A BIGOTED ATTACK ON CATHOLICS

New Zealand Tablet, 7 November 1918, Page 11

A BIGOTED ATTACK ON CATHOLICS

BISHOP PHELAN'S VIGOROUS REPLY. There was a very large attendance at St. Mary's Schoolroom, Sale, Victoria, after Mass yesterday morning to protest against the remarks contained in Bishop Cranswick's address to the Anglican Synod respecting the Catholic Church (says the Gippsland Times of October 21. As some of those present had not read Bishop Cranswick's address, Mr. P. Finegan read that portion to which exception was taken, from the Gippsland Times, and went on to condemn in strong terms what he described as "a tissue of insults" which would be hard to beat. Mr. Cullinan and Mr. Anthony Brennan also addressed the meeting from the point of view of the laity. A motion of protest was then put to the meeting, and carried by loud and prolonged applause, whereupon Bishop Pheian rose to speak, the applause increasing as he did so. Bishop Pheian said: The object of this meeting, and the reason why I have been called back from New South Wales, are contained in that portion of the synodal address of the Bishop of Gippsland, which has just been i~ead. An unprovoked and virulent attack has been made on the Catholic body, at a time and under circumstances which make that outburst of anti-Catholic bigotry most painful to us, and, indeed, to many members of the Church of England with whom we wish to live in peace, and for whom we have nothing but respect. (Applause.) At the close of the most terrible war in history, and at the dawn of what we hope will be a permanent peace for humanity, and at a time when, the members of all the Christian denominations are fighting for the freedom of the world, or their dust commingled in the battlefields of Europe, Dr. Cranswick has launched an unjust attack on the Catholic Church in general, and the Catholics of Australia in particular. His Lordship, too, selected an occasion which gave his unfounded charges a weight and a publicity they would not receive -under any other set of circumstances. The synodal charge of a Protestant Bishop is the public event of the year for his diocese. On other occasions he speaks on parochial matters, or on some particular question ; but in synod he delivers a message to his entire flock. And on this solemn occasion Bishop Cranswick turns from his own particular duty, the settling of his own household affairs—and they are many and greatto fling at the Catholics of Gippsland an insult which they deeply resent. (Cheers.) The form of that insult was conveyed to me in another State, and I was asked to return to preside at this indignation meeting which you, the Catholics of Sale, have organised. (Applause.) Then Bishop Cranswick exhausted all the means at his disposal to carry his gratuitous insults over Gippsland, and farther. I can well understand the feelings of the Catholics of Sale- at this unwarranted attack made on the creed they hold more sacred than their lives. Not the slightest provocation was given Bishop Cranswick. In fact, on more than one occasion I have singled out the Anglicans as having a Church with some history to support it, as compared with the Churches which supply the members of the Orange-Protestant Federation. Yet, his Lordship has selected this particular time, and the greatest annual occasion in his own Church, to denounce the "iniquities of Rome" and our want of loyalty to the Empire. The denunciation of Dr. Cranswick falls under three headings, and with these three I shall briefly deal. Catholics and the War. Unless Dr. Cranswick is stronger in Theology than he is in figures and ecclesiastical history, the Anglicans of Gippsland have a poor theologian. He states that we have a population of 22 per cent, of the population of the Commonwealth ; and that we sent to the war only 18.57 per cent. I hold in my hand a reply from Captain Mackintosh, Base Records Office, Melbourne, dated September 13, 1918, which show that from the statistics compiled to June 7, 1918, the number of Catholics in the Australian Imperial Forces

