The Catholic bulletin. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1911-1995, 1913-01-18
Written for The Catholic Bulletin by
Rev. j. Gmeiner.)

lately puDnSn0Q new Cn6Ory, ac-
cording to which Catholics have been
mistaken for many ages as to the true
site of the Holy Sepulchre. For six
teen hundred years Catholics have be-
lieved that Emperor Constantine had
built a grand church over the tomb in
which the Saviour was laid after His
crucifixion, and whence He arose again
gloriously on the third day; and
ever since, in all ages, there was a
church at the same place called the
Church of the Holy Sepulchre, though
repeatedly destroyed, but promptly re-
built.
Now the Minneapolis paper pub
fishes "a new theory" according to
which Catholics were mistaken, and
prints map and an exact photograph
of the supposed true site of the Holy
Sepulchre.
Origin of the "New Theory"
Let us examine the true inwardness
of this new theory"
In 1888 a New Englander, Edward
Robinson, the son of Congregational
ist minister, visited the Holy Land.
Two impulses moved him: curiosity to
see the Bible Lands and venOmous
aversion to everything Catholic there.
Dr. Frederick Jones Bliss, fair
minded Protestant, who has spent a
great deal of time in exploring Pales-
tine and doing much excavating, and
who has published such books as "Ex-
cavations at Jerusalem, 1894-1897," and
THE Development of Palestine EXplo-
rations," published in 1908, says OF
Robinson: I'VE are bound now to take
count of his lapses from a calm and
scientific temper. Spots held in pecu-
liar veneration by the Roman Catho-
lie and Eastern clergy seem to have
been thereby rendered obnoxious to
him, and we're visited with obvious re-
luctance. Thus, the day after his first
arrival in Jerusalem, in 1888, he wit
messed part of the Easter ceremonies
in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.
But, he says, to be in the ancient
City of the Most High and to see these
venerated places profaned by
lying and idle mummeries all
this excited in my mind feeling too
painful to be borne, and l never Wis
tied the place again." DR.. Bliss re-
marks: Here speaks the Puritan, not
the Explorer"
In short, it seems that Robinson, on
his first visit to the Church of the
Holy Sepulchre "smelled" that this
was not the right place of the tomb of
the Savior, although it had been ven
Grated as such from the time of the
Apostles by countless millions OF
Christians. And from that time on
Robinson with all the anti-Catholic
venom that was in him ragged against
the "pious fraud" etc.
Although fair-minded and learned
Protestants like Williams, Kraft
Raumer, Rosen, Furrer, Caspari and
Tischendorf promptly opposed Robin
sons gratuitous assertions, yet, by
many, especially in England and Amer
lea, with whom anti-Catholic prejudice
more than counterbalanced their sense
of historical fairness, Robinson's bold
ness was cheered, for it was "a good
SLAP at the Catholic Church. Thus
Robinson in his crusade against the
Church of the Holy Sepulchre gradual
ly gained large following, even
among men who, if they had been left
to their own undisturbed good sense Of
historical fairness, would quite likely
never have thought of becoming his
followers.
Among such men may be mentioned
Colonel Conder and Mr.. Crawley
Boevey, who are cited as authorities
The Minneapolis paper says: "Col
onel Conder declares his belief thai
the site of Calvary is knoll north O
the present Damascus gate of Jeru
salem"
Colonel Conder must have been yer!
slow in making this discovery. For IL
1912, soon after Robinson's 'inven
tion." Otto Thenius had already
started this new theory" which IL
based on a number of other unsup
ported theories. The Dictionary o.
the Bible" edited by James Hastings
published in 1909-perhaps the mos
widely known English work on Bible
matters-says in the article on "Gol
gotha'': "All these hypothesis are ex
tremely doubtful
The Walls Of Jerusalem.
The Minneapolis paper says thai
new evidence against the traditiona
site of the Holy Sepuchre has beer
advanced by W. Crawley Boevey, whC
claims that the present Damascus
Gate of Jerusalem stands on the site
of the gate that existed there il
Christ's time and was part of th'
principal city wall of that time.
Well, the Damascus Gate was bull
under Sultan Soliman in 1888, as thu
inscription on it still testifies. More
over, that it was built on the ruins o
the older gate of the walls of HeroC
Agrippa, commenced soon after tht
crucifxion of Our Lord, was consid
cred fact long before Mr.. Boeve.
was born. Mr.. Boevey may dig abou
the Damascus Gate as long as h