The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1896-01-28
Pleasantries INDUCED In by Par
Elephants in the Great
Discussion.
THE PASTORS ABLE CRITICISM
Clever Verbal Fencing by the Learned
Contestants in the Present
Controversy.

The following communication by Rev.
Father Yorke has been received by THE
CALL:
JANUARY 81, 1896.
To the Editor Of the CdI-DEAR SIR: remark
with pleasure that the Rev. DR.. Wendte returns
smiling 10 the controversy. 1t is evident that
he Is in exceeding good humor this morning,
for he thanks me with much taste and elo-
quence. Dlsraeli describes one OF the charAc-
tiers IN "Endymon" as having a feeling in his
bosom about which he was not sure whether
it was gratitude or Indigestion. I am not pre-
pared to say whether Dr.Wendte's controversial
hilarity is inspired by his literary success or
his sunday dinner.
In the pretty quarrel which has sprung up
between the Rev. DR.. Wendte and the Rev. MT.
Payne have no desire to interfere. AS both
belong TO the same denomination l suppose
they consider themselves a liberty TO pummel
one another in spirit OF fraternal charity.
"Quam bOnum ct guam jucundum ha bi " re
fratres in unum." SrilI they would doubtless
resent the intrusion OF an outsider in a purely
domestic broL- However, l cannot refrain
from remarsing that though l have been ac-
cused by DR.. Wendte OF using harsh terms in
this discussion have not yet gone so far as to
describe my opponent as a man saturated with
lymph.
DR.. wendte has devoted considerable space
TO his personal opinion OF me and of my atti-
tude. oplne, Mr.. Editor, that my personality
has very little TO do with the discussion. That
Dr. Wendte should rejoice that my sentiments
are loyal, or that can express my readiness to
stand by my oath OF allegiance, argues very lit
tie acquaintance with Catholics on his part or
very niue trust IN tnelr word. since the tOun-
dauon OF this Republic an unnumbered multi
tude OF Catholics have sworn TO defend the flag
against all enemies Does DR.. Wendte imagine
that they perlured themselves by a reservation
in favor OF the Pope2 What l said had been
said years before by Archbishop Kenrick, and
better said. In a famous sentence, too, il was
the century, Daniel O'ConleN, when he de-
clared: 81 take my religion from Rome but l
would as soon take my politics from Constanti-
nople."
ANSWER THE QUESTION.
But after all this is not the question. DR..
Nendte started out by asserting that q con-
s:stent Catholic cannot be loyal American.
With chains OF quotations he bound US TO the
stake, and, hand in hand with Mr. John s.
HitteQ, he executed q war dance around us
But alas and alack! the links in the chain were
not cleverly forged and Mr.. John s. Hittell lies
hors de combat while DR.. Wendte sits ululant
on his remains.
To one point 1 would draw the attention of
the ludlclous reader, and that is the strange
indisposition TO answer my question mani
tested by DR.. Wendte. He had been talking
much and nightly about church and state
and divided allegiance [ therefore put it to
him plainly:''W What would you do ife Unitarian
congregation came in conflict with the laws
OF q slater" He has answered never q word.
l regard this silence as ominOus. We deal
ing now with church and state and DR.. Wendte
is dumb. He has asked me what would do
and have answered without reluctance In
return, would have been better pleased had
he given me less soft soap and more informa-
ton. What would you do, DR.. Wendte, If your
congregation came in conflict with a State?
II you do not reply intend TO call the atten-
ton OF the Canadians and New BrunsWickers,
who have undertaken TO protect our institu-
nons1 10 your suspicious retlcence. The readers
OF The CALL are anxious for your answer
Break the Geld chain of silence which has
hung over you too long. Let US hear your
solution of the problem: 'fWhat would you do
II Cnitarianism got into a conflict with q
Slater
DR.. wENDTE's LOGIC.
