IPSE, IPSA:
IPSE, IPSA. IPSUM:
WHICH?
(The Latiii Various Readings, Genesis iii. 15.)
Controversial Letters in answer to the above question, and in
Vindication of the Position assigned by the Catholic Church
to tlie Ever-Blessed Mother of the World's Redeemer
in the Divine Economy of Man's Salvation.
IN REPLY TO
The Right Reverend Dr. Kingdon, Coadjutor (Anglican) Bishop
of Fredericton, New Brunswick, and "John M. Davenport,
Priest of the Mission Church," Ritualist Minister,
St. John, New Brunswick.
BY
RICHARD F. QUIGLEY, LL.B.,
(Harvard and Boston Universities), Harristbr-at-Law, St. John, New Brunswick,
Canada.
" Behold from henceforth all gener.ntions shall call me blessed. For He that is mighly
has done great thing!> to me, and holy is His name."— St. Ll'Ke, i. 48-49.
• * . • . . • • ...
• • • » •. * • •
*• •••» • ••.•■«,» t
,«*••*••• • ••• *
FR. PUSTET & CO..
New York and Cincinnatt.
for sale by
T. O'BRIEN & CO., St. Jjmn, N. B. D. &. J. SAPLIER & CO., Montreal, Cam.
t • • • •
» • • • *
« • • •
• • *
« • • • •
PREFACE.
The- occasion of writing the letters here republished, suffi-
ciently appears from the " Report " of Bishop Kingdon's
Lecture and the letter thereon in the first pages of this volume,
and need not be foreshadowed in an introduction. The writer's
motive, indeed, lay deeper, and he strikes the key-note in
these words :
" Wliat I desiderate in Protestant teachers is a knowledge of the
Catholic doctrines they attack. In the conscientious discharge of
their duties from their standpoint, they may feel themselves obliged
to point out errors (so called) iu the doctrines of the CathoHc
Church. Of this no reasonable man can complain, but for heaven's
sake, let them firat learn exactly what these doctrines are. We will
then have less of the wild figments of hysterical imaginations and
pandemonium caricatures of beliefs, in defence of which the
mightiest intellects that ever adorned our race have found their
highest sphere, ant! of which genius allied with sanctity have ever
been the most persuasive and enthusiastic exponents. "
Here I appeal for " more llghV on the part of virtuous and
high-minded Protestants. I would excite a spirit of enquiry,
create a distrust of impressions mechanically imbibed in youth,
and perpetuated and permanently fixed by more serious studies
on the same lines. I would force back the honest mind U[)on the
sources of its knowledge, induce it to reconsider the process by
which its religious convictions touching Catholic doctrine were
formed, and, \\nth a more matured knowledge of the conclu-
sion, to re-investigate the preniises on which it is grounded.
The Catholic Church, I delight to proclaim, has nothing to
fear from the closest and most minute investigation. It is
ignorance which is the great Anti-Christ ; and sincere inquiry
and honest research are the only antidote. These we cease-
lessly challenge — yet, for the most part, in vain. Why, we-
Catholics ask again and again, are we to be insulted and slan-
(8)
4 Pbeface.
dered, calumniated and taunted, day after day, year after year,
with doctrines which we iiave a thousand times formally and
distinctly repudiated '{ Why are the insults, slanders, calumnies,
and taunts repeated without even an allusion to the defence?
I shall have done all that I proposed if I have succeeded
in satisfying thoughtful and fair-minded Protestants that
the Catholic religion is very far different from the absurd
and revolting caricature so long held up to their abhorrence
and execration, — if I havo not failed to show that the
religion against which so mu'iy of their teachers and writers
inveigh under the name of the Catholic religion, is a religion
which Catholics themselves would detest most cordially — if
such a religion really existed.
These letters, I need hardly say, were not designed to appear
In a collective form. They are now, however, reproduced out
of regard to the wishes, perseveringly urged, of known and
unknown readers, Protestant and Catholic, who professed to
have received them M-ith much interest. They are repul)lished,
too, as originally issued, excepting a few verbal corrections and
the addition of a few lines at the end of Letter XII., which I
have enclosed in [ ], and which slipped out in the Imrry of
preparing the printer's MS. of that letter. I have, also, here
and there throughout the volume, added postscripts, and a few
notes, both as references and in further proof of the positions
taken in the text. The more elaborate notes which I had in-
tended to make, would but distract the general reader, and the
learned in such matters do not need them.
The volume is made up of four parts, namely : the Prelimi-
nary Letters, liesunu', Rejoinder, and Itebutter. The lirst ia
intended to give the reader a general conspectus of the origin
and progress of the discussion, and of the initial attitude of my
opponents ; the Tteaxum is a consideration of the arguments
advanced up to that stage in the debate ; the Rcjmmier is my
I'ejily t« their Stru'tuTes on the Resume ; and the Rebutter is
my answer to their second series of Strietv>re,<i. I can assure
the reader that lie will get from these letters a full and com-
plete idea of the whole controversy ; for, I have made it their
€si)ecial feature to set out in my opponents' own words not
Pkeface. 5
only their strongest positions, but every semldance of argu-
ment in the St/'/cturcft. Indeed, I do not hesitate to sav. tliat
a much clearer impression can be gained from these letters.
alone than if my opponents' confused and illogical jumble were
in the hands of the reader — even when jnirged of the <lisgrace-
fid blunders for which they had repeatedly to apologize.
In discussing such toi)ics as have engaged us in this contro-
versy, I had rather ''' bear my sword hid in a myrtle branch ''
and keep it there, than make a merciless onslaught on my (ip-
]ionents and scourge them '' hip and thigh."' But the Vicar,
though my nominal opponent only, has not allowed me to act
in this courteous spirit. The combat must be what the adver-
sary makes it. In his very first letter (the third preliminary),
he deliberately surrendered all claims to j)articipate in the
rights of controversial chivalry. By the insolence, ignorance,
stupidity, and malice there displayed, he forced the button from
off my foil, and obliged me to thrust my weapon home. lie
compelled me to treat him as a knight of old would have dealt
with a churl who had assailed him with base, ungentle weapons.
In this particular, I trust to the camlor and " sweet reasonable-
ness" of my opponents, however multitudinously and multi-
fariously real, ioY a hearty and whole-souled appreciation of
my good-will in their regard.
There remains that I should say a word on the matter of
these letters. The construction and logical order of the dif-
ferent parts was suppliecl by the tactics of my opponents ; the
substance was furnished by Catholic and Protestant Biblical
critics, and Catholic theologians of tine highest authority. Hue
nndlque gaza. On the academic (piestion involved in the dis-
cussion, the quotations made will speak for themselves. Here
it is a most noteworthy fact, that in no one instance did my
opponents dare to dispute them, while in nearly every case I
have turned their relevant authorities against themselves, and
with crushing force. But what is more remarkably disgrace-
ful : they passed over in silence citations which are absolutely
crucial, and everlastingly definitive of the questions which, in
their ignorance, they had raised. While I do not profess to be
exhaustive under this head, I can assure the reader lie has before
6 Pbeface.
him the results of some labor and careful research among many
leanied volumes. But I have not grudged it, and I am ref reslied
by the thought: Et haec olhn ineminiase juvabit.
In the purely theological exposition of Catholic doctrine, I
am reminded of, and desire to pay homage to the dictum of
the old philosopher : Alienaa aarcinas adoro. Here my occu-
pation has been but to kneel aud pick up the "gem(8) of
purest ray serene " from the writings of Cardinals Wiseman,
Newman, Manning; the giant Jesuits, Fathers Harper aud
Passaglia, and the illustrious Keviewers, Doctors Ward and
Brownson. The extent of my indebtedness to them will be
easily recognized by students familiar with their works. I
have made the very freest use of their arguments and language,
incorporating them with my own on occasions impossible to
specify in detail. This is especially true of Father Harper's,
and those of Doctor Ward in the DuUin Review. My obli-
gations to other Catholic writers, whether in Latin or in Eng-
lish, I have acknowledged, each in its proper place, so far as
I know them. I will make mention here, too, of the learned
Nicholas' work: Tm Yierge Marie iVapres VEvangiU et da?is
VEglise, and that of I'Abbe Petitalot : La Vicrge Mere d''apres
la Theologie, from both of which I have also drawn. Specific
and detailed acknowledgment of my obligations to learned
Catholic theologians is, however, of the less consequence here,
since my appeal throughout is to facts, i nd to reason in its
legitimate, and, to me, imperative actton on Christian princi-
ples admitted and professed by Protestants. For their instruc-
tion my exposition of Catholic doctrine, on the points in dis-
pute, is written, — to them it is addressed. I pretend to no
discovery, no invention. My aim has been but to focalize for
the general reader a few scintillations of what the faith, and
piety, and learning of some of the brightest intellects and the
purest hearts among the children of the Catholic Church, have
handed down on the religious topics discussed in these letters.
If my readers derive from their perusal any profit at all com-
mensurate with the delight I experienced in preparing them,
I will feel amply rewarded for my labor.
H. F. Q.
Feast of the Assumption, 1890.
PRELIMINARY LETTERS.
Extract from a Report in the St. John Globe, November 23,
1887, of a Lecture on " MISPRINTS," delivered by the Right
Reverend Doctor Kiugdon, Coadjutor Bishop of Fredericton,
New Brunswick:
"Church of England Instftute.
"Rev. Canon Brigstocke occupied the chair in Trinity Church
School-House last evening, and in a few graceful words introduced
the Right Rev. Dr. Kingdon as the lecturer of the evening. Tlie
subject was 'Misprints,' but the lecture covered more than the
title indicates, for it abounded in illustrations of errors of all kinds,
having their origin in copying, in printing, in pronunciation, and
in transposition, and in changes of form and in changes of sound.
"Sometimes the substitution of one letter for another
made a vast difference, and as an illustrat.'on of this he re-
FERRED TO THE WORDS IPSE AND IPSA, THE LATTER WORD IN AN
IMPORTANT PASSAGE IN THE DOUAY (SIC) BiBLE BEING THE FOUNDA-
TION OF THE DOGMA OF THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION "
I. •
LETTER FROM MR. QUIGLEY.
IPSE, IPSA, IPSUM.
To the Editor of The Glole :
Sir,— I very much enjoyed the Right Rev. Dr. Kingdon's
lecture on " Misprints," a short report of which you gave last
evening. His Lordship made a strong appeal for accuracy and
correctness, and yet, by a strange Nemesis, grievously erred in
(7)
8 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
liis illustration of their iinportunce, based upon the words ijm'
and ijjua, and liiti statement in eonneetion therewith. Here,
l)y a niis[)nut of tlie letter 'v^' for the letter '<'," said his
Lordship, there lamentably resulted that thirty-three years aj^o
the Iloinan Catholic Church was led to j)romulgate the dogma
of tho Innnaculate Conception. The inference, I assume, he
intended his hearers to draw was that the alleged foundation
for the doctrine being, in these days at all events, a clear and
confessed mistake, the church had fallen into grave docrrinal
error in declaring it to be a truth of the Christian religion. I
aim to report the Bishoj) correctly, though oidy substantially,
and in the criticism I propose to make I desire to avoid the
very semblance of the odium tJieohnjicxim and to treat him
with the utmost respect and courtesy.
Xow, I begin by saying that the Bishop's statement is not
only wholly incorrect and baseless, but to me his misapprehen-
sion is simply ap]>alling. The case for a mis])rint even, and
quite regardless of the conse(|uence deplored by him as result-
ing from it, is far otherwise than that stated by his Lordship.
The discussion raised by him is not between ipse and ijisa
alone, but between them and the word ijisuni. Why did he
not so put it, since this is the real state of the question 'i To
make the points at issue perfectly intelligible I will here set
down the matter of tho dispute, viz.: Genesis iii. 15 — accord-
ing to the different versions. Protestant version : And I ivill
j)>ti enmity hetweeii thee and the icoman, and between t/ii/ seed
and her seedj w shall bruise thy head, etc.' Douay version :
I loilljptit eninities between thee and the ivmnan^and thy seed
and her seed; Siiv: shall crush thy head, etc.; The Vulgate :
Inimicitias ponam inter te et mulierem, et sevien txmin et
semen illius ; ipsa conteret cajnd tuum, etc. This whole text
has been called by the early writers in the church the Pi'oto-
Gospel, for it contains a promise of the future Savior. It is,
therefore, to Protestant and Catholic alike of transcendent im-
portance and very comprehensive application ; but it will be
observed that the present contention is over the Jirst word of
the second clause only : " It shall bruise thy head^'' etc.; " She
shall crush thy head,^'' etc. The Hebrew text from which both
Pkeliminauy Lettkus. 9
troiislations vltimaU'hj come is accorilinf; to the learned Cardi-
nal Hellarniiiie aiulii^uous, and in consefiuence tlurc dilTerent
readings prevailed among eeelesiastieal writers as follows; IrsK
conteret caput tuv/n — II k ( Christ) shall bruise thy head ; Ii'SA.
conteret caput tuum — Shk (the woman, the I'lessed Virgin,
through Christ her Seed) shall crush tl.y head ; Ii'sim conteret
cuput tnnm — It (her seed that is Christ), shall bruise thy head.
AVhy, then, eontine the cjuestion of misprint to Ipnc and Ipsa
and ignore ipmuu^ the Protestant reading, which itself rejects
■ipse i The simple truth is that liia Lordship's theory of a niis-
jtrint and his statement thereanent is sheer nonsense. There
is absolutely no dirt'erence /// .soisr, U) the Catholic mind at
least, between these three readings. The learned commenta-
tor Cornelius si Lapide, says "all are true'' — omtiea sunt venv.
The Almighty ])romises that the triumph over Satan is to be
complete and his power broken by Christ, who is the seed of
the woman. The Protestant version adopts " ipsum " — "It,"
because it thinks it more literally in accord with the true He-
brew reading and that ol' some of the ancient fathers. The
Douay version "ipsa" — "she" follows the Vulgsite, which is
sanctioned bv almost all the Latin Fathers, includine: such
names as St. Augustine, St. Gregory, St. Ambrose, St. Ber-
nard, Victor and Avitiis, as well as by (the Latin translator of)
St. Clwysostom, Bede, Alcuin, and many others. And thus it
becomes a mere quillet of verbal criticism ! So much for the
academic aspect of the question.
And now what becomes of the Bishop's assertion that the
doctrine of the Immaculate Conception is founded on a mis-
print i It vanishes into thin air. Of course I am not now
discussing the truth of this doctrine, but simply correcting an
amazing misconception. Unfortunately such misconceptions
are too common among our Protestant brethren where the
honor of the Blessed Virgin, the mother of Christ — the
" Woman ! above all women glorified, our tainted nature's
solitary boast," as the Protestant Wordsworth addresses her —
is concerned. And while Protestant churches will resound
with the praises of Sarah and Rebecca .tnd Rachel, of Miriam
and Ruth, of Esther and Judith of the Old Testament, and of
10 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
Elizabeth and Anna, of Magdalen and Martha of the New, the
name of Mary, the mother of Christ, is uttered with bated
breath lest the sound of her name should make the preacher
liable to the charge of superstition. I do not think of imput-
ing such views to his lordship, but the animus of Kemnitzius
and others in discussing this translation in another connection is
born of such ignorant prejudice, and I do imagine their inter-
pretations led to his mistake. Catholics do not forget the
Blessed Virgin's own prediction of that honor which the
church in all ages should pay to her — " all generations shall
call me blessed," — Luke i. 48 ; and we believe with St.
Epiphanius that " it is no less criminal to vilify the holy Vir-
gin than to glorify her above measure.''^ But enough. I have
tried to maku the matter clear. There is nothing at all in the
Bishop's point. I, as a Catholic, have no more interest in re-
taining " ipsa," " SHE," in the text than he has, so far as the
Immaculate Conception is concerned. "Words have been cor-
rected in the Vulgate since the Council of Trent by Popes
Sixtus V. and Clement VIII.; so, if, by the discovery of new
MSS. or otherwise, it be found 'at "it" or "he," and not
" SHE " is the true reading +^ .ction will no doubt be
made. But the sublime docl the Immaculate Concep-
tion and its definition will not be affected by the change, be-
cause it is not dependent upon nor founded on it. It will
stand forever all the same, and, perhaps, his lordship and
others who now grudgingly "give honor where honor is due"
will then have learned to say : Dignare me laudare te, Virgo
Sacrata : Da mihi virtutem contra hostes tuos.
Respectfully yours,
R. F. QuiGLET.
Ritchie's Building, )
Thursday, Nov. 24th, 1887. f
[Mr. Quigley having signed his letter, no letters on this sub-
ject will be published unless the writers' names are given. —
Globe.]
PKELDimABY LeTTEBS. 11
n.
LETTER FROM REV. MR. CAMPBELL.
The Rectory, Dobohesteb, N. B., Nov. 29.
To the Editor of the Globe:
Sib, — In last evening's issue Mr. Quigley quotes three Latin
versioi. - of Gen. iii. 15. I have a Latin version of the whole
Bible, including the Apocrypha — but vt^anting the title-page
and the date — which agrees with no one of the three quoted. I
send my reading to you merely as a contribution to the litera-
ture of the discussion. On the main argument I say nothing
in this communication ; for it may be fairly assumed that his
Lordship will make Mr. Quigley a fitting reply.
But I would like to ask whether any of your readers have a
copy of the same version ; and, if they have, whether they will
kindly state what version it is, with the date of publication ?
The verse reads thus : " Praeterea inimicitiam pono inter te et
mulierem hanc sirailiterq ; inter semen tuum et semen hujus ;
hoc conteret tibi caput, tu autera conteres huic calcaneum."
Yours obediently,
J. Roy Campbell.
III.
LETTER FROM MR. DAVENPORT.
IPSE, IPSA, IPSTJM.
To the Editor of the Globe :
Sir, — Surely Mr. Quigley is not correct in his criticism on
Genesis iii. 15. He asks somewhat indignantly why Bishop
Kingdon, in his lecture did not put the real state of the ques-
tion before his hearers, and tell them the dispute was not be-
tween Ipse and Ipsa, but also between Ijpsum. "Where then is
12 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
to be found a Latin version of the Bible with Ipsum in this
passage ? I have never read of it in any commentary. Jerome's
old Vnlgate, made direct from the Hebrew, has the masculine
Ipse — the modern Vnlgate in spite of this has Ipsa. Where
is the Ipsum\ Because the English version speaks of the
" Seed of the woman " as It., it must not be supposed that the
neuter occurs in the Hebrew original, or in either the Greek
or Latin versions thereof. It is not true that in speaking of
the promised offspring of the woman as 7i!, the English trans-
lators rejected Ipse., as Mr. Quigley says.
The ''academic aspect of the question," to borrow Mr.
Quigley's phrase, stands thus : The Hebrew has a masculine
pronoun followed by a masculine verb " He shall bruise." It
is true that if the pronoun stood alone without the vowel-point-
ing, as in the old style of writing Hebrew, it could not be told
without looking at the verb wJiat was its gender. About the
verb (y'shuphcah), however, there is not and never has been a
doubt because it begins with the masculine affix. Therefore
the translators of the modern vnlgate are without excuse in
adopting a feminine translation of the pronoun, and thus doing
violence to tlie verb, more especially as they had the grand old
vulgate of Jerome before their eyes to keep them right. So
plain is the Hebrew here that the Septuagint translators (who
accomplished their task three centiiries before the coming of
Christ), while adopting a neuter word sperma for "seed,"
nevertheless use a masculine pronoun autot^ here to repre-
sent it.
Bishop Kingdon's statement, therefore, it se jms to me, is not
as Mr. Quigley says, " wholly incorrect and baseless," even if
his " misapprehension be simply appalling " to Mr. Quigley.
I confess that if the Bishop asserted that the doctrine of the
Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin yvn.?, founded on
a misprint, it was too bald and uncpialified a statement. Many
things helped to stereotype it besides this error. At the same
time it must be borne in mind that this mistranslation has been
long and much used in the Roman Church for the 'indue ex-
altation of the Holy Virgin, while it is very note\ rliy that
Pope Pius IX., when promulgating the I>ogma in S. Peter's
Pbelimixaky Letteks. 13
at Rome, December 8, 1854, alluded for its defence to this
very text, and, moreover, afterwards set up a memorial column
of the event in the city, on the top of which stands a figure of the
Blessed Virgin (without the holy child, mark you, in her arms)
trampling the serpent under foot. This representation of the
bruising of the serpent's head hy the woman^ everybody knows
has been for years and still is very common among Roman
Catholics. Therefore **" is no exaggeration to say that the
modern vulgate mistranslation of Genesis iii. 15 has largely
helped to smooth the way for the promulgation of the Dogma
of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin.
There is one other point in Mr. Quigley's letter I cannot
suffer myself to pass over unnoticed. In my opinion he would
have been wiser in his own cause had he been less satirical
about the neglect of the Holy Virgin by Christians outside the
Roman Church. Who is to blame, let me ask, for their present
attitude towards her? Who has rendered it well-nigh impos-
sible for them to yield her her proper place and dignity as chief
of saints ? None other than the Roman Church herself, with her
exaggerated and too often idolatrous devotions offered to her.
I must prove such a serious charge as this. I will take two
well-known l)ooks, in use among Roman Catholics of all lands.
" Liguori's Glories of Mary," and " The Raccolta." The first
named is a book approved by the highest authorities of the
Roman Church, and formally recommended to Anglo-Rouians
by Cardinals Wiseman and Manning. In that book are to be
found such instructions as these : " Mary is our only refuge,
help and asylum." "Often we shall be heard more quickly,
and be thus preserved, if we have recourse to Mary and call
npon her name, than %oe should he if we called on the name of
Je^ns^ ouf Saviour.'''' " Many things are asked from God and
are not granted ; they are asked from Mary and are ubtained."
" At the command of the Virgin all things obey, even God."
(Imperio Virginia omnia famulantur, etiam Dens.)
" The salvation of all depends on their being favored and
protected by Mary. He who is protected by Mary will be
saved ; he who ia not, will be lost. M'try luis only to siwak,
and her Sou executes all." (See Littledalo, p. 55.)
li Ipse, 1p8A, Ipsum.
In the second book mentioned are to be found devotions to
the Yirgin in keeping with these impious utterances.
When on a visit to Rome, in 1880, I purchased an English
copy of the " Raccolta," at the Propaganda, in order to test the
accuracy of Li ttlec' ale's quotations. The " Raccolta " is a popu-
lar Roman manual of indulgeuced devotions. My copy is
dated, "Woodstock College, Maryland, 1878. About 130 out
of 450 pages are devoted directly to the Virgin, while she finds
mention in nearly all the devotions. The following irnpicus
acts of worship and prayer are taken from the "Second
Xovena in preparation for the Feast of our Lady's Nativity,'*
p. 275 (the italics are mine) : " We hail t]\\.'e, dear child, and
we humbly worship thy most hcly body ; we venerate thy
sacred swaddling clothes wherewith they bound thee, the sacred
cradle," &c.
Prayer : " Most lovely child, who by Thy birth has com-
forted the world, made glad the heavens, struck terror to hell,
brought help to the fallen, &c We pray Thee with all
fervent love, he Thoxi horn again in spirit in our souls^
through Thy most holy love ; renew our fervor in Thy service,
rekindle in our hearts the fire of Thy love, and bid all virtues
blossom there, which may cause us to find more and more
favor in Thy gracious eyes. Mary ! be thou Mary to us, and
may we feel the saving power of Thy sweetest name. Let it
ever be our comfort to call on that great name in all our
troubles ; let it be our hope in dangers, our shield in temp-
tation, and in death our last murmur."
Herein we find expressions of worship and supplication such
as Christians are wont to present only to God, or the Incarnate
Son, or the Holy Spirit. We could not say more at the cradle
of Jesus, nor could we pay more honor to the Blessed Paraclete
Himself than to beg Him to " rekindle in our hearts the fire
of His love."
Now this book has on its title-page, " Published by order of
His Holiness Pope Pius IX. Translation authorized and ap-
proved by the Sacred Congregation of Holy Indulgences";
while in the preface people are urged to use this book, because
then they may feel perfectly assured the indulgonces are all right.
Preliminary Letters. 15
The Eoman Church, therefore, is thoroughly committed to
this book with all its enormities.
Surely it is the duty of all lovers of " the truth as it is in Jesus,"
i. e., all true Catholic Christians, to come out of a church
which puts its imprimatur upon such idolatrous worship as this,
and it ill becomes one who accepts such extravagances to chide
those who, for fear of them, fall short of their duty.
It ought to be remembered, in this connection, that the
Church of England has preserved her balance well under the
circumstances, and observes four feasts yearly in honor of the
Holy Mother.
Yours faithfully,
John M. Davenport,
Priest of the Mission Church,
Portland, St. John, N. B.
November 28, 1887.
IV.
LETTER FROM MR. QUIGLEY.
To the Editor of the Globe:
Sir, — Two communications have appeared in your columns
anent mine of Monday last, from writers with whom I had no
quarrel. One purports to be an answer and a defense (?) of
Bishop Kingdon. Surely the Bishop must feel — Non tall
auxilio! Save me from my friends: I will look after my
enemies myself !
"/i^ ynay he fairly assvmed,''^ says the second writer, "that
His Lordship will make .... aftting reply." 1 think so
too. The Bishop, deservedly no doubt, gets credit for " pluck "
in more departments than one. He is also a man of honor,
and recalling his own thought — '^ hnmanum est errare — to err
is human " — often expressed during his lecture, will not, I
^^ Ii'SE, Ipsa, Ipsiru.
think, hesitate to acknowledge bis kinship with our common
humamtj, by making an amende hmioraUe for Lis error touch-
ing tiie old church to which he owes at least fau- plaj.
Respectfully jours,
r>v u- > T, -1 ,• ^- ^- QUIGLEY.
Ritchie's Building,
Friday Morning, Dec. 2d, '87.
Y.
LETTER FROM MR. DAYENPORT.
MR. QUIGLEy's criticisms ON BISHOP KINGDOn's LECTURE.
To the Editor of the Globe:
Sir,— It is as I suspected when I criticised hypothetically
what was attributed to Bishop Kingdon by Mr. Quigley. The
Bishop has l)een misrepresented.
Bishop Kingdon has not seen Mr. Quigley's letter, but he
lias kmdly taken the trouble to give me the substance of his
own remarks and also some quotations from his lecture With
regard to the Hebrew and Greek texts of Gen. iii. 15, he went
over much the same ground as myself in my strictures on Mr.
<Hinigley. He proved also from several of the chief Fathers
of the Church that it was far from their mind to attribute the
bruising of the Serpent's head to the Yirgin ; and simply said
that the mistake ipsa for ipse had acquired a tremendous im-
portance from being quoted in the promulgation of the dogma
of the Immaculate Conception by Pius IX.' He neither Wd
nor implied that " the dogma was founded on a misprint." I
' It is my duty to say that what is here attributed to Bishop King-
don IS utterly untrue. He attempted nothing of the kind. The
writer, later on in the discussion, swaUows his own falsehood and
does his httle best to prove that " the dogma was founded on a mi;s-
P"°*- R F. Q.
Preliminaby Letters. 17
hope, therefore, now Mr. Quigley has been proved in error on
every point, he will see his way to act upon his own recom-
mendation which appeared in your to-day's issue. Mr. Quigley
seems somewhat indignant that any one should notice his let-
ters besides the person attacked. Why then did he appear in
public? and why reproach people in general who refuse to wor-
ship the Virgin Mary i
In conclusion, allow me to draw the attention of your read-
ers to a quotation made by Mr. Quigley from S. Epiphanius
(I have not verified it, but it will suit my purpose as it stands),
which he thinks very telling against persons outside his church,
but which, '• by a strange Nemesis," points its darts against
himself and co-religionists. " It is no less criminal," says the
saint, " to vilify the Holy Virgin than to glorify her above
measure." Now, I suppose that not even the most rabid prot-
estant will dissent fron the assertion that it is a crime to vilify
the Blessed Virgin or Indeed any other saint living or de-
parted — it remains, liowever, for Mr. Quigley and his friends
to tell lis how much further we should go than Liguori and
the Raccolta I quoted in glorifying the Holy Virgin before we
become criminous. I have no doubt myself what the answer
of S. Epiphanius himself would be.
Yours faitlifully,
John M. Davenport,
Priest of the Mission Church.
December 2d, 1887.
VI.
LETTER FROM MR. QUIGLEY.
IPSE, IPSA, IPSrM.
To the Editor of the Globe :
Sir, — I am not, the public cannot be, satisfied with the
latest shuffle in this matter of the writer in Saturday's paper.
18 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
It is quite " too thin,"— too diaphanous indeed and your in-
terested readers will easily " catch on." To exhaust every ob-
ligation of courtesy to the Bishop I liave liad all the papers
sent to him to-day. The talk about misrepresentation is sim-
l)ly absurd. Mr. Ellis, of the Globe, was present at the lec-
ture, and the Globe's report (Nov. 23) sustains me. The
Bishop said substantially what I have charged against him and
on the spot immediately after the lecture I protested to Mr.
G. Herbert Lee, Secretary to Lecture Committee, against the
incorrectness and unfairness of the Bishop's statement. But
Saturday's letter makes it even worse for the Bishop, and I
cannot believe he will so stultify himself as to adopt it as a
part of his defence. However, I propose patiently to await
Lis action after he will have seen the Globe's report, my first
letter and the subsequent correspondence. In this country,
happily, no man in church or state is beyond the reach of fair
criticism of his public utterances. If the Bishop is content
with the defence made for him, I will not complain.
The Bishop's defender says I am indignant that any one be-
sides the Bishop should notice my letter. Surely I have not
manifested thus far any indignation. I regret if my inatten-
tion has unduly wounded his vanity. I did not mean it. I
only desire to give the Bishop an opportunity to vindicate him-
self or to refuse to do so. In either case, I perhaps ought to
assure his defender, I will not forget him. Meanwhile let him
castigate somewhat his vanity and cultivate the spiritual tem-
per by reading " Liguori and the Raccolta."
Respectfully yours,
R. F. Quigley.
Ritcliie's Building, Monday, A. M.
Pkelimixaey Letters. 19
VII.
LETTER FROM MK. QUIGLEY.
IPSE, IPSA, IPSUM — A CHALLENGE.
To the Editor of the Glohe :
Siii, — This matter has now assumed a new phase. I meant
my criticism of Bishop Kiugdon's statements, as set out in my
tirst letter, to be a candid talk between gentlemen with you as
my interlocutor. I sought, by the " sweat reasonableness " of
a logic of facts and authority, at once simple and irenic, to lead
his Lordship to avow and correct a mistake into which he
miglit have unwittingly fallen. I was willing, even, to con-
cede something to his iconoclastic research and fancy, by
granting that ipsa might be a misprint for ipse or ipsum in-
deed, if he would only forego the luxury of creating a new
anti-Catholic tradition in this city by connecting such misprint
with the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception as cause and
effect. I proved unanswerably that there is no difference in
setise to the Catholic mind between the three readings, and
consequently there is no choice so far as any matter of doctrine
is concerned. I have waited a reasonable time for some sign.
His Lordship, however, dies, and — i?npemtent, except so far
as vicarious utterances can be made to do duty. The ^^car is
•' John M. Davenport, Priest of the Mission Church." Why
should I waste words here over the vicar's wretched attempt to
deal with the " academic aspect of the question " ? " Where,
then, is to be found," he asks, " a Latin version of the Bible
with ipsum in this passage i I have never read of it in any
commentary." Therefore, of course, there is no such read-
ing ; though, after opening another bottle of fog, he straight-
way confesses that the statement charged against the Bishop
was " too laid and u7iquaUJied"
And now the vicar warms to his work ! Verily 'tis the
shriek of a lost spirit or the scream of a drunken Beelzebub !
Sophocles was accused of madness and wrote the "CEdipus at
80 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipscm.
CoLONOS " as Ins vindication. This yclept "j)rie6t" is taxed
with ^^ papistical inclininys,^^ by more consistent Protestants,
and behold his answer: "Extravagances," "Enormities,"
" Impions utterances," " Impious acts of worship and prayer,"
" Idolatrous devotions," " Idolatrous worship 1 '■ Good God !
"What monstrous charges ! And from such a quarter, my
Protestant fellow-citizens will say — Et tu Brute! The creed
of a Fenelon, Vincent de Paul, Aquinas, Xavier, De Sales,
Augustine, Bute, Ilipon, Lyons, Newman, ACanning, Leo XIII.,
80 characterized ! But there is a compensation. One of the
chief glories of our time is its abhorrence of bloated, spongy
shams, religious or otherwise — mere show without substance.
No creed can live in its stormy surf that will not bear its
piercing light. It demands from every man " a reason for the
faith that is in him." I thank God for this. No mere news-
paper letters are, it seems to me, at all adequate to the proper
discussion of the above charges. I love to meet my opj^onent
on any important question face to face in the presence of my
fellow-citizens. I have a profound trust in their intellectual
honesty. Therefore, sir, through you, I now challenge the
Right Reverend Dr. Kingdon, Coadjutor Bishop of Frederic-
ton, and " John M. Davenport, Priest of the Mission Church,"
to a public discussion, in the Institute or elsewhere, of the
position of the Blessed Virgin, the Mother of the Redeemer,
in Catholic theology, when I will undertake to vindicate that
position to the intellect and conscience of my fellow-citizens
from Tradition, Reason, and Holy Scripture.
To facilitate matters, I will request Rev. Dr. Bennet,' Dr.
A. A. Stockton," Dr. Alward,' Thomas Millidge, Esquire,* and
Hon. R. J. Ritchie,* to act as my committee to meet a like
committee from my opponents for the purpose of arranging
the details of the discussion. And may God defend the right.
Respectfully yours,
R. F. QuiGLET.
Ritchie's Building,
Feast of the Immaculate Conception, Dec. 8, 1887.
'Presbyterian, 'Methodist, 'Baptist, ^Anglican, 'Catholic.
Pkeliminaky Letters. 21
YIII.
LETTER FROM THE VICAR.
IPSE, IPSA, IPSUM.
To the Editor of the Globe :
Sir, — What would be thought of a lawn tennis player who,
after choosing his own court, petulantly demanded a change
before the finish of the set simply because after des2)erate
efforts he had failed to score \
I cannot accede to your correspondent's request, however
polite and polished the style of his invitation may be. I see
nothing to be gained by doing so. The public has an excel-
lent view of our position and can fairly judge the issue of our
contention more fairly and deliberately, I think, than if we
adjourned to tlie limited area of the Institute.
The matter is very simple. Mr. Quigley has impugned
Bishop Kingdon's scholarship, and has emphasized, in the title
of his letters, what he considers an important emendation. He
has also censured all Christians who do not worship the
Blessed Virgin.
I have, therefore, asked him, in the first place, to mention
some of those standard Latin versions of the Bible he accused
the Bishop of overlooking. He has now had a fortnight for
the search and probably the help of learned friends. Let him
produce his witnesses — a few lines in your paper can notify
them — or else let him make the amende honorable.
Again — if I made misstatements with regard to the meaning
of the Hebrew or Septuagint renderings of Genesis iii. 15, a
few lines of solid argument will ensure my discomfiture. If,
moreover, 1 have misquoted Liguori's " Glories of Mary," or
the " Raccolta," he can easily expose my deceit. If, however,
he cannot do this, then I contend that the public are already in
possession of facts (though I could easily multiply them) which
amply justify the expressions I used about the worship of the
Virgin in the Roman Catholic communion.
22 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipscm.
It would bo an excellent thiti;^ if all your readers would
secure for themselves copies of " Lignori " and the " liaccolta."
I will make no further disclosures till occasion requires.
Yours faithfully,
John M. Davenport,
Priest of the Missiou Church.
December 9, 1887.
IX.
LETTER FROM THE VICAR.
IPSE, IPSA.
To the Editor of the Globe :
Sir, — Though the controversy on Genesis iii. 15 seems now
over, the interest it has awakened is not. I shall feel obliged,
therefore, if, for the benefit of J>iblical students, yon will allow
me a little space for an extract from a famous livinj; Italian
Roman Catholic scholar of catacomb-inscription celebrity, De
Rossi, on Genesis iii. 15. He enumerates thirty-five "most
exceedingly and insurmountable original authorities and wit-
nesses" iji support of the masculine "//e shall brui.ee the
serpent's head." Among them (1) all trustworthy Hebrew
MSS.; (2) the analogy of the "sacred context, in which the
verb which follows and the pronoun suflfixed are masculine :
(3) the Samaritan text and Samaritan version ; (4) the Greek
version of the Septuagint, all the MS. editions and versions
derived from it, Ethiopic, Coptic, and Old Latin, and those
who used it, whether Greek-speaking Jews, as Pliilo, or Chris-
tian writers, agreeing; (5) all the Chaldee paraphrases, Onke-
los, Jonathan, and the Jerusalem ; (6) all the other versions of
the East, the oldest Syriac, the Arabic of Saadias, the Mauri-
tanian Arabic of Erpenius, the Persian of Tawes ; (7) some
MSS. of the Vulgate . . . . ; (8) many editions of the Vulgate
Preliminary Letters. 23
on the margin, l)eforo those of Sixtiis and Clement ; (9) the
pure version of Jerome in tlie Bihliotheca Divma, edited hy
the Benedictines of S. Maur, 0pp. T. 1."
Tlien follows a long list of the Fathers who quote the mas-
cnline.' lie then asserts, "the masculine reading is better, by
which the bruising of the serpent is ascribed immediately and
alo7ie to the Seed of the woman, and from which the redemp-
tion, power, and divinity of the Messiah are plainly elicited."
His conclusion reads as follows: "To whomsoever, then,
the present reading of the Vulgate (i. e., ' She,' the woman,
'shall bruise,' &c.,) belongs, whether to the interpreter, or
(which is more probable) to the amanuensis, it ought to le
amended from the Hebrew and Greek fountain-heads, and to
be referred to those passages of the Clementine edition, which
yet can and ought to be conformed to the Hebrew text, and to
le amended hy the authw'dy of the ChiirchP (The italics are
mine.) De Rossi, Varr. Lectt. Vet. Test., Vol. iv. App. pp.
208, 209, 211.
Here, then, is overwhelming evidence of the accuracy of
our translators of the Bible in this particular.
It must, however, prove very perplexing to those who have
built so much upon the false reading.
Canon Oakley, an Ultramontane of the Ultramontanes, says
In his review of Dr. Pusey's Irenicon (1866): " I now come to
what we (Roman Catholics) regard as the Scrijptural germ of
every doctrine, and the legitimate ground of every authorized
devotion on the subject of the Blessed Virgin. I mean the
prediction of her office in the Christian Dispensation, uttered
by Almighty God at the time of the fall," (viz., Gen. iii. 15).
This is a very strong statement, and ought to be exceeding
startling to those who accept it, now that such a great Roman
Catholic authority as De Rossi has convicfted the text of very
serious fundamental error, especially when it is known that
Liguori (Glories of Mary, Pt. 11. Disc. 1), Pope Pius IX., and
many of the Bishops who asked him to promulge the Dogma
of the Immaculate Conception, based their chief arguments in
' The Fathers " quote the masculine and the neuter.
24 Ii'SK, Ipsa, Ipsum.
favor of it on the false reading in some such terms as these :
" She who was said to crush Satan could never have been even
for a moment, even in her mother's womb, under original sin."
Very startling, I say, since, in the apt phrase of Dr. Pusey,
" the major premise of the argument is gone, when it appears
that nothing is said here (Gen, iii. 15) of any personal victory
of hers." It was to the Seed of the Woman, God Incarnate,
directly and personally, that the crushing of the Serpent's head
was attributed, not to the woman nor to Him in conjunction
with her, but to Ilim alone, and it is in Him and through Him
that all faithful Christians are enabled to crush Satan under
their feet also.
Thanking you for your space, I remain,
Yours very sincerely,
John M. Davenport,
Priest of the Mission Church.
December 15, 1887.
POSTSCRIPT.
I beg to call the special attention of my readers to the above
letter. The Vicar here commences with malicious earnestness
that career of fraud, falsehood, and dishonesty which he ran so
recklessly during this discussion. He has been guilty of the
very grossest kind of literary forgery in dealing with Father
De Kossi, while his calumny on Father Oakley has branded
him with the mark of Cain. I exposed his infamy here, and
challenged him over and over again, but he dared not to open
his mouth in reply. Of the statements made on his own au-
thority \\\ this letter, not one is true. I offer these preliminary
remarks now to prepare my readers for the full — almost verbal
— criticism which is given in the Resume and Itejomder. It
is also referred to in the Rehutter, in connection witli his con-
fession of the crimes here charged against him.
I will but remark now on a further proof of my charges not
noticed before. Tlie Vicar makes De Rossi say that, '■''All
trustworthy Hebrew MSS." have Tjyse; whereas what De Rossi
says is : ^^ Almost all Hebrew MSS." have Ipse. Again he
PuELIMINARY LeTTERS. 25
makes De Rossi say : " All the Chaldee paraphrases, Onkelos,
etc.," have Ipse, whereas on the very page in Pusey from
which he took his shamelessly garbled quotation, De liussi
honestly admits that there is one MS. of Onkelos that has Ipsa.
Again, ray readers will notice in the quotation, that De Kossi
says : " Some MSS. of the Vulgate — (that is in the text), (and)
many editions of the Vulgate on the margin, before those of
Sixtus and Clement," have Ipse. Precisely. But this is simply
what Cardinal Bellarmine, though himself in favor of retaining
Ipsa., said to Chemnitz. " I reply," writes the Cardinal, " that
the Vulgate is VARIOUS here ; for some Codices have Ip)se^
some Ipsa, and besides IT IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE
VULGATE EDITION should one be convinced that he
ought to read Ipse or IpsumP
The gigantic intellect of iiuriarminc, a most devout and en-
thusiastic believer in the Immaculate Conce])tion 300 years
before its dogmatic definition, could neither see the " tremen-
dous importance " attached to Ipsa by Bishop Kingdon, nor
yet the "serious fundamental error" alleged by his Vicar!
But then, you know, he never studied theology at Oxford, and
unfortunately was born too soon to get the benefit of Little-
dale's Plain Reasons. Get away, you Liliputs, get away, and
fly into space 1
R. F. Q.
LETTER I.
IPSE, IPSA, IPSUM— A RESUMII.
BY B. F. QCIGLEr.
St. John, N. B., )
New Year's Eve., Dec. 31, 1887. f
To the Editor of the Glohe :
Sir, — Since the declination of ray challenge in this matter,
many duties, private and professional, have conspired to push
it simply aside from my attention. This, however, I do not
now regret since Bishop Kingdon's Vicar has been thereby
enabled to offer another installment of his case — a tremendous,
critical cataclysm as he perhaps thinks, and which he submits
for the beneiit of " Biblical students " forsooth ! I am not by
profession either a Biblical Exegete or Theologue, but most
heartilv do I on their behalf thank him for his diligence and
sagacity. The threatened "further disclosures" not being
thus far forthcoming, I may now^ charitably " ho23e his blun-
ders are all out," and that he stands up for judgment.
Here I must refer, but only parenthetically, to my oppon-
ent's statement that I have " probably had the help of learned
friends " in this discussion. Characteristic Surely ! The petty
malice of the insinuation is amusing enrugh, but it witnesses
to such insatiable vanity, solenm self-conceit and debasing
egotism that it is positively pitiful. These weaknesses blind
him to the fact that such an assertion is an unconscious tribute
to the logic and force of an argument which a Bishop and a
soi-disnnt " priest" are incapable of answering. I accept the
tribute for the sake of the honor done to the truth which I
espouse, but the simple fact is I have received no help from
friends learned or unlearned, directly or indirectly. I asked
no help, I needed none ; and with the exception of a verifica-
tion or two, I have relied entirely upon my own library. But
(86)
A Resume. 27
lie does not believe in the truth of his own statement. Theo-
logical charlatan and religious dwarf that he is, he perched on
the shoulders of the " armed strong man " of the Protestimt
prejudice against the Blessed Mother of our Kedeemer, which
he himself admits, and adopting the Chinese method of war-
fare, charged upon me with shield aloft, bearing the beast with
seven heads and ten horns, with outcries a id shouts of derision
and vituperation, of " idolatry," " impiety," and '' blasphemy."
I thought the height from which he had fallen so frenzied
him that he became profoundly unconscious of all demands of
logical argumentation. Nevertheless, I offered to meet him on
the public platform, where "the help of learned friends"
would not avail me, but he threw his shoes into the air and
took to flight, because he could " see nothing to be gained by
doing so." A lawn tennis set he thinks more entertaining and
divertinfj ! "Well, 1 shall be the last to dis^wte the correctness
of his judgment.
Now, I suppose, at any rate, I hope, that this writer has his
serious moments. His last letter gave some evidence of such.
In Cardinal Newman's phrase I wish "to appeal from Philip
drunk to Philip sober," I propose, therefore, to examine the
strictures made by him, in his series of letters, upon my first
letter, so far as they are relevant to the points at issue, and I
am now perforce obliged to consider Bishop Kingdon as speak-
ing in and through him, and consequently inculpated* with
him. Meeting my opponents with visor up I shall not hesi-
tate to deal blows direct and heavy, and to indulge in such
severity of comment as I think their errors at once so extreme
and grotesque^ imperatively demand. I am, of course, aware
that with a certain class of my Protestant fellow-citizens in
such a matter as this there is one obliffation of honestv and
decorum imposed on a Catholic and quite another on a Prot-
estant. The latter may freely use invective, cowardly insinu-
ation, perversions of meaning, vague declamation, insult and
scurrillity, and the like a])j)liance8 of a worthless cause, or a
worthless advocate ; the former must manifest towards his
opponents a sweetness of disposition and temper almost an-
gelic. Charges of " idolatry," " impiety " and blasphemy may
28 IrsE, Ipsa, Ipsum.
be made against us ; men witli pretensions to learning, with
character and reputation to maintain, and with a cause to ad-
vocate, may repeat all the exploded calumnies and publications
of frenzied fanatics against the Catholic church, yet we may
not hurl them back witli indignant defiance. From pulpit and
platform, tlieological and literary pedlars may level against us
the most sweeping and crushing accusations, in their crass ig-
norance draw the most atrocious pictures of our doctrines and
religious practices, uiisrepresent and falsify the Catholic creed
in every particular, and to many Protestant minds " everything
is lovely." We are not men, we have not characters to lose,
we have not feelings to be wounded, we have not friends ; we
liave nothing personal about us, we are not the fellow-creat-
ures of our accusers, we are not gentlemen, we are not Chris-
tians ; and yet in spite of such provocation, in the " style polite
and polished,^' in, candor, generosity, honorable feeling, in
manly and noble bearing towards our Protestant neighbors and
straightforwardness in our dealings with them, we must simply
surpass them as much as the Cedars of Lebanon outgrow the
little shrubs before we get credit for the attributes of ordinary
hiunan beings. But enough. I hope I am, as I ever have
been, too philosophic, too magnanimous, built on too broad a
scale mentally at least, too impervious to the unbecoming, the
indecorous, the petty and miserable, to be irritated or dispirited
at being called names, or being treated with injustice or con-
tumely for my religion's sake. Betimes it must l)e no mean
tonic spiritual and intellectual. Thus much am I let to say in
standing off for the first time before my opponent and taking
a death grip of him, of course metaphorically" speaking. It
will serve to introduce the main subject and to clear the
ground. I make to him no irenicon, nor will I pretend to ex-
hibit a chivalrous courtesy to one wlio can ])lay such shabby^
tricks with the sacred memory of our Mother.
I now charge against him that his attempted defense of
Bishop Kingdon is a glaring and undeviating misrepresenta-
tion of the true position of the question — a gross, unpardon-
able and dislionest attempt to shift the ground measured for
the lists in my critique on the Bishop's statement, and the
A E.E8UME. 29
most boldly and impudently illogical shuffling I have ever
known. Thus I begin, and I hold myself bound by the
saerednees of my manhood and her honor who gave it me
to make good my indictment.
To recapitulate then. Seeing it announced in the papers
that Bishop Kingdon would lecture on " Misprints," I bought
a ticket and took a seat a few feet from the lecturer in the
public hall. The lecture was illustrated, so to speak. The
words commented as " Misprints " — mostly Greek and Latin —
were exhibited in large letters on sheets of paper attached to a
large framework or blackboard. On one sheet were the two words
" Ipse — Ipsa," placed one above the other. After the lecturer
had spoken about three-quarters of an hour on differc'it " Mis-
prints," he said substantially as follows : " Hitherto the errors
or misprints of which I have spoken have been of no great im-
portance, practically speaking ; but I now come to one which
in these times has been the cause of grave errors. Here (point-
ing to the sheet containing the words " ipse — ipsa ") by a mis-
print of the letter " a " for the letter " e " there lamentably re-
sulted, that tidrty-three years ago the Roman Catholic Church
was led to promulgate the dogma of the Immaculate Concep-
tion. The Globe's report was as follows : " Sometimes the
substitution of one letter for another made a vast difference,
and as an illustration of this he referred to the words Ipse
and Ipsa, the latter word in an important passage in the
Douay Bihle being the foundation of the dogma of the Im-
maculate Conception.'''' AVe^substantially agree on the Bishop's
statement. He offered no argument in support of it. He
said St. Bernard favored Ipsa, but that while he was a "very
devout soul," he was altogether " unreliable " ! Had the Bishop
stopped here his hearers migiit have fairly inferred that he
meant to say St. Bernard was not an authority on Textual
criticism, but he went on to prove the Saint's unreliability in
such matters by saying that he prophesied a successful issue
for a crusade which turned out disastrously I Wonderful logic !
It reminded me of a school-boy speaking of Newton or Iler-
Bchel as dunces in mathematics, or a blooming freshman after
wading through Aid rich or Whately, speaking of Kaut or
80 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
Ilegel, St. Thomas Aquinas or Aristotle, as grossly deficient
in their knowledge of logical science ! I could not contain my
astonishment and amazement at the Bishop's statement, that
the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception was in any way
connected with or dependent upon a choice between Ipse and
Ipsa, such a dispute, if one, being absolutely irrelevant, and
on the spot immediately after the lecture I protested to the
secretary of the lecture committee against the incorrectness and
unfairness of the Bishop's statement. Writing to the Globe
a day or two afterwards I characterized it as " wholly incorrect
and baseless." The first dishonesty my opponent commits is
in connecting these words of mine with the question of " mis-
print," whereas, it is evident I used them to describe the
Bishop's statement that the Immaculate Conception was
founded on such, even assuming that a " misprint " could be
made out.
Now, I do not propose that there shall be any doubt about
the truth of this matter or about my view of the Bishop's
position. "Mr. Quigley has impugned Bishop Kingdon's
scholarship," says my opponent. That is just it. I do so, and
most emphatically, and I characterize it as simply slovenly in
this particular at least. This I consider mild to begin with.
Much ought to depend on the Bishop's animiis. As I have
proved before, and will directly repeat, the Bishop is absolutely
without a leg to stand on. Now, what was the drift and in-
tention of his assertion ? Was it the result of pure ignorance
of what he was talking about, su#i as led Dr. Johnson to de-
fine " Pastern " as " the knee-joint of the horse," or was it a
desire to commend liimself to an audience naturally indeed
fair and generous in their instincts, but educated in traditions
and prejudices which predisposed them to credit the wildest
charges against "Popery"; or did he come there with his dia-
gram in his pocket prepared, and with malice aforethought, to
attack the Catholic church and more especially in the honor
paid by her to Our Blessed Lady ? He can have his choice.
He has stood by his Vicar and must be taken to adopt his line
of thought and defense — perhaps, indeed, he gave the inno-
cent the unfortunate extract, that edgetool from De Rossi ! So
A Rk8Ume. bl
at least I opine. I will see that he gets all the comfort possi-
ble out of it.
Again : I accused the Bishop of suppressing the real state of
the question on which he undertook to speak. I repeat it.
The real dispute, such as it is, is between Tpse^ Ipsa and Ipsom.
There is no place for any question of " misprint. " Such a
designation of what is involved in this three-fold reading is
wholly improper. It is simply a various keadino and for-
tunately like " many hundred thousand, probably upwards of
a million of such " contained in Kennicott and De Rossi's
Bible, absolutely insignificant, because it does not affect the
sense. Did the Bishop know the real state of the question, or
was he bent only on making a point against the Catholic
Church, and discrediting the truth of the Immaculate Concep-
tion before an audience not more than six of whom knew what
that doctrine was i I do not think the Bishop himself knows
to this very hour. I never met a Protestant clergyman wlio
did know it before I had explained it to him. So great a man
as the illustrious Prof. Agassiz, of Harvard University, did
not know it until I explained it to him one day. He was de-
livering a course of scientific lectures — strongly anti-Darwin-
ian— on " The Natural foundation of Zoological Aflinity," and
one day he was discussing " Embryology." The audience in
the gallery of the Museum was a distinguished one. Long-
fellow, with other noted IHtet'ateurs, was there. While speak-
ing of a fact in connection with Bee-culture, discovered in
Germany by the observations of Pastor Dzierzon, he suddenly
stopped and said that " he never faced this fact without being
reminded of the Church dogma of the Immaculate Concep-
tion." Even now I remember the scene so distinctly I I could
not see where the Inunaculate Conception, as I understood it,
came in, and trjnng to think it out I heard little of the closing
part of the lecture. I was not satisfied. Though studying law
I lived in Divinity Hall quarters, and was thus brought into
daily contact with the ablest Unitarian theological scholars of
the United States resident at Harvard and those who visited
there — Clarke, Hale, Bellows, Savage, Brooke, Bartol and
others — notoriously the best educated Protestant clergy in the
32 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
world. I knew Agassiz's statement would evoke discussion, and
I felt bound to get at the bottom of the Prof.'s thought before
meeting my theological friends. I called at his room and the
great Naturalist talked the matter over with me with the sim-
plicity and condescension of a child, lie simply did not know
anything at all about the " dogma of the Immaculate Concep-
tion," as taught by the Catholic Church. Wliat he meant was
the Miraculous Conception of Christ — the Incarnation — and
the physiological fact he referred to was a scientific tribute to
its truth. As I had anticipated, the discussion came up, but
my case was won before it commenced. Agassiz had been
misunderstood through las loose or careless use of theological
terms, with which like so many scientists of to-day he had not
made himself familiar, but my friends had their compensation,
for they learned what the Catholic doctrine of the Immaculate
Conception was. And so may it be in this present case !
" Learned and devout men stumble at this doctrine because in
matter of fact they do not know what we mean by the Im-
maculate Conception." So said Cardinal Newman to Dr.
Pusey when answering his famous '"^Eirenicon'''' of 1864, and
pointing out to him his ignorance of the matter. I am con-
vinced, that the " ninety-and-nine " of religiously-minded Prot-
estants who learn what this thrillingly beautiful and sublime
truth is will say at least what some have said to me — " "Well,
it ought to be true." But this incidentally.
To return : For the sake of convenience I here set down
again Genesis iii. 15, according to the different versions. Prot-
estant version : And I will put enmity hetween thee and the
woman, and hetween thy seed and her seed ; it shallhruise tliy
head, etc. / Douay version : / will put enmities het "een thee
and the woman, and thy seed a/nd her seed j she shall crush
thy head, etc. / the Vulgate : Inimicitias ponam inter te et
muUerem, et semen tuum et semen illius / ipsa conteret caput
tuum, etc. And just here in my first letter I expressed myself
with the most careful and unexceptionable distinctness.
" This whole text " or verse I said " has heen called hy the
early loriters in the Church the Proto-Gospel hecause it con-
tains the first promise of a future Savior. It is, therefore, to
A ItESUME. 33
Protestant and Catholic alike of transceiulent importance
and very comprehensive applica''on^'' Kow, this Btateiiieiit
about " THE whole text " or verse i8 very clear, and J ask the
careful attention of my readers to it. I then proceed to say :
" BUT IT WILL BE OBSERVED THAT THE PRESENT CONTENTION IS
OVER THE FIRST WORD OF THE SECOND CLAUSE ONLY ; IT skull
hruise thy head, etc. / she shall crush thy head, etc." To tliis
I now add the otlier reading: "He shall hruise thy head,
ctr.," not adopted l)y eitlier tlie Douay or Authorized Protest-
ant Version, but common enough and recognized and estab-
lished equally with the other two — " She" and "It."
Here is the ring bolt of the whole matter ! " The first word
of the second clause only " — this is " the ground measured off
for the lists." This is the thing discussed by the Bishop, and
to that I have confined myself and propose to chain my oppo-
nent. Our readers will see that his vague declainations, his
miserable fallacies, his wretched sophistries and fanfaronades are
but the necessary result of his barefaced, cowardly and dishonest
ignoring and malicious putting aside of my most definite and
emphatic explanations right here, and tliat they run through
his whole attempted defence of the Bishop and the attack oa
the Catholic church he made on his own account. How be-
coming in a " true Catholic (Caw-tholic) Christian " !
LETTER n.
IPSE, IPSA, IP8UM — A RESTJAIE.
To the Editor of the Globe :
Sir, — How does the question stand then? "While a great
many important things are daily discussed in the columns of
the Globe, it is hardly the place to test by collation a thousand
or two Hebrew, Greek and Latin MSS. Kennicott's magnifi-
cent Hebrew Bible alone gives nearly 5em^n./mw</;'^^.^' Critico-
' I have examined this work in Harvard University Library.
84 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
Biblical disquisitions and deep linguistic athletics and exegesis
are out of place here. We can reach such practical conclu-
sions as we require without them. The question is not ahso-
lutely which of these three readings Moses used in Genesis —
that may never be jproved this side of eternity ; but are there
three and are they and have they been in use and recognized ?
It is admitted on all hands that the Hebrew text, tlie foun-
tain-head, such as we have it now, is hopelessly anibiguous.
The learned Cardinals IJellarmine and liarouius are my author-
ity. (/ will refer later to what my opponent says about the
determining effect of ilie masculine verb. Absolute feak-
LE88NES8 IS MY MOTTO !) lu conscquencB of this ambiguity,
these three different readings prevailed among ecclesiastical
writers as follows : Ipse conteret caput taum — He (Christ)
shall bruise thy head ; Ipsa conteret caput tuum — She (the
woman, the Blessed Virgin, by and through the power of her
seed, Christ) shall crush thy head ; Ipsum conteret caput tuum
— It (her seed, that is Christ) shall bruise thy head.
Here let me add an interesting fact. I do not forget what
was done by the venerable Bede (died A.D. 735), and the
good and great Catholic King Alfred (died 901 A.D.), to
translate the Bible into the English tongue. Bede died while
dictating his translation of the last verses of St. John's Gospel,
and Alfred is credited in later tradition with having been a
translator of the whole Bible. Smith's Diet, of Bible, Art.
Auth. Vers., p. 1665. The Ormulum, too, is a specimen of
the work done in this direction. John Wycliffe, D.D., the
English Heresiarch, and lovingly called " The Morning Star of
the Reformation " by the compatriots and blood-relations in
religion of my opponents, died exactly ^^ hundred and three
years ago to-day ! Some time before the Immaculate Concep-
tion and before the Douay translation of the Bible in 1582 and
1609 ! He gave to the world the year before he died an Eng-
lish version of the whole Bible — perhaps the first complete
translation into English. Dr. Roberts, member of the New
Testament Company of Revisers, says " it is possessed of great
merit." And Wycliffe's Version has this clause of our text as
follows: "She shall trede thy head.''^ My opponent will
A Rksume. 35
probably Bay Wycliffe was an old ignoramus, did not know
Hebrew, and more especially Lad not seen the quotation from
De lioesi — " t\iQ famous living Italian Roman Catholic scholar
of Catacomb celebrity !^^ How comjilimentary he can be to
Catholic scholarship when he thinks it suits him ! It is so
l)i'ofound !
, ^fy opponent admits the readings " Ipse " and " Ipsa," but
in his death throes, grasping at a straw, puts me to proof of
the existence of the neuter form "Ipsum." I admit this is my
case — the burden of proof is mine, and I accept it cheerfully.
I will not let him go from the bolt on which he is impaled
until I excoriate him — till he feels that in an evil hour he for-
got the ethos of his religious " school," and came to the succor
of a Bishop, though probably it was not through very profound
reverence for the Episcopal Otfice.
But to the proof. The celebrated Jesuit commentator, Corne-
lius ix Lapide (who died in 1637 — some time before the Immaeii-
late Conception was dejvned — 1854 was that date), conmienting
on the words " Ipsa conteret caput tuum — She shall crush thy
head," says — (I translate) : " The reading here is three-fold.
The first is that of the Hebrew Codices which have ' Ipsum''
— ' It,' to wit, the seed shrll bruise thy head, and so reads St.
Leo (the Great, Pope and Doctor of the church, died 461, I
add), and after him Lipomanus. The second is ' Ipse ' — ' He '
(Christ or man) shall crush thy head. So the Septuagint and
Chaldaic. The third is ' Ipsa '— ' She ' shall crush thy head.
So the Roman Bible and almost all the Latins read with St.
Augustine (the Latin translator of), Chrysostom, Ambrose,
Gregory (the Great), Bede, Alcuin, Bernard, Eucherius,
Rupert and others." So much at present from a Lapide on the
three readings. I wish to confine myself first, exhaustively and
overwhelmingly to the proof of " Ipsum," or the neuter form,
which I also find as " Hoc " — " This, the seed^'' both simple
pronouns of the same class, " //o(?" being the more emphatic.
My next witness is Kemnitzius, or Chemnitz (according to
modern spelling), probably the ablest Lutheran theologian of
the period immediately succeeding Luther himself (1522-1586).
In his greatest work, Examen Concilii Tridentini, he says :
30 IrsK, Ipsa, Ipscm.
"We should read Tpsmn mnterct caput tiium. It nhall Iruise
thi/ head, seeiiifj; it was sj)okeii of tlie seed, which was Christ,
as ancient writers teach." I take this from Ward's ^'^ Errata of
the Protestant Bihle^'' a work of the very higlicst authority.
Ward himself was a man of marvellous linguistic attaimnents
and an unfortunate " pervert to Rome," IIow(!ver, I believe
when he "came over" he was really quite sane, and in this
respect, at all events, dilTered from those drivelling 'Idiots^
Faber, Newman, ^Manning, the Will)erforces, Allies, ]\Iivart,
the Harpers, Oakeley, Clarke, Shipley, the Bowdens,
Caswall, Dalgairns, Ryder, Coleridge, Ward of the "Dub-
lin Review," the oidy man in England John Stuart ^lill
feared or was influenced by. There are a few other dolts
of the same capacity as Ripon, Bute, and Hope-Scott, whom
the church is tenderly matronizing and "tis thought they will
recover. This by tlie way. Chemnitz's arguments for " Ii'sum "
are quoted by Cardinal Bellarmine, De verho Dei {Lih. 2, Cap.
12, 13, 14). Was I not correct in saying that the Protestant
reading " It " came from a Hebrew, Greek or Latin neuter
gender i " Our translators," the " English translators," " the
English version," my opponent says, speaking of the " Protest-
ant Version " — lie scorns the word " Protestant " evidently,
and will have none of it ! He writhes and squirms to clear
himself from its hated folds. He likes it as little as one is said
to like Holy Water I The translators of the Protestant version
certainly did not adopt the masculine " He," and if they did
not reject it, as I claimed and asserted, how did they get " It "
from the Greek masculine autos, if they followed my oppo-
nent's version of the Septuagint ? This is too clear to need
a word more.
Again, the Catholic and " Historic Dublin Review," Sept.,
1856, has a great article reviewing the Jesuit Professor Passa-
glia's wonderful work on " The Immaculate Conception of the
Mother of God," published the year after the definition of the
Immaculate Conception. The learned writer says (p. 161),
" the weight of authority is in favor of the masculine or neuter,
' Ipse ' or ' Ipsum,' " and he cites : PassafjUa, Par. 2, p. 916 ei
seq.,' Melchior Canus, De Locis Tlieologicis, Lib. 2, Cap. 15 ;
A IIe8umk. 87
De Ruheis in App. de Var. Zed. V. T., p. 207, seq. Vol. 4,
and Cardiiiiil Piitrizi's great woi-k, " De Immacuhita Markie
Orhj'me a Deo pvaedicia Disquixitlo. lioinae, 1853." Two
Dominicans and two .Tosuits! Does it not l)ring a blush of
indignation to the cold, pale cheek of logic and truth, to hear
an Anglican Bishop hacked uj) hy a I^rKiTANicAL Syncketist
vcleped " Priest," declare that "Ipsa" is a misprint, that the
Inunufuiate Conception is founded upon it, and that all sorts
of idolatries and impious jugglery have been and are being
wrought by it — and here we have two great Jesuit priests, in
the shallowest convolution of whose brain the Bishop and his
Yicar nn'ght he stowed away — we have these two — one of
whom, Passaglia, was called "the Theologian of the Immacu-
late Conception" — declaring, one hefore the definition of the
dogma, and the other after., that " Ipsa " had nothing at all
to do with it, but that "Ipse" or "Ipsum," critically speaking,
was a more correct reading ! ! ! O for a few liours before a
New Brunswick Pan-Anglican Synod to discuss the Preroga-
tives, Dignity and Pelation to her Divine Son of the ever Im-
maculate, Glorious, and Sublime Virgin Mother, with Passa-
glia and Patrizi, " St. Liguori " and " The Paccolta " on the
table !
Have I not proved the existence and currency of the reading
"Ipsum"? A little more, however. Dr. Pusey was "kicking
up some shines" in 1804 (the " /i«Ve/u*cwi " period), and getting
oflf some of those inconsequent utterances for which he was so
fatuously famous in his later years, and in this very connection.
The Duhlhi Revieiv, then Cardinal Wiseman's organ, had an
article on " The Blessed Virgin and Apostolic Tradition," in
which Genesis iii. 15, occurred. In a note at the bottom of the
page, the writer (was it Wiseman?) says: "/j! makes no differ-
ence., lohatever, to the force of the Protevanyeliuin., as an argu-
nnentfor Mary's exaltation., tohether we read ' Ipsa ' or ' Ipsum,'
which latter loe ourselves helieve to he the true reading. Let
Dr. Pxisexj., therefore., not raise an outcrxj which has no mean-
ingP I shall invoke this later, my readers. Please keep it
sharply m mind.
Now for a nightcap for the Bishop and his Vicar ! I hold
38 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipscm.
in ray liand " Biblia Sacra sive Testamentum Yetus ah Im.
TremelUo et Fr. Junius ex Ilebraeo Latine redditum et Tes-
tamentum Novum a Theod. Beza e Graeco in Latinum
Versum: The Holy Bible or Old Testament rendered into
Latin from the Hebrew by Emmanuel Tremellius and Francis
Junius and the New Testament translated from Greek into
Latin by Theodore Beza." Tremellius and Junius were pro-
fessors at Heidelberg (the former a converted Jew), and they
brought out their Old Testament at Frankfort, in 1597. This
is the Version from which the courteous Mr. Campbell quoted,
and I am happy to "ive him this information in lieu of the
" fitting reply " which the Bishop failed to make to my indict-
ment. He has my sympathy in his disappointment ! In this
Bible the clause in question runs thus : " Hoc conteret t'lbi
caput: This (the seed) shall bruise thy head" — as good as any
can desire — as good as " Ipse," " Ipsa," or " Ipsum." " This
translation is preferred by the English Protestants," says a high
ftuthority — Rev. Alban Butler, Lives of the Saints, vol. 3, p.
804, N., and this alone may account for " It " in the Protestant
Yersion.
Again, refer to the annotations to the Douay Bible on this
text, and what do you find ? " Ipsa " or " Ipsum," and the
remark : " The sense is the same ; for it is hy her seed, Jesus
Christ, that the woman crushes the serpents headP
I think our readers will now concede that I have jiroved my
case so far as " Ipsum " goes, and answered my opponent's
question. I can better this ; but " enough is as good as a feast."
My opponent admits the existence and currency of " Ipse "
and " Ipsa," and I presume we can now treat " Ipse," " Ipsa,"
and " Ipsum " as more or less authorized readings. Alas ! now,
for the Bishop's little diagram of '"''Ipse — Ipsa,^'' and his silly
story in connection with it. It reminds me of that well-known
method in German philosophy : first set things on their heads,
and then anmse yourself at seeing them unable to walk I I
wonder if the Bishop is an adept ?
And now an independent word on " Ipsa," supererogatory
indeed, o far as the necessities of my argument stand, but
yet furnishing a peg for some tattooing remarks. I confoi^s
A Resume. 39
this is to me an enticing part of the discussion. It brings to
mind the grand old Yulgate of the Catholic Church, whose
history would require a small volume. Its text is a composite,
eclectic one, so to speak, formed by the fusion of the old Italic
and Latin versions in use in the Western Church before St.
Jerome, and Jerome's translation. It needs no apology from
me, for it remains to-day the most important means at our
command for the final settlement of many critical questions
connected with the Greek and Hebrew Scriptures. This is the
testimony of the ablest Protestant critics — Grotius, Cappell,
Mills, Walton, Roberts, and others. " Jerome's old Yulgate,"
says my opponent, " made direct from the Hebrew, has the
masculine 'Ipse' — the modern Vulgate in spite of this has
'Ipsa.'" Yes, but lie overlooks the fact that the reading
" Ipsa " of the present Vulgate is older than St. Jerome's read-
ing " Ipse." When, therefore, my opponent say that " the
translators of the modern Yuhjate,^'' as he calls them, " are
loithout excuse in axlopting ' Ipsa,' more especially as they had
the grand old Vulgate of St. JeroDie before their eyes to keep
them right,^'' he talks arrant nonsense. He puts the cart be-
fore the horse. 'Tis St. Jerome who is, in this particular, with-
out excuse for attempting to make the change from " Ipsa " to
"Ipse"; and St. Augustine, his great friend, and St. Ambrose,
two giants (with others mentioned above by Cornelius a, Lapide)
told him so, and refused to give up their old love " Ipsa " for
St. Jerome's " Ipse," and they have been sustained down to
this very hour. In this connection let me state a remarkable
fact, with an interesting episode, showing the relation of the
present Vulgate, as well to the Old Italic or Vulgate and its
sources, as to St. Jerome's Vulgate, and showing, too, the
tenor of tradition in affecting and determining that relation.
The Greek word epiousios — meaning '''■ daily, ^' the Latin
" Quotidiamim,^^ — is found in the New Testament only in the
petitions of the Lord's Prayer, as given both by St. Matthew
vi., ii., and St. Luke xi. 3. The Old Latin Version trans-
lates epiousios by " quotidianum — daily," in both Gospels, and
it is rendered " daily " in both Gospels in the Protestant Ver-
sion. When St. Jerome revised the Latin of the New Testa-
40 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
ment, lie substituted "supersubstantialem — supersubstantial " for
" quotidianuin — daily " in St. Mattbew, but apparently in doubt
about his correctness be left " quotidianuni — daily " in St. Luke,
and GO it stands in the Yulgate to-day and in the Douay trans-
lation. But the " quotidianuni — daily " of the old Latin main-
tained, and still maintains, its place in the church service book
and offices, in the Liturgies — Roman, Galilean, Ambrosian and
Mozarabic — in the celebrated catechism of the Council of
Trent even, and in the private devotions of Catholics to-day.
They know no other, I may say. It is the remnant of a Ver-
sion older than St. Jerome's, as " Ipsa " is such another rem-
nant, and although Jerome's revision in this particular is the
reading of the Yulgate to-day, it has been powerless to dis-
place the ante-Jerome " quotidianuni — daily." I ought to point
out that both words appear together in that inexpressibly beau-
tiful Post-Communion prayer of St. Bonaventure, beginning :
" Transfige Dulcis sime Domine Jesu," etc. The application
here, however, is purely Eucharistic and refers solely to the
holy and adorable Sacrament of the altar.
Anent these words a tilt took place between Abelard and
St. Bernard. The Saint having occasion to visit the convent
of the Paraclete, of which Heloise was Abbess, observed that
in repeating the Lord's prayer at the daily hours a change was
made in the usual form, the word " supersubstantialem '' being
substituted for " quotldianum " in St. Matthew's gospel. St.
Bernard forbade Heloise to adopt the former word. As
Heloise had made this change under the direction of Abelard,
she told him of the prohibition, and thereupon Abelard wrote
a letter of defense to St. Bernard, which is extant. The
result was that the innovation was disallowed, and " quotidi-
anuni — daily " once more rang through the cloisters of the Para-
clete. See Canon Lightfoot on Revision, etc. " Ipsa " is the
reading of the Vulgate to-day — "the best Version of all those
that have come down to us from antiquity." These are the
words of Scott Porter ; Canon Westcott, in Smith's " Diet, of
the Bible," is almost as strong, and they are certainly confirmed
by the action of the Protestant Revisers a little while ago.
They made several startling corrections in accordance with the
A ItESUME. 41
Yulgate. Let me give a very important one — tliey have re-
stored the true reading of 1 Cor. xi. 27. For 200 years, to
fasten on Catliolics the cliarge of " mangling tlie sacrament," as
they put it, tliey read this text conjunctively: "Whosoever
shall eat the bread a7id drink the cup, etc." This they did to
infer a necessity and obligation for the laity as for the ])riest to
f communicate under both kinds, as the conjunctive '* a;uZ" may
seem to do. The Revisers have done an act of justice to
Catholics by restoring the true reading — "w drlnk,^^ and thus
removed a corruption which Dean Stanley owned was due •■' to
theological fear or partiality." Other great tributes to the
Yulgate I cannot stay to chronicle now, without expanding the
letter too much.
This is not, as I said before, the place to argue nice questions
of Textual Criticism and Biblical Hernieneutics, but I cannot
allow some very crude and shallow statements of my oppo-
nent to pass without correction. He must admit, that it is now
absolutely impossible to determine from the Ilcl)rew text
direct, without merely speUing it out and, us he thinks
inferentially, whether the pronoun is masculine, feminine, or
neuter. 71us I have already proved by the testimony of Car-
dinals Bellarmine and J>aroiiius. There can be no stronger.
We have no Hebrew text older than the Wi centiirxj. My
opponent, however, labors to show that because the verb " con-
teret " is inasculine, therefore the pronoun is masculine, and
that settles the whole thing. Silly nonsense ! Somebody must
have told him this in a joke ! What sort of studies has he
made in Textual Criticism within the last thirty years? Giants
in scholarship have tried to determine this very point, and
have so far failed. Why should Liliputs presume ! He ought
to know that it is common in the Hebrew Scriptures, idiomatic,
indeed, in certain cases, to have pronouns and verbs of the
mascuhne gender joined with nouns of the feminine, as in
Kuth i. 8; Esther ii. 20; Eccles. xii. 15. Again, there are in
the Pentateuch several places in which the masculine pronoun
is used instead of the feminine, although the antecedent is a
noun feminine; and this construction, I read, occurs so fre-
quently that there is every reason to believe that it proceeded
42 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
from the original author of the Books. See Kennicott's Bible
in loco for the authorities touching the two celebrated texts : Gen-
esis XX. 5, and Genesis xxiv. 44 ; also Porter's Bib. Criticism. I
speak on authority, of course, as I do not know Hebrew well
enough to set up my own judgment. But I refer the Bishop
and his Vicar to Cornelius a Lapide, as above quoted, where
they will find a critical and exegetical discussion on tliis gram-
matical point, eminently Jesuitical, in the true literal sense of
the term, that may somewhat enlarge their now apparently
very contracted intellectual horizon. A Lapide concludes his
argument thus (I translate): " Wherefore it seems to me that
MosES IX THE Hebrew heke joined a masculine verb with a
FEMININE PRONOUN, SAYING III'ASCUPH, ' IpSA CONTERET
SHE SHALL CRUSH,' TO SIGNIFY THE WOMAN AS WELL AS HER
SEED, AND SO THAT THE WOMAN BY AND THROUGH HER SEED,
TO WIT, BY Christ, should crush the head of the serpent."
Kow I am familiar with the critical literature in Greek and
Latin touching all these three respective readings, and so pro-
foundly convinced am I (catching, as I think I do, *^he very
quintessence of the idea involved in the first clause of the text),
that Moses wrote the feminine pronoun, that I will discuss the
matter with the Bishop before a committee of Protestant
clergymen in this city — say the Peverend Doctors Bennet,
Pope, and Macrae, if these gentlemen will pardon my using
their names — and at such time as may be arranged, when I will
undertake to maintain that position. I can lay claim, indeed,
to no special spiritual perception or illumination on such a
matter, but there is to my mind a higher criterion of genuine-
ness than MS. authority. There is what Griesbach calls an
"interna bonitas"; there is what Bengel calls an " adamantina
cohaerentia," which, he says, speaking of a matter very like
this, " compensate for the scarcity of MSS." These words are
almost untranslatable.
But 1 hear some one ask : What about the appalling critico-
cyclonic cataclysm on " Ipse " from De Rossi, whom my oppo-
nent describes as " A famous living Italian Roman Catholic
scholar of catacomb-inscription celebrity?" Ye Gods! Is it
true, then, that whom you would destroy you first make mad ?
A Resume. 43
Has this writer no friends — "learned friends" of conrse I
mean, who, if they cannot help him, might save hiui from —
himself f Verily "an enemy hath done this!" Has Bishop
Kingdon "sold" his friend? Or can I trust mine eyes?
Will it now be wondered at that, profoundly distrusting the
honesty of this writer, I sought to meet him face to face before
my fellow-citizens, where I could unmask his presumptuous
pretentiousness, his little shifts and miserable subterfuges, and
hold him up to the piercing gaze of every man who values
truth more than empty semblance of victory, honesty more
than mere vainglorious triumph over an opponent ? I believed
him to be a master in the art of suppression and misstatement,
and, therefore, I preferred "the limited area of the Institute"
which he so pathetically deprecated, the " Fifty Years of
Europe " — " the audience fit though few " before whom casti-
gation for dishonesty would be administered on the spot. I
am magnanimous enough, however, to say that the religious
position of a ritualistic minister, so-called, is intellectually sim-
ply so contemptible that honesty in a matter like this is too
much to expect.
LETTER HI.
IPSE, IPSA, IP8UM — A RESUME.
To the Editor of ilie Globe :
Sir, — Here is a writer steeped to the lips in vanity and self-
conceit, signing himself " Priest of the Mission church " (and
I am told an Oxford graduate), anxious to instruct " IJiblical
students," barefacedly pretending to speak with knowledge of
and to quote from a learned work which he evidently never
saw, and about which he by his own confession — hahemus con-
Jitentein reum — knows absolutely nothing ! No, not even the
name of the author ! Good Heaven 1 The great and saintly
Father John Bernard De Rossi, of Parma, " the last of the
Tribunes" of that period in Sacred Criticism brought back
44 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
from Heaven and by a new ritualistic theory of Metempsycho-
sis transformed into the great CathoHc Archaeologist, Commeii-
datore G. B. De Rossi, now at Home, aged about sixty-five ! —
and this by the "Priest of the Mission church!" Oh, no!
Thaumat gist though he fain would be thought, he cannot
hope to d' what the Pope and the whole college of cardinals
could not do ! The humble Priest and Professor, the learned
Hebraist, the pet and pride and darling of Pope Pius \I. and
all Europe for his Biblical scholarship, who spent his life and
fortune in collecting MSS. and rare editions of the Hebrew
texts, for which the Emperor of Russia, in vain, offered him an
enormous price, and which Pius VI. delicately proposed to buy
for the Vatican, but which De Rossi bequeathed to the library
of his native city, — to attempt to rob him of all his glory, and
by the " Priest of the Mission church ! " Fie ! O Fie ! 1 may
well say to him with Prince Hal : " What trick, what device,
what starting hole canst thou now find out to hide thee from
this open and apparent shame ? "' To conscientious readers of
these letters I say : Thrust this slmfiiing witness out of court,
and if you seriously wish to know the teachings of the Catholic
church on any question, go to some duly accredited exponent
of her doctrine, and not to a man who has shown himself to be
one of those of whom St. Leo observes in forcible terms that
" they have made themselves makers of error because they
would not become the disciples of truth." To " Biblical stu-
dents " let me say that De Rossi published this volume just
one hundred years ago this very year, as an aj^pendlx to Dr.
Kennicott's great Hebrew Bible, and a fifth volume in 1798-9
and he died in 1831. Now, if it in the remotest way affected
my position, or the state of the question at issue, I could not
safely accept a quotation from De Rossi by my opponent — I
would not trust liim. But it just plays my hand — it establishes
by strong evidence the currency of the third reading, " Ipse."'
This was a part of my case — to establish the fact of three read-
ings, not two only as the Bishop and his Vicar alleged.
Let me dispose of De Rossi while I have him in hand. My
opponent quotes him as saying: "The masculine reading is
better, by which the bruising of the serpent is ascribed imme-
A Resumk. 40
dlately and alone to the Seed of the woman, and from wltich
the redemption, power and divinity of the Messiah are ph\inly
elicited." Perfectly Catholic doctrine, and exactly my position
stated in my first letter and repeated often in this. Where
does the comfort for my opponent and the Bishoj come in ?
The masculine reading may be, verbally and critieally speak-
ing, the best — we are not now discussing that — and, no doubt,
this is what De Rossi meant, and clearly enough said, too, had
we his words before us in the original ; for as I shall make
very clear directly, whether we read Ipse, Ipsa or Ipsum, the
result and meaning is absolutely the same — that is to say, the
Ijruising or crushing of the serpent is ascribed immediately
and alone to Christ, and its whole si(jnificance for us comes
from His Redemption^ Power and Dimnity. This is the
pure Catholic doctrine with which I have all through scalded
my opponents; and will anybody believe that the genuine
" Father " De Rossi did not know it and hold it, too '{ Yes,
thank God ! A Priest of the Catholic Church can never pub-
licly deny her tenets and at the same time claim to be in full
communion with her, and to teach doctrines whose true and
logical home, if they are worth anything at all, is eUeiohere !
Can I point out to the writer in clearer terms the contradic-
tions and confusion in which he involves himself, and those
who fatuously follow him, by persisting in his concentrated
calumnies against the Catholic Church and her teaching in this
particular ? But more anon.
Again De Rossi is quoted : " The present reading of the
Yulgate ought to be amended by the authority of the church."
Good Catholic sentiment again ! I had already anticipated it
when I said, in my first letter, that "I as a Catholic have no
more interest in retaining 'Ipsa' — She in the text than he
(Bishop Kingdon) has, so far as the Immaculate Conception is
concerned, and that if it be found that ' It' or 'He' and not
'She' is the true reading the correction will no doubt be
made." De Rossi's words just quoted very well interpret and
explain his view of the whole matter, and put it exactly in ac-
cord with " the pure Catholic doctrine " spoken of above. The
proud boast of the Catholic church is that in matters of doc-
46 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
trine affecting God's sacred truth she is semper eadem — To-day,
Yesterday and Forever the same. Will anyone believe that a
verital)le and loyal priest of that church, in suggesting a merely
verbal change in a certain document in her custody, meant to
charge her witli doctrinal error which he proposed to correct
by the change ? Bah ! Tell that to the marines. De Rossi,
as a learned priest, knew quite well, as we do now, that his pro-
posed change made no difference in the sense, but as a stickler
for critical nicety and absolute, literal correctness, merely for
its own sake, he hoped the churcli, in which he expressly rec-
ognized the power, would make the change. Now Bible revi-
sion is not made every day in the church of God for a merely
verbal whim, but Pius VI. might have obliged his friend De
Rossi by making the change just as a delicate compliment to
liis great industry in collecting MSS. ! It would not have
made the slightest difference doctrinally speaking, and De
Rossi would have been, what he no doubt was, a devout
believer in the Immaculate Conception all the same, and long
before it was defined ; and, besides, the pardonable vanity of a
pious enthusiast in merely verbal perfection would have been
gratified by the Pope's adopting his proposed emendation.
Pius VI., however, was not much of " a ti'ue Catholic (Caw-
tholic) Christian " anyhow, and it would appear that the good
De Rossi's pet wish was not gratified, and the Vulgate remains
in statu quo.
Anent De Rossi my opponent again says : " Here then is
overwhelming evidence of the accuracy of our translators of
the Bible in this particular." What must our readers think of
such diisgraceful muddling up of the question to be discussed ?
More than once have I pointed out that we were not discussing
the relative merits of readings or versions, and yet at every
turn my opponent tries his dodging and shuffling, but his Pro-
tean dishonesty will not save him from the scorn of all fair
men. Now, while unfortunately for him and the Bishop the
whole question over which they have made such hideous
grimaces is, as I shall further re-state, the veriest verbal quillet,
yet is it not the most solemn trifling with the intelligence of
their readers to say that " It," the actual Protestant reading,
A Resume. 47
and " He " are identical as words I Of course, I offer no crit-
icism on the Jilleged quotation from De Rossi. Did the logical
requirements of this argument, however, permit it, I could very
interestingly discuss the value of some of the MSS. mentioned
when compared with those in favor of the other two readings,
Ipsa and Ipsum. Such a course on my part would very prop-
erly be taken as an insult by readers who have a right to expect,
and I think demand from me a logical treatment of the subject
in hand.
I will bunch the balance of his last letter with the first
directly.
To sum up, I have now proved beyond cavil, I think, the
existence of the three readings — Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum. The con-
troversy over them between Catholics and Protestants, learned
men on both sides have long since repudiated as unmeaning
and useless. It possesses interest and importance as a question
of Biblical criticism only, and that of the lower kind, but it in
no way affects any truth of Revelation or any matter of Catho-
lic doctrine, because, when properly understood, tlie sense is
the same to Catholic and Protestant alike, to the Catholic at all
events, which is now the important point.
I beg my readers to keep clearly in mind that the battle-
ground is the first word of the second clause of the text. Gen-
esis iii. 15, to wit : He, She or It shall bruise or crush thy
head.
Now my case against the Bishop and his Vicar requires, to
be submergingly complete, that I prove, that according to
Catholic teaching and authority there is absolutely no difference
in meaning between the three readings. I have already often
stated the fact. Now to the proof.
My first witness will be Cornelius a Lapide already quoted.
I translate : '''•Note in ilie first 'place, tJiat none of these three
readings is to he rejected / on the contrary they are all trueP
Tirinus — Commentary on the Old and New Testament —
speaks of the three readings and then says : '■''Sed in idem redit
— but it amounts to the same thing."
Suarez (1617), of whom the admirable and celebrated Protest-
ant philosopher Grotius wrote : " So profound a philosopher and
48 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsim.
tlieologian that it would be hardly possible to find his equal"
— Suarez says, in speaking of the three read in js : " Sensus
tcaner idem est — Notwithstanding (the three readings) the
sense comes to the same thing." The lovers of Mary in paitic-
ular owe the deepest gratitude to tiie truly illustrious and re-
vered name of Suarez ; for the whole body of Marian doctrine
has never been drawn out with a fulness and accuracy com-
mensurable with that exhibited in his second volume on the
Incarnation. Could I be fairly charged with a design or a
desire • to seethe the kids in tlieir mother's milk," if I were to
recommend to the Bishop and his Vicar a brain-bath in this
volume, with frequent douches thereafter for those parts of their
cranial anatomy that remained morbidly sensitive on the quan-
tum of honor due the Blessed Mother ?
I here beg publicly to thank my dear friend and old teacher.
Father Dixon of Newcastle, for the use of Suarez. He sent it
me after he had seen my letter in the papers, and in confirma-
tion of my position. I am glad to have an opportunity to turn
it to account in this connection. He is absolutely the only
" learned friend " who has bothered himself about me. Doubt-
less, those of them who know me think I can be safely trusted
with such a theological choice as this.
Again : I have in my hand the great work — De Divina Tra-
ditlone et Scrq)tura: On Divine Tradition and Scripture —
by perhaps the greatest theologian to-day in the Church, the
Jesuit Cardinal Franzelin. Ttmching Ipsa and Ipse he says :
TJie truth tawjht ly doth is the same, p. 536.
Again : Ward's Errata says : " Whether we read ' She '
shall hruise, or, ' Iler seed ' — that is her Son, Christ Jesus, \oe
attribute no more, or no less to Christ, or to his Mother, hy this
reading or ly that^
Let me add to those authorities our own Archbishop O'Brien
in his marvellously beautiful little book " Mater Admirabilis."
I can quote twenty more to same effect, but enough.
The tide has long since risen above their heads, submerged
and engulfed my opponents, but I feel bound to sliow how
outrageously wicked and malicious the Vicar can be in his dis-
regard of all logic, and the violation of all the laws of manly
A Resume. 49
and straightforward polemic. Hitherto my criticism lias been,
from the exigencies of my case, mainly constructive, but here-
after I shall turn my attention to destructive work, and though
the material in ray path is abundant I will not loiter.
LETTER IV.
IPSE, IPSA, IPSUM — A KESUMii.
To the Editw of the Globe :
Sir, — The argument on the main question is finished, and I
might here rest my case, satisfied, indeed, that I have fairly "
accomplished the task imposed upon me by Bishop Kingdon's
wild statements, illustrated by his little diagram, and his
Yicar's cachinations in support thereof. I have met my oppo-
nents —
" dareful, beard to beard,
And beat them backward home."
The Yicar has, however, so encrusted the matter with irrele-
vant rubbish that might mislead the general Protestant public,
and dim the clear impression I have sought to give, that I
crave the patience of my readers while I disengage it from this
encnistment.
Complaints have been made against me that I have been
imduly severe in my language to " educated English gentle-
men holding the Orders of the Church of England." Now I
said nothing about that apocryphal entity known as the
" Orders of the Church of England," but as to the " educated
English gentlemen " — well, I had always been taught that edu-
cation and station had their obligations — their duties as well
as their rights. Nohlesse oblige, my opponents and their apol-
ogists should remember. My walks in life have been suffi-
ciently varied to give me some idea of ecclesiastical brawling
and blackguardism in regard to the Catholic church, her teach-
ing and her institutions. I have on my table a work of 606
50 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
pages, entitled " The Varii tions of Popery," l)y the Rev. Dr.
Edgar, an Anglican clergyman in my own dear Ireland. I
dip into this now and then when my hrain is sluggish and in
need of a tonic, when 1 wish to indulge in that elan (Iere,y)}'it
which, from a merely natural and intellectual standpoint, floods
my mind and heart at the very thought that I am a " Papist "
— and hy the pure mercy of God. But who cotnmenced the
"offensive" in this discussion? Did I not treat Bishop King-
don with the utmost courtesy and respect? Turn to my first
letter of Nov. 2ith. Tlie complaints against me well illustrate
the truth of what I said early in this letter — "that there is one
obligation of honesty and decorum imposed on a Catholic and
quite another on a Protestant." Is it nothing, then, I ask fair-
minded Protestants, that the church which I love more than
my life is accused of " enormities," " impieties," " idolatries "
and blasphemies, and that I am personally charged with
^^ accepting ^^ and practising the same? And by whom ? By
one of a so-called religious " school " (I cannot call it a Church)
that in the face of history, in defiance of contemporary decla-
rations on the part of the Anglican Bishops, and contemporary
decisions of the Ecclesiastical Law Courts, proclaims the iden-
tity of the English Church of to-day with the Apostolic Church
and the pre-Keformatiou Church in England, and maintains
doctrines which are reprobated by the Bishops and three-
fourths of the Anglican comnmnion, and iises ceremonies which
are condemned by its formularies, and prayers which are de-
clared blasphemous and rites which are declared idolatrous !
At present I refrain from illustrating these statements for my
Protestant fellow-citizens by an account of what took place in
London at the funeral of a leading Ritualist recently deceased.
Yet in the face of all this I do not forget the Christo-centric
teaching of patience and self-denial i7t: .-• ";\'-;;'.ts, nor yet His
own example in dealing with the desecrators of the Temple.
He was the Prince of Peace, but I ween He sanctioned no
methods for fo. warding peace which did not uphold the
supreme authority of the truth. I have sat at the feet of some
of their ablest lecturers and teachers of Divinity, and am as
famihar with the symbolic and doctrinal writings of the Prot-
A Rksumk. 61
estant deuoniiimtions as most laymen, and I can appeal with
absolute contidence to hundreds of my Protestant friends and
associates when I say, that I never in my life maligned, slan-
dered or misrepresented a Protestant liroiid, ov co/nmcncal a
religious discussion. I do not like religious polemic, vnd I
have invariably acted otdy on the defensive, and I can again
appeal to honored names among the Protestant clergy, even of
tliis city, whose friendship I have the pleasure to claim. }>ly
motto has ever been, " Beware of entrance to a (piarrel," espe-
cially a religious quarrel ; however, I have just human nature
enough in me to adopt the rest of this quotation : " but, being
in (the quarrel), bear it that the oi)posed may beware of thee."
I am emphatically a man of peace — but not " peace at any
price." 1 am not content that any theological fraud or
Ijoanerges who chooses shall by caricature, insult, calumny and
outrage of Catholic belief " make a wilderness and call it
peace." That would be subordinating tfuth to peace, and con-
sequently traitorous. The distinction between Christ and
Iscariot must be kept clear at least in matters of religion.
What I desiderate in Protestant teachers is a knowledge of
the Catholic doctrines they attack. AYe will then have less of
the wild figments of hysterical imaginations and pandemonium
caricatures of beliefs in defence of which the mightiest intellects
that ever adorned our race have found their highest sphere,
and of which genius allied with sanctity have ever been the
most persuasive and enthusiastic exponents.
In this discussion I ask no quarter from my opponents — I
will give none. On them I will have no mercy, controver-
sially speaking; and I have about as much sympathy for them
as St. Paul felt for " Alexander the Coppersmith," for whom
lie desired " a reward according to his works." They have
both maligned the Catholic church, and set oflE their own sect
in opposition to their burlesque of her, but, nevertheless, iu
what I have hereafter to say, I will not " carry the war into
Africa" beyond repelling their attack. Beside my opponents
I have no quarrel with Anglicans or Anglicanism. There are
niany non-Catholic friends who will be pained by my course
and my utterances in this matter. They cannot feel it more
52 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
keenly tlian I do, but the fault is not mine. The duty of
speaking out has been cast upon me by a gross and wanton
attack, wholly unprovoked in the quarter from which it came.
Common justice, therefore, demands that the responsibility for
unpleasantness be put on other shoulders than mine. So far as
in me lies, I do not propose " to hold the truth of God in in-
justice." Religious systems are one thing — individuals quite
another, and individual religious life I have ever regarded as
the most sacred of things. I have hundreds of Protestant
friends whom I resjiect and love, and to whom, as man to man,
I am much indebted, biit even in this so-called Protestant com-
munity, I want it distinctly understood I do not fear them. I
will defend my religious creed when attacked, with their sym-
pathy and approval of fair play if I can get them, but in spite
of all, if I cannot. On the ])altle-lield of pure theology, science
and philosophy and not Biblical research nor mere ritualistic
vagaries, must shape religious polemics in the future, for all at
least who feel their responsibilities and grasp the importance
of the issues.
So mvjh have I been led to say by the criticism — written
and spc-vcn — on ray style of conducting this controversy. I
must now hasten to the work.
" It is much more easy," justly remarks a writer, " to catch
popular approval by the briUiaiicy of an assault, than to com-
mand it by the steady virtues of a defence." " Error," says
the Chinese proverb, " will make the circuit of the glo])e while
Truth is pulling on her boots." An unscrupulous writer can
make a statement in a half-dozen lines which it wcmld require ,
a volume to answer. The accusation or proposition may be
short and stinging; the answer is a]3t to be long and dull.
Everyone has felt the truth of this. Kingsley's charge, for
instance, against the Catholic priesthood is contained in six and
a half lines, and yet it drew from Cardinal Newman that
epoch-making book, the " Apologia," which entombs Kingsley's
reputation, and many other like things, for all time. To com-
pare small things Avith great, it is the same here. The Bishop's
Yicar has made a number of statements in his characteristically
grandiose way — hardly 07ie of which is correct. To make his
A Resume. 53
demolition as thorough and complete as any demolition can be,
I am obliged to track him through all his sinuosities, and to
expose his ignorance and recklessness, so that not one shred or
tatter of truth will be left to cover his hideous nakedness. It
is a wearisome affair, but truth obliges to it, and I have no
choice ; but I will make the journey as interesting as possible.
Now, in my first letter I said : " Of course I am not now dis-
cussing the truth of this doctrine (the Immaculate Conception),
but simply correcting an amazing misconception." Here I ex-
pressly disclaimed the intention of discussing the doctrine, and
I did not discuss it — such a thing was out of place then. The
Eishop has stated that Ipsa was a misprint for Ipse, altogether
ignoring tlie fact that there were three readings in good form
here. His Lordship's way of putting the question was bad
enough, and disgraceful and humiliating enough as a matter
of mere scholarship ; but to follow it up with the statement so
minutely xoorded that thirty-three years ago such misprint led
to the pronmlgation of the dogma of the Immaculate Concep-
tion by the Roman Catholic church, was unpardonable in a
man with the honors of the Anglican Episcopate fresh upon
him, and thus filling a position where, according to St. Paul, it
behoveth him to be ''a teacher": 1 Tim. iii. 2. In my inno-
cence of what simple ignorance, iron-clad by prejudice could
do, I mildly called the Bishop's proposition " an amazing mis-
conception." But notwithstanding St. Paul's injunction again
that a Bishop "must have a good testimony from them who
are without," Dr. Kingdon seemed to stick to it. It became,
therefore, logically necessary to reduce the matter to charge
and counter-charge. I denied point blank both of the Bisho})'s
assertions, as matters of fact ^ and, as I think, proved my case
even in my very first letter, and hefore there api)eared on the
scene the " Priest of the Mission Chapel," that " true Catholic
(Caw-tholic) Christian," the new Keeper-ix-ordinakv, in this
city, of the types and blocks and chromo-process from and by
which Popery is ever hereafter to be printed off ; the ti'adi-
tional fictions, sophisms, calumnies, mockeries, sarcasms and
invectives with which Catholics are to be assailed. In the lan-
guage of Art he has now given us a "• proof copy." He no sooner
54 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
enters the lists than, having told the Bishop his statement was
" too bald and unqualified," he proceeds to create an adver-
sary for his own little "lawn tennis set," and launches into
an attack upon the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception,
the truth of which I had not discussed at all, because, not be-
ing involved in the argument I had to make against the
Bishop, I was logically bound, and by respect for the intelli-
gence of my readers, to disclaim its discussion. He begs the
question by calling Ipsa a mistranslation, raves about " the undue
exaltation of the Holy Virgin" resulting from it, and walks
straight into the yawning abyss of the most degrading indiflfer-
ence to all logical decency, truth, and self-respect, by asserting
that " Pope Pius IX. when promulgating the Dogma in S.
Peter's at Rome, Dec. 8, 1854, alluded, for its defence, to this
very textP The itahcs are mine. "What monstrous perver-
sion of the truth ! Has this writer become so maniacal, so
satanized in his hatred of the Catholic church, and the honor
given our Blessed Lady therein, as to renounce all sense of re-
sponsibility for his utterances? Cannot others read as well as
he ? I hold in my hand the original Latin Decree on the Im-
maculate Conception known as the Bull " Ineffabilis." It con-
sists of twenty-eight sections. Let my readers remember that
I asserted the importance of this whole text — Gen. iii. 15 — to
Protestants and Catholics alike and for the same reasons, alto-
gether apart from any question about the Immaculate Concejv
tion, but I narrowed down the discussion to the frst word of
the second clause — He, Shk, or It, shall bruise or crush thy
head. This is just where the Bishop put the matter by his
statement, and this is just the very ring-bolt to which I shall
hold him and his Vicar. The first clause — " I will put enmi-
ties between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her soed "
— is outside of our discussion and altogether irrelevant to it.
Yet it is the first clause only that is quoted in the Bull or
Decree, and then only in a summary of Patristic teaching on
the Blessed Mother ! It occurs twice as follows, — I translate :
. . . . " but (God) also raised in a wonderful manner the
hopes of our race, when He said : ' I will put enmities be-
tween thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed.' They
A Resume. 65
(the Fathers) have taught that in this divine declaration was
clearly and plainly showed forth the Merciful Redeemer of
the human race — namely, Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son
of God, &c., &c." I translate from the Latin only enougli to
give the context, and I point it exactly as in the original. This
is from the twelfth section of the Decree. Again, from the
seventeenth section I translate : " Then, too, they (the Fathers)
published their belief .... that her (the Blessed Virgin's)
coming was foretold by God himself on the occasion when he
said to the serpent : ' I will put enmities between thee and the
woman.' " Kow this first clause of our text stands in the
original in quotation marks just as I have given it and set
off as that part of the text used, in both sections. And so
the first clause is used by the great Jesuit Passaglia, called
" the Theologian of the lunnaculate Conception," in his work
already referred to, as well as by other eminent Catholic writers
on this doctrine who have referred to this text at all. And
some eminent theologians do not use in their argument for
the dogma even the first clause. I have before nie Ilurter's
" Dogmatic Tlieology," in three volumes — a work of the highest
authority. The author is to-day a Professor at the University
of Innspruck, and a son of the illustrious Frederick Von
Hurter, called by Sebastian Brunner " the apostolic historian
of the XlXth century," and who, though a Protestant clergy-
man, undertook to write and did write, in £our volumes,
after twenfy-four years' labor, the famous history of that great
Pope, Innocent the Third. He got bis reward even here —
Faith! For St. Paiil says — '■^ Fides est don uin Del : Faith is
the gift of God." The profound studies and investigation at-
tending this stupendous work led him into the fold of the Cath-
olic church. Father Hiirter's volumes are the text-book in most
of the Catholic Theological Seminaries throughout the world.
In his second volume, page 387, he is discussing in his enchant-
ing way the doctrine of the lunnaculate Conception, and says
in a note — I translate: "Mayhap some one will look for an
argument drawn from Genesis iii. 15: I tmll put enmities,
<('('., which text Catholic theologians freely use. But since we
do not need this argument, i&c, i&c, cfec," and he then passes
66 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
to criticisms of and suggestions about it. Now in the face of
all tins, even as to the use made of the first clause of our text in
the Decree, does it not display in this Yicar an impudence and
ignorance colossal in their criminality when he says that Pius
IX. alluded " to this very text " for a defence of the doctrine 1
But let that pass as regards the first clause, with which I am
not concerned in this controversy. What about the second
clause, or rather its first word? It remains just as I have
stated — indifferent to He, She, or It so far as the Immaculate
Conception is concerned, or the honor paid the Mother of the
Redeemer by Catholics, and absolutely without any weight or
bearing, in the Vicar's sense, on the pronmlgatlon of the doc-
trine by the Pope. And yet in a letter to his Vicar the Bishop
himself says " that the mistake Ipsa for Ipse had acquired a
tremendous importance from being quoted in the promulgation
of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception by Pius IX."
Are any words too strong to express the indignation a Catholic
must feel at such an exhibition, in high places, of absurdity
and silliness so gigantic in regard to his religion, and in persons
who besides have the cheek and assurance to publicly criticise,
slander, and malign it! Does Bishop Kingdon knew Latin
well enough to read the Papal Decree, and if — yes, has he read
it — understandingly '{ I cannot believe it, because if he did
he would not be such a madman as to pen such stuff for the
public. Wh}*, Ipsa, as we are discussing it, does not appear
at all in the hull or decree ! The second clause of our text is
not even quoted, properly speaking, but is only referred to in-
directly, and the idea expressed paraph rastically, while the first
clause is quoted verbatim and with absolute precision in quo-
tation marks as I have given it above. Here is the strongest
paraphrase of the second clause that occurs in the decree which
I gave for the Bishop's benefit, to wit : " Quae procid duhio
verienatum ejusdem serpentis caput contrivH: who (referring
to Mary) without doubt crushed the empoisoned head of that
same serpent." But this is simply the idea conveyed by the
clause itself as it stands in the full text, where it is much
stronger as expressed by the Almighty than when paraphrased
as in the decree. Will the Bishop, or any one for him, point out
A Resume. 67
how the words or ideas even of this clause have acquired such
" a tremendous importance " by appearing in the decree pro-
mulgating the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, so re-
cently ago, when they had already been used and expressed in
a stronger and more emphatic and more authoritative form if
possible by the Catholic church herself in the Old Vulgate
land the New for fifteen hundred years before an Anglican
Protestant Bishop or ritualistic Vicar had been thought of —
except in the Counsels of God! Indignation retires before
the saddening pity evoked by such reflections. So far as my
own personal feeling is concerned, I rather thank the Bishop
and his Vicar for the delight they have given me in making
or renewing my acquaintance with thoughts so elevating as
those suggested and inspired by my subject-matter ; but I de-
plore it because of the scandal given to the " little ones " of
their own flocks who look to them for guidance in spiritual
matters — " the little ones " wJio don't hnow ! The mild-man-
nered and sweet-tempered good "Queen Bess," the abl^est
" Pope " the " Church of England, as by law established," ever
had, used to say to her Bishops when they misbehaved :
" Proud Prelate ! I made you a Bishop and, by God, I will
unmake ; I will unfrock you if you don't look sharp ! "
Green's " Short History of the English People," p. 383, is ray
authority. What would she do in a case like this ?
LETTER V.
IPSE, IPSA, IPSUM — A RESUME.
To the Editor of the Glohe :
Sir, — In very weariness of spirit and disgust unutterable I
would turn away from this Vicar and his disreputably ignorant
ravings ; I could say with the impatient Hotspur :
"I had rather live
With cheese and garlick in a windmill, far,
Than feed on cates, and have him talk to me,
In any summer-house ni Christendom."
58 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
But I am obliged to prove in detail the damning charges I
have thus far inaintained against him, and must, therefore,
sift his every assertion. He complains, he charges that Pius
IX. set up in Rome, to commemorate tlie pronmlgation of
the dogma, a figure of the Blessed Virgin trampling the ser-
pent under foot — " and without the holy child, mark you, in
her arms," he emphasizes. That is, he accuses Pius IX. of
excogitating out of his own brain the idea of such a figure as
something brand new and manufactured pro re nata, for the
sole purpose of memorizing the pronmlgation of the dogma,
and he adds that "this representation .... has been for
years and still is very common among Roman Catholics."
Now, notwithstanding the aifectation of learning and tone of
confidence of this writer when instructing the public on the
" enormities," " impious acts of worship," " impious utter-
ances," and " idolatrous devotions " of " the Roman church,"
his ludicrous and audacious ignorance brand him as the most
gigantic fraud in this community. 'Twas a remark of an old
Jesuit priest that religion suffered more from the sayings and
doings of '"'■ Pious fooW'' than from any of its open and pro-
fessed enemies. I have lately, in utter desperation at his
fatuity, frequently asked myself if the Bishop's Vicar was one
of the brotherhood ! Let us see. I have already explained
the Catholic meaning of the words — "She sliaU crush thy
head^'' etc. Let me pay him the compliment of adopting, as
well and fully expressing the Catholic doctrine, his own closing
words in his last letter — that cataclysmal letter in which he,
only ignorantly^ I would charitably believe, tried to palm off
on some of his innocent fellow-citizens and readers, the words
of Father John Bernard de Rossi, who died 57 years ago, as
the utterance of the present Catholic Archaeologist, Giovanni
B. de Rossi, or liis brother Michael — the " famous living Italian
Roman Catholic scholar of Catacomb-inscription celebrity" as
he alinost hyperbolically called hitn, because lie thought he
would help him through with his little " lawn tennis set." The
Vicar writes : " It was to the Seed of the Woman, God Incar-
nate, directly and personally, that the crushing of the Serpent's
head was attributed, not to the Woman nor to Him in conjunction
A Resume. 6^
with Her, but to Him al&ne, and it is in Ilim and through
Him, that all faithful Christians are enabled to crush Satan
under their feet also^ The italics are mine. Wliat is the
story of Balaam? Verily does history repeat itself! And
what does St. Paul mean when he says that " the wrath of God
is revealed from Heaven against all impiety and injustice
of those men that detain the truth of God in injustice?"'
How very like the language of the old Catholic Saints and
Doctors is that of the Vicar, just quoted ! For instance, the
Bishop's "unreliable" St. Bernard says: "Christ crushed the
serpent's head by his death, suffering Himself to be wounded
in the heel. His blessed mother crushed him likewise, by her
co-operation to the mystery of the Incarnation and by reject-
ing, with horror, the very first suggestion of the enemy,
to commit even the smallest sin." St. Gregory the Great
{3£or. i. 38) says : " We crash the serpent's head when we ex-
tirpate from our heart the beginnings of temptation, and then
he lays snares for our heel, because he opposes the end of a
good action with greater craft and power." I cannot forbear
referring here to an injunction my dear, good Irish mothei*
used to give me, when a boy rambling in the woods, to always
kill the first snake of the season that 1 met with, and never
to allow one to cross my path — an injunction I have not yet
forgotten. This is doubtless the survival of some old " Popish "
superstition which would seem to have overmastered even the
great St, Patrick, and from whom one of his daughters in the
faith may have inherited it ! Now, I suppose this writer will
admit that the Mother of our Lord was a "faithful Christian."
He himself calls her the " Chief of Saints." Why then is it
unlawful for Catholics to say that she crushes Satan under her
feet, in his own words just quoted, and those of St. Bernard
and St. Gregory ? The Vulgate, Douay and Wycliffe's version
of the Bible do say so and Catholics say so too — and that is all
they do say. Wherein does their meaning, when properly
understood as I have explained it from these great Catholic
saints, differ from the Protestant meaning attached, I trust,
to " It or He shall hrtiise thy head ? " It differs not at all.
Christ Jesus — the only name under Heaven given to men
60 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
whereby they must be saved — crushes the serpent's head by
the prowess of His own Divinity, Power, and Virtue ; His
Blessed Mother and all other "faithful Christians" in, through,
and by Him — by giving birth at once to her Son and Kedeemer
and in the words of the promulgating Decree — " hy that virtue
with which she was endued fi'om on high.''"' Section 15,
Why should not, then, the representation of the Blessed
Mary, declared by the Angel to be " full of grace," and tram-
pling the Serpent under foot be "very common among
Roman Catholics " — " true Catholic Christians " as they are l
It " has been for years, and still is very common," Le says.
Yes, thanks to God, and for more years than he seems to take
in. It is so easy for him to circumscribe the limits of the life
of his own little " cult," that the contemplation of centuries
seems to make him dizzy ; to give him a mental squint, so to
speak, in presence of the spectacle of the historic grandeur of
the Catholic Church which therefore sits upon him like a night-
mare. Is this representation, then, as he says, the invention
of Pius IX.? Pestilent nonsense! The man is stark madl
Christian archaeology, symbolism and art, is full of the idea.
The original, in another form, appeared at Bethlehem in that
sublime picture of " the Child with Mary his Mother," which
the Magi saw on that happy morning when " the stars sang
together," and before which they knelt and adore^\ I am not
arguing now, but only instruGting the Vicar and liis Episcopal
superior, if, oddly enough, he acknowledges him as such, in
Catholic truth. " God sent his Son, made of a woman," says
St. Paul, Galatians iv. 4. Here is the germinal, the basilar
principle of all devotion to our Blessed Mother as " Chief of
Saints." This thought carries me out on the wide ocean of ,
Catholic truth, while my opponents are away up in little rivu-
lets and stranded on shoals at that, with hardly water enough
to moisten the soles of their parched feet. It lifts me and my^
subject to the mountain top, while my opponents are browsing
in the valleys below. The profound and eternal principles
which underlie the dogmas we hold, the honor we pay the
saints, and the worship of God in which we join, give a scope
and grasp to our knowledge of the Christian religion too tre-
A Kescmk. 61
raendons to be cooped up in cavil such as my opponents in-
dulge in; and one feels "cabin'd, crilll>'d, contin'd " in tlie
attempt to talk itj) the little ^^JVarroivs " where they do their
theological thinking. An instructed Catholic is simply a giant
in kni. '■ (Ige of the Christian religion compared with such
men, and he feels uneasy in combat with dwarfs. This is no
mere extravagance or affectation, but literal fact. A Catholic
may be unable through want of habit or reading, through in-
disposition or inal)ihty to handle details, to answer readily or
clearly to those thousand little petulances which a read adver-
sary may launch by the hour ; and a learned Protestant will
often fancy he has "shut liim up," the real fact being that the
Catholic is •' shut up " by the stupendous Pon-ac(piaintance of
his opponent. lie may give some general answer to such
popular objections as St. Bartholomew's, or " The Gunpowder
Plot "; he may speak wisely on Littledale's " Plain Reasons,"
" Bishop Strossmayer's speech at the Vatican Council," or " The
Impious Utterances" of "St. Liguori " and "The Raccolta,"
but, because his creed is a logical synthesis, he feels all the
time how superficial it all is, and that what he really has to do
is to begin at the beginning, to discuss what is meant by Chris-
tianity, and what the very theory of the supernatural involves.
This he cannot do in a moment.
" God sent his Son, made of a woman." Christianity,
therefore, is the religion of the IncariMtion. All there is in it
proceeds from, depends on, and clusters around that ineffable
mystery, in which the design of God in creation — the deifica-
tion of the creature, or his elevation to perfect union with
God — is consummated. The devotion to Mary grows out of
the Incarnation, as does the Church herself, and tends, we
think, to keep alive faith in that crowning act of the Creator.
If we would express Christianity as a whole we must symbolize
the Incarnation, and the only perfect symbol possible is that
of the reality which the Magi saw — the Madoima and Child.
And why is it the only symbol of the Incarnation % Because
the Incarnation means that God is man ; but how can we ex-
press the truth that God is man except by showing that he has
a mother ? In his divine nature he has no mother ; then if he
62 Ii'SE, Ipsa, Ipsum.
lias a motlier lie is man. Wlience the Creeds do not merely
say that Clirint is the Son of God, or that the Son of God was
made man, but affirm that He was " horn of the Vir</ln Mary ";
" Incartiiite of {or from) the Viryhi JLtri/,'''' — thus setting
fortli the same divine Person as at once tlie Son of God and
tlic Son of Mary. Tliat is, they show us Incarnate God in his
, Mother's arms, they st/j/ibolise the Incarnation by the Madonna
and Cliild. This, I need not say, is no mere modern idea. It
is found again and again in the Catacombs. See De Rossi, in
the Fi'cnch translation of his work, " Images de la Sainte
Vierge choisis dans les Catacombes de Home." Rome
18G3, p. 0.
And the poetic representation of the woman crushing the
serpent's head is also of great antiquity. It is sung by Pru-
dentius, the most illustrious of the Christian poets, who tlour-
ished about 405, in his work, Cathemer'mon seu Liber Ilym-
norum Quotidlanorum, 3, 5, 146, SS. as follows:
Hoc odium vetus illud erat,
Hoc erat aspidis atque honiiuis
Digladiabile discidiiim,
Quod modo cernua femineis
Vipera prater itiir pedibus.
Edere namque deum merita
Omnia virgo veuena doniat,
Tractibus unguis inexpUcitis
Virus inerme piger revomit
Grainine concolor in viridi.
But the crowning proof that Pius IX. did not invent the
idea of the figure said by the Vicar to have been erected by
him, is furnished by the celebrated statue ordered to be made
by Ugo de Summo and erected in a chapel in Cremona, in
1047. He ordered to be made — I translate : " A noble and
beautiful statue of incorruptible wood or marble to represent
the figure of Blessed Mary our mother crowned with twelve
stars, fully clothed with the sun and moon, and having beneath
her feet the old serpent to which God had said in earthly Para-
dise : IwiUjput enmity between thee and the woman, etc. (Gen.
