THE SUBSTANCE OF TWO LECTURES DELIVERED BY REV. FATHER HURLEY, RANGIORA.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XIV, Issue 44, 25 February 1887, Page 7

THE SUBSTANCE OF TWO LECTURES DELIVERED BY REV. FATHER HURLEY, RANGIORA.

In our days we know what the world desires. It asks the Supreme Pontiff to set at defiance the responsibilities cast upon him by God Himself, and by a false indulgence to reconcile tQe Divine law— a thing which never can be done— with the progress and liberalism of the age. And because he will nut do this they fly into a rage with him, and denounce him as a tyr.nt who would enslave the human race. But in what consists this liberalism and progress of which men so vainly boast 1 It is in setting reason above authority error above truth, science above revelation. The secret societies of the world will have it that reason and authority are incompatible ; the Church boldly says the opposite, and, because they see in her the highest authority of all, they make her the principal object of their attacks. She says that nothing is more reasonable in reason itself than submission to authority. She says that religion is full of mysteiies, that there are mysteries far above reason. She does not teach that they are opposed to reason, but that they are far above it It is one thing to be opposed to it ; it is another to be beyond the full' comprehension of its natural powers. And there are mysteries far above the intelligence of Freethinkers and Atheists— althoueh perhaps, they do not believe it themselves. Let no one for a moment imagine that God requires us to believe unreasonably— that is to say, without an authority sufficient to satisfy our reason One of the canons of the Vatican Council says : " If any one shall say that in revelation there are contained no true mysteries, and mysteries properly so called, but that all the dogmas of faith can, by reason duly exercised, be understood and demonstrated from natural principles, A.S." (let him be accursed). There are, then, objects of knowledge proper to reason and objec s of knowledge proper only to faith. Now, besides these things, a knowledge of which we can acquire by our unaided reason, there are .-d-o proposed to us by God truths to which reason could never, without the light of revelation have attained, and these we are required to believe as firmly as those things of which by our natural faculties alone we can acquire a knowledge. But when Freethinkers and others assert that the Pope is a tyrant for condemning a proposition which gave liberty to every man to follow what religion his individual reason may suggest as true, they simply deny to God a rip;ht to subject our reason to His own sovereign will. Again, there is another way in which a Catholic can reason on this point, and very justly too, against Freethinkers— although I f.-ar they may not agree to start fiom the premises. The Catholic, believing God to be the author of all true reho-iou md that religious truths are, many of them, above the domdin of reason holds that some power superior to the exercise of individual reason was established to faithfully communicate religious truths to man This being a dogma in the Church, is it not clear that Catholics are necessitated to hold that every man has not ihc right to reject that religion or religious truth which he is unable to reconcile with his individual reason ? Reason was not given to rebel against God nor against the authority appointed by Him, nor was man ever authorised from Heaven to reject any religious truth which he could not underBtand. The argument may be put this way : In the true religion are found many mysteries above the g.asp of individual reason. But the true religion is thai alone which '• every man " ou<*ht to follow. Therefore individual reason is not to be the supreme judge in the sJcction of every man's religion. But if individual reason is not to be the supreme judge in the selection of every man s religion, " every man " is not free "to embrace and profess that religion which, led by the light of reason he may have thought true." Therefore tho doctrine of those who say " every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which led by the light of reason, he may have thought true," is justly and deservedly condemned. lam aware that this argument will appear lame, if not perfectly absuid, to most Freethinkers. They will deny revelation, redemption, and, consequently, that the Catholic Church was divinely appointed to communicate religious truths to man But where tbev will see it defective or absurd. Catholics will see it having all the more force. Some men quit the ordinary path for the discovery of truth to give themselves up to their own inspirations Their minds get hold of a peculiar idea, which they develope under the influence of prejudice, until it becomes to them the germ of important doctrines, which they would fain diffuse through society with philosophic pride. They parade before the world as the pioneers of liberty, and, true enough, they pi each it in theory, while in practice they are the most consummate and intolerant bigots. Look to the various associati .na of men who, bound to/ether by secret oaths are eating the heart from modern society and planning the destruction of all authority. Are they tolerant of their fellow-men, and would they give them freedom of worship in practice? What is their feeling towards Catholics but the most withering hatred and lowest type of bigotry And they pieach the word liberty without in reality knowing what it means In the whole vocabulary of the English language there is no more absurd word. Liberty is a word too common in the mouths of the multitude to be properly understood. Liberty is applied to a thousand objects every hour of the day. It would be an- end less task to show how the word, expressive of one of the noblest ideas living in the soul of man, is constantly abused and distorted from its true mianine Ihe genuine notion of liberty involves the idea of power, and the idea of a cause in relation thereto. Where we do not conceive some power exercising some influence, we can have no idea of liberty Thus we rightly understand it to be the absence of any cause to impede the exercise of any power. I am not here confounding license with hbeity. lam not here speaking of that freedom of action which would prove the destruction ot society and moral life. But I presume that when Fieabinkers talk about liberty of conscience and freedom of worship, they mean, not merely the enj >yment of freedom of thought in man, for no law either of Church or State can have any power wheieby to check that, but liberty to give public expression to thosj thoughts whatever they be. Do they therefore me m that, at all times, in all places, under all ciicumstances, and on all subjects whatever, every individual, should have the right, to give utterance to