Dr.. Wendte began by attempting to prove
that Catholics cOuld not he lOVaI "a tho fara
he ends by attempting 10 prove that the church
burned hereticS and that the Jesuits taught
regicide. Even il both these counts were ad.
mltted, how would they show that Catholics
cannot be loyal to American citizenship? DR..
Wendte's logic does not possess the qualities
one would expect from his claims concerning
Protestant scholarship" regret to saw that
he appears to be entirely unacQuainted with
the structure OF the syllogism, and to be hope
)esSly Indifferent TO the rules laid down for the
proper management OF Barbara CeIarent
Daril, Ferioque." However, we must not ex-
pect too much from Protestant scholarship. "
complete Indifference to dates is happily
supplemented by complete disregard for the
rules OF reasoning.
But let me come to DR.. Wendte's quotations
about regicide. The state of the question is
this:
~ Dr.. wendte stated that suarez taught that
regicide was lawful in the case OF an heretical
king, and that this teaching resulted in the
assassination OF Henry H. Henry " and VIII
liam OF Orange at the instigation OF the priest
hood.
(2l In answer:
CG) denied that the assassination of the
princes mentioned was instigated by the
prlesthood, and | challenged Or. Wendte to
produce his proofs.
DR.. Wendte is silent.
% 1 asserted that in the places cited there
was not q solitary syllable about regicide.
DR.. Wendte says no more about his reference
With the characteristic accuracy of protestant
scholarship he quotes another book.
(c) L asserted that neither Bellarmine nor
Suarez held that regicide was lawful. DR..
Wendte had defined regicide as the murder OF
king because he was hereto.
The doctor replies:
will now examine few of the PRINCIPAL Meas
made by Father Yorke in defense of his church
But first be asks me 10 sustain certain OF my dl-
Will crafty him. TO begin with, the question
of regicide. He denies my assertion that The
am surprised at his bodness in denying what is
so generally admitted and known and can be Sc
easily proven Thus Suarez, to whom my opponent
especially refers, in his work, ode Fideh Qib
vi, cap. ~, argues that when the preservation OF
ereign, and may, if necessary, depute anr person
TO Kali him. This is especially true of an heretica
prince, Tor heresy aunuls his title to the throne
STILL as the Pope is aroiter of these questions q
sentence OF deposition should precede rebellion
70 deny that the Pope could infiict such penalties
on heretics no matter what their rank is 70 fan
under the suspicion OF heresy. Todenv that death
Is natural punishment for heresy is TO assal the
whole system OF persecution which the church has
organized. But Suarez maintains that the de
rope mas especially authorized. Isl papa regem
deponat ao Ills tantum poterit expei vel inter
fici qubus ipse i'd commiserit.)
Concerning this citation and others DIR
Wendte gives us to understand that he has
gone to the trouble of verifying them and he
says that he produces them.
ITO vlndlcate the truth of history the
accuracy of Protestant scholarship and nv
own honesty OF statement have gone through
all this uncongenial labor"
Alas for the truth of history and the aeon.
racy or protestant scholarship" DR.. Wendte
has been misled again by his secondhand
authorities. OF course take it for granted
that he has never seen SuareZ. Though he did
take liberties with Jouin, do not believe him
capable OF perpetrating the egregious blunders
contained in his description OF Suarezs doc.
trine.
1. In the first place Suarez wrote two books
on faith. One is entitled "Tractatus de Eide -
or a Treatise on Faith. The other is called
"Defensio Fidei Catholice Adversus Angli-
came Secta Errores,' or Defense of the Cath.
Ollie Faith against the Errors of the Anglican
Sect
2. The first is quoted as ode Eide" or OF
Faith, and can be found in the twelfth volume
OF the works of Suarez, published at Paris by
Wives in 1853. The second is quoted as ODE
fensio Fidei Catholies b" or Defense of The
Cath Ole Faith, and is contained in the twenty
fourth volume of the same edition.
q. DR.. Wendte has confounded the two