A ItEiUMt:. 68
iii. 15). I wish, too, that tlie serpent be so carved that he may
be seen to eject his poison harmlessly, and that his most vile
head the Blessed Virgin may so crush, as becomes her, who by
the grace of her Son, her redemption being anticipated, was
preserved from the original stain, her soul and body being
intact and immaculate.
" I also ordain that every year on the festival of the Im-
maculate Concei)tioii of Blessed Mary, Mother of God, in this
same chapel during Mass . . . this hymn be sung:
" Candidissima uti lilia
Salve aeterni Patris iilia.
Salve mater Redeniptoris
Salve sponsa Spiratoris.
" Sme macula coucepta
Salve Triadis electa.
Salve inferni victorix aspidis
Illius expers sola cuspidis.
*' Salve Triadis electa
Sine macula concepta."
On this famous moimment of Christian antiquity, see Bal-
lerini, Sylloye 21(mum£iitorum, part first, pp. 1-25. Home,
1854.'
' I have before me the Sylloge of the learned Jesuit critic, Father
Ballerini, in which the above document is given in full and illus-
trated with explanatory notes. Father Hurter, in his Dogmatic
Tlieoloyy, vol. 2, p. 390, gives an extract from it and rofei-s to the
Parisian edition of Ballerini, while my edition is the Roman. Since
writing the above Letter, however, I find that Father Harper, who
had formerly quoted it in proof of a popular belief in, and devotion
to the Immaculate Conception of Mary in the eighth century, now
denies its authenticity, and I'efei's, in sujjport of his contention, to a
contribution on the subject from a learned Bollandist (Jesuit) in the
columns of the Society's famous jmblication, Etudes Religieuses,
which he had not before seen. I leave the matter in the hands of
experts ; but it is another striking proof of the care and fearlessness
with which Catholic scholarship, purely and pimply in the cause of
truth, has walked over the records of ancient documents, testing
and sounding at every step, in their endeavors to find every boggy
spot in them. See the splendid tribute of the Anglican Pi-ofessor,
Canon Stokes, to the Bollaudists, in Letter XL of the Rejoinder.
64 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
How many hnndreds more of symbolical representations of
the Holy Mother could I give from Christian art through the
ages? See Clement's ^^ Christian Syinhols,^'' pp. IDl, 214.
But as Raskin observes, " Art is nothing but a noble and ex-
pressive language," and the " Glories of Mary," whether por-
trayed by the rude artist of the Catacombs, a Ilaphael with his
liundrod and twenty Madonnas, or a Cimabue, a Dante or a
Wordsworth, are still for the sake of her Son, are ordered to
that great central fact of our holy religion — the Incarnation —
and do but remind us that there was One, who, though lie was
all blessed from all eternity, yet for the sake of sinners "did
not shrink from the Virghi's womb." I am not here dis-
cussing any doctrine concerning her, but simply meeting this
writer's statement about the figure which he says Pius IX.
erected, Dec. 8th, 1854. According to Clement, page 210, the
model of the Virgin for the Immaculate Conception is the
woman of the Apocalypse. In \\\q facade of the Cathedral in
this city, there is a statue representing this Immaculate Con-
ception with the moon beneath her feet, while she crushes the
serpent's head. The significance of the whole idea, whether
embodied in figure or text, I have fully explained, and having
vindicated the Catholic position thereon, need dwell no further
on it.
LETTER VI.
ipse, ipsa, IPSUM — A RESUME.
To the Editor of the Globe :
Sir, — I have been asked to give a translation of the quoted
Latin hymns, for the benefit of non-classical readers. The first
stanza from the beautiful hymn of Prudentius is at follows :
" Hence came the enmity of old between the serpents and
man, that inextinguishable (implacable) feud, — that now the
viper prostrate heneath the woman's feet lies crvshed and
A Resume. 65
tramjjled onP Second stanza : " For the Virgin, who obtained
grace to bring forth God, hath charmed away all his poisons ;
and driven to hide himself in the f/mss, green as himself^ he
there coiled up in his folds, torpidly vomits forth his now
hai^mless venom,"
The hymn ordered to be sung in the Mass by the famous
Ugo de Summo, is as follows :
Spotless as the lily
Hail daughter of the Eternal Father,
Hail Mother of the Redeemer,
Hail spouse of the Holy Ghost.
Hail elect of the Trinity
, Conceived without stain.
Hail vanquisher of the infernal
Sei-pent who alone didst avoid his dart.
Hail elect of the Trinity-
Conceived without stain.
Of the Yicar's last letter there remain to be dealt with— his
quotation from Canon Oakeley, his comments thereon and con-
clusions therefrom. I am obliged to refer to it, in the execu-
tion of my purpose, that I may burn out its crypto-poisonous
deceits, lest they might mislead and my work seem incomplete.
And, first, he calls Canon Oakeley " an Ultramontane of the
Ultramontanes," thus using the word offensively for the whole
Catholic communion — a sort of substitute for the word
'•''Poper])^'' which has grown somewhat vulgar. But as a con-
troversial trick it is simply characteristic, and I would not
notice it did not this writer Avhine so piteously for the " polite
and polished style " of treatmjent for himself. Perhaps after
all I rightly " measured my man." My readers may like to
know a little about this " Ultramontane." Who was he % He
was at one time a most charming Ritualistic minister, and as he
himself would say, ''''played at priest " in that celebrated Mar-
garet street chapel in London, where be endeavored to work
out to the utmost the liturgical and devotional capabilities of
the Anglican system. His object was to engraft as much
66 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
Catholic feeling upon the English Eitual as it would bear, to
make his ilock as Catholic as it was possible without ceasing to
be Anglican. But the system broke down under the pressure
— the plant would not bear the new honors set upon it. In-
stead of sympathy from his ecclesiastical superior, less happy
in this than the man who now insults his memory, a prosecu-
tion in the Ecclesiastical Courts checked and crushed Mr.
Oakeley's attempt to infuse life into the service and devotion
of the English Church. The illusion was dispelled ; and he
saw no alternative but sinking down fairly into Anglicanism in
its ordinary dreariness, or embracing the glorious liberty and
consolations of Catholicity. He responded to God's grace and
accepted the latter. In " A Letter on Submitting to the Cath-
olic Church " he says : " I have now come round to the opinion
with which others wiser than myself began : that the attempt
to infuse the Koman spirit into the Anglican body is like ' put-
ting new wine into old vessels,' the effect of which must be to
mar the vessel and spill the wine — to dissipate the Catholic
introduction and shiver the Anglican receptacle to pieces."
He was ordained a priest of the Catholic Church and loved,
lived and labored for her cause till his death a few years ago.
Of course, therefore, he is " an Ultramontane ! " But let that
pass. During his life he wrote many able and beautiful things,
in prose and verse, but his very best was his triumphant
answer to his old friend, Pr. Pusoy's Irenicon — a pam])hlet en-
titled "The Leading Topics of Dr. Pusey's recent Work."
From this pamphlet is taken the quotation which the Vicar
gives as follows : " I now come to what we (Eoman Catholics)
regard as the Scriptural germ of every doctrine and the legiti-
inate ground of every authorized devotion on the subject of
the Blessed Virgin. I mean the prediction of herolnce in the
Christian Dispensation uttered l)y Almighty God at time of
the fall," and he brackets — (viz. : Gen. iii. 15). IS'ow in the
name of the sacred memory of Canon Oakeley, of honor,
decency and truth, I invoke upon this writer the reprobation
of all fair-minded and truth-loving men ! Has he in his pos-
session Father Oakeley's ])amphlet, or is he quoting second-
hand ? In either case his sin is the same ; and is the Bishop a
A Eesuaie. 67
imrticeps crhninis? He intends to give the impression that
Canon Oakeley is speaking of that part of the text under dis-
cussion — " She shall crush i/ii/ head,''' etc. — whereas he is
speaking of Mary as the AVoman divinely jirojihesied as Satan's
direct and irauiediate enemy in that great scheme of Redemp-
tion wliich God was announcing, whose seed, Christ, was to
■ redeem lue world and between whom and the serpent undying
enmity was to exist. It is " her office in the Christian dispen-
sation," as mother of our Redeemer and Saviour, in His sacred
Immanity, that is predicted in the utterance of Almighty God,
and tliis, with all that it implies, is her great glory as "chief of
saints." AVell, then, may Canon Oakeley call it the " Scrip-
tural germ " and " legitimate ground " of devotion to her.
AVill this writer deny it ? Rut the reading of " He," " She " or
" It " does not afEect this sublime truth which is absolutely in-
different to them, as I have so f ally shown, and Canon Oakeley
builds nothing on them. I challenge this Vicar, then, to ])ro-
duce liis proof to thu contrary, if he has it, and from the
pamphlet, or stand before this comnmnity branded as the
prince of garblers and tergiversators !
My readers can now " measure their man " when he says,
speaking of the above quotation, that it " is a very strong
statement and ouglit to be exceeding startling to those who
accept it." Rut who wt'll noic accept it in tlie sense lie has so
mahgnantly tried to twist out of it ? And as for being star-
tled, well, Catholics are too familiar with the blasphemies
against truth of that Grand Lama of ritualism — Littledale, to
be at all moved by the stammerings of a mere " middy " in his
crew. He follows uj) his last statement by saying : " Espe-
cially when it is kiiown that Liguori (Glories of Mary, Rt. 2,
Disc. 1), Rope RIiis IX. and many of the bishops who asked him
to promulge the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, ba.sed
their chief arguments in favor of it on the false reading in
some such terms a.'? these : ' She who was said to crush Satan
could never have been, even for a moment, even in lier
mother's v^cmb, under original sin.' " '' In some such terms
as these!" How perfect an imitation of the cuttle-fish! lie
thus obfuscates the waters of truth in ordej- to escape from in-
68 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
coTivenicnt scrutiny ! How can I, willing and anxious to meet
every miserable semblance of argument of tliis writer, be ex-
pected to encounter and grapple with so shadowy and indefi-
nite a statement? In February, 1849, Pius IX., in answer to
petitions which flowed in from every side asking him to pro-
nounce a dogmatic decision on this doctrine, issued from Gaeta
his Encyclical Letter addressed to all the patriarchs, primates,
archbishops and bishops of the Catholic world, requesting
them to make known to him, in the most clear and explicit
terms, what was the devotion of their clergy and people
towards the Immaculate Conception of the Mother of Christ,
and what above all was their own opinion and desire. From
Asia and the East to North America and the Far West, from
the shores of tlie J^altic to Australia and the Isles of the Great
Pacific, replies poured into Rome from six hundred and three
hisJiops, every one of whom, without exception, exju-essed his
belief in the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Mother
and his devotion towards this mystery of God's love and
power. Before such a majestic scene what is the whole
Anglican Episcopate capped by its " Papal " Privy Council
with its American daughter thrown in ! A sorry group in-
deed ! By order of the great Pontiff these replies were printed
m nine large volumes with an appendix. And yet this Yicar
who never saw their very covers dares to epitomize their con-
tents — "In some such terms as these!" What blind infatua-
aion ! What unparalleled, what audacious and arrogant
insolence ! It is simply and absolutely false, that many of the
bishops " based their chief arguments " on the alleged " false
reading" and the phrasing he has confessedly manfactured ;
it is shamelessly and monstrously false that even ane of the
bishops based any argument for the Prerogatives of Mary
upon that part of the text: "She shall crush thy head."
When it is used at all the meaning is simply that which I have
already so often put, and it would be the same to the Catholic
mind if "He" or "It" were used. And this is the sense of
St. Liguori himself in the ])assage referred to — " Glories of
Mary," p. 340. Dr. Pusey's " ajjt phrase " that " the major
premiss of the argument is gone, when it appears that nothing
is said here (Gen. iii. 15) of any personal victory of hers"
A Eesume. 09
(Mary's), is therefore meaningless ; it is, in the words of Canon
Oakeley — "a phantom of the Devil's creating, and one
among the many evidences which history and experience fur-
nish of liis implacable hostility to her whom he knows to be a
great antagonist of his power.'' The Vicar is quite welcome
to his " apt phrase," and if the cap Canon Oakeley made for
\ Dr. Pusey fits hhn he can appropriate it with my best wishes.
It is not Canon Oakeley who says there shall be enmity between
the serpent and his seed and the woman — these are the words
of Almighty God Himself. Amen !
Having thus disposed of the Yicar's incrustations of the
main question I have now to accept the challenge — to take up
the gauntlet which he throws down in the concluding para-
graph of his first letter in these words : " It ought to be re-
membered, in this connection, that the Church of England has
preserved her balance well under the circumstances, and ob-
serves four Feasts yearly in honor of the Holy Mother." What
<;an he mean by "under the circumstances"?
" The Church of England ! " Here a difficulty presented itself
which for a moment I could not solve. I could not forget that
within that church " as by law established," there are at least
two parties too widely different to make it pc^ssible to argue
with both at once without a great deal of force on one or the
other being wasted. A sharp line, which grows sharper year
by year, has to be drawn between the old-fashioned Protestant,
represented by the Bishop, whose earnest conviction generally
I calls forth respect, and the modern Ritualist or Anglo-Catho-
; lie, as he would style himself, with whose seeming self-delusion
it is so difficult to be gentle. It is of little use to prove to the
Bishop that the pre-Augustine Chm-ch in England was Pajial,
for he might easily grant and lament it in the same breath
without the fact U})setting his particular theory; and it is
equally waste of time to prove to the Ritualist that the Refor-
mation was a terrible disaster, both from the social and religions
point of view. This he already believes, for, do not two
Ritualistic leaders say so ? The Rev. Baring Gould says the
Reformation was "a miserable apostasy," and the Grand Lama
Littledale says the Reformers were *' utterly unredeemed vil-
10 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipslm.
lains^^; the ilitualistic Church News, that "Cranmer, Eidley,
Latimer and Jewell " and the rest " were apostates, traitors,
perjurers, robbers and persecutors," and the Union Review
that "Barlow and Scory were rascals" — and is not the Eitualist
striving in his own way to undo the work of all these
" villains"? IIow was I to reconcile these contradictions so as
to be able to meet the paragraph before me? In my per-
plexity I had recourse to the " myriad-minded " poet. The
attitude of these rival parties resembles that of the two Dro-
niios in the comedy: each maintains that //(? is the true and
original representative of the genuine Church of England, and
that the other is only an impostor. Dromio of Syracuse, who
represents the Bishop, says to the Duke of Ephesus, who repre-
sents the Privv Council :
" I, sir, am Dromio ; command him away." But Dromio of
Ephesus, who represents the Ritualist, replies :
"I, sir, am Dromio; pray let me stay." The Duke — that is
the Privy Coimcil — benignly observes that it is cpiite open to
anybody to "stay" if only he is willing to do so; whereupon
the battle ends, just as in the comedy, and one of the Dromios,
giving his arm to the otlier, cheerfully exclaims :
" We came into the world like brother and brother ; and
now let's go hand in hand, not one before the other." And so
I will consider the Bishop and his Vicar thus shaking hands
over "The Book of Common Prayer," in which I can thou
look for evidence, binding on both parties, of the way in which
the Church of England "preserves her balance" in honoring
the Mother of man's Redeemer.
Let me l)ogin by saying that in this paragraph the Vicar has
" sounded the very base string " of religious hypocrisy and deceit,
from which he can be absolved only on the assumption that he
is suffering from such a paralysis of conscieiice as to be unable
to distinguish liglit from darkness. Now, in reply to his claim
I charge that, judged l)y the Book of Conmion Prayer, no sec-
taries have surpassed, few have e(iuallcr1, the Anglican Church
in ingratitude and irreverence tow<ards her in whom the Most
High became Incarnate. Thus Greeks and Russians, in spite
of their exile from Catholic Unity, have not so far departed
A Resume. 71
from Christian belief in this particular. There is not a house
in all Russia, from the palace of the Emperor to the hut of
the jjeasant, which does not contain a picture of the Immacu-
late Virgin. Even modern Greeks, fallen as they are, cease
not to invoke her. England alone knows not, nor desires to
know, the Mother of the world's Redeemer. The only English-
men who comprehend, however faintly, w^iat she has been to
the human family, are the professors of pure rationalism.
Though they have misused, they have not quite abdicated, the
gift of reason ; and it helps them to see in part what is hidden
from those wlio, in losing faith, seem to have lost reason als^o.
"The world," says Lecky, in one of the most remarkable
works of our time, and one of the saddest, " is governed by its
ideals, and seldom or never has there been one which has exer-
cised a more profound and, on the whole, a more salutary iiillii-
ence than the mediaeval conception of the Vii-gin. For the iirst
time woman was elevated to her rightful ])osition, and the
sanctity of weakness was recognized as well as the sanctity of
sorrow. No longer the slave or toy of man, no longer associ-
ated only with ideas of degradation, and of sensuality, woman
rose, in the person of the Virgin JMother, into a new spheiv,
and became the object of a reverential homage of which antii]-
uity had had no conception. Love was idealized. The nioral
charm and beauty of female excellence was for the tirst time
felt. A new type of character was called into being ; a new
kind of admiration was fostered. Into a harsh and ignorant
and benighted age this ideal type infused a type of gentleness
and purity unknown to the proudest civilizations of the past.
In the pages of living tenderness which many a monkish
writer has left in honor uf his celestial patron ; in the millions
who, in many lands and in many ages, have sought with no
barren desire to mould their character into her image ; in those
holy maidens, who, for the love of Mary, have separated them-
selves from all the glories and pleasures of the world, to seek
in fastings and vigils and huml)le charity to render themselves
worthy of her benediction ; in the new sense of honor, in the
chivalrous respect, in the softening of manners, in the refine-
ment of tastes displayed in all the walks of society ; m tlioso
72 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
and in many other ways we detect its influence. All that was
best in Europe clustered around it, and it is the origin of many
of the purest elements of our civilization." "History of
Rationalism," vol. 1, pp. 234, 235.
The Church of England " observes four feasts in honor of
the Holy Virgin," says this writer. Yes, and just about as
McMillan's Almanac observes those three in its pages ! Good
God ! What a way to honor her in whose pure veins lirst
flowed that precious and life-giving blood whose shedding on
the Cross cancelled death, satisfied the justice of God and saved
us ! Let me prove what I have said. In the English church
calendar it is true there are certain days which are called feasts
of the Blessed Virgin — the Purification, Annunciation, Visita-
tion and Nativity — but can anything be conceived more sad
and melancholy, more cold and uninviting than these Anglican
remembrances of Mary ? They are fasts rather than feasts.
They are the gaunt and awful spectres of those Catholic fes.
tivals which used once to cheer up and gladden the popular
heart of the nation. They are indeed called festivals of Mary,
but Mary's name remains unnoticed and uncommemorated by
them. Listen, my readers. The few other saints whom An-
glicanism professes to honor have their names mentioned in
the Collect of the day, but even this cold tribute of respect is
denied to the Mother of God ! The rule is, on such days, to
avoid as much as possible any allusion to the Holy Virgin, and
the occasion is improved into an attack on the Catholic Church
for her " Idolatrous worship, etc., etc." The Vicar calls her
the " Chief of Saints." Yet, take it in Christian hearts, if you
can, her blessed name is never mentioned from one end of the
Book to the other, l)eyond the way in which it occurs in Mc-
Millan's Almanac, outside of its mention in the Gospels, where
it could not be suppressed — that is, not the slightest notice is
taken of her on account of any merit of hers ! I wish I had
space to copy here the Collects for the feasts of the Purifica-
tion and the Annunciation, the only feasts of Blessed Mary
provided with Collects, and to place them side by side with the
Collects for the feasts of "St. John the Baptist" and "St.
Michael and All Angels." In the latter the Saints are extolled
A ItEstMi;. 73
and their examples held up for imitation, whereas in tlie
former not tlie slightest reference is made to Mary, who is
supposed to be honored by the feast. Let my readers just
compare these Collects and see for themselves the way in which
the so-called feasts of the "Chief of Saints" are observed. I
am right, alas ! too correct in saying that the Church of Eng-
land indignantly rejects and scorns any teaching that calls upon
it to exhibit the slightest practical reverence or gratitude to the
Mother of God. If this Yicar is any better we know where
he gets it — that is suh rosa for the present.
But what has become, in this Vicar's hands, of the Jifth
feast, marked in the church calendar — the feast of the " Con-
ception of the Virgin " on the 8th December? This was estab-
lished in England by St. Ansel m, Archbishop of Canterbury,
in the Eleventh Century. Wliy did the Vicar suppress it in
his enumeration 'i Was it because it is of as little importance
as the four he mentioned? Give the public the reason.
Thus I leave the matter to the judgment of my readers. I
have not touched " St. Liguori " and " The Raecolta." My chal-
lenge to the Bishop and his Vicar to discuss that whole sub-
ject before a select audience, chosen by ourselves through a
responsible joint committee, still stands.
To put the whole matter of this controversy in a nutshell.
Bishop Kingdon said that " IrsA " in the Vulgate Bible (Gen.
iii. 15) was a misprint for "Ipse," and that the doctrine of the
Immaculate Conception was based or founded ou it and re-
sulted from it. This statement I denied, both as to the mis-
print and its alleged connection with the doctrine ; and I
proved, I think, that there are t/iree accepted readings in this
place — Ipse, Ipsa and Ipsum — so that no such question of
misprint as the Bishop put it can arise. I showed, moreover,
that the meaning was the same, no matter which was adopted,
and that C^itiiolic authorities used them indifferently. The
consequence is that, even assuming that the true state of the
question is as the Bishop put it, simply between Ipse and
Ipsa, yet then he was absolutely in error, as I have fully
proved, in asserting that the doctrine of the Immaculate
Conception or its promulgation, had anything whatever to
74 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
do with it, or was in any way dependent upon it. His duty
would now seem clear and imperative.
A word of explanation. I cliaracterized the Vicar's at-
tack on the Catholic church and myself personally as " the
screain of a drunken Beelzebub." This has been objected
to. I can't help it. It has, perhaps, been misunderstood.
The expression is purely metaphorical, and its genesis was
this : "ylZ^ the yods of the heathen are devils^'' Holy Scripture
says ; but idols are the gods of the heathen — therefore, a wor-
shi])per of idols is an idolater, and an idolater is a worshipper
of the devil. He accused the Catholic church of idolatry in all
the moods and tenses, and charged against me that I accepted
and practised her teachings thereon — and this of his own mei'e
motion. I was not very particular about my reply, for it flashed
through my mind as the counterpart of his charge against me —
If I am a worshipper of devils, as you say, then you arc the prince
of devils, and that personage somewhat under the influence of
" the ardent." That is all, and I sing no palinode over it either.
He first offended, and he sticks to it. I am content.
Here I take leave of this ecclesiastical dilettant. For the
present I will say with the poet (" Twelfth Night ") : " Fie,
thou dishonest Sathan : I call thee l)y the most modest terms, for
I am one of those gentle ones that will use the devil himself
with courtesy." But if this mild admonition does not pro-
duce the desired effect, let this reviler of the Catholic church
be warned that I have a rod in pickle for him, which I shall
know how to lay on — and with sufficient vigor.
I thank you, Mr. Editor, for your unbounded courtesy, and
remain,
Most gratefully yours,
E. F. QUIGLEY.
My opponent replied to the above Resume in a series of
seven letters. A most minute refutation of his Strictures is
given in the following Rejoinder. From it, too, readers will get
a more complete, and a clearer idea of his criticism than if they
had the alia podrida, the ritualistic stew, in a mass.
IPSE, IPSA, IPSUM— A EEJOmDER.
To the Editor of the Globe :
Sir, — When St. Jude described certain teachers as " raging
waves of the sea foaming out their own confusion," he must
have had in prophetic view the " Priest (save the mark !) of
tlie Mission Church," and in some such exhibition as that con-
cluded in your cohimns yesterday. Like some of his modest
theological progenitors — Ridley, Latimer, Barlow, Parker,
Cranmer and Co., wliom his favorite saint, Littledale, fondly
calls " utterly unredeemed villains " — he M'ould cheerfully offer
instructions to the very Omniscient. He has poured himself
out after the error of Balaam /b/' a reward (St. Jude i. 11),
and I hope he may get it. \yill he have admirers ? " Heroic
Swan ! " — I hear them exclaim — " I love thee even when thou
gabbiest like a goose." Their bewitchment must often be ex-
pressed in Titania's words to Bottom, the weaver, as soon as
he ceased from braying :
" I pray thee, gentle mortal, sing again;
Mine ear is much enamored of thy note."
The apostle of ritualism in this city has spoken. He has
served up for its citizens a meal as foul with falsehood and
calumny as was ever offered in support of a starvetl-out creed.
I ought not to dirty my ink by noticing it. A great apostle of
another gospel expresses my feelings, and while ex])ressing,
saves them from excess. " What partici])ation has justice with
injustice? Or what fellowship hath light with darkness?
And what concord hath Christ with Belial?" It is indeed
"beneath the dignity of a gentleman to cross swords \\nW\ such
an adversary," and " were it not for deeper interests at stake
than my own honor, nothing further would be heard from
me."
(T.-J)
7d Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
But lam a Priest! And lest my ministrations in that
capacity be thought unauthorized, or the validity of my orders
be called in question — shades of Parker and Barlow, avaunt !
— I beg to refer your readers to my documents : 1 Pet. ii.
6-15 ; Apoc. i. 6, v. 10, xx. 6. Can Bishop Kingdou's Vicar
show a better title ? Well, hardly.
These texts authorize, yea, oblige me to officiate at the altar
of truth, and my " priestly vows " — my baptismal promises —
*' bind me to be ready, with all faithful diligence, to banish
and drive away all erroneous and strange doctrines contrary to
God's Word," and to " silence the ignorance of foolish men."
1 Pet. ii. 15. " Busy priest " though I am (and Lent is now
upon me), other " clerical duties " must bend somewhat to the
present demand, but I will not trespass upon you till next
week.
I am aware of the press on your columns and will act on
the spirit of your editorial intimation as strictly and sharply as
an exhausting logic and the absolute requirements of the issue
will permit.
Respectfully yours,
R. F. Qdigley,
Eitchie's Building, Friday A.M., Feb. 24, 1888.
LETTER I.
IPSE, IPSA, IPSUM — A REJOINDER.
St. John, N.B,, Thureday evening, March 1, 1888.
To the Editor of the Globe :
Sir, — After the argument made in this matter in my Re-
sume, two courses, I submit, were open to Bishop Kingdon.
He might acknowledge he had blundered, or by his silence he
might show his intention of at any rate leaving those who
heard or read his statements in the error into which — whether
by culpable negligence and ignorance or downright malice —
A Rejoiadek. 77
lie had done his best to lead them. He has elected the latter
course, and has thereby exhibited himself in a light hardly
consistent with his position as a "teacher in Israel." But
though the Bishop is silent his Vicar conies to the rescue.
Such a procedure recalls td one's mind the words of the memo-
rable Pym : " I dare not fight," says the Bishop, " but I can
wink and hold out my iron " — this Vicar. " It is a simple
one, but what though ? It will toast cheese, and it will cndun^
cold as another man's sword will ; and there's the humor of
it.^'' The "strictures" would appear to have operated vari-
ously to judge from the skits in your columns of the last few
days. They affected the bram as well of those who claimed to
understand them as of those who proclaimed they did not.
The Vicar himself confesses he takes such things hy the yard
— owing perhaps to the millinery tendencies of his theology.
I am not sufficiently skilled in' pathology to reconcile such
conflicting results. Their professed object, however, is to re-
vindicate the damaged reputation of the Bishop as a scholar,
theologian and doctrinal historian ; but unfortunately for him,
their blatant and boisterous dishonesty is so damning, that they
but encumber him, while they convict the writer of a readiness
and ability to glut his dupes with misstatements, falsehoods
and calumnies reeking with infamy. In his effort to "serve
God l)y well-meant lies " — pious frauds, let me call them,
since he likes a euphemism — he has but slipped off the motley
mask from hoof and tail, and it will appear by the time I get
through with him that the Bishop's worst enemy is one who
just noio professes to be of his own household.
The word of God aptly describes such as he : " Their throat
is an open sepulchre, with their tongues they have used deceit ;
the poison of asps is under their lips, their mouth is full of
cursing and bitterness." A seventh thing the Lord detesteth
— " A deceitful witness that uttereth lies " ; " the detractor is
the abomination of men " — " a false witness shall not be un-
punished, and he that speaketh lies shall not escape.''^ The
Vicar has placed the judgment in my hands, but I will not
execute it. I shall but point out how malevolent, belligerent,
busy and zealous he has been in committing these execrable
78 Ii'BE, Ipsa, Ipsum.
Bins of calumny and detraction, and I will then hand him over
to the ve:ifi;eance of your readers. At this moment he is, per-
haps, chuckling over this reflection : " The scourges which
alHict mankind shall not come near me; for I have made lies
my refuge and under falsehood liUve I hid myself." He is
douhtless, too, ohlivious of the reply: "Forasmuch as you
have put your trust in calumny .... this iniquity and your
ruin shall he like tliat of a high wall, whose breaking cometh
suddenly at an instant. It shall he broken as the breaking of
a potter's vessel that is shivered in pieces, and there shall not
be found in the bursting of it a shard to take tire from the
hearth or to draw a little water out of the pit."
In the olden time they studied Aristotle at Oxford, but what
cares he for logic ? The stomach of a Protestant ritualist could
not brook such a stranger. How establish a fellowship between
it and ritualism — "a white-washed abortion," a " bastard
Popery," with its " stinking, greasy, anti-Christian and execra-
ble Orders," as they are called by that great Anglican cham-
■|)ion, Fulke. These are not my words, but those of genuinely
logical Protestants who scorn to " steal the livery of heaven to
bcrve the devil in " — to masquerade in clothes stolen from the
Catholic Church, to deck themselves out with shreds and
tatters of Catholic doctrine in the vain hope to pass themselves
off atid im])ose themselves on the world as '' true Catholics."
How could logic comport itself with such a sham and impos-
ture ? The Vicar professes a love for " honest speech." So
do I, and I will share it with him.
Is it to be wondered at, then, that my opponent has not met
my argument i}i one single particular ? A more ignominious
failure, a more miserable collapse of an attempted defence of
one Oxford man by another is not on record. He simply
abandoned it and betook himself, as he says, " to supply the
public with a little thesaurus or treasury of argument against
the vain boasting of Romanist controversialists." After six
weeks' labor with " copious and exhaustive indices " we get
from this " busy priest " what ? Simply a tailless little mouse
so far as the question under discussion goes. He filled your
columns with quotations from a cloud of Catholic priests,
A ItEJOINDKR. 79
bishops and Popes, Yery edifying reading, of course, but as
germane to our subject as an argument on the parallax of the
moon. lie might have reheved the monotony, and brightened
the picture somewhat by introducing a few rituahstic " Fathers,"
but perhaps such a suggestion would be premature and might
be taken as a juke. Ahsit !
In addition to the counts in my indictment already laid
against my opponent and proved in my liesume, I now add
another to the effect that no writer witliin my knowledge lias
ever been guilty of more conscious and deliberate, unparalleled
and unblushing suppression of the truth, as I will clearly show
in my critique on the "Strictutes." Your readers will be the
jury to whom I confidently submit the issue. I have no inten-
tion of wandering off or allowing him to draw me away into
the mazes of his rhapsody, but I will cover tlie ground pretty
effectually, without, I trust, an undue demand upon your
space, and without violence to the logical instincts of interested
readers.
LETTER II.
IPSE, IPSA, IPSUM — A REJOINDER.
To the Editor of the Globe :
Sir, — I will take up the Yicar's letters, seven in all, serio
tim, and I will paragraph them.* I will also adopt his manner
of referring to mine. This will conduce to clearness and ena-
ble your readers to track him with me through his long laby-
rinth of falsehood and sophistry, inconsistency and misrepre-
sentation. The blood-stains by the way will witness for
themselves.
There is little in his first letter to the point beyond appeals
ad misfi7'iG07'diam. " Cry-baby " is its key-note. He protests
against the use of the " shillalah." It is always associated, you
know, with the "poor Irish," as he calls them. He prefers a
' It became impossible to carry this out.
80 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
club and uses it riglit vigorously. I do not object. M}' own
liglit weapon has a history. I do not wonder that an English-
nian objects to its lightning flashing around his head. Before
the foot of the Saxon had cursed the soil of Ireland her lovely
virgin daughters could walk abroad unprotected, though
adorned with gems and gold, and they knew it :
Sir Knight ! I feel not the least alarm,
No son of Erin will ofFer me harm —
For though they love women and golden store,
Sir Kaight ! they love honor and vii'tue more.
T^o parent, brother or husband need worry, and Ireland had
no liendish Pall Mall Gazette disclosures. With the advent
to her shores of the bestial English landlord the "shillalah"
was in some sort consecrated to woman's service, when
On the one side stood virtue and Erin,
On the other the Saxon and guilt.
Ireland's sons stood by Ireland's daughters and the result was
an oft-told tale. Indeed " it's a way they have in Ould Ire-
land." I thank the Vicar for his magnanimous avoAval of the
service it has ronilered in her cause whose honor is so dear to
every truly Christian heart and to every Catholic maiden, wife
and mother. I will take it with me as I follow him, and
though he is, by all the rules of deceut, manly debate, a contro-
versial outlaw, I ^vill use it sparingly — to a degree.
Parag. 3. — Here he tries to set up a breastv/ork and writes
five sections. 'Twere better for him had he taken his chances
without it. I appeal to your readers that from Mrst to last I
did not, and did not undertake to, discuss on pi'inciple the why
and the %oherefore of CathoUc devotion to the Inunaculate
]\rother of God ever blessed. The logical conditions of the
controversy, it seemed to me, did not permit it. That, how-
ever, I offered to do on the public platform, but my opponents,
discreetly as it now appears, refused to meet me. I referred,
by way of explanation, not of defence, to the Incarnation as
the formal, eflicient and linal cause of that devotion. I intended
A Rejoindek. 81
thereby to furnish Protestants j?enerally witli a j'ww sto (a
whereon to stand) from which they might l)e able to catch a
glimpse of the heights of the Catholic philosophy of this mat-
ter. For however our love and devotion may delight to paint
the glories of the mother we never allow them to approach
near the incommunicable glory of the Son. But we delight to
meditate on the nearness of the glorified flesh of Jesus to that
Mary, Its original source. A man must be a Pagan who is
not moved by such a mystery.
The Catholic intellect and heart, nevertheless, for its last
resting-place, even here, ever goes back to that Adorable Heart
whence all graces come ; wliich made Mary what she is, " the
Chief of Saints" — the great masterpiece of that only Redemp-
tion, which is in Christ our Lord. These were my thoughts
when referring to the Incarnation in my " Pesiune," M}' op-
ponent here complains that I gave him and the Bishop '* ele-
mentary instruction on the doctrine of the Incarnation, as if
we did not realize (probably far better tlian himself) that this
is the foundation mystery of our faith." Well, us to the
Bishop's knowledge I have no data l)y which to pronounce,
nnlocss^ follovring Iris Vicar's style of reasoning, I should con-
clude, from two blunders and seriously damaging misstate-
ments, to bis general unreliability.
"^he Vicar himself, however, has been more cominunimtive.
Hl oves "to contribute some solid information" on every
question, at ail times, and to everybody. It is a way every
ritualistic pseudo-" priest " has. He is ready to instruct the
Pope, tlie Catholic church ancient and modern, and Ii'. iwn
Anglican Protestant Bishop, though should the latter lai! to
agree with him, he snaps his finger in his face and — <joes to
gaol, ! " Hast thou seen a man wise in his own conceit ? There
shall be more hope of a fool than of liim." Proverbs xxvi. 12.
The Vicar has put himself on record. " Wwds are th/n//s,"
he has told us. I acce]>t bis principle, and from it will prove
that he still needs " elementary instruction " on the Incarna-
tion. I quote from the synopsis of his sermon as follows:
"The Holy Virgin Mother of God " is "dear, as the hallowed
vessel from whose substance God the Holy OJtost took the
82 Ipsk, Ipsa, Ip.sum.
sacred humanity of our Lord Jesus^ He is not copying now
from "St. Liguori," "Tlie Raccolta," Pusey, Littledale or
" Janus "; be is giving ns a little theology on bis own account.
And what puzzle-beadedness and bewilderment! Wbat can
tbis Oxford theologian of immense pretence and equal inca-
pacity mean? I thought it was God the Son who became In-
carnate by the Holy Ghost — " took earth from the earth ....
received liesh from the Hesh of Mary " (St. Aug.), assumed and
raised buumn nature and united it to bis Divbie Person by
hypostatic union — " by taking of the manhood into God," as
the Athanasian Creed has it. I never heard before that God
the Father or God the Holy Ghost " took " flesh and assumed
either Mary's humanity or Christ's sacred humanity. " Words
are things" the Vicar should remember from the Arian Con-
troversy, But perhaps he is beyond me here, as be has been
reading the Roman Catholic Fathers for "«?'» loeeks^^ with
" copious and exhaustive indices " — that is, he has read them
Ilebraici.lly beginning where others usually end. " Six weeks' "
instruction, however, would not qualify a Catholic child for
the sacr.iment of Confirmation and I ought not to be too exact-
ing, seeing that the Anglican church and her theology is
"gangrened" wath heresy on that "foundation mystery of our
faith " — the Incarnation.
Let me prove this serious proposition. I quote from the
Union Revieio, an Anglican publication of the very highest
authority among Ritualists themselves ,
"A great deal of the shrinking felt by Anglicans from
giving our Lady due honor, arises from the lingering effects of
heretical teaching, or unconsciously heretical belief, on the
mystery of the Incarnation. Kestorianism prevails to a very
great extent among English churchmen, and its withering
effects are very dijjicxdt to shahe off, even by those who have
long become orthodox in their theoretical creed It is
also true, and deserves consideration, that there has hee7i hither-
to no innrked te?idency to heresy on the subject of the Incar-
nation among Horn v Catholics, lohile, where the dignity of
the Blessed Virgin has heen underrated, heresies have
speedily crept in It is sadly true that many persons
A Kejoindek. 83
in the English chnroh place onr Blessed Lord exactly where
the Catholic church places a saint. They see nothing wrong
in asking Him to pray for them, and do (in words which
Canon Oakeley hesitates in ap})lying to English churchmen,
hut tvhich he mi<jht hc.ve truly used) seem to imagine that we
suppose our Lord to mediate or intercede with tlie Eternal
Father in the same sense in which we believe the Blessed
Virgin to mediate or intercede with Ilim. They .'ipeak to our
Blessed Lord as if he loas a human heing with a h^l7nan per-
sonality, and in consequence their attitude of mind towards
Ilim and towards His Blessed Mother would be so precisely
the same that no wonder they shrink from the comparison."
([)p. 400-401). So much for an Anglican on Anglicanism.
It is a confession on the doctrinal corruption prevalent within
his connnunion more honorable to the writcir's clear-headedness
and straight-forwardness than a Ritualist is in the habit of
making.
I now introduce a witness of a different kind, but of world-
wide authority — Cardinal Newman. Even the Yicar con-
descends to patronize him. "Few Protestants," says the cardi-
nal, " have any real perception of the doctrine of God and
man in one person. They speak in a dreamy, shadowy way
of Christ's divinity ; but when their meaning is sifted, you will
tind them very slow to commit themselves to any statement
sufficient to show that it is Catholic Then, when they
comment on the Gospels, they will speak of Christ, not sim]ily
and consistently as God, but as a being made up of God
and man, partly one and partly the other, or between
both, or as a man inhaltited by a special divine presence.
Sometimes they even go on to deny that He was the Son of
God in Heaven, saying that He became the Son when He was
conceived of the Holy Ghost ; and they are shocked, and think
it a mark both of revenaice and good sense to be shocked,
when the Man is spoken of simply and plainly as God. They
cannot bear to have it said, except as a figure or mode of speak-
ing, that God had a human body, or that God suffered
Such, I believe, is the character of the Protestant notions
among us on the divinity of Christ, whether among members
8i Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
of ilie Anglican communion, or dissenters from it, excepting
a section of the former." In view of these authorities and the
Vicar's exliibition of his own theology, I would like an oppor-
tunity to examine him publicly on the how of the union of God
the AVord with humanity. The Union Review and Cardinal
Newman might get strong support, liah ! The insolent and
shameless effrontery of such a nondescript theological nonentity
as this Vicar ])resumiiig to sit in judgment on the doctrine and
practice of the Catholic Church in regard to the gracious and
Immaculate Mother of Jesus Christ, is simply disgusting! In
the sight of God nmch may be forgiven him, but it will not be
for any lessons of genuine love of the " Woman, above all
women glorified," which he learned from Anglicanism ; but in
the siiiht oi man he ouy-ht to show more ij;ratitude to a Church
on the scraps and crumbs of whose table the religious school to
which he belongs depends for any reason it has for being
at all.
To clear himself from my "unscrupulous" charges he gives
a long quotation from his sermon. This offers me a good deal
of satisfaction. lie preached it, I believe, as the newspapers
announced, after I had nearly finished my " Resume."
Though this looks very much like an attempt to create evi-
dence for his case / do not object. To force from an enemy
60 much truth as it contains is no small cause for joy. Such
words of respect for the Mother of God were never before
heard in a Protestant church in this city ; but they have no
"sanction in the church from which he holds the license
whereby he utters them. What a cruel irony! And yet in
the most untilial fashion he gives that church a sharp blow in
the face. In his very first letter in this matter he said that
" the Church of England preserved her balance well under the
circumstances, and observed four feasts "of the Blessed Virgin.
I pointed out her mode of observance, and asked him to tell
the public why he suppressed the ffth feast in his church cal-
endar — that of the "conception of Mary." He gave us no
stricture in reply. The truth is I riddled his statement so
Itadlv that he swallowed it, and in shame and humiliation
straightaway confesses judgment by saying that it is "the sad
A Rejoinder. 85
and sorrowful lot of the English cliurch .... to have to
wear the a])pearance of those who fail to yield the Blessed
Virgin her proper honor. Her preachers are unable, through
no fault of their own, to eulogize the Blessed Mother of God
as it is meet they should, without being compelled to hedge
their expressions with so many ccnUiotis about false doctrhie
and ^practice in regard to her, that many a one shrinks, &c."
Surely here are concessions enough to utterly destroy and anni-
hilate any logical defence of Anglicanism, and yet the same
preacher makes accusations against the Catholic Church, which
render his concessions simply monstrous. But the consoling
logic is charming ! Some persons sin by excess : therefore I
am justified in sinning by defect ! This is the miserable sub-
terfuge, this the doctrine put forth in the name of a Church,
which clamors for recognition as a " branch " (save the mark !)
of the Church of God — '* the pillar and the ground of truth."
Ahslt Uasphemia ! Of course the Vicar means to say, "Look
at me, however! I am a Catholic," but no "Romanist." "No
pent-up Utica contracts my powers" — of self-exaltation.
Church of England : Church of " my priestly vows " — scat !
What care I for your " cautions about false doctrine." For
"six weeks " I have been scavenging the works of the "Early
Church Fathers concerning the Blessed Virgin," and I must
admit, I stand " aghast " at the sublime titles given to " the
holy Theotokos." I find "that very excellent things have
been spoken of her by divines of all ages," but their panegyrics
in her praise have so confused, perverted and knocked out of
joint "the faith once for all delivered to the saints" that I felt
it to be my duty and by virtue of my " priestly vow " to
restore the balance. This I have done to my own entire satis-
faction, in my beautiful and eloquent sermon, and as a " Pope "
in my own right. I may now well believe, indeed I know,
that out of j)ure gratitude she will feel obliged "to love,
lienor and pray specially for " — me. And I protest that the
fact that one of those "poor Irish" was after me with the
" shillalah " had no part in my inspiration." Ha ! Ha ! ! Ha ! ! !
Now when did the " English Church " become so "cautious
about false doctrine ? " Is it since she had as bishops Hoadly,
86 Ipsk, Ipsa, Ipscm.
Whately, and Hampden (one Cambridge and two Oxford men),
the first of whom was an Arian, the second a Sabellian, while the
notorious Hampden (who died in 1808) was a sort of conglom-
erated compound of both, or something more infamous. The
Tractarian party brought a charge of Arianism against him in
]833; a University Statute of censure for heterodoxy in his
Bainpton lectures stood against him in 1836, but it made no
difference; he was made Kegius Professor of Divinity in Ox-
ford ! His luck was in. That orthodox saint (!) Lord John
Russell, in 1847 nominated him to the See of Hereford. A
violent opposition was made. Many of the Bishops (to their
honor) remonstrated publicly. The Queen, however, as
spiritual head of the church, gives Anglican Bishops their
jurisdiction, and Lord John's pet was "consecrated" — to
what ?
Is it since she sent Bishop Colenso a missionary to the
African heathen, to become, as he did, in spite of all attempts
to disci])line him, an apostle of infidelity to the country that
sent him ? Is it since the publication by Anglican Ministers
of that blasphemous book ^'Jissays and Reviews'''' f The
writers were prosecuted, but the Privy Council, the ultimate
court of appeal in Anglican theology, and in which Bradlaugh,
Chamberlain, Morley or Labouchere may sit to-morrow, sus-
tained them. They retained their benefices, endowments,
social position and hopes of preferment in the very church
whose vital doctrines they scorned and scoffed at. Hear Dr.
Pusey on the matter : " The Essays and lievieios let loose a
tide of scepticism upon the young and uninstructed
Their writers threw doubts on everything. They took for
f^janted that the ancient faith had been overthrown, and the
Essays were mostly a long trumpet-note of victories won (they
assumed) without any cost to them over the faith, in Ger-
many." Lectures on Daniel^ p. 1. Is it since Mr. Gorham,
an Angl'ican Minister^ denied Baptismal Regeneration and
was sustained in his denial by the Privy Council, which over-
ruled Gorham's Bishop and Archbishop % This doctrine is now
an open question in a Church claiming to be Christian and
Catholic ! Thirteen distinguished men, including Pusey and
A IIejoinder, 87
Manning, signed a public protest. It was of no avail, and six
of them became CatlioHcs. Pusey never could digest the
heresy, and died with it still on his stomach.
It is now sufficiently clear that no form of opinion comes
amiss in the Anglican Church. It is simply the lurking-place
of the most omnigenous latitudinarianism. Unitarians, Sabel-
lians, Nestorians, Pelagians, Utilitarians, Methodists, Calvinists,
Swedenborgians, Irvingites, Free-thinkens — all these it can
tolerate in its very bosom ; from Hampden, Colenso and the
writers of the Essays and lieviews down to the meretricious
ritualistic pseudo-" priest " who swaggers about with the
"Koman coHar'' round his neck, that historic badge of the
Roman Catholic Priesthood — all these are acconmiodated, but
Rome it cannot abide. These are facts long patent to the
world and cannot be disproved. I know its history well. The
Anglican Church has beconie one great theological graveyard.
Over its corpse hovers the vulture of Ritualism in stolen
Roman Catholic plumes, and while it strives " to create a soul
under the ribs of death," it screams out its eternal requiem.
I regret that the twaddie indulged in by my opponent in his
first letter has obliged me to be, perhaps, prolix in clearing
decks. But, as I have been thus enabled to scatter to the wind
and to dispose of a kind of rubbish spread all over his " Stric-
tures," I may be pardoned. I will make the engagement as
short as possible. In my next I will plunge in mcdias res.
LETTER III.
IPSE, IPSA, IPSUM — A REJOINDER
To the Editor of the Glohe :
Sir, — In opening his second letter the Yicar declares his in-
tention to exai line whether I have properly performed the
penance he had set me for my " impertinence" in impugning
Bishop Ivingdon's scholarship and honesty. I am beginning
to fear that with all the assistance he gets from our books, his
88 Ipse, Irs a, Ipsum.
progress in the study of moral theology is slow. He evidently
does not yet know that the sacrament of the church which he
parodies consists of three parts — Contrition^ Confession and
Satisfaction. This a " priest " ouglit to know, no matter how
" busy " he may be. However, I am not just now a lit subject
for his ministrations, kindly meant though they be. I have no
contrition, I make no confession, and as for satisfaction, well,
he has about as much authority to impose a penance as a Sal-
vation Army lassie. But let that pass. Such newly found
zeal and regard for the Episcopal office in a ritualistic '"father"
(ye gods !) is very amusing. The late Anglican Bishop Eraser
of Manchester said " there are no wox'ds strong enough to ex-
press the contempt and righteous indignation that should be
felt at the folly of ' ritualistic sacerdotal pretensions.' " He,
of course, was no favorite with pseudo-" priests," and phantas-
mal and fantastic imitators of Catholic rites and ceremonies.
The reason is well known and one of the causes famous. Lord
Penzance, at the instigation of the Bishop, sent a '• sacerdotal
pretender," Rev. Mr. Green, to gaol, so that from being ^pirate
of Catholic doctrines and practices he became to his fellow rit-
ualists a martyr of Penzance. But the Rev. Harry Cowgill,
Mr. Green's curate, during his long imprisonment, carried on
boldly, and despite the Bishop, at all events for a while, all the
inhibited ceremonies — altar lights, the mixed chalice and
Eucharistic Vestments. "Priestly vows" and the oath of
Canonical obedience sat as lightly on the Rev. Harry as they
do on every ritualistic " Pope " when anyone in authority calls
into question his pontifical prerogatives, or the infallibility of
his views either on ecclesiastical law or the doctrine of the
primitive church. Bishop Eraser described Ritualism as pos-
sessed of " the anarchical temper which will recognize no law
but its own will, which would wreck a great church for the
sake of preserving an Ornaments' Rubric " ; but he hated it,
not wisely but too well, and he died of a broken heart about
two years ago. Again : the present Anglican Bishop Ryle of
Liverpool recently preached on Baptism and the Holy Euchar-
ist — sacraments which hold in the (Christian faith a place wliicli
is undeniably essential, fundamental and elementary. He said
A Rejoinder. 89
that they are " of little, or, at all events, of secondary import-
ance," he declared roundly that " the Church of England has
no altar, no sacritice, no sacerdotal priests," and that the Kitu-
alists had reduced the church to a state of " lawless anarchy."
The Ritualistic Church News (from which I ;ote) "baited"
the unfortunate Bishop in the most merciless fashion. It
' called him the '' Dunce of the Episcopate," described his teach-
ing as '' silly," " exploded over and over again," " nonsense,"
"railing," "shocking," and told him that the mininmm to be
expected of him was " to hold his tongue " so that he might
not "utter the pernicious nonsense he generally talks when he
speaks at all." Again, at a church congress. Bishop Ryle said :
" So long as the Church of England is infected with semi-
Romanism on the extreme right and semi-unbelief on the ex-
treme left, and cannot cure or expel the disease, so long, we
may depend on it, our Nonconformist brethren will never em-
bark in our ship." The Bishop here pays a Avell-deserved
compliment to the intelligence of his dissenting Protestant
brethren who are not ashamed of their name. He, too. was
obliged to " gaol " some of his " sacerdotal pretenders." Your
readers will remember that at the time of the celebration of the
Queen's jubilee in this city the Rev, Bell Cox was languishing
in a Liverpool prison for aping the Catholic Church, " playing
priest " and practising a " bastard Popery." The Vicar pub-
licly declared this a sufficient reason why the jubilee should be
observed by a fast — he thought it such an outrage that a con-
' frere should be hindered in his career of " lawless anarchy " by
his own Bishop and he an Episcopal " Dunce." His pretended
defence of Bishop Kingdon exhibits humor hardly inferior in
kind, and supplies some excellent touches of light comedy.
The notion that he is anxioue about his office, scholarship or
honesty, is a " goak " of that peculiar flavor which would have
delighted the lamented Artemus. The Bishop must feel like
saying to him :
Perhaps it was well to dissemble your love,
But why did you kick me down stairs ?
He launches into his work with a sprightly escapade of ten
9iJ ll'SE, IrsA, Ip8UM.
paragraphs whicli he calls an " Outline history of the Vulgate."
It is empty, futile and trumpery, and of no importance as
respect the points at issue ; it is sim{)ly a jet from one of the
spiracles of the cuttle-Hsh settling himself into position for
work. I will say but a word on it. lie gives it, he says, that
your readers may perceive the shallowness and worthlessness of
my remarks about St. Augustine and Jerome, and the hollow-
ness of the psiaan I sang over Clement's edition of the Latin
Bible. I submit that he has not invalidated one single state-
ment made by me in this connection : and I sang no piean. It
is not in my line. The singing was done by a chorus of the
ablest ProteKant critics who have written in praise of the Vul-
gate — Grotius, Cappell, Mills, Walton, Porter, Westcott, Dean
Stanley, Dr. Roberts, and I might extend the list, but I adhere
to the names already cited by inc. The innnense value and
authority of the Vulgate, and its matchless importance as
interpretative of the Greek text has been stated by all the
great Protestant writers. This, however, is not the question
now before the court.
He next opens another spiracle of tlie fish on the " working
metliod of textual criticism," and finally in his fourteenth par-
agraph approaches the questions in debate. He begins at once
to flounder, but the hook is too firmly fixed in his gills. Noth-
ing can save him — he must drown, and his Episcopal j97Y;!'c^</d
must go under with him. Oxford sciolism, though it wear a
mitre or masquerade in "Roman collar," is not more respect-
able than any other sham, but is only the more pernicious in
that its presumption in the present case is fully commensurate
with its ignorance.
I have already iisserted the Vicar's " mental kinship " with
his great precursor, the ciittle-fish. In his effort to escape
scrutiny he has bettered the trick of his prototype by injecting
into this discussion all sorts of '■'■ foreign matter and unsavory
impuritiesP His " strictures " for the most part are about as
relevant to the real point as a disquisition on the Eocene, Mio-
cene and Pleistocene periods in geology would be. Let me
"discharge the color from these cuttle-fish secretions" by a
short re-statement of the issue.
A Rkjoindkk. 91
Bishop Kiiitijdon put forward two propositions : First, tliat
the (piestion was between Ipse nid Ipsa, and that the letter
"rt"in the hitter was a misprint for the letter "e" in the
former ; and second, that the Catholic Church based on this
misprint the doctrine of the Immaculate Concej)ti()n of the ever
blessed Mother of God. I challen<fed both propositions and
charged tlie Bishop witli suppressing, either througli ignorance
or malice, the fact that the reading of this place in Gen. iii. 15,
was a very ordinary " various reading," and that this was —
IrsE, Ipsa and Ipsum. Had he thus correctly put the matter,
of course his little nursery-tale could not have been told, and
liis lecture would have lacked an embellisliment. This story,
let me say, was to the lecture as the very " snap of the whip."
This " misprint," so called, was the only one of all those men-
tioned by the Bishop that, to his mind, entailed important and
deplorable consequences.
To explain the origin of this three-fold reading, I said : " It
is admitted on all hands that the Hebrew text, the fountain
head, such as we have it now, is hopelessly ambiguous." In
support of this I contented myself with the authority of two
such illustrious scholars as Cardinals Bellarmine and Baronius.
Does the Vicar offer one tittle of evidence to contradict their
testimony ? No ! His tactics are those of the bull in a china-
shop. This model of charity and urbanity simply calls them
"princes of deceit," " forgers "and perjured " liars," and consigns
them both to the " lake that burnetii with fire and brimstone."
This harsh sentence he pronounces in the very teeth of a deci-
sion, binding on his own church, given by the Privy Council in
the Essay s-and- Reviews case in 1804, by which Hell and Eternal
Punishment were dismissed and with costs from the creed of the
Church of England. Tait (the late Archbishop of Canterbury),
then Bishop of London, concurred in the judgment, while Long-
ley and Thompson, respectiv^ely Archbishops of Canterbury and
York, protested against it, but Gui bono f The Anglican Church
is a branch of the national police. Her ministers, high and low,
are simply members of the force and must take their doctrine
from the courts created by an Act of Parliament just as does
the policeman who locks up an " ordinary drunk."
92 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsdm.
"Without going into details I will shortly vindicate the posi-
tion I took on tlie authority of the scandalously maligned Bel-
lannine and Baronius, viz. : that the Hebrew text in Gen. iii.
15, as elsewhere, is ambiguous.
My first witness will be the Vicar's uewly-made acquaint-
ance, De Rttssi. I ask your readers to keep clearly in mind
that I am not now discussing the relative merits of the three
readings from a critical or doctrinal standpoint. I quote De
Rossi here to show In's opinion on the state of the Hebrew
text : " Few, douhtful and altogether unreliable are the Hebrew
MSS. in support of in (that is Ipsa I add) in which yod \% per-
haps a little vaw^ If the Hebrew text were free from ambi-
guity why use the words '''' douhtfuV and '"'■ j)erhapa'''' about
its readings? Rev. Dr. Roberts, member of the New Testa-
ment Company of Revisors, ?ays : " The truth is, that the real
character of the existing Hebrew text, as respects absolute
trustworthiness, is as yet undecided, and must remain so until
certain great objects are accom])lished. There must be a more
scientific handling of all the materials of criticism. IVfaimscripts
and versions of the Hebrew text must be more thoroughly
investigated The science of Old Testament textual
criticism is still in a comparatively imperfect condition, so that
little can with certainty be said as to the value or antiquity of
extant manuscripts." Dr. Kennicott in his work, " The pres-
ent printed Hebrew text considered," Diss. 2, p. 222, gives
fully the history of the text, and says it cannot be denied that
it is now very defective through the fault of copiers, as the
ablest Rabbins acknowledge. Appletonh Cyclopedia, to which
my opponent referred, says : '' The Hebrew text of the Old
Testament as we have it has already passed through many re-
visions. Of the primitive text we have little positive informa-
tion." The Septuagint itself differs from the present Hebrew
text in more than two thousand places. Of course I do not say
nor admit that these defects and ambiguities in the Hebrew
text at all affect the authority of Holy Scripture as a guide to
truth ; such a contention has never been sustained by the most
ultra^rationalist of modern times. They affect the forms
rather than the substance of words, and such is the case here.
A Rejoinder. 93
Had tlie Bishop known the true state of the reading, or know-
ing it put it truly, he could not have told his little story.
Hence, too, a little more knowledge and reflection might have
led the Vicar to ahstain from his attack on two such famous
scholars as Bellarmine and Baronius, which I here declare to be
a vile slander and calumny. Besides, it was uncanny in him
to suggest to sarcastic readers the old picture of a " live asjs
braying over a dead lion."
He says I have not "fulfilled my penance" — that is, I have
not proved my assertion "that J/hsurn as a various reading dis-
putes the place of Ipse and Ipsa therein." Before "slaying
the dead over again," as the Greeks say, which I promise
your readers very eflfectually to do, I will examine his " Strict-
ures" on my proof. I will confine myself strictly for the
present to the case I made in my "Resume." I claim that I
am entitled to a verdict against the Bishop and his Vicar
though I should not utter another word. I can afford, how-
ever, to be indulgent, remembering that while " it is excellent
to have a giant's power, it is tyrannous to use it as a giant."
Such is the strength my case gives me.
I quoted so great a Biblical commentator as Cornelius d
L:vpide to this effect: "The reading here — Gen. iii. 15 — is
three-fold. The first is that of the Hebrew Codices, which
have Ipsum .... and so reads St. Leo and Lipomanus."
Now I have no Biblical MSS. in either Hebrew, Greek or
Latin in my Library ; neither, I take it, has the Bishop nor his
Vicar. The question is one of authority, and must be settled
by the best that exists. A Lapide is among the very highest.
Here is my opponent's reply to him : " But Cornelius is a
very weak witness for a start, feeble enough to condemn the
whole case with costs off hand. He is made to say that the
word Ipsum is found in Hebrew Codices ! ! What next I
Cannot my opponent even weigh the evidence of his own wit-
nesses? The Latin word Ipsum cannot possibly be in a He-
brew Codex." What shabby, disgraceful quibbling! Orie it
ignorance of the simplest principle of ideology ? I give an
absolutely verbal translation. What a Lapide says is that the
pronoun in the Hebrew is of the neuter gender, and to express
94 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
tliis mental concept in the Latin language, in which he was writ-
ing and thinking, too, no doubt, he uses as his oral ten/i a cor-
responding Latin pronoun in the neuter gender — Ipsum, a
simple pronoun. This is tlie principle and process of ali trans-
lation from a foreign tongue into our own. First ascend from
words to ideas, and then descend from ideas to words. Corne-
lius says that St. Leo uses the same gender, though from the
grannnatical exigency of his language he \x?m& a relative ^vowown
in the Wiiwiev-quod : " Denuncians serpenti futurum semen mu-
lieris quod noxii capitis elationem sua virtute conterercc." Aly
opponent exclaims — " Well, qiiod is not Ipsum." No, neither is
it Ipse nor Ipsa; it is a fourth reading, if you will — an addi-
tional burden on the Bishop's back. He adds : " What Cor-
nelius probably meant was that the Hebrew is against Ipsa"
" Probably meant ! " What he says is that the Hebrew is
Ipsxim (which I will refer to later on) and not Ipse or 7/«a.
Did I choose to act the dolt I could " hoist him with his own
petard." When giving his wonderful quotations from the
Fathers he forgot the silly objection he nu\de to a Lapide's
words and exactly follows his example. " Irenaeus," he says,
" in two passages has Ipse in both."' Suppose that I should ask
in his own words — "cannot my opponent even weigh the evi-
dence of his own witnesses ? Irenoeus wrote in Greek ; the
Latin word Ipse cannot be the one used by him." I would
dimply merit the ridicule your readers have poured on him, and
yet this Oxford Aristarchus has the insolence to say that, " no-
toriously in the case of Cornelius a Lapide, he had to stand at
my elbow as ray tutor 1 " Commend me to a ritualistic " Pope "
for modesty 1 Again, Cornelius says Lipomanus adopts Ipsum.
The Vicar evidently knows nothing about his writings. He
says he comes " a little too late to give evidence in his own
writings of ancient MS. readings." Well, this is just the evi-
dence Lipomanus does give. I do not want to enlarge on my
" Resum^ " here, but just a word. He was one of the most
distinguished bishops at the Council of Trent, and made a
" Catena " on Genesis, Exodus and the Psalms from the Latin
and Greek authors. With characteristic recklessness the Vicar
says : " If be (Lipomanus) does follow Leo he adopts quod, and
A Kejoindek. 95
quod is not Tpsum.''^ Alas, no ; but lie gives Latin versions of
the Bible with that terrible Tpsuni for which the Vicar has
been thirsting. No, quod is not Ipsum! "O, the pity of it,
lago ! O, lago \ the pity of it."
LETTER IV.
IPSE, IPSA, IPSUM — A REJOINDER.
To the Editor of the Globe:
Sir, — I resume the examination of my examiner. He is very
evidently ashamed of his exhibition on a. Lapide, and at once
casts about for a soft spot to break his fall. It has, however,
quickened his perception somewhat — he begins to hedge. He
begs your readers to bear in mind that he is oidy seeing that I
perform my task, for "the result," he says, "makes no differ-
ence to the main (piestion to be discussed later on." To keep up
his courage meanwhile he whistles out the innocent remark :
"The case is pretty weak so far." Whose case? I ask yr-^r
readers: his or mine?
My next witness was Chemnitz, a famous Protestant theo-
logian, much respected by Catholic writers for his ability and
hojiesty. He criticised the use of Ipsa in the Vulgate Bible
sanctioned by the Council of Trent, at which time he wrote,
and said that Jpfium was the correct reading according to
ancient writers. This was said by him in the face of learned
Europe. Bellarmine replied to Chemnitz. Of course, I apolo-
gize to the Vicar for using the great Cardinal's name. It is
true the Encyc. Britanniea., never very partial to anything
Catholic, says that his " life was a model of Christian asceti-
cism "; but what matters that since a ritualistic Inquisitor puts
him in "the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone"?
At all events he was one of the best Hebrew scholars of his
time. Did he call on Chemnitz to produce his MSS. ? No :
he admitted, in part, like an honest man, the truth his oppo-
nent had asserted. He knew it as well as Chemnitz. Here is
06 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
liis answer — T translate : " I reply that the Vulgate is various
liere; for some codices have Ipne, some Fpsa^ and besides it is
not contrary to the Vulgsite edition should one be convinced
that he ougiit to read Ipse or Jpsum.'''' He then jiroceeds to
discuss the authority for Jpm^ which I omit here.
IIow does the Vicar meet the tcstimonv of Ciiemnitz backed
up by Bellannine, his opi>onent i " This witness," he says, " is
probably only witnessing against the corrupt reading of the
conunon text approved by the Council of Trent." '' Probably
only witnessing!" Whereas Chemnitz sai/s ahsolutehj that
Ipsum is the correct reading, not Ipsa. What imbecility I
My next authority was a learned writer in the Duhlin Re-
view., who declared that " the weight of authority is in favor
of the masculine or neuter, Ipse or Ipsum.'''' This he supports
by four great names in Biblical and theological learning — two
Jesuits and two Dominicans, who in their works exhaust the
whole subject. What says the Vicar in reply ? " Witnesses
altogether insufficient and the above remarks probably apply
here." " Proliably apply ! " He loves the "sweet reasonable-
ness of prohah'dities. What an admirable aide-de-cainp he
would make in a weather bureau ! His authority would be
supreme on — wind.
My next witness was another writer in the Dublin lieview,
whom I believe to be Cardinal Wiseman, one of the greatest
linguistic scholars of modern times. Contrasting Ipsa with
Ipsum he declares his belief that the latter was " the true read-
ing." The Vicar's only reply here is that I forgot " the critical
apparatus." Quite satisfactory and characteristic.
Again I cite the Latin Bible of Tremellius and Junius which
has Hoc instead of Ipsum. In a voice slightly move falsetto
than his wont, the Vicar asks : " Is Hoc Ipsum f " Well, no ;
it is only another reading — one straw more.
The Bishop's little diagram is being badly disfigured. He
says he knows of an edition of t/ie same work which has
Ipsum. If I chose to claim it this is a piece of evidence for
me, but as " I fear the Greeks even gift-bearing " I will have
none of him. At the same time I do not believe he knoios
anything of the kind. Junius and Tremellius issued editions
A Kejoindek. 9*
separately, eacli on his own account. Either of these may liavo.
Ij)su7n, but I do not liesitate to say that tlie Vicar does not
know of any copy of the jomt edition which has Ipsum. So
much for simple truth. What he means to l)e the effective
part of his answer is, that "Tremellius from being a Jew was
converted to Romanism, but disyusted xoith Popery^ joined
the Reformers" — those "utterly unredeemed villains," as the
Vicar's " Pope," Littledale, calls them. And yet every one
knows, O Vicar, that these very " villains " are " the rock
whence you are hewn and the hole of the pit whence you are
dug out" — that Ritualism is but a " bastard slip .... of
that multiplied brood." "Who can make clean the oflFspring
of that great iniquity ? Who but Thou alone, O Gud." — Job xi v.
Logical minds will say that " Popery," pure and simple, the
"poor Irish" and the "shillalah," with its sjwrtive memories
and tendencies, are respectable beside such a gilded abortion.
Again : I referred to the notes to the Douay Bible which
give Ipsa or Ipsum. Tiie "stricture" in reply gives strong
evidence that the Vicar is frenzied. He says: "Concerning
the Douay Version, which by its misleading note has brought
so much trouble upon my opponent. It supplies not a refer-
ence to any authorities." This would disgrace anyone less jire-
tentious than a ritualist " Pope." Have your readers seen the
" trouble " it has brought upon me ? I have not met it. What
further " authorities " were required for the fact of the cur-
rency oi the reading? But to cheer my opponent's lieart I
will give the "authorities " omitted from the Douay. I hope
they will dry liis tears.
In closing this part of my case I said I could give more
evidence in support of Ipsum, but " enough is as good as a
feast." After his brilliant " strictures " he still has the cour-
age to say : " Well, some folks are easily satisiied .... tlie
whole thing is really nothing but a wind-bag." Your readers
are now aware who these "folks" are, and from what direc-
tion the " wind " blows.
Now I advanced all these authorities for the sole purpose of
showing how common the reading Ipswiii was in all tl-e litera-
ture of this question, yet my opponent says " I fail to establish
'JiJ Ipsk, Ipsa, Ipsum.
lysumP The truth of this I leave to yonr readers, lint tlio
fact is that hitherto I have been \)Wi phiyhuj \s\i\\ the unfortu-
nate Vicar, I will now exhibit him as ijuilty of the most in-
iquitous j)erforrnance, the most shameless, despicable and
knavish piece of dishonesty to the public it has ever been my
lot to meet. More than once he insinuated that I was sujv
pressing something, expressed his anxiety about me in that
regard, and prated ab(jut verification, &c. It is an old siiying
that when you see a nuiu thus su8j)iciou8 about liis neighbor —
look out for him. The Vicar well exemplifies its truth.
Your readers will rememl)er his ignorant blundering
aboiit De llossi, his own witness, and the whine of injured in-
nocence in the apology he made for his " mistake." We then
learned for the tirst time that his quotation was second-hand
from Dr. Pusey, and that he " foolishly jumped to his conclu-
sion." He has done a good deal of that sort oi jxunpiiig in his
" strictures," but as your readers will now see there was more
knavery than J^oolinhness in the jumper. I will now give him
the " comfort " he says I promised him from De llossi. In
what I shall have to say about Hebrew my authorities will be
the very best : Gesenius' Hebrew Lexicon and Grammar, and
Ewald's Hebrew Grammar.
Here let me clear the way for a full understanding of the
position by the ordinary reader. In Hebrew the words corre-
sponding to 7/we, lj)sa. /p.su?n, are Jfu, Hi, Ilii, to speak
popularly since, I cannot reproduce here the Hebrew charac-
ters. It will be noticed that in Hebrew the masculine and
neuter genders are the same, so that an authority for one is at
tlie same time an authority for the other.' This fact explains
' It is not necessary to remind learned readers tlmt there is no
neuter j^ender in Hebrew. Here I desii-od to hp plain, witliout
a shadow of obscurity to the ordinary reader. I have tlierefore used
the Hebrew woi-ds — Hii, Hi, Hu—as physical signs rather than
strict {jframmatical forms, and have paralleled them with Jjise, Ipsa,
Ipsuni, to which they are respectively equivalent, for the puiiwses of
my tirg'uinent to the non-classical reader. See the last Letter of this
Rejoinder, and my comments, on this topic, in the Rebutter to the
"Third Letter."
A Hkjoindkk. 99
and proves tlie truth of ti Lapiile's statement, ai.d of the many
commentators who a<ifree with him, that the Hebrew ('ooicos
have Iptiu/n, and also exphiiiis the many other commentators
wlio sji}' that tlie Hebrew has /j)se. lln — maseuhne and
neuter — supports them both. Let your readers bear tliis in
mind in order fully to grasp the Vicar's fraud. See, too, ti
Lajiide's comment in fith parag. of the Vicar's .'kl stricture,
Xow for De Kossi. In \\\»jirst paragraph, quoted by Pusey,
he discusses " /// — //wa " and says " it is not y^/^ sitjicientlij
certain . , , , it is rather to Ix; accounted among the errors in
thai (the Vulgate) version ; and the most learned expositors
and critics aniotuj Catholics so in fact account it," So we did
not have to wait for an Anglican Bishop and a " sacerdotal
pretender" to instruct us on the " tremendous importance '' of
Ijysa. How much of the Bible would they have anyway but
for the Catholic Church ? Pshaw ! Notwithstanding the
doctrinal chaos that exists in their own church, and tlie chasms
that separate themselves, they are simply theological Robin
Hoods as regards her.
De Rossi's second paragraph is the imj>ortant one just now.
He begins it: " But for the masculine//?* there stand — 1) the
consent of almost all Hebrew MSS,, &c." I give this with
absolute verbal correctness, simply translating the Hebrew
characters into English — Ha. He follows this up by citations
of Texts, Versions, MSS, editions and readings from Fathers
and writers Greek, Latin and Syriac, but he g;ives the worth'
of none. He then immediately concludes: "Which original
authorities and witnesses, being most exceedingly grave and
insurmountable, evidently demonstrate that the tnie reading of
the sacred text is //w — fj>sc, Ipsum ; and conntless Catholic
authors both hefore and since the Council of Trent follow this
reading as the truc>' ki\(\'j)r<:f('r''t to lllic'femlnine," (The
italics are mine,) Theicnpcir T*u.'tey adds; "Tie'(De Rossi)
enumerates thirty-riVe-iiud si't*-' that- M^e i.iorJe of moet of them
and the places whvJie 'thaj' Occur are giv^-sn 'by (^oster and
Natalis Alexander." It is clear, then, that when De Rossi in
the opening of his paragraph said that " for the masculine IIu
there stand, &c,," he meant for the masculine or neuter ^^ ITu
100 IrsE, Ipsa, Ipsi'm.
— J^m4\ Ii»8CM," "there stand, &c.," tliou<jh he does not j)oint
out which of his cited authorities are for the one, wliich for
the other. Happily I can supplement and explain De Rossi
here, for I have on my table Natalia Alexander, from which
De Rossi quoted and to which he refers his rejiders. '*"niem-
ber my penant'e was " to estohlish IjMum.''''
Now turn we to the Vicar's letter of Dec. 15th. For distor-
tion, suggestion of falsehood, and 6U])pressi(jn of truth " none
but itself can be its parallel," as Martimis Scriblerus would say.
The Vicar writes: "lie (De Kossi) enumerates thirty-live
' most exceedingly grave and insurmountable original authori-
ties and witnesses' in support of the masculine '//i? shall bruise
the serpent's head.' '' Is not this something monstrous ^ Of
course De Rossi does nothing of the kind. The Vicar sup-
presses Ipstufi in liis quotation from De Rossi and interjjolates
the words, "//e shall bruise the serpent's liead." Ilis cooking
and garhHiuj of Pusey's quotation from De Rossi is so out-
rageously dishonest that I des])air of making it plain. I do
not wonder he feared " the limited area of the Institute " where
the books could be passed around. As I have already said De
Rossi's si'cond paragraph, as given by Pusey, is divided into
twelve heads. Under the first nine heads De Rossi gives the
names of texts, versions, MSS. and editions ; under the tenth
and eleventh heads he gives the names, with a reference to the
works only, of eleven writers ; and the twelfth head is a state-
ment of liis own opinion. He inunediately concludes " that
the true reading of the sacred text is JIu, Ipse^ Ipsijm." These
are his very words. And he adds that ''^countless CatJwlic
authors prefer this reading to the feminine." These words
close this part of the quotation from De Rossi in Pusey's book.
Pusey then adds that De Rossi enumerates thirty -five of these
Catliolic authtJTS who )Mefer llu,- Tj'^\'-lifsi^^U but Pusey gives
none of them. In' -thd fa'?e of {liis \\hai "stupor of soul, what
paralysis of conscience swept over Ih*; VicaV which led him to
say : " He (De Rossi) ei?uni era tee thirty -five 'most exceedingly
grave and insurmountable original authorities and witnesses'
in support of the masculine ^Ile shall bruise the serpent's
head,' " when he knows De Rossi says that the " witnesses and
A Hejoinder. 101
anthoritiefi" cited uiuler tlie eleven heads support the mascu-
line or iifute)' — "'Jill, Ipiic, Ii'siM," and the thirty-tive Catho-
lie autht)rH are afterwards enumerated in addition according to
Pusey. The Vicar wrote this in Deceud)er last *' for the hene-
fit (»f IJihlical student^" and yet in his second letter, n(»w under
examination, he says in the lOth paragraph : " In all the com-
mentaries I have read on Gen. iii. 15, I have never found
IpxHiii mentioned as a various reading, and that therefore I
tlouht if one exists." Good Heaven! He copies from De
Rossi rujht up to the very word Jpnum, wilfully and wickedly
suppresses it, avows he never heard of it, and then with hypo-
critical tears in his eyes complains that I "brand him with dis-
honesty and knavery to the public ! " Some lovers of retribu-
tive justice among your readers, thinking of the sad fate of
Bellarmine and JJaronius, may ask — who " have their part in
the lake that burnetii with fire and brimstone?" The Vicar
liimself is fully entitled to any "comfort" which reflection on
this (juestion suggests.
I might here leave him to his sobering thoughts and pass on,
but it might appear cruel. I now believe that he is so under
the dominion of some physiological and psychological fatality
in regard to religious truth and the Catholic Church, that he is
not free to use his reason in the ordinary way. Charity plaiidy
bids me pause in i)re8ence of his misfortune. JJut as lie loves
to "give information'' I think I discharge the obligations of
ch.arity by enabling him " to stock up," though it now seeme
like calling in an army to arrest a house-breaker to offer further
evidence of Ips^iin. His mental condition can alone justify it.
From Natalis Alexiinder and other works in my hand, I
think I can double De Rossi's " thirty-five," but I will give
but a few. The Hebrew text according to Alexander is :
Jpsum conteret tihi caput, though as I exjilained above some
read Ipse, ITii being Hebrew for both. Unfortunately we
have now but fragments of the splendid Hexaj^la (six-fold)
Bible of Origen. The standard edition of these fragments is
that of Montfaucon in two volumes. In volume one, p. 18, I
find the Hebrew rendered : Ipsum conteret tihi caput. The
Syriac Version has : Ipsum concidahit caput tuum, and the
102 Ipse, Ipsa, Iphim.
two celebrated Syriac writers, St, f]j)liracin and Moses T3ar-
Ceplia, mentioned hy De Uosni, use Ijixnin in tlieir writini^s
(jiioted hy De Rossi; the Samaritan Pkntatkicu lias : lj»<niit
contei'i't tibi cajxit ; the Latin liihie of the celebrated Sanctes
Pa^ninus has IpHUiit ; the Koyal IVdyjflot r>li)le of Arias
!^^ontanuH has Ijpmkih; Yatable's Bible has limrnii; the
famous I»ible of Isidore Clarius has JpHtnn ; the Lyons IJible
])rinte(l in ir)50 lias T/w? in the text, but Ipsiuii in the marj^in ;
the Hible of Ik'Hajo, Hishop of Paris, has the same; Lipoiiia-
mis in his "Catena" gives a list of Latin copies which have
Ipmtm.^ .... Perhaps I ought to stop here. I wonder if I have
t'ldfilli'd i»ij junaiicc ! Put I must mention Kather Perrone's
"Dogmatic Thesis on the Inmiaculate Concei)tion," and lastly
Cardinal I^itrizi's " gem " of a book entitled : " De I In, hoc est,
de Lnmaculata ^fariae origine a Deo praedicta Uomae, 1S53."
It examines critically all the Texts, Editions, Versions anil MSS.
which have either Jpnc, Ipmi or Ipniuii. It was written the
year before the definition of the Inunaculate C(mce])tion, and
the Cardinal ado|)ts Ipne or IpHum as the true reading.
So much in confutation, and for the instruction, of the Ox-
ford twain. I feel but too keenly the humiliation of annihi-
lating such antag(»nists, but I am saddened by the reflection
that Oxford University, founded and reared under the auspices
of the Catholic church, should in these days be responsible for
swell exponents of Biblical scholarship.
I have now provetl beyond cavil the various reading for
which I contended — JpHc\ Ipsa, fpsum against the Bishop's
diagram Ipse-Ip^a^ and the Vicar's puny attempt to bolster it
up. I have not noticed other readings in Gen. iii. 15, such as
///<% //rtf'f, ///6', for which I can give authorities. In my next
I will consider the effect of this proof.
POSTSCRIPT.
There are four famous Polyglot Bibles — the Complutensian,
the Antwerp, the Parisian, and the London. I will here give
my readers the results of my examination of them on our text.
' I have omitted here some Protestant te.xt writers because I could
not consult the originals.
A Kkjoixdek. 108
The CoMri.rTKXsiAN i^ivcs the llt'ltrew with a Latin transla-
tion, Ipxn, wliirh is alleged to he that of St. fleronie; the
C'iialdaic I'araj)lira«e with a Latin translation, Ij^me ; the Se[>-
tua;;int (Jreek with a Latin translation, /yw.
The Antwkki' gives the Hehrew with a Latin tratislation,
Ipnn : the (ireek with a Latin translation, /jjne ,' the Chaldaic
Para[)hrase with a Latin translation, /jt-st'.
The Takisian gives the Hebrew with a Latin translation.
Ipsa; the Greek with a Latin translation, Tjhst' i the Chaldiiic
Paraphrase with a Latin translation. Ipse j the 8vriac with a
Latin translation, Ipsuii) ; the Arahie with a Latin translation,
Hatc ; the Samaritan with a Latin translation, Ipstuit.
The London is snperior to all the others. It was edited by
tlie Rev. Dr. Jiryan Walton, afterwards Anglican Bishop of
Chester, and printed in l(i53-l<!57, in six large folio volumes.
It gives the Hebrew with an interlinear Latin translation,
Ipsuni I the Vulgate, Ijysa ; the Greek with a Latin transla-
tion of Flaniinins Nobilius, /j>fie ; the Syriac with a Latin
translation, Ipftinn ; the Targum of Onkelos with a Latin
translation, Ipse j the Samaritan Pentateuch with a Latin
translation, Ijysvm j the Samaritan Version with a Latin trans-
lation, Ipsum ; the Arabic with a Latin translation, Ifacr.
These magnificent works I cimsulted in the Lennox Library,
!New York, and in Gore Hall, Harvard University. Walton's
Polyglot is also in the Parliamentary Library at Ottawa.
I have also examined the following minor Polyglots: Ber-
tram's (1586), Welder's (1590), Ilutter's (1599), and IBagster's
(London).
Bektkam (with notes by Vatable) has the Hebrew, Greek,
and two Latin translations. Ipse, fystan.
WoLDER has tho Greek, the Latin — Ipse, Ip-nnn, and
Luther's German.
HcTTER has the Hebrew, Chaldaic, Greek, Latin — Ipsa,
German, Italian,
Baoster lias the Hebrew, Greek, Vulgate — Ipsa, German,
Spanish, Italian, English,
I have also examined the following celebrated Bibles :
The Zurich (1543), which has Ipstim/ the joint edition of
104 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
Vatable and Pagnini, which has Ipsuin ; the heautiful edi-
tion of Father Houbioant, the Fnjnch Oratorian, which has
the Hebrew with a Latin translation — Illud ; and the Hebrew
Bible of Arias Montanus (1584) with Latin interlinear trans-
lation — Ipsum, to which I have already referred in the above
Letter ; the " Biblia lUustrata " of Galovius (1719), which has
Ipse, Ijps'unn.
I have, too, examined the works of the following learned
Biblical Commentators :
Sebastian Munster, who gives Illud ; Paul Fagius, who
discusses Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum, and prefers Ipse, Ipsum / Dru-
8IUS, who says that nearly all the Latin MSS. have Ipsa, while
somo have Ipse and others Ipsum; Lucas Brugensis the
famous Catholic Biblical critic of Louvain University, who
has a splendid note on the whole matter. lie expresses liis
preference for Ipsum in these words : " Fortassis autem com-
modius neutro genere transferatur, Ipsum conteret caput
tuum." But as he knew much more about Catholic doctrine
than either Bishop Kingdon or his Vicar, he does not hesitate
to say that it makes no doctrinal difference which of the three
readings is adopted. Speaking of Ipsa he says : " Ncque vero
haec lectio Hebraeo repugnat Potest (autem) haec lectio
. . . . de Christi matre intelligi, ut serpentis capiit cont?'lvlsse
dieatur qui Eum genuit qui contrivit, qui diabolum Sua morte
divicit, et nos ex ejus tyrannide-in libertatem asseruit."
I also refer my readers to the critical edition of the Latin
Old Testament by the learned Tischendorf and Heyse. These
scholars give the three readings — Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum, in their
note on Genesis iii. 15. See "Postscript" to the twenty-
eighth Letter of this Rejoinder, where I again quote from
Walton's Polyglot and Tischendorf, on Ipsa.
Vercei.lone, too, in his peerless work — The Yarious Head-
ings of the Latin Vulgate Bible, Yol. I., p. 13 — gives the edi-
tions (with their dates) of Bibles with Ipsum, and then adds :
" Ignoramus utrum haec lectio (Ipsum) ex codicum fide, quod
affirmare videtur Lippomanas, derivata sit — I do not know
whether this reading {Ipsum) rests upon ^he authority of MSS.,
but Lippomauus seems to say that it doofj."
A Rejoindkr. 106
To my mind Lippomaims absohitely affirms it in these
words : '■'■Ipse conteret caput tuuin ; vel juxta alia excmpla-
ria, Tpsttm conteret caput tuum, scilicet semen nmlieris." See
Lippomanus' Catena on Genesis and Exodus.
Let me add to these authorities that of Calvin. In his
"Commentary on Genesis," now before me, the text com-
» mented by him reads: Ipsum vulnerabit te in capite, et tu
vulnerabis ipsum in calcaneo."
This may suffice to establish the point that the Latin reading
of Genesis iii. 15, is not Ijyse, Ipsa, simply, but Ipse, Ipsa,
Ipsum.
LETTER Y.
IPSE, IPSA, IPSUM — A REJOINDER.
To tlie Editor of the Globe :
■Sir. — In connection with the proof of Ipsum in my last
1' 'I have to add a word anent a. Lapide. In the sixth
ph of his third letter the Vicar says : " Since suggest-
ing an explanation of Cornelius a Lapide's statement that
Ipsum was found in the Hebrew Codices, I have accidentally
met with a corroboration of its accuracy from Cornelius liim-
self. Wordsworth quotes his comnient on Rom. xvi. 20, v)hick
I trust my opponent will mark in his copy with a reference
to Gen. iii. 15: 'Alludit apostolus ad Gen. iii. 15, ut directe
habent Hebraica Hu Hic, id est Ipsum Semen sive proles
mulieris, puta Christus, conteret caput tuum.' Cornelius iis-
serts that the Hebrew is masculine Ilic, and that tliis mascu-
line means Ipsum Saneti, or Christ. This is almost identical
with my explanation." AVill your readers believe it? Here
is another mutilation by suppression and interpolation. The
Vicar cannot be safely tnisted for anything. He appears to be
utterly " gangrened " with dishonesty or incapacity, or l)oth.
He refers to Bishop Christopher "Wordsworth, a contemptible
" no-popery " ranter. Why did he not take the trouble *' to
106 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipbcm.
verify" liim before asking me, with his usual insolence, to
" mark my copy " ?
Evidently he does not know the late Bishop Christopher as
w^ell as 1 do or he would not so " foolishly jump " again. Now
here is that part of a Lapide's comment on Romans xvi. 20,
verbatim: "Alludit(St. Paul) ad Gen. iii. 15 — 7/?,9a (vel, ut
directe habent Ilebraea Ilu, id est Ipsum, semen, sive proles
mulieris, puta Christus) mnteret caput tuumP Compare this
with the Vicar's quotation and you find that Wordsworth or
the Vicar suppresses ^'■Ipsa^' and interpolates ^^Jlic" after
'^IIu" so that it is simply worse than a " pious fraud " to say
that "a Lapide asserts that the Hebrew is masculine IIigP
"Wordsworth died about three years ago — I hope he has escaped
the hard fate of Bellarmine and Baroiiius. There is always a
locus penitentif^ for the living which the Vicar may turn to
account.*
Having, in my " Resumd," given what I considered suffi-
cient evidence to support the various readings — Ipse, Ijjsa,
Ipsum — I said " that, according to Catholic teaching and au-
thority, there is absolutely no difference in meaning between
the three readings When properly understood the sense
is the same to Catholic and Protestant alike." In proof I cited
great Catholic writers living and dead, and I can expand the
list indefinitely, but I desire to compress. In the face of these
authorities my opponent calls my statement a "ludicrous fal-
lacy"; but how does he meet me? By the most flagrant
calumny and vituperation ! I cannot point to a single instance
of fair, manly investigation in the course of his " Strictures."
They are made up, to a great extent, of the ingredients of the
Witches' Cauldron :
Eye of newt, and toe of frog,
Wool of bat, and tongue of dog.
Adder's fork, and blind- worm's sting,
LizanVs leg, and owlet's wing,
For a charm of powerful trouble,
Like a hell-broth, boil and bubble.
' See Postscript to this Letter for a fuller exposi of Wordsworth's
disgraceful ignorance and calumnies.
A Rejoinder. 107
In tlie 15th paragraph of his third letter he says : " It may
coniidently be said that there cannot be found in the whole
history of literature an instance of a misreading which has led
to such grave and .... awful consequences as this apparently
slight change of an e to an a in the sacred text." The " awful
consequences" he has told us is the "undue exaltatitm of the
Holy Virgin." This has provoked many a smile among your
readers, especially since the bad "snowing under" of tlie
Bishop's diagram in my last letter. Lest the Vicar, however,
with unwonted discourtesy, in a moment of gasping despera-
tion, should say that "a man may smile and smile" and yet —
have his part in the burning lake, I will change the venue
from the Western (the Latin) church, where Ipsa has done so
much mischief, and been of such " tremendous importance "
to the " poor Irish " and " Romanists " generally, to the Orien-
tal (the Greek) church. This church, let me say broadly, uses
the Greek masculine — '■''Autos — Ile^'' in Gen. iii. 15, or having
in mind the Syriac writers, — '''Auto — /;!," to conform with the
Greek what I have already said about St. Ephra^m and Moses
Bar-Cepha using the neuter Ipsum as stated by De Rossi. This
church does not use Ipsa nor Ante, and yet it fully realizes the
sublime, ecstatic and inspired projihecy of the Blessed Mary as
expressed in t\\Q Magnificat : "For behold, from henceforth
all generations shall call me blessed. For He that is mlglity
hath done great ♦liings to me and holy is His name."
Willingly, for a while, do I leave tli'^ rough tield of conti-o-
versy for the more genial region of contemplation, and I ask
your readers to go with me. And would that my lips might
be touched with "coals from the Altar" as I utter the words I
write. For, if there be one persoti in the New Creation of
Grace who seems to hush to silence the discord of tongues, by
the unbroken tranquillity of her sweet, patient love, it is the
Madonna. Her life on earth was to nurse and foster Christ ;
and her glory in Heaven is to be enthroned by His side. What
she was on earth, that she is still in the Church of God. She
is the Mother of Jesus All her vast power, — all her divinely-
appointed innuence, — i.io whole omnipotence of her interces-
sion, as God has willed it in the sweet coungels of His love, —
108 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
her solitary grandeur in tlie church, as the one golden link
which unites earth with Heaven, — the dazzling brightness of
lier high throne of Empire — all are hers that she may nurse
and foster Jesus in the hearts of men, as in the special cradle
of His own election. His is the only name under heaven given
to men whereby they must be saved. All that Mary has and
is, she has and is by and through her Son and for His sake.
Cruel indeed are they, thankless and heartless, who would try
to make a breach betv;een the tender mother and her Child.
By so much the more cruel are they than Herod and his sate-
lites, by how much the love of Mary for her Son was and is
more intense, more pure, more sacred, more spiritual, than
that of the forlorn mothers of Judah for their bleeding little
ones. And who of men or angels can measure the distance
which separates these two loves ?
Turn we then, from the Babel of confusion which the cold
and sceptical Protestantism of my opponents has willed to
thrust into the midst of the tenderest love of heaven, to satisfy
the eyes of the soul and the aflfections of the human heart with
the vision of Mary's growth in the Church of God. This is my
present purpose. I wish to set before your readers the picture
of Mary as the Greek Fathers alone have painted her from the
very dawn of Christianity. In the earliest ages of the Primi-
tive Church she occupies a position of unequalled dignity in
the writings of the Fathers, Greek and Latin, and wins for
herself sentiments of the tenderest devotion and titles of
highest pre-eminence. I confine myself now for reasons
already given, to the Greek Fathers.
I ask your readers, then, to accompany me while we search
in the records of the first six centuries for the place which
Mary held in the devotion and doctrine — in the heart and
mind — of the early church. This is the period of the undi-
vided church by which Anglicans and Ritualists at all events
profess to be bound. I do not intend to rely upon one or two
stray passages, obscure and incidental. I leave these to the self-
willed enemies of Mary's empn-e — "to preachers who are com-
pelled to hedge their expressions with so many cautions about
false doctrine and practice in regard to her, that many a one
A Rejoinder. 109
shrinks from a theme which, under other circumstances, he
would rejoice to handle!" God help the poor weaklings!
Nor could I hope to offer to your readers a true idea of anti-
quity by such a process. What they want is a chain of
Fathers living in different parts of the world and in succeed-
ing centuries, the uniformity of whose unconscious utterances
may give them a real Apostolical tradition. The sublime por-
trait, therefore, which I propose to exhibit, is uot the work of
one hand. It is the ilective labor of centuries. I have for
the most part, the Grreek and the Latin of the Greek before
me.
In the first century we cannot, of course, expect much assist-
ance. It was an age of martyrs and evangelists, not of writers,
unless we except the composers of the New Testament. Yet
there exists a document, which is, by many learned critics,
assigned to the Apostolic age. It consists of a letter written
by the priests and deacons of Achaia, in which they narrate the
acts of the martyrdom of St. Andrew the Apostle. Even those
who deny its authenticity (as the Protestant Cave) are com-
pelled, by the evidence of facts, to assign it a place among the
earliest records of the Church. Gallandus, Piazza and Natalis
Alexander leave no doubts about it. In this letter St. Andrew,
speaking of our Lord, says that " He was born of a hlameUss
Virgin."
There is, besides, another document, which is considered by
some to be the work of an Apostle, though the preponderance
of authority is apparently in favor of the contrary opinion. I
may as well, however, introduce it here. It is, at all events, a
most important witness to the Apostolic tradition of which we
are in search, not only because it is the oldest and most famous
of Oriental Liturgies, but also because the forms of expression,
which I am about to quote, "occur in all the Liturgies of the
East. In the Liturgy, then, which is called after tlie name of
St. James the Apostle, I find the following words in four
several parts of the Mass ; *' The most holy, immaculate, most
glorious mother of God, our lady and every-Virgin Mary."
And, again, " All-blameless, and mother of our God, more to
be lionored than the cherubim, and more glorious beyond com-
110 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
parison than tlje seraphini." And, once more, she is thus in-
voked : "O Sanctified Temple!" My authorities here are tlie
ilhistrious Asseniani, a Syrian Marouite family of four famous
Orientalists.
My Greek witnesses for the second century are St. Justin
Martyr (A.D. 12U-165) and Irenjeus (120-200). St. Justin
J represents Palestine, and St. Irenseus Asia Minor and Gaul —
or rather he represents St. John the Evangelist, for he had
been taught hy the Martyr St. Polycarp, who was the intimate
associate of St. John, as also of other Apostles.' St. Justin
says ; " We know that He, before all creatures, proceeded from
the Father by Ilis power and will, .... and by means of the
Virgin became man, that by what way the disobedience arising
from the serpent had its beginning, by that way also it might
have had an undoing. For Eve, being a virgin and undefiled,
conceiving the word that was from the serpent, brought foi-th
disobedience and death; but the Virgin Mary, taking faith and
joy, when the angel told her the good tidings, that the spirit of
the Lord should come upon her and the power of the Highest
overshadow her. and therefore the Holy one that was born of
her was Son of God, answered, ' Be it to me according to Thy
word.'" Dialog. Try ph. 1^*^. St. Ireufeus writes : "With a
fitness, Mary the Virgin is found obedient, saying, ' Behold Thy
handmaid, O Lord: be it to me according to Thy word.'
But Eve was disobedient ; for she obeyed not, while she was
yet a virgin. As she, having indeed Adam for a husband, but
as yet being a virgin .... becoming disobedient, became
the cause of death both to herself and to the whole human
race, so also ALiry, having the predestined man, and being yet
a virgin, being obedient, became both to herself and to the
whole human race the cause of salvation .... and on ac-
count of this the Lord said that tire first should be last and the
last first And so the knot of Eve's disobedience received
its unloosing through the obedience of Mary, for what Eve, a
virgin, bound by incredulity, that Mary, a virgin, unloosed by
faith." Adv. liar. 3, 22, 34.
' See Newman's Letter to Pusey.
A Rejoindkk. Ill
And again : " As Eve by the speech of an angel was seduced,
so as to flee God, f'-ansgressing His word, so also ^lary received
the good tidings by means of the angel's speech, so as to bear
God within her, being obedient to His word. And, though
the one had disobeyed God, yet the other was drawn to obey
God; that of the Viryin Eve the Viiujln Mary mhjht he-
come the advocate. And, as by a virgin the human race had
been bound to death, by a virgin it is saved (or loosed), the
balance being preserved, a virgin's disobedience by a virgin's
obedience." — Ihkl. v. 19. Cardinal Xewman, commenting on
these two writers (with Tertullian), says : " They unanimously
declare that she (Mary) was not a mere instrument in the In-
carnation, such as David or Judah may be considered ; they
declare she co-operated in our salvation not merely by the
descent of the Holy Ghost upon her body, but by specific holy
acts, the effect of the Holy Ghost within her soul .... that
as Eve made room for Adam's fall, so Mary made room for
our Lord's reparation of it ; and thus .... it follows that, as
Eve co-operated in effecting a great evil, Mary co-operated in
effecting a much greater good." Can any logic beat that ? Let
your readers peruse Newman's historic letter to Pusey — the
logical Pusey who described Lii^hop Colenso's teaching as
" Colenso's heathenism," and yet called the Church of England,
in which Colenso lived and died a Bishop, a " branch of the
Catholic Church " ! Of course otlier members of the same
church thought Pusey the bigger " heathen " of the two (as I
will show later on) because of his '' Popery " and "Komanism."
1 turn now to the earlier part of the third century, and begin
with St. Hippolytus, Bishop of Porto, who was a pupil of St.
Clement of Alexandria, and coeval with the great Origen. In
one of the fragments of his writings, which liave been preserved,
he has these words: "And the ark of incorruptible woods was
the Saviour But the Lord was without sin, made as
regards His human nature of incorruptible woods, that is, of
the Virgin and the Holy Ghost, covered over within and with-
out, as it were, with the most pure gold of God the "Word."
This likening of Mary to the incorruptible wood, out of which
Christ, the Ark, was made, is a favorite comparison with the
112 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipscm.
Fathers, as we shall have occasion to see. How happily it sug-
gests the purity of her conception.
St. Gregory Thauinatargus (the wonder-worker), Bishop of
Neo-Cfesarea, another of Origen's pupils, is an illustrious wit-
ness to Catholic tradition about Mary in this century. He was
certainly present at the lirst council of Antioch, convened to
condemn Paal of Samosata, in A.D, 2G4. He died in the fol-
lowing year. This illustrious Saint speaks of Mary as "the
pure and chaste and immaculate and holy Virgin Mary "; again,
as " the immaculate flower of life "; as " the ever verdant Para-
dise of immortality"; as "the perennial fountain "; as "the
ever verdant Vine." Homily on the Annunciation, Migne,
PP. Graeei, Tonie x., p. 1152. He compares her in the same
place to the Virgin soil out of which Adam was formed, when the
earth was not yet subject to the curse. He describes her nearly
in the same words as St. Hippolytus — "the Ark covered over
with gold from within and from without." In a second Homily
on the same subject he introdiices the Archangel Gabriel as
addressing her on the day of the Annunciation in the follow-
ing terms : "All the celestial Powers salute thee, the holy Virgin,
by my mouth. And what is more, He who is Lord of all the
celestial powers has chosen thee, the holy and all-adorned one,
from among all creatures; and by thy holy, and chaste and
pure and immaculate womb, the bright-shining Pearl comes
forth for the salvation of the whole world ; since thou hast
been made the holy one, and more glorious, and more pure,
and more saintly than all the rest of human kind, having a
mind whiter than snow, and thy soul more purified than the
finest gold."
Again he calls her " an Immaculate Virgin "; " incapable of
corruption"; "God's rational Paradise"; "Another Heaven
upon earth "; " The pure Bridal-chamber of the generation of
the Word according to the flesh"; "The Immaculate Virgin
Mother of an orphaned world "; " The Living Temple of God."
It is my duty here to remind your readers that doubt has
been cast upon the authorship of. these homilies. Cardinal
Bellarmine and Dupin doubted about them, but I must also
add that the critics are ten to one against them, including the
A Rejoinder. 113
learned Protestant, Gerard Voss. For us the question is com-
paratively unimportant ; for every thing conspires to assign
them an early date. And, moreover, I am not at present seek-
ing to prove a doctrine by the authority and weight of great
names, but to discover the general mind of the early church
respecting the Mother of God. And, therefore, whether these
homilies were preached by the illustrious Bishop of Neo-Ca-'s-
area, or by St. Chrysostom, or by Macarius is comparatively of
small importance.
My next witness shall be St. Dionysius of Alexandria (A.U.
247), the great champion of the Catholic faith against the
heresy of Paul of Samosata. In a letter which he wrote to this
heresiarch he speaks of our Lady as " Christ's Holy Tabernacle,
not made with hands." He says that "Christ was conceived
in the womb of the Virgin Mary, the Holy Ghost descending
upon her ; and as lie alone knew the order of His conception
and Birth, preserving the Mother incorruptible and blessed
from head to foot." He, too, like St. Gregory, calls her "a
Virginal Paradise." Lahheum, T. 1, pp. 900-907. Moreover,
tliese expressions are not merely the individual testimony of
the Alexa-ndrian Patriarch — they have a sort of synodical au-
thority, for the letter was written by the authority, and as the
expression of the doctrine, of the Antiochene Fathers.
POSTSCKIPT.
In his Strictures on my Rejoinder the Vicar does not dare
to deny my charges against Bishop Wordsworth, whom he had
the misfortune to introduce into this discussion. They are
literally true. On turning to Wordsworth's Greek Testament,
Vol. 2, p. 272, 1 find that this learned bigot has actually been
guilty of the literary forgery which I have pointed out in the
foregoing letter. I will now set forth the whole matter, and
thus give my readers the opportunity to pronounce judgment
on the honesty and knowledge of Catholic doctrine of another
Anglican Bishop.
In his note on Rorrocms xvi. 20, Wordsworth writes :
" Satan now rules at Rome, but the Seed of tJie Woman has
11-i IrsK, Ipsa, Ipscm.
bruised tlie fierpeiit's liead, accord! njj; to the first propliccy in
Holy Scripture ((tcu. iii. 15),
" After tlie recent perversion of tliat ])ropliecy, in tlie Papal
Uecree on the Immaculate Conception (Rome, Dec. 8, 1854),
wherein this act of bruising tlie serpent's head is applied to the
Virgin Mari/, as her special prerogative, it is not irrelevant to
cite the following testimony to the truth, from the j)en of the
learned Komanist Cotnr lentator, Cornelins a La^pide, in his
note here (Rom. xvi. 20) :
(A Lapide's very words from his
commentary now before me) :
*• Alludit (St. Paul) ad Oenes.
iii. 15, IPSA (vel ut directe ha-
bent Hebraea, Hm, id est Ipsum
Semen, sive, proles mulieris, puta
Christus), conteret caput tuum."
(A Lapide's words according to
Wordswortli) :
" ' Alludit apostolus ad Genes.
iii. 15, ut directe habent Hebraica
Hu Hic, id est Ipsum Semen, sive
Proles mulieris, puta Christus,
contei-et caput tuum. ' "
Now, is not this an infamous specimen of literary forgery ?
He suppresses Ipsa from a Lapide's text, and inteqwlates Hie!
Are all Anglican Bishops and Yicars alike ? Forty years ago
two well-known Anglican Ministers who shone among the
brightest lights of Exeter Hall — the Rev. Dr. McGee and Rev.
Dr. Todd — deliberately forged and gave to the world in its
pretended Latin original, a Papal Brief, from Pope Gregory
XVI. to the Bishops of Great Britain and Ireland. And even
though convicted, they would not confess, until the forgery
had accomplished its end. History repeats itself to-day in
Wordsworth and the Vicar. The latter is not only convicted
of literary forgery — and on his own confession — but he scattered
broadcast tlie forged speech of Bishop Strossmayer because he
thought it '■'advantageous to our church," as he wrote to the
New York 67 urch Eclectic. Aud worse than that — for, even
after I had convinced him that the alleged speech was a
forgery, he publicly solicited " ^m7(1-<wi^ " subscriptions to en-
able him to circulate it more widely ! And yet Bishop King-
don continues lo him his license to preach what they agree to
consider — the Gospel ! In the face of these blazing facts is it
not a fair, legitimate inference that the Anglican Church ap-
proves and admires, or certainly does not disapprove and con-
A lllJOIXDKU. 115
<lemn, the crime of forgery, provided only it be " advantageous "
to Anglicanism ?
My readers will nc^te that AV^ordsworth, in the above quota-
tion, is guilty of the same idiotic in)pertinence as Bishop King-
don, in what he says about the "perversion" of Gen. iii. 15,
and the "tremendous importance" of 7/w«. Probably he now
knows better. Let me admonish Bishop Kingdon to improve
liis opportunities before " the night cometh."
R. F. Q.
LETTER YI.
IPSE, IPSA, IPSUM — A REJOINDER.
To the Editor of the Globe :
Sir, — I continue my testimony from the 3d century. St.
Clement of Alexandria, the great Origen's great master, com-
pares Mary to the church : " O mystic marvel ! The universal
Father is one, and one the universal "Word; and the Holy
Ghost is one and the same everywhere. One also is the only
Virgin mother. I love to call her the Church
But she is at once Virgin and Mother — pure as a virgin, loving
as a mother. And calling her children to her she nurses them
with holy milk, viz. : with the "Word become her child." I
follow here " Ante-Nicene Library," vol, IV., p. 142, almost
verhatim. Again. The mighty Origeu (Homily VL on Luke)
speaking of the angel's words — " Hail full of grace," says :
" For Mary alone is this salutation reserved." And (Homily
VIL on Luke) he proves from the words of Elizabeth that our
Saviour could never have slighted, or reproved, as some early
heretics asserted, his blessed mother. He writes : " Elizabeth
filled with the Holy Ghost said : Blessed art thou among
women. If Mary is pronounced blessed by the Holy Ghost
how could the Saviour deny her? " Speaking of Mary's visit
to Elizabeth (Homily IX.) and that at the sound of Mary's
voice Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost, he says : " If
116 IPriE, Il'8A, Il'SUM.
in one hour she (Elizabeth) had gained eo much, we may con-
jecture how nnich John gained in throe months by Mary's
presence with Elizabetli." Finally censuring those who spoke
in an unbecoming manner of the "bless'xl Woman," he says:
" In what respect does such language difter from that of those
wlio pour abuse on others on the public streets, and whose
words are unworthy of any serious attention i "
Again. St. Arclielaus, liishop of Caschar in Mesopotamia,
in his disputation with the Ilcrosiarch ^fanes writes: ".lust as
all the Law and the Prophets are summed up in two words, so
also all our hope is made to depend (hinges) on the birth by the
blessed Mary." Ante-JV. Z/7>., vol. xx., p. 395.
To close this century with another extract from Second
Honn'Iy of St. Gregory. He says: ''With what words of
laudation, then, shall we describe her fMary's) Virgin-dignity ?
AVitli what indications and proclamations of praise shall we
celebrate her staiidess figure? With what spiritual song or
word shall we honor her who is most glorious among the
angels ? She is ]ilanted in the house of God like a fruitful
olive that the Holy Spirit overshadowed ; and hy her means
are we called mns and Iieirs of the kingdom of Christ. She
is the ever-blooming paradise of incorruptibility, wherein is
planted the tree that giveth life, and that furnisheth to all the
fruits of immortality. She is the hoast and glory of Virgins,
and the exaltation of ^fathers. She is the sure support of the
helieving, and the succourer (or example, Katorthoma,) of the
pious. She is the vesture of light, and the domicile of virtue
(or truth). She is the ever-flowing fountain, wherein the water
of life sprang and produced the Lord's incarnate manifestation.
She is the monument of righteousness ; and all who become
LOVERS OF HER, AND SET THEIR AFFECTIONS ON VIRGIN-LIKE IN-
GENUOUSNESS AND PURITY, SHALL ENJOY THE GRACE OF ANGELS."
Ante-Nicene Library, vol. xx., p. 128. This is an excellent
Protestant translation of some of the Catholic Fathers in 24
vols. To any of your readers desirous of reading those beauti-
ful Homilies of St. Gregory on the blessed Virgin I will be
happy to loan my copy.
The most eminent source from which I am able to gather
A Kpioindkr. 117
tlic sense of the Church in the Fourth Century on the (li<;nity
and ])rero^ati(»n of Mary is the Father next on my list. It is
St. Ephrem, the Syrian, who was ordained priest by St. Basil,
one of the four Doctors of the (Jreek Church. His praises are
celebrated b}; St. Gregory, of ^ijHKa, St. (nirys(»st<)ni,St. Basil,
Theodorot, St. Jerome and others, who call him "the blaster
of the World,'' and "the Euphrates of the Church"; and who
tell us that his writinirs were publicly read in many churches
next after the Divine Scriptures. lie died in 379. He is a
witness for the Syrians proper and the neighboring Orientals,
in contrast to the Graeco-Syrians.
St. P^phrem, then, thus speaks of our Lady in a Ilomily,
which is dedicated to her praises. He calls her " the new mys-
tical Heaven," "the Vine fruitful in sweet odors," "Fountain
issuing forth from the House of God." "VVe have, from the
Syrian and Greek Codices and on the authority of Voss and
the Assemani, certain prayers to Mary, which he composed.
His fourth prayer is, from beginning to end, so illustrious an
example of the devotion of the Eastern Church to her at
this early time that I wish I could give it entire, but I must
abridge :
" My Lady, most holy Mother of God, full of grace, recejv
taele of tlie divinity of thy only begotten Son, fiery throne far
more glorious than the four-formed " (of Ezechiel) " of the im-
mortal and invisible Father, all-pure, all-immaculate, wholly
. without spot, .... wholly most blessed, all-inviolate, all-
1 venerable, all-honorable, wholly to be blessed and praised, and
honored and desired, Virgin in soul, and body and mind,
throne of the King who sitteth above the Cherubim, Heavenly
Gate through which we hasten from earth to Heaven, Bride of
God by whom we are reconciled, unexpected miracle, ....
Manifestation of the bidden mystery of God, Invincible de-
fence. Powerful aid. Living fountain, Exhaustless ocean of
divine and unutterable graces and gifts, Height more sublime
than that of the heavenly powers. Common glory of nature,
Exuberance of all things noble. Queen of all after the Trinity,
the other Paraclete after the Paraclete, and after the Mediator
the Mediatrix of the whole world. Chariot of the intellectual
118 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
Sun, — tlmt true liglit wliicli lightenetli every man coming into
the world, the Immaculate Vesture of Him who clothes Ilhn-
self with liglit as with a garment, Bridge of the whole world
that leadeMi us to the highest heaven, higher and far more
glorious heyond all comparison than Cherubim and Seraphim,
lirightness of the Angels, Safety of men, JVfother and hand-
maid of that Star which knows no setting, Brightness of the
true and mystical day. Abyss of the unsearchal)lc goodness of
God, mostiirm foundation of the true faith. Place most easily
containing Ilim who knows no ])lace, .... fulness of the
graces of the Trinity, holding the second place after the Trin-
ity, Security of those who stand, Kestoration of those who fall,
Arouser of the lukewarm, treasure of undctiled life. Cloud
dropping down celestial dew on the earth, Ladder by which
heavenly angels descend to us. Haven to the tempest-tost, Joy
of the afflicted, Patroness of the injured, Help of the deserted,
Strength of the weak, Succor of those who are weighed down,
Staff of the blind, Saving Guide of the wanderers, Sure Help
in troubles, holy ark by whom we have been saved from the
deluge of ini(juity, unconsumed l^ush which Moses saw who
looked OT) God, Golden Censor in which the word, setting light
to the flesh, filled the world with sweet odors, and the devia-
tions of disobedience were utterly consumed. Tablet on which
God hits written, Candelabrum of seven lights whose splendor
surpasses the rays of the sun. Holy Tabernacle which the spir-
itual Bescleel set up, lloyal Chariot, vessel filled with Manna,
enclosed Garden, sealed Fountain whose most pure streams
water tlie whole world, Hod of Aaron that buds by the power
of God, Fleece of Gideon wet with dew. Book written by the
hand of God, by which the handwriting of Adam has been torn
lip, Mountain of God, Holy mountain, in which it hath pleaded
God to dwell, Masterpiece of the tretnendous economy of
Grace, lovely dwelling place of the divine al)asement. Recon-
ciliation of the world, .... Model of Virginity, precious
vision of prophets, most manifest fulfilment of all prophecy,
ceaseless voice of Apostles, invisible confidence of those who
conquer, .... my lady, my joy, my deepl^m advocacy ivith
God ! Behold my faith, and my heaven-inspired desire, and
A KlCJOINDKR. 119
as one having compassion and able to lielp me ; and since thou
art tlie Mother of llim wlio alone is good and merciful, receive
my soul and deign to place it, hy thy mediathm and defence,
at the right hand of thy oidy begotten Son, and in the repose
of His elect and saints. I have no other help and defence save
thee. In thee I ho])e I shall obtain my wish. In thee I glory.
Do not by reason of my many sins turn thy face away from
me, thy unworthy servant. For thou hast the will and the
power, since thou hast generated one of the Trinity. Thou
hast the means of persuading and bending. Thou hast those
hands, with which in an unspeakable way thou didst carry
Ilim, those breasts with which thou gavest Iliiu milk. Call to
mind the swaddling clothes, and the rest of His bringing up
from infancv. Join to thine what are His own — the Cross, the
Blood, the Wounds, by which we are saved. Do not remove
far from me, I beseech thee, thy protection, but aid and pro-
tect, and ever be at hand. For He is thy debt(jr Who said —
lienor thy father and thy mother ; and how much the rather
will He, who willed to be reckoned among servants, observe
the law of gratitude and His own decree in thy regard who
served Him in that generation which was redemption. W/ietr-
fore also coriftideriiuj it as Ills own (jloryto yield to thy inter-
cession. He fulfils thy petitions, as thouyh it 'were an ohliya-
tion. Only despise not me unworthy ; nor let the foulness of
my actions stay thy innnense mercy, mother of my God, fondest
above measure of names. For there is no stronger pledge of
victory than thy help. For thou hast wiped away all tears
from the face of the earth. Thou hast filled the creation with
every kind of benefit. Thou hast brought gladness to things
in heaven, salvation to things on earth. Thou hast reconciled
the creature, and appeased the creator. Thou hast lowered
the angels and exalted men. Thou hast mediated by thyself
between things above and things below .... We have
thee as the protectress of our salvation. The congregation of
Christians has thee as its strongest wall of defence. Thou hast
opened the gates of Paradise. Thou hast pre|)ared an ascen-
sion to heaven. Thou hast associated us with thyself and God.
By thee, O Immaculate, and thee only, all glory, honor, sane-
120 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
thy, has been, is, and ever ^\•ill be, from the time of the first
Adam even to the end of the world, to Apostles, Prophets, the
just, and to the humble of heart. And in thee rejoice the
whole creation, tilled with grace. And I confide in thee, for
thy sake, who didst most truly bring forth, according to the
flesh, the true God, to whom is due all glory, honor and
adoration with the unoriginated Father, and His all -holy and
good and life-giving Spirit, now and ever and throughout all
ages — Amen." I have given but half of this wondrous prayer.
Subtract from it all we may be inclined to set down to Lhe
glowing warmth of Oriental devotion and there yet remains
enough, one would think, to startle and astonish those who
have l)een led to imagine that the cidtiis of Mary is a corrup-
tion of comparatively recent times — the result of a. /torrid tnis-
2)rint (/) of "a" for "e" forsooth ! St. Ephrem has literally
ransacked Old and New Testament, in order to find a type of
Mary in every thing which has in any icay heen hrouijld near
to God. The exalted ]ire-eminence which she holds in this
prayer can scarcely find its parallel in our modern books of
Catholic piety. And nothing can be more unreserved and un-
doubting, than the confidence which he expresses from first to
last in the power of her Intercession and Patronage.
