Obrázky na stránke
PDF
ePub

J. M. in his first letter, complained, that, calumniated, misrepresented, and ridiculed as our holy religion is, and long has been, by our ignorant and bi goted countrymen, it is a deplorable misfortune that, since the days of bi

of the individuals of our body, whom God has qualified to vindicate it, should aid, or at least connive at, those irreli gious acts against it. He then proceeded to illustrate his statement, by naming the historian of Abeilard, Dr. Geddes, Mr. Eustace, and a celebrated catholic counsellor, as the individuals thus gifted, and thus betraying the religion they ought to have defended.Now, if what J. M. here stated were "foul aspersions" on the characters of these writers, as CANDIDUS says they were, surely the ugliness of them might have been pointed out in a less petulant manner, and my correspondent J. M.

abusing Dr. Milner. But are they as persions, or are they not? Did J. M. state facts or falsehoods? That is the question to be decided, so far as the

only as bishops, but also as doctors of the catholic church, to denounce works of an innovating or erroneous ten dency, conformably to the canons and decrees of that church, whose grand characteristic is her doctrinal inflexibility. What arrogance, then, did he as-shop Challoner and Alban Butler, most sume in calling upon a bishop to declare by what authority he exercised so sacred a right! But, returning to CANDID's last statement, he says he prefaced his defence of the history 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." Now, on referring to his first letter to Dr. Milner, I cannot discover that CANDIDUS made any attempt to remove the just censures passed by J. M. on the three gentlemen alluded to, which the former calls "foul aspersions;" on the contrary, he avows his own incompetency to decide on the case of his "in-have been replied to without personally genious" co-mate; with respect to his "amiable" friend, the tourist, he ad mits his ignorance in not being able to discover that which must be visible to every person, who is well instructed in the catholic faith, and thinks an injury has been done to the "elegant" author of the Tour; and as to the learned gentleman of the law," so "far from considering him as the betrayer of his religion," CANDIDUS is content to contemplate him as the best promoter of its interests, from his exemplary forbearance in not replying to the virulence of Dr. Milner's pen. This is the substance of the attempt made by CANDIDUS to rescue his "three highly respectable CATHOLICS" from the foul aspersions" cast upon them; and a more weak or more pitiful exertion in behalf of presumed injured innocence was never I believe made. For what are we to conclude of a defence which consists of nothing more than a few high-flown personal compliments on the delinquents, an equal share of abusive epithets on their supposed calumniator, and a confession of the inability of the advocate to decide on the merits of one of the parties, his ignorance of the errors of the other, and his admiration of the tacit submission of the third to the chidings of the prelate? What puerility and trifling, on behalf of his friends, and what indecency towards the bishop, is this!

66

three highly respectable CATHOLICS", are concerned, CANDIDUS having given up the infidel Geddes, and the merits of the historian we will consider on a separate count. In the course of the controversy it has been clearly established, that the " ingenious" historian of Abeilard has been formally condemn, ed, in more than one instance, of pub. lishing works containing errors and in. novations in doctrine, and even of he resy; how then can it be a "foul as persion" to say that this writer, instead of employing his pen to vindicate his calumniated religion, has aided, or at least connived at, irreligious acts against it? CANDIDUS himself is so convinced of his inability to defend his " ingenis ous" friend, that he attempts to parry off the blow, by accusing the bishop of uncharitableness in publishing it to the world, the transgressor having retracted his error. That he has done so is highly praiseworthy in him; but as the works are still extant, and as they are frequently referred to by a certain party, it is highly necessary that the catholic public should be occasionally reminded of the danger lurking in them; and I refer CANDIDUS to the excellent letters of a "NO UNBELIEVER," in the numbers for September and October

prelate propounded certain questions to the author, which required explanation. What is this but admitting the work was faulty, which certainly ought not to be the case with a formulary of faith for catholics. Whether the replies printed against the latter bishop's objection were satisfactory or not, is not sufficiently evidenced by the work being permitted to circulate uncensured in his district; because a work may be tolerated without being approved, and therefore this circumstance by no means invalidates the official censure of the Midland prelate. Upon the whole, then, it is completely substantiated, that, however laudably the "ingenious" historian of Abeilard may now be employed in promoting the interests of religion as a clergyman, in his capa city of a public writer, for which his Maker had eminently qualified him, he stands the betrayer of that religion, by derogating in his writings from the definitions, decisions, and discipline of the church: and if any breach is committed against charity in this case, it is not by those who caution the faithful from being deceived by these writings, but by such men as pertinaciously praise them, notwithstanding their condemnation, and thus hold out snares to lead the unsuspecting into error.

