement. II was
certainly entitled TO the courtesy due to Monsicnor
Satolis Office and character. and techuicaltics
should have been seized upon by Bishop Mcdonnell
or any other bishop for the purpose OF evadil; #.
These statements OF Dr. Mctilynns regarding the
fusa allow him to say mass in public, have
TO me before Certainly the lack Of obedience, and
therefore OF respect for the utterances Of the Holy
Father and his representative shown by certain high
authorities does not set well an EXAMPLE to be
followed by priest and aity. Some OF these
thorcs to think that they say what they
please and do what they please, and that others
must remain silent about IT,
There has been persistent opposition Mon
sienor Saolu among some Catholics. He has been
continually mSreprcsentcd, and efforts have been
made to weaken or set aside his Just and
decisions. Articles. snccring the Apostolic Dele
gate or in almost open opposition to him. have APP
pearci in the papers, and while they bore the alp
pearance Of coming from layman they really came,
II Is strongly suspected from well known eccl"Ni-
astic.'
IL might not be advisable - say all think on
this subject" added Father Ducey. My language
would BE- pretty strong.
st the Archicpscoral residence last night II was
said that Archbishop Corngan was out OF the city
and would not be back until saturday. MonSgnor
Farley. the Nicar-Gcncral. speaking for lin. was
quoted H. saying: know little about the
lrcnle between Bishop Mcdonnell and Father Nc
Glynn. OF course If Bishop Mcdonnell refused to
allow Father McGlynn or any priest the right to
say mas, In his diocese, upon the ground mat
the priest was a mcsnbcr Of his dlocc," It was
undoubtedly II reflection on the priest.
Bishop Mcdonnell said yesterday IN regard to ~
failure to permit Dr Mc'Fun To celebrate mass pup
iiriy after his reinstatement by Monsienor Ha'1lh
lie he fact, n %
mas, ty Or. McGlynn have been correctly stated Inc
reasons for his privacy ia ~. Johns Chapel nave not
been set forth properly. socn after MoiAsn'r
>atoli rcinstated Dr. McClynn. Father Nalon" came
To me and showed the papers settling forth his re
instatcment ard asked that d.. McGynn be- allowed
to SAY mas, I'm Ibis diocese. Now Dr. McGynn i not
row and never priest In my dioc"r" ana
called In my official adviser, who did not see why
priest foreign 10 III" diocese should nave al inc
privileges Of our priests, and him permission
10 say mass I'm privacy in II. Johns College IL"
exercised THIS privilege until ne went 10 FLORIDA On
his return he MonsignOr >atolli and stated 'ht
lis relatives desired him 10 celebrate a mass when
tacy could attend. lir asked The P'pli Abrga'" ="
notify me to allow Lin 10 do 80. Now M'hsiElor
-at Iii i, not here 10 interfere with dctat" TO
regularly constituted authorities. Accordingly h" told
IT, MrGlynn 10 write 10 telling OF tn" wishes ol
hi, household and said that / would grant their r.
quest if ! thought best. received IN" letter on
1hIl sdly and after constitution Answered II OH
saturday 50 that Easter sunday he ceiebiat'l
mass. and his relatives were present. That was al
we could do FOR him. even by courtesy. IL" Is ho'
and Was member Of the diocese, ana 50 cohd
not have every privilege
In regard to the alleged statement that my action
vas due 10 intimacy with Archbishop CoIrigai' mat
is absolutely false and foolish. am the rcspoh'she
head The diocese, and If Monsislor saiol has any
fault to find with he wond find II through IN"
proper tribunal. When first came here | did see
g. tie lrItO Of ia
seen him a north. My actions IN my diocese
are moi governed BY him. As 10 Monsisnor Ha'oIh'
the public has a wrong imprcssi"h lie Il hcr" ID
represent the Pope in questions % poilcy ana Dogma
and to interfere unless Interference Is needed
lie is an adjudication between ana not Il rui'T over
the heads Of the dioceses."
Father sylvester Malone, OF the Church oil HtS.
Peter and Paul. a great friend Of Dr. Mc'dj m, SAID
Yesterday IL called on Bishop Mcdonnell AFTER Dr'
McGlyHn's reinstatement ana requested from ann
permission for DR.. McGlynn 20 celebrate mass III me
diocese. The request preferred 1t was refused
\ limited permission glven-l had better not say
grid gingy-in Il Spirit that does not seem I" me 10
IL, IN accordance with III" explicit terms @! the I'M
conditional reinstatement Of my friend j Is dell
cate matter 10 critics" the acts 81 SUPERIOR but
when they not IN accord with the wishes OF com
mands Of 1Ac fcunt 81 authority feet less scruplc
than ! ojhc. yi,r should. ly what right does any
dare to ,',rcgard compiandl i.sucd from KDin'
here is the authority final and supreme. vested IL
moi iu the Iloly Father ana MS represent atNc'i
What is the meaning this alfGbedicnce. this re-
Lic,out ac1ulosccnccl II the Bishop had seen fiji
he could have granted full prcsly privileges TO Or.
McGlynn. The fact that DIR. McGlynn was not
Incst Of this diocese need not have stood III hi,
Way DR. Mc;ynn has been declared by the head
Of The church a priest. enjoying 10 "a" fu the pr"
rogaivcs OF the office. such have b'en refused
him The refusal suggests dlsobcdlcncc 10 the lnml
mandate 800
Ir Mc(lynn has gwen up the honsc in Willoughby |
ave- where he recently lived with his sister.
no NEED TO DIVIDE THE ARCHDIOCESE. |