I pass on, omitting, for brevity's sake, quotations from the
famous St. Chrysostom, and from St. Epiphanius who speaks
eloquently for Egypt, Palestine and Cyprus, to the fifth cent-
ury. I begin with St. Proclus, Patriarch of Constantinople,
and a disciple of Chrysostom. After his consecration to the
Episcopate of Cyzicum he preached a celebrated sermon in
presence of the heresiareh Nestorius, and in the latter's own
cathedral, on " The Praises of Mary, etc." These are his open-
ing words: "The Holy Virgin Mary, Mother of God, has called
us together in this place ; she, that pure treasure of virginity —
the spiritual paradise of the Second Adam — the chosen place
in which the two natures of Jesus Christ were united ; she, the
festival of saving reconciliation — the bridal-chamber in which
the Word of the Father espoused our human nature ; She, the
living bush which the fire of Divine parturition did not con-
sume ; She of a truth that light cloud, who bore in her body
A IIe.joindek. 121
Him who sitteth above the Cherubim ; She, that most pure
Fleece, watered with celestial dew, with which the Shepherd
has clothed his sheep ; She, handmaid and Mother, Virgin and
Heaven itself ; She, the only Bridge by which God canie down
to men ; She, the awful Loom of the Incarnation, in which the
tunic of that union was woven after an ineffable manner, whose
weaver was the Holy Ghost, and the power overshadowing
from on high ; the wool of which was the old fleece of Adam ,
the warp, the unpolluted Flesh derived from the Virgin ; the
shuttle, the inmieasurable grace of Him who bore it ; the Arti-
ficer the Word of God descending,"
My next witness is St. Cyril, Patriarch of Alexandria, who
was prominently connected, hke St. Proclus, with the Nestor-
iau heresy. The Fathers had just arrived at Ephesus, previous
to the first session of the council, when St. Cyril preached as
follows before them all :
"Hail Mary, Mother of God, venerable Treasure of the whole
world, inextinguishable Lamp, Crown of Virginity, Sceptre of Or-
thodoxy, indestructible Temple, chosen place of Him wlio knows
no place, Virgin and Mother .... Hail thou, who didst contain
in thy holy and virginal womb the uncontainable ; thou, by wliom
the Trinity is glorified, by ivhom the precious Cross is made knoion
and adored in all the ivorld ; by whom heaven is made glad, by
whom angels and archangels rejoice ; by whom devils are put to
flight; by whom the tempter, the evil one, fell from heaven; by
whom the fallen creature is received up into heaven ; by wliom the
whole creation, fettered in the chains of an insane idolatry, has
come to 8 complete knowledge of the truth ; by whom holy baptism
is given to them that believe, by whom the oil of gla(hicss ; by
whom churches liave been founded everywhere ; hy whom all the
nations are brought to penance ! And what shall I say more ? By
whom the only-begotten Son of God shone forth, a light to tliem
that sat in darkness and in the shadow of death ; by whom prophets
prophesied; by whom Apostles preached salvation to the Gentiles;
by whom the dead are raised to life; by whom kings reign thi'ough
the grace of the Holy Trinity. What man is there tvho may emi-
merate the multitudinous graces of Mary ? .... miracle ! The
wonder strikes me dumb with amazement."
The next whom I shall quote is St. Basil of Seleucia, one of
the Fathers present at the Council of Chalcedon — the fourth
122 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
Ecumenical Council, A.D. 451. He addresses Mary in this
wise : " O sacred womb Avhich received God ; in which the
liandwriting of sin was torn to pieces." He exclaims, " what
gifts sufficiently worthy of her can we offer, of whom all earthly
things are unworthy ? " He calls her " The Amaranthine Para-
dise of Chastity ; " — " Med'mtnx heticeen God and Man " —
" Temple truly worthy of God ; " and he bursts out into the
following ardent exclamation — " O all-holy Virgin, of whom he
who says all that is venerable and glorious errs not from the
truth, hut fails in equalling thy merit.'''
St. James, Bishop of Batnae in Mesopotamia, in the district
of Sarug, joins the fifth with the sixth century. He is always
quoted in nearly all the religious books of the Syrians with St.
Ephrem, and is called "the flute of the Spirit " — " the Harp of
the Church of the Faithful." In a sermon on the Blessed
Virgin, he says : " If any stain or defect had been in her soul
(the Lord) would have sought out another mother for Himself,
who would be free from all sin." Bib. Orien. Clem. — Vat.
vol. 1, p. 301. Simon Assemani, Ilomse, 1719.
To pass on to the sixth century. I content myself with two
witnesses. The first shall be St. Sophronius, Patriarch of Jeru-
salem, an illustrious defender of the Catholic faith against the
heresy of the Monothelites. In his synodical letter which he ad-
dressed to Sergius, the heretical Patriarch of Constantinople,
he speaks of " Mary the holy and illustrious, and heavenly-
minded, and free from all stain in body and soul and mind,"
Again in a sermon on the Annunciation, published by Father
Ballerini in his Sylloge, he introduces the Archangel Gabriel as
addressing our lady in this wise :
"Hail, Mother of Supercelestial Joy ! Hail, nurse of sublimest
joy! Hail, metropolis of saving g-ladness! Hail, joint cause
of immortal joy ! Hail, mystical inn of ineffable joy! Hail,
admirable soil of unspeakable joy ! Hail, altogether blessed-
fountain of unfailing joy! Hail, God bearing heir-loom of
eternal joy I Hail, most flourishing plant of vivifying joy !
Hail, unwedded Mother of God! Hail, Virgin inviolate after
parturition ! Hail vision most eminently wonderful of all wonders !
Who can declare thy glory? Who can tell the wonder that thou
A Eejoinder. 123
art? Who shall dare to proclaim thy greatness? Thou hast adorned
human nature.- Thou hast surpassed the oi-ders of angels. Thou
hast thrown into the shade the brightness of Archangels. Thou
hast shown the high seats of the Throne to be beneath thee. Thou
hast put down the height of the Dominations. Thou hast outstripped
tlie noblest of the Principalities. Thou hast weakened the strength
of the Powers. Tliou hast come forth a Virtue more powerful than
the Virtues. Thou hast surpassed with earthly eyes the many-eyed
Cherubim. Thou hast ascended with the divinely agitated wings of
the soul above the six-winged Seraphim. Thou hast, lastly, far sur-
passed every creature, inasnmch as thou shinest with a purity above
every creature, and didst receive within thee the Creator of all
creatures, and didst bear him in thy womb, and didst give him birth,
and hast alone of all creation become Mother of God."
My second witness is St. Anastasius, the Sinaite, who says :
" And who (tell me, I pray) whether of men or devils will dare
to say, that she, who is of the same essence with God, as regards
the flesh, is not after the image and likeness of Him, who was born
of her? For how is she mother of such a Son, if she bear not in
herself whole and unbroken the image of her offspring ? "
Who can be so Winded witli prejudice as not to perceive in
these quotations, borrowed from siiccessive centuries, an Apos-
tohc tradition, which is as far removed from the least heterodox
conception of Mary professed by my opponents and the An-
glican church generally as Heaven is from earth. Voices reach
us from Syria, — from Mesopotamia, — from Plicenicia, — from
Constantinople, — from Jerusalem and Mount Sinai which, one
and all, conspire in ascribing to Mary a solitary pre-eminence
in God's creation of grace. Tj^ies are borrowed everywhere
from the Old Testament of all that is most holy and most
singular in Divine Benediction. In giving expression to
their inward perception of the beauty and hoHness of Mary,
the writers have exhausted the rich sources of tlie Greek
tongue ; and if we would desire to put into words our own
thoughts we can only repeat the language that was long ago
familiar to them. The Catholic Church in the East and in
the West simply took up the note of Mary's holy song:
" Behold from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed "
124 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
— and went forth resounding it tliroughout the four corners
of the globe.'
My purpose in this letter and in my last was that your read-
ers should see what the Saints and Doctors in the Primitive
Greeli Church thought of our blessed Lady — how they spoke
of her ; what was the picture of her they had over before their
eyes — and tliis, remember, in regions where " Ipsa " was un-
known ! I ask your readers to examine this picture well, to
take in its background, to study each finishing stroke of the
pencil. Then put in the foreground Bishop Kingdon and his
Vicar holding up their little diagram — *■'' Ipse-Ipsa " while they
weej) over the *' awful consequences " of the " misprint."
What a spectacle to men and angels !
LETTER FROM THE YICAK.
ipse, ipsa MR, QUIOLEt's KEJOINDER — A CAUTION.
To the Editor of the Globe :
Sir, — I have no desire to intrude out of my turn, but as Mr.
Quigley has invited a confiding public to borrow what he calls
an " Excellent Protestant translation " of the so-called Homilies
of S. Gregory Thaumaturgus, I am in duty bound to give them
a caution.
Let any one who may avail himself of Mr. Quigley's offer
turn, as he directs, to p. 128 of vol. xx. in Clarke's Ante-Nlcejie
Lihrary^ then let him refer to the Table of Contents and the
Introd-ctory notice and he will find that the translator has
taken special care to separate between the "Acknowledged"
and the " Dubious or Spurious " writings of the Saint, and that
tiie latter, wherewith the Church has for centuries been de-
ceived, are very copious. He will next observe that Mr. Quig-
ley's quotation is taken from this latter part without even a
hint as to its character.
A reference to Smith and Wace's Dictionarrj of Christian
' See Fatlier Harper's Peace through the Truth, Vol. 1, p. 401.
A Rejoinder. 125
Biography^ p. 737, shows tliat these Homilies belong not to the
merely Dubious but to the Undoubtedly Spurious writings
attributed to Gregory.
I abstain at present from further remark, although most of
Mr. Quigley's citations are equally misleading.
Yours truly,
John M. Davenport,
Priest of the Mission Church.
April 23, 1888.
See reply to above letter in the " P. S." to my next letter.
R. F. Q.
LETTER YII.
IPSE, IPSA, 1P8UM — A REJOINDER.
To the Editor of the Globe :
Sir, — Though it seems a debasing of the mind further to
refute the Vicar's ravings, I have not yet done with him. I
propose now to exhibit him in a light so detestably lurid that
the sins he so falsely charged against the Catholic Church pale
into veniality — even were they true. There is no reason, as
things go, why I should not make as nmch of Anglican mis-
deeds as the Vicar has tried to make of ours ; only " bad luck
to us," says Cardinal Newinan, " we have never kept a record
of Protestant scandals." The Catholic mind does not take to
that sort of argument, and, because it does not forget that non-
observance of the Decalogue does not abrogate it. The ritual-
istic mind, on the contrary, as we see it displayed in the Vicar,
would deny the most rigid mathematical deduction if seen to
involve any concession to hated Rome. In this connection,
however, I will content myself with letting an Anglican author-
ity introduce to your readers the Vicar in his new character.
The Anglican historian "Whittaker, a Rector of the Established
Church, in his vindication of Mary, Queen of Scots, writes :
126 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
'■''Fortjery — / hlusJi for the honor of Protestants while I write
it — seems to have been peculiar to the IteformedP Vol. 3, p.
2. Let us see how the Vicar ilhistrates, if he does not emulate,
the httle weakness of his pious theological ancestors.
Your readers will remember his tactics over my quotation
from Prudentius, a writer of the Fourth Century, who uses
Ipsa as I have fully set out in my " Resume." lie is not able
to offer a tittle of evidence against it from any quarter ; there-
fore, he invents an objection, lie begins by exclaiming : " O
the fraud, the villainy, the trickery of the Roman church ! "
Because " of her forgeries, we cannot trust a quotation slie
gives from ancient authors till we have thoroughly sifted the
evidence in their favor.*^ So he pronounces my quotation
" spurious," but hastens to reassure us by saying, " I shall make
a point of enquiring of my friends in England what critics
think of the question." What! Is the "Oxford twain "re-
duced to tliis ? Must " learned friends " come to the rescue on
a matter so simple ! Where is the Vicar's " critical apparatus " ?
Cannot his pet authorities — Littledale, Pusey, Janus or some
of his oft-quoted dictionaries and cyclopaedias — help him out?
Alas ! for the honor of his " dear Alma Mater ! " Believe
me, your readers will not hear from his " friends in England "
or elsewhere a word in support of his cowardly statement before
the " Greek Calends." It is simply the old trick of giving an
inconvenient question the " three months hoist." Meanwhile
let me assist the Vicar in liis dilemma — he may send the infor-
mation to his " friends."
The best editions of Prudentius' works are those of Weit-
zius, Heinsius, Cellarius, Elzevir and Chamillard. Every one
of these has the Hymn which this pseudo-" priest " has the
effrontery to declare " spurious." He thus proves himself ad-
mirably qiialified for the role he has recently played. I mean
to say that with his own hand he has put into circulation and
scattered hroadcast one of the vilest, most sca/ndalous and most
palpable forgeries ever penned. This he had published in an
American magazine, now on my table, as the " speech " of a
distinguished living Catholic Bishop at the Vatican Council. I
ask the careful attention of your readers to what follows.
A RWOINDKR. 127
Among tlie Bishops at the Vatican Council who opposed
the definition of Papal Infallibility on the ground of its Inoj)-
porHincness waa the illustrious Bishop Strossuiayer of Bosnia,
Austria. During the Council certain notorious and infamous
letters from Rome were published in the Au(jsbur(j Gazette^ a
German newspaper. On the authority of Bishop Von Ketteler,
Bishop Hefele (Germans), and Cardinal Manning, who were
members of the Council, these teem with " perversions," " false-
hoods " and the " most abject mendacity." They have been
translated into English and published by a Protestant book-
seller in a volume entitled — " Quirinus : Letters from Rome
on the Council." It is recommended by Littledale in his
" Plain Reasons " among " Books on the Roman Controversy "
— birds of a feather flock together ! Of course the Vicar has
a copy of "Quirinus." It professes to give snatches from
speeches which it attributes to Strossmayer, but with these I
am not concerned. I am to deal with a Tract entitled " The
Gospel in the Vatican," and called " the celebrated speech of
Bishop Strossmayer in the Vatican Council," 80,000 copies and
more of which were printed in English. This so-called
"speech" is not mentioned at all in "Quirinus." It is, as
your readers will directly see, a ridiculous, monstrous, and
apparent forgery. Yet in November, 1884, the Vicar sent
this Tracts with a letter ^or publication in the New York
Church Eclectic (Ritualistic-z^'A) Magazine ! We shall see how
this professing stickler for literary honesty " sifted the evi-
dence " of its genuineness before committing such an abomin-
able crime, and circulating such a fiendish calumny on a
Catholic Bishop who happened to be far away in Austria. I
wonder how much better he would treat Bishop Kingdon if it
served his turn !
Now here is the Vicar's letter as I copy it from the Church
Eclectic, January, 1885, p. 928 :
128 Ii'SK, Ipsa, Ipbum.
(For the Church Eclectic.)
BISHOP STROSSMAYER'S SPEECH IN THE VATICAN COUNCIL OF 1870.
Nov. 25th, 1884.
To the Editor of the Church Eclectic :
Dear Sir, — Apropos of the Hopkins v. Capel business icould it
not be advantageous to our church to print the enclosed in your
paper ? Except in this form I have never met with the famous
speech in full of Strossmayer at the Vatican. Sevei'al snatches from
his speeches appear, as doubtless you know, in " Quirmus," but not
this one. It is the finest thing I know of on the opposition side.
Strossmayer, so the "letters from Rome " say, was the most elo-
juent Latin orator at the Council, and his speech produced a furor.
True it is that after he returned to his diocese he, in common witli
the rest of the opposition, swallowed the new dogma at the point of
an anathema, and I have been told, though I cannot vouch for the
truth of the statement, that he is notv building a stately cathedral
in reparation for his impertinent opposition to the wishes of Pius
IX. But if so that in no way overthrows his splendid arguments,
but simply illustrates the horrible despotism of the Papacy.
I remain, yours very truly,
John M. Davenport.
The italics in this letter are mine. Comment would spoil its
uniqueness. The "speech" is then printed at length, filling
about eleven pa^es of the magazine. Of course I cannot copy
it here. It is worthy only of a Littledale or a ritualistic Vicar.
It is simply a rechauffe of all the threadbare sophisms, the
hundredth-time refuted calumnies and the stale misrepresenta-
tions which have been the stock-in-trade of Protestantism since
it has existed. The bishop is made to repudiate even St.
Peters Primacy, and to doubt that St. Peter ever was at Rome
— facts admitted even by "Janus" and " Quirinus." But that
your readers may be able to form some judgment of the char-
acter of the ideas imputed to a Catholic bishop in the " speech,"
I give the closing words :
' ' Ah ! if he who reigns above us wishes to punish us, make his
band fall heavy on us, as he did to Pharaoh, he has no need to
permit Garibaldi's soldiers to drive us away from the Eternal City.
He has only to let them make Pius IX. a god, as we have made a
A RWOINDER. 129
goddess of the Blessed Virgin. (Tlie iUilics are the Vicar's— tliey
are not in the orijfinul tract.) Stop, stoj), voncnibk'^ l>rothreii, on the
odious and ridiculous incline on which you have placed youi-selves:
save the church from the shipwreck whicli threatens her, asking
from the Holy Scriptures alone for the rule of faith which ice
ought to believe and prof ess."
The italics are juine.
I remark on this " speech " as follows : Bishop Strossmayer ^
is to-day, and has always been, one of the most illustrious
Bishops in the church, and a few years ago was liighly honored
at Rome in being made by Leo XIII. an "Assistant at the
Pontiiical Throne." I have pronounced the speech a ridiculous
forgery, llow do I prove it? I am aware that it is as easy to
close the eyes of the understanding as to close the eyes of the
body. And yet I do not hesitate to say that, relying alone on
the intrinsic evidence furnished by the "speech" itself, no in-
telligent Protestant, with any knowledge of Catholic principles,
could for a moment be deceived by it. Years ago I submitted
it to several Protestant legal friends, with no extrinsic evidence
beyond the fact of Bishop Strossmayer's present position in
the church, and they did not hesitate to declare their belief
that it was a forgery. Can a?iy one believe that a Catholic
Bishop ever uttered the closing words — that the Holy Scrip-
tures alone are the rule of faith in the Catholic Church ? Why,
even a Ritualist would anathematize such a heresy as that.
Pusey and Littledale, with all their vagaries, certainly would.
But the extrinsic evidence leaves no doubt about the matter.
The English translator of "Quirinus" exposes the fraud, and
remember, the Vicar has this whole book in his possession, as
his above letter admits. Again, the editor of the Church. Ec-
lectic in the " Home Summary " of the magazine, discusses the
Tract sent him by the Vicar, and then adds : " Since writing
the above we have been informed by another correspondent
that the speech was not Strossmayer's, but was made up very
ingeniously by a certain journalist (name not given) out of the
' leakages ' of the council as they were reported about Rome."
But the best evidence of all is Bishop Strossmayer's own denial
and repudiation of the scandalous forgery. Fortunately he was
130 Il'SE, Il'riA, IpSL'M.
alive to answer his calumniators. He published his denial in
the leading; papers of all the capitals of Europe when the
forgery was first put into circulation in 1872. This was copied
into the English papers, and among them was the London
Tablet. I had the Bishop's letter thirteen years mjo, but lost
it with my library in our great fire. Fortunately my loss is
made good by Appleton's Cyclopaedia (1S70), which brands the
calumny, like the mark of Cain, on the forehead of the crim-
inal. The Vicar (pioted from Appleton in his " Strictures."
I quote from Vol. xv., p. 42G : " Strosamayer .... was
represented as having delivered a violent opposition speech in
one of the sessions, the text of which was reproduced by several
journals; but in 1872 he addressed a letter to i\\G Franca is
denying the authenticity of the speech and affirming that he
^ never said oneicord during the entire council ivhich could in
any way diminish the authority of the Holy See, or tend to
jpromote discord iii the Church.^ In 1875 ho jmblished a
])astoral letter on the occasion of his 25th anniversary as a
Bishop, declining a public manifestation in his honor ' while Ins
fellow-countrymen of the Croats across the frontier are shed-
ding their blood for liberty, and Christian charity makes it a
duty to aid the widows and orphans of the fallen.' " In pres-
ence of these facts I do not trust myself to express my abhor-
rence of an impostor so ntterly ''gangrened" with malice.
Sixteen years ago Bishop Strossmayer denied the calumny and
publiidied it to all the world. Three years ago the Vicar un-
earthed the covpse, re-baptized it with ritualistic " bell, book
and candle " accompaniments and introduced it to readers who
never before had heard of it. The editor of the Eclectic re-
minded him that it was not Strossmayer's, the translator of
"Quirinus" exposes the fraud, and "Appleton" clinches the
whole matter with the Bishop's own words. And yet no word
of regret or apology has ever appeared from the Vicar to atone,
if possible, for the heinous offence against the slandered Bishop.
The calumny stands in letters of blood in the pages of the
Church Eclectic and undimmed by a repentant tear. Bellar-
mine, he says, "deemed a flagrant lie a mere pious fraud,
when the credit and position of the papacy were at stake," and
A Rkjoinoek. 131
he consigns him to tlie '* hurning hike." The Vicar himself
tliinks it "advantageous to our church" to circulate a vile
forgery, and expects to be canonised! Surely ingenuous minds
in this comnumity ought at once to he aroused to a suspicion
of tlic true ciiaracter of a man whose venomous tooth spares
nor living nor dead.
P.S. — " Caution." — Such is the caption of the Vicar's latest
olTusioii. It reminded me, at first blush, of a patent medicine
advertisement. And it is worth about as much. It indicates
feverishness, however. I wundei what sort of nerve-food does
he use!
Short as is his letter it is full of impudent falsehoods, the
result of deliberation or stujndity or both. His oft-time imbe-
cility is fast dowering into downright wickedness. Patience
with such a man can only stretch to siuipping pohit. Now
mark carefully. There are three Homilies on the r)lessed
Virgin attributed (let me say so as not to seem to beg the
question) to St. Gregory Thaumaturgus. In the 3d last para-
graph of my second last letter I give short selections from the
three. I then say :
" It is my duty here to i-emind your readers that doubt lias been
cast on the authorship of tliese Homilies. Cardinal Bellarnnne and
Dupin doubted about them, but I must also add that the critics are
ten to one agabist them (Bellarniine and Dupin) uicluding the
learned Protestant, Gerard Voss. For us the question is conqiara-
tively unimportant ; for everything conspires to assign them an early
date, and moreover I am not at present seeking to prove a doctrine
by the weight of great names, but to discover tlie general mind of
the early church respecting the Mother of God. And thcrefoi'c
whether these Homilies were preached by the illustrious Bishop of
Neo-Ca'sarea, or by Saint Chrysostom, or by Macarius of Philadel-
phia, is comparatively of small importance."
These were my words touching all three Homilies, as your
readers plainly see.
The quotation in my last letter closing the Third Century is
taken from the second Homily. And yet the Vicar impu-
dently and falsely says that I gave my quotation " without
even a hint as to its character" — when I had just told all about
132 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
the Homilies fairly and fearlessly. Evidently he 1ms read my
letters hackwards as he read the Fathers during his famous
" six weeks' " incubation. What can an honest debater do with
snch a contemptible opponent ?
But is there any doubt about the authorship of these Homi-
lies ? Practically none. Voss, the learned Protestant philol-
ogist, discovered them in a most ancient MS. of Grotto Fer-
rata, a convent of the Greek Benedictines near Rome ; and,
having collated them himself with other Codices in the Vatican
and Sirlctan Libraries, he published them with the other works
of St. Gregory, Leo Allatius, Theophilus Raynaud, Honoratus
a S. Maria, and Piazza assign them to St. Gregory. These
are the great authorities on the matter. Bellarmine doubted
the aiithorshfj) only, but the Vicar would not " believe him on
his oath," so he is dismissed. Piazza examined and utterly re-
futed Dupin's arguments, so that nothing is left to cause anv
doubt. Montfaucon savs he found 09U' of the homilies some-
times attril)uted to St. Gregory, sometimes to St. Chrysostom,
sometimes to Macarius of Philadelphia. Either of the latter is
as good as St. Gregory as to time and authority. This is their
whole critical history. What diiference does it make how an
English Protestant translator classifies them ? His translation,
as an authority, derives all its value from the originals. It is
worth neither more nor less. What does he know about them
anyway except in so far as ho learns from the critics and
scholars whose names I have given above ? Why, the very
translation in Clarh is from the text of Voss, the great editor
of St. Gregor}', who, as I have said, assigns them all to him.
The Vicar evidently did not know anything about Voss. He
says the church (what church, pray ?) has for centuries been
deceived by these " Dubious and Spurious" writings of St.
Gregory, and that they are very copious ! May God pity him !
I now believe he would deny the genuineness of the Holy Scrip-
tures themselves to get himself out of the miserable scrape his
pitiable vanity led him into — his itch to "give informa-
tion " and to " instruct Biblical students " on subjects of which
he is as ignorant as a sucking dove. The copiousness he
speaks of amounts to T4 pages 1 He is not quite satisfied with
A Rejoinder. 133
"Clark's Ante-Nicene Library," and refers to Smith and
Wace's Dictionary of Christian Biography — learning made
easy. Not bad for Oxford ! Better go to " Comic Black-
stone." But as he has told us " tliere are lawyers and law-
yers," so also, I suppose, are there theologians «wc? theologians ! '
Great Heaven ! I myself fearlessly raised the question of
the authenticity of the Homilies, which I quote, of St. Greg-
ory, I give the names of the greatest critics /(/-o and con, with
a result that leaves no reasonable doubt. But no reason or
authority can pierce the coat of malice worn by this scrap-book
theologian of Oxford. He says I gave no hint even of their
character, he pronounces them " undoubtedly spurious," and
like a veritable coward retires behind a reference to a penny
" Dictionary of Christian Biography." seri stvdiorum !
" Most of (my) citations are eqiially misleading," he says.
Goodl This is indeed a compliment in disguise. Thanks!
Your readers will not forget Prudentius, Bishop Strossmayer,
and St. Gregory Thaumaturgus.
If you will pardon my saying so, Mr. Editor, I think it a
mercy to the Vicar to prohibit his hysterical interjections dur-
ing my Rejoinder. It is hardly fair to tempt him between
the upper and nether mill stone. Besides, he will have lots of
time " before Lent sets in."
R. F. Q.
LETTER YIII.
IPSE, IPSA, IPSUM — A REJOINDER.
To the Editor of the Glohe :
Sir, — In my last letter I put in blazing light the detestable
character, mental and moral, of the Vicar as an anti-Catholic
controversialist. Theretofore I had fully proved not only how
variotis the reading of our text is, but also that it made no dif-
ference to Catholic doctrine on the Blessed Virgin whether we
read in Gen. iii. 15 — Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum, llle, Illi, Ilic, Ilaec,
134 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsdm.
Hoc — all which are to be found in this place. To the
second branch of this case I will devote, for the most part,
what I have to say. I would gladly stop here because of other
pressing duties, but I owe it to truth and to charity to make
the religion I profess known as it really is in this particular,
and to vindicate it, as well as I can, against the gross calum-
nies and misrepresentations of my opponents.
To premise : It is the unhappiness of my position now that
I am compelled to join issue with the Vicar in detail
rather than on principle. He has no religious principle.
He is "neither fish, flesh, fowl, nor yet good red
herring." He is a sort of theological hermaphrodite and
hybrid. For instance : He is licensed by the Bishop of his
diocese ; he lives and oificiates within the limits of the St.
John Anglican Deanery, and yet he has not hitherto dared,
because he would not be allowed, to attend the meetings of the
Deanery. He professes to belong to the Church of England.
He is no Protestant — only a "true catholic," you knowl
And yet he puts himself forward as the spokesman of Angli-
canism. All right. Let me here only remind my " dissent-
ing Protestant " friends that I am to deal with this Proteus
just as liis theological kaleidoscope presents him. They will
the better be able to gauge the depth of his sympathy for
them in their loss of " apostolic " Christianity and " the minis-
try and sacraments of the church."
In his third letter the Vicar says : " It is an imheard of doc-
trine which asserts that Christ put forward His mother and
helped her as our champion to overthrow the devil." Pre-
cisely ! But in the paragraph preceding he uttered a malicious
calumny against the Catholic church by charging this mon-
strous doctrine to her ; whereas if any such exists among per-
sons claiming the Christian name, it cannot probably be found
anywhere outside of such an ecclesiastical bedlam as Anglican-
ism. Pusey says : Even Mohammedanism^ as a (jreat heresy,
has retained more fragments of truth than m,\ich of this so-
called modern Christianity of the Church of Englaiid. The
Catholic doctrine is that Jesus Christ by His Passion, Death,
and glorious Resurrection is our only champion of Redemp-
A Rejoinder. 135
tion from the devil — and all his aiders and abettors, no matter
how loudly they may cry out, " Lord ! Lord ! "
Again he says : " That she has overcome Satan as one of
Chi'isfs redeemed in the power of the Holy Ghost none ever
doubted." What is he prating about then \ Over and over
again I stated this to be the meaning of our reading of the
words, '■'■Ipsa conteret caput tuum — She shall bruise thy head^''
— and I quoted from the Bull Ineffah'dis that the Blessed Vir-
gin crushed the serpent's head " hy that virtue with which she
was endued from on high." All the great Catholic theologians
cited by me were to the same effect. Let me add here the au-
thority of an old French Catholic Bible (1748), with the cele-
brated Calmet's commentary, where the explanation is actually
given in the text : " Je mettrai une inimitie eternelle entre toi
et la femme, entre sa race et la tienne ; elle te brisera la tete
{par le sauveur qui naiti^a d'elle) et tu tacheras de la mordre
par le talon" — Translated: — "I will put an eternal enmity
between thee and the woman, between thy seed and hers ; She
shall bruise thy head {by the Saviour who will be born fronri,
her), &c."
Again he writes : " The modern Roman Church, it seems to
me, in her efforts to exalt the Blessed Virgin has overlooked
the fact so admirably expressed by St. Augustine, that ' though
the Virgin was Christ's mother in the flesh. She was born of
Christ after the spirit ; forasmuch as all who have believed m
Him, among whom is herself also, are rightly called the chil-
dren of the Bridegroom.' " " The modern Roman Church "
forsooth ! Am I really talking to a blind man about colors ?
Why, St. Augustine's words are simply a paraphrase of Mary's
own sublime outburst of inspiration : " My soul doth magnify
the Lord and my spirit hath rejoiced in Go.1, My Saviour."
The saint was a Bishop of this same " Roman Church " and no
Anglo-ritualist I ween. He got his doctrine from her as he
himself so well expresses it : "I should not believe the Gospels
unless the authority of the church moved me thereto." Let me
commend to the Vicar's meditation another passage from the
great " Doctor of Grace " on Mary's dignity as he conceived
it:
136 Ii'SE, Ipsa, Ipsum.
"Except, therefore, the Holy Virgin Mary, about whom, on ac-
count of the honor of the Lord, I will not allow the question to be
entertained when sins are under discussion; for how do we know
what increase of grace was bestowed on her to enable her to over-
come sin in every way, who merited to conceive and bring forth
Him who, as is plain, had no sin ; with the exception, therefore, of
this Virgin, if we could gather together all those male and female
saints, while they were living here below, and could ask them
whether they were without sin — what answer do we think that they
would give ? "
Did St. Augustine think that any other " eminent female
saint " could illustrate, so well as Mary, the triumph of God's
grace in the crushing of the serpent ?
Once more, the Vicar says: "To make the woman the
champion of the race is to distort all Scripture." Yes, and to
wickedly and scandalously and maliciously assert as he does over
and over again that the Catholic Church does so is to run the
risk of incurring the penalties pronounced in Scripture against
" liars," " slanderers " and " calumniators " — a place in " the
burning lake." So much have I felt bound to say in reply to
the " champion " calumny. The Vicar writhes and wallows in
its very shme to the end of his " strictures." Your readers
can apply the answer where required.
He next flies off to Papal infallibility and the False Decretals.
We are not discussing these subjects now. One thing at a time
if it so please him. Those of your readers interested in the
"False Decretals," so called, can satisfy themselves by studying
what distinguished Protestant writers have said about them —
Guizot, Ranke, Vogt and others. The silly slanders of " Janus "
and Littledale they will find answered in " Anti-Janus," by
Cardinal Hergenrother, and in Father Ryder's " Catholic Con-
troversy," a reply to Littledale's " Plain Reasons," of which
book I will speak later. Papal infallibility is a terrible bugbear
to the Vicar, and naturally so — it interferes with his own self-
assumed prerogjitive. However, that question is not now
before the court. It is true that schisms of all kinds were
prophesied to follow its definition by the Vatican Council.
The great theological windbags of Germany and England have
A Rejoinder. 137
had time to exhaust all the resources of their " scieutilic his-
tory," their " liberal theology," their " higher criticism " and
their " deeper views " — to shoot their last brittle sophism against
the Everlasting Rock, to spit at it their last envenomed lie ;
and yet from the summit to the base of that Rock there is
neither chasm nor mark of chasm. Through all the Catholic
Church there is Unity of Faith — unity perfect and undestructi-
ble — as has been ever, as shall be ever, all days even to the con-
summation of the world. Every day, from every clime, one
glorious Credo arises to the throne of God, harnionious as the
chant sent forth from all creation, in the first exulting dawn of
its being, " when the morning stars praised Me together, and
all the sons of God made a joyful melody." Aye, there she
goes, that tiny ship of Peter's, with a Leo at her helm :
Blow fair thou breeze ! She anchors ere the dark.
Already doubled is the cape — our bay
Receives that prow which pi-oudly spurns the spray.
How gloriously lier gallant coui-se she goes !
Her white wings flying — never from her foes —
She walks the „aters like a thing of life,
And seems to dai-e the elements to strife.
A few other points in this letter I will notice later on.
Fourth Leti'er. There is absolutely nothing in this ad reyn,
beyond the veriest " balderdash " (his own term) and rubbish,
that I have not already disposed of. I notice, however, that
he recommends " every student of Church history " to get a
copy of " Janus," while not a word is said about tlie learned
reply to it entitled '"Anti-Janus." Of course, the Vicar never
read it because Littledale, to whom he is a mere bob-tail, does
not mention it in his list of " Books on the Roman Controversy."
I cannot allow his slander on the memory of " the Saintly
Pere Gratry," as the Yicar so justly calls him, to pass uimoticed.
He appears to have three letters written by Gratry to Bishop
Deschamps at the time of the Vatican Council. Littledale
has them " on his list." Doubtless they are the only writings
of this great author and French academician the Vicar has ever
read. He quotes from them two sentences, which as they stand
are utterly meaningless ; but they sound well and that is all he
188 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
requires. Now, in the whole history of literature, I know of
no misapprehension by a learned man so inexplicable as that
by Ptire Gratry, of the question he discussed. Ah ! yes, but
he was an honest man and publicly confessed his mistake and
corrected his error. Here are his words in a letter to one o*"
his fellow academicians after the definition of Papal Infalli-
bility by the Vatican Council : " I do not wish to enter upon
theological ground, but I would just observe that I have with-
stood the doctrine of inspired infallibility, and this the Council
rejects. I have fought against the doctrine of personal infal-
libility — the Council decrees official infallibility I
dreaded something like a scientific, political, or governing in-
fallibility, but the Council decrees only that which is doctrinal.
I do not mean to say that I am free of error in my polemical
views. I have made many 7nistal'es in this, hut, at least, Iain
ready to htimhle myself wherein I have erred.^'' Translated
from " Les derniers jours de Pere Gratry, par Pere Perraud "
now a Bishop and member of the French Academy. But then
you know Gratry " had to swallow the new dogma at the point
of an Anathema" ! I do not know that he built any "stately
cathedral in reparation for his impertinent " letters. Perhaps
the Vicar would inform us.
A very funny thing about a ritualistic " priest " is the way
he patronizes revolt against church authority. To his mind it
always implies, at all events, the presence of great mwal and
intellectual power. Gratry, for instance, is called " saintly "
because of his three ephemeral letters, and Dollinger is a
*' learned church historian and theologian " because " it is sui>
posed " he wrote Janus — a statement, by the way, for which
the Vicar has not a particle of evidence beyond Littledale's
assertion which is not true. Has Dollinger, I wonder, become
a ritualist? From being a "papist" has he fallen up to the
dignity of an — " apist."
Fifth Letter. This is the offspring of the famous " six
weeks " i ncubation. It simply reeks with the infamous cahimny,
already repeatedly exposed, that Mary ever blessed, is the
" Champion of the human race " according to Catholic teach-
ing. As it is based on that and has no significance without it.
A Rejoinder. 13&
I might pass it by unnoticed, more especially, too, since it is
foreign to the points at issue. But his iniijuities are now sa
great that I cannot allow even a lack of logic to save him.
He quotes passages from the Fathers which assert that God
alone is to be adored, that Christ is the One Mediator between
God and man, and that all our trust is to be reposed in Him
alone. This he says contradicts the " Roman doctrine " on the
Blessed Virgin !
Now, I fear this argument proves too much for the Yicar,
because it goes towards demonstrating that St. Liguori himself
did not admit the Roman doctrine. And as I am most heartily
willing to accept the strongest language he has quoted from the
Fathei-s, or which they have ever used on the subject, it proves
that / also reject the Roman doctrine. Yet, if this conclusion
is false, how can the premises be true ? Let us look at the
argument.
Major premiss : " No one who saj's that all his hope is in
Christ can admit the 'Roman doctrine ' on the Blessed Virgin."
Minor premiss : " But the Fathers quoted by the Vicar say
this." Therefore they do not admit the " Roman doctrine."
The Vicar has proved the minor premiss, which no Catholic
ever dreamed of denying ; when has he or any of the brood
of Littledale & Co. condescended to prove the major, the very
subject, be it observed, that he has introduced into this discus-
sion ? Noxohere !
I can, however, prove the truth of the contrary proposition,
by referring to any of our devotional writers. I open at ran-
dom the " Soliloquy of the Soul " by Thomas i. Kempis. He
says of our Lord :
" He it is who made and redeemed thee; who labored and strove
and overcame for thee. He is thine Advocate, and the propitiation
for thy sins. He is thy Comforter, thy Guide, and Guardian. He
is tliine only One, thy beloved One, ' who feedetli among the hlies'
and who longeth to rest upon thy breasts. Whether thou art in
sadness or in joy, ever have recourse unto Him ; for He is the mirror
of holy hfe, and the model of justice. He is the never-failing light
of the soul, the lover of chastity, and the joy of the conscience.
.... To Him, above all, should every intention, every action,
speech, reading, prayer, meditation, and speculation be directed.
140 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
Through Him salvation is given unto thee and life eternal is pre-
pared for thee. "
And again, a few pages fartlier on :
"For I know that my life and convei-sation is not such, as I may
dare to put any trust in myself ; but this is my hope and my con
solation, to place my trust and my rest in the price of Thy
precious Blood, in which I place my whole repose."
Your Catholic readers will probably be astounded at the in-
formation the Yiear has put together as passages from the
Fathers, containing the above doctrine as decisive proof against
ais. Why ! we are bound by the Vatican Council to say anath-
ema to whosoever will not receive this doctrine.
But I forget myself. The question is, whether Thomas d
Kempis, after using the language just quoted, could honor the
Blessed Virgin in the " Roman " fashion. I turn a few pages
and find these words addressed to our Lady :
" Do thou, O most pious mother, vouchsafe to look upon my little-
ness, for thou canst assist me in many ways, and warm my heart
"with plentiful consolation amidst my afflictions. When, then, I am
girt about with afflictions or temptations, I will presently without
dread have recourse unto thee, because mercy is there more ready
where greater grace abounds."
This, I suppose, the Vicar will allow to be " Roman doc-'
trine." And if so, it is clear that persons holding the
Roman doctrine may still use the language of the Fathers
respecting our Divine Lord. But it may be supposed, rather
he charges it against us, that we have left off using this lan-
guage. Let liim open a very common Prayer Book, the
Garden of the Soul. He will find there that —
"We must believe that neither mercy, nor grace, nor salvation,
either can or ever could, since Adam's fall, be obtained any other-
wise than through the death and passion of the Son of God."
Or again, look at anotlier common book amongst us, the
Manual of Devotion. He will find that—
"The Church of GJod teaches us to put our whole confidence in
the merits of Jesus Christ. He is our only Saviour, the One Media-
A Eejoinder. 141
tor between God and man, as the apostle tells us. It is in His life-
giving Blood alone that we can hope for mercy and grace and
salvation."
But what about " St. Liguori " and " The Raccolta " ? Well,
in the Saint's address to the reader of " The Glories of Mary,^^
he says: Our Divine Lord " offered and paid the superabun-
dant ransom of His precious Blood, in which alone is our saJva-
tiofi, life and resurrection^ The italics are the Saint's. Again, '
the Raccolta has : " O, most compassionate Jesus ! Thou alone
art our salvation, our life, and our resurrection."
But tliis elementary doctrine of Cliristianity is the underly-
ing idea, the very quintessence of every prayer in both these
favorite books of the Vicar's, whether addressed to the Blessiid
Virgin or to any other saint. The Vicar may not understand
this ; but then he ought not, for simple decency's sake, to say
nothing of self-respect, call himself a "true Catholic." "Oh,
Heavens," exclaims Carlyle, as he glances with a kind of repug-
nance at the newest sub-sect, " what shall we say of Puseyisni
(another Jiame for Ritualism) in comparison to Twclftli-Cen-
tury Catholicism ? Little or nothing, for indeed it is a matter
to strike one dumb."
Is it not, then, a wretched mockery, and does it not betray
the most disgraceful ignorance of Catholic belief, to quote pas-
sages from the Fathers, not one whit stronger than those from
St. Liguori and the Raccolta alone, and tlience to argue the
diversity of belief between the Ancient and " Modern Roman
Church"?
LETTER IX.
IPSE, IPSA, IP8UM — A EEJOINDER.
To the Editor of the Globe :
Sir, — This is not the time to discuss the question at all fully,
but is it true, as the Vicar asserts, that the Fathers knew nothing
of the intercession and invocation of the Blessed Virgin ? A
I;i2 Ii'SK, Ipsa, Ipsum.
more contemptible faloehood was never penned ! To the
Fathers he has appealed, and to the Fathers he must go.
" Antiquity " and " the Primitive Church " is the great hobby
of Ritualists — at least so they say. Let us see what support
they get in that quarter. The Vicar allows the Blessed Mary
to be one of the Saints — " the Chief of Saints," in his own
words. Was this a slip of the pen? I say that the Fathers
certainly believed in the intercession and invocation of the
Saints, and I will prove it by Protestant authorities alone.
Here I must compress. Daille, v»'hose knowledge of the
Fathers was not the result of " six weeks' " study of " copious
indices," declares that St. Gregory Nazianzen was infected
with the superstitions of his day on that subject. Le Clerc
says the same thing, and is fully satisfied with the al)surdity of
those Protestants who claim the Nicene Fathers as being on
their side. Larduer will tell the Yicar the same thing. Isaac
Taylor, like a rational Protestant, has written an elaborate work
to show that the Xicene Church was even more corrupt than
the present "Roman Church." Middleton looks upon the
Church of the Fourth Century as in a state of modified pagan-
ism, because of the same superstitions practices. Take again
the historians. Milner seems to date "popery" at least from
the time of St. Cyprian. Mosheim speaks of the corniptions
in the same direction, which a superstitious zeal had introduced
into the church. Spanheim has a whole chapter on the subject.
So has Gibbon. Waddington is to the same effect. All these
writers side with the heretic Vigilantius in his attack on the
doctrine of the church. But perhaps these authorities are too
Protestant for the Vicar. Let him consult Pusey, Keble, and
Cardinal Xewman before his reversion. They will tell him
(Library of the Fathers, vol. ix., p. 135, note) that the invoca-
tion of the saints was common in the fourth century. Perhaps
again these gentlemen are too " Iloman " for him. Be it so.
Maybe Mr. Palmer, of Worcester College, Oxford, will suit
him. Well, in his " fifth letter to Cardinal Wiseman," Palmer
reluctantly acknowledges the fact that the saints were invoked
in the fourth century, and he allows, without the slightest
hesitation, that their intercessory power was always acknowl-
A Kejoindek. 143
edged by the Fathers of the Church. A ritualist '* priest,"
liowever, likes a Bishop as an authority on such matters — not,
of course, an "Episcopal Dunce," like him of Liverjiool.
Bishop Newton was a celebrity in his day, and his " Disserta-
tions on the Prophecies" is one of his monuments. I will
quote from the 23d Dissertation :
" Read only some of the most celebrated Fathers ; read the
orations of Basil on the Martyr Mamas, and on the Forty
Martyrs ; read the oration of Ephrem Syrus on the death of
Basil, and on the Forty Martyrs, and on the praises of the holy
martyrs; read the orations of Gregory Nazianzen on Atliana-
Bius, and on Basil, and on Cyprian ; read the orations of Greg-
ory Nyssen on Ephrem Syrus, and on the martyr Theodorus,
and on Meletius, Bishop of Antioch ; read the sixty-sixth and
other homilies of Chrysostom ; read his orations on the martyrs
of Egypt, and other orations, and you will be greatly astonished
to find how full they are of this sort of superstition, what powers
and miracles are ascribed to the Saints, what prayers and praises
are offered up to them And who are the great patrons and
advocates of the same worship now ? Are not tiikir lkoiti-
MATE SUCCESSORS AND DEFENDANTS. THE MONKS, AND PRIESTS,
AND BISHOPS OF THE ClIURCH OF RoME ? "
Correct you are. Bishop Newton ! What more can be de-
sired? The Yicar will admit that if any Saint may be lawfully
invoked, the Blessed Virgin — " the Chief of Saints " may be.
How preposterously ridiculous, then, and absurd it is for such
as he to write and speak on this subject as if the honor paid
by the Catholic Church to our Blessed Lady differed at all in
Jcind from that paid to other saints. That they differ in
dt 'free I delight to proclaim, and God forbid that any profess-
\\\r Christian, who knows what he is talking about, should
hesitate to acknowledge her unspeakable privileges, or allow
that any one whose faith respecting the Incarnation was sound,
could possibly go too far in venerating her who is " blessed
among women." But we have no special doctrine respecting
the veneration due to her. She is to be honored, because all
saints are to be honored, and for no other reason. She is to be
honored more than other saints, l)ecause certain facts are re-
144 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
vealed to us respecting her, both in Tloly Scripture and by
Tradition, from whicli we know tliat God woidd liave us
especially to honor her wlioni lie has chosen to honor above
all other saints. So much oijxissant on this topic.
Having closed his quotations from the Fathers, the Vicar
says : " I am credibly informed that no instance is to be found
in an ecclesiastical writer of even the corrupt reading fpsn
l)eing interpreted of the Blessed Virgin till S. Bernard's time
(12th cent.)." 01 O! Save me from such *' learned friends " !
Alas! renowned Oxford! Verily you have fallen into the
hands of thieves in this diocese of Fredericton and been
despoiled of your fair fame ! I beg your readers to remember
that the above statemciit is made by a man who said that I
ought to be " more modest," — that I was " ignorant or disin-
genuous," — that I wanted "knowledge or understanding," — and
that it was necessary for him to stand .at my elbow, as a tutor,
to instruct me how to read my own authorities. AVhew ! The
" learned friend " who so " credibly informed " the Vicar must
have had perfect confidence in the unlimited voracity of his
shark for anti-Catholic garbage. By and by I will administer
a counter-irritant, in the shape of quotations from ecclesiastical
writers many hundred years before St. Bernard.
Again he says: "I cannot find the slightest liint for tlie
modern Roman interpretation of Gen. iii. 15." And yet
every Father he quoted gave simply the " Roman interpreta-
tion," viz., that Jesus Christ, our " all in all " in life and in
death, crushed the serpent's head as our only Redeemer and
Saviour and by the prowess of His own Divine and Almighty
power, — while the Blessed Mary His Mother crushed it by the
Grace and Merits of that same Saviour whom she herself
in the Magnificat calls — "God, my Saviour" even before He
was born. By the same Grace and Merits " all faithful Chris-
tians" triumph over Satan, as St. Paul beautifully says : " May
the God of Peace crush Satan speedily under your feet," Rom.
xvi. 20. Of course the Fathers knew nothing of the doctrine
which he calumniously attributes to the Catholic church.
There is no escape for the unfortunate Vicar here. "Mini-
mizing ! " he will exclaim in the agony of his shame. Bah !
A Rejoindek. 145
As soon could the hand of man tear from the vault of heaven
a star which Almighty power had hung there, as i)luck from its
place a single truth which the Spirit of God has set to shine
forever in the Church's everlasting creed.
The truth of Scripture, as St. Jerome well says, is not in the
words, but in the sense — " nee putemus ui verbis Scripturarum
esse Evangelium, sed in sensu.^^ To whom will my Protestant
friends apply for the " Roman interpretation " ? To Catholics
themselves or to a conceitedly bloated m.ushroom growth of yes-
terday — a ritualistic Vicar ? I need not pause for a reply. But
for their benefit I will here introduce a witness whose authority
is simply supreme. Hugo Grotius, who lived 1583-16-i5, was
one of the most learned of Protestants and certainly a choice
specimen of wisdom and virtue. He was, too, a bosom friend
of the celebrated Jesuit Petau (Petavius). In his commentary
on Genesis iii. 15, speaking of Ijpsa, Grotius says — (I trans-
late):'
"The Vulgate has Ipsa, as if it were spoken of the woman,
but in a sense not improper."
Now Grotius had no difficulty in seeing that the sense was
the same to his Protestant intellect as to that of his Catholic
friend whether Ipse, Ipsa, or Ipsnm was used. And that
sense, as T have so often pointed out, is that the whole victory
over the serpent is to be referred to Christ, who " blotted out
the handwriting of the decree which was against us ... .
fastening it to the Cross .... triumphing openly .... in
Himself." Coloss. ii. 14-15. Of course, it were too much to
expect every theological upstart of the calibre of this ritualist-
ico-sacerdotal wight to be a Grotius. Yes, indeed, but we have
at least the right to demand more modesty in the use of those
phrases with which your readers are familiar in the prophetic
writings. From the "occipital region " of the Vicar's brain a
sign has, for some time, been hanging out in large type — " The
word of the Lord came to me saying ; " or " The burden of the
word of the Lord to the Catholic Church, her Popes, Cardinals,
Bishops, Theologians, and Biblical scholars by the hand of the
' "Vulgatus habet, Ipsa, quasi de muliere ageretur, seusu non
male."
146 IrsE, Ipsa, Ipsum.
Vicar — the 'Priest of the Mission Chapel.'" Let him call in
that sign and many of his follies and impertinences may be
forgotten.
But the hugest joke in the whole series of " Strictnres " is
his appeal to the " Vincentian Canon," " the criterion of Cath-
olicity," viz. — " that which hath been believed everywhere, at
all times, by all men." Even here he is at his old trick of
copying second, perhaps third — or fourth-hand. It is evi-
dent he knows nothing about the work of St. Vincent of
Lerins from which he professes to quote. There is no such
work of St. Vincent's as that given by the Vicar — '' adv. Ilaer-
eses." The work in which the celebrated Canon occurs is the
" Commonitorium (or Peregrinus) adversus Ilaey^eticos.'''' A
full translation of the Canon is as follows : " In the Catholic
Church herself very great care is to be taken that we hold that
which has been believed everywhere, always and by all men."
The remainder of the chapter from which this is taken must be
veritable " gail and wormwood " to an Anglo-ritualist. Think
of the Vicar quoting this against me ! 11a ! Ila ! ! Ha ! ! ! O
'tis too good ! He belongs to a school of thought (?) or senti-
ment about eighteen years old — a sort of aftermath of tl j
Tractarian Movement led by Newman, Pusey, and Keble.
How many of his peculiar religious tenets were taught and
practiced among Anglicans here before his advent three or
four years ago? Why is he now tabooed, shunned, and ostra-
cized as a theological leper by his brethren, lay and clerical, in
the Church of England, who charge against him that he has
" gone in the way of Cain .... and perished in the contra-
diction of Core," and has moreover incurred all the terrible
penalties pronounced by St. Paul against schism and schismat-
ics? llow does he reconcile this with the Apostle's entreaty :
" But I beseech you, brethren, that you all speak the same
thing, and that there be no schisms among you, but be you
perfect, in the same mind, and in the same judgment." What
is the matter ? And yet he has the " cheek " to claim the at-
tributes of " Universality, Antiquity, and Consent " — the Vin-
centi^in Canon — for Anglicanism or Ritualism : which ? while
he brands the teaching of the Catholic Church with " Idola-
A TIkjoindkk. 147
try," " Apostacy," " Infidelity," '' Impiety," " Blasphemy," aiul
"Novelty." It is too appalling to be funny, still
Spectatum admissi risiun teneatis amici i
A few reflections anent the Yincentian Canon, in its affirm-
ative sense one of the touchstones of Catholic doctrine. There
is now in session at Lambeth, England, a Pan-Anglican Synod.
It will, doubtless, discuss questions touching the very foimda-
tions of Christian belief and doctrines that are dear to every
Christian heart because they affect the whole Christian life.
Should the deliberations result in any conclusions these may
be embodied in decrees or furnish the material for some " Pub-
lic Worship Act" like that of 1870, passed on purpose to put
down Ritualism. Now, by what will these decrees be ruled ?
By the " Vincentian Canon " ? O, no, but purely and simply
by Acts of Parliament passed by Henry YIII., Elizabeth, and
that " young tiger-cub, Edward YL," as Littledale calls him.
These are the cornerstones of the " National establishment,"
and no stream can rise higher than its source. What has the
Judicial Committee of the Privy Council decided and what
will they decide ? This is the crucible in which the results of
the labors of this Pan-Anglican Synod must be tried. They
will not be worth the paper that will record them if they can-
not stand this test. How is this? Let me state a few historico-
legal propositions.
The Boyal Supremacy in Spirituals was created by the Stat-
ute 25 Henry YIII., C. 19, and, re-enacted by 1 Elizabeth, is
still law. What was the object of its creation and its effect?
I quote from "Brooke's Privy CouncilJudgments " and " Fre-
mantle's Judgments." In Fremantle, p. 110, Lord Chief Jus-
tice Campbell says : "In the .... year 1534 Henry finding
that there was no chance of succeeding with his divorce suit with
the sanction of the Pope, and being impatient to marry Ann
Boleyn, resolved to break with Home altogether, and preserv-
ing all the tenets of the Roman Catholic faith, to vest in him-
self the jurisdiction which the Pope had hitherto exercised in
England." He proceeds to say that tliis seizure of the Papal
jurisdiction was effected by the Statute 25 Henry YIII., C. 19,
118 IrsE, Ipsa, Ipsum.
hy which it was enacted that " for lack of justice at or in any
of tlie courts of the Archbishops," " it shall be lawful to the
parties grieved to appeal to the King's Majesty in the King's
Court of Chancery, where delegates are to be appointed under
the Great Seal, who are to adjudicate upon the appeal. This
appeal is given in all causes in the courts of the Archbishops of
this realm, as well in the causes of a purely spiritual nature
which might hitherto have been carried to Rome, as in the
classes of causes of a temporal nature, enumerated in statute
2-i, Henry VIII., C. 12." Now Lord Campbell does not mince
matters in assigning uiotives to Henry which induced him to
break what had been the fundamental law and invariable prac-
tice of his realm since it had been a Christian country. It was
to gain the adulterous and incestuous possession of the wretched
object of his lust, whom he was presently to sacrifice by a
bloody death to his jealousy. What Avas Esau's selling his
birthright for a mess of pottage to this infamy on the part of a
Christian king ?
The effect of this statute was not only to transfer to the king
an authority hitlierto exercised by the Pope, but by the same
stroke it degraded the Bishops and Archbishops of the King's
realm from the place they had hitherto occupied, as feeding
each one his portion of the flock of Christ, over which the
Holy Ghost, by the hand of Peter, had made them Bishops, to
the condition of mere officers of the King, discharging a spir-
itual obligation imder him, which they received from him, just
as all the civil officers of his kingdom received their civil juris-
diction from him — an infinite degi'adatlon which lies upon the
Anglican Episcopate assembled to-day in Synod at Lambeth ;
infinite because it changes the mission 5f the Holy Ghost for
the exercise of divine endowments, into the mission of a civil
ruler, incapable of communicating it. I here prescind alto-
gether from the question of the validity of Anglican Orders.
I speak of vt^liat the effect would be if these orders were valid,
as in the Russian church.
Again : This Statute 25, Henry VIII., enacted not only what
was contrary to all Christian practice, and to all Christian his-
tory, up to that time, in all the countri'js wherein the Christian
A Rejoinder. 149
religion had been planted ; but it enacted what is contrary to
reason, inasmuch as it confounded the Divine kingdom, and
the functions carried on in it by a Divine gift proceeding from
tlie Person of our Divine Lord, with the functions of the liuman
kingdom, which is the outcome of the natural society of man.
God, indeed, stood at the head and origin of this natural society
of man, and authorized the powers that be, as proceeding, me-
diately, from Ilim ; but He had distinguished from it the Spirit-
ual kingdom of His Son, and up to that time ail Christian na-
tions had recognized the distinction. Henry YIH. began this
fundamental confusion of the Divine with the human kijig-
dom ; because the seizure of jurisdiction is the seizure of the
Supreme power, on which rests the exercise, though not the
essence, of all anthorit3\ See Allies — " Per Crucem ad Luceni."
What becomes of the Yincentian Canon, — " the criterion
of Catholicity" to use the Vicar's own words? Alas! It will
find no echo in the Pan-Anglican Synod. It has no use for it.
It can define no doctrine, it can teach nothing having the slight-
est binding obligation on the conscience of the most humble
member of the church it claims to represent. The Privy Coun-
cil is its master. Over fifty years ago it took the place of the
Court of Delegates, originally appointed under the Royal Su-
premacy, as enacted by the Statute 25, Henry YIII. In this
Court the Queen decides personally. During 'the last thiity-
eight years, from the Gorham case (1850) to the i)resent time,
it has had to deal with questions which embrace the whole
range of Christian belief aiid Christian life. Thus in the judg-
ment in Heath vs. Biirder^ in 1802, it had to deal with our
Lord's Atonement, with Justification, and the Forgiveness and
Remission of sins. In the case of WiWuDnfi vs. The B'luhop
of Salisbmn/, and Wilson vs. Fendale^ it had to deal with the
Inspiration of Scripture, the doctrine of Eternal Rewards and
Punishments, the belief in Prophecy, and many of the most
intricate questions of theology. In the Gorham cases it decided
that it was open to an Anglican minister to hold and teach
Baptismal Regeneration, but not punishable in an Anglican
minister to deny it. In the cases of Liddell vs. WeKterton and
IJddell vs. Beal, it laid down that in the Church of England
150 Ipse, Ipsa, Irs cm.
there was " no longer an altar of sacrifice, but merely a table
at whicli the coniniunicants were to partake of the Lord's Sup-
per ; that the term altar is never used to describe it, and there
is an express declaration at the close of the Service against the
doctrine of transubstantiation, with which the ideas of an altar
and sacrifice are closely connected."
But a word more on this topic. As in times past in other
places Anglican Bishops and writers have charged all sorts of
corruptions in morals, in discipline and doctrine to the Catholic
Church, so to-day the halls at Lambeth will ring out the old
changes. Perhaps too the tremendous importance of Ipsa will
be learnedly dwelt upon. Not Aiiglifan right but Roman
wrong will be the burden of their speech. This is the every
day defence of the Church of England. But how can Roman
sins justify the position taken up by her on the Royal Su])rem-
acy ? What this Pan-Anglican Synod ought to set itself to
prove is that this Royal Supremacy in Spirituals is compatible,
either with historic facts before the time of Henry, or with the
Christian faith in itself, or with reason, as the general guide of
human things ; that our Saviour has made promises to be with it
and with the Bishops who are created by it ; that lie has promised
in general to be with Bishops who allege that they make a por-
tion of the church, though not in communion ^vith the rest of
it, even as they themselves conceive it, and who besides receive
their spiritual jurisdiction from a King or a Queen. Would
the Vicar just fresh from the Fathers give us the names of a
few who point out the grounds on which controversies of the
Faith are to be decided by Queens? And it might assist the
Synod in proving their case if he would forward his own " true
Catholic " views of the " Yincentian Cajion " especially in its
exclusive seme. See Allies on " The Royal Supremacy."
A Rejoinder. 151
LETTER X.
IPSE, IPSA, IP8UM — A REJOINDER.
To the Editor of the Globe :
Sir, — I continue my observations on the Yicar's fifth letter.
Near its close he says : " Of course it woiikl be simply impos-
sible for any one to show that falsifications and forgeries were
palmed off upon Christendom for the mere sake of supporting
the corrupt reading of Genesis iii. 15." Yes, indeed ; '' simply
impossible " and therefore not shown. And yet the cry of
" falsifications and forgeries " has been his paint, battle-axe and
war-whoop ever since he had the infelicity to champion Bishop
Kingdon's scholarship. What a humiliating confession ! "What
an ignominious " biting of the dust " ! But he comes to time
again. I must here protest that this "killing of the dead over
again" has become as dull to myself as I fear it is otiose to
your readers. I have to ask their earnest attention, however,
to what immediately follows. It certainly points a moral on
the disreputable ignorance and inconsistency, want of logic and
disgusting pretentiousness of the Vicar which he has not, per-
haps, hitherto equalled. Here is the paragraph on which I
comment :
" About the 10th or 11th century a forgery in the shape of
a panegyric on the Virgin was issued by an unknown author
under the name of Methodius (312 A.D.). It is full of extrav-
agant expressions and adulations, together wnth direct invoca-
tion and worship of the Virgin. It has deceived people up to
the present day — has been translated in Clarke's Ante-Nicene
Library as genuine, and quoted as genuine in Blunt's Theologi-
cal Diet, under the head of ' Mary.' It is now condenmed both
by English and Roman theologians as spurious and not only
spurious in the sense of being attributed by mistake to Metho-
dius, but as a forgery, because the writer claims at the outset
to be the writer of the Symposium on Chastity which is
Methodius
■> »»
Here is emphatic testimony, supplied by himself, to the
152 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
stupefying prejudice of the Yicar, — to the utter worthlessness
of liis knowledge on the matters he so gallantly undertook to
handle, and to the atrocious recklessness of the manner in which
he has done his work. His mind, fed so long on the uncouth
Sliibholeths of " PojDe " Littledale's " Books on the Koman Con-
troversy," seems a weltering chaos in respect of divine things
connected with the Catholic religion. One would have thought
that "six weeks" spent in an incubator constructed of "copious
indices " of the Catholic Fathers, with a yai'd stick close by
to test the progress of the evolnting chick, must tend to clarify
the theological conceptions of any mind. So to think must
be an error. Bit who is sufficient to heal a mind so distem-
pered? Exorlare allqxds ex ossihus — ? O well, let him con-
sult the " Eirenicon," " Plain Reasons " or Tyler's " Worship of
the Virgin" — the mind grows by what it feeds on, and the
ajjpetite comes by eating, as the French proverb says. Mean-
while let me put your readers in touch with the Vicar as he
manifests himself in the above quotation from his letter.
St. Methodius was an illustrious Father of the Church and
Bishop of Tyre. He was martyred in the last general pei-se-
cution about 312. His works were famous among the ancients.
Among them is one entitled — " The Banquet of the ten Virgins
or a Symposium on Chastity." It is an eulogium of the state
and virtue of Virginity. A discourse is put into the mouth
of each of these virgins in commendation of this virtue. The
holy Bishop thus teaches that Christ, the Prince of \'irgins,
coming from heaven to teach men the perfection of vii'tue,
planted among them the state of virginity, to which a ])articular
degree of glory is due in heaven — (Apoc. XIV. 4), and he calls
it " the greatest gift of God to man, and the most nol)le and
most beautiful oifering that can be made by man to God, the
most excellent of all vows." Such is a summary of this l)Cok
so celebrated in the Catholic Church. Milton embalms its
spirit in his beautiful lines :
So dear to Heaven is saintly Chastity,
That, when a soul is found sincerely so,
A thousand hveried angels lacky her,
Driving far off each thing of sin and guilt.
A Rejoinder. 153
About its autborsliip there is not now, nor has there ever
been, the shadow of a shade of doubt Indeed tlie unanimity
of critics on the genuineness of all the writings attributed to
Methodius which have reached us is well-nigh marvellous ; more
especially when we know that somebody is always to be found
who, after "six weeks" among "copious indices," is ready to
' better the attempt of the philoso])hers of Laputa to extract
sunbeams from cucumbers. For instance, the only work con-
sidered doubtful by recent critics is his treatise " On Free Will,^"
but the Rev. "William R. Clark of Oxford, who translates it for
Clarke's Ante-Nicene Library, says : '* The internal evidence
must be said to confirm the ancient testimonies which assiijn it
to Methodius." This is the language of the " Introduction."
Now this " Library " (Vol. XIV.) contains all his writings and
they are all declared to be genuine. I wish to draw the atten-
tion of your readers to the " Oration concerning Simeon and
Anna on the day they met in the Temple^'' which well deserves
the careful and thoughtful consideration of all students, theo-
logically inclined, Anglican as well as Catholic. This oration
the Vicar in his grandiose way pronounces a ^''forgeryP He
merely echoes the words of one Tyler, a " Bachelor of Divinity,"
(save the mark !) who about fifty years ago issued the first edi-
tions of two books filled with quotations from the Fathers,
merely asserting that Christ is the one mediator between God
and man — a doctrine, as I have shown, no less earnestly taught
by Catholic theologians and spiritual writers than by the Fathers.
These books are among the "copious indices" in which the
Vicar travailed in compiling his " little thesaurus of argument
for the public against the sophistries and vain boastings
of Romanist controversialists." Did he have any idea how
" little " it would be \ I trust his " public " will consider he
has kept his promise. But I will return to Tyler's books later.
Why does the Vicar catch up and repeat Tyler's words, that
the " Oration " is a " forgery " ? Purely and only because it is
"full of extravagant expressions and adulations, together ^vith
direct invocations of the Virgin." O those " impious" invoca-
tions ! They act upon him like a scarlet cloth in a Spanish
bull-fight. Has he any knowledge beyond this on which he
154 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
could base his claim? Not a particle. Has he given your
readers any authority for his statement that the " Oration " " is
now condemned both bv English and Roman theologians as
I/O o
spurious and a forgery " ? None. But that makes no differ-
ence, because his faculty of smell in detecting a " Roman "
forgery is never at fault except when it is an anti-Roman for-
gery and "advantageous to our church," as in Bishop Stross-
mayer's case. Then he " barks up the wrong tree," but only
by accident. He does not mean to adopt the horrid principle
that " the end justifies the means." O no — that were too
" Jesuitical."
Now I will prove for your readers that the " Oration " in
question is neither '"spurious" nor a "forgery," but a genuine
work of St. Methodius. And first, there is a strong antecedent
jDrobability arising from the fact alone that he wrote the " Ban-
quet of the ten Virgins" or Symposisni on Virginity. The
Blessed Virgin — the Virgin par excellence — was the first woman
who consecrated herself to Christ in that state. A mind and
heart, therefore, properly balanced in presence of divine things
would be quite prepared to hear " very excellent things spoken
of her by divines of all ages," as the Vicar himself admits.
Of whom, then, would St. Methodius more naturally and
fittingly use these " expressions and adulations," impiously de-
clared by the Vicar to be " extravagant " 1 ijut I do not care
to deal in probabilities on such a matter. We all know that
some persons have so very characteristic a manner of writing
that any practiced reader oan at once pronounce the authorship
of their disputed works. There is, for instance, no mistaking
Macaulay's, Carlyle's or Cardinal Newman's compositions.
And the same thing is observable in many of the Fathers.
Now, the great critics say that no writers have styles more
characteristic of their authors than the works of St. Methodius
have of himself. His language (Greek), they say, is elaborately
ornate. The most flowery metaphors meet us at every turn.
See even the translation in Clarke's "Library" — it is loaded
with epithets. He expresses, says Du Pin, a few thoughts in
many words. His interpretations of Scripture are almost
always mystical. His writings show him to have been well
A Rejoindkr. 155
read in the heathen Classics, to have warmly admired their
beauties, but to have held their objects in abhorrence. His
treatise on " Free-will " displays an accurate acquaintance with
Philosophical matters. But his most striking peculiarity is his
violent antipathy to the errors commonly attributed to Oi ^cu.
Now, even/ one of these characteristics of St. Methodius' confess-
edly genuine writings is to be found in the " Oration " which the
Vicar, without any knowledge of it liimself but simply as play-
ing parrot to Tyler, calls a "forgery." What has become of
" the critical apparatus " which early in this discussion he led
us to believe he carried around in his breeches' pocket ?
Who are the critics and what do they say about this
" Oration " ? I will select but a few, and they are the most
severe. Leo AUatius (1679) is called the last theologian and
writer who kept guard over the honor of the letters of Greece
— "dicitur ultimus theologus atque scriptor qui GrsecifB lite-
rarium servaverit honorem." JV^atalPs Enchirid, p. 115. He
was not only a most learned and judicious critic but he gave
to this particidar "Oration" the most careful and accurate
study. In his work — " Diatriba de Methodii scriptis, p. 341 —
Disquisition on the writings of St. Methodius," he declares
that " Nmh ovum ita simile est ovo neque aqua aquae, id 'istius
jihrasis et elocutio, et reliqua dicendi hiinina, Symjwsii foj^n-
ulis similia sunt ; Egg is not more like e^^, nor water like
water than the phrasing and style and other ornaments of
speech of this (Oration) are like their patterns in the sympo-
sium" (on Chastity), He leaves no doubt about it on an
honest, unprejudiced mind. But as the Vicar is of a sceptical
turn, and probably has confined his attention so closely to the
second-hand rubbish of Tyler et hoc omne genus, that he never
heard of AUatius, I will refer him to the "Eirem'con" — his
"perfect store-house of accurate information." When wi-iting
that work Pusey was on the qui vive for authorities from every
quarter against the honor paid to Mary in the Catholic Church,
He, too, sought the assistance of " learned friends " and to
scavenge the Greek Liturgies. Here are his words ; " My own
studies not having lain in the Greek Liturgies, T consulted my
friend the Rev. G. Williams, King's College, Cambridge, aiid
156 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
append some observations which lie addresses to me." Will-
iams writes to Pusey as follows : " It cannot, I think, be denied
that the Orthodox Greek Church does ' even surpass the
Church of Rome ' in their exaltation of the Blessed Virgin in
their devotions; and all I can say is, that on this point the
Orientals, generally ' so jealous of antiquity,' have innovated
on the practice of earlier and, what we hold, to be purer times.
This, we shall presently find, is mere matter of history.'''' Yes,
"mere matter of history," as I have already shown in my
quotations from the Greek Fathers of the first six centuries.
Very creditable to Cambridge is this straightforward confes-
sion. But this is not the point now. What does Cambridge
say about Leo Allatius as an authority? The testimony is very
satisfactory. Williams tells Pusey that "we cannot have a
more competent witness than Leo Allatius" on the Greek
Office Books. Who support the judgment of Leo on St.
Methodius' Oration i Natalis Alexander, a host in himself;
Du Pin, the most cautious and sceptical of critics ; Fabricius,
the most severe and judicious of critics, and Gallandus, a hyper-
critic. In addition to these we have the authority of the trans-
lators in Clarke's Ante-Nicene Library (18G9) and Blnnt's Theo-
logical Dictionary. The latter is a favorite book of the Vicar's,
and I have a right to use it against him, more especially since
it is scarcely possible to turn over ten pages of it without meet-
ing with some more or less open attack on the Catholic Church.
Again, what will your readers say to his treatment of Clarke's
" Library " ? Shortly ago I quoted from a Homily of St. Greg-
ory Thauniaturgus. Thereupon he rushed frantically into your
columns with a "Caution" and declared it "spurious," appeal-
ing to the fact that Clarke's "Library" classified it with
" spurious or doubtful " writings of St. Gregory. I disposed
of the " Caution " very summarily. But now when the same
" Library " declares the " Oration "' of St. Methodius to be
genuine the Vicar screams out — deceit ! Consistent, indeed !
Here I might leave this " Oration," but I am anxious that
your readers should know a good deal more about it than the
Vicar appears to know. Notwithstanding what the critics
quoted above say, there is a diflSculty, perhaps worth mention-
A Rejoindek. 157
ing, connected with it. I refer to the fact that in one or two
passages it speaks of the Holy Trinity as if the Nicene doctrine
on that subject had been fully developed in the time of St.
Methodius, which was not the case. I leave the Vicar to
ponder the " Oration " and lind the passages. IJut it is ridiculous
in the extreme for people like Tyler and the Vicar (if he know
anything at all about it) to make this a ditficulty, for they dis-
avow the principle upon which it is built. If they once con-
cede that the Church has a right to alter its language on sub-
jects whicli heresy, if nothing else, has rendered most impor-
tant, they must not blame the Catholic Church for applying to
the Blessed Virgin a principle which they allow in other cases.
This difHculty led several writers to doubt its genuineness, but
by a consensus of all the great critics, assuming their interpre-
tation is correct, these technical expressions are interpolations.
They say that the " Oration " is so clearly the work of St.
Methodius that they would as soon think of rejecting a book
of Holy Scripture in consequence of one or two existing inter-
polations. For instance : The Vicar rejoices over the fact that
what he calls the "celebrated interpolation in 1 John, v. 7,"
is now omitted in the Revised Version. Again : The Revisors
have omitted from the Lord's Prayer in St. Matthew the words
— " For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory
forever. Amen." Is this a valid reason for rejecting the
Gospel of St. Matthew or St. John's Epistles? '
' The evidence above submitted in support of the authenticity of the
" Oration" of St. Methodms so demoralized the Vicar, that he did
not dare to say a word in reply. He put his "priestly vow " in his
breeches' pocket with his "yard stick "and "critical apparatus,"
and went his way — to consult hia "learned friends" in England.
This cowardly shirking of a question, which he himself had raised,
is one of many striking proofs of his imbecility, and is, besides, a
stentorian confession that he believes that no moral or mental re-
sponsibility whatever attaches to his words. I need say no more
now on St. Methodius. I v/ill but refer the learned reader to Bishop
Fessler's classic work, Institutiones Patrologice — Institutes of Pa-
trology, a new edition of which, by the illustrious Professor Jung-
niann, of Louvain University, I have just received fresh from the
press, for an estimate of Methodius and his writings.
168 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
I have devoted thus mnch space to St. Methodius tliat your
readers may thoroughly kuow the methods of the Vicar — the
man wlio has prated so much about " verification," "suppres-
sion," and the " critical apparatus" — the man who is so <levoid
of all sense of shame and intellectual self-respect as to swallow,
apparently without a grimace, any authority, which, when re-
tailed by him, may assist in defaming the church of Jesus
Christ, and in "minimizing" the honor to be ])aid to the
woman who stood by His side from the cradle to the grave. I
have not space for any sort of vindication of those other writ-
ings which, on tlie mere ipse dixit of Tyler, the Vicar rejects,
nor is it necessary. He refers your readers to Tyler's " Wor-
ship of the Virgin " for a full list of the " palmed off " sermons
on the Blessed Virgin.
I would poorly perform the task I have set myself in this
Rejoinder did I allow the name of this wretchedly ignorant
author and his miserable book to pass, without giving your
readers an idea of the pabulum on which the Vicar 8uj)port8
his lean and hungry creed. Tyler's book has upwards of four
hundred octavo pages and sells for ten and sixpence. This is all I
can say in its favor. It displays an intense ignorance of some of
the commonest particulars in ecclesiastical history. The author
shows himself unacquainted with the first principles of histor-
ical or bibliographical criticism. And the violation of every
established law of ordinary reasoning which occurs at every
page would but further disgrace the Vicar were that possible.
Now it is very easy for persons like Tyler and the Vicar to
be sceptical in the extreme, when the Blessed Virgin is con-
cerned. But, if they know what they are talking about, would
they like to stand to their principles (so-called) when the doc-
trine of the Holy Trinity is at stake? Yet, I fearlessly main-
tain, in the face of all the Theological science ihe diocese of
Fredericton can muster, that the historical grounds upon which
the Vicar and his " pals " reject the veneration of the Blessed
Mary, as practised in the Catholic church, may logically be
turned against the adoration of our Divine Lord and Saviour.
The possibility of such a thing probably never crossed their
minds. I therefore would beg them, and all who agree with
A Uejoindkk. 159
them, seriously to consider the matter, and see whetlier they
can well afford to use negative arguments against doctrines
which have once received the sanction of Christendom.
Let me, on so important a matter, exemplify my moaning,
and instruct the Vicar, by shortly running through the reason-
ings (?) of Tyler's first chapter of patristic testimony, which ia
a review of the evidence respecting the Blessed Mary, taken
from the ancient creeds and Apostolic Fathers.
Section 2. " The ancient creeds," says Tyler, " contain no
allusion to any worship paid to the Blessed Virgin, whereas
the creed of Pius IV. does. Therefore, the Church of Rome
has added to the primitive faith."
Mij Answer. The earlier creeds contain no allusion what-
ever to any worship paid to the Son or to the Holy Ghost.
Has the church then added to the primitive faith by saying of
the Holy Ghost — " who with the Father and the Son is adored
and glorified ?" I thought it had been fully settled, that *'to
add to the Confession of the Churcli, is not to add to the faith."
The wording here is mine, and presents Tyler's argument in a
more logical shape than his own book does.
Section 3. " St. Clement of Rome never invokes the
Blessed Virgin, neither does St. Barnabas ; nor does St. Her-
nias, St. Ignatius, or St. Polycarp," says Tyler. " Therefore,
the Romish doctrine was unknown in those days."
My Answer. Tyler being dead yet speaks by the Vicar.
"Will tlie Vicar be kind enough, notwithstanding my discourte-
ous use of the " Shillalah," to show me a single invocation of
Christ throughout the writings of St. Clement, St. Barnabas,
St. Hermas, or St. Polycarp ? Does he believe that their silence
on this point is conclusive or not ? And if it be not conclusive
in one case why is it in another ?
Your readers will see at once what sort of reasoners I have
to deal with in Tyler and his disciple and parasite. And tbe
fallacy, whicli is here so palpable, runs throughout the whole
book. The plain state of the case is this : The earlier Fathers
are silent, say, as to the doctrines A, B, C, and D, whereof
Anglicans admit A and B, but reject C and D, which Catho-
lics admit, and blind and prejudiced controversialists, like
160 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
Tyler and the Vicar, press their negative authority against the
latter doctrines, either in utter ignorance that the same argu-
ment is fatal to their own cause in behalf of the docti'ines A
and r, or from gross want of comprehension of the matter.
The danger of arguing on Anglican principles may be proved
in the case of almost every important doctrine. For instance :
The Church of England invokes the Holy (xhost in the Litany,
and the Thirty-nine Articles assert the Consubstantiality of
the Holy Ghost with the Father and the Son. Now I would
like to know upon what grounds high church Anglicans —
Anglo-Ritualists — can assent to this when they reject the doc-
trine of Purgatory, or the invocation of Saints, upon the plea
of insufficient evidence. For every ancient authority they can
produce in favor of the Consubstantiality of the Holy Ghost,
I offer to produce as unequivocal an authority in behalf of Pur-
gatory. And for every prayer to the Holy Ghost, I offer to
produce as direct an invocation to a Saint. But I shall not
allow " Roman " doctrine to be rejected on grounds which
would be equally subversive of Trinitarian doctrine ; nor have
I the slightest hesitation in saying that should there be any
Anglo-Ritualist so wretchedly ignorant of the first princi])los,
I will not say of Christianity, but of natural religion, as to be
jprepared to give up his faith in the Holy Trinity, could it be
proved to \\\\\\ that the ecclesiastical writers of the first ten
centuries were perfectly silent on the subject — I have no hesi-
tation, I repeat, in saying that such a person might as profit-
ably, hie et nunc, do without such a faith as with it. Just
now the richest sight I can picture would be the Vicar in
theological conflict with some one of our able Methodist or
Presbyterian ministers. Where would he be if he could not
fall back on those Catholic principles which in his " Strictures "
he professes to reject ? Nowhere ! He would simply be
ground to powder. He may have to settle his position with
them yet since he has gravely charged against them that they
are wanting in respect for the Mother of God. However, that
is their affair.
One word more on Tyler as an authority on Paleooraphy.
To make out his miserable case he coolly sets aside as spurious
A Rejoinder. IGl
not only works which one or two critics had rejected, but some
of the most niiiversally acknowledged works of the Fathers.
For instance : he tosses overboard a Homily of St. Gregory
Nazianzen, which has been received not only by such writers
as Bellarmine, Baronius, and Labbe, but by the Benedictines of
St. Maur, Natalis Alexander, Fabricius, Ceillier, T'Uemont,
Dupin, Baillet, Daille, Le Clerc, Montagu, Cave, Dr. Pusey,
Mr. Palmer, the Oxford editors of " The Library of the
Fathers," — in short by the learned in such matters whatever
their creed or conununion. The poor ignoranms did not know
evidently that St. Jerome, who studied theology at Constanti-
nople under St. Grefjory, had expressly mentioned it as one of
the works of his " Master." De Viris Ilhis., vol 2, p. 020.
He treats Homilies of St. Cyril of Alexandria and St. Basil of
Seleucia in the same way. Who but an Oxford " Bachelor of
Divinity " could be guilty of such disgusting folly and imper-
tinence ! This shows in a few words the character of the book
from which the Vicar gets his " thesaurus of information for
the public," and to which he refers your readers.
Here I leave Tyler and his book. Let me assure his chief
mourner, the Vicar, that it was not less ridiculous for him or
any other Anglican — high church, low church, broad church,
every church, no church — to write a volume on the " "Worship
of the Blessed Virgin " than it would be for an infidel, who
rejects the first principles of Christianity, to write a book
on Justification. As only a Christian can understand the
latter doctrine, so only a Catholic can understand the former.
LETTER XI.
IPSE, IPSA, IPSUM — A REJOINDER.
«
To the Editor of the Globe :
Sir, — I begin to-day my critique on the Vicar's sixth letter.
On the very threshold I am met with the shibboleth —
" Forgery," now so stale to your readers. This time he applies
102 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipscm.
it to the doctrine of the " Assuinption of the Blessed Yirgin,"
jS'ow, wliile nothing could give nie greater delight, yet, to
treat this subject at all worthily, and in all its bearings, critic-
ally, historically, and theologically, would make demands upon
your space and my time altogether incommensurate with its
relevancy to this discussion. Besides, more captious and ex-
tremely shallow, more contemptibly superficial observations
were never put forward on a grave topic than those copied by
the Vicar from one of his favorite dictionaries. I can see
nothing to save them from being insulting to the intelligence
of your readers but the character for irresponsibility already
established by the scribbler who transfers them to your col-
umns. But again : he absolves me from any elaborate argu-
ment by his own admissions. Speaking of the " Assmnption,"
lie says : " All that can be said for it is, that it seems reason-
able that if Enoch and Elijah, forerunners of the Messiah, were
translated from e:.rth without seeing corruption of their bodies,
the mother of the Redeemer ought not to be less honored. It
seems fit, certainly, to mere human reason that the body which
bore the Son of God should, like His own body, see no corruj)-
tion." Very good indeed. But it is evident he does not
realize the full force of his own words. Common sense, how-
ever, like nuirder, will now and then out— even from the
Vicar. It is true that one of his distinguished religious pro-
genitors tells him that "in religious matters Reason is worth-
less," ''Reason is the enemy of all religion," and "in discuss-
ing such matters we should leave the jackass Reason at
home"; but the Vicar is a "true Catholic," you know, and
does not always agree with Martin perhaps. Be it so. I will
inform him, then, that Catholicity is not rationalistic, but it is
a rational religion, and at every step satisfies the demands of
the most rigid reason. The Catholic Church teaches that the
exercise of reason necessarily precedes the acceptance of the
truths of religion, and that it is an obligation laid upon reason
to inquire diligently, and to be certain that those truths which
are proposed to its belief, have God for their author, before it
gives its assent, in order that it may exercise, according to the
teaching of the Apostles, a "reasonable obedience." Sureiy
A Rejoindek. 1G3
truth cannot be in contradiction with the very faculty to which
it is addressed — cannot be hostile to that faculty whose natural
function is to welcome, assent, and embrace it. Let the Yicar
not so dishonor God's noblest gift to man by supposing that
the idea of the Assumption, whose feast has been celebrated
throughout the Christian Church for over fourteen hundred
years, which has its roots so deep down in the analogies of
faith, and which is so logically and so profoundly connected
with truths which even in the sixth century were yet in an early
stage of development, sprang forth, like Minerva from the
head of Jupiter, full grown from the brain of ^onie obscure
forger.
Reason, he confesses, sanctions the belief of Mary's Assump-
tion. This is a good start. For the present, then, it will suf-
fice to instruct him that its truth rests :
1st, on a positive and direct tradition, which reaches back
until lost in the origin of the Liturgy ; 2d, on ?i positive and
indirect tradition, which can be traced as far as St. Epij)ha-
nius, who died in 403 ; 3d, on negative evidence of the highest
anticjuity, and of the most striking cogency ; 4rth, on rigorous
theological deduction from other revealed truths ; 5th, on the
Sensus iidcliuyn. the common voice of the faithful. Here he
will find room to work the "Vincentian Canon." Let him
give but " six weeks' " conscientious study to the question on
these lines and he will find that
Belief is but a higher faculty of Reason
As the snow-headed moimtain rises o'er
The hghtning, and appUes itself to Heaven.
Only a word more on this topic. The fact of the Corporal
Assumption of the Blessed Virgin is not yet a dogma of Cath-
olic faith. It is a " pious belief " recommended l)y its intrinsic
reasonableness, for surely it is natural to suppose that our
Divine Lord did not suffer that sacred body in which He him-
self had dwelt, and from which He had taken His own sacred
humanity, to become a prey to corruption. Such is the lan-
guage of the Fathers in the East and the West from the very
164 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
beginning. The belief met not one opponent in its progress,
and but few sceptics ; was received from the first by all schools
of theology ; has been qualified as certain, not to be denied
without rashness, proximate to faith by theologians generally
— nay, as dejide by the first University of Christendom, that
of Paris, in 1497. Instead of spending his time looking at the
pictures in the " fine quarto edition of the Breviary," which
the Yicar says he has, let him read the Lessons of the Second
Noctarns of the Office of the Breviary for the 15th of August,
where he will find the Corporal Assumption categorically as-
serted and insisted upon by various arguments. Mary is the
"living ark of the living God, which has its resting place in
the temple of the Lord." She is the " living Paradise" taken
up into heaven ; in her the old " curse " of death " is broken."
" The lunnaculate Virgin, stained by no earthly affection, did
not return to earth," but, because she was herself a "living
heaven, has her place in the tents of heaven." " How could
she taste death, from whom flowed life to all ? She did, how-
ever, die, because she was a daughter of the old Adam, but she
was fitly taken up to the living God because she was His
Mother." " Animata Area Dei Viventis .... quae requies-
cit in teinplo Domini. — llodie Eden novi Adam paradisum
suscipit animatum, in quo soluta est condemnatio. — Virgo Im-
maculata, quae nullis terrenis inquinata est affectibus ....
non in terram reversa est, sed, cum esset animatum coelum, in
coelestibus tabernaculis collocatur. — Ex qua enim omnibus vera
vita manavit, quomodo ilia mortem gastaret ? Sod eedit legi
latae ab eo quem genuit, et ut f'ia veterls Adam, veterem sen-
tentiam subiit . . . . ut ante* i Dei viventis Mater, ad ilium
ipsum digne assumitur." To compress I quote from but two
Lessons of the Nocturns in my Breviary (Totum), p. 892, and
translate it as above. These are the thoughts of St. John
Damascene (of Damascus), the St. Thomas Aquinas of the
Greeks, taken from his second sermon, read on the feast. How
sweet its music to the Catholic heart as it rolls up through the
ages with ever swdlling chorus! A word about St. John. He
died about 780, before the schism of the East, and nearly eight
liundred years before the world heard of Anglicanism :
A Rejoinder. 165
This miserable pageant of untruth,
Feeble with three poor centuries of age.
"We have the unexceptionable testimony of the Rev. Dr. Cave,
an Anglican critic, of Cambridge University, that no man can
have a sound judgment, who, reading his works, doth not
admire his extraordinary erudition, the justness and preci-
sion of his ideas and conceptions, and the strength of
his reasoning, especially in theological matters. Jlistoria
Liiterarla, 1(588. Recalling the language of this great Father
on the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin, can your readers
wonder tliat ministers of a church, " by law established," held
together by "legal fetters" and " state support " and yet very
fast disintegratin;^, do not think very highly of St. John Da-
mascene? And was it not fitting that a sermon should be
preached in the *' Mission Chapel " two weeks ago, which was
published in your columns, June 2Tth, in which the preacher
seems to go out of his way to insult the memory of a man so
great, spiritually and intellectually, that, I hope it is not dis-
courteous to say, the preacher would not be wortliy to tie the
latcliet of his shoo ? In this sermon St. John is described as a
" blind guide leading the blind multitude." Is not this, to
thinking men, the verj' acme of impertinence and dis-
gusting conceit? Would an Anglican so speak of Plato
or Aristotle, Marcus Aurelius or Epictetus? O no — ]>ut
one reason would be that they had written nothing in praise
I of the Mother of God. Would he so speak of Cardinal
Xewman, a living saint of the Catholic Churcli ? Were
the great old Greek saint walking amongst us what would pre-
vent his lashing such people across the face for their insolence?
Nothing but his profound humility or the insigniiicance of his
revilers. Another cause of the dislike felt l)y Anglicans for
St. John of Damascus is to be found in the f^ccond of his three
celebrated discourses against the Iconoclast heretics. The Em-
peror Leo, the Isaurian, trying on the Privy Council "dodge"
and the tactics of Henry YIIL, published his edict against holy
images in 726. St. Jolin entered the lists against the heresy,
and in this discourse he, like another Paul before Agi'ippa,
166 Ipsk, Ipsa, Ipsum.
points out to the emperor that though he was entrusted with
the government of tlie state he had no autliority to make decis-
ions in j)oi?its of ecclesiastical doctrine. But after all, " blind "
as St. Jolm Damascene may have been, will he not compare
favorably witli the "fathers" of the English Reformation
whom Littledale calls " utterly unredeemed villains," " a set of
miscreants," and who says that " Robespierre, Danton, IMarat
.... merit quite as much respect as Cranraer, Ridley,
Latimer " ?
But enougli. " Enoch and Elijah were translated from earth
without seeing corruption of their bodies," says the Vicar.
Why not Mary ? Every Catholic believes it. It would, there-
fore, be a great glory to scientific theology, and a great joy to
its professors if this pious belief were to receive the final sanc-
tion of a dogmatic definition. And I do hope and pray that
before I utter my Nunc dimittis to this world, I may have
lived to see the edifice of JVIary's peerless glories crowned
by a solemn declaration, that the Catholic Church believes and
teaches the integral Assumption of the Mother of God as a
part of Divine Revelation.
The Vicar next takes np. under the heading "Forgery," my
quotation from the hymn of Prudentius. This I have already
disposed of in a previous letter, together with the stale slander
on Bishop Strossmayer which the Vicar, lately in your columns,
pathetically complains is a "fresh subject" because, no doubt,
of its terrible force as an argiimentum ad hominem. His cries
for help from his "friends in England" on Prudentius, will
bring him no relief. The cowardice displayed in thus sneaking
out of a difficulty, instead of manfully meeting it, forcefully
einphasiz'^s the character and controversial methods of the man
who could daio to write : " We cannot trust a quotation (the
Church of Rome) gives from ancient authors till we have
thoroughly sifted the evidence in their favor." Though such
a statement from his pen merits as little attention as that of a
lunatic who would assert that two and two make eight, I would
like to follow at length the refiections it suggests. If I did the
Vicar would be "after you" for allowing me to introduce a
" fresh subject " and have as much cause for wincing and whin-
A Rejuindkk. 1G7
ing as the Strossmaycr exjjose gave liiin. But I cannot, in justice
to your readers, let it wholly pass. "Ancient authors " inc'oed ?
How many would we have but for the "Church of Konie"' !
To whom are we indebted for those monuments of Christian
antiquity, the writings of the Fathers, hers not his nor of any
of his Theological kith or kin, over the very " copious indices "
of which he labored for "six weeks," with such stupid results,
to find arguments against her? To whom are we indebted for
the transmission to us intact of the Holy Scriptures themselves ?
iS^ow, I do not forget the claims of our modern Protestant
scholars, and I am proud of them. — Niebuhr, Mommsen, Boeh-
nier, lianke. Pertz, Duruy, Gibbon, Grote, Hallam, Milner,
Stubbs, Freeman ; but their names had been writ in water but
for the " Church of Pome." She put into their hands the
boundless treasures she had gathered up, preserved and accumu-
lated in her majestic march through the ages — else, their occu-
pation was gone. Blot out what the " Church of Rome" has
done for the study of history, — historical criticism, the materials
on which it is exercised and its results as we enjoy them to-day,
and the remainder you might put away in your waistcoat pocket.
Let me prove this, though I will give but a merely suggestive
sketch. My authorities will be entirely Protestant, of great
name and now living — Wattenbach, Gardthausen, writers in
the Enc]jclo_p(£d'ia Britannica, and the Rev. Prof. Stokes, an
Anglican Canon, in his article in the Conteinporary Ueview
for January, 1883, entitled — " TheBollandists," which I heartily
commend to your readers as a generous portrayal of the spirit
and the labors of many imperial sons of the " Church of
Rome." I propose to speak magisterially now, as I can well
afford to do, and I invite the Yicar if he has any learned " friends
in England " or out of it, of Oxford or Cambridge either, to seek
their assistance, should he desire to dispute my statements.
I need not here speak of the great qualities of the present
illustrious Pope, Leo XIII. His wisdom, his learning, his
single-miudedncss, his spotless character, his deep interest in all
the arts and sciences, his true and sincere solicitude for the wel-
fare of leligion and society, have been duly applauded by the
whole world. A few years ago when throwing open the Vati-
168 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
can Archives to scliolars for the purpose of historical research,
he used these words — I need not give liis own sonorous Latin — :
" History, tlie guide of life and the light of truth, is one of
tliose arms most lit to defend the Church," and — " tlie first law
of history is to dread uttering falsehood ; the next, not to fear
stating the truth ; the last, that the historian's writing should
be open to no suspicion of partiality or of animosity." One is
reminded of the apostrophe of Lecky, the historian of Ration-
alism, to the grandeur of St. Peter's at Home : " There lie those
mediiKval Pontift's who had borne aloft the lamp of knowledge
in an evil and benighted age, who had guided and controlled
the march of nations." Is Pope Leo the first Pope that furthers
the study of history — of tlie " Ancient Authors " 'i Let me
inquire shortly what the " ('hurch of Rome " has done for both.
Protestant Germany is to- day the leader in this branch of
learning, but she began her work only yesterday. Fitful at-
tempts had previously been made, but it was only after tlie
great Napoleonic wars, when a new national spirit arose among
the Germans, that the efforts of Anidt and Grimm, and especially
of Von Stein, were crowned with success. Not till 1819 was
it possible to found the society for the study of Old German
History. Pertz was the leading spirit, and his great work, the
^'■Jfonu/iienta " represents the high-water mark of even German
self-sacrifice, learning, judgment and vigor in the lOtli century
in this department. But the " Church of Rome " helped him
in his work. He visited Rome on his first journey of research
in 1820 and AVattenbach says "he received from the Papal
Regesta alone 1800 unprinted documents." Kennicott, the re-
nowned Oxford Hebrew Biblical scholar, had been treated in
the same way, as he so cordially acknowledges in his letters.
Now, up to the time of Pertz nothing had been done by Prot-
estants (I do not forget the good Leibnitz's work) that could be
at all compared with the great historical collections undertaken
and carried out by Catholics. The " Church of Rome " was
the leader in the cause of historical progress. Hear Canon
Stokes on the matter : " It was the existence and rich endow-
ments of the great monasteries," says he, " which explains the
publication of such immense works as those of the BoUandists,
A Rejoinder. 109
Mabillon and Tillemont, quite surpassing any now issued, even
by the wealthiest pul)lishers among ourselves, and only ap-
proached, and that at a distance, by Pertz's ' Monunienta ' in
Germany." Surely this is glory enough, but it is not all. Let
me untwist for your readers this quotation from this Anglican
scholar. The Church of England has many such at home, but
she sends curious specimens to the Colonies now and tlien.
One of the most gigantic historical works ever undertaken
was the Acta Sanctorum of a company of Flemish Jesuits,
called Eollandists from their founder, John 13olland. " Their
majestic tomes," says Canon Stokes, " stand as everlasting pro-
tests on behalf of real and learned inquiry, of accurate, pains-
taking and most critical research into the sources whence his-
tory, if worth anything, must be drawn." During this cen-
tury, the Belgian Jesuits considered it a matter of honor to
continue and complete the vast work begun by their brethren
of old, and the whole work published to the present time num-
bers sixty-four folio volumes. They include a great part of
the history of the world since the establishment of Christianity.
" I regard the Acta Sanctorum,''^ says Prof. Stokes, "as especi-
ally valuable for Medioeval history, secular as well as ecclesias-
tical, simply because the authors, having had unrivalled o]jpor-
tunities of obtaining and copying documents, printed their
authorities as they found them, and thus preserved for us a
mine of historical material which otherwise would have perished
in the French revolution and its subsequent wars." He may
well express his surprise that " neither of our own great histo-
rians who have dealt with the middle ages, Gibbon and Hallam,
has, as far as we have been able to discover, ever consulted
them." To prove how valuable the mine is. Prof. Stokes cites
the titles of some of the critical treatises in the work. Of the
honesty of the Eollandists, which, according to Pope Leo, is
the essential condition, the first, second, and third law of all
history. Canon Stokes says : "■ This much any fair mind will
allow : The Society of Jesus, since the days of Pascal and the
Provincial Letters, has been regarded as a synonym of dishon-
esty and fraud. From any such charge the student of the Acta
Sanctortim must regard the Eollandists as free We find
170 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
in them thorough loyalty to historical truth ; they deal in no
suppression of evidence ; they give every side of the question.
They write like men who feel, as Bollundus their founder did,
that under no circumstances is it riqht to lie. They never lies-
itate to avow their own convictions and i)redilections ; they draw
their own conclusions and put their own gloss upon fact and
document ; but they give the documents as they found them."
In my first quotation from Canon Stokes he mentioned the name
of Mabillon. What glorious memories it evokes ! Vet he was
but one of the fifteen thousand writers produced by the Order
of St. Benedict. It would require a whole letter to speak at
all adequately of the works of the French Benedictine monks
of St. Maur alone. On the same plane as the great Jesuit
work, Wattcnbach places their Acta Sanctorum Ordinis S.
Benedicti in nine large folios which he says " are of the utmost
importance to histoi-y."
Again he says : " After these industrious and learned monks
liad rendered the most extraordinary services to the Itistory of
their order and the church, and in various collections had made
accessible unlimited historical material, they began in 1*38 to
publish the Becueil des Illstoi'lens des Gaules et dc la France
by Dom Bouquet and his successors, a collection the publication
of which has been taken up quite recently, and now consists of
tioenty-one folio volumes.'''' I cannot stay to speak of Ughclli,
Baronius, Paperoch, Tillemont, d'Achery, Germain, Ruinart,
the brothers Fez, or Father Muraton. Of the last writer Wat-
tcnbach says : " Ilis Scriptores Iteruin Italicarum., in tiventy-
one folio volumes, ^VQ the first comprehensive systematic col-
lection of the documentary history of any country, and to this
day the only one which has reached completion." To publish
his vast collection, 48 volumes in all, several princes and nobles
of Italy subscribed $4-,000 each. Again Wattenbach says :
"The history of the Roman Church, written by Cardinal Bar-
onius, embraced the whole Christian world, and in it every
nation found the most important information regarding its own
past from the treasures of the Vatican Archives."
I cannot more fitly sum up this part of my reflections than
in the words of Matthew Arnold, our great critic, recently
A ItEJOINDKK. 171
(leiul. Speaking of the great library of England, he says:
" In spite of all the shocks which the feeling of a good Catho-
lic has in this Protestant conntrv inevitably to underjro, in
spite of the contemptuous insensibility to the grandeiu* of
lionie which he finds so general and so hard to bear, how iiuich
has he to console him, how many acts of homage to the great-
ness of his religion may he see, if he has his eyes open. I will
tell hiiu one of them. Let him go, in London, to that delight-
ful spot .... the reading-room of the British Museum. Let
him visit its sacred quarter, the region where its theological
books are placed He will tind an immense Catholic
work .... lording it over that wliole region, reducing to in-
significance the feeble Protestant forces which hang upon its
skirts. Protestantism is duly represented, indeed ; Mr. Panizzi
knows his business too well to suffer it to be otherwise ; all
the varieties of Protestantism are there ; there is the library of
Anglo-Catholic Theology, learned, decorous, exemplary, but a
Huh' imlntcrcfttiiHj; there are the works of Calvin, rigid, mili-
tant, menacing; there arc the works of Ur. Chalmers, the
Scotch Thistle, valiantly doing duty as the Hose of Sharon, but
keeping something very Scotch about it all the time; there are
the works of Dr. Channing, the last word of religious philos-
ophy in a land where every one has some culture, and where
superiorities are discountenanced — the flower of moral and in-
telligent mediocrity. Bat how arc all these divided against
one another, and how, though they were all united, are theij
dwarfed hy the Catholic Leviathan, their neighbor ? Majestic
in its blue and gold unity, this fills shelf after shelf and com-
partment after compartment, its right mounting up into heaven
among the white folios of the Acta Sanctorum., its left plung-
ing down into hell among the yellow octavos of the Law
Digest. Everything is there, in that immense Patrologim
Carsus Completus, in that Encyclopedie Theologique, that
Nouvelle Encyclopedie Theologique, that Troisieine Encyclo-
pedie Theologique ; religion, philosophy, history, 1)iography,
arts, sciences, IJibliography, gossip. The work embraces the
whole range of human interests ; like one of the great ]\Iiddle
Age Cathedrals, it is m itself a study for a life. Like the net
172 Il'8K, Il'SA, Il'8UM.
in Scripture, it dra<^ everytliing to land, bii'l and good, lay and
ecclesiastical, sacred and i)rofane, so that it he hut matter of
liunuin concern. Wide-enihracing as the ])o\ver whose i)roduct
it is! A power, for history, at any rate, eminently the
cuuKcii." How heautiful ! How true 1
LETTER XII.
IPSE, IPSA, IPSUM — A KEJOINDER.
To the Editor of the Globe :
SiK, — In my last letter I considered the world's debt to the
"Church of Rome" and her sons for their labors to promote
liistorical science. I wish shortly to contrast these with the
spirit of the Church of England and her sons — the Vicar's
theological progenitors. The closing words of his " Strictures "
are these: "May the God of Truth in His mercy hasten the
time" when "we shall behold a disastrous collapse for the
Roman Church of her extensive and expensive ])lant in the
(jood old Countnj.''^ Xow the unctions piety of this de-
sjiondent and despairing ejaculation does not redeem its blaa-
phoiny, as your readers will presently confess. History indeed
may repeat itself, for John Bull is a vagarious sort of fellow,
to say nothing of the theological huU-ies who now and then
escape from his shores. The "good old country" once had a
good deal of "expensive plant" belonging to the "Roman
Church." The "plant" ?«a.s "expensive " because it was the
coinage of the very life-blood of men who had pledged
their thought and power, and had consecrated their lives to the
promotion of the knowledge and love of the God of Truth, and
the happiness and well-being of their fellows. Let us inquire
what the Church of England and her sons of this "good old
country " did with this " plant." My authorities, remember,
all through, are Protestants, not "Si. Liguori" or "the Rac-
colta " — these will come by and by.
Before the brutal lust of Henry YIIL begat Anglicanism,
A Hejoinuer. 173
many monasteries, those historic homes of great learning a'ul
greater virtue, existetl in England. They all had their
libraries. In those of the greater monasteries were deposited
the Acts of Parliament after the coming of the Normans ;
and under the English Saxons the ])rincipal decrees of the
Witenagemote and Gemote. In several monasteries Registers
of the Kings and public transactions were compiled and pre-
served, so)ne of which we f(jrtuimtely have, as the Saxon annals
or chronicles, published by Gibson at Oxford in 1('>92. From
such monastic chronicles Florence of Worcester and William
of Malniesbury, declare they compiled their histories. The
destruction of these momnuents are an irreparable loss to
English history. Tyrell, in his " History of England," p. 15*2,
says : " From the conversion of the Saxons most of the laws
made in the Witenagemote, or great Councils, were carefully
preserved, and would have been conveyed to us more entire,
liad it not been for the loss of so many curious monuments of
antiquity at the suppression of the monasteries, in the reign of
Henry VIII." But worse than that. Fanaticism and more
than vandal rage did not even spare the libraries of Oxford and
Cambridge, especially the two most noble public libraries at
Oxford, the one founded by Richard of Burg, or Richard
Aungerville, Lord -treasurer of England and Bishop of Durham,
in the reign of Edward III., who spared no pains or cost tr
make this collection complete ; the other, furnished with books
by Thomas Cobliam, Bishop of Worcester, in 1367, and exceed-
ingly augmented by King Henry lY., his sons, and by the
addition of the celebiated library of the Duke of Gloucester,
filled with curious manuscripts brought, at any price, from
foreign countries. Read the words of Chamberlain in his
work entitled " Present State of England" part 3, p. 450 :
" These men," says he, " under pretence of rooting out Popery,
superstition, and idolatry, utterly destroyed these two noble
libraries, and embezzled, sold, burnt, or tore in pieces all those
valuable books which these great patrons of learning had been
so diligent in procuring in every country of Europe. Nay,
their fury was so successful as to the Aungerville library, which
was the oldest, largest, and choicest, that we have not so much
171 Ii'SK, Ipsa, Ii-sum.
as a catalogue of tlie books left. N^or did they rest hero. They
visited likewise the college-lil)raries, and one may guess at the
work they made with them, by a letter still kept in the Ar-
chives, where one of them boasts that New College qnadratigle
was all covered with the leaves of their torn books. The Uni-
versity thought fit to complain to the government of this bar-
I barity and covetousness of the visitors, but could not get any
more than one single book .... and to this day there is no
book in the Bodleian Library besides this and two more which
are certainly known to have belonged to either of the former
libraries. Nay, and the University itself, despairing ever to
enjoy any other public library, thought it advisable t.^ disj^ose
of the very desks and shelves the books stood on in the year
1555." ' The time was certainly not auspicious for Roman
" plant." Your readers had a glimpse at what the " Church of
Rome " did — " Look here on this picture and on that^
Hitherto I have discussed the quantltive aspect of the his-
torical work of the "Church of Home" among the "Ancient
Authors." There remains now to consider the qnalH]) of that
work — the value of those materials, in amassing which her sons
led lives of ceaseless, unwearied toil, as tested by historical
criticism. Here they have pushed erudition to the very point
of genius. ^^' historical criticism I mean the probing of his-
torical tc^ .- aony ; its acceptance, if found to be true, no mat-
ter how contrary to the historian's sympathies; its rejection, if
false, no matter how strongly it favored his views and theories.
To probe historical testimony is to inijuire whether documents
are genuine or spurious, whether the witnesses are partial or
unprejudiced, whether the facts harmonize with or contradict
other ascertained facts. .N')W your readers will remend)er my
quotation from Whitaker, an Anglican minister and historian.
' Read Mr. Gladstone's burnino^ words on tliis satanioally-inspirctt
vandalism. In liis article On Bookstand the Housing of ihem, in
the Nineteenth Century. Mardi, 1890, he says : "Oxford had ....
i-eceived noble {jifts for her University Lil)rary. And we have to
recollect with shanio and indiijnation tliat that institution was ])luu-
dered and destroyed by the Coninussioners of the boy king, Edward
the Sixth, acting in the name of the Reformation of Rehgion."
A liEJOIXDKR. 175
wlio says: ''Forgery — I blnsli for the honor of Protestants
while I write it — seems to liave been peculiar to the Tieforni-
er.?." According to Littledale this nnist be true, but I think it
4.,,. „., ,,: T., i.1.:., a...i,, M .. •' ji i -,., i ii i' ^
luu n\Vc;eJ»iiig. xii tiiir- \iiieui lUciis luc; iruu iliui iiiu iui^e
will ever move along together, as a body and its shadow. There
are always realities, there are always shams — tributes to the
real thiny-s. For^-eries arc committed to-dav — it was so in the
])ast, and it will be so in the future while Imman nature re-
mains as it is, Tu historical work, which is based so largely on
the study of documents, public and private, state and ecclesias-
tical, much depends on the character of these documents, or
diplomas, as they were called. T/ie '•^Church of' Jiome^^ stands
to-daij u/iKjuaNed la the whole science of P((/eof/mj)h//, Greek
and Latin. The world lias nothing to compare with the
treatises written by her sons to establish the true principles for
distinguishing genuine from forged documents. My authority
is the Eneyeloj)a'xlia Brltannica, not by any means partial to
her. I i-efer your readers to A^ol. 7, Art. " Diplomatics," and Vul.
18, Art. " Pala30graphy." The immortal Pope, Innocent III.
(1195-1210), issued a decretal laying down rules for detecting
forged bulls. In 1075 Paperoch, the illustrious Eollandist
Jesuit, wrote his Propylaeum AnthiiuD'ium circa veri etc falsi
discrimen in vetustis wemhranis, freely translated — " The
Anti(p;ary's Introduction to the art of distinguishing the true
from the false in old manuscripts." Your r ^.ers will not
have forgotten Canon Stokes' testimony to ti:c "ha.acter of i'le
Bollandists. With a view to establish the credit of those docu-
ments preserved in the original, the Benedictine Monk, Ma-
billon, in the year lOSl, produced his masterly work, called
by Magliabe(!hi an '" immortal book," J)e lie Dijiloniatica —
on "Diplomatics." In 1750-1705 appeared the JVoiiveau
Traite de Diplomatique by Dom Toustain and Dom Tassin,
Benedictine Monks of St. Maur, vols., cpiarto, treating of the
whole subject of Diplomas, and accordingly entering at lengtli.
into a minute investigation of the j)eculiarities and character-
istics of writing proper to diiferent ages and countries. Hear
the Jiritaniiica : "The bibliography of Latin paleography in
its different branches is very extensive, but there are compara.
176 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
lively few books which deal with it as a whole. The most com-
plete work is due to the Benedictines, who in 1750-1765 pro-
duced the Nouvcau Traite de Diplomatique, which ex-
amines the remains of Latin writing in the most exhaustive
manner As their title shows, they did not confine
themselves to the study of MS. volumes, but dealt also with
that other branch of paleography, the study of documents, in
whicli they liad been preceded by JMabillon in his De De Dip-
lomatlcaP In these monumental works the Benedictine
Monks, therefore, not only laid the foundation of the critical
study of Latin historical documents but almost brought it to
l)ei'fection. They classified the writings of different ])eriods
and countries, thus establishing external tests of the genuine-
ness of manuscripts, and founding the science of Latin Paleo-
graphy. By minute study and careful analysis they also estab-
lished and sot down many internal criteria, such as the wording
of titles, the value of geographical terms at different times, and
contemporary chronology, which are in some ways even more
certain and more serviceable than the external tests. These
latter are dealt with in the science of Diplomatics.
But the Jjenedictines were not satisfied with these achieve-
ments. AVhat ]\[al)illon, Toustain and Tassin did for Latin
documents and Paleography, that the great Montfaucou did
for Greek. " The first book," says the Britannica, " wdn'ch
dealt with the subject in a systematic manner was the Palae-
o(jraphla Gvaeca of the learned Benedictine Dom Bernard
Montfaucou, published in 1708. So thoroughly well was the
work done, that down to our time no other scholar attempted
to improve ujxm it, and Montfaucou remained the undisputed
authority on this branch of learning." To-day a distinguished
German Pn)testant, GardthauHen, is trying to improve upon
Montfaucou. He says: ''^The Palaeogycqdiia Gvaeca is and
will remain one of the most remarkable achievements by which
a new science was not only founded, but, as it seemed, also
perfected. It is the more remarkable, as Montfaucou had no
one to precede him, but created everything from notiiing."
Again : Dates suj)ply most useful -r. id reliable ways of
checking historical docunients. Hence tlie importance for pur-
A Rejoin DEK. 177
poses of historical criticism of a sound, detailed and systematic
Chronology. The father of Chronology was Joseph Scaliger,
a Protestant, who in 1583 published his work, De Emenda-
tione Temporum, on the "Correction of Time." He soon
found not only critics but fellow-workers in the learned Jesuits
Sirmond, Labbe and Petavius, whose book on Chronology
appeared in 1627, and remained as authority for a long time.
But in 1750 was published "the first edition in one volume,
quarto, of L Art de Verifier les Dates — 'The Art of Verify-
ing Dates,' which in its third edition (1818-1831) appeared in
38 volumes, 8vo, a colossal monument of the learning and
labors of various members of the Benedictine Congregation of
St. Maur." Encyc. JBritannica, vol. 5, Art. " Chronology.''
[Let me complete the above sketch of the labors of Catholic
scholars in the interests of truth, with the name of Cardinal
Mai. He was the most consummate critic, in our time, of
ancient texts and MSS., and his splendid labors attracted the
attention and admiration of all E ^ope. His sagacity and
genius in deciphering Palimpsest MSS. were supreme, and
liave never been equalled. His merits in tliis particular were
Iieartily recognized by the best scholarship of England; for, a
few years before his death (1854:), a gold medal was there
struck in his honor, bearing the following inscription : " An-
(jelo Malo, PaUmjysestprum Inventori atque Restauratori —
To Angelo Mai, the discoverer and restorer of Palimpsest
MSS."]
Now here I intend to say a word on two famous documents
of the Middle Ages, the Donatio Constantini — the " Donatian
of Constantine," and the " Forged Decretals " about which,
copying Littledale, the Vicar made some noise, and to which I
have already referred in this Rejoinder. We have just seen
how the Jesuits and Benedictines vied with each other in pro-
viding tools for the critical historians. But long before Pape-
roch and Mabillon, long before Tassin, Petavius, and Dom
Clement, the principal compiler of "The Art of verifying
Dates," Catholic scholars had given proof that they possessed
both the keenness, the learning and the impartial love of truth
M'hieh distinguishes the true critic. Perhaps I can give no
178 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
better proof of this shortly, tlian the story of the two docu-
ments above. On the lirst, many mediaeval writers based the
temporal jiower of the Pope, while tlie second was used to
fortify many other papal rights. But scarcely had the llenais-
sance set in, scarcely had the study of history been reawakened,
when Catholic historians and scholars, churchmen, too, nay
Bishops and Cardinals, began to doubt the genuineness of
these two important documents, and fiiuxlly condemned them
as spurious. It is well known that Laurentius Yalla condenmed
the Donatio Constcuitini in unmeasured terms. " Doubts of
the genuineness of this Document " says Prof. L. Pastor, " had
been expressed years before Valla by the learned Nicholas of
Cusa in his Catholic Co7icor dance. Independently of Yalla
and Cusa, Reginald Pecock, Bishop of Chichester, showed after
careful examination of the historical testimony, the impossi-
bility of upholding this document so long looked upon as
genuine. In 1443 Silvio Piccolomini, afterwards Pope Pius
II., urged Frederick III. to bring the question of the Donation
of Constantino before a Council." As to the False Decretals,
the Popes have often been accused of having had them com-
piled and partly forged to back up some of their pretensions.
