31 DECEMBER 1921, Page 21

PRIESTCRAFT.*

Tars is a book with a good deal of bitterness in it—a book which one cannot help wishing had not been written, or rather, we should say, a book which we wish there had been no necessity to write—for on the whole we admit the necessity.

• Priesteraft. By Hush E. IL Stutileid. National Review Publiihing Offices. Gd. nets

We claim for the Roman Catholic a respect for his religion as sincere and as full as that accorded to any and every other Christian or non-Christian Church or form :of faith. We do not desire for gi moment to challenge the Roman creed or ritual or moral code. We have neither the right nor the desire to do so. Further, we bow our heads in deep respect to the many •good and great men of the present day, as of the past, who are of the Boman faith.

But, alas ! one cannot stop here. The Roman Church, or, at any rate, the ultramontane section of it, as not content to keep control over matters of faith and morals within the domain of its own membership. Wherever they can, ultramontanes feel it their duty to do combat with their opponents and to .save men's souls in their despite. That this is done in good -faith and not out of the love of power we are quite ready to believe, but they must -remember that the imperative attitude which they take up, and which is implicit in a good deal of their teaching, makes it necessary to examine and to understand their claims and their position, and to a large extent to condemn those claims It is no -good to pretend that you can adopt the same attitude towards Roman Catholic theological literature that yxm can -adopt towards the teaehings of the Quakers or the Wesleyan.

Especially is it necessary in the .case of the. Roman Church to deal 'with Sacerdotalism. But to combat the claims of Sacer- dotalism they must be understood, and to understand them -they must be studied and criticized. Now, we do not say that we altogether like the methods of Mr. Stutfield, the author of The Boman Mischief-Maker. They are often too irascible in tone, or, rather, too "inconsiderate—for Mr. Stutfield is not, we believe, bitter in intention. Still, it would be most unjust to him not to acknowledge that he often does good and useful work in his exposition. His new book Prie.storaft .has got things in it which will, we are sure, be very disagreeable to many enlightened Roman Catholics to read or to have recalled to their notice ; for they, like other people, are inclined not to dwell on the things which they dislike when, on the balance of good, they decide to belong to a particular Church or to work with a particular body of men. At the same time, all impartial people must agree that it is good for all of us to be challenged, even in regard to our deepest spiritual feelings, and to be asked "Do you really believe this ? " or "How do you reconcile your belief that the Church is not a human and therefore fallible institution, when she puts forward this or that unworthy statement as authoritative ? " Superficially, it may look like persecution to be always dragging into light the theological ineptitudes of such a writer .as .Alphonsus Liguori, or parading the more foolish phenomena of Mariolatry ; but at the same time it is impossible not to feel that, if the Roman Catholic Church is ever to be reformed, it can only be done by making men and women ashamed of views and teachings which ought to have been " scrapped " several generations ago, but are still declared to be of authority.

Our Roman Catholic readers will smile at the idea of a Protestant newspaper writer talking about reforming the Church which rests on a divine foundation. And yet, if Roman Catholics of sincerity could be made to feel for a moment that the admissions would not be used against them, they would, we feel sure, agree that the great organization to which they belong, and which they hold to be always under divine guidance, does need a good deal of intelligent revision, and would admit that they look forward

with passionate eagerness to such a cleansing of the faith.

Further, we feel sure that they would be inclined to admit that the usual arguments which are used to defend indefensible things in the doctrines of the Church had very much better be abandoned. They love their Church and we honour them for their devotion, but at heart they are no real votaries of infallibility.

Therefore, though loth to do anything to hurt tender souls, or to make Roman Catholics think that Protestants are in- tolerant, we have regretfully to assent to the view that there is a real need to keep on record many of the things written of in Mr. Stutfield's Prieatcraft. We note -that he has placed in the first of his two appendices an account of the Ne Temere

Decree, and that he prints the Marriage Forms -under that Decree which show the Roman Church's attitude towards

Protestant marriages. The matter is of mare than academic interest, for the attitude of the Roman Church in Ireland in regard to the Ne Temere Decree may possibly raise acute controversy. The other appendix, i.e., that on Roman Catholic Morality, we think would have been better omitted. We doubt its doing any good, and it will certainly seem unjust to many Roman Catholics. That the alleged immorality often does exist we do ,not doubt. It is the penalty of an enforced celibacy—" that ungodly chastity " of which Mrs. Hutchinson complained. We must not forget, however, that in a country like England, • where Roman Catholics are in a minority, criticism may very soon drop Into persecution.