The San Francisco call., 1896-03-03

the church even in purely temporal things
lhls explanation, given formerly by the par
the reign OF Louis XIV, and at present by
Janus, DR.. Schultz, the old Catholics, and the
opponents OF the Papal infallibilty in general,
Is designed to throw odium upon the Holy see
ana arouse the passions of men, especially OF
governments against the lawful authority OF
the sovereign pontiff."
Perhaps it was because these words were
sucn an accurate description of his own mOue
OF action that d. Ross suppressed them.
Again, no doubt in order to get the true
spirit OF the quotation, D. Ross leaves out the
following: "Thus the illustrious Bishop Fess-
Ter, secretary to the Vatican Council, says that
this bull afhrms merely that Christian rulers
are subject to the Pope as head of the church,
but not in purely temporal things; still less,
ontlnues Fessler, does IT 1.-THE BULL say tas
Dr.. Schultz fUrmulates his second proposltioIi)
that the temporal power must act unc0n-
ditionally in subordination TO the spiritual.
Again, take another beautiful example. IN
the first lecture and several times after D. Koss
insisted on the following quotation: civil
laws derive all their force, so far as they are
applicable to ecclesiastical matters, soieIy
from the authority OF the church"
Upon this he comments as follows:
"Look a the significance of that! Civil laws,
so far as they touch the Catholic churcn; 9e-
rive all their authority from the Cathohc
church, and if the Catholic church says that
these laws are not right they just simply rloe
over them
OF course 1t was to get the true spirit of the
quotation that Donald Ross tore relative
clause out of sentence, dressed 1t up with
new head, doeked its tail and sent II out into
the world to do service against the Cathonc
church. Oil d. Ross is all honorable man, and
he has sworn before high heaven that he has
been scrupulously faithful in dealing with the
Papists.
Now, let US see where D. Ross got the quota
ton and how he manipulates 1t. In
the chapter on the sources OF canon
law Smith is dealing with the legis-
lative authority of the church. He is
treating of church law-that is to say, with
laws for the internal guidance of the church.
He says that there are eight sources OF church
law, and he goes on to name them-scrlpture,
tradition, councils, etc. If he were dealing with
Methodist canon law ne would proceed in the
same manner, for, be it distinctly understood,
he is treating simply of the rules which gov
eTn the workings of an ecclestical society.
Then he goes goes 10 say: "To those
[sources some add civil laws which, how
ever, derive all their force, so far as they are
applicable TO ecclesiastical matters, solely from
the authority OF the church In fact, in her
judicature the church disdains not TO adopt at
times the mode OF proceedings which is pecu-
liar to civil courts"
Now let me ask: Suppose a court constituted
under Congregational polity determines TO
adopt the mode of procedure in Judge Camp
bells court, whence does that mode OF proceed
ure derive its force? Simply from the author
Ity OF the Congregational council. The civil
laws are careful not to interfere with the laws
OF an ecclesiastical body, and if the church
uses the forms and modes prescribed by civil
law these forms and modes are OF force, not
from their civil authority, but simply from the
authority OF the church. This is precisely
what Smith says and what our American con-
stitutlon says, but D. Ross, in order TO get the
spirit of the quotation, lifts ii bodily from its
context and presents it to the world as new
and startling manifes tation OF Romish treason.
It must have been near 2 in the morning when
he made this astounding discovery.
CARDINAL GIBBONS.
1 do not wish TO take up much more time
with this preliminary demonstration OF the
honesty of D. Ross, but l cannot refrain from
giving another example. In his last lecture he
undertakes to prove that men have no right
TO go to the ballot-boX unless you go with
Father Yorke's ballot" He quotes from Car
dinal Gibbons: "The Roman people, had they
so desired, had ino right to transfer
by their suffrage the patrimony .of ST.
Peter 10 Victor Emmanuel" He aban-
dons the Cardinal and English grammar
al this point and eXclaims: 81 thought the
people were the governing power. Buthere the
people living in the PepaI states had no right
10 say who should rule over them and govern
them. That is g beauty. We talk about the
Car of Russia; he is no worse than that. Now
does that not mean that the church has q
right to dominion over temporal affairs? When
they say that the people living in those States
had no right by their votes TO choose their
governors does that not mean that the church
has right TO dominion over temporal affairs?
/ am sure that that sounds beautiful III the
ears OF Americans, who love election day"
[Applause.
Now let us turn to Cardinal Gibbons He is
discussing that feature known ss the temporal
power of the Pope, or the claim OF the POpeS
to sovereignty over the Citv OF Rome and the
adjacent territory. He describes that territory
as an ecclesiastical District of Columbla and
he asks, Was the alleged vote of the Roman
people sufficient reason for depriying the Pope
OF his patrimony? This is his argument: sin
the second place, the Roman people, even had
they so desired, had no right 10 transfer, by
their suffrage the patrimony of St. Peter TO
Victor Emmanuel. They could not give what
did not belong to them. The Papal territory
was granted to the Popes III trust for the use
and benefit of the Catholics of Christendom.
The Catholic world, therefore, and not merely
handful of Roman subjects, must give
its consent before such transfer can
be declared legitimate. Rome is to Catholic
Christendom what Washington is to the
| United States. As the citszens of Washington
have 10 power, without the concurrence of the
United States, TO annex their city to Maryland
or Virginia neither can the citizens of Rome
hand over their city to the kingdom OF Pied
mont without the acquiescence of the faithful
dispersed throughout the world"
There is not word in this quotation which
is opposed to republican ideas. The tempera-
ture will be much lower than it is this evening,
Nr. Editor, when D. Ross will be able to teach
Americanism 10 Cardinal Gibbons.
GENERALITIEs
Before concluding this preliminary examina-
ton let me say a word or two on d. Ross
learning. He has made so many boasts about
his skill in foreign languages, his acquaintance
with history and his knowledge OF Catholic
theology that We are almost tempted to for
give his "Me, of course and other weaknesses
on English grammar. However, a man who
could translate the German "hatte" as "has"
ought to take another year in Manitoban
university. The statement that Doell1nger was
in Rome during the Vatican Council
is paralleled by the statement that the "Edict
OF Nantes was laid aside so that the massacre
OF st. Bartholomew could take place in
France" Any schoolboy could inform this
graduate of a university that the edict OF
Nantes was first issued in 1898 and that the
St Bartholomew massacre occurred in 1872
His creation of 265 Cardinals might be ex-
pected from the expert in Catholic theology
who defined an infdel as one not belonging to
the Catholic church.
l must apologize to your readers, Mr. Editor,
for inflicting all these quotations upon them
but as D. Ross has threatened TO spend the
rest of that $500 in printing pamphlet | am
| cnrnnelled lO nrOYide the autidOte. Yours