It is now estabhshed that this collection was made in the
Prankish Empire between the years 852-7. The then reigning
Pope, Nicholas I., did not so much as know of its existence
till 804. Subsequently for several centuries this forgery was
looked upon as genuine ; but even during the " dark '■ ages,
long before Luther, Petrus Comestor, in the twelfth century,
doubted its authenticity. In 1324 Marsilius of Padua pro-
nounced it a forgery, and in the fifteenth century its genuine-
ness was not admitted by Persona, Kalteisen, Cardinal Cusa,
and John of Turrecemata. [These are crucial facts. Two
documents, supposed to support strongly certain Papal claims,
one a forgery which imposed upon the Jesuit Turrianus even
in 1573, were rejected by the critics of the Middle Ages, most
of them ])riests and bishops, before the schism of Luther, and,
therefore, solely in the interest of truth.'] See Hergenrother,
" anti-Janus," and Prof. Ilerbermann, A. C. Q. Review, April,
1888.
A Rejoixdeu. 179
I trust I have now eviscerated the Vicar's " thesaurus " on
*'foro;eries and falsifications" of the "Church of lionie" and
to the satisfaction of your readers. When next tliey meet him
with a yard stick in one hand and the " critical apparatus "
in tlie other, and hear him talk of "sifting the evidence" of
Iloman quotations from the " ancient authors " they can " hold
their sides." Your readers, however, may justly complain of
the length of this licjo'inihr^ but when they consider the
space I am obliged to occupy in refutation of so miserable a
statement as that with which I have just been dealing, I can
fairlj- claim their indulgence. I have felt obliged to track him,
step by step, through his irrelevant ravings, for the sake of the
" Clod of Truth " and His little ones. In my next we will get
nearer to the question which he did his little best to befog — if,
indeed, he is responsible at all.
LETTER XIII.
IPSE, IPSA, IPSUM — A REJOINDER.
To the Editor of the Globe :
Sir, — I continue my critique on the Vicar's sixth letter. He
says : " I now pass to the consideration of my opponent's re-
marks on the Papal Decree of the Immaculate Conception."
Your readers will remember that in my Rfsumt I was led
to consider the " Papal Decree " — the Bull Ineffai!Ilis — on the
Immacidate Conception by the Vicar's statement " that Pius
IX. when promulgating the dogma .... alluded for its de-
fence to this very text" (Genesis iii. 15), and by Bishop King-
don's assertion "that the mistake Ipsa for Ipse had acquired a
tremendous importance from being quoted in the promulgation
of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception by Pius IX. " I
have already so fully disposed of both of these silly and igno-
rant utterances that there is nothing to add in the nature of
argument ; but a little expansion here will the better enable
180 Ipse, Ipjja, Ipsum.
the ordinary reader to take in the ineptnese and imbecility of
the Vicar when he lets go the hands of Pusey and Littledale
and attempts to step alone. The exhibition is indeed a sorry
one.
It was quite evident from the Vicar's statement and that of
the Bishop, anent the " Decree," that they had never read it ;
but the Vicar now comes into court and confesses it. " I have
not a copy of the Bull Inkffabilis," he says, " but I possess a
long extract in English by Dr. Pusey." This is pretty good,
but only characteristic of the " Priest " (save the mark !) who
with audacious " cheek " and insulting impudence puts himself
forward as (lualified to instruct the public on the " apostacy,"
" infidelity " and " idolatry " of the Koman church ! Of course,
my opponents were not ohliged to read the " Decree," but then
they would not be expected to know much about the "tremen-
dous importance" of its alleged mistakes. By overlooking
this fact they have brought upon themselves the shame and
humiliation that covers them to-day. May the " peiiance "
chasten their love (!) for the Koman "branch" of their ideal
Church Universal 1
I give again for convenience and point Genesis iii. 15 : "I
will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed
and her seed ; he {she or it) shall crush thy head, &c." This
celebrated text is divided into two parts : the first of which
declares that God will place a barrier of enmity between the
serpent and the woman, between his seed and her seed ; and the
second expresses the consequences that should result from this
enmity, namely, the crushing of the serpent's head. I put, in
the second clause, the three received readings that your readers
may see that ^'■Ipsa — she " has absolutely no weight or bearing
on the promulgation of the " Decree " on the Immaculate Con-
ception, or on the doctrine itself, and that its " tremendous im-
portance " is only a figment of a badly diseased anti-Roman
episcopal imagination. By all three renderings, as I have so
frequently proved. Catholics understand, admi't and assert that
the agent in crushing the serpent's head is the seed of the
woman, our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ. Hitherto, I have
considered the Vicar's imbecility as the offspring of nialevo-
A Eejoinder. 181
lence, but I will now prove that it is congenital. He is as blind
as a bat and has actually put himself and the Bishop out of
court. Let your readers follow me sharply here.
In my Resume I said, that the Jirst clause of our text was quoted
t^oicem the "Decree" and verhatim, while t\\e second clause was
only " referred to indirectly, and the idea expressed paraphras-
tically " with the meaning already fully explained. I did not
say whether it was so referred to once or twice as the Vicar
impudently asserts, but to teach him a lesson in fearless honesty
in dealing with religious topics, I gave him (what he could not
get from Pusey) the original I^atin, with a translation, of the
strongest language in his favor in the " Decree." Yet he says :
" I hope he is not suppressing anything ! " Why did he not get
the " Decree " and read it before " rushing into print " \ Be-
sides, as " Xothing ^jood can come out of Nazareth," he surely
owed it to your readers to " verify " the quotations of one so
"thoroughly Jesuitical" as he charges me with being. I gave
the two quotations from the 12th and 17th sectioTis of the decree
as follows : " But (God) also raised in a wonderful manner the
hopes of our race when he said — ' I will put enmities between
thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed.' They (the
Fathers) have taught that in this divine declaration was clearly
and plainly showed forth the merciful Redeemer of the human
race — namely, Jesus Christ;" again, the 17th section: "Then,
too, they (the Fathers) published their belief .... that her
(the Blessed Virgin's) coming was foretold by God himself on
the occasion when He said to the serpent — ' I will put enmities
between thee and the woman." On these quotations the Vicar
remarks : " My opponent's contention is that because the text
Genesis iii. 15 is not quo.ed in full in the two first instances
(12th and 17th sections of the Bull) that therefore the Patristic
and Papal comments thereon have no reference to the second
clause." Nonsense 1 I was guilty of no such stupid " conten-
tion." Whv, the Catholic sense of the second clause is in-
eluded in the comment — " that in this divine declaration was
clearly and plainly showed forth the merciful Redeemer of the
human race — namely, Jesus Christ." How ? Because He was
the se^d of the woman spoken of, who by His Divine and
182 Ipse, Ipsa, Ip.sum.
Almiglity power was to effectuate the result of tlie de-
clared eniTiity, namely, the crushing of the serpent's head.
AVhat becomes of I].>8a then '\ It is not thought of at all in the
cahnnnious sense of the Bishop and his Yicar, and this they
could have known had they riad the closing words of the ]2tli
Section immediately after m^ quotation, as follows : " Where-
fore, as Christ, the Mediator between God and man, has, by
assuming human nature, blotted out the handwriting of the
decree of condemnation against us, and as Conqueror fastened
it to the cross, so, in like manner, the most holy Virgin, linked
to Him in the closest and most indissoluble bonds, in union
with Ilini and through Him .... has completely crushed
his head under her innnaculate heel." Did not St. Paul express
the same idea when he prayed on behalf of the Roman Chris-
tians — " May the God of peace crush Satan speedily under your
feet ? " But why should I dwell longer on this \ The Catholic
sense of the Second clause is common throughout the ages of
the church. Permit me one lightsome illustration. Two of
the most illustrious names connnemorated in the chuix'h to-day
are Saints Perpetua and Felioitas. They were martyred during
the violent persecution under the Emperor Severus, in 202.
Their " Acts " to the eve of martyrdom, were written by St.
Perpetua herself and we have them now. They are quoted by
Tertullian in his book — " De anima — on the soul," ch. 55,
Clarke's "Ante-Nicene Library," vol. xv. I refer the Vicar to
the Oxonian editor of these " Acts " as well as to Dodwell (Diss.
Cypr. A. n. 8, 15). While imprisoned, with her brother, in one
of those horrible ancient Ronum dungeons and doxd)tful about
her fate, St. Perpetua records that the following took place :
" One day my brother said to me : ' Sister, I am persuaded that
you are a peculiar favorite of Heaven ; pray to God to reveal
to you whether this imprisonment will end in Martyrdom or
not, and acquaint me of it.' I, knowing God gave me daily
tokens of His goodness, answered, full of confidence, I will
inform you to-morrow ! I, therefore, asked that favor of God
and had this vision : I siiw a golden ladder which reached from
earth to the heavens, but so narrow that only one could mount
at a time. To the two sides were fastened all kinds of iron in-
A Tv !■:.[( iixDEU. 183
struiiieiits, as swords, lances, hooks and knives ; so tliat if any
one went np carelessly he was in groat danger of having his
flesh torn by these weajwns. At the foot of the ladder lay a
dragon of an eiiornions size, who kept guard to turn back and
terrify those that endeavored to mount it. The first that went
up was Saturus, who was not apprehended with us, but volun-
tarily surrendered himself afterwards on our account, When
he had got to the top of the ladder he turned towards me and
said : ' Perpc'ua, 1 wait for you ; l)nt take care lest the dragon
bite you ! ' I answered : ' In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ,
he shall not hurt me ! ' Then the dragon, as if afraid of me,
gently lifted his head from under tlie ladder, and I, having got
upon the first step, set my foot itpon h is head. Thus I mounted
to the top As soon as I had related t.' my brother this
vision, we both conclnded that we should suffer death." See
the Benedictine Rninart's — '■'■Acta primorxim martyrum sin-
cera et selecta'''' — '■^ recueil inspire dhin veritable e.y)rit cri-
tique ^^ says a learned French Protestant writer. Also Orsi's
" Vindication of the Acts of SS. Perpetua and Felicitas." St.
Augustine has a celebrated sermon on this episode from which
I will translate a thought or two. The Yicar can " verify " at
his leisure. He will find the sermon, too, by using one of his
" copious indices," or perhaps some of his '' learned friends "
may save him the trouble by giving him the reference off-hand.
Only let him remember it is not St. John of Damascus, l)ut St.
Augustine. The saint says : " The dragon, therefore, was
crushed by the chaste foot and the conquering tread when the
upraised ladder was pointed out by which the blessed Perpetua
was to go to God. Thus the head of the old serpent which
was a stumbling-block (praecipitiinu) to the falling woman (Eve)
was made a stepping-stone (gradus) to her (Perpetua) who was
ascending." This sermon of the great African Doctor is indeed
a monument more lasting than brass erected to commemorate
the crushing of the serpent's head by the pure and gentle Per-
petua. Now, if such an imagination were soul-stirring to so
great and tender a human heart and one so miraculously attuned
to divine harmonies as that of Augustine, need we wonder that
he said such " excellent things " of Mary and that he clung to
184 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
the reading Ipsa of tlie old Yulgate (as I have pointed out),
which expresses the same idea, but in a manner altogether super-
eminent as is beeoniing to her who is the " Chief of Saints/'
Let me express tlie hope that when the Yicar next visits Rome,
and sees " a memorial column .... on the top of which stands
a figure of tlie Blessed Virgin (without the holy child, mark
you, in her arms) tramphng the serpent under foot " — let me
express the most sympathetic concern and fond hope that " this
representation of the bruising of the serpent's head hy the
ivoman" which was as "common among Roman Catholics " in
the days of St, Perpetua and as familiar to them as it is to-day,
will not so shock and paralyze his "true Catholic" feeli igs as
to prevent his going to the Propaganda to purchase a new
edition of " an English copy of the Raccolta," published in the
United States, to which he could apply his yard stick and the
" Vincentian Canon " and learn how it squared with " Little-
dale's quotations."
Commenting on my extract from the 17th clause of the
Decree as given above, the Vicar makes the following sapient
remark : " Is it not evident that the prophecy of the woman's
coming is in the second part of the text which contains that
very corrupted reading, Ipsa,^^ and he exclaims — "What a
very unsafe guide my opponent seems to be to the understand-
ing of the plainest texts and comments,'' Can your readers
diagnose the mental condition of a man who could so write ?
Who is the seed of the woman, j^a;^ excellence, divinely prophe-
sied in the ^r*^ part of the text? Undoubtedly Christ. Who
is the woman, predicted in the same part as the enemy of
Satan, whose Seed Christ was? Surely, just as undoubtedly
Mary. Even Pusey has to admit this. Now, what has Ipsa
to do with this prophecy? Please tell us, O Oxford exegete !
Nothing remains of the Vicar's Sixth Letter but a quotation
from Pusey as follows : " Dr. Pusey distinctly says (Eirenicon,
L 108) that the error of Gen. iii. 15 became the support of the
doctrine of the Immaculate Conception and gives rise to the state-
ments in De Montfort (an influential Roman writer) that God has
never made or formed but one enmity ; but it is an irreconcilable
one, which shall endure and develop unto the end. It is be-
A RWOINDER. 185
tween Mary, His worthy Motlier, and the devil ; between the
children and the servants of Mary and the children and in-
struments of Lxicifer." The tirst part of this quotation I have
long since disposed of. What shall I say of the seconds It
literally takes away one's breath. Pusey declares that this sup-
posed error gave rise to the statements, that God had made an
enmity between Mary and the devil, between her seed
or children, and his seed. Good Heaven ! Gave rise
to the statements! Why, the words are those of Almighty
God Himself! If the whole of the second clause — "//t', {i^he
or it), shall crush thy head^'' — had never been written, that
statement would have been as plain and undeniable as it is now.
It would have been equally impossible to doubt the fact that
God had established an enmity between Mary and the devil ;
unless one had preferred to reject the Bible itself, as explained
by reason and universal tradition, rather than accept it. For
the Jirst clause of the verse, at ail events, is unquestioned.
Here there are no variations or various readings. Protestants,
equally with Catholics, admit the words as they stand. The
authorized Anglican version renders the Hebrew: '' I will put
enmity between thee and the Woman." It retains, there-
fore, the force of the Hebrew article. It is the woman, be-
tween whom and the devil, God declares that He will i)ut
enmity — that woman, one, that is, who should be well known,
easily recognized, in the new order of grace. And there can
be no mistake as to who is meant. For it is that woman,
whose seed is to crush the serpent's head. It must be IMary,
the Mother of Jesus, and she alone, to whom these words al-
lude. And, so, as every student of Patristic Theology knows,
the Fathers generally understood them. St. Irenceus in the
second century leads the way ; though he gives the ma&culine
reading of the second clause. I^ot once oidy, but in several
places he explicitly interprets the woman, announced in the
Protevangel to mean our blessed Lady. Origen follows Ire-
naeus. The pseudo-Origen makes a third ; St. Epiphanius, a
fourth ; Severianus, Bishop of Gabala, a fifth ; the author of
the letter De Viro Perfecto, who is pronounced by Vallarsius,
St. Maximus of Turin, a sixth ; Fulbert of Chartrain, a seventh ;
183 Ii'SE, Ipsa, Ipsdm.
and St. Bernard, the last of the Fatliers, an eighth. In consc-
(|uenee, the Fathers were accustomed to ascribe " to tlic Blessed
Virgin directly and personally" what Pusey tells ns was
" promised as to (sic) the Person of our Lo! 1." Cardinal New-
man has demonstrated this assertion from the writings of St.
Justin, Tertullian, St. Irenreus, St. ('yril of Jerusalem, St.
Ephraem, St. Epiphanius, St. Jerome, St. Peter Crysologus,
and St. Fulgentius. See Newman's ^''Letter to Pusey^^ — an
unexampled piece of work. How could a man of Pusey's
learning and ability, with any show of reason affirm that the
substitution of " She " for " He " or " It " gave rise to the
statement that God had never formed but one emnity ; and
that was between Mary and the devil — between Mary's children
or seed, and the seed of the devil i This is the doctrine which
Almighty God Himself has revealed as the foundation of
Christian hope. I have an explanation which I will give later
on. As for the Vicar, I would ])lead for mercy with your
readers. He simply swallowed whole Pusey's assertion without
having the knowledge necessary to correct it. He probably,
too, thought it " advantageous to our church " to send it
around. To the mind of a ritualistic "Priest" "the end justi-
fies the means" where Rome is concerned, all considerations
of trutli and self-respect to the contrary notwithstanding.'
LETTER XIV.
IPSE, IPSA, IP8UM— A REJOINDER,
To the Editor of the Globe :
Sir, — I begin to-day my examination of the Vicar's seventh
letter — and last. His " Strictures " are certainly not open to
the charge of permitting your readers the luxury of indulging
the " fond imagination " that —
This honest creature, doubtless
Sees and knows more, mucli more, than he unfolds.
See Father Harper, 1. c, p. 346.
• A Rejoindke. 187
In his sixth letter he told us he was " becoming convinced "
of the " tremendous importance " of Ipna ; and now he comes
forward with the announcement of a veritable treasure-trove, and
he fairly staggers under the burden of the great thought he has
to deliver. " I have made a valuable find," he says, " which if
discovered earlier would have saved trouble and space. On
referring to tiie Jesuit Schouppe .... I find a summary
history of the Immaculate Conception followed by its proofs.
The first is from Scripture. In the forefront stands Gen. iii.
15, with its corrupt Ipsa in full, and dependent upoi. it are
three texts, Is. vii. 14, Gal. iv. 4, Lu. i. 26." He recalls with
sorrow the outlay of "trouble and space" — the '' six weeks' "
incubation, and the " yards " of " useful information " —
Tlie toil
Of dropping buckets into empty wells,
And growing old in drawing nothing up.
All this might have been " saved " had he sooner made the
" valuable find." What a pity his common sense did not sug-
gest to him, in the beginning, the propriety and prudence of
consulting Catholic authorities for Catholic doctrine, instead of
relying on Pusey, Littledale, and the anonymous scribblings of
"Janus" and "Quirinus." He might thereby have saved
what is more important than " trouble and space," namely, a
remnant, even though ragged, of credit for ordinary intelli-
gence. In the sphere of purely human science, conduct simi-
lar to the Vicar's in this respect would be regarded only as
evidence of imbecility, for in that region idiots do not give the
law to experts. But the less a man, especially a self-styled
"Priest," knows about the Catholic religion, theoretical or
practical, the bettor qualified he is to discuss it, and the more
])eremptory are his judgments, I have said the Vicar might
have saved something by sooner consulting his Jesuit author-
ity. A delusion ! Even his " valuable find," now that he has
it, exhibits him in the last stages of mental decrepitude. It is
indeed a cruel Nemesis. It reminds me of a big dunce in a
class at the blackboard doing a sum in simple addition, lie
adds up the figures written ou the board, say, 3+4+2+0
188 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
— and writing down as the result of the operation, 20, exclaims
with a flourish of triumph in his voice : Twenty ! while all
the rest of the class very plainly see that the result is 15, not
20. I ask your readers to be the class for the nonce, whilst the
Oxford theological acrobat and contortionist evolves his exege-
sis of his Jesuit friend. Here is the Vicar's translation in full
from Schouppe :
" The Lord God eiid unto the serpent, ' I will put enmities
between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed ; she
shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.'
Now that matchless (praeclara) woman is the same of whom
Isaiah prophesies, ' Behold, a Virgin shall conceive '; the same
of whom St. Paul writes in Gal. iv. 4, ' God sent forth His
Son made of a woman '; the same of whom St. Luke records,
' The angel Gabriel was sent to a Virgin.' Furthermore the
enmities which God foretold He would place between this
woman united with her Son and the serpent, show not only
that in Mary would be nothing in common with the devil and
his works, that is sin, but everything which would be most
opposed and contrary to them, that is sin ; whence it follows
that she would be pure from every stain, and moreover very full
of sanctity and grace." The athlete bows for applause
Let the performance proceed. Now comes the Vicar's com-
ment on his "find," as follows:
" Here, then, we have an authorized exposition of the Script-
ure proof in which Ipsa is clearly the fulcrum of the whole
position. The comment on inimicitias would be utterly mean-
ingless were the second part of the text omitted or the Ipsa
changed to Ipse. It is because the woman appears (by the
corrupt reading) as the champion of the human race against
Satan that Romanists argue her freedom from every conse-
quence of his polluting touch. It is true, Schouppe adds,
' united with her Son,' but that is only a make-weight, since
the position of Christ in the corrupted text is altogether insig-
nificant. He does not appear in it as the source of power for
th4 conflict^ nor even in personal form."
There is something so inexpressibly sad in this poor man's
stnpidity, that I almost feel towards lum a pity which masters
A Rejoinder. 189
indignation, and puts severity to flight. But I would be want-
ing in courtesy did I fail to show my appreciation, at all events,
of his labors on behalf of the " poor Irish " of " this diocese."
Therefore I remark that the Vicar's above comment surely ex-
hibits him in the very apogee of imbecility. As your readers
are aware it has not been my object in this controversy, it is
not my intention now, to discuss and prove the doctrine of the
Immaculate Conception. My aim throughout has been, so fur
as it lay in my power, to correct the wretched and disgraceful
mistakes of Bishop Kingdon and his Vicar, and so assist minds
in their communion that are honestly and earnestly seeking after
truth amid its Babel of doctrines. Father Schouppe, on the
contrary, in the extract from him given by the Vicar, is dis-
cnss'mg the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. As an
argument from Scripture he cites Gen. iii. 15 — and he quotes
both clauses of it. Now, I have repeatedly explained the
Catholic sense of the second clause as it stands in the Vulgate
and Douay Bibles, and pointed out that, as regards the doctri-
nal meaning, it makes no diflference whether we adopt Ipse^
Ipsa, or Ipsum. I also proved from great Catholic theologians
that neither Marian doctrine generally, nor the doctrine of the
Immaculate Conception owes anything whatever to the last
clause of the Protevangel ; and much less did they owe to the
present reading of the Vulgate. Catholic devotion here was sim-
ply the response which was made by the heart of the faithful,
under the inspiration of God's grace, to the Church's teaching
concerning the excellence and prerogatives of Mary — "our
tainted nature's solitary boast," as even the Protestant poet
could call her. It is, in very truth, one of the marvellous
works of the Holy Ghost, Whose office it is " to lead the church
step by step into all truth." St. John xvi. 13.
But Catholic theologiiins do affirm, on the other hand, that
the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception was implicitly re-
vealed in that first danm of the Protevangel, ^'herein God says,
— ^ I will put enmities between thee and the Woman.'' For, in
the first place^ it is evident, as I have before remarked, that the
woman referred to can be no other than the mother of Jesus,
the second Eve, as the Fathcrd from the earliest times call her.
190 IrjiE, Ipsa, Ipsdm.
She is plainly enough the Woinan of the ilestoration. Ami
our Jilessed Lord would seein to have had this in Ilia mind,
when He calls her by that name, especially on that solemn oc-
casion on which lie appointed her from His cross to be the
Mother of all His elect, AVhilst the redeeming I'lood of the
dying Saviour is trickling down from the Tree of Life in the
middle of the New Paradise, Calvary, and the serpent's head
is being cruslied beneath it, the Woman with whom the serpent
is at emnity, receives her otKce, — Wovian^ hehold thy Son !
So7i, hehold thy Mother, and Mary then becomes the Mother of
all who had been purchased to the New Life. Therefore does
the dying Jesus call her Wonuui, the Woman, the enemy of the
serpent. Again : it is equally evident, that the Divine Mercy
is announcing in this first clause an enmity between Mary and
the serpent whicli should not be the result of her perseverance
under the comforting influence of grace, but rather the product
of Ilis own absolute will. For He says : ' I will put '; — the
work shall be Mine. I will ordain it from the beginning.
*' You," — we may suppose God to say, addressing the serpent, —
" have deceived the tirst woman, and made of her an instrument,
whereby to procure the ruin of man. That same creature,
which has been the cause of your triumph, shall, to your more
signal confusion, become the cause also of your ignominious
defeat. And to this end I will see to it that you shall never
have either part or lot in t/ie Woman of Promise. My sancti-
fying grace shall I)uild a wall round about her soul, which shall
separate her from you forever. Eve was the beginning of
death ; Mary shall be the beginning of the world's resurrection.
You shall never boast that she has for a moment been polluted
with the mark of your present victory. I will put an ever-
lasting enmity between you : for I purpose to bestow on her
an Immaculate Conception." Such is the contention of Cath-
olic Theologians.'
Now the Vicar's astounding " find " confirms all this. For,
what have I just been doing? Simply expanding somewhat
Father Schouppe's " exposition " of the first clause of our text —
' '3ee Father Harper, 1. c.
A RiCJOINDKK. 191
Ills coiniiiont on enmities as a i)r()of of tlie truth of the Im-
maculate Conception. He quotes the verse from Genesis in
full, hilt, hecause the second clause in its Catholic sense is alv
solutely irrelevant to his ar<:;mnent, he utterly igtiores it and
does not refer to it directly or indirectly. It is simply point-
less as regards the Immaculate ('onception, and Jesuit theolo-
gians are altogether too jeNultlcal to use that sort of jiroof.
And yet the Vicar says : '■'"Ipsa is clearly the fulcrum of the
whole position." Why should I he angry with him i Let me
hut say to him, with genuine pity, as Saint Augustine once said :
"May God teach yon the things which you think you know."
"It is true," he says, "that Schouppe adds 'united with her
Son,' hut that is otdy a make-weight, since the jwsitiou of Christ
in the corrupted text is altogether insignilicant. lie does not
appear in it as the source of power for the conflict, not even
in 2)ersonal form." Good God ! The words of the Eternal
Father Himself, at the most momentous crisis in the history of
the human race, characterized as a "make-weight " ! And this
hy a man who claims a part in the priesthood of the Bride of
Christ, the Incarnate God, whose coming is so clearly fore-
shadowed in these, words! What hlasphemy ! AVhy, Schouppe
'"'' adds"' nothing at all. The union of the woman with
her Son is the verv work of God in the ainiouncement
of man's redemption. His first promise of a Redeemer
was ind)edded (so to speak) in His promise of a Co-
Redemptress. Look at the text: 'I will put enmities he-
tween thee and the Woman, and thy seed and her seed.' AVhat
can be clearer and more simple of comprehension ? Two ])arties
are mentioned by God, between whom He will ))lace iri-econ-
cila})le "enmities"; these are the respective parties of evil and
good ; they wlio fight under the respective banners of Satan
and of God. The one party, receiving its name in the prophecy
from Satan, includes all evil angels and evil men. The other
party, receiving its name in the prophecy from Mary — the
woman, includes, firstly, the Incarnate God ; and secondly, all
good angels and good men.
I am not discussing the Immaculate Conception now, and
liave therefore drawn out but a small part of the full purport
192 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
and extraordinary significance of this ji/rst cla'^ise ; but in view
of my remarks what can your readers say of the blasphemous
length to which the Vicar has carried his impertinence in his
" make-weight " quotation ? But worse. He actually dares to
sit in judgment upon, and to criticise, the man7ier in which
Almighty God, in this clause, has chosen to indicate " the
position of Christ " in the scheme of man's salvation I He
says that "position" is "insignificant," and complains that
Christ " does not appear .... as the source of power for the
conflict, nor even in personal form ! " I forbea: comment ;
but did I speak too strongly when I expressed my belief that
" he would deny the genuineness of the Holy Scriptures them-
selves to get himself out of the miserable scrape his pitiable
vanity led him into"?
In this connection and while I am dealing with the first
clause of our text I must give your readers another illustration
of the Vicar's cowardly and malicious dishonesty — it cannot be
stai-k ignorance. In his famous letter " for the benefit of Bil)-
lical students" he quoted from a pamphlet of Canon Oakeley's
the following words : " I now come to what we (Roman Cath-
olics) regard as the Scriptural germ of every doctrine and tlie
legitimate ground of every authorized devotion on the subject
of the Blessed Virgin. I mean the prediction of the office in
the Christian Dispensation uttered by Almighty God at the time
of the Fall " (viz., Gen. iii. 15). These words he tried to twist
into an argument against me. In the last installment of my
Resxims I very clearly pointed out that Oakeley's statement
referred entirely to the first clause ; and I proved that it was
Mary's office in the " Christian Dispensation " as Mother of our
Redeemer and Saviour, in His Sacred Humanity, that was pre-
dicted in the utterance of Almighty God. I showed that neither
Ipse^ Ipsa, nor Ipsum, as your readers now well know, had
anything whatever to do with this, and that Oakeley built
nothing on them. I also said : " I challeDge this Vicar, then,
to produce his proof to the contrary, if he has it, and from the
])amphlet, or stand before this community hranded as the prince
of garblers and tergiversators." How does he meet me ? He
simply repeats, in his third " stricture," his cowardly slander.
A Rejoinder. 193
and in a worse form. Here are his words : " We have already
seen it admitted by that extreme Ultramontane, Canon Oakeley
.... that Gen. iii. 15 (o/* course in itn corrupt form) — see
that, my readers — ' is the Scriptural (jeriii of every doctrine and
the legitimate yround of every anthorized devotion on the
Blessed Virgin.' " That is, he cannot accept my challenge, bnt
elects the alternative of the hrand instead. That is ])roper and
becoming. The same line of thought applies to my quotation
from Hurter's Dogmatic Theology and the Vicar's " stricture"
on it. Your readers can examine them.
I need not remind thoughtful students that it is only a pos-
teriori — from the fact that we live in the full blaze of the light
of the Incarnation with its concomitant mercies, and revel in
the glorious liberty of the children of God purchased for us
by the passion and death of the " Seed of the Woman," Jdary's
Son — that we can catch the full significance of that iirst gleam
of light which relieved the darkness of Man's Fall : "I will
put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and
lier seed ; She (he or it) shall crush thy head." How clear its
meaning to the Catholic mind 1 Permit me a word more on
the second cla^ise. In its primary sense, it refers to Christ,
the Incarnate God, whom we met in the first clause, and with-
out whom we can do nothing. In its secondary sense, ancient
and modern witnesses to Catholic doctrine use it to illustrate
and to accentuate our victory over Satan by and through
Christ. Thus we have seen St. Augustine use it in his sermon
on Saints Perpetua and Felicitas, and he also applies it to the
Church. So St. Paul, as we have seen, uses it — Romans xvi.
20, and the Bishops and Catholic writers of to-day quoted from
Pusey. I trust the Vicar has now learned something about it
in both senses which he \v\\\ not soon forget.
In closing liisconmients on the quotation from Schouppe the
Vicar innocently says : " I may now, thereupon, fairly hand
over my opponent to his own Schouppe backed by Pius IX.,
expressing the hope, however, that he will not speak of his
contention with them as a theological chore, or they miglit
deem him rude and perhaps the church he represents so
ably in this city might in that case have a word to say to
194 Ii'SK, Ii'SA, Ipsum.
liim." I am sure I have cause to thank the Vicar very lieartily
for his solicitude that I should be in good company. As a
" priest," you know, he is not inUiiferent to its influence on a
man's mind au morals. But, if I may so speak, Pius IX., of
immortal memory, the PontitI of the Immaculate Conception,
and Father Schouppe are old friends of mine ; and I can assure
the Vicar that my "contention" in their company has been a
simple delight. I Avould not use the word " c/ior*' " now — its
bouquet is not sufficiently exquisite to be used in connection
with two such names. I feel it would be positively "rude."
The Vicar is right — he is such a veritable testhete in such mat-
ters ! But then he speaks of the church which he says I " rep-
resent 80 ably in this city." "Ay, there's the rub!" Who
could withstand that appeal? He knows, none better, how
near vanity is to being " the last infirmity of noble minds."
Let me then generously answer his appeal by commending him
in turn to Schouppe's theology. In a P.S. to his " Strictures "
he referred to an article in the Quarterhj lievieio, written, I
do not hesitate to say, by Littledale. It is characteristically
full of false and silly statements, l^ut there is one so ludi-
crously consonant with strict truth and so in line with my re-
marks that I give it as follows:
" The English student of theology, who happens to light for
the first time upon a Roman Catholic theological text-book, is
apt to be struck by its lucid arrangement, its incisive, unfalter-
ing statements, contrasting not a littU with some of the books
his own teachers recommend to him."
Just so. The Vicar will find Schouppe such a book. He
will not find it like the one he read to pass his examination for
" Orders" — a ridiculous admixture of everything almost excejA
theology and philosophy. Let him read Schouppe, not for
controversy with Rome, for which he is so utterly unfitted and
unprepared, not as water is poured upon sand, but as it is
poured upon the roots of a tree, to be absorbed and incorpo-
rated into real knowledge. Dr. Johnson says that "much may
be made of a Scotchman if he be caught young," perhaps be-
cause mv Celtic brethren are Irishmen by descent. It has
fallen to the luck of the Vicar to be " caught young," and in
A ItKJOINDEK. 195
tlif first flusli of Ills zeal to keep tl»e oblij^iitions of liis "priestly
vow." If he but act upon my friendly advice now, he will
find his studies open a vista through the entangled contradic-
tions of Anglo-ritualist theology, furnish him with some theo-
logical perspective, and stretch Ins mind to such a degree that
the light of common sense at least will shine tliroutjh and save
him from repeating the exhibition your readers have witnessed
in the " Strictures."
I thought I was through with this subject, but he asks your
readers' "attention to an interpretation of //>««," which, he
says, is ''new" to him. Well, it ought not to be "new" to
him, for it is the pure creation of his own nmddled, opaque,
and bedismalled brain. O it is rich ! Let us look at it. He
quotes from a " Pictorial Church History " as follows : " She
(the seed of the woman) shall crush thy (the serpent's) head,
&c." And he remarks upon it thus : " Mary then is now to
be considered by the rising generation as the Promised Seed.
Eve the woman and Mary the seed alone aj)pear in the text.
.... It banishes all reference to the Messiah, and the text
.... ceases to be ... . the first announcement of the Gos-
pel." Ha! ha!! ha!!! O will not some of his friends even
now look after this man ! Fennm hahet in cornu. Verily we
have a new interpretation. It is a pity, a thousand pities, to
spoil it. But where does Mary appear as the "Promised
Seed " ? And where does " Eve the woman " appear at all ?
Of course — nowhere ! What is the difference between " She
(the seed of the woman) shall crush thy head," and " she (he or
it) shall crush thy head " ? Surely there is not a particle of
difference. The words in brackets in both citations are the
absolute equivalents of each other. IIow could such stuff get
into his head? What is his malady? The beaut}' and truth
of the illustration to which he also refers — " Judith encircled
by this text" — would only be sullied by another word. I
desist.
Just here he slips in a reference to the " edge-tool from De
Rossi." He " forgot to say " that he " searched for it in vain,"
and he " wonders what it was." Long before this his wonder
has given place to very different emotions. I hope he enjoys
196 Ii'SK, Ii'SA, Ipsum.
them. " I know of a capital mare's nest in Pusey's quotation
about /j)fiu}n" he says. What ! Why did he sujjpress it tiien,
in his letter hist December, written " for the benetit of Biblical
students," when he quoted from De Rossi's work on *' Tlie
Various Keachngs of tlie Old Testtiment'' i Worse than tliat.
Why did he say in the lOtii jiaragraph of his second "strict-
ure": "In all the connnentaries 1 have read on Gen. iii. 15, I
have never found Ipsuni mentioned as a various reading and
that therefore I doubt if one exists " ? He has probably suf-
fered enough for his sin in this particular. I therefore hand
him over to the tender mercies of your readers, only reminding
them in the words of the Talmud, that " There is a great dif-
ference between one who can feel ashamed before his own
soul, and one who is only ashamed before his fellow-men."
" I have now," he s{»ys, " concluded all the necessary argu-
ments I have still a fesv words to say outside the main
contention." To a consideration of these " few words " I will
invite the attention of your readers in my next.
LETTER XV.
IPSE, IPSA, IPSUM — A REJOINDER.
To the Editor of the Globe:
Sir, — I have now disposed of Ipse^ Ipsa, Ipsum in their
strict relation to this discussion, and my labors were at an end
had my opponent adhered to the points at issue when we began
it. Instead, however, he has swept the gamut of misrepre-
sentation and calumny on a topic selected by himself, namely,
the position of the Blessed Virgin in Catholic theology. The
one aspect in which, throughout his dreary " Strictures," he
represents his Saviour's dearest Mother, is as the object of an
anti-Christian worship, and as the most formidable antagonist
to her Son's due honor. This is their most repulsive character-
istic. He is one of the tribe, as flourishing now as in the days
A Rejoinder. 197
of Aristoplianes, whose occupation it is " to make the worse
appear the lietter reason." In the "Strictures" lie appears at
his best — or worst. They are simply instinct with jjassion,
prejudice, and malevolence. Ueginning with his very first letter
and thence continuously to the end, he hurls at Catholics and
the Catholic Church such opprobrious terms as "Idolatry,"
" Apostasy," " Impiety," and " Intidelity." Surely these are
the most frijrhtful charges that can be laid to the score of any
Christian ! For, throughout God's Word, the crime of idolatry
is fijx)ken of as the most heinous, the most odious and the most
detestable in His eyes, even in an individual. What must it be
then, when Hung as an accusation upon millions who have been
baptized in the name of Christ, who have tasted the sacred gift of
the Holy Eucharist, and received the Holy Ghost ; and of whom,
therefore, if guilty of this crime, St. Paul tells us (Heb. vi. 6),
tliat it is im|x>.ssible that they be renewed unto penance?
But what is idolatry i It is the giving to man, or to anything
created, that homage, that adoration, and that worship, which
God has reserved for Himself ; and to substantiate such i charge
against us, it must Ik; proved that such honor and worship is
taken by us from God and given to a creature. My opponent
has in the presence of the God of truth (if he was conscious of
such), and our fellow-citizens taken the awful responsibility of
imputnig this crime to us, and he appeals for proof to the lan-
guage we use in expressing our love for, and veneration of, the
holiest creature that ever came from the hands of the Creator,
creation's masterpiece, its crown and glory — Mary of Nazareth.
I have before me while I write a copy of Raphael's famous
painting, the " Madonna di San Sisto." ' There stands " the
transfigured woman," as Mrs. Jameson finely says, " at once
completely woman and something more; an abstraction of
power and purity and love, poised on the empurpled air, re-
quiring no other support, and looking out with lier melancholy,
loving mouth, her slightly-dilated, sibylline eyes, quite through
the universe to the end and consummation of all things."
There Ls a listening' feai* in her regard,
As if calamity had but begun ;
198 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
As if the vanwaitl cL^uds of evil days
Had spent their iiialice, and tlie sullen rear
Was with its stored thunder laboring up.
In presence of this conception of sui-passing loveliness and
majesty, and in the gaze of the immortal eyes of the Divine
Child enthroned upon her heart, I pledge myself to encounter
squarely and fully the infamous calumny of the Vicar, to
steadily confront his so-called proof, and so far as reason can,
to tear ttway utterly and entirely the veil of prejudice that has
been hanging, alas ! too long, between the eyes of Protestants
and the claims upon their veneration of the Mother of their
Redeemer. I promise that of his argument I will " leave not
a rack behind " — and to a large extent I will use Pusey and
other Anglican authorities. I ask the thoughtful attention of
your dissenting Protestant readers. I blnsh at the thought of
my unworthiness to be the apologist of those claims, and I re-
gret that by the exigencies of the moment
The lyre so ] ong divine
Degenerates into hands like mine.
Truth, however, is objective and altogether iiidependeut of
my personal demerits. Besides, I claim a share hi that sonship
declared at the foot of the Cross — Woman, he/iold t/iy Son !
Son, behold thy Mother — and I am summoned to a discharge
of its duties by the Yicar's challenge. If I regarded only the
influence his words may have on the Catholic mind nothing
further need be said in reply to them. It would be but break-
ing " a fly upon the wheel." Before that ineffably awful and
winning doctrine of the Real Presence of Christ with His
Church, the living, loving Incarnate God tabernacled with me!i,
the notion that any reverence to those in whose bodies He had
dwelt, any love to her whose milk He had deigned to drink,
could lessen by a hair's breadth the immeasurable distance be-
tween the Creator and the creature, is so unspeakably absurd
that it vanishes out of its presence as an impure fog generated
by human malice and weakness. My opponent's " supply of
useful information," then, from " Liguori " and " the Eaccolta '*
A IIejoindeu. 199
in his first letter, and his " wider view of the Roman Cnltus of
Mary," from Pusey, in his last, are for the benefit of his fellow-
Protestants. Of course, he disowns and disclaims anv sucli fel-
lowship, for lie is a " true Catliolic," but as he can be " all
things to all men " to score a point against Home, I trust my
"dissenting" Protestant friends will not feel aggrieved v^r
insulted at mv associating him with them in this connection.
What though as a ritualistic " Priest '' he has " popish ten-
dencies " ? Does he not
Compound for sins he is inclined tq,
By damning those he has no mind to,
when he holds up for their execration the soul-destroying idol-
atry of the " Roman Cultus of Mary " ? This he has done for
Protestants, Jiud I propose to answer him for Protestants.
In Theology, as in Philosophy, in order to understand any
specific doctrine, it is necessary, first to have mastered, at least
in the way of clear apprehension, the great main idea wliich
constitutes its intellectual basis. Now, without going deeply
into questions of doctrine, for which this is not the place, what,
let me ask, is the dogmatic teaching of the Catholic Church
with regard to the Saints ? We find it embqtlied in the solenni
declarations of her highest tribunal. The Council of Trent
" Enjoins upon all Bishops and others having the charge of
teaching that, according to the usage of the Catholic and
Apostolic Church, received from the primitive times of the
Christian religion, and according to the consent of the holy
Fathers, and the decrees of sacred Councils " the faithful be
taught that " The Saints, reigning with Christ, offer up their
prayers to God. for men ; that it is good mid useful suppliantly
to invoke them, and to have recourse to their prayers, help
and assistance, in order to obta'oi favor from God through His
Son^ Jesus Chnst oxir Lord, loho is our only Redeemer and
SaviourP The Catholic doctrine regarding the Saints is,
therefore, two-fold. In the first place, that the Saints of God
make intercession l)efore Him for their brethren on earth ; and,
in the second place, that it is lawful to invoke their inter-
cession.
200 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipscm.
The setting up of the Saints by the Church, as patterns for
religious and moral imitation, connected with the doctrine of
their intercession in our behalf with God, and of the corre-
sponding invocation of their aid on our part, constitutes the
'principle of the veneration of Saints, which is in the same
way related to the supreme worship of God, as the mutual
relation existing between creatures is to the state of dependence
of them all on their common Creator and Lord. Virtuous
creatures look with love and reverence on those of their body
who were eminently endowed by God, and, in virtue of the
love implanted within them, they wish each other all good,
and lift up tlieir hands in each other's behalf to God, who,
rejoicing in the love that emanates from Himself and binds
His creatures together, hears their mutual supplications, in
case they be worthy of His favor, and out of tlie fulness of
His power satisfies them — and this no creature is abie to accom-
plish. Besides, if we are to worship Christ, we are forced to
venerate His Saints. Their brightness is nothing Init an irra-
diation from the glory of Christ, and a proof of His infinite
power, because out of dust and sin He is able to raise up eternal
spirits of light. The Christian, therefore, who reveres God's
Saints glorifies Clynst from whose power and grace they have
sprung and whose true Divinity they attest. Hence the Cath-
ohc Church, while commemorating, in her Liturgies and Offices
during the year, the great events in the life of our Divint
Lord, encircles them with the feasts of the Saints who, through-
out the history of the Church, testify to the effects in this world
of the coming of our Redeemer, of His ministry and His suf-
ferings, His resurrection and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.
So that in the lives of the Saints, the effects of the life of
Christ, and its fruits, are brought home at once to the contem-
plation and feelings of every Catholic. Here let me remind
your readers that the doctrine of the Church does not declare
that the Saints tnust^ but only that they can,, be invoked ; since
the Council of Trent, already quoted, says only that " it is (jood
and usefvl suppliantly to invoke their intercession." Of faith
in the Divinity of Christ, and in His mediatorial office, or in
His sanctifying grace, and the like, the Church by no means
A Kejoindeb. 201
teaches that it is merely " good and useful," but that it is ab-
solutely necessary to salvation.
So far I think your Protestant readers will find no evidence
of idolatry. As I am not discussing doctrine here so umch as
explaining, T may be permitted to contrast our position with
theirs in this particular. They concede that the lives of the
' Saints are worthy of imitation, and that they should be honored
by our imitation. They even admit (in their Symbols now be-
fore me) that the Saints pray for the Church at large, but they
assert that the saints must not be prayed to for their interces-
sion. The reason they adduce is that Christ is our only medi-
ator! Let me examine shortly the colierency of these ideas.
Is it not passing strange that the saints should pray to God for
us without apprehending that they encroach on the mediatorial
office of Christ ? And that God, the Father, and Christ should
even permit these, their functions, in our behalf, and accord-
ingly find them free from all presumption — and yet that we,
on our part, should not ask the exercise of these kindly offices,
because our prayer would involve an offence, whereas the thing
prayed for involves none? But the prayers of the saints must
surely be wrong, if our requests for such prayers be wrong.
But if their supplications in our behalf be laudable and pleas-
ing to God, why should not our prayers for such supplications
be so too? Tome it is clear that the consciousness of their
active intercession, admitted by Protestants, necessarily deter-
mines an affirmation of the same on our part, and excites a joy
which, when we analyze it, already includes the interior wish
and prayer for their intercession. For all communion is mutual,
and to the exertions of one side the counter-exertions of the
other must correspond, and vice versa. Surely an indifference
to the intercession of the Saints would annihilate it and com-
pletely destroy all communion existing between the two forms
of the one Church — triumphant and militant. But if it be im-
possible for us to be indifferent in this matter, then the doc-
trine of the Catholic Church remains the reasonable and true
doctrine.
Again: The intercession of the saints, as well as the corre-
sponding invocation of that intercession on our part, is so far
202 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsdm.
from impairing the merits of Christ, that it is merely an effect
of the game — a fruit of His all-atoning power that again united
heaven and earth. This our ecclesiastical prayers very beauti-
fully and strikingly express ; for they all without exception,
even when we petition the Saincs, are addressed in our Re-
deemer's name. Moreover, if the intercession of the Saints
interfere with the mediatorial office of Christ, then must all
intercession, and prayer for intercession, even among the living,
be absolutely rejected, which is absurd. Christ alone redeemed
us, and by communion with Him, all gloriiied through Him,
partake as well in His righteousness as in all things connected
therewith — hence the power of their intercession, and hence
also the right of asking for that intercession from the living,
as well as from the departed just. This is the doctrine familiar
to every Catholic child. (Moehler, Syvibolism.)
Let me explain still a little further the rationale of Catholic
veneration of the saints. We do not ask the saints to pray for
us because we cannot pray directly to God for ourselves, or
because we feel that they love us better than our dear Lord and
Redeemer. It is not because they have a greater, a more
tender, sympathy with us, or are more ready to help us, that
we pray to the saints, and ask them to intercede with our Di-
vine Mediator for us, or to bear for us our petitions to the
throne of grace, for our Lord is perfect man as well as perfect
God, and God himself is the fountain of all love, mercy, ten-
derness, and compassion to which we appeal in the saints. The
reason is the mediatorial character of the kingdom of God.
The principle of the order founded by the Incarnation of tlie
Word is the deification of the creature, to make the creature
one with the Creator, so that the creature may participate in
the divine life, which is love, and in the divine blessedness, the
eternal and infinite blessedness of the Holy and Ineffable
Trinity, the one ever-living God. I find this idea in that
glorious saying put forth by the greatest of the Eastern, as by
the greatest of the Western leathers, "that God became man in
order that man might become God — Factus est Deus homo ut
hmnofieret Deus'''': St. Athanasius and St. Augustine. Crea-
tion itself has no other purpose or end ; as the Incarnation
A Rejoindek. 203
of the Word, and the whole Christian order, are designed by
the divine economy simply as the means to this end, which is
indeed realized or consummated in Christ the Lord, at once
perfect God and perfect man, united indissolubly in one divine
person. i
The design of the Christian order is, through regeneration
by the Holy Ghost, to unite every individual man to Christ,
and to make all believers one with one another, and one with
Him as He is one with the Father. All who are thus regener-
ated and united are united to God, made one with Him, live
in His life, and participate in His infinite, eternal, and ineffable
bliss. Creation is but a manifestation of the goodness of the
Creator ; and as the ])urpose of God in creating was to give to
creatures a share in His own infinite life and blessedness. He
must be infinitely more loving, tender, and compassionate than
any creature, however exalted or glorified. It is from Him
that the glorified saints and angels draw whatever of love, ten-
derness, or compassion we appeal to in them.
Again : God not only permits the glorified creature to par-
ticipate in His own life, love and beatitude, but He also per-
mits His creatures to be coworkers with Him in His work, and
to participate in the glory of its accomplishment. He makes,
in some sense, the creature a medium of effecting its ])erfec-
tion ; that is. He uses created agents and ministers in effecting
His purpose, and in gaining the end for which He creates them
and thus enables them to gain the signal honor of sharing in
the glory of the Creator's and the Redeemer's work, that is, in
the glory of the Kingdom of God. Hence it is that the true
followers of Christ enter into glory with Him, or participate
in the glory of His Kingdom — this they could not do if they
had done nothing toward founding and advancing it. It is not
that He needs them for Himself ; but because, in His super-
abounding goodness. He would bestow on them the honor and
blessedness of sharing in His work, and of being, so to speak,
employed in His service, and meriting His approbation and
reward. It is His love to His saints. His friends, that leads
Him to employ them in His service, that gives them the high
honor of being intercessors for us. They are filled with His
204: Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
love, and like Him, overflow with love and goodness to all
His creatures. Our veneration of, and devotion to, the saints
flows naturally, so to say, from the principle of the Incarnation
— the deification of man or the creature / and in it we not only
honor the saints, but manifest our faith in the superabounding
love and goodness of God, which permits them to work with
Him for tlie fulfillment of His design iu creation, and to share
in its glory.
The fact, that God does employ' the saints and angels as
agents and ministers in carrying on His mediatorial work, is
indisputable. If anything is clear and certain from the Holy
Scriptures, it is this. I do not intend to argue here. It is
implied in the very fact of the Incarnation, which makes the
creatiire one with the Creator. It is only the universal exten-
sion of the sacerdotal principle which underlies all religion, and
cannot be denied without denying the very principle of the
Christian order. Even Protestants, when they send a note to
their minister asking him to pray, and the congregation to pray,
for a sick or dying friend, or for a family, or an individual in
great aftliction, recognize, whether tbey know it or not, the
sacerdotal principle, — the very principle on which rests the
invocation of saints. We can, of course, ask God directly for
whatever we think we have need of ; but when we ask also the
saints to ask Him for us, we act in accordance with His love
for them, and unite with Him in honoring them, by engaging
them in working out His designs. We honor God in honoring
with our love and confidence those whom He delights to love
and honor ; and in invoking their prayers, we enlist, in aid of
our own prayers, the prayers of tliose whose sanctity renders
them dear to our Lord and God. The pretence of Protestants,
that, in honoring the Saints, we are ro])bing God of the honor
that is His due, and putting the creature in the place of the Crea-
tor, shows, if not absolute want of faith in Christ, an absolute
ignorance of the Christian system or the theological principles
revealed in the Holy Scriptures. It overlooks the mediatorial
character of the Gospel, and the fact that all in the Gospel
grows out of the Incarnation of the Word, who was with God
in the beginning, and is God. Their doubts or difficulties on
A Rejok^dek. 205
this subject originate in their rejection or ignorance of the In-
cariiatiou, and their never having considered the Christian
system as a whole. The heathen retained tlie primitive revela-
tion, but only in a broken and piecemeal state. Protestants do
the same with the Christian revelation as preserved and taught
by the Catholic Church. They have lost the perception of the
relation of the several parts to the whole, and fail to recognize
their inter-dependence and strict logical consistency one with
another, and with the whole, of which they are integral parts.
Cardinal Newman both sums up our doctrine on this head,
and answers the, to me ever unintelligible, objection of Protest-
ants, in these words : " Only this I know full well now, and
did not know then (that is, before his reversion to the Church
of his forefathers), that the Catholic Church allows no image of
any sort, material or immaterial, no dogmatic symbol, no rite,
no sacrament, no saint, not even the Blessed Virgin herself, to
come between the soul and its Creator. It is face to face,
^ solus cum solo,' "in all matters between man and his God. He
alone creates ; He alone has redeemed ; before His awful eyes
we go in death ; in the vision of Him is our eternal beatitude.
.... The command practically enforced (is), 'My son, give
Me thy heart.' The devotions then to angels and saints as
little interfere with the incommunicable glory of the Eternal,
as the love which we bear our friends and relations, our tender
human sympathies, are inconsistent with that supreme homage
of the heart to the Unseen which really does but sanctify and
exalt what is of earth."
So much for the Catholic view of our doctrine on the vener-
ation of the Saints. I do not think your candid readers will find
much " idolatry " in it. But as I like to agree with my adver-
sary in the way when it is possible, I will summon some Angli-
can witnesses in support of the orthodoxy of this view.
Bishop Latimer (apiid Foxe) writes as follows:
" Take Saints for inhabitants of heaven, and worshipping of
them for praying to them, I never denied but they might be
worshipped, and be our mediators, though not by way of re-
demption (for so Christ alone is a whole mediator, both for
them and for us), yet by way of intercession."
20G Ii'.sK, Ipsa, Ipscm.
I ouglit to apologize to Littledale's disciple for calling this
witness, since Littledale says lie was one of those " miscreants "
and " utterly unredeemed villains" who "did not break and
eh.atter (the Church of England) so completely as to prevent
honest men from repairing it." Ilow delighted Anglicans in
"this diocese" must be to know they have one of thoee
" honest men " among them ! The Church was " going to the
dogs " before he came, but now, of course, its " dry bones will
live again." I ask your readers to note for the present the
word '•'"worshipped'''' in the above quotation.
Bishop Montague writes as follows :
" I see no absurdity in nature, no iiicongruity unto analogy of
faith, no repugnancy at all to sacr. J Scripture, much less impi-
ety, for any man to say, ''0 sande amjele mistos, wa pro me ' (O
holy angel gu.ardian, pray for me)." In like manner he defends
the Virgin Justina mentioned by St. Gregory Nazianzen, as im-
ploring the help of the Blessed Virgin, and says that "against
such a manner of itivoking saints, joined with faith in Christ,
he would not contend." — Forbes, " Consid. Modest.,''^ p. 327.
Thomdyke writes thus : " The second kind of invocations is
the ' oi'a pro nobis ' (pray for us) and the ' te rogamus audi
nos ' (we beseech thee, hear us) directly addressed to the Blessed
Virgin and the saints." Of this kind he pronounces that "«^
is not idolatry'''' ; and that the greatest "lights of the Greek
and Latin Church, Basil, Nazianzen, Nyssen, Ambrose, Jerome,
Augustine, Chrysostom, both the Cyrils, Theodoret, Fulgen-
tius, Gregory the Great, and Leo, ifec, who lived from the time
of Constantine, have all of them sjwken to the saints departed
and desired their assistance."
Again : Forbes, Bishop of Edinburgh, has exhausted the
whole subject in his book entitled " Considerationes Modestae^''
&c. The third chapter of his treatise is devoted to prove the
following proposition :
" The mere invocation or addressing of Angels and Saints,
asking them to join us in praying, and to intercede for us to
God, is neither to be condemned as unlawful, nor as useless,"
p. 229. And before bringing an overwhelming mass of testi-
mony from Protestants themselves, he concludes thus :
A Rejoinder. 207
" In fine, for very many aj^es now past, tlironghout the Uni-
versal Church, in the East no less than in the West, and in the
North also among the Muscovites, it is a received usage to sing
' St. J\'ter, etc. ^ pray for ns '; but to despise or condemn the uni-
versal consent of the whole church is most dangerous presumjv
tion," p. 322.
The same Bishop, among other admissions of later times,
quotes with approbation the following from a book entitled
'"^Plaet Cathollca Christiani Iloininis Inst'dntio^'' in English
and Latin, put forth by the Bishops of the Church of England
in the year 1537, and afterwards again in the year 1543 (the
Latin in 15*14), and never hitherto retracted or condemned :
"To pray unto Saints to be intercessors with us and for us
to our Lord in our suits which we make unto Ilim, and for
Buch things as we can obtain of none but Him, so that we
esteem not, or worship not them as givers of those gifts, but as
intercessors for the same, is received and approved by the most
ancient and perpetual use of the Catholic Church ; but if we
honor them any other ways than as the friends of God,
dwelling with llim, and established now in His glory everlast-
ing, and as examples which were requisite for us to follow in
holy life and conversation, or if we yield unto Saints the
adoration and honor which is due unto God alone, we do, no
doubt, break the commandment."
This is the Catholic doctrine pure and simple — the doctrine
of the Council of Trent, and it will suflfice to say that Pnsey
endorses every word of it and accepts the teaching of the
Council. See " Eirenicon^'' vol. 1, pp. 100, 101 ; vol. 2, pp.
34-5, 41, &c. These witnesses, one and all, accept and pro-
claim as true the simple lessons of " the catechisms of Butler
and Milner adopted by the Bishop of St. John for this diocese,"
on which the Vicar so magisterially, and withal so graciously
puts his Imprimatur.
Now let the unsophisticated Anglican " of these parts " turn to
Article XXH. of the famous Thirty-nine and read as follows:
"TheRomish doctrine concerning .... invocation of Saints
is a fond thing vainly invented, and grounded upon no warranty
of Scripture, but rather repugnant to the Word of God."
208 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsdm.
His old-fashioned associations and ideas must receive a nido
shock, and his feelings bo those of a veritable Rip Van Winkle
as he looks into the faces of his teachers who blandly assure
him, in the words quoted above : Nous avona chaiuje tout
cela ! However, he has some compensation in knowing that
he belongs to o. progressive church. The Lambeth Conference
now assures him that the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion are
no longer in their entirety to be binding as a condition of
" complete intercommunion " with the Church of England. I
hope the Vicar will look after his " Old Catholic " friends in
Wisconsin now, and see to it that they get the benefit of this
measure of grace from Lambeth. Perhaps, however, he still
adheres to the ritualistic view of the Episcopate expressed by
Froude. This ex- Anglican deacon puts it thus :
" The latest and most singular theory about them (the Angli-
can Bishops) is that of the modern English Neo-Catholic who
disregards his Bishop's advice and despises his censures, but
looks on him nevertheless as some high-bred worn-out animal,
useless in himself, but infinitely valuable for some mysterious
purpose of spiritual propagation."
Thus far 1 have confined myself to a simple statement of
the Catholic doctrine on the veneration of the saints, as I
learned it at my mother's knee, and the principles which un-
derlie it. In my next I will apply these principles to the
interpretation of those facts, touching the " Queen of Saints,"
massed by the Vicar from "Liguori," the "Raccolta," and
Pusey. Yoiu* readers will then be able, once and forever I
hope, to give these facts their due value.
LETTER XVI.
IPSE, IPSA, IP8UM — A BEjrOINDEB.
To the Editor of the Globe :
Sir, — In my last letter I did but suggest the great positive
principles and moral ideas which are the vertebration, so to
A Eejoindeb. 209
speak, of our doctrine on the veneration and invocation of the
saints. If I have made myself understood, I have shown why
it is that we honor tliem, and why it is that God Himself, in
fulfilling Ilis design in creation, esjjccially the " new creation "
or the order founded by the Incarnation, uses the ministry of
saints and angels, and chiefly, as their Queen, Ilis Blessed
Mother, 'from whose chaste body He took His human nature. I
so spread it out to make it intelligible as well to non-cultured
religious Protestant minds as to the elite, spiritually and intel-
lectually, among them. Relying on the simple aspirations of
the human heart informed with the Christian idea, however
fragmentary, I hoped to bring home to many of tliem a real-
ization of spiritual facts, which, however acknowledged as
truths, hang in visionary distance like a far cloud on the hori-
zon of their thought. Of course I am aware, from the miser-
able and wretched performances of the Vicar alone, which I
am now considering, how utterly incapable they are to appre-
ciate the full devotion of CathoKc hearts to their Divine Lord.
They cannot imagine or believe that there is au exquisite and
all-sufficing happiness in the communion with our Saviour
which compensates all sacrifices, lightens all burdens and tran-
scends all the enjoyment that this world can offer — and, because,
they know nothing of, or believe nothing in, that stupendous
miracle of His love, His real presence in the holy and adorable
Sacrament of the Altar. Bound, from their infancy, with the
triple cord of calumny, wherein Protestantism has involved
the Catholic Church, the gigantic framework of prejudice
erected thereon, and which rises up and permeates the mind
and heart of Protestants, ignorant and intelligent alike, and the
whole developing into the power of liahit, the mightiest
over fallen man, the very truth which is most dear to them in
the shape in which they have received it, ceases to be amiable
in the Catholic Church, where it is most pure and perfect.
Their writers and preachers and " Priests " (is it impious so to
speak ?) of " Mission Chapels " seem hardly to suspect that in
outcast " Romanism " the love of Christ is incomparably stronger,
the familiar consideration of His divine Sacrifice more frequent,
the sense of His satisfaction for our sins more vivid, the appro-
210 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsfm.
priation of His transcendent merits more intimate and babitual,
the reliance on Him only as the hei«;fht and depth of onr secu-
rity more exclusive and more entire than among their multi-
1 lied and contlicting sects. The truth of these remarks is aj)-
parent every day and not always eitlier in minds of dimensions
m near a geometrical line that they cannot hold the Ten Com-
mandments.
Now, iis I have once remarked, we liave no special doctrine
respecting tlic veneration due to Mary of Nazareth. She is to
he honored becatisc all saints are to be honored, and for no other
reason. She is to be lionored moi'e than other saints, because
certain facts are revealed to us regarding her, both in
Holy Scripture and by Tradition, from which we know
that God would have us especially to honor her whom He has
chosen to honor above all other Saints. In them there is a
colored, refracted ray from His sanctity and holiness ; in her
there is a full-orbed glory, a paler reflex from Him who is the
reflex of His Father. She is the very Queen of angels and saints,
and, as the Mother of God, is exalted above every other crea-
ture, and is only below the IneflFable Trinity. Whom, then,
should God more delight to honor, or more delight to have
honored by us i She is the spouse of the Holy Ghost, she is
the Mother of Christ, and nothing seems more in accordance
with His love and goodness, and the very design of His medi-
atorial kingdom, as revealed in the Gospel, than that He should
do her the honor of making her His chief agent in His work
of love and mercy, — the medium through which He dispenses
His favors to men. There is joy in heaven among the angels
of God, we are told, over one sinner that repents. The Saints
and Angels, filled with the Spirit of God, and in perfect con-
cord with the divine purpose in creation, and with the Word in
becoming Incarnate, are full of love to all the creatures of
God, and join with Him into whose glory they have entered,
in seeking the blessedness of those He has redeemed by His
own Precious Blood. They take an interest in the salvation of
souls, tlie repentance of sinners, and the growth and perfection
of the regenerated, and consequently love their mission, and
perform their task with their own good-will, and with joy and
A Rkjoinder. 211
alacrity. Tbislove, this interest, this good-will, must be gryat-
est in their Queen, the ever-blessed Mary. As she is exalted
alx)ve every other creature, only God llluiself can surpass her
in His love for His creatures.
Why do Catholics claim so exalted a position for Mary?
What is its foundation, the principles or reasons on which it
rests? Let me consider them. This claim, I say, is author-
ized by her peculiar relation to the mystery of the Incarnation,
therefore to our salvation, and the peculiar, special honor we
render her is in honor of that mystery itself, that is in honor
of God in His human as well as in His divine nature. Those
who reject the Incarnation, such as pi'ofessed Pelagians, Nesto-
rians, Socinians, or Unitarians, can understand nothing of this
honor, and have no lot or pa :t in it ; for they can neither wor-
ship God in Ilis human nature, nor admit that He really as-
sumed flesh from the flesh of Mary. To them Mary is only
an ordinary woman, and holds no peculiar r.?lation to the mys-
tery of redemption. She has, in their view, nothing to do
with our salvation, and is related to Christianity no otherwise
than is any other woman. They assign lier no peculiar position
or oflSce in the economy of God's gracious providence. They
are offended when they hear us call her the Mother of God,
and wisely sneer at us when they hear us address her as our
own dear mother. I have nothing here to say to them and to
such as they. The veneration of Mary presupposes the real
Incarnation of our Lord in her chaste body, and her real and
subsisting maternal relations to God made man, and they who
shrink from it show by that fact that they do not really believe
in that mystery, and therefore do not really embrace the Christian
religion, and at best make only a hollow profession of it- Con-
cede the Incarnation, and the Catholic veneration follows as a
necessary consequence, because then Mary becomes truly the
Mother of God. If you coTJcede the Incarnation, you must
concede that Mary is the Mother of God ; if you deny that she
is the Mother of God, you must de^^ ^^ the Incarnation. There
is no middle course possible. If Mary is the Mother of her
*^>on, then the relations between mother and Son and all that
those relations imply subsist and must ever subsist between
212 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipscm.
them, and she must be honored as the Mother of God, and
therefore of grace, the grace through which we are redeemed
and saved.
Proof — In the Incarnation God assumes human nature, be-
comes man without ceasing to be God, and so assumes human
nature that He becomes from the moment of the Incarnation
as truly human as He is divine, — perfect man as well as perfect
God. It is not that a perfect man is united to perfect God,
but that perfect God becomes Himself really perfect man, in
such sort that the human nature is as truly the nature of the
Divine Person or word, as is the Divine nature itself. The
two natures are united in one person, or the one person is the
hypostasis or the one suppof'tum (as logicians say) of two dis-
tinct natures, one Divine, the other human. The tendency of
Protestants, even of those who profess to hold the mystery of
the Incarnation, is to regard the union, not as the union of two
natures in one person, but as a simple moral union of two per-
sons, one human, the other God, or the luiion of human nature
in its own human personality with God, which is what the in-
famous Nestorius taught. Hence, Protestants have a tendency
to '■dissolve'' Christ, and to cherish the spirit of whf»t the
Apostle calls Antichrist. But the true doctrine of the Incar-
nation, which we must admit, if we admit any real Incarna-
tion at all, is, that the human and Divine natures are united,
without being confounded, in one Divine Person. Person is
distinguishable, but not separable, from nature, for no person
is conceivable as really existing without a nature ; and though
human as well as Divine nature is distinguishable from
person, yet neither is conceivable as really existing with-
out person or personality. The human nature of Christ is
not human nature divested of personality ; it is a person as
much as is the human nature of James or John, but its person is
Divine, not human, — the eternal person of the Divine nature
of Christ. Hence, Christ is tivo distinct natures in one person,
which Divine Person is God, or the second person of the ever-
adorable Trinity.
Now God in His human nature is literally and timly the
Son of Mfvry, and she is as much His mother as any woman is
A Rejoinder. 213
the mother of her own son. She is not the mother of a son
nnited to God, of a human son received into union with God,
for tliat were the error of the Adoptionists and would imply
that the human nature of Christ has a human personality,
which it has not and never had. Human nature cannot exist
without a personality, and the human nature of Christ, there-
fore, was not and could not have been generated, without His
Divine personality. Then that which was conceived in the
womb of Mary and born of her was the Divine Person assum-
ing to Himself flesh, or the nature of man, therefore God.
Hence in the strictest sense of the word, Mary is the Mother
of God, and therefore God is as truly her son as any one is the
son of his own mother. Undoubtedly, Mary was not the
mother of God in His Divine nature, that is, the mother of the
Divinity, for in that sense God is eternal, necessary, and self-
existent Being, and the Creator of Mary, not her Son ; but
God Incarnate is still God, and God having assumed flesh is no
less God in His human nature than in His Divine nature.
Aiid therefore Mary is none the less the Mother of God be-
cause His mother only in His human nature, for the human
nature of which she is the mother is the human nature of God.
She is not the mother of the Divinity, but she is the mother of
God, for since the Incarnation, God the Son is the Lfiejjerson
of both Divine nature and human nature, and is as to nature
at once God and man. How God can descend to be the person
of human nature, or exalt human nature to be truly His own
, nature, is a mystery which transcends every created intelli-
gence and which none but He Himself can fully comprehend.
All we know or can pretend to know, is the fact that He has
done so, and thus, although our Creator has become our Brother,
flesh of our flesh, that we might be made partakers of His
Divine nature, and live forever in a true society with Him.
Such is our doctrine on the Incarnation as I have learned it
and taught it to Catholic boys in day and Sunday school.
"Now Mary, as the mother of God, is something more than
an ordinary woman, and holds a place in the economy of grace
different from that of any otlier woman, different from and
above that of any other creature. She has been honored by
214 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
the Creator as no other creature has been, for she alone has
been selected by Him to be His mother. If God has distin-
guished her from all other women, if He has chosen her to be
His mother, shall not we distinguish her from all other women
and honor her as His mother? What higher honor could God
confer on a creature than He has conferred on Mary? Shall
we not honor whom God Himself delights to honor, and like
Him give her the highest honor that we can give to a creature ?
We are to love and honor the Son as we love and honor the
Father, and we are to love and honor Him in His sacred Hu-
manity no less than in His Divinity. We cannot dissolve
Christ; for "Every spirit that dissolveth Jesus," says the
blessed Apostle John, "is not of God; and this is that Anti-
christ of whom ye have heard that he cometh, and he is now
already in the world" (I John iv. 3). We cannot dissolve
Christ and worship Him in His Divine nature only, and refuse
to worship Him in His human nature. He is one Christ, not
two, — one human, the other Divine. He is two forever distinct
natures in one person, to be loved and honored alike in both
natures, and therefore in her from whom He took His human
nature. We cannot honor Him without honoring her, if we
try, nor honor her as His mother without honoring Him. Such
is the intimate relation between the Mother and the Son, that
whatever honor we render her as His mother redounds to Him,
and whatever honor we render to Him as her son — that is, to
Him as come in the flesh — will overflow and extend to her.
The two cannot be separated, for the flesh of the Son is ^»f the
flesh of the Mother, and both have one and the same natui-e,
and impossible is it to honor the nature in the one without
honoring it in the other, ^y this fact Mary becomes inti-
mately connected with the mystery of our Redemjition and final
salvation. We are redeemed only by God, not in His Divine
nature, but in that very nature which He took from Mary, —
God in human nature; for as the Divine nature can neither
suffer, nor obey, nor merit, it was only in human nature, in the
flesh, become really His nature, that God could perform the
work of Redemption, that He couM satisfy for sin, and merit
for us the grace of pardon and satisfaction. Mary is thus
A He JOIN DEB. 215
called, and rightly called, " the Mother of Grace," for she is
that, inasmuch as she is the Mother of the Sacred Blesh through
which grace has been purchased and is communicated to us.
Again : Let your readers turn to St. Luke, i. 26-38. They
will lind that the Incarnation did not take place without Mary's
free and voluntary consent. It was asked and given, though
not given till an explanation had been demanded from God's
messenger to Mary and received. Not until she is assured by
Gabriel that *no word is impossible with God' does she give
her consent : " Beliold the handmaid of the Lord : le it done
to me according to thy Word." There was then a moment
when the salvation of the world depended on the consent of
Mary. Man could not be redeemed, satisfaction could not be
made for sin, and grace obtained, without the Incarnation, and
the Incarnation could not take place without the free, voluntary
consent of this humble Jewish maiden. While, then, we are
lost in admiration of the infinite condescension of God, that
would do such honor to human nature, as in some sort to place
IIin)self in dependence on the will of one of our race, to carry
into effect His own purpose of infinite love and mercy, we can-
not help feeling deep gratitude to Mary for the consent she
gave. We call her blessed for the great things He that is
mighty has done to her, and we bless her also for her own
consent to the work of redemption. She gave to that work all
she had ; she gave her will ; she gave her flesh ; she gave her
own and only Son to one long passion of thirty-three years,
to the agony in the garden, and to the death on the Cross.
It is true, God had selected her from all eternity to be His
Mother, and had filled her with grace ; but neither the election
nor the grace took away her free will, or diminished the merit
of her voluntaiy consent. She could have refused ; and de-
serves she no love and gratitude from us, who have hope only
through her flesh assumed by the Son of God, that she did not
refuse? Can we say, in vie v of this fact, that she has no
peculiar relation to our Redemption, no share in the work of
our Salvation ? To say so would be simply to deny that we
are redeemed and saved by God in the flesh, that the human
nature of our Lord performs any office in the work of redeiup-
216 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
tion and salvation. Therefore to refuse to honor Mary as con-
nected with and sharing in that work is to deny that it is in
His human nature that God redeems and saves us, which is
either to deny redemption and salvation altogether, or to con-
tend that God redeems and saves us in His Divinity, that is, to
contend that the Divine nature suifered and died, which is
absurd.
" If we have faith," says Cardinal Newman, " to admit the
Incarnation itself, we must admit it in its fullness; why then
should we start at the gracious appointments which arise out
of it, are necessary to it, or are included in it ? " It established
between Mary and Jesus the real relation of mother and son.
This relation is a subsisting relation, and subsists as really in
Heaven as it did when both were on earth ; and therefore
Mary still preserves all her maternal rights in regard to her
Son, and He still owes her all filial love, reverence, and. obedi-
ence. For if He is God, He is also man, and in His humanity
lias all that pertains to pure and sinless humanity. The Son of
God in His humanity, not of course in His Divine nature, nor
in any matter which is proper to Him, only in that nature,
was subject to Mary here, and obeyed her — St. Luke ii. 51 ;
and as the two natures remain in Him forever distinct, two
natures in one person, I know no reason for supposing that the
relation, and what pertains essentially to it, between the mother
and the son in His hunir.n nature, are not precisely, save that
both are now in a glorified state, what they were when on the
earth. We are not to suppose the soul loses in the future life
the habits of this — (see Joseph Cook's " Final Permanence of
Moral Character ") — and therefore we must suppose that the
habit of obedience, love, and reverence of our Divine Lord to
His holy mother here, are still retained. Tlierefore, we con-
clude surely that her will, always one with God's will, because
moved by the Divine charity, is still regarded by Him as the
will of His mother, and has that weight with Him that the
right will of a mother must always have with a good, loving
Bon.
Once more. Mary is also our mother, the mother of all true
Christians. They who never reflect on the Mystery of the
A Rejoinder. 217
Incarnation, and who have no faith in redemption through the
Cross, laugh at us when we call Mary our mother. Yet she is our
mother, and, to i-ay the least, as truly our mother as was Eve
herself. Eutychianism is a heresy. The human nature hypo-
statically united to the Divine, remains forever distinct from
the Divine nature, and, therefore, our Lord remains forever
God and man in one Divine person. By assuming our nature
the Son of God has made Himself our Brother. We become,
through the nature so assumed, of the same nature with God.
Hence, He is not ashamed to call us hrethren. Now of this
human nature in Christ, by which we become united to God
by nature, Mary is the mothe7\ and as there is but one human
nature as well as but one Divine nature, she is truly our
mother, in so far as we through that human nature be-
come united to Him. She is not our natural mother in the
sense of mother of our personality, but of our nature in God,
and in so far as we were raised to hrotherhood with Christ her
Son, and are made through Him 07ie with God.
She is our spiritual mother, for it is only through her flesh,
assumed by the Son of God, that we were redeemed and be-
gotten to the new spiritual life. I cannot too often repeat,
that it is the Word made flesh, or God in the flesh, that re-
deems and saves or beatifies us. It is always through the In-
carnate Son that we have access to the Father, or that even the
saints in heaven become one with God, and behold Him in the
Beatific Vision as He is. The life we, as Christians, live here
is the life that proceeds from God in Ilis Humanity, and the
life we hope to live hereafter proceeds from Him in the same
sense. To suppose the saint here or hereafter separated from
the flesh, which God assumed from Mary, would be to suppose
his annihilation as a saint, as much as to suppose our separa-
tion from God as Creator would be to suppose the annihila-
tion of our natural existence. Here is the mystery of godliness
which was manifest in the flesh. Then, unless we can make it
true that Mary is not the Mother of our Lord in His human
nature, we cannot make it untrue that she is our spiritual
mother. So long as spiritual life is dependent on God in His
human nature, so long is Mary truly the mother of spiritual life,
218 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
and so long as she is the mother of that Hfe, so long is she our
spiritual mother, and to be honored as such, and honored even
more than our natural mother, for the spiritual life is infinitely
more than the natural life.
Lastly. We call Mary the Queen of Heaven — of heaven
and earth — Universal Queen, This is our explanation : Our
Divine Lord is King, for to llira has all dominion been given.
He is King, not merely as Son of God, in His Divine nature,
but He is King in His human nature, as Son of Mary. Her
Son is King; then, as mother of the King, we love to call her
Queen, the Queen His mother. As He loves and honors His
mother, and must as a good son wish all creatures also to love
and honor her, He must have crowned her Queen, and given
her a formal title to the love, honor, and obedience due to a
Queen. How suggestive of thought in this connection is that
beautiful picture of King Solomon and his mother : " Then
Bethsabee came to King Solomon, to speak to him for Ado-
nias : and the King arose to meet her, and bowed to her, and
sat down upon his throne : and a throne was set for the king's
mother, and she sat on his right hand " (3 Kings ii. 19).
LETTER XYIL
ipse, ipsa, ipsum — A REJOINDER.
To the Editor of the Globe :
Sir,— In my letter of Tuesday I submitted considerations
which will fully justify our warm devotion to Mary, and the
strongest expressions which the fervor of Catholic piety can
use. They explain, too, why Mary holds so distinguished a
place in Christian worship, and performs so important a mis-
sion in furtherance of the mediatorial work of Her Divine
Son. Her love is greater, for she is " full of grace," as the
Archangel declared, greater than that of any other creature.
She is more intimately connected with the Holy Trinity, and
holds a relation to God which is held and can be held by no
A Rejoinder. 219
other creature. In some sense, as the Mother of the Incarnate
Word, she is the medium througli wliich is efifected the deifi-
cation of man, — the end of the supernatural order, She can-
not be separated from that end. We can easily understand,
then, why God should assign her a part assigned to no other
creature. Her love is only less than His, and her heart is
always in perfect unison with the Sacred Heart of her Son,
and mother and sori are strictly united and inseparable.
Equally easy is it now to understand why the Christian heart
overflows with love and gratitude to Mary ; why Christians recur
to her with so much couiidence in the efficacy of her prayers,
the success of her intercession ; and why Catholics offer her
the highest honor below the supreme worship offered in the
Holy Sacrifice, but never offered except to God alone.
Protestants call the veneration we pay to Our Lady, in which
"it is their sad and sorrowful lot" to have no share, Mariola-
try, and in order to justify their alienation from the family of
Christ, seek, under pretext of zeal for the honor of God, to
brand it as " idolatrous." I am not at all surprised by this.
They have lost the deep sense of the Christian religion, and
really retain no worship to God superior to that which we pay
to Him in His saints. In regard to external worship, it is not
we who worship Mary as God, but they who do not worship
God Himself as God. The peculiar distinctive external wor-
ship of God is the offering of sacrifice ; but Protestants have
no sacrifice, as they have no priesthood, and no altar — even
their churches are only meeting houses, or places of assembling
together. In rejecting the holy sacrifice of the Mass, they
have retained nothing more than we offer to Mary and the
saints. Consequently they are unable to perceive any distinc-
tion between what they regard as the external worship of God,
and that which we render to Him in His saints — that is, a wor-
ship of prayer and praise. But we have a sacrifice, and are
therefore able to distinguish between the highest honor we
render to His saints, and the supreme worship we render to
Him. Supreme religious worship is sacrifice, and sacrifice
we offer to God only, never to any creature.
The Protestant may speak of internal sacrifices, those of a
220 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
broken heart, and of inward justice, but these are only sacri-
fices by way of analogy, and what should always accom-
pany the sacrifice proper. If the Protestant tells me he
has in the interior homage of contrition and real submission of
himself a distinct and peculiar worship of God, I must tell
him in return that then he must not call the veneration we ren-
der to Mary Mariolatry, because this homage and submission in
the sense he means, we never offer to .her. If he has some-
thing in this interior homage that pertains to supreme worship,
the worship of Latria, he must bear in mind that we do not
offer it to the saints, and therefore our veneration of them is
not " idolatry "; if he has not something of this sort, then he
does not himself offer any worship proper to God, external or
internal, and therefore has in no sense any worship to offer to
God of a higher order than that which we offer to Mary and
the Saints. Hence Catholics are not surprised when Protest-
ants accuse them of Mariolatry. Not one out of five thousand
knows what he is talking about.
The simple truth is, that the Protestant, including the " true
Catholic " Ritualist, rejects the veneration of Mary, because he
does not believe in the Incarnation, and his calling it Mariol-
atry is only a proof that he " dissolves Jesus," and does not be-
lieve that salvation comes from God in the fiesh, from God
whose nature is human nature as well as divine nature. The
honor we render to Mary is in the last analysis the honor we
pay to the sacred mystery of the Incarnation, and either it is
idolatry to worship the human nature of Christ, that is, God
in His human nature, or our devotion to Mary is not idolatry.
The first, none but a Unitarian dare assert, and therefore none
other dare deny the last.
Scientific Theology has its technical terms, as philosophic
and physical science have theirs. Hence the words — Latria.,
Dulia, and Tlyperdulia — used in dogmatic treatises on the
subject. Our whole doctrine and practice, then, in this partic-
ular, as fully understood by every Catholic child, is expressed
in the three following propositions :
1st. We give to God alone, on account of His infinite per-
fections, the supreme homage of adoration, which is due
A Rejoindee. 221
to Him alone, and which is called by CatlK Mo Tlieo-
logians — Latvia. Protestants, including small liitualists,
repeat in the Nineteenth century the slander of faustiis,
the old Manichean heretic. I commend to both St. Au-
gustine's answer to Faustus, as true now as when that old
" Romanist " gave it : " With that worship which in Greek is
called latreia (in Latin it cannot be expressed by one word),
as it is a kind of service properly due to the Divinity, we
neither worship, nor teach to worship, other than the one God."
Contra Fauatum, L. 20, C. 21.
2d. We honor angels and saints as God's servants and
friends, with an homage which they deserve as such, and which
is altogether different from that which we pay to God ; and
this veneration of the saints goes by the theological name of
Dulia.
3d. We honor in a special manner among the Saints the
Virgin Mother, Queen of all angels and saints, on account of
her eminent sanctity and her sublime and most intimate rela-
tionship with the adorable Trinity ; since the Word of God,
who is from all eternity begotten of the Father, and consub-
stantial with Him, was in the fullness of time begotten of her,
taking to Himself from her immaculate body our human
nature. This special honor which we pay to the Virgin
Mother of God is called — Ilyperdulia, the homage paid to the
most highly privileged creature, but as to a creature, and
therefore never to be compared with the worship which we
give to God.
Is there any " idolatry," " apostasy," " infidelity," or " im-
piety " in this ? I am defending the creed of my heart and of
my mind, the creed of the Catholic Church, against the wan-
ton insults and vindictive slanders of the Vicar, and I appeal
to even the smouldering spark of that tenderness implanted by
God in every man's breast and still more in every woman's. If
the Incarnation is the sole fountain of life, grace, and benedic-
tion to all God's intelligent creatures, and some receive more
and some less from that Divine Treasury, — is it " idolatry " to
hold that she in whom the stupendous mystery was actually
accomplished, with her own consent, received a fuller measure
222 Ipse, Irsx, Ipsum.
tlian others, whose consent was never asked, wlio approach it
from afar, and only accept it by faith ? If to toucli even the
''garment" of her Creator and Son was to feel tlie mij^lit of
His Divinity, so that " virtue went out of Ilim," and the weak
became strong, — is it " idolatry " to say that she, who bore Tlini
in her womb, who nourished Him at her breasts, who enfolded
I Him in her arms, and who caressed Him with her lips, was
transfigured by a union with the Living God which " The
Seven Spirits before the Throne " would not have been able
to endure, and received from the Almighty the filial embraces
which the Seraphim would not have dared to accept? If at the
sound of His voice the dead stood up, the winds were hushed,
and the demons fled away, — is it " idolatry " to believe that
she, who listened to that voice for vhirty years, speaking as it
never spoke to man or angel, and revealing unimaginable
abysses of light which no other creature could have seen and
lived, that she derived some special benefit from what she saw
and heard, and that her wisdom transcended all that human
thoughts can conceive, because she alone had for her teacher
the Uncreated "Wisdom of God ? If to look, for one brief
moment, on His adorable Face, which is the Light of Heaven,
would seem to us the most transporting joy which a creature
could ask or obtain; what is it to have watched that Face
with worshipful love day after day and year after year — to
have dwelt for weeks and months together in the same house,
and sat at the same table— to have touched at one time His
omnipotent Hand, at another His sacred Head — to have looked
into the eyes of the God-Man and seen the movement of His
divine lips — and to have done all this with an unceasing adora-
tion, by day and by night, more perfect than ever was ofi"ered
to their Almighty King by the greatest princes of the heavenly
court? Is it, too, "idolatry" to claim that these soul-dazzling
thoughts suggest motives for devotion to Mary, much more the
conviction that she is the Queen of angels and men, as well as
the Mother of God ?
Again : If the share which He assigned to this Incompara-
ble Creature in the work of our salvation was present to
His thoughts even in the supreme hour of His agony,
A liiyoiNDEu. 223
eo that His last words from tlic Cross to each of Ilig
elect was tliis : " BehoU tliy Mother ! "—is it " idolatry " to
recognize an office so aet forth, to call lier our Mother hecause
she was His, and totrend)le lest we forfeit the protection which
lie wills her to extend to all His children and hersi If she
was the Mother of the Natural Body of Christ, which derived
from her its life, and the supply of all its needs, — is it '" idola-
try " to believe that He made her the Mother of Ilis Mystical
I'ody also, that the lower was included in the higher, or that
He willed her to do for His Cliurch what He made her worthy
to do for Himself? If the Divine Word, by whom all things
were made, " was auhjeot to " His own creature, as a child is
subject to his mother, and Mary ruled Him who rules the
universe, — is it " idolatry " to suppose that she has any intluence
over Him now, that He continues to treat her as a Mother,
or that He grants requests which she presents to Him in heaven,
because He obeyed so promptly those which she addressed to
Him on earth? If He wrought His tirst miracle to give
pleasure to her, and to relieve a transient pang which had
moved her gentle pity, and if He did this, as she evidently
knew He would, though " the hour was n 3t yet come," — is it
"idolatry" to suppose that she still continues to call His atten-
tion to the wants of her clients, or that He continues to supply
them at her word ? If His sacred Passion was the expiation
of our guilt, who were not consulted about it, and neither aj)-
proved nor dissuaded it, but are constantly renewing it by our
sins, — is it " idolatry " to praise and exalt her who generously
acquiesced, for the love of us, in the death of that dear Son to
whom she had given birth ? If the Precious Blood which was
shed on the Cross cancelled death, and satisfied the justice of
God, — is it "'idolatry" to assert, as one of her titles to our
reverence, that this life-giving Blood, by which we are saved,
first flowed in Mary's veins ?
Once more : If to have been only a servant of God shall
win, in spite of defects and shortcomings, such a recompense
as " it hath not entered the heart of man to conceive," — is it
" idolatry " to imagine that anything higher was reserved for
her whom He chose to be His mother, and whom He had
224 Ii'8i:, Ipsa, Ii'slm.
already made so great by the majesty of His gifts, that nothing
could make her greater but the glory of her maternity 'i It"
Catholics have never ceased to adore the Divinity of her Son,
and to worship the sacred mysteries of the Trinity and the In-
carnation ; and if heretics, after professing to refuse devotion
to her only out of reverence for God, have come in every land,
to doubt or deny the highest truths of Revelation, — is it " idola-
try '' to hold that the former proves devotion to her to he the
safeijuard of faith ^ and to see, in the latter, evidence that men
who begin by declining to honor the mother are sure to end by
blaspheming the Son '{ Tiie Anglo-ritualist Union Review,
quoted in the second letter of this Rejoinder, proves this. It
says : ^^Westorianisin,^'' that is a denial of Christ's humanity,
^''prevails to a very great extent among English Chii^'chmen,
and its withering ejfects are very difficult to shake off even hy
those who have long become wthodox in their theoretical
creed.''^ Terrible and affrighting confession ! "/;! is also trxie^"*
the Review adds, " and deserves c&nsideration, that there has
been hitherto no marked tendency to heresy on the subject of the
Incarnation among Roman Catholics, while where tJie dignity
of the Blessed Virgin has been underrated, heresies have speed-
ily crept in.''^ I refer your readers to the full quotation.
Lastly : If Anglicans and Ritualists are distinguished, first,
by indifference, and then by dislike, to the blessed Mary until
"they can no longer hear her named without feeling tormented
as were the demoniacs by the presence of our Lord, and their
liatred finds too often vent in blasphemies which belong not to
man, but to those evil spirits which then possess them," — is it
" idolatry " to find in this a verification of the words which
were spoken from the beginning : " I will put enmities between
thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed," and to remind
the Yicar of the lessons for him in the peaceful stability of
Catholics who honor Mary, compared with the dismal apostasy
of the theological " bone of his bone," who contemn her, not-
withstanding the famous " sermon " forced from him by his
necessities in this discussion ? '
' See Marshall's My Clerical Friends.
A Rejoinder. 225
LETTER XVIII.
IPSE, IPSA, IP8UM — A REJOINDER.
To the Editor of the Globe :
Sib, — lu my last two letters I was occupied in stating the
true doctrine of the Incarnation, and in drawing from it some
idea of Mary's greatness. I have made it clear that in the
hierarchy of creatures the highest place must needs Ijelong to
her through whom the Creator received a created nature. In
the Incarnation the spheres of the Infinite and the Finite
touched at a point. In the finite sphere that point was Mary,
In this truth Protestants ought to discover that there is a sig-
nificance. What was her greatness ? Was it that she was the
mother of a great Prophet ? No ! To be the mother of the
greatest child of earth that the Jew of old, or the later Nestorian,
could conceive — this was not Mary's greatness. She was not
the mother of the highest mere creature ; she was herself the
highest in the scale of mere creatures, because the Creator was,
in His humanity, her Son. That which we know of God's serv-
ants is their work. The work allotted to Mary was the Divine
Maternity. Those who admit that this immeasurable gift was
hers, yet see nothing in it. who speak as if it was hers by acci-
dent, and might have equally been another's — whereas it was
hers by an original predestination, with her solemn consent,
and in concurrence with the plenary grace which prepared her
for it, — those who believe that not a sparrow falls to the ground
without God's will, yet who find nothing noteworthy in the
highest elevation to which God has ever advanced the creature
formed in His own image — such persons " have eyes and see
not." It is not from any real force in the objections urged by
Protestants that their blindness in this matter arises. It comes
from the superficiality of the unspiritual intelligence, hardness
of heart, and consequent lack of spiritual insight. To believe
vitally in matters of religion, one must love : " With the heart
man helieveth unto salvation.''^ As Christianity built upon the
heart originally, so it must vanish out of the world — and the
226 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
process may be so gradual as to be imperceptible — in propor-
tion as a decay of charity makes the heart superficial by mak-
ing it hard. The Pagan nature was hard, harder even in the
polished Greek than in the rough Roman, and for this reason
it was superficial and vain, Greek art loved the beautiful, and
could, on occasion, show forth the terrible ; but the pathos that
everywhere underlies human life it could not feel, or chose to
ignore. Pagan philosophy was like Pagan art. It was super-
ficial and hard, and for that reason it was vain. It was proud
of the body and proud of the mind ; and in a balanced con-
dition of both, it placed its ideal of perfection. But Christi-
anity exalted the soul, in which alone is to be found the charac-
teristic excellence of humanity. The intellect is a feverish
activity within a narrow sphere ; the human soul has a passive
power in the depth of which lies the boundless receptivity of
Faith. In what Paganism would have despised as the soft, the
feeble, the womanly in human nature, lay that which united
with weakness the strength conceded to weakness, and
the gift of spiritual fruitfulness. This is why the Prot-
estant intelligence so often fails to see the greatness of
Mary. It fancies itself shocked when she is called the " high-
est of creatures"; yet if some German dreamer or mystic un-
dertook to prove that St. Michael or St. Gabriel wei;e the high-
est of creatures, it would find nothing alarming in such ele-
vation. Nay, if it chanced to light on a text or two, wliich, in
its estimation, assigned that rank to the Blessed Virgin, with a
better theology, a whole world of false philosophy might, per-
haps, melt like mist ; and those who have persuaded themselves
that the veneration of the highest creature puts her in the place
of God might discover — what a true Theism teaches the child
and the unlearaed believer — that between the Infinite and the
Finite, whether in the highest or the lowest example of the
latter, the distance must ever remain infinite.
Again : In this attitude of the Protestant mind towards Mary,
ever blessed, I find a parallel to its treatment of our dear Lord
Himself. Not onl_> those who walked with Him in the days
of His humiliation did not know Him, but even now, after His
kingdom has been established for nearly nineteeix centuries
A TIejoindeb. 227
upon earth, multitudes deny His Divinity, and vindicate that
denial out of the Gospel ; while other multitudes who think
that they helieve it, dishelieve it, unconsciously (I hope) assign-
ing to Him a double Personality as well as two Natures, and
denying, consequently, that His mother is the "Mother of
God." Holy Scripture is confessedly appealed to both by those
• who assail and those who confess the Divinity of Christ. It is
ajjpealed to no less by those who assail and those who
confess the greatness of Mary. As to the place as-
signed to others in the Scriptures — to Moses, to David,
to St. Paul, or St. John — there is no doubt. The Bible
is only challenged on both sides in the case of those two
whose position, though infinitely ■unequal,via.& alike exceptional
— the Creator Incarnate and the creature who was made the
instrument of the Incarnation. Dr. Jebb, Bishop of Limerick,
was a prelate of that defunct Irish Establishment so long an
incubus and a hlotch upon Catholic Ireland. He, who with
Alexander Knox, in some sort anticipated the High Church
movement in England, (see Contemporary Review, August,
1887,) makes a striking statement in one of his works. The
Eoman Catholic Church, he says, has been preserved by a
special Providence, because it alone was found to be the iiiex-
})ugnable citadel of the doctrine of the Trinity — the various
Protestant bodies having always betrayed a tendency to Arian-
ism or Unitarianism. No wonder that it should be thus with
them. Arguments strictly analogous to those urged against
, the greatness of Mary are used against the Divinity of her
Son ; and the same general objection is made, viz. : That so
great a mystery, if revealed at all, must needs have been re-
vealed plainly. We meet, too, identically the same misconcep-
tions. " What you give to Mary," urges one objector, " you
take from Christ." " What you give to Christ," the Unitarian
adds, " you take from God." One would imagine the Vicar sided
with the Unitarian from the exulting magnanimity with which
he surrenders to him the testimony of the " Three Heavenly
Witnesses" (1 John v. 7, 8), omitted in the Revised Version.
I had rather say that the world could better spare a whole bench
of Anglican Bishops — the whole Lambeth Conference — than
228 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
one single verse of Holy Writ which bears wdtness to Christ's
Divinity and the mystery of the Blessed Trinity.
Mary's maternity, which was the crown of creation, and the
way by which its Creator became its Redeemer, conferred upon
her a greatness which cannot be augmented. Even the wokli>
goes on repeating that it was this idea that elevated woman-
hood, and led the way to a spiritual civilization ; yet what that
idea is, it can hardly answer in detail. The thought of her
trembles on the surface of its troubled intelligence like the
dawn upon a lake. In its knowledge, and even in its ignorance,
it is reverential. It reverences in her the image of her Son.
It recognizes also her own image in the Saints, and in those
most Uke the Saints upon earth. I could fill a column with
tributes from Byron, Wordswortli, Coleridge, Holmes, Long-
fellow, Willis, and Poe. The Ritualist controversialist of the
Littledale stripe alone is bitter when he treats of her. The
world, so far as it does not absolutely disown its Divine Lord,
pays a homage it scarcely intends to pay to the great maternal
sanctity. This is not wonderful. The world is protected even
by indifferentism itself from some aberrations — from that dis-
torted vision, for ir^soancc, which is produced by such polemical
fanaticism as I am now considering ; and the common sense on
which it prides itself teaches it that the Religion of the Incar-
nation must ever be, what it has ever been, the cause of "Jesus
and Mary^ The Catholic Church is the church of the Incarna-
tion, and therefore only in her are " Jesus and Mary " to be
found ever and inseparably united — only there are they truly
at home. Let me prove all this out of the mouths of Anglican
witnesses.
" The pious and affectionate Bishop Hall," as Pusey calls
him, writes:
*' But how gladly do we second the Angel in the praise of
her, which was more ours than His ! How justly do we bless
her, whom the Angel pronounces blessed ! How worthily is
she honored of men, whom the Angel proclaims blessed of
God 1 blessed Mary, he cannot bless thee, he cannot honor thee
too much, that deifies thee not! That which the angel said of
thee, thou hast prophesied of thyself ; we believe the Angel,
A Ee-joindeb. 229
and thee : 'All generations shall call thee blessed,' by the Fruit
of whose womb all generations are blessed."
Bishop Pearson, styled by Pusey " exact and theological,"
writes :
'' The necessity of believing our Saviour thus to be ' born of
the Virgin Mary,' will appear both in respect of her who was
the mother, and of Him Who was the Son.
" In respect of her it was therefore necessary that we might
perpetually preserve an esteem of her person, proportionable
to so high a dignity. It was her own prediction, ' From hence-
forth all generations shall call me blessed '; but the obligation
is ours to call her, to esteem her so. If Elizabeth cried out
with so loud a voice, ' Blessed art thou amongst women,' when
Christ was but newly conceived in her womb, what expressions
of honor and admiration can we think sufficient, now that
Christ is in heaven, and that mother with Him ? Far be it
from any Christian to derogate from that special privilege
granted her, which is incommunicable to any other. We can-
not bear too reverend a regard unto the ' Mother of our Lord,'
60 long as we give her not that worship which is due unto the
Lord Himself. Let us keep the language of the primitive
church : ' Let her be honored and esteemed ; let Him be wor-
shipped and adored.' "
The learned but controversial Bishop Hickes writes :
"God the Father^ who was to prepare a body for His
Eternal Son, as it is written, ' a Body hast Thou prepared Me,'
, would not form it of the substance of a sinful woman ; but His
own essential holiness, as well as the mysterious decency of the
dispensation, would prompt Him to form it of the substance of
one, that like the king's daugliter in the psalm, was ' all-glorious
wiBtlin,' and a pure and spotless Virgin, both in body and
mind. The fullness of the Godhead would not dwell bodily
in a wicked woman, nor would she be deceived and led away
by the serpent, whose heel was to bruise the serpent's head.
{Here is Ipsa from one of the Vicar'' s oivn Bishops !) To
be chosen for the Mother of God was the greatest honor and
favor that ever God conferred upon any human creature.
None of the special honors and favors that He did to any of
230 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
the saints before or since are equivalent to the honor of being
the Mother of God, and, therefore, we may be sure that God
who said, ' Them that honor Me, I will honor,' would not have
done so great an honor to any daughter of Abraham, but to
one who best deserved it, who had no superior for holiness
upon earth. If we had no particular account of her graces, we
might naturally conclude all this from the history of our Lord's
Incarnation ; for nothing less than a superlative hohness could
receive such a testimony of Divine honor from the Holy
Trinity. She was, as it were, the spouse of God, Co-parent
with Him of the wonderful Imnianuel, who was God and
man, ' God of the substance of the Father, begotten before the
worlds ; and man of the substance of His Holy Mother, born
in the world,' 'Perfect God and perfect Man,' 'yet not two
but one Christ.' .... And therefore it is our duty, who have
the benefit of her example, to honor and celebrate her name
and commemoraij her virtues, and set forth her praises, in
whom there was a concurrence of so many Divine accomplish-
ments, etc. If the names of other saints are distinguished
with miniature, hers ought to shine with gold, especially, if we
consider that she, of all the virgin daughters of Israel, had tlie
honor to be chosen by the Holy Trinity for the mother of our
Lord. ' What shall be done to the woman whom the King of
Kings delighted to honor ? ' Certainly if we should hold our
peace and refuse to praise her among women, the stones of the
church would cry out, 'the stone shall cry out of the wall, and
the beam of the timber shall answer it.' Wheresoever tlie
Gospel is preached, that which she hath done and suffered for
our Lord ought to be spoken of for a memorial of her, from
whom He took that very Body which was crucified, and that
precious Blood which was shed for the remission of our sin."
Again, the Kev. Dr. Frank writes :
" I shall not need to tell you who this ' she ' or who this
' Him.' The day rises with it on its wings. The day wrote
it with the first ray of the morning sun upon the posts of the
world. The angels sang it in their choirs, the morning stars
together in their course. The Virgin Mother, the Eternal
Son I The most blessed among women, the fairest of the sons^
A IIkjoinder. 231
of men. The woman clothed with the sun, the sun com-
passed with the woman / she the gate of heaven ; He the
King of Glory, that came forth. She the mother of the Ever-
lasting God : He God without a mother ; God blessed for ever-
more. Great persons as ever met upon a day."
For uttering thoughts not more beautiful than these, St.
John of Damascus, in the "Mission Chapel," so called, was
characterized as a " blind guide leading the blind multitude ! "
Again, George Herbert writes :
I would address
My vows to thee most gladly, blessed Maid,
And mother of my God, in my distress.
Thou art the holy mine, whence came the f^'Bi,
The great restoration for all decay
In young and old.
Thou art the cabinet where the jewel lay —
Chiefly to thee would I my soul unfold.
I can fitly close these quotations with Keble's beautiful little
poem on " The Annunciation," from " The Christian Year."
Your readers will remember thfit Keble, with Pusey and Car-
dinal Newman, started, in 1833, the " Tractarian Movement,"
from which Ritualism " cropped up " a few years ago. Froude
says that Keble and Pusey were the ciphers — Newman the
indicating number. Keble lived and died a quiet country
parson of the English religion ; Pusey, years before his death,
practically quitted it without formally joining the Catholic
Church, although he preached and practiced nearly all her
doctrines, while Newman, drawing the logical conclusions
from their common premises, reverted to the old religion, be-
came a "benighted Romanist," and preserved, at least, his
intellectual self-respect.
I ask your readers' attention to the last stanza of the poem.
The Vicar has given us nothing more "extravagant" from
" Liguon and the Raccolta " than the utterances of Keble and
Bishop Hall, to say nothing of Hickes and Frank :
232 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
Ave Maria ! Blessed Maid I
Lily of Eden's fragrant shade,
Who can express the love,
That nurtured thee, so pure and sweet,
Making thy heart a shelter meet
For Jesus' Holy Dove ?
Ave Maria! jn.' her blest.
To whom, caressing and caress'd,
Clings the Eternal Child :
Favour'd beyond archangels' dream.
When first on thee with tenderest gleam
Thy new-born Saviour smiled.
Ave Maria ! Thou whose name
All hut adoring love may claim.
Yet may we reach thy shrine;
For He, thy Son and Saviour, vows
To crown aU lowly lofty brows
With love and joy like thine.
These quotations well express the thoughts of a few choice
minds in Anglicanism, but alas! they are not Anglican
thoughts. The Vicar has long since confessed that " it is the
hard and sorrowful lot of the English Church " to be among
those who dishonor the mother of God. "Well he knows that
no sectaries have surpassed, few have equalled Anglicans, in
ingratitude and irreverence towards her in whom the Most
High became Incarnate. These thoughts came to Anglican
hearts from a higher spiritual zone than that whicli can only
' believe in a motherless Saviour, as it believes only in a divided
church — they came from the Church of the Incarnation, the
home of " Jesus and Mary."
LETTER XIX.
IPSE, IPSA, IPSUM — A REJOINDER.
To the Ediim of the Globe :
Sib, — As an introduction to my examination of the quo-
tations from " Liguori and the Raccolta," T devote this letter
A Rejoinder. 233
to Dr. Pusey, whom, by the Vicar's blundering perverseness,
your readers have doubtless set down as a witness most hostile
to us. Indeed I propose nothing less than to vindicate his
memory against the dishonor the Vicar seeks to put upon
it. He invokes the authority of Pusey's name to cloak his
own malice and ignorance, and uses it as a theological scare-
' crow to divert the attention of logical and honest Protest-
ants from his own humiliating position. He makes him
sponsor for charges against the Catholic Church at which
Pusey would stand aghast. This is an injustice to Pusey
which I cannot permit. After Newman had become in Eng-
land the "Achilles of the City of God," Pusey, now the
" Hector of a doomed Troy," labored with unbounded zeal and
ability for fifty years to propagate some of the most funda-
mental Catholic dogmas. His essay on Baptismal Regener-
ation, scouted by bis own church in the Privy Council judg-
ment in the Gorham case, is the most thorough and exhaustive
one in English. It has had an incalculable influence over the
theological mind of the Episcopal Church in England and
America in laying the foundation of a right belief in sacra-
mental grace, and thus preparing the way for the reception
of the entire Catholic system. The same may be said, in part,
respecting the doctrine of the Real Presence, the authority
of Tradition, and other points. By dint of study, meditation,
and prayer he worked his way with difficulty through thickets
and morasses back to the very threshold of the Catholic Church.
Why should I stand by and hear his name dishonored by
one who to-day ungratefully enjoys the fruits of Pusey's toil
amid the wreckage of Christianity in the Anglican Establish-
ment? Why should I offer a stinted homage to his devout
and deeply religious spirit, the purity and goodness of his life,
and the profound learning, in certain departments, which he
brought to the service of the Catholic cause ? It is a great gain
that thousands to-day in the Anglican Church confess truths
revealed by God which they once blasphemed or ridiculed.
And, more than this, it is a gain still greater that by degrees
the prejudices which have so long veiled the minds of Angli-
cans of all classes in Egyptian darkness, and made it morally
234 Ipsk, Ipsa, Ipsum.
impossible for them to see tlie brightness and glory of the
Catholic Church, have already been removed from the hearts
of thousands. An ordinary Anglican, fifty years ago, really
and tinily believed all the monstrous, almost unimaginable
horrors which have been handed down by a Protestant tradi-
tion to the dishonor of the church. Such a man was, humanly
speaking, as little likely ever even to think of becoming a
Catholic as to think of becoming a Mahometan or a Hindoo.
He never thought of looking into a Catholic church, or of
opening a CathoHc book. How utterly he was in darkness as
to what it all meant we may imagine, when such a man as
Cardinal Kewman records that as late as 1833, when he had,
been for some years '' in orders," and had already written his
learned work on the Arians, he " knew nothing of the presence
of the Blessed Sacrament " in the Catholic churches into which
he accidentally strayed while waiting at Palermo for a passage
to England. Instead of this totally ignorant generation sin-
cerely believing that all the points in which the "Koman
Church " differed from their own were " pagan superstitions "
and "abominations," the Ritualists are giving us a generation
thousands of which will have been trained from their child-
hood to believe that all the distinctive doctrines of the Catholic
Church against which Protestants have for centuries been blas-
pheming, are living and life-giving truths — the Real Presence,
the Sacrifice of the Mass, Confession and Absolution, the Re-
hgious Life and Yows and the Invocation of the Saints. All
these things, which the last generation beheved to be worse
than Paganism, they know to be truth and life. After New-
man's reversion Pusey continued the Tractarian Movement in
the Church of England with increased vigor, and he devoted to
it every power and faculty he possessed — position, wealth, learn-
ing, and intellect. The result was that multitudes of souls have
been brought by him from far-distant wanderings in regions of
darkness and cold, to a position, as yet, indeed, outside the
church, but yet sufficiently near to her to ensure their feeling
her attraction. Besides, how many of his disciples have now
the happiness to be Catholics? Outstripping their master,
seeking a clearer atmosphere than that in which he was con-
A Rejoindek. 235
tent to dwell, a broader and firmer grasp of divine verities
than that which he possessed, they have found, one after an-
other, their way to the region of light, the fullness of truth.
Pius IX. used to liken him to a church bell, summoning others
to the household of faith, but remaining himself without.
The submission of so many of his valued and trusted associ-
ates to the Catholic Church was a great sorrow to Puscy.
Why did he not follow them? It might almost seem, to hu- ^
man eyes, as if his excellences and virtues merited the grace
which was given to many others who, as far as human judg-
ment can deem, showed far less disposition to faith. A
mighty question, indeed, and one upon which all speculation
must be more or less unsatisfactory. For myself, I do not
hesitate to express my helief that he died in the bosom of the
Catholic Church, and that he met his Maker with the eternal
sunshine of the full-orbed glory of Catholic truth beaming in
his face.
How was Pusey treated by the Anglican Establishment
which he labored so long and so faithfully to Catholicize and
vivify ? Let the London Times answer : " By the concurrence
of an infinite number of witnesses Dr. Pusey is the nominal
founder of the existing phase of the Church of England
He has seen an incessant warfare of controversy, litigation, and
rival demonstrations. He has heard of more hostile charges
than man could remember or read. But he has seen all sides
agree in acknowledging Dr. Pusey to be the author of this
restoration or of this corruption. It is he that has scattered
blessings over the land or curses. Half the English theological
world has reverenced him as a saint, .... Tialf have found no
charge or insinuation too bad for him. It is Dr. Pusey who
has been the Reformer or the Heresiarch of the Century." I
beg to give your readers a sample of the " curses " attributed
to Pusey as reckoned by his Low Church brethren. Two
months before Pusey's death the Rev. Mr, Smelt, speaking
before a Bible society, concluded his speech with this perora-
tion : " If we ' take stock ' of the result of two generations of
Ritualistic teaching, we find that {a) our schools are schools of
free-thought ; (J) our churches are Mass-houses ; {c) our litera-
236 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipscjm.
ture is steeped in slcepticism even when it shrinks from an
open rejection of revelation ; (d) license revels in our institu-
tions ; (e) vice riots in our streets ; (f) an ever increasing laxity
of morals pervades all grades of society ; ((/) venality, which
does but correspond to the absence of principle among public
men, is rampant throughout the constituencies ; (A) while anar-
chy, threatening to turn to rebellion, meets us on all sides and
in every form ! Such, when we sum them up, are the fruits —
call them rather the^A*«^fruits, for there are worse to come, of
the much-vaunted Catholic movement, which its abettors de-
clared, and its dupes believed, was destined to purify the
Church and revivify the State. Such is the price we have to
pay for converting the Protestant Minister into the Massing
Priest ! May God in His mercy forgive us and send us help
from His holy place ! " This I take from that amiable Low
Church organ, the Pock. Oxford University, which Canon
Liddon says may *' in a few years at most " cease to be a Chris-
tian university, suspended Pusey from its pulpit for two years
because of a sermon delivered there on the Real Presence. He
declared to his bishop, Wilberforce, his belief in Purgatory
and the Invocation of Saints, and the bishop scolded and tried
to " bully " him. The preface to his sermon on " The Entire
Absolution of the Penitent " is one long and fervid recom-
mendation of the practice of Confession, and he impresses upon
men that Confession is the only satisfactory way to ensure a
quiet conscience and that therefore it is '' generally necessary."
He acted as Confessor and Director to persons of all classes and of
both sexes all over England, and published a long letter in de-
fence of the principle that " the Church of England leaves her
children free to whom to open their griefs." Again Bishop Wil-
berforce, whose daughter and three of whose brothers became
Catholics, "charged" against him. "The fact remains," he
says, " you seem to me to be habitually assuming tiie place and
doing the work of a Koman Confessor, and not that of an
English clergyman." The Bishop then prohibiied him from
performing any ministerial act in his diocese. Pusey went
right on adapting Catholic books of devotion for Anglican use.
Again Wilberforce fulminated and addressed to Pusey these
A Kejoindeu. 28Z
words : " Events have deepened my conviction that the effect
of your ministry has been in many cases to lead those who fol-
low your guidance to become dissatisfied with the pure Scrij>
tural teaching and services of our own church and to join the
.Roman schism." And again the Bishop tells him : " You
'nourish amongst those whom you guide religious principles
and practices for which the Church of England affords no war-
rant, but which belong, and so ultimately surely lead, to the
Church of Rome." Day after day the Bishop's prophecies
were fulfilled as one after another in rapid succession Pusey's
associates and adherents became Catholics. I cannot enlarge
on this now. Dean Hook was a celebrated moderate High
Churchman in these times. In a letter to The Guardian he calls
Pusey and hie friends " Romanizer8,"and sums up their work in
these words : "I now find them calumniators of the Church of
England, and vindicators of the Church of Rome ; palliating
the vices of the Romish system, and magnifying the deficien-
cies of the Church of England ; sneering at everything Angli-
can, and admiring everything Romish ; students of tlie Breviary
and Missal, disciples of the schoolmen, converts to mediceval-
ism, insinuating Romish sentiments, circulating and republish-
ing Romish works; introducing Romish practices in their
private, and infusing a Romish tone into their public devo-
tions ; introducing the Romish confessional, enjoining Romish
penances, adopting Romish prostrations, recommending Roinish
litanies, muttering the Romish shibboleth, and rejoicing in the
cant of Romish fanaticism, assuming sometimes the garh of
the Romish priesthood, and venerating without imitating their
celibacy, defending Romish miracles, and receiving as true the
lying legends of Rome; almost adoring Romish saints, and
complaining that we have had no saints in England since we
purified our church ; explaining away the idolatry, and pining
for the Mariolatry of the Church of Rome ; vituperating the
Enghsh Reformation, and receiving for the truth the false doc-
trines of the Council of Trent, etc., etc. It is sometimes asked
why we should be continually attacking the Church of Rome ?
When this question is put to us, I admire the subtlety, but not
the candor of the querist. It is not against EomanistSj but
238 Ii'8K, Ipsa, Ii-sum.
against Romanizers tliat we write ; against those who are doing
the work of the Church of Rome while eating the breud of the
Churcli of Enghmd." For all the facts given above I refer
your readers to the " Life of Bisliop Wilherforce," London,
1881 ; and the "Life of Dean Hook," LonJon, 1878.
I now ask your readers' attention to some remarks on the
Eirenicon^ often referred to by the Vicar. Here, too, he has
done injustice to Pusey. This work is in three volumes. The
fimt is a letter to Keble, and the second and third, severally,
letters to Father Newman occasioned by his reply to i\\Q first.
For years before Pusey's death he worked earnestly to bring
about a union between the Catholic and Anglican churches.
