REV. P. CORRIGAN. 

The Bishop and The Priest 

N E W YORK, O C T O B E R 1884. 

T H E A M E R I C A N N E W S C O M P A N Y , 

AGENTS FOB T H E TRADE, 

3 9 AND 4 1 CHAMBERS S T R E E T . 

l'RICE, 50 CENTS. 





AC&bOfí G ' I S 

COPYRIGHTED BY 

P . C O R R I G A N , 
lbsä. 



APPENDIX. 

E X T R A C T P R O M A L E T T E R I N A N S W E R TO F A T H E R 
M C C A R T I E ' S C R I T I C I S M . 

The bishop of the diocese has in no manner interfered 
•witn the publication of the present pamphlet—'' What 
the Catholic Church Most Needs," published by the 
American News Company, 41 Chambers street, New-
York. It has been ably reviewed in the New York 
Herald and the N E W Y O R K T A B L E T , the leading Catholic 
paper of New York City ; it has been most warmly com-
mended by the ablest and most strictly orthodox Catholic 
paper of the country—the Catholic Mirror of Baltimore, 
which is the official organ of the highest ecclesiastical, 
authority in the United States—Archbishop Gibbons. 

Another letter in reference to other criticisms by the 
Rev. D McCartie, Chancellor. The Secretary of the 
Propaganda was here styled Cardinal by mistake. He is 
Archbishop. This accounts for the same mistake in the 
newspapers. 

CORRESPONDENCE. 

F A T H E R C O R R I G A N ' S P A M P H L E T . 

To the Editor of the Tablet: 
I have always deprecated newspaper controversies be-

tween priests, as more calculated to manifest the " tan-
ice/te animis coelestibus tree," of both than to lead to edi-
fication. I have not sought this controversy. Father 
McCartie is responsible, not only for having started it, 
but for having laid down principles and drawn conclu-
sions, so foreign to my teaching, that I cannot, as a. 
public teacher, responsible for my own soundness of doc-
trine, allow his absurd and dishonest charges to remain 
unanswered; and this the more so, as they come from' 
oae whose position—but fortunately only his position— 
must necessarily lend them weight. I know these charges; 
of heretical teaching and of rebellion against the Church 
in general and against mv own Bishop in particular, are 
the result of his incoherent oratory, without any founda-

t t e t t s d 



ii 

tion, in fact, and every impartial reader of the pamphlet 
will say the same thing. 

While reverence for his position as chancellor and pro 
fessor in the college forces me, as a priest of the same 
diocese, to silence, the very same consideration constrains 
me to speak. The general reader will, at first sight, take 
it for granted that the dogmatic assertions of one who 
holds such exalted positions must be correct; and when 
Father McCartie says that " a i r good Catholics will re-
ceive such teachings (what he absurdly and falsely 
attributes to Father Corrigan) witli mingled surprise and 
sorrow ;" the reader concludes that Father Corrigan must 
be a most dangerous man, and must wonder why he is not 
publicly excommunicated. 

Now the reader must remember that Father McCartie'a 
position as chancellor, or even as professor, lends no 
intrinsic weight to his arguments ; his arguments are his 
own, and, fortunately for his offire and position, neither 
is in any way responsible for them. When examined, 
they are found, not only a disgrace to any mere tyro in 
theology, but, what is far worse, they are shame-
fully dishonest. This is strong language, but it is pain-
fully true. I have received many letters on this very 
point from clergymen and laymen. I will insert here an 
extract from a letter I received a few days ago from an 
able Catholic lawyer of New York. He says; " I have 
just completed your brochure, ' What the Catholic 
Church Most Needs in the United States.' In my judg-
ment it is deserving of the highest regard and attention 
of the clergy and laity. The severe criticisms of the 
Chancellor, are not justified in theory or in fact, and I do 
not consider him a faithful interpreter. It seems to me 
that he is willfully blind to the premises you lay down, 
and I should say that his efforts have been directed to an 
entire misconception of the questions so clearly ex-
pounded by you." I may say there is hardly another 
man in the United States that could take the same vie.w 
of tfte work as Father McCartie without running the risk 
of being regarded as a Don Quixote, or a shamefully dis-
honest critic. 

He complains that I do not follow his reasoning in my 
letter. I might as well try to reason with the old Knight 
of La Mancha. Father McCartie purposely evades the 
question, as the lawyer well remarks, and tries to lead me 
to the discussion of nonsense that has no bearing on the 



I l l 

pamphlet, in order to give liim a chance to accuse me, as 
he does, of having said what I never said, and what no 
one but a miserable theologian like himself could say. 
The dishonesty of his criticisms is seen in the fact that in 
all the twelve mortal columns of your paper which he 
fills with his rigmarole against the pamphlet,. he never 
quotes one connected sentence from it in order to show 
my meaning, evidently proving that he wishes to attach 
his own sinister meaning to the few words which he tags 
together from different parts of the work, distorting the 
meaning they evidently bear in the text. A fair sample 

• of his argument and honesty is found in the action of the 
man who, insisting on proving from Scripture that every 
Christian should hang himself, quoted from one part of 
the Bible that " Judas hanged himself," and from an-
other place, " Go, thou, and do likewise," and made the 
Bible say: " Judas hanged himself; go thou, and do 
likewise." 

In one place, and only in one, as if by way of lucid 
interval, Father McCartie does give my meaning, when 
he says, I maintain that the law of the Church gave the 
right of suffrage to the priests. This was in his second 
letter, where he says I gave not the shadow of proof for 
the existence of such a law, and that such a law is purely 
" mythical and suppositious." In his third letter, how-
ever, this queerly logical Father spends a half column in 
proving the very thing that he had so fiercely denied, and 
tells us that whole pages might be filled showing that I 
was right, when I said, and proved, too, that the Church 

ave the priests a voice in the election of Bishops. What 
_ oes the Father mean ? He denies a thing, then he proves 
i t ; then he berates the Apostles, and the Popes, and the 
Fathers of the Church for having made such laws that 
tended, in his absurd way of looking at things, to destroy 
the divine character of the Church, and that must have 
"a l l good Catholics receive such teachings with mingled 
surprise and sorrow." Does the Father forget that in 
denouncing the Popes and Councils and Fathers of the 
Church, he is standing with Luther and Calvin and the 
other great enemies of the Church ? But, he says, they 
allowed the people from the first to the fifteenth century 
to have a voice in ecclesiastical elections, and this is a 
principle destructive of the divine constitution of the 
Church. Poor St. Peter, fallible Popes and useless Coun-
cils ! How wrong they were to have established and 



iv 

maintained such a system for fifteen hundred years—a 
system which, according to him, "good Catholics would 
regard with abhorrence as sacrilegious." What a pity, I 
say, the Popes had no infallible theologian from Skib-
bereen in those days to teach them sound doctrine ! I t is 
now too late. However, the American Church is safe 
while New Jersey possesses Rev. D. McCartie. The 
Father is so confused in his ideas that he hardly knows 
what to prove, and he reminds us of the flatulent Fourth 
of July orator, who, when told by a member of his im-
patient audience to " speak sense, or shut up," answered 
that he would do neither. 

The Father accuses me of advocating the restoration of 
the right of the laity to a voice in the election of Bishops 
and priests. The Father knows this charge to be false, 
and his violent and scandalous tirade against me in his 
letter, on this score, to be malicious. 

The Father accuses me of claiming a divine constitutive 
right on the part of the clergy in the election of Bishops, 
and the Father must know that this charge is false, and, 
consequently, that his scandalous conclusions placing me 
in league with Luther and Calvin for the destruction of 
the divine character of the Church of God, are most 
malicious. 

To guard against any misconstruction of my meaning, 
such as the Father is guilty of. I had said in the preface 
to my pamphlet: "This power of merely nominating 
Bishops which the Irish priests enjoy, and which the 
Popes have given in nearly all ages of the Church to 
kings, has nothing to do with the power of creating or 
consecrating Bishops, which belongs to the Episcopacy 
alone, and which cannot be alienated." 

The Father, in his desperate effort to make out a case 
against me, persists in attributing the word " r igh t , " a 
meaning which the above quotation shows it does not 
bear, and which I limited by saying "r ight or privilege." 
There is, as he must know, a difference between a divine 
constitutive right and a divine moral right. The former, 
as I have said, belongs to the Episcopacy alone, and 
radically to the Pope, its head, and this is the only essen-
tial power in creating Bishops, no matter what power, lay 
or ecclesiastical, is permitted by the Pope to make the 
nominations. Ecclesiastics, however, have a divine moral 
right in" the government of the Church; the civil., rulers 
have not. The Church permitted civil rulers, under pro-



V 

test, and for fear of worse consequences, to exercise this 
power of nominating Bishops ; but owing to the great 
abuse of this power by the State, the Church struggled 
hard to take from it this power and to restore it to the 
Clergy, 

The Father, to the great scandal of good Catholics, 
falsely accuses me of writing against the tyranny of the 
Church, when he knows that I was writing against the 
tyranny of civil rulers. He says my whole pamphlet 
leads to the most terrible consequences, because I use the 
word " r i g h t " to mean ''privilege." The man seems in 
a bad fix for an objection. 

If the good Father has become an American citizen (a 
great acquisition to the theological lore of Uncle Sam), we 
may some day hear him assert that he has a right to vote, 
though the fact that even some native-born Americans 
(Indians) have no vote, shows that the Father's right to 
vote is, after all, only a privilege. What nonsense to say 
the priests had not a right to vote ! Did not the Church, 
as Father McCartie himself proved, give them the right 
to vote % And when she gave it was it not their right I 

The Father bitterly complains of me for wishing a 
change in the present mode of nominating Bishops, and 
he says that all good Catholics must regard my plan as 
most "abhorrent and sacrilegious." Does this queer 
Father not know that the Pope is struggling to-day for 
this very change? It was bad enough that the civil 
rulers had this power, when those rulers were all Cath-
olics, but it is now a thousand times worse when many of 
them are excommunicated free masons or infidels, or even 
disbelievers in the existenoe of a personal God. And 
these are the men who, in Father McCartie's mind, and 
not the priests of God, who should have the nominating 
of the Bishops of the Church, as they actually have 
to-day ! 'No, good Father, they are not the proper per-
sons to nominate the Bishops. The influence of such 
men is a terrible curse to the Church, and it is your duty, 
as well as mine, to labor to free the Church from this 
curse. The Pope has no civil ruler in these United States 
lo interfere with his establishing the normal law of the 
Church, which gives the priests a say in the election of 
Bishops, and the Pope is anxious to establish that law ; 
and he has already sent a command to the Bishops of 
the coming council at Baltimore, to give the priests of the 
United States at least some »«v in Episcopal nominations. 



ix 

Father McCartie, like a good many of his kind, whosp 
chances of adoption or promotion in this country would 
be much diminished by the establishment of ecclesiastical 
law, is naturally opposed to such a change, and his 
almost total ignorance of this country makes him believe 
that the clergy are neither anxious nor even qualified to 
•exercise such a power. Father McCartie will find no 
American priest, properly so-called, to agree with him, 
though he will certainly find many adventurers to do so» 
whose influence is a comparative nightmare on the pro-
gress of the Church in this country. From an old priest 
whom I once asked why so many priests left their own 
dioceses to seek adoption and promotion in the United 
States, I got this answer: " I t is not for reading their 
office and saying their prayers that they left the diocese 
for which they had been ordained." 

The Father is smarting under the public ridicule which 
his absurd charges against my first work has brought 
upon him. Why does he not apologize publicly to me 
for his public charges of false doctrine ? It would cer-
tainly be more honorable than to rely, as he seems to do, 
on his old habit of writing weekly, four mortal columns 
of political clap-trap in the Irish papers, as a means of 
enabling him to escape in a cloud of words and sentences 
that may confuse the profanum vulgus, that appreciates 
neither logic nor theology. The Father has no scruple in 
the means he employs to destroy my standing as a priest 
of my own diocese. Conscious that neither the weight of 
his office, nor the want of weight in his arguments would 
have any influence with intelligent readers, he shamelessly 
pronounces me in the public newspapers guilty of insub-
ordination to my Bishop, in order to clinch, as it were, 
the false charges which he had made against me. As I 
have labored in my own diocese for twenty-fo,ur years 
without having ever merited or received the slightest in-
dications from my Bishop of such a charge, I now 
demand that Father McCartie withdraw this slander as 

'publicly as he has made it. 
I might have made this letter very short, were it not 

that I thought it better to show what a real wind-bag 
this eccentric theologian is, and to open the eyes of some, 
who still imagine his charges against my pamphlet have 
any truth in them. This same pamphlet, "Episcopal 
Nominations," has been examined by the ablest professors 
of Rome, who found nothing in it contrary to the strictest 



v i i 

teachings of the Church, and the master of the Sacred 
Palace who read it, declared that its author " was ani-
mated by the purest zeal that could inspire a pr ies t" 
Rev. Denis McCartie thinks otherwise, but Rev. Denis 
McCartie is Rev. Denis McCartie and nothing more He 
tells us that the "Episcopal Nominations'' is a miserable 
thing, and that it is now dead and forgotten Is the 
Father sincere when he says this ? Does he forget that I 
sent him a month ago a copy of an Italian translation of 
the work printed in Florence? Does he forget that 
Bishop Wigger, of Newark, tried in vain with the Arch-
bishop of Florence to suppress the Italian edition« Did 
he not read the New York Sun of June 29th, whose able 
Koman correspondent in a letter dated Rome, June 17th 
mentions Father Corrigan, of Hoboken, whose book oil 
Episcopal Nominations has been printed in Italy, and has 
notbeen suppressed by the Roman authorities ? 

Father McCartie does not know, but I will tell him now 
that a distinguished theologian and doctor of the Church'' 
who represented me in Rome in my appeal to the Propa-
ganda against the action of Bishop Wigger regarding my 

h
+f informed me by letter, dated Rome, June 

29th, 1884, that His Eminence, Cardinal Jacobini Secre-
tary of the Propaganda, has given permission to circulate 
my pamphlet in English or in Italian, even in the verr 
city of Rome. * 

This negative approval of my pamphlet Episcopal 
.Nominations, was all that I ever claimed; I always felt 
that I would obtain ample and even speedy justice in 
-Kome, I hat justice has come even sooner than I ex-
pected it, and in the name of the noble priests of the 
United States, in whose behalf I wrote the little pamph-
let, I most humbly thank His Eminence. I claim no per 
sonal triumph, but I cannot help rejoicing that my teach-
ing and my conduct have the approval of Rome. Roma 
locuta est causa finita est. 
m I have been obliged to submit to many painful things 
in connection with this matter; but the reward has com! 
and the little martyr {brochure), which the Bishop of 
Newark and the editor of the Pastor, solemnly consigned 
to the fiery furnace of the type foundry in punishment of 
its alleged sins is now flourishing in the capital of fair 

GocPs Church ^ ° n t h e t 6 a d b y ^ Princes of 
Hoboken, N. J . P A T R I C K C O R R I G A N . 



V i l i 

T H E FOLLOWING IS AN EDITORIAL FROM T H E Catholic Mir-
ror OF BALTIMORE, T H E OFFICIAL ORGAN OF ARCHBISHOP" 
GIBBONS. 

"EPISCOPAL NOMINATIONS." 
Rev. Patrick Corrigan, rector of the Church of Our 

Lady, Hoboken, IN. J., has received a letter from Rojne 
informing him that his pamphlet on "Episcopal Nomina-
tions" has been formally permitted to circulate in that 
city by Cardinal Jacobini, Secretary of State. An edition 
in the Italian language has appeared at Florence and one 
at Rome. Secular papers and even some sky-rocketing 
Catholic journals may attempt to make a sensation out of 
this, but well-informed Catholics, who know the history 
of the Church, although they will take a keen interest in 
the progress of the dicussion, will also calmly recognize 
that it is only an ordinary phase of Church history which 
has often taken place in various countries. The simple 
question is, will the changes proposed by Father Corrigan, 
whom all admit to be an earnest and gifted priest, be bene-
ficial to the welfare of the Church in this country ? Cer-
tain it is, as Bishop England pointed out fifty years ago, 
the Church has lost and is losing to-day millions and mil-
lions of her children. 

Now, what is the cause of this 1 It cannot lie in the 
Church, because she is divine and naturally attracts man. 
It cannot lie in the noble army of prelates who have ruled 
the American Church, for we doubt if any country in the» 
world can point out in any century of its history a larger 
number of gifted and pious men among the feeders of 
Christ's sheep. It cannot lie in the priests, because, in 
their stations and measures as a body, they have been able-
seconds of the bishops. Nor can it lie in the laity, be-
cause the American Catholic ranks only below the Irish, 
in his zeal and devotion to the Church. 

Where, then, is the cause to be sought ? It would be' 
presumption for us to say, but we have weighty authori-
ty. The great dead prelate whom we have mentioned, 

.and than whom none was ever more in the confidence of 
Rome, in a communication to the Propagation Society 
and in various parts of his works, said that the fault lay 
in lack of organization. Father Corrigan, who seems to 
have studied the question deeply, says the same thing. 
Several learned ecclesiastics have criticized his pamphlet, 
but we do not think they have treated him fairly. Most 
of the criticisms have been merelv verbal, and, of course, 



ix 

any man is liable to fall into such mistakes. Let those 
reverend gentlemen go to the heart of the subject and 
point out where the fault lies if it does not lie where 
Bishop England placed it and where Father Corrigan 
places it—the absence of strict canon law. 

We deprecate anything like the wild sensation which 
unconscientious sheets will make on this subject about 
the time the council meets here in the autumn. The 
•Church is calm and deliberate in her actions; she does not 
sway about like political parties or Protestant sects. W e 
may be sure that the learned and wise prelates who as-
semble here in a few months will not be moved by any 
•extravagant writing, but will view the matter in the inter-
ests of the Catholic Church in America. Their decision, 
whatever it be or how far it goes, will be conclusive and, 
we are confident, for the best. 

T H E FOLLOWING IS FROM T H E Emerald Vindicator, OF 
PITTSBURGH, J U L Y 1, AND SHOWS W H A T T H E LAITY 
T H I N K OF T H E P A M P H L E T . 

It is not our custom to trench on our editorial columns 
ior the purpose of criticism or review of books, nor indeed 
are we going to do either-at present. The matter and the 
manner of the work pleads for itself—and with no little 
iorce. W e are free to say, however, and rejoice in the 
saying that Father Corrigan has written a timely and a 
much needed defence and eloquent plea for the restoration 
of the normal discipline of the church on the nomination 
-of bishops. Every priest and every intelligent layman 
who has a heart for the interests and a zeal for the welfare 
of the church in the United States ought to have 
this pamphlet. I t does not deal in mere theory—beating 
the air—but treats this most important, nay, absorbing 
question, with argument and facts that brings conviction 
to every honest mind that a change is absolutely necessary 
i n the manner of electing our bishops. The present sys-
tem has entailed and will further entail a heritage of im-
pediments to the progress of the church, and if not rem-
•edied, will produce, as in the past, widespread scandals 
weakening to the faith and the growth of religion. We 
said we wouldn't criticise, but we can't help giving a few 
quotations to show the flavor of the work: 

In giving the history of the suppression by the Bishop 
of Newark, N. J . , of his "Epi scopa l Nominations," (a 



part of the present brochure) he displays a moderation of 
language that reveals the well tempered spirit of the Priest, 
a t the same time he is sturdy in the defence of his Priest, 
ly character, and the purity of his motives. " I wrote 
the brochure," he says, "with the purest intentions, for 
the interests of the Church in this country, after I had 
seen the lamentable condition of the Church in Italy, 
Prance and Spain. The leading idea of the work is con-
tained in a letter of one of the greatest Popes that ever 
reigned.—Pope Leo the Great—wherein he says that no 
man should be placed as Bishop over a diocese unless he 
be acceptable to the Priests and the people." This idea 
is well developed as his zeal is enkindled against the re-
proach to the Church of great members in South America 
and Latin Europe. " Give the Churcli perfect freedom in 
carrying out her laws, that she may ascertain and select 
the men that have not only the respect, but the confidence 
and affection of their flocks. 

The Church has had enough of the men that were 
forced upon her by the civil power. She has had enough 
of the men that forced themselves upon her by their in-
trigues. She wants men to-day, and the present Pope is 
•crying aloud for such men, that can wield all the moral 
power of the diocese by commanding the heads and the 
hearts of all classes of its children." "Give us, then, a 
system of electing our Bishops that will secure this end. 
There is no need of apology for style, though his modesty 
makes one. I t is robust and manly as becomes the Priest 
when pleading for the best interests of religion crippled 
in the house of its friends. It goes for nothing to say 
that we recommend this pamphlet to the Rev. Clergy, and 
to our intelligent laity. It merits more than recom-
mendation, and whether the object aimed at be successful 
Or not, one thing is certain, and that is that Father Corri-
gan deserves well of the Church, and of the Priesthood 
that is ignored, in this country, in this one of its most 
ancient rights, the one of nominating their Bishops. 







xi 

T H E TWO F O L L O W I N G LETTERS, ONE FROM A P R O T E S T A N T 
CLERGYMAN AND T H E OTHER PROM A PROTESTANT L A I -
MAN, SHOW T H E I N T E R E S T T A K E N I N CATHOLIC A F F A I R S 
BY OUR FELLOW-CITIZENS : 

T H E R E C T O R Y , ) 

T R I N I T Y C H U R C H , H O B O K E N , N . J . T 
A U G U S T 1 5 T H , 1 8 8 4 . I 

M Y D E A R S I R : 
I have read your pamphlet through, and have been both 

interested and edified by it. I write to congratulate you, 
my fellow townsman, upon its manly, subordinate tone, 
so rarely found in oat-spoken corrective criticism, and 
upon its initial success, which must be gratifying to you 
and those for whom you have written, whatever may be 
the permanent outcome. 

It is the loyal voice within, which heard and heeded, 
aids 111 adjusting the lines and upholding the bulwarks. 

Since reading your pamphlet I feel that I know you,, 
and therefore thus write, and subscribe myself, very 
sincerely. Yours, G . C . H O U G H T O N . 

To the Rev. Patrick Corrigan. 

H O B O K E N , A U G . 13 , 1 8 8 4 . 
R E V . F A T H E R C O R R I G A N ; 

I have read every word of your once condemned book, 
which has so actively influenced Rome. 

