תמונות בעמוד
PDF
ePub

in matters of faith; and that none should arrogate to themselves a power of inhibiting the use of opinions allowed to be taught in the catholic church, an evident consequence following from a transgression of either of these rules would be, that either the soundness of our faith, or the rightful liberty of catholics would be continually trampled under foot.

In all disputes therefore among catholics, whether between equals, or between superiors and subjects, it is an indispensable duty and obligation, whatever objections some persons may make to this doctrine, that a fair and candid appeal should be admitted by both parties to the decrees of the church, wherever faith is concerned, and that a due and proper deference should be paid to the approbations usually given in catholic schools and universities to opinions, which are allowed to be taught amongst us, however sternly others may set their faces against such opinions; and without an inviolable adherence to these rules the most fatal scandals must ensue.

the whole body, which Christ commands us all to have at heart,

Hence, Mr. Editor, I shall ever declare myself a humble admirer, and through the grace of God, a follower of the rules of the learned pontiff, and, upon mature consideration, I hope that others will be of the same sentiment with myself.

A LOVER OF ORTHODOXY
AND PEACE.

ON CIVIL TOLERATION, By l'ABBE FOERE. (From Le Spectateur Belge.) The Son of Man came not to destroy souls, but to save.-ST. LUKE c. ix. v. 56.

Civil toleration is synonymous with fraternal charity; both social intercourse and humanity require that no difference in religious opinions should dispense with this reciprocal obligation of man and man. "If religion proscribes error, because she herself is truth," says the bishop of Nantes, "she also teaches us to bear with the wandering because she is charity.

The knowledge and most intimate conviction of truth do not authorize the persecution of those in error. Error is not criminal but when voluntary, and he alone can judge of that who can search the heart....A persecuting zeal is not less contrary to the spirit and maxims of christianity, than to the principles of sound policy and the rights of conscience.

"You do not know of what spirit you are, Nescitis cujus spiritus estis, that is to say, you do not know the spirit of my religion, said Jesus Christ to his two apostles, who wish

In truth, if every bishop is entitled to publish and enforce a code of doctrines upon his own subjects, we should necessarily have as many creeds and professions of faith, in different parts of the world, as there are prelates capable of and liable to misconceive and misconstrue the doctrines of the church; and the catholic religion, though essentially one, would no longer be a source of union and concord among all its members. In one diocess we should be commanded to teach and promul-ed to have fire sent from heaven on a gate heresy; in another we should be directed to withhold from the faithful the knowledge of truths, which God has revealed for the salvation of all; and thus being continually at variance we should never know what steps would be most conducive to the good example and edification of

city which had refused to receive them. The Son of man is not come to destroy souls but to save them. By instruction and miracles of benevolence, never by miracles of terror and chastisement, did our Divine Master establish his sacred doctrine. He could have arrayed legions of

in couverting the whole world? And without dogmatical inflexibility. how would she have brought the world to unity of doctrine? The si ecclesiam non audierit, sit tibi sicut ethnicus et publicanus, (Matt. c. xxviii. v. 17.) as clearly invested the church with its dogmatical in

angels against his enemies, but behold | still our justification would be abso him in the agonies of death praying lute. The church, in the first ages, for his very executioners. was reduced on all sides to a state of "All the fathers of the church opposition not only with the heterohave forcibly inculcated the unlaw-dox but even with the pagans; now, fulness of coercion in matters of reli- without civil toleration, without chagion. Tertullian, Origen, Lactan-rity, how would she have succeeded tius, and St. Athanasius are also strongly opposed to it, and what these holy doctors taught, when the church was persecuted by pagans and Arians, their successors have applied to her when victorious and triumphant under the christian emperors. Sulpicius Severus blames the two bishops Idacius and Itha-flexibility, as the mitto vos sicut oves cius for having recourse to the secular authorities, to have the Priscillians driven from the cities.St. Martin besought the emperor Maximus to spare the blood of these deluded men; by which he prevented their execution. Both St. Ambrose and St. Martin refused to communicate with Ithacius, who had become the accuser of the Priscillians.”