He was dissatisfied with the individual secessions to Home and
desired to bring about a *' corporate reunion," by which he and
his party ^' through mutual explanations," might go over to
Rome in a body — " lolthout calling upon the Church of Home
to ahandon anything to which she had 'pronounced to he ' de
fide ' " — of faith. These are Pusey's very words {Eirenicon,
vol. 2, p. 7). That is to say, he was ready to accept all the
dogmatic teaching of the Catholic Church. " I have long been
convinced," he writes, " that there is nothing in the Council of
Trent which could not be explained satisfactorily to us, if it
were explained authoritatively — i. e., by the Roman Church
itself, not by individual theologians only." Pusey's Letter to
tlie London WeeHy Register, Nov. 22, 1865, written to
thank the editor " with all my (his) heart for your (his) kind-
hearted and appreciative review of my (his) Eirenicon?'' To
promote the aspirations of this Unionist Movement headed by
Pusey, an association was formed known as the " Order of
Corporate Reunion." For the same purpose Pusey says he
wrote the Eirenicon — a simple overture for peace, as the word
implies. It was occasioned by a letter addressed to him by
Dr. Manning, entitled : " The "Workings of the Holy Spirit in
the Church of England" — in which the Archbishop urged
upon his old friend that all who believe in the supernatural
order, in the revelation of Christianity, in the inspiration of
Holy Scripture, in the divine certainty of dogmatic Tradition,
in the divine obligation of holding no communion with heresy
A Kejoindek. 239
and schism, are logically drivon in upon the lines of the only
etronglKild which God has constituted as " the pillar and <i;round
of the truth " — the Catl'-olic Church. I have this letter now
before me, and if your readers desire to get an idea of the
cogency of the argument by which the appeal to Pusey was
supported, let them read the article by Cardinal Manning in
the current number of the North American Rcvlev\ entitled :
"7y<<? Gladntone-IiujersoU Contraversy: The Church a Witness
to Herself:'
One of the stumbling-blocks in the way of the reconciliation
with Rome which Pusey sought, was the devotion of Catholics
to the Mother of God. He poured into the first volume of tlie
Eirenicon all his difficulties, prepossessious, and, to the Catholic
mind, bewildering misconceptions and apparently perverse mis-
understandings on the subject, but he said not a word about his
own belief on the greatness of Mary . From this volume the Vicar
lias taken, almost verlatim, that " wider view of the Roman
cultus of Mary" spread out in his last "Stricture," and with-
out a single reference to the second volume in which Pusey
explained, neutralized, and practically retracted the violent
criticisms of his first volume — as I will show. For so heinous
a crime against candor, honesty, and truth, and the memory of
an honest-minded man, I know of no parallel in all the annals
of misrepresentation. This is a grave misfortime for himself
as well as a crying injustice to Pusey. And now to the
proof.
Cardinal (then plain Father) Newman, in reply to the first
volume, the original Eirenicon, addressed to Pusey his famous
letter, than which there has never been written a more mas-
terly and faultless specimen of Patristic and Scriptural exege-
sis. Other writers, indeed, had catalogued and exposed what
the Eirenicon contained of misstatement, misquotation, unfair
insinuation and conclusion. But the appearance of Dr. Xew-
man on the scene was that " of the great Achilles moving to
the war," The gleam of well-worn armor flashes on the eye,
and the attention of both armies is riveted on him as he lifts
his spear. He cannot nmtter his favorite motto ;
240 Ipse, Ipsa, Ii'sum.
And well shall they perceive that, till this hour,
I paiised from war (Iliad, B. xviii., L. 125) ;
for it is but lately that he struck down and kicked oflE the
field the swaggering bully Kingsley, hardly worthy of his
steel. It is different now. He will begin in true Homeric
fashion with a complimentary harangue to the champion on
the other side ; but then will come the time for blows — blows
of terrible force, dealt ont with that gentle affectionateness
which ever characterized the friendship of these two great
souls. Dr. Newman begins by a generous tribute to Dr. Pusey
himself, and to those whom he is supposed to influence. He
allows him to have every right to mention the conditions on
which he proposes to become a Catholic, as well as the rigiit to
state what it is that he objects to, as requiring explanation in
the Catholic system. But then the tone changes and business
begins. Dr. Newman tells his old friend in the plainest
way that " tliere is much both in the matter and manner of
his volume calculated to wound those who love him well, but
truth more"; and he points out the glaring inconsistency
of " professing to b*^ composing an Irenicon while treating
Catholics as foes"; and characterizes in his happy way, the
proceeding of Pusey as " discharging an Olive branch as from
a catapult." " The hundred pages which you have devoted to
the subject of the Blessed Virgin," he tells him, " give a one-
sided view of our teaching about her." Few have charac-
terized these pages in stronger terms than Dr. Newman. lie
asks Pusey : " What could an Exeter Hall orator, what could
a Scotch commentator on the Apocalypse, do more for his own
side of the controversy by the picture he drew of us i " Fur-
ther on he pointedly reminds him that he all (lie time hneio het-
ter. This brings me to the important point. After a proof
from the Fathers as to the Catholic doctrine about the Blessed
Virgin, he says to Pusey : " You know what the Fathers assert ;
but, if so, have you not, my dear friend, been unjust to your-
self in your recent volume, and made far too much of the dif-
ferences which exist between Anglicans and us on this particu-
lar point ? It is the office of an Irenicon to smooth difficulties.
A Rejoinder. 241
.... Had you happened in your volume to introduce your
notice of our teaching about the Blessed Virgin, with a notice
of the teaching of the Fathers concerning lier, which you fol-
low, ordinary men would have considered that there was not
much to choose between you and us. Though you appealed
ever so much, in your defence, to the authority of the ' Un-
divided Church,' they would have said that you, who had such
high notions of the Blessed Mary, were one of the last men .
who had a right to accuse us of quasi-idolatry. When they
found you with the Fathers caUing her Mother of God, Second
Eve, and Mother of all Living, the Mother of Life, the Morn-
ing Star, the Mystical New Heaven, the Sceptre of Orthodoxy,
the AU-undefiled Mother of Holiness, and the like, they would
have deemed it a poor compensation for such language, that
you protested against ^er being called a Co-Redemptress or a
Priestess. And if they were violent Protestants, they would
not have read you with the relish and gratitude with which, as
it is, they have perhaps accepted your testimony against us.
.... They would have felt in this case that they had the same
right to be shocked at you as you have to be shocked at us ;
and further, which is the point to which I am coming, they
would have said, that, granting some of our modern writers go
beyond the Fathers in this matter, still the line cannot be logic-
ally drawn between the teaching of the Fathers concerning the
Blessed Virgin and our own. This view of the matter seems
to me true and important ; I do not think the line can be satis-
factorily drawn." And again he urges on Pusey : " As you
revere the Fathers, so you revere the Greek Church ; and here
again we have a witness on our behalf, of which you mvst he
aware as fully as we are, and of which you really must intend
to give us the benefit. In proportion as the Greek ritual is
known to the religious public, that knowledge will take off the
edge of the surprise of Anglicans at the sight of our devotions
to our Lady. It must weigh with them, when they discover
that we can enlist on our side in this controversy those ' Seventy
Millions ' of Orientals, who are separated from our commun-
ion. Is it not a very pregnant fact, that the Eastern churches,
so independent of us, so long separated from the "West,
242 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
so jealous for Antiquity, should even surpass us in their
exaltation of the Blessed Virgin?" Once more he point-
edly puts it to Pusey : " The height of our offending
in our devotion to the Blessed Virgin would not look-
so great in your Volume as it does, had you not deUherately
placed yourself on lower ground than your own feelings to-
wards her would have spontaneously prompted you to take. I
have no doubt you had some good reason for adopting this
course, but I do not know it ; what I do know is, that, for the
Fathers' sake who so exalt her, you really do love and venerate
her, though you do not evidence it in your hook. I am glad
then in this place to insist on a fact which will lead those
among us, who know you not, to love you from their love of
her, in spite of what you refuse to give her ; and lead Angli-
cans, on the other hand, who do know you, to think better of
us, who refuse her nothing, when they reflect that, if you come
short of us, you do not actually go against us in your devotion
to her." This is surely inimitable ! The calm gentleness of
the language in the above extracts did certainly not conceal
from Pusey the gravity and severity of the rebuke adminis-
tered, and it " drew " him.
The second volume of the Eirenicon is the reply to Father
Newman on our topic. The third volume is also addressed to
him, but its subject is foreign to this discussion. I am to con-
sider the second. What an improvement on the original Eiren-
icon ! It scarcely appears to bo the work of the same author : for,
(1) it contains not one ward throughout calculated to give Cath-
olics unnecessary pain, and (2) it speaks strongly on the great-
ness of our Blessed Lady, and on the veneration with which
Christians should regard her. The very title-page mentions
"the reverential love due to the ever-blessed Theotokos" —
JMother of God. No wonder the Vicar did not refer to it in
his last " Sti'icture." It was probably a revelation to him, and
I have no doubt he took courage from it to deliver his " Ser-
mon " so-called, of which, else, his hearers had been deprived.
He catinot take Littledale and repeat the " Sermon." Not one
irhn listened, to it ever before heard its like in any Anglican
ch urch in this city.
A Rejdinder. 243
Pusey begins his volume by admitting the truth of Fatlier
Newman's rebuke that he " deliberately " suppressed the ex-
pression of his own feelings towards Mary. These are his
words: "My omission of any positive statements, in regard to
the greatness of the Blessed Virgin, was partly owing, I sup-
pose, to my not even imagining that any one could doubt my
belief, since the doctrine expressed by that great title Theotokoa
(Mother of God), is a matter of faith, an essential part of
the doctrine of the Incarnation^ I will now let Pusey fur-
nish evidence of the truth of Dr. Newman's assertion that he
was the last man who had a right to accuse Catholics of extrav-
agant language towards Mary. He says : " (God), in all eter-
nity, we both believe, foreordained her who was to be Theotokos,
Genetrix Dei, the Mother of God. He, in time, created her ;
He endowed her with all those qualities, with which it was
fitting that she should be endowed, in whom, ' When Thou
tookest upon thee to deliver man. Thou didst not abhor the
Virgin's womb.' It was indeed, in my young days, a startling
thought, when it first flashed upon me that it must be true, that
one of our nature which is the last and lowest of God's rational
creation, was raised toanearnessto Almighty God above all the
choirs of Angels or Archangels, Dominions or Powers, above the
Cherubim, who seem so near to God, or the Seraphim with
their burning love, close to His throne. Yet it was self-evi-
dent, as soon as stated, that she, of whom He deigned to take
His Human Flesh, was brought to a nearness to Plimself, above
' all created beings ; that she stood single and alone, in all crea-
tion or all possible creations, in that, in her womb. He Who, in
His Godhead, is CoTisubstantial with the Father, deigned, as to
His Human Body, to become Consubstantial with her." Let
your readers take in the sublimity of thought suggested by
this quotation while I remark upon it. When Pusey was twenty-
four years old he was elected a Fellow of Oriel College, Ox-
ford, along with Newman ; at twenty-eight he was Canon of
Christ Church and Royal Professor of Hebrew. How won-
derful are the ways of God ! Does the Vicar know the history
of the foundation of Oriel ? Perhaps he does, since he had the
misfortune to proclaim Oxford his Alma 2fatcr. Then he will
244 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
recognize the truth of my statement that : but for the place
long held by the Blessed Virgin in the mind and heart of man,
Pusey could not have been a Fellow of Oriel, for Oriel would
never have existed; neither would he have been Canon of
Christ Church nor Professor of Hebrew — neither would we
have the Eirenicon, much less the Vicar's " Sermon," though
he doubtless considers this equivalent to the honor meant for
Mary by the men who founded Oriel College. Pusey confesses
it was " a startling thought " when the idea of Mary's greatness
"first flashed upon" him. The heart sickens at the thoughts
called up by these words. A Catholic child lisps in the Arch-
angelic salutation to Mary — " Hail, full of grace, the Lord is
with thee : blessed art thou among women," and the seal of
the Incarnation is pressed upon his lips with his mother's milk ;
and to-day when the cathedral bell strikes the hours, Catholic
hearts ring out in full diapason, in that same Angehis, their
gratitude to God for the benefits of the Incarnation. But here
we have a Fellow of Mary's College, a Canon of Christ Church,
a Royal Professor of Hebrew, proclaiming to the world that
before he entered his young manhood no Ave had ever been
uttered by his voice to salute the Queen of Heaven — no earthly
mother had ever taught his lisping lips to sing that song of the
Innocents, " O Mary, how sweet is thy name ! " It was not,
however, the fault of Pusey's pure heart, and in the maturity
of his great intellect, he tried to atone for his neglect. But
how could it be otherwise in the Anglican Church a few years
ago ? It was not from the impure crew who founded the sect,
with which he outwardly allied himself, that he could learn j,
anything of her whom he now places so high. Semirarais or
Cleopatra, Anne Boleyn or Queen Elizabeth filled a larger place
in their thoughts than the Blessed Mother of God. How is it
to-day among the rising generation in this city ? Is that Blessed
One anything more than a name ?
A Eejoixdeb. 245
LETTER XX.
IPSE, IPSA, IPSUM — A EEJOINDEB.
To the Editor of tJie Ghhe :
, Sib, — I continue my observations on the Eirenicon — second
volume.
Pusey follows up the quotation on which I commented at the
close of my last letter with tliis extract from a sermon of St.
Proclus, Patriarch of Constantinople, A.D. 447 :
" Traverse in thought, O man, the creation, and see if there
is anything equal to or greater than the Holy Virgin, who bare
God. Compass the earth, survey the sea, search the air, track
the heavens in thought ; consider all the invisible powers, and
see whether there is any other such marvel in all creation. For
the heavens declare the glory of God ; the Angels serve with
fear ; the Archangels worship with trembling ; the Cherubim,
not sustaining, quiver ; the Seraphim, flying around, approach
not, and trembling, cry, 'Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord of hosts;
heaven and earth are full of His praise.' The clouds in awe be-
came the chariot of the Resurrection ; Hell in fear cast forth
the dead ; — count over the miracles, and admire the victory of
the Virgin ; for whom all creation hymned with fear and trem-
bling, she alone inexplicably housed. Blessed for her sake are
all women. For womankind is no longer v/nder a curse / for
, the race has received That wherefrom it shall surpass the Angels
in glory. Eve is healed," etc.
Those words remind one of the beautiful saying of the saintly
Father Faber, from whom Pusey gratefully confesses he learned
much : " There are cold, shallow controversies on earth, about
our Lady's greatness, while at this hour the great St. Michael
is gazing on her throne with a rapture of astonishment, a de-
lighted rapture which will grow to all eternity." But this is
simply another way of putting Pusey'sown words already
given, and which are, in their turn, those of St. Proclus. Now,
not only does Pusey heartily adopt and fully endorse the lan-
guage of St. Proclus, but he proceeds to quote, in order to con-
246 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
cur in them, the glowing panegyrics of St. Cyril of Alexandria,
Hesycliius of Jerusalem, Tiieodotus and St. Basil. That is to
say, he accepts as tnie and fitting to Mary everij word in that
magnificent panorama from the Greek Fathers-, which I passed
before the eyes of your readers in the fifth and sixth Letters of
this Rejoinder. And, he makes tliis remark : " Doubtless, any
imayinations of ours must come short of the truth, if we
would picture to ourselves the superhmnan, engraced beauty of
the soul of her whom God vouchsafed to create, so alone in
His whole creation, whose being ever lay in His eternal coun-
sels, who must have been in His Divine Mind, when, in all
eternity. He contemplated the way in which He should unite
His rational creation to Himself, redeeming His fallen race ;
from whom He, who should be God and Man, was to derive
His Human Flesh, and in His Sacred Childhood be subject to
her."
Again : Pusey seemed to imply that Mary had no other part
or position in the Incarnation than as its mere physical instru-
ment — much the same part, as it were, that Judah or David
may have had. Father Newman points out to him that the
Fathers, on the contrary, from the very first, speak of her " as
an intelligent, responsible cause of our Lord's taking flesh '';
" her faith and obedience being accessories to the Incarnation,
and gaining it as her reward." And Father Xewman con-
tinues : " They (the Fathers) declare that she co-operated in
our salvation, not merely by the descent of the Holy Ghost
upon her body, but by specific holy acts, the effect of the Holy
Ghost upon her soul ; that, as Eve forfeited privileges by sin,
so Mary earned privileges by the fruits of grace; that as Eve
was a cause of ruin to all, Mary was a cause of salvation to all ;
that, as Eve made room for Adam's fall, so Mary made room
for our Lord's reparation of it ; and thus, whereas the free gift
was not as the offence, but much greater, it follows that, as Eve
co-operated in effecting a great evil, Mary co-operated in effect-
ing a much greater good." Pusey transfers these words to his
own pages in the Eirenicon and accepts their truth absolutely.
" Your words,^'' he says to Father Newman, '' express my helief
alsoJ'^ Here, then, I will partially anticipate the subject set
A Eejoindek. 247
off for my next letter. Pusey had objected, in the first vol-
nme of tlie Eirenicon, to the title " Co-Iiedcniptress" as applied
to Mary. He did so, honestly I assume, because he had no ade-
(juate sense of what it implies, and supposing it to mean more
than it does mean in the mouth of a Catholic. When his dif-
ficulty is removed by Father Newman's appeal to the Fathers,
and to their explanation of the ways by which Mary ^^co-oper-
ated in our salvation,^'' he says so like an honest man, and as-
sures Father Newman that his words express his belief also,
and, therefore, that Mary is justly styled — " Co-Redemptress."
Let me for the instruction of thoughtful Protestants, who do
not claim to be " true Catholics," enlarge on this. Their one
obvious objection to the Catholic phrase, " Co-Redemptress,"
would be, that it denies the otiHce of our dear Lord as Sole
Redeemer. But this difiiculty arises from their forgetting that
there are two different kinds of co-operation ; and that where
the co-operation takes place by counsel, by instigation, by inter-
cession, or by a consent without which the work could not he
accomplished, the work still remains exclusively performed by
its immediate agent. Thus it was Adam's sin which exclu-
sively wrought man's fall ; and yet Eve actively co-operated in
that fall, because she incited Adam to do that which exclusively
caused it. Moreover Eve's co-operation was formal and not
merely material, because she knew she was exciting him to
what involved man's ruin. In a parallel manner, Christ, our
Redeemer, alone wrought man's whole Redemption ; and yet
Mary as truly and as formally co-operated in man's redemption,
as Eve in man's fall. She co-operated, of course, in one sense
by the circumstance of becoming His Mother. But, if this
were all, it could not be said that she is the Co-operatrix of Re-
demption or Co-Redemptress, except in a purely material sense.
At the solemn moment of the Annunciation, man's redemp-
tion depended on the alternative, whether she would or would
not give her consent. And the consent which she gave was
not merely to the being Mother of God — that would have been
simply an unparalleled exaltation and dignity — but she con-
sented to His work of redemption. She consented to undergo
all that unspeakable suffering and anguish, which were involved
248 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
in lier Son dying for the sins of the world. As Eve then
formally co-operated in the fall, so Mary formally co-operated
in the Kedemptiou, and therefore, no one, whose faith on the
doctrine of the Incarnation — the basilar idea of Christianity —
is sound, can hesitate to call her, in the Catholic sense, " Co-
Redemptress."
When it is said, however, that man's Redemption depended
on Mary's consent, it must not be forgotten that this involved
no jeopardizing of God's work ; because by His infallible grace
He secured her consent without in any way violating her per-
fect liberty of will. Pusey says to Father Newman on this
point: ^\God\in all eternity, we both helieve, foreordained
her who was to he Theotokos, Genetrix Dei, the Mother of
GodP So, too, it must not be forgotten, that the Co-Redemp-
tress was herself redeemed ; and, I could illustrate the perfect
harmony of these two facts by a very striking parallel between
Eve's relation to Adam and Mary's to Jesus. Moreover, she
was redeemed with a higher redemption than any other crea-
ture — a redemption oi preservation, and not of deliverance^ for
she was redeemed by her Son's foreseen death. To this I will
refer later. So much have I felt obliged to say in justification
of Mary's title, " Co-Redemptress." I have little fear of any
reasoning on Christian principles, that would attempt to de-
prive her of it.
At present I am in an atmosphere of thought, which uxor ■
tion of the Yicar's name cannot but cloud and sully, and I
protest against tlie necessity of using it, for I feel it little short
of a degradation. In the confused mass of citations which he
takes from Pusey 's^rs^ volume for his last " Stricture" he in-
cludes — " Co-Redemptress." So far he exhibits himself as a
mere parasite to Pusey. Why did he not read in Pusey's
second volume, Father Newman's explanation from the Fathers
of the title "Co-Redemptress," which Pusey himself so
heartily accepted? Well, I believe he did read it; but I will
give him the benefit of the milder alternative when I say that
not malice, but pure ignorance of the matters he has under-
taken to discuss, prevented his understanding it. That this is
his mental condition your readers are long since convinced.
A Rejoinder. 219
Why should not a Catholic feel it degrading, even under the
pressure of duty and " priestly vows," to magnify such as he
by noticing him at all ? Why should so respectable a weapon
as the " shillalah " be put to such ignominious uses ?
Again. Pusey oxpressed his fears that there might be a
difficulty in his adopting the great titles given by the Fathers
' to the Blessed Virgin because he had an "impression," he says,
that their meaning was changed. This makes a Catholic smile.
'• I am not accusing," he assures Father Newman, " I only say,
from what we wish to be exempt " — when he and his party
became Catholics. Father Newman refers him to one of our
prayer-books — "The Crown of Jesus," — from which Pusey
very fairly makes this extract, explaining our every-day use of
the " great titles" given by the Fathers to Mary : '•''Mother of
Divine Grace, because she is the parent of Him who is the
Source and Author of all grace ; Seat of Wisdom, as being re-
plenished with this heavenly virtue, because she is the Mother
of Him who is wisdom itself ; Cause of our Joxj, as being the
instrument of that great blessing, which is the source of all our
Christian consolations ; Tower of Ivm^y, as being remarkable
for the purity of innocence : ivory, by its whiteness, being the
emblem of delicacy, whence that saying in the canticles, ' Thy
neck is as a tower of ivory '; Arh of the Covenant, as being the
parent of Him who is the Mediator of the new Covenant ;
Gate of Heaven, as being, again, mother of Him who has opened
to us the gate of everlasting happiness; Morning Star, as
' being the harbinger of that bright Day which has brought im-
mortality to light." To these beautiful titles let me add that
other, '■'■ Mater MisericordicB " — Mother of Meroy — because she
is the parent of Him who is IVfercy itself. By this will Mary
now be honored and saluted in this city as the Patroness of the
new hospital just erected by the zeal of our venerated Bishop.
These explanations perfectly satisfied Pusey, and he says to
Father Newman: "I am thankful to see in 'The Crown of
Jesus,' to which you referred me, expositions of the great titles
which are concentrated in the Litany of Loretto, sttch as every
Christian, must receive.''^ Here again the Yicar displays " the
hoof and tail." He copies Pusey's objection, says not a word
250 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
about the Catholic explanatiou and Pusey's satisfaction with it
expressed in the foregoing words, and then cliarges " the Church
of Koine with bringing in such a confusion of terms as to
make it next to iin possible for true Catholics to use innocently
even the phraseology of the Catholic Fathers." My God!
What a confession ! And from apostates who dare lay claim
to a divine commission to proclaim Thy truth to the world !
Surely they have their reward : "& then hecause thou art luke-
xoarm^ and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my
mouth.''''* The Vicar then adds: "In the same way (modern
Romanists) have wrested the meaning of the term Advocate
or Comforter in S. Irenaeus, although the context and the
general teaching of his writings give them tJie lie direct.''^
Only the " father of lies " could have inspired an utterance so
transparently his offspring. Pusey would turn in his grave at
the very thought of being made responsible for such blas-
phemies against honesty and truth.
To return to the Eirenicon. Having quoted from the
Fathers, whose names I gave a moment ago, the most glowing
language in exaltation of the blessed Mother tliat the human
mind can conceive or hutnan tongue utter, Pusey says : " Now,
in all this, I suppose that there is nothing which any Anglican
who reflected on the term ' Theotdkos ' (Mother of God), would
hesitate about (except that we are unaccustomed to m^'stical
interpretations of Scripture) " Yes ; but how hard
pressed Pusey would be to find "any Anglican who reflected
on the term (Mother of God)'' and applied it to Mary no man
could be more painfully aware than himself. He knew but
too well how it was him before, as he confessed, the idea of
Mary's greatness " first flashed upon " his mind. " No man,"
candidly confesses that learned Protestant divine. Dr. Nevin —
" No man whose tongue falters in pronouncing Mary Mother
of God can be orthodox at heart on the article of Christ's
person." Dr. Nevin was a Presbyterian, and the originator
and exponent of the celebrated " Mercersburg System of The-
ology." Of course be had no pretensions to being a " true
Catholic." Now, that Mary is " Theotokos," or Mother of God,
is an integral part of the Catholic Faith fixed by the Third
A Rejoinder. 251
General Council of Epliesus, A.D. 431. The Anglican Bishop
Burnet, in his Exposition of the Thirty-nine Articles, speaking of
the time of the Council of Ephesus, sjiys: "The whole world
was then filled with very extravagant devotion to her (Mary)."'
Art. XXII. " Extravagant ! " Ever the old shibboleth in the
mouth of Bishop and Vicar. Nevertheless, the title '' Mother
of God," as Cardinal Newman beautifully writes, " carries with
it no admixture of rhetoric, no taint of extravagant affection,
— it has nothing else but a well-weighed, grave, dogmatic
sense, which corresponds and is adequate to its sound. It in-
tends to express that God is her son, as tmly as any one of us
is the son of his own mother. If this be so, what can be said
of any creature whatever which may not be said of her? What
can be said too much, so that it does not compromise the
attributes of the Creator? It is this awful title, which both
illustrates and connects together the two prerogatives of Mary,
.... her sanctity and her greatness. It is the issue of her
sanctity ; it is the origin of her greatness. What dignity can be
too great to attribute to her who is as closely bound up, as in-
timately one, with the Eternal Word, as a mother is with a
son ? What outfit of sanctity, what fullness and redundance
of grace, what exuberance of merits must have been hers,
when once we admit the supposition, which the Fathers justify,
that her Maker really did regard those merits, and take them
into account, when He condescended 'not to abhor the
Virgin's womb'? .... Men sometimes wondei' tliat we
call her Mother of Life, of Mer(nj, of Salvation', what are
all these titles compared to that one narne — Mother of God? "
The Anglican Book of Homilies declares that the Primitive
Church is to be followed, and that the first Four General
Councils are to be admitted as belonging to the Primitive
Church. Pusey, on the contrary, says {Eirenicon, vol. 1, p. 93):
"The Church of England receives the Six General Councils."
At all events the Thirty-nine Articles state that the Book of
Homilies contains " a godly and wholesome doctrine." Thus
in theory, at least, Anglicans are bound to admit that Mary is
Mother of God, because Ephesus, the TJilrd General Council,
defined it. But who ever heard an Anglican, lay or clerical,
252 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipscm.
60 speak of her ? I never did ; and I can confidently affirm
that no AngUcan minister in this city ever before used it. We
hear it for the first time from the Vicar, taught by Pusey,
who says that " those other great teruis," of the Fathers, •' great
aa they were, were but weaker expressions of that one word
Theotokos (Mother of God). They were so many colors
evolved out of that central light." Here again he agrees with
Father Newman.
I cannot better illustrate the truth of what I have said on
this topic, than by transferring to your columns a correspond-
ence between the new Bishop of Nova Scotia, the Rev.
James Simpson, a llitualist, and one Mr. Hall, evidently a
genuine Anglican, in England. The comedy opens with a
letter from Mr. Simpson to Bishop Courtenay, as follows :
Halifax, April 27th, 1888.
To the Lord Bishop of Nova Scotia:
My Lord,— At the execution of William Millman, in the Char-
lottetown jail, on the 10th inst., I said the following committal :
"The Glorious Cross and Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ, and
the mighty intercessions of the Mother of God and all the
Saints, be between thee and thy ghostly enemies at this the hour of
thy departure, and the blessing of God, " etc. , etc.
In consequence of this I have been charged with invoking the
Virgin Mary, and making requests to her, thereby acting disloyally
to the Church of England. I beg therefore to lay the matter before
your Lordship, requesting that I may be allowed to publish this
letter and your reply.
Believe me, your Lordship's obedient servant,
(Signed), Jajies Simpson.
Your readers will notice that the " committal " used by
Mr. Simpson is, almost verbatim, the prayer used by Catholics
at the bedside of a departing soul, invoking in its behalf the
intercession of the Blessed Yirgin and the Saints. Bishop
Courtenay replied as follows :
Halifax, 30th April, 1888.
My Dear Sir, — The words which you quote in your note of the
27th inst. are not an invocation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and
therefore in using them you have not laid yourself open to the
A Kejoindur. 253
charge, which you say has been brotight against you, of acting dis-
loyally to the Church of England. The chuixih has not, so far as I
am aware, asserted or taught that the children of God in the invisible
world cease to pray for those on earth, or that such prayei-s are less
efficacious than those wliich we offer for one another, and, tlierefoi-e,
the pious desire and aspiration that the whole of such prayers might
be an aid to a criminal at the point of death for the defeating of his
spiritual foes is not other than right and fitting. The one thing
which, in my judgment, is liable to misconception, on the part of
hasty and ignorant persons, is the special me;ition of the "interces-
sions of the Mother of God," which, to such people, might seem to
imply an assumption of the mediatorship of our Blessed Lord, and
an infringement of His right ' ' who ever loveth to make interces-
sion for us." "While, therefore, I do not think you justly open
to blame for the use of such a phrase, I would, if I were you,
avoid it on any other occasion, as being likely to cause you to be
misunderstood and wrongfully accused.
(Sig.) F. Nova Scotia.
Is not this appalling ! Is it, or not, apostasy ? The Bishop
declares it to be " right and fitting " hy " pious desire and
aspiration " to ask the " prayers" of "the Mother of God and
all the saints," "at the point of death, for the defeating of
spiritual foes." Only " hasty and ignoi'ant persons " can ob-
ject to it, he assures Mr. Simpson. Again : it does not matter
so much about the other " saints," but " the special mention of
the intercession of the Mother of God" is peculiarly odious to
those "hasty and ignorant persons" and detested by them.
Since, then, to " such people " the asking for Mary's intercession
" might seem to imply an assumption of the mediatorship of
our Blessed Lord," what does the Bishop counsel Mr. Simp-
son ? Does he, like St. Paul, urge him to declare boldly God's
truth, " in season, out of season," to instruct those "hasty
and ignorant persons," " to exhort in sound doctrine and con-
vince the gainsayers," to " rebuke them sharply that they may
be sound in the faith " ? Not at all ; he advises him to surren-
der and thus make life more pleasant for himself. Mr. Simp-
son must not " on any other occasion " " mention the interces-
sion of the Mother of God " 1
254: Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
Again Bishop Courtenay says : " The church has not, so far
as I am aware, asserted or taught that the children of God in
the invisible world cease to pray for those on earth, or that
such prayers are less eflScacious than those which we oflfer for
one another." Has the bishop ever read the '* Homilies of the
Church of England," the authoritative exposition of Anglican
doctrine % In the " Second Part of the Sermon concej-ning
Prayer," the invocation of the saints is most distinctly pi'ohih-
ited^ on the express ground that the saints are " not able to help
Ufi,'" and the mere " desiring help at their hands" is represented
as a treason against the majesty of Heaven. "Yet thon wilt
object there that the saints in Heaven do pray for us, and that
their prayer proceedeth of an earnest charity that they have
towards their brethren on earth. "Whereto it may be well an-
swered, first, that no man knoweth whether they do pray for us
or no." Jlomilu's, \>\>. 290-301. Ed. Oaford University Press.
Last summer Bishop Courtenay went to England to attend
the Lambeth Conference. While there an Anglican layman,
Mr. Hall, brought him to task for his letter to Mr. Simpson
endorsing his "Committal " prayer. The correspondence is so
germane to my topic that I need not apologize for incorporat-
ing it here. The bishop replied to Mr. Hall as follows :
Lambeth Palace, 27th July, 1888.
My Dear Sir, — The whole coutrovei-sy turns upon tlie interpre-
tation of the words you complain of. You assert that they consti-
tute an invocation of " the Blessed Virgin." I as.sert that they do
not. I acquit Mr. Simpson on that ground alone. I am as well
aware as you can be that our Church of England has in her articles
condenmed "invocation of saints," and as one of her officers I am
ready to condemn such a thing too, but I cannot consent that you
or any other member of the church should deternune that certain
words are what I contend they are not, and call in question my
judgment as if the office of judge belonged to them and not to me.
As to the term "Mother of God," you are aware, I suppose, tliat it
is generally understood to be the equivalent of the Greek term ' ' TJieo-
tokos," which was approved by a general council as "Orthodox"
and to he used against heresy. This is the only sense in which it
is allowed by any Bishop of our church to he made use of hy the
clergy. I am quite willing to be " the wrong man in the wrong
A Rejoi>'dkr. 255
place" according to your wisdom, but tlien you see it is not to you
that sucli judt^meut belongs, and I would advise you very earnestly
to obtain sufficient knowledge of " tlieological terms, "before you
undertake to decide what is or is not false teaching according to tlie
Church of England.
I remain yours truly,
(Sig.) F. Nova Scotia.
Twice in tlie Vicar's sermon lie speaks of Mary as tlie
" Holy Virgin Mother of God " and the " Blessed Mother of
God," and again he calls her " the holy Theotokos." Was he
only preaching against my " heresy " on the Incarnation ? It
was not any love for the Blessed Virgin, after all, that begat
that " Sermon," since Bishop Courtenay says that he would
not be allowed to speak of the " Mother of God " except
''agaiiist heresy." How ca7i he forgive the Bishop for expos-
ing the false pretence, the " controversial trick," by which he
sought to impose on your readers ?
Mr. Hall's rejoinder to the Bishop's letter is as follows :
AiNTREE, July 30th, 1888.
My Lord, — Tlie whole controversy does not turn on whether the
Rev. J. Simpson's words to the dying criniinal, viz. — "the mighty
intercession of tlie Mother of God and all the Saints be between
thee and thy ghostly foes," are an invocation of Saints, but rather
whether our Church teaches any " Mother of God " or any such in-
tercession. You say, " I am not aware that our Church teaches
that the Saints in heaven do not intei-cede for those on earth." My
Lord, is not tliis mere trifling? You know that the question is not
what our Church does not teach, but what she does. If she does,
why denounce its invocation as " a vain invention "? Wliy did she
remove the " Mother of God " and every word about such interces-
sion from our Prayer Book ? My Lord, wliat can you know of an in-
tercession of wliich our Prayer Book is wliolly silent, and of which
God Himself in His whole revelation says not one word? Is it on
such grounds that you rush in and dare to dogmatize? Your Lord-
ship denies that Mr. Simpson's words arc an invocation of Saints.
Yet liis words being an undoubted prayer, they are cither an invo-
cation to the " Mother of God " or (the greater absurdity) of invok-
ing God to invoke the Saints' intercession. This distinction is so
fine that it reaches the dignity of a quibble. It needs no Episcopal
Judge, but only a little 'common sense, to see that the Rev. gentle-
256 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
man appeals to this mighty intercession — was teaching the poor
soul to invoke it. My Lord, you tell us as any Komanist would
that the term " Mother of God " is orthodox because it is the English
equivalent of the Greek word "Theotokos," which word was sanc-
tioned by a General Council. What, I ask, has your Lordship to
do with General Councils, of which our Church says, Twenty-first
Article: "Wherefore things ordained of them (General Councils)
have neither strength nor authority unless they be taken out of
Scripture." Still less the packed Council of Ephesus which illegally
and violently banished the Bishop of Constantinople because he
would have none of this very woi-d "Theotokos." My Lord, can
you find any "Theotokos" in the Greek Testament? Did any
Apostle ever write it? Can you show its English equivalent any-
Avhere except in the Romish Breviary? My Lord, you tell me that
no Bishop permits the use of this term "Mother of God" except
against heresy. Did Mr. Simpson use it against heresy? Yet you
wrote to him — " that only the ignorant object to it," and you hold
him " blameless." Which am I to believe? Can both be true? Is
it even true that only the ignorant object? I may not be a master
of the theological terms to which you refer, but I do undei-stand
plain English and can generally distinguish the real from the sham.
On every side the laity see Bishops and clergy first foisting upon us
(on false pretences) the teaching of Rome, next shamelessly avow-
ing the fact. My Lord, depend upon it a day of reckoning must
come between this outraged laity and these dishonest and law-break-
ing Bishops and clergy.
I am, my Lord,
Yours respectfully,
(Signed), M. Hall.
Here ends the play. Who would not pity the Bishop ? " Two
chief reasons," the Vicar says, " have tended to keep Roman-
ism in England from displaying its true colors," and the prin-
cipal one he assigns is " the healthful influence of English
church atmosphere with its solid theokxjy and devotions^
Ha ! Ila ! ! Ha I ! ! Your readers cannot get a better sample of
both than is to be found in the foregoing correspondence. Mr.
Simpson's "devotions," his "pious desires and aspirations" in
aid of the dying are "nipped in the bud" by the Bishop,
whose " solid tJicology " is, in turn, simply dispersed by a lay-
man of his own communion. Such an exhibition, one might
suppose, ought to prevent a man, who dares to think at all,
A Rejoinder. 257
from remaining an Anglican for twenty-fonr hours. A private
in the Salvation Army ranks is far more respectable from a
logical standpoint. As for Ritualism — well, as Carlyle says,
" it is a matter to strike one dumb."
To return again to the Eirenicon. Your readers must won-
der by what blind fatuity the Vicar was led to cite Pusey as a
witness against us to support his own malicious, malignant, and
disgustingly ignorant caricature of our devotion to the Blessed
Mother of God. Pusey's first volume, indeed, contains the
strongest verbal expressions of that devotion in all their chill-
ing nakedness. On these the Vicar bases his indictment.
And yet does Pusey denounce the Catholic Church as " apos-
tate," "infidel," "impious," and "idolatrous"? ^Nothing of
the kind. On the contrary, in the second volume he says to
Father Newman : " I have often (though you will smile per-
haps at the advocacy) had to defend the Roman Church against
being idolatrous, and that, on the ground of this and the like
language." Father Newman had expostulated with Pusey, on
his first volume, in these words : " Have you not been toucli-
ing us on a very tender point in a very rude way ? . . . .
Have you even hinted that our love for her is anything else
than an abuse? Have you thrown her one kind word yourself
all through your book ? I trust so, but I have not lighted upon
one. And yet I know you love her well Is not the
effect of what you have said to expose her to scorn and oblo-
quy, who is dearer to us than any other creature ? " Pusey, at
the close of his letter, replies to this last question : " God for-
bid ! I have not spoken, I trust, anything which could be con-
strued into derogation of her, who is the Mother of Jesus, my
Lord and God They are not any expressions of love,
or reverence, or admiration, which I have stated to be our dif-
ficulties. I know not how any could be too great, if they had
not a dogmatic basis, beyond what we believe God to have re-
vealed. And here, too, if God had clearly revealed, what some
among you believe, there would be no further question, just as
we believe that God has given authority to the priest to pro-
nounce forgiveness in His Name, and that He Himself confirms
to the penitent what is so pronounced in His Name, do not think
258 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
that the priest comes between us and God ; and we know that we
ourselves are wrongly accused of ' substituting the Sacraments
for Christ,' i.e., the modes of His operation, or, in the Holy
Eucharist, His Presence, for Himself Plainly, we could
not love too much her, from whom Jesus vouchsafed to receive a
mother's care, who loved Ilim, the All-Holy and her Redeemer
too, as no other mother could love her son ; whom He loved
with a Divine, but also with a Deified human love ; love with
which no other son could love his mother. The love of the
mother and Son were essentially different from all other love,
because He was her Son after the Flesh, but also Almighty
God. And that same love must continue on now, only that
her God-enabled power of love, in the beatific vision of His
Godhead, must be unspeakably intensified." Your readers
cannot wonder, after words like these, that I expressed my
belief that Dr. Pusey " died in the bosom of the Catholic
Church." He continijes : "■ They are cold words to say, that
it is not the amount of love for the Mother of our Redeemer
and our God (how could it be?), but the mode of its expression
to which any of us have objected." Your readers already
know how many of Pusey's own misconceptions on this very
point were removed by Father Newman. Indeed I believe
not one was left. I propose, after my own humble fashion, to
do the same office for those honest, fair-minded, and thought-
ful Protestants here, whose ordinary prejudices may have been
deepened by the ignorance, dishonesty, and malice of a pseudo-
" Father."
LETTER XXL
IPSE, IPSA, IPSUM — A KEJOINDER.
To the Editor of tJie Glohe :
SiR^ — If it were my sole desire to silenoe the Vicar by a
rt'dnctio ad ahsiirdum, it could not be necessary to add another
word to the testimony to Catholic truth adduced by his own
A Rejoindek. 259
witnesses. But tliis is neither all nor any part of my desire ; I
wish simply to do whatever may lie in my power, under the
circumstances in which I write, to dissipate certain prejudices,
which exist, and have been excited, in the minds of sincere
Protestants, by the particular construction of the language in
which Catholic piety clothes those feelings of devotion towards
the Mother of God, which I have, theologically, so irrefragably
justified. Devotion is one thing, theology is another ; but they
nmst not be separated. It is true that they have an individu-
ality of their own, and claim separate apartments — one in the
head, the other in the heart. But they are twin sisters, and
dwell in one house.
I closed my last letter with the following quotation from
Pusey : " It is not the amount of love for the Mother of our
Pedeemer (how could it be ?) hut the mode of its exjpression to
which any of ns have objected." And the Vicar, speaking of
the language of his extracts from St. Liguori and the Raccolta,
says : " Herein we find expressions of worship and supplica-
tion such as Christians are wont to present only to God or the
Incarnate Son or the Holy Spirit."
Now, this is no longer finding fault with our doctrine and
practice, but simply with the ^vord by which it is expressed.
Yet, the real meaning of our devotion to the Blessed Virgin is
80 clearly defined among us, and so plainly explained for the
benefit of Protestants, that it is certainly no fault of ours if
somebody chooses to be so blind or so obstinate, so ignorant or
so malicious as to misunderstand or misinterpret our meaning.
I propose, then, to address myself just now to the argument
against us drawn by the Vicar from the similarity of language
used by Catholics when addressing God and when addressing
the Blessed Virgin. The objection is so utterly imbecile and
worthless that I confess to a feeling of disgust in facing it; but
for the sake of that multitude of "hasty and ignorant persons"
I will give an easy solution.
In order to show that we give God's glory to His Blessed
Mother because of words expressive of our hope and confidence
in her intercession, my opponent ought to prove, first of all,
that our language is fully adequate to our idea of God, and
260 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
secondly, that that idea is fully adequate to its Divine Object.
For until he has proved these two propositions, which are evi-
dently /"rt^Aie, it may be true that whilst on earth we are forced
by the infirmity of our nature to give God only that glory
which is due to His saints, if even that. And that this is
nearer to the truth than the Protestant objection, will appear
on careful examination. It is impossible for us to think of God
or Heaven otherwise than under the subjective conditions of
human thought. Our conceptions of Him are, and cannot keep
from being, anthropomorphic; that is to say, they are con-
ditioned by the essential limits of our nature. It may, in a
sense, be said that we iticarnate God by a necessity of our in-
tellectual and spiritual existence. '■^Omnis cognitio est secun-
dutn modum cognosccntis,^'' observes the Angelic Aquinas.
We all start, as children, with most human views of divine
things, and the vast multitude of men remain all their lives
children in this respect : children in understanding, although
in virtue they may attain " unto a perfect man, unto the meas-
ure of the stature of the fullness of Christ." Even the inspired
writers, when speaking of God and His operations, could only
make themselves intelligible by using expressions which, if
taken to the letter, would sanction the Anthropomorphite
lieresy. Yet how unspeakably unjust it would be for a cold
rationalist or an ignorant and conceited Ritualist to accuse them
of entertaining a narrow or materialized conception of the
Divine Nature. If we are ever to speak of God, it must be
with the sorrowful consciousness how W'retchedly our concep-
tion of Him falls beneath the reality, and how miserably our
warmest language falls below even that poor conception. We
would speak more gloriously of Him. but we cannot. Human
language has an essentially physical, sensual, materialistic char-
acter, or as St. Thomas Aquinas puts it : " Yerla seqwitur non
modum essendl qtd est in rehus, sed modum essendi secundum
quod in nostra cogitatione sunt."" So too if wo would express
our worship externally. It has been the custom in most ages
and countries to express the respect due to superiors by pros-
trations to the earth. God has in Holy Scripture expressly
sanctioned this honor when paid to His servants. The Sunamite
A Rkjoinder. 261
woman prostrated before Eliseus. Joshua " fell on his face
and did worship " before the Angel of the Lord's Host. Daniel
fell upon his face before God's Angel. Yet what more coxild
we do to express the worship due to God alone ? We are tied
down to earth — the Finite cannot grasp the Infinite. (See
Fortnightly Review, July, 1887: Art. "The Higher Theism,"
by the learned Catholic writer, W. S. Lilly ; also, the Nine-
teenth Century, August, 1888: Art. "What is Left of Chris-
tianity ? " by the same.) All this, of course, is a mere truism.
Yet the Protestant objection, put by the Vicar in his ignorance,
involves its denial. Once for all then I maintain, that, as a
matter of fact, whenever we have to address God, whether by
way of petition, or of thanks, or of expressing our love, hope,
or confidence in Him, it is impossible for us, by reason of our
imperfection, to do this in a way which might not legitimately
be observed in addressing our fellow creatures. But what I
have said respecting our incapacity of attaining to an adequate
conception of God, or of worthily expressing our worship of
Him, applies equally to the Saints, and more especially to the
Queen of Saints. We never can form the remotest idea of her
glory and exaltation : " Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither
hath it entered into the heart of man, what things God hath
prepared for them that love Him " (1 Cor. ii. 9). We need not,
therefore, be apprehensive of too highly exalting her. We
cannot possibly love her or honor her more than God, our
Saviour and great Exemplar, does ; we need not, therefore, be
afraid of loving or honoring her too much. We cannot realize
the full value of her intercession ; we need not, therefore, be
afraid of placing too much confidence in it.
I am, of course, aware that there are several of the ordinary,
ridiculous objections to what I have just said, but they vanish
if only looked at. It may, for instance, be said that a person
loves the Blessed Mary too much if he loves her more than he
loves God. Not at all. He sins indeed very grievously, but
not from his excess of love for her (he cannot possibly love her
enough), but from his want of love for God. Or it may be
said that a person who feels sure that the Mother of God will
obtain from her Son the pardon of his sins, however careless
262 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
he may be of his own salvation, has too much confidence in
her intercession. By no means ; he is guilty of the sin of jjre-
Bumption, precisely in the same way as if he hoped that God
Himself would pardon him whether he repented or not. Ko
one would, in the latter case, say that he had too much confi-
dence in God's power — which would mean that God's power
was less than he estimated it.
Tliis will suffice, for the present, on this point ; but I proceed
to ask, who are to blame for the truly pitiable misunderstand-
ing, and strange perversion of the meaning of the language of
such of our devotional books as St. Liguori's " Glories of Mary "
and the " Raccolta " \ Protestants themselves. The chief reason
is because they examine them as Protestants, and not as Catholics.
Our devotional books are written for Catholics, and not for
Protestants ; and therefore to be understood aright, they must
be looked at from a Catholic and not from a Protestant point
of view. This is surely the dictate of common sense. Let me
apply it to the subject in hand.
A Protestant has learned from his childhood to believe that
the devotion which Catholics pay to the Mother of God, if not
absolutely idolatrous, has at least an idolatrous tendency. Hence
the term Mariolatory, which is so common among " hasty and
ignorant" Protestants, who may not have another religioua
idea beside. This early training is more and more confirmed
in proportion as he becomes familiar with Protestant literature
in which Catholic doctrine is almost invariably misrepresented.
Thus he naturally comes to look with suspicion and distrust on
the language in which the great dignity and the high preroga-
tives of the ever Blessed Mother of God, are set forth by
Catholic writers. By a lamentable and quasi-satanic perversion
of his natural instincts, he insensibly acquires such a habit of
mind, that, while he may love God, he can feel nothing but cold-
ness and indifference (to speak mildly) towards her whom Jesus
Christ loved and honored as the first of creatures. In theory
he will not, aJid cannot deny that Mary was adorned by God
with the plenitude of every virtue; and then, when she stood
before Him "full of grace," that He came down from Heaven,
and having dwelt for nine months in her sacred body, lived
A Rejoindeb. 2Go
with her for thirty years in her home at Nazareth and " was
subject " to her. And yet, in practice, he seems to think tliat
every word of praise which is given to Mary is so much taken
from God. A Protestant, therefore, is little disposed to make
any allowance for the ardor of devotional feeling towards tlie
Blessed Virgin. \1q professes to be jealous, forsooth, for the
honor of God when he sees a Catholic rush eagerly to Mary,
as a child to the embraces of its mother, and when he hears
the fond endearments that pass between them, he measures
every word, and balances every phrase by the iincompromis-
ing rules of grammar and logic. In a word, the ordinary Prot-
estant is so matter-of-fact as not to make allowance for the
language of hyperbole ; and so untheological, as not to have
any clear intnition of the mystery of the Divine condescension
in the Incarnation, of the union of the Godhead and Manhood
in One Divine Person, of the relation of the great Mother of
God to the "Living God who has purchased us to Himself by
His own Blood," and of the mystery of hutnan exaltation, by
which the redeemed and she who is the first and best of the
redeemed, "are seated in Heavenly places with Christ" on that
throne which He shares with His Eternal Father.
Now, far different is the tone of mind in which a Catholic
takes up his book of devotions. To begin with, he has a
range of spiritual conceptions which are as remote from the
twinkling, phosphorescent philosophy of the Yicar as from the
mental vision of the rudest boor. From the time that his
infant lips have been able to lisp the name of Mary, he has
been taught that, though she is the peerless Queen of Angels
and Saints, she is yet but a creature, and therefore, in nature
and dignity, infinitely inferior to the Creator. It is conse-
quently to him a first principle that the honor which is due to
the Blessed Virgin is not only very different in degree^ but
also wholly different in kind, from the honor which is due to
God. All this has been engraved on his mind from earliest
infancy, as the fixed, unalterable teaching of the Catholic
Church. If then, amid the ardent effusions of saintly, devo-
tional writers, he meets with phrases and expressions which to
Protestants might seem ambiguous or exaggerated, he is not
-64 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
disturbed. He, instinctively, understands these accordinj; to
the accurate theology and whole living tradition of Catholic
faith in which he has been taught from his inother's knee. He
holds the key to the true interpretation. Such language, when
considered in itself, scrutinized through the medium of Protest-
ant prejudice and ignorance, and measured by the inexorable
rules of grammar and logic, is ambiguous to Protestants ; but
it is not ambiguous to Catholics for whom it is written. It is
sometimes exaggerated, if you will ; but the language of senti-
ment and feeling is often exaggerated, and yet is not, on that
account, false : it must be always understood according to the
known opinions of the writer, and of those for whom he writes.
Again, a Catholic knows that the warm feelings of saintly men,
when contemplating the sublime holiness of Mary, must some-
times outrun their powers of speech ; that they will not always
stop to pick and choose their language with the calm indiffer-
ence of a mathematician ; and that very often their only
thought is to give the fullest expression to the depth and ten-
derness of their devotion. In a word, the Catholic; heart is so
attuned to praise and venerate liis Redeemer's dearest mother,
that it is little inclined to measure her glories with the line
and plummet of verbal precision, or to express them through
the chilling medium of chemical or algebraic formulas. Never-
theless, "Fools rush in where angels fear to tread," and a
ritualistic vicar, with the aid of a "yard stick,'' will undertake
to determine anything from the altitude and angles of an Arch-
angel's wing down to the cut of a vestment. The great St.
Bernard is called the " Last of the Fathers." Bishop Kingdon
said he was " a very devout soul." He had a great devotion to
the Blessed Virgin. The Vicar '^npies from Saint Liguori
language attributed to St. Bernard, and straightaway character-
izes it as "abominable"! Think of it! The "Priest of the
Mission Chapel " sitting in judgment on St. Bernard ! Truly :
" The sensual man perceivetli not these things that are of the
Spirit of God : for it is foolishness to him, and he cannot un-
derstand " (1. Cor. ii. 14).
Let me sum up my reflections on this head in the words of
the greatest religious intellect that to-day uses the English
A Rkjoindkr. 2G5
tongue, and one of the purest hearts in Christendom. Father
^'ewman wrote:
"Religion acts on the affections Their object engrosses
them, and they see nothing else. And of all passions love is the
most unmanageable; nay more, I would not give nmcli for that
love which is never exti-avagant, which always observes the
proprieties, and can move about in perfect good taste under all
emergencies. What mother, what husband or wife, what youth or
maiden in love, but says a thousand foolish thitigs, in the way of
endearment, which the speaker would be sorry for strangers to
hear; yet they are not on that account unwelcome to the parties
to whom they are addressed. Sometimes by bad luck they are
Avritten down, sometimes they get into the uewspapei-s ; and what
might be even graceful when it was fresh from the heart and in-
tei-pi-eted by the voice and the countenance, presents but a melan-
clioly exhibition when served up cold for the public eye. So it
is ivith devotional feelings. Burning thoughts and u'ords are
as open to criticism as they are beyond it. What is abstractedly ex-
travagant may in particular pei-sons be becoming and beautiful,
and only fall under blame when it is found in others who imitate
them. When it is formalized into meditations or exercises, it is as
repulsive as love-letters in a police report. Moreover, even holy
minds readily adopt and become familiar with language which
they would never have originated themselves, when it proceeds from
a writer who has the same objects of devotion as they have ; and, if
they find a stranger ridicule or reprobate supplication or praise
which has come to them so recommended, they feel it as keenly as
if a direct insult were offered to those to whom that homage is ad-
dressed. In the next place, what has power to stir holy and refined
souls is potent also with the multitude I say, then, when once
we have mastered the idea, that Mary bore, suckled, and handled
the Eternal in the form of a child, what limit is conceivable to the
rush and flood of thoughts which such a doctrine involves? What
awe and surprise must attend upon the knowledge, that a creature
has been brought so close to the Divine Essence?
"It was the creation of a new idea, and of a new sympathy, of a
new faith and worship when the holy Apostles announced that God
had become Incarnate • then a supreme love and devotion to Him
became possible, which seemed hopeless before that revelation. This
was the first consequence of their preaching. But, besides this, a
second range of thoughts was opened on mankind, unknown before,
and unlike any other, as soon as it was understood that that Incar-
nate God had a mother. The second idea is perfectly distinct from
2G0 Ipse, Ipsa, Ii'sum.
the former, and does not interfere with it. He is God made low,
she is a woman made higli He who charges ua with making
Mary a divinity ia thereby denyiny the divinity of Jesus. Such
a man does not know what divinity is. Our Lord cannot pray
for us as a creature prays, as Mary prays ; He cannot inspire tliose
feelings which a creature inspires. To her belongs, as being a crea-
ture, a natural claim on our sympathy and familiarity, in that she
is nothing else than our fellow. She is our pride -in the iM)et's words,
' Our tainted nature's solitary boast.' We look to her without any
fear, any remorse, any consciousness that she is able to read us,
judge us, punish us. Our heart yearns towards that pure Virgin,
that gentle Mother, and our congratulations follow her as she ri.se3
from Nazareth and Ephesus, through the choii-s of angels, to her
throne on high, so weak, yet so strong ; so delicate, yet so glorious ;
so modest, and yet so mighty. She has sketched for us her own
portrait in the Magnificat. He hath regarded the low estate of His
handmaid; for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call
me blessed. ' He hath put down the mighty from their seat, and
hath exalted the humble. He hath filled the hungry with good
things, and the rich He hath sent empty away.' I recollect the
strange emotion which took by surprise men and women, young
and old, when, at the coronation of our present Queen, they gazed
on the figure of one so like a child, so small, so tender, so shrink-
ing, who had been exalted to so great an inheritance and so vast a
rule, who was such a contrast in her own person to the solemn
pageant which centred in her. Could it be otherwise with the
spectators, if they had human affections? And did not the All-wise
know the human heart when He took to Himself a MotLei' ? Did
He not anticipate our emotion at the sight of such an exaltation in
one so simple and so lowly? If He had not meant her to exert that
wonderful influence in His church, which she has in the event ex-
erted, I will use a bold word. He it is who has perverted us. If she
is not to attract our homage, why did He make her solitary in her
greatness amid His vast creation? If it be idolatry in us to let our
affections respond to our faith, He would not have made her what
she is, or He would not have told us that He had so made her ; hut,
far from this. He has sent His prophet to announce to us, 'A
virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and they shall call His name
Emmanuel,' and we have the same warrant for hailing her as
God's Mother, as we have for adoring Him as God.''^
So much in explanation of the ordinary language used by
devotional writers.
A EUOLNDEB. 267
LETTEK XXII.
IPSE, IPSA, IP8UM — A REJOINDER.
To the Editor of the Globe :
Sir, — I come now to anotlier Guy Fawkes dressed up by the
Vicar with the old clothes he borrows from Piisey. His mind
(or what he may be plesised to call his mind) seems to be utter
chaos. There is some sort of order in Pusey's manner of put-
ting his objections, but his parasite simply "rfwm/w" them into
your columns in bewildering confusion. I propose now to
consider the objection based on the application to Mary of
Scriptural language. Pusey complained, in the Jirst volume
of the Eirenicon, that there was a studied identiiication of the
Blessed Virgin with her Divine Son, because the church has
applied to her passages from the Book of Proverbs and of Wis-
dom, which have been interpreted and understood to refer to
Christ. In the second volume, however, Pusey confesses that
Anglicans " are not accustomed to mystical interpretations of
Scripture." The Vicar simply varies Pusey's language and
falsely says, " There is not a title of Jesus Christ but has been
adopted for Mary." But let this malicious charge stand with
Pusey's more honest complaint. It will make the supposed
difficulty more telling and complete. Again he says that we
"substitute Mary's name for 'Jesus' or 'God' in quotations
from Scripture."
Now this objection is deserving of all attention, and I am
happy to answer, as well as to instruct, this Oxford sciolist.
Such application of language, I claim, is perfectly legitimate,
according to sound hermeneutical principles. I begin, then,
by laying down a general principle of Bible hermeneutics,
which has received the sanction of the greatest names among
the Fathers and Doctors of the church. And I give it in the
concise and simple words of St. Jerome : " Each sentence,
syllable, dot, in the Divine Scriptures is full of meanings." Or
as St. Gregory the Great tells us : " The sacred writings are
rightly compared to the Sea ; for in them there are huge bil-
268 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsdm.
lows of meanings, wave upon wave of senses." The Bible is
not like other books, nor can we treat, use, or interpret it, as
we do other books. When we read a classical author, Greek
or Latin, we know that there is one sense ; and our undivided
effort is to find out what that sense is. But the Sacred Script-
ures are an unfathomable ocean of truth, because they are
God's word. The whole theological genius of the church will
never to the end of time exhaust their fullness. One meaning
lies hidden in another — the implicit in the explicit, the spiritual
in the historical, the anagogical in the moral. And these
several meanings — distinct, but not opposed — extending the
representative power of the Divine Idea to many objects, yet
welling out from the depths of the Uncreated Unity, and re-
turning to it again — beautifully multiform, but perfectly har-
monious — ever developing into new mysteries, yet ever living
pure and innnutable in the Eternity of their Source and
Light, are (if they have the due sanction of the illuminating
and directing Spirit, Whose it is to bring all things to remem-
brance in the Church), of equal weight, equal authority, equal
truth and certainty. And thus, one text may be adduced to
illustrate, or even prove, two or more distinct truths without
impairing the force of the proof in the one case or the other.
Thus, for instance, St. Paul quotes the words of the Psalmist —
Ps. ii. 7 — '• Thou art my Son ; this day have I begotten
Thee," in proof of three distinct mysteries. For, in one place
— Acts xiii. 33 — he interprets them of our Lord's Resurrec-
tion ; in another — Ileb. i. 5 — ajjparently of His Divine gener-
ation as the Son of God ; and in a third — Heb. v. 5 — of His
human generation in the womb of the Blessed Virgin.
The learned Piazza has explained this law of Scriptural ex-
egesis with so much clearness that I beg to quote his words at
length. He says:
"We must tlistinguish between two other literal senses of Holy
Scriptures — one which is explicit and express, tiie other whicli is
implicit and virtual. For the genuine and literal sense of Scripture
not only includes wlip.tever is clearly and expressly stated in the i)re-
cise words of Scripture whether undei-stood in their proper or in their
metaphorical meaning, but also whatever is implicitly and virtually
A Rejoinder. 209
contained in them, as well as all the legitimate consequences we can
draw from them. For the Holy Ghost, Who knows most fully all
that these woi-ds mean and imply, wished to convey these senses to
us Our Lonl certainly adduced Scripture evidence of this
sort to convince the Sadducees of the Resurrection of the dead. For
as they did not admit the books in which this dogma is expressly
taught, but only the Pentateuch, our Lord quoted Exodus iii. 6,
where this truth is only virtually and implicitly contained. ' Have
you not read about the Resurrection of the dead,' He asked, ' what
was said by God when He said, I atn the Jrod of Abraham, the God
of Lsaac, and the God of Jacob? ' He then added this brief explana-
tion : ' He is not the God of the dead, but of the living.' The force
of the argument lies in this, that God did not say, ' I have been or
I was, but I am the God, ' &c. As God then is not the God of the
dead, but of the living, it follows that Abi-aham, I«iac, and Jacob
are still living as far as their noblest pai't is concerned, namely,
tiieir souls. And so the Resurrection of the dead is proved against
the Sadducees, who denied it, because they denied that the soul was
immortal. And yet our Lord mair ^ains that these words were said
by God of the Resurrection of the dead, for He tells the Sadducees :
' Have you not read about the Resurrection of the dead what was
said by God, when He said,' &c.
" The Church, taught by her great Master, used the Scriptures ui
the same way."
So speaks Piazza about the virtual or implicit meaning,
Now coine nearer home. lie also speaks of the mystical
meaning (to which Anglicans are so unaccustomed, God help
them !), i; 'lese words :
" As the literal sense )i Holy Scriptui'e is that which is immedi-
ately expressed by the woi-ds, so, the mystical sense is that which is
denoted by the things signified in the words of Scrii)ture. More-
over, it is certain that this mystical sense (if it is truly the mystical
sense, and not a mere acconnnodation) is a true, i)roper. and genu-
ine meanhig of Holy Scripture no less than the literal ; and is
equally intended by Its ])rincipal Author, the Holy Ghost, and
therefore, considered in itself, it has the same authority and weight.
.... And wo may be perfectly sure of the truth of this mystical
sense, if it is either so exphiined in some other part of Scripture, or
handed down by the consent of the Church or concluded evidently
fi*om reason."
Let me liere make one observation, lost tins principle should
270 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
be misunderstood. It must not for one moment he supposed,
tliat we are at perfect liberty to invent meanings for ourselves,
and tlien to use texts, accommodated to this meaning, in con-
firmation of a particular doctrine, according to our private
judgment. But wbat Catholics maintain is this. If a second
meaning, or even a secondary meaning, has been attached to
the words by the traditional teaching of the church, or in the
writings of her Fathers and Doctors generally, in such case it
would be hardly possible to deny that the passage, so under-
stood, might be produced in confirnntion of a question of doc-
trine. Here Piazza again says: "If there should be au evi-
dent agreement about the mystical as about the literal sense,
the one and the other would be equally efficacious as an argu-
ment; since the Holy Spirit is the Author alike of both."
And more germanely to our present topic he says : " There is
nothing to liinder our understanding the same passages to have
been spoken of Mary in a literal sense, which are also under-
stood of Christ and the Church in a literal sense ; since She is
the most noble moml^er of the Church, and is united to Christ
by that close near less which exists between a Mother and her
Son. Moreover, it has been the custom of the Church to
apply to Mary mnny things wliich are predicted in the Script-
ures of Christ and the Church." In support of his assertion
Piazza quotes celebrated theologians.'
Now, applying these principles to the objections under con-
sideration, let me ask your candid and thoughtful readers : Is
there any danger of a gradual identification of yLxry with her
Divine Son to be apprehended, from a use of the Holy Script-
ures consecrated by grave authority, and the long-established
practice of the Church herself? Will devout and humble
contemplation ever run the ri.slv of confounding the Wisdom
of the Son of God with the communicated gift of wisdom,
which Mary received of God's pure goodness, and for the
merits of Jesus — her Son and Saviour 'i Has any one Priest
in the Catholic Church for these centuries during which her
Offices have been in constant use, ever equalled Mary with
See Father Hai-per, 1. c.
A Rejoinder. 271
God, because, in the appointed Lessons, Holy Cluircli lias
taught him to see, in the \vor.ds of Inspired Wisdom, a picture
of the Mother as well as of the Son ? Why shouhl not my
Protestant objectors have the same misgivings, when St. Paul
calls the church or congregation of the faithful by the very
name of Christ Himself '{ (1 Cor. xii. 12). If there is no peril
in one case why should there be in the other? I must then
urge upon honest, thoughtful Protestants, and repeat for their
beiieiit, what has been said a hundred times before, that such
a notion could only arise in the minds of men who are total
strangers to the inner life of the Catholic Church, It is a
dream, a nightmare, a phantom evoked perhaps by prejudice
and the ignorant ravings of a Vicar, but which a month's
experience in the bosom of the Church would suffice to dissi-
pate.
Once more. The difference between the Catholic Church
and the modern schools of heresy is remarkably api)arent in
their respective treatment of the Sacred Scriptures. Protest-
.iitisin, professing to regard the inspired volume with the
deepest reverence, is continually by its acts giving the lie to
its professions. For, not contented with rejecting a large por-
tion of the Holy Scriptures as being in its opinion unworthy
of Divine inspiration ; not satisfied with setting aside the
acknowledged standard and rules of interpretation, and with
rejecting, whenever it suits its convenience, the literal sense of
the Sacred Words, the true Protestant spirit treats the Bible,
as it does everything else that is holy, with a cold, hard, and
scornful scepticism. Where there is mystery the literal mean-
ing is denied and explained away. Where certain exi)ressions
of Scripture appear to fall in with and to favor its own
peculiar conventionalities, those expressions are explained with
a rigid severity totally inconsistent with the laws of true inter-
pretation. The Bible, in such hands, is either an armory of
Protestant Polemics, or a t ollection of dry, barren, pharisaical
rules of conduct, imposing burdens upon men's consciences
which God Ahnighty never w^illed to impose, and inculcating
a rigid and constrained code of morals, as unlike the sweet,
cheerful, and holy law of Christ as the light of the sun is un-
272 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
like the darkness of night. There are, of course, eases of ex-
ception to this statement, since individuals, the Vicar assures
us, are very often much better than the system which has
formed and trained them ; but the statement itself is true.
Protestantism, even when decked out by ritualistic " Fathers "
in the lion's skin of stolen Catholic ritual, lacks love, generos-
ity, and depth of feeling ; and these deficiencies are remark-
ably manifested in its use and interpretation of the Scriptures.
The Catholic religion, on the other hand, brings to the study
of the Sacred Volume all that warmth and all that devotional
feeling which is the marked characteristic of its inner life. It
is not afraid of the Inspired Volume, of which it is both the
witness and the keeper, therefore it admits, defends, and pro-
tects the literal sense of the Bible. It believes the Sacred
Scriptures to be the Words of Him whose Wisdom is infinite,
and whose actions, and whose dealings with men are them-
selves full of mystery, hence its threefold use of Scripture —
according to the letter (literal), according to \\\q figure (mys-
tical), and by Accommodation. I have already spoken of the
first two. I ask your readers' attention to some remarks on
the third, in its application to the Blessed Mary.
At all times the Church has applied the words of Scripture
to other objects besides those which are intended by the in-
spired writers themselves; not, indeed, meaning by this to
supersede the literal and mystical senses, or to convey the im-
l)rcssi()n that such ecclesiastical applications are really enter-
tained in Scrij)ture, or rest upon its authority; but simply
intending to point out some quality some virtne or some
prerogative, in the object of this new application, which,
in its own judgment, is suitably and aj)tly expressed by certain
words of the sacred vohniie. This is what is called accommo-
dation. No practice is more common in every department of
literature and speech — none more innocent in itself. Thus
when the illustrious Cardinal Baronius, to declare he had no
" learned friends,^'' said of \\\^ unaided labor in compiling his
Ecclesiastical Annals, "I have trodden the wine-press alone,''
he Tised the words of Isaias, in reference to Christ, in an
accommodated sense. We have the example of our Divine
A Rejoindeb. 273
Lord Himself — Matt. iv. 4; also of St. Paul, Acts xxviii.
25-28. For other examples of accommodation of words of
the Old Testament in the New I refer to Matt. xiii. 35 ; Psa.
xxviii. 2 ; 1 Pet. ii. 24 ; Matt. viii. 17 ; Isa. iii. 4. The piety
of the church has made the Scripture its daily food of medita-
tion. When it seeks to express itself in a suitable manner
about the glory of God, or the gifts of His Saints, it naturally
employs the very words of the Holy Scripture itself. It is
upon this principle that all its sacred offices have been con-
structed. The Introit, the Offertory, and the Conunnnion in
the Mass, are almost always passages of Scripture accommo-
dated by the church to the particular festivals of the day. So
also are the Antiphons and Yersicles, and other portions of the
offices contained in the Breviary. In a word, the natural lan-
guage of the church is the language of Scripture, and it
employs this language, either (1) to state a truth, or doctrhie.
or fact, as the holy volume literally contains or states it ; or (2)
to teach some truth, fact, or doctrine, of which the type and
emblem is to be found in the Old Testament Scriptures, and is
there designed by the Holy Ghost ; or finally (3) to illustrate
some fact or truth in the kingdom of grace, by woi-ds which
most appropriately apply to the fact or truth, although the in-
spired Author did not intend to make sucli application of
them, when he first committed them to writing. Such, then,
is the natiire of accommodation — the pious application of
sacred words to other objects than those designed by the
sacred writers.
Pusey says: "Any imnginations of ours must come short of
the truth, if we would picture to ourselves the superhuman,
engraced beauty of the soul of (Mary)." Precisely. Fully
realizing this truth the Fathers and Christian writers of the
Church delighted to apply to the Blessed Virgin texts and
parts of the Sacred Scriptures in which they seemed to find
epithets and images that expressed in the fittest terms their
own idea of her supernatural prerogatives. They applied to
her in an especial way the Song of Solommi, which according
to Theologians has only a mystical, and no literal sense ; and
in this mystical sense, it relates either to the union of the
27-i Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
soul with God, or to the union of tlie Churcli with Christ.
But as Mary is the most excellent ineniher of the (Jhurch, on
whom is conferred in its fullness the grace that is pa 'tially be-
stowed uj)on others, it is not unnatural to infer that all which
is expressed in this Canticle with respect to the magnificence,
tlie beauty, the order and sanctity of the Church, applies in
the highest degree to her own supereminent perfection. It
M'ould take too much space to show by quotations how exten-
sively accommodations of this Canticle to Mary occur in the
Patristic and Ecclesiastical writings of antiquity. They are to
be found in the Mozarabic and Coptic Missals, the Hymns of
the Greek Church, the Missals and Breviaries of the Latin
Church, in various other ecclesiastical monuments, and in the
writings of St. John Damascene, Tarasius, Methodius, Modes-
tus jf Jerusalem, St. Ephrem, Psellus, Anastasius of Antioch,
St. Germanus, St. Anselm, St. Bernard and most medlaival
writers. In these we find the most beautiful passages of this
mystic song directly applied to the most holy Virgin. She is
the " Flower of the Field," and " the Lily of the Valley." She
it is, of whom it is said, " Behold thou art fair, O my love,
behold thou art fair." It is Mary whom the beloved calls to
" Arise, make haste, my love, my dove, my beautiful one, and
come." It is Mary whose magnificence and whose sanctity dif-
fuses, as it were, a fragrance of the sweetest savor over the
whole world. " Who is she that goeth up by the desert as a
pillar of smoke, of aromatic spices, of myrrh, and frankincense,
and of all the powder of the perfumer i" It is her beauty
which enraptures the beloved, and constrains him to exclaim.
" How beautiful art thou, my love, how beautiful art thou ! "
" Thou art all fair, O my love ; and there is no stain in thee."
"Who is she that cometh forth as the morning rising, fair as
the moon, bright as the sun, terrible as an army in battle
array 5
In addition to the Song of Solomon, the Church has accom-
modated to the Blessed Mother other portions of the sacred
volume, and in particulai" different passages from the Books of
Proverbs, Wisdom, an<l Ecclesiasticus, besides several of the
Psalms of David. These passages are familiar to all who are
A KicjoixDER. 275
acquainted with the offices of tlie Blessed Virgin in the Rouuiii
Breviary, and witli the Lessons appointed to be read in them
upon tlie principal Festivals. They are to be found chietl^' in
tl'.e 8th chapter of Proverbs, the 24th chapter of Ecclesiasticus,
and the 1st and 4th chapters of Wisdom.
I have space but for that very beautiful application to Mary
of the 24th chapter of Ecclesiasticus. Wisdom there says of
herself: " I came out of the mouth of the Most High
Then the Creator of all things commanded, and said to me,
and lie that made me rested in my tabernacle. And He said
to me, let Thy dwelling be in Jacob, and thy inheritance in
Israel, and take root in my elect And so was I estab-
lished in Sion, and in the holy city likewise I rested, and my
poM-er was in Jerusalem. And I took root in an honorable
people, and in the portion of my God His inheritance, and my
abode is in the full assembly of the Saints. I was exalted like
a cedar in Libanus, and as a cypress tree on Mount Sion. I
was exalted like a palm tree in Cades, and as a rose plant in
Jericho. As a fair olive tree in the plains, and as a plane tree
by the water in the streets, was I exalted As the vine I
have brought forth a pleasant odor, and my flowers are the
fruit of honor and riches In me is all grace of the way
and of the truth ; in me is all hope of life and of virtue. Come
over to me all ye that desire me, and be filled with my fruits.
For my spirit is sweet above honey, and my inheritance aljove
honey and the honeycomb." This sublime description of
Wisdom is accommodated to the Blessed Virgin in all the
Offices used on her Festivals throughout the Latin church. It
is besides applied to her by many Fathers and commentators of
antiquity, and among them by St. Germanus, St. Ej)hrem, St.
Proclus, St. John of Damascene, Tarasius of Constantinople,
Modestus of Jerusalem, St. Ansehn, St. Ildephousus, St. Peter
Damian, and a host of others. These writers either directly
apply the very words of Ecclesiasticus to Mary, or else they
select different types and emblems from this chapter, and use
them to express their conception of her greatness. And it is
evident that the fitness of these most remarkable accommoda-
tions depends altogether upon the existence of a certain analogy
276 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
between \visdom itself and the prerogatives of the Mother of
God. But Pusey confesses that the Holy Virgin is one who
approaches as near as a created being can posblbly approach to
the Scriptural portrait of Wisdom given above. Hence we
are bound to admit that in the judgment of the Church and
of her ancient writers accommodating these portions of Script-
ure to Mary, there is no creature, whether angel or man, whom
she does not wholly surpass in dignity, in grace, in imiocency,
and in glory. For she it is who is the Queen of Sion and
Jerusalem, that is of the Church militant and the Church tri-
umphant. She it is in whose sacred tabernacle her Creator
designated to rest. She it is whom the unanimous voice of
the Church commemorates as alone holy amidst the daughters
of men, alone worthy that God should rest within her sacred
body, the Lily among the thorns, the Olive ever verdant, and
the Morning Star, shining with a brilliant light upon the
world, and by the very splendor of its brilliancy manifesting
itself as most innnacuhite and most innocent. Moreover, it is
Mary into whose bosom the Divine bounty has poured all the
treasures of Heaven. It is she who stands forth amid angels
and men, exalted far above all, "• like a cedar in Libanus, and
as the cypress trees on Mount Sion." She, as the instrument
of the Incarnation, is the instrument of Salvation, so that
through her and in her all things are renewed, life repaired,
the power of death destroyed, the graces of Heaven con-
veyed to man. Heaven itself opened, and man united witli
Christ his God and Saviour. She v.'as united with Jesus in
nature, because she was consubstantial with Him, and in
innocency of life because she was ever pleasing to God. In
all this Pusey would agree ; for it is the great lesson in re-
gard to Mary, which the Christian Fathers, Doctors, and Saints
are ever urging in their hymns, panegyrics, and discourses. It
is the idea of the Blessed Mother of Jesus brought jut and cast
into shape by such teaching as this, which they attempted to
illustrate by the accommodation of this wonderful chapter of
Ecclesiasticus. And it is impossible to ignore the judgment
of the church and of her Doctors, that there really does exist a
true analogy between the wisdom of God and his lovely
A Rejoindek. 2T7
mother, an analogy which cannot be supposed for a moment
unless Mary bo acknowledged to be the most pure, the most
holy, the most beautiful, and the most perfect among the crea-
tures of God.
Who, I ask, can see in this any attempt to bridge (. jv that
impassable distance which separates the measure of Mary's
glory from that of Jesus ? Any attempt to hide out of sight
tliat unparalleled eminence of the God-Man, which it is her hfe
in Heaven to adore, to love and to praise 'i Surely oidy one of
a sect that "preserves her balance .... and observes four
feasts yearly in honor of the Holy Mother," but in not one of
tchich is her hlessed name even so tnuch as Tne^itioned ! Is
spiritual stupidity and imbecility so withering as to dry up and
scorch all the natural instincts of the human heart in presence
of all th.at is pure, and good, and lovely, and tender, and holy i
I liave now considered in a way, I trust, satisfactory to all
candid readers, all those general propositions, so to speak,
against which, on the score of language alone, the Vicar has
most severely though only parasitically inveighed. In my
next I will face severally every one of tliose individual passages
textually quoted by him from " Liguori's Glories of Mary,"
the "Raccolta" and Pusey. I invite the earnest attention of
Protestant religious teachers to my explanations.
LETTER XXIII.
IPSE, IPSA, IPSUM — A EEJOINDEE.
To iJw Editor of the Globe:
Sir, — To thoughtful minds and honest hearts it will appear
a truism to say, that there must be an enormous difference
between any comprehension of the Catholic Church and her
life which can be obtained by outsiders, and the results of ex-
perience on those who have lived in church membership. This
difference has been aptly compared, by the great Cardinal
Wiseman, to looking at a beautiful stained-glass window from
278 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
loithorit and froyn within tlie building it adorns. This strik-
ing illustration is especially to the point in the matter now in
hand. Mj opponent has never experienced, or come near to
exi)eriencing-, the state of mind engendered by a constant and
loving devotion to the Blessed Mother of Jesus; and
yet he confidently, with characteristic impudence and inso-
lence, pits his a priori augury of what that state of mind mu^^t
be, against the unanimous testimony of those who hnow that
phenomenon on which he descants in ignorance, at once debas-
ing and soul-dishonoring. When, for instance, he and others
like him tell a Catholic, on purely a priori grounds, that his
daily, yea hourly, Avet to Mary lessen his simple trust in Jesus,
such a statement can o dy elicit from liim amazement and pity ;
because the Catholic hioivs, as a matter most strictly within
his own immediate experience, that devotion to her is in no
respect inconsistent with the most jealously exclusive devotion
of heart to God and to Christ ; but, on the contrary, that the
love of the Mother is among his most efficacious helps for
growing in the knowledge and the love of the Son, that it in-
definitely intensifies that love, and gives to it an otherwise
untasted quality of tenderness and passionate affection. All
the Vicar's absurd and groundless olgeetions and difficulties
are solved by the difference of being without and wit/ii?).
The wild and absolutely imaginary picture he draws of us
vanishes into thin air, together with the sophisms which he so
]ierversely constructs, or rather borrows from Pusey's Jirst
volume.
I ask your readers to bear in mind that Pusey admits the
Catholic doctrine on the Intercession and Invocation of the
Saints. For, he says: (The Blessed Virgin,) " with all the in-
habitants of heaven, and she more eminently than all, does
pray for us. The intercession of the saints, departed and at
rest, for iifi, who are still militant, is part of the doctrine of the
Communion of Saints, and would be a necessary consequence
of God-given love, even if it did not appear from Holy Script-
Tire. The contrary is inconceivable." He also heartily ac-
cepts the teaching of the illustrious Bishop Milner on the
permissibility of invoking Mary in particular, because he says
A Hejoindek. 279
" tliiit she is far more exulted and acceptable to God." Hero
is tlie fullest admissiuii, by my opponent's own witness of all
the Catholic principles retpiired by your readers in this con-
nection. Their application will appear as I proceed.
In treating of the subject in hand, in the Jirst volume of
the Etrcnicun, Fusey has chosen among C!atholic writers those
wlio are most enthusiastic about the lilessed Virgin, and from
these writers he picks out the strongest passages he can Hu'l.
Ilavinj; thus collected his materials he then so combines them
that his readers will be led to think they have before them a
complete representation, as if in a ]ianorania, of what Catholics
think and say about the Mother of God. The result is a cari-
cature. No one can honestly believe that a mnnber of expres-
sions selected after this fashion separated from the context, and
skilfully dovetailed together, will fairly represent the general
tone and character of Catholic sentiment and Catholic devotion.
Nay, more, this is not a fair representation of the sentiment
and devotion even of those writers from whom the passages are
quoted. Surely the sense of a writer upon any subject,
and more particularly on a subject in which his affec-
tions are deeply engaged, is not to be judged by a few
phrases, often highly rhetorical, often highly figurative,
picked out from the context, and served up cold iuid dry
for the reader. On this matter Father Newman renuu-ks
to Fusey : " I think you have not always made your (piota-
tions with that consideration and kindness which is your rule."
He thus calndy complains of the unfairness — of which Fusey
is habitually guilty in Xmjird volume — of taking a strong and
apparently objectionable passage from an author who, either
in the immediate context or elsewhere, has qualified it by
other statements, which any one but a partisan writer would
feel bound to take into consideration and place by its side,
without giving the reader any intimation that such qualifica-
tions exist. He asks Fusey very pointedly whether he thinks
'* this a fair and becoming method of reasoning . ... or the
procedure of a theologian " ? The Vicar is beyond tlie reach of
such an appeal. He simply out-Herod's IngersoU in coarse
malignity and dishonesty. The greatest author he quotes from
2S0 Ii'sE, Ipsa, Ipsum.
is St. Lijjjuori in the " Glories of Mary." Speaking of this
book Father Newman says : " It never surprises nie to read
anything extraordinary in the devotions of a sjiint Such men
are on a level very different from our own, and we cannot un-
derstand them. I hold this to be an important canon in the
Lives of the Saints, according to the words of the Apostle,
' The spiritual man judges all things, and he himself is judged
of no one.' But we may refrain from judging, without pro-
ceeding to imitate." The Vicar, however, armed with his
" yard stick," is ready to pronounce judgment even on " the
spiritual man," and the less he knows of the subject the more
peremptory he becomes. No words, for instance, seem suffi-
ciently strong to express his estimate of the " Glories of Mary "
— that inexhaustible mine of the most tender and beautiful
sentiments in regard to the Mother of Jesus. He says that
the " whole book .... raises not a dispute as to what sort of
worship (Latreia, donleia, hyperdonloia, &c.) ought to be ren-
dered to the Virgin, but the all-important question, ' What
must I do to be saved ? ' The practical answer to Romanists
from Ligiiori and his followers is ' Go to Mary and you will be
saved.' From our Blessed Lord and Master it is ' come unto
me.'" Wliat unclean spirit could suggest a more audacious
libel than this both on St. Liguori and on the Church of God ?
Now, though St. Liguori's book is written for Catholics who
cannot misunderstand him, yet he lays down their principles in
the clearest way as if he had in his mind the Vicar and his
" ilk." Thus, in his address " To the Reader " of the " Glories
of Mary " he siiys : " In order that my present work may not
be condemned by the over-critical, I think it well to explain
certain propositions that will be found in it, and which may
seem hazaixlous, or perhaps obscure. I have noticed some, and
should others attract your attention, charitable reader, / heij
that yoxi xoUl xmderstand them, according to the rules of sound
theoloijy and the doctrine of the Holy Iloman Catholic Church
of which I declare myself a most obedient son And
now to say an in a few words: God, to glorify the mother of
the Redeemer, has so determined and disposed that of her
great charity she should intercede in behalf of all those for
A Rejoindeu. 281
whom His Divine Son paid and oflfered the superabundant
price of 11 is precious Blood in which alone is our salvation^
life, and resurrection. On this doctrine, and on all that is in
accordance with it, I ground my projH)sitions — propositions
which the saints have not feared to assert in their tender col-
loquies with Mary and fervent discourses in her honor."
' Pnsey accepts every word of the " doctrine " here laid down
hy St. Li^nori. The saint then refers his " reader " to chapters
the sixth, seventh, eighth, and ninth of his book for the appli-
cation of his " doctrine." From one of these chapters (the
eighth), the Vicar has taken what he calls the " l)ald concentra-
tion of the teaching of the whole book," and then, in the very
face of the author's statement, just quoted, utters the base,
ssitanic libel already mentioned. And he desires to ])ose as a
"true Catholic" and a "priest" ! Then again, the simplicity
is almost affecting with which St. Liguori elsewhere expresses
himself on figurative and rhetorical language in devotion to
Mary. " Without doubt," he says, " hyperbole, under which
name tropes (figures) are included, cannot be taxed with untruth
when it is evident from the context that it goes beyond the
truth — as is the case when St. Peter Damian savs that " Marv
does not pray, but commands." The same applies to St.
Anselm, when he says that " She weeps in Heaven for those
who offend God." In such cases as these, in which there can
be no ntistake, tropes (figures) are lawful. But such is not the
case in propositions in which the hyperbole is not evident, and
there would be a real deception." The "Glories of Mary"
is full of devout contemplations and pious amplifications and
figurative expressions. Wliat canon for the interpretation of
these could be more clear, and simpler, than that su])plied by
the author? What more could St. Liguori do than he has
done in these extracts to guard against such perverse and
malicious misrepresentations as I am now considering i I leave
it to candid Protestants to answer.
One more preliminary reflection. The same line of thought
which vindicates agjiinst Unitarians and Deists the worship of
Jesus, vindicates no less triumphantly against Anglicans and
Ritualists the Catholic veneration of M>>ry. Let us sujipose
282 Ipse, Ipsa, Ii-slm.
the Vicar in controversey with a reh'giously-rainded Unitarian,
who labors under a blind and ignorant prejudice against the
doctrine of the Incarnation, similar to that which possesses the
Vicar against our doctrine and practice. The Unitarian (I have
often heard him) would express his objections to the Incarniv-
tion in some such terms as these :
" Men were created for one end — the knowledge and love of
God. They better fuldll that end, therefore, — they are more
perfect of their kind, — in proportion as they more constantl"
keep the thought of God before them ; contemplate His ex-
cellences ; labor to fulfill Ilis conunands. Kow this sad doc-
trine of the Incarnation presents one constant 'mpediment in
the way of man's great work. When we Unitarians are op-
pressed with trial, temptation, suffering, we stinmlate our con-
fidence in the Almighty Creator by steadily fixing our thoughts
on His Infinite Mercy and Ilis Infinite Power. But you Trini-
tarians, I have often observed, shrink from this ; it is not once
in a thousand times that your pious affections take any such turn.
JS^o ; you fix your thoughts not on the Infinite Love which is en-
tertained for you by God ; but on the finite love which (as you
think) is entertained for you by that created soul, which you
believe God to have assumed, in the form of Christ ; and you pon-
der according!}' on the various most touching circumstances of
Cljrist's Life and Passion. Yet even if I were to grant your
full doctrine, it would still remain true that the love felt for
you by the soul which so suffei-ed is but a finite love. And
further, since no one finite object is nearer than any other to
the Infinite, it is true, in the strictest and most literal sense,
that the love felt for you by the Divine Nature as far exceeds
the love felt for you by the soul of Christ, as it exceeds the
love you feel for each other.
" Then, again, we Unitarians preserve untouched that most
sacred truth, which your own Scriptures so prominently testify
— that God alone can read the heart ; whereas you Trinitarians
.idmit the soul of Christ iato a participation of that incommu-
nicable privilege, and thereby invest a finite object with the
very attributes of Infinity. Or, again, suppose I would rouse
myself to repentance for sin : I reflect on God's Infinite Sane-
A Rbioindick. 283
tity — on the disloyal insult which I have offered to that Sanc-
tity, and on the foul contrast between God, the great Exem-
plai*, and myself. Now I will not say that you Trinitarians
never do this ; but I will confidently say that you far of tener
do something else. You dwell on the anguish which you con-
sider your sin to have inflicted on the loving Heart of your
Redeemer ; or on the contrast between your sin and Christ's
spotless sjuictity on earth, that is, the spotless sanctity of a
created soul ; or on your ingratitude for the torments endured
by that soul on your behalf; and then you gaze with com-
punction on the pierced hands and feet. In fact, you carry
this idolatrous principle into every detail of the interior life.
You do not come face to face with God ; what you cjII the
Sacred llunumity (of Christ) stands up as a constant b;\rrler
between Ilim and your soul. Indeed, I must say that your
Trinitarian doctrine of the Atonement has fearfully encouraged
sin, by representing pardon for the most frightful offences as
so certain and so easily obtained.
" I do not here speak, ' the Unitarian may continue to say,
in closer parody of Pusey's assault on our devotion, " I do not
here speak of saintly men, but of the great mass as we find
them ; of those who fulfill their religious duties in a quiet and
ordinary way. These men give a certain fixed portion of each
day to prayer; and it is arithmetically evident that if some of
that portion goes to the created soul of Christ, so much less
will be left for the Infinite God. But this is far from the
M'orst. It is qn\te indefinitely easier and more pleasant to man
as he is, that he shall contemplate a created object — especially
one invested with the singularly pathetic and imaginative
interest surrounding Christ's Life .aid Passion — than that he
shall contemplate the Divine Nature. If men are told, there-
fore, that Christ's human soul knows their thoughts and can
grant their petitions, they will be ever increasing the time de-
voted to that soul, at the expense of the time devoted directly
to the uncreated. They will thus learn practically more and
more to look to the created soul of Christ for pardon, for help,
for strength, for consolation : it is their prayers to that soul
which will issue freely and warmly from the heart ; while
284: Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
their direct addresses to the Divine Nature will be little more
than the perfimctory and external performances of a certain
stated and pre8cril>ed routine.
" Now can you justly ar^ue," the Unitarian continues, " in
reply to all this, that you regard the soul of Christ as apper-
taining to a Divine Person, and that your prayers to that soul
are addressed to God the Son. I do not deny that such is
your theory I the simpleyat'^ is this: For once that your pious
aflfections are directed to the Eternal Father, they are directed
a thousand times to the Sacred Humanity (of Christ). You
Trinitarians must perforce, therefore, admit one of two alter-
natives, and I care not which. Either you love the Second
Person of your Trinity far better than you love the First ; or
else you love the created soul far better than you love the
Divine Person. In either case your doctrines of the Trinity
and Incarnatioi have introduced a shocking and most pei'verse
corruption iiito your practical worshij)."
Under tne pressure of such arguments from his Unitarian
opponent, I think that the Vicar would be disposed to wring
liis hands in perplexity — at least I hope so. Great would be his
distress to iind that men can argue with such perverse ingenu-
ity, on grounds purely a jmori, in favor of a proposition
])roved to be monstrously and extravagantly false by the daily
experience of every Trinitarian. In fact, he would have a
practical perception of the effect which is produced on the
mind of Catholics by his own confused " re-hash " of Pusey's
criticism of our devotion to the Mother of Jesus. I mean to
say that Pusey's argument against us, in his first volume, iin-
manglcd by the Vicar, is paralleled in every essential })articular
by the above Unit^irian argument against the Incarnation and
Divinity of Christ. I do not wish to be so discourteous to the
Vicar as to wound his vanity and love of notoriety, by losing
eight of him altogetlier ; but he will excuse me if I prefer
original sources because he appreciates a taste for " verifica-
tion." Let me then tell your readers that the pith and mar-
row of Pusey's argument, as spread out in the ^rst volume of
tlu^ T^'rrf'rf^f, ur.iy };c thus Gxprossed : " Love of God and of
Jesus is the highest of spiritual perfections. But the constant
A lii:.ioiNnKR. 285
thouglit of Mary by practical and devout Catliolics is greatly
prejudicial to this love, by drawing men's minds from the Cre-
ator to the creature ; and a proof of this is, that when a pious
Catholic is in trouble, he far more spontaneously turns to
Mary than to her Divine Son and his Kedeenjer." Now the
Unitarian argument against belief in the Incarnation is strik-
ingly analogous as your readers will admit. Here it is again
in summary: "Love of God, for the sake of His Divine Ex-
cellencies, is the highest of spiritual perfections. But the con-
stant thought of Christ by practical and devout Trinitarians is
greatly prejudicial to this perfection, as leading men to love
God, not for the sake of His necessjiry Divine Excellencies,
but for the sake of those liuman excellencies which (according
to Trinitarian doctrine) He has freely assumed. And a proof
of this is, that a pious Trinitarian, when in trouble, very far
more spontaneously turns to the Second Person than to the
First. The Z>/t'/;ie^ Excellencies appertain to BotJi ; if, there-
fore, it were for them that he loved God, the Father would be
quite as frequently in his thoixghts as the Son." If I had the
space I could easily draw out the overwhelming Trinitarian
answer to this, but it is not necessary. Undoubtedly every
devout l)eliever in the Divinity of Clirist Hees and hnows that
the Unitarian argument is monstrously fallacious; and in like
manner, every devout Catholic see% and knows that Pusey's
argument is monstrously fallacious — but, it goes without say-
ing, and your logical readers must concede, that the one is just
as plausible as the other.
I come at last to the Vicar's textual quotations, made as well
in his very first letter, from St. Liguori and the JRdccolta, as
in his lust through Pusey from other sources. I will consider
i\\Qm, every one. Nay, more; I will give him what he likes
so much — "a wider view "and "useful information;" for I
propose so far as my limits will allow to consider and explain
for honest Protestants all those passages in I^usey, from what-
ever source, which I think present the greatest difficulty to a
Protestant mind. Perhaps the "bitter regrets," which the
Vicar prophesied for me. mav. like the proverbial chickens,
" come home to roost."
286 Ipse, Ipsa, Ii'scm.
1. I will consider first the statement {E!re)itmn, p. 105) that
Mary ''Appeases her Son's wrath" — whence Pnsey infers that,
according to Catholic writers, "the ssiints are more ready to
intercede with Jcsns than Jesus with the Father"; or (in other
words) that Mary loves sinners more warmly than Jesus loves
them. This objection occupies the Vicar in the sixth last par-
a<rraph of his closing " Stricture." Now here, as in so many
other instances, the parallel of the Incarnation is precisely in
])oint. The Vicar has heard many Anglican preachers say
that " tlie Father is justly irritated," and that " the Son ajv
peases Ills wrath." Docs he, therefore, Jiscribe to them the
portentous heresy, that sinners are loved with less intensity hy
the Divine Nature than by the soul, or Sacred Humanity of
Christ? The Incarnation displays no less tndy the Father's
loving kindness than the Son's. " God so loved the world that
He gave His only begotten Son." " God commends His Love,
in that Christ died for us"; and any ditferent doctrine belongs
only to a Calvinistic heretic. And yet it is said with a most
true drift, in practical and devotional writing, that the Son
a])pease8 the Father's wrath, and the like ; because such
phrases are understood to signify what is most true — viz., that in
consequence of the Incarnation, the Father forgives lis our
sins, and treats us with innneasnrably greater mercy than would
otherwise have been the case. It is most certain, indeed, that
the love felt for men by the Father is infinitely greater than
that felt for them by the soul of Christ ; and in like manner
that the love felt for them by the soul of Christ is very far
greater even than that felt for them by their Heavenly Mother.
Still it is axiomatically evident that, if Mary's intercession has
any efficacy at all (which Pnsey himself asserts), it must induce
her Divine Son to treat men more mercifully than would
otherwise have been the case ; and therefore, just as it is very
suitably said that the Son appeases the Father's wrath, so it is
said with precisely equal propriety that Mary ap]ieases her
Son's.
Under this head comes the famous " Vision of the two lad-
ders," from the " Glories of Mary," over which my unhaj)py
^pponon^ flaps Lis Icuucu wiiigs. Yuur reaciers can turn to it.
A Rejoindeu. 287
Let UP Hiipposc some Anglican poet to depict " a vision toucli-
ijig tlie two ladders that reached from earth to heaven : the
one red, upon whieli the Eternal Father leaned, from which
numy fell backward and could not ascend ; the other white,
upon which the Sacred Humanity leaned, the help whereof,
such as used, were by Jesus received with a cheerfid counte-
nance, and 30 with facility ascQiided into heaven." The only
unfavorable comment on this I would expect from the V^icar
would be that, in saying '''•many fell backward" from the
former hu.der, the poet rmplied the existence of some who did
not fall backward from it. Otherwise he would heartily ap-
j)laud such a poem as teaching the all-important truth, that
Jesus is the one appointed Way of coming to the Father, and
that those who attempt to reach the Father without that media-
ticm will be disappointed. Such, then, is exactly the meaning
of St Liguori, and of those saintly writers who have a]>iiealed
to this vision. They teach that, to a Catholic, the Mother of
Jesus is immeasurably the surest way of reaching Jesus; that
those Catholics who neglect her regular and habitual invoca-
tion will find it much more difficult to obtain their saiictitica-
tion and ultimate salvation. Why ? Because of the might of
her intercessory power, so graphically ilhistrated by this figure
of the two ladders. For, as Cardinal Newman puts it : " If
'God heareth not sinners, but if a man be a worshipper of
Ilim and do Ilis will, him lie heareth'; 'if the continual
prayer of a just man availetli nnich ; if faithful Abraham was
required to pray for Abimelech, for he was a prophet '; if
patient Job was to ' pray for his friends,' for he had ' spoken
right to things about God'; if meek Moses, by lifting up his
hands, turned the battle in favor of Israel, against Ainaiek ; why
should we wonder at hearing that Mary, the only spotless child
of Adam's seed, has a transcendent influence with the God of
grace? And if the Gentiles at Jerusalem sought Pinlip, be-
cause he was an apostle, when they desired access to Jesus, and
Philip spoke to Andrew, as still more -closely in our Lord's
confidence, and then both came to Him, is it strange that the
ir»r»tlir>r kIioiiIH Imvn nmrpr wi^li tj»p ^^^■x^ Histinct in Tfrntl froi))
that of the purest angel and the most triumphant saint % If we
288 Ipsk, Ipsa, Ipsum.
liave faith to admit the Incarnation itself, we must admit it in its
fullness ; why, then, should we start at the gracious appoint-
ments which arise out of it, or are necessary to it, or are
included in hi If the Creator comes on earth in the form f
a servant and a creature, why may not His mother on th
other liand rise to be the Queen of Heaven, and be clothed
with the sun, and have the moon beneath her feet '{ "
But there is no need of aryutaent here at all. It is Pusey's
own contention that the intercession of the Blessed Virgin,
more eminently than that of all the saints, for us who are still
militant, is part of the doctrine of the Communion of Saints,
and a necessary consequence of God-given love. {Eirenicon,
vol. 2, p. 33.) That is to say : God has so determined and
disposed that she should intercede in behalf of all those for
whom Christ paid and offered the superabundant price of His
Precious Blood in which alone "is our sjdvation, life, and
resurrection." Her intercession is a part of the Divine j)lan,
a merciful chain by which God has bound the hearts of His
prodigal children in all ages to Himself. Pusey and St.
Liguori, one of the greatest luminaries of the Catholic Chnrch,
are at one. " May the infinite goodness of our Lord be ever
praised," says Bishop Kingdon's "devout soul," St. Bernard,
"for having been pleased to give us Mary as our advocate in
heaven, that she, being at the same time the Mother of our
Judge and a Mother of Mercy, may be able, hy her interces-
sion, to conduct to a prosperous issue the great affair of our
eternal salvation." And St. Augustine says: "As Mary co-
operated by her charity in the spiritual birth of tlie faithful,
so also God wills that she should co-operate by her intercession
in obtaining for them the life of grace in this world and the
life of glory in eternity." These quotations are from St.
Liguori, and this is the doctrine stamped on every page of the
" Glories of Mary." But intercession and invocation are cor-
relative doctrines in Catholic teaching which Pusey accepted
absolutely, and I have already triumphantly proved its truth
(piite independently of his admissions. Now, St. Liguori de-
clares in his Introduction that the great object of his book is to
portray Mary's intcree&sorv power with her Divine Son and to
A Kkjoindkb. 28'J
urge Catholics to Lave recourse to it. The vision of the two
ladders is one among very many of the beautifully striking
and figurative illustrations used by him to impress this truth
upon the minds of his readers. " Come unto Me " is the con-
soling invitation of our dear Lord. And surely we do not go
less directly to our Kedeemer for grace and salvation by going
in company with His Blessed Mother, since all prayer to her
(let it never be forg(jttcn) is always most truly, though indi-
directly, virtually and ultimately the worship of llim from
whom alone it can have any efficacy, while her intercession
secures this worship offered in the most effective way. I need
not dwell longer on this blazing truth. The subtlest minds have
confessed its incomparable beauty, as the purest hearts have
done homage to its irresistible attraction. To say nothing of
countless saints, in all the long ages of the past, nor of myriads
of pure and bright souls known only to God, Mary has counted
in modern times among her noblest children and most loving
clients such mighty intellects and luminous thinkers as Suarez,
Bellarmine, Schlegel, Bossuet, Fenelon, Lacordaire, Monsabru,
Ward, Harper, Faber, Manning, Newman, Brownson, Mar-
shall, and Leo XIII.
The Vicar concludes his stricture on the " story " of the two
ladders as follows :
" Liguori says in the story Jesus has no compassion for
struggling sinnei's ; He will not lend them a helping hand to
Paradise ; they fall again and again if they respond to His
invitation, 'Come unto Me,' but they succeed on the first
attempt up Mary's ladder, because she has such compassion for
poor sinners she will bestir herself to help them. There is
something far worse than grotesqueness here — something far
worse than even heresy. It is apostasy."
Were I to characterize this infamy in the words of our
Divine Lord or of St. John the Baptist, the Vicar would com-
plain that I was no "gentleman" and protest against the use
of the " Shillalah "; but, in the face of my explanation of the
" story," to say nothing of its own very words, is not his state-
ment an outrage against reason and God ? It contains as many
falsehoods as lines. There is no contrast, intended by the
290 Il'SK, Il'SA, Il'SUM.
saintly writer, between Jesus and ^^ary as reganls their power
and willingness to help s»juls struj^gling to be free. Tiie whole
])oint in the figure is to enforce the elKcacy of the Mother's
intercession with the Son on behalf of those wlioni lie has re-
deemed. Who but ^he Vicar would dare inijiute to so great
a saint and Doctor of the Church as St. Liguori the intoleral)le
error that the love felt for us by Mary exceeds that felt for us
by the Soul of Christ i
LETTER XXIV.
IPSE, IPSA, IP8UM — A REJOINDER.
To the Alitor of the Globe :
Sir, — I continue my explanations of the language character-
ized as " impious " by the " gentleman " from Oxford.
2. "God retaineth justice to Himself, and granted mercy to
(Mary) " {Eirenicon, p. 105). " God lias resigned into her
hands (//* one may say so) His Omnipotence in the sphere of
grace" (p. 103). "To her He has committed the kingdom of
mercy, reserving to Himself that of justice." The last of tliese
quotations is, perhaps, the commonest shape in which the idea
is expressed ; but that idea is one and the same. Kow such
phrases as these convey a meaning, either on the one hand intoler-
able and heretical, or on the other hand beautiful and edifying,
according to the sense in which they are taken. They may in
themselves mean that our Divine Lord has in such sense given
to Mary the kingdom of mercy, as to have abdicated that king-
dom IIim^ielf—t\mt mercy and grace can no longer be obtained
by addressing Him directly, but onl}' by invoking His mother.
Such a notion, no Catliolic need be told, would ]>e nothing less
than an appalling blasphemy. T will only say, tliprefore, that
no one but the progeny of " utterly unredeemed villains " ever
•Jrcamcd oi so undcrstancJmg tlie statement. Oatliolics know
that the holy men who most constantly uttered it were also
foremost in urging those prayers to the Blessed Sacrament and
the Sacred Heart of Jesus which are absolutely inconsistent
A Kkjoindkk. 2D1
with its false interpretation; and tliat they are even more
ardent and glowing than other Catholic writers in their descrip-
tion of those unspeakable blessings which How from prayer to
the Sacred Humanity of Christ. Indeed, tlu-oughuut the writ-
ings of the great St. Liguori there is manifested a veritable
ocean of love and coniidence in our Lord, absolutelv over-
whelming the few sentences strongly setting forth his severity
to sinners. Open, for instance, his " Reflections on the Pa8sit)n
of our Lord." Li chapter xiv. he says: "Jesus Christ did not
cease with Ilis death to intercede for us before the Eternal
Father. lie still at present is our advocate ; and it seems as if
in heaven (as St. Paul writes) He knew no other office than
that of moving His Father to show us mercy — ' always living
to make intercession for us' (Ileb. vii.). And, adds the Apos-
tle, the Saviour for this end has ascended into Heaven ' that
He may appear in the presence of God for us ' " (Heb. ix.).
This is but an imperfect sample.
There remains, then, the true sense of the statement I am
considering. Christ has reserved wholly to Himself the king-
dom of justice ; He has given to His mother no lot or |)art
whatever in the oflice of judging and condemning. r>ut Cath-
olics love to say that He has so handed over to her His king-
dom of mercy, that she possesses (as it is often expressed) an
*' Inter cessm'y omnipotence''^ j that the invocation of her will be
fully as effective in obtaining mercy and grace from Christ, as
would be prayer to Him offered with the same dispositions. To
all, therefore, who feel themselves bowed down by a sense of sin,
she is a truly attractive object of veneration and supplication,
because her office in heaven as an intercessor is exclusively that
of mercy, and within that sphere her Divine Son has connnuni-
cated to her the greatest power. Father Newman says : " Our
Lord cannot pray for us, as a creature, as Mary prays ; He can-
ii(">t insoire those feelings winch a creature in spires. 'J'o her
))p]or(rra, ^a K^ipor ^ cresti'Ts R 'jjnt'jrHl cl^irp 0''? "jiff, "^'mp.-ikv-
and familiarity, in that she is nothing else than our fellow. She
is our pride, — in the poet's words, ' Our tainted nature's solitary
bop.Gt.' \Vc- look to her without any fear, any remorse, any
consciousness that she is able to read us, judge us, punish us."
292 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
3. " To sinners who have lost Divine grace, there is no more
sun " (the symbol of Jesus) "for him, but the moon is still on
the horizon ; let him address himself to Mary " (p. 106). " No
sinner doth deserve that Christ should any more make inter-
cession for him with the Father .... and therefore it was
necessary that Christ should constitute His well-be.oved Mother
a mediatrix between us and Him " (p. 105). " (Mary) is the
only refuge of those who have incurred the Divine indigna-
tion." " Often we shall be heard more quickly, and be thus
preserved, if we have recourse to Mary and call upon her
name, than we should be if we called on the name of Jesus
our Savit tr." "Many things are asked from God and are
not granted ; they are asked from Mary and are obtained."
The last two are the Vicar's quotations from St. Liguori in
his first letter. Now, did he find such words as the above
without any indication of authorship, the Vicar, with his frag-
mentary idea of Christianity and peculiar vieics on the Incar-
nation, might be forgiven if he understood them to mean, that
one who has fallen into mortal sin commits grievous pre-
sumption in offering direct prayer to God ; and that God
would have no power to remit mortal sin if He had not created
Mary to intercede for it. But notoriously every Catholic in
the world would regard either of these propositions with horror
unspeakable — and since the words were addressed by a Catho-
lic to Catholics, it is clear that neither writer nor readers under-
stand any such blasphemy. In fact, as I have often explained,
St. Liguori and others were able to use such strong language,
precisely because no one of their readers could by possibility
take their words in their literal sense. It is as though a son said
to his mother : " You are the author of my being — in you is
my only hope," and the Vicar immediately pounced on him
for blasphemously and impiously introducing a second Deity. .
Let me submit a Catholic interpretation of the language I
am considering. It is as if the saintly authors had said to us :
" If you have once possessed the unspeakable blessedness of
justification and adoption, and have fallen from that blessed-
ness by deliberately outraging your Creator with mortal sin,
you have nothing favorable to expect from God's Justice.
A Rejoinder. 293
With no approach to injustice, God might remove you straight-
way from earth to hell ; there is nothing bought for you by
Christ in His Sacred Passion which could preclude your Cre-
ator from so acting. You must sue, then, for favors which
Christ has not secured for you by His Passion — you must
throw yourself most unreservedly on His Mercy, and you have
more hope of forgiveness in proportion as you more keenly
realize this fact. Yet this very keenness of realization may
injure you, unless you adopt the appointed remedy. Your
sense of the insult you have offered to God may make you
feel as though there were ' no sun in the horizon ' — may make
you slow in apprehending the boundless mercy of Him wlio is
to be your judge. He has Himself provided for this your ob-
vious need. He has appointed a mediatrix, who entertains for
you no feeling but that of pity, and whose maternal love will
strengthen and encourage you to approach her Son. x^or is
this all ; for her prayers have a most powerful effect in obtain-
ing for you a far greater degree of mercy than He would other-
wisp hn-e granted."
4. ' ,Ir2g He obeyed not only His Father, but also His
Mot:' 158). " The Blessed Virgin is superior to God,
and God Himself is subject to her in respect of the manhood
which He assumed from her," " However she be subject unto
God, inasmuch as she is a creature, yet she is said to be superior
and placed over Him, inasmuch as she is His Mother." " You
have over God the authority of a mother, and hence you obtain
. pardon for the most obdurate sinners." " At the command of
the Virgin all things obey, even God." — Vicar's quotation in
first lettei'.
My opponent, in his ignorance, is often so severe on Catholics
for going beyond Scripture, that one might have expected
some forbearance when they have but used New Testament
language. St. Luke says (c. ii. v. 51): "lie came to Nazareth,
and was subject to them." "Who was "He" ? The Incarnate
God. Who were " they '■ ? Mary and Joseph. Now, Pusey,
in his first volume, p. 103, expresses himself as though the
very phrase " God is subject to Mary " were so plainly revolt-
ing as to require no express refutation : yet it is almost word
294 Ipse, Ij'sa, Ipsum.
for word the Holy Ghosfs statement through St. Lxike!
Moreover, to say that the Incarnate God was suhject to Mary
and Joseph is simply and precisely saying in other words that
they were "' superiors " " set over " the Incarnate God. We
have it, then, on the inf alii hie authority of the Holy Ghost,
that for certain years the Incarnate God was subject to His
Mother ; that she was " superior " to Him — " set over " Him
— " had over Him the authority of a mother,"
There are probably many "educated English gentlemen,
holding the Orders of the Church of England," who, on read-
ing this argument, would at once object, that our Lord was
only placed under Mary and Joseph during His nonage, before
His faculties were fully developed. The Vicar has given no
evidence that his belief is otherwise. But Pusey held, of
course, as strongly as Catholics do, that from the very moment
of His miraculous Conception the soul of Christ knew dis-
tinctly and explicitly every object which it knows even at this
present moment. Other Protestants again are more or less
consciously under the impression, that since our Lord's As-
cension His Sacred Humanity has in some sense ceased to b3 ;
but here again Pusey would heartily anathematize any such
heresy.
Let me begin, then, by examining what the Holy Ghost meant
in St. Luke's words. This, of course, is certain ; that at every
moment there was this or that particular act, which the Eternal
Father wished the soul of Christ to elicit ; and also that this
precise act, did, in fact, always take place. "We cannot sup-
pose, however, consistently with St. Luke's language (to jnit it
on no other ground), that the commands of Mai-y and Josepli
were constantly overruled by the superior claim of God's will ;
and still less can we suppose that that Will surrendered its
claim to them. Only one supposition then remains, which is
unquestionably the true one. God so inspired Mary and
Joseph that whenever they commanded Jesus, such command
was precisely accordant with the Divine preference ; and Jesus,
among the various motives which at that moment influenced
His human will, vouchsafed and deigned to direct His act to
this particular motive also, viz., the virtuousness of obeying
A Rejoinder. 295
His Mother; and of obeying liim, too, whom God had ap-
pointed to stand in the place of an earthly father.
Now, firstly I ask, what possible diflHculty there can be in
supposing that the same obedience was paid by Jesus to Mary's
authority at a somewhat later period, viz., when He entered on
His Passion ? That He prepared Himself for this by asking
her permission? That "by dying He obeyed not only His
Father but also His mother " ? I am not arguing that He did
so, though, for myself, I have every disposition to believe that
He did so. But I ask, what possible theological ohjectioti can
be raised against such an opinion, should it commend itself to
some holy and " devout "soul " ? Canon Oakeley (The Leading
Topics of Dr. Pusey's recent Work, pp. 24-25) points out the
plain implication of Scripture, that at the Annunciation " She
must express her free and imbiased consent before the human
race can be redeemed in the manner fore-ordained of God " :
aTid he then proceeds :
"Xor can I see (though I admit this to be rather the pious
inference of devotion, than the logical conclusion of dogma)
that any more direct share in the unapproachable office of our
Redeemer is ascribed to His Blessed Mother in re<jardl)uj the
Passion itself as suspended ujyon her consent, than is implied
in the intimacy thus proved by the language of Scripture itself
to have existed from the first between the decrees of the most
Holy Trinity and the free-will of the Blessed Virgin."
Now, then, following Jesus and Mary from earth to heaven,
something still surely remains in their mutual relations, not
identical indeed (far from it), yet surely not unanalogous.
Take the parallel of an absolute monarch, whose mother still
lives and is fondly loved by him. He possesses over her un-
doubtedly supreme authority, and so far from her being able
in any true sense to command him, he can impose his com-
mands on her without appeal. And yet his assent to her just
petitions will not altogether resemble in kind his assent to
other suppliants, — he wiT regard her still with a real filial
deference, and she will in tigurative sense, exercise over him
a certain maternal authority. This, then, is the simple and
obvious sense of the expressions last above quoted. Such burn-
2£6 Ipse, Ipsa, Ips[jm.
ing words represent, indeed, rather the shape into which men
of ascetic lives and profoundly spiritual minds are accustomed
to cast their thoughts, than the standard of ordinary preaching
or the scale of general devotion. Yet it seems most touching
and appropriate, and most conducive to a real apprehension of
the Divine Personality of Christ and a more intense love of
the Incarnate God, that earnest devotees of Mary should de-
light in setting forth, exhibiting, amplifying, her various unap-
proached and singular prerog.. ves among God's Saints. She
herself declares them in the Magnificat : " For He that is
mighty hath done great things to me and holy is His name."
I may add here, as in the former case, that the paradoxical
form itself which such expressions wear, shows clearly how far
it was from the mind of their originators that they should be
construed literally. In every case a Catholic in a Catholic
country was addressing Catholics, who could never dream of
suspecting him to mean what both he and they knew to be
erroneous and heretical. No one more abounds in such ex.
pressions than St. Liguori, and no one takes greater pains than
he to guard against perversions of his meaning, as I pointed out
in my last letter. He gives his testimony to the general ortho-
doxy around him in the words already cited : " Figures are per-
mitted whenever there cannot he any mistalce on the subject."
Of course there were no Ritualistic Vicars abroad in these days.
5. "It seems to be a part of this system to parallel the
Blessed Virgin throughout with her Divine Son, so that every
prerogative which belonged to Him by nature or office, should
be in some measure imputed to her" (p. 161). The Vicar
adopts this, and copies from Pusey in support of it, a confused
" heap " of incoherent ejaculations.
Can there be a more perverse and stupid comment than this?
If you earnestly love two objects, it is a delight to trace every
possible analogy and similarity between them ; between their
circumstances, their character, their benefits to you : and the
fact therefore, to which Pusey draws attention (the Vicar can-
not see beyond the mere letter of Pusey's page), shows how
dearly the lovers of Mary love her Son. But who, except
Anglicans and parasites of the crude and unenlightened views
A Rejoinder. 297
of Pusey's first volume, would dream of drawing the very
opposite conclusion of inferring that Catholics elevate the
Mother into her Son's rival and antagonist ?