I congratulate Hoboken upon its possession of a son 
whose headlight shall illumine a page of church history 
far down the pathway of approaching years. 

Sincerely yours, L . W . E L D E R , M . D . 



THE BISHOP AND THE PRIEST. 

For the convenience of persons who may order copies of 
of this pamphlet, the above short title takes the placo of the 
long one of the first edition, " What the Catholic Church most 
needs in the United States." An appendix accompanies thia 
issue, to show the progress and the prospects of the movement 
to obtain for the priests of this country a share in the choosing 
of their Bishops. 

Nothing published in the United States has ever attracted 
so much attention among Catholics, or has ever created such 
a complete revolution, in so short a time, in favor of any 
question of church government, a3 this same pamphlet. Tins 
is owing to the fact that it advocated a change in the manner 
of electing our bishops, that is demanded by the best interests 
of the church in this country, and more still to the fact that, 
when a determined effort was made to stifle public discussion 
on this question, Rome raised her authoritative voice and not 
only sustained the person who'had commenced the discussion, 
hut praised him for his Sacerdotal zeal. 

What a magic change the voice of Rome produces! In 
June 1883, the first pamphlet, " Episcopal Nominations," of 
which the present one is only a development—was regarded 
'by certain persons in the United States, a3 a very dangerous 
and revolutionary production, unfit for even priests to read ; 
in June 1884, the very same pamphlet, translated word for 
word into Italian, was published in Italy, was praised by the 
dignitaries of Rome, and was allowed free circulation in that 
very City by no less a personage than the most distinguished 
Secretary of the Propoganda, Archbishop Jacobini. This 
most powerful argument in favor of the cause advocated by 
the pamphlet, and the recent action of the priests of the dio-
cese of Davenport, Iowa, who of their own volition assembled 
and voted for their bishop with the subsequent sanction of the 
bishops of the province and of Rome, show plainly what we 
are to expect from the Council of Baltimore. These two facta 
complete the great work that has only begun, and crowd into 
a few short months the rich harvests that seemed only the re-
ward of a wide-spread, and active organization on the part of 
the priests for many years to come. 



.2 

I t seems to me almost a dream that a few weeks ago I was 
a thousand miles from heme on the banks of the Mississippi, 
when, with a multitude of priests from all parts of the country, 
I saw the princely Archbishop of Chicago, in presence of 
many of the very brightest lights of the American Episcopacy, 
consecrate the new bishop of Davenport, and heard the elo-
quent bishop Ireland address these words to the new prelate: 
'•You are the choice of your people, priests and laymen, for 
the high office of the Episcopate, and this fact secures to you 
the heartiest assistance in your enterprise for God's Church. 
Such an utterance has never been heard since the priests nom-
inated the first bishop of the United States nearly a hundred 
years ago. It was no dream ; it was a living reality, and the 
glad tidings came from the very heart of the noble bishop:— 
" You are the choice of your people, priests and laym.en, for 
the high office of the Episcopate, and this fact secures to you 
the heartiest assistance in your enterprise for God's Church." 

The priests, at the call of a few of their number, assembled» 
made their choice, and telegraphed the fact to Rome, and 
Rome, with the consent of the bishops, approved the choice. 
The election, of bishop Cosgrove is a great historical event in 
the church of the United States. The action of the priests in 
selecting him, with the sanction of the bishops of the province 
and the approval of Rome, is the death-knell of the old regime 
and the bright beginning of the new dispensation. While we 
of the East have been talking, the noble priests of the West 
have been making history by anticipating this action of the 
approaching Council. 

Such, then, has been the progress of the movement, that the 
great work may be regarded as already completed.' Hardly 
anything remains to be done. What, then, of the projected or-
ganization of the priests with the view of influencing the 
Council, or of appealing to the Propoganda? 

The organization I refer to may be eft'ected in a very short 
time, and it could possess a mouth-piece that would make it-
self heard all over the land, a mouth-piece that would employ 
itself in other matters than the villifying of the priests, and that 
inight use some very plain talk where now the constant stream 
of incense ascends from certain " organs " and so called Cath-
olic papers. 

It is well to remove the necessity for such organization for 
it is only in case of necessity that it would be called into ex-
istence. I am not in favor of such a move myself, if the rem-
edy can be otherwise effected, and there is no doubt but the 
Council can apply the remedy. 



.3 

The Propoganda has already decided that a certain percent-
age of the clergy shall have a voice in the election of th& 
bishops, and has left it optional with the bishops at the com-
ing Council to increase that percentage. Is it not proper, 
then, to await the action of the Council ? The bishops, unern-. 
iarrassed by such an organization, may graciously anticipate-
the wishes of the priests. The bishops are too well aware 
that an organization of the priests with the view of appealing " 
to Rome may be most easily effected, and this matter alone will 
home its due weight at Baltimore. There need be no anxiety 
as to the result of the Council; the cause is too far advanced 
to suifer from the influence of the few who regard its advocates 
as a " mere radical wing of the clergy," and whose ideas of 
government take no account of the co-operation, or even of 
the o-ood will, of the clergy. Those persons are in fact the-
reafradicals, and they will meet with little countenance from 
the really representative men of the Church. Since the-
ret.urn of the archbishops from Rome there have been very 
many and very extraordinary conversions to the doctrine-
advocated by this pamphlet. The matter is now fairly before: 
the bishops, and it is sure of receiving proper consideration. 

One word more and 1 shall have done for all time to come. 
I regard the voice of the priests in the election of the bishops-
of this country as a great blessing for the Church ; and the-
facts already referred to induce me to feel that this blessing 
has been even now granted and that it is about to be con-
firmed by the Plenary Council of Baltimore.. My own con-
nection with the movement astonished myself as much as it 
certainly astonished some of my friends, for it was purely acci-
dental, and perhaps on that account providential. 

In the spring of 1882, while in search of health, I found 
myselt in Rome, and by accident in the company of a very 
distinguished ecclesiastic, who was most anxious to obtain all 
possible information reg; rding the state of the Church in tlie-
United States. I had 'just seen France and Spain, and trav-
elled through Italy from Malta. My heart was sore trom the 
lamentable state of the Church in those lands, and it was-
made more so by the thought that such a state of things mighty 
one day be witnessed in America. I must confess 1 felt in 
very bad hmnor with the clergy of those countries, who, I 
thought, were in great part responsible for the troubles of the-
Church; and calling to inind certain ecclesiastical transac-
tions of my own land which up to that time had only made a 
passing iripression on my mind, as their remedy was not 
within my control, I felt sore even with Rome for permit-



ting them. Hence when asked my opinion as to certain diffi-
culties in the United States I answered very bluntly—and I 
must have appeared very rude indeed in the eyes of the 
•ecclesiastic—that Rome herself was responsible for them. In 
this, however, I was totally mistaken, as I afterwards learned. 
Why not, I asked, give the priests of the country some share in 
electing the bishops if you wish to end those complaints ? The 
answer I got astonished me. "Rome is willing to give the 
priests that power if your bishops ask it". I asked him to 
repeat the answer, fearing that I had misunderstood him. If 
•that be so, I said, the priests will soon heme it, for I will do all 
in my power to make this known on my return, and, if neces-
sary, do all in my power to organize the priests in order to 
induce the bishops to obtain the power from Rome. 

This is the true history of my connection with the present 
movement. 1 found that Rome was not at all responsible for 
•certain appointments in this country that caused surprise and 
pain to many, and I rejoice that such occurrences are morally 
impossible in the future. My action in the cause was one of 
pure zeal, and I feel that God has abundantly blessed it. 
Those small-minded persons who could only see contemptible 
ambition in it are totally mistaken. There never was an 
" episcopal bee" in my bonnet; I am as little affected by 
that creature as I am by any common Jersey mosquito, and 
much less. 

October 1884. 



THE HISTORY OF THE SUPPRESSED PAMPHLET, 
'-EPISCOPAL DOMINATIONS." 

I.—The normal law of the Church gives the, Clergy a 
voice in the election of Bishops—The causes that inter-
fered with the exercise of this right—The Cathedral 
Chapters. 

II.—How the Church labored to maintain this right of the 
Clergy—The kind of persons she recommended for the 
Episcopacy. 

Ill-—The condition of the Church in countries where the 
Clergy were deprived of this right a warning to the 
Catholics of the United States—This country not 
obliged to submit to old European Systems ; shé is 
entitled to a form of Episcopal Election that best"'suite 
her own genius. 

IV.—Objections against giving this power to the Priests—If 
Rome wishes to grant it, what prevents her ? If she 
does not know the condition of the country, why does 
she not send a Delegate ? 

V.—Are the Bishops opposed to giving it? Are all the 
Clergy in favor of it? Do we need Monsignori ? Many 
other questions asked and answered. 

VI.—Should the Religious Orders, and especially the Mendi-
cants, Male and Female, be restrained within fixed 
limits? 

VII.—The men we want, and how to get them. 
VIII.—The remedy of many evils—The Coming Council-

Concluding Remarks, showing that the Priests should 
get this power, because the Church needs it, the Priests 
are prepared for it, Catholics and all other denomin-
ations favor it, the genius of the country fWots ilj an 
Rome is- anxious to grant it if the Bishops of the 
country only ask it. 





T H E H I S T O R Y O F T H E S U P P R E S S E D P A M P H L E T , 

" E P I S C O P A L N O M I N A T I O N S . " 

This is my second attempt at calling the attention of my 
fellow-priests to a question of great importance to themselves 
and most seriously affecting the interests of the Catholic 
Church m the United States—the right of the Clergy to a 
voice m the Election of the Bishops. My first effort partially 
failed, owing to the suppression by the Bishop of Newark, 
N. J., in June of 1883, after a thousand copies had been' 
printed, of a pamphlet entitled, Episcopal Nominations' This 
suppression was not only a great surprise to myself, but to all 
the Clergy of the land, for the brochure had been printed and 
published in the City of New York, and without the slightest 
objection on the part of the Cardinal, who alone had any right 
to interfere with publications of his own city. 

I believed then, as I do now, that the question of Episcopal 
Nominations was a legitimate one for discussion, and though 
perhaps somewhat delicate ground for a mere Priest to tread 
upon, I felt that the Church had given me a right to tread 
upon it, and that I had maintained no position in the pamph-
let that conflicted in any manner with the teaching of the 
Church. The denial of this right of a Priest to discuss in a 
proper manner a question of vital importance to the Church 
and not directly treating of faith or morals, -without having 
previously obtained a formal license to do so, is a thing un-
known in this country, and calculated to excite alarm in the 
minds of those who are most anxious for the future of the 
Church in America. Hence, though I regarded the action of 
the Bishop of Newark as merely local, and in no way express-
ing the sentiments of the other Bishops of this land, most of 
whom are m favor of giving, at least, some say to the Clergy 
in the choosing of Bishops, still, lest his action should be taken 
as a precedent, and perhaps as a salutary warning against 

jutwe reference to this matter by other Priests, I felt it my 
duty to the Church in this country, and to the Priests in par-

t 0 P r o t e s t w h i l e 1 rendered obedience. The spirit of 
the Church, as well as the spirit of the country, allows a man to 
maintain his rights, and he is neither a good child of the 
Church nor a faithful citizen who is afraid to do so. In this 



.6 

country, at least, we are entitled to a mild i/nterpretation of 
odious laws, and so fa/r we have been used to such interpretation. 
We are living in the United States, and not in Germany. 

My declining to ask a formal license to publish the pamph-
let from Ecclesiastical authority argued no want of respect 
for such authority. I did not consider it imperative on my 
part, for many reasons; and among them, in my own mind, 
was the wish to save my own Ordinary, only lately conse-
crated, from annoyance on the part of the other members 
of the American Episcopacy, who would naturally blame one 
of their youngest brethren for formally sanctioning a movement 
that aimed at depri/oing them of their present unlimited power.. 
I thought this a strong reason at the time, and I think so 
still. Beside?, I was aware that the Bishop himself was 
actually in favor of giving this very power to the Clergy. It 
was however, a/a open question, and I had a perfect right to 
discuss it without asking his special permission, or any per-
son's permission. It would have been foolish for me to ask, 
and at least most embarrassing for the Bishop to grant, his 
sanction publicly to a measure that must have been very 
questionable in the eyes of many of the other Prelates. THE 
P A M P H L E T CONTAINED NOTHING AGAINST T H E T E A C H I N G OF T H E 

CHURCH. My references to Latin Europe were pretty sevei e 
on the want of Catholic life and zeal, even among the Clergy 
themselves, as compared with those of the United States. 
They were indeed severe, but none the less true; and I think 
a little more free use of the lancet would cure many of the 
diseases of the Church in those lands. Hiding them and 
laboring to ignore them is hardly the wisest policy. We do 
not hesitate to throw light upon dark spots in this land ; and 
the result is always in favor of the Church. This is not giv-
ing scandal: it is giving the Church fair play. The proof 
of what I said of lack of proper Catholic life in many parts of 
Continental Europe, is seen in the lives of those persons 
amongst us who come from those lands, and whose apathy 
and perfect indifference to the affairs; of the Church, and to 
the ordinary practice of their religion, awake our astonish-
ment and indignation. 

W H A T I S A I D ON F I N A N C E S . 

What I said on the question of Finances and the giving of 
a share of the management of Church temporalities to the lai ty. 
was, in my mind, simply common sense; and I think so still. 
I was astonished that any fault, could be found with it. The 
sooner, however, these very sentiments are adopted, the better 



.7 

lur the Cliurch 'in the United States. We have scandals 
enough arising from mismanagement of Church property, and 
a stop should be put to them, unless we wish the laity to. be-
come totally disgusted. Many things are lawful that are not 
expedient, at least in the eyes of the Church. Selling 
loithout necessity—and with the consequent suspicion of 
money-making attached to the transaction—graveyards, in 
which rest the bones of the noble immigrants who have built 
our churches, and whose faithful families still nobly maintain 
them, is a great crime against the Church, opening wound» 
that are hard to heal and staggering even the faith of her 
weaker children. I did not touch on such a delicate 
theme in the old pamphlet, but some persons are not aware of 
its importance. The laity who retain profonnd respect for 
God's-acre deserve the thanks of Mother Church. 

The following is an extract from what I said on finances. 
" The higher as well as the lower order of the Clergy needs 

legislation in financial matters. It will injure no diocese to 
have its accounts properly audited once a year by those in 
whom the Bishop may have confidence. The great scandals 
that from time to time shock the whole country are proof 
against any rashness on my part for making such a suggestion. 
It we want to benefit the Church, let us make laws for all that 
require them. In financial aifairs we are sadly in need of 
legislation. We do not acknowledge any right on the part 
of the people to demand an account of what use we make of 
their money, but when our inexperience, or our culpable 
ignorance, has brought 6hame and scandal on the Church, we 
very religiously insist that the people should make good the 
deficit!!! Yerily our people so far excel even Job in pa-
tience. 

" What things a man shall sow those also shall he reap." 
A time may come, and that before long, when people shall 
not ask us to give a reasonable account of our stewardship, for 
-they will leave nothing in our hands to be accounted for. 
After remedies come too late ; and we are tempting the people 
to take the remedies into their own hands, as they have 
already clone in Europe. The same cause will produce the 
same result under like conditions. This same spirit may have 
had much to do with the condition of the Church in the great 
< 'atholic countries of Europe. Formerly the Clergy had sole 
control of Church temporal affairs, and the laity had no say at 
all; now, the other extreme has been reached, where the 
people have taken all to themselves, and refuse to give to the 
Priests the very crumbs that fall from the table. It is strange 



.8 

"that we do not see the great evils that flow from the want of 
proper financial management, or if we do see them, that we 
iail to apply the proper remedies. It is matters of this kind 
that make us fear for the future of the Church, and make us 
feel th at the present machinery of the Church in this country 
as inadequate to its pressing wants." 

W H A T I S A I D ON T H E SCHOOL Q U E S T I O N . 

Owing to the tact that very few persons were enabled to 
procure a copy of the pamphlet on account of the suppression, 
there was muaf' misunderstanding as to what I said on 
the school question, and this misunderstanding was in-
creased by reason of some newspaper articles that misrepre-
sented what I really had said. I insert the following letter 
here which appeared in the New York Sun of September 4th, 
1883, a paper that has always acted most honorably towards 
the Catholic Church. As I have always been a very hard 
worker in behalf of parish schools, I am unwilling to submit 
to false charges on this score. There is no doubt, however, 
but that we are losing very large numbers of our children for 
want of proper attention to their early religious training. 
It was with the view of remedying this defect that I referred 
in a special manner to the necessity of instruction before mak-
wig their first communion, for this is neglected in many parts 
of the Eastern States, where children of all ages are allowed 
to go to th.e public schools, and are even compelled to go, since 
there is no parochial school at all provided for many of them. 
This is the evil that I was aiming at. The Western States 
are doing much better for Catholic education, though we of 
the East have more wealth. There is one thing we should 
take for granted, viz.: that the school is of far more value than 
the church, and if we fail to provide schools where our faith, 
is taught, we might as well shut up our churches. Sunday-
school is, indeed, a good auxiliary to a day-school, but as a 
substitute for such, it is a mere mockery. I have had too 
much experience in these matters to be mistaken in what I am 
saying. 

It is true I refrained from applying harsh terms to the public 
schools, and called attention to the fact that religion is not 
wirred against in the public schools of this country as it is to-
day in so-called great Catholic nations, where religion is positive-
ly driven out of the schools and irreligion is positively taught. 
Things might be much worse than they are in our public 
schools. I do not at all say that such schools are fit for Catholic 
children, .who must learn their religion; but I do say that, 



.9 

continually assailing those institutions with intemperate lan-
guage is only unnecessarily irritating the American people 
•who are most friendly to the Catholic Church; and it is cre-
•uting a spirit of opposition to the Chwrch that may pome the 
way to persecution. Such intemperance should be stopped ; 
'it is only increasing the evil. I used the following words in 
the article on the school question: " I am not, however, in 
•favor of imprudent legislation that shall cause the Priest to 
lose control of many members of his flock, and that may 
-eventually tempt the civil authorities to shut up our schools. 
We must remember that this can be done, and that hastv and 
unwise legislation may tempt many of our own Catholics to join 
the civil power in accomplishing it. This can he done; this 
has been done where all are Catholics, in Italy, France and 
Spain. It has been done in the very city of Rorre, while the 
Pope was calling on us to make education more Christian. 
Let us art with caution ; we may lose all by imprudent zeal. 
I am not in favor ot sending any child to a public school; 
but I am not in favor of legislation that will drive parents and 
children out of the Church, and increase our present difhcul-
ties tenfold." 

The following is the letter already referred to. It was not 
Written till five weeks after the charges to which it refers: 

A QUESTION IN THE CATHOLIC C H U R C H . A L E T T E R FROM THE 

A U T H O R OF T H E P A M P H L E T ON I EPISCOPAL N O M I N A T I O N S . " 

To T H E EDITOR OF T H E S U N — A W | The intelligent and phi-
losophic spirit which your paper has always manifested towards 
the Catholic Church encourages me to ask space for the cor-
rection of certain false impressions that prevail among Catho-
lics regarding a pamphlet called " Episcopal Nominations," 
addressed by me last June to my fellow-Priests of the United 
States, but which the Bishop of Newark suppressed after a 
few hundred copies had appeared. 

I wrote the brochure with the purest intentions, for the 
interests of the Church in this country, after I had seen the 
lamentable condition of the Church in Italy, France and 
Spain. The leading idea of the work is' contained in a letter 
of one of the greatest Popes that ever reigned, Pope Leo the 
Great, wherein he says that no man should be placed as Bishop 
over a diocese unless he is acceptable to the Priests and the 
people. 

Some of the laity are not perhaps aware that, according to 
^tlie law of the Church, no book written by a Catholic, no 

• matter what subject it treats of, history, geography, or even 



.10 

agriculture, may be printed without its formal approbation or 
imprimatur of the Bishop in whose diocese the printing is 
done. Any Bishop may invoke this law at his pleasure, but 
it is seldom done, except in the case of works that treat of 
faith and morals. The rigid laws regarding printing of books 
have been modified very much by custom even in Catholic 
countries. In this country there are many instances where 
books that treat even of faith and morals are printed and sold 
by Catholics without any episcopal permission or imjjrimatvr, 
and without any hindrance on the part of the Bishops. Two 
of the most distinguished Priests of the Diocese of Newaik 
published books treating even of faith and morals under 
Bishop Corrigan, who is perhaps as well acquainted with the 
requirements of the law as any other man in the country, and 
as anxious to enforce them. In fact, to such an extent has the 
law governing the publication of books fallen into abeyance in 
this country, that certain Catholic laymen well known to their 
Bishops are largely interested in the printing and selling of 
Protestant books written against the Catholic Church, and 
this, too, without any action being taken, as far as I am aware, 
against them by the Bishops. 

I know that two wrongs do not make a right. I refer to-
these facts simply to show what little reason I had for appre-
hending any unfavorable action with regard to the pamphlet. 

I do not, however, complain of the suppression of the work, 
for it is strictly within the letter of the law. I have even sub-
mitted to things in connection with the suppression which no 
law required of me, in the hope of being allowed to publish it 
with whatever eliminations the Bishop or his censors might, 
suggest. This request, however, which might have resulted 
in a clear vindication of my orthodoxy by the pamphlet itself, 
was not granted. 

