Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1910-06-30
VATICAN COURSE IN
ROOSEVELT CASE
JUSTIFIED
Archbishop Ireland Replies to
Address Issued by Methodist
Bishops Who Condemned
Attitude Of Holy See.


| 10y fhpfuih III Utttit Aehht0 VT
New York. June 29.-Respondinl
to the address of the board of bishop
of the Methodist Episcopal church
issued May 10. Archbishop Irelan,
contributes to the forthcoming ISSUE
Of the North American Review, al
extended article upon the Methods
Episcopal church in Italy, reviewing
the statement of the Methods
bishops and justifying the action Of
the vatican in connection with the
proposed audience Of Colonel Roose.
welt.
lie quotes extensively from the
writings of Methodist missionaries
bishops and newspapers in italy at
lacking the papacy, and sets forth
that each visit of a public mar OF
America to the Methodist college in
Rome has been seized upon by the
local representatives Of the Methodist
church as an occasion for insulting
the vatican. He cites the cases or the
visits OF ex-Mayor Seth Low and Mr..
Fairbanks as an Illustration.
He asserts that the Methodist
preachers in Italy are paid higher sal
aries than those Of other denomina-
tons; tina their work is confined
chiefly to PROSECUTING, and that the
results have not been at all common
surate with the cost of the work.
Respecting the Roosevelt incident,
he says.
LAS far as precedents gave lessons,
the vatican could not but fear that
pressure might be brought to bear
on him to induce him to lend his favor
in whatever degree to the institution
of the Via VENT Settembre. With the
purposes and wiles of the institute
Mr.. Roosevelt, it vas thought, most
likely was not conversant. SO far he
has had no occasion to run up against
it's ruling spirit, Rev. Nj. Triple. The
honor Of the vatican was supreme, as
it should he, in the mind of the car
dinal. IL must at all hazard be safe
guarded; neither must obstacles in
tervene that should keep the doors of
the vatican from being thrown wide
open in greeting Mr.. Roosevelt.
so, in reply to Mr.. Roosevelt's re-
quest for an audience, a message was
sent, courteous and confidential, ac-
ceeding, of curse, to the request, yet
intimating the unpleasant position to
which the vatican should be reduced
were there the least peril that what
had happened to Mr., Low and to Mr..
Fairbanks were by any characterization
or oversight to happen to him. Thc
more illustrious the visitor. the more
was he to be put on his guard.
unfortunately, the message of
vatican reached Mr.. Roosevelt
under the cover Of comments from
hand Of the American ambassa-
dor to the q~uirinal n was read in
he glare Of those comments. Ger
tainly the situation was perplexing.
The comments of Mr.. Leishman under
his eyes, the answer given by Mr.
Roosevelt is not a surprise TO Ameri-
Subsequent Developments brought
'urther confusion. There were other
yet more embarrassing comments
rom Mr.. Leishman to Mr.. Roose-
relt; ana there was the cavalier and
lnwarranted declaration of Mr..
)Laughlin to the cardinal that Mr..
Roosevelt was just the man to go
rom the vatican to the Methodist
lall. Circumstances, let us say, con-
spired to defeat an understanding,
Inch was sure 20 be, had Mr.. Roose-
'elt and the cardinal secretary of
tate come face to face or had they
poken to each other in direct CORE
pondcncc, without permission or
lindrance Of Intermediates.
However. as things went, the car
linal secretary Of state, supremacy
,%re-occupicd. as it was his duty to be,
With the necessity Of safeguarding at
n hazard the honor of the holy see,
vas allowed no alternative, The au-
icnce was made impossible. Such
the Roosevelt incident. in which,
ack of all the immediate circum-
the one controlling element
vas the American Methodist Epis-
opal church.
'rhe attitude OF the vatican
)wards the Methodist mission must
OF be other than what il is. II in this
there is intolerance. it is the
tolerance of vile insult and treach-
rous fraud. With persons differ
lg from in creed, honorable in
heir sincerity and belief and well
hammered in their bearing, the vati-
an is always most tolerant, most
,nrteous. But as was the Saviour,
imsclf, SO is the vatican-severe and
tolerant when confronted by the /
and the money changer OF
Ie temple
/