OUR LONDON LETTER.

Evening Star, Issue 3724, 29 January 1875, Page 2

OUR LONDON LETTER.

r *P eech delivered by Mr Disraeli at the Dora Mayor’s banquet was altogether a most delicious morsel of Tory logic. The working classes of this country certainly do possess some valuable rights, which, however, have only been won in spite of the most determined opposition qt the so-called Conservatives. And Mr Disraeli would insinuate that for the preservation of those rights the nation must look to the party which, had it been strong enough, would never have allowed those rights to exist at all The gratitude of the working classes towards such conservators of their rights is hardly likely to become ecstatic; and surely they may trust themselves to keep what they themselves have won. Mr Disraeli’s list of blessings enjoyed by , outworking classes is, indeed, but a recapitulation of the successful labors of the Liberal party, the credit of which he is seemingly desirous of appropriating; and it would appear even as if he wished to charge upon the Liberals a sinister design of undoing all the good work they have accomplished, by suggestions that the lories only can be trusted to defend it. In view of all these delightful professions of maintaining popular rights, kc , it is instructive to call to mind the recent attempt to seize the endowments of schools intended for the whole nation, and hand them over to the clergy of the Church of England. But after all the speech of Mr Disraeli, absurd and illogical though it be, js yet instructive and worthy of attention, as showing that when it is desired to pat down Toryism in a pleasing light, the only way is to'dreas t it up so as to resemble Liberalism 3.8 XQ.l* possible. rOfCSS n r a^ dress at Belfast has, of course, called forth a flood of opuosition and now Cardinal Cullen has entered the lists. ’ Tho point which called foith most hostile criticism wa« the announcement of the Professor that he discerned in matter the promise and potency of every form and quality of life.” inat, or course, is a shock to our accepted notions as to the creation of living beings, but it is only fair to remember that, as a merely scientific man, Professor Tyndall had nothing tD'do mth the supernatural; and his theory is little more tuan au extension of ideas which, «« regards inanimate creation, have long been Evfcmme now admits, that, bo far as geology la concema, all the 9}

nature may be referred to laws constantly in force, and inherent in matter. Hr why, such laws were impressed on matter, is, of course, quite a different question. The Belfast address has the fault, or perhaps the merit, of being something vague, but it would seem that Professor Tyndall’s “ materialism ” consisted in claiming that the animal and vegetable kingdoms were regulated by laws as constant as, though more complex than those governing the inanimate universe. However that may be, the Roman Catholic Church evidently regards the •’ rofessor’s views as very dreadful, and has set about to warn itsfiock against them. Cardinal Cullen sets forth to explain that Science and Faith can never come into real collision. If they appear so, it is merely the result of a misunderstanding. Perhaps the scientific proposition has not been rightly appiehended; and, as regards the theological dogma, it may very likely turn out to be no dogma at all, but only an opinion, “or even if it be a dogma it has been misunderstood, or not explained according to the mind of the Church.” This may be satisfactory to Roman Catholics, but to outsiders it seems very much like pitching the doctrine of infallibility to the winds. If the Church is liable to mistake as regards theological opinions, and is only infallible on dogmas and, further, on such dogmas as have not been misunderstood, but interpreted according to the true mind of the Church—tneu its infallibility is reduced to very narrow dimensions. Moreover, if that infallibility is to be of any practical service, it would be requisite tor the Church, in enunciating her doctrines, to state whether she was expressing an opinion or giving forth a dogma, and to accompany that dogma with explanations to prevent its being misunderstood, and a certificate that such explanation was according to the true mind of the Church. Everyone is right now and then; so far, therefore, the Homan Church would not seem to be very different from ordinary mortals, and unless she herself will take the trouble always to define her dogmas, on which she is infallible, as distinguished from mere theological opinions on which she admits a liability to error, it is to much to expect other people o the reservation made by Cardinal Gullen amounts to stipulating that everything is to be accepted in a Pickwickian sense, which may be understood to mean--well anything that may subsequently prove convement. It would be unfair to the Roman Catholics, however, not to admit that reasoning is made use of by other Christian sects. I have before me a “Testimony” recently delivered by the Ivingites. who Believe in the second coming of Jesus, which they represent as being imminent. They admit, of bZ?’ S? Christianß Held a similar K f t t th .® expectations entertained by themselves from tune to time have not beeu realised. Despite this they contend that they have never been deceived—only disappointed—simply that. The difference may not appear very striking to the uninitiated, who however taZw