To add to my ill fortune, the amount of episcopal discipline 
which the suppression necessarily carried with it, and which, 
under the circumstances, was amply sufficient to vindicate the 
law, has been largely increased by two newspaper interviews, 
the one with the V̂ ery Reverend Chancellor of the Diocese, 
and the other with the Bishop himself. The former charges 
that " some of the positions taken in the pamphlet were not 
in accordance with the teachings of the Church on these mat-
ters," and the latter that " Father Corrigan says that a Catho-
lic child may, after its first communion, attend these schools 
[public schools] with safety." I simply deny the very serious 
charge of the Chancellor, who has given no proof that such 
positions are maintained in the pamphlet. I also deny the 



.11 

other charge for there is no such proposition in my pamphlet. 
My whole life Las been spent in building ahd Maintaining 

parish schools. I have now a free school of more than 900 
children, where only a few years ago 1 found hardly half that 
number, and this, too, while I am struggling under a debt of 
more than $90,000. I did say in the pamphlet: «1 am of 
course in favor of parish schools, and, with all my experience 
of parish and of public schools, I cannot see how any Priest can 
think otherwise without betraying the best interests of re-
ligion. 1 believe that the school-house is of far more vital 
importance to a parish than the church-edifice. I am not in 
lavor of sending any child to a public school." These are my 

I I I S K i l l a™ rePresented as favoring the sending 
of Catholic children to the public schools in order to throw 
odium on the pamphlet. 
• W i l a y . sPe c i¥ emphasis on the necessity of sending 

children to parish schools, before their first communion, it was 
not that I favored sending them afterward to the public 
schools but because of the facility with which tens of thou-
sands of them are virtually compelled to go to these schools in 
their most tender years, and long before they are capable 
ol making their first communion. I am working in the 
true interest of those poor children who have at present no 
chance of even a minimum of religious training, and who seem 
to be forgotten m our cry for a higher education. If it is 
wrong to send our children to what we are calling "godless 

w l ' 7 w e c o n t i n u e to'send them? 
What I did not say in the pamphlet I say now: that either 

the ecclesiastical authorities of certain places believe the danger 
to the faith of the children attending these schools is remote 
or a great wrong is being done the children. But whether 
the danger be remote or not, at least some substitute for a 
parish school should be provided, and the children kept in it 
M t i e y acquire some smattering of thfeir religion; and then 
it we will not, or cannot, do more, let us say honestly to the 
children who have no alternative but the public school 
that our want of school room, or our lack of qualified teachers 
ior children of all ages, compels us to acknowledge a modus 
vwenfo for the grown, up boys and girls who attend the public 
schools. This would be a lesser evil, if, indeed, an evil, than 
tne present state; for we must remember that here in the East 
there are great cities where the provision for Catholic training 
is so limited that if the public schools were to close to-morro! 
there would be hardly room for the children who have not yet 
made their first communion. This is not merely in poor dis-



.12 

tricts contemplated by the instruction of 1875 from Rome, but-
in many of cjir rich parishes, where grand churches show 
what we could do, if we would, for parish schools. 

I do not say this is general in the East, but it is too oft em 
the case. It was with such facts before me that I said some-
relgious instruction should be provided for every child, at-
least before its first communion; but I nowhere advocated' 
sending children to public schools before or after their first 
communion. 

The question of education was only incidentally referred to-
rn the pamphlet, but the public was given to understand that 
its mode of treatment by me was the real cause of the oppo-
sition to the pamphlet. This can hardly be true, tor my request; 
to publish it with the question on education left out was refused. 
Apart from this, I am not informed myself of the real cause-
of the suppression. P. CORRIGAN, Rector. 

T H E CHUKCH OF O O R L A D Y OF G E A C E , H O B O K E N , A u g . 2 5 . . 

T H E R E A L QUESTION OF THE P A M P H L E T , OK T H E ELECTION OF-

THE BISHOPS BY T H E C L E R G Y OR A C E R T A I N QUALIFIED-

N U M B E R OF T H E C L E K G Y . 

TO my mind the real, though not the specific objection 
against the pamphlet, was the leading idea of the work, or 
the nomination of the Bishops by the Priests; and this objection 
seems to have had another source than the Bishop himself, for 
I offered more than once, though without a shadow of success,, 
to purchase non-interference on his part by the elimination of' 
everything to which he or his censors might object. This, to-
my mind, seemed sufficient to remove his own scruples; and) 
this the more so as the work had not been vrinted or pub-
lished within his jurisdiction y and the authority who alone 
had a right to interfere, according to the laws of the Church, 
had made no objection at all against the pamphlet. 

As I engaged in a cause that I was well aware would meet 
with little favor on the part of the Episcopacy, and also on 
the part of many of those of the Clergy who float from diocese 
to diocese, and who prefer potluck in our present imperfect 
system of church discipline, to most uncertain fortune for such 
men, under well-established law, I made up my mind to sub-
mit to any amount of annoyance that did not compromise the 
cause itself. Hence I refrained from saying a single word 
publicly or privately in criticism of the Bishop's interpretation 
of the law, or of his manner of applying i t ; and I took no 
notice at all of a very indecent personal attack by a certain 



.13 

notorious denial character, whom I had most charitably 
befriended on three different occasions. This peison is not. 
what some New York paper mistakenly called him. f a distin-
guished New Jersey Priest," though he has certainly '< distin-
guished " himself at all points of the ecclesiastical compass 
lhere is no better or more high-toned body of Priests in tae 
United States, « than the.New Jersey priests," and the attack 
of this stranger is not calculated to impair my standing among 
them. I mention this matter for the sake of those who may 
have read the article, and whose respect for the word of 
" a distinguished New Jersey Priest" may give them wrong-
ideas of the motives of the author of « Episcopal Nominations * 
and consequently may injure the cause itself. Though I had 
no reason to propitiate my fellow-Priests of New Jersey I did 
anticipate objections on the part of strangers, by inserting the. 
following opening remarks to the old pamphiet, at the no 
small risk of offending modesty, or, at least, of creating a smile 
where I was totally unknown. This is what I sa!d. and I 
trust I shall be pardoned for having said it, for, in my own 
mind, 1 am nether a poet nor a fool, as some may be tempted 

• to imagine. r 

R E V . A N D D E A R S X E : - A S I am calling your most earnest 
attention to a matter of great moment to the Church in this, 
country, and as such a course is seldom taken by a mere 
Kector, who has other things at heart than his own real or 
imaginary grievances, I deem it proper to say a word about 
mysell, before asking you to risk any loss of time in reading 
this document. & 

I have no grievance against people, Priests or Bishops: I 
feel the same interest in the welfare of the Church that you do-
yourself. I believe that I have at heart the real honor and 
glory of the Church in the United States. Hence, I have not 
the remotest idea of causing scandal; I am aware, however, 
that in matters of great importance some things are necessary 
that fail to meet the approbation of every person, and that 
very poor instruments may sometimes suffice for the begin-
nings of the noblest undertakings. 

. leaving Ireland before entering on my teens, and ordained 
m Baltimore in 1860 for New Jefsey, where I'have L e e la-
bored in the iJiocese of Newark with no small success, I can 
not be accused of having native prejudices, while at the same 
time all my sympathies are American. I have been success-
ively pastor of four of the largest Congregations of the Diocese 
one of which, St. Peter's Church, of Jersey City, Igave to the 



.14 

Jesuits* on the sole condition that they should build a college 
in the parish. The college lias been built. A labor of twenty-
three years in the very heart of great Catholic populations, 
and within one mile of the City of New York, seventeen of 
those years spent in building churches and. schools, is a guar-
antee that I am pretty well acquainted with the real wants of 
the mission. The great interest that I have always taken in 
schools, and the sacrifice that I made (humanum dico) in giv-
ing up, of my ownfree will, one of the wealthiest parishes of the 
diocese for this sole purpose, show that I am aware of the fact 
that, the question of Education is the question of questions for 
the Catholics of this country. 

I mention these matters not for any silly vanity or weakness, 
* but by way of anticipating the hasty criticisms of those who 

perhaps have had much less experience than myself, and who 
may have done very little, if any, of the real hard work of 
the mission. 

I might say more, though you may think I have already 
said too much. However, this will suffice for those who may 
have no other means of satisfying their minds as to the char-
acter of the person who presumes to address them on a matter 
which, in the ordinary course of events, seems entirely beyond 
the province of a mere Priest. 

The subject is indeed a delicate one; hut we can hardly expect 
the Bishops themseloes to take the initiative. I do not at all pre-
sume to place the matter before you in its best light. 1 am 
not capable of doing so. I simply undertake to sow the seed ; 
others, I trust, will cultivate and reap the harvest, p The mere 
preliminary step may easily be followed, if necessary, by a 
proper organization, the branches of which will extend to 
every diocese, in order to obtain the sentiments of all the 
Bishops and the Priests of the land. 

There is no better way of informing the Bishops of the real 
wants of the Church in all parts of the country than by ascer-
taining the opinions of all the Priest's, who, on account of 

* I mean that it was myself that conceived the idea of giving my parish to the 
Jesuits, and that I induced Bishop Bayley to sanction at. I may add that 
some years after that, I gave up St. Mary's Church, Jersey City, and came to 
an inferior parish in Hoboken, solely in. order to extricate Bishop Corrigan 
from the financial difficulties which resulted from the attempt to build the 
great church of Hoboken ; and after I h»d succeeded in building that 
church and had made the financial condition of the church most flourishing. 
I volunteered during the past year to go to St ffl.^wSh, and to begin 
•work a new by laying the foundation of a church. I know it is against all 
lule and modesty to Bing self-praises, but I have reason for doing so, as i 
have already remarked. 



.15 

their intimate knowledge of the people, may be regarded as 
the very pulse of the Church, whose touch tells the beatine of 
her heart That such knowledge would be a great desidera-
tum for the Bishops is beyond doubt; that it would lead to 
the adoption of the proposed measure is more than likelv 

matter rests with the Bishops,/^ it is certain 
that Kome wM grant this power to the Priests, if the Bishops 
mm m for the Wm interests of the Church in this MM 
-Lhis is a great point gained, and we should not forget it 
ihough we cannot use the words in their full significance' 
still, by way of anticipation, we may say : » Homo, locata est 
Causa finita est. 

nf̂ bentVe SÌS SÉ KÉ a11 P l a n s f o r t h e present condition . 
ot the Church and for her future prospects in this country It 
will certainly give her an element of strength which she needs 
J ust now, by securing the co-operation of a majority of the 
Priests, and consequently of the laity. This is a most serious 
point and we do not always secure it with our present system 
i t will also put an end to the many causes of discontent that 
are manifesting themselves in various sections of the country 
not only between people and Priests, but also between the 
r nests and the Bishops, for it will give us men of experience 
p. ¡SI m^sion, who are thoroughly acquainted with the 
Jrriests and the people That the wisest and most experienced 
among Priests and laity will be enthusiastically in favor of 
mieti a proposition may be regarded as a foregone conclusion : 
that some of our Bishops are in favor of it, I am certain, and it 
may be taken for granted that the whole non-Catholic popu-
lation, already so favorably disposed towards the Church, from 
the humblest citizen to the President of the United States, 
will regard with satisfaction a measure so calculated to har-
monize the discipline of the Catholic Church with the genius 
and. the institutions of this great representative country 
T o l f M W h ° f i n A f a ^ t , W i t h m e f o r g a t i n g this question, 
I can only say that I think it will be a great blessing to thè Church, and that every Priest should enter into this matter 

l Y m l t f m i n ^ r d e r t 0 8 h o w t h e B i s h°P 8 t h e real sen-
timents of the whole Church, and thus to enable them to de-
cide wisely m a matter of vital importance to us all " 
«liìhtf J r e l a t l o n 1

s J f t m 7 Bishop there has not been the 
• » I P t i M Ìe.elinS' f o r t h o u g h each took a different 
view ot the same subject, both acted most conscientiously and 

lo ^? , a t e r g° o d ? f religion. I not only submitted to what 
tne law did not require of me—in order to avoid scandal—but 

reJra/me(l jrorn taJcmg advantage of certami newspaper inter-



.16 

views in wtiich I was treated by authoritywith urmscesswy 
S T ; nay, more, I ftp restrained my,frzendsfrom « r * 
ina me sinqU word in reference to tUse mwspaver rnd _ extra,-
ZdZi Zrges, lest the remotest occasion should le gwen, to 

JU^e£rUlicly or privately, A 
alwavs manifested towards the sptntual head of the aiocese. 
Z K J S scrupulously avoided all newspaper m f a f l f c 
myself (not an easy matter under the circumstances), and 
m dered them totally unnecessary on the part of others by 
mv al solute silence, justice and charity justify me R freeing 
myse from those eitra-judicial and newspaper charges of 
h v i L advanced propositions contrary to the teaching of the 
ChurJh after having waited silently and patien ly for more 
W S t W M in t ie vain hope of their b^ng 

A letter which I received from one of the most eminent 
Cardinals of Korne, to whose judgment 1 referred the matter 
of" the orthodoxy of the pamphlet, pra ses the good spirit of 
t eau thor of the pamphlet, and has no fault whatever to find 
with its orthodox v. f t was the same Cardinal who blamed 

- ^ e " v l l e n c e ' ' of the suppression of the work. I must con-
fess that my asking ^ C a r d i n a l whether it contained any 
hiug contrary to the teaching of the Church is the only real 

I fliVtinn that I exDerienced in the whole history of the af-
Ja r '• for I felt th at I ^v as askin g the great Roman theologian 
avery silly question, and giving him most ample cause to 
L i f e at the theological lore of Uncle Sam. I took the pre-
8cau ?on however fo tell him that I did 
for my own information, or for that of the other Priests oi the 
United States. 

H o w THE P i M P H L E T WAS BECEIVED IN ROME. 

A most special providence seems to have watched over the 
litde pamphlet now so famous in the history of the Church in 
I s country and destined to influence in no small degree its 

fuuu'c history The open and manly hostility of the Bishop 
of New ark tar from injuring the caase of the pamphlet, only 
seeded to 'call the attention of all 
of this country to it, and to make it known even to the Oardi-
n a Is f)f die very City of Rome. I have every reason, then, to 
f "el f a te fu l for this result; and I have hardly any cause to 
fi.td S w h the attempts of those who employed other 
means than Uie open ones of my own Ordinary to lessen the m-
fl.rcVot- the pamph^t in Rome. T to tote rtemfrhov-
mr^eriLioZ ot my repeating so much of my ownper-
W history from the old pamphlet, a thing which some per-



.17 

sons may severely blame, as an outrage on modesty. 1 do it 
in order to 6how Home that I am not the kind m man ¡'that 1 
have been represented by a few Vho are anxious to destroy 
the real influence that, the pamphlet has produced in Rome. 
I may say with regard to the reception of the work in Rome, 
that the principal reason why I now discontinue my efforts to 
obtain a. formal approbation of the work by the Propoganda is 
the favorable manner in which it has been received in Rome, 
and my own unwillingness to cause any annoyance by a de-
cision which 1 am certain must be in my favor as to the dog-
matic soundness of the pamphlet. There WAS NOTHING IN IT 
O O N T E A E T TO T H E F A I T H OF T H E C B C E C H , and this is from the 
lips of one of the most eminent of the Cardinals of the Pro-
paganda. 

1 knew before writing the work that my advocacy^of the right 
of the Clergy to a voice in the election of Bishops would fiinl fav-
or at Rome. Rome, with her divine instincts, has the correct 
idea of what this country wants. She is not only in favor of 
giving Priests this vote, but she is anxious to give.it, and if 
she were only sure of the exact state of this country, «he .would 
insist on giving the Clergy this power. 

H o w T H E B I S H O P S E E C E I V E D I T . 

Its reception by many of the Bishops of the country,has not 
been unfavorable. There are certainly many of the most lead-
ing members of the Episcopacy in favor of giving the Clergy 
some say in the choosing of Bishops. There are, however, 
others, and they not at all the ablest, or even the abler ones, 
who are intensely opposed to it. I am not aware that a single 
representative Bishop of the whole country found fault with 
what I said in the pamphlet regarding the defects of our pre-
sent system of electing Bishops. One or two persons mis-
takenly imagined that I referred to them, and thait the pam-
phlet was dictated by mere personal motives. They are totally 
mistaken. I had something more in view than such a trifle, 
that would be quite unworthy of a Priest. I mustconfess, how-
ever, that the knowledge of certain things which only had re-
ference to one or two cases may have added to my warmth of 
expression in some parts of the old, pamphlet, as well as of the 
new one. Real love tor the Church loses respect and even pa-
tience with ecclesiastical ambition that only makes itself the 
more offensive by protestations of disinterestedness that are 
made to conceal it, and that employs the lips in loud cries for 
strict ecclesiastical discipline, while in the very act of seeking, 
through other than ecclesiastical methods or even ecclesias-



.18 

wml persons, that position which is only for those who are 
called by God through the established laws of His Church. 

If, then, any shade of such meaning manifests itself in what 
I say, it must refer to this, and this alone; and in no manner 
even to a very small number of persons. There is no more 
humbler nor more zealous body of Bishops in the world than the 
American Bishops. My meaning in the old as well as in the 
new pamphlet is, that a changed system of electing our Bish-
ops would give us men whose knowledge ot the needs of 
the Church, and whose personal influence among Clergy and 
laity, would enable them to Y i e l d a11 t b e m o r a l f o r c e 

of the diocese. We have many such men now; but there are 
many, again, who, though acting to the best of their ability, are 
unable to fulfill these requirements. I must not, then, be under-
stood as finding fault with the Episcopacy; the fault ™vnth 
the system that fails to give us the best men ; and the Church 
in this country'is entitled to the lest men; <md Priests and 
people should insist on getting them. The Priests know them 
bestyond hence they should be allowed to choose them. If it is 
wrong to advocate this, then I am doing wrong. 

H o w T H E C L E R G Y A N D THE L A I T Y R E C E I V E D I T . 

The reception of the pamphlet by the Clergy and laity was 
most enthusiastic. The hundreds of letters that reached me 
from all quarters, from Priests, lawyers, newspaper editors, 
literary men, and even from pious nuns, told me plainly that 1 
had touched the proper chord, and that I had made no mistake 
in the effect which I had intended the work to produce. Ihose 
letters were perhaps one of the most correct expressions of the 
real feeling of the Clergy and laity that could possibly be ob-
tained To give an idea of the tone of those communications, I 
will quote a few lines from one of them. It is from one of the 
most distinguished Catholic laymen in the United States. 

•« R E V . D E A R S I R — I got hold of your pamphlet yesterday, 
and,notwithstanding the heat, 1 did not leave my office until I 
read it through. I am glad to find that there is one Bnest 
in the country not afraid to speak out and make known the 
sufferings of God's Church in this country. * * * -Now, 
as you have opened the door, do not desist until you see your 
ideas carried out. May God spare you to do His holy will. 

It was, indeed, no small consolation to find the general 
verdict, not alone of the Catholics, but also of those most 
friendly, to the Church, though not of her communion, m fa-
vor of the step I had taken, and in praise of the substance, 
tone, and opportuneness of " Episcopal Nominations. 



.19 

Since the appearance of the pamphlet I have spoken to 
many of the most distinguished Priests of the country, and 1 
have not found one who did not fully agree with what I said 
on the question of electing the Bishops. I may say the same 
i n regard to many prominent laymen with whom I have spo-
ken. They all feel that our present system of nomination 
needs a change. Let the Clergy ieel, however, that proper 
exertions on their part will effect a remedy. They are most 
anxious that the really representative men of the Clergy should 
govern them ; it will he their own fault if this is not the case. 
Let the really representative Priests of each Diocese interest 
themselves in this movement, before it is too late, and what 
our own Bishops assembled at the coming Council in Baltimor« 
may hesitate to ask for us from Rome, we ov/rsel/ves, by pru-
dent amd united action, may obtain from the same Rome. 

A petition from a few of the representative Pastors of Bal-
timore, Philadelphia, New York, Brooklyn, Boston and Chi-
cago—which may be said to represent all the country—would 
have great weight at the Council and would be looked upon 
in Rome as the real voice of the Priests. There is no doubt 
but such a petition, asking a vote for the Priests in Episcopal 
elections, would be kindly received at Rome, though it may 
be taken for granted that it would meet with small favor at 
home. 

I think I have said enough about "Episcopal Nominations," 
and that it is ample time to begin the preface to the new bro-
chure. Unless circumstances should render it necessary, there 
will hardly be any future action taken to disurb the final and 
honored repose of the little production that has done much 
good, in bringing this very inportant question of appointing 
Bishops fairly before the whole Church of the United States. 
The new pamphlet will materially strengthen the position I 
took on this question by its proofs from the Popes, the Fathers 
of the Church, and General Councils. 





.21 

PREFACE. 

According lo the present mode of electing the Bishop? 
of the United States, the Bishops of the province or sec-
tion of the country to which the vacant diocese belongs 
send the names of three persons to Rome, from which the 
Pope selects the one who is to be Bishop. "Die Clergy of 
the vacant diocese hame absolutely no say at all in the matter, 
the very knowledge of the names sent to Rome being 
scrupulously kept from them by the Bishops. What the 
Clergy of this country now ask is, that the Parish Priests 
have the power from Rome of designating the three 
n a m e s — a s they have in Irelnnd—subject, if necessary, to 
the veto of the Bishops, though this veto-power is not re-
tained by the Irish Bishops. If this is not given them, 
they should, at any rate, have a sulstcmUal say in the nom-
inating of the Bishops. . ' 

This power of merely nominating which the Irish 
Priests enjoy, and which the Popes have given in nearly 
all ages of the Church to kings, has nothing to do with 
the power of creatwig or consecrating Bishops, which ̂ belongs 
to the Episcopacy alone, and which can not be alienated. 
If real active union is to be secured and maintained for the 
Church in the United States, there seems to be no reason 
why' this power should be denied to the Clergy, and every 
reason why it should be granted to them as soon as 
possible. Let me quote here what I said in the old 
pamphlet: 

•1 You may say it makes very little difference to a Bishop 
whether the Priests or the people are satisfied with his 
appointment. It makes a very great difference to the 
Church, and this fact Is making itself felt very material!y 
in many parts of the country. It is all very well to say 
that Priests and people should always cheerfully submit 
to those whom the Church has placed to rule them. This 
should be so, and would be so, and if it is not always the 
case, it is in a great measure owing to the system which 
renders it very difficult. Men are not always chosen who 
are identified with the country and with the majority of 
the people who have built up religion and who are still its 



.22 

main support. If we have a choice of plans, we should 
choose the best. The men chosen by the Priests will 
always have a majority of Priests and people to support 
them, and no matter what feelings of nationality may at 
first be felt, they will soon vanish after the will of the 
greater number shall have been made known. This is a 
representative country, and we are used to submit with-
out grumbling to the decision of the majority, so that the 
giving of this power to the Priests will tend to do away 
with feelings of nationality, and not to increase them. 
With our present system, we seldom have a respectable 
minority satisfied; and hence we create these bitter dis-
appointments that militate against the growth of the 
Church. Our present system ignores ex jprofesso the will of 
the Priests, and makes it even impossible for them to exer-
cise any scrutiny as to the moral, or intellectual, or busi-
ness qualifications of the person into whose hands are to 
be committed the destinies of the diocese. So strict is the 
secrecy observed in sending the names to Rome, that the 
very Priests who have spent themselves in building up 
the Church cannot obtain an inkling of who is to be their 
Bishop. But, perhaps, they would criticise him too se-
verely if they were to know him, and thus prevent his nom-
ination. I think the man whose character cannot stand a 
severe criticism is hardly the best man for a Bishop ; and 
X think that it were much better to prevent his nomination 
by proper representations to Rome than to be sending 
these representations when it is too late. 