! LETTER XXY.
IPSE, IPSA, IPSI3 —A REJOINDER.
To the Editor of the Globe:
Sir, — I resume my explanations of the language on which
the " educated English gentleman " from Oxford '• holding the
Orders of the Church of England " bases his charges of " Infi-
delity," " Apostasy " and " Idolatry " against the Catholic
Church — the Bride of Christ.
6. St. Liguori says : " Those whom the justice of God saves
not, the infinite mercy of Mary saves by her intercession."
Pusey puts the word " infinite " in italics, as showing the
point of his objection ; but can it be seriously claimed that St.
Liguori lays down a dogmatic proposition, the infinitude of
Mary's attributes ? "I have taken infinite trouble to oblige
you," says a friend to the Vicar. " Sir," gravely replies the
latter, " you shock me ; no one can do anything infinite save
God alone." St. Liguori meant, of course, that the Mother's
mercy and love for her Son's redeemed embraces every kind of
evil, moral or spiritual, which can possibly be brought before
her in prayer.
7. St. Liguori also says (p. 103): "God has resigned into
her hands {if one might say so) His Omnipotence in the Sphere
of grace." The very words which I have italicized show that
he is not speaking literally ; and the general thought has been
already explained under No. 2.
8. " Mary is our only refuge, help, and Asylum." " Health
of the Weak, Refuge of Sinners, Comforter of the Afflicted,
Help of Christians."
These are titles given, as I have already shown, by the
Fathers and saintly writers throughout the ages, to the Blessed
298 Ipse, Ipsa, Ip.sum.
Virgin. Her Litany of Loretto (so called) is a necklace of
such tenderly beautiful pearls ; and I have before me at this
moment tlie name of each contributor to the collection, from
the " Holy Mother of God " of the Council of Ephesus to
" Queen of the Holy Rosary," solemnly added by the beloved
and illustrious Leo XIIL Plow it must sadden the heart of a
" true Catholic " Ritualist to see so great a Pope — and in the
nineteenth century too ! — thus abet and promote " Infidelity,"
" Apostasy " and " Idolatry " ! In his third " Stricture " the
Vicar told us that : " On the accession of Leo XIIL wiser
councils prevailed" "with regard to the worship of Mary."
How chilling to his " true Catholic " aspirations !
But let me give your readers the context of these titles from
St. Liguori himself. They can then form some idea of the
honesty and fairness of the Vicar and his patron saint — Little-
dale. St. Liguori writes :
The Angelical Doctor, St. Thomas, says, that we can place our
hope in a pei-son in two ways : as a principal cause, and as a medi-
ate one. Those who hope for a favor from a king, hope it fronx
him as lord, they hope for it from his minister or favorite as an
intercessor. If the favor is granted it comes primainly from the
king, but it comes through the instrumentality of the favorite ; and
in this case he who seeks the favor is nght in calling his intercessor
his hope, &c. The King of Heaven, being infinite goodness,
desires in the highest degeee to enrich us with His graces ; but be-
cause confidence is requisite on our part, and in order to increase it
in us. He has given us His own mother to become our mother and
advocate — (our most powerful intercessor, as Pusey admits) — and to
her He has given all power to help us ; and, therefore, He wills that
we should repose our hope of salvation and of every blessing in her.
Those who place their hopes in creatures alone, independently of
God, as sinners do, and in oi-der to obtain the favor and friendship
of man, fear not to outrage bis divine Majesty, are most eertamly
cursed by God, as the prophet Jei-ennas says. But thase who hope
in Mary, as Mother of God, who is able to obtain graces and eternal
life for them, are truly blessed and acceptable to the heart of God,
who desii-es to see that greatest of His creatures honored, for she
loved and honored Him in this world more than all men and angels
put together. And therefore we justly and reasonably call the
Blessed Virgin our hope, trusiuig, as Cardinal Bellai-mine says,
"That we shall obtain by her intercession, that which we should
A Kejoindek. 299
not obtain by our own unaided prayers." "We pray to her," says
the learned Suarez, "in oixler that the dignity of the intercessor
may supply for our own unworthiness ; so that (he continues) to
implore the Blessed Virgin in such a spirit, is not diffidence in the
mercy of God, but fear of our own unworthiness."
Perhaps, after all, it is only "the poor Irish" who can ap-
preciate this, since there are only " two beings, certainly pucIi,
■in rerum natu7xi^^ whom the " lawless " Ritualistic preacher
does not fear — Almighty God and his own Bishop, whom, as
ex-deacon Froude tells us, he regards only as " some high-bred,
worn-out animal, useless in himself, but infinitely valuable for
some mysterious purpose of spiritual propagation."
I have thus far considered not only all the quotations from
St. Liguori made by the Vicar, but a selection of the most dif-
ficult from Pusey as well. I now proceed to those extracts
which the Vicar prophesied would be "new and perhaps
shocking to many of the Komanists of this diocese." They
are taken from a work of the venerable Grignon de Montfort,
translated into English by the saintly Father Faber, who
speaks of the book in these terms :
" There is a growing feeling of something inspired and supernatu-
ral about it as we go on studying it ; and Avith that we cannot help
experiencing after repeated i-eadings of it that its novelty never ap-
pears to wear off, nor its fullness to be diminished, nor the fragrance
and sensible fire of its unction ever to abate. "
This is pretty good testimony from very high authority.
But before considering in order those various propositions of
Montfort which I am specially to treat, I will give one or two
other extracts as illustrating the relative position which he re-
spectively ascribes to our Divine Lord and His blessed mother.
He says :
"I avow, with all the Church, that Mary, being but a mere creat-
ure that has come from the hands of the Most High is, in compari-
son with His Infinite Majesty, less than an atom ; or rather she is
nothmg at all, because He only is ' He Who is.' and thus by cnnsp-
quence that grand Lord, alv .ys independent and sufficient for
Himself, never had, and has not now, any absolute need of the holy
300 Ii'SE, Ipsa, Ipsum.
virgin for the accomplishment of His will and for the mani-
festation of His glory
"Jesus Christ our Saviour true God and true Man, ought to be
the last end of all our devotions, else they are false and delusive.
Jesus Christ is the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end of
all things. We labor not, as the Apostle says, except to render
every man perfect in Jesus Christ; because it is in Him alone that
the whole plenitude of the Divinity dwells, togetlier with all the
other plenitude of graces, virtues, and perfections ; because it is in
Him alone that we have been blessed with all spiritual benediction ;
and because He is our only Master, who has to teach us ; our only-
Lord, on whom we ouglit to depend ; our only Head, to whom we
must belong; our only Model, to whom we should conform our-
selves ; our only Physician, who can heal us; our only Shepherd,
tvho can feed us; our only Way, who can lead us; our only Truth,
who can make us grow; our only Life, who can animate us; and our
only All in all things, who can suffice us. There has been no other
name given under heaven, except the name of Jesus, by which we
can be saved. God has laid no other foundation of our salvation,
of our perfection, and of our glory, except Jesus Christ. Every
building which is not built upon that firm rock is founded upon
the moving sand, and sooner or later will fall infallibly. Every-
one of the faithful who is not united to Him, as a branch to the
stock of the vine, shall fall, shall wither, and shall be fit only to
cast into the fire. If we are in Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ in us,
we have no condemnation to fear. Neither the angels of heaven,
nor the men of earth nor the devils of hell, nor any other creatures,
can injure us ; because they cannot separate us from the love of God
which is in Jesus Christ. By Jesus Christ, with Jesus Christ, in
Jesus Christ, we can do all things ; we can render all honor and
glory to the Father in the unity of the Holy Ghost ; we can become
perfect ourselves, and be to our neighbore a good odor of eternal
life.
" If, then, we establish the solid devotion to our Blessed Lady, it
is only to establish more perfectly the devotion to Jesus Christ, and
to put forward an easy and secure means for finding Jesus Christ.
If devotion to our Lady removed us from Jesus Christ we should
have to reject it as an illusion of the Devil, but on the contrary, so
far from this being the case, there is nothing which makes devotion
to our Lady more necessary for us, as I have already shown, and
will show still farther hereafter, than that it is the means of finding
Jesus Christ perfectly, of loving Him tenderly, and cf serving Him
faithfully " (pp. 37-39).
A Rejoinder. 301
Is there any " Infidelity," " Apostasy," or " Idolatry " about
this? Let me ask your fair readers a simple question : Are
any words quite adequate to express the feelings of detestation
and sickening disgust thai must force themselves on the mind
in presence of the tactics of this Vicar? Remember — he has
never read, nay more, never seen, Montfort's book. This is
the most charitable view, while, I am sure, it is simple fact.
And yet, while simulating an honesty to which he is an utter
stranger, and pretending an anxiety for " verification," he
snatches up second-hand a lot of scraps, and swoops down upon
the Catholic Church and attempts to defile by his Harpy touch
the purest and holiest thoughts. But he calls himself a " true
Catholic" and a "Priest"! May God forgive so sacrilegious
use of two so venerable words !
Your readers will bear in mind that the Vicar copies his
extracts from Pusey's^^'*^ volume of the Eirenicon. He in-
troduces those which I am about to explain with these words :
" De Montfort does not scruple to assign to the Blessed Vir-
gin an office like that of God the Holy Ghost, in dwelling in
the soul." Compare this with Pusey's statement as follows:
" (De Montfort) seemis) to assign to her an office like that of
God the Holy Ghost, in dwelling in the soul." In the words
I have italicized your readers can see the difference between
the rabid, ignorant fanatic and the man who fears to misrepre-
sent. Pusey says : " It seems to me that De Montfort meant
so and so," implying a doubt of his understanding him aright ;
the Vicar, with no more aptitude for entering into the spiritual
beauties of a writer like Montfort than a Chimpanzee, changes
Pusey's modest doubt into an absolute affirmation that Mont-
fort " does not scruple " to say so and so. Commend me to a
ritualist " Priest " for honesty and a tender regard for truth !
I need not say that the idea in any shape, ascribed to Mont-
fort, is ridiculous in the extreme. And now for the quota-
tions.
9. "De Montfort speaks of souls which are not born of
blood, nor of flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God and
Mavy." Let me give your readers the context of these words.
Montfort, speaking of his book, says :
302 Ipsk, Ipsa, Ipsum.
*' Oh 1 but my labor will have been well expeuded if this little writ-
ing, falling into the hands of a soul of good dispositions, a soul well
born, — born of God and of Mary, and not of blood, nor of the will of
the flesh, nor of the will of man, — should unfold to iiira, and should by
the grace of the Holy Ghost inspire him with the excellence and the
price of that true and solid devotion to our Blessed Lady, which I
am going presently to describe I ftel myself nioi-e than ever
animated to believe and to hope all which I hiive had desply en-
graven upon my heart, and have asked of God those m my years,
namely, that sooner or later the Blessed Virgin shall have more
children of love than ever; and that by thia means, Jegus Christ,
viy dear Master, shall reign more in hearts than ever."
In the face of such burning words as these, where is the dif-
ficulty in the expression under consideration 'i Is not a cold
spirit of criticism most revolting? An examination of the fol-
lowing extracts will make this very clear.
10. "Tlie Holy Ghost chose to make use of our Blessed
Lady to bring His fruitfulness into action by })roducing in her
and by her Jesus Christ in His members." " When Mary has
struck her roots in tlie soul, she there produces these marvels
of grace which she alone can produce, because she alone is the
fruitful Virgin, who never lias liad, and never will liave, her
equal in purity and fruitfulness." " She alone can produce in
union witli the Holy Ghost singular and extraordinary things.
When the Holy Ghost, her spouse, lias found Mary in a soul.
He flies there ; He communicates Himself to that soul abun-
dantly and to the full extent to which she makes room for her
spouse."
Kow, these expressions, in their obvious Catholic sense, are
simply beautiful and singularly suggestive. They are based
upon the analogy between that joint office, on the one hand,
whereby, iti the Incarnation, the Holy Ghost and Mary pro-
duced Christ Himself, and that joint office, on the other hand,
whereby they form Christ in the individual soul. The thought
which they express is simply a development of the doctrine of
our Lady's Maternity, and is evidently taken from St. Augus-
tine. Nay, the very passage is quoted by Montfort in which
that Father says, that according to the Spirit, Mary is clenrly
our Mother, both because we are His members who took flesh
A IIejoindku. 303
in her womb, and because by l»er love she co-operated in the
birth of the faithful in the Church, of whom lie is the head.
That the Vicar may gratify hie taste for " veritication " and
consult his "friends in England," I give the original from St.
Augustine as follows: "Spiritu quidem .... jdane Mater
est membroruin ejus, quod nos sumus; quia co-operata est
charitate ut iideles in Ecclesia nascerentur, (piae illius capitis
membra sunt: corpore vero ipsius capitis Mater" {De Sancta
Vhginitate, Lilt. i. 6). The same thought is expressed by
Origen, when he says : " Jesus says to His Mother, ' Behold
thy son 1 ' and not ' Behold he too is thy son ! ' as if He had
said : Behold here is Jesus whom thou hast begotten. For
whoever is perfect, no longer lives himself, but Christ lives in
him. And as in him Christ lives, so it is said to Mary : Be-
hold thy Son, Christ" {Orlgcn inJoann, i. 6). And St. Bona-
venture says : " Mary has two sons, the Man-God and pure
man, and of both she is the mother, of the one corporally, of
the other spiritually." Again, too. Blessed Albert the Great
teaches that Mary is tlie " Mother of all who are reborn to life,
and she is the Mother of us all according to all the properties
of maternity, because He was begotten of her in whom all are
regenerated." And so also the great Abbot Guerric most
beautifully writes: "She is the only Virgin mother who
glories in having brought forth the only Begotten of the
Father, who embraces her only Begotten in all His members,
and who is not confounded at being called the Mother of all
those in whom she recognizes that her own Christ has been
formed, or is in the course of formation ;" and again : " If the
servant of Christ (St. Paul, Galatians iv. 19) is in labor again
and again of his little children .... until Christ be formed
in them, how much more the Mother of Christ? For she her-
self desires to form her only Begotten in all the children of
adoption .... and she is in labor of them all daily ....
until they meet into the perfect man, into the measure of the
fullness of the age of her Son." See Abbot Guerric's Sei^mona
on the Assumption.
It is this beautiful thought, then, which runs through both
^lontfort's Treatises on our Blessed Lady, and hardly an ex-
304 Ii'BE, Ipsa, Ipscm.
presBion occurs in either of them which may not he found in
other approved authors. As Clirist hecame Incarnate, and was
horn of God the Holy Ghost and of Mary, so also lie is formed
hy both in the souls of the regenerate. It is a first principle
of Christian theology that the Holy Ghost differs from the
other Divine Persons, in that He has no Divine P'ecundity.
The Father generates the Son ; the Father and Son, by one
undivided spiration, produce the Holy Ghost; but He pro-
duces no Divine Person. It is only, therefore, in acting on
created things that His Fecundity exists. And now your
readers will be able to understmd the extract given above :
"The Holy Ghost brings into fruitfulness His action by
(Mary) producing in her and by her Jesus Christ in His mem-
bers." An expansion of this thought explains the other ex-
tracts under this head : Thus : Certain pure souls permit Mary
to " strike her roots " in them ; that is, to produce in them, by
lier watchful vigilance and unremitting intercession for them
before the Throne of Grace, a real though imperfect image of
herself, by the imitation and practice of those virtues which
made her so pleasing to God. Will the Vicar deny that the
virtues of Faith, Humility, and Purity, as illustrated in Mary's
life are dear to the Holy Spirit ? Does he agree with Pusey
that God endowed her with a " superhuman, engraced beauty
of soul .... alone in His whole creation ? " Then why does
he stumble ? By a very familiar figure of speech, Mary is said
to " strike her roots " (words of Ecclesiasticus, ch. 24) in pure
hearts, because her name is a synonym for all the glories of
divine grace that can embellish a human s»ul, and of which
she herself was so conspicuous an example. When the Holy
Ghost sees that Mary has thus taken root, or (to use Montfort's
expression) when He sees Mary in those souls. He flies to them
and performs the "startling wonder" of forming Christ
within them. " She and the Holy Ghost produce in the soul
extraordinary things ; and, when the Holy Ghost finds Mary
in a soul He flies there." In other words, sanctity in its germs
is attributed by Montfort to Mary's intercession on behalf of
souls desirous of imitating her virtues. In its maturity, how-
ever, it is described as the formation of Jesus Christ in the
A l.EJOINDEK. 305
soul, through the joint agency of the Holy Ghost and Mary.
She watchfully intercedes ; He, in answer to her prayer, puts
forth His highest efficacy in training and nurturing the soul,
and 80 the coni])lete image of her Son is more and more effect-
ually produced within it.
But what wonder is there in all this? If the Holy Ghost
overshadowed Mary with love imspeakable in her little house
at Nazareth on that midnight of the New Creation, what
wonder that the heavenly Dove should also fiy and find a rest-
ing-place in those elect souls in which Mary " has tul-en root,^"
and with which the Catholic Churcli has ever been resplendent ?
For what, after all, is the great work of the sanctitication of the
souls of men, but the Incarnation of Christ in each of them,
by which they are made " flesh of His flesh and bone of His
bone ? " Now, if St. Paul could say to the Galatians : " My
little children, of whom I am in labor again, until Christ be
formed in you ;" and if he could say to the Corinthians that
he had "begotten them in Gospel," and to Philemon that he
had " begotten Onesimus in his bonds," why should a con-
ceited, spiritually mole-eyed Vicar, who never read a page of
his book, cast stones at so holy a servant of God as Montfort, for
saying that Christ is formed in our souls by Mary, who is His
Mother and our Mother ; and that she watches over His growth
in us, and our growth in Him, until we grow " unto the per-
fect man, unto the measure of the age of the fullness of Christ,"
as lovingly and tenderly as she watched over Him, as He
" advanced in wisdom and age and grace before God and men " ?
Will the intelligence of this community stand it, that "educated
English gentlemen " so called, — graduates of Oxford and Cam-
bridge, if you will, — dare undertake to instruct the public by
ignorant criticisms on books they have never read, of whose
doctrines they are profoundly ignorant, and by insulting as-
saults upon a creed whose articles they but ape and mimic in
their attempts to eke out the merest theological existence ?
11. "According to that word, 'The Kingdom of God is
within you,' — in like manner the kingdom of our Blessed Lady
is principally in the interior of a man, that is to say, his soul."
Thus the Yicar after Pusey. He takes a scrap right out of
306 Ipsk, Ipsa, Ipsum.
the middle of a sentence. Here is the extract in full from
Montfort :
"Mary is the Queen of heaven and earth, by grace, as Jesus is
the King of them by nature and by conquest. Now, as the King-
dom of Jesus Christ consists principally in the heart and interior
of a man — according to that word, ' Tlie Kingdom of God is within
you,' — in like manner the Kingdom of our Blessed Lady is princi-
pally in the interior of a man, that is to say, his soul ; and it is
principally in souls that she is more glorified with her son than in
all visible creatui-es, and that we can call her, as the Sauits do, the
Queen of hearts."
These beautiful sentiments have already been fully eluci-
dated, but I give them for the purpose of considering the 07ie
quotation made from the Baccolta by the Yicar in his iirst
letter. This would appear to be so strong as to set all his
" true Catholic " zeal ablaze. In the Vicar's quotation occur
these vs'ords, apropos of Mary's birth : " We pray thee 'vvith all
fervent love, be thou born again in spirit in our souls, through
thy most holy love, .... rekindle in our hearts the fire of thy
love, and bid all virtues blossom there which may cause us to
find more and more favor in thy gracious eyes." The Vicar
says this prayer " attributes to the Virgin an entrance into our
souls ! " [See his third " Stricture " in the closing paragraphs.]
And he further says that " even Newman, honest though he
fain would be, does attempt to ' explain away ' this prayer,
. . . . and wisely overlooks others in the ^accoZto equally bad."
What idiotic impertinence ! Now mark you. Only a few
lines before, with the most barefaced suppression of the truth,
as I will show, he represents Father Newman as deploring
''the devotions and instructions concerning the office and
worship of the Virgin being introduced from Italy into
England."
What will your readers say when I tell them, that the most
beautifully extreme book on devotion to the Blessed Virgin in
use among Catholics throughout the world is the Raccolta, and
that the best translation, from the Italian, is that made by that
genuine Oxford scholar, Father St. John of the Birmingham
Oratory, under Father Newman's own direction. A new edi-
A ItKJOINDER. 807
tion lias just been issued with tlie re-impr'imatur of Leo XIIL,
on whose accession " wiser counsels "' were to prevail, as the
sapient " Priest of the Mission Chapel " informed the world.
Look now at the Vicar's "muddle." Wliy should Father
Newman attempt to " explain away " a prayer which the " Mis-
sion Chapel " critic says " attributes to the A' irgin an entrance
into our souls," when no such prayer exists J lie admits im-
mediately before this, that Father Newman protests against
" that teaching." And so he does ; nay more, he denies the
existence of any such doctrine, for he says : " (Mary's) presence
is above, not on earth ; her office is exte7'nal, not roithin lis.
Her work is not one of ministration toward us ; her power is
indirect. It is her prayers that avail, and her prayers are
effectual by the^a^ of Him who is our all in all." IIow, then,
can Father Newman be said to attempt to "explain away"
teaching which he denies has any existence at all ? Of course,
neither the prayer from the liaccolta nor Montfort teaches any
such doctrine as the entrance or presence of Mary in the soul.
The thought here is allied with what I have already said about
Mary's Divine Maternity and the analogies based upon it. In
the extract un'^' j:' consideration Montfort refers to two things.
On the one hand to the implicit thought of Mary, which he
considers will always be present to the mind of one who faith-
fully practices the devotions he recommends, and endeavors to
imitate her virtues, especially her holy purity. On the otlier
hand, and as if by way of requittal, Mary exercises (so Mont-
fort thinks) a very special intluence, and })ractises a very
si)ecial watchfulness by her intercession, over such a faithful
soul. In a word, the keynote of his doctrine is simply that of
St. Paul himself in the text already quoted : " My little chil-
dren, of whom I am in labor again, until Christ be formed in
you" (Gal. iv. 19). If the Vicar would make this profound
thought a matter for his pious contemi)lation, instead of his
ignorant criticism, his " sermons to men only " on some of the
lost virtues might bear some fruit.
It will be in order here to point out the Vicar's barefaced
suppression of the truth, and to protest against his monstrous
misrepresentation of Father Newman. I refer to the close of
308 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsdm.
the third " Stricture." He there represents Father Newman
as saying, of expressions quoted by Pusey from CathoHc
writers, as follows : " Sentiments such as these I never knew
till I read them in your book, nor, as I think, do the vast
majority of English Catholics know them They seem to
nie like a had dream They defy all the loci theologici.
.... They do hut scare and confuse me."
Now what is it that Father Newman really said in the para-
graph of his letter in reply to Pusey's^/'*^ volume, from which
the Vicar quotes ? He was commenting on certain passages
quoted by Pusey from St. Liguori, from Montfort, from Sala-
zar, and others. Your readers know that Pusey's quotations
were " scraps " picked out, and separated from their context.
Father Newman had never read in their context the passages
cited by Pusey. He therefore said (1) that he put them away
from him " when taken in their literal and absolute sense, as
any Protestant would naturally take them, and as the writers
douhtless did not use themP He said (2) that these ])assage8,
" as they lie in Dr. Pxisey^'s pa<jes,^^ will be understood hy
Englishmen of the nineteenth century as containing certain
propositions which he drew out. He said, however, (3) that
he " knew nothing of the originals "y and (4) that he was not
speaking unfavorably of all of these passages "«« they are
found in their authors^'* because he was confident that they
did not mean what Pusey thought. " I will have nothing to
do with statements, which can only be explained, by being
explained away. I do not, however, speak of these statements,
as they are found in their authors, for I know nothing of the
originals, and cannot believe that they have meant what you
say ; hut I take them a^ they lie in your pages" So far then
was Father Newman from speaking of a " Certain set devoted
to extreme views" as the Vicar scandalously misrepresents
him, that he actually expressed his disbelief in the existence of
any such " Set.^^ Does the Vicar believe Father Newman's
own testimon}'^ as to Father Newman's own meaning, or does
he not ? If he does, how can he be excused from wilful sup-
pression and misrepresentation ? If he does not, what reasons
can he give for his disbelief ? Father Newman expressly said
A Hejoindeb. 309
that he had not examined Pusey's quotations, and "knew
nothing of the originals." Is it prohahle tliat lie would have
expressed severe censure on passages taken from Catholic
M'orks, which he had not even seen in their original shape and
in their context ? Such is not Father Newman's habit — he
leaves that to his maligners and the Littledale brood generally.
LETTER XXVI.
IPSE, IPSA, IPSUM — A REJOINDER.
To the Editor of the Globe :
Sir, — I continue my examination of the Vicar's charges of
" Infidelity," " Apostasy " and " Idolatry."
In my last letter I pointed out that Father Newman, in his
letter to Pusey, contented hhnself with protesting against the
meaning attached by Pusey to the extracts made by him from
several writers. How easily the great Cardinal could have de-
fended these illustrious men from the unfounded calunmies of
Pusey, reiterated by the Vicar, your readers are now aware
from the simple analysis of their language which I have given.
Fifteen years before, however. Father Newman had written
down the philosophy of the cowardly dishonesty of the Vicar's
mode of controversy. Here are his words :
" Protestants judge of the apostles' doctrine by ' texts,' as
they are connnonly called, taken from Scripture, and nothing
more; and they judge of our doctrine, too, by 'texts' taken
from our writings, and nothing more ; picked verses, bits torn
from the context, half-sentences, are the warrant of the Prot-
estant idea of what is Apostolic truth on the one hand, and on
the other, of what is Catholic falsehood. As they have their
chips and fragments of St. Paul and St. John, so have they
their chips and fragments of Suarez and Bellarmine ; and out
of the former they make to themselves their own Christian
religion, and out of the latter our anti-Christian superstition.
They do not ask themselves sincerely, as a matter of fact and
history, What did the apostles teach them ? Nor do they ask
310 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
sincerely, and as a matter of fact, What do Catholics teach now ?
They judge of the apostles and they judge of us hy scraps,
and on these scraps they exercise their private judgment, —
that is, their prejudice, .... and their assumed principles,
.... and the process ends in their bringing forth, out of
their scraps from the apostles, what they call 'Scriptural
religion,' and out of their scraps from our theologians what
they call Popery.
" Catholics, at least, have a lively illustration and evidence
of the absurdity of Protestant private judgment as exercised
on the Apostolic writings, in the visible fact of its absurdity
as exercised on themselves. They, as their forefathers, the first
Christians, are a living body ; they, too, preach, dispute, cate-
chise, converse with innumerable tongues, saying the same
thing as our adversaries confess all over the earth. Well then,
you would think the obvious w^ay was, if they would know
what we really teach, to come and ask us, to talk with us, to
try to enter into our views and to attend to our teaching. Not
at all ; they do not dream of doing so ; they take their ' texts ';
they have got the cut-and-driod specimens from our divines,
which the Protestant tradition hands down from generation to
generation, and, as by the aid of their verses from Scripture,
they think they understand the Gospel better than the lirst
Christians, so by the help of these choice extracts from our
works, they think they understand our doctrine better than we
do ourselves. They will not allow us to explain our own
books. So sure are they of their knowledge, and so superior
to us, that they have no difficulty in setting us right and in
accounting for onr contradicting tliem.
" Thus, Protestants judge us by their 'texts'; and by ' texts '
I do not mean only passages from our writers, but all those
samples of whatever kind, historical, ecclesiastical, biographical,
or political, carefully prepared, improved, and finished off by
successive artists for the occasion, which they think so much
more worthy of credit and reliance as to facts, than us and our
word, who are in the very communion to which those texts
relate. Some good persoTial knowledge of us, and intercourse
with us, not in the way of controversy and criticism, but what
A Rejoinder. 311
is prior — viz., in the way of sincere inquiry in order to ascer-
tain how things really lie — such knowledge and intercourse
would be worth all the conclusions, however elaborate and
subtle, from rumors, false witnessings, suspicions, roman-
tic scenes, morsels of history, morsels of theology, morsels of
our miraculous legends, morsels of our devotional writers,
morsels from our individual members, whether unlearned or
intemperate, which are the text of the traditional Protestant
view against us Yet any one is thought qualiiied to
attack or to instruct a Catholic in matters of his religion : a
country gentleman, a navy captain, a half-pay officer, with time
on his hands, never having seen a Catholic or a Catholic cere-
monial, or a Catholic treatise in his life, is competent b}' means
of one or two periodicals and tracts, and a set of Protestant
extracts against Popery, to teach the Pope his own religion,
and to refute a council."
In these words your readers have as perfect a picture of the
Vicar's " Strictures " as can possibly be drawn — and they will
ask for no better authority than John Henry Newman. In
addition, I have fully illustrated their truth.
12. To return to the Vicars quotations. In the " ISTovena
for the Feast of our Lady's Nativity," referred to in his first
Letter, occur these words : " We hail thee, dear child, and we
humhly toorship Thy most holy body, &c." The italics are
his. So throughout the "■ Strictures," he emphasizes the word
" worship''^ and " idolatroxis worship of the Virgin " as apj)lied
to Catholic devotion to the holy Mother of God. In the open-
ing paragraph of his first "Stricture" he professed to have
"some experience with the tricks of controversialists." His
acts certainly do not belie his words. In the matter now under
consideration he is guilty of one of the most contemptible of
controversial tricks. He must know that by the word " woi*-
ship," his Protestant readers are generally led to understand
adoration^ in which sense he must also know that Catholics
do not worship either the Blessed Virgin, or any other saint.
A great part of the objection to the language of Catholic de-
votion, made by ignorant or dishonest Protestants, arises from
the practice of confining certains words to their conventional
312 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
sense, instead of interpreting them according to the intention
of the writer or speaker ; or, on the other hand, of restricting
to a secondary and technical use those whicli are employed in
a more general sense. Thus there is really no difference, in
fact, between the terms " worship " and " veneration "; yet,
while mere human qualities are popularly considered to war-
rant veneration. Catholics are charged with idolatry who speak
of the Blessed Virgin as an object of worship — a charge the
more impertinent and insulting when we remember that
in the words of the marriage rite, common to Catholics and
Protestants, this word is actually employed in the sense of
"service" or "devotion." The word "adoration," again, has
come to be restricted, like that of " prayer," to the homage
claimed by God only ; though the first according to its etymol-
ogy need mean no more than " invocation," and the second,
though refused to the Saints, is used without scruple in peti-
tions to Parliament or the Legislature. All such words inean
only what they are 'meant to imply. They are to he inter-
■preted hy our intention, and not our intention hy thetn. The
word "worship," then, in its real old English acceptation,
means honor or respect. And so we find it, used by Bishop
Latimer, one of Littledale's "miscreants," as follows: "Take
Saints for inhabitants of heaven, and worshipping of them for
praying to them. I never denied but they might be wor-
shipped., and be our mediators, though not by way of redemp-
tion (for so Christ alone is a whole mediator, both for them
and for us), yet by way of intercession." Do we place magis-
trates and members of the Masonic body, for instance, on a
level with tlip Almighty when we address them as " Worship-
fuVf Do we believe that a supreme and divine honor is
given to the person to whom these words of the marriage ser-
vice are addressed: "TT/^/i my body I thee worship f"* and
do not Protestants read in their own Bible (1 Chronicles xxix.
20) : " and all the congregation blessed the Lord God of their
fathers, and bowed down their heads, and w&rshipped the Lard
and the King f " This may suflice on this point for the in-
struction of candid Protestants who are in danger of being
misled by such tricksters as the Vicar. Catholics " worship "
A Eejoindeb. 313
God alone, in the ordinary Protestant sense of that word, but
many of our writers use it to express that honor and veneration
we pay to the Mother of God and the Saints, because it is a
most serviceable word, for which it is very dithculL to find a
substitute.
Let me add a word for the Vicar's benefit. A few years
' ago England was roused from one end to the other to do its
utmost in honor of Shakespeare, on tlie occasion of the tercen-
tenary of his birthday. A distinguished Oxford professor
delivered an eloquent address, which closed with these words:
" May England never be ashamed to show to the world that
she can love, that she can admire, that she can worsh'q) the
greatest of her poets." Would the Vicar denounce this as
idolatry ? Not at all ; he reserves that epithet for those whose
hearts and affections overflow in meditation upon the sublime
thoughts suggested by Mary's birthday. The simple truth is
that the sensual materialism of the man's thought ])linds him
to the beauty of things invisible and spiritual in the order of
grace. He has no idea of Mary's position in the divine
economy of man's redemption ; and while he would applaud
the orator who worshipped Shakespeare, he has nothing but
insults and curses for us who honor her, "whose being," as
Pusey beautifully writes, "ever lay in God's eternal councils,
who must have been in His divine mind when, in all eternity.
He contemplated the way in which He should unite His
rational creation to Himself, redeeming our fallen race ; from
■ whom He, who should be God and Man, was to derive His
human flesh, and in His sacred childhood to be subject to her."
13. " Perhaps Romanists of these parts are not aware that
the heretical teaching of Cornelius a Lapide of old, concerning
the body and blood of Mary being received with the Body and
Blood of Christ in the Eucharist, has been j^ractically received
hy many Romanists in Europe Newman condemns
it ; but there it is. Leading Eomanists like Faber, Oakeley,
and Cardinal Manning esteem it, at least, a worthy, pious
opinion Where such teaching will lead people God
only knows. It is surely Romanism run mad."
The Vicar here surpasses all his former infamies. From the
314: Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
days of Cain it lias ever been, that the nearer the hater of
the Catholic Church approaches her altars the more intense and
loathsome his hatred becomes. The nearer he conies to infinite
purity, goodness, nobleness, love, the more does his base and
craven nature boil and seethe in its presence. And, it is not a
hatred engendered by the reason of intelligence, but it is the
bitterness of human passion, of a debased and poisoned nature
under the influence of a power beyond the most sublimated
rankness of mere flesh and blood. History repeats itself in the
" Priest of the Mission Church."
I ask your readers to follow me while I expose the iniquity
and ignorance of the Yicar in his handling of Pusey's matter.
A young German ecclesiastic, named Oswald, once went the
extravagant length of maintaining that the body of the Blessed
Virgin is co-present with our Lord's in the Holy Eucharist.
Oswald's book was promptly put on the Index, and the teach-
ing put forth in it condemned by the church as " erroneous,
dangerous, and scandalous." Oswald "laudably submitted
himself" and retracted his words. The instinct of a Catholic
would have anticipated this condemnation. There is not a
word to be said in behalf of so shocking a notion, as that our
Lady's body, or any part of it, is co-])resent in the Eucharist.
It is simply monstrous, and the Catholic Church, the jealous
and sleepless guardian of God's truth, was not slow to so de-
clare it, though, I suppose, very few even of Catholic students
ever heard of it. Yet this is the doctrine which, the Vicar
infamously declares, " has been practically received by many
Romanists in Europe." I know nothing that could do justice
to the iniquitous recklessness of such a loathsome calumny,
short of the scourge of cords so effectually applied by our
Divine Lord to the desecrators of the Temple. Has he any
perso7ial knowledge to justify such a statement ? Of course
not. Does he offer a particle of evidence in support of it i
Not at all. Can he produce any ? Xot a tittle. Where did
he get the materials out of which he manufactured it ? Let
us see.
In i\\e first volume of the Eirenicon, Pusey quoted Oswald's
book as authority for the proposition under consideration. He
A Kejoinder. 315
also said that he himself noticed it in a letter written to Doctor
Jelf about twenty-tive years before, as a " belief, said to exist
among the poorer people of Rome"; but then, to Pusey's
honor, he frankly confesses, in a note, p. 169, that for this
statement he had only the authority of a friend who had been
staying in Rome! This is the miserable evidence on which
even Pusey bases the rubbish of which the Eirenicon is so full.
The important points in his argument he tills up with hearsay
and private reports, which can tell upon the credulous, but
escape the possibility of exposure. Here, however, your
readers have the " whole cloth " out of which the Vicar makes
his infamous calumny, that Oswald's monstrous doctrine " has
been practically received by numy Romanists in Europe."
Compare this assertion with its source in the Eirenicon, and it
will be difficult to dismiss the suspicion that some unclean
spirit must be riding this unfortunate man to death.
But now mark you. It was promptly pointed out to Pusey
that Oswald's doctrine was reprobated and condemned by the
Catholic Church. Thereupon, in the second volume of the
Eirenicon, he pleaded ignorance of the condemnation, apolo-
gized and explained. Here are his words : " I am thankful to
hear that (Oswald's) book has been condemned. Of course,
had I known this, I should not have quoted him. But I think it
hard to be blamed for not knowing ihis, or for not looking in
the Index to ascertain the fact, when I had no ground to
imagine it." About Pusey's blunder and its correction the
honest, truth-loving Yicar says not a word. He is bound,
however, that we shall not have the benefit of it. lie sup-
presses all mention of Oswald, and practicos one of his con-
troversial tricks by attributing Oswald's doctrine to Cornelius
a Lapide, Faber, Oakeley, and Cardinal Manning.
What a muddle! Here, however, he is not entirely to
blame, since knowing nothing about the matter himself, he but
limps along after Pusey, and falls into the ditch with his
master. The fact is, that Pusey confused Oswald's condemned
tenet with another which differs from it in every relevant par-
ticular. Various Catholic writers have held that a certain por-
tion of matter, which once belonged to the Blessed Virgin, now
316 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
belongs, unchanged, to lier Son ; and is therefore present in
tlie Eucharist. For instance, Canon Oakeley says that " all
which was once the Blessed Virgin's is infinitely exalted in the
human nature of our Lord by its union with the Second Per-
son of the Blessed Trinity, and is 7iow no otherwise hers, than
as it was from her that our Lord condescended to take that
nature." And again he says : " In the same sense, surely in
which we say that the blood of our parents and ancestors How
in our veins (those physical changes notwithstanding) and
with the necesscu'y Ihnitatwn expressed above, we may also
say, and truly say, that the blood of the Blessed Virgin was in
her Son from first to last, and is, therefore, in that wondrous
communication of Himself which He makes to us in the
Blessed Eucharist." A Lapide, as quoted by Pusey himself,
says : " That flesh of Christ, hefore it was detached, ivas the
own flesh of the Blessed Virgin." These words the Vicar
suppresses in his quotation from Pusey ; and they ai-e abso-
lutely necessary to the true meaning of a Lapide's words as
quoted. The old trick ! To this opinion Father Faber also
inclines and he cites in its behalf a vision of the great St.
Ignatius. Even that mighty intellect — Suarez, equal to the
whole Lambeth Conference, holds the same opinion. The
Vicar says "Newman condemns it." Another calumny —
Newman does not even so much as allude to it. Of course he
condemns Oswald's doctrine, but the radical distinction between
that and the tenet professed by the writers just quoted is
manifest. Yet even this is no Catholic doctr'ine, though ac-
cording to Aristotelian Physics it is nature's own order. To
me, however, a true Catholic metaphysic of the Incarnation
supplies any defects in " the Philosopher's " physical science,
and argues the truth and beauty of a Lapide's sentiment.
If then there are good speculative grounds for holding this
tenet, the pious inferences drawn by a Lapide are certainly
most apt and fitting, and heartily welcome to an orthodox if
not to a " true Catholic." Now this is not the place for dis-
cussing nice questions of physiology and chemistry, but would
the Vicar be good enough to inform the " Romanists of these
parts " by what authority he pronounces the " pious opinion "
A Rejoindeu. 317
of Oakeley, Fabur, and a Lapido to be "heretical." He can
get no assistance from Pusey liere. While waiting for the
light, let nie assure your readers that these ^STiters are as far
removed from upholding any true co-presence of Mary in the
Blessed Eucharist, as Ritualists are from having any Real
Presence.
14. "Romanism in this diocese," the Vicar thinks, is " w/7/
Loto church indeed." And he expresses his solicitude for us
in these words: "May the cultus of Mary never so develop
here as to make it possible to distinguish the English and
Roman churches, sis they are distinguished in Southern India
and Ceylon, as "Jesus churches" and "Mary churches."
Here again he only repeat? Pusey. Now, I can understand
Catholic churches being called "Mary churches" by some
ignorant extern or Ritualist, who knows nothing about the
presence of the Blessed Sacrament, and who sees a large image
of our Blessed Lady surrounded by eager suppliants, engaged
in prayer and meditation to their inestimable spiritual advan-
tage ; but by what possible indication he could be led to call
an Anglican edifice a " Jesus church " it utterly bewilders one
to conjecture. Is it in an Anglican edifice, then, that he
would see a colossal image of Christ crucified, and a crucifix
placed conspicuously over each of the numerous altars 'i Look
at the disgraceful scene being enacted to-day in England in
what is called the " Reredos case." It is simply a question
whether an image of our Divine Lord on the Cross shall be toler-
ated on the altar or in the sanctuary. The Bishop of London
refused to interfere, and now the Dean and Chapter of St.
Paul's have been compelled to appeal to the Attorney-General.
This is perfectly proper. The Royal Arins or a bust of her
gracious Majesty, the Queen, who is the head of the English
Estabhshment, instead of the Crucifix ! Of course ; and the
first law officer of the State js the proper person to look after
the Sovereign's rights in this regard, and to help the bishop to
decide the question. " Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar "
— and everything " belongs to Caesar " in the English State
Church. Again: At the so-called Reformation, altars were
everywhere converted into communion tables. The very woid
318 Il'SK, Il'SA, Il'SUM.
"altar" is not to be foinul in tliu authorized J?ook of Cuniinon
Prayer, but a " conveiiioiit and decent table" is ])rovided by
the 82nd Canon. In the celebrated ciwes of Lidddl versus
^Vedert(m and Lhldell versus Bml,, the Privy ('(juncll, which
is above the Lambeth Conference, decided that in the Church
of Eii<i;land there was " no lon/^er an altar of sacrifice, but
merely a table at which the conmiunicants were to partake of
tiie Lord's Sui)])er ; that the term altar is never used to de-
scribe it, and there is an express declaration at the end of the
service against the doctrine of transubstantiation, with which
the ideas of an altar and sacrifice are closely connected." In
a word, take out of the " Mission Church," so called, what is
there contrary to '' lawful authority " in the Church of England,
and one nnght as well give the appellation "Jesus Church" to
a Moluunmedau Mosque so far as visible emblems are cou-
cerned.
LETTER XXVII.
IPSE, IPSA, IPSinU— A REJOINDER.
To the Editor of the Globe :
Sir, — I conclude to-day my demolition of the Vicar — his
charges of " Impiety," " Infidelity," " Apostasy " and " Idola-
try "; and also my humble vindication of the position, theolog-
ical and devotional, assigned by the Catholic Church to the
ever-blessed Mother of Jesus in the Christian scheme.
15. "In my copy of the Breviary," says the Vicar, "is a
small picture of the Virgin crowned with thorns."
What a revolting profanation is the meer at the Sorrowful
Mother expressed in these words! I may not dare make any
commentary on it, I beg permission, however, from your
outraged readers, to offer a few reflections.
To expiate the crimes of Saul and his people, and arrest the
famine which they had brought upon the nation, it was de-
creed that seven of his children should be crucified. They
A lilCJUl.NDEU. {JiO
wore ace()r(lin<^ly crucified "upon a hill before the Lord."
Two of tlie victims were the t^uuH of Ilespha. Let us see the
iiinthcr's place at sucli a scene of a^ony and ignoniiuy : " And
Jiospha, the (hiuj^hter of Aja, took haircloth and spread it
under her upon the rock from the l)e<;inning of the harvest till
water dropped ujion them out of heaven ; and suffered neither
the birds to tear them by day nor the beasts by ni<i;ht. And it
was told to David what Kespha had done" (2 Kings xxi. 1(»).
How inexpressibly touching is this picture of maternal affec-
tii)ii— that patient, calm, resigned breast, which endures un-
subdued shame, grief, fatigue, not to speak of the quivering
agony of a mother's heart, witnessing torment in the best-
beloved — all from that very love. Appreliending hi/ the
stdndard of nature, i\\e coimnunion of eye and heart, if not
of word, Avhich took place between Eespha on lier rocky seat
and Armoni on his cross, would the Vicar blaspheme against
any artistic portrayal of the mother's sorrow I Then change
the scene to Calvary, and recall the closing scene of Mary's
Son, crucitied on a hill before the Lord for expiation of others
sins. " There stood by the cross of .Tesns, His mother.'' Let
that great, human-hearted preacher, Dr. Tahnage, describe this
picture :
"O woman, ni your hour of anguish, whom do you want with
you? Mother. Young' man, in your hour of trouble whom do you
Avant to console you? Mother. If tlie mother of Jesus could have
only taken those bleeding feet into her lap! If she might have
taken the dying head on her bosom ! If she might have said to
him : ' It will soon be over, Jesus, it will soon be over, and we will
meet again, and it wnll be all well.' But no; she dared not come
up .so close. They would have struck her back with hammei's.
They would have kicked her down the lull. There can be no allevi-
ation at all. .Tcsus must sutfer, and Mary must look. I sui)pose
she thought of the birth-hour in Bethlehem. I suppose she thought
of that time when, with her boy in her bosom she hastened on in
the darkness in her flight toward Egypt. I suppose she thought of
his boyhood, when he was the joy of her heart. I suppose she
thought of the thousand kindnesses He had done her, not foi-sakmg
her nor forgetting her even in His last moments ; but turning to
John and saying: ' There is mother; take her with you. She is old
now. She cannot help herself. Do for her just as I would have
320 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
done for her if I had lived. Be very tender and gentle with her.
Behold thy Mother.' She thought it all over, and there is no mem-
ory Hke a mother's memoiy, and there is no woe like a mother's
woe."
Would Dr. Talraage, though no " true Catholic," object to
a crown of thorns as litly symbolizing tlie sorrows and trials
of the mother of such a Son? Certainly not. Our Divine
Lord wiispar excellence the "Man of Sorrows," and bore His
Crown of Thorns ; but surely His blessed Mother, in her own
unapproachable degree, was the " Mother of Sorrows " and had
her Crown of Thorns. Would the Vicar be advised to spend
some time during next " Lent " in meditation on the " Stabat
Mater " ? He might then " get up " another " Sermon " with
less disgusting hypocrisy in it than his first contained.
16. "It is, of course, an abuse of (Catholic) teaching,"
admits Pusey, " when any confine their prayers to the Blessed
Virgin." But he adds, — "A certain proportion, ^V //as hee^i
ascertained by those who have inquired, do stop short in her."
I do not like to place on permanent and public record my
views of such pitiable and ridiculous rubbish. Is that "certain
proportion " never then to make the theological acts of faitli,
hope, and charity? Never to prepare for Confession — that
searching of reins and heart, face to face witli God alone ?
Never to receive Holy Connrmnion, and pour out in thanks-
giving such feelings of exuberant exaltation as can accompany
no prayer to the Blessed Mother ? Does this " certain propor-
tion " carefully avoid all visits to the Blessed Sacrament, to the
Forty Hours' Exposition, to the solemnity of Benediction?
"It has been ascertained," forsooth! by whom, when, where,
hoio f I apologize heartily to the humblest intelligence among
my fellow-Catholics for thus noticing this revolting ignorance.
Even Pusey's learning does not save him from frequent mani-
festations of that idiocy, with which the Vicar has made us so
familiar.
17. I now come to the Vicar's complaint, copied verbatim
from Pusey, against Father Faber, for saying that " an im-
mense increase of devotion to Mary," " nothing less than an
i?nmense one" is among the most desirable of eventualities.
A Rejoinder. 321
Before comiiienting on this, let ine put before your readers
the sentiments of the Anglo-ritualist periodical, the Union
lieview. This was the organ of the Unionist Party in the
Anglican church in 1866, led by Pusey and others, of which I
have already spoken. The lieview says :
' ' Jesus chose Mary. What more can be said ? When it is said, n ot
concealed iu learned language, but conveyed in warm and loving
words thi'oughout the length and breadth of England, we shall be
satisfied. The people are being taught to believe in Jesus: they
must learn to link her name with His in their memories, as it is in
the Sacred Scriptures and as it is in the Divine Decrees. In every
heart in which the Cross is set up She, the Mother of the Cruci-
fied, must find a place, and her own place. Then, and not till then
will a reproach be rolled away from England, then and not till
then may we hope for reunion with the rest of Christendom."
O what a rapture ! Is it not simply transpoi'tiiig to liear your
opponent talk in such strains, though in the next breath he
vilifies the saintly Faber, for expressing similar thoughts,
though happily in a very different spirit — "Faber, whose
memory I cherish," says Pusey, " and from whom I thankfully
own that I have learned much."
But to return to my text — Faber's desire for " an immense
increase of devotion to Mary." These words occur in Father
Faber's preface to De Montfort's work, already referred to ;
and they do but say what that profoundly spiritual writer
earnestly inculcates. Now, to a Catholic nothing can be more
intelligible and acceptable than Montfort's and Faber's view.
"Would to God that Protestants would take it to heart in these
days when the world, outside the Catholic Church, has ceased
to believe in the Incarnation, and Naturalism and Agnosticism
flaunt their baimers to every breeze ! The Incarnation casts
off two rays of light : on the one side, the mystery of the Holy
Sacrifice of the Altar ; on the other, the devotion due to the
blessed mother of Jesus. The shepherds of Bethlehem from
the hill-sides, the Magi from the East, came to adore the
newly-born God. "They found the Child with Mary His
mother"; they found Him resting in His mother's ariris, as on
His appointed throne. They anticipated that very form of
322 Ipsk, Ipsa, Ipsum.
worship which Catholics have retained and Protestants re-
jected. It was, indeed, one of Mary's greatnesses and bene-
dictions, that her Divine Son thought fit to manifest Himself
in an age and condition which obliged Him to manifest her
with Him. Thus, it is a right belief about the Divine Mater-
nity of Mary which is the most perfect safeguard and security
of the doctrine of the Incarnation. The whole of the Chris-
tian religion depends upon this doctrine, and the one true and
only sovereign remedy against the decomposition of tin? fun-
damental truth is to be found in the dogma of the Divine
Maternity — " Mary, of whom was born Jesus." Father New-
man says :
" If we look through Europe, we shaJl find, on the whole, that just
those nations and countries have lost their faith in the Divinity of
Christ who have given up devotion to His Mother, and that those
on the other hand, who had been foremost in her honor, have re-
tained their orthodoxy. Contrast, for instance, the Calvinists with
the Greeks, or France with the North of Germany, or the Protestant
and Catholic communions in Ireland In the Catholic Chui-ch
Mary has shown herself, not the rival, but the minister, of her Son ;
she has protected Him, as in His infancy, so m the whole history of
the Religion."
The Union Review concurs, in these words :
"It is also true, and deserves consideration, that there has been
hitherto no marked tendency to heresy on the subject of the Incar-
nation among Roman Catholics, while, where the dignity of the
Blessed Virgin has been underrated heresies have speedily crept in."
The reason is obvious. The Church teaches in a thousand
ways that the most effective and acceptable way of contem-
plating Jesus, is the uniting with His mother in that contem-
plation ; that the thoughts of Jesus and of Mary should be
indissolubly united. By honoring Mary as His Mother one
can never forget that He is Man ; by approaching Him through
her mediation one can never forget that He is God. " Mary
is the marvellous echo of God" beautifully writes Montfort,
" wlio answers only ' God ' when we say ' Mary '; who glorifies
only God, when with St. Elizabeth we call her Blessed." So,
A Rejoinder. 323
too, devotion to her, if worthy of the name, will assuredly
issue in a loving contemplation of her history — of those jnys-
teries (as Cathohes call them), Joyful, Sorrowful, Glorious,
which are commemorated in the Rosjiry. Now, there is no
history of her current in the Church except in closest connec-
tion with her Divine Son. On the details of her life during
those periods when her life was led apart from His — before
the Annunciation and after the Ascension — Scripture preserves
a deep silence ; nor has there been any beyond the most
f paring supplement of Scripture from the stores of tradition.
Her joys, as contemplated by Catholics, were in His Presence;
her sorrows in His Passion ; her exaltation in His Resurrec-
tion and Ascension. To dwell on her mysteries, then, is to
think of Him in the most affecting and impressive way in
which that thought can possibly be presented.
Thanks be to God, we see to-day the fulfilment of the
aspirations of Faber and Montfort. Most remarkable has been
the increase of devotion to the blessed Mother of God during
the last quarter of a century, and its fruit is an increase of the
worship of her Son. But it is in the wants of our own times
that we find the special reason for this devotion. During the
month of October, our illustrious Pontiff, Leo XIII., has di-
rected the recital of the Rosary in every church throughout
the world, and in his Encyclical Letters urges us to recite the
Rosary without ceasing and to never intermjpt that holy cxer-
eisc. In this city, too, there has just been established " The
Association of the Perpetual Rosary," in which it is recited
day and night umnterruptedly^ to render homage to our
Blessed Mother, and to commemorate the Incarnatir ii, Passion,
Resurrection, and Ascension of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus
Christ. It is these scenes in the Divine Drama that the
Rosary recalls and puts before us each time we repeat it. It
is simply " an abridgment or compendium of the Gospel of
Jesus Christ." It compels us, so to speak, to fix our minds on
the various details of the history summed up in the words of
the Evangelist : '■'And the word was made flesh ^ It invites
us to become familiar with the working out of the Divine
plan for man's salvation. It is an easy and approj)riate, yet
324: Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
the sublimest, series of Bible lessons. How far more real and
vivid the impression made by such a pious exercise as this than
by that merely verbal study of the New Testament which pre-
vails outside the Church 1 Contrast the intelligent knowledge
of Our Lord's Life and Death and Resurrection possessed by
a Catholic child who has been taught the Rosary, with that of
a mere Protestant Bible reader, and there will be no doubt
which of the two best appreciates the meaning and the value
of the Gospel story. And so. Bishops, Cardinals, and Popes,
rulers of men and leaders of thought, statesmen, politicians,
generals, and kings tell their beads, and find in the Devotion
of the Rosary a holy and wholesome practice of prayer, well
•suited to raise the thoughts to God and do honor to His
Divine Majesty. The predictions of Montfort and Faber have
been justified. " Ignorance," says Carlyle, " is an awkward,
lumpish wench, not yet gone into vicious courses, nor to be
harshly used ; but ignorance and insolence — these are for cer-
tain an unlovely mother and bastard." That the "mother"
and the " bastard " are of the Vicar's kith and kin is once
more apparent.
I have now met unquaiHngly, and answered fully and defi-
antly, not only every one of the "scraps" gathered by the
Vicar from Pusey, St. Liguori, and the HaccoUa, but, at the
cost of some tediousness, I made a selection from Pusey of
others which I conscientiously believed to be the greatest
stumbling-block to candid Protestants, in the apprehension of
our doctrine on the topic in dispute. The labor lias been to
me one of love and simple delight, and I will feel amply re-
warded if your honest Protestant readers will have learned,
that the religion which most of their teachers and writers in-
veigh against under the name of the Catholic religion, is a re-
ligion which Catholics themselves would detest most cordially
— if such a religion reaUy existed !
I have something more to say about Pusey, whose testimony
has been so damning to the Vicar. Your readers are aware of
the difference between the tone of \}i\Q first and second volumes
of the Eirenicon. But I am able to offer them a piece of inde-
pendent evidence from Pusey, which will serve, for all time,
A Rejoindek. 825
to destroy the value of the Jirst volume as an arsenal for ritual-
istic Vicars in their quixotic attempts to hide their tlie^logical
nakedness. I have three Letters written hy Pusey after the
appearance of the Eirenicon. Two of them are addressed to
the editor of the London WeeJdy Register^ a Catholic paper,
and the third to Dr. AYordsworth. This last contains an ex-
press avowal of that lamentahle ignorance as to the very mean-
ing of the Immaculate Conception with which Father Newman
had charged him. But I am not concerned with this now. I
refer to the first, that of Nov. 22, 1865, in which he expressly
and deliberately retracts the violent and ignorant criticisms of
his first volume, which the Yicar now " trots out " afresh —
suppressing all notice even of the second volume. Your
readers will remember that at this time Pusey with the Union-
ist Party was seeking admission into the Catholic Church — on
terms ! Here are his words :
' ' Let me say that I did not write as a reformer, but on the defen-
sive. It is not for us topr srihe to Italians or Spaniards what they
shall hold, or how they shall express their pious opiniona. All
"which we wish is to have it made certain by authority that we sliall
not, in case of reunion, be obliged to hold to them ourselves. Least
of all did I think of imputing to any of the writers ichom I quoted
that they took from our Lord any of the love which they gave to
His mother. I was intent only on describing the system /
had not the least thought of criticising holy men who held it.''^
These are certainly extraordinary words from the author of
, the Eirenicon, as the Vicar has introduced it to your readers ;
out, nevertheless, they are the sober, second thoughts of the
Vicar's witness to his " wider view of the cultus of Mary," on
which he bases his loathsome charges of " Impiety," " Infidel-
ity," " Apostasy," and " Idolatry " !
Now mark. The very devotions which Pusey denounced in
the Eirenicon are now mildly characterized as the "expres-
sion " of men's " pious opinions." Why, then, may not those
who use the English tongue, as well as Italians and Spaniards,
if God draws them to it, "express their pious opinions" in a
similar shape ? Again. In St. Liguori, in Montfort (whom
Pusey constantly quotes), and in a thousand other like-minded
826 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsiim.
men — next to their personal love of God and of their Saviour
— there was no more conspicuous characteristic of their whole
interior life than their enthusiastic devotion to Mary. Pusey,
in his work, describes this devotion as extravagant, and as tend-
ing to obscure the thought of God • but nov/ he protests in his
letter that he had "no thought of criticising these holy men."
What does the Vicar say? How does Pusey support his
charges ?
Pusey thinks, moreover, that none of these men took from
our Lord any of that love which they gave to His mother. But
if so, their love of Mary must have been to them an unspeak-
able blessing. Surely to love tenderly, and contemplate unre-
mittingly, a spotlessly holy creature, will be admitted by every
religious man to be in itself an immense blessing. Ignorant
Protestants, however, commonly think that this blessing cannot
be obtained without paying for it too high a price ; without
taking from our Lord a large portion of that love which they
give to His mother. Why is it, by the way, that Protestant
preachers and "heated pulpiteers" generally, so persistently
disparage tenderness to the highest and purest creature that
ever came from the hands of God, while so tolerant of creature-
love in a very far more questionable shape ? How transcencl-
ently transcendental becomes the spirituality of some "uxorious
men of God" as they descant on the "idolatrous worship"
paid by Catholics to the lovely Virgin Mother ! Eeally, to
hear tlieir language about us, one would suppose that they ex-
haust the whole tenderness of their hearts on Objects simply
Divine ; that there is among them no love of mother, of wife,
of children, of friends — that their hearts beat with sensible
love for God and for God alone. Out on such damning hy-
pocrisy ! Kow Pusey, at all events, thinks the Protestant ob-
jection chimerical; and he must consider, therefore, that the
love of Mary is an unmixed blessing to " these holy men." In
other words, Pusey thinks that they derive an inappreciable
happiness and blessing from a devotion which his poor parasite
denounces as " Infidelity," " Apostasy," and " Idolatry " ! So
much for Pusey considered as a witness invoked by the Vicar,
and for his evidence against us.
A Rejoin DKK. 327
I now proceed shortly to remark on Pusey's competency as a
witness to the teaching of the CathoHc Church, as evidenced by
the Eirenicon. Tlie Vicar in his sixth letter thus speaks of it :
" Dr. Pusey's Eirenicon, 3 vols., is a perfect storehouse of ac-
curate information on Roman errors, and is specially full on the
cultus of the Virgin. Every lover of Christian truth should
secure a copy." With the third volume we are not concerned in
this discussion. T\\Q first and second alone engage us. The Vicar,
for reasons already pointed out to your readers, suppressed all
reference to Pusey's sentiments expressed in the second, and
took his " wider view " from the first. This has reached the
seventh thousand edition, and is the armory from which such
controversial tricksters as the Vicar borrow their weapons.
Bishop Kingdon got his little story from tlie same source.
Pusey had been brought into active and successful contro-
versy with the school of rationalists and unbelievers in the
Anglican Church ; he had attacked " Colenso's heathenism," as
he calls the doctrine of a bishop of his own church, and he had
grappled ably with the infamies written in " Essays and Re-
views" by beneficed ministers of Anglicanism. It was the
nnhappiness of Pusey's position, however, that he was com-
pelled to join issue with Rationalism in detail rather than on
vrinciple / that he was precluded from assailing it at its start-
ing point — that he could not impugn its first principles with-
out condemning the whole ecclesiastical position of the Anglican
Church. It is more apparent now than when uttered by
Disraeli forty years ago, that for men who must think on such
matters, the issue is between the Catholic Church and infidelity.
Protestantism in all its protean shapes, as an intellectual system
of Christianity, is " played out." The one secret of intellectual
strength is intellectual consistency. Catholics, and they only,
are able consistently to contend against the foe, because they
only have consistently contended against the foe's fundamental
maxims. Pusey had a measure of success because he worked
on Catholic lines and used Catholic principles. For his noble
services to that portion of Catholic truth, which he held in
common with them. Catholic writers have expressed the warm-
est gratitude.
328 Ipse, Ipsa, 1p8[jm.
Now, it has been observed by the learned and philosophic
De Maistre as noteworthy, that so many writers, who have
warred against infidelity with signal power and sncce&i, when
turning their weapons against Rome, have been suddenly
smitten both with feebleness of arm and unskilfulness of aim.
No more singular instance of this can be found than the Jirst
volume of the Eirenicon. Pusey was occupied twelve months
on its composition, and it is a mass of inaccuracies and gross
mistakes. Error and misquotation is the rule, accuracy the
rare exception, while his elaborate notes are one vast congeries
of blunders. He has heaped together from Protestant sources
long-ex])loded accusations against the Catholic Church, and
objections, refuted long ago, against her teaching ; and he has
filled more than half his volume with the effete sophisms of
the Protestant controversialists of the last three centuries, of
which modern criticism has learned to be ashamed. But he
has not been content with this. He has filled up the nooks
and corners with gossip and hearsay, and the interesting com-
munications of his private correspondents ; or, with calumnies,
which are only at large because they preserve their incognito.
1 have counted and marked twelve such argumentative inde-
cencies. He has undertaken to explain our Councils and
Papal Bulls for us, according to principles of interpretation
which we can neither accept nor admit ; and in the course of
his disquisitions has displayed so complete an unacquaintance
with the scholastic Theology from which he professes to quote
as to elicit feelings of simple pity. He has in fact confounded
articles of faith with questions still open to discussion ; has mis-
understood the authors whom he quotes, and made them de-
fend as opinions of their own, what they, in common with the
whole churcii, have condemned as heresy. So far does this
ignorance go, that he has actually quoted, in the instance of
three distinct Doctors, arguments which, according to the
known practice of the great scholastic Theologians, are placed
at the commencement of the articles or chapters for the express
purpose of refutation, as though they were the genuine opin-
ions of the authors themselves. Your readers have already as
much proof of tiiese statements as they, at present, can require.
A Rejoinder. 829
And this is the book that " educated Engh'sh gentlemen " quote
against the benighted " Romanists of these parts"! "Were I
an Anghcan, my daily prayer would be that God might frus-
trate the consummation of Imperial Federation, lest more of
such ^'■gentlemen'''' might be inflicted on the church in this
Province.
Let us see now, if a new witness will contribute something
to comfort the Vicar. Ah ! there is Saint Littledale ! and his
" admirable and honest Plain Reasons, 30th Thousand ! " Now,
I intended to devote a Letter to this ritualistic " Pope," and the
"Plain Reasons, «&;c.," but time does not permit; nor is it
necessary, since I can refer your interested readers to Father
Ryder's "Catholic Controversy," a reply in detail to the
" Pope's " book. As a good Catholic, however, always re-
spects a Pope, I cannot entirely ignore him, though my
remarks will be only supplementary to Father Ryder's book.
I begin, then, by asserting that "Richard Frederick Little-
dale, LL.D., D.C.L.." is an infamous liar and unmitigated hypo-
crite, for eve^^ hypocrite is a liar. Now I will prove it.
In his " Plain Reasons " Littledale denounces the doctrine
and practice of the Invocation of Saints and Angels, and de-
votes pages to prove the Catholic Church " idolatrous " on this
account. Now he is either a hypocrite or an idolater with her.
For, I have before me a ritualistic book entitled : " Devotions
for the Comminiion of Saints," which not only advocates
veneration and invocation — direct invocation— of the Blessed
Virgin, and of the Saints and Angels, but which contains
prayers and exercises for putting this doctrine into practice.
Littledale has written u preface to this work. In it he replies
to objections to the doctrine of the Invocation of Saints, and,
while advocating the, practice, declares that although it is not
abaoUitely binding, yet if a person choose to neglect it he
thereby "fails to avail himself of a privilege" (i)age xii).
Here is a short list of the contents of his new book.
First there are " Vigils or wakes of the departed," taken, we
are told, " from the old service books of English use," a " use "
existing, by the way, when the " Romish doctrine of Purga-
tory " (39 articles) was in full sway. Besides several prayers
330 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipslm.
and litanies for the " faithful departed " we also have — what
do you think ? " The Rosary for the faithful departed ! "
(page 104). Thei'e are also exercises for the 2l8t of Novem-
ber, which day we are told is observed " in honor of our Lady's
being presented in the Temple," (page 167), and the recitation
of the Five Joyful Mysteries of the liosary of the Blessed
Virgin Mary is recommended as a pious method of ohserv-
ijuj the feast. One of the " Plain Reasons against joining the
Church of Rome" is the use of the Rosary — an idolatrous
custom to be repudiated by all " true Catholics." It appears,
then, that the Rosary is " idolatrous" only when it is necessary
to concoct " Reasons " against persons becoming Catholics, but
for Ritualists, who desire to go in for '' all Roman doctrine "
without submitting to the Church which alone teaches it, it is a
" pious and edifying devotion." Besides the Rosary there are
litanies and prayers addressed directly to the Blessed Virgin,
with the " pray for us," as in the Catholic Church. Then fol-
low other litanies and prayers addressed to different saints and
angels, invoking their aid and intercession, in language similar
to that of our books of devotion.
Then again, compare the following language used with re-
spect to the Blessed Virgin in ''Devotions for the Comnmnion
of Saints " with the charges brought against us by the Vicar,
and by Littledale in " Plain Reasons," of " idolatry," " ex-
travagant expressions," " impious utterances," etc., etc .
"Hail and rejoice, most Blessed, most pure, and most hon-
orable Virgin Mary! O most illustrious Star of the Sea! Who
shinest more brightly than all others over the darkness of tliis world.
.... Behold I praise and salute Thee, O most Holy Virgin, mother
of my Lord " (page 195).
According to Littledale's "Devotions, etc.," the Blessed
Virgin is a dispenser of grace — hardly in accord with " Plain
Reasons." Read :
"Hail full of Grace! Let thy charity overflow, then, upon us,
for wherefore art thou full, if not to dispense of thy fullness !
Let thy fountains be dispersed abroad; even thy prayers for us
exiles in this vale of tears " (page 197).
A Rejoindeu. 881
Again :
"O most holy Virgin, who is able to measure the fullness of
grace whicli thou hast above all the saints ? They were little rivers;
but thou, according to thy name, art full like the sea" (page 205).
Once more, the following prayer to our Lady scarcely bar-
monizes with the views ex])re88ed in " Plain Ileasons ":
"And I also, O Lady, praise, bless, and glorify thee, and rejoice '
that thou art praised, blessed, and glorified by all genemtions of
faithful Christians! And I beseech thee remember me in thy
prayers, that I may obtain all the blessings which thy Son's Incar-
nation purchased for me" (page 207).
Or again the following :
V
"Holy and Immaculate Virginity ! with what praises to address
thee 1 know not " (page 247).
But I must stop. There is Littledale — the ritualistic Dr.
Jekyll and the anti-Catholic Mr. Hyde, the liar and the hypo-
crite. The picture is perfect. I wish I had time to expand
it, but have I not proved my case ? And this is the man who
is permitted to speak, even in the pages of the EncyclopoRdia
Britannico, against the Catholic Church and her religious
Orders. This is the hmiest man wlio charges the Catholic
Church with "idolatry" and " corrxiption " because lier chil-
dren practice the very doctrine which he, as an Anglican
Minister, does liis best to promote among the members of his
own church. This is the Littledalean morality — and not
" adapted " from St. Liguori either, the very spawn of whicli
has rei ched even to this city. It comes simply to this : An-
glicans can go to any extremes in Catholic practices, but if
they seem disposed to waver in their allegiance to Anglican-
ism and its teachings, they must be taught that these same
doctrines, however good when held by Anglo-Ritualists, are to
be regarded in the Catholic Church, their true liome, as " Im-
pious," "Infidel," "Idolatrous." This is the plan which
Littledale and his satellites adopt the world over, to prevent, if
possible, Ritualists from becoming Catholics.
832 Ii'rtE, Ipsa, Ii'sim.
Now, there are, perhaps, few spectacles more calculated to
draw tears from augels and mockery from devils, than that of
good men led astray in pursuit of a shadow, whilst the living
reality is there present before them, if they would but open
their eyes to see it. To distract virtuous souls from a real
good by its false semblance, is no new artifice of man's great
enemy ; but it would be difficult to lind a more lamentable in-
stance of it, than Ritualism affords. Having catalogued to his
own satisfaction, in his Jlrst Letter, the "enormities" of the
Catholic Church, the Vicar appeals to me and to my fellow-
Catholics in these words :
"Surely it is the duty of all lovers of "the truth as it is in Jesus,"
i.e., all true Catholic Christians, to come out of a Church which
puts its imprimatur upon such idolatrous worship as this, and it ill
becomes one who accepts such exli-avagauces to chide those who,
for fear of them, fall short of their duty."
Thus far had he got, when a loud burst of laughter of his
own conscience at itself rang out through his soul. This con-
vulsion of irony sent cold shivers through all his nerves, and
reduced him to such a state of syncojje, that his words of invi-
tation to join the " Mission Church," if uttered, were drowned
in the din and have not reached us. Let the will stand for the
deed. I will take up the broken chord. Ours, in addressing
the Yicar and his friends, shall be those words of St. Cyprian,
and I honestly and fearlessly utter them :
"Think not that you must maintain the Gospel of Christ while
you separate youi-selves from the liock of Christ, and from its
peace and concord And since our unity of soul and heart
may in no wise be broken ; and because we cannot leave the Church
and come over to you, we invite and beseech you with all possible
entreaty, to return to Mother Church and to a brotherhood of com-
munion with us."
It is one of the last efforts of the enemy of souls, when lie
sees devout and earnest persons casting a wistful look Home-
wards, to distract them and turn aside their half-formed re-
solves, by unpractical schemes, delusions, and snares. Human
responsibihty is always independent of circumstances — at least
A RE.JOINDEK. 888
before God. Rev. Mark Pattison missed the stage-coach on
the morning when he was to be received into tlie Catholic
Churcli with Newman, and he swung oflE into — ? The stream
of time flows quickly, though insensibly. The morning grows
into mid-day ; and lo ! it is evening and the shadows of nigiit
gather round. If you have doubts about your present position
— doubts unsatisfied ; doubts smothered or laid aside ; and you
do nothing — and the end comes ; how will you stand " at the
great assize " ? Meanwhile, by God's mercy, you are still alive.
You may still have real peace through the one Ti-uth, for —
The Spirit of the Truth, and the Catliolic Roman church, tlie
Bride of Christ, say to you, Come. And he who Ustens to the call
and is converted, let him cany on the invitation, and say to
others, Come. And let him that thirsteth after truth and peace
and grace. Come. And whoever has but the honest will, let him
receive the celestial stream, which flows ever from the Seven Sacra-
ments of Life. It shall cost him nothing ; for Christ Jesus has pur-
chased these mercies for all by His Pi*ecious Blood.
" Et Spiritus, et Sponsa, dicunt,
Veni:
Et qui accedit, dicat
Veni:
Et qui sitiat.
Veniat :
Et qui vult, accipiat aquam vitse gratis."
Apoc. xxii. 17.
I will conclude in my next with some critico-biblical remarks
on Ijpm^ " for the benefit of Biblical students."
LETTER XXVIII.
IPSE, IPSA, IPBUM — A EEJOINDEB.
To the Editor of the Globe :
Sir, — When discussing the academic aspect of our question,
I disclaimed any intention of investigating and weighing the
critical value of the reading Ipsa. My object then was to
334 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
prove that in Latin (of which Bisliop Kingdon spoke), the
reading of Genesis iii. 15 was Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum, and not
Ipse, Ipsa, simply. Again, I was intent on making very clear
to your readers that neither what the Yicar calls the " cultus
of the Virgin,'' nor the doctrine of the Innnaculate Concej>
tion owes anything whatever to the last clause of the Prot-
evangel ; and much less did they owe anything to the present
reading of the Yulgate. On these points I have left not a
shadow of reason for the assertions made hy my opponents,
and I commend what I have written to the attention of the
next Lambeth Conference.
I will now address myself to a brief exposition of the critical
argument in favor of Ipsa, based upon data supplied by
Hebrew, Arabic, Chaldaie, Greek, and Latin authority.
To refresh the memory of your readers, and to enable them
to fully estimate the grossness of Bishop Kingdon's blunder,
I will here give the Globe's report of his words as follows :
" Sometimes the substitution of one letter for another made a
vast difference, and as an illustration of this (the Bishop) re-
ferred to the words Ipse and Ipsa, the latter word in an im-
portant passage in the Douay Bible being the foundation of
the dogma of the Immaculate Conception." The ^^ Douay
Bible," remember ! But let us charitably suppose that this
was a lapsus linguae, and that the Bishop meant the Yulgate.
Even then, however, the statement displays disgraceful igno-
rance or a reckless disregard of truth ; because he would lead
his hearers to imagine that the reading fysa was only to be
found in the Latin Version or Versions, and it was only in this
way that he could work up his "anecdote" about a ''mis-
print." Let us, therefore, examine the fountain-heads.
And first as to the Hebrew, the original par excellence.
Now there are eight Hebrew MSS. in favor of Ipsa, three of
which are absolutely certain, and five doubtful — " Tria hebra-
ica certo, (luinqiie dubie," says Patrizi. In this connection I
would draw attention to the great critical principle, first laid
down by Bengel, but not fully established and acted upon till
the publication of Griesbach's Recensions, that the testimonies
in favor of a various reading have not an individual force
A Rejoinder. 335
independent of the recension or family to which they belong ;
and that a reading must be decided, not by the number of dis-
tinct authorities, but by the weujht of the recension which con-
tains it.
My next Hebrew authority is the famous Hebrew inter-
lineary edition of the Bible, pubHshed in 1572 by the learned
Plantiu, under the inspection of Boderianus. This has Ipsa,
or rather the Hebrew equivalent — IH. Plantin also published
the great Polyglot Bible of Aleala, containing the Hebrew,
t'haldaic, Greek, and Latin texts. This work was done under
the direction of Arias Montanus, whose own edition of the
Royal Bible, in Latin, has fysmn, as I have already pointed
out. Again, besides this interlineary edition, there are tivo
other editions of the Hebrew Bible published at Venice in
1776, both of which have Ipsa.
I now ask your readers' attention to the testimony of the
illustrious Jewish scholar, Maimonides, A.D. 1135-1*204. The
Encyc. Britannica says of him : "He was the greatci^t theolo-
gian and philosopher the Jews ever produced, and one of the
greatest the world has seen to this day." His greatest and
most learned work is entitled the Guide of the Perplexed, in
Hebrew Moreh Nelmkhim. This was written in Arabic and
translated into Hebrew by himself. In this work Maimonides
reads the Hebrew, Ili — Ipsa, or, what is the same thing. Ilia.
The book is translated into Latin by Buxtorf, the great German
Hebraist, and the most enunent Oriental scholar of his day. I
give the words from Buxtorf (P. IL, Cap. XXX.) as follows:
" Sed mirandum magis est quod serpens cum Eva conjungatur,
lioc est, semen illius cum hujus senn"ne, ca])ut et calcaneus
qnod ILLA (Eva) vincat ipsum (serpentem) in capite, et ille
(serpens) vincat ipsam in calcaneo." To this the "Editio Jus-
tinianaeo" adds these words: " Hoc est quod dictum est. Ipsa
conteret caput tuum — This is what is said — She shall crush
thy headP Your readers will notice that Maimonides, being
a Jew, does not refer the Woman's seed to Christ, but to Eve.
Christians, however, who by reason of the fulfilment of tho
prophecy in Christ, now know that He is the seed of tho
"Woman who is to crush the serpent's head, refer it to Him.
336 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
But this does not affect the testimony of Maimonides to the
feminine reading iu this place, and I do not know where to
look for higher authority on the Hebrew text. I must not
argue the matter, however, since my present purpose is only to
give your readers a strictly impartial account of facts in this
matter just as I find them. The Vicar, however, makes uu
admission, based on Ajrpleton's Cyclopedia, Vol. II., 610,
which supports my opinion on the authority of Maimonides.
He says : " A most careful recension of the Hebrew text was
made in the Middle Ages by eminent Jewish scholars, v/ith the
aid of the largest possible collection of MSS., who in their
writings speak of famous copies now lost whose use they en-
joyed." Now Maimonides was living in the midst of these
Jewish scholars, he was the most eminent among them, and he
adopts Ipsa as the true Hebrew reading. Surely the inference
to be drawn is strongly in its favor.
Before passing to the Arabic authorities, I submit a few
other considerations on the Hebrew text. We have very little
knowledge of the primitive text, and no MSS. older than the
ninth century ; while of those we have very few can be deemed
older than the twelfth century. Since the days of Kennicott
and De Rossi, modern research has discovered various MSS.
beyond the limits of Europe, and Patrizi's statement, already
quoted, proves this. Now, we know that in the Hebrew as
primitively written, the masculine form of the pronoun was
used of the feminine also, and that it would represent alike
Ipse or Ipsa; so that from the simple form no argument
could be drawn as to its gender. This, Pusey himself con-
fesses, is " one of the observed archaisms of the Pentateuch ";
and indeed it is a favorite argument among scholars for the
superior antiquity of this part of the Old Testament. Fortu-
nately, I am able here to refer your readers to a work, easily
accessible, in absolute proof of this proposition. In the En-
eye. Britannica, Vol. XL, p. 597, Prof. Robertson Smith,
now of Oxford, shows that the old Hebrew orthography was
TIu and Hi, Ipse and Ipsa, indifferently. He gives the
Hebrew characters with and without the modern vowel-points.
Not until about the sixth century was this changed. Then the
A Rejoinder. 337
Masorete doctors (from Masora^ tradition), Jewish grammari-
ans, introduced their famous thirteen vowel-points so-called,
to mark the pronunciation only for the puhlic readers of the
sacred volume, Hebrew having become a dead language. But
to-day the Jews in their synagogues use Bibles without points
(though I have not been able to verify by personal inspection
this statement of a learned writer), and from these, therefore,
the gender of the pronoun camiot be determined. ()p])()nents
of this view would point out that since the verb contcret is
masculine in Hebrew, the pronoun must bo masculine. To
this I have replied in my liesuine by showing that it is a com-
mon thing in the Hebrew Scriptures to join ]>ronouns and
verbs of the masculine gender with nouns of the feminine, and
I need not repeat the references in proof. On this very inter-
esting and important point in the critical argument, I beg to
refer yoiir curious readers to Ewald's Hebrew grammar, J>ook
II., § 184; Gesenius' Heb. Gram., Cap. I., § 33; but especially
to Eoorda's Heb. Gram., Book III., § 88, where the Hebrew
characters are given, with and without vowel-points, and the
matter fully discussed. I also refer them to Cardinal Patrizi's
work, entitled, "De Feminini Generis Enallage in Linguis
Seiniticis Usitata " — " The Enallage of the Feminine Gender
occurring in the Semitic Languages," with his thirty-five
canons on the same.
There are tico Arabic editions of the Bible having Ipsa, one
published in 1671, the other in 1752.
There is one MSS. copy of the Chaldaic version that has
Ipsa.
So much for Semitic authority in support of the unfor-
tunate " misprint,'' and I will now examine Greek sources.
I liave already spoken of the splendid Hexapla (six-fold)
Bible of the great Origen. It was six-columned, and con-
tained the Hebrew text in Hebrew characters, and the same
text in Greek letters, with the versions of Aquila, Theodotion,
Symmachus, and the Church version of the Scptuagint. Its
object was to exhibit the discrepancies between them, and to
correct the last when necessary. Nothing now remains of this
monumental work but fragments. Fortunately, lilontfaucon
338 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
has gathered these into two volumes. In Voh I., p. 18, I find
the Greek auie sou teiresei Kephalen^ that is Ipsa conteret
caput tuum. He gives the niascuhne '"'■ Autos- Ipse'''' as well ;
but of '''' Ante- Ipsa'''' he sajs : " Ita MSS. quidani, ethaec vide-
tur f uisse, lectio veteris eujusdam interpretis, eu jus nomen tace-
tur, et quern sequitur Vulgatus interpres, — so some MSS. and
this appears to have been the reading of some old translator,
whose name we know not, and whom the translator ot the
Vulgate follows." And so we have the authority of Origen
(A.D. 186) for Ipsa^ supported by Montfaucon from Greek
MSS.
To those let me add the Latin translator of St. John Chrys-
ostom, and the Latin translator of Josephus, who was Epipha-
nius the Scholastic, A.D. 510. I have before me the Greek
of Josephus, the Latin rendition, with the Latin comment
thereon of Havercamp, the best editor of Josephus. But my
limits permit no comment.
I now pass to the Latin version. The existence of a Latin
version which was made at latest as early as A.D. 150 is cer-
tain. It is considered by competent critics to be probable that
there were two such versions, one Italian, called the Vetus
Itala — the old Itala ; the other African. Time does not per-
mit me fully to discuss the vexed question — which of these has
claims to the greater authority, which can justly be considered
the true representative of the original version ? My present
purpose does not require anything so elaborate. Speaking of
the Itala St. Augustine says :
" But among the translations themselves the Itala is to be
preferred to all others ; for it is more rigorously observant of
words and has also greater perspicuity — in ipsis autem inter-
pretationibus Itala ceteris proeferatur ; nam est verhorum ien-
acior, cum perspicuitate sentential."
On this passage great Biblical and theological writers have
based an almost universally received hypothesis that there ex-
isted in the early Western Church one authentic version called
the Vetus Itala — the Old Itala, the first Latin translation of
the Scrijitures, and that it was used by the early African
Church, which thus received its Bible as it did its faith, from
A Rejoindek. 339
Rome, the fountain of Christianity. Acting \;pon tliis sup-
jiosed certainty three erudite writers — Nobilius, Bianchini, and
Sabbatier — have labored to reconstruct this version indiffer-
ently from the quotations of all the Fathers, without regard to
country. Now what do these great writers say about l2)sa f
I have delayed this Letter in the hope to receive from Europe
■ verified extracts from Nobilius and Bianchini, but they have
not come to hand. I am able, however, to speak of Sabbatier,
who says that the Old Itala, the first Latin translation has Ipsa.
May we not surely conclude, that Nobilius and Bianchini say
the same thing, since they go over the same ground ? See
Sabbatier, Blh. Sac. Lat. Vers., Ant. ad Gen. iii. 15 ; T. 1, p.
J 9.' If this be the true state of the case. Ipsa is the oldest
reading, and this is confirmed by the fact that it spread with
lightning rapidity all over Europe, in a time when there were
no railroads or steamboats to bridge over the distance between
Avidely separated peoples. Consider, too, the authority of these
two gigantic minds — St. Ambrose and St. Augustine. The
former was consecrated Bishop in A.D. 374. lie always uses
l2)sa, and it must therefore have been in the Codex which he
used, and which he had always by him. How did the reading
get there ? If it had got in ever so surreptitiously, would it
' Since writing the above I have been able to examine the works
themselves of Bianchuii and Nobilius. Bianchini's book — Vindi-
cice Canonicariim Scripturarwn — has uotlung on our text. Fj-oiii
this as from his later work — Evangeliorum quadruplex—he ap-
pears to have devoted his attention more especially to the New Tes-
tament. The first attempt to reconstruct the Old Italic Vei-sion was
made by Flaminius Nobilius. He gathered up all the quotaticms
from this translation wliich he could find in the writings of the
Fathers. The missing passages he supplied by a translation of the
Greek after the Vatican MSS. Tliis has Autos-Ipse in oiu* text,
and Nobilius therefore gives Ipse. His work, however, is necessa-
rily incomplete. It was printed at Rome in 1588 — more than a cen-
tury before the period when the discovery of MSS. began to excite
scholars. Sabbatier, a Benedictine monk of the celebrated Congre-
gation of St. Maur, published his magnificent work in 1743. He
collected all the fragments which had come to light since the time
of Nobilius, and his volumes remain to-day the basis of aU the
researches since made upon the subject.
840 IrsK, Ipsa, IrsuM.
Lave been able to escape tbe careful study of this vigilant
Bishop ? Could lie have been free from suspicion about its
correctness? Could he have received an innovation so singu-
lar, and not only have adopted it with an improbable credulity,
but have done so without informing his theological readers
(who would naturally be surprised at this innovation on the
old reading), what had induced him to admit the alteration ?
Or are we to suppose that he never had the smallest suspicion
of any other reading? This supposes that he, a Bishop and
learned Doctor of the Church, was so contented with his one
copy of the sacred text, as never to have even collated it with
all the older manuscripts, Latin and Greek, in which the mas-
culine pronoun may have been retained. Yet surely this is
simply incredible.
Again, how docs it come to pass, that the erudite St. Augus-
tine always uses Ipsa, without dropping a hint about the read-
ing being new or doubtful I When at Milan, immediately
after his conversion, and when he frequented the school of
Ambrose, he mnst surely have consulted the Codices there;
and also afterwards at Rome where he wrote and published his
Soliloquies and other works. On his return to Africa, where
he became Bishop, he still adhered to the Old Itala. And,
moreover, the question of Latin versions generally seems to
have attracted his particular attention, for he says : " The skill
of those who desire to know the divine Scriptures must be on
the watch, that MSS. not emended may give place to such as
are emended." It is plain from his writings that he had great
love for the works of St. Cyprian, an African Father who, with
Tertullian, also an African, uses Ipse. Yet notwithstanding
all this, Augustine never makes any explanation, any apology,
suggests no doubt, but uses what is to-day our received text.
But more. Writing in Africa, and in the face of the mascu-
line reading in the pages of St. Cyprian and Tertullian open
before him, the great Bishop expressly and emphatically de-
clares, in words already quoted : " Among the translations, the
Itala is to be preferred to all others, for it is more rigorously
observant of words {tenacio)' ve?'honwi, more closely accnrate),
and has also greater perspicuity," To break the weight of St.
A Rejoinder. 841
Augustine's autliority, the Vicar quotes from Canon Westcott
tliese words : " He (St. Augustine) was not endowed with crit-
ical sagacity or historical learning, and had very little knowl-
edge of Greek." This is characteristic of a man who can swal-
low whole the calumnies of a Littledale, and is so lost to all
sense of self-respect as to offer to your intelligent readers the
anonymous scribbiings of "Janus" and " Quirinus" as author-
ities in an argument. Westcott, however, only rejjeats the
nonsense of the elder Rosenmuller, whose language about St.
Augustine is worthy of a writer who gives the iirst rank,
among Christian commentators, to the infamous Pelagius and
Julian !
But a vindicator of St. Augustine, in this particular, against
"Westcott and all " smaller fiy," has not been wanting. A
learned Protestant writer. Dr. Henry Clausen, in a work en-
titled " Aurelius Augustinus Hipponensis Sacrce Scripturai lu-
terpres," published at Copenhagen, has placed the merits of
the great Bishop, as a Biblical scholar, in a very dilfcrent light.
He proves that he was sufficiently acquainted with Gi'cek to
make a useful application of it in his Commentaries ; that he
has laid down clearly all those principles "which are the stam-
ina apd first elements of chaste and sound criticism "; that he
has both diffusely given and condensed all the best maxims of
hermeneutics ; that by the good use of these, joined to his nat-
ural sagacity and the greatness and subtlety of his genius, he
has been most happy in elucidating the obscurities of Script-
ure; in confuting, by accurate research, the erroneous inter-
pretations of others; and that he has frequently removed diffi-
culties by acutely penetrating the views of the inspired writers,
and adducing parallel texts. When the Vicar has again "six
weeks" to devote to the Fathers, I would recommend to him
the study of the Saint's work ^'■Against Faustns,'''' where he
will find critical rules for deciding among confiicting " various
readings." The " yard stick " is gone out of use. St. Augus-
tine's order is, first, to consult MSS. containing a more true or
gemune text ; secondly, to weigh the number ; thirdly, to ex-
amine the antiquity of the testimonies ; and fourthly, if the
point still remains undecided, to recur to the originals. Now,
342 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipslm.
as St. Augustine always practiced what lie preached, your read-
ers will easily believe that by such investigation he reached the
conclusion that Jpsa was the true reading of Genesis iii. 15.
But we do not find it recorded that he ever exhibited any dia-
gram to his people, by which he sought to impress upon their
minds the " terrible consequences " arising from the " mis-
print " Ipse, which St, Cyprian had used. Evidently St. Au-
gustine taught what his fellow-Catholics teach to-day, that it
makes not a particle of doctrinal difference whether Ipse, Ipsa,
or Ipsum be read, since he found all three in the Hebrew,
Latin, and Greek MSS. about him. Your readers will find an
interesting discussion on the Old Itala and African versions
among Cardinal Wiseman's essays. This great linguist argues
for the African origin of the first Latin translation, and his
theory is heartily adopted by the learned Anglican canons,
Westcott and Ilort, and others. But, father Gams, a Bene-
dictine monk, has simply annihilated the arguments and con-
clusions of the Cardinal and his followers.
I now proceed to fulfill a promise made some time ago. In
his fifth letter the Vicar said :
" I am credibly infonned that no instance is to be found in any-
Ecclesiastical writer of even the corrupt reading Ipsa beings, inter-
preted of the Blessed Virgin till St. Bernard's time (12th century)."
Here we have Oxford scholarship at its high-water mark, —
the whole contingent "trotted out" to back up such brazenly
diso-raceful ignorance. By what blind fatuity are such people
led to attack the Catholic Church ! Let me once more instruct
those "educated English gentlemen."
What will your readers say when I tell them that I now
have before me the Greek and the Latin of twenty-eight
ecclesiastical writers who interpret Ipsa of the Blessed Virgin,
beginning with St. Ephrem (A.D. 362) and ending with St.
Bernard, besides others later than St. Bernard. To save my
now limited space I will give but a few. The Vicar and his
"lejarned friends" can have the rest — mi demayid. I hold
myself ready to accommodate them.
To commence with St. Ephrem. Addressing the Blessed
A Rejoindek. 343
Virgin, he says :" Salve paridisus deliciarum Salve pura
quae draconis neqiiisslml caput contrivisti et en abi/ssu//i j)7'o-
jecistivinouUsconatnctum — lluil, Paradise of delights
Hail, thou pure one who crushed the head of the most wicked
dragon and hurled him bound iu chains into the abyss." I
will make the quotations as short as possible.
Omitting St. Proclus and Tarasius, both of Constantinople,
and Chrysippus of Jerusalem, I give one from Pusey's second
volume, which the Vicar either did not see or suppressed.
Ilesychius of Jerusalem, writes :
" ' Lo a Virgin shall conoaive and bear a Son, and they shall call
His Name Emmanuel.' ' Lo, a Virgin ! ' What Virgin? She who
is the chosen of women, the elect of Virgins, tlie excellent orna-
ment of our race, the boast of our day, who freed Eve from shame
and Adam from threat, xvho cut off the boast of the dragon, when
the smoke of desire and the word of soft pleasure hurt her not."
Prudentius writes :
Hoc odium vetus illud erat.
Hoc erat aspidis atque hominis
Digladiabile discidium,
Quod modo cernua femineis
Vipera proteritur pedibiis.
Translated : ' ' Hence came the enmity of old between the serpents
and man, that inextinguisliable feud— f^a^ now the Viper pros-
trate be^ieath the wr lan^sfeet lies crushed and trampled on."
I have given this with another stanza in my liesfume. Your
readers will remember that the Vicar, not being able to meet
it, adopted the ritualistic tactics and cried out — " A forgery ! "
He promised, however, to consult "friends in England" about
it. I do hope they can help him out ! Prudentius was a
Spaniard by birth, and died A.D. 405.
My next authority is Claudius Marius Victor, whom Sidonius
calls a " most illustrious and learned man." He was a native
of Marseilles, and flourished about A.D. 426. He wrote a
Commentary on the Book of Genesis in verse, in which he in-
troduces our text after this manner :
344 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsdm.
" Pedibxis repes et poctore prono,
Teque tuo Mulier perimet cumsemine, cujua
Callidus extremis tantum insidiabere plantis
Ut trepidana etiam capiti vestigia figat."
Here the Almighty addressee tbe serpent :
"Thou shalt crawl on thy pi'ostrate breast, and the woman for
•whose heel thou shalt lie in wait with so much cunning, will crush
thee together with thy seed, so as even with triumphant eagerness
to plant her feet upon thy head."
These two writers well illustrate the facts which I have
given about Ipsa. They prove that the fe)ni7iine reading was
the authorized and popular reading, since it appears as a matter
of course in the religious works and even poetry of parts of
the world so distant from each other as Milan, Africa, Spain,
and France. And all this in days prior to steam and electric-
ity. Moreover, St. Prudentius and Victor were both laymen,
and would be sure to adopt the popular version ; and I have
even a more forcible quotation from Prudentius. Wbo can
believe, in presence of these facts, that the reading crept for
the first time into the Latin versions either in the days of St.
Ambrose or St. Augustine, as Pusey and his counterfeits
ignorantly assert?
My space is contracting, but I am sure your readers will
thank me for my next quotation. It is taken from St. Avitus,
Bishop of Vicnne, the most distinguished among all the Chris-
tian poets from the sixth to the eighth century. He became
Bishop A.D. 490, dying in 525. His six poems are in hexam-
eter verse. They are : " The Creation," (De Initio Mundi) ;
" Original Sin," (De Originali Peccato) ; " The Judgment of
God," (De Sententia Dei); "The Deluge," (De Diluvio
Mundi) ; " The Passage of the Eed Sea," (De Transitu Maris
Rubri) ; and, " In Praise of Virginity," (De Consolatoria
Laude Castitatis), etc., addressed to his sister. The first three
constitute what is called the " Paradise Lost " of St. Avitus.
They were published in the sixteenth century, and from them
Milton borrowed for his work. Guizot writes of them as fol-
lows:
* A Rejoindkr. 345
"On pourrait I'appeler le Paradia Perdu. Ce n'est point par lo
sujet et le noni seuls que cet ouvrage rapelle celui de Milton ; les
ressemblances 8ont frappwitea dans quelques parties de la concep-
tion generals et dans quelques-uns des plus iniportants details."
And he often gives the palm to St, Avitns. See Guizot's
llistoire de la Clmluation en France ^ Guclieval: De sancti
Aviti VienncB esjjiscoj)i openhus, These (1863).'
The Vicar may desire to consult his " friends in England "
— the poems may be " forgeries " 1 Kome cannot be trusted,
jou know.
I quote from " The Judgment of God," the Creator's words
to the serpent :
Praecipue in felix mulier, cum prole futura,
Tecum inimicitias otlio constante i-eixinet,
Seminibusqe tuis ejus cum semine bellum
Perpetuum, sed dissimilis Victoria, nam qui
Anibos una opera vicisti, subdole Serpens,
Olim erit ut sexum muliebreni proims adores,
Cujica tu quanqam pavidae insidiabere calci,
Conteret una caput tandem tibi femina victrix,
Naacendunique etiam tali de stipite germen.
' Since the above was written, the extent of Milton's debt to St.
Avitus has been made apparent by a learned Protestant writer in
the Atlantic Monthly, January, 1890, in the article "A Precursor
of Milton." It is exceedingly interesting to mark how faithfully
the great Puritan poet copies and translates the saintly Cathobo
Bishop. At the close of his essay the writer asks :
" Why did Milton announce himself as undertaking
' Things unattempted yet in prose or rhyme ' ?
In view of his familiarity with Avitus the claim is audacious, not
to say mendacious. M. Guizot, in reference to Avitus, says that
Milton could afford to imitate, for he could create. In this view
there may be a Protestant indulgence for the great Puritan poet ;
a Roman Catholic would probably judge him more severely. With-
out theological partiality, one cannot but ask. How could he stoop
to rob the forgotten dead ? He has rifled a venerated tomb. Let us
forbear to push the accusation."
346 Ipse, li't^A, Ii-sum.
The last four liiies freely translated : "But a day will come
when you will crinj^'c before the female sex, and although you
will lie in wait for her timorous heel, ultimately one woman
victorious over you will crush your head, as will also the seed
to be bom of Ik r."
I will give but one more poetical quotation, for the benefit
of your classical readers. It is froiri Lipsius, who with Isaac
Casaiibon aud Joseph Scaliger were called the *' Literary Tri-
nnivirate." '
"Et quom non genium fuget,
Et (juam non striga, quam sagam
Magna magni Dei parens?
De qua saei'a profantur,
Hanc fore quae aerpentia
Contereret caput improhi.
This is not to count against the Yicar, since Lipsius lived
long after St. Bernard, having been born A.D. 1547. But
why did he not read Pusey's second volume? Ahl he does
not like it. Here are some examples of the use of Ipsa in
connection with Mary. At p. 324, St. John Damascene, A.D.
731 (once sneered at in the " Mission Church "), says of the
Blessed Virgin :
"In this Eden the serpent found no stealthy entrance. . . . For
the Only bagotten Sou of God Himself .... formed Himself Man
of this Virgin and pure field,"
Again, at p. 300, Pseudo-Origen (some Latin writer later,
Pusey thinks, than St. Jerome, A.D. 385) represents an angel
addressing mothers in these words : " Hear ye, that a virgin shall
be with child, .... who loas neither deceived hy persuasion
of the serpent, nor infected hy his venomous hreath^ And
again at p. 161, the great St. Bruno, A.D. 1086, fifty years
perhaps before St. Bernard, writes :
"The first head of this line is Adam; the second is Clirist. This
line begins in Eve and ends in Mary. In the beginning was death;
and in the end is life. Death was caused by Eve; life was restored
thi'ough Liary. Eve was conquered by the Devil ; Mary bound and
conquered the Devil For since the line is extended from Eve to
her, in her at length that Hook was bound and Incarnate, through
A IIUOINDKK. 347
whom that Leviathan was taken, the old Serpent who is the Devil
and Satan, that he who entei-ed his Kingdom tlirongh a woman,
should be drawn out of his Kingdom through a woman."
Your readers can now form an estimate of the value of any
statement made by the "educated English gentlemen " from
Oxford, and their " learned friends."
PO8T80KIPT.
I am happy to offer to my readers some interesting evidence
in support of Ij)sa. It is nothing less than the famous Codex
Amiatinus, the oklest and must excellent of all the Latin ilSS.,
no\v in the Laurentian Library, Florence. It contains the
whole Vulgate Bible except the I3ook of Baruch. T'.ie
witness through whom I introduce it is Tischendorf. Among
Protestants he is confessedly the most consummate of Biblical
critics, since he is said to have " crowned the edifice " of Biblical
Criticism. In 1873, shortly before his death, completing the
work of Heyse, he edited this MS. in his critical edition of the
Latin Old Testament, now before me. In the text he gives
Ipsa, and in his note thereon, after discussing its origin, he
very clearly and simply states the Catholic meaning of it thus :
" Ipsa, i.e., mxdicr per semen siium — She, that is, the woman
through her seed," shall crush the serpent's head. This is
what I have repeated over and over again. The learned Prot-
estant Grotius expresses agreement with Tischendorf in these
words (already quoted) : " The Vulgate has Ipsa, as if it were
spoken of the woman, but in a sense not improper."
Tischendorf also gives a beautiful fac-simile specimen of
this great MS., in large uncials, in which our text reads thus :
" IPSA OONTEUET CAPUT TUUM."
Here again I beg to refer my readers to Bishop "Walton's
Polyglot Translations of the Chaldaic Paraphrases. In the
paraphrase of Jonathan-ben-Ussel, the common opinion of the
ancient Hebrews when explaining Geyiesis iii. 15, is ex-
pressed as follows : " A remedy will truly exist for them
(Adam and Eve), but not for thee (the tempter) ; for they
shall crush thy heel in the latter days, in the days of the King
348 Ipse, Ipsa, IrsiM.
Messiah." Again, to accentuate the bond which identities
Mary — the Woman — with the combat and triumph of her
seed, the Chaldaic Paraphrasers use one sole pronoun which
embraces the two readings — Ipse^ Ipsa, and they read : " They
shall hruise thy headP See Dissertations on the Messiah, by
Jacquelet, p. 79 ; First Letter from a Converted liabhin, p. 57.
Let me say a parting word on St. Jerome's testimony. He
publislied his version of tlio Pentateuch A.D. 40-i. In liis
translation, at least in what is supposed to be the genuine
transcript, as it has been published by Vallarsius and Maffei,
ho uses Ipse,' furthermore, he adopts it in his book l>e
Quaestt. Ilehraicis iii Gen., where he is writing critically.
But in his own works, in common with St. Augustine and the
rest, ho adoj)ted Ipsa (See Comment, in Isaiam, I. xvi., c. 58,
in vers. 12). This surely aflfords us another and independent
proof of the antiquity and authority of Ipsa. For, that such
an enthusiast for the Hebrew text, as St. Jerome proved him-
self to be, should have retained a reading, which he rejected
as a Biblical scholar, is inconceivable — except on the hypothesis
that it was already so strongly stereotyped in the memory of
the faithful, as to deter him from attempting to innovate ujion
it in his excgetic works (See Father Harper, 1. c).
I have before me, and beg to refer my classical readers to
the learned work of the Jesuit, Father Corluy, Professor of
Sacred Scrii)ture in Louvain University, entitled : Spicilegium,
Dogniatico-B ill ieu m .
R. F. Q.
LETTER XXIX.
IPSE, IPSA, IPSUM — A EEJOINDEB.
To the Editor of the Globe :
Sir, — I have now a word to say on Ipsum. "We have
throughout this discussion been speaking of Latin words
— Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum, and the masculine, feminine, and neuter
genders in Greek, Latin, and English. As in French, so in
A Rejoinder. 349
Hebrew and tbe cognate Semitic languages, there is no neuter
gender ; but for the sake of simplicity, and to accommodate
myself to the mode of speech used by the Latin writers whom
I quoted, I made no distinction, in respect of gender, between
Hebrew and Greek and Latin. Here, then, a word of expla-
nation may not be out of place for the unlearned reader.
In Hebrew there are but two forms of the pronoun — " IIu —
//<;" and " //«' — She''''\ and yet De liossi, s])eaking in refei-
ence to Latin, says "that the true reading of the sacred text is
IIu, Ipse, IpsumP So, many of the Latin authorities which
I cited say that the Hebrew text is Ipsiim, Avhile others say
that it is fyse. Jjoth are correct, since every Hebrew author-
ity iov Ipse is also one ior Ipstwi • and it is the same fur
Greek. In like manner, Fusey, with reference to English,
says that the Hebrew text ought to be rendered '* It," or "• He
shall bruise thy head." Thus we see that Greek, Latin, and
English writers speak of translation from the Hebrew into
their own several languages according to the grammatical
capabilities of these languages as to gender. Take, for instance,
the Protestant translation of our text in both forms of tlie
pronoun, as directed by Pusey :
" 1 will put enmity between thee and the woman, and be-
tween thy seed and her seed. It shall bruise thy head," etc.;
and
" I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and be-
tween thy seed and her seed^' He shall bruise tliy head," etc.
In the Jirsi form, the pronoun " It " remains simply level
with its antecedent " seed,''^ the mere word in the neuter gen-
der, and it expresses nothing more.
In the second form, the translator has risen above the mere
word " seed,'*^ seized tbe idea signified by it, which is Cbrist,
and expressed it by the pronoun " /A'," referring immediately
to Christ and only indirectly to "seed."
Now, as this mental process is tbe philosophy of the mascu-
line and the neuter " He " and " It " in tbe English Protestant
translation, so it is the philosophy of the masculine and the
neuter, "^Iwtos" and "^m^o" in the Greek, and "7^;st'" and
" Ij)sum " in those Latin translations which reject " Ipsa.^^
350 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
As then, when speaking of English, we say that the Hebrew
has "7/e" or "7^," so when speaking of Latin and Greek we
say that the Hebrew has " Ij)se " or " Ipsum. " and " Autos "
or "^w^o," respectively. Hence Cardinal Patrizi and De
liossi quote their Semitic authorities in support of " Ipse "
and " Ijjsum " indifferently, just as apologists for the Greek
" Autos " and " Auto " would do. Here let me state distinctly
that Alontfaucon mentions Greek MSS. of the Septuagint,
which have the neuter " Aiitoy This is confirmed by Wright
in his I'ook of Genesis in Hebrew, for an extract from which
I am indebted to the very obliging and courteous theological
Librarian of the Protestant University of Princeton, New
Jersey.
Where is Bishop Kingdon's little " diagram " ? Echo an-
swers — Where ! But, what is more serious, there rests upon
him the grave obligation, either to correct his blunder and re-
tract his outrageous misstatement based upon it, or to defend
it either by himself, or with the aid of some Vicar qualified
for the task. The intelligent public can be satisfied with noth-
ing less, and a " teacher in Israel " ought not to be.
I must now gather up a few dropped threads and hasten to
a conclusion.
In a short paragraph near the end of his last " Stricti re,"
the Vicar starts a new objection, based on the alleged silence
of Scripture, and to the effect that the general spirit of the
Gospels is altogether adverse to the Catholic view of the Blessed
Virgin. To this particular objection I have not at all addressed
myself. I was engaged solely in answering his charges
of "Idolatry," "Impiety," "Infidelity," and "Apostasy,"
which he based upon the language of our devotions to her. I
felt and know that these charges do and should influence Prot-
estants more profoundly than any other, and I think your
candid readers will admit that I have unanswerably confronted
them. This i:ew objection in tiecnty lines would require a
series of letters with which I cannot ask to trespass on you
now. In reply to it, however, I can maintain, that no con-
clusion of Euclid is more rigorously demonstrable than is the
direct contradictory of this Protestant allegation. The one
A Ee JOINDER. 351
implication of tlie Gospel narrative, I most confidently assert,
is that Mary's position is immeasurably exalted above — nay, is
essentially different in kind from — that of any other of her
Son's redeemed. Will Bishop Kingdon give me the freedom
of the Anglican pulpits in this city for four consecutive Sun-
days on this text : " Mary, the Mother of Jesus, in Prophecy
and its Fiillllment intei-preted by Antiquity?" "Scripture
interpreted by Antiquity," is Pusey's standard — the ablest man
Anglicanism has had since Cardinal Newman's reversion. I will
accept that standard pro hue vice. My " Orders," too, are all
right, and I will not appeal either to i\ 2>fioto(jraph of the " Lam-
beth Register " in proof of their validity, as did he recently,
among the " Anecdotes of the Lambeth Conference," in sup-
port of his. Or, will Bishop Kingdon lead out his Oxford
" contingent " — a dozen if he has them — and calmly discuss
the proposition I have alleged, at any time or place, and before
any audience ? Let there be no shilly-shally about this matter.
I want these " English gentlemen " to feel assured that one of
the "poor Irish " in this Diocese, where " Eomanism is very
Low Chnrcli,-^ as the Yicar writes, is ready and able to vindi-
cate against their united forces the position assigned to the
ever-blessed mother of his Redeemer, by the Catholic Cinirch,
in the divine economy of man's salvation. Your readers have
received bnt an installment of that vindication in this Re-
ooinder — a few pearls from the lap of Holy Church, which I
have tried to string into a Rosary to lay in homage at blessed
Mary's feet — a few shells from the shore of that boundless
ocean of Catholic truth which laves the throne of the Eternal,
as an humble rej)aration for the insults offered her by Anglican
Bishops and their Vicars the world over. I have, in this part
of my subject, cited no authorities, but consistently and
throughout appealed to reason pure and sim])le. I leave to
your attentive readers to say what measure of success has at-
tended my labors. On another occasion, I will give a list of
books in which they can make deeper studies.
And now a word on the Strossmaycr episode. Since writing
on this matter, an important piece of evidence has come to
hand in absolute confirmation of what I then proved. Cardi-
352 Ipse, Ipsa, L'sum.
nal Manning's word will be taken the world over, at its face.
AVell, he has written a work entitled, " The True Story of the
Vatican Council," in which we get the " true story " of the
Vicar's "famous speech of Strossniayer," which he hoped
would be so "advantageous to our Church," were it only
printed in the Church Eclectic. At page 164 of the Cardi-
nal's book, he is speaking of the falsehoods circulated about
the doings of the Council, and he proceeds as follows :
" But, in truth, tlie Italian papers and the Augsburg Gazette are
the chief sources of these mendacious exaggei-atious. An Italian
pajier gave in full the speech of Bishop Btrossmayer, who was the
subject of one of these Houieric counnotions. In that speech he
was matle to apostrojihize by name, as present before him and as a
chief offender, a Bishop who was not there at all to be aijostrophized.
When the speech had gone the roinid of Eui-ojie in a polyglot ver-
sion. Bishop Strossmayer in a Roman paper denounced it as a forg-
ery, and his letter has again and again been repi'inted in England.
Nevei'theless, the speech is i-eprinted continually at this day at Glas-
gow and Belfast, and so^vn broadcast by post over these kingdoms,
and probably whereVer the English tongue is sijoken."
My copy is printed at Belfast, and on it the announcement
is made that " Persons Avishing quantities for yratnitous dis-
irihuiion will be liheralhj treated.'''' It would be interesting
to know what discount the Vicar got on his " gratuitous dis-
tributions." This is the document of which the Vicar wrote :
" It is the finest thing 1 hiow of on the oj)position side ! "
Of course the " Strictures " had not then been written — else
Strossmayer's " speech " was nowhere. Would it not be " ad-
vantageous to our Church " to send them to the Church Eclectio
— without the Rejoinder f Because j. exposed his crime
against Bishop Strossmayer and truth, he has charged me with
" defaming " his character ; but surely a hawker of forgeries
has no character to be defamed, especially when he makes a
hypocritical pretence of a fondness for testing his wares by a
" yard stick " and " critical apparatus." But perhaps he will
plead ignorance of the imposture. It may be ; but then he
will save but a remnant of honesty at the expense of his judg-
ment, for no intelligent Protestant, not to speak of a " Catho*
A Rejoindkr. 353
lie Protestant," ought to be deceived by the forged " Speech."
But let us .await the reparation. Meanwhile, I have set a trap
to test the honesty of this Oxford innocent, and, ten to one, he
will walk straight into it. We will see.
On the subject of Ritualism I have barely touched in these
Letters. Beginning with a purely critical question, the Vicar,
most insultingly and illogically, introduced and provoked a dis-
cussion on Catliolic devotion to the Mother of God, and I felt
obliged " to run him down." I kept simply to the point, and
turned neither to the right nor to the left, till he had disap-
peared. He has stated his case, given his " wider view of the
cultus of the Virgin," and constructed his " treasury of argu-
ment " against " Romanists." Of this fabric, builded with so
much love, I have left not one stone upon another. The dis-
cussion is therefore logically at an end, saving to the Vicar a
right to clear himself, if haply he can, from some of the
crimes charged and proved against him. To his explanations
I, of course, claim the right to reply. Having thus performed
my task, I am hereafter a free lance. If he gives me occa^
sion, I will consider Ritualism root and branch — as well in re-
lation to the Catholic Church, her doctrines, rites, and cere-
monies, as in relation to the Anglican Church, her Homilies,
Articles, Book of Common Prayer and the late Lambeth Con-
ference. From my complete Ritualistic library — " cribs " of
Catholic books for the most part — I will exhibit the theological
piracy and freebootery by which Ritualism lives, and I will
expose its hideous hypocrisy and dishonesty, as it never has been
exposed in this city. Remember, I am speaking of Riiualhm,
not Hitualists generally, though the Vicar's tactics in this dis-
cussion have well illustrated some of its worst vices. Was ever
hypocrisy more audacious than to protest to have no desire " of
wounding any person's feelings," when he attacks with satanic
fury all that we hold to be true and sacred ? Was ever hypocrisy
carried to a greater extent than his bitter assaults on the char-
acter of Popes and Cardinals, Bishops and Priests of the Cath-
olic Church — " not to oflFend," he says, " but for truth's sake " ?
He talk of truth and charity 1 lie talk of candor and honesty !
Ah I we have heard before of such champions of sincerity :
354 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
The Devil was sick, the Devil a monk would be :
The Devil was well, the Devil a monk was he.
Yet, I would not be thought out of sympathy with Ritualism
in itself, and apart from the hypocrisy which it is made to
subserve ; because, as the Anglican Dean Hook so well said, it
is " doing the work of the Church of Rome while eating the
bread of the Church of England." It is one of the best mis-
sionaries that the Catholic Church has, inasmuch as it is famil-
iarizing the Protestant mind, and indoctrinating it, with Catholic
principles, truths, and views of truths, to which it is such a
stranger, but to which, however, it would not listen if they
came in full Catholic garb. It gets a hearing for Catholic doc-
trine in quarters to which the ordinary missionary has no access.
It cannot, indeed, be said of every mind : " Jla saisilaverite
jparcequ^ il a saisi les ensembles / " but honest and thoughtful
minds in Ritualism, who are earnestly searching for the truth
amid the doctrinal chaos of Anglicanism, must sooner or later
connect facts with the principles that give them vitality. To
many such. Ritualism has been the vestibule from which they
have entered into peace and joy in the bosom of the Catholic
Church. The latest example is the Rev. Luke Rivington of
Oxford, and I would commend to the Vicar his learned little
work, entitled : " Authority ; or, a Plain Reason for Joining
the Church of Rome," another illustration of the great argu-
ment — If Theist, why not Christian, if Christian, why not
Catholic, as the true issue of religious polemic to-day.
Another reason for my sympathy with Ritualism is suggested
by the beautiful words of St. Augustine : ''^llli in vos sacviant,
qui nesciunt cum quo labore verum, inveniatur, et gtiam diffi-
cile caveantur errwes : Let those who rage against you, who
know not with what labor truth is discovered, and with what
difficulty errors are avoided." God forbid that any Catholic
should speak words of bitterness or scorn about those Angli-
cans and Ritualists who, though it may be with limping gait,
are slowly retracing their steps after the wanderings of three
hundred years. On the contrary, we should rather kneel in
reverence with uncovered heads as they draw nearer. But the
bitterest ridicule, the most stinging satire, and the severest re-
A Rejoindek. 355
crimination would make too light a scourge for those pseudo-
" Priests " who, while they assume the garments — hoth lit-
erary and material — of the Holy Catholic Church, persuade the
wanderers that they are the accredited officers of the Great
King, and that the wanderers themselves are already safe in
His Kingdom. I have not for a moment shrunk from bring-
ing, and urging, and proving such a charge against the Yicar.