that for a lon « «»* to come theology will occupy a very prominent place in public attention. The struggle which fc being fought out in Italy ana Germany has *2 Let UB be thankful that it is here to be decided by argument and 4banb y bloodand steel The signal for the strife has been given by a pamphletby Mr Gladstone upon bearing of the Vatican decrees, and its effect is similar to that of tb^°fn, b r he ' X v- *?*? be from W^ oh be undertakes to prove 1.1 hat Rome has substituted for the proud boast of temper eadem, a policy of violencel and change of faith. 2. That she has HSSj rCP 3 Udl TW m °H der S tho^hta “danoient History, d. That she has returbishei and paraded anew every rusty tool she was thought to have disused. 4. That Rome requires aconvert who now 301ns her to renounce his mental 2nd dT al * ff eedom « aQ d to place his loyalty and duty at the mercy of another.” In reply 5 Archbishop Manning has written one or two letters to the papers, and the fact remains that Roman Catholics generally are good citizens, though the tendency of the Vatican dftfp2 eS if a pomt upon which opinions may Ik - 18 urged * enough, that even civil allegiance must have a limit, because the • may command that which the conscience Wro “/ 14 18 also apparent that there is a wide difference between the latitude allowable to individual consciences and that winch may be safely extended to an organised «S«°L me ? rofe “ 8 t0 > aQd fc fact sometimes do submit for direction to an external influence. This feature of the cas^ow^r nCT l JX° n^\ h l J ? rd Acton > is k liberal Catholic, but the line he has taken in defence „f hta Chutoh hj.. occasioned t£ most funous offence amongst its clerical members, which will hardlf be wonder^ from r tt Dg °w or , tw d extract trom his letters. For the purpose of proving that Roman Catholics do not surrender the direction of their consciences ho gives a list of atrocities committed by the 6 “V ?d A van ? u ?. P °P es . Pointing out that It is hard to believe that these filings tth™ Ite * m boßom of the most fervent Ultramontane that sort of admiration or assent that shows itself in action. If thev do not then it cannot be said that Catholic forfeit their moral freedom, or place their duty at the mercy of. another.” His Lordship’s logic cannot d u Uch £ ult with, but the premises on which he bases it give the most shattering blows to the doctrine of infallibility. Thus “A Pone who lived in Catholic times, and who is *amous in history as the author‘of the first CroS decided that it is no murder to kill excommanicatcd pe K „„s. This rule was mcotp“S?n L “»-, •• It has bJn for“S years, and continues to be part of the ecclesiastical law. Far from being a dead Jjf«[» lt ob V l^ ed » new application in the days t q TtT’f Qd one of the later Pep®* has declared that the murder of a Protestant is so good a deed that it atones, and more than atones, for the murder of a Catholic.” Airain wh r A AC K n telk Ul ? “ Puis the sth - the only lope who has been proclaimed a saint for many centunes, having denounced Elizabeth, commissioned an assassin to take her life; and his next STi ° n leam |ng that the Protestants were being massacred in France, pronounced the action glorious and holy, but comparatively barren of results, and implored the KW months by his Nuncio and Legate? to cany the work on to the bitter end, until S y ths, U v e r ot^ hj 2 d recanted or perished." ordshl P. in the passage q 2? ed, i° Bay - that 411686 tb iogs cannot excite the admiration of the most fervent Ultramontane, &c. Then he would‘ show that as regards scientific opinions liberty had bead tX y th?p oliCß W °J th ® de»mnciations of the Popes. “As far as decrees. censures, and persecution could commit the Court of Rome, it was committed to the denial of the Copermcian system. Nevertheless tbe history of astronomy shows a whole catena. of distinguished Jesuits ; and, a century ago. a an i? rd who thought himself bound to adopt Roman°dirinM.?’ heory Waß lau S h6d at b y m If then the decrees of Rome are systemaficaiiy set at defiance, or treated with sileS contempt by Catholics, what, we may wonder{ss, hccomea of the doctrine of infatii-. bility. and if the Popes have been bo frequently wrong on points of morals, how is it possible to admit their claim to universal allegiance within that province ? Lord Acton might perhaps reply that the infallibility did not extend beyond points of faith, such, for instance, as to whether the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Father and the Son, or from the Father only. But if we granted him suck an admission, and if we were further to concede that on such subjects the Roman Church was miraculously guided right, we should arrive at a very impotent conclusion, namely that a dispensation had been specially vouchsafed from Heaven to inform ns of the origin of the Holy Spirit, &c., whilst not a rayof light was granted to save us from the cmse religious persecution. I do not wish to b« irreverent, and hope I am not so, but it docs seem a very small thing to be in the right as regards transubstantiation, consubstantiatioh' or original sin, and wrong upon such points as murder, persecution and relentless iutolemnc? And if a revelation has come from heaven onlv to keep us nght oh the former, for all nrneHnrfi pm noses it would seem we murht dn JE?. welt without it as with itT 8 d ° &lmoßt M liberality to the pointof lte ■ or even ihtmnalists. Th e

miracles. The question now is, how are the two branches to agree ? The one party would base its action on liberty, whilst the other upholds the necessity of faith. The one appeals to the sacredness of every man’s conscience and the obligation to conform to his inner lights, whilst the other proclaims the supreme authority of the jK ible. It seems hardly possible that any compromise can be effected, and the probability is that henceforth there will be two Protestant Churches in France one with definite creeds, and the other allowing to each of its members the most unrestrained liberty of opinion. (To be continued.)