Mgr. Louis de Ségur: Plain Talk about the Protestantism of Today [1868]

[Stone]

PART SECOND.


XIX. Learning and Controversy of Protestant Ministers.

— At first sight, Protestant ministers appear to be very learned men; but by following them close, very little solidity is to be found in their learning, which is all Protestant, — that is, negative; it is a belligerent knowledge, not inspired by the hallowing love of truth, but by the powerful hatred of whatever is Catholic.

In dispute and controversy, they bring along an interminable array of books, quotations, texts, facts, and dates. The audience, dazzled by such light (?), feel disposed to think that the gentlemen are really prodigies of learning.

Nothing of the kind. There are exceptions, indeed, and I know some distinguished men among them, hard students. You will find them in Germany, and among the High Church men of England; and some in this country. Their studies lead them nearer and nearer to Catholic faith. Willing as we earnestly are to render homage to men learned and friendly to truth, we must say that they are few in number. In France, the erudition of ministers is confined, generally speaking, to a certain number of passages from the writings of the Fathers, garbled after the minister's own view; some facts of doubtful authenticity, apparently in opposition with some Catholic dogma, or practice; lastly, a thundering storm of quotations from the Bible.

We cannot be fooled by such people. Hundreds and thousands of times have those objections, the same which Martin Luther offered, been refuted, in a most conclusive way, by Bellarmin, and Suarez, and St. Francis de Sales, and Fenelon, and Bossuet, etc., etc., etc. For the lack of better weapons, they tread on the same ground over and over.

It must be admitted that unless one's studies have been extensive, and unless one is endowed with an extraordinary memory, a well-instructed Catholic, and even a priest, can be very easily startled by a telling quotation. The least chance for examination or research would very easily afford a reply; but the discussion allows of no respite, and the momentary embarrassment is proclaimed a defeat. There is honesty for you.

From what we have said it can be very easily understood why the Church, sure as she is of possessing divine truth in her doctrine, and of the futility of heretical assertions, commands her children to keep clear of controversies with Protestant ministers, and forbids us to listen to their sermons or to read their books, without a special authorization. It is no fear on her part; it is prudence, and prudence begets security.

[Stone]

PART SECOND.


XX. Why do not Catholic Priests marry as Protestant Ministers do?

— Once a Protestant minister reproached a young student for his misconduct; to which the latter replied: "Very easy for you to talk so, sir. Luther has declared that it is as impossible to keep from marriage, as to go about without clothes, or live without nourishment; after this, his opinion, you have married. I would marry too, had I the means; but I am only twenty, and the government and the evangelical societies give me nothing, as yet, wherewith to keep house; so, meanwhile, I do the best I can."

It would prove interesting to know what reply was given by a parson married on the Protestant principle, that celibacy is against nature.

A Catholic priest would have replied: "Be ye followers of me, as I also am of Christ" (1 Cor. xi. 1). Be chaste, as I am, and say not that it is impossible, because, what one can do another also can.

Celibacy enables the priest to devote himself wholly to his ministry. On embracing the ecclesiastical state priests pledge themselves with free will, and, after due probation, to observe perfect continence. Although this obligation is not a divine institution, it is, nevertheless, one of marvellous wisdom. The Church well knew what she was about, when she changed the evangelic and apostolic counsel of celibacy into an absolute command for her priests;* and the devil knows very well what he is about when he protests against this salutary institution.

Were our priests married, do you think they would sacrifice themselves as they do every day? Do you not believe they would hesitate before they entered a place of loathing and contagion, and leave directions concerning their bank accounts with next kin and neighbor? And who are the kin and kith of a married man but his wife and children?

It is out of the question. We can never be reconciled with the idea of a Catholic priest being married. Christian priesthood and the wife's teakettle will never harmonize. The Protestant parsonship, which after all is only a caricature of the priesthood, drags after itself its household like a cumbrous cannon-ball. Nothing more laughable than what a certain pastor, Mr. Bost, tells of himself in his Memoirs.* The history of his apostolic excursions, of his preaching, of his divers vocations, of his change of convictions, is interlarded with ludicrous histories of matrimonial cares, of tin pans, and cooking-stoves. With his wife, eleven children, two servants, one piano, and two canary-birds, the unfortunate apostle parades all around, for fifteen or twenty years, thirteen thousand pounds of evangelic baggage.

How vividly all this represents primitive Christianity, Saint Paul and his staff!

[Stone]

PART SECOND.


XXI. How our Saviour and his Apostles differ on the Point of Sacerdotal Celibacy from Protestant Ministers.

— Few questions are better defined by the Bible than that of religious celibacy. The church only repeats what our Saviour and his great apostle, Saint Paul, have taught on this delicate subject.

The Pharisees question Jesus about marriage, and our Lord solemnly proclaims its indissolubility. The apostles, alarmed at the hard condition of married folks, consult him in their turn: "If the case of a man with his wife be so, it is not expedient to marry." "But," he said to them, "not all take this word, but they to whom it is given." Then he adds: "There are such who deprive themselves of marriage for the kingdom of heaven. He who can take it, let him take it." (Matt. xix. 10, etc.)

It seems as if the ministers, although very evangelical, are not of those to whom it is given to take the word; whereof our priests, papists though they be, ignorant as they are said to be of the genuine word of God, take it. They understand the counsel of the Master, and have heart enough to follow it.

The doctrine of virginity and celibacy is none the less beautifully defined by St. Paul, in his first epistle to the Corinthians, seventh chapter. The principles are so distinctly set down that Mme. de Gasparin, in her anti-Catholic zeal, declares, with charming ingenuity, that it is evident that such passages of the epistle as refer to celibacy are not inspired. "Inspiration returns," says she, "when St. Paul passes to other subjects."

Well, the apostle says: "Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord; but I give counsel, as having obtained mercy of the Lord, to be faithful." Just what the Catholic Church teaches; she forces no person to a life of celibacy. True, she makes a law of this counsel, a strict law for her ministers, but she forces no one to embrace the priesthood; and when a Christian expresses his intention to become priest, he acts on his perfectly free will, and it is only on his spontaneous determination that he accepts the condition of a perfect chastity.

The motives of this conduct of the Church will be also found in St. Paul. After showing that matrimony is good and honorable, he adds: "I would have you without solicitude. He who is unmarried, careth for the things of the Lord, how he may please God. But he who is married is solicitous about the things of the world, how he may please his wife, and he is divided. And the unmarried woman and the virgin thinketh of the things of the Lord, that she may be holy in body and spirit. But she that is married, thinketh of the things of the world, how she may please her husband." And the apostle concludes thus: "Therefore both he that giveth his virgin in marriage, doth well; and he who giveth her not, doth better." Bene facit; melius facit.

There is the argument summed up. Marriage is good, celibacy is better. What have the ministers to say to this? It is not I that speaketh, but the Bible. Let us be candid. They care naught for the Bible, but they detest the priests, the only true ministers of the Gospel. They wish them to marry, that they may be unpriest ed. They are chagrined, because they cannot deprive them of that angelic celibacy, which crowns them with a holy halo, and justly secures to them the confidence and the veneration of the people.

Cunning Philistines, they would like to rob Samson of his strength, through their Delilahs! But, warned by the example of the first Samson, the latter will not give in. They reject Delilah, and fight against the enemies of God's people the unconquerable battles of faith.