" I t is thought better to stifle all dissatisfaction by 
announcing the names after the confirmation has taken 
place, when the fear of giving scandal, and the stringent 
laws of the Church governing such matters are regarded 
as proof against unfavorable public comments. This, 
however, is hardly the wisest plan, for it only intensifies 
dissatisfaction and causes many of the Priests and the 
laity to lose heart in their work, on account of charges of 
insubordination from their spiritual head, whose piety, 
and learning, and good intentions, are outweighed by his 
want of experience in the management of the great inter-
est which their prudence and liberality have given to the 
Church." 

In advocating then, the right of the Clergy to a voice in 
the election of the Bishops, I am simply claiming what 
the ancient law of the Church justifies; what the great 
changes now so seriously affecting the moral world 3A 



.23 

mand; what is most in keeping with the best instincts of 
our own country ; and what the laity, the Clergy and 
many of the Bishops regard as the most effective remedy 
lor the numerous difficulties of the American Church thiTt 
are now imperatively demanding a speedy solution. The 
question of the right of the Clergy to a voice in Episcopal 
nominations has a special interest for the Priesthood of 
the United States, where the civil power is not opposed to 
their acquiring it, as it is in some parts of Europe • and 
this interest is intensified just now by the approach of 
the contemplated Plenary Council at Baltimore. I t is 
well known that Rome is willing to grant the Clerev any 
share m the choosing of the Bishops that the Fathers 
of the coming Council may deem for the best interests of 
the Church. 

# The normal law of the Church which gives them a voice 
m such elections has been hitherto suspended by Rome in 
regard to the American Priests, owing to the missionary 
character of the country. The missionary or temporary 
lorm of government, however, is about to cease. The late 
meeting of the American Archbishops at Rome, though 
having for its object the mere outlining of legislation ne-
cessary for this change, gives us to understand, by the tone 
and the acts of the distinguished Prelates, that the Amer-
lcan Jipiscopacy is not only competent, but even anxious, if 
permitted toassume,full control of all domestic legislatura. 

It the Bishops, then, are capable of discharging their 
full obligations, we have every reason to suppose that the 
same may be true of the Clergy; and if the time has 
comei lor'the Bishops to speak out with such marked em-
phasis, it certainly has come for the Priests 

^ A e x . p r T n t P a m P M e f c is intended to show the Priests 
that they have a right to this power by the laws and the ' 
practice of the Church, and that it is their own fault if thev 
tail to obtain it in this country. Rome is on the side of 
the Clergy and she leaves the decision of the matter in 
the hands of the Bishops. Rome will find no fault with 
the Clergy for agitating this question, provided the really 
representative Priests unite in the movement and act with 
f í r r í T ^ prudence. It is a great question 
for the United States, and also for Canada. We must 
help Rome, for she wants to do what is for the greatest 
good of the Church ; and this, in the estimation of all the 
priests who thoroughly understand the Church of Amer-
ica, is the proper remedy for most of our troubles. W e 



.24 

i.rt continually calling for union among all ranks of the 
Church. This is the best means of securing this union. 

In agitating this question, I have nothing at heart but 
the real good of the Church, pure and simple, whatever 
some persons may say to the contrary. 

I am no alarmist. I am only anxious to see proper 
remedies applied to certain tendencies to disunion that 
are manifesting themselves between Bishops and W f p | | 
and between people and Clergy. If I do appear over bold 
and almost wanting in due reverence for the established 
order of things in this country, I must not be accused of 
want of proper regard for authority. My whole eccle sias-
tical career is opposed to such a charge. I have always 
anticipated the slightest wish of my Bishop. Humanly 
speaking, I am not benefiting myself in what I am now-
doing, I am not looking to self | I am aiming at the good 
of the Church—only looking to the future. My apparent 
boldness is the result of the lamentable state of the Church, 
which I saw with my own eyes in 1882, on Contmentdl Europe, 
and of the oft-repeated call of the Pope for_ stronger union 
among Catholics. Our own happy condition in this country 
may be maintained and increased by the changed mode of 
electing our Bishops. The Catholics of Europe are much 
to be blamed for their apathy in Church affairs. Let us 
seek the best means of insuring lasting nnion ; let us not 
hesitate to seek it earnestly and persistently, m season 
and out of season. This is my own state of mind, am.d is the, 
hey to what may appear to some, perhaps, mere presumption. 
I am acting honestly, and, if not much mistaken, even 
prudently. Of course, timorous people may think other-
wise ; but timorous people are much to be blamed for many 
mils that are allowed to injure the Church through fear of 
calling attention to them, «"he Pope himself has been for 
many years, as he is to-day, a prisoner where no Turk or 
heretic holds sway, in Italy itself; nay, in the very City 
of Rome; and he has not dared to appear m the very 
streets of his his own city where the robber-king ot 
Sardinia rules supreme, and insults him, with the consent 
and the applause of 27,000,000 of Italian Catholics, while 
Austria, France and Spain look on with cold indifference. 
Was there no nation to command the robber to take his 
hands off the property of the Church but the far-off and 
so-called infidel land of the West—the United States] 
" Hands off the American College ! it is the property of 
American Catholics." These were the words of the 



.25 

rS i nf l .u e n c . e d by her few Catholic subjects. 

I S S f i w i r a ff L , a t i n a
E u r ° P e t h e same independent 

spirit as we of the United States, the Church would not 
be suffering as she is to-day. Where is the hold of Bish-
Catholic ft?* C l e r ^ ° I e r laity, in these so called 
cur in i rvS U S ° f i m e r i c a t h e m e a n s of «»-

m m i S f f l g S b e ° a t h 0 l i C S C a X 6 
worn-out and anti-Christian Europe are 

have t i ^ R
n i h , e i r m ° r e t h a n l a m e n t a b l e results. Let us £25 ?i!i R E P R E S * ™ T I V E SYSTEM that is forcing itself 

irresistibly upon the whole civilized world, wherever 
there are men to rule and subjects to obey. I t i l the In-

system most m keeping with the very genius of America 

I Z T & l V f ^ ' 1 8 insist t p o n iU 
Tn*n 5 1 K i y ° l ? v e i T Priest, the right of every lay-
Let oiirsifri01* r J ' 8 end? Let us not wait too long. 
Let our superiors have patience and trust to our loyalty 
—boldness is not imprudence. Let them refuse us freedom 
to speak, even where the Church leaves us free and in a 

feSlI S i n $ 3 W e S h a 1 1 have noToicT or no 
theCatZlill S SOTS o f t h * Church-we shall be as 



.26 

CHAPTER f 

1 . T H E N O R M A L L A W OF T H E C H U R C H GIVES T H E C L E R G Y A 

V O I C E I N T H E E L E C T I O N OF T H E B I S H O P S . 2 . T H E C A D S E S 

THAT I N T E R F E R E D WITH THIS R I G H T OF T H E C L E E G Y . 

3 . T H E C A T H E D R A L C H A P T E R S . 

I. The normal law of the Church from the days of the-
Apostles down to the present time, when uninfluenced by po 
litical or other outside pressure, has always given the Priests 
a substantial say in the election of the Bishops, and has, more-
over, insisted, that no one should be made a Bishop unless he 
was acceptable to the laity. So rigidly was this law enforced 
in the early ages of the Church, that the Popes themselves 
called a man an vrit/ruder who had been placed over a Diocese 
without the choice of the Priests and the desire of the laity. 
They pronounced the consecration of such a one unlawful, and 
declared that the people were not bound to receive him, though 
he had been consecrated for their diocese : " Wullus vn/oitis 
detur Episcopus ; cleri^ plebis et ordinis consensus et destde-
rium requi/rat/ur. " These are the words of Pope Celestine I., 
and they are the sentiments of the other Popes and Fathers of 
the Church: " Let no Bishop be placed over those who are un-
willing to receive him ; it is not only necessary that the 
Priests and the people consent to receive him, but that they 
should also desire him as their Bishop." 

In the choice of Bishops, the Church, which has always aimed 
at harmony and efficiency, has ever sought the men who had 
already gained the confidence, and the affections of Priests and 
people, and had thus made them willing instruments in ad-
vancing her holy work. Though often obliged, after the first few 
centuries of her existence, to modify her laws respecting Epis-
copal nominations, in order to meet the exigencies of the pa-
gan world and its numerous semi-civilized rulers; and though 
constrained in after years, and even up to the present day, 
through fear of greater evils and loss of souls, to yield to the 
encroachments and the tyranny of Christian rulers, whether 
Catholic or Protestant, she ever reminded them of her ancient 
law and of her firm resolve to return to that law when circum-
stances would permit. This is written upon every page of her 
history. Whenever the secular power sought to influence 



.27 

or to control the election of the Bishops, the voice of Christ's 
Vicar was raised in loud protest; and'when necessary ™he 
united voice of the Universal Episcopacy spoke in the Gen 
era! Councils of the Church and defined the limits of civil Ju-
risdiction. This became necessary from the fact thatTnter-
ference on the part of the State inEpiscopal nom nation was 
coeval with the earliest Christian rulers u 

The freedom of these elections was at the bottom of nearly 
all the great struggles between the Church and the State dur-
ing what was called the Middle Ages, from the fifth To the 
fifteenth century The violent contest that rages to-day be 
tween Rome and Germany recalls most forcibly® the memora-
ble struggle of the same powers in the eleventh century? when 
fel B B S S ! t 0 fltf I V " o f Catholic Germany 
S K S B ^ t 0 t h e P ^ s t a n t Emperor of infidS 

K ^ E U E G i l l r c h 9 L
wil l in^ t 0 make concessions 

when the need of souls demands them; but the sad experience 
of the past influence of the civil power in the a p p o S e n of 

ua l lvT. i" 8 n 1 J * t f 0 ^ ° t t e n h V t h e ° W h ' «he is graS 
^ f ; 7 ¿ U n l u r e l ? r e t u ' ' n i n g t 0 the old Apostolic law which 
gives the Church and the Church alone, the a p p o i n t o r of 
her own officers. This is her right. The sp rit ofthe present L e 
is in favor of liberty; and why should not the Ch7rch be free 
• R f f f S H l S , h e r own constitution, which she has re-
ceived from the hands of Christ himself? The State has al-
r / b

S w T o d ; ° T i 0 1 t l l e , C h u r c h 5 * h a s endeavted to ab-
sorb her to divide her, and even to annihilate her • but the 
Church has ever claimed her right to exist in her own person 

ft a / 1 . r a e r e h u m a Q Po w e r- Her misPsfonis 
i u d l / n f T ' a D f l ' J 6 a l 0 D e ' . a n d n o t State, is the proper 
judge of the means for attaining that end. She insists on her 
her o °A a Tf 8 * 2 ?

m M M s N l force may deprive her of that freedom, she still continues her mission, though 
mere W e ' w . ^ f S ^ $ g | 8 t r u ^ l i n g ^ t 

2 . T H E C A U S E S T H A T I N T E B F E E E D W I T H THIS R I G H T OF T H E 

C L E E G Y . 

w T f f i Pn-S°nS - T ? Y e l r e a d ^ t 0 b l a m e the Church for all 
S S i i g T t h wi tho«t having examined the 
S w of.those difficulties. The great political power 
and wealth enjoyed by the Bishops for more than a thousand 
years, were only the indirect result of causes most honorable 



.28 

to the Church, and causes to which all the nations of Europe 
owe their present civilization. Neither the political power, 
nor its consequent wealth, was originally sought, or even de-
sired by the Bishops; and both became the occasion, if not the 
cause, of most of the troubles of the Church, inasmuch as they 
tended to separate the Bishops from the Priests, as well as from 
the people. The power and wealth of the Prelates came to them 
as marks of gratitude for the noble sacrifices which the Church 
had made in her efforts to civilize and to Christianize the bar-
barous tribes that poured themsel-es in countless numbers 
over the ruins of the old Roman Empire. _ 

The Church was the only moral power that survived the 
destruction of that great empire. To her fell the mighty 
task of taming the fierce warriors whose ideas of law and mo-
rality were regulated by the power of the sword and the voice 
of their unbridled passions; and whose contempt for letters 
was so complete that even their very kings boasted that they 
were unable to write their names. * 

Hallam acknowleges the services the Church rendered to 
civilization when he says: I The Bishops acquired and re-
tained a great part of their ascendency by a very respectable 
instrument of power, intellectual superiority. I hey alone 
were acquainted with the art of writing; and they were in-
trusted with political correspondence and with the framing ot 
the laws They alone knew the elements of a few sciences, and 
the education of royal families devolved upon them as a neces-
sary duty In the fall of Rome their influences upon the bar-
barians wore down the asperity of conquest, and saved the 
provinces half the shock of that tremendous revolution. Aa 
captive Greece is said to have subdued her Roman conqueror, 
so Rome in her own turn of servitude cast the fetters of a 
moral captivity upon the fierce invaders of the north. Chiefly 
through the exertions ef the Bishops, whose ambition may be 
forgiven for its effects, her religion, her language, in part even 
her laws, were transplanted into the courts of Pans and Toledo, 
which became a degree less barbarous by imitation lhe 
learning, then, the prudence, and the piety, of the Bishops, 
was the foundation of the great European nations of to-day ; 
a debt which most, if not all, of them, seem to forget. 

Those great results, h o w e v e r , were not accomplished with-
out much spiritual loss to the Church. The great secular re-
sponsibilities were followed by the wealth with which the va-
rious nationalities rewarded the great services of the Bisliops, 
and this wealth in its turn was followed by a loss of zeal on 
the part of the Bishops, many of whom became more inter-



.29 

ested in the affairs of the State than in those of the Church. 
The office of fSishop became, in course of time, on account of 
the great wealth attached to it, the object of the ambition of 
worldly-minded men. Hence we often find mere boys of fif-
teen years of age, the sons of noble families, appointed to rule 

I the Priests and the people. 
I Let us quote from Alzog's History of the Church, vol. 2, 
I p. 98 : " The evil which came upon the Church by reason of 
her connection with the feudal system will more than balance 
the good. The distinction between things sacred and profaue 
was gradually lost sight of; Ecclesiastics became the vassals 
of kings, and as such mingled with the worldly and shared 
their dissipations. Then were sown the seeds of the long and 
terrible struggle between the Throne and the Altar, the Church 
and the Empire. • Even the appointments to Bishoprics, 
which, according to ecclesiastical canons, should have been 
the result of the concurrent choice of the Bishops of the prov-
ince, and of the Clergy and laity of each Diocese, were wholly 
dependent upon the arbitrary will of princes. "Whatever 
qualifications men so appointed may have possessed, they 
were not, at any rate, such as would recommend them as fit 

' persons to preside over the destinies of the Church. They 
were courtiers, and not Ecclesiastics. Having received their 
appointments, they were hastily promoted to Holy Orders, 
without regard to the rule of the Church, requiring the obser-
vance of the interstices. Moreover, as those who held land in 
lief became by this very fact the vassals of princes, such, when 
appointed to Bishoprics and Abbotships, were required to take 
an oath, not only of personal but also of feudal fealty to their 
liege lord, by which they bound themselves to serve the king 
in war, to appear at court when commanded to do so, to assist 
at his tribunals, and to remain subject to his jurisdiction. 
Again, since every free-lorn man among the Germans was 
liable to military duty, and could not enter either the clerical 
or monastic state without the permission of the Government, 

| it was necessary to recruit the ranks of the Clergy from 
among those who, formerly serfs, had been set free by the 
Church. Owing to their former inferior condition, they were 
often kept in a humiliating state of dependence by Bishops, 
who owed their appointments to the favor of princes-, and who 
were naturally proud of their rank and fortune." This gives 
us one of the strongest reasons why the power of taking part 
in Episcopal nominations was gradually withdrawn from the 
Priests. At first the ambition of their immediate rulers, 
lay as well as ecclesiastical, denied them a voice in Episcopal 



.30 

elections, and then having deprived them of their rights, they 
so degraded them morally and intellectually, that even the 
Church herself was obliged to withold from them the exercise 
of this power, or entrust it only to a few of those best quali-
fied-to use it, such as the members of Chapters. Those who 
are opposed to giving the Priests of the JJmted States the voice 
in Episcopal elections should remember that arguments drawn 

from the fact that the Church in past ages withheld or limited 
this power of the Priests, are very poor indeed when applied 
to the present day and especially to the Priests of this 
cowrdry. And yet the arguments we hear to-day rest on 
this very foundation, though we are neither " serfs" nor slaves, 
nor dependent upon any secular lord. So great were these 
abuses, that Pope Pascal II. in the beginning of the twelfth 
century, in a letter to. Henry V. of Germany, offered to relin-
quish all those worldly honors and emoluments of the Bishops 
to the secular power on the sole condition that the secular au-
thority should abandon all claim to the appointing of Bishops. 
Most of the Bishops, however, were content to remain in com-
parative servitude to the civil power for the sake of the bene-
fice or revenue attached to their offices. 

So far had the State gone in its encroachments on the 
Church, that kings insisted on the right of nominating every 
Bisiio,- within their dominions; and son e 01 them went so 
far as to prohibit even the ordination of Priests without their 

Permission. Even the Pope himself had to pay a fee to the imperors of the East for his election, until it was remitted 
by Constantine IV., in 668. The Emperors of Germany 
claimed, and, on some occasions, exercised, the right of con-
firming the election of the Pope. Even Gregory VII. himself 
awaited the confirmation of his election from Germany, say-
ing, as Alzog tells us : " I have indeed been elected by the 
people», but against my own will. I would not, however, 
allow myself to be forced to take Priest's Orders until my elec-
tion should have been ratified by the King and the Princes of 
Germany." This is the last time, however, that the election of 
a Pope was ratified by an Emperor, for Pope Nicholas II. in 
1059, just a little before the election of Gregory YII. had pub-
lished a decree w. ich restored the right of election to the 
Romansj but with a most important change. " The Cardi-
nal Bishops," says Hallam, (" seven in number, holding 
sees in the neighborhood of Rome, and consequently suffra-
gans of the Pope as Patriarch or Metropolitan), were to 
choose the . upreme Pontiff, with the concurrence first of 
the Cardinal Priests and Deacons (or Ministers of the Parish 



.31 

Churches of Rome) and after wards of the laity. * * * It was in-
tended as far as possible to prepare the way for an absolute 
emaneii ation of the Papacy from the Imperial control." 
This decree, which had been inspired by Gregory VII., who 
had been the principal adviser of Nicholas II. was soon fol-
lowed by the great struggle between Gregory "VII. and Hen-
ry IV. regarding the claim ot the latter to the appointment 
ot Bishops. 

3 . T H E C A T H E D K A L C H A P T E E S . 

The great triumph of the Pope restored much of her an-
cient freedom to the Church in Episcopal appointments ; but 
the state of the Church, consequent on centuries of ecclesias-
tical usurpations on the part of the State, rendered it difficult 
if not impossible, as I have already remarked, to take full 
advantage of the liberty thus restored. The influence of 
Bishops who had been obtruded upon the dioceses, and who 
were more fitted for the court or the field of battle than the 
spiritual care of souls, had lowered the moral and the intel-
lectual standard of the Clergy. 
| The condition of Priests and people, combined with the de-

sire of the ruling classes to retain as much as possible of 
their old hold on Episcopal appointments, is responsible in a 
great measure for the increased influence which the Cathe-
dral Chapters now began to exert in the election of Bish-
ops The Chapter consisted of the Priests who were attached 
to the Cathedral, and who formed, the Council of the Bishop 
The election by the Chapter was . to a certain extent a com-
promise between the strict law of the Church and the secular 
power ; in fact it may be considered a mere continuation of 
the secular power in another form, for the rich, revenues at-
tached to the office of Canon or member of the Chapter was 
such a tempting bait for thenoble families, that none but men 
of distinguished birth were allowed to become members of the 
Cathedral Chapters. The influence of the Chapters in the 
eleventh and twelfth centuries was almost supreme ; but even 
then, when they aimed at . ngrossing the election of Bishops 
to the exclusion of all other Priests, we find the Church in 
the second Council ofLateran 1139 insisting on the right ol 
others than mere Canons or members of the Chapter to be 
present on the occasion of the nomination of Bishops In one 
of the decrees of that Council the pronounces anathema 
against those Canons who should presume to choose a Bishop 
without having first summ ned other " persons of piety " to 
be present, or who should dare to exclude such persons from 



.32 

the election when present, By using the words I persons of 
piety'' the Church meant, as the interpreter of the mind of 
the Council tells us, other Priests who had the real interests 
of the Church at heart, and whose zeal for the election was 
not the mere personal interest which they felt in the promo-
tion of this or that family. This shows the real animus of the 
Church ; for though the necessities of the times, whether mo-
ral or political, constrained her to limit the active power of 
election to a few Priests, s ie still retained the old principle of 
requiring others to be witnesses of the exercise of that power. 
It is to be sincerely hoped that a change in our present form 
of electing Bishops in the United Sta es will not consist merely 
in giving the few members of a Chapter a voice. This 
would, indeed be a very sorry representation of the great 
masses of the Priests, and would only serve to irritate them. 

The facility with which the temporal rulers manipulated and 
controlled the Chapters, not only of the great Metropolitan 
Churches, but even those of ordinary jurisdiction, left them lit-
tle cause to regret the triumphs which Gregory VII., Pascal II., 
Innocent III., and other Popes had gained for the liberty 
of Episcopal elections. The extraordinary concessions of later 
Popes, and especially of Leo X. to Fr. ncis I. of France in 1517, 
of Adrian YI. to Charles V. of Spain, and of Pius VII. to Na-
poleon, in the present century, left little power to the Chap-
ters and made the secular power once more almost supreme in 
the nomination of Bishops. 