last, which he has passed over, for a refutation of his defamatory charge of uncharitableness. CANDIDUS complains of the partiality of JUDEX, of his deviating from the character of a judge to become a special pleader, and of endea- | vouring to brow-beat him, to mislead the judgment of his readers, by interrogating him upon questions with which, he says, he (CANDIDUS) has no manner of concern, and which are nothing at all to the purpose, as the sole point of kis (CANDIDUS) argument hinged on the retractation. Were the question merely a personal one between JUDEX and CANDIDUS, he might, perhaps, have some reason to complain; but as it is one of a public nature, and as the public are left to decide the question, the more light that is thrown upon it, the less will the public mind be misled. If, therefore, JUDEX did travel a little out of his way, in summing up the evidence, it was not to confuse, but to enlighten the jury; which conduct, though perhaps not correct in a regular court of justice, is perfectly allowable, in my opinion, before the tribunal of public opinion. Here I must say a few words on the ingenious" historian's last work, The Faith of Catholics, which Dr. Milner formally censured. CANDIDUS says that he, with the distinguished author of the history of Eng- The next case for consideration is land, and with other learned and pious that of the "amiable" author of the catholic clergymen, whom he could ea- Classical Tour, on which little need be sily name, must still be permitted to re- said, since his advocate proclaims himgard this production as a valuable work, self ignorant of the tendency of the notwithstanding the terms of disappro- work, and will not take upon himself bation in which JUDEX has thought to deny that it is not entitled to the cenproper to speak of it. To be sure it pures passed upon it by J. M. For my may be valuable in the opinion of CAN-part, I cannot help expressing my astoDIDUS and his party, but will they take upon themselves to say that it IS The Faith of Catholics, the TRUE faith of catholics, and NOTHING but the faith of catholics? If I remember right, Dr. Milner censured it because it was not the faith of catholics; he did not say any thing of its worth or value. It purported to be, by its title, what it was not; therefore it held out a specious appearance on a question of vital concern to catholics; and consequently it became the duty of the honest guardian of a divine faith to guard the ignorant and unwary against it. CANDIDUS next charges the judge with incorrectly stating that Dr. Poynter found great fault with it, yet he admits that this

nishment how a catholic can read Mr. Eustace's work without being scanda lized at the loose and irreligious senti ments it contains, adorned with the most fascinating style of eloquence; at once shewing the transcendant abilities his Creator had conferred upon him, and the ungrateful use he put them to, by attempting to detract from that immutability of doctrine so conspicuous in our holy religion, and lessen the regard which catholics pay to religious institutions. It is now about two years since I had the opportunity of reading the work in question, and I have not yet forgotten the disgust I felt at the latitudinarian principles of the author, while I admired the beauty of his style

these frivolous criticisms, these childish
dribblings; it is clear that CANDIDUS,
in reproaching the judge, was unable to
protect the "amiable" author from the
censure of J. M. which has been proved
to be well-merited, and that, of course,
no injury has been done to his charac-
ter as a public writer, except what he
himself inflicted by his own relaxed
principles. The charge, therefore, a
gainst J. M. of casting a
"foul asper-
sion" upon the fame of the tourist,
brought forward by CANDIDUS, is un-
founded; and the writer of the Classi-
cal Tour must have a verdict go against
him of being a betrayer of his religion.

I now come to the case of the "learn-" ed gentleman of the law," in whose behalf CANDIDUS has much less to say, and no more to the purpose, than what he advanced on the preceding one. J. M. having said, that this personage