is 19 per cent. I then turn to our proportion of the general" population in the Commonwealth, and from the Statistician Department find that at the last census of the males over 20 we were 19.6. That is, we have contributed our full proportion and we are maligned for not having sent more.' But the marvel is why we should have sent so many, considering that the Catholic young men of this country are, for the most part, children of Irish parents; and that Ireland owes little to England in her so-called defence of small nations. (Great applause.) "Dr. Cranswick is then guilty of a double false statement—he understates our numbers in the fighting ranks, and over-states our numbers in the Commonwealth. Statements without foundation, coming* from the supposed chair of truth, on the great occasion of the year, place the Bishop in a position few will envy. Priest-Ridden Ireland. Of the many objectionable phrases in Dr. Cranswick's address the one that is most keenly resented by the Catholics of Sale is his foolish reference to "priestridden Ireland." For an English parson to commit himself to such a statement shows how innocent he is of the iniquity of his own communion in the Island of Saints and Scholars. In the shameful history of Protestantism in the land of our fathers the most shameful chapter is—How the Parsons Plundered Ireland. Like a brood of harpies or vultures, the English parsons preyed on the vitals of the Irish nation, and sucked its material life-blood in the form of the tithe curse. The tenth sheaf, the tenth cow, and the tenth sheep, dragged from the Irish Catholics to support a form of religion which they abominated, supplies material for a chapter of England's iniquity without parallel in the Christian world. Reunion With Rome Impossible. The groundless charges of Bishop Cranswick on the recruiting question, and his unhappy reference to ''priest-ridden Ireland," are light offences compared with his reckless statements on the question of reunion. But I ask, Who is asking you to unite with us? To make the position plain, I shall use a homely illustration. A respectable business man in Sale is attending to his duty, and he is startled from his work by the voice of a half-demented woman of doubtful reputation, who cries out from the street, "I won't marry you till you vote for a ' dry ' show, and promise that you won't go to the Cup." And this man comes to the door and asks, "Madame, I am not proposing any alliance with you; I would not think of admitting you to my household ; your character is stained beyond repair my sins of putting a £ 1 on the Cup, and voting freedom for the men who patronise our show, are small compared with the crimes of your life." Dr. Cranswick, as sponsor for the Church of England, is in the position of that foolish woman. In the course of his foolish address he says: "Reunion with Rome is an impossible thought while she continues to be what she is." Again he deplores "the corruptions in doctrines of a system that has always made liberty of thought, and action impossible," and goes on to pray that Catholics may be relieved "from the system which holds them in thraldom." With that business man, to whom I referred, I ask: "Who is pressing you for an alliance? And, is- the Church of England so immaculate in her conception and so sinless in her career that union with us would stain her character? The gratuitous insult flung at us by the Bishop of Gippsland leaves me no choice but to expose the crimes surrounding the conception of the birth of the Church of which he is the local head. For this purpose I shajl not call a single Catholic witness, but shall confine myself exclusively to the testimony of Protestant historians of the highest repute, such as Green, Gairdner, and Macaulay. Let the last-named speak for all. Reviewing Hallam's Constitutional History, Lord Macaulay, with characteristic bluntness, deals with the principal actors in the Reformation in England .from Henry VIII., of many wives, to Cranmer, of many religions. He says that the Reformation "sprung from brutal passion, and was nurtured by selfish policy." "A King, whose character may be best

described by saying that he was - despotism,itself personified, unprincipled ministers, a rapacious aristocracy, a servile Parliament,, such were the instruments by which England was delivered from the yoke of Rome. The work which had been begun by Henry, the murderer of his wives, was continued by Somerset, the murderer of. his brother, and completed by Elizabeth, the murderer of her guest." And yet the progeny of that unholy alliance is considered too sacred to think of reunion with Rome ! We must be a bad, a very bad lot. (Laughter and applause.) A stream that is pure in its source may indeed suffer on its way to the ocean, but the perpetual virgin, spring cannot be corrupted. But a spring that is poisoned at the fountain can never purify itself. And that is the difference between the Church established by Jesus Christ and the Church established by the Reformers. Our Divine Lord warned us of the scandals which would necessarily arise in His Church, but that the purity of faith and doctrine would be as little affected by the sins of individuals as the Apostolic College was affected by the fall of Judas. But a human - institution, like the Church of England, has received no such guarantee ; it is human in its origin and secular in its government. Lord John Russell created no small sensation in 1875 when he published in the Times the Oath of Homage, which every bishop in England has to take in the presence of the King or Queen. Dressed in full canonicals, with the Bible in his hand, and kneeling at the feet of the sovereign, he declares: "I acknowledge that I hold the said Bishopric, as well as the spiritualities as the temporalities thereof, only of your Majesty." This most extraordinary oath came in with Elizabeth, and shows that the spiritual jurisdiction is derived, not from the succession of the Apostles, but from a layman or woman. And the Council of the Sovereign is the highest court of appeal in spiritual as in temporal matters. That Council may be composed of Jews and Gentiles ! The unscriptural decisions of this Court, the Privy Council, has driven from the Anglican Church some of the brightest ornaments, including the late Cardinal Manning. ""he Gorham case in 1850 revealed to Archdeacon Manning the unpleasant fact that a clergyman in the Church by Law Established could hold his position without believing that infants were regenerated in the Sacrament of Baptism. Anglican Orders Not Valid. While the Anglican Church might shake off State interference, the one obstacle in the way of reunion with Rome which she cannot remove is that she cannot make good her Orders. Every ecclesiastic in the Church of England, from the Archbishop of Canterbury to the humblest bush curate, is, in the eyes of Rome, a layman—and nothing more. All the Sacraments he can administer is Baptism—and any instructed school child can do that. A quarter of a century ago an appeal was made by many leading churchmen in England for union with Rome ; and, as a necessary step, the question of Anglican Orders had to be decided. Amongst the laymen Lord Halifax and Mr. Gladstone took the. lead ; while the Revs. Mr. Lacey and Mr. Puller prepared a treatise in Latin advocating the claim of validity. Pope Leo XIII. warmly entertained the hope of corporate reunion of England with Rome. A council of expert theologians and canonists was called to examine the question. To make that council as representative as possible members were invited from England, France, Spain, and Italy; while two Anglican clergymen went to Rome to supply information from their point of view. Mr. Gladstone hailed Pope Leo as the great peacemaker, and expressed his own belief in the competency and fairness of the investigaing tribunal. "The aged Pontiff," he said, "had shown yearnings for peace first in entertaining the question of this inquiry, and secondly in determining and providing, by the infusion both of capacity and impartiality into the investigating tribunal, that no instrument should be overlooked, no guarantee omitted for the probable attainment of truth." During the*investigation Abbot Gasquet, now Cardinal, made an important discovery in the archives of the Vatican, namely, the Bull issued by Pope Paul IV. in 1555. This document arose, out of an inquiry being made at