It must, however, be borne in mind that, in all these conces-
sions, whether the result of. violence or otherwise, the Church 
only yielded when she saw that her retnsal might entail greater 
loss of souls. To save souls she adapts her laws to the ne-
cessities of every age and every nation. Whether she gave to 
particular persons, or to particular nations, a limited or a com-
plete control over the nomination of her Bishops, she always 
did so with the view of more effectually accomplishing her 
divine mission ; and she never failed to remind those individ-
uals and nations that the concessions were exceptions to her 
normal law. by which the Church, and the Church alone, had 
the power of selecting her own officers. The Church has never 
lost sight of this in her Councils ; and when her hands were 
free she lias always shown her preference for that ancient and 
Apostolic system which gives the Priests a most important in-
fluence in the nomination of her rulers. 



.83 

C H A P T E R I I . 

H O W THR OHUJRCH A L W A Y S L A B O R E D TO M A I N T A I N T H E R I G H T 

OP F I WESTS IN T H E E L E C T I O N F O E B I S H O P S , A N D T H E K I N D 

OF M E N S H E R E C O M M E N D E D FOB E L E C T I O N . 

_ From general remarks, however, let us come to par-
ticular ones, and see how the Church, when free, always 
allowed the Priests a say in the election of Bishops In 
the original pamphlet I did not cite a single proof from 
history, for the reason that I was addressing Priests as 
I am now, and I knew that their familiarity with the his 
tory of the Church rendered it unnecessary for me to 
enter into details. Besides, I was addressing American 
Priests, and I employed the arguments taken from the 
practical and pressing wants of the Church here As 
some ofj the Priests may not have paid special attention 
to the question of nominating Bishops, or may have for-
gotten many of the facts in connection with this subiect 
I will recall some facts which will not only confirm what 
I have already said, but will also show that men were 
selected for the Episcopacy, not alone by reason of their 
moral and intellectual excellence, but because they were 
well known to the people over whom they were to rule 
and had their confidence and affection. They will also 
show that it was a thing unknown in the early ages of the 
Church, and condemned by the Popes when first at-
tempted, to send men from distant or obscure places, no 
matter what their other qualifications, to govern Priests 
and people who had had no voice in the election. 

No one, of course, will accuse me of attempting to claim 
tor the Priests any power essential to the making or con-
secrating of Bishops. This belongs to the Episcopacy 
alone, audit is a right which the Church can not give to any 
power, since it belongs to her essentially. However, the 
Jrriests claim a real power, or privilege, if you may choose 
to call it so, given them by the Church herself. The 
¡state enjoyed a right in the nominations ; but it was not a 
right which naturally belonged to the State. The State 
was given the power, because it forced the Church to 

£V 



.34 

grant it, as a lesser evil; the Priests, as Priests, received it, 
not through any political necessity, but by divine conces-
sion This moral though not essential right ol the Priests 
the Church may suspend, as she has done from time to 
time, but when free, she has always given her Priests 
permission to exercise it. I 

We see a most striking proof of this in the very days 
of the Apostles. Then, the Apostles had certainly the 
absolute power of appointing Bishops. Did they always 
insist on exercising that power« Let us see the conduct 
of Peter himself in the choice of a successor to J udas. 
Read the first chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, and 
you will find that Peter called upon the brethren to se-
lect a proper person. " I n those days," says the Scrip-
ture "Pe te r rising up in the midst of the brethren, 
said'(now the number of persons was about one hundred 
and twenty-) * * * * * Wherefore, of these men who have 
accompanied with us, all the time that the Lord Jesus 
came in and went out among us, beginning from the bap-
tism of John until the day wherein he was taken up Irom 
us one of these must be made in witness with us of his 
resurrection. And they appointed two, Joseph, called 
Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. Now 
the living of the power by Peter himself to a hundred and 
twenty persons, who, certainly were not all Bishops, shows 
how early the head of the Church sought the men who 
had the confidence of the flock. g 

In the very first century Pope St. Clement tells us that 
the Bishops should be elected by the " Universal 
Church" " Comprobcmte universa ecclesia" St. Cyprian 
in the third century says the same thing, and tells us that 
it is according to "divine tradition and Apostolic law : 
"Quod apud nos quoque et fere per provincias universas 
t&TiCf/U/P '' 

In the Sixth Canon of the Council of Nice, held in 325, 
we are told that the Bishops should be elected m accord-
ance with the Canons of the Church. 

Pope Julius I., in referring to Gregory, who had been 
consecrated and forced upon the people of Alexandria by 
the influence of the Imperial Court, calls him an intruder, 
and among other reasons he gives for calling him an in-
truder, he mentions the fact that this Bishop Gregory had 
never been asked for by the Priests, and that he was com-
paratively unknown to the people : " Quia necmultisnotus, 
nec a presbyt&ris, nec ah episcopis, nec a populo postulatus fue-



.35 

rat. " This is another proof of what the Church requires, 
that the Bishop should not be taken from some obscure 
corner, that he should know and be known to his flock— 
the shepherd should know his sheep and the sheep should 
know their shepherd. 

Listen to what the great St. Athanasius says on the 
freedom of Episcopal elections, in speaking of Constan-
tine the Great, who seemed to forget that his jurisdiction 
did not extend to God's Church, and assumed powers 
which he afterwards relinquished at the command of the 
Pope : ' ' He, seeking to alter the laws—to dissolve the Constitu-
tion of our Lord transmitted to us by the Apostles, and to 
change the customs of the Church, invented a new way of ap-
pointing Bishops ! He sent them to an unwilling people from 
strange regions, even fifty days' journey o f f . " 

Alzog in his History of the Church, Vol. 1, p. 275, 
speaking of the nominations of Bishops during the first 
three centuries says: "The election of Bishops, as be-
came the importance of so great a dignity, was sur-
rounded with circumstances of great formality and jealous 
precaution, and we may add only those of advanced age, 
of proved virtue—ascetics and confessors of tried cour-
age having been usually preferred—were selected to fill so 
responsible an office. They received their appointment 
conformable to the example of the Apostles in the case 
of Matthias, through the suffrages of the Clergy of the 
Episcopal City, which however required the concurrence 
of the provincial Bishops and the consent of the people." 

W e have seen the testimony of Pope Celestine I. that 
no Bishop should be placed over people against their will : 
' ' Nullus invitis detur Episcopus." Innocent I. in 417, in 
his letter to the Synod of Toledo, Spain, says it is against 
the discipline of the Church, to send Bishops from ob-
scure places to rule over people who did not want them : 
" Qui contra populi voluntatem et disciplina} rationem Evis-
copum locis abditis ordinaverat.'''1 Ep. III., c. 2. 

The history of the Church is full of these instances. 
Let us, however, cite the testimony of Leo the Great, who 
ruled from 440 to 461 : " On no account should those be num-
bered among the Bishops who ha/oe not been chosen by the 
Priests, and asked for by the people, nor consecrated by 
the Bishops of the province, with the approbation of the 
metropolitan."—" Nulla ratio sinit, ut inter episcopos bar 
beantur, qui nec a olericis sunt electi, nee a plebe expetiti, nec 
a provinciaUbus cum metropolitani judicio consceratiThe 



.36 

same Pope in the same letter uses these most remarkable 
words - " When thereis question of electing, the Chief Priest, 
let him be preferred above all others who is required by consent 
of both Clergy and people; and if the votes should be equal, 
let the Metropolitan prefer him who has obtained most affec-
tion, and is a man of greater merit; only give heed that none 
shall be chosen who are not wished or asked for ; lest the people 
being t h w a i ted should despise and hate their Bishop, or l est 
they should become less religious than is fitting, not having 
obtained him they desired.'' These are the words of one 
of the greatest of the Popes and one of the greatest ol the 
Saints, and they are the very essence of what I said on 
Episcopal elections in the pamphlet. And yet, strange 
to say it, is not considered by some, who are neither Popes 
nor canonized saints, a proper or a wise thing to advocate 
such sentiments to-day! Témpora mutantur/ They are 
the very sentiments thajb should be taught to-day, and it 
is the absence of that same principle in the election ot 
Bishops—at least in regard to the share the Clergy 
should have in elections—that creates that lamentable 
state of things against which the Pope wished to guard 
the Church. In repeating what the great Saint taught, 
we are not introducing revolutionary principles into 
the Church, we are not trying to Americanize the Church 
by advancing democratic demands on the part of the 
Priests, hitherto unheard of, and that would tend to de-
stroy the Church of America. No, but we are advocating 
what we believe before God is the wisest system for the 
Church in this country, and the only one that can main-
tain a firm union oí Bishops, Clergy and Laity, and place 
the Church fairly before the American people, by giving 
it that representative character which every interest ot 
this country demands, and which is in no way opposed to 
the general laws of the Church. 

It is unnecessary to enter further into proof ot th i s 
matter, for history is full of such proof. The Church h a s 
always favored the giving of this power to her Priests, 
but the State, for reasons assigned, has always opposed it. 
There is no State to oppose it in this country ; hence we 
should exercise it. Shutting out Priests, as well as 
people, from any share in such elections, is not the com-
mon law nor the traditional practice of the Church ; and 
there is no valid reason why such a practice should be 
continued in the United States. 



.7 

C H A P T E R i n . 

T H E CONDITION' OF T H E C H U R C H IN C O U N T R I E S W H E R E T H B 

C L E R G Y H A V E B E E N D E P R I V E D OF T H E I R R I G H T S , A W A R N -

ING TO T H E CATHOLICS OF T H E U N I T E D S T A T E S . 

Some persons may say that the condition of the Church in 
Europe and in South America as well as in the United States, is in 
direct contradiction of my thesis, since the evils of which I com-
plain exist only where the priests actually have a voice in the 
election, as in Europe and South America, but they do not exist 
at all in the TJnitea States, where the priests possess no say in 
the election. What I have already said regarding the merely 
nominal power of the Chapters is sufficient answer to what is said 
of other lands; and as to the United States, the growth of the 
Church has not been in consequence of our present defective 
system, but in spite of it. 

It was the results of the old hold of the State on the ap-
pointment of her Bishops that caused me to lament what I saw 
with my own eyes when lately in Europe, and to say many 
things in the pamphlet, perhaps to the scandal of some persons, 
who are totally ignorant of the real condition of the Church 
there. What I said was true, though not at all flattering to the 
zeal of the clergy of Italy and Spam as manifested in the re-
ligious training of their people who are now flocking to this 
free country. The clergy of those lands are not at all aware of the 
mortification the Catholics of the United States experience when, 
notwithstanding all their efforts to defend the Catholics of Italy 
and Spain from the attacks of infidels and heretics, they are 
compelled to acknowledge, in the sad spiritual condition of 
those who come here, a want of zeal in those who are respon-
sible for their religious training. 

Did I write in a spirit of hostility to the Italians ? God for-
bid. I have spent many a day within the past few years (not 
an easy task for a man that is now not far from fifty years of • 
age and much occupied with the cares of a large parish) in study-
ing their language solely with the view of benefiting the four 
hundred Italians that are in my own parish. I have even ap-
plied for an Italian priest who is willing to devote himself 
solely to the ca/re of his own cov/ntrymen—a very difficult 
thing tojind. 



3í5 

We have, of course, many very zealous Italian priests among 
us, especially those who came here many year« ago but we 
need more of this class for the tens of thousands of Italians 
that are coming here. 
Italians at the port of New York City alone. Why do not 
some of the numerous Monsignori who have been honored^for 
Zir qreat zeal for the Church come here and help us to save 
ThZ ZZpsh Ld blood that are actually pe^ng fvr want 
of spiritual food,? No adequate provision is made for the 
Se l f Italian immigration. With proper care at home and n 
Siis country, thereis no race that could give us more real help 
in the great battle that the Church is waging against mfidehty 
than this same most intellectual Italian race. g | g | could not 
the labors of the Italian clergy in this country be confined to 
their own countrymen, since they so sorely need religious care ? 
Are thiy not worthy o'f care? í h e English-speaking people do 
not need Italian priests at all. 

I have been always friendly to the poor Italians who are cast 
upon our shores without friends and without any knowledge of 
our knguage. I do feel that more cou d be done for them by 
?heir own' priests whose zeal for their preservation does not 
seem Tal l L á to the zeal of 

Bead the following extract from the New York Itmes ol 
last year: 

" A MISSION FOE T H E I T A L I A N S . - T H E E E V . C . STAUDEE'S SUC-

CESSFUL W O E K AMONG HIS C o U N T E Y M E N . 

•in the Grace Protestant Episcopal Chapel, H É g g K W 
150 Is,alian children attended the Mission Sabbath-school, su-
perintended by the Eev. C. Stauder, of the Itahan Evangehz-
feon Society of the Protestant Episcopal Church. The chii-
£ were as a rule neat in their appearance^ and even to 
the smallesr joined in singing the hymns m their own 
language to an accompaniment on the organ arranged from 
moK' ic and especially the Gregorian chants. When 
9 B was dismissed about 40 adults organized an Italian 
branch of the Young Men's Christian Association, its Secre-
tary Elbert E. McBurney, being present for that purpose. Dr 
Staudei said that the need of such an organization among his 
country men, the Italians of New York, had long been felt, and 
that the Eev Henry. C. Potter, Sector of Grace Church, and 
" f h s congregation, had promised aid and encourage-
ment Dr. Staudlr said he had been engaged in this work m 
New Y c S City, under the auspices of the Protestant Episco-



m 

pal denomination, for nine years, and that the Italian Evangeliza-
tion Society, from the time of its inception eight years ago, 
had accumulated a membership of Y00 adults and 300 children. 
Of these a few were in good circumstances; the others were 
poor, being mostly laborers, but he did not know of a single 
case of destitution among them. These people were all born 
Roman Catholics, buf had not practised that religion here. 
There are, he said, between 50,000 and 60,000 such people in 
the city, and only one Roman Catholic church." 

I do not blame the Clergy so much as the old hold of the 
State on the Church which has rendered the Clergy less zealous 
and consequently less influential with the people. I said in 
the old pamphlet: " I t was the'power of the State that con-
trolled the appointment of the Bishops. The.Bishops could not 
move without the will of the Civil Power, and the Priests, as 
well as the people, were totally dependent on the Bishops. The 
people had hardly any will of their own in political matters, and 
hence when their power could have saved the Church in those 
lands, they were unable to use it, and they allowed themselves 
to be trampled upon by a few desperate men." 

Had Clergy and Laity had the same zeal for religion that we 
have in the United States, such a state of things as we now see 
in a purely Catholic country would be impossible. We see in 
Italy a most deliberate attempt made by the so-called Italian 
Government to make the Church the merest creature of the 
State. It is the old tyranny of the Civil Power trying to ab-
sorb or control the Church. The attempt of the Italian Govern-
ment is the most shameless that we find in history. Not satis-
fied with having deprived the Church of all her temporal 
power, it seeks to rob her of the little property that individu-
als have given her for special purposes, in order to deprive her 
of every means of exerting her divine mission. Seeing the 
vitality of the Church and its own failing strength, it confis-
cates the property of the Propaganda in ordeir to deprive the 
Church of the power of resisting its persecution ; and in order 
to force the Church to labor to maintain the same robber-power, 
it promises her the interest on the property it has stolen from, 
her. It is perhaps well for the Church that the Government 
has done this desperate deed, for it reveals to the whole Chris-
tian world the hypocrisy of that wicked power, and also the 
true nature of the terrible persecution that the Church is under-
going in Italy. 

If there is any faith left in Catholic Europe, she will mani-
fest it by offering protection to the head of God's Church. It 
is the Propaganda to-day; it will be to the great works of art 



.40 

to-morrow; and the next day the Yatican itself, and perhaps 
the very temple of St, Peter. If such things can take place m 
what we should consider the most Catholic of nations, are 
we to he blamed for crying out in time for whatever means is 
best calculated to keep the people so united to the Church as to 
make it impossible for demagogues to betray them, or to come 
between them and the Church ? Let us interest the laity m 
Church matters if we are to rely on them in time of need. I 
remember reading in 1882 a pastoral letter of one of the Bish-
ops of Southern Italy in which he complained most bitterly ot 
the fact that the laity failed to render adequate help to the Clergy 
in the great battle in which the Church is now engaged m 
Italy, leaving, as lie expressed it, the army of the Church to 
consist only of officers (Bishops), and without any soldiers 
(Laity) at all to do the fighting, and excusing themselves on 
the plea that they were not Priests. 

We must encourage that personal interest which American 
Catholics manifest in Church affairs, and not drive them to in-
difference in such matters, as we are now doiqg in many parts 
of the land, by refusing them a proper share in the manage-
ment of those very temporalities that their own liberality has 
placed in our hands. . 

But let us return. The growth of the Church m Europe and 
South America is necessarily slow on account of old political 
systems, but the freedom which she continues to enjoy in this 
land has caused her to advance like a giant rejoicing in his 
course. The Church receives full protection from the law here, 
while she is persecuted in most of the so-called Catholic Coun-
tries. The American system is protection to all, but favor to 
none, a good system under the circumstances, when we consider 
the great variety of sects that exists here. But though the 
State in its corporate capacity does not formally recognize the 
Catholic Church as the religion of the land, still, the American, 
people are most favorably disposed towards her. 

Considering the great political influence that this country has 
exercised, and continues to exercise, over Europe, and the won-
derful growth of the Church within its vast territory, we are 
not calling on our imagination when we say that this is des-
tined to be the great Catholic power of the world, and that its 
influence may yet compel old worn-out Europe to restore 
Mother Church her long-lost freedom. The best instincts of 
the Americans are Catholic. Americans admire the Church 
when the.y see her in her native splendor, and apart from the 
shadows that political complications have cast upon her in other 
lands. The secret of much of the blame we throw on foreign 



.41 

Clergy for failing to instruct their people properly, is the 
fact that those people are great stumbling-blocks to this con-
version of the American people, by their want of zeal when 
they come here. It is unnecessary to say that I do not include 
the Irish in this class, for they are the mainstay of the Church 
in .this country; the Germans too, are good, and so are the 
English Catholics; but, as a general rule, we find very few practi-
cal Catholics among the male members of the populations that 
come from Latin Europe. Practical Catholics, especially among 
the men, who can explain the doctrines of the Church to others, 
are what we need for the conversion of the American people, 
who are easily attracted to the Church by men whose lives are 
not a contradiction of their faith. It is no exaggeration to say 
that most of the men who come from that portion of the Cath-
olic world to this country fail to edify us, and are to a great 
extent undoing our own hard work. It would be no harm to 
the American Church if such men could be kept out of this 
country totally. 

Every effort should be made to foster the good spirit of 
America, for she has been most friendly to the Church, and if 
concessions have been made in past times to countries to satisfy 
their national prejudices, why should we not even anticipate 
the wish of the United States by harmonizing the laws of the 
Church with the instincts of the country, when these instincts 
are in favor of the Church ? We have everything in our favor, 
and we still hesitate to take advantage of it. It is so long 
since "people and Priests ha/ve been considered in connection 
with, the election of Bishops in other lands, that we hardly feel 
willing to trust them now. Yet the di/vine instincts of Home 
are ever prompting her to fait hick on her old Apostolic law, 
that cements all branches of the Church firmly together by giv-
ing her faithful Clergy the exercise of their ancient privilege. 

She is-willing, nay, 6he is anxious to restore this privilege 
to-day in the case of the Priests of the United States, provided 
it may be done withprudcnce. There is no difficulty then, I 
repeat, on the part of Rome ; the only difficulty lies with our 
own Bishops. 

Let us be wise in time ; let us have confidence in the Priests, 
and proper regard for the laity. The condition of the Church 
on the continent of Europe and in South America, where the 
voice of Priests and people in Church matters has been stifled, 
should speak to us as the very warning voice of Heaven. It 
may be too late, if we fail now to take advantage of the happy state 
of things in this country. "We may call on the Clergy and on 
the laity to interest themselves in Church matters, as the 



Church is now vainly doing in Italy, France and Spain, when per-
haps our own legislation may have rondured them either unwill-
ing or unable to do so. The cry for representation is heard all 
over the world: why not lioarken to it, when it iB in harmony with 
the fundamental laws of the Church, and when it tends to gi ve-
ils the very men that the Church so lamontably needs, in the 
wonderful changes that are taking place in the moral world t 
We want fair play for the Church. I ara not inciting to insub-
ordination on the part of Clergy or people, as some weak-
minded persons may imagine and proclaim. 

N o R E A S O N W H Y T H E R E S U L T OF O L D E U R O P E A N P O L I T I C A L 

COMPLICATIONS S H O U L D HE IMPORTED INTO TIIIS N K W L A N D . 

If the state of civilization in Europe of the past, or of 
South America of to-day, necessitated certain forms of disci-
pline tending to curtail the freedom of the Church and to 
weaken her influence over her own children by suspending or 
withholding their right to a voice in the choice of their ecclesias 
tical superiors, there is no such state of society here, and there' 
is, consequently, no reason for submitting to its effects. We 
ha/oe good reason, then,for objecting to that form of govern-
ment, and for demanding one that is more in keeping with the 
freedom of the Church and the freedom of our own country. 
Our present form of government is, as all agree, only tempo-
rary, now, if a change is to be made, we want the permanent 
form to favor tho normal law of the Church, which gives the 
Priests a substantial say in Church affairs. Tho Priests in 
America without the aid of tho State, have made a now order of 
things, or rather, they have brought things back to their old 
status, when Bishops, Priests and Laity were animated by one 
spirit—tho spiritual good of tho Ohurch. Thoy should have 
a voice in Ohurch matters, and their earnestness in this is only 
a proof of their zeal for the glory of tho Ohurch. It would be 
a sad day for tho Ohurch when tlie Priests and tho Laity of tho 
United States should manifest in Ohurch matters the apathy 
that is witnessed in the lands referred to, The change we ask 
Is in conformity with the very spirit and laws of the Church, 
and it is in harmony with the fundamental principles of our 
own country—representationThis last argument should not be 
ignoroa. The groat American Republic has lean m theory and 
in practice most favorable to the Catholic Ohurch. Are we 
not standing in our own light by )hesitating to adopt this prin-
ciple of representation f ; 

In tho old pamphlet, I used these words : " Those who are 



able to BOO the drift of tilings in this oountry know too well 
that we are beginning to lose, to some extent, our firm hold on 
the laity, and that much of the fault must ho attributed to our-
selves. Our newspapers and the Clergy themselves are con-
stantly telling us that tho children are showing less loyalty to 
the Church than thoir parents. We ourselves are sowing the 
seed, and the harvest must follow. 

