The Intermountain Catholic. (Salt Lake City [Utah] ;) 1899-1920, 1900-01-20

divine revelation, the true Church, he
authority, etc, etc.
Now. in teaching theology proper
what method can be more appropriat.
than the synthetical or demonstrative'
The very nature of theological science
requires the adoption of this method
Theology teaches, not occult truths, but
truths proposed for our belief by the
proximate rule Of faith; that is by the
expness authority of the Church truths
which both matter and disciples must
accept Internationally. Its principles
are not the inventions of theoIogians
not the labored results of human gen.
Jus, but a sacred deposit received from
on high In teaching others how to ar
rive at results to which you have at
tanned only by dint of patient and per-
sistent effort, it may be we'll to cause
them to pass over the same rugged
paths which you yourself had been
obliged to traverse; but there can be
no justifiable motive for adopting this
method in the teaching of truths, the
certainty Of which is matter Of faith.
The DUTY of the theologian consists,
therefore, not in making laborious re-
searches after truth, but rather in ex-
planning, illustrating and defending the
doctrines of the Church, and in show
ing that those doctrines are in perfect
accord with the remote rule of faith;
that is, with tradition and the Holy
Scripture.
The advantages of this method are
immeasureable. For the things to be
explained being already known, they
may be classified in such manner
that they viii all be mutually connected
and scientifically arranged. The princi-
pies upon which the conclusions ar
rived at are based having been pre-
viously laid down. and the preliminary
notions accurately defined it only re-
mains to establish by appropriate ar
guments each particular proposition
advanced. BY this arrangement we are
enabled not only to economic time, but
also TO impart clearness and solidity
to our treatment of the various sub
iects under consideration. The analyt-
ical method, on the other hand, does not
possess a single one of these advan-
tages, and if applied to theology, can
only serve to involve this beautiful sci
ence in subterfuge and confusion. Be
cause whenever the subject concerning
which an inquiry is instituted for the
purpose of determining whether it is
embraced in revelation, and, if so, in
what manner, it will be necessary, in
accordance with the analytic method,
to first resolve it into all its parts and
take into consideration all its various
relations. and then to subject these
parts and relations to further analy-
sis, keeping constantly in view the
sources Of revelation, whence they are
supposed to flow. Moreover, the objec-
tons which present themselves must be
answered, and the difficulties which
beset the investigator path overcome;
and care must be taken that the con-
illusions arrived at do not conflict with
any known truth Of revelation. or any
principle of sound reason. Who does |
not perceive the difficulties which must |
necessarily attend this winding and in /
tricate process? How easy is it not |
for error to creep in and lie concealed |
amid its labyrinthian mazes! And |
what an ample field does it not present
for the employment of subtle distinc-
tons and fine-spun sophisms! This is
certainly not the method best adapted |
TO the minds of young theologians, but |
it is Of great service to those who de |
spise revelation and would gladly en-
velop it in uncertainty ana con-
fusion; who seek to involve our
youthful theolOgians in universal !
doubt, in order to convince them
that they are the adherents of
an irrational faith, or to precipitate
them into the abyss of indifferentisun.
They thus hope to extinguish in the
breasts of faithful Priests that Seyvent
zeal in fighting the battles of the Lord,
which is the result Of strong and ear
nest conviction. This is the secret of
the opposition manifested by unbelfev-
ers in common with Luther their pa
triarch, to the svntheticaI and their
strenuous advocacy of the analytical
method. The former opposes an insur-
moUntable barrier to all their efforts
while the latter operates directly in
their favor. They desire to bring about
the ruin of the Church of Christ: and,
as a preliminary step, they seek the
destruction OF it's bulwarks and all its
means Of defense. They would fafn
have their dognag of faith regarded
in the light Of mere problems, entirely
upon the Judgment of indi-
v!dual reason. The doubt which their
principles engender, at first purely hy-
pothetical, soon becomes positive and
real; because the mind soon accustoms
itself TO discard eternal sources of con-
vdotfon, to rely solely upon it's own
powers to despise the authority of the
7iblest theologians, and to accommodate
the teaching Of the Church to its own
peculiar views. Thus reason is en-
1hrOned and recognized as the sole ar
bitter Of the true faith The Progress
sion.sts honor as their progenitor the
famous Abelard, of whom st. Bernard
says that if you hear him speak OF the
Trinity. you would imagine that Arius
was addressing you; that, when he dis
sussed the nature Of grace, he seemed
instinct with the spirit Of Pelagius: and
nat, when he discoursed concerning
he Incarnation, you could with diff
sulty conceive that you were not lis
ening to NestOrius. He fell into the ]
,rrons Of these heresiarchs, as the game
saint observes through too strict an
adherence to the analytical method, or,
n ether words, by constantly refusing
o ACCEPT as an article of faith any
doctrine which his reason could not