that/date on the same question. During the short reign ; of Mary, Cardinal. Pole, , a near kinsman ,of the Royal Family, was called to the Metropolitan See of Canterbury, and found; the clergy composed of two classes—those who had been ordained under the Catholic Pontifical, and those ordained under the new Anglican Ordinal. How was he to treat those who sought reconciliation with the. Catholic Church, and who / had received Orders under the new Anglican Ordinal ? The Council of Trent was then sitting, and « special committee was appointed to prepare the reply of the Pope on the question. The Edwardine Ordinal was examined, and it was found that the Reformers had deliberately eviscerated the Roman Pontifical, with the express intention of cutting away from it every word and phrase which could signify the Sacerdotium, or sacrificial power. This was perfectly consistent with the destruction of the altars, and excluding all idea of the Real Presence, and the Sacrifice of the Mass. The essence of the priesthood consists in power to offer sacrifice. The morning we were ordained the bishop said: "Receive power to offer sacrifice to God and to celebrate Masses for the living and the dead." Since the Edwardine Ordinal decided that idea, the Commission decided that there was no priesthood in the Anglican Church. In September of 1896 Leo XIII. issued the Bull Apostolicae Curae, declaring Anglican Orders invalid, and, therefore, excluding all hope of corporate reunion. Like the Tractarian Movement of 50 years before, many brilliant men left the Church of their fathers to find peace in the bosom of the Catholic Church. The first to break away was the son of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Robert Hugh Benson. (Applause.) He died a few years ago as Monsignor Benson ; and his companion, Father Maturin, lost his life on the Lusitania. I have said sufficient for the present to show reunion with us is impossible, not because we are held in "thraldom" by the iniquity of the Vatican, but because the Church seeking reunion has not the humility to acknowledge that she is a secular organisation without priesthood and sacrifice. Considering the discord reigning in the Anglican Church, as revealed at the Melbourne Synod, Dr. Cranswick should find sufficient work to cleanse his own establishment and let us alone, to remove the beam from his own eye, and we will attend to the mote in our own. (Applause.) His Grace the Archbishop of Wellington (Dr. Redwood) also spoke briefly, and congratulated the Catholic people upon having so able a champion as Bishop Phelan. He had read Bishop Cranswick's remarks with mingled feelings of indignation and pity. The remarks were rash and wilful, and Bishop Cran6wick should have more common sense than to make so untimely an attack. It surprised him. He felt indignant because it showed such barefaced calumny against the Catholic Church, against Catholic people, and against Catholic Ireland. How a man in his position could show such extraordinary ignorance on a matter that had been before the people for centuries he did not know. He was a victim to that false tradition so admirably exposed by Cardinal Newman. lie pitied Bishop Cranswick if he did it in ignorance, and he felt indignant and scornful if he did it in malice. The idea of a reunion with Rome ! As though they (Catholics) wanted it! Protestantism can only support itself by telling lie after lie. They must tell lies by the million, that is the position. He was glad to see them. (Catholics) championed in so clear and cogent a manner. It was sure to increase their loyalty to their country and their Church. (Applause.) Mr. Cullinan moved a vote of thanks to his Lordship and his Grace for their addresses, On behalf of the Catholic laity. This meeting did not come off the Bishop's bat; this time the laity took action. In a few remarks Mr. Cullinan said he took exception to the horrible term "priest-ridden Ireland." Every time he heard it it made him feel sick. He had never attacked any man's religion in his life; his motto had always been the motto, of Abraham Lincoln: "With malice towards none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives me to see the right I strive on. (Applause.) » The motion was carried by acclamation... and brief responses were made.