Has CANDIDUS ever read the work And if so, how does it happen that he could discover nothing therein contrary to the strict tenets of the catholic faith? Unable to stand his ground against J. M. he has made a furious attack on the judge, and, politely calling him a "presumptuous intruder," charges him with falsifying the evidence, garbling the sentiments of the author, and ascribing language to him which the work does not warrant. The falsification of the evidence consists in making CANDIDUS deny that there was a single passage in the work in question contrary to the strict tenets of the catholic faith, whereas, he maintains, he deliberately and guardedly stated he was not aware there were any such. Whether CANDIDUS deliberately and guardedly made use of this expression, for the purpose of entrapping J. M. into an unguarded expression, to allow the lat-" began his public life with an avowed ter to cry victory, I cannot take upon attempt to turn his fellow-catholics into me to say; but I shall not suffer my- protestant dissenters, and seems to have self to be misled by such a miserable lived till old age with no other view cavil. If CANDIDUS was not prepared than that of subjugating the divine to deny or doubt the statement of J. M. priesthood of his church to an unrewhy did he stir the subject, since he stricted lay, and even heterodox concould only look for an exposure of his trol," CANDIDUS takes occasion to tell own ignorance, without benefiting the Dr. Milner, that he is a highly re character of his deceased friend. That spectable CATHOLIC," and that the perthere is a difference between charging son of the lawyer, not his public meaCANDIDUS with the denial of facts and sures, is offensive to him, and is the his not being aware of their existence I occasion of the prelate's pouring illibeadmit; and it appears to be an unin-ral abuse upon him. And so far from tentional mistake of the judge, who considering the counsellor a betrayer did not take CANDIDUS for such an ig. of his religion, CANDIDUS is induced, noramus as he avows himself to be." by his examplary forbearance, under Next, as to JUDEX misrepresenting the provocations received from the withe sense of the author by a garbled rulence of the bishop's pen," to contemquotation, I have not the work to refer plate him as the best promoter of its to, but on turning to the third volume interests." Now what is to be said of of the Journal, p. 468, I find the objec- this "attempt to rescue the injured tionable sentence there quoted, and character of this gentleman from the that it stands as the words of the au-foul aspersions (said to be) cast upon thor, who proposes them to every con- it?" Is the single contemplation of sistent protestant. Then as to the CANDIDUS Sufficient to overthrow the judge ascribing to the author terms of language which the passages alluded to by no means warrant, as I before said, not having a copy in my possession, I cannot make a reference to ascertain the correctness of the complaint; but the very sentiment which CANDIDUS has imputed to his deceased friend manifestly implies that he held some of the religious state in contempt, and even his respect for the benedictines is given in a qualified sense. But enough of

[ocr errors]

provo

specific charge of J. M.? And on what
ground does he contemplate the coun-
sellor as the best promoter of the inte
rests of the catholic religion? His
exemplary forbearance under the
cations experienced from the pen of Dr.
Milner! What, Mr. CANDIDUS, is
this your attempt to rescue the charac-
ter of the "learned gentleman of the
law?" Is this the way to promote the
best interests of the catholic religion?
Why, then, every conscious dissembler,

able CATHOLIC," who was very nearly transforming all who bore that honour able title in England into protestingdissenters? As a member of society there is no doubt the "learned gentleman" is highly respectable, and gifted with many eminent qualifications; but, as a catholic, so far from thinking him highly" meriting respect," which is the definition Johnson gives to the word respectable," I cannot help looking on him with cautious suspicion, because he is clearly proved to have more than once betrayed the interests of his reli

[ocr errors]

Having disposed of the "three highly respectable catholics," and shewn that the imputed "foul aspersions" of J. M. are just and well founded char

every man who bears the lash of another's pen, from fear of further chastisement, or tacitly pleads guilty to the offence charged on him, is the best promoter of the interests of religion. The "learned gentleman" has been accused of attempting to take from us the glorious title of CATHOLIC.— Would he not remove this stigma, think you, from his shoulders if he could? There can be no doubt but he would, were it possible for him to do So. But as he cannot do this, he silently bears the reproach, and this is extolled into an act of exemplary forbear-gion. ance!! What idle perversion is this. on the part of CANDIDUS. The same may be said of the learned gentleman's impious protest in the second blue book; of his schismatical bill of 1813,ges, we must now take a view of the which was condemned not only by the case, as it regards "the distinguished Midland vicar individually, but by the author of the History of England.". whole hierarchy of Ireland collectively; CANDIDUS having given up the princiand of all his other plans and schemes pal objection regarding Saint Thoto obtain the civil emancipation of ca- mas à Becket, and not having noticed tholics; all of which have ended in the argument adduced by J. M. of the discomfiture and disgrace, and were at- obligation every catholic missionary is tended with danger to the spiritual in- under "to employ the whole of his terests of the church. The hazardous talents, and to avail himself of every designs of this man have been invaria- opportunity which presents itself to bly opposed and successfully detected clear up religious truth, and to save by the vigilance of Dr. Milner, who, souls," it must be concluded that the by the "exemplary forbearance" of the guilt of the historian on this point is "learned gentleman," was expelled the too manifest to be denied even by his self-named board, under the worse than advocate. -I therefore lament that he foolish idea, that the prelate's charachas had the weakness to suffer himself ter would be thereby tarnished. And to be influenced by a mock liberality to is it probable the "learned gentleman" suppress that talent he so nobly evincwould forbear trying a few more expe- ed in the Durham controversy. Why riments to degrade Dr. M. if he thought he could not undertake to refute the it possible to take some of the "viru- calumnies, and remove the misreprelence" off himself, and place it on the sentations of our protestant historians, bishop's back? There is no doubt but with the same zeal as Rapin attempts he would give half his estate to be able to distort every fact which bears testito gain so great a triumph. What then mony to the catholic faith, is a mysbecomes of his exemplary forbearance? tery to me, if interest or vanity had no How can he be the best promoter of the influence over him. But this is best interests of a religion, whose whole known to himself. That he has failed public life has been devoted to subju- in his duty as a catholic writer is in my gate it to the control of its enemies? opinion indubitable, and in attributing Were this "learned gentleman" to en- the martyrdom of a canonized saint to deavour secretly to destroy the rule of a a sudden gust of human passion, and court of justice, in which he might be a not to the grace of God, is a blot upon pleader, does CANDIDUS think he would his religious character, which it is to be be looked upon by his brethren of the hoped he will endeavour to make long robe as a "highly respectable atonement for in the succeeding part of LAWYER," however respectable his his labours. As to the imaginary sosphere might be in society? He must phistry and historical mistakes which answer in the negative. How then CANDIDUS thinks he has discovered can he call that man a "highly respect-in the summing up of JUDEX, they are

