The Intermountain Catholic. (Salt Lake City [Utah] ;) 1899-1920, 1902-06-28

were not logically drawn from his
promises. This weeks dialogue opens
with a debate on Gallicanism. Pressed
for precedence, the nephew advance
Gallican principles to support his the
DRY. The uncle demurs to such princi-
pies, as they were opposed to Catholic
faith He corrects the nephew's err
( roneous ideas of these principles, and
proves that instead of being in accord
ance with Catholic teaching, they were,
if not in name, at least included in
condemnations of the holy see.
Professionalism is only full blown
Gallicanism and PrCtestants are dis
| tinguished from Gallicans only in being
q little more daring, and drawing one
or two conclusions which the Gallican
| shrinks from. Professionalism not only
asserts the two principles, but it COM
pletes it's Manicheism by making one
| good and the other wicked. According
to it the secular or principle represent
| ed by the state is the good principle,
and the spiritual or principle represent
| ed by the church is the bad or wicked
| principle. Hence, it calls the church
the mystery of iniquity,' and the pope
the man of sin 'antichrist.' Protest
ants claim to be the defendants of the
! Albigenses. who were the descendants
of the Paulicians, who were. as is well
known, Manicheans. | might prove
! Professionalism to be Manchean, when
| not aetheistic in it's character, by an
examination of its early dogmas, but it
| is not necessary.
You would then maintain that CALI
canism contains the germs of all that
you find to condemn in us liberals of
| today"
Most assuredly. You are all chill
dren of the old French revolution, and
that revolution was only the last word
of Gallicanism. The Gallican bishops
in the first place emancipated the tenn
poral order from the spiritual, and as
serted its independence; and in the
second, by undertaking to define the
extent and limits of the papaI power,
they practically asserted the right of
subjects to judge their sovereign. They
transferred to the spiritual order the
principles on which the English rebels
had acted in the civil order. and de-
prived authority in both orders of all
its sacredness. The convention, in
judging Louis XVI and condemning
him to death, only applied to the civil
order the principles asserted by the as
sembly in 1852. The assembly conse-
Grated the principle rebellion by sitting
in judgment on the powers of their
spiritual chief, and the principle of re-
bellion once consecrated, all authority
is denied, all vested rights are annulled
and nothing can be asserted but the
simply natural rights of man as man,
which ends either in atheism or panthe-
ism. All the dangerous heresies of our
times were in principles stained almost
from the first by the leading monarch
les of Europe, in spite of the anathe-
mas of the church, and those monarch
les are now reaping their reward. 1t is
perhaps fitting that they should be
punished by their own sins.
But 1 thought Gallicans were Cath
olics, and the better class of Catholics"
"They are, doubtless, Catholics
against whom Protestants have the
fewest objections to urge, which, to a
Catholic mind. is not much to their
credit. Gallicians who do not push their
principles to their logical conclusions,
who really submit to the sovereign pom
tiff as supreme pastor and governor
of the church, and neither in theory
nor in practice deny this spiritual SUI
premacy, are. doubtless, Catholics; but
that does not say that Gallicanism,
developed, is not an unsound !
opinion, and destructive of all legiti-
mate authority, and incompatible with |
we owe to the Holy See The four arti-
cles may not have been formally con-
demned; indeed, we are told that they |
have not been, but the Holy See has !
shown, on more occasions than one, !
that it disapproves them. Innocent XI, |
annulled them, and declared them of no |
and Plus VI, in his bull Auc |
loren Fidel against the acts of the Sy- |
nod of Pistoia. seems to me to come
very near expressly condemning them. |
Plus TX seems also to have condemned |
the very principle of the first of them, |
which I regard as the worst, in his
recent condemnatio of Professor
NoytZ's work on Canon Law, and Bail
US Theology heretofore used in several
French ecclesiastical seminaries. How
ever. of these matters l am no judge.
only know that these articles are not
md never were, accepted at Rome; and
seek to be a Catholic as they are
Catholics at Rome, not merely as they
ire at Paris; for Rome, not Paris, holds
he chair of Peter. Yet the French are
lot the worst Gallicans in the world,
md it would be wrong to suppose that
Gallicanism save at the court, predom-
mates in France. The doctrine, since
t was attacked by De Maistre, has lost
ground. and the immense majority of
he French bishops and clergy reject
t as strenuously as 1 do. 1t is retained
low by very few anywhere, except by
he laity, and they, it is hoped, will
oon abandon it. The ultramontane
doctrine is, no doubt, very odious to the
,ivil power. and to non-Catholics; but
t is the Roman Catholic doctrine, and
I'll odiouS as it is, we are not a little
Indebted for the wonderful increase of
1atholicity during the last thirty years
o it's fearless and energeti cassertion.
Sallicanism is a species of old fogy-
SIN, in the proper sense of the word,
md as such is powerless. Even non
are forced to respect the
Catholic who is not afraid nor ashamed
o be true to the most rigid doctrine of
lis church..