" It is the bounden duty," he says, " of those who know the
truth to speak out boldly at the risk of exciting anger, opposi-
tion, and reproach, or of being misunderstood." I fondly trust
that his candor will duly appreciate my motive : I, too, have
spoken out — " not to offend, but for truth's sake." May God
prosper the word, that it fall not on stony ground !
While on this topic, let me inform your readers tliat Little-
dale's " Plain Reasons " — the Vicar's theological text-book and
" critical apparatus " — has been " kicked out " by the Protest-
ant Association since this discussion commenced. It had be-
come so discredited under the fire of its critics, Protestant and
Catholic, that it had to go. My authority for this statement is
a London paper which I have unfortunately mislaid, and for
which I have lately hunted in vain. This statement, iiowever,
can be verified, or corrected, if untrue. Your readers will eas-
ily credit it when I tell them that the Rev. Dr. Lee, an An-
glican minister, himself very High Church, has pointed out
and tabulated two hundred and one mistakes, as follows :
Regarding Historical facts, 61
" Dogmatic facts 43
" luaccui-ate quotations from writings on history and
Canon Law, 29
Regarding historical and theological quotations half -made, often
with remarkable omissions or qualifications, . . . .30
Regarding quotations from the Fathei-s, which, when sought
out, are found to bear an entirely different meaning from that
which Dr. Littledale puts upon them 24
Confusing the personal opinion of Catholics with the defined
doctrines of the Church, 17
Assuming that current opinions of theologians are without
doubt defined dogmas, 7
Total 201
856 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
Dr. Lee adds : " Every edition of Littledale's book receives
fresh corrections, while in several cases the corrections are
equally inaccurate with the statement presumed to be cor-
rected." To the edition of 1881, the last I have seen, are pre-
fixed 29 pages of closely printed " additions and corrections "
■ — mainly the latter, in all 13,340 words of errata. Pretty
good showing for a book of 200 pages ! Some other time I
will give your readers Littledale's history.'
At the close of the last " Stricture," the Vicar says : " I shall
not shrink from encountering any advocate of (the Immacu-
late Conception) if you feel disposed to open your columns
for the discussion." Ye Gods! Why, I will lay a wager the
man does not knovv any more about it than did Pusey when
he wrote the first volume of Eirenicon^ and in using these
words he had his eye on Pusey's " Scraps," with which he
would like to fill your columns, as he did on other occasions.
The Yicar discuss the Immaculate Conception ! lla ! Ha ! t
Ha ! ! ! Now, this mild offer to appear in a " wider area than
the Institute," implies some knowledge of Theology. And,
what is Theology ? It is the philosophy of Revelation ; in
other words, it is the result of applying to revealed dogmata
the methods and principles of philosophy. But the Vicar
could get no sound Christian philosophy at Oxford, and there-
fore luckily for himself got none. Oxford, the capital of An-
glicanism, has given up the profession of Christianity in its
educational capacity. Two anti-Christian philosophies in the
very opposite poles of thought are, not so much striving for
pre-eminence there as joint-tenants in full possession to-day.
Listen to Canon Liddon :
' ' Cases have come ivithin my oum experience of men wlio have
come up to school as Christians, and have been earnest Christians
up to the time of beffinning to read philosophy for the final school,
but who, during the year and a half or two years employed in this
study, have suiTendered first their Christianity and next their belief
in God, and have left the University not believing in a Supreme
Beingy
A similar account is given by Mr. Appleton, a member of
' See Appendix C for full text of Dr. Lee's Letter.
A Rejoinder. 357
the " Select Coirmiittce of tlie House of Lords on University
Tests " with Canon Liddon. He pays :
" I think it is quite impossible for any man to throw himself into
the system of education for the final classical school .... with-
out having the whole edifice of his belief shaken to the very foun-
dation.'' — First Report, pp. 44, 69.
This was written seventeen years ago, but we see its prac-
tical results to-day in " liohert Eh^ncrcP I say nothing about
the argumentative value of the novel, because Anglicanism can
attend to its own funeral ; but I think it most ungallant of
Anglican parsons especially, to rail at the authoress, because
she who " knows Oxford well " simply gives an " Oxford pict-
ure of Oxford influences," and is only in accord with Canon
Liddon. The Quarterly lievieio for October, 1888, says that
Christianity is regarded at the college described in the book as
an open question, that aspirants for holy orders are told by
their tutors that the faith they intend to preach is only a re-
spectable mythology, and that the government and discipline
of Oxford are now committed to men who are emancipated
from obligations to any form of belief — to philosophical deists
and hopeless skeptics. Cardinal Newman's prophecies on
" Liberalism " at Oxford have been verified to the letter. See
'"'' Apologia^'' pp. 57-62. Now it is evident that the Vicar
never reached the "final schools" described by Canon Liddon,
but rather took to Ritualism, which has appropriated to itself
enough of Catholic principles and teaching, always " instinct
like relics with supernatural power," to justify W^^i 2^crhajps
as a phase of Christianity. This, however, is no reason why
he should think himself qualified to discuss a theological topic
like the Immaculate Conception. Upon this question I have
not entered, nor is it now, thanks be to God, at all necessary,
for I assure your readers and I am prepared to prove, in any
manner acceptable to Bishop Kingdon and his Vicar, that
Pusey in his second volume, and in published letters and
speeches which I have, accepted and believed the doctrine
itself as defined by the Catholic Church ; and more, that he
strongly urges its fitness and truth from its analogy to the
sanctification of Jeremias and John the Baptist expressly re-
358 Ipse, Ipisa, Ipsum.
vealed in Holy Scripture. What a triumph for Catholic truth I
The greatest and most Catholic-minded intellect, after New-
man, that the Anglican Church has ever produced kneeling in
homage at Mary's feet 1 Praised and blessed forever be her
Immaculate Conception ! Pusey's second volume is a perfect
Jlosanna to the Blessed Virgin, and it is a simple delight to a
Catholic to read it. Indeed, there is nothing more " advan-
tageous to ouB Church," in English. By all means, " let
every lover of Christian truth secure a copy " 1 Had the Vicar
read it when ho gave this advice? Or, is he after all but a
" Jesuit in disguise " ?
When Pusey wrote the first volume of the Eirenicon he did
not even understand this doctrine, and while Father Newman
told him so, he gave him a singularly lucid exposition of it.
Afterwards, Pusey went to France and spent some months
among the French Bishops, and sojourned notably with the
great Dupanloup. On his return to England he wrote the sec-
ond volume, addressed to Father Newman, in which he ex-
presses himself perfectly satisfied with the doctrine as explained
by him and Dupanloup. Will the Vicar, after he has care-
fully studied Pusey's words, dare assert that Pusey rejects the
doctrine of Mary's Immaculate Conception as defined by the
Catholic Church ? Of course I must honestly say that I doubt
his ability, through lack of theological training, even to read
the mattens involved understandingly, since Pusey himself dis-
plays a strange bewilderment on the meaning o-f some of the
details of the Church's definition. He is modest enough, how-
ever, to ask Father Newman, for " an explanation which would
remove diflSculties" on some speculative aspects of it, but on
which the Church has not pronounced,
A few words of advice to the Vicar. While Cardinal New-
man was yet an Anglican, he said " hard things," as he con-
fesses, against the Catholic Church. He became a Catholic in
October, 1845. Nearly three years hefore that, he drew up
and published a document, dated December 12, 1842 (now be-
fore me), containing a formal " Retraction " of those " hard
things." He had spoken in his writings of doctrines of the
Catholic Church as " unscriptural," " profane," " impious,"
A Rejoinder. 359
"blasphemous"; and said, among other severe things, that
" we ought to treat (Popish Rome) as if she were that evil one
which governs her." He closes his "peccavi " document with
these words :
"If you ask me how an individual could venture not simply to
hold, but to publish such views of a communion so ancient, so
wide-spreading, so fruitful in saintr I answer, that I said to my-
self, ' I am not speaking my own words, I am but following almost
a conaenarta of the divines of my church. They have ever used
the strongest language against Rome, even the most able and most
learned of them. I wish to throw myself into their system. Wliile
I say what they say I am safe. Such views, too, are necessary for
our position.' Yet I have reason to fear still that such language
is to be ascribed, in no small measure, to an impetuous temper, a
hope of approving myself to persons I respect and a wish to repel
the charge of Romanism."
Remember, this was written while an Anglican minister.
Why, then, did he withdraw categorically these " hard things "
while still in the Anglican church? He found o\it that he
had been deceived hy the divines of his own church! Years
afterwards, when he had become a Catholic, in the pages of
the Apologia he told what he meant in the words I have just
quoted :
*' I was angry," he says, "with the Anglican divines. I thought
they had taken me in ; I had read the Fathers with their eyes ; I had
sometimes trusted their quotations or their reasonings ; and from
reliance on them I had used words or made statements, which prop-
erly I ought rigidly to have examined myself. I had exercised more
faith than criticism in the matter. ... I had leaned too much upon
the assertions of Ussher, Jeremy Taylor, or Barrow, and had been
deceived hy them."
Now, Cardinal Newman is the most illustrious Englishman
to-day living. Even the Vicar calls him "honest"; but the
Vicar himself has used against the Catholic Church in this dis-
cussion, and unprovoked by me, the harshest words the lan-
guage has. Cardinal Newman did the same thing, but, on
learning that he had been deceived by his teachers, he honor-
ably withdrew them and as publicly as he had uttered them.
The Vicar mtist be satisfied and convinced from my reply and
360 Ii'SK, Ipsa, Ipsum.
explanations, that ho too has heen deceived — ?n-" credibly in-
formed.''' If then, like Cardinal Newman, he he an "honest"
man ho will follow his example — " Go and do likewise." Let
him remember " the j^reat assize," " the burning lake," and the
imhappy lot of Bellarminc and Baronius.
I would advise the Vicar again : 1. To make himself ac-
quainted with the first principles of Catholic Theology, of
which he has shown himself profoundly ignorant. 2. To de-
vote the next five years to getting some knowledge of Chris-
tian antiquity, and meanwhile refuse to be "credibly in-
formed " by " learned friends," who know no more about it
than himself. This will save him from a renewal of the dis-
grace and humiliation brought upon him by his ignorance of
the application of Ii^sa by ecclesiastical writers before the 12th
century. 3. Not to dream of understanding the full meaning
of the Fathers he may read during this probation, unless he is
determined to sympathize most fully with them. Remember
the words of Cardinal Newman to Pusey, describing his feel-
ings as an Anglican :
" I recollect well what an outcast I seemed to myself, when I took
down from the shelves of my library the volumes of St. Athanasms
or St. Basil, and set myself to study them ; and how, on the con-
trary, when at length I was brought into Catholic communion I
kissed them with delight, with a feeling that in them I liad more
than all that I had lost ; and, as though I were directly addressing
the glorious saints, who bequeathed them to the chureh, how I said
to the inanimate pages, ' You are now mine, and I am now yours,
beyond any mistake.' .... The Fathers made me a Catholic,
and I am not going to kick down the ladder by which I ascended
into the church. It is a ladder quite as serviceable for that purpose
now as it was twenty years ago."
4. Not to be guilty of the disgusting folly and impertinence
of crying out " Forgery ! " because an inconvenient quotation
is made from a writer of whom he knows nothing, and of
pressing to his bosom what he ought to know to be a forgery,
only because it is "advantageous to our Church." And,
finally, that he be quite sure that the arguments he uses against
Catholic devotion to the Blessed Virgin are not equally valid
A Ke-ioinokr. 301
against what he himself cuiisidcrs the fundamental doctrines of
Christianity.
And now a parting word to Hishop Kingdon, the original
offender. AVhen he made the statement that Ij^f^a was a " mis-
print " for Ipse, did he know that at the very moment when the
Catholic Church promulgated the doctrine of the Innnacuhite
' (Conception she was holding in her hand the Koinan edition of
the Septuagint, the peerless Vatican Codex, i)rei)ared as an aid
to the revisors of the authentic Vulgate, at the suggestion of
Cardinal Perretti (afterwards tiie great Pope Sixtus V.), and
published in the second year of his pontificate, A.D. 1587?
Did he know that this king of MSS. has the mascaline read-
ing, Autos — lie f An edition of the Vatican Codex by Father
Loch, fresh from the press, and dedicated to the illustrious Leo
XIIL, is now before uie. It is the most valuable and authori-
tative Biblical MS. in the world. "How should '■'' Pi'otest-
anis," asks Tregelles, one of the chief among recent Protestant
textual critics — " How should Protestants have been willin<; to
concede such an honor to this text which had appeared under
Papal sanction ? It gained its ground and kept it because it
was really an ancient text, such in its general complexion as
was read by the early Fathers " (Tregelles' " Account of the
printed Text of the Greek N. T.," p. 185). But according to
Bishop Kingdon the Catholic Church knew nothing about the
Vatican Codex. On the contrary, in 1854 she was misled by
a " misprint " in the Vicar's " corrupt " Vulgate and she, the
" pillar and the ground of truth," " founded " her solemn
teaching about the Immaculate Conception of the ever blessed
Mother of God upon it ! New, an ordinarily intelligent mind
would conclude from the knowledge of the Church and her
action on it, that she recognized no doctrinal difference be-
tween the masculine and theyemi7mie reading in Gen. iii. 15,
and that she therefore " founded " nothing upon it. Alas !
She had no " educated English gentlemen " from Oxford at
her elbow, to teach her how to read her own documents, and
to warn her of the "tremendous importance" of the blunder
she was making ! Verily, the sight of an Anglican Bishop ut-
tering such words as I have been considering, confirms what a
362 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
learned Protestant writer says of the theological requirements
for the office, to wit : " The primary qualification for the An-
glican Episcopate is ability to conjugate correctly the Middle
Voice of the Greek verb."
Here I take leave of my opponents for the present. I am
in doubt whether I should say " Good-by," or simply " Au
revoir "; I therefore address them in Carlyle's words : " Oh ye
hapless two, mutually extinctive, sleep ye well in the Mother's
bosom that bore you both."
I beg to add only a few more words of a personal sort, and
then make an end. The contest has been an unequal one. It
is true we are both " busy priests," but from the nature and
necessities of my daily occupation, my "clerical" duties have
been more exacting than those of my opponent. N^evertheless,
I have met him single-handed and alone. No unmanly ego-
ism prompts the emphatic declaration that, from beginning to
end of this controversy I not only 7iever asked from my many
"learned friends" even one question touching it, but what is
more, I never received even one suggestion regarding it, directly
or indirectly, from any quarter outside of my books. Such of
these as I did not have in iny own library, I got either from
Rome, Paris, London, New York, or elsewhere. I make this
declaration in justice to the main subjects discussed, to the end
that responsibility for all shortcomings may rest entirely with
me. I might well indeed have sought assistance, and received
it abundantly, but — to say out honestly what I feel — I thought
it a treason to my venerated teachers — Fathers Barry, Varilly,
Dixon, Doucet, and Bannon, and to His Lordship Bishop
Rogers, clarum et venerahile nomen, the founder of my own
bumble Alma Mater, St. Michael's College. My opponents
were too small to justify any intellectual fear for the armor
she gave me — and their eyes were upon me. Intellectual
fear ! An instructed Catholic knows not what it is. Why
should he fear ? The truth of Catholicism rests on historical
arguments, which are not only incontrovertible, but in some
sense irresistible. " Tiie proof seems," to Cardinal Newman,
" such as even to master and carrj' away the intellect directly
it is stated ; so that CathoUcism is almost its own evidence."
A RwoiNDER. 3G3
Why should he fear ? He is tlie heir to the wealth, — moral,
Bpiritual, scriptural, philosophical, historical — of nineteen cent-
uries of Christian thought created by the Church whose intel-
lectual life he lives. The atmosj^here in Avhich he dwells
vibrates with logical thunderbolts, and he has but to put forth his
hand and seize them as they go whizzing by. What business
has an Anglo-Ritualist with one so equipped ? This Rejoinder
will explain.
Again, I wish to disarm those of your readers who try to
divert others from the real points at issue in this discussion by
accusations against me of bitterness, causticity, and the like.
I would remind them that a burglar has no difficulty in keep-
ing his temper ; but that when the ov/ner of the house, on
rising, finds himself to have sustained grievous loss, he de-
serves no small praise if he bear that loss with perfect patience.
So when an assault is made on the object of a man's dearest
attachment — the Catholic Church with all that it implies — he
is of course tempted to anger and excitement. A man is not
expected to argue unmoved with the unjust assailant of the
fair fame of his mother, his wife, or his sister. In this case
the l)urglar was caught in the act, but straightaway lost his
temper and proceeded to insult where he had tried to injure,
pleading zeal for trutli in justification. I claim the privilege
of the same plea, and neither accuse nor excuse myself for the
language in which I have tried to project on the burglar's
attention my contempt for his clumsy attempt. liij, eons in-
dignation is one thing; malice, hatred, bigotry, a;>d pujudice
quite other things. These, indeed, argue an uncleanness in
which I will have no part. They are to me as loathsome as an
impure thought deliberately entertained, and with them, as a
Catholic, I can have no fellowship. Will ingenuous Protest-
ants please lay this to heart ?
And now I have done. To you, Mr. Editor, I beg to renew
the expression of my warmest gratitude for your boundless
courtesy and tireless patience during the execution of my
task.
Ever gratefully yours,
R. F. QuiOLEY.
3Ci Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
My opponent replied to the above liejoinder in a series of
twenty-three letters. On tlieir conclusion, the Editor of the
Gloije declared the only conditions on which the discussion
could be continued in its columns. I was to have one column,
my opponent the same space afterwards, and then a half-col-
umn was to be allowed me to close. Now, so far as the Globe
was concerned, no reasonable man could complain of these
terms. We had been treated in the most generous and court-
eous way, and I doubt if ever before so prolonged a discussion
on such serious themes of theological controversy was permitted
in newspaper columns. Nevertheless, so far as the matters in
debate were concerned, the limits within which the Globe
proposed that I should compress my review, were wholly in-
adequate to the demands made upon me by my opponent's
mode of handling our subjects. Having put my hand to the
plough, I must needs go from headland to headland. There-
fore I did not accept the Globe's terms. Instead, I have pre-
pared for publication in this volume the following Hehutter, —
a full, fearless, and conscientiously faithful consideration of
every attempt at counter-argument made to the Rejoinder.
For the sake of uniformity, I have preserved the epistolary
style, and addressed myself to the Editor and the readers oi'
the Globe. I have little doubt about the verdict.
IPSE, IPSA, IPSUM-A KEBUTTER.
To the Editor of the Globe :
Sir, — The Vicar recently finished in your columns a second
series of his Strictures, in twenty-three letters. By my Jie-
joinder to his^;'*^ series, I have made his name a watchword
of infamy amongst all honest, truth-loving men— forever. But
no one who has not read the second series can have any con-
ce^/tion of the terms — malignity and meanness, platitude and
perversity, decrepitude of cankered intelligence, and despera-
tion of humiliated vanity. Here we have the llitualist pseudo-
" priest," the " Old Catholic " as he styles himself, in full
bloom. I propose, how^ever, to look at them seriatim, and to
give your readers a faithful account of thel contents. I will be
as brief as possible.
First Lettkr. — This is but a lachrymose jeremiad. Like a
whipped school-boy he appeals to your readers for sympathy,
and complains that some frolicsome young maidens so "de-
meaned themselves" as to laugh at him. Well, I suppose
their plea would be that of the old Greek, St. Gregory Nazi-
anzen : " Give us leave to he tnen'y on a merry sultjectP
That the Vicar has now become such in ibis community — who
doubts ?
Second Letter. — To divert public attention from the over-
whelming force of my Rejoinder on the main question, he de-
votes this letter to the (piestion of the authenticity of the well-
known seventh verse of the fifth chapter of 1 tlohn — "And
there are three that give testimony in heaven, the Father, the
Word, and the Holy Ghost : and these three are one." This
he calls "the celebrated interpolation," says it is "omitted
now of course in the lievised Version " of the Bible, and he
(305)
366 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
winds up with the magisterial declaration : " I surrender (!) the
interpolation concerning the Three Heavenly Witnesses which
the scholarly revisors of the English New Testament have
abandoned."
Now, is not such language in the mouth of an Anglo-Ritual-
ist simply disgusting? Why, to-day the Revised Version is of
no more authority in the Anglican Church than an old alma-
nac. No Anglican minister (in England at least) can lawfully
use it in public worship. Parliament, or the Privy Council rep-
resenting the Crown, must first appoint or allow it to be read,
as is the case with the King James Version. This was proved
a little while ago. At a meeting of the London Diocesan
Conference a proposal was made to petition Convocation to
consider the advisability of permitting the use in public wor-
ship of the Revised Version. The proposal was rejected, and
during the debate Dr. Wace called attention to the censures
on the Revision of Dr. Scrivener, Dean Burgon, and Canon
Cook ; and he himself protested in particular against the doubt
thrown by the Revisors on the close of St. Mark^s Gospel and
against the rendering, "Deliver us from the evil one," in the
Lord's Prayer. Then one minister avowed that he had adopted
the Revision in his week-day services; whereupon Bishop
Temple interrupted him with the remark that this was illegal,
tliough personally he would neither prosecute nor allow him
to 1)6 prosecuted for so doing.
But what is the Revised Version ? It is the work of Angli-
can Bishops, sitting with Methodists, Baptists, Presbyterians,
and Unitarians — that is, the English Bible improved according
to modern ideas of progressive Biblical Criticism ! And who
gave these men authority over the written Word of God ? It
was not Parliament, or the Privy Council, but the Church of
England acting through Convocation ! Who gave Convocation
the autiiority ? Nobody.
IIow are we to know what is the genuine written Word of
God ? Tlie Vicar can give no intelligible answer, because he
has no conception of the character and office of the Church of
God. The Catholic at once gives an answer in the words of
St. Augustine : " I should not believe the Gospel were I npt
A Kebuitek. 367
moved tliereto by the autliority of the Catholic Church." So
must it be with every man who looks the question fairly in the
face. The Bible is the creation of the Church ; and to accept
it, in any true 8ense,*as the Word of God, logically involves a
belief in the infallibility of the Church. External authority is
the only voucher for canonicity. It was for the Church here,
as in doctrinal controversies, to judge of conflicting traditions
and diverging opinions, and in the fullness of time to give her
sentence. And, in fact, so she judged, and judged infallibly,
or her judgment is vain. The Vicar, who hypocritically boasts
of the " Bible-only " principle (thereby flatly contradicting his
own school), prefers the opinion of the Quaker critic, Tre-
gelles, to the authority of the Church of God. "Well, that is
consistent enough. In the first days of Protestantism private
judgment fixed what the Scr'i])tnrG meant ; now textual crit-
icism settles for the Vicar what Scripture says,' and shortly
" higher criticism " will reject text and meaning alike. In
Germany such criticism has put the Bible in the nuiseum, —
England will soon follow suit. But one thing is certain.^ that,
as in the centuries before the birth of Protestantism, so after
it is dead and gone, the Catholic Church will continne to read
in her Bible and profess in her creed that '' there are Three
who give testimony in Heaven, and these Three are one •' —
the Vicar's Quaker critic and " scholarly revisors " to the con-
trary not^vithstanding.
On leaving this irrelevant topic, I would call the attention of
your learned readers to a very recent discussion, jt>?'0 and co7i,
between Catholic theologians. I refer to the articles by the Abbe
Martin (recently deceased), the Abbe Rambouillet, and Canon
Maunoury, in the lievue des Sciences Jteolesiastiques, Aout et
Septembre, 1887; Septembre, 1888; Mars, Avril, et Mai,
1889 (now before me); and to the Dublin Review, January,
1890, p. 182.
TniuD Letter. — I beg the serious attention of your readers
to my connnents on this letter. I have convicted hijn of so
many impudent falsehoods tliat I am loath to follow him
further. But he has now so surpassed himself in shameless.
368 Ip8e, Ipsa, Ipsum.
iinblusliing, and deliberate mendacity that I cannot pass it by.
Here " Iniquity hath lied to itself," and I have alleged it to be
deliberate. Let me probe it.
He says : *
"Let us now consider .... whether or not my opponent has
yet accomplished the penance I set him for his impertinence to
Bishop Kingdon.
"It will be remembered that I set him to name a manuscript of
the Latin Vulgate, either uncial or cursive, which reads Ipsu7n
instead of Ipse or Ipsa in Gen. iii. 15."
When he wrote this last paragraph, had he become too petri-
fied for any moral struggle 'i lu pity let us believe it. Doubt-
less his purpose, but took on the shape of Macbeth's thoughts
when contemplating Duncan's murder :
Slai-s, hide your fires !
Let not light see my black and deep desires !
The eye wink at the hand ! Yet let that be
Which the eye fears when it is done to see.
He asserts that he set me, as a penance, " to name a manu-
script of the Latin Vulgate" which has Ipsum. Most wicked
and deliberate falsehood ! He never mentioned " a manuscript
of the Latin Vulgate " from first to last. Here I am irresist-
ibly reminded of these 'crushing words of Inspiration : " Out
of thy own mouth I judge thee, thou wicked servant"; and, let
me add the sentence, from the same source, in words equally
fitting : " The feet of those who shall bury thee are at the
door." Now to the proof.
In his very first letter in this controversy (the third pre-
liminary letter in this volume), he wrote as follows :
(Mr. Quigley) "asks somewliat indignantly why Bishop Kingdon,
in his lecture, did not put the real state of the question before his
hearers, and tell them the dispute was not between Ipse and Ipsa,
hut also between Ipsum. Where, then, is to be fpund a Latin
Versio7i of the Bible with Ipsum in this passagef — (Gen. lii. 16).
I have never seen it in my commentary."
Again, in the eighth preliminary letter, when declining my
challenge, he says :
A Rebuttkk. 3G9
"The matter is very simple. Mr. Quigley has iniinigued Bisliop
Kingdon's scholarship, and has empliasized, iu the title of lu.s
lettere (not Ipse, Ipsa, but Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum), what he con-sidere
an important emendation I have, tlierefore, asked him in
the firet place to mention some of those standard Latin Versions of
the Bible (mark you!) he accused the Bishop of overlooking."
And again, in tlie first letter of liis first series of StrictureSy
he wrote :
"My challenge, therefore, to my opponent to name even one old
Latin Version of the Bible (mark you!) containing Ipsum i)i Gen.
iii. 15, was made simply to punish him for impugning the Bishop's
scholarship and honesty."
Once more, in the second letter of the same series, he un-
dertakes to examine :
' ' Whether my opponent has properly performed the penance I
set him for his impertinence to Bishop Kingdon, tliat is to say,
has he really adduced any Latin Version of the Old Testament
(mark you!) of any critical value whatever in the eyes of Biblical
scholars, to justify his assertion that Bishop Kingdon suppressed the
truth when he omitted to mention Ipsum as a various reading iu
Gen. iii. 15."
Again, in the same letter he asks me
" To name a Latin Version (mark you I) either among the uncials
or cui-sives which contains the word Ipsum in Gen. iii. 15." —
and he winds up by again proclaiming his ignorance iu these
words :
"In all the commentaries I have read on Gen. iii. 15, I have
never found Ipsum mentioned as a various reading (mark you!)
and that, therefore, I doubt if one exists."
These quotations give an absolutely correct and exhaustive
account of his utterances on Ipsum. Where can your readers
find a demand upon me " to name a manuscript of the Latin
Vulgate " ? And yet he has the audficious effrontery to say
that "/«! will he remeinherciV he had set mc that task as a
" penance " ! What shameless, deliberate mendacity ! Truth
and honesty have no claims upon him — he murders them in
370 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsfm.
cold blood. Does it abate the moral horror that must thrill
your readers to parallel him with Macbeth when bracing him-
self for his great crime ?
.... Why do I yield to that sug'gestion
Wliose horrid image doth unfix my liau'.
And make my seated heart knock at my ribs
Against the use of nature ? Present feai-s
Are less than horrible imaginings :
My thought, whose murder yet is but fantastical,
Shakes so lay single state of man, that function
Is smothered in surmise; and nothing is
But what is not.
"And nothing is but what is not." Ilow happily these
words express the essence of the Vicar's babblings in the letter
I am now revicwiTig ! He asserts the thing th^t is not, and
then proceeds to build his " castles in the air."
Now, your re^iders will remember that the first l)ranch of
my position against Bishop Kingdon was, that the reading in
Gen. iii. 15 was various, that is to say, not J/)se, Ij)sa simply,
but Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsxmi. Tlie Vicar, as ippears by the quota-
tion made shortly ago, denied the existence of Ipsum, declared
he had never seen it mentioned as a various reading, and
challtMiged me to produce " any Latin. Version of the Bihle "
having it. A reference to the fourth letter of my Rejoinder
will show that I gave him SIX FxiMOUS LATIN BIBLES,
with a host of other great authorities. Thereupon, stupefied
by his humiliated vanity, he blurts out the insolent untruth
that he had asked me for " a manuscript of the Latin Vulgate."
Who ever claimed that Ipsum, was found in the Latin
Vulgate ? Why, Ipsa is the great sin of that Version in the
Vicar's eyes, and I put it forward as the anthority,^;«r excel-
lence, for that one of the various readings which I had to prove.
For the other two, Ipse, Tpsiim, I adduced names and books
from every qi;arter, and I think I have satisfied your readers
on that score. In a postscript to the fourth letter of ray 7?^-
joinder will be found additional evidence for Ipsum, which
will allay the Vicar's thirst for ^'Uncials" and "Cursives."
In the same letter I have charged against the Vicar the das-
A liEBUTTEK.
371
tardly crime of literary forgery — that is, garbling a quotation
from De Kossi, which he gave in the ninth preliminary letter
in this volume. Every one, Catholic and Protestant alike, to
whom I showed the books, confessed it was an infamous trick,
lie copied from Do Rossi right up to the word Jpsiivt, wilfully
and wickedly suppressed it, interpolated words not in De
Rossi's text at all, and then solemnly declared that :
"In all the comnientai'les I have read on Gen. iii. 15, I have never
found Ipsiim mentioned as a vai'ious reading, and that therefore I
doubt if one exists."
In his letter, now under review, he admits the commission
of the f(M*gery in these words :
" I allow that I purposely ouutted mention of Ipsuvi in my sum-
mary of De Rossi, because bad I introduced it without a long ex-
phuiation (such as now given), after the utter rubbish v.ritten about
Ipsum by my opponent, I sbould only have seconded his efforts
to confuse the public mind, and I wanted to be spared the unneces-
sai-y and useless trouble of givhig it."
What a confession! But the "damned spot" will not so
" out." Examine it as paralleled :
De Rossi's icords.
"Which original authorities
and witnesses being most exceed-
ingly grave and insurmoxmtable,
evidently demonstrate that the
true reading of the sacred text is
Hu, Ipse, Ipsum.'"
The Vicar'' s forgery.
"He (De Rossi) enumerates
thirty -five 'most exceedingly
and insurmountable original
autborities and witnesses ' in
support of tlie masculine 'He
shall bruise the serpent's head.' "
Why suppress Ipsum, interpolate the Scripture text, "Z?i?
shall bruise the serpent's head," and then avow to his readers
that — '• I have never found Ipsum mentioned as a various
reading"? What explanation was needed? Moreover, when
the Yicar volunteered the evidence of De Rossi, I had not dis-
cussed Ipsum beyond my statement of fact in my first letter
to the Bishop, and the Yicar himself had concluded that " the
controversy had closed." " I wanted to be spared the un-
necessary and useless trouble of giving it," he says, "^'ly.
372 Ipsk, Ipsa, Ipscm.
there's the rxibP The hypocritical stickler for lionesty row
confesses that he considers it to be "unnecessary and useless"
to abstain from literary forgeries — and therefore any other
crime — if these can in any way l)e made "advaTitageous to our
Church." This candid avowal explains his course in this dis-
cussion. The principle is borrowed from his master, Little-
dale, whose whole career was shaped and directed by it. The
disciple is worthy of the master in blatant dishonesty, though
not in ability. May the occasion of the awful judgment of
Holy Writ strike terror into his heart while he is still young :
" The feet of those who shall bury thee are at the door."
I will now consider the Vicar's attempt at humor. lie
pretends to believe that I did not know there were but two
genders in Hebrew, because I so effectively exposed his dis-
honest garbling of De Eossi. I have already discussed the
matter in the last letter of my Rejoinder. V>\\i I Avill offer
here my account of the language in the fourth letter of the
Rejoinder, which he criticizes.
I despaired of making plain to the non-classical reader the
Vicar's heinous forgery of De Rossi mentioned above. I set
about it, however, in these words :
"Here let me clear the way for a full undei-standuig of the posi
tioii by the orclniary reader. In Hebrew the words corresponding"
to Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsumare Hu, Hi, Hu, to speak popularly, since I can-
not reproduce here the Hebrew charactere. It will be noticed that
in Hebi-ew the masculine and neuter genders are tlie same, so that
an authority for one is at the same time an authority for the
other."
Now, in adopting this mode of speech my sole desire was to
aid the ordinary reader in comprehending the matter in dis-
pute I therefore paralleled the Hebrew — IIu, Hi, Ilti, with
the Latin fjm', Ipsa, Tpsvm ; that is to say, I made use of
physical signs v^i\\QV than strict grammatical forms, ior the
purpose of impressing the idea more sharply on the mind of
the general reader, llu, as a sign, is represented in Latin by
Ipse, Ipsum, and Hi, also as a sign, is represented in Latin by
Ipsa — at least in the matter and connection under discussion
in this controversy. Had I pointed out that Hi sometimes
A Rebutter. 373
represented tlie neuter gender (viz., when it refers to inani-
mate ohjects), I would have only blurred the clear impression
which the parallelism I had made was well calculated to give.
No such explanation was necessary here, because we were not
discussing " inaninuite objects," but no less a ^>e/'.w/i than the
Inniiaculate Mother of God. Therefore I coniiiicd /// to the
expression of the feminine gender. For this reason, I submit
to your learned readers that my parallel is not only legitinuite,
but well conceived in this connection. Indeed, it was sug-
gested to me by all the Latin counuentators on our text. For
instance, many of them say that the Hebrew MSS. have
Ipsum, while others say they have Ipse, — IIu, the Hebrew
sign, being the e(piivalent for both. This explains, very
clearly, what I meant when I said that an authority, in Hebrew,
for the masculine Jj^se, is at the same time an authority for the
neuter, Ipsum. De Rossi supports and confirms my whole
position here, for he says: "The true reading of the sacred
text is JLu, Ipse, Ipsum : and countless Catholic authors, both
before and since the Council of Trent, follow this reading as the
truer, and prefer it to the feminine "; that is, prefer it to III
--Ipsa. Your readers will instantly remark that De Rossi
adopts absolutely my parallel, JIu, Hi, llu — Ipse, Ipsa, Ip-
sum / and he does not confuse his readers by reminding them
that " inaninuite objects," of which he was not speaking, are
sometimes masculine, and sometimes feminine in Hebrew. I
very much fear the poor Yicar will never recover his mental
equilibrium. That *'six weeks" study of the Fathers has
proved too much for him.
Here I close my comments on his third letter. Your read-
ers will not now be deceived by the shameless falsehood, repeated
over and over again, that he had set me to name "a manuscript
of the Latin Yulgate which reads Ipsum.''^
Fourth Letter. — Beyond the untruth just now exposed,
and which " like a wounded snake, drags its slow length along,"
this contains nothing worthy of remark. He simply repeats
from his first series of Strictwes what I have fully answered
in my liejoinder. There is, however, an insult to myself
37-i Ipse, Ipsa, IpdUM.
against which I must protest. He represents me speaking
of him as — " Father ! " O, No ! God forbid that I should so dis-
honor a title consecrated by respect and affection to the Cath-
olic Priesthood. It is a piece of wanton insolence to put it
into my mouth as applied to him.
Fifth Letter. — If it be true that " all a man's experience
h funded in him," the Vicar is to be envied. He has prated
ad nauseam about " forgeries," " verifications " of authorities,
and my " Seminary text-books." We have long since learned
how ridiculous were his pretensions in this particular. But I
propose now to expose anothor infamous trick, as bad if not
worse than any we have had from " the cap and bells."
He returns, in this letter, to the discussion of Ipsa. Early
in this controversy, with characteristically vulgar insolence, he
charged that I had the help of " learned friends." Now he
declares the source from which he has drawn his information.
It is from the office of the London Church Times, — LittL-*""
dale's workshop. " The Church Times^'' he says, *' cour-
teously allowed one of the students on its staff to make refer-
ences for me to these works." I have no doubt this " student "
was Littledale — the "grinning Voltaire" of the Ritualistic
party. One of the "works" reported by the "student;" — ^
"the scholar who made the references for me," snys r'lo*^' 'c?.r,
— was the "famous work" of Father Vercellone on tl>p " V?.'--
ions Readings of the Latin Vulgate Bible/' ir» two folio vol-
umes. Rome, 1860. I got it since writing my Rejoinder, and
it is iiow before me. Now wutcu tiie trick of the " scholar "
anu his dupe and accomplice, tho pseudo-" Priest of the Mis-
sion Church."
Vercellone — " the eminent Roman Catholic scholar," as the
Vicar truly calls his new-found aide — is commenting (Vol. 1,
p. 11), on Gen. iii. 15. lie refers to the essays of De Rossi
and Cardinal Patrizi, which I have so fully reported to your
readers. He then says (I translate) :
" Fi-om which it appears to be established (videtur oonstare), that
at fii-st tlie present reading of tl\e Vulgate ai-ose from carelessness of
the copyists, and was then preserved by the Roman revisora of the
A Rebcttee. 875
text because it had secured for itself a kind of prescriptive right
from the usage of many centuries among the Latms in nearly all
the MSS. : so that it was evidently afar greater inconvenience to
change it than to leave it untouched.''^
In these words Yercellone simply sums up the opinions of De
Rossi and Patrizi. But surely there is nothing new here.
Was not the learned Cardinal one of my own witnesses against
Ipsa, and in support of Ipse, Ipsum f And did I not impale
the Vicar for his wickedness (now confessed !) in 6U]>pre66ing
Ipsum from De Rossi's text ?
The Vicar gives the first clause in the above quotation from
Yercellone; but who suppressed the second clause which I
have italicized? Was it the "scholar" of the Church Times
on his unprincipled henchman here ? If it was Littledale, then
the disciple is so worthy of the master that they can divide
the fflory of the infamy between them ; but if it was the
. Tr: ^^ Mnf'V' '1% "ilia Lci '. :' • ■. rXlK- *c JD'ce in being " beaten by
the boy " at his own game.' "* ^'*^ •
But why did they suppress the last clause ? " Ay, there's
the rub." It was to help Bishop Kingdon in his preposterous,
disgraceful, and dishonoring statement — which he has not yet
retracted and apologized for — that the Immaculate Conception
was founded on Ipsa. What satanic persistence in calumny !
"Evil i be tVioi; :r4i.g=>-ii/i" .is ?viil;;.^!tlY their motto in regard
to the Catholic Cirarch. !Novv ir^ark, my rpsdora, Inljiy very
first letter I said :
"The simple truth is that (Bishop Kingdon's) theory of amis-
print and his statement there anent is sheer nonsense. There is
absolutely no difiFerence in sense, to the Catholic mind at least, bo
tween the three readings (Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum) It becomes a
mere quillet of verbal criticism I, as a Catholic, have no
more interest in retaining "Ipsa," "She" in the text than he has
so far as the Immaculate Conception is concerned."
This is the language alike of the great Catholic scholars who
adopt Ipse, Ipsum, on critical grounds, as of those who plead
for Ipsa on the same grounds. In proof of this I have given
some of the most profound theologians in the Church, — not
one of whom has been, or can he, offset hy contrary teaching.
376 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
And all this is now absolutely confirmed by the evidence of
the learned Vercellone, a witness " courteously " called to the
Vicar's assistance by the "scholar" of the Church Times.
What a cruel Nemesis ! What a crushing humiliation to Bishop
Kingdon 1 The Vicar says that Vercellone is " an eminent
Roman Catholic scholar." Precisely. He ought therefore to
be accepted by Protestants as a better authority on Catholic
doctrine than Bishop Kingdon ? Most assuredly. Well, then,
Vercellone says that, assuming the critical aspect of the matter
to be as stjited by De Lossi and Patrizi, still from its great an-
tiquity and almost universal use in the Western Church, it
would cause greater INCONVENIENCE if Ipsa were changed
to Tpse or Ipsum than if it were left untouched. Simply
" inconvenient,^^ mark you. Is this the language of a Catholic
Theologian when he is discussing a question in whi"h Christian
doctrine is involved ? O, no ; but it is the reason why the
Vicar found it convenient to suppress this part of the quotation
from Vercellone, that is, if the second-hand " reference " of
his "scholar" contained it. Of course, "you know," honesty
is quite " unnecessary and useless " in dealing with a " Roman
controversialist." It is " beneath the dignity of a gentleman
to cross swords" in honorahU warfare with "such an adver-
sary "; and then, "you know," if he happens to be one of the
" poor Irish," one stands in grave danger of heanng from the
"Shillalah," "you know."
But more. Vercellone proceeds to discuss the whole ques-
ti(m, and he gives the authorities for Ipisc, Ipsa, Ipsum,
though not so much in detail as I have given them. He ex-
presses his own opinion that " there are many arguments which
render Ipse (or Ipsum) the more probable," but he commends
the Papal Revisors for retaining Ipsa and he gives very logical
reasons. Here, however, is the cap-sheaf of the evidence of
this " eminent Roman Catholic scholar " (I translate) :
'* But as regards the sense, it must be observed that both readings
have the same meaning; for whether you say He (the Son of the
woman) shall crush the serpent's head, or She (the Woman by her
Son) shall crush the serpent's head, the same doctrine (or idea) is
expressed."
A Rebcttek. 377
"Wliat will Bishop Kingdon say to this? Why did not the
Vicar's " scholar " report it ? What infamous deceit has this
" Old Catholic " jackanapes, this Ritualistic Thersites practiced
upon the public 1 lu his fourth letter, speaking of my argu-
ment, he wrote :
, " Surely if his first contention be true, that it makes absolutely
no difference to the meaning of Gen. iii. 15, whatever the gender
of the pronoun, then, for him at all events, Cadit questio."
" Cadit questio " — the discussion is at an end. Precisely I
And may I humbly presume to think that he will be satisfied
with the testimony of his own witness, the " eminent Roman
Catholic scholar," so " courteously " recommended to him by
his " student," counsellor, and guide of the Church Times —
the sponsor, confessedly, of many of his monstrosities ? Face
to face with this witness I ask the Vicar to pause. At the
close of his first series of Strictures he bade me remember
that :
" Giants of learning who have prostituted their talents ' to make
. oid the Word of God by mere human tradition,' and so to deceive
numberless souls dear to God's heart, will appear exceedingly ' lili-
putian,' if nothing worse, at the Great Assize."
I quite agree. It is the only truth he has uttered since this
controversy began. ''Liliput" indeed he is, even when
jprimed by his " learned friends " in the " good old country,"
and he is also something worse. But let him recall, while
there is time for repentance, that God has declared that " he
who speaketh less shall not escape." There will be no
" scholars " of the Littledale stripe to act as counsel for con-
victed liars at the " Great Assize," but every soul bloated with
falsehood and calun.ny, and scarred by infamies such as he has
committed during this discussion, shall be put to " the penal
discipline that looks to health " should it have the good fortune,
by God's uncovenanted mercy, to escape the merciless fate of
Bellarmine and Baronius consigned by him to " the lake that
burneth with fire and brimstone."
Again. In his first Strictures, the Vicar had alleged the
378 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
" awful consequences " of the so-called " misprint " to be " an
undue exaltation of the Holy Virgin." To meet this absurdity
I changed the venue (in the fifth and sixth letters of my lie-
joinder), from the Latin Church where Ipsa was used, to the
Greek or Oriental Church where Autos — Ipse prevailed. "We
found that the Greek Fathers simply exhausted the glowing
splendors of their magnificent tongue on panegyrizing the
Blessed Mother. This my opponent calls " the most contemp-
tible of shifts." Indeed! Well, let me reassure him that
notwithstanding their language, the same Fathers held as the
Catholic Church holds to-day — that Christ, the Seed of the
woman, is the Champion of the human race against the Devil
and all his aides and abettors. But hear Balaam's ass once
more. The Vicar writes :
" The consent of tlie Fathers of the first six centuries Qie might
have said of nineteen centuries almost) is tlierefore unanimous as
to the meaning, if not as to the reading, of Gen. iii. 15. Not one
attributes the bruising of the serpent's head to the Blessed Virgin but
to Christ immediately and alone."
Precisely. This is what Vercellone, his own witness has told
him, what the Bull Ineffahilis says, what the Catholic Church
teaches, and what I have tried to get into his malevolently
ignorant head from the beginning. Christ, our blessed Lord
and Saviour, crushes the serpent's head by the prowess of Ilis
own Divinity and Almighty power, and Mary, as one of
the redeemed, the first in glory among the redeemed, is said
to crush the serpent's head by giving birth to Jesus, and
in, by, and through that grace and virtue with which she was
endued by Him. The Doctors of the Church are just as
unanimous in this teaching in the Nineteenth Century as were
the Fathers of the first six centuries. Can the Vicar be sincere
in his insolent attempt to ignore this explanation of the mean-
ing of Ipsa? Or, has tlie unclean spirit of malice and
calumny so wholly possessed him that he cannot see it ?
Once more. Your readers will remember, that when I
quoted against him the crushing evidence of Prudentius, the
Vicar cried out " spurious ! " But he asked permission to
consult his " learned friends " in England. I assured your
A Rebutter. 379
readers that he could get no support for his cowardly statement
from his English "scliolars" or elsewhere. I was correct
again. His friends, while they blush for his audacious ignor-
ance, assure him that my quotation from Prudentius " is genu-
ine," and once more this wretched pilferer of scraps, and re-
tailer of exploded calumnies, " bites the dust."
And finally. Your readers will remember, that in the fifth
letter of his first Strictures the Vicar said :
" I am credibly informed that no iiistance is to be found in any
Ecclesiastical writer (mark you !) of even the corrupt reading Ipsa
being interpreted of the Blessed Virgin till St. Bernard's time (12th
Century)."
" Credibly informed," forsooth ! He has confessedly been
but a wind-bag and foot-ball for every so-called " scholar " to
whom he appealed for help. His repeated confession of his
reliance on " learned friends " explains his contemptible cow-
ardice in refusing to meet me on the public platform. On
more than one occasion, he taunted me with receiving assist-
ance from distinguished Catholic scholars. This provoked
some amusement among your readers who recalled my chal-
lenge to him and Bishop Kingdon. His miserable insinuation
but witnessed to the low vulgarity and baseness of the pol-
troon, with whom it is my misfortune to deal. He hoped
thereby to screen himself from the scorn and contempt of fair-
minded Protestants in this community, but he has — failed.
Now, I accepted the gauntlet thrown down by the Vicar's
informer. In the twenty-eighth letter of my liejolnder I
produced eleven " Ecclesiastical writers " (and I offered to pro-
duce twenty-eight), who interpret Ipsa of the Blessed Virgin
before St. Bernard's time. What did he say to this ? Here
are his words :
"Notice in the first place that my opponent dares not call them
Fathere, because he knows that but few, if any, of them rank with
what his own Church technically style ' the Fathers.' "
That is to say, he asked me for " Ecclesiastical writers " and
now howls because he gets them. He reminds me of the
little boy who cried bitterly because he could not eat all the
380 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
pudding his mother gave him. Well, St. Eplirem is not only
a " Father " of the Church but a Doctor as well ; St. John
Damascene is called the last of the Greek Fathers, while even
Prudentius is recKoned a " Father " by the learned Protestant
Le Clerc in his '* Primitive Fathers," p. 281, and Erasmus de-
clares that he deserves to be ranked among the gravest Doc-
tors of the Church. St. Proclus was an illustrious Father of
the Church, St. Tarasius a Patriarch of Constantinople, and
Chrysippus a Presbyter of Jerusalem. I did not quote from
these three, but I mentioned them as authorities for the use
of Ipia, or the idea expressed by it, before St. Bernard's tune.
I have their words before me in Greek and Latin, — produce-
able on demand of Bishop Kingdon.
Again he says :
(Notice) "fn the second (place), that he does not inform us how
many of the tweuty-eight belong to the first six centuries, which
are all I ask for, though in an obiter dictum I said something
about St. Bernard.''''
Hal Ha!! Ha!!! « Obiter dictum," indeed ! How com-
plimentary to the " scholar " (this time Bishop Kingdon per-
haps), who so badly fooled him ! " Something about St. Ber-
nard ! " He pretends to have forgotten all about it though
he assured your readers that he was " credibly informed " it
was true. Ye Gods and little fishes !
Again he writes :
(Notice) "in the third (place), that he does not say how many
came after St. Bernard's time (12th Century)."
Of coarse I don't! He confined me to that time — else I
could fill a column. But note the malicious pretence that I
had gone outside his limits. The twenty-eight writers of
whom I spoke (and to which I can now add), are all before
St. Bernard's time, — and I emphatically so declared. I gave
the names of eleven of these writers, with quotations from
some only, to economize space. They are all what he de-
manded — " Ecclesiastical writers "; three of them, at least, are
illustrious " Fathers," and eight of them are within the first six
centuries. Yet he mendaciously asserts, that I gave two ex-
A Rebutter. 381
tracts from writers later than St. Bernard ! I beg your readers
to verify my statement by a reference to the end of the
twenty-eighth letter of my liejohider. I gave atie extract
from the celebrated Lipsius, but I said it was not to count
against the Vicar, "since Lipsius lived long after St. Ber-
nard."
This unfortunate man has more than once assured us, on
the authority of " God's holy Word, the Word of Truth," that
" all liars shall have their part in the lake that burneth with
fire and brimstone." He has given many proofs that he is
willing to risk it.
Sixth Lktteb. — Here the Vicar quotes very beautiful words
from St. Ephrera, with every one of which I most heartily
agree. They but express, in the Saint's magnificent way, the
glory of Christ's triumph over Satan, and our redemption by
His Cross and Passion. The result of this victory was to be
what St. Paul declared to the Romans : " The God of peace
shall bruise Satan under your feet speedily." St. Ephrem
knew very well, that among all the redeemed of Christ, His
blessed Mother supereminently illustrated in her life this re-
sult. Therefore he addresses her in words already given :
" Hail Paradise of delights .... Hail, thou pure one who
crushed the head of the most wicked dragon and hurled him
bound in chains into the abyss." The Vicar, with perverse
stupidity, alleges that /lis quotations prove mine to be " spuri-
ous." May God forgive himl He also complained that I
gave no reference. It does not make much difference to him,
but here it is : (I translate) — " Prayer to the Mother of God,
Greek Translation E.— F., p. 547. Latin Translation, Vol. 3."
The Greek and Latin are before me. Let me add to St.
Ephrem's prayer a very good commentary upon it.
In Hymn 27, the Saint writes :
"Truly it is Thou and Thy Mother only who are fair altogether.
For m Thee there is no stain, and in Thy Mother no spot. But my
sons (i.e., the members of the Church of Edessa) are far from resem-
bling this twofold fairness." And again : "Two were made simple,
innocent, perfectly like each other — Mary and Eve — ^but afterwards
one became the cause of our death, the other of our life" (u. 327a).
882 Ii'SE, Ipsa, Ipscm.
The "scholars" wlio supply this Ritualistic wind-bag with
references and scrape, will Hnd the above quotations in Bick-
ell's critical edition of the Ifynma of St. Ephreni, p. 122.
When the Vicar s again "six weeks" to devote to the
Fathers, let me conm.jnd to him the magnificent edition of
the Hymns and Sermons of St. Ephrem, in Syriae and Latin,
recently completed by the learned Professor Lamy, of Louvain
Univernity, in 3 vols., 4to.
He closes the letter under consideration with a telling illus-
tration from St. Liguori, of the intercession of the Blessed
Mother with her Divine Son. I have already so fully ex-
j)lained and vindicated the principles of intercessory prayer
(see liejohider, 23d letter), that I need not remark u])ou it
here. His tiresome jumbling of subjects will, however, neces-
sitate a word later on.
Seventh Letter. — My remarks on this will be very brief.
At the close of his first Strlctui'cs he started an objection, hi
twenty lines, to the Catholic view of the Blessed Virgin's
position based on the alleged silence of Scripture. This he
did to draw me off from a logical treatment of tlie matter in
liand. Now, I have given some years to the study of Euclid ;
I have also spent some years in walks amid the majestic tow-
ers and under the sweeping arches, in the sun-lit glades and
over the prairie amphitheatres of Catholic thought, and it is
simple fact to say, that the logic of the former is not more
irrefragal)le than that of the latter — as the intellectual system
of Christianity. Therefore the Vicar's attempt to draw me
in his direction did not succeed. But I offered to discuss in
the Anglican pulpits this text : " Mary, the Mother of Jesus,
in Prophecy and its Fulfilment interpreted by Antiquity," —
in other words, Mary m the Gosjyels ; or, if that did not suit
my opponents, I challenged Bishop Kingdon to lead out a
dozen of his Oxford " scholars " to discuss it before any audi-
ence. The gauntlet thus fairly thrown down remains un-
touched, and I do not propose at this stage to take up a new
line of argument. I do reassert, however, that no mathemat-
ical proposition is more rigorously demonstrable than is the
A Rebutter. 383
direct contradict(»ry of tlie Protestant position on this matter.
When Oxford, led by Bishop Kingdon, can muster courage tf»
meet me I will be on hand.
Eighth Letter. — His remarks here on the authenticity of
the "Acts of the Martyrdom of St. Andrew," I had already
anticipated by a frank and honest statement of the authorities.
I will now add, however, that the counter-arguments of Cave
are founded on a falsilication of facts.
He perverts, though, and misrepresents the object of my
quoting this document. I was not discussing the Innnaculate
Conception when I quoted the words alleged to be St.
Andrew's : (Our Lord) " was born of a blameless Virgin." As
your honest re.iders will confess, I was then engaged in setting
before them the picture of Mary as the Greek Fathers almw
have painted her from the very dawn of Christianity, — and in
regions where Ipsa was unknown.
Now, however, that his dishonesty, ignorance, and stupidity
has put me to it, and all the authorities are in my hand, I had
better nulvcrize him.
In the first ))lace, then, let me call attention to the Vicar's
utter incapacity to understand the matters he has dared to
handle. lie refers your readers to page xvi. of the Introduc-
tion to Volume XVI. of Clarke's Ante-Nicene Library, now
before me. Let us examine its contents.
The " Introduction " is made uj) of critical notices of docu-
ments of which a translation is given in the volume. Among
these notices is one of a book entitled — Acts of Andrew. A
short history of the disputed authorship is then given. Im-
mediately thereupon the editors say :
" This hook (the Acts of Andrew) is 7nuch the same in sub-
stance with the celebrated Preshyterornm et Diaconormn
Achahie de Martyrio S. Andreae Apostoli epistola encyclica
— (Encyclical Letter of the Priests and Deacons of Achaia con-
cerning the Martyrdom of St. Andrew the Apostle)."
Now, I am not concerned here with the extent of their dif-
ference. I have nothing to do with the " book " as such. In
the fifth letter of my Eejoinder I professed to quote from
384 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
" the celebrated letter,^'' and I am obligated to your readers only
to prove the credibility of the witness whose testimony I
offered to them. I hope the Vicar will admit that this is a
lawyer-like view of my duty, since he has assured us that
" there are lawyers and lawyers."
Well, then, this "celebrated letter" was at first considered
spurious, or at least doubtful, because it was in Latin, and no
Greek copy known ; but since the Greek was found in the
Bodleian Library, Oxford University, and published by Charles
Christian Woog, a learned Protestant, in 1749, all intelligent
doubt has ceased, so that Morcelli, the famous Jesuit archceolo-
gian and epigraphist, made no difficulty about inserting it as
true and authentic in his Calendar of the Church of Constan-
tinople, under the date of the 30th November. Woog himself
held it to be a genuine writing of the Apostolic age, composed
a])out A.D. 80, and he has most ably vindicated it against all
its assailants. What great scholars support him? Morcelli,
Cardinals Baronius and Bellarmine, Gallandus, Piazza, Natalia
Alexander, and Lamper. Who oppose him ? Fabricius, who
only thinks it later than the Apostolic age, and the Anglican
scholar. Cave ; but the latter is ruled out as an authority, be-
cause his counter-arguments are based upon a falsification of
facts. The editors of Clarke's Library mention Thilo, but it is
not very clear what his opinion is. Pusey admits that " it
would, if genuine, have the same authority as Holy Scripture,"
and he does not even attempt to dispute it. They aU, how-
ever, agree to assign the " celebrated letter " a place among
the earliest records of the Church. This was all I claimed for
it originally, though now your readers will concede, if evidence
is worth anything, that the lips of my witness keep Apostolic
testimony.
Again : The editors of Clarke's Library, speaking of the
" book," say that —
" There does not seem to be any undoubted quotation of it
before the eighth and the tenth centuries."
I am not concerned to dispute this statement with regard to
the " book " as such, but it is utterly untrue as to the " letter ";
for from it is taken the Preface of the Masp In the Gothic
A Rebutter. 385
Missal of the Sixth Century. My authority liere is absoUito
and final, a "cloud of witnesses" in himself — Mabillon, Litur-
(jiii Gallica, L. 3, n. 17, p. 221.
I Buhinit, therefore, to the jury of your readers that as well
the competency as the credibility of my witness is unimpeach-
able. But I will now go farther. 1 will do what, keepinj^
good faith with your readers, I did not do before ; that is, 1
will (piote the "celebrated letter" as evidence of the belief in
the Immaculate Conception in Apostolic times. 1 give the
Litin, with an English translation, as follows :
" Et quoniam de iuimaculata terra factus fuerat homo
primus, qui ])er ligni prcvaricationem mundo mortem intulerat :
necessarium fuit, ut de immaculata Virgine nasceretur j)er~
fectus homo Filius Dei, vitam aeternam, quam per Adanmm
perdiderant homines, rcpararet, ac per lignum Crucis lignum
concupiscentiae excluderet — And since the first man, who
brought death into the world through the tree of prevarica-
tion, had been made from the immaculate (spotless, blameless)
earth, it was necessary that the Son of God should be begotten
a perfect man from an immaculate (spotless, blameless) Virgin,
that lie nn'ght restore that eternal life whicli men had lost
through Adam, and cut off the tree of carnal desire by the tree
of the Cross."
This comparison of the virgin earth with the immaculate
Virgin shows us Mary immaculate in her very origin, even as
was the earth of which the first man was formed, before God
said to Adam : " Cursed is the earth in thy work." Moreovei-,
this celebrated comparison became a common expressson with
the Fathers. Take, for instance, St. Hippolytus, Bishop and
Martyr, early in the third century. Speaking first of our
Lord, he says :
"He was the Ark formed of incorruptible wood. For by
this is signified that Ills tabernacle was exernptfrom putridity
and corruption, which brought forth no corruption or sin.
But the Lord was exempt from sin, of wood not ohnoxions to
corruption according to man; that is, of the Virgin and of the
Holy Ghost, covered within and without with the pure gold of
the Word of God." The same comparison is instituted between
386 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
Eve, while yet immaculate and incorrupt, that is to say, not
subject to original sin, and the Blessed Virgin, by Saints Jus-
tin and Irenseus, Tertullian, St. Cyril of Jerusalem, and St.
Epiphanius. I refer your readers to the fifth and sixth letters
of my Rejoinder, where I have quoted from all th )se Fathers
in a different connection.
I address myself now to his remarks on the Liturgies. Here
I beg an attentive and interested hearing. In the fifth letter
of my Rejoinder I quoted from the Liturgy of St. James.
Again I very properly referred to its evidential value. I do
not remark upon the silly comments he makes about this Lit-
iirgy — they are beneath notice. What I want to consider is
his pestilent assertion that the Eastern churches were accus-
tomed to pray for the repose of the soyl of Oue Blessed Lady.
In proof of this he says :
" To take as an example the Cultus of the Virgin with which we
are now dealing. An eighth century manuscript of St. Chrysostom's
Liturgy mentions the Blessed Virgin only twice, once to pray for
her (italics his) in common with the rest of the faithful departed in
Paradise."
This astounding statement I assure your readers is a r
and unblushing falsehood. What it lacks in malice .
up by criminal ignorance. Please follow me patiently, i.y
readers, while I expose the manner in which this unscrupulous
" sacerdotal pretender" has turned a holy thing to his vile uses.
As has been my rule, the authorities I follow are the great
authorities — Renaudot, Asseman, Cardinal Bona, Goar, and Leo
Allatius. It will be remembered that the Rev. G. Williams,
King's College, Cambridge, assured Pusey that, " We cannot
have a more competent witness than Leo Allatius," on the
Greek Ofiice Books. Let, then, these scholars lead us through
the Eastern Liturgies.
I will first consider the Liturgy of St. Mark, the Liturgy of
the Church of Alexandria. I extract from that part of it
known to Catholics as the Canon — the most sacred part of the
Mass — what is called a commemoration.
" To the souls of our fathers and brethren who aforetime have
kept ii< ihe faith of Christ, give rest O Lord our Ood ; being mind-
A Rebutter. 387
ful of our forefathers from the beginning, fathers, patriarchs, proph-
ets, apostles, martyrs, confessors, bishops, saints, and just men, and
of every spirit that hath been perfected in the faith of Christ, and of
those of whom we make commemoration this day, and of our holy
father, Mark, Apostle and Evangelist, who showed us the way of
salvation. [Here is said the Hail Mary.] Hail, full of grace, the
Loi-d is with thee ; blessed art thou among women, and blessed is
the fruit of thy womb, because thou hast brought forth the Saviour
of our souls. [Then the priest proceeds, raising his voice] and (be
mindful) especially of our all holy, unspotted, and blessed Lady
the Mother of Ood, the ever Virgin Mary" (Renaudot: Litm-giae
Orientales, vol. i., pp. 149, 150).
Who but the Vicar and " his kidney," can be such a blunder-
ing ignoramus as not to see the difference between praying for
mercy upon the souls of the faithful departed, and praying Jy
the hallowed memory of the saints ? Is he so blind as not to
be able to read the " Hail Mary " when it is set before his eyes
in clear, bold type ? What did the Psalmist mean when he
said, " O Lord I remember David and all his meekness " ? The
above extract contains the first portion of the " Hail Mary,"
sufficient evidence, if there were no other, of the absurdity of
the Vicar's assertion. But some " scholar " from the " good
old country " — from the Church Times factory — will perhaps
" credibly inform " him that the " Hail Mary " is a manifest
interpolation. Well, what then ? Such a plea is entirely be-
side the mark, as your readers will admit. Granted, for the
sake of argument, that the " Hail Mary " found no place in the
• earliest form of the Liturgy, what manner cf prayer must that
have been in which this invocation could be inserted ? What
man out of Bedlam (or its equivalent. High, — Low, — Broad, —
No, — Church Anglicanism) could imagine the Alexandrian
Christians to have interrupted by s^ich an interpolation a prayer
for the repose of our Lady's soul ? The simple fact (so plain
to a Catholic) is, that the Mother of God is commemai'ated,
not, of course, prayed for.
But perhaps Bishop Kingdon, who knew so much about the
" tremendous importance " of Ipsa, will instruct his Vicar (if he
has not soured on him because of that obiter dictum about St.
Bernard), that the Alexandrian Christians, when thoy said, " be
888 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
mindful of the saints," must have intended to pray for them I
The gudgeons of the " Mission Church " may be caught with
bait like this. I may then ask once more, wliat the Psalmist
meant when he said, " O Lord ! remember David and all his
meekness"? Fortunately, however, I can pin down these
shufflers — the Oxford twain — with something more pointed
than a mere a pari argument.
I will now give a passage from the Coptic Liturgy of St.
Cyril, which is only another recension of that called after St.
Mark. The following prayer occupies in St. Cyril's^Liturgy
exactly the same place as that which I quoted from " St. Mark ":
"Grant rest to our fathers and brethren who have slept, and
whose souls Thou hast received. Be mindful also of all the saints
who from the beginning have been pleasing to Thee, our holy-
fathers, patriarchs, prophets, apostles, evangelists, martyrs, confes-
sors, preachers, and all the spirits of the just who have been i)er-
fected in the faith. But especially of the holy and most glorious
Mother of God, ever Virgin, the pure and stainless Saint Mary ....
and of the whole choir of Thy saints.
(The Priest) : And we, O Loi-d, are not worthy to make supplica-
tion for those blessed ones ; but whereas they stand before the throne
of Thy only begotten Son. May they intercede in our place for
our poverty and weakness. Forgive us our transgressions for the
sake of their prayers in our behalf, and for the sake of Thy blessed
name which is invoked upon us" (Renaudot: Lit. Orient., i., pp.
41, 42).
From the same authority I can match this extract with par-
allel passages from the Coptic Liturgies or Anaphorse of St.
Gregory and St. Basil the Great. The latter, with that of St.
Chrysostom, holds undisturbed sway in the East to-day, among
Catholics and schismatics alike.
Now, your readers will easily see that to " commemorate^*
a saint implies that — in the words of St. Cyril's Liturgy — he
" stands before the thronu " of God in eternal blessedness mak-
ing intercession for us; but to " jo^-ay/b?' " a person implies
that he is in some place or state in which our intercession can
benefit him.
But St. Cyril (of Jerusalem) goes further and explains that
the practice of the Church was to commemorate not only
A Rebdttke. 389
Patriarchs, Prophets, Apostles, etc., hut also to pray for all
other departed souls, and he tells us the reason why they com-
memorated one class and prayed for the other. " We com-
memorate,^' he says, " those who have fallen asleep before us,
FiKST, Patriarchs, Prophets, Apostles, that God, hy their
prayers and mteroession, would receive our petition: then,
ALSO, on behalf of the holy Fathers and Bishops who have
fallen asleep before us, and of all, in short, who have already
fallen asleep amongst us, believing this to he a very great help
to those souls, for which the prayer is offered up, while the
holy and most tremendous Victim lies present " (Catech. 23,
Myst. 5, n. 10).
From these words of St. Cyril it is very clear that prayers
were offered to God not for Patriarchs and Prophets, etc., bat
for those souls who had departed this life in sin, that God
might be propitiated in • their behalf and grant a respite to
their punishment. The same explanation is given by St.
Epiphanius, who says :
" For we make a commemoration of the just aad on behalf of
sinners; on behalf of sinners, supplicating mercy from God; and
for the just, both Patriarchs, Prophets, Apostles .... in order
that on account of the honor which we pay to Christ, we may sep-
arate him from the race of men " {Haerea. 75, n. 8).
St. John Chrysostom expresses himself in the same manner :
" Let us not then grow weary of helping the departed, of offering
up prayers for them, for even the common expiation of the world
lies (before us). By this made confident, we then pray for the
world and name them with martyrs, with confessors, with priests.
Yea, for one body are we all, although some members are more
glorious than others. And it is possible to gather from all sides
pardon for them from tbe prayers — from the gifis (offered) in their
behalf— /rom those who are named with them " (Hom. Ixi. on I.
Cor., n. 5).
Having thus made clear to your Protestant readers, the dis-
tinction between commemorating a saint and praying for a
person, I will return to the Liturgy of St. James — the Jeru-
salem Rite, from which are derived forty Syro-Jacobite Litur-
gies or Offices, as well as that of St. Chrysostom to be next
390 Ipse, Ipba, Ipsum.
discussed. We find in this Liturgy (St. James'), in the Com-
memoration at Mass, these words :
"Let us commemorate our All-holy, Immaculate, most glorious
and blessed Lady, the ever-Virgin Mother of God and all the
saints, that bj their prayers and intercessions we may all obtain
mercy" (Asseman, t. v., p. 24).
And this is followed (pp. 44, 45) by a singularly devout and
affectionate prayer to her whom " all creatures congratulate,"
to her who is " ever blessed, every way blameless, more honor-
able than the Cherubim, more glorious than the Seraphim,
.... the hallowed temple, the spiritual paradise (of God),
and glory of Virgins."
Again, in the Syrian Hite, in the Commemoration at Mass,
we read :
^'Priest. Especially and first of all, we make mention of the
Holy, Glorious, and Ever- Virgin Mary, etc. Deacon. Remember
her, Lord God, and at her holy and pure prayers be propitious, have
merey uix)n us, and favorably hear our prayers. Priest. Mother of
our Lord Jesus Christ, pray for me to thy Son, Only-begotten, Who
came of thee, that, having remitted my sins tmd debts. He may ac-
cept from my humble and sinful hands this sacrifice, which is ofl'ered
by my vileness upon this altar, through thy intercession. Mother
most holy" (Asseman, t. v., p. 186).
I come now to the Liturgy of St. Chrysostom. I have said
that it was derived from that of St. James. My authorities
say that this Liturgy, with that of St. Basil the Great, already
referred to, holds undisputed sway in the East to-day. They
are now such as they were when they came from the hands of
the great men whose names they bear, and they are used by
Catholics and Schismatics alike. They are used by the Rus-
sian Church in the Empire of Russia itself and throughout all
the imperial dominions ; not, indeed, in their Greek form but
in the Sclavonic, which is the liturgical language in all those
parts. They are used in the Kingdom of Greece and its de-
pendencies, and have universal sway among the Mingrelians,
Wallachians, Ruthenians, Rascians, Bulgarians, and Albanians,
as well as with all tlie Uniat or Melchite Greeks of the four
Patriarchates of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and
A Rebutter. 391
Jerusalem. The United Greeks of Italy and those of the
Austrian Empire also use them. St. Basil's Liturgy, we have
seen, holds tho sime language as that of St. Cyril given above.
Now, the Liturgy of St. Chrysostom, by Goar, p. 78 (Paris,
1647), contains the same sort of commemoration with the
meaning so clearly given by St. Cyril.
But, perhaps, some tricky " student " or " scholar '- has told
the Vicar of a well-known passage from "an eighth century
manuscript of St. Chrysostora's Liturgy," in which the Holy
Sacrifice is said to be offered " on behalf of " (the Greek pre-
position Iluper), that is to say, in honor o/'the Saints and our
Blessed Lady. Well, in the Mass to-day, according to the Rite
of St. Chrysostom, we find the Offertory made :
^^ In honor and memory of our singularly blessed and glorioua
Queen, Mary Theotokos and Ever- Virgin ; at whose intercession, O
Lord, receive, O Lord, this Sacrifice unto Thy altar which is beyond
the Heavens " (Groar, Euchologium Graecorum, p. 58).
Now, granting for argument's sake, that the passage in ques-
tion is of doubtful interpretation whatever may be the precise
force of the Greek preposition IIvj)er, which I have translated
by the words "ow- behalf of,^"* will Bishop Kingdon, laying
aside for a moment Ipsa and its " awful consequences " — will
he, I ask, dare — in the face of the absolute unanimity of the
conservative Eastern Church, Catholic, Schismatic, Jacobite,
and Nestorian against the Vicar's miserable second-hand false-
hood, — will he, I again repeat, dare to put his Episcopal im-
primatur on the proposition that the Greek preposition
Iluper will bear the meaning of the English preposition ^^for"
in the phrase ''^ to pray for'''' a person?
It makes a serious man to bum with indignation ! One day
they juggle with a YoSavl pronoun^ another with a Greek ^r^-
osition. In the latter case as in the former I give them their
choice of acknowledging — either that they have perpetrated
an egregious and unpardonable blunder, or that they have told
an impudent falsehood.
When a gentleman finds that he has unwittingly cast a slur
upon the hitherto stainless memory of another man's wife or
392 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
sister, he hastens to make a candid retraction and an humble
apology. My opponents appear to think that the memory of
the Virgin Mother of God is entitled to less consideration
(perhaps they imagine it is less affectionately cherished) than
that of the mother or sister of the humblest of us all. For in
her case they have substituted a repetition of the ofiFence for
the usual apology and retraction. I leave their punishment in
the hands of vour fair-minded readers.
A parting word on the Greek Liturgies. The Vicar, with
his usual stupidity, writes :
"The fact is, the Liturgies, more than any other Church docu-
ments, have been subjected to alterations, excisions, and additions
from time to time in the days of the manuscripts. A comparison of
existing manuscripts tells us this."
Well, what then ? Let the learned Renaudot answer :
" Their (the Liturgies') weight does not depend on the authority
of the writers, but on the use of the Churches. Those prayers had
their authors, who indeed were not known ; but, when once it was
clear that they had been used in Mass, who their authora were
ceased to be a question" {Liturgiae Orient., vol. I., p. 173).
" The existing manuscripts," says Cardinal Newman, " can
hardly be supposed to be mere compositions, but are records
of Rites."
I commend to Anglicans who speak so pathetically of the
Branch Theory — that mere " Will-o'-the-Wisp " — the folloMang
remark of the Cardinal :
"That usage, which, after a split has taken place in a religious
communion, is found to obtain equally in each of its separated
parts, may fairly be said to have existed before the split occurred.
The concurrence of Orthodox, Nestorian, and Jacobite in the honors
they pay to the Blessed Virgin, is an evidence that those honors
were in their substance paid to her in their ' Undivided Church.' "
The Vicar promises " to return to the Liturgies later on ";
but wiser counsels prevailed, for he declares in his closing
letter :
"I regret, exceedingly, as I have said, that I cannot now fulfill
A llKBUTrER. 398
my promise of exposing in detail the ginevous delusions under which
my opponent is lahorin^ with regard to the Ancient Liturgies."
Hal Hall Ha!!! " Grievous delusions," indeed ! 0!0!!
Cicero expressed his wonder how two Roman Augurs could
meet without laughing in each other's face. Perhaps Bishop
Kingdon and his Vicar will give us the secret — if they can
stand the test. Your readers now see who is the victim of the
"grievous delusions." An Anglo-Ritualist had better not refer
to the Eastern Cburch, Orthodox or Schismatic, when looking
for arguments against the Western Church. Let him remem-
ber the Rev. Mr. Williams' words to Pusey :
"It cannot, I think, be denied that the Orthodox Greek Church
does even surpass the Church of Rome in their exaltation of the
Blessed Virgin in their devotions."
Ninth and Tenth Letters, — These will not « letain us long.
He proposes to consider :
"Whether my opponent has produced satisfactory evidence to
show that Gen. lii. 15, with its corrupt Ipsa, is not the text relied on
by Poman theologians as the Chief Scripture foundation for tlie
dc'gma of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary" ?
His argument in reply to the question, is simply that of his
first Strictures written backwards, Hebraically so to speak,
and it is but a re-hash of his audacious, insolent, unprincipled,
mendacious, and satanically malevolent calumnies, I have
given your readers some account of the immense literature on
the gender of the pronoun in Gen, iii, 15 — Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum
— amongst Catholic Theologians ; I have shown that they take
either side — I^se, Ipsum, or Ijysa, without feeling that the
doctrine of the Immaculate Conception was at all dependent
on either ; I have shown, moreover, that whatever support the
doctrine has in the text is claiined to be drawn from the first
clause ; and, I have stated, over and over again, in the most
luminous manner, the Catholic sense of Ipsa as taught by the
ablest theologians in the Church, to say nothing of the learned
Protestants, Grotius and Tischendorf. Has the Vicar quoted
one solitary dissentient voice ? Not one ! Whose word, then,
394 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
will your readers take on Catholic doctrine? That of this
wretchedly ignorant and insolent "sacerdotal pretender,"
backed up by his Episcopal godfather, or all the Theologians
of the Catholic Church ?
For an answer to his rubbish here on his own quotation from
Father Schouppe, read the fourteenth letter of my Rejoinder.
Eleventh Letter. — Here he begs to introduce "another
small item of considerable interest and importance " in further
support of the contention of his last two letters. Well, it is a
" small item " sure enough. For, it is a criticism on the Bull
Incffubilis by a so-called " prominent and eminent divine " of
the Russian Church. Now, his divinity (save the mark !) is
exactly of the same grade as that of Bishop Kiugdon and his
Vicar. What do your readers think the "criticism" is?
Simply a repetition of the s^w^f uttered by the Bishop and his
scribe on Ipsa ! Indeed, the Vicar has evidently borrowed
his very words for his own argument ! And this is the witness
" trotted out " to testify that the Eastern Church did not be-
lieve in the Immaculate Conception ! What disgusting impu-
dence !
The Vicar intimates that I will "perhaps" put "this vener-
able, learned, and prominent Russian divine" (as he calls him)
in the category of "ignoramuses — with Dr. Pusey, Bishop
Wordsworth, Bishop Kingdon, and many others." Well, as
to their Lordships of Lincoln and Fredericton judged by their
utterances on this question, I think the " Russian divine "
could not be in better company; and, not to disappoint the
Vicar, or treat his Oriental friend inhospitably, I impale him
with them. The Russian bear and the British lion do not
often so happily consort ; but now that they are sans teeth,
sans claws, sans everything save their divinity, they will not
hurt each other.
" Repentance is second innocence." I allow the plea in
Pusey's behalf. I alleged that he, on being instructed by Car-
dinal Newman and Bishop Dupanloup as to its true meaning
as defined by the Catholic Church, did not reject the doctrine
of the Immaculate Conception. I challenged the Vicar to
A Rebutter. 395
deny my assertion ; — he nevi / even referred to my challenge.
The coward ! He tried to conjure with Pusey's name and tlie
Jirst volume of the Eirenicon^ but he throws him overboard on
account of the second volume. Shame ! shame I !
Now, what is the truth about the belief of the Eastern
Church on the Immaculate Conception ? The belief exists to-
day among the Schismatic Greeks, and even among those Ori-
ental sects which have been separated from the Church of
Christ from the time of Nestorius and Eutyches. This is clear
from the fact that in 1691, Father Joseph Besson, Superior of
the Society of Jesus in Syria and Persia, before three Patri-
archs and an Archbishop, in presence of Francois Baron, the
French Consul, proved from more than two hundred passages,
taken from the oldest liturgical books, that all the churches and
Oriental peoples believed in the preservation of Mary from
the stain of original sin. His proof was openly and candidly
acknowledged by the Prelates present, who signed, then and
there, the declaration that " Mary was always free and exempt
from original sin, as very many of the ancient holy Fathers, the
teachers of the Oriental Church have explained." (See Gar-
garin, L^Eglise Musse et V TmmacuUe Conception, Paris, 1876 ;
Hurter's Dogmatic Theology, Vol. 2, p. 379.) Exit the
" learned divine."
Under his " fifth head " in this letter, the Yicai- returns to
the question of the Invocation of Saints. He admits that the
practice arose early in the Church, and has existed for cen-
turies both in her Eastern and AVestern Branches ; but he says :
"Careful study of the whole question has strengthened my con-
viction that the Church of England acted most wisely and ui strict
accordance with her truth-loving character at the Reformation,
when she rejected in toto the practice of invoking Saints and
Angels."
"The Church of England," did he say? This so-called
Church exists only in idea ; there is no such a thing in fact.
The reality is but a bundle of conflicting sects exhibiting to
the world, at this very moment, a horrible scene of discord
and confusion. Dollinger, one of the Vicar's pets, well de-
scribes Anglican doctrines. They are, he says :
396 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
"A collection of heterogeneous theological propositions tied to-
gether by the Act of Uniformity; propositions which, in a logical
mind, cannot exist by the side of one another, and whose effect
upon the English churchman is that he tinds himself involved in
contradictions and disingenuousness, and can only escape the pain-
ful consciousness of it by sophistical reasoning."
During this discussion the Yicar has used Dollinger's name
against nie very often. Over the fresbly-elosed grave of tliis
unfortunate man, I do not propose to utter a word beyond an
expression of my sincere gratitude for Lis intellectual services
to Catholic truth. " I am with that Dulliuger wliose teaching
in former days tilled his disciples with love and enthusiasm
for the Church and the Holy See, but I have nothing in com-
mon with that Dul linger whom the enemies of the Church and
of the Holy See load with praises." I adopt these words of
the illustrious Bishop Von Ketteler.
" Turn about is fair play," we are told. Let us read Dol-
linger's judgment of this " Church of England," so-called. I
quote from his great work entitled "The Church and the
Churches; or, The Papacy and the Temporal Power," Mc-
Cabe's translation :
"There is no Church that is so completely and thoroughly as the
Anglican, the product and expression of the wants and wishes, the
modes of thought and cast of character, not of a certain nationality,
but of a fragment of a nation, namely, the rich, fashionable, and
cultivated classes. It is the i*eligion of deportment, of gentility, of
clerical reserve. Religion and the Church are then i*equired to be
above all things, not troublesome, not intrusive, not presuming, not
importunate" (p. 145).
"The laws from the time of the Tudors, Henry, Edward, and
Elizabeth, declare the Supremacy over the Church to be an inalien-
able prerogative of the Crown. These statutes still exist in full
force. The King or the reigning Queen is in possession of the
Church ecclesiastical power, and that of the Bishops is only an ema-
nation of the Royal authority " (p. 155).
"Besides the Ministers and the Parliament, 'the Privy Council,'
since 1833, exercises a supremacy over religion or the Church. It
was appointed by Parliament to be the Supreme Court of Appeal in
A Kkbuttee. 897
ecclesiastical disputes, whether concerning doctrine or discijjline,
and cimsists wholly or chiefly of laymen, who are in part not even
members of the Established Church " (p. 150).
" "When about the same time a desire for a certain indei)endent
Synodical action arose, the (Loudon) Times said : ' It ought to be
considered that this Chui-ch, to which the Parliament had given its
present form, possesses every attribute, every advantage, and every
disadvantage of a compromise. Her Articles and authorized Fornui-
laries are so drawn as to admit within her pale, persons ditfei-ing
as widely as it is possible for the pi-ofessors of the Christian i-eligion to
dilFcr from each other. Unity was neither sought nor obtained ; but
comjH'ehension was aimed at and accomplished. Thei-efore we have
within the Church ol England persons differing not merely in their
particular tenets, but in the rule and ground of their belief '" tp. 157).
"The Bishops are, on the whole, powerless concerning doctrine
and discipline ; and for fear of a long and exi^ensive lawsuit, they
seldom venture to proceed against a beneficed clergyman " (p. 157).
"The inextricable contradiction between the Thiity-nine Articles
which are essentially Calvinistic, and the sti-ongly Catholicized
Liturgj' originated in the circumstance of the age of the Reforma-
tion. The Articles were to be the dogmatic fetters binding the
clergy to Calvinism, and were onlj^ laid before them for signature.
But the Liturgy, with its prayers and sacramental forms, was in-
tended to prove to the people, who were still more Catholic than
Protestant, and who had to be threatened with pecuniary fines be-
fore they would attend the service, that their religion had not been
sensibly altered, and that the Old Catholic Church still really
existed " (p. 159).
' ' Each of the two great parties in the Church cast on each other
an asjiereion of hypocrisy and disingenuousness with equal right;
for the one cannot sign the Cahnnistic Articles with inward convic-
tion, and the other can only accept the Liturgy, for which they
have an antipathy, for the sake of the benefits they receive, and
are obliged to wrest the meaning of liturgical forms in the most
violent manner" (p. 160).
" It may be said of the English Church, that it is like an Indian
idol, with many heads (and every one with different views) but very
few hands" (p. 171).
398 Ii'SK, Ipsa, Ii'slm.
"On the whole the entire ex!8t<'nco of the E^tahliahed Church is
seriously threatened, and its dissolution only a question of time. It
is completely in the power of the House of Commons and of the
Cabinet constituted by the majority of that House, which already
counts among its Tuembers a considerable number of Dissenters who
are all enemies of the State Chureh, as well as Catholics, and it is
noi necessary to mention the Jews The dissolution of this
ill-connected organism will then follow; the profounder and more
earnest minds will withdraw from a Church in which the double
yoke of governmental authority and compulsory communion with
a foreign doctrine, will not allow them in honor and conscience any
longer to remain " (p. 173).
In the face of this crushing indictment of the so-called
"Church of England," Low grim is the hinnor of the Vicar's
use of Dollinger's name in this controversy ! Mark, too, that
in these extracts he is dealing with no debatable questions
such as led him into revolt against the Church, whose authority
nobody, more distinctly and emphatically than he, had pro-
claimed and defended. He here states purely historico-legal
])ropositions which the world knows to be facts. The conse-
quences, too, which Dollinger foresaw must inevitably result
from these facts, are in full bloojn in the " Church of Eng-
land " to-day.
I am now in conflict with a representative of one of those
sects which are battling within the bosom of the Church of
England, namely. Ritualism. Let me illustrate the truth of
Dollinger's words, by giving your readers some examples of
Ritualistic practice in the Invocation of Saints.
My first quotation will be from one of their books entitled
"The Little Prayer Book," which we are told is intended
chiefly for heyinners in Devotion, and has been revised and
corrected by three priests. " Beginners in devotion^'' mark
you ! It contains instructions for Confession, and the Peni-
tent, when making his Confession to the Priest, is instructed
to say : " I confess to Almighty God, to Blessed Mary, to all
Saints, and to thee, my ghostly Father, that I have sinned
.... wherefore / leg Blessed Mary, all Saints, and thee,
my ghostly Father, to ^ray to the Lord our God for meP
A Petition to be used after Holy Communion runs as follows :
A Ekduitek. 899
*' Let tl»e glorious and ever-Virgin Mary, the Mother of God,
tlie lilessed Ai)08tle8, Martyrs and Virgins, and all the C<nirt
of Heaven make supplication unto Thee on our behalf." Then
we have Hymns: "To the Holy Mother of God," and she is
(ioscrihed as " the all-holy, undetiled, and more than Blessed
;Mary, Mother of God." This book also contains a hynm, " To
my Holy Angel Guardian," in which these verses occur:
*' Then for tliy sake, dear Angel, now,
More humble will I be :
But I am weak and wben I fall,
O weary not of me !
*' Then, love me, love me, Angel dear,
And I will love thee more ;
And help me, when my soul is cast
Upon the eternal shore."
Again we have another devotional book called The English
Catholic's Vade Mecum. This contains Litanies of the Saints
and Angels. I coiUd fill colunms with the same sort of thing
from the most popular manuals of the Ritualistic sect. I have
in my Rejoinder (twenty-seventh letter), quoted from Little-
dale's book — Devotions to the Saints. I ask your readers to
refer to the extracts. The book is extensively used by Ritual-
ists to-day. The Vicar says that "the maturer views" of
Littledale are not in accord with those he expressed in the
"Preface" to this book, and which I have quoted in the lie-
joinder. What a confession ! What a confirmation of Bol-
linger's indictment. Now mark. The Twenty-second Article
of the famous Thirty-nine, says :
" The Romish Doctrine concerning .... (the) Invocation
of Saints is a fond thing vainly invented, and grounded upon
no warranty of Scripture, but rather repugnant to the Word
of God."
Now at his ordination Littledale " signed " these Articles,
and made the Vicar's " priestly vow " to " be ready, with all
faithful diligence, to banish and d. »'e away all erroneous and
strange doctrines contrary to God's Word." But ten years
400 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsdm.
afterwards, in the face of the above Article and his " priestly
vow " to obey its injunctions, Littledale publicly advocates the
practice of the Invocation of the Saints, replies to objections
against it, and proclaims that the Christian who neglects it
" fails to avail himself of a privilege." The Vicar now in-
forms us that his Master, and " Scholar " of the ChurcJi Times
has changed his " views." That is it, precisely. " The Eng-
lish Church," says Dollinger, "is like an Indian idol, with
many heads (and every one with different views)." To have
"^>^V^^J5" and to be '■^ viewy" is the sum and substance of An-
glican teaching ; and it is a matter of the very least conse-
quence, whether the views of to-day contradict the Thirty-nine
Articles or be in accord with the views of yesterday. Indeed,
the more widely the views of a Parson differ from each other,
from day to day, the better — since he thereby exhibits to per-
fection that vieioiness which is the leading feature of Anglican
theology. Littledale's vagaries on the Invocation of Saints
illustrate this to a nicety. When he " signed " the Articles
and made his " priestly vows " he had one set of views ; when
he wrote the " Preface " to the book entitled " Devotions for
the Communion of Saints," he had another set ; and now the
Yicar announces that he has still another 1 " Comprehension
was aimed at and accomplished " in the Church of England,
say the London Times and Dollinger. I should think so.
And now let me call attention, on the same subject, to the
Treasury of Derotion^ a popular book with Ritualists in this
Province — yes, in the " Mission Church " in this very city.
It is pirated almost verhatim from our prayer books, especially
from our Golden Manual. It has prayers for the intercession
of Saints and Angels. Here is one :
" May the intercessions of the holy Mother of God, of the Proph-
ets, of the holy Apostles, of tlie Martyrs, help me! May all the
Saints and Elect of God pray for me, that I may be worthy with
them to possess the Kingdom of God. Amen."
And again :
" May the holy Angels, especially my own Guardian, keep watch
around me throughout this night, to protect me against the assaults
A Rebutter. 401
of the evil one, to suggest to me holy thoughts, to defend me against
all dangers, to lead me in the perfect way of peace, and to bring me
safe at length, to my home in Heaven. Amen."
And again, in the prayers for the Dead (when the soul has
departed) :
" May the Holy Ones of God succor him ; may the Angels of God
receive and bear his soul and present it before the Face of the Most
High.
V. May Christ, Who has called thee, receive thee ; may the
Angels carry thee into Abraham's bosom.
R. Receive his soul, and present it before the Face of the Most
High !
V. Grant him eternal rest, O Lord ; and let perpetual light shine
upon him.
R. May the Angels of God receive and bear his soul, and present
it before the Face of the Most High.
" This is ' comprecation ' only, which, notwithstanding my
change of view, I still think quite defensible," exclaims Little-
dale, as quoted by the Vicar. Rubbish ! The distinction is as
obsolete as the word. Here we have a sample of " Jesuitical '
jugglery in true ritualistic style. Is it not benesith contempt ?
I have said that the Treasury of Devotion was a " crib " —
especially from our Golden Manual. Let me give your re^\-
ers an opportunity Ix) test my statement, in the above pray^/s
for the Dead. Here is the language of the Golden Maiiual :
"Come to his assistance, ye Saints of God; come forth to meet
him, ye Angels of the Loi-d, receiving his soul, offering it in the sight
of the Most High.
V. May Christ receive thee. Who hath called thee, and may the
Angels conduct thee to Abraham's bosom.
R. Receiving his soul, offering it in the sight of the Most High.
V. Eternal rest give unto him, O Lord, and let perpetual light
shine upon him.
R. Offering it in the sight of the Most High.
What do your readers think of that ? Tlie simple fact is
that the "Priest," who "compiled" the Treasury, gives a
slightly different English translation of the Latin of the Golden
Manual from that which the Golden Manual itself has. That
402 Ipsk, Ipsa, Ipsum.
is absolutely the only difference. I see no room for choice
between them. But now for the joke of this farce.
The "Priest "who "compiled "the Treasury "desires to
withhold his name," and the book is edited by the Rev.
" Father "(!) Carter, one of the most notorious Ritualists in
England. In the Preface to the " third edition " of the book
Carter says ;
"In preparing the Treasury the desire was to supply a body of
devotions in faithful accordance with the truest standards of the
mind of the Church of En .^land, and, in trust that this rule had
been observed, it was thought better to commit the book to the test
of general approval rather than seek any authoritative sanction to
its contents."
" The truest standards of the mind of the Church of Eng-
land," according to the Ritualist Carter, are to be found in
Catholic Prayer Books — and in the shape of prayers invocatory
of the Saints and Angels, and for the Dead, both of which are
condemned by the Twenty-second of the Thirty-nine Articles 1
Do your readers wonder that " it was thought better " not to
" seek any authoritative sanction " for the Treasury f Im-
agine the Rectors of the " Stone Church " and of " Trinity,"
in this city, reciting from the Treasury its prayers for the
Dead over the remains of some deceased member of their con-
gregation ! I do believe that so far as the late lamented mem-
ber was concerned, it would prove to be but a case of sus-
j^ended animation.
In the face of all this, need I weary your readers with
another word on tha in-toto rejection by the Church of Eng-
land, of the Invocation of Saints? The practice is spreading
every day in spite of the Thirty-nine Articles — and the Ritu-
alists deserve all the credit for it. And yet these hypocriti-
cal pseudo-" priests " daily insult their Teacher — the Catholic
Church, the True Witness who has been teaching for nearly
two thousand years the very truths which they have been re-
hearsing for about twenty^ which they learned by listening out-
side her door, and but for her would never have learned at all.
Twelfth Letteb. — The same subject is continued in this
A Rebutter. 403
letter without a particle of argument not fully answered in my
Hcjoinder.
Thirteenth Letter. — The best thing in tliis is a sort of In-
dex to the information given him in my Rejoinder. Tlianks 1
The balance of it is a long quotation from Cardinal N^ewman's
" Letter to Pusey," which I have already fully discussed. Tlie
closing words are: "They seem to me like a bad dream."
This, too, I have explained in the twenty-fifth letter of my
Bejoinder.
Fourteenth, Fifteenth, and Sixteenth LEriERS. — I am
here reminded that " the way of him that is laden with guilt is
exceedingly crooked." He continues to repeat in these letters
all maimer of rubbish on tlie Invocation of Saints, St. Liguori,
and the Haccolta. Evidently, " this way madness lies." What,
I ask your honest readers, what is the use of it all, in the face
of the very full explanation I have given of Catholic doctrine,
and in the face of the quotations I have made from Bitualistic
books of devotion ? Ritualistic practice admits our principle,
and no amount of such stuff as we have here can avail with
honest men.
He has, however, dared to accuse me of garbling. As usual,
the accusation is the offspring of his malice, and a deliberate
attempt to misrepresent. Now, mark. In the eighteenth let-
ter of the Rejoinder I was not discussing the Invocation of
Saints, and therefore did not even refer to it. I was engaged
in showing the homage the AVorld paid to the great maternal
sanctity of the ever-blessed Mother. I alleged that only the
Ritualist controversialist of the Littledale stripe is bettor when
he treats of Her. To prove this assertion, I gave selections
from the writings of Bishops Hall, Pearson, and Ilioks, and
from those of George Herbert, Keble, and Frank — "a few
choice minds in Anglicanism," but I took care to jKjint out
that their thoughts were not Anglican thoughts ; their truo
home was the Catholic Church. And now the Yicar accuses
me of '"garbling," because having called these writers as wit-
nesses to one point, I did not also offer their evidence on an-
404 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
other point absolutely alien to the question in hand. What a
mud-head ! This explains very clearly the disf^raeeful confu-
sion, and the utter lack of logical argument that characterizes
the Strictures.
Again he returns to St. Liguori's Glories of Mary and the
Raccolta. He says :
"These devotional books, we know(!) abound in direct appeals
to the Virgin for every kind of gift, temporal and eternal."
Xow, if he means by this to assert that these books either
encourage or authorize Catholics to suppose that our Blessed
Lady has power in herself to bestow spiritual gifts or temporal
gifts either, then it is a calumny either very criminal in its
ignorance or quite characteristically satanic in its malevolence.
From my knowledge of the debauched state of the man's
mind, I believe it to be both. For we Catholics know, on the
contrary, that there is not even the most superficial appear-
ance of sucii a result ensuing. Indeed, the very cause of that
spiritual attraction which devotion to Mary possesses for the
great body of Catholics, is their regarding her as a fellow-
creature, — else, I admit, it would be absolutely indefensible.
But if he means to assert that these books encourage a reli-
ance on the intercession of the Mother of Jesus with her Ador-
able Son to obtain from Him spiritual and temiporal gifts for
those who strive to imitate her virtues — then, well may I ask
him, in the words of St. Paul : " Did (this) Word of God come
out from you or came it only to you?" For once he is in
accord with Holy Scripture, and I felicitate him on his blun-
der: he never meant it.
Does the Bible encourage this reliance ? First, as to spiritual
gifts. Why, the very first nn'racle wrought by our Divine
Saviour was in the spiritual or supernatural order, and it was
wrought through His Blessed Mother's mediation. The mys-
tery of the Incarnation had no sooner been accomplished in
Mary, than she rose up and went into the hill country " with
haste," to visit her cousin Elizabeth. What was the result of
the interview between these two higlily-favored women ? More
stupendous than the creation of worlds. " And it came to pass
A Eebcttek. 405
that when Elizabeth heard the sahitation of Mary, the iufant
leaped in her womb." I^ow the Catholic belief, in which
Pusey heartily concurred, is that John the Bai)tist was sancti-
fied, was cleansed from original sin, at the moment when he
*' leaped " in Elizabeth's bosom ; and the precise moment
chosen for its accomplishment was when the voice of Mary's
' greeting sounded in Elizabeth's ears. For Christ tlien spoke
by the mouth of His Mother, and John heard by the ears of
Elizabeth. No sooner has Mary spoken than Elizabeth
" was filled with the Holy Ghost, and she cried out with a loud
voice and said : Blessed art thou amongst women and blessed
is the fruit of thy womb. And whence is this to me that the
Mother of my Lord should visit me ? For behold, as soon as
the voice of thy salutation sounded in my ears, the infant iu
my womb leaped for joy T
" And whence is this to me that the Mother of my Lord
should visit me ? " What a marvellous speech ! The very God
Incarnate was also present at the very same moment ; and yet
Elizabeth speaks explicitly, not of His visit, but of His
Mother's ! Mary is now the Temple of the Holy Ghost, filled
with His presence, so that it overflows all around. She had
told nothing to Elizabeth, but the very voice of her sahitation
has sufficed. I do not at all attempt to draw out the awful
significance of the simple Gospel recital, or to voice the soul,
stirring, heart-piercing, reason-bewildering reflections suggested
by it. Able hands and loving Catholic hearts have done all
that, and I need not intrude.
Now, will the Vicar deny that in this instance Mary was the
medium of spiritual gifts and graces to St. John the Baptist ?
Yes, he would give the lie to God Himself, as lie has done
before, to score a point against Rome.
And second, as to temporal gifts. Here again the very first
jyvhlic miracle performed by our Blessed Lord was in the tem-
poral or physical order, ajid it, too, was performed at Cana
through Mary's intercession. " Tliey have no loine.''^ How
exquisitely tender is the thoughtfulness implied in these few
and simple words ! The heart of the woman and the mother
speaks. "They have no wine," — that seems to us but a trifling
406 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipscm.
matter, only a qiieBtioii of a little chagrin and annoyance to
the hosts and young married folks, and not an occasion of suf-
ficient solemnity for the first display of Christ's Divine Power.
But Mary, full of tenderness for the natural feelings of her
friends, feels for their emharrassment, and unHollcited interests
herself for their relief. She has perfect faith and confidence
both in the power and in the goodness of her Divine Son. She
does not command, she does not even ask. She confines her-
self to the most simple statement of their wants. " They have
no wine" — she whispered to Him whose creative j^'a^ first
broke the silence of eternity, and rather than reject a mother's
prayer. He anticipated the eternal decrees :
The modest water saw its God — and blushed !
Nympha pudica Deum vidit et erubuit.
Will the Vicar deny that in "this beginning of miracles"
there is any evidence of the power of Mary's influence with
her Divine Son ? And will he also deny that there is anything
to encourage us to have recourse to her intercession for even
temporal gifts?
Tlie Son of God in His Sacred Humanity, not, of course, in
His Divine Nature, nor in any matter which is proj^er to Him
only in that nature, was subject to Mary here, and obeyed her
(St. Luke ii. 51); and as the two natures remain in Him for-
ever distinct, two natures in one person, I know no reason for
supposing that the relation, and whatever jiertains essentially
to it, between the Mother and the Sou in His human nature,
are not precisely, save that both are now in a glorified state,
what they were when on earth. "We are not to suppose the
soul loses in the future life the habits of this, and therefore we
must suppose that the habit of obedience, love, and reverence
of our Divine Lord to His holy Mother here are still retaine<l.
Therefore, we conclude surely that her will, always one with
God's will, because moved by the Divine charity, is still re-
garded by Him as the will of His Mother, and has that weight
with Him that the right will of a mother nmst always have
with a good, loving son.
Since, then, /or her sake, at the wedding at Cana He even
A Rebutter. 407
anticipated the hour He Lad resolved upon for the manifesta-
tion of His own glory, what may we not expect that He will
do for her when the hour of glorifying her throughout all the
the earth is come ?
In the twenty-third letter of the Rejoinder^ I drew out a
parallel between those objections which the Protestant is so
fond of adducing against the Catholic veneration of Mary, and
those which a Unitarian might allege against the worship of
Jesus Christ. Now, of course, every believer in the Trinity who
has practiced the worship of the God-Man, knows experiment-
ally that there lurks a monstrous fallacy in the Unitarian's
argument. But, then, in like manner, every Catholic who has
practiced devotion to our Blessed Lady, knows experimentally
that there lurks a monstrous fallacy in the Protestant'' s argu-
ment. Referring to this parallel, the Vicar makes this cow-
ardly statement :
'* His long and flimsy argument in the person of an Unitarian,
claims no remarks. Any tyro m a diviuity scliool could as easily
as my opponent ' draw out an overwhelming Trinitarian answer. ' "
Indeed ! But this Ritualistic " tyro " does not attempt it. O,
no! Something more than a supply of divinity "scraps " is
required to meet the Unitarian's objection. Let me, then, as-
sure Bishop Kingdon that, -when he puts forward a " tyro "
competent to give an unanswerable reply to the Unitarian, I
will be on hand to give a reply, equally unanswerable, to those
objections urged by Protestants against the Catholic's devotion
to '• Mary the Mother of Jesus."
One word more on these Letters. Bishop Colenso, Pusey's
"heathen," but a Jiame of far greater authority in the Angli-
can Church than that of Bishop Kingdon will ever be, in
writing to the London Times, quoted eleven texts of Scrii)ture
to prove that prayer ought not to be offered to our Blessed
Lord. Again : all the world still remembers the No-Popery
frenzy that broke out in England M'lien Pius IX. re-established
there the Catholic Hierarchy. On that occasion the mob,
feeling by a true instinct that it could do nothing else so pain-
ful to all Catholics, proceeded publicly to burn in ^'(^^y the
408 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsijm.
ever Blessed Mother of their Saviour, and (who can write it
without a shudder !) even our Divine and Crucified Redeemer.
They knew not what they did. The insult was intended, not
for Him, but for CathoHcs. Who was the more consistent —
the Enghsh mob, or Pusey's Episcopal " heathen " ?
Seventeenth Letter. — The object of this letter is, to cover
up the infamy that attaches to his publication of the forged
speech of Bishop Strossmayer, in the columns of the CJmrch
EclectiG. He manages to repeat, over and over again, the
rubbish of the anonymous scribblers and defamers — Janus,
Quirinus, and Pomponio Leto. This sort of evidence is the
very life-blood of the Ritualist brain. Happily, now-a-days. in-
telligent men do not form their judgments on such authority.
He adduces, too, a private letter to support a contemptible
calumny on the memory of the honored dead — His Grace, the
late Archbishop Connolly. This was so effectively disposed of
at the time by His Lordship, Bishop Rogers of Chatham, that
I give his letter in the Appendix A.
Now, his conduct in regard to the forged speech of Bishop
Strossmayer is simply %ale. In one breath he admits its spuri-
ousness, in another he asserts that substantially it came '' from
the lips of the eminent Croation Bishop himself." And yet
he wriggles and squirms ; but he winds up by rebaptizing his
own monstrosity with Ritualistic " bell, book, and candle," and
says :
" I shall be glad to forward a copy of it to any person who
will send me a stamped and addressed envelope and a two-cent
stamp." What impious malignity and mendacity! Only
shortly before he had told your readers, that some anonymous
donor had sent him a copy. Now he confesses that he has a
stock on hand, and is only intent on recouping his loss on a
bad investment. The " copy " he advertises, is published at
" one-halfpenny,^'' and he says nothing to his prospective cus-
tomers about the discount, which the pamphlet announces will
be allowed to persons purchasing "quantities for gratuitous
distribution." That is hardly fair ; but I will be satisfied if
he infonn the public, through your columns, that he has ex-
A Rebuttkr. 409
pended the profits of tlie transaction in "evangelizing the
heatlien" — tliat is to say, in spreading genuine Iiitiialistic
l^rinciples and practices, among the Rectors of the Anglican
Churches and their congregations in this city, who now so
cordially anathematize him and liitualism.
Let us now hope, however, that this cowardly libel on the
* venerated Bishop Strossmayer is at an end. Since I finished
my Rejoinder, the Bishop has written a letter anent this for-
gery to Bishop Maes, of Covington, Kentucky, who Lad sent
him the " famous speech." I give it in the Aj^jpendix B.
Comment is needless.
There is a wondrous law of compensation running through
human existence. The unfortunate Pigott, when caught in a
like infamy with that of the Vicar, paid the penalty of out-
raged truth with his life, and like another Judas, " went out "
and blew out his miserable and mischievous brains. How does
the Vicar propose to atone for his crime ?
Eighteenth Letter. — Here he returns once more to the
imhappy Littledale and his Plain Reasons, the Vicar's theo-
logical text-book and vade tnecxim. It need not detain us long.
I alleged that it had been " kicked out " by the " Protestant
Defence Association." This is tnie, and the Vicar has not
dared to deny it. I also referred shortly to the arraignment of
the book by the Rev. Dr. Lee, an Anglican clergyman. For
the sake of the numerous Protestant witnesses I give his letter
in the Appendix C. Father Ryder's Catholic Cojitroversy is
an answer in detail to the Plain Reasons.
Nineteenth Letter. — Here again he displays the most
shocking malice and bewildering ignorance in what he asserts
" concerning the presence of the Blessed Virgin in the Euchar-
ist," as he expresses it. Let your readers turn to the twenty-
sixth letter of the Rejoinder for a full and clear answer to his
stupid calumnies here. His " opponent's edition of it " can,
and will be accepted by all honest men, who value truth and
desire to learn the true Catholic teaching.
I beg, however, to ask thoughtful attention to some other
410 Ipse, Ipsa, Ii-sim.
remarks here. In the opening letter of his first Strictures, he
proelaiined tliat he was bound hy his " priestly vow " to " be
ready with all faithful diligence, to banish and drive away all
erroneous and sti'ange doctrines contrary to God's Word.''
Let us see how he has kept the " vow.''
He writes as follows :
"The next exagj^eration to be exposed is based upon the unwar-
rantable assumption tbat tlie Blessed Virgin bad full knowledge of
all tbat was inii)]ied in Gabriel's message; tbat she fully realized
that she bore in lier body a Divine Person."
That is, if lie knows what he says, he denies that Mary
realized the mystery of the Incarnation wrought in her by the
power and operation of the Holy (Ihost. What more could
an avowed athois-t say ^ Did Pusey's Episcopal "heathen,"
Colenso, ever utter a blasphemy more contrary to "God's
Word " i
Let us consider, then, for a moment the tremendously awful
interview between the Archangelic messenger and Mary, set
down from Mary's own lips in St. Luke's Gospel. God's
envoy unfolds to her in detail the Royal secret with which he
had been entrusted :
" Behold thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and shalt bring forth
a Son ; and tliou slialt call His name Jesus.
"He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Most High :
and the Lord God shall give unto Him the throne of David His
father: and He shall reign in the house of Jacob forever,
" And of His Kingdom there shall be no end.
"And Mary said to the Angel: How shall this be done, because
I know not man?
"And the Angel answering said to her: The Holy Ghost shall
come upon thee; and the power of the Most High shall ovei-sbadow
thee. And therefore also the Holy which shall be born of thee,
shall be called the Son of God.
"And Mary said: Behold the handmaid of the Lord: be it done
unto me accoi'ding to thy word."
But the Yicar asserts that Mary did not " fully realize " the
consequences of the consent thus given ! Well, consider again,
Mary's visit to Elizabeth :
A Rebctter, 411
"And (Mary) entered into tlie house of Zachary, and salutod
Elizabeth.
"And it came to pass, that when Elizabeth heard tlie sahitation
of Mary, the infant leaped iu her womb: and Elizabeth was filled
with the Holy Ghost :
"And she cried out with a loud voice, and said: Blessed art thou
amon^ women ; and blessed is the fruit of thy womb.
"And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should
come to me?
"For behold, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in
my ears, the infant in my womb leaped for joy.
"And blessed art thou that hast believed; because those things
shall be accomplished that were spoken to thee by the Loixl."
Kow Mary had not disclosecl her mighty secret even to tins
Baint, her cousin. But Elizabeth " was tilled with the Holy
Ghost," and by His infused light she understood the niysteiy
of the Incarnation which God had wrought in Mary. In
raptures of delight and astonishment, Elizabeth pronounced
her blessed above all other women, because she was made by
God the instrument of His blessing to the world, and of re-
moving the malediction which through Eve had been entailed
on mankind. But the " fruit of her womb " Elizabeth called
blessed in a sense still infinitely higher, because He was the
boundless source of all the graces, by wlioi'^ only Mary herself
was blessed. Tiien Elizabeth, turning her eyes upon herself,
cried out — Wlience is this to me that the Mother of my Lord
should visit me ? She calls the Child of Mary her Lord, sig-
nifying that she knew He was God ; and she declares herself
honored far above her deserts, to have received the visit of the
Mother of God. She herself liad conceived one greater than
the prophets, but Mary held in her bosom the eternal Son of
God, Himself true God. But bound by his " priestly vow "
the Vicar denies that Mary " fully realized " what Elizabeth
by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, here proclaims " with a
loud voice " — so that even he might hear.
What, again, shall I say of the 2La<jnificat — that proplietic
announcement of the glory of Christ and His Mother ? It is
not for me, in this place, to draw out the sublime reflections
it suggests to the Catholic heart. For my present purpose it
412 Ipse, Ii'sa, Ipsum.
is eiiongli simply to read it : " And Mary said : My soul doth
magnify tlie Lord : and n)y spirit hatli rejoiced in God my
Saviour." "//i God my Saviour,^'' sings Mary. " That is an
exaggeration" — cries the Vicar, — "she did not 'fully realize'
what she was saying! " " Behold from henceforth all genera-
tions shall call mo blessed. Because He that is mighty hath
done great things to me : and holy is His name " — proclaims
Mary. "That is another mistake" — cries the Vicar, — "she
had no idea what the ' great things ' were which the Almighty
had done to her." Could any ^tie have imagined beforehand
that a professed believer in Christianity would make so wild an
assertion as that which I have here been considering?
Beyond the above suggestions, I do not propose to discuss,
at this stage, Mary's place according to the Gospels. My chal-
lenge on that subject still stands. But do Protestants ever
reflect on the importance of her testimony as a witness to the
Gospel ? The grand mystery of our Faith is the Incarnation
of the Word of God. In the Divinity of Christ the whole of
Christianity is summed up, and it is but an empty sound — for
Redemption vanishes away, the Cross falls — if the Crucified
was not God.
Now, it has pleased God that there should be but one wit-
ness to the truth of this fundamental mystery, upon which the
whole doctrine of the Apostles hangs ; that one person only
should be our guarantee with regard to those details which
chiefly characterize the Incarnation, — and this sole witness,
this one guarantee of our Faith, is Mary of Nazareth. This
fact is indisputable. She was alone with the Angel when the
great mystery was announced and accomplished. It was from
her only that the Apostles could receive the knowledge of it,
and transmit that knowledge to us. And if, says St. Ambrose,
St. John speaks more clearly, and after a more sublime man-
ner than the rest, of the mysteries of the Incarnate Word, it is
because he was more closely connected with her who was the
very Temple in which those heavenly mysteries were accom-
plished. God, moreover, chose that Mary should be the faith-
ful and mute depositary of this mystery during the whole time
of her Son's life upon earth ; He chose that she should keep
A Kebutter. 413
tlie secret inviolable during all these years. The Heavens,
Angels, and the very stars will proclaim His Birth and Ills
glory. Prophets and Saints will receive Him in His Temi)]e ;
the Apostles and great wonders on earth and in heaven will
herald His work to the very ends of the world. All the
mighty ones of the earth, all the saints, wise men and kings,
all peoples will acknowledge Him and pay homage to His
power. And all this Matnf knew. The Angel had an-
nounced it to her, and presently after, in the Magnificat, the
Holy Ghost inspired her with words of prophecy which allude
to her secret but do not betray it. Even Calvin admits all this.
He says :
"God chose that the treasure of this exalted mystery (the Incarna-
tion) should be n)ade over to the charge of the Virgin, and be as
though buried in her heart, in order that sliortly afterwards, wlien
the fitting time Avas come, it might be communicated to all the
faithful " (Calvin's Commentary upon the Harmony of the Gospels,
p. 49).
Mary is therefore our only witness, not alone to the Incar-
nation, but also to the Visitation, to the Nativity, to the Ado-
ration of the Wise Men, to the Presentation in the Temple, to
the Flight into Egypt, to the Wisdom o^ Jesus among the
Doctors, and to the first thirty years of the Life of our Divine
Lord upon earth. This is expressed in the Gospel in quite a
characteristic way. When speaking of the great testimonies
borne to Jesus during His infancy, it repeats three times :
"•And Mary kept all these wards and pondered them in her
heartP " That is to say," observes Calvin, a second time, " that
this treasure was entrusted to her to keep it in her heart, until
the fitting time came when it was to be made manifest to oth-
ers." Observe, too, that in spite of very critical circumstances
that might have seemed to make it the duty of the Blessed
Virgin — certainly, her interest — to speak sooner, yet she kept
the secret locked up in her own breast so long as Jesus re-
mained upon earth. Her husband, St. Joseph, m the inscru-
table providence of God, is allowed to conceive doubts of
Mary's chastity, yet even under this most painful trial she does
414 IrsE, Ipsa, Ipsum.
not open her moutli to reveal her Divine Maternity, but in
silent patience awaits her justification from God. But now
the time is come that she should speak, and the secrets of
God's wisdom and power, and the hidden counsels of His love,
whereof she alone of creatures had before been fully cognizant,
are by her revealed to the Apostles and Evangelists.
" And Mary kept all these things and pondered them in her
heart." Your readers will note that this is the language of St.
Luke, in whose Gospel all the particulars of the Birth and
Infancy of Jesus are far more fully recorded than by any other
of the Evangelists. Speaking of the human sources of his
knowledge, he says that "he has diligently attained to all
things from the beginning, according as they have delivered
them unto us who from the beginning were eye witnesses and
ministers of the AVord." Mark that significant phrase, so em-
phatically repeated — ''from the beginning." Who was such
an eye witness "from the beginning"? None but Mary.
The learned Protestant connnentator, Grotius — no " sacerdotal
pretender" — has observed that " St. Luke seems to have men-
tioned this fact of Mary's habit of thoughtful meditation upon
the words and deeds of her Divine Son and of others in His
regard, precisely because she was the authority fi-om whom he
had received the narrative that he was recordmg. "Quod
ideo videtur a Luca expressum, quia ipsam habetat harum nar-
rationem Aiictorem " (Grotius, Annot. in Quatxior Evan-
(jelid).
It is true that the Mystery of the Incarnation had been in
some measure revealed to St. Joseph by the Angel sent to
reassure him as to the spotless purity of Mary and to command
him to take her to his home ; also to Elizabeth at the time of
the Visitation, when she exclaimed: "Whence is this to me
that the Mother of my Lord should come to visit mo " \ But
both of these witnesses, there is every reason to believe, had
been dead long before the close of our Lord's life upon earth,
and we may be quite certain tliat God did not allow these hid-
den things to be revealed before His Resurrection, according
to His own ex]H'ess connnand with reference to the Transfigu-
ration and other tokens of His Divinity. I repeat, then, Mary
A Rebutter. 415
was tlie one only witness who could speak to the very founda-
tion of the Christian Faith. Her pure heart is thus our Lord's
first Gospel. In that virginal and maternal heart, now conse-
crated by a whole life of silence, of humility, and of holy re-
serve, we read transcribed by St. Luke, the account of the
great event of the Incarnation of the Son of God. To that
event, as to their basis, all the other events and all the other
evangelical mysteries refer. Whence the beautiful saying of
St. Ildephonsus, when he calls the Blessed Mother " God's
Evangelist, under whose discipline the AVord made a Child
was brought up."
