The Irish standard., 1902-12-13


Kilian Dwyer, in reply to sermon by
Rev. E. J. Groeneveld, appeared in the
Anaconda (Mont) Standard of Nov. 80:
I believe in the supremacy Of con-
science as well as Mr.. Groeneveld, so
does every other Catholic. BY adher-
ing to the dogma of papal infallibility
there is no reason why we should
take leave of our consciences. With
Newman will say, Certainly if I am
obliged to bring religion into after-din-
ner toasts (Which, indeed, does not
seem quite the thing), I shall drink
to the pope, if you please-still, to con-
science first, and the pope afterwards"
Catholics believe that there is ample
scriptural evidence to show that the
pope, or head of the church, has been
invested by Christ with the preroga
tive of infallibility, when speaking ex
cathedra, as head of the church, in
matters of faith and morals. In de-
claring the infallibility of the pope, the
church has not given to the world
new truth. 1t simply declared what
had long been believed. No dogma is
entirely new. The development of doc
trine may be illustrated as follows:
Suppose man has title deeds to
large tracts of land, Of the limits of
which he is not exactly sure A time
arrives when it becomes important to
definitely ascertain whether or not a
particular portion of ground belongs
to him. Some say it does. Some say
it does not. The title deeds are scru.
tinized. After keen analysis and due
deliberation, he discovers that the piece
of ground in question: is embraced in
the title deeds. 1t is similar with the
dogmas Of the church. Controversies
arise as to whether or not certain
views have their foundation in the
Scriptures. Pope and council examine
the Scriptures, and finally the pope,
speaking ex cathedra, pronounces his
decision. Thus the question is remov.
ed forever from the pale of contro-
yersy.
AS to Mr.. Groeneveld's views on 'san
open Bible" and private Interpretation,
I would say that much of the open
Bible is closed book to many. Scrip
tural criticism has never been so sci
'entific as it is today. All the resources
of human genius are brought to bear
.on the ancient records. Yet, in the
face of these facts, we find that the
result is far from cheering to orthodox
Christians. For this state or things,
private Interpretation is mainly re-
,sponsible. Biblical exegesis cannot
but prove fatal to Professionalism. 10
the intellect Professionalism makes a
most flattering appeal. It points out
that the Bible is book that each one
cam interpret for himself. Every man
lis his own pope. The revelation God
has given to mankind, each can dis
cover. Thus the Protestant's rule Of
.. ldlIu Is IL DOOh-IuV blDle, ClS D1Ule
only, and only the Bible. But COM
mon sense and experience have shown
,us that the Bible falls far short of
supplying by itself rule of faith suf-
ficiently explicit to guide mankind in
discovering what Christ requires of
Christians. A reference to the num-
Der of sects establishes the truth Of
what we say. Private Interpretation
is in the sphere of religion what anar-
, chy is in the political order. Every
sect claims that itself is the church
established by Christ, and quotes
Scripture in proof of it's contention.
My God, what further evidence is
needed to prove that the Bible by it.
self is inadequate to supply the re-
.quirements of rule of faith! "EX-
perience proves surely" declares Car
dinal Newman, ''that the Bible does
not answer a purpose for which it was
never intended. 1t may be accidental
ly the means Of the conversion of indi-
viduals, but a book, after all, cannot
make stand against the wild, living
intellect of man, and in this day it
begins to testify as regards its own