A Reply to Bishop Julius.

Gisborne Times, Volume VI, Issue 157, 15 July 1901, Page 3

A Reply to Bishop Julius.

Tun Bov. Father Des Chcsnais, of Christ church, replying to Bishop Julius’ stateincut that ho regarded tho supremacy of Homo in any country ns being fatal to that country's good, and, ill the long run, disastrous to truo religion, states : What ! Catholics a danger to the State ? A fundamental dogma of the Catholic Church is to respect ovor.y legitimate authority, never to join any secret society, novor to take part in any- revolution, and, when, unjustly persecuted, never to seek redress but by lawful means and moral suasion. The I’opo has repeatedly told the Catholics of Franco to accept tho Bopublic unreservedly, although the present Uovornment persecutes innocent nuns, who spend their lives for the relief of the poor, nursing the sick and teaching little children ; although, by tho civil law, priests are obliged to serve in the army, and monasteries and unjustly mulcted. Are our soldiers who are fighting in South Africa n dauger to tho State ? Yet many of them and several of their generals and officers arc sincere Catholics. Was the Marquis of Bipon, Viceroy of India, a danger to the State '? IV as Sir Frederic IVeld, Governor of Tasmania, a danger to the State ? Was Lord Charles Bussell, Lord Chief Justice, a danger to the State ? Is the Hon. Sir Joseph Ward, Minister of Bailways and FostmasterGcneral, a danger to the State '? A large number of our police force arc Catholics : are they also a danger to the State '? Bo one, if 1 am not mistaken, is admitted to the Civil Service except he bo duly qualified and has fulfilled all the conditions required by the State ; to think the contrary would be a slur on our Ministers and representatives. If Bishop Julius wants the children of liis persuasion to be taught religion, why do not Anglicans build and support schools of their own, out of their own pockets, as Catholics are doing all over the world? Is it not, perhaps, because Catholics are thoroughly convinced of tho divinity and apostolicity of their Church and many Protestants are not ? As to nv.xed marriages, Catholics dislike them, discourage them, but, valuing their faith more than their lives, they insist on all children born of a Catholic parent being brought up Catholics. If the Protestant party will not consent to this, ho is quite free to marry a person of his own persuasion, which certainly would be the best. IN hat tvranuy is there in this ? Cannot Protestants do the same, as Bishop Julius advises them'? If it be right for Protestants to do so, how could it be wrong for Catholics'? Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones. Bishop Julius praises the Orange Society for their loyalty to the State and to the Church. Is he aware that this organisation of which “we should be alfproud " was suppressed by Act of Parliament in the year 1825, or that Orangemen were at the bottom of the Cumberland plot to deprive our late lamented Queen, then Princess Victoria, of herlawful right to the throne ? Does he know that on July 1, 1822, and Bovembor 11, 1829, general orders were issued by the Commandor-in-Chief of the Forces strongly reprobating the holding of Orange Lodges in any regiment, as “ fraught with injury to the discipline of jhe army : that, on military grounds, the folding of Orange Lodges in any regiment or corps is contrary to order and the rules of the service-” ? *is His Lordship also acquainted with the true nature of the Ortrnge oath ? .