My object, in what I have jnst said, has been simply to sug-
gest to thoughtful Protestants the beautiful harmony and pro-
portion of everything connected with Mary's position in the
Gospel record of the scheme of Man's Redemption ; and fur-
thermore to ask them this question : Whose doctrine in her
regard is the more evangelical f Yours — who see in her an
ordinary woman, a saint it may be, but nothing more, or ours
— who confess her to be Mother of God, our Redeemer, and
who render her the honor due to that dignity?
To proceed. In this connection, and to give some color to
the statement which I have just considered, the Vicar has been
guilty of a most dastardly infamy. I ask the most thoughtful
attention of your readers while I expose it.
In the two closing paragraphs of this letter ho names these
Fathers : Origen, Basil the Great, Jerome, Tertullian, Chrys-
ostom, St. Cyril of Alexandria, Gregory Xaziauzen, and Am-
brose. He gives a quotation from St. Cyril, and then says :
" I cite them not in order to parade their opinion on certain
texts as infallible authority, but simply to show that it was far
from the Church's mind of the early centuries to suppose that
the Virgin apprehended the mystery of which she was the
willing instrument" (that is, the Incarnation).
A more monstrous falsehood was iiever penned. There is
not ONE Father whom lie can cite for any such proposition,
since, iis we have seen, it is directly contrary to the Gospel. It
is the offspring of a malevolent heart and a muddled brain.
And, moreover, he stole the objection, such as it is, from Car-
416 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
dinal Kewman, without giving his answer, because had he done
80, like Pusey he would have had nothing to say. Let me
explain.
Cardinal Newman, in his " Letter " to Pusey, is inquiring
into the doctrine of Antiquity on the subject of Mary's pre-
rogatives. Now the world admits that he is a theologian too
candid and fearless to put out of sight or explain away adverse
facts from fear of scandal, or from the expediency of contro-
versy. And here he proves that he merits the distinction
accorded him. Pusey did not take the point in his Eirenicon,
to which the Cardinal is replying. He raises it himself in
these words :
"It is true that several great Fathers of the fourth century do
imply or assert that on one or two occasions she did sin venially or
showed infimjity. This is the only real objection which I know of;
and as I do not wish to pass it over lightly, I propose to consider it
at the end of this Letter."
And he does consider it in J^oie 3 to his Letter, — a piece of
exegetical writing not to be paralleled in our language. I can
assure your readers that the supposed difficulty, put by Cardi-
nal Newman himself, vanishes into thin air. The Fathers
spoken of are St. Basil, St. Chrysostom, and St. Cyril of Alexan-
dria. His commentary on these occupy twenty-four pages,
and I do not propose to mangle it. In the second volume of
the Eirenicon, which is a reply to the Cardinal's Letter, Pusey
has not only not one word to say against his exposition, but,
on the contrary, expresses his agreement with the Cardinal in
these most striking words : " I have not spoken as those Fathers
spake, for whom you apologize, and whose language you ex-
plain. / could neither use it nor cite it, and I mm'vel that
they xised' it.^^ The coarse spirit of my opponent is not
troubled with such delicate qualms.
But I am concerned now only with the Vicar's assertion that
these Fathers show that the Blessed Virgin did not apprehend
the mystery of the Incarnation. When he made this statement
he had Cardinal Newman's open page before him, for from it
and Littledale he " cooked up " his monstrosity. Yet St. Basil
in his Epistle, on that very page, emphatically affirms that
A Rebutter. 417
Mary had " the secret knowledge of the Divine Conceptions^
and that she " had been taught from above tlie things concern-
ing the LordS^ On the same page, too, and under the Vicar's
eyes, St. Chrysostom says that Mary, on liearing the Angel's
word, " searcJied what was the nature of the salutation^'' and
knew the ^^ clear fact" of the Incarnation before she gave her
consent. Now what is all this but the Gospel record already
discussed ? But what have I to say in reply to his quotation
from St. Cyril ? It has nothing at all to do with the question
whether or not Mary " apprehended the mystery " of the In-
carnation. Cyril is discussing whether the Blessed Virgin
actually doubted at the crucifixion. Here is Cardinal New-
man's answer :
"As to St. Cyril .... he does not, strictly speaking, say more
than that our Lady was g^evously tempted. This does not imply
sin, for our Lord was ' tempted in all things as we are, yet without
sin.'"'
And again, he observes:
"On the other hand, we admit, rather we maintain, that except
for the grace of God, she might have sinned ; and that she may have
been exposed to temptation in the sense in wliieh our Loi-d was ex-
posed to it. Though as His Divine Nature made it impossible for
Him to yield to it, so His gi-ace preserved her under its assaults
also."
I would ask your interested readers to compare Littledale,
Cardinal Newman, and Father Ryder on the question discussed
by Saints Basil, Cyril, and Chrysostom. It will amply repay
them.
In the face of all this, has my criticism on the Vicar under
this head been too severe? I submit that it has not. Readers
familiar with rhe writings of St. Thomas Aquinas, for instance,
know his metliod of treating questions. He gathers up all the
objections possible against the proposition or thesis he has to
maintain, an. I he then refutes them, one by one. It is said that
from the objections so put in St. Thomas' pages, Voltaire stole
the matter of his attacks on religion. The Vicar simply imi-
tates him. Cardinal Newman volunteers a seeming difficulty
only to solve it for inquiring minds. The great Jesuit,
418 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
Petaviiis, had done the same thing, and but for the fearless
honesty of the Catholic writers, Littledale would not have been
able to supply the Vicar with "scraps." The Yicar now
snatches up the objection, twists it out of its proper relations,
and throws it like a strangled corpse into the face of the general
reader, who is not always able to estimate it at its true value.
And this he professes to do under the obligation of a " priestly
vow " ! This he does, too, while proclaiming to the world that
" It has been the hard and sorrowful lot of the English Church
.... to have to wear the appearance of those who fail to
yield (the Mother of Jesus) her proper honor." The consum-
mate hypocrite ! Avaunt !
i
Twentieth Letter. — He opens this letter with an apology
for his inability to keep his " priestly vow " — in a very impor-
tant particular, too. He says :
"Unfortunately I shall not be able to return, as promised, to the
consideration of the Catena of questionable quotations supplied by
my opponent in support of his contention in the early part of his
Rejoinder. It is fortunate for him that my Strictures must be cut
short."
" Fortunate for him," forsooth ! What has my good or bad
fortune to do with the matter ? He assured your readers that
he was bound by his " priestly vow " to " be ready, with all
faithful diligence, to banish and drive away all erroneous and
strange doctrines contrary to God's Word." Now the " quo-
tations " in the " early part " of m}^ liejoinder, are in support
either of very truth or what is very " contrary to God's Word."
What becomes of the " priestly vow " ? The cowardly brag-
gart!
But here, unfortunately for him, he furnishes your readers
with a test absolute and final, of his utter indifference to " God's
Word," the " Great Assize," and the " burning lake." After
his confused way, he devotes another paragraph here to St.
Cyril of AlexaTidria. He copies from Littledale's Plain Rea-
sons a " scrap " of the Saint's comment on St. John xix. 26,
and then adds :
A Kebutter. 419
" Let any one compare (this) commentary .... with the extract
attributed to S. Cyril of Alexandria by Romanists, given by my
opponent in Globe, April 20, 1888, and judge for himself whether
the two could possibly have come from the same pen. Apart from
other evidence, the latter stands self-condemned."
" Attributed to St. Cyril by Romanists." This is the language
he holds on the famous sermon preached by St. Cyril against
the arch-heretic Nestorius, before the Council of Ephesus (A.D.
431), in the Cathedral Church of St. Mary in that city. In
the sixth letter of my Rejoinder will be found the quotation
from this sermon, of which the Yicar speaks. During this di&.
cussiou ' I "vve challenged from your readers absolute credence
for eve-'y critical statement I have made. What have I to say
to his present assertion \ Simply that he has again played the
part of a deliberate and malignant falsifier, — that there is not
a semblance of truth to support it. I liave ransacked all the
authorities for even one expression of suspicion of its genuine-
ness, but have failed to find it. I need not, however, have
taken the trouble. Cardinal iS'^ewman quotes part of it in his
Letters to Pusey. Pusey in his reply {Eirenicon, Yol. 2, p. 29),
accepts the Cardinal's extract, expands it to twice its length,
and then adds: "I adopt it all." Moreover, in a note,
Pusey says :
"I have followed in some slight things a text amended from MSS.,
collated by my son, which I mention lest certain critics should
accuse me of falsifying. "
" Attributed to St. Cyril by Romanists," says tliis pseudo-
" priest" of the "truth-loving .... Church of England."
Has iniquity ever more atrociously lied to itself ? Alas 1 for
the "priestly vow." Were the "old Catholic," Nestorius, to
come xip on the earth again (speaking Dantesqucly), what an
ally, true and tried, would he find in the " old Catholic " of the
" Mission Clmrch " !
And now I approach the beginning of the end. The worth-
less remains of the Strictures will not detain me long.
The Vicar objects to my statement that Anglicanism was
begotten of the brutal lust of Henry VIH. But my authority
420 Ipse, Ipsa, Ihsum.
was Lord Campbell, Chief Justice of England. Moreover,
there is but one opinion about it from Hudibras to Pusey.
The " Gospel light," says Hudibras, " first beamed " in " the
good old country " from the lascivious eyes of an exceedingly
unpleasant daughter of llerodias. And Pusey affirms the
same proposition in these wortio .
" Had we a S. Louis instead of a sovei-eign who, owning no mas-
ter except his lusts, his rapacity, and his ambition, confounded all,
right and wrong, the great quarrel between the Crown of England
and the Pope in the sixteenth century might have been averted "
(Eirenicon, Vol. 3, p. 180).
To offset this the Yicar " trots out " for the millionth time the
old, old story. The worn-out tales of Popes, Bishops, and
priests, charged with infidelity to their high calling, has been
the staple of Protestant tradition and the basis of the Protestant
view of the Catholic Church since Protestantism began. I will
say a few words on this topic in my notes on his next letter.
Twenty-first Letter. — He continues here the same subject.
Now, granting for argument's sake that there is too much
truth in the Vicar's charge, that there have been periods when
much evil existed among the clergy and laity, even among the
highest dignitaries of the Church. In answer to this I submit
to thoughtful, honest men, that " there never was an epoch,
never a year, never a day since Jesus Christ ascended into
Heaven, that there has not existed on this earth, plainly visible
to all men, a society of pre-eminent Fanctity, notable, not only
by the holiness of its doctrines, but also by tlie heroic sanctity
of multitudes of its members, teaching, by miracles and exam-
ple, both the precepts and the counsels of the Lord Jesus.
There never was a time when the evil lives of the Church's
children were not evidently in opposition to the doctrines they
professed, or rendered it difficult to distinguish the true Church
from the heresies which surrounded it. The so-called dark ages
(tenth and eleventh centuries), with all their abuses, were rich
in saints." And, moreover, there never was a moment when
the Catholic Church failed to proclaim " that it were better for
A Rebutter. 421
sun and moon to drop from heaven, for the earth to fail, and
for all the many millions who are on it to die of starvation in
extremest agony, as far as temporal affliction goes, than that
one soul, I will not say should be lost, but should eonnnit one
single venial sin." This is the great and most glorious charac-
teristic of the Catholic Church, which, writes Cardinal New-
man, " has been brought home to me so closely and vividly
since I have been a Catholic" {Anglican Difficulties, pp.
197-8).
Let the same master pen sum up for us the argumentative
and controversial value of this kind of evidence against the
Catholic Church :
"If Satan can so well avail himself even of the gifts and glories
of the Church, it is not wonderful that he can be skilled also in his
exhibition and use of those offences and scandals which ai-e his own
work in her now or in former times. My brethi-en, she has scan-
dals, she has a reproach, she has a shame ; no Catholic will deny it.
Slie has ever had the reproacli and shame of being the mother of
cliildren unworthy of her. She has good chilth^n, — she has many
more bad. Such is the will of God, as declared from the beginning.
He might have formed a pure Church ; but He has exjjressly pre-
dicted that the cockle, sown by the enemy, shall i-emain with the
wlieat, even to the harvest at the end of the world. He pronounced
that His Church sliould be like a fisher's net, gathering of every
kind, ajid not examined till the evening. Nay, more than this, He
declared that the bad and imperfect should far surpass the good.
' Many are called, ' He said, ' but few are chosen ' ; and His Apostle
speaks of a 'remnant saved accoitling to the election of grace.'
There is ever, then, an abundance of materials m the lives and the
histories of Catholics, ready to the use of those opi>onents who,
starting with the notion that the Holy Church is the work of the
devil, wish to liave some corroboration of their leading idea. Her
very prerogative gives special opportunity for it; I mean, that she
is the Church of all lands and of all times. If there was a Judas
among the Apostles, and a Nicliolas among the deacons, why should
we be surprised that in the course of eighteen hundred yeai-s there
should be flagrant instances of cruelty, of unfaithfulness, of hypoc-
risy, or of profligacy, and that not only in the Catholic people, but
in high places, in royal palaces, in Bishops' households, nay, in the
seat of Peter itself? Why need it surprise if, in l)arbarous ages
or in ages of luxury, there have been bishops, or abbots, or priests
who have forgotten themselves and their God, and served the world
422 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum. i
or the flesh, and have perished in that evil service ? What triumpl) is
it, though, in a long line of between two or three hundred popes, amid
martyrs, confessors, doctors, sage rulers, and loving fathei-s of their
people, one, or two, or three are found who fulfill the Lord's descrip-
tion of the wicked servant, who began ' to strike the man-servants
and maid-servants, and to eat and drink and be drunk.' What will
come of it, though we grant that at this time or that, here or there,
mistakes in policy, or ill-advised measures, or timidity, or vacilla-
tion in action, or secular maxims, or inhumanity, or narrowness of
mind, have seemed to influence the Church's action or her bearing
towards her children? I can only say that, taking man as he is, it
would be a miracle were such offences altogether absent from her
history."
Having made, tlien, these candid and generous admissions to
the bursting out of poor human nature under the Catholic sys-
tem, I might fairly ask how the same wild and raging element
in us all works under the Protestant system. Why, as the
public very well knows, two or three years ago this very
Province was reeking with the infamies of certain Protestant
ministers, and tlie Press throughout the Dominion and the
United States daily witnesses to the like facts. What would
my Protestant friends say were I such a dolt as to cite these
scandals as an argument against their respective creeds ? Their
answer would be this : AVheu you succeed in reconciling the
presence of so much sin and evil in the world with the exist-
ence of a beneficent, omniscient, and omnipotent Creator, we
will explain the vice and corruption that breaks out among our
clergy and laity. I will do the same thing on our behalf when
they will have made a like explanation to me. The first man born
into the world killed the second ; there were wicked liigli-
priestsin the history of Israel, — the first connived at the worship
of the golden calf, and the last demanded the death of the God-
Man, who came to save His people ; and Littledale proves that
the English "Eeformers" — Cranmer, Ridley, Latimer, Jewell,
Parker, Barlow, Scory & Co. — were " utterly unredeemed vil-
lainsP Away, then, with such arguments as the Vicar and his
"kidney" attempt to draw from alleged scandals in the Catho-
lic Cliurch. Poor human nature accounts for them all, and the
daily cry of every honest heart is — " Save us. Lord, we perish."
A Rebutter. 423
But why, then, do I refer to the crimes of Henry VIII.?
Because, as Pusey admits, they are the very rock whence An-
glicanism is hewn out. To avoid repetition, I ask your readers
to turn here to the last six paragraphs of the ninth letter of
the Rejoinder. I will now but supplement what I have there
written.
I will begin by exposing a delusive dream, a very fable,
nowadays much in fashion with Anglo-ritualists, and which the
terror of approaching Disestablishment has constrained nearly
all the various parties of the Anglican Church to adopt.
The idea is this. It is assumed as a lirst principle, that from
Apostolic times, there has always existed a National Church
in England, quite independent of Rome and the rest of Chris-
tendom. That this Church in British, Saxon, and Norman
times struggled continually with the gradually usurping power
of Rome, and the insidious introduction of popish doctrines,
from which it was at first quite free, and against which it
always protested. That this double yoke, becoming at length
unbearable, the English Church, in the person of its Bishops,
seized the first opportunity offered by a quarrel between Henry
VIII. and the Pope, to assert her independence of papal juris-
diction, and to reform herself from popish errors.
Now, to the student of English history during the Tudor
period, with the wealth of documentary evidence daily increas-
ing, as MS. after MS. is being brought to light, the Anglican
first principle can only appear as a fabulous, a monstrous delu-
sion.
On the eve of the dfiy when Henry VIII.'s lust was excited
by the charms of Anne Boleyn, what was the state of the
Church of England ? She then formed two important Prov-
inces of the one Catholic Church — Provinces in full and per-
fect communion with Rome, and with all the other Churches
in union with the Holy See. Her faith was identically the
same as that of Rome, and of these Churches. Henry VIII.
had, a short time before, and in opposition to Luther, written
an able theological defense of orthodox doctrine, in which the
full supremacy and jurisdiction of the Pope were set forth and
proved, together with the full doctrine of the Sacraments, as
421 Ii'SK, Ipsa, Ipsum.
tauglit later by the Council of Trent. For his book he re-
ceived from the Pope the title of " Defender of the Faith," —
a title still appropriated by English sovereigns, male and
female ; his work was hailed with delight by the Bishops,
clergy, and people of England. This Catholic country (none
more so in Europe) was proud of its Catholic King. Will
any one with any knowledge of history, maintain that King
Ilem-y's book taught a strange, un-English doctrine, personal
simply to the King; that it was in opposition to the faith
of the English episcopate and clergy; that it was not, on
the contrary, the plain enumeration of the doctrine common
to all the English schools ? Had a Conference of the Bishops
been summoned to give an answer to Luther instead of the
King, would its voice have differed, otherwise than in style
(if in that) from the book of the royal author, himself an ac-
comphshed theologian? The Church of England had no
quarrel with the Church of Eome. She did not look upon
the jurisdiction of the Pope as an usurpation, but taught his
supremacy in the very words of the definition of the Council
of Florence — as an Article of revealed Faith. Her enemy in
past ages, against which her Bishops had often appealed to
Rome, was the usurping Civil Power. The more holy her
bishops, the bolder their appeal to Rome. The English Clnirch
counted among her saints and martyrs, those of her children
who had suffered for their fidelity to Rome, and no saints were
more popular with the people, for the Church's cause was
their cause.
The enemies of the Church had been at times the King, and
always a godless, licentious, and arrogant party among the
nobility. These were by their nature opposed to Rome,
though none had yet dared to deny the Pope's supreme
spiritual power. A bad King, however, might count on these
bad nobles, in any quarrel he might have with *he Pope. The
crash came. Lord Campbell puts it well : " In the . . . year
1534 Henry, finding that there was no chance of succeeding
with his divorce suit with the sanction of the Pope, uvd being
impatient to mat'ry Ann Boleyn, resolved to break with
Rome altogether, and .... to vest in himself the jurisdic-
A Rebi riER. 425
tion which the Pope had hitherto exercised in EngUuid."
Henry defied the Pope, and bade the Convocation of Bishops
do Ukewise. Did they gladly, freely seize upon this oppor-
tunity for asserting their independence, and for ridding their
Church of popish errors? Nothing of the kind. Grudg-
ingly, unwillingly, bit by bit, in fear and terror, with huniili-
' ating and disgraceful cowardice and equivocation they bent to
the storm. Fisher, the one only saint among them, suffered
niartyrdom, rather than follow his craven brethren in their
fehameful apostasy. The rest were men. Catholic for the most
l)art in belief, but not holy : they were unmortified, loving
their ease, their luxuries, their great riches ; trembling, with
the craven fear of those who lead voluptuous lives, before the
wratli of a King, whose wrath the bravest could hardly bear
unmoved.
These unsaintly men preferred riches, honors, and luxury
with apostasy, to niin, prison, and probably a cruel death with
honor. But dare we, in the face of history, say that they aj)-
jyroved of this breach with Rome, and with all the ancient
glories of their order % Is there tlie slightest doubt, that in
their hearts and consciences, they accepted the arguments
which the martyr Fisher made in his noble speech to Convo-
cation ? And, moreover : this breach once consununated, did
they gladly, freely, continue the work of destruction and of
60-called reformation ? Did they desire to see the sacred lan-
guage of the Church changed for the vulgar tongue, the Missal
and Breviary give place under Edward V^I. to the " Book of
Comm(m Prayer " ? History is there to prove that, if they
were cowards, they did not descend to this abject folly. That
work was done by those new creatures of the King, Littledale's
"utterly unredeemed villains" — Cranmer, Latimer, Ridley,
and Hooper — men who, before the breach with Rome, would
never have been raised to the episcopate, and who, by the
wave of a Catholic reformation, would have been swept, with
the other unworthy clerics of the time, into that disgrace which
their crimes merited. The old bishops looked on, or tried at
least to delay the foul work. Many in their old age, obtained
grace enough to make a partial stand under Edward VI., and
426 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsdm.
to sufifer deposition and imprisonment. At length, when Mary
once more gave them hberty, they joyfully cast off the cursed
yoke forever, and, chastened by past misforaines, remained
true to the Old Faith, being ready, uiider Elizabeth, to suffer
imprisonment and exile rather than yield a^rain.
Where, then, is this continuous English Church, whose or-
thodoxy the world is now asked to acknowledge ? What has
the present Anglican Establishment, raised on the ruins Eliza-
beth made of the Church she found standing, in common with
the old Provinces of Canterbury and York, Provinces — in
communion of faith and discipline with the Catliohc world ?
All the Catholic Church asks of Anglicans and Anglo-Ritual-
ists to-day, is to accept that faith, which the entire Church of
England held before Henry VIII., together with those salu-
tary reforms in discipline, inaugurated by the Council of
Trent, aud "which would have been hailed with joy, by every
good man then in England. Such are substantially the facts
of the relation of Henry VIII. to the Anglican Church, as
they are so clearly put by Father Richardson in What are
the Roman Catholic Claims f What the Vicar's " scholars "
and Bishop Kingdon ought to set themselves to prove is, that
this Royal Supremacy in Spirituals, fished up out of the depths
of Boleyn's lascivious eyes, is compatible, either with historic
facts before the time of Henry, or with the Christian faith in
itself, or with reason as the general guide of human things ;
that our Divine Saviour has made promises to be with it and
with the Bishops who are created by it; and that He has
promised in general to be with Bishops who allege that they
make a portion of the Church, though not in communion witli
the rest of it, even as they themselves conceive it, and who be-
sides receive their spiritual jurisdiction _ from a King or a
Queen.
While the Bishop, the Vicar, and his " scholars '' are work-
ing out their little exercise, let me help them with a few re-
flections on Dante — the mightiest poetic genius that ever
walked this earth. By what fatuity was the Vicar led to cite
him against me in this controversy! It is very evident he
uever read the Divine Comedy, but was supplied by somebody
A Rebutter. 427
with the "scraps." This "sublime Apocalypse" has been well
described as — " the Suinma of the Angelic Doctor set before
lis in raptures of Divinest love and ecstacins of Divinest po-
etry." The Vicar, referring to it, says :
" The Roman Catholic poet Dante is very plain-spoken about
the Popes."
" Very plain-spoken," surely. Let us glance at the poet's
idea of the Papacy as he embodies it in the titles of honor
which he bestows upon the Pope. According to Dante the
Pope is the High Priest, the Shepherd and Guide df the flock,
the Spouse of the Church, who is his liride, and his chair is at
Rome. He is the Vicar of Christ, the Head of the World,
the Father of Fathers, to whom all owe reverence, even the
Emperor himself, as the first-born son to his father; "the
Chief Pontiff, Vicar of our Lord Jesus Christ and succesGor of
St. Peter, to whom we owe, not indeed all that we owe to
Christ, but all that we owe to Peter." Therefore the Papacy
is the liighest and holiest dignity, the " robe of sovereignty ";
and to renounce the Papacy is "the great renunciation." To
the Pope is committed the power of the keys ; he holds " the
keys of glory " assigned by Christ to Peter, " within whose
mighty grasp our Lord did leave the keys." To him also it
belongs to feed the sheep and the lambs. (See Hettinger's
Divina Commedia.)
This is " very plain-spoken," I admit, and I have no doubt
the illustrious Pius IX. had them in his mind, when in 1857
he placed a wreath on the tomb of Dante at Ravenna, as a wit-
ness to his Catholic loyalty and faith. I iiave no doubt, too,
that Leo XHL, now gloriously reigning knows all about them,
since it is said that no matter where a quotation is started in
the Divine Comedy, he can take it up and continue it to the
end of the poem — memoriter.
But the Vicar's meditations on the Royal Supremacy are
disturbed by such plain speaking, and in his agony he cries out
tliat Dante puts Pope Celestine V. in Hell :
"And saw of him the shade whom cowardice base
Led, through his great refusal, to disgrace.
428 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
Forthwith I deemed, and felt assured was true,
That this the crew of poltroons base must be
Whom God doth hate, and whom his enemies flee."
Now, in the first place, it is not clear who is meant here, and
no name is given. Lombardi, a learned Dantean commenta-
tor, maintains, in view of the context, which indicates a fam-
iliar acquaintance with the person alluded to, that Dante's allu-
sion here is a political and local one, that he had in his mind
some one of his fellow citizens whose position and fortune
could have saved the imperialistic party from its reverses, and
by whom these valuable aids were, through avarice or lack of
public spirit, or craven fear, refused. Dean Church, an Angli-
can Dantean scholar, expresses the same opinion, while Dean
Milman, History of Latin Christianity ^ vol. vi., p. 194, thinks
that Dante points to St. Celestine the Fifth.
But granting, for argument's sake, that Pope Celestine is
meant, what are the undisputed facts of history ? These facts
show that the saint and pontiff was a man of extraordinary
piety, a monk of ther Benedictine order, a hermit, and the au-
thor of several religious treatises. They further show that
against his earnest protest, he was elected to the pontificate in
a very troubled time, and w^:en he wae of the advanced age of
seventy-two. " The news of his election," says Darras, His-
tory of the Church, vol. iii., p. 414, "drew from him tears of
grief While he gave himself tip to tl^p sweets of prayer
and contemplation, in a cell lohich he had huilt in the midst
of his palace, the government of the Church was in a state of
confusion Men of judgment complained of such a state
of things ; their complaints reached the ears of the Pope. He
had accepted the onerous charge only to avoid a seeming oppo-
sition to the will of God. In these complaints he heard the
expression of the same divine will, warning him to cast down
a burden too heavy for his weak shoulders. On the 13th of
December, 1294, tl>e holy Pope convoked the cardinals in a sol-
emn consistory. He appeared before them in full pontificals,
and read aloud his resignation of the papal dignity. Then
stripping off all the pontifical vestments, he once more put on
the modest habit of the hermit, and took leave of the assem-
A Rebutter. 429
bled dignitaries, who followed him in tears, recommending to
his prayers the now widowed Church."
Such are the facts of history. Do they justify Dante in say-
ing that they describe " a poltroon," one " disgraced by base
cowardice " ? Do they not rather describe a man controlled
by sincere piety, by a lofty sense of duty ? He was clearly
within his rights in resigning, and the disinterestedness of his
conduct is praised by Petrarch as the act rather of an angel
than of a man. Yet, solely for this act, Dante classes him
among the reprobates, with the sluggards and base minded
souls (See Wilstach's Daniels Divine Comedy).
Again the Vicar states that Dante
"Sees Pope Anastatius in hell on account of his following the
heresy of Photinus."
Well, as the "good Homer sometimes nods," so does the
learned Dante fall into historical mistakes — the result of haste,
or of insufficient revision. The poet erred here in accepting
the authority of Martin the Pole, Gratian, and others, who
asserted that Pope Anastatius restored the Eutychean, Acacius,
and connnunicated with the Acacian, Phothius. For it is now
certain, according to the testimony of Evazrius (b. iil, c. xxiii.),
mcephorus (b. xv., c. 17), and Liberatus ("Nestorian Cause,"
c. 18), that Acacius died before the election of Pope Anasta-
tius the Second ; and that Martin the Pole, etc., confounded
the Pope with the emperor of the same name, who favored
Acacius, and was killed by lightning.
Again the Vicar says that Dante
"Presents a terrible picture of Pope Nicholas III. in hell for
simony— head downwards in a flammg pit."
Here again the question is one of history, not of doctrine,
for Dante was as genuine a Papist as I am. Pope Nicholas
the Third assumed the Pontificate in 1227. The Anglican
Dean Milman, Latin Christianity^ book xi., c. iv., says of
him :
"At length the election fell on John Gaetano, of the noble
Ronian liouse, tlie Orsini, a man of remarkable beauty of person
antl demeanor. His name, 'The Accomplished,' imx>lied that in
430 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipshm.
him met all the graces of the handsomest clerks in the world, but
he was a man likewise of irreproachable morals, of vast ambition,
and of great ability."
During the three years of his Pontificate, he compelled both
the Einperor Rudolph and Charles of Anjou to abandon their
claims on the Holy See, labored strenuously and with success
for the reunion of the Greeks, and was the special protector of
the Franciscan order. Yet Dante condemns him to hell, on
what Dollinger {History of the Church, vol. iv., p. 75), calls
" the unproved and improbable accusation of simony." But
notwithstanding the poet's severity to the man, he does not
forget his profound reverence for and loyalty to the Papacy,
for he thus addresses Nicholas :
*' And, were it not that reverence yet me awes
For the Great Keys which in the glad life came
Into thine hands, unworthy of the same,
I should use heavier words of blame."
WUstach, canto xix., 100.
This is a tempting subject to me, but I must stay my hand.
To Dante Christ Himself was the Prototype of the Church and
of her visible life ; judging all things, therefore, by the stan-
dard of His Divine Ideal, he felt keenly the contrast between
the exemplar and the copy {Paradiso, xxviii., 55), like an art-
ist " whose trembling hand cannot perfection's ultimate point
command " (Paradiso, xiii., 77) and how the " brightness of
the seal" is dimmed and tarnished by human frailty. Hence
his severe- treatment of certain Popes is a defense of the Pa-
pacy itself, since it is the very dignity of their office which
makes any fault in a Pope so conspicuous. The great poet
was human and therefore liable to err. His errors have long
since passed into oblivion, but his sublime work belongs to
mankind for all time. As long as one human heart beats with
love for the sacred things of human nature — Freedom, "Wis-
dom, Faith, so long will the name of the author of the Divine
Commedia be loved and revered.
Let me commend to my opponents Dante's words on the
teachiTig authority of the Church :
A Rebutter. 431
" Christians! be ye to principles more true;
Not by each wind be ye like feathers blown,
Nor deem that e^'^ery fount doth merits own,
Ye have the Testaments, the Old and New,
Ye have the Pastor of the Church your guide ;
Let them for your eternal needs provide."
Wilstach, Paradiso, canto v., 73.
Twenty-second Letter. — For confusion and chaos this takes
tlie prize. More arrant rubbish has not been penned since the
world began. Probably it is just as well that not a Protestant
who read it understood what the writer was talking about. I
a&sure them they have lost nothing. A few years ago the Rit-
ualists got hold of the word " Jurisdiction," and, like the witch
on the broomstick, they have been riding it ever since — try-
ing to reach the moon. For present purposes I have suffi-
ciently disposed of this letter in my comments on the last. To
readers who desire to go more thoroughly into the farce being
played by Ritualists, I recommend the following very recent
works :
"Authority, or a Plain Reason for Joining the Church of
Rome," by Father Rivington ; " Roman Catholic Claims," by
Rev. Charles Gore ; " What are the Roman Catholic Claims ? "
by Father Richardson ; " Dependence, or the Insecurity of the
Anglican Position," by Father Rivington. Fathers Richard-
son and Rivington are both learned converts to the Catholic
Clmrch, while Mr. Gore is Pusey's theological heir, and Prin-
cipal of Pusey House, Oxford. He was selected as principal
to carry out Pusey's theological views in all respects, but he
has recently appeared in the book entitled Lux Mundi, with
an essay which goes right to the heart of Pusey's convictions
as to the Old Testament. The veteran Archdeacon Dennisoii
has fulminated an assault on the book under tlie title of '* The
Political Heresy and the Intellectual Heresy of Century XIX.
in England." And the end is not yet. What a happy fam-
ily, theologically speaking, are Anglicans, Anglo-ritualists, et
hoc omne genus !
Twenty-third and Last Letter. — This is the saddest let-
ter of the batch. Between the lines, you can hear the wails
432 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
that accompany the apologies and the humiliating confessions
of regrets over unfulfiled promises " to smash " me. Milton
describes the fallen angels as lying in a " lake of marl " with
no rest for their uneasy limbs. I wonder to what extent their
good intentions simply were a factor in their agony. At this
stage of the controversy I would fain be generous with my
opponent, and assure him that in the next world there are hap-
pily more paths than one paved with good resolutions, but his
turpitude, made manifest now even to his own dull apprehen-
sion, absolutely prohibits me. Let me explain.
In the last paragraph of his first letter in this discussion
(third preliminary in this volume) the Vicar says :
"It ought to be remembered, in this connection, that the Church
of England has preserved her balance well under the ciixjumstances,
and observes four feasts yearly in honor of the Holy Mother."
In the last letter of my Resume I charged him with sup-
pressing a fifth feast marked in the English Church Calendar
— that of the " Conception of the Virgin Mary," on the 8th of
December ; and I demanded that he give the public the rea-
son. He wrote his first Strictures in reply to the Resume, but
said not a word in explanation of his ignorance or dishonesty.
We hear from him now only because he thinks it " advisable,"
he says, to notice my charge.
" Advisable," indeed ! Is not this the language of the very
sneak-thief when caught plying his trade ? He, too, thinks it
"advisable" to restore the stolen property. Was the Vicar
afraid that an earlier and more candid acknowledgment of his
sin might disturb the " balance " which his Church was able to
preserve so well — wi th 'only /bw?' feasts on her hands? Now
watch his tactics. He says :
' ' At the opening of the controversy I inadvertently alluded to
' four ' instead of ' five ' feasts of the Blessed Virgin commemorated
in the English Chtirch. My opponent .... takes it for granted
that the commemoration I suppressed was that of the ' Conception
of the Virgin.'"
" Takes it for granted." Why not ? Has he dared to deny
it ? Of course not. But he does not hesitate to lie about it.
A Rebutter. 433
" I inadvertently alluded to four feasts instead of five," he says.
"Inadvertently!" AVill any reader of these letters believe
him ? Not one. The simple fact is, that he either did not
know that the feast was in the Calendar, or that he did not
know what to do with it, and therefore suppressed it. The
latter I will prove to be the true view. Now, mark, he says :
" I need scarcely observe to studious cliurchmen that the Black
Letter day entered on our Calendar as the ' Conception of the B. V.
Mary ' is the equivalent of what the Eastern Church commemorates
under the more accurate title of 'the Conception of Anna,' and is
intended like that minor feast to direct attention to 'the remote
dawnings of our salvation,' as an Archbishop of Canterbury of the
14th century puts it, and to provide a more distant hailing of the
Incarnation of the Son of God than the Feast of the Annunciation
supplies."
Note the pathetically cunning appeal to " studious church-
men " — the rank and file of the laity, he confesses, are not sup-
posed to know anything about this^^i^A feast, and they do not.
Small blame that even " studious churchmen " know little about
it, since the Vicar himself either " inadvertently " suppressed
it, or was ignorant of its existence. It is a " Black Letter day,'*
you know. "What contemptible knavery !
He informs the " studious churchmen " that the feast of the
" Conception of the B. Y. Mary " is the equivalent of the feast
of the "Conception of Anna," which, he says, is a "minor
feast." Could the humblest intelligence in the Salvation Army
ranks display greater ignorance and stupidity ! A " minor
feast," indeed. Why, they are one and the same thing, and
absolutely identical. Hear Father Perrone :
"The Feast of the Conception of the Blessed Virgin obtained
among the Greeks and Orientals from the earliest times. For as
early as the fifth century we come across traces of the institution of
this Feast. In the Typicon of S. Sabas (who flourished in A.D.
484), or in the order for reciting the office throughout the year on
Dec. 9, it is marketl down ' The Conception (active, i.e.) of S.
Anne, Mother of the Deipara.'' Similarly in the seventh centiuy
mention is made of the same Feast by S. Andi-ew of Creto, who in
the ecclesiastical Hours and Triodium, on Dec. 9, thus announces
the Feast of the Conception : On Dec. 9, t?ie Conception of the Holy
Anne, Mother of the Mother of God.' And in the first Ode he
434 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
writes: ' We to-day celebrate, O Holy Anne, your conceiving; in
that, freed from the bonds of sterility, you conceived Her in your
womb, who was able to contain the Uncontainable.^ "
But Pusey told liiin the same thing, Eirenicon, vol. ii., p.
353 : " The Festival was at once the ' Conception of S. Anne ;
and the ' Conception of the Blessed Deipara.' This is the Ox-
ford genius who boasted that he had to teach me to read my
own authorities. This quotation was directly before his eyes in
Pusey's pages, yet he dares to instruct " studious churchmen ''
that the feasts are different. When the blind thus leads the
blhid, we know what happens.
Remember I am here considering simply the feast of the
" Conception of the B. Y. Mary " as it appears in the AngU-
can Calendar, and without any reference whatever to its im-
maculateness. How did the feast get into this Calendar ? As
we have seen from Father Perrone, the Festival of the Con-
ception was celebrated at an early period in the Oriental
Church. The earliest records call it either the Conception of
St. Anne or the Conception of the Blessed Virgin. But
while in the "Western Church the Feast has been alwavs cele-
brated on the eighth, in the East it was first observed on the
ninth of December. After the great St. Ansel m had been
made Archbishop of Canterbury, in the year 1093, he estab-
lished the Feast of the Conception in his ' province, St. Ber-
nard being then a boy of eighteen.
In 1328 a Council was held in London by Simon Mepham,
Archbishop of Canterbury. The result of its deliberations
was the Constitution of seven Chapters or Canons, the second
of which runs as follows :
"Moreover, because among all the saints, the memory of the
most blessed Virgin and Mother of the Lord is by so much more
frequently and solemnly observed, by how much she is believed to
have found greater favor with God, who ordained her predestined
conception for the temporal origin of His only Begotten, and of Him
who is the salvation of all ; in order that by these means, the begin-
ning, though remote, of our salvation (in which matter for spiritual
joy occurs to the mind) may increase devotion in all ; — and follow-
ing in the footsteps of our predecessor, the venerable Anselm, who
thought it fitting, besides her other more ancient solemnities, to add
A Eebutter. 435
the worthy solemnity of her conception ; — we appoint and command
under strict obligation, that for the future the Feast of the afore-
said Conception be festively and solenmly celebrated in all the
churches of our Province of Canterbury."
Now I have often pointed out that devotion to Mary grows
out of the Incarnation, as does the Church herself, and tliat it
tends to keep alive faith in that crowning act of the Creator's
love for us. This is admitted by the xVnglican Union lievieiOy
in tliese words :
"It is also true and deserves consideration, that there has been
hitherto no marked tendency to heresy on the subject of the In-
carnation among Roman Catholics, while, where the dignity of
the Blessed Virgin has been underrated, heresies have speedily
crept in."
Can your readers imagine the present incumbent of the See
of Canterbury, or the lute Archbishop Tait, who lived and
died a Presbyterian at heart, issuing a decree such as that of
their Catholic predecessor, Archbishop Mepliam, every word
of which is a Te Deum in lienor of the Incarnation ? O, no.
Yet the Vicar instructs "studious Churchmen," that Arch-
bisliop Mepham intended, by the observance of the Feast of
the Conception, to direct attention to the " remote dawninga
of our salvation," and to provide a more distant hailing of the
Incarnation of the Son of God than the Feast of the Annun-
ciation supplies. That is precisely what tliis Catholic Arch-
bishop intended. What an appalling confession on tlie signifi-
cance of a feast so gloriously celebrated to-day througliout the
Catholic world, but which is not even alluded to in the Book
of Conunon Prayer, which the Vicar "inadvertently" sup-
pressed from the calendar, whicli is never mentioned in Angli-
can Church or " Mission Chapel " now, and which has never
before been heard of by Anglicans — " studious " or otherwise
— in this Pro\nnce. Good heaven ! And they will dare assert,
that the Anglican Apostasy of to-day — the bastard progeny of
Henry's last, cradled by tlie " utterly unredeemed and villain-
ous " accoucheurs^ Cranmer, Ridley, Latimer, Scory «fe Co.—
is the direct descendant and heir of the great Catholic Church
of pre -Reformation times! Shades of the blessed martyrs
436 Ipse, Ipsa, Ip.sum.
Fisher and More— forgive them I The saintly Catholic Bishop,
and the illustrious Catholic lawyer — the Law and the Prophets
— once more stand together to witness to God and His Christ.
Hallowed be their sacred memory !
Here again I catch the Yicar in a bare-faced falsehood.
He says :
"Even Bellannine admits that nothing more than this was in-
tended by the originators of the feast."
One would suppose that having put the great Cardinal in
the " burning lake " as a liar, the Vicar could afford to be just
to him. Tliis is a mistake. He deliberately lies about liim,
with the evidence of his falsehood staring him in the face in
Pusey's i)ages, Eirenicon, vol. 2, p. 380, from which he got
Bellarmine's name. Pusey says :
"Bellarmine, who piously beheved in the Immaculate Concep-
tion, still asserts that it was ' not the chief foundation of the festi-
val ' of the ' Conception of the B. V. Mary.' "
Here are Bellarmine's words in full :
"The chief foundation of this festival is not the Immaculate
Conception of her who was to be the Mother of God. For whatso-
ever that conception may have been, from the very fact that it was
the conception of the Mother of God, the memory of it bringeth
singular joy to the world. For then first had we the certain pledge
of redemption, especially since, not without a miracle, was she con-
ceived of a barren mother. So then they too, who believe that the
Virgin was conceived in sin, celebrate this festival."
The Vicar, with these words before him, makes Bellarmine
eay, that a belief in the Immaculate Conception had nothing
whatever to do with the festival! Is not this monstrous? Is
there no difference, let me ask, between one thing's being the
chief foundation of another, and the same thing's forming no
part of the foundation ? Does not Bellarmine expressly assert,
that the belief in the Immaculate Conception was the founda-
tion of the Feast of the Conception in the minds, at least, of
those who accepted that truth ? To the extent, then, that the
Immaculate Conception was received throughout the Church,
to the same extent was it considered *he foundation of the
A Rebuttek. 437
Feast of the Conception in England and elsewliere. But why
need I argue the matter, when I have Bellarniine's own ex-
planation of himself, in a note on the same page of the Eiren-
icon. Bellarmine says :
" There is a great dif^'tonce between the Mother of God and His
forerunner, and between the conception of each. For since the
greater part of the Church piously believe the Immaculate Con-
ception, the same Church had an occasion for instituting this
festival, which occasion it had not to institute a festival on the
conception of John Baptist."
Need I make a single remark upon this? Is there > any
doubt in Bellarmine's mind about the connection between the
belief in the Immaculate Conception and the institution of
the Feast of the Conception ? Of course not. Pusey, fairly
enough, gives this quotation with the other. He proceeds to
remark upon it, too, in a way that witnesses once more to the
bewildering muddle into which even this learned man could
fall when he attempted to handle Catholic theology. In the
matter under discussion, however, he honestly stated enough
of the truth to enable the Yicar to avoid a bath in the " burn-
ing lake." But he will not be saved — even from himself, for
no sooner do I exorcise one unclean spirit of falsehood and
calumny, than he forthwith returns with a dozen others of the
same kidnev, but more vile and wicked.
One word more right here. Anent my charge that he sup-
pressed the fact of the existence of the Feast of the " Concep-
tion of the Virgin Mary" in the Anglican Calendar, the
Vicar says :
' ' I can only suppose he wishes your readers to believe that the
revisers of the English Prayer Book accepted the doctrine of the
Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin."
What fatuity led this unfortunate man to draw attention to
the history of the English Book of Common Prayer ? I know
it well. Permit me just a word upon it, in answer to the
Vicar's insinuation.
After the Feast of Pentecost in 1549, the use of the book,
as it came from the hands of the committee of Convocation
488 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipscm.
originally appointed with the sanction of Henry VIII., be-
came obligatory, by Act of Parliament, on all ministers of the
Anglican Establishment. Scarcely had it been launched, when
it met violent oi)position from the more radical school of re-
formers, headed by Hooper, Bishop of Gloucester, and several
continental Protestant adventurers. Among these were the
notorious Martin Bucer, Peter Martyr, and John a Lasco, who
had come to England after the accession of Edward VI., and
made their way to important posts. Calvin, too, urged upon
the Protector Somerset the necessity of pushing the Keforma-
tion in England further than it had gone. The result was
that Edward VI., the "young tiger-cub," as Littledale calls
him, declared himself in favor of a more thorough revision of
the Prayer Book. The infamous Cranmer, then Archbishop
of Canterbury, one of the frainers of the first book, gave his
consent, and another committee of divines, the same assumedly
who prepared the ordinal of 1550, undertook the preparation
of a second book, which was duly ratified by Parliament, and
came into use on All Saints' day, 1552. This is substantially
the " Book of Common Prayer " in use to-day. Your readers
have seen under whose inspiration the work was done. The
Anglican Church News asserts, that some of the revisers —
" Cranmer, Ridley, Latimer, and Jewell — were apostates, trai-
tors, perjurers, robbers, and persecutors "; and Littledale, that
they were "utterly unredeemed villains."
Now, God forbid ! that I should, even in thought, associate
such miscreants with either the Incarnation, or its " distant
hailing '' and " certain pledge " — the Immaculate Conception
of the Mother of the Incarnate. They cared as little for the
one as for the other. But I do fearlessly assert, in the face of
the Anglican Episcopate in this Dominion, its Deans, Canons,
and Vicars, that the illustrious predecessors of Cranmer in the
See of Canterbury — St. Anselm, who established the Feast of
the Conception in that See, and Simon Mepliam, who obli-
gated its festive and solemn celebration — did accept the glori-
ous doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of Christ's all-holy
Mother, and in testimony of their belief did inscribe that feast
in the calendar of the Catholic Church in England, where it is
A KEBUTfEK. 439
triumphantly celebrated to-day — the Book of Common Prayer,
its aj)08tjite revisers, and " black-letter " calendar to the con-
trary notwithstanding.
But how do I explain the fact, that such men as these Prot-
estant revisers were, adopted and continued in their Protestant
calendar this feast introduced into England by Catholic Arch-
bishops i My explanation is this : Their outraged consciences
had made such cowards of them, that they were afraid to ex-
punge from their country's religious record this evidence of
her early love of the Woman, who had been the Ark and
Tabernacle of the IncarMation, and whose " predestined Con-
ception," in the words of Archbishop Mepham, " God had or-
dained for the temporal origin of His only Begotten, and of
Him who is the salvation of all." So the feast stands in the
Protestant calendar, a gaunt and awful spectre, a " black letter
day," to be observed upon by Ritualistic Yicars for " studious
Churchmen" as the fossil remains of a behef long since ex-
tinct. The Anglo-Ritualist ifnion Review connects the fact
with its philosophy in these words :
"A great deal of the shrinking felt by Anglicans from giving
our Lady due honor, arises from the lingering effects of heretical
teaching, or unconsciously heretical belief, on the mystery of the
Incarnation. Nestorianism prevails to a very great extent among
English Churchmen, and its withering effects are very difTicult to
shake otf , even by those who have long become orthodox iu their
theoretical creed."
I come now to the Vicar's remarks on St. Bernard touching
the observance of the Feast of the Conception. He says :
' ' S. Bernard, however, clearly detected the dangerous tendencies
of such a festival in his day, excessive though his own devotions
were to the Virgin, and he sharply reproved the Canons of Lyons
for the unwarrantable gi-ounds on which they admitted and sup-
ported it."
There is scarcely a word of truth here — in the Vicar's sense.
Though the festival in question had been established from an
early period in the East, as we have seen from Father Perrone,
in Spain in the seventh, in Naples in the ninth, and iu Eng-
440 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
land in the eleventh century, yet it had not been instituted in
Konie. In the days of St. Bernard, the Church of Lyons, in
France, influenced by the example of other particular churches
which had done the same, adopted in its turn the custom of
celebrating the Feast of the Conception. Whereupon the
saint addressed a letter to the Canons of that Church, in which
he reproved them for taking the step upon their own author-
ity, and before they had consulted the Holy See. The whole
scope of the letter, now before me, is to discountenance tiie
introduction of the feast into their church without the knowl-
edge and authority of Home. Here, are St. Bernard's words,
in justification of the reprimand :
*' For, if it thus seemed proper, the matter should have been first
referred to the authority of the Aiiostolic See, and not to act thus
rashly and unadvisedly on the simple notions of a few unlearned
pereons."
It is true, nevertheless, that St. Jiernard discusses the doc-
trine of the Immaculate Conception by way of obiter dictum^
as the Vicar would say, and appears to argue against it. But
does he assail what the Catholic Church to-day understands by
the Immaculate Conception ? I most emphatically assure your
Protestant readers that he does not. His argument is directed
against an idea upon which the Church is silent, and which she
does not at all contemplate in the mystery. This, too, Pusey
discovered in the case of St. Thomas, and candidly confessed
in a letter now before me. The Vicar says that St. Bernard's
" devotions to the Virgin were excessive." " St. Bernard was
a very pious soul, but altogether unreliable," chimes in Bishop
Kingdon. What insolent impertinence. The doctrine of the
Immaculate Conception has since been defined by that very
*' Apostolic See " to which this great saint and Father of the
Church referred the Cauons of Lyons. What would be his
own attitude and conduct now, your readers can form an accu-
rate judgment from the concluding words of his famous letter.
Here are his words :
" But what I have said I have certainly said without prejudice to
what may be more soundly thought by one more wise. I reserve
aU this, and everything else of the kind, for the examination and
A llEBurrEK. 441
judgment especially of the Roman Church, and if I think in any-
thing differently, I am prepared to be amended by its judgment."
Throughout this controversy, I have not diseussud the doc-
trine of the Inunaculate Conception ; it came up but incident-
ally. In bringing it to a conclusion, however, I think it will
be acceptable to intelligent and tlioughtful Protestants if I
state just what the doctrine is, and, at the same time, offer for
their reflection a few thoughts in connection with it.
On the 8th of December, 1854, Pius IX., of immortal mem-
ory, in presence of a vast concourse of Catholic bishops who
thronged the Basilica of St. Peter, solemnly defined tiie Im-
maculate Conception of Mary to be a dogma of Faith, in the
following words :
"In honor of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity, for the gloiy
and ornament of the Virgm Mother of God, for the exaltation of
the Catholic Faith and the spread of the Christian i-eligion, by the
authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the blessed Ajxtstles Peter
and Paul, and by our Own, we pronounce and define that the doc-
trine, which maintains that the Most Blessed Virgin Mary in the
first moment of her Conception, was, by a singular grace and jirivi-
lege of Almighty God, m regard of the merits of Christ Jesus tlie
Saviour of tlie human race, preserved free from the stain of original
sin, has been i-evealed by God, and is therefore to be firmly and
constantly believed by all the faithful."
I am aware, of course, that there are grave theological ideas
involved in this definition, which are not familiar to Protest-
ants. They were not familiar even to so learned a man as
Pusey. I will therefore lay before them a short commentary
upon it from Cardinal Newman's letter to Pusey, on the occa-
sion of his Eirenicon. The Cardinal addressed his old and
beloved friend in these words :
"It is indeed to me a most strange phenomenon that so many
learned and devout men stumble at tliis doctrine ; and I can only
account for it by supposmg that in n)atter of fact they do not know
what we mean by the Immaculate Conception ; and your volume
(may I say it ?) bears out my suspicion. It is a great consolation to
have reason for thinking so, — reason for believing that in some sort
the persons in question are in the position of those great saints in
former times, who are said to have hesitated about the doctrine,
442 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
■when they would not have hesitated at all, if the word ' Concei>-
tion ' had been clearly explained in that sense in which now it is
universally received. I do not see how any one who holds with
(the Anglican Bishop) Bull the Catholic doctrine of the supernatural
endowments of our fii-st parents, has fair reason for doubting our
doctrine about the Blessed Virgin. It has no i-eference wliatever ta
her parents, but simply to her own pei'son ; it does but affirm that,
together with the nature which she inherited from her pai'ents, that
is, her own nature, she had a superadded fulness of grace, and that
from the fii-st moment of her existence. Suppose Eve liad stood the
trial, and not lost her first grace; and suppose she had eventually
had children, those children from the fii"st moment of their exist-
ence would, through divine bounty, have received the same privi-
lege that she had ever had; that is, as she was taken from Adam's
side, in a gai-ment, so to say, of grace, so they in turn would have
received what may be ciUed an immaculate conception. They
would have then been conceived in grace, as in fact they are con-
ceived in sin. What is there difficult in this doctrine ? What is
there imnatural ? Mary may be called, as it were, a daughter of
Eve unfallen. You believe with us that St. John Baptist had, grace
given to him three months before his birth, at the time that the
Blessed Virgin visited his mother. He accordingly was not immac-
ulately conceived, because he was alive before grace came to him ;
but our Lady's case only differs from his in this respect, that to her
the grace of God came, not three months merely before her birth,
but from the first moment of her being, as it had been given to
Eve.
" But it may be said, How does this enable us to say that she was
conceived without original sin f If Anglicans knew what we mean
by original sin, they would not ask the question. Our doctrine of
original sin is not the same as the Protestant doctrine. ' Original
Sin,' with us, cannot be called sin, in the mere orilmaiy sense of
the word ' sin ' ; it is a term denoting Adam's sin as transferred to
us, or the state to which Adam's sin reduces his cliildren ; but by
Protestants it seems to be understood as sin. in much the same sense
as actual sin. We, witli tlie Fathei-s, think of it as something nega-
tive, Pi-otestants as something positive. Protestants hold that it is
a disease, a radical change of nature, an active poison internally
corrupting the soul, mfocting its primary elements, and disorgan-
izing it ; and they fancy that we ascribe a different nature from
ours to the Blessed Virgin, different from that of her parents, and
from that of fallen Adam. We hold nothing of the kind ; we con-
sider that m Adam she died, as otliei-s ; that she was included, to-
gether with the whole race, in Adam's sentence ; that she incurred his
A Rebuttfic. 443
debt, as we do ; but that for the sal:e of Him who was to redeem her
and us upon the Cross, to her the debt was remitted by anticipation ;
on her the sentence was not carried out, except indeed as regards
lier natural death, for she died when her time came, as others. All
this we teach, but we deny that she had original sin; for by origi-
nal sin we mean, as I have already said, something negative, viz.,
this only, the deprivation of that supernatural, unmerited grace
which Adam and Eve had on their first formation, — deprivation
and the consequences of . ^privation. Mary could not merit, any
more than they, the restoration of that grace ; but it was restored to
her by God's free bounty, from the very fii-st moment of her exist-
ence, and thereby, in fact, she never came under the original curse,
which consisted in the loss of it. And she had this special privi-
lege, in order to fit her to become the Mother of her and our Re-
deemer, to fit her mentally, spiritually for it ; so tliat, by the aid of
the first grace, she might so grow in grace, that, when the Angel
came and her Lord was at hand, she might be ' full of grace, ' pre-
pared, as far as a creature could be prepared, to receive Him into her
bosora.''
The marvellous effect of this exquisite exposition on Pusey's
mind, your interested readers can easily ascertain by looking
over the second volume of the Eirenicon. I have already
referred to it, somewhat at length, in my Rejoinder. On the
subject of original sin Pusey speaks out very strongly. He
confesses the ignorance of his own people — " our people," he
says — repudiates the doctrine of Luther and Calvin, and heart-
ily proclaims his acceptance of the Catholic truth as taught by
the Council of Trent. But he goes farther, and claims that
the doctrine of the Thirty-nine Articles " virtually agrees with
that of the Council of Trent." Would to God that a consen-
sus of opinion to this effect could be brought about among
" studious churchmen," bishops, and vicars. We would then
be nigh to the begiiming of the end of the Anglican apostasy
as well upon the Immaculate Conception, as upon other truths
of Christianity. But what, unfortunately, are the facts against
Avhich the Catholic-minded Pusey so strenuously fought ? Tlie
Vicar introduced Dollinger to your readers as "the learned
Church historian and theologian." But Dollinger atlirnis that
" the Thirty-nine Articles are essentially Calvinistic," — a fact
the world knows, Pusey's efforts to minimize its truth to the
444 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
contrary notwithstanding. The repulsive coloring, therefore,
which Calvin's heresy has given to the notion of original sin,
and to other parts of the Christian revelation intimately con-
nected with it, has become the very web and woof, so to speak,
of Anglican theology — such as it is. It is only this infamous
monstrosity and caricature of Christianity that throws any
serious obstacle in the way of an acceptance of the Catholic
doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of Christ's Blessed
Mother by "studious churchmen." But this is not all the mis-
chief that Calvin's offspring has done. For it has predisposed
a multitude of thoughtful inquirers against the Divine author-
ity of the Gospel altogether. Reason revolts against the hor-
rible assertion, that the great Father of the Universe should,
because of the sin of one of His creatures, create millions upon
millions of intelligent beings in a state of essential deformity
and unnatural proclivity to evil ; to say nothing of the philo-
sophical impossibilities which beset such a theory. And when
an anomaly so monstrous is authoritatively identified with the
Christian faith, it is no wonder that private judgment should
adopt the only alternative which seems open to it, and unhesi-
tatingly reject a religious system that offends against the first
principles of its moral sense. The London Spectator (June,
1890,) now states the result : " The decay of religion in Eng-
land is general. Formerly, such religion as Englishmen had
ivas intimately associated ivith Protestantism- ; and as the lat-
ter has declined, it has heen replaced hy a state of feeling
which, ivhateverhe its other advantages, is near of kin to indif-
ference to truth " — quoted in the London Tahlet, June 21st,
1890. In this our day, I know of no triumph, on theological
lines, more simply glorious for the Catholic Church than the
movement for the Revision of the Calvinistic Creed of the
famous Westminster Confession of Faith. This exposition of
Christianity contradicts the dictates of Reason, shocks the con-
victions of Coifscience, and is subversive of all Human Dig-
nity. " Let us be honest, and confess," writes Dr. Schaff, " that
old Calvinism is fast dying out." May God hasten the day of
its utter extinction ! I commend to your theological readers
the following recent literature on this topic, pro and con : Dr.
A Rebutter. 445
Scliaff's Creed Revision^ Dr. Briggs' Whither?; and Dr.
McCosh's Whitlier ? WJdther ?% Tell me Where ? a con-
sideration of Dr. Briggs' pamphlet.
Some of your readers may ask : But was the Immaculate
Conception not unknown to the early ages of the Church's life ?
I say — No, not unknown simply, imless it may he said that the
Incarnation itself was unknown to the first centuries, and even
the being of God. How many Saints have used expressions
concerning our Incarnate Lord, which seemed to deny one or
other aspect of the mystery of His Incarnation, and which, in-
deed, would have been a denial of the truth after the truth
had been defined ! How often they used language which was
harmless in them, but being misused by others was laid aside !
What strange expressions they used even of the Immensity
of God ! So that, as (the Anglican) Bishop Bull reminds us,
they might even be convicted of having erred on that funda-
mental truth. And so, although in those early times they had
not sifted the meaning of their own expressions nor drawn out
in careful phrase their inmost thoughts concerning her, whom
they called the Second Eve, they cannot be said to have been
strangers to the truth of her Immaculate Conception.
It took ages to settle the exact equivalent of those high
thoughts which they had concerning her, so that expressions
may be culled from the language of nineteen centuries, whicli
are at least inexact — occasionally contrary to the truth. It was
only when at length theologians were in danger of violent dif-
ference that the subject was mercifully closed, and by the
Divine Assistance the infallible head of the Church decided in
what terms the glorious Conception of our Lady should hence-
forth be enshrined, and unity thus be secured. And not only
was unity thus secured, but the Church received fresh light
for her growing work. So, beautifully writes Father lliving-
ton, in Dependence^ etc.
Your readers will admit, I hope, that I have always treated my
opponent with courtesy and nKtgnanhnity in the matter of his
witnesses. For instance, I have over and over again put in
evidence the testimony of Dollinger, Pusey, Littledale, Vercel-
lone and P^rc Gratry — witnesses called against me. Simply
416 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
because the Vicar thought to make out Father Gratry a rebel
against the Catholic Church of which he Hved and died a de-
voted son, he canonized him, and introduced him to your read-
ers as the " Saintly Pere Gratry." Thanks ! He well deserves
it, but, if I must play the part of " Devil's Advocate," not for
the Vicar's reasons. Now the " saintly Pere Gratry " was a
, " Priest of the Oratory of the Immaculate Conception," — a
society of priests founded by himself for the conversion and
instruction of the Parisian youth. Your readers, then, will not
be surprised to learn that the " saintly Pcsre " wrote a most
beautiful book (now before me) on the Immaculate Concep-
tion, in which he looks upon the definition of this dogma l)y
Pius IX. as a most glorious contribution to our knowledge.
Your readers will be glad to hear the words of this member of
the French Academy, mathematician and philosopher on our
doctrine.
The " saintly Tbre Gratry " writes :
"O Queen, conceived without sin, pray for us! Pray that in
these our days the manifestation of this mystery (i.e. , of her Immac-
ulate Conception) may become a shining hght in thy Chui'ch. Pray
that this manifestation may be such a progress of Christian wisdom
as S. Vincent of Lerins speaks of in the same pages which warn the
Christians of his days against dangerous novelties. 'Shall there
never be,' St. Vincent exclaims, 'any religious progi-ess in the
Church of Christ ? Assuredly there shall be very great progress ;
and who would be so envious of man, so hostile to God as to wish
to hhider it ? Yes, there shall be progress in the faitli, but no
change in the faith ; let, then, understanding, knowledge, and wis-
dom grow and develop from age to age, both in the Universal
Church and in the individual soul. In the coui-se of time the old
doctrines of the heavenly philosophy must be more and more culti-
vf "id and explained ; they can never be changed, maimed, or muti-
!• .ted, but they must acqui'-e more clearness, evidence, and precision,
while they ])reserve the fulness, integrity, and propriety that they
originally possessed.' "
P^re Gratry next quotes from a pious author, whose name
he does not give, these words :
' ' There are many reasons why God willed that the mystery of
Mary should dawn by degrees, like the day One reason, as
theologians conunonly say, is this : because the Church is not
A Hebuitkr. 447
founded on our Lady, but upon her Son. Therefore it was conven-
ient that God should fli-st make clear the truths of salvation, and
afterwards in the superabundance of His goodness should clear up
ethers, which, thougrh of less consequence, yet raise our minds to
know him better and to love him more ai-dently."
And tlie Vicar's " saint " thus concludes his philosophic
reflections :
"The Immaculate Conception of the Virgin is a truth so deep, so
fundamental, and so central ; it throws so strong a light on all the
trutlis of faith, and even on all the truths of philosophy, that its
fuller manifestation will perhaps contribute to bring about that
intellectual revolution in the Christian world and in the human
mmd which clear-sighted souls are looking for."
I have adopted Father Rivington's translation of these ex-
tracts : they will give your readers some idea of the enthusi-
asm with which this "saintly" Christian philosopher greeted
the final settlement of the question as to the relation between
the first and Second Eve — as the Fathers call Mary.
" The saintly Pere Gratry," " the good priests of Portland
and the Cathedral," says the Vicar in one breath, while in the
next breath he accuses them of being guilty of "extrava-
gances," "enormities," "impious utterances," "impious acts of
worship and prayer," " idolatrous devotions," and " idolatrous
worship," toward the ever-blessed Mother of his and their
Redeemer ! The cowardly and insolent hypocrite.
I will now submit to your readers the testimony 'of two very
different witnesses, — the leaders of the two greatest revolts
against the Church of God, — Mahomet and Martin Luther.
They represent the sixth century and the sixteenth, rnd they
have received and refiected, each in his pecuh'ar way, the tra-
dition of the Church on tlie Immacuhite Conce])tion.
My references will be to Davenport's edition of Sale's trans-
lation of The Koran, Philadelphia, 18G4, now before me.
It is well known that Mahomet, during the cotnmercial
period of his life, conversed with Christians on their doctrines,
especially in iiis visits to the great fair of Bosra, which brought
people together from all parts of the East. In various parts
of the Koran he has inserted fragments of Christian teaching.
448 Ip8k, Ipsa, Ii'sum.
colored with his own fancies. And, amongst the Christian
traditions which he thus got hold of, was that of the Innnacu-
late Conception, The passage to which I desire to call atten-
tion is to be found in the third chapter of the Koran, which
is entitled, The Family of hnran. Imran, or Ainran, accord-
ing to the Mohammedan commentators, is the husband of
Anna, and the father of Mary — it is another name for St,
Joachim. Here are Mahomet's words :
"God hath surely chosen Adam, and Noah, and the family of
Abraham, and the family of Imran, above the rest of the world ; a
race descending the one from the other; God is He who heareth and
knoweth. Remember, when the wife of Imran (Anna) said, Lord,
I have vowed unto thee that which is in my womb, to be dedicated
to thy service ; accept it therefore of me, for thou art He who hear-
eth and knoweth. And when she was delivered of it, she said. Lord,
verily I have brought forth a female (and God well knew what she
had brought forth), and a male is not as a female (because the latter
could not minister in the temple) ; I have called her Mary, and I
commend her to thy protection, and also her issue, against Satan,
driven away with stones. Therefore the Lord accepted her with a
gracious acceptance, and caused her to bear an excellent offspring."
Your readers will find this passage fully explained by Mo-
hammedan commentators in the notes to Sale's Koran. Sale
himself suras them up in these words :
"It is not improbable that the pretended Immaculate Conception
of the Virgin Mary is intimated in this passage. For according to
a tradition of Mohammed, every person that comes into the world is
touched at his birth by the devil, and therefore cries out, Mary and
her son only excepted ; between whom and the evil spirit God
placed a veil, so that his touch did not reach them. And for this
reason, they say, neither of them was guilty of any sm, like the
rest of the children of Adam. Which peculiar grace they obtained
by virtue of this recommendation of them by Hannah to God's pro-
tection."
The Koran proceeds to say that Mary, under the care of
Zacharias, was placed in a chamber of the temple. It then
narrates the miraculous birth of St. John the Baptist, whom it
calls an honorable, chaste, and righteous prophet, who should
bear witness to the word from God. It then adds: "The
A Rebutter. 449
Angels said, O Mary, verily God hath chosen thee, and hath
purified thee, and hath chosen thee above all the women of the
world : O Mary, be devout towards thy Lord, and worship and
bow down with those that bow down."
Now the respect which Mahomet and his followers have
always expressed towards the Blessed Virgin, and which should
put many to shame who profess themselves Christians, is the
more remarkable when we consider their notions respecting
the rest of her sex, opinions as disgraceful as they are degrad-
ing, and which tend to show that theoretical opinions concern-
ing Mary are of no avail, unless in those Christian hearts wliich
separate her not from Jesus, and truly honor her as the Mother
of God. The "sermon " preached by the Vicar after this dis-
cussion had long continued, is a good illustration of such theo-
retical opinions : it had nothing but words.
In his great work, Bihliotheque Orientale, D'Herbelot tolls
the following anecdote, which illustrates the Mohammedan
opinion of Mary,
Abou Ishac, one of the most famous doctors of Mohammedan-
ism, was ambassador from the Caliph, at the court of the Greek
Emperor. There he had warm disputes on the subject of relig-
ion with the Greek Patriarch and several bishops. The bish-
ops had quoted sundry reflections made by Mohammedans to
the disadvantage of Ayesha, the wife and widow of the false
prophet. Abou Ishac replied, by drawing a picture of the
divisions in the East respecting our Lord's Incarnation ; how
some said that the Holy Virgin brought forth, some said she
did not bring forth, some said they knew not whether she did
or not. He then concluded with this appeal to the Bishops :
" How can you be surprised that Mohammedans have differed
about Ayesha, since Christians have differed about that glori-
ous Virgin Mary, who was a mine and a fountain of purity."
See Bishop Ullathorne's beautiful '"'' Exjposition of the Immac-
ulate Conception^
I will now call attention to a passage in Luther's Kirchcn-
jpostill (Opera, ed. Walch., Haliae 1Y45 ; xi. 2616), which runs
as follows :
"As other men were conceived in sin, both in soul and body, but
450 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsdm.
Christ without sin, either in body or soul ; so Mary the Virgin was
conceived according to the body indeed without grace, but accord-
ing to the soul full of grace. Such is the meaning of these words
which the Angel Gabriel spoke to her, ' Blessed art thou amongst
women.'' For it could not have been said of her, '^ Blessed art thou,^
if she had ever been under the curse. It was also right and just
that that person should be preserved without sin, from whom Christ
was to take the flesh that should overcome all sin. For that is
properly called ' Blessed,^ which is endowed with God's grace, that
is, which is without sin. Of this matter others have written more
at length, and adduced excellent reasons which it would be too long
here to relate."
i
So wrote Martin Luther in 1527, or ten years after his fall-
ing away from the Catholic Church, thus showing how strong
and general was the general belief on the doctrine of the Im-
maculate Conception in Christendom in the sixteenth century,
just as Mohammed's testimony (he was born A.D. 570) shows
the same fact for the sixth century.
Three hundred and twenty-seven years after Luther had so
clearly and strongly affirmed his belief in the Immaculate Con-
ception, the solemn definition of the doctrine by Pius IX. was
greeted with clamors and cries from the enfeebled sects of
German Protestantism. Thereupon German RationaHsni
charged Protestant evangelicalism with its inconsistencies, as
exhibited in these outcries against the definition. The German
Protestant Ecclesiastical Gazette, of December 9th, 1854, re-
monstrates with it in these words :
"Why all this clamor on thfl part of orthodox Protestants? This
belief is but the necessary and very natural consequence of their
own prmciples, and it is surprising that the definition did not take
place sooner, and that orthodox Protestantism had not long smce
proclaimed it The roots of the dogma of the Immaculate
Conception of Mary extend in fact into the very depth of the sub-
stance of their own dogmatic system, and show both the weak sides
and the corruption of the Evangelical Church. In substance it is a
question on the historical fact of the holy and immaculate personal-
ity of Jesus Christ If they are not disposed to revise from
top to bottom the theory of original sin, and our orthodox now
desire it less than ever, there is no other part to take but to imitate
the Catholics, and to deny the influence of original sin on the
A IIebuttkb. 451
human nature of Christ; this will also lead to the liherating of His
Mother, that is to the asserting that she was conceived without orig-
inal stain. This is what the Roman Church has done in our days,
not arbitrarily, but pushed on by the foi-ce of a necessary conse-
quence. Thus it is not possible that Rome could refuse her sanction
to the dogma of the Immaculate Conception. These things seem at
this moment to have no direct influence on the Evangelical Church,
but before long we shall see the theologians of orthodox Protestant-
ism driven at last to the necessity of acknowledging what is con-
tained in their own principles, of which the Roman Clmrch has
done nothing but recognize a consequence, and sooner or later it
will bring the orthodox to venerate the Virgin."
And now I will adapt and apply to the Vicar, as the repre-
sentative and embodiment, in this community, of the miser-
able fraud of Ritualism, the scathing parallel of the great-hearted
Marshall, — himself a learned convert from Anglicanism to the
Catholic Church. lie truly says :
" One point of difference there is between (the Rationalist and the
Ritualist), and only one. The Rationalist denies tliat the creature
owes obedience to any spiritual authority whatever, the Ritualist
that he owes it to any but the ' Primitive Church.' Refusing his
homage to the living spouse of Christ, he hopes to escape being
counted among the lawless by professing filial adhesion to the same
spouse BEFORE she became impure and defiled. He displays his
reverence for her who is ' without spot, or wrinkle, or any such
thing, ' by asserting that she lost all title to reverence before she had
begun to convert the barbai'ians, or to civilize all the Kingdoms of
Europe. Yet the Christian who palliates his revolt against her by
the plea that he is loyal to an older authority, which he calls the
Primitive or Undivided Church, only resembles the citizen who
should contend, as a pretext for rejecting the Common Law of Eng-
land, that his entire submission is reserved for the decrees of the
Witenagemote, or the precepts of the Justinian Code. And the
answer of the judge would be the same in both cases. The author-
ity by which the Divine Lawgiver tests human obedience, till the
second coming of Christ, is not one which expired a thousand or
fifteen hundred years ago, but which, like Himself, is ' the same
yesterday, to-day, and forever.''
" I know not if the Rationalist aspires to heaven, or even believes
in its existence. If he does, he probably expects that his chief em-
ployment there will be to make further discoveries in chemistry or
astronomy, or perhaps to give lectures to the Angels on those interest-
452 Ipse, Ipsa, Ipsum.
ing subjects. The Ritualist certainly believes in heaven, and Avill
display there also, if its gates should be opened to him, hia essential
agreement with the Rationalist. While tlie latter will be a scien-
tific missionai'y to the Angels, the former will be a theological mis-
sionary to the Saints. Thus he will represent to St. Peter, if the
opportunity should occur, that if he had only disclaimed all per-
sonal ]ire-eminence, and forbidden others to assume it, the fiction of
Papal supremacy, for which he is clearly responsible, could never
have been established. He will observe to St. Paul, if he can per-
suade him to listen to him, that his intemperate injunctions about
dogmatic unity were excessive, and since they could not at any
time have been complied with in the Chuix;h of England, there can
be no clearer proof that they were erroneous. He will reprove St.
John, if he is not too far removed from him to do so, for his extrav-
agant doctrine, that whosoever consorts with a heretic ' communi-
cated with his wicked works' Anglicans did it every day, which
proves that it was lawful and right. He will severely upbraid St.
Augustine. Avho merely asked the Pope's permission before he came
to convert England ; and St. Boniface, who culpably swoi-e to obey
him before he went to evangelize Germany. He will frown upon
St. Bernard, always supposing that he finds himself in his company
(on account of ' his excessive devotions to the Virgin ') ; and turn
his back on St. Anselm (who, as Archbishop of Canterbury, intro-
duced the Feast of the Conception of Christ's Blessed Mother into
England), and whose language on the same subject is unworthy of
a pi-edecessor of (Cranmer and) Parker, Tait (and Dr. Benson, the
present incumbent of St. Anselm's See). He will decline to speak to
Sir Thomas More, wiio died rather than revolt against the Pope, a
weakness discreditable to a patriotic and enlightened Englishman.
And thus, truths previously unknown, save in the British Isles and
their favored dependencies, will be gradually diffused throughout
Heaven, to the great profit and jubilation of the hitherto unin-
structed Saints. Amid such duties and occupations, perfectly ,
adapted to (his) previous habits (the 'Mission Church' Thersites)
hopes to enjoy a cheerful eternity."
Here, for the present, I take leave of this Yiear, — the veriest
ritualistic Tbeocrines. I have for the unfortunate man no
other feehngs but ''pity and ruth." "If he seek truth, is he
not our brother and to be pitied ? If he do not seek truth, is
he not still our brother and to be pitied still more ? " I have
shot across the inner crust of his malicious soul, gleams of radi-
ance from Catholic truth amply sufficient to guide him out of
A Rebutteb. 453
his labyrinthine prison. Let liiin now remember that liis own
Jeremy Taylor warns him, that whoever sins against light
Icisses the lips of a blazing cannon ; and let him not he indif-
ferent, in his examination of conscience, to his present mental
condition, which Shakespeare, with prophetic vision, seems to
have had in his eye when he peimed these words :
" But when we in our viciousness grow hard,
The wise gods seal our eyes ;
In our own slime drop our clear judgment, make us
Adore our errors ; laugh at us while we strut
To our confusion."
And, finally, a word to Bishop Kingdon. I would ask him
whether he thinks he has either promoted the dignity, or hon-
ored and discharged the responsibilities of his position as a
" Teacher in Israel " by imposing upon such a Vicar the task
of handling controversially such topics as have engaged our
attention in this discussion ? If, however, he thinks that he
himself can do it any better, it is surely his duty to buckle on
his armor. He has allowed his Vicar to overlay with every
species of insult, falsehood, and calumny against the Catholic
Church, his miserable statement that Ipsa was a misprint for
Ipse, and that the doctrine of the Immaculate Concejjtion was
founded upon and depended on this misprint. I have held up
this statement to the breezes that blow out of all quarters of
the sky of Catholic theology ; I have held it up to the winds
that blow from the pages of the loftiest mountain-peaks of
Catholic scholarship, Biblical and Patristic, and I have thrown
in the mighty Protestant names of Grotius and Tischendorf.
What is the result \ The hUzzard has so winnowed the state-
ment that nothing of it is left but a "damned spot" on the
reputation of Bishop Kingdon as a scholar and theologian,
which will not " out " by all the infamous " perfumes '^applied
by his Vicar, and which nothing can purge away but an hon-
est confession of mistake with an honorable retraction and
apology.
I closed my first letter with the words used, on an ever
memorable occasion, by the famous John Duns Scotus, the
immortal Franciscan monk, and genuine Oxford scholar. He
454 Ii«8K, Ipsa, Ipbum.
uttered thciu in the University of Paris, whitLer he was called
from Oxford, when, in presence of the assembled glories of
contemporary science and genius, he so resolved two hundred
arguments on the Immaculate Conception that he went forth
from the lists with the title of Victorious. In that great con-
test of giants, he not only determined the future teaching of
the Paris faculty, but he gathered to his side all the famous
Universities of Europe. Even Pusey concedes that Scotus'
" answers to the abstract arguments" are " invincible."
I caimot better conclude this discussion than in the words of
a genius mightier than Shakespeare. In the 33d Canto of the
Paradiso, Dante opens with the following magnificent prayer
of St. Bernard to the Blessed Mother, on behalf of the Poet
liimself, who, guided by Beatrice, is present and longs to look
even to the throne of God :
O ! Virgin Mother, of thy Son a child,
Most Immble, yet above all others great;
In Wisdom's depths fixed object uudefiled :
Thou who, with wondrous gifts, didst elevate
Man's nature so, that God approving smiled
Disdainirtg not with human flesh to mate.
Again was lit within thy virgin breast
The Maker's love ; by its sweet ray, like flowers,
These souls are born into eternal rest.
Thou ai-t, of Charity, in heavenly bowers,
Meridian beam ; below, the fountain blest
Of loving hope in mankind's darkest hours.
So great the power that from thy greatness springs
1 Lady high, that he, who in his need,
Seeks not thy help, would soar bereft of wings. '
Nor dost thou always stay a gracious deed
Until invoked ; oft in dubious things
Thou dost forestall a wish with loving speed.
In thee bright Mercy, and sweet Pity shine ;
In thee Magnificence ; in thee are knit
What shreds there are in others of divine.
Wherefore this man, who from hell's lowest pit
E'en to this place, has seen in ordered line,
The spirit world, now prays tliat thou wouldst fit,
By grace from God obtained, his mortal eye,
To gazt' aloft, unto the awful throne
A IlKDU'riEK. 455
Of Him the source of perfect bliss Most High.
And I, who never favor of my own
More fervent sought tlian this, raise up my cry
To thee, (and may it not in vain be throw^n)
That frail mortality's encircling cloud
Thou wouldfet with prayers dissolve, so to his gaze
Tlie cause of bliss might now his face unshroud.
Lady, who canst, in God's mysterious ways.
Thy every wish obtain, preserve, I ask,
From ill, the senses that such things have seen :
To quell his human pride, be thine the task ;
Behold, Beatrice prays to thee, O ! Queen,
And many Saints with outstretched hands for this.
(Archbishop O'Brien's Translation.)
Ever sincerely yours,
R. F. QUIGLEY.
APPENDIX A.
• LETTER FROM BISHOP ROGERS.
THE LATE ARCHBISHOP CONNOLLY.
To the Editor of the Globe :
Sir,— May I again ask the kind hospitality of your valuable
paper? In the spring of 1885 (Globe of the 19th March, 17th April,
and 9tli May), you granted me the use of your columns to correct,
over the signature " Veritas," some erroneous impressions which the
letters of the Rev. J. M. Davenport, Ritualist Anglican minister of
the Mission Church, St. Jolni, writing over the noin de plume
"Catholic," were calculated to produce in regard to the late Most
Rev. Archbishop Connolly. I then stated, in substance, that the
said illustrious Archbishop of Halifax (formerlv Bishop of St. John),
when called to the duty of participating in the deliberations of tlie
(Ecumenical Council of the Vatican, fully undei-stood and faithfully
discharged the responsibility of his office as a Bishop of the church
at that council, in exercising his right witli apostolic liberty, yet so
as not to derogate from the rights of others, whether equals or supe-
rior, during the trying period of the council's deliberations. I say
trying period; for it is the conscientious duty of each one, during
the proper period of deliberation, to express candidly and clearly his
views, even though it may be painfully evident that his views differ
from the majority of s colleagues and from those of the Sovereign
Pontiff. Then, when <? period of deliberation is ended, it becomes
the duty of all to acquiesce in th( ^nal decision when approved by
the Pope; that is, to " Hear the Church," in submitting one's own
particular will and judgment to the decision and judgment of tlie
higher autliority which God has ai)pointed to guide and govern us.
Is tliere anytliing wrong or abnormal in tliis? In temporal
affairs, in councils of State as well as in churcli matters, is not this
the correct rule and jM-actice? and in so acting at the Vatican Coun-
cil did not Archbisho]) ComioUy and the other Bisliops of the so-called
" minority " act correctly? Evidently Rev. Mr. Davenport flunks
not. Like his preference for the forged and repudiated speech of
Bishop Strossmayer t^does he also admire Pigot's forgeries, " Par-
nellism and Crime "?), he seems to prefer that Archbishop Connolly
(457)
458 Appendix.
should have rejected, as he himself does, the decisions of the Catho-
lic Church, even while retaining the name "Catholic."
But, to the point of my letter. I wish in no way to obtrude my-
self into the controversy between the Rev. Mr. Davenport and Mr.
R. F. Quigley in the matter '' Ipse, Ipsa"; for I had nothing to do
with it from the beginning, except, after it began, to follow with
admiring sympathy Mr. Quigley's irrefragable arguments and sound
erudition. Both antagonists are valiant champions. But I wish to
protest, as earnestly as it is possible, against the forgery of a libellous
calumny as stated in Mr. Davenpoit's letter in your issue of the 18th
inst., in reference to Archbishop Connolly at the Vatican Council.
The Rev. Mr. Davenport writes : " I will quote a letter which I
myself received from Dr. Nevin, Priest of the American church of
St. Paul ill Rome, dated December 4, 1885, acknowledging receipt
of my pamphlet on Pupal Infallibility. ' You are quite in the right,'
he says, ' about Archbishop Connolly He was on one occa-
sion pulled down from the sort of pulpit in which the speal-trs
stood, after they had tried in vain to silence him with cries of silen-
tium hereticus. He described this scejie to me the same evening iu
the presence of several membei's of the Council. Then when lie
would not yield to the cries with which they attempted to silence
him, there was no end of a row, ' said the Archbishop, ' and I was
got down out of that mighty quick.' "
Now from my own personal knowlBdge I pronounce this statement
to be utterly void of truth. I was pref&nt as well as Bishop Sweeny of
St. John, Bishop Mclntyre of Ch:;rlottetown, P. E. I., and many
other living Bishops to whom I can appeal, at each of the speeches
made by Archbishop Connolly in the hall of the Vatican Council, and
no such occurrence as is here stated ever took place in regard to him,
nor indeed in regard to any other, but I speak emphatically of him.
Nor could he have made such a statement to Dr. Nevin. It would
be untrue and absui-d. Archbishop Connolly and the priest who was
liis secretaiy, Bishop Sweeny, and myself clubbed and messed together
during our stay in Rome foi- the Council, like many other groups of
Bishops. We occupied a suite of apartments on the same flat or
piazza, each having his own separate room, but our dining room, re-
pa.sts, recreation room, parlor, temporary altar for mass, carriage for
going to the daily meetings of the Bishops, and servants, were in com-
mon, and nothing of any importance could happen to any one of us
without its becoming known to the others. Hence, I know whereof
I speak, and I make this statement simply iu the interests of truth
and justice, not in any spirit of carping coiitrovei"sy.
Thanking you, Mr. Editor, I remain, etc.,
t J- Rogers. Bis' .p of Chatham.
Appendix. 459
APPENDIX B.
BISHOP STROSSMAYER'S LETTER TO BISHOP MAES.
Right Rev. and Illustrious Bishop: Most Beloved Brother in
Christ:
I reply to your two letters informing me that various things
under my name, prejudicial to the Catholic faith and Church, are
circulated in your country. Every one of the pieces circulated and
published in your country in my name, prejudicial to the Catliolic
Church and faith, are malignant inventions; are lies, are calum-
nies, concocted at the instif^-ation of him who goeth about the flock
of the Lord seeking whom he may devour. I deem it my glory, and
I regard it as one of the chief gifts of Divine goodness, that I was
born of pious Catholic parents and brought up by them, and have
all my life constantly adhei-ed to the Catholic faith. It is almost
sixty years since I was ordained priest, and for forty years I have
belonged to the episcopate ; all this time I have openly and publicly
taught and explained the whole uncorrupted Catholic doctrine ac-
cording to the sense of Mother Church. This is attested by almost
numberless documents, most of them public and official. It gives
me great gi ' and sadness of mind that men can be found so giddy
and perveree as to dai-e to abuse my name and authority, in order
to seduce souls redeemed by the blood of Christ and called to the
hope of immortality, and wrest them from the Catholic Church.
Soon after the Vatican Council a sermon was published, purport-
ing to have been delivered by me, which teemed throughout with
insults and contumely against the Catholic faith and Church. I
have t'gain and again in private and public denounced this impious
and mcst sacrilegious sermon as ajKwryphal, falsely and menda-
ciously asci'ibed to my mouth and my name ; but the impious fraud
and forgery devised for the destruction of souls has not yet ceased.
At last, however, I was informed by a certain pious American
priest and onfcssor that he had attended an apostate priest who on
his deathbed confessed that he was the author of the above-men-
tioned fraud and forgery, and had ascribed the stiid imiiious .ser-
mon to me ; he added entreaties that as a sign of final repentance
and expiation this should be communicated to me and my pardon
obtained. All this I made known at Rome and published widely,
and the storm against me was somewhat lulled for a time.
By your letters, dearest brother, I .see that the old enemies of the
Catholic faith and Church have retui'ned to their vomit, and, as the
prophet says, " become an outspread net for the faithful people.'' I
460 Appendix.
beg and implore you, dear brother, in your piety and zeal to refute
these calumnies, and by means of this letter publicly to brand them
as impious frauds. Let all know, especially those most likely to
incur danger of being seduced and perverted, that the Catholic
Church is most dear to me, and that I have always and everywhere
preached it as the most divine work of the Eternal Father, as the
true and living body of Christ our Lord, God, and Saviour ; as the
most holy spouse of the Holy Ghost, from whom she seeks her
strength, her invincibility, and her perpetual ti'iumphs. The Cath-
olic Church is to me the only mediatrix between God and men, the
only true dispenser of the mysteries of the Holy Cross, so that it ia
due to the Catholic Church alone if those gifts of supernatural
grace are never wanting to the human race, with which it not only
cannot absolutely dispense, if we are to retain the inheritance
■which we have acquired by the mystery of the cross, or even in the
natural order those good ends pleasing to God, to which within the
limits of our mortality we may lawfully aspire.
We must on this earth have the Catholic Church as a Mother if
we would merit to have God in heaven as our Father. Any man or
any nation that desires its divine and human vocation to be made
perfect and sanctified by the elements and gifts of the supernatural
order, must be in connection with the Catholic Church, either im-
mediately, that is, with its body and soul; or at least mediately, that
is, with its soul. This has been, is, and ever will continue to be my
doctrine as to the Catholic Church. To her I freely and with all
my heart ascribe, what St, Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage and Martyr,
enlightened by the Holy Ghost, wrote in his treatise on the Unity
of the Church : " The Church is one, which is extended widely into
a multitude by the fruitf ulness of her growth. As the rays of the
sun are many, but the light one; and many the branches of the
tree, but one the trunk supported by a firm root ; and as from one
fountain manj' streams flow, and the multiplicity may seem im-
mense in the number of gushing branches, yet unity is preserved in
the origin. If a ray is severed from the body of the sun, the unity
of the light receives no division; rend a branch from a tree, the
fragment cannot germinate ; cut oflp a stream from its source, the
severed stream dries up. Indeed, it is self-appai-ent ; unity, con-
cord, harmony belong to the essence and, as it were, to the inmost
soul of Christ; so that where there is unity, concord, harmony,
there undoubtedly is the Church ; where unity, concord, harmony
are wanting, there infallibly the Cluu'ch, too, for that very reason
is wanting. Unity, concord, harmony, is the highest and most evi-
dent proof of the divinity of the Catholic Church." Whatever the
holy Martyr says of the unity of the Church, he says of the Church
Appendix. 461
of God itself. The Catholic Church is then the sun, whose rays en-
lighten all churches and nations throughout the whole world. The
Catholic Church is the oak, braced by a sturdy root; its fruit, all
those whom the different churches and nations bring to the salva-
tion of eternal and temporal life, are due to the fecundity of this
divine tree and trunk.
The Catholic Church is the fountain of the unfailing river,
s])ringing from eternity itself, and gliding on to eternity through the
whole series of ages, tilling all the streams of the different churches
and nations fully with the welling torrent of its watei-s, to an
inexhaustible abundance and plenty of celestial and terrestrial
fecundity. Moreover, I love, cherish, and honor the Roman
Church as matrix and mistress of all churclies throughout the
world. To the Church of Rome I do most freely and with my whole
heart endoi-se the splendid testimony of St. Irena?us, Bishop and
Martyr, in his work against Heresies.
The same saint (Book III., chap. iii. of tliat work) extols the
glory of the Roman Church, which he calls the greatest and most
ancient, founded by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul.
To this Church, he says, on account of its more powerful princi-
pality, the whole Church must necessarily be united, that is, the
faithful who are everywhere, for in her is ever preserved, by the faith-
ful everywhere, tlie tradition derived from the apostles. Moreover,
of the same Church and in the same work he affirms that the apos-
tles brought together into her, as into a certain I'ich deposit of the
Holy Ghost, whatever truth there is. Often and often do I say to
myself a.s I regard these rights and prerogatives of the Roman
Chureh: May God, merciful and patient, rather forget me and my
salvation than that I should forget what I owe to this most glorious
and ancient Church. May my voice rather cling forever to my lips
and become dumb, may my right hand rather wither than that I
should utter or write a word that is not to the praise, the honor,
and the glory of this Church. This has been, is, and ever will be
forever constantly my faith, my judgment, my conviction. I
know, moreover, and feel in my heart tliat this right, privilege, and
glory of the Roman Church is due especially to the Sovereign Pon-
tiff, the successor of St. Peter, whose throne is fixed at Rome for-
ever.
The Sovereign Pontiff, the successor of St. Peter, is the vicar on
this earth of Jesus Christ Himself, our God and Saviour. He is the
visible head of the Church, he is the father of his believers, he is
the supreme pastor of the Lord's flock, he is the infallible teacher of
all the sheep and lambs in the Church of God. He is the source
a."id eternal pledge of the unity of the Church, and of the unity of the
462 Appkndix,
sacerdotal order, so that, accorduig to St. Ambrose : where Peter is,
there is the Church; and according to St. Augustine: Rome lias
spoken, the case is decided. I have ever adopted as my own what
our St. Jei-ome wrote to Pope Damasus (Ej). xv., Ad eundem): "I
am united by communion with your Holmess, that is, with the
chair of Peter; I know that the Church is built on that rock.
Whoso eateth the lamb outside this house is profane. If any one is
not in the ark of Noah, he will perish when the deluge holds sway."
This has been most constantly my faith, my judgment, and the un-
alterable rule of my life, which I hope to bear whole and unsullied to
the very throne of God as a token of my eternal life and salvation.
Finally, I honor the present Sovereign Pontitf, the most glorious
Leo XIII. , with absolutely filial piety, reverence, obedience, and adhe-
sion, and if it could be, I would most willingly be totally united to
him, not only in my soul and heart, but also in body and in my
earthly lot, to his cro.ss and chains, and to all he suffere, even unto
death, well aware that I would thus most completely become jmr-
taker of his praise, honor, and glory.
All this, I beseech you, dear brother, publish ni your papers, and
confound my malignant slandei-ers. God bless you! Give me
your attachment, and remember me in your prayers.
+ Joseph George, Bishop.
Djakovar, June 18, 1889.
APPENDIX C.
LETTER FROM REV. DR. LEE (ANGLICAN), ON LITTLE-
DALE'S "PLAIN REASONS."
A CRUSniNO REPLY. — A PROTESTANT REFUTES PROTESTANT
CALUMNIES.
"We publish this week what we may perhaps best describe as a
' smashing ' letter from the Rev. Frederick George Lee, D.D., Yicar
of All Sahits', Lambeth. Dr. Lee, of course, writes fi-om his own
standpoint, and there are one or two incidental remarks as to which
we are likely to remain in permanent disagreement with him, but
nothing could well be more effective tliaii his brilliant and trench-
ant exposure of the reckless carelessness and slovenly scholarship of
the man who, with a light heart, has set himself to ' criticise the
saints, correct the Popes, and snub the Cardinals.' Indeed our read-
Al'PKNDIX. 403
ers may even be a little curious to know what is left of ' Plain Rea-
sons,' when they learn that for its 200 pages, Dr. Littledale has
ah-eady had to make 201 retractions, and that its latest edition con-
tains a Preface with ' no less than 13,340 words of errata.' This sig-
nal discomfiture of Dr. Littledale we trust may {wove a lesson and
a warnuig to other rash assailants of the Church of God:'— Londo7i
Tablet.
Below we give the letter referred to : —
AN ANGLICAN ON ANGLICAN CONTROVERSY.
gir^ — Certain generous and wise woixls which you published on
November 4th, 1882, lead me to trouble you with this letter, and to
ask you to favor me by printing it.
ENGLAND'S MOST IMMINENT DANGER.
Your woi-ds stood thus: " Anything which tends to weaken the
influence of the Church of England as a teacher of those religious
truths which she, liowever imperfectly, holds and proclaims, appeai-s
to us to be matter of regret, as so much gain to the cause of secular-
ity and unbelief." Even from your point of view, in a certain
sense, the scaffolding and organization of the Established Church,
including moi-e particularly baptism and marriage, is after the an-
cient type, and is inherently Christian. It has lost much, I know,
and its needs are numerous; our ancestoi-s were betrayed, robbed,
hoodwinked, persecuted and defrauded by the Tudoi-s, and, as a
coiisequence, religion itself, and England as a nation, have griev-
ously suffered. Whether, in the future, the national church, after
disestablishment and disendowment, will break up, i-emains to be
seen. If it does, our beloved country will be far on the way to re-
verting to paganism. And atheism subsequently may become very
powerful, if not dominant, to our great woe and loss, for all of us.
WHAT DR. LEE WISHES TO SEE ACCOMPLISHED.
Surely, therefore, to maintain and mend the Church of England
without breaking it up, to regain wbat has been lost, to restore it to
visible corporate communion with the Holy See (as did Cardinal
Pole under Queen Mary) and not to destroy it, seems to me the right
and proper policy to adojjt. I see nothing wj-ong in such a pi-o-
gramme and plan, but everything Hiat is wise and good, righteous
and true. This being so, and having been so with myself for more
than thirty yeare, I rejoiced when I read your politic, sensible, and
kindly-expressed words, and often read them anew.
46-i Appendix.
A GOOD WORD FOR THE TRACTARIAN MOVEMENT.
Everything tliat tends to remove the dark sliadow of polemical
misrepresentation from tlie minds of pati-iotic EngHshmen seems to
me distinct advantage to the country. Tlie Tractarian movement
not only began this good work, but steadily carried it on for years.
In tlie various restorations effected, malignant, long-cherished preju-
dices have been laid to rest, mistakes admitted, history re-written,
old trutlis regained, zeal and self-denial brought to the forefront.
In most of our ancient Cathedrals, where the Abomination of Deso-
lation was set up by the Poynets, Eidleys, B les and Aylmei-s of
old, such beneficent restorations have been Ci "ected as that Mass
miglit tlierein be said again with all proper dignity and order at a
few days' notice. During the last half century, moreover, nearly
0,000 new churches and chapels have been built in England, and
more than that number of old sanctuaries creditably restored.
A RITUALISTIC BLUNDER — DR. LITTLEDALE.
Now, just as a breach of unity sealed divisions, and all kinds of
dangerous and woi-thless sects and everlasting wranglings sprang
from the deplorable Tudor changes; so ought peace and liarmony
and re-union to s])ring from, and become the direct and distinct out-
come and the final crown of the Oxford or Tractarian movement—
evidently from God. Anything that tends to hinder such a desira-
ble consummation is mischievous, disastrous, and certainly not from
above. It is because I feel very keenly that the recent pitiable pol-
icy of the Ritualists in mattei-s controversial— so gi-eatly at variance
with that of forty years ago— is both dangerous and disastrous; and
tliat in several particulare this movement, in.stead of beuig con-
structive, is now actually i/e-structive, that I venture to assure you
that a large portion of the English clergy— many of them retiring,
uncontroversial, and peace-loving— have no sympathy whatsoever
with the blatant and boisterous noise of mere professional controver-
.sialists, wlio. with arrogance and art. but with no responsibility, are
doing their best to render future peace and unity, humanly speak-
ing, impossible. No publication with which I am acquainted has
been more disastrous in iis aim and consequences than "Plain Rea-
sons." published by the Society for the Promotion of Christian
Knowledge. More than 3.'), 000 copies have been sold, and its read-
ers, of couree, have been numerous. Its success, as a literary spec-
ulation, is one of the darkest signs of the times. Had we a body o*"
clergy with a sound theological education, such a publication must
have been met first only with a chilling welcome from those being
duped, and then with a howl of execration. I will not dii-ectly say
more than that, having carefully examined it in conjunction with
Appendix. -i^o
others— the first edition was the last— we have found it to be merci
lessly unfair, and altogether untrustworthy. I would that we could
regard its compiler as unintentionally misled and mistaken. The
book will very possibly destroy the faith of many.
DR. LITTLED ale's "CORRECTIONS."
Now I here ask you, sii', to note that, independent of eighteen
separate apologetic letters sent from time to time (from 1880 to 1885)
to the Guardian and Church Times, each containing certain retrac-
tions, emendations, and corrections of mistakes which had been
pointed out, the author, in a new edition of his book, published in
1881, prtiixed no less than twenty-nine pages of closely printed " ad-
ditions and corrections " (mainly the latter), each page containing
forty-six lines, and each line about ten words; thus making no less
than 13,340 words of errata— a, somewhat unprecedented and start-
ling literary performance, and a remarkable example of original
slip-slop and random accusation— for a person who, criticising the
saints, correcting the Popes, and snubbing the Cardinals, claims to
hector and teach other people, and whose book in its totality does
not extend to two hundred pages. Every f esh edition has received
fresh corrections, while in several cases th corrections are equally
inaccvu*ate with the statements presumed tc be corrected.
TABULATED STATEMENT OF CORRIGENDA AND ERRATA.
The various errata and explanatory additions referred to, as can
be calculated and seen, amovmt, I am given to conclude, to exactly
two hundred and one. These— which will probably be set forth at
length in a future publication— are, of course, of different kinds,
some more important than others, and have thus been carefully tab-
ulated by myself and two friends:
Corrigenda and Errata.— Reg&rdmg historical or traditional
facts, 51 : regarding dogmatic facts, historical and theological, 43 ;
regarding quotations, either first or second hand, from writers on
history and canon law, with inaccurate conclusions from uncertain
premises, 29; regarding historical and theological quotations half
made, often with certain remarkable omissions or qualifications, and
consequently, for purposes of controversy, imperfectly and not
fairly quoted, 30; regarding short scraps of quotations from the
Fathers, which, when souglit out and studied, are found to bear an
entirely different meaning from that which, for controversial pur-
poses, they were credited, 24; moreover, the compiler of "Plain
Reasons" has, on no less than seventeen occasions, made mistakes
in confusing the personal opinions of Catholic writers on dogma,
canon law, or ecclesiastical histoid with the defined and authorita-
406 Appendix.
tive faith of the Catholic Church — a somewhat serious series of addi-
tional errata, 17 ; furtherniore, in seven cases he has assumed that
ceriain current opinions — highly prohahle opinions, no doubt, but
as yet only opinions — are without any doubt dogmatic facts, sacred
dogmas, and part of the unchangeable Divine deposit, and has
argued accordingly. This is neither fair nor faitliful. The "opin-
ions " even of Popes or canonized saints are opinions, and nothing
more. Such opinions are not imposed on the faithful, and may be
distinct from the Catholic faith, 7. Total, 201.
THE DOCTRINE OF INTENTION.
Several of the above referred to corrigenda and sub-added notes
contain several other retractions, further detailed explanations, and
careful explainings-away of grave n istakes. The artful and insin-
cere criticism (and I must add suprt me nonsense) which is found
i"egarding the doctrine of intention — a doctrine as familiar to law as
to theology, and as important to one as to the other (for if good
faith were not kept in ordinary public and official acts, where should
we be ?) — is so utterly puerile and ridiculous, that it can only take
in those who are anxious to be deluded. If one man, in the pres-
ence of another, apparently executing a legal deed, deliberately and
openly declares, ' ' I do not deliver this as my act and deed " — the
proper intention is wanting, and the signed instrument is probably
invalid, and certainly open to have its value contested. So most
probably in regard to an official sacramental act when the general
intention has been found to have been absolutely withheld.
ADVERSE PROTESTANT CRITICISMS OF DR. LITTLEDALE.
Many of the criticisms in question, though maintained with some
show of learning, are accurately enough measured at their true
value by those Anglicans competent to form an opinion. Circum-
stances have placed at my disposal numerous comments upon the
book criticised. I select a few as evidence that the new and disas-
trous policy embodied in " Plain Reasons " is by many repudiated;
its method being mistrusted, its veiy gross and uncharitable lan-
guage deplored, and its conclusions rejected. I only wish those
clergymen in official places, who are so ready and even voluble to
condemn it in private, would have the courage of their opinions in
public. But this is scarcely a courageous age. Wills are too often
weak, and moral backbones either disjointed or broken.
An Honorary Canon of Oxfoi*d Cathedral writes :
" No long experience of ' Plam Reasons ' has proved to me that
the plan of appealing to mere reason, and bringing everything down
to its own level in dealing with Romanism, is likely to be turned to
Api'kndix. 467
a deadly account in dealing with the great doctrines of the Trinify
and of God manifest in the llesh I know two at least whom
the book has made first anti-Roman and then scoffing infidels."
Another clergyman of the Diocese of Oxford writes: "In my
parish and neighhorhmxl it has done more harm than good, making
its readei*s, in some cases, often loose believere, and then Christians
unattached. In others, it has sent devout minds, shocked by its
unpleasant cynicism, over to Rome."
Mr. Shirley Brabazon, of Stoke, Oxfordshire, expressed in public
(Uth of October, 1881) the following sentiment: "A book w^hich
lias been corrected in nearly a hundred cases of misstatement,
should have been fli-st submitted to some competent author ....
before being put in print. It shakes our confidence in the Society
for Promoting Christian Knowledge, and it is not creditable that no
expression of regret was made by its committee for the circulation
of errors and fictions. Dishonesty in controversy, especially in re-
ligious controvei-sy, even when resulting from want of necessary
inquiry beforehand, is much to be deprecated."'
Dr. Mossman, of Torrington, Lincolnshire, in 1881, wrote thus:
"The book appears to me to be written in a most reprehensible
spirit. Unless exposed and refuted, it is calculated to do grievous
harm to the blessed and holy cause of coiijorate reunion. The book
cannot, of course, mislead any one who is really acquainted with
ecclesiastical histoiy and dogmatic theology, but how very few of
its readers will know that it is little more than a crude congeries of
fallacies and erroneous statements, taken at second hand, which
have been exposed and refuted again and again."
Another clergyman, of the Diocese of Salisbury, writes: "I am
not prepared to face the malice and nxalevolence of (a certain relig-
ious newspaper), otherwise I could easily point out a score of mis-
takes and misrepresentations (in ' Plain Reasons ') as to our rela-
tions with the saints in glory — their help, our duty."
A Rector in Kent, in a published letter in 1882, put on record his
judgment, as follows: " That such a book should be issued at all by
the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge is a sign of deteri-
oration, and a bad sign. too. For to di'ive more wedges into the
breach between us and Rome, and to make it bigger and wider, is
not to my mind the work of a Catholic (?) priest, now that irreligion,
imbelief, and profanity are extending so."
The Rev. Wentworth Hankey, of Christ Chureh, Oxford, in Au-
gust, 1881, wrote thus: " I shall be much obliged, if you will allow
nie.as an Anglican clergj^man, who prefers Dr. Littledale's past to his
present views, to express the shame and irdignation with which I
fiavo from the first regarded the publication of 'Plain Reasons.'
463 Appendix.
Since the iasue of translations into French and Italian, the claim of
the work to be defensive and not aggressive can no longer be sus-
tainecl; and considering what manner of men are the vast majority
of the Church's ejieniies in France and Italy, I protest in the name
of our common Christianity against any such attempt to weaken the
liands of the Church."
HANDUNG DR. LITTLEDALE "WITHOUT GLOVES."
The Rev. E. W. Gilliam remarked of its author's controversial
wi'itiiigs that they are "so evidently dictated by ill-feeling and prej-
udice, and the i-ules of good breeding are so completely ignored by
him, that a reader of any refinement of mind instinctively draws
back fi-om one who seems thus regardless of the first principles of
Christian moderation and oi-dinary charity." Adding, with much
force and terseness of "Plain Reasons": "Entii-ely negative in
character, it is, moreover, a coarse, vituperative, bruUil book, with-
out piety and without justice — a book whose spirit has nothing in
common with a holy and upright mind."
I am informed by persons who know them that Canon Liddon,
Canon Carter, Bishop King, Prebendary West of Lincoln, Mr. R. M.
Benson of Cowley, Mr. Chancellor Wagner, and others, have ex-
pressed their dislike of the methods, assertions, and style of reason-
ing of " Plain Reasons," in terms more or less in harmony with the
various sentiments just quoted.
THE DOCTRINE OF THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION.
To return to the Ixwk itself. As regards the important doctrine
of the Immaculate Conception, which has always been held by the
Catholic Chureh, it is perfectly certain the first Bishop of Norwich,
Herbert de Losinga (1050-1119) taught it as a matter of course,
openly and publicly, with the greatest distinctness. Here are words
— a strong contrast to the confu.sed sentiments and distressing pro-
fanity of certain preachers at Oxford thirty-five years ago — taken
from one of Bishop de Losinga's sermons: "She, the Blessed Virgin,
was made white with many virtues and merits; yea, whiter than
the driven snow was she made by the gift of the Holy Ghost ; and
showed forth in all things the simplicity of the dove, since whatever
was done in her was all purity and simplicity, was all pure grace,
was all the merey and justice which looked down from heaven.
And therefore is she called Undeflled {et ideo immaculata) because
in notlung was she corrupt (quia in nullo conmpta).'' — Vol. ii.,
p. 349.'
' Life and Letters of Herbert de Losinga, Blsliop of Norwich. By E. M.
Goull)onie, Dean, and Henry Symonds, M.A., Precentor of Norwich Cathedral.
In two volumes. London : 1878.
Appendix. 4G9
THE ABStrMPTlON AND INVOCATION OP SAINTS.
And the following beautiful passage relates to the dogmatic fact
of the Assumption, and to the consoling and sustaining doctrine of
the Invocation of Saints: "To-day the Most Blessed Virgin
Mary was taken up above the heavens, and in the presence of the
Holy Apostles her body was placed in the sepulchre. She dietl, but
a body of such excellent dignity could not (as Blessed Gregory saith)
• long be held in the bonds of death. For it was impossible that the
flesh should be corrupted by a long death of which the Word was
made flesh and dwelt among us. For if at the Lord's resurrec-
tion many bodies of the saints that slept arose, how could tliat flesh
not rise again which gave birth to the Author of life Himself ?
With a full and undoubting faith, believe ye, my brethren, that the
Most Blessed Virgin Mary, made immortal, both in body and soul,
sitteth at the right hand of Gkxl, with her Son, our LoH Jesus Christ,
being the mother of penitents, and the most efl'ectual intercessor for
our sins with her most gracious Son." — Vol. ii., pp. 351, 352.
BASELESS AND PROFANE CHARGES.
With regard to what is set forth in " Plain Reasons" concerning
Church law, the maxims of Ferraris and other canonists quoted are
no more infallible, as is practically assumed, than are the personal
opinions of Sir Robert Phillimore and Sir Ednmnd Beckett equiva-
lent to our authoritative declaration of what is the present law of
the Established Church. The charges of "accumulated falsehood,"
of "entire disregaixi for truth," of "deliberate and conscious false-
hood with fraudulent intent," and that "truth pure and simple is
almost never to be found, and the whole truth in no case whatever, "
in the Roman Catholic Church, are statements exceedingly shock-
ing, and in most cases have the exactly opposite effect intended.
Such vague charges are incapable of being met, for they are baseless
1 as they are profane. In one case this accuser of his brethren goes
so far as to deliberately charge Baronius with purposely altering a
date, and of deliberately falsifying the Roman martyrology for cer-
tain controversial purposes. Now, any historian is liable to a chro-
nological error ; yet no certain evidence of the accuracy oi the grave
charge in question exists ; while a writer who has himself made no
less than two hundred retractions or explanations in a hastily com-
piled book of two hundred pages, should not (without any hearing
or defense) be severe upon a Christian hero who may possibly have
made one in two thousand.
BROUGHT TO TASK BY A GREEK.
Dr. Littledale's treatment of the Seventh CEcumenical Council
and its decrees has brought down upon him a sconiful and wither-
470 Atpendix.
ing criticism by Professor Damalas of Mount Athos, referred to in a
recent number of a German literary serial, which I have not seen,
but which a learned Anglican friend informs me is painful to read,
and quite impossible to answer.
THE CONSEQUENCES OP DR. LITTLEDALE'S METHOD.
In fine, only let the Sacred doctrines of the Blessed Trinity, of the
Procession of the Holy Spirit, of the Incarnation, of the Two Wills
of our Blessed Saviour, of the Sacraments and of the Episcopate, be
treated in a like carping and rationalistic method with which the
writer of "Plain Reasons" has dealt with the need of a Visible
Head to a Visible Church, and the exercise by delegation of our
Lord's Univei-sal Sovereignty, and the mischief of the method would
be apparent. Furthermore, devotion to and invocation of the
saints, which of course is only the "communion of saints " (in which
all profess to believe) put itito practice, the state of the faithful de-
parted, the Immaculate Conception and Assumption of our Blessed
Lady, would by a like rationalistic and destructive method, l)e
swept away. The Catholic faith, however, is like a perfect and
complete arch. If but one stone bo removed and several others be
painstakingly battered and intentionally broken, there is a grave
danger that the whole archway may fall.
DR. LEE AGAIN EXPRESSES HIS OREAT HOPE.
I conclude, therefore, that for more than three and a half cen-
turies in England destruction, protests, negations, bitter controver-
sies, and self-pleasing have done more than enough evil and mis-
chievous work ; and that the Established Church, now confrontetl
by indiflFerence, atheism, sectarian spite, and avowed Agnosticism —
can only retain its present position, or be proved to be worth its
salt, by its leaders and officials making a zealous endeavor to re-
store what is wanting, and to secure from ecclesiastical authority
in the face of Christendom a restoration of what has lapsed and
been lost — the original scheme, so far as there was one, of NewTnan
and Pusey, of Manning, Keble, Froude, and Ward. By this means
all Cliristians— like animals when attacked by a common foe —
might at f'rst be led in mere self-defence to herd together, and then,
under supreme authority, to act together for the honor of God, the
extension of the Catholic faith, and the advantage of Christendom.
In this hope, I subscribe myself, sir, your obedient and obliged
servant,
Frederick George Lee, D.D.
All Saints' Vicarage, Lambeth, S. E., Rogation Sunday, 1886.
Appendix. 471
APPENDIX D.
When I asserted in the text, that to De Rossi's Cathohc mind
there was no doctrinal difference between the three readinjpn^, Ipse,
Ipsa, Ipsum, I had before nie only the extract from his great work
given by Pusey, and I relied entirely upon my Catholic mstinct in
the matter. It has not deceived me. I have since examined the
work itself, and it confirms every statement I have made. De Rossi
translates the Hebrew by Ipsum, but he agrees with Lucas Brugen-
sis that Ipsa is not opposed to the Hebrew in sense, and he adds the
testimony of the learned Father Bukentop to the Catholic meanmg
of Ipsa in these words: Idem repetit Bukentopius addensdici posse
Ipsa, sicut Oen. xii. 3, dicitur in te benedicentur universal cogna-
Hones terroe, id est iti semine tuo, ut Deus ipse explicat Oen. xxii.
18." De Rossi here refers to Buken top's work— Ltu? de luce, writ-
ten in reply to James' Bellum Papale. I have given the words of
Lucas Brugensis in the "Postscript" to the fourth letter of the
Eejoinder.
APPENDIX E
In the Twenty-eighth letter I refer to Maimonides and his book
entitled The Guide of the Perplexed. I state that it was written in
Arabic and afterwards translated into Hebrew by himself. This I
desire to correct. From Friedlander's translation of The Guide of
the Perplexed I find that it was composed in Arabic and written in
Hebrew characters. Subsequently it was translated into Hebrew
by Rabbi Samu6i Ibn "Vibboii, m the ;Iif<^ti*ne p* Maimonides, who
was consulted by ihe. t^nsJaW On all ditatiiit pa.s£ages.
ERRATA,
I'age 132, line 11, insert a period after "St. (ireyory."
" VM), " 18 Ironi botUini,
•' 144, " 7.
" 14o, noti",
" 171, line (i from hottoni,
2.-)0.
<t
10
2(i7,
tt
7
284,
It
4,
335,
*4
8
353.
It
5
354,
H
9
354,
tl
10
3ti8,
it
:',
377,
t(
10
378,
U
7
383,
It
20
403,
"
it
414,
i*
14
418,
u
419,
t>
20,
429,
i(
17
430,
(4
Hi
433,
(i
4
435,
a
4
471,
(>
14
471,
ti
.V
For
Head
when
wliere.
an
any.
mule
nialo.
Carsns
t'ursns.
after "Hvm"
insert with.
Bible
Hiblintl.
Now
Nor.
Kditio Justin!
anaei)
.Instiniani's Ktlition.
after '" Ihuit "
iiiM^rt in.
" -Ifioxe"
erase who.
guani
qnani.
probe
prove.
leas
lies.
on
in.
hu
have.
better
bitter.
babetiit
Iiabebat j
iiarrationem
narrationuni. |
the
these.
Letters
Letter.
Kva/.riiis
Kvagriu.s.
His
this.
Creto
Crete.
last
Inst.
universal
uni versa'.
Yibbon
TiblK.n.
De Hoissi's nu
aniii^
Is (liseusseci
, refer to Appendix 1)