Current Topics

New Zealand Tablet, 8 January 1914, Page 21

Current Topics

A Good Example We have not much time— to use a colloquialism—for Mr. ‘ Billy ’ Sunday, the enterprising American evangelist, who, according to report, makes the contracts for his mission tours on high commercial and cash lines; but he sometimes says things that appeal to us. He is reported as having said recently : ‘ I don’t want to convert the Catholics. I would far rather see a man a good Catholic than a bum Protestant. I am going to take the names of all those Catholics who come to my meetings through curiosity, and those names are going to be sent to the' nearest rectory.’ Chapman-Alexander papers please copy. Trouble for the * Asino Referring to the recent Italian elections we mentioned last week that one of the Anticlericals who went down in the melee was Signor Podrccca, the editor of the infamous Asino. As wo then stated, the paper has already declined greatly in circulation and standing ; but its character evidently remains the same, and according to the Rome correspondents there is now serious talk of bringing Podrecca to book for the publication with a view to effecting its suppression. The paper, it is held, breaks the law of Italy in the matter of printing obscenity, and it certainly breaks the Law "of Guarantees, since it insults the (acknowledged) sovereign ’person of the Pope every week. Hitherto it has been practically impossible to take measures against Podrecca because of the protection afforded him by his position as a member of Parliament. Before a deputy can be prosecuted permission must be got from Parliament; and on every occasion a parliamentary commission has decidednaturally—that there was no case for prosecution. It will be interesting to see how it fares with Podrecca when he faces the courts no longer as a deputy but merely as a private and entirely unimportant citizen. The Federation in America At a great public meeting held in New York on October 12 under the auspices of the Knights of Columbus, in honor of Columbus the Discoverer, Bishop McFaul, of Trenton, N.J., delivered an interesting and inspiring address on ‘The Apostolate of the Laity.’ In the course of his remarks he referred to the Catholic Federation as it is in operation in America. In a few pithy sentences he outlined what the Federation ought to be, what should be its relation to politics, and what was the nature of the work it was meant to perform ; and then proceeded to show, by concrete examples, that the organisation was actually doing in the United States precisely the work which it was established to carry out. ‘ This organisation,’ he said, ‘has been established, and has existed during the past twelve years. It is striving to promote the social, civil, and religious interests of society, whether Catholic or non-Catholic. There are still a few persons who look askance at the Federation. This is chiefly due to the fact that they have not studied its scope 'and objects. It does not interfere with the autonomy of any other organisation ; it serves as a bond of union between subordinate societies, and increases the influence of each by forwarding the general welfare of all. It is not a partisan political organisation. It could not assume such a role. To do so would be suicidal,, as all the leading parties are found within its ranks. When problems arise which are of a political nature and affect the interests of Catholics, irrespective of their party allegiance, then politics naturally should be among the means employed for maintaining our rights and liberties. Take for example : efforts had been made by the bigots to exclude desirable foreigners from the United States. Drastic action was taken in Congress and the Bill was passed bv both Houses. Through the American Federation of Catholic Societies, assisted by others, notably the National Liberal Immigration League, President Taft was induced to veto the Bill. v » -

‘ The Federation is a means of focussing all the influence of Catholics on a given question. It is a lever which can be used at a moment’s notice for the promotion of good and defence from evil. It may be asked what has the Federation done since its establishment? Those of you who have read the Catholic press are fully aware of its good deeds. Hence, I shall mention only a few of them. It brought to a successful issue the betterment of conditions in the Philippines and Porto Rico. Through ■ it the Indian school question was settled, and it has inaugurated a crusade against the immoral stage and Socialism. Every day some question arises. Take the scandalous stories and calumnies originated by the shameless anti-Catholic press. The Federation is doing its' best to run down the vile wretches who are pandering to the prejudices of an ignorant public. Let me exhort you all to take a live interest in this organisation. The Catholic clergy and laity united, the apostolate of the laity standing shoulder to shoulder with their shepherds, must work out the salvation of the race. Theirs it is to battle for truth and justice in every nation ; and here we have a most promising and fruitful field.’ How Legends Grow Again and again have leaders of the modern feminist movement cast it up against the Church— as evidence of the inadequate view of the dignity and true status of women alleged to have been entertained by the early Christiansthat at one of the old Council? of the Church the Fathers gravely discussed the question, Have Women Souls ?’ and only decided in favor of the affirmative after a heated division. Anatole France, Mrs. Philip Snowden, in her little book on The Feminist Movement, Rosa Mayreder, in The Position of Women, and many others, have recently narrated this story to point the necessary moral, and have mentioned the ‘ Council of Maijon ’ as the Council referred to ; but none - of them have cited any authority for their statement or referred the reader to any fuller or detailed statement on the matter. A little investigation shows that the whole story is based on ignorance and misconception. To begin with, there was no ‘ Council of Ma9on.’ There was a Council of French bishops at Macon (not A.D. 585, and Gregory, Bishop of Tours, in his Ilistoria Francorum, vol. viii. 20, mentions that at this Council a certain bishop objected to the word homo being applied to women. It was not at all a question of whether women were human beings, still less of their having souls. The only doubt in this scrupulous bishop’s mind was whether the generic term homo, used in classical Latin of both sexes, could rightly be used of women. In reply, several of his colleagues pointed out that the word homo, man, was never restricted exclusively to the male in the Holy Scriptures. Here is the quotation in full as to what happened from Gregory of Tours : ‘ In this Council one of the bishops declared that a woman could not be called homo. -But when the other bishops had reasoned with him he held his peace, for they showed him that the sacred text of the Old Testament taught that in the beginning, when God created man, it was said male and female. He created them, and He called their name Adam,’’ which means man of the earth, thus using the same term for woman and man alike, for He said that each of them was equally Homo. And also the Lord Jesus Christ is called the Son of Man, although He is the Son of the Virgin, that is of a woman. To whom when He was about to turn the water into wine, He said, What is it to Me and to thee, woman,” and so on. Thus with many other testimonies was this dispute cleared up and put right.’ * - That is, of course, a translation from the Latin of Gregory. For those who might wish to see the original, here it is: — * Extetit enim in hoc sinodo quidam ex episcopis, qui dicebat, mulierem hominem non posse vocitaH. Sed'.tamen ah episcopis, racione accepta quievit ,. eo quod sacer V fieri s Testamenti liber doceat, quod in princ.ipio, Deo hominem creante, ait: Masculum et feminam creavit eos, vocavitque nomen eorum Adam., quod eat homo terrenus, , sic utique vocans

mulierem ecu viruin; uirumque enim hominem dixit, bed et Do minus Jesus (J hristus ob hoc vocitatur filius hominis, quod sit filius Virginia , id est mulieris. Ad quam quum aquas in vino, transferee pi'raret, ait; Quid milli et fi(n est mulier? et reliqua. Multisque et aliis testimoniis hate causa convict a , nuievit. Dom Leclei'cq, a French Benedictine of our own time, in his edition of the Uisioire des Candles (p. 213), has the following reference to the objection put forward to homo at Macon ‘ha difficulty soul e ne vise this Vame humaine et raisonnable de la femme, metis le nom Ixpmmc, homo, que cet eveque puriste s’etoune de lui voir attrihuer. (The difficulty raised does not refer to the human and rational soul of woman, but to the word man, homo, which this pedantic bishop was surprised to find applied to a female.’ * Thus on this bishop’s simple grammatical question the whole absurd legend has been built up. It is a striking illustration of the vitality of a lie that after the lapse of nearly fourteen centuries the falsehood is still being aotively propagated and circulated by reputable and well-meaning but partisan and ill-informed writers.