THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND THE BIBLE.

Southland Times, Issue 1606, 16 July 1872, Page 3

THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND THE BIBLE.

" As lone as words can different meanings bear, JLnd each mag lie his own intervreter, Our airy faith ■will no foundation find, The Word's a weathercock for every wind." Detden. Sib, — It is onlynatural I should be contradicted by a man whose Tery name is a contradiction. I am asked by your correspondent of polite memory, in your issue of July 2nd, to " give a reason for the hope that is in me." This I will do as briefly as I can. *' A Catholic, bat not a Papist" is a contradiction in terms — let me illustrate that proposition in this way, viz. : — If a relative, say, of some Catholic namesake of your correspondent, (who is a Protestant,) arrived in Invercargill, and asked to be informed of the whereaboutß of hia friend, who also resided here, would he be sent to that gentleman who signs himself " A Catholic, but not a Papist," or, if enquiry were made, no*, only in Invercargill, but in any other part of the world, for the Catholic church, would the stranger be shown or conducted to any Protestant church, by any man, Catholic, Protestant, or Pagan ? I do not wonder so much at the weakness of your correspondent's arguments as to see them in print ; for, from the weakness of his letter I infer the weakness of his intellect, and from the weakness of his intellect I conclude he is a fool. However, as " the number of the fools is infinite," we tnuet not be surprised to meet one occasionally. lam sorry to trouble you again, Mr Editor, but I wish to avail myself of the opportunity to give my Apologia of the line of conduct I have observed since the commencement of this correspondence. The first letter I wrote — under the beading '•Protestant Calumnies" — was not intended as a controversial letter, but as an answer to an insult, which, if intended for myself, and not for the Church, I should not have noticed. My letter may have seemed controversial to some, because I conld not avoid detailing a little of the doings of the so-called Keforaiere. I repeat, I could not avoid it, not because of an insult offered eo much as because there has been a system of manufacturing lies, (as I have already demonstrated,) admitted as well as established by the first Reformers themselves, and because we are not to expect the " disciples are above their masters." Whoever is so unreasonable as to expect thi«, will be sadly disappointed in reading the subsequent history of the " Reformation," and the consequences of its established system b. I need not say I took no notice of any controversial letters after the publication of my letter in reply to the paragraph in the News. I have abstained from so doing on the principle that what generally does harm and seldom good, ought not to be ventured ; and, in fact, the letters that were written to me or against me, were of such a character as to render them altogether unworthy of notice. The writers of them seem to have read no other book in their lives but the Bible, and that badly. Your correspondent, " A Catholic, but not a Papist," could have anticipated nearly all the trouble he gave both you and himself by sending me up his Bible. What does he mean by re-printing it ? Does he mean to give us a new version ? which (according to Protestant principles) is a privilege that could not be denied him. I should like to see it. Your correspondent speaks of education under Papal sway. As I must be brief, I shall content myself with merely noting two facts in reference to that subject, viz. : — In the city of Borne (which has certainly been under Papal sway), there are more schools, and of a superior class, in proportion to itß population, than in any other part of the Uni verse. Switzerland, which has reached the highest average number as regards schools, is exceeded at Rome by a fraction over two, proportionally, — at least it was ao up to the time Victor Emmanuel went there to improve the state of affairs. Fact 2nd.—Cardinal Cullen, since he became Bishop of Dublin, has spent £100,000 on educational purposes which he could, without injustice, if he had less zeal, have expended in ways more to his own advantage. He established over 100 schools in that time — Bchoolsthat, even as regards the material structure, arenot surpassed,perhaps, in any part of the world ; and Dr Whately, theProtestant Bishop of the same city, with hundreds of thousands poured into and passing through his hands from the Government, &c., how many did he establish during his time »6 Bishop of Dublin ? — not one. Please to remember, not even owe. I may here add the College of Holy Cross, built by the private parse of the Cardinal, ranks with the first college* in the United Kingdom. That's a little information for your honeßt coTreßponuent. What shall I say of that charge of poverty brought against the Catholic Church— a charge for the first time in my life I have heard preferred agaiuit any church, A man speaking in that