Give us, however, large-minded men who are capable of 
seeing and controlling those causes, and the danger to the 
Church will soon be diminished. 

If persecution comes to the Church in this country wo shall 
never have to blame tho American people ; it will begin, as it 
has already begun in Italy, France ana Spain, among the chil-
dren of the Church. 

There is no other country in the world whore tho masses of 
tho people have more reverence for religion, or where the non-
Catholio and educated classes are so favorably disposed 
toward the Catholic Church, than in the United States. If 
wo fail in this country, wo deserve to fail, for a fairer field, 
and on so grand a scale, has never boen opened to tho Church 
from the foundation of Christianity. 

Is tho Church equal to the task ? Of this thore can bo no 
doubt. Tho Church, however, must get fair play from her own 
children. She must bo allowed to oxert all her divino power 
if she is to gather its millions into her fold and to atono for 
tho IOSSOB she is sustaining in the onco groat Catholic coun-
tris of Europe. 

Thoro is no question of tho real loyalty of tho laity of this 
oountry to Rome. They aro tho very llltramontanos of tho 
U1 tramontanes, but they have a business-like way of doing 
things, and they want to see tilings done in a business-like 
manner. They want tho best means to the end. It is a 
healthy sign of tho growth of the Church in this land to see 
tho laity talcing an intonso interest in tho appointment of our 
Bishops. What a contrast to the laity of other lands, that 
treat the affairs of tho Church with cold indifference, and 
where tho Bishops consider themselves fortunate if they aro al-
lowed to appear in pubUo without being insulted. 



Vt 

CHAPTER IY. 

OBJECTIONS A G A I N S T G I V I N G THIS P O W E R TO T H E C L E R G Y . — I s 

R O M E I N F A V O R OF G R A N T I N G I T ? I F S H E W A N T S TO 

K N O W T H E N E E D S OF T H E C O U N T R Y , W H Y D O E S SHE NOT 

S E N D A D E L E G A T E ? 

Rome is certainly in favor of giving the Clergy a say in the 
election of Bishops; there is no doubt on this point. In 1870, 
when the American Bishops were in Rome, this very ques-
tion of giving the Clergy a share in the election of the Bish-
ops was proposed to them by the Propaganda. Archbishop 
Spaulding was then at the head of the American Hierarchy, 
being in the See of Baltimore, and, in consequence of his 
having often written to the Propaganda while merely Bishop 
of Louisville, urging'it to give the Clergy a voice in the elec-
tions, the Propaganda thought as Archbishop of Baltimore 
he would influence the other Bishops of the country in favor 
of the Clergy ; but strange to say, he himself voted against it. 
This was enough to discourage Rome. 

It is an easy matter to show why Rome does not wish to take 
any independent action in American affairs as long as there 
is hope that the local authorities may be induced to effect the 
change. Rome is proverbially slow because she is very wise. 

The question with her is not, whether the Priests have a 
right to vote in the election of Bishops, but whether the time 
has come for the exercise of this right. She must be_ sat-
isfied as to the steady normal growth of the Church in a 
country before she applies her permanent laws. The progress 
of the Church with us has been as great a surprise to the re-
ligious world as the growth of the Republic itself has been te 
the political world ; and it has taken even Rome herself some-
what by surprise. Hence, Rome is waiting to see whether 
our o-rowtli is natural, or the result of some accidental, can so O 7 
that soon must cease. 

W H Y D O E S S H E NOT S E N D P E R S O N S H E R E TO A S C E R T A I N 

T H E T R U E S T A T E OF T H E COUNTRY % 

The United States, politically and religiously, are a mystery 
to foreigners. It is morally impossible for Europeans to 



.45 

understand this country unless they reside here for some 
years and speak the language. A Representative from Rome 
would find it impossible to form a correct idea of the condition 
of the Church here without a perfect knowledge of the language. 
He would be at the mercy of his own countrymen, whose 
knowledge of our language, as well as of our country, is ne-
cessarily very limited. He would be much astonished, if in-
deed, not much scandalized, according to his European notions, 
to hear Priests and people talking with a freedom regarding 
the affairs of the Church that is unknown, and that would not 
be tolerated in Latin Europe; and. yet, he would be equally 
astonished and edified to find that this very freedom was the 
result of pure love for the Church, and that it came from, men 
who were willing to suffer even martyrdom, for the faith. In 
this country, all classes take a personal interest in Church af-
fairs ; not so, however, in Europe. 

We heard much of late about the coming of a Papal Dele-
gate, and we were making up our minds to give him a right 
royal welcome, when, lo ! <we were informed that Rome had 
changed her mind ! Some weighty reasons must certainly 
have operated to cause Rome to waver in her resolution. 
On her part, the only reason was her anxiety to do what was 
best and most pleasing to this country. The change was cer-
tainly made to meet the wishes of the American Archbishops 
then in Rome, who were of the opinion that the Church in 
this country is sufficiently developed to legislate for its own 
practical wants. This action of the Archbishops seems to 
strengthen the demands of the Clergy, who claim, that the 
Church in this country is so fully developed as to warra/nt the 
introduction of Canon Law. 

It was mere newspaper talk to say that there were any 
" national reasons " against the coming of a Papal Delegate to. 
this country. rlhere are no "national reasons" against his 
coming, any more than there are such reasons against Arch 
bishop Gibbons acting as Papal Representative at the opening 
of the projected Council in Baltimore. Not alone the Cathc 
lies, but all donominations, would welcome a Papal Delegate 
to our shores. 

The Church is not what she was thirty years ago, when 
Archbishop Bedini came here; nor does tlio same blind 
prejudice exist against her. She is to-day a great moral power: 
yes, I may say, the greatest moral power in the land; and 
her influence is not only felt but respected by the American 
people of all religious denominations. The very sects that 
thirty years ago were most bitterly opposed to her, and that 



.46 

.laughed at and despised her so-called pretensions, are to-day 
loud in their praises of her ; and some of their leading men re-
gard her as the only consistent Christian Church, and advise 
Their disheartened followers to range themselves under her 
banner in the great battle against infidelity and immorality. 
The few tha|t hate the Church to-day must fear her. There 
are no " national reasons," then, on the part of friends or 
foes, against the coming of a Papal Envoy. 

But, perhaps, it was intended to send a Delegate, in the 
capacity of Nuncio, to the Government at Washington, as a 
mere Civil Representative, or Politico-religious Representative 
of the Pope? No such thing was thought of. He wa9 simply 
to come in n purely religious capacity, to preside over the 
council, to examine into the general condition of the Church, 
and to settle such matters as now claim the special attention 
of the Propaganda. There certainly were no national reasons 
against the coming of such an one. 

The will of the Archbishops was the only " national rea-
sons"that existed, or that is likely to exist against the coming of 
a Papal Delegate. Our Bishops are certainly in favor of Home 
Rule, and Rome shows that she is most willing to grant it. 
The action of our Bishops at Rome, in this regard, was very 
decisive, and I may say even somewhat startling, to the Clergy 
of th is country, as it certainly must have been in a much 
greater degree to the authorities at Rome. I' twas, however, the 
proper and honest'action for the Church in this country, and 
Rome recognized it as such. Home Rule and Rome Rule, is 
what the Church in this country need ; but we must not push 
Home Rule too far. We must encourage Rome to come here 
in order to see the land with her own eyes. There is one 
thing we must not forget in connection with the coming of a 
Delegate to this country, when an effort is about to be made to 
bring the Church of this land into harmony with the strict dis-, 
cipline of the Universal Church : that his presence could in no 
manner add to the supreme power which our Bishops already 
possess, but that it might materially add to the power <f the 
Clergy. Whether this idea has anything to do with thé so-

^ called " national reasons " against the coming of a Delegate, 
at least in the minds of some few members of the Episcopacy, 
I would not venture to assert. 

The firm attitude of the Archbishops with regard to Amer-
ican affairs, and which has been sanctioned by Rome, forms a 
precedent tor the American Clergy, whose equally earnest re-
quest to be allowed their full canonical share in the saine 
Home Rule is only a proof of their enlightened zeal for the 

t. 



.47 

greater welfare of the Church. If we are very much In 
earnest in calling the attention of Rome and of our own Bish-

, ops to this point, we do not feel that our action should create 
much surprise, for if the authorities at Rome leave the matter 
entirely in the hands of the Bishops, it is to be feared that 
they will manifest little inclination to share their power with 
the Priests. If the Propaganda were thoroughly acquainted 
with the real state of the Church,in the United States, it 
might give at one day's notice, the power ashed by the Priests, 
and the Bishops of the country would not make the slight-
est objection. 

Rome still thinks that the body of Bishops in this country 
have somewhat the politico-religious influence that the Bishops 
have, or that they formerly had, in old Catholic countries 
where the State controlled the nominations, and where, conse-
qently, the power of the State was in part represented by the 
Bishops. Hence she is afraid that any independent action of 
hers with regard to the nominating of Bishops, or any' other 
very important measure, might create dissatisfaction in all 
ranks of the American Church from the sole fact of its fail-
ing to find f amor with the Episcopacy. This misunderstand-
ing of the real, influence of the Clergy and people in this 
country gives our Bishops a wonderful power at Rome, where 
the Bishops are regarded, as they should be, as the full ex-
pression of the will of Clergy and Laity. This should be so, 
and would be so, de facto as well as de 'jure, in all respects, if 
the Bishops were chosen by the Clergy. But ,perhaps l am 
going too far. I am only, however, giving a reason for the .fact 
that Rome hesitates to take independent action in the matter of 
allowing the Priests of. this country a share in the election of 
.Bishops, though she is undoubtedly in favor of their exercis-
ing it. : 

! The coming of' a Delegate who could speak our language, 
'would have much influence in removing, this misunder-
standing and obtaining proper recognition for the great part 
whicli belongs to the Clergy in the affairs of the American 
Church. It may not be out of place to quote what I. said in 
raie old. pamphlet on this point. 

' -A i things are in this country, all. the 'Bishops,: un&tf, but' , 
apart from the Priests and the peep ¿e, who ,wilh ns are a unit*,-
could not cause Rome ,any dnnoyancer,eyei\ if so inclined, for 
any measure, w| patter how much , opposed to their will, that 
Rome should ihinfcproper to. enforce.. J' The only sources-, from 
which any tipuble pan, arise 'c{re fy&'Pifcesis apdjlie pe^UA'yj'ho 
hold towards the Bishops in this countryj at least in a finan-



.48 

rial poinkof view, somewhat the relation that the civil power 
holds towards them in Europe. Here the Bishops depend 
upon th i voluntary offerings of the people and upon the per' , 
sonal efforts of the Priests, whose zeal may increase or dimin-
ish those offerings at will. The person on whom the growth of 
ths Church in this country depends mainly, is the Priest. I 
am simply stating the condition of things in the United States. 
There is not, as far as I am aware, the same Btate of things in 
any other country. This exceptional state of things is hardly 
understood outside of this country, and if Rome were 
thoroughly aware of it, there would be one great step made 
towards securing the power of nominating the Bishops for the 
Priests." 

It is the Clergy that have actually made the Church what she 
is in the United States, and strange to say, they have no more to 
say in legislating for the interests of the same Church than the 
inhabitants of South Africa. T H E I R ZEAL GATHERS U P T H E 
F U N D S THAT BRING CONSOLATION TO T H E H E A R T OF T H E Holy 
Father in the midst of his own ungrateful countrymen, and 
yet the mere Priests have hardly any channel of communica-
tion open between them and the Propaganda. Their voice can-
not make itself heard. As we have no Papal Representative 
here to whom we could open our minds without reserve, 
were it not wise to give us some means, 6ome easy and trust-
worthy means, of giving expression to our wants ? The absence 
of a Delegate, and the absence of any and every American or 
even English speaking person, in and around the Propaganda, 
cuts the American Clergy off practically from all direct commu-
nication with Rome. 

It is strange that the English language lias not more attrac-
tions for some of those ecclesiastics that could use it to such 
advantage for the Church of this land. What a godsend it 
would be to some of our American Priests, who may not talk 
Italian or French, or only imperfectly, to find, even among 
the assistant clerks in the Propaganda, one or two persons to 
whom they could write, or with whom they might freely con-
verse in explanation of matters that perhaps had necessitated 
their traveling so many thousand miles from home. Looking 
at things, as I thought, practically, but as others may judge, 
impertinently, I wondered why a few of our American Col-
lege young men could not be retained even as assistant-clerks 
in the Propaganda, after their ordination. It would certainly 
be a great convenience to American Priests, and they would 
fully appreciate this favor on the part of the Propaganda, which 
would gain much more than the trifling expense of a mere 



.49 

nominal salary of a few young men. The person should be an 
American who speaks Italian, but not an Italian who speaks 
English. It would do more good in another direction; it 
would certainly put an end to that matter to which I referred in 
the old pamphlet, and for which one or two persons in the 
United States, and not in Rome, are totally responsible. The 
words I used were these: " Notwithstanding all our extraor-
dinary growth, notwithstanding all our extraordinary resources, 
and notwithstanding our oft-repeated determination to bring 
the Church of this country under strict ecclesiastical dis-
cipline; notwithstanding all this, the Laity and the Priests, 
and the very Bishops themselves, of the great American Church 
ha/oe to depend upon ike enterprise of a pious lady convert at 
Rome for the ¡first authentic information of the appointment 
of the Bishops for this country." 

"We do not blame the lady ; but we are certainly inclined to 
find fault with those one or two prelates without whose influence 
& female could never have obtained such recognition, and but 
for whose influence, at least, one English-speaking ecclesiastic 
would have been assistant-clerk at the Propaganda. It is sur-
passing strange that some of our Americans who are devoutly 
scrupulous and punctilious in matters purely ecclesiastical, 
should not be more anxious than they are in confiding eccle-
siastical matters to ecclesiastical persons !! ! The matter to 
which I now call attention has occasioned much unfavorable 
comment in all ranks of the Church in this country, among 
Laity and Clergy, and even among the Bishops ; AND IT SHOULD 
B E STOPPED AT ONCE. " Non tali -auxilio, nec defensoribus istis 
tempus eget." 

I am not ignorant of the great importance of this 
matter or of the great delicacy of touching i t ; but as long 
as those who are responsible for it fail to see it in its proper 
light, we are justified in calling the attention of Rome to it; 
and Rome will put a stop to it. The blame is on the American 
side, and we must all feel annoyed that blame should be 
attached to any one, and especially to those whose influence is 
by no means insignificant, and who may be a most demon-
strative element in the coming Council, since they are firmly 
opposed to giving any share in Episcopal elections to the Priests. 
Those persons should remember that the Priests are the proper 
persons to be relied on in all ecclesiastical matters; and that by 
employing other channels they are not only injuring them-
selves personally, but also the Church. 

Rome will* give us all the fair-play we want, but kome must 
q-'t fair-play, for herself. She is anxious to ascertain the true 



.50 

state Of the Church in this Great .Republic ; let us tell it to her 
ourselves, and not p&rmit a small clique of a few individuals, 
qt even a pious lady, to do all the talking for us. 

It is a great pity that some of the great men of Rome, and 
especially of those who. have control of the affairs of the 
American Church, do not come here even m an unofficial 
capacity, in order to learn what Rome is so anxious, to know. 
A >f ew years' travel of such men would do infinite good, i here 
is no doubt but the warmest and most enthusiastic welcome 
would be given them in all sections of the Great Republic, is 
it not wortk trying? Let one.of Home's greatest men come 
here, such as Cardinal Parocchi, who has so many extraordinary 
qualities to render his visit a,great blessing to the United btates. 
Rome's most loyal children will give him as warm a welcome 
here as any Prince of the Church has ever received m Catholic 
lands; and perhaps in after years they may congratulate them-
selves on having seen at least one. Pope whose presence had 
honored the Great Republic. The great gain to the American 
Church and to Rome herself would well repay the incon-
venience of such a visit. Let us see more* of Rome, and let 
Rome see more of us with her. own eyes. 

í s i / i «á'¡¡.¡ív.'ví -' '•• •i'-íin-í;... • .. 

- j . i a . . J . a j , i>íi ovs y/; • • ' '. ; ;" -• 



.51 

C H A P T E R V . 

OBJECTIONS CONTINUED. 

T H E B I S H O P S A R E T H E O N L Y P E R S O N S Q U A L I F I E D TO A D V I S E 

R O M E ON THIS P O I N T ; A N D T H E B I S H O P S A R E O P P O S E D TO 

T H E G I V I N G OF THIS P O W E R , T H E C L E R G Y A R E N O T A L L 

I N F A V O R OF I T . M A N Y O T H E R O B J E C T I O N S M A D E A N D 

A N S W E R E D . 

I was saying that Rome must knoW the condition ot the 
country before making any serious changes. The question 
naturally arises i ere : Who are'to give Rome the proper in-
formation? Some, of course, will say that the information 
must come from the Bishops, and from them alone, and that if 
they are opposed to the change, this should end all discus-
sion of the matter by Priests or by anybody else. 

We must remember, however, that we are not discussing 
an article of faith, and that where mere judgment and practi-
cal experience and love for the Church are required, the 
united voices of the Clergy and Laity and of many among 
the Bishops must have great weight. There is no doubt but 
the voice of the laity is entirely in our favor ; and the people 
whose goodwill has always been sought in the appointment 
of Bishops should have this concession granted them. 

Iri this country, where the interests of Priests and people 
ha/oe been so identical, the people a/re willing to leave their 
choice to th judgment of the Priests. In giving the Priests 
the power asTced, you gvde the people all they desire in the 
United States'. While granting, then, the great force of the 
negative voice of, say, most of the Bishops, for mere argument's 
sake, the united voices of so many others are certainly suffi-
cient'to mak6 them reflect seriously on the prudence of with-
holding a right which nothing but extraordinary reasons will 
justify. 
. I t is human nature, and we all share it to a great extent, 
no matter how high we climb the ladder of perfection, topart 
reluctantly, or, at least, very slowly, with power, and espe-
cially when long possessed. It may, of course, be alleged that 
it is equally human to desire.-power, and hence, that the 
Clergy are. in f.ivor of obtaining a .voice in the election qf 



.52 

their Bishops. There is, however, this difference, that one 
side is withholding what belongs to the other, and that the 
Clergy are only asking what is* their right and what is guar-
anteed them by the laws of the Church. If mere weight of 
judgment be taken, I think the verdict is in favor of granting 
this power to the Priests, for we must not forget that the 
i udgment of the Bishops in this matter is simply the judg-
"ment of persons who a few years ago were themselves mere 
Priests. 

W O U L D A L L THE P R I E S T S F A V O R THE C H A N G E ? 

I do not presume to say that every Priest would favor it, 
for this would be morally impossible, considering that many 
of them have lately come from other lands, where such a power 
does not exist, and where political considerations render it 
impossible for many years to come. There is no doubt, how-
ever, but a vast majority would vote for it. All those of the 
country, 01; ordained for the country, or who have become 
identified with the country from long residence, are in favor 
of it. There is no doubt but some of our so-called American 
Priests would object to such a change. I mean Priests who 
call themselves Americans, but who are only a short time in 
the country, and whose conduct as reported 11 Rome forms 
one of the greatest obstacles against entrusting the American 
Priests with the power of electing the Bishops. It is strange 
that many of our Bishops manifest partiality for such men ; 
perhaps on account ot obtaining them already ordained with-
out expense to the Diocese. If the matter were thoroughly 
examined, it would be found that most of the real complaints 
against the fitness of Am. rican Priests come from these very 
source. These men would not only oppose any measure tend-
ing to establish strict law, but it would be a very easy matter 
to induce them to send a petition to the Council at Baltimore 
protesting against giving the power of Episcopal noriiinations 
to the Clergy. K ep this class of men at a distance, and the 
American Priests Will enjoy a better reputation at Rome. 
We have to bear the sins of others. 

T H E C H D R O H IS NOT S U F F I C I E N T L Y D E V E L O P E D I N THIS 

C O U N T R Y TO J U S T I F Y SUCH A C H A N G E . 

There may be a few exceptional places in the Far West or 
Southwest where the temporary or missionary law may still 
be leftin force; but theie is no other part of the world where 
the Church is in a more flourishing condition than in the 



.53 

United States. To us in this country, and especially to 
those of us who know how matters are elsewhere, it seems 
preposterous to attempt to prove this proposition. It we are 
to count only practical Catholics, New York City is the most 
Catholic city in the world. Philadelphia and Brooklyn m 
this respect will compare with the greatest cities of Continen-
tal Europe. There are more Catholics m the Chty of JSew 
Fork than there are inhabitants in any city of Italy. 

What do we lack I Absolutely nothing We have the 
faith, the zeal and the firm attachment to the bee ot reter 
that are not surpassed, and that are hardly equaled, by any 
other Church of Christendom. Churches and other manifesta-
tions of religion abound, and are arising daily as if by mira-
cle. And yet, forsooth, we are not fully developed to justify 
the establishing of the regular law of the Church!!! No ; we 
must submit to the old missionary and un-American system, 
against which the old pioneer Priests protested—a system good 
enough, perhaps, a hundred years ago, when Priests were very 
few Ind when congregations were mamly composed ot the 
half-savage Indians of the forests; but entirely inadequate to 
our growth of to-day. 

B U T W I L L NOT T H E G R A N T I N G OF SUCH A P O W E R T E N D TO 

E X C I T E TOO MUCH AMBITION AMONG T H E P R I E S T S ? 

Granting, for argument's sake, that a few of our city Pastors 
take it into their heads to spend a little extra time in dispens-
ing hospitality to their fellow-Priests from the country, with 
thf double view, if you will, of showing that they possess the 
ordinary virtues of a Priest, and. a least, one ot those required 
of a Bishop, such ambition will harm no one. Should our 
city Pastors, however, presume too much on the verdancy ot 
2 r country guests, they are more likely to become he 
laughing-stocks, than the Bishops of the country The plan 
of voting by the Priests renders mere tudividuai-diplomacyoX 
no avail The best man in this case has the best chance. Be-
sides, the Bishops may retain the veto power, and thus render 
any s'uch ambition ineffective. 