St Prosper, and breaks the link of unity which binds the church of God together. Is AMICUS JUSTITIE a member of the kirk of Scotland, or a disciple of the bishop of St. David's.-Admitting that the five ancient writers do not say one word of St Germanus having been sent by the pope, or of his having exercised any authority derived from the pope, St. Prosper asserts positively that the saint was sent by pope Celestin! Now will AMICUS JUSTITIE, and the "distinguished" historian, aud the galled and petulant CANDIDUS take upon themselves to say, that St. Germanus could constitute St. Dubricius the first metropolitan of Wales through the "con

too trifling to occupy any more space in the Journal, I will therefore once more recommend him to read the second letter of the "No-UNBELIEVER" in the October number, which he has passed over, though highly deserving his notice, for the clearness and soundness of its reasoning. I cannot however help taking a glance at the sapient conclusions of his brother advocate AMICUS JUSTITIA.-To convict J. M. of an error respecting the mission of St. Germanus, whom the historian said was sent with the concurrence of the pope, which expression J. M. objected to, and contended he came by the authority of the sovereign pontiff, the friend of justice has given a transla-currence" of the bishops of Gaul, and tion from Bede, which says, "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." -Now what is this testimony of Bede but a condemnation of the term used by the historian, and a confirmation of the statement of J. M.-For if the two prelates received a command, it implies something more than a concurrence, which may be defined a joint right. And as this is stated to be a command of the holy church, it must come from the pope, because the church cannot speak but by her head. Again, AMICUS JUSTITIE denies that any British author or record testifies "that Sr. Germanus

exercised any legatine power. They all (he states) say like Bede, that he was sent by the bishop 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, he exclaims sacrificed the catholic cause to temporal motives."-I cannot pretend any claim to classical lore, and really from the use which the historian and his defender make of it, in this instance, I am perfectly content with my state of ignorance. Nay I prefer it to their scholastic skill. For what is the tendency of the defence set up by AMICUS JUSTITIE but to destroy the divine right of the see of Rome? So then to convict J. M. of an historical mistake, this writer rejects the positive authority of ORTHOD. JOUR. VOL VIII.

without the authority of the see of St.
Peter? If they answer me in the affirm-
ative, then they are not catholics; if in
the negative, then the historian, by
using the word concurrence instead of
authority, most certainly vitiated a proof
of the pope's supremacy, and is highly
censurable for it; nor is his friend A
CUS JUSTITIE less deserving of re-
proach, for the bungling manner he has
attempted to establish an ecclesiastical
democracy in the fifth century, which,
if a catholic, he must know could not
exist.-As to these ancient writers
sacrificing the catholic cause to tempo
ral motives, the times in which they
wrote and the state of literature were
so different to our own days, that the
friend of justice must have felt himself
hard driven to make so foolish and con-
temptible a comparison.

In conclusion let me offer a word of advice to my correspondent CANDI pus. By the style of language used in his last communication, as well as in his letters to Dr. Milner, it is demonstratively clear that his feelings were personal, and not directed to the cause of the complaint made by J. M. on the origin of this controversy. If any one doubt the accuracy of the appellation of "galled partisan" given by J. M. in his second letter to CANDIDUS, the terms, "invidious and unprovoked animadversions,"-"foul aspersions"―arrogated to himself"- presumptuous intruder"" flagrant misrepresentations," applied by the latter to JUDEX, bear the strongest testimony that CANDIDUS laboured under "a fit of the spleen," accompanied with an overflow of the gall.—That the highly-respectaF

« PredošláPokračovať »