in medio luporum, (Ibid. c. x. v. 16.) with its civil toleration. When the Spaniards, in the 16th century, exercised their cruelties on the Indians, not only Las Casas, as the celebrated historian Robertson acknowledges, but the whole of his order and the other Spanish priests, continually declared against the violences of their countrymen. Philosophical fanatiThe catholic religion opposes er- cism, in order to throw the odium of ror with an unshaken firmness, and civil intolerance with greater ceran inflexible energy, against which tainty on the catholic religion, has earthly despots in vain employ every maintained a profound silence on engine of cruelty and terror; but she this passage of the historian of treats her mistaken brethren, with Charles the fifth, which is so much unexampled sweetness, indulgence, more decisive, as the author was a and charity, and extends to them her presbyterian minister; and the more helping hand not to foster them in incontrovertible, as it is corroborated their errors, as seems to be the pre- by undeniable proofs. Every one vailing spirit at this day, but to re- knows that Hennuyer, bishop of claim them by a pleasing persuasion. Lisieux, refused, with a fortitude The actions of Jesus Christ and the that excited the admiration of the conduct of the church have always king of France, to submit to the orbeen conformable to each other on ders of participating in the massacre these two points. Jesus Christ com- of the Hugonots in Normandy. batted error with a dignified energy," These misguided sheep," said he, sometimes even with indignatiou," are gone astray from my flock, but but he was mild as a lamb, and I hope to reunite them to the fold." amiable as an angel, towards all. If we have no other argument than the example and the commands of our Divine Legislator to justify our dogmatical inflexibility, and to prove that our civil toleration is one of the first duties of the catholic religion,

The whole church applauded his clemency and charity. When policy suggested the massacre of St. Bartholomew, religiou had no share in the transaction.

"The distinction between civil and theological toleration is puerile

and surely the catholic church cannot reasonably be censured for acting with as much prudence in affairs of such weight, as is used on all occasions where life and safety is con❤

For the Orthodox Journal.

SIR,-I beg to make a few remarks on the answer of "Judex" to my communication in your jour

from his historical mistakes, I should conclude that it is not. And as for the expectations of the catholic pub

and vain," says Rosseau. (Emile, tom.iii.) Such is the language often used, but would not the author of the Emile have blushed at such a position, if on one side he had heard all the Belgian clergy preach against dog-cerned. matical concessions, and, on the other, had witnessed the shining example which they gave of civil toleration, by their cheerful eagerness in raising subscriptions throughout their parishes, and in their churches, for the relief of the wounded afternal for October. Had he been an imthe battle of Waterloo, who were partial judge, I would have remained almost all of a different religious silent, but he has shewn himself persuasion. "There is among the an interested advocate, and has catholics in Germany," says Mad. de made assertions calculated to deStael, “a sincere, tranquil, and cha-ceive your readers. 1st, He alleges ritable piety;" and whieh on the that the historian has not satisfied part of the German and Dutch pro- the expectations of J. M. or the testants has been met in Belgium catholic public. But is the judg by a civil intolerance, both in their ment of J. M. an infallible criterion voyages, in their commercial inter-of historical merit ? To judge course, and, in fine, in their literary correspondence. During the time that pope Pius VI resided at Vienna, the ministers of the protestant pow-lic, unless he means himself and his ers at that court were entertained by friends, I am free to say that I am his holiness with a kindness which of a different opinion. 2nd. Then convinced them that their ideas of he acknowledges that J. M. has the intolerance of the catholic church overshot the mark when he charges was but a phantom, and that they had the historian with never having used imbibed most erroneous notions of the appellation of saint: but adds the pope. It is known that Pius VI that, he calls St. Thomas archbishop was possessed of extensive knowledge in the very passage in which he menand of a very agreeable disposition; tions his canonization. That is true: in his conversation with their protest- but after his canonization he calls ant excellencies, he went over, with him saint. And if he had not, the greatest ease and taste, the des- why should he be blamed any more cription of Italy and of its antiquities than Bede who in his history styles and superb monuments. St. Gregory simply "Gregory." Again J. M. praises the history of Mr. Mylius as a true catholic history, yet Mr. Mylius, speaking of the archbishop, styles him during his life "plain" Becket or "plain" Thomas, except in two instances. Can any reasou be given why that should be a a crime in one, which is none in others!

The circumstance in which, according to the principles of the catholic religion, it is forbidden to have any communication with the heterodox, is when they endeavour to pervert a catholic. It is a natural consequence of its dogmatical inflexibility. In this sense, the apostle said, Hæreticum hominem devita....nec ave dixeris ei. Now, simply to avoid a heretic is not to persecute him,

3rd. We next come to the mission of St, Germanns: and it is contended

that the ancient authors cited by Candidus do not contradict the testimony of Prosper. In express words they do not; but in meaning they do. I will here translate the testimony of Bede which is similar to that of others. "The Britons sought assistance from the bishops of Gaul. On which account a great synod being assembled, it was debated in common who ought to be sent. And, by the judgment of all, Germanus bishop of Auxere, and Lupus bishop of Troyes,were chosen, who with ready devotion received the prayer and the command of the holy church." Here I will observe, 1st, that if the pope had appointed Germanus his legate, the synod would not have debated on the choice of a proper subject to send: and that, as five other ancient writers say the same, it is more than probable that Prosper was under a mistake, 2nd, That venerable Bede calls the two missionaries "plain" Germanus and "plain" Lupus. Did he also "sacrifice the catholic cause to temporal motives?" But then J. M. proved that St. Germanus exercised high acts of legatine power, so far as to constitute St. Dubricius the first metropolitan of Wales, as all British record and authors down to Giraldus testify. But this is mere rant. No British record nor author testifies that St. Germanus exercised any legatine power. They all say like Bede, that he was sent by the bishops of Gaul, and that he and "plain" Lupus consecrated St. Dubricius, having been elected by the king, and clergy and people, metropolitan of Wales. There is not one word in these writers of his having been sent by the pope, or of his having exercised any authority derived from the pope. But they also perhaps "sacrificed the catholic cause to temporal motives."

