Hide Article Text (OCR)
fttye ItabacttU.to their trouble they ere apt to become dangerons. We should, in all friendliness, advise Mr. Shiels to follow the example of the ant, and he wiBe in time.TUE PLEASURES OF FALSEHOOD.Osi of Mr. Raskin's lectures at Oxford was on “ Protestantism : The Pleasnres of Truth and illustrating the inability of certain Protestant minds to sppreciato the beauties of art as employed in the service of the Catholic Church, he produoed a sketch of a little porker, saying—•' Hero I have tor you a type of the honest but not liborally-minded Protestant. The little pig walks slang, you lee, knowing every inch of its ground, having in its snout a capital instrument for grubbing op things. You may bo shocked, perhaps, at my ideation of this animal for Iho type of a religious seot; bnt if yon could but realise all tbe beautiful things which the insolence of Protestantism has destroyed, you would think surely the Oadsreno swine too good for them. Bat my illustration is, at any rate, appropriate, tut sigoihcanl of tbe Protestant and Evangelical art whioh can draw a pig to perfeolion, but never a pretty lady.” Mr. Raskin then passed on to the hypocritical Protestant, and produced as the type of him a sketch in black and whito of n truly repulsive Mr. Stiggins with a concertinn.lint there are other Protestants than those who arc neither 11 honest nor liberally-minded,” and it is much to ho regretted that the great art critic did not sketch them in some form. The class to whom we refer find compensation in tbe pleasures of falsehood for their insensibility to the beauties of Catholic art, or, in Mr. Ruskin's words, “ to the beauty of the spectral phenomena in which Catholicity delights.” These pcnplo pass much of their time in the whitewashing process, nnd arc but poorly rewarded for their pains. They have been at work for many years on Martin Luther's character, and hare not yet ancceedcd in whitening it. How far from succeeding in their purpose his apologists still arc is explained in an article which recently appeared in the Wrstmimler Rtciim from the pen of Mr. Karl Pearson, formerly Follow of King's College, Cambridge, and nn avowed Socialist and Freethinker. It could not lie expected that a writer of Mr. Pearson’s very literal views would find fault with Luther on nil grounds on which he stands condemned hy Catholics. To a Freethinker we should not look for a severe view of the Reformer's apostacy, profanity, or frailties of the lleaii. But, really, there is no occasion for any further accumulation of evidence on these points. It is of much more importance that the consequences of Lnthor's revolt and teaching on the religions, moral, and intellectual condition of the people who fell under his baneful intluence should be olcared up, and Mr. Karl Pearson has rendered vslnahle service in that respect.The Protestant myth is that the Catholic Chnrch endeavoured to fetter the human mind, and that the Reformation set it free ; that Catholicism is inimical to enlightenment, culture, end political freedom ; that it keeps the hnman understanding in bondage to error; that it thns cramps man’s reason, and so prevents the divine light from penetrating the soul. On the other band, it is represented that the world is chielly indebted to Lather and the other Reformers for the revivsl of letters and for the wonderfol tdvsnces that have been made within the past three centuries in the arts, in science, and in every department of literatnre. Over and over again it baa been proved on the strongest svidenoe that the Catholic Chnrch has at all times been s most liberal patron of literature, science, and the arts, and that many of its ministers have done mankind signal service in every branch of study. More than that, it baa been proved that bnt for the loving care with which the Chnrch preserved all that was known to the ancients, end the pstient iddustry with which it msde idditiona to its Ireasnre-honM of knowledge, tbe world's sum of intellectual products most have been small indeed after the time of Alnric, snd tbe human mind conld not from the 16 th century havs made those great progressive leapt for which Proteauatima falsely and impudently claims to Real! so much credit.In the article to which we refer Mr. Karl Pearson discusses the character of Lather and the influence which his teachings have had in his own day and since. More books, ho remarks, have been written about the Reformation than about any other period of history, and yet since the time when history emerged from the mist of legend such a mass of myth has never grown up to obscure all true examination of facte. Myths survive, though scholars have again and again shown that Lnther’s translation was neither the firat norths best. Osrdinal Wiseman thus pithily exploded that falsehood;—A version of tho Bible appeared in Bpaan in 1487, before Luther wee thought of, end almost before he was boro. In Italy, the country most peouliarly under the sway ol Papal dominion, tho Bcrlptures were trene. lated into Italian by Malermi, at Venice, in 1471; end this version was published seventeen times before that of Luther appeared. A second version, of parte of Boriptore, was published in 1472 : a third at Home. 1481; a fourth in Venice, 1522; end a corrected edition in 1638, two years after Luther had completed hie. And every one ol these came out not only with the approbation of the ordinary authorities, hut with that of the Inquisition, which approved of their being published, distributed, and promulgated.Another falsehood from which Protestants of a certain class derive pleasure is that toleration was a part of the programme of the Herman Reformers, nnd the statement does not stand the test of critical investigation. Toleration, snys Mr. Pearson, “has grown to bo a leading factor of our modorn faith, in the very teeth of Protestant, or at least Lutheran, opposition. Agaiu, does anyone ask us to be grateful to Luther for modern culture? We answer that he cheoked the growth of culture ; that literature, and art, and scholarship decayed under the influence of the Lutheran ChuiWs* “ Wo are told,” he adds, “ that coarseness and violence were only typical of the age ; hut there is no attempt to ascertain whether the nobler thinkers of tbe age were coarse and violent. And from the imputation he defends them, It is said that the Reformation swept away intolerable abuses ; “ yst,” observes Mr. Pearson, “ we search in vain for any scientific comparison of the moral and social con ditions of the clergy and laity at the beginning and at the middle of the sixteenth century. We are told, ho adds, “that literature and learning were fostered by tho Reformation, and yet wo find absolnte ignorance as to the intellectual collapse of Germany in tbe sixteenth century.” Aa to the boest that the thought of to-day owes its freedom to Luther, Mr. Pearson does not hesitate to assert that thought could express itself far more freely in Basel snd Erfurt in 1500 than it could any-wbore in Europe by the middle of the century.Touching the relaxation of discipline among the clergy, Mr. Pearson asks :— “ Did the Lutheran Reform produce a purer and more enlightened clergy ; did it inorcaae the moral and social welfare of the people ; was it foremost in the support of literature end art; waa it more tolerant, more charitable, nay, even more Christian than that which it attempted to replace ? Shortly, did it reform more evil than it destroyed good ?” To none of these questions, he saya, can an affirmative answer be given. Catholics do not deny that abases had, from various causes, crept into ecclesiastical discipline in tbe early part of the sixteenth eentary, bnt they do deny that these abuses could not, snd would not, hive been corrected without a great apostacy. At a fact, steps were being taken at the time to bring about the cooes vary reforms.We have not space to deal with Mr. Pearson's article at any great length ; but ere hare, we hope, given a sufficient indication of its scope and purpose to enable our readers to see that its iaflueaoe must have been considerable on the edaonlcd mind of tho EnglishI*°Ple' ________Tin latereoloala! eriokst match played in Sydney between Mew South Wale* and Victoria wan oonaloded on Wednesday, lbs visitors winning by an innings sad Ifloeawill b* eten trero oar advertising ■an lhal the Matin Ossiamss Mod
Newspaper Details
Melbourne Advocate
Melbourne, Victoria, AU
Sat, Jan 30, 1892
Page 7
Full Page
Clipped by
The U.
IL, USA 24 Oct 2024
Other Publications Near Melbourne, Victoria
Melbourne Record
Melbourne Punch Thu
Melbourne Public Opinion
Melbourne Norden
Melbourne Herald