Not so, however, with our present system, which makes it 
possible to awaken ambition that may destroy the best quali-
fces of men, otherwise most worthy, by involving them m a 
career of diplomacy that banishes for ever the filial love and 
reverence that should alway attach tot he spiritual head of the 
Diocese. The new plan, as I >iave said, makes it morally im-



.54 

possible for the choice to depend virtually on one or two per-
sons; who, years in anticipation of the events, inform a certain 
person of their intention of elevating him to a certain position, 
and who, having secured his own active co-operation towards 
his own election, are responsible for a course of action, ren-
dered necessary, indeed, for the success of their mutual 
scheme, but hardly pardonable in secular politics, and cer-
tainlymost contemptible in the eyes of God's Church. With 
our present plan this is possible; with the one suggested, it 
is not. 

N E W T I T L E S . 

The Priests ask this power, not through ambition, but solely 
for the benefit of the Church. Anything that tends to cre.te 
unworthy ambition among the Priests should meet with no 
encouragement from any side. And for this reason it is with 
real pain that we see an attempt made to introduce axong us, 
of late, titles and distinctions hitherto unknown, and certainly 
without apparent usefulness to the Church of this country, 
and calculated more than anything else to lay the foundation 
of that same foolish and silly ambition so much apprehended. 
It is a question whether such dignities have done any real 
good to the Church even in aristocratic lands where they are 
60 numerous ; and it is more than questionable whether they 
will benefit the Church in this republican country, where 
such honors, at least at the present time, are more likely to 
create a smile at the expense of their possessors than to awaken 
reverence among their fellow-Priests. 

Rome is not over-anxious to confer such honors on Priests 
of this country unless asked to do so. No Priest of the United 
States has ever asked for those distinctions, and it is little less 
fthah a strain on his humility to accept them when informed 
by his Bishop that he has asked aud obtained them for him. 
The Americans are most practical people, and they wish to 
see the cui-hono of all things. It seems to them that such hon-
ors are likely to injure the old Apostolic and democratic 
spirit of the American Priesthood. 

We do not covet honors, nor do we grudge the highest hon-
ors that the Church can confer u] on our really distinguished 
men, but we cannot view with indifference the introduction 
of distinctions that must, as a matter of course, extend to 
many whom we may not regard as deserving of them as our-
selves. Such honors are practically calculated to compel us 
to feel an inferiority, without any corresponding benefit to 
the Church. The greatest blessing a Church can have is a 



.55 

high-toned,, .self-respecting clergy. We have this. Why, 
then, attempt ito introduce castes among us? Who are re-
sponsible for this? If Rome really understands that the 
Bishops, the Qlergy, and even the Laity, are unanimously op-
posed to the necessity or the utility of introducing here what 
the Priests, consider a most odious and invidious distinction, 
she will soon put a 8to,j to it. 

We are proud of true mental ability, and hence we honor 
those men who have gained a D. D. in a public contest. 
These are the only titled men'that we need, and the real Mon-
signori of the Church in this land. • , ; 

The typical American Priest ,is neither selfish nor--ambi-
tious, but he is unwilling to be forced to acknowledge an. in-
feriority for which there is no''rais9P,.fl'®tre ": '' 
aufc nullus,".,is his. motto ; Either;- a -Bishop, or.a simple. 
Priest." He labors, as a yery .Apostle^ never once casting a 
single thought on the honors and distinctions so well known 
and so much' prized by foreign ecclesiastics. His only real 
ambition is the hard work of the mission, and as far as the-
mere worldly distinction is concerned, it makes very little 
difference to him whether lie wears the red hat of the Cardi-
nal or the humble garb of a Knight of the Holy Sepulchre., 
I am aware that this language may be very rude., indeed, ac-
cording to some, but I know that the sentiments I express are 
those of the whole country. 

The .Church needs many-things, but she certainly does .not 
need this. Those who are responsible for this new mode of 
honoring our Priests are hardly doing the wise thing for the 
Church; and it is to be hoped that some of our shrewd far-
seeing fathers of the coming Council may give them a polite 
hint not to ash for any more Monsignori, at least for a very 
long time to come. 

" Psincipiis obsta, sero medecina paratur, 
Cum mala per longas convaluere moras." 

L E T W E L L - E N O U G H A L O N E . 

This is hardly a Catholic or an American principle. Things 
are not well-enough for the Church when they are easily sus-
ceptible of improvement, and when circumstances render this 
improvement imperative. Matters are not at all well-enough 
as they are now. This hardly requires proof for those who see 
beneath the surface. It would not be prudent or profitable to 
spread the proofs before the public in a pamphlet. A few of 
the most glaring needs of the Church have been referred to 
because they are already too well known. 



56 

T H E C H U R C H HAS P R O S P E R E D U N D E R T H E P R E S E N T SYSTEM, 

ANT H E N C E W E SHOULD NOT C H A N G E IT. 

The growth of the Church has not been in consequence of our 
present imperfect form of government, but in spite of it. It is 
the hard-working apostolic Priest under the guidance of the 
equally hard-working and zealous Bishop that made the Church 
what she is. The argument that holds the plan is best because 
the Church has flourished while it was in existence proves too 
much, since the same reasoning would abolish all Clerical 
Retreats, all Synods, all Conferences, all Bishops', Councils 
and many other old-fashioned requirement4 of the Church, 
simply because more than a few of our Bishops get along with-
out them, and their Dioceses are said to be most flourishing. If, 
however, matters do flourish (?), or at any rate seem to flourish, 
without those grand old safeguards which the wisdom of 
mother Church has thrown around the Bishop for his own sake 
as well as for that of his Priests and his People, is there any 
reason to suppose that affairs would be less prosperous if all 
the appliances of'the Church were in full operation t The 
progress of the Church has hot been advanced by neglecting 
her laws. On the contrary, our present system, as practised by 
some, and a good number, is a comparative nightmare on the 
progress of the Church. No Clerical Retreats, no Conferences, 
no advice asked from Council from one end of the year to the 
other!!! And this is substantially the argument against a 
change!! 



5T 

CHAPTER YI. 

O T H E R R E A S O N S W H Y T H E C L E R G Y ASK A CHANGE. 

The system should be changed. It leaves the very Bish-
ops themselves at a great disadvantage. Everything con-
sidered the Bishops are doing according to the best ot 
their ability. Some of them, owing to old customs and 
precedents of the exercise of arbitrary power, which the 
absence of well-defined law rendered possible, and even 
pardonable in the past, are tempted to be a canon law to 
themselves. It was not very long ago that it was humor-
ously said by Pope Pius IX that an American Bishop had 
more jurisdiction than himself. The Clergy are in a 
qreat measure dependent on the Bishop's interpretation 
of a loosely defined law, and this is the caMseofas 
much, if not, indeed, more, inconvenience to the Bishop 
than to the Priest. I am not at all in sympathy with those 
who are ever retailing their real or imaginary grievances 
against Bishops, but who in ninety-nine cases out of a hun-
dred are the authors of their own misfortunes. I would, 
however, have the law sharply defined for bishops as well 
as for Priests. , 

i t is no easy matter to exercise supreme power with su-
preme moderation. It is a task that very few men, and 
especially men who have little experience in the art of 
governing, as some of our Bishops, are capable of perform-
ing Some are so earnest in applying all the might of the 
most odious laws, for the greater honor and glory of God, 
as they firmly believe that they seem to be totally igno-
rant of the fact that Priests have any rights at all, save to 
submit absolutely, and underpa in of being regarded .as 
most rebellious subjects, fo their harsh interpretation, and 
harsher application, of cold, formal and ill-defined law. 
The spirit of the Church is mildness itself, and a Bishop 
is expected to govern as a tender father and not as a 
maaistrate who ever holds the rod in terror em. 

I do not presume to say that the Bishops are unreason-
able or unkind to the Priests. Most of the difficulties that 
arise between them are owing to the badly defined laws 
that throw all the power into the hands of the Bishops and 
leave comparatively p^thine to the Priests. This is cal-



58 

culated to create a feeling of insecurity and a want of man-
liness in the Priest to have the hand of absolute power 
ever raised over his head, though the Church tells the 
Bishop to be extremely cautious in the exercise of that 
power. The mere caprice of an excentric person may take 
advantage of such power and destroy the future of a noble 

. worker in the Church. It is true, we are called "Rectors" and 
we are told that we cannot be moved from our Churches. 
Well, if I mistake not the Bishop has still the absolute 
power of changing a Priest from one Church to another 
against the will of that Priest, though he be a Rector. 
What is a " Rector " in this country? Nobody knows. 
We are called "Rectors," but there are no "Rectors," as. 
such, in the United States. What are we then?. 

Another matter that tells more against the so-called Rec-
tor, is removing his parish from him when the law re-
quires too much formality in removing himself, or when 
te Priest may be tempted to appeal to Rome even after 
his removal. His parish may be easily divided. A relig-
ious order may get permission to build a church in part of 
his parish. The Bishop may,' of course, assign fixed limits 
to the new parish so-called, and besides giving the Holy 
Fathers full jurisdiction over all classes of Catholics of all 
nationalities within those limits, allow them also in virtue 
of his plenary, power to baptize and to marry persons 
within their neighbor's parish, even when the neighbor 
can speak the foreign language of those baptized or mar-
ried, at least, well enough to administer these sacra 
merits; or even, when such persons speak English lari~ 
guage as fluently as-their mother tongue. This gives 
two Pastors within the same parish, a thing that, is new 
to canon law. What can the Pastor do ? Protest. What 
more 1 Nothing, absolutely nothing, I have great respect 
for the Religious. Orders, but I think-accepting a parish 
under such conditions, is injurious to the' orders them-i 
selves, as well as unjust to the secular Clergy. I would stop 
such a practice, so contrary to the spirit and the inten-
tion of the Church, which wishes every Pastor to have .his 
own sheep and that he should know them, and they should 

follow HIS voice and not that of another. 
The secular Prtests are most friendly to their brethren 

of the Religious Orders but they want every Pastor to be 
a pastor over his own flock, to have the limits of his. ju-
risdiction well defined and to be supreme within those 
limits. \ ..»;."•• 't ?.v ,,..... .... 

i 



.59 

It is no wonder some of our Female Orders have taken 
advantage of the example set thein and by their persist-
ent system, of begging in all directions, outside their 
own parishes and outside their own dioceses, against 
prohibitions of Priests andBishops, have become the tor-
ment and the very terror of the business men, the bankers 
and the merchants of our large cities, Catholics as well as 
Protestants. It is no exaggeration to say that such con-
duct is a serious injury to those very orders and that it 
lowers the Church in the eyes of strangers, many of whom 
are ceasing to wonder that such persons were driven torn 
other lands. ^ • I s t l 

The very Sisters of Charity that enter the stores in New 
York City, to make purchases, are mortified when they 
see themselves shunned by the merchants, and even the 
employes, who take it for granted that they are begging 
money. These good Sisters, however, are not ot the 
b e g i n s class, but the others trade on the esteem which 
every one has for the Sisters of Charity. Charity that 
costs the church so dearly is very questionable. 

Can nothing be done by way of controlling those Mend-
icant orders, male and female, that erect extravagant ed-
ifices without and even against the advice of Priest and 
Bishop whenever they have obtained the humblest toot-
ino- in a diocese, and who then spread themselves over 

^ . _ m 7 I
 J BfiQB >* /I« / v / v i / V 

every parish, rudely cropping whatever is green, and 
thus depriving ourselves of the voluntary offerings that 
are necessary for the support of our parish schools/ it arc '/ieueoou-/ u j <->/ vw «¡¡¡gm t̂ ~ ^ --- -
must be remembered that the secular Priests depend en-
tirely on the voluntary offerings of the laity, having no 
Church endowments, as the secular Clergy have even yet 

I in Italy, and that, if the spare cash is persistently and 
systematically drawn from our people to build and main-
tain edifices that ,are far less needed than parish schools 
and orphan asylumsj the schools and t lie asylums must 
suffer. Our schools',, in many places, are now suffering 

' from this evil $ our people are suffering from it, and even 
those charitable , people friendly to the Catholic Church, 
though not of her communion, are pestered by those male 
and female itinerant collectors or beggars. This has. ai-
ready become a crying abuse ; and it is a common thing 

• for male and female " tramps" to go from house to . house 
• soliciting money, pretending to be father so-and-so,or 

sister, so-and-so from certain, well-known monasteries or 
i ft convents. •• • • ' . ' • • • B " ' 



.60 

CHAPTER VII. 

T H E K I N D OF H E N W E N E E D AND HOW TO GET T H E M . * 

This chapter is taken word for word from the old pam-
phlet : 

"The Church in this country has begun to experience 
troubles—as to the causes and the remedies, I cannot be 
said to be ignorant. I have already pointed out some of 
the difficulties experienced in this land; how are we to 
remedy these and others that we are aware of ? The rem-
edy lies in the very power that I ask. I t will stand on 
its own merits without the aid -of arguments from the 
state of the Church in Europe. Our present system of 
nominating Bishops is a comparative drawback to the 
growth of the Church here. It aims at giving us the best 
men, but it does not always succeed. It gives us men of 
piety, and of learning, but it does not give us men of 
large experience on the mission, and of large experience 
among men. This experience is one of the most impor-
tant qualifications for a Bishop in the United States. In 
other countries the temporal affairs of the Church depend 
in a great measure on the civil power, or they have been 
fixed by former legislation, but in this place the Church 
is being built, and new developments are presenting 
themselves from day to day and demanding immediate 
solution. To meet these, to buy and sell, and exchange 
property, and to govern a large number of Priests, re-
quires a man of wisdom, of prudence, of experience, and 
of tact. The mere business qualities so absolutely neces-
sary in this country, are hardly thought of in Europe, 
where piety and learning suffice to watch over the estab-
lished order of things. There is an exceptional state of 
things in this country that requires this new element, if 
I may so call it, in the American Bishop. 

Hence, to make a man a Bishop in this country who 
has never been on his mission, is a cruelty to the man 
himself, if he feels his inability, and it is also a great in-
justice to the Church. He may be a great theologian, or 
a great saint, but he is certainly not qualified to be a 
Bishop withouti,a, thorough acquaintance with the ;dio-
cese and the Priests of the diocese. It may happen that 



.61 

a man has piety and learning and still is practically unfit 
to govern the smallest parish, not to talk of a whole dio-
cese. 

We want men who know how to govern, and also who 
know the country, and the people they are to govern. 
God has blessed his Church with such men in the past, 
and we have such men now among us. But there are 
some who are sadly wanting in these business qualifica-
tions. Some one may say: This is speaking disparaging-
ly of our Bishops, and it is very unbecoming in a Priest 
to do so. It is far from my mind to wish to say the re-
motest word in dispraise of our great and good Bishops. 
No man can be blamed for want of experience on the 
mission ; and it is not wrong to say that such experience 
is necessary for a Bishop in this country. I do not find 
fault with the Bishops personally, but with the system 
that fails to give us the best men for the present wants of 
the Church. 

T H E B E S T M E N A N D H o w TO G E T T H E M . 

The best men are those who have labored long and suc-
cessfully on the mission, and who have manifested ability 
in the management of important affairs. Now, the 
Priests of the mission are the best qualified to choose 
such men, for they know their fellow-Priests thoroughly. 
The Bishops are often unable, owing to circumstances, to 
decide whether certain persons have the requisite quali-
ties, whereas the saine persons cannot escape the scrutiny 
of a hundred or more of their fellow-Priésts. I do not 
say that a young Priest, just from the seminary, should 
be allowed to decide on the qualifications of a Bishop or 
the wants of the Church. This power should be confined 
to the rectors of Churches, even to those rectors who may 
have been a certain number of years on the mission. 

But supposing the power limited to this number, and 
supposing them to be well qualified for the choice of a 
Bishop, is it certain that they would nominate the best 
men ? I think they would. Biit would not the exercise 
of such a power lead to disorder and scandal ? I think 
not, providing always proper legislation regulates the ex-
ercise of this power. But would it not give rise to bitter 
feelings on the score of nationalities ? I think any feel-
ings arising on this account would bejaiuch- less intense 
than thbse that ar& engendered by dur present mode of 
nominating. 



.62 

, W l U ^ give rise to disorders or scandals! There mio-ht 
be some lack of order were there no laws as to the time 
place, and manner of exercising this power. It is not 
necessary that the place of meeting should be a hotel or 
tnat every Priest m the diocese, young or old, should be 
present at the nominations. Proper safeguards will pre-
vent any disorder. Take, for example, the case of Ire-
land where the Priests exercise this power; there is not 
tne slightest fear of disorder or of disedification. The 
voting takes place under the supervision of the Metropol-
itan in the Cathedral of the deceased Bishop on the oc-
c a s i o n ^ , the ' < Month's Mind.'' In this meeting, where 
everything is calculated to inspire them with the gravity 
and the solemnity of the work before them, none are per-
mitted to vote save the parish Priests. The Bishops of 
irf/r anr?, S e n e r a l l y present on account of the 
J ^ i 1 S M i-n d ' b u t wh<*her they are or not, they and 
the Metropolitan send the three names voted for by the 
rriests to Rome with their own comments as to the quali-
ncations of each person voted for. Thev may consider 
tne digmssimus of the Priests only dignus, or vice versa-
or they may advise Rome to reject all the names, and to 
appoint a person who may have received only one single 
vote at the meeting of the Priests. This influence of the 
-Bisiiops h^s very often succeeded in rendering the choices 
or tne Priests ineffective, and causing much dissatisfac-
tion in many parts of Ireland. This point should not be 
lost sight of, if we wish the choice of the Priests in this 
country to be more than a mere nominal one. The best 
way, perhaps, for us would be to nominate subject to the 
veto of the Bishops. However, this is only a suggestion. 

W I L L T H E R E C T O R S N O M I N A T E T H E B E S T M E N ? 

Are the rectors likely to give us the most pious and the 
• most learned men ? Perhaps not ; but they will certainly 
give us men with sufficient piety-and learning, and with 
™ P™d e i? c e a n d t a 6 t so necessary in this new countrv 
Il ie Church can avail herself of all the piety and of alp 
tne learning of her children without making them Bish-
ops. A man may be a saint, but a very poor Bishop ;• he 
may know how to teach philosophy in a college, .but be 

-very poorly fitted for governing Priests on the mission 
• He may govern, but,he will have,to be always making 
laws of his own, or recurring to the most odious laws of 



.63 

the Church, to enforce the obedience to what he may re-
gard as his most conscientious duty. 

The rectors will give us men for whose want of experi-
ence we shall not be compelled to apologize to our own 
people as well as to those outside the Church. 

My idea is expressed by an anecdote that is told of St 
Bernard, who was asked to vote for a prior of the monas-

? r y" x. e " r s t m a n Pr°POsed to him under the plea 
<raJ\ h e , was the most holy in the monastery, he said 

If he be the most holy, let him pray for us : " of anoth-
er, who was the most learned, he said, " I f he be thé most 
learned, let him teach us ; " but of the last who was most 
prudent, he said, " I f he be the most prudent man, in the 
name of H Lefc h l m g07«™ us." This is the class of 
men the Church needs. The Priests will give us the best 
men. The condition of the Priests in this country is dif-
ferent from that of Priests in other lands Here the 
Priests themselves have built up the Church and made 
lier the wonder of Christendom. They have done in a 
comparatively short time, what it required centuries to 
do m other countries. Their zeal and their disinterested-
ness are beyond question; and yet we ask, "Will they 
take a conscientious interest in giving us the men to rule 
the churches that are the work of their own hands?" 
There is not a more hardworking body of Priests in the 
world than our own. Give them fair play and they will 
give us the men, who will make short work of our pres-
e t numerous complaints of insubordination on the part 
01 the Clergy. 

W I L L NOT B I T T E R P E E L I N G S OP N A T I O N A L I T I E S A R I S E ? 

Well, no matter what system is employed there will be 
more or less of nationality felt, owing to the great variety 
of nations that are represented here. I consider every 
Priest an American who has been in the country from his 
youth and who has been thoroughly identified with the 
spirit of the country. With this definition of an Amer" 
lean, 1 think any system that forces men of other nation-
alities upon the country, does a great injury to religion. 
Uur present system is not at all free from this charge. 
P ® f l r a oe.no question of nationality raised, but if there 
is, let the Bishop be American. This would indeed be a 
very strong objection, if it could be urged against the 
proposed plan. In fact, the very plan we now employ 
seems to provoke this very question. We fall into a 



.64 

greater evil by trying to avoid a lesser one, for, in order 
to avoid the charge of nationality, we appoint in many 
parts of the country the very men who are totally oppos-
ed to the nationality of the majority of the Priests and 
the people of the diocese, men whose youth, whose early 
training, whose habits of thought, and, in some cases, 
whose very language, are foreign to the country. Hu-
man nature is human nature, and the Church does not 
require us to divest ourselves of it altogether; and as 
long as we live we are inclined to grumble when we think 
we have cause. W e can not blame people or Priests if 
they labor with less enthusiasm under such Bishops, than 
under those who understand and sympathize with them. 

D E F E C T S OF OUR P R E S E N T SYSTEM. 

What would people in Germany say if some American, 
with all his Yankee ways, were to be appointed over 
them, on the plea that there were a large number of Ame-
ricans in that section of Germany 1 They would hardly 
submit with a good grace, for they would think that the 
Americans might be well attended if a second Vicar-Gen-
eral were appointed for their special benefit. 

You may say that the Bishop does not depend upon 
majorities in the discharge of his episcopal functions. He 
certainly does not; but the best interests of the Church 
are consulted by keeping people and Clergy united, and 
a Bishop who has the great majority of Priests and people 
firmly united with him, may do much good, where the 
Church depends entirely on the voluntary oiferings of the 
people. 