?hemo 9t9 t fhlnrH P fT eS thr ? Ugh his mind * Who does not see that wmlllow f™ ' ti ?m< f lmm °u ra1 ' and the most tamable doctrines, wh n f •? !' Away the nwith the laws of decorum, away Trete th PcP c m P n wV?™* 8 ' T* 7 With the P eace of «° ciet y- SSS because on nriZ?? v™'* iQ * rage with the Oatholic CQa rch, •w«'Jf >P* P L- Bbc canuot it to be the right of rights^ thn Sp°7°rßhS p°7° rBh^ in an ? form of reli & ion - Man can h»ve no JK those decreed from Heaven. But God does not grant man ste/tL wUI of X * i al f8«f 8 « re^ iOQ ' And th « Church may not outtherefore^lhp G 'k^u 6 %* doeß nofc a false worship, so may thf Ah ? g i* the Church - God tolerates false worship, anS ?Se" fs no B^h n« P^ be V Xped - iency re< * aire8 > and <0 ma * ifc not, when word s nnfSW Ex P e diency forsooth ! cry Freethinkers. The tenet to if l!J- conße< l a^ce. St. Paul attached great imporS« i i Bx P ed . lencv with its many surrounding circumstance! Lnd thnn g hf \ at ° th ?. traas^ons of daily life. The Reformers of En" Br4h defmf '• eX t >edl ™ t to Proscribe the Catholic religioH through the now Th« On f m th > cl l d c ay ' ifc is Dot thou g h t expedient to do so Kestant woSf.T' ° E i pain thoU S ht ft ex Pedient to exclude the noliov t ZiZr * ? ff 5 0m at country aboat the Bame tin »c ; their po icy is different to-day. The civil governments of othar days are They Jr P P t tana h n h l f° • h ? k Ot theße matters as Freethinker, think of them. and y Q f thpir 3U ? geS Of the relations of their respectire countries, Catholic Ohn2T ia T ds at P articular times, as the Pope and the doctrines And FrT^l beßt judgeß and * own that Ahntna themselves can see how it is expedient SI >S? ♦ m r thlß Ooloa y Bhould be compelled to thJ Sfpn 68 fv, ° r im P artin S a godlass education to ,-nHir h t of others, and at the same time be obliged indirect y to put their banda in their pockets again, to bfild S5tS/ohS?h °^ eh i ldren ; but the y do thu bec * üße th «y wi *» RohVrt sS, r f fc ~ e State ou S ht to be separated. Now what do Sir £n»rit£ ft ™ th het c Gov emment of this country underatand by this to P «av h?A - rCh and State ? Por my P art - J will not undertake \o say , but I venture to assert, I am not unacquainted what meaning modern Revolutionists attach to it. They would tell us that the State should bj anWed in its control over society and over the family. Ihey would tell us that the State should be not only perfectly ndependent of the Church, but superior to her, and superior to her ij the sense that the Church should willingly submit to every law by which statesmen may think proper to bind her authority. No ! the bute and the Church ought not to be separated in this sense. The Church is i he guardian of religion and the State ought not to ignore he worship due to God. The State is not unlimited in ir 8 powers. It has no r.ght to absorb the individual and the family. It receives its power trom tleaven for the m tintenance of social order and unity, but id ought not to surpass the limits assigned it. And thus, in one sense, as a matter ot fact, the two powers are separated, for the Church claims nut only independence in the exercise of her duties from State control, but the right of a certain jurisdiction over the latter, within prescribed limits. If the State, for instance, enacted laws subversive or morality, it is the duty of the Church to tell the people they are not bound to obey. God is to be obayed rather than man. Those who, Ike our Premier, say the Church should be separated from the state, and the btate from the Church, have nothing else in view than to give to the btate a power to cripple the exercise of Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and authority. No wonder the Catholic Ohurch should, in particular, be an object of attack, since she is the principle, I might say the only obstacle to State tyranny. (To he continued.)

tji ,, J BtJCHII -P AIB^ —Q nek, complete cure all annoying Kidney Bladder, and Urinary Diseases. At chemists and druggists KemDthorne, Prosser and Co., agents, Dunedin. ° Cardinal Newman is said to be engaged in preparing his autobiography, though the work is not likely to come before the public for a considerable time.

The story of the Prince of Wales's letter to Cork about the Queen's Jubilee Fund, and its reception by the Corporation, is rery funny says Iruth. " rtebel Cork " wishes to be civil, but does not know exactly what to do with the document One alderman moves that it be ' marked as read." Another has doubts, but, on the whole, does not think that this will be " a courteous mode " of treating an "autograph letter from the Heir Apparent." At length it is agreed that the best way of disposing of the document without giving offence will be to " refer it to the Law and Finance Committee." I imagine that the committee will report that, inasmuch as it is only upon the coin of the realm that Cork ever has an opportunity of seeing Her Majesty s gracious features, it would be in no sense conducive to Cck loyalty to part with a single effigy of their belore d Soveieign. The Times indulged the other day in a gushing article upon the favourable and flattering opinions expressed by some German officers who have lately visited Aldershot. The officers in question were most hospitably entertained, and, no doubt, enjoyed their visit, while their favourable criticisms must have been gratifying to the staff and regiments atjthe camp. " Consequently," says the Times, "itisto be hoped that these officers will, on their return to Germany, no longer pooh-pooh the English army, as they have so frequently done." The Times is probably not aware that these German officers made most copious notes, and that the verbal courtesies which passed on tbeoccasion of their visit must be taken with considerable grains of salt. One of the foreign officers in question was greatly uurprised at the disproportion existing between the actual strength of several of the regiments in garrison and the muster on parade ; while another officer, who had visited Aldershot some few years back, remarked on the decrease in stature exhibited in our ranks. There is not the slightest doubt as mentioned in The Broad Arrow, that during the last ten years tho average height and chest measurement of our rank and file hare steadily decreased. Thirty years ago, when we obtained a large proportion of our best recruits from Ireland, and long before Mr Parnell was invented, it was no unusual thing for a" crack" corps to have an average height of five feet eight and a-half inches. The Horse Gnarda rtturas of that date can prove this fact.