New Zealand Tablet Fiat Justitia. FRIDA.Y, APRIL 20, 1877. HOLY SCRIPTURE AT FAULT.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume IV, Issue 211, 20 April 1877, Page 10

New Zealand Tablet Fiat Justitia. FRIDA.Y, APRIL 20, 1877. HOLY SCRIPTURE AT FAULT.

Can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit 1 ? The Saviour of the WV.rld declares that it cannot, but the Rev. Professor Salmond evidently considers that it can. Whose dictum are we to receive as the truth % In the course of a lecture delivered by him last week to the Knox Church Young Me?i's Society, entitled the " Relation of Christianity to Science and Civilisation," and much of which, as reported by the Otago Daily Times, we find remarkably good and pertinent, but from much of which we also dissent emphatically, the rev. gentleman alluded to took occasion to assert the claim of the Church to haviug contributed largely to the civilisation of the world ; to eulogise the primitive missionaries, and even to pass a qualified sentence of approbation upon certain works of the religious < >rders. The Church, indeed, lie speaks of, is not the divine and infallible institution that we, Catholics, know by that name. In " each generation it invariably shares, in its measure, the • prejudices and infirmities which belong to its generation," therefore it cannot be that which is appointed to teach the nations truth that cannot vary, atid which Christ has promised t » be with, " All days, even to the consummation of the w«irld." The example of missionary labour also, which he h*s especially brought forward is suspicious. He speaks generally as follows : — " The lands were covered with impenetrable forests ; the missionaries were the first to penetrate them, made the first roads, and the spots where they raised their tents are now the centres of great cities. The missionaries have made alphabets, and grammars, and dictionaries, and given the first books to innumerable barbarous tribes — they have c ■rried with them the spade and plough, clothing and buildings, drainage and agriculture, schools and ti edicine — and ail this, not as their main work, but as a mere incidental — superadding all this to

the leavening of their minds with sublime tiuths and new moral ideas and emotions." But he does not give us any of the particulars concerning the missionaries who accomplished all this, and who were invariably monks. The results of their labours he avails himself of, when forced in defence of -the Christian faith to point to what the XJhurch has done for the world ; the names of the labourers Be dare not name, for what follower of Calvin and Knox might without a blush openly appeal to the works of the sons of St. Benedict in illustration of the benefits conferred upon the world by religion ? " Less than a ce ntnry after the death of Benedict," says Montalembert, "all that barbarism had -won from civilisation was reconquered ; and more still, his children took in hand to carry the gospel beyond those limits -which had confined the first disciples of Christ. After Italy, Gaul, and Spain had been friken from the enemy, Great Britain, Germany, and Scandinavia were in turn invaded, conquered, and incorporated with Christendom. The West was saved ; a new empire was founded ; a new world begun." Professor Salmond, however, instead of instancing any one of the great missionaries from amongst the monks, who were the true victors, holds up to admiration a doubtful apostle, for, though not by name, be clearly indicates Ulphilas, who, while he composed an alphabet, and gave to the Goths a version of Holy Scripture, did yet but win these barbarians to Arianism, and thereby infect with heresy all the kindred tribes of the North, from which many terrible deeds followed in due course. The Rev. Professor, however, perhaps desired only to be consistent, so far as his subject would allow him, and therefore took care to avoid stating broadly that the best proof he could adduce in support of the beneficial influence of Christianity, was the good works performed by men whom the narrowness of his creed compels him to believe to have been idolaters. But we merely make these remarks in passing. We are not concerned in any special manner with the notions of a church entertained by members of the Presbytery, individually or collectively ; nor with the particular preacher whom they may select in order to illustrate their idea of primitive mission work. What -we desire to call attention to is the following passage which occurred in this lecture to which -we allude :—: — " Monastic institutions are in bad odour among us, and not without reason. There is a radical vice in the institution ; it has always degenerated into viciousness ; and it becomes at length an intolerable thing. However, there were long periods during which the monasteries were the centres of all humanising and civilising influences. They stood as a shield between a wild, lawless, feudal nobility and down-trodden serfs. They were the asylums and hospitals of the district. They were the homes of literature, where laborious hands saved from oblivion the treasures of ancient literature. They were the conservators of learning, music, poetry, and architecture — the nurseries of agriculture and arboriculture." Here we have a picture of a tree rooted in evil, and yet bringing forth fruit surpassing the fabled apples of the Hesperides. The Rev. Professor evidently differs generally from the decision laid down in the Guspel, strict compliance with which he makes bis bonst. " There is radical vice in the monastic institution," says the Rhv. Professor Salmond. But Athanasitjs, Basil, and Chrysostom. Jekome, Ambrose, and Augustine were defenders of the monks, and promoters of their institution. Can it be that these great iut llects shall be found incapable of judging as to what lay at the root of the system they approved ? Their opinion will, at least, pass current as being of equ=il value with that of any Professor, however wise or learned he may be, who occupies a theological chair at the present day, and in comparison with such an one we leave it. That the Monastic institution, however, " has always degenerated into viciou«ness," we strenuously deny. Such a statement is hardly justifiable even on the ground of its being a rhetorical flourish ; and in a would-be champion of Christianity we should gladly see Christian charity predominant ; which in this instance is not the case. There have been abuses in the institution referred to ; but, says Lacordaire, " Abuses prove nothing against any institution ; and if it is necessary to destroy every thing that has been subject to Abuse — that is to say. of things which are good in themselves, but corrupted by the liberty of man — Q-oD himse'f ought to be seized upon his inaccessible throne, where too. often we have seated <>ur own passions and errors by His side." Had the Monastic institution generally degenerated into viciousness, it must have passed away long since from the face of the earth, instead of being as it is at the present day, and never I

more vigorous nor flourishing. Those monasteries which became corrupt invariably perished. — " Life ebbed away from them little by little," says Montalembert, — "not only religious life, but life of every kind. In spite of the attractions which an existencn easy and rich, almost without care and mortifications, offered to vulgar souls, a sufficient number of monks could not be found to people these dishonoured sanctuaries. L*t us well observe, to the honour of human nature, as of Christianity and religious life, that the corrupt orders werealways barren. The world would have none of them, as God would not. Like God, the world addressed them in these words : ' I would thou wert hot or cold — so then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mout'i.' " —We quote from the English translation of The Monks of the West, which accounts for our use of the Authorised Version. But of what avail is it to write? The "Protestant Tradition" requires that the Monastic institution should be considered vicious, and vicious it will continue on the tongues of Protestant lecturers to the end, let truth proclaim never so loudly in its favour, and its works testify to its nature, — the fruit to the value of the tree.