BISHOP STROSSMAYER’S SPEECH.

Evening Star, Volume IX, Issue 2708, 21 October 1871, Page 2

BISHOP STROSSMAYER’S SPEECH.

To the Editor.

Sir —Your correspondent “G.” may be a good Catholic, but he is a very ba I i-easoner. Perl laps 'there is nothing extraordinary in this. Accustomed to take on tr st whatever doctrine is promulgated by his Church, the cultivation of the reasoning faculties appears perhaps to his simple mind altogether unnecessary. He is precisely one of those good sons of the Church who will blindly a 1 mire, but will never question, any absurd or antiquated folly that may exist in its bosom. The heretical breach which reason first induced in the Catholic Church will never be widened while it can boast only such submissive members as “ C.” Perhaps a Church ought to be congratulated on the possession of such men, who, though they add little lustre to it, are at ouoe its best security. “ C. ” says the head of the Church is infallible, because the members of that Church believe him to be so. Again, he says : “ A doctrine that is supported by 300,000,000 of Christians must be true.” Not being a lamb of the Catholic fold, I confess that these statements do not satisfy me. To say nothing of the ridiculous presumption involved in the infallibility question, I have yet to learn that “infallibility” is established because the members of a Church make the assertion. If we ask for proofs in support of this ridiculous doctrine, they are not forthcoming. It is, I suppose, the unction of apostolic descent which confers infallibility (?). Now it would be difficult to trace the apostolic descent in a diiect line to the present head of the Homan Church ; and anyone acquainted with history must be aware how monstrous it would be to associate apostolic purity or apostolic descent with many of the degraded creatures who have occupied and disgraced the pontifical chair. Then by what means are we to decide whether the boasted apostolic de cent were continued in the Greek or Romish Church? The disavowal of the former is hardly sufficient. But these are matters of secondary importance. It was to call attention to “C.’s” inaccurate figures that 1 ventured to address you. “C.”is not satisfied with stating his >nvu views, but endeavors to impose upon us by referring to 300 000,000 Catholics who, he says, entertain the same views. Now, considering that in the year 1824 it was computed tha in the whole world there were only 175,000,000 Christians, and that of this number 30,000,000 belonged to the Greek and Eastern Churches, and 05,000,000 were Protestants, it is clear that only 80,000,000 could be claimed at that period as connected with the Catholic Church. It would be interesting therefore to know by what process 80,000,000 have grown in 47 years into 300,000,000. I should like “ C.” to quote some authority to justify this apparently extravagant statement. There is another point upon which, with your permission, I will say a few words. When “C.” writes of Presbyterianism and other “isms” being irreligious, he should make it, I conceive, a point of duty to explain his meaning if he have one, and to furnish evidence which will give some color to so grave a charge. “ C,” should understand that Presbyterianism is not neccessardy irreligious, because its tenets indicate a wide departure from those of Roman Catholicism. Such a conclusion may, in the bosom of his own Church, be held to need no explanation, but when a charge of such a nature is preferred in the pir he print s it should in decency aud charity be accompanied with reasons to justify it. For my own part 1 should rejoice if there were ten thousand religious “isms” in the world, as their existence would he a sure indication of a healthy brain activity, which is sadly wanting in the Catholic Church. I am, &c., Balcii. October 20, 1871.