The sun., 1903-12-27
Religious Controversy and Religious
Inquiry.


"Sao crdos. began the discussion of the
rights Of the clergy Of that Church to
freedom Of thought concerning ques-
tions he regards as not distint lively de
6de. brings to close to-day the contro-
vcrsy which was provoked by him.
It is time tha. the discussion should
come to an end, for unhappily, it has
aroused much i'll feeling. and only by
taInness, courtesy and mutual consid-
GRAFTON amonE the disputants could it
he made 70 serve any good purpose
III" oIignt Hc'l l)Jicum which has made
rnIigi9us discussion 50 often injurious 70
the cause of religion, and has defeated
- many even honest purposes TO en-
!ig,fcn reasonable minds has again
exp s'l its ugly front and instead OF an
amicable discus sion n Somewhlt bitter
controversy has resulted. This wo do
not say in rebuke OF citller side, but sim
ytosucgcst Il G impo ssibility of keeping
dspaasinnate any discussion which in
.'olves criticism of tenets and rsages and
authority accepted and venerated with
he passion Of religious conviction
The sentiment expressed by "Sacer-
dos and his sympathizcrs could not have
been repressed by us justly, and it would
net have been desirable for the Church
# which they are able and distinguished
priests to prevent the publication of
fher views. The tendency of thought
represented by them is, in many re-
,pccts, the most remarkable wilic h has
appcarcd in the religious world since the
advent of Christianity. 1t may be said
t, be Indicative OF general religious
eve vclution; but the Christian Church. as
,hn most orthodox of theologians teach
and have taught, is always passing
trough stages Of evolution. Nothing
cen be added to the fund of revealed
and inspired truth, according to the
orthodox conception, but new light
may be let in for its development
and Interpretation. This opportunity
for eluoidation and olarifcation encour-
sges instructed and thoughtful minds
to seek to find in cid dogmas justification
O. following present drift Of thought
aild method of reasoning which seem
20 be in conflict with them.
@Sacerdos" and the distinguished Ro-
man Catholic scholar who supported
his position wrote as friends and cham
pions Of the old faith and order, and not
as their critics and enemies, and, obvi-
cusly, they are sincere in their profess
sions. Their theory is that the Catholic
world is needlessly suffering losses be-
cause its dogma and doctrine are pre-
sented and interpreted in q spirit of re-
sistance to contemporary intellectual
tendencies. when actually there is no
such contradiction il the germ of in
spred truth is expanded into its per-
feet flower.
Is it possible for any such harmony
to be? Are not the two rather diamet-
rically and radically opposed? Is it not
an attempt to bring together two es-
sentially contradictory views and theories
# the world the religious and the sci
entilic, the supernatural and the natural,
faith and practical demonstration? If
cne miracle is set aside as impossible
under natural law, must not the whole
supernatural structure Of religious faith
he torn down also?
The Chi ii, IN RELIGION has its fount in
the mi |, of the Incarnation. 1t
could not be a religion from Heaven
unless its source was supernatural and
IN defiance of purely nG tural law. Other
il e, as DR.. PATTON has sal 1. it would
he no more tim a di i,put lble moral
Philosophy. If the Intellect alone. the
cili2ai and sci ,rti ic faculty, is m de
the test, the whole supernatural super
structure falls to pieces. 1t must be
taken on fl ith in the authority Of dogma
supernGturally proclG med, or it must be
ci ,carded as final answer to the riddle
q! the universe.
Inevitably, therefore, the Church re-
ais., any Gi po. i.ion of the human
Il tcIleot merely to solve that mystery
or W que. ii m the completeness of
the soluti IN the Church offers in its
dogmas. Roman Catholic correspond
ents have replied t. "Sacerdo," and his
fellow critic-sometimes in a rancorous
spirit which seems to have been un-
fortunate and unjusti fable-bv rcle 5at-
irG them to the ranks Of treacherous
'ntiCols. That term has not now the
,errors it once had. for it applies not
les, appropriately to many Of the fore
most contemporary scholars of the
Church, more particularly of Profess
t&nlism, but also to some extent to
Roman Catholic students. In the old
scnse in which the term was used, are
they not all actually iafidels' Is not
inidolity the logic end of the course
thew are pur-ui G? Whero else, for
example can those theoloe ioal students
land VINO teach or are taught that the
miracles on wi ioh rests the supernatural
ism Of Chri ii u ity are only myths and
legends expressive of the blind search of
humanity in all ages 10 find the key to
the INV terv Of exi tence?
feeling thus. VIC can understand and
'an excuse the passionate denuncia-
lions Of the learned school of which Sac
crd0s' is 90 distinguished representa-
i've. He closes the contr )versy he pro-
voked by expressing confidence that it
viii result in the elimination as distinc- |
,ivelvand essentially Cath lie, Of teach |