Waterbury evening Democrat. [volume] (Waterbury [Connecticut]) 1903-1917, 1908-01-29

that 1t Is a shame for an Protestant
to confess that any Protestant denied
: it (Memoir, London, 1750) Add to
this that the most celebrated modern
/ psychologists are of nearly one opin-
ion in the matter. With such an ar
ray of even non-Catholic historians as
! can be marshalled for the residence
j and episcopacy of st Peter at Rome 1t
Is certainly astonishing to hear 1t de-
clared that the fact rests upon very
slight historical testimony. Up. to
the twentieth century it was never
denied.
To the defendants of Calvin 1t Is
like shaking the traditional red rag
| before bull to speak of hierarchy.
With them the governing power is
the people. All church authority is
vested in the people and between
clergy and laity there is no distinc-
ton save the accidental one of pro-
fession. When chosen the minister
breaches and exercises his other &C.
clessastical function by the authority
of the congregation which chose him.
| When he no longer satisfies he is, il
you will pardon the language of the
Squared ring" down and out" Let
|
archy and did he give ecclesiastical
authority to the people. In st Matt
| (xviii) we read: Amen, / say unto
you, whatsoever you shall bind upon
earth shall be loosed also in heaven"
and whatsoever you shall loose upon
earth, shall be Tossed also in heaven"
This was said to the apostles. But be-
| side the apostles Christ also had ~
disciples. Yet only to the apostles
were these words said. There is a
distinction, the same as we Catholics
| make to-day, between clergy and
laity. Again in st Matt (xxvD we
read that Christ said to his apostles
and to them alone: do this in
commemoration of Me-" Not to His
blessed mother or the disciples was
this said. The reason is clear. He
was instituting the priesthood of the
new law and He drew the line of
demarcation. Again in st Matt
| (xxviii) Christ said to the apostles:
GO forth and teach all nations, etc"
thus setting them apart as the au-
thoriZed teachers and their successors
also becase He adds: Behold | am
with you all days even to the con-
summation of the world" 1t seems
that these texts determine a broad
line of distinction between the
apostles and their successors and the
rest of the faithful. 1t might easily
be shown that in the days of the
apostles that there were bishops as
distinguished from priests. Thus, St
Paul q Tim. v 19) Against the
priest (Presbyterian) receive no ac-
cusation unless under two or three
witnesses Here Timothy is en-
powered under condition of witnesses
to receive testimony against the
"presbyter" and for what purpose un-
less to judge him, to punish him If
guilty and so to exercise true juris-
diction. Now if he who has the
right to examine and judge the con-
duct of presbyter be not superior In
office, wherein does official superior
| ity consist?
1t is Mosheim, | think, who is the
authority for saying that in the first
century and from the time of the
apostles the government of the church
was purely democratic and all au-
| thority in the hands of the people.
Now St Matt (xxxviii) tells us: "All
power is given to me in heaven and
on earth, go We. therefore, teach all
nations" In John Xxx we read: AS
the Father had sent Me | also send
you" There is no trace of the Mos
helm theory that ministers receive
! their authority from the church and
as the church did not exist in formal
manner until the day of Pentecost 1t
| is not clear how the apostles could
receive their authority from it when
it had no existence. Neither did. the
! apostles wait for any such authority,
| but began to preach Immediately.
| Nor is Mosheim more happy in the
contention that the authority of the
hierarchy was usurped especially in
the third century with st Cyprian as
chief usurper 1t is, to say the least,
strange that the bishops of Asia,
Africa. Egypt, Italy. could all have
conspired to change government es-
tablished by the apostles.
| No one with regard for truth can
gainsay DIR Davenport's words to the
effect that there are hundreds OF
! thousands of Protestants represent
! ing a vast amount of cultured man
| hood and womanhood, wealth and
| learning But is it because of Pro-
testantism? Why then should not
| Professionalism monopolize the cultur-
ed manhood and womanhood, wealth
and learning? That in some local.
tiles they have a larger portion es-
| pecially Of the wealth is easily ac-
counted for. But if Professionalism is
| the adequate cause of all these things
nobody else should share in them,
/ and that such is the case even the
most rabid Protestant will not MAIN
tain. And especially in the field Of
science Professionalism holds no NOM
opoly. Catholicism can claim her
share of good names: Basil Valen-
/ tine. the father of modern chemistry.
/ Linacre. the scholar. physician and
priest; Father Kircher, scientist and
orientalist; Bishop Stensen. anatom-
list and father of geology: Abbi Hauy,
father of crystallography:A Abbot Mems
del, the greatest authority on hered-
ity: Pasteur, the biologist and bacter-
iOlogist; Secehi. Searles, Zahm, News
/ ton. ROntgen, Mareoni. all are names
that tell the tribute Of Catholics to
science and that they too ARE in the
closest alliance with the advanced
thought of the time"
And il Oxford and Cambridge ara
great universities to-day, they ars
I but pygmies in the influence they ex-
] ert now compared to the DAYS when
I they were founded under the guild
| ing hand of the Catholic church. in
the days when Roger Bacon, the
/ Franciscan monk. held sway. who, by
4 . L. H..