way is hardly of sound mind. I wonder he is not afraid the twelve poor fishermen, and Christ Himself, " who had not whereon to lay his head, ' may "be listening. Alas ! the sacra fames aun has had a Kood deal to do with Protestantism, and this brine* me to your correspondent's charge of degradation. As to that, probably he had better bo silent. If he would tell me from what country he comes, we may he able to finH a late census — hac de re — throwing some light on the subject. I will put poor Treland into the scales against it or any other count- y— Treland, which though poor is pure, and which has won for her children the title and made the world familiar with the proverb— " The Virtue of the Daughters of Erin. Your correspondent repeats the oft-refuted calumny preferred by Protestants against the Catholic Church— that " she interdicts the laitv from reading the Bible"— wherea?, in point of fact, (under salutary restrictions and proper conditions.) she not only encourages its perusal, but her Liturgy comprises nearly the whole of its contents, from Genesis to Revelation, while she ha?, with anxious solicitude, for more than eighteen L centuries, guarded and preserved it as " the apple of her eye," amid the crash of systems, the ruin of empires, the rage of violence, and the wreck of time. The indiscriminate distribution and unrestricted perusal of the Bible, without note or comment, among all classes and conditions — the young and the old, the learned and the unlearned, the civilised and the savage— together with the free exercise of " private judgment" thereon, has been, in my opinion, the principal cause of all the fanaticism, blasphemy, and infidelity that. have distracted and disgraced the Christian world since the commencement of the so-called " Reformation" in the beginning of the sixteenth century. The soi-disant apostles of that " Reformation," having blazed into open rebellion with an excommunicated prie9t — Martin Luther — at their head, against the Church of God, appealed to the Bible as a dernier ressort, in support of un-heard-of doctrines which were then for the first time broached, in direct opposition to the unanimous belief of Christendom, and asserted that " the Bible, and the Bible only, was the true rule of faith." Now I assert per contra that «' the Bible is not, cannot, and never was intended to be the sole rule of fatih ; but that the Church and the Bible conjointly, are the true Catholic rule of faith." Neither can they, under any circumstances, be ever separated without destroying the whole fabric of Christianity — because on the one hand " the Bible proves the authority of the Church," and on the other hand " the Church is the only living witness to the authenticity and inspiration of the Bible." Moses wrote the " Law," and Mahomet wrote the " Koran," but our Divine Redeemer, during His mission upon earth, never committed to writing, and never commanded any of His disciples to write, any portion of His heavenly doctrine — not even that most sublime of all prayers which He Himself composed, and which is, I believe, retained in every Christian congregation. But He " built a Church upon a Rock," against which He promised that " the gates of hell should not prevail," and with which He promised to " remain for ever." And He appointed pastors to that Church ; and He directed them to "Go and teach all nations" the doctrine that He had taught them." Which doctrine — if the Evangelists had never been inspired to write — His Church would have handed down to posterity " whole and entire," as it is at the present day ; for He had promised her that He " would send the Holy Ghost to teach her all things, to bring all things to her remembrance, and to abide with her for ever." Not one single iota of the New Testament was written for several years after our Saviour's crucifixion, and not before a considerable portion of the then known world was converted to Christianity by the viva voce teachings of the apostles and their disciples. It was written piecemeal, at different periods, as occasion required — addressed to particular congregations or individuals — and whs intended not so much to teach as to explain and " define" doctrine thar. had been previously taught by " word of mouth," nor was it until the latter end of the fourth century that its various parts were collected and arranged in their present form, and the " canon of the Scriptures" authoritatively "defined*' by the Catholic Church, What " unerring guide" then had the Christian world for the first four centuries of the Christian era? Surely none other than " the Church of the living God — the pillar and ground of truth." Has He forsaken His " spotless Bpouse" with whom He promised to '" remain for ever," in order to pour out His inspiration upon every enthusiastic eclectic and frenzied fanatic that misinterprets His holy word and concoctß for himself a peculiar "system," which he miscalls " Christianity." It is to be feared their inspiration proceeds from the same " dark-complexioned gentleman" that persuaded Martin Luther to discontinue the Mass. (See Luther's own account of his famous conference with the Devil. — De Abro. Miss. Priv.) Your correspondent is astonished at my making use of the phrase — dead letter. It ia an axiom, to gainsay which would be an absurdity, that "No book — being a dead letter — can prove its own authenticity," consequently " the Bible cannot prove itself no more than it could have written itßelf." God could have given us a Bible to read as easy as a child's primer. He has not been pleased to do so, but has given us a work more difficult to understand, perhaps, than any other in existence. No Greek classic, no Arabic or Persian poet, no Hindoo mystic, is more abstruse. Neither is there from Genesis to Revelation satisfactory evidence of its inspiration. Upon what authority, then, do Protestants receive it as the " Word ot God ?" On what grounds do they believe it to be the sole rule of faith ? And, believing so, by what authority do they break through the only one of the ten commandments given with a warning, by " changing the Sabbath from the seventh to the first day of the week ?" By what authority do they " swear" in courts of law, when the Bible expressly commands us to " swear not at all ?" By what authority do they " baptise" infants, for which there is no warrant whatever in the Bible ? And doing all these things in the face of day, with what sort of consistency can they still persist in asserting that " they take their religion from the Bible, and the Bible only." I hope your correspondent now understands how foolish as well as illogical it is to be fishing for Soman Catholic observances notfound, as ho says, in the Christianity of the Bible ; for, granting for the moment his proposition, argumentationis causa, we can account for things not in the Bible, by the authority of the Church, whereas Protestants cannot account for observances, while admitting the Bible only, nor even for their Bible itself, as I have already explained. I shall not attempt to heighten the effect of the foregoing facts by an ornate and elaborate commentary, but respectfully submit them, in the unadorned majesty of truth, to the serious consideration of the Protestant public. — I am, &c, J. Cabdbk. St. Mary's, June 10, 1872.