4th, Judex asks if there can be a more ancient writer of the life of

St. Dunstan than his contemporary Osbern. But is this ignorance or what is it?" St. Dunstan lived under Edwy and Edgar, Osbern after the Norman conquest, Then we learn that he abridged Bridforth and Adalard. If this be true, to abridge in those days must have been a very laborious employment: for his abridgment is thrice as long as both their works put together.

Lastly, Judex has no doubt that the two miracles rejected by the historian will be found in the works of Bridforth and Adalard. No-they will not. Both these writers "sacrificed the catholic cause to temporal motives."

5th, Judex accuses the historian of attributing the performance of a sacred duty by St. Thomas to irritation. The historian on the contrary, denies that it was a duty, and proves that it was not, because the saint himself had previously determined not to deliver the letters.

6th, I may add that Judex says not one word in defence of the false quotations which I mentioned, and therefore by his silence admits them to be false. Thus, sir, I have answered the principal objections which that writer has brought against the historian, and confidently appeal to your readers whether any proof has been shewn that the historian "has sacrificed the catholic cause to temporal motives." If not, what idea wil they form of the man who could publish so foul a calumny?

AMICUS JUSTICIA.

To the Editor of the Orthodox Journal.

MR. EDITOR,-A letter was inserted in your journal of last month with the signature of Judex affixed to it, the author of which in this his assumed judicial character, professes to sum up the evidence on both sides respecting the long-pending

controversy on the subject of Mr. | object of his particular censure. Lingard's history of England, with a view of obtaining from you and from the public a definitive verdict. But as this self-constituted judge does not appear to me to have discharged the office he has rashly undertaken, with that firmness and impartiality which it became him to display; I have to request the gentlemen of the jury, to whom he has appealed, to suspend their sentence, till they shall have duly weighed the following observations which I am now about to submit to their consideration.

It is the duty of a judge, in summing up evidence on a litigated point, to state with precision the arguments adduced on each side by the contending parties, in order that the Jury may be enabled to form an equitable decision. But whether or not the individual who has obtruded himself upon the attention of the public, on the present occasion, in the capacity of judge, has so conducted himself, I shall leave it to you and to your readers to determine, when they shall have duly considered the remarks I have to make on his mode of proceeding. A person under the signature of J. M. had, in a letter dated the 19th of June, commenced, what I conceived to be, an unjust attack on Mr. Lingard's recently published history of England, to which he prefixed a variety of invidious and unprovoked animadversions on three highly respectable catholics, one of whom is now no more. history I undertook to defend. And I prefaced that defence with an attempt to rescue the injured characters of the three gentlemen alluded to, from the foul aspersions which J. M. had cast upon them. One common appellation he did not hesitate to bestow upon them all; which was that of betrayers of their holy religion, And he also made each individual among them the specific

The

I

observed in reply, that his censures were as unmerited, as they were upfounded. That with respect to the ingenious historian of Abeilard, it was not for me to decide what errors might have crept into his works; but that whatever they might be, he had retracted them all, to the complete satisfaction of his ecclesiastical superior; and that therefore J. M had violated the principles of justice and charity, in exhibiting him to the public, and in particular to the flock committed to his charge, as the betrayer of that religion the interests of which he was at that very time engaged in promoting. That, as to the author of the Classical Tour, I was not aware that there was a single passage in his work which was contrary to the strict principles of the catholic faith, and that his character at least should have been spared by J. M. though his doctrines might not perhaps be altogether conformable to J. M.'s notions of orthodoxy. Finally, I contended, that the catholic counsellor, whom J. M. had wa tonly vilified as the enemy of his religion, had shewn himself in reality its best friend, by his exemplary forbearance under the provocations he had sustained. To these observations J. M. returned distinct answers in a second letter, which appeared in your journal, the futility of which I also in my rejoinder eudeavoured to demonstrate.

Now, sir, I appeal to you, and to the readers of your journal, if the individual who has arrogated to himself the character of judge, and who, in his judicial capacity, has professed to sum up the evidence produced on each side, on the question in debate, ought not, in con formity with his character and profession, to have stated that evidence, and to have weighed it with a steady and unbiassed hand in the scales of impartial justice? But has he actu

« הקודםהמשך »