You may say it makes very little difference to a .Bishop 
whether the Priests or the people aie satisfied with his ap-
pointment. It makes a very great difference to the Church, 
and this fact is making itself felt very materially in many 
parts of the country. It is all very well to say that Priests 
and paople should always cheerfully submit to those whom 
the Church has placed to rule them. This should be so, 
and would be so, and if it is not always the case, it is in 
a great measure owing to the system which renders it very 
di08.3alt. Man are not always chosen who are identified 
with the country and with the majority of the people who 
have built up religion and who are still its main support 
If we have a choice of plans, we should choose the best. 
The men chosen by the Priests will always have a majority 
of Priests and people to support them, and no matter what 



.65 

feelings of nationality may at first be felt, they will soon 
vanish after the will of the greater number shalihave been 
made known. This is a representative country and we 
are used to submit without grumbling to the decision of 
the majority, so that the giving of this power to the 
-Priests will tend to do away with feelings-of nationality, 
and not to increase them. With our present system, we 
seldom have a respectable minority satisfied; and hence 
we create these bitter disappointments that militate against 
tile growth of the Church. Our present system ignores 
ex prqfes so the will of the Priests, and makes it even im-
possible for them to exercise any scrutiny as to the moral 
or intellectual, or business qualifications of the person 
into whose hands are to be committed the destinies of the 
diocese. So strict is the secrecy observed in sending the 
names to Rome, that the very Priests who have spent 
themselves m building up the Church cannot obtain a ink-
ling ot who is to be their Bishop. But, perhaps they 
would criticise him too severely if they were to know him 
and thus prevent his nomination. I think the man whose 
character cannot stand a severe criticism is hardly the best 
man lor a Bishop ; and I think that it were much better 
to prevent his nomination by proper representations to 
Itome than to be sending these representations when it is 
too late. 

I t i s thought.better to stifle all dissatisfaction by an-
nouncing the names after the confirmation has taken 
place, when the fear of giving scandal, and the stringent 
laws ol the Church governing such matters are regarded 
as proof against unfavorable public comments This 
however, is hardly the wisest plan, for it only intensifies 
dissatisfaction and causes many of the Priests and the 
laity to lose heart in their work, on account of charges to 
insubordination from their spiritual head, whose piety 
and learning, and good intentions, are outweighed by his 
want of experience in the management of the great in-
thefchureh P r u d e n c e and liberality have given to 

There a,re not more law abiding Priests and people in 
the world than those of the United States. But they 
want all orders of the Church to abide by law, and it is 
m the interest of the Church that they are unwilling to 

H U M * w i t h i m P u n i t y - The Council of Balti more 
m 1866 made very wise laws for the needs.of the Church 
at that time, but many of those laws are no more observed 



66 

in many parts of this country than if they were made for 
the man in the moon. Even many of the restraints placed 
on the mode of selecting men for bishoprics have to yield 
to the personal preferences of individuals. This is an 
abuse that Rome will not sustain, and the person who 
calls^ attention to it, is working for the true interests of 
the Church, It is not at all necessary to give instances, 
bnt new legislation is necessary to render such abuses 
impossible-' 



«7 

CHAPTER VIII. 

T H E R E M E D Y . T H E C O M I N G C O U N C I L . C O N C L U D I N G 

R E M A R K S . 

What is the remedy for these and many other matters 
that may not be mentioned in a pamphlet ? I think the 
remedy will come when we get the men who understand 
thoroughly the real wants of the Church and who can 
wield all the moral power of the diocese by possessing the 
confidence of Priests and people. The Church wants such, 
men; and such men she can have by permitting the Priests, 
or at least a fair representation of them, to make, Of to 
assist the Bishops in making, the selection. The laity, 
too, have a right to some consideration ; and at present 
they have no say directly or indirectly on such matters, 
and God knows they deserve it, in this country, at any 
rate. It is true, they lay no claim to a voice in the 
election of a Bishop, such as was granted them by the 
ancient law of the Church from the very days of the 
Apostles, but they have reason to expect the best men 
that the ranks of the Clergy can furnish. This is not done, 
and it is too patent to require proof. Is it not a crime 
against them, and in some sense high treason against the 
Church to deny them this? They have a right to those 
men for whose drawbacks they must not be forced to 
apologize. The Church has them, and the Church should 
be free to employ them in the Episcopacy. 

. T H E COMING C O U N C I L . 

What have the Clergy to expect from the Council ? I 
must confess I have little hope of obtaining the power we 
ask unless we take united action, such as that already 
suggested. The Council will, without doubt, be a great 
blessing, if this question is fairly met and solved. Any 
attempt to postpone the question, or to give us a mere 
shadow of power, will only serve to irritate the Clergy and 
to increase the evil. I am no alarmist. This question is 
a burning one ; and its neglect would be most un,wise. 
It underlies nearly all the other questions that are press-
ing for immediate consideration. Without this change*, 



.68 

'others will hardly effect much. There is certainly a 
grand opportunity, and one that Rome fully sanctions, 
of healing many wounds and of giving the Church an ele-
ment of strength, that nothing else can secure her. If we 
winfc real unity, give the Clergy the power of nominating 
the rulers of the Church. 

Any attempt at postponing the Council, or substituting 
for it, tha mere narrow policy of (Dne particular diocese, 
and which, perhaps, does not meet the wants of religion 
even in that particular diocese, would be a misfortune. 
W e want the Plenary Council because we want serious 
changes in our present temporary form of government; 
and we need a broad policy to suit all sections of the 
country. There is no doubt, but some few persons, but 
very few, and they not at all the eminent members of the 
Hierarchy, are opposed to a change and consequently to 
the coming of a Delegate or the coming of a Council. 

Let us hope for great things from the Council. And 
we have good reason to hope for them, for a better selec-
tion than Archbishop Gibbons could not have been made, 
to preside over the Council. He is an apostolic Bishop; 
and besides his thorough knowledge of the state of the 
Church in this land, he is heart and soul in sympathy 
with the Priests. He is, moreover, the ruler of a great 
diocese whose traditions favor the rights of the Clergy, 
for it has always paid, at least, some regard to the opinion 
of its distinguished Priests whenever there was question 
of selecting names for the Episcopacy. 

C O N C L U D I N G R E M A R K S . 

Clergy and laity manifest interest, and intense interest 
too, in church affairs in the United States, a thing which 
the Church is almost vainly laboring to bring about in 
many other parts of Christendom, where the results of old 
political complications still weigh her down. Why should 
we not labor earnestly to maintain this state of things by 
giving men to govern the people who thoroughly under-
stand them, and who know how to employ the people to 
help them govern with glory to the Church ? There seems 
to be no sound reason against this ; but in many cases 
this is not done; and hence the spirit of discontent which 
is doing its fatal work in many of the most important 
«actions of the country. God forbid that I should attempt 
to misrepresent or to exaggerate the true state of matters, 
r>r thai I should wish in any manner to expose unneces-



.69 

sarily existing evils. I am laboring honestly, and not at 
all imprudently, as some silly persons may charge, to re-
move one of the most potent causes of mischief to the 
Church in this country. 

We must not be deterred from this work by mere phari-
saical scandal, or the cry of insubordination which may 
be raised by those who do not at all represent the Epis-
copacy of this country, and who are bent on perpetuat-
ing their inefficiency by appointing men of their own in-
ferior grade. I am working in the true interest of the 
Episcopacy when I favor the election of men who really 
represent the Clergy and laity and when I oppose such 
men as could not obtain five votes in a hundred, even in 
their own diocese, if the rectors had a say in the elec-
tions. . . I 

It is the want of ability and of experience in some of 
our Bishops that is causing the blush to rise constantly 
to the cheeks of the intelligent and the educated classes 
of our people, and that causes many of them to grow 
cold in their religion. This coldness, that we can not deny, 
is leading to a much worse state of things, and it is the 
duty of every Priest to try to stop this evil. Do not wait 
till the laity have lost respect for us and become disgusted 
with us and with religion through our own fault. 

It is very easy to deny the existence of discontent or 
of any cause for it. Denying it, however, is not remov-
ing it. All the Priests of large experience among clergy 
and laity know too well that such discontent exists and 
that it has a cause. The newspapers place before us 
from time to time occurrences that force the blush to every 
.catholic cheek, and Catholics feel that these occurences 
are due, in part, if not mainly, to the want of governing 
capacity in some of those who are entrusted with the in-
terests of the Church. They do not complain of lack of 
piety or zeal, or, in most cases, of learning, but they do 
complain and most Utterly too, clergy and laity, that 
they are so poorly represented by those who can not ob-
viate or control the dfficulties of themselves and who of-
ten fail to seek aid through the ordinary channels which 
the Church provides. 

Be not afraid of the independent spirit of clergy or laity. 
Would to God that Catholics of other lands had the same 
faith and zeal and love for His Church that the American 
Catholics possess! Let us choose our Bishops. We are 
well qualified to do so. If we are not, how comes it that 



.70 

those persons who but a few years ago labored in our 
ranks, and who, in many cases were hardly distinguish-
ed in those ranks for extra wisdom or prudence, are now 
so capable, and the only ones in their own estimation, 
capable of making episcopal selections ? 

You ask the prudence of calling public attention to 
such matters, even granting that they exist. Ask rather 
the wisdom of applying a remedy. Some things cannot 
be cured without calling public attention to them. I do 
not expect to please those who are ignorant of the real 
state of the Church in the United States, or who are afraid 
to acknowledge it publicly, or who are eternally preach-
ing silence and so-called prudence in the face of the most 
glaring abuses. Such persons see nothing but perfect 
harmony on all sides the result of wonderful ability and 
prudence. 

This is not the remedy. We must face the actual state 
of things. The Church requires this. Calling public at-
tention to the discontent that exists with the view of ap-
plying a remedy may be doing the work of God. It may 
not be popular with authority just now; but we must look 
to the future. The Priest who weighs his own personal 
interests against those of the Church, will not do her 
much good. Charges of ambition or insubordination is 
not judging the case according to its own merits. 

Anything that tends to create disunion or that fails 
to maintain union, in the ranks of Clergy or laity should 
be avoided. In this country people are not inclined to 
tolerate evils that are easily remedied. Why then place 
rulers over them that are so illy qualified to rule ? Why 
bring from other dioceses men, perhaps of sufficient abil-
lity to govern where they are well known, but who have 
nothing to recommend them that is not possessed in a 
much higher degree by those of the same dioceses ? The 
very factor of strength so strongly insisted upon by St. 
Athanasius and Pope St. Leo, of choosing men of the 
same diocese, whose personal influence and practical 
local knowledge enable them to wield all the moral 
power of a diocese is almost totally ignored in the United 
States. Is this the law of the Church ? Is it common sense f 
If we desire union why not give us the means of securing 
it? We say the Priests of such and such a diocese are 
hardly the proper persons just now to choose a Bishop. 
Who says so ? Perhaps the very person whose appoint-
ment has served to bring about this very result. 



» The result of such appointments are seen every day ; 
such Bishops, feeling the slight hold they have on Priests 
and peoplef knd being unable to create enthusiasm by 
their oWn personal qualities, are disappointed by the 
coldness which can not conceal itself, blame Priests and 
people for want of loyalty and zeal. This, state of things 
Fs by no means confined to a few localities With our 
present system of election, it is most difficult to apply a 
remedy. It is this want of harmony that is doing its 
fatal work and that is serving as the entering wedge of 
disunion. If allowed to continue, the time is not very far 
distant, when Clergy and Laity will begin to lose heart 
and, as most of those of Continental Europe of to-day, will 
be unwilling or unable to render help to the Church when 
she called on them in the hour of need. 

It is silly to charge a Priest with lack of reverence for 
the Episcopacy, or with some mere personal end, because he 
speaks out, as the Priest should speak, against evils that 
exist, and advocates a remedy for those evils. Let us 
meet the difficulty honestly, and discuss it honestly^ ig-
noring it, or attempting to cover it up, orvilliiymg those 
who conscientiously call public attention to it, is not ap-
plying a remedy ; it is only increasing the evil. H E 
P In othercountriesthe power of the Episcopacy is circum-
scribed by Canon Law and the jealousy of the civil power; 
while the full "facul t ies" from Romeand he non-inter-
ference in matters of religion on the part of the State 
in this land,have WM H Bishops a supreme andclic-
tatorial power hardly mer wielded by g^V other body of 
Bishop sin- any other time or nation from the foundation 
^Christianity^ Is it wise to continue this power? Is. 
t iere a temptation to hold on to this power beyond its 

VI°WhilTthere are no people that are more ^w-abid.mg 
or that have more real reverence for law, as such, than 
the American people, we must ever bear in mind that 
there are no people that have a mare supreme contempt 
f w the arbitrary exercise of absolute power than the 
same American people. I ^ M S 

I am not speaking disparagingly of the Episcopacy, 
whose learning, virtue and zeal are proofs of the high 
standing of B Priesthood from whose rank it is i ^ 
eruited for it is my very reverence for the illustrious 
Episcopacy- of the United States that makes me advocate 
a system of election that will add to its lustre, by giving 



.72 

i t in all cases the best men that those ranks can afford, 
and by making as impossible as is is despicable, the very 
suspicion of wire-pulling or lobbying in any and every 
section of the country. If I do feel warm on this ques-
tion I cannot help it. I have seen the state of the Church 
m other lands, and I am not totally ignorant of some of 
the abuses of election in our own country. Is it not more 
prudent to listen with patience to plain but sharp words 
from, one of our own household, though our inferior 
than to be forced in after years to submit to the reproaches 
and the contempt of strangers. The temper of the Clergy 
and the educated classes of the laity of the United States 
should be heeded, for it is one of righfeous impatience 
-with the many reproaches to which the inexperience and 
the want of ability on the part of some of their otherwise 
pious and amiable guides oblige them to submit. 

Our present form of government has done much good, 
tout, though far superior to that system which political 
complications have forced upon, and to some extent, en-
grafted upon her, and which have handicapped her, and 
•compelled her to labor at great disadvantages even in 
the most Catholic countries, still, it fails to give the 
•Church, in many cases, the men whose broad minds, en-
larged experience, and high standing among the people 
-would enable them to wield all the moral power of the 
•diocese in the great battle that is now raging between the 
world and the Church. 

It is the old tale, submission, submission, submission, 
till we have lost heart and hope, and are compelled, in 
utter despair, to let things have their own way, and we 
become, perhaps, like a large number of the Catholics of 
South America and Latin Europe, a very reproach to 
Mother Church. Give the Church perfect freedom in car-
rying out her laws, that she may ascertain and select the 
men that have not only the respect but the confidence and 
the affection of their flocks. The Church has had enough 
of the men that were forced upon her by the civil power. 
She has had enough of the. men that forced themselves 
upon her by their intrigues; she wants men to-day, and 
the present Pope is crying aloud for such men, that can 
wield all the moral power of the diocese by commanding 
the heads and the hearts of all classes of its children. 
Give us, then, a system of electing our Bishops that wili 
secure this end. Such a power is possessed even by the 
Pnests of Ireland, which cannot be called a representa-



tive country, and yet, many of «or Bisliops are aston 
ished and express alarm for the safety of the Ohurcn 
when such a pPower is asked by the Clergy of the greatest 
Representative country on tfie face of the earth, the 

U ThedClS?y hive made the Church in this country what 
«he is the wonder of Christendom, and they deserve the 
confidence o Eome, and Rome is not only willing bu 
anxious to manifest that confidence through the judgment 
nf the Bishops of the expected Council. f 

I amappmlmg to thebest class of the Priests whose 
vidTandsoundjudgmmt are proof against any charge 
TamUtion or dsubordination to exert pelves b ^ 
fore it is too late, in a matter that must influence th e 
Church for better or for worss, even in the far ¿ ^ t tu-
ture Is it not Utter that such men should agitate this 
question, than that it be left ^ those ^ ramps^ and 
nnonvmous writers who have neither the right nor tne 
«ourSe to speak out in behalf of the Priests, and whose 
X o r t f can never attract the respectful attention of the 
Bishops 1 This is my own 
¿ask I am aware of my great inability, but I belieoe Vie 
cause itsdf is strong, and I wish to wake up those who 
Te capable of placing it before the commg Counci at 
Baltimore, and if necessary afterwards, before the Prop 
aeanda in Rome, with proper force and grace. I believe 
a a that I am working in the right direction and 
though I foresee now, as I did .in the old pamphlet no 
small degree of heated discussion m consequence of my 
reflections, it is a discussion that will lead to solid goocL 
I neither seek, nor do I value, the approbation of those 
who are incapable of judging the motives of others save 
by their own narrow and selfish hearts, and whose zeal for 
the Church is ever limited by their own mere human 
i DWhaSound reason can be a s s i g n e d against the giving of 
t h i s p o w e r to the Clergy? We do not demand ,t fo rg | . the 
Clercry but we ask it for a four representation of them. 
Everv' Priest that is capable of discharging the great responsi-
bilitL attached to the core of souls vn tie f a 
parish, is certainly a Jit person to vote m the election of a 

i f f i l i Clergy begin in time to make known their wishes 
in this matterf and we shall not be obliged to content our-
selves with a mere shadow or mockery of representation, sucU 



.74 

as a few Rectors or a Cathedral Chapter, WHOSE EXISTENCE M A T 
D E P E N D ON N E A R L Y T H E SAME V E R Y DEFECTIVE MODE OF ELECTION 

THAT W E A R E NOW LABORING .TO REMOVE. Some of those SO 
chosen may perhaps have labored little, if any at all, on the 
mission: others of them from advanced age, may have little 
or no sympathy with the living present; and more of them 
the rrm-e personal friends of authority, and who, owing to the 
continual presence of authority may not have as much indepen-
dence as to call their souls their own. If we are to have any 
power at aU, let it he a reality and not a rwre excuse for such • 
let it be a substantial say, or it were much better that the ques-
tion be not touched at all. And yet this question should be 
attended to, for it is certainly the most important one that can 
come before the Council as it underlies all the other questions 
that imperatively demand attention. 

The Church in this country needs representative men, and 
Clergy and Laity should insist on getting them. Were we 
living in other times or in other lands the expression of dis-
satisfaction would be unavailing, for the simple reason that the 
State having appointed the Bishop, would compel submission. 
Things are different here, and as the State takes no action in* 
matters of religion, Rome is perfectly willing to give this 
country whatever form of government suits her best. Are we 
unreasonable then, in asking to be governed in a manner be-
fitting the present interests and the future prospects of religion 
in this land % Are the best instincts of this country, so favorable 
to the Catholic Church, to be tortured into conformity with at 
system of discipline that was partly forced upon the Church 
and to some extent ingrafted upon her, by State influences t 
M ust the relics of civil tyranny that deprived the Clergy of a 
vote m the election of Bishops in other times and other lands be 
maintained and perpetuated in the United States? What ex-
cuse can we assign for witholdiny this right from the Clergy t 
The good of the Church demands an answer to this question 
and demands it at the present time. Rome rejoices that she ia 
free from political restraint in this country, and her broad and 
liberal policy favors the aspirations of Clergy and Laity 
Rome is perfectly willing to adapt her discipline to the favor-
able condition of things in this land, but strange to say some 
of our American rulers, looking rather to the state of the Church 
of three hundred years ago, and in lands where the voice of 
Priests and people was hushed by the iron hand of State, than 
to the changed condition of the world and to the bright faith and 
ardent zeal of our independent, though most loyal Priests and 
people of the United States,shrink from the thought ofsharwg 



.75 

restoration. ror>rr>ai>hes of our non-

• • • • • B B W M l of our lacking 
S M ; " £ . h r « h e occasion of ».ch a falae 

charge should cease. foreien to their rights 
The Priests are 

in demanding this power, lhe very ^ p o ^ General 

canonical rights. r<Wch in the United States, and 
In the very infancy of the Church intne t h e 

before there was a single ^ w e l i ^ 
few old pioneer-Priests, power of elec^ 
American instinct, petitioned the P o ^ lor the pow êr 

momzing ^ with the genius anax^ ^ them this power, 

i l | H character, 
^ r a H ^ n th™K lve. w,th p e , 

sons of timr owm A St. Pater, the 

m M M M * * 1 | I 
rmi,iiiet • verj P o i 



.76 

old one i " I have already amply apolgized for my apparent in-
discretion in attempting to address you on so important a mat-
ter and also for my very crude way of doing it. The crudeness is 
hardly my fault, for 1 am incapable of foing better, owine to 
my mexpenence in the use of the pen. I have asked no one's 
advice or help to enable me to put the matter decently before 

f i f e * M I«"» expressing the sentiments of 
nearly every Priest m the land, as well as of tie Laity, and at least 
of some of the Bishops I try to express them in my own rough 
rude manner, rather than compromise any person by a step 
which some timorous people may severely blame 
J / ? 0 ] ^ ^ b e w ^ t i n g due reverence for those 
whom God has placed over the Church in this Country If in 
my attempting to express my zeal for the Church any shadow 
of want of the most humble submission should appear, it must 
not be attributedI to my heart, but to the unskilled use of the 
pen Love for the Church means love for those who rule it. 
and I trust I shall never be wanting in either. I have sirrmlv 
the real good of the Church at heart. P 7 

My words have a certain querulous tone: I feel this mv-
of tWnL ^ h 6 lf I h a v e seen the lamentable state 
of things m Europe, and it has made my heart sick. I see 
certain tendencies in this country that are calculated to inflict 
lasting injury on the Church. I feel, as every Priest must feel 
that an end should be put to them, if a man t r i e sWst lyTo 
remedy those matter, must he be looked upon, as a matte? of 
course as devoid of a proper ecclesiastical spirit ? Is hesu£ 

° h ! V e W s .lodgment and to have placed a weapon 
m the hands of the enemies of the Church to in ¡ure her ? 

Is not calling attention to the evil that assails the Church one 
of the best ways of building np the Church in this country^ 
Are we to wait ti l these evils have rotted the very vitals of 
the Church and then show zeal when it is too late? If my 

m7mvnW0U-Se-iS 1 firerd a f e w s r r k s ^ l l fall oi my own roof, is it not prudent to extinguish them ? Is it well 

our^own W s T m ^ ^ ^ t h e r e m e d ^ i s * 
The lesson taught us by the misfortunes of the Church in 

Europe should not be lost sight of. Give us the men of reS 

i S i P M t e RLaity if want a I f m 
Wiil withstand the power of demagogues and revolutions. But 
to preserve and increase the growth of the Church in the Uni-
ted ¡states, ffwe to us such men at once 

The sad condition of the Church in Italy, France, and Spain 
Mainly increased my anxiety, while it has intensified my 



••p 
É M M ^ W M i f B