V] 
 
 <^ 
 
 /a 
 
 // 
 
 "c>l 
 
 7 
 
 
 IMAGE EVALUATION 
 TEST TARGET (MT-3) 
 
 1.0 
 
 I.I 
 
 ^Kl IIIM 
 
 '- "^ |||||21 
 
 I" U£ '""^ 
 
 " kg III 2.0 
 
 1.8 
 
 Photographic 
 
 Sciences 
 Corporation 
 
 ^^ 
 
 /. 
 
 
 7 
 
 (/i 
 
 fA 
 
 
 1.25 1.4 
 
 1.6 
 
 
 *4 6" — 
 
 
 ► 
 
 23 WEST MAIN STREET 
 
 WEBSTER, NY. 14580 
 
 (716) 872-4503 
 
L<P 
 
 Q>, 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 
 Microfiche 
 
 Series. 
 
 CIHM/ICMH 
 Collection de 
 microfiches. 
 
 Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 
 
Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques 
 
 The Institute has attempted to obtain the best 
 original copy available for filming. Features of this 
 copy which may be bibliographically unique, 
 which may alter any of the images in the 
 reproduction, or which may significantly change 
 the usual method of filming, are checked below. 
 
 
 
 D 
 □ 
 D 
 D 
 
 D 
 D 
 D 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 D 
 
 Coloured covers/ 
 Couverture de couleur 
 
 Covers damaged/ 
 Couverture endommagee 
 
 Covers restored and/or laminated/ 
 Couverture restaur6e et/ou pellicul^e 
 
 Cover title missing/ 
 
 Le titre de couverture manque 
 
 Coloured maps/ 
 
 Cartes g^ographiques en couleur 
 
 Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ 
 Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) 
 
 Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ 
 Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur 
 
 Bound with other material/ 
 Reli6 avec d'autres documents 
 
 Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion 
 along interior margin/ 
 
 La reliure serree peut causer de I'ombre ou de la 
 distortion le long de la marge int^rieure 
 
 Blank leaves added during restoration may 
 appear within the text. Whenever possible, these 
 have been omitted from filming/ 
 II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajout6es 
 lors dune restauration apparaissent dans le texte, 
 mais, lorsque cela dtait possible, ces pages n'ont 
 pas 6xi film^es. 
 
 Additional comments:/ 
 Commentaires suppl^mentaires; 
 
 L'ln^titut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire 
 qu'il lui a dt6 possible de se procurer. Les details 
 de net exemplaire qui sont peut-dfe uniques du 
 point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier 
 une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une 
 modification dans la m^thode normale de filmage 
 sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. 
 
 □ Coloured pages/ 
 Pages de couleur 
 
 □ Pages damaged/ 
 Pages endommagdes 
 
 I I Pages restored and/or laminated/ 
 
 n 
 
 Pages restaur^es et/ou pelliculdes 
 
 Pages discoloured, stained or foxei 
 Pages d6color6es, tachetdes ou piqu^es 
 
 Pages detached/ 
 Pages d^tachdes 
 
 Showthrough/ 
 Transparence 
 
 Quality of prir 
 
 Qualitd indgale de I'impression 
 
 Includes supplementary materia 
 Comprend du materiel supplementaire 
 
 I I Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ 
 
 I I Pages detached/ 
 
 I I Showthrough/ 
 
 I I Quality of print varies/ 
 
 I I Includes supplementary material/ 
 
 Only edition available/ 
 Seule Edition disponible 
 
 Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata 
 slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to 
 ensure the best possible image/ 
 Les pages totalement ou partiellement 
 obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, 
 etc., ont 6t^ filmdes d nouveau de facon d 
 obtenir la meilleure image possible. 
 
 This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ 
 
 Ce document est U\m6 au taux de reduction indiqu^ ci-dessous 
 
 10X 14X 18X 22X 
 
 
 
 
 26X 
 
 
 
 
 30X 
 
 
 
 i 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 J 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 12X 
 
 
 
 
 16X 
 
 
 
 
 20X 
 
 
 
 
 24X 
 
 
 
 
 28X 
 
 
 
 
 32X 
 
 1 
 
The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks 
 to the generosity of: 
 
 National Library of Canada 
 
 L'exemplaire film6 fut reproduit grdce d la 
 g6n6rositd de: 
 
 Bibliothdque nationale du Canada 
 
 The images appearing here are the best quality 
 possible considering the condition and legibility 
 of the original copy and in keeping with the 
 filming contract specifications. 
 
 Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed 
 beginning with the front cover and ending on 
 the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, or me back cover when appropriate. All 
 other original copies are filmed beginning on the 
 first page with a printed or illustrated impres- 
 sion, and ending on the last page with a printed 
 or illustrated impression. 
 
 Les images suivantes ont 6t6 reproduites avec le 
 plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et 
 de la nettet6 de l'exemplaire filmd, et en 
 conformity avec les conditions du contrat de 
 filmage. 
 
 Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en 
 papier est imprim^e sont film6s en commenpant 
 par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la 
 dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illurtration, soit par le second 
 plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires 
 originaux sont film6s en commenpant par la 
 premidre page qui comporte une empreinte 
 d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par 
 la dernidre page qui comporte une telle 
 empreinte. 
 
 The last recorded frame on each microfiche 
 shall contain the symbol — ^ (meaning "CON- 
 TINUED "), or the symbol y (meaning "END"), 
 whichever applies. 
 
 Un des symboles suivants apparattra sur la 
 dernidre image de chaque microfiche, selon le 
 cas: le symbole — ♦- signifie "A SUIVRE", le 
 symbole V signifie "FIN". 
 
 Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at 
 different reduction ratios. Those too large to be 
 entirely included in one exposure are filmed 
 beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to 
 right and top to bottom, as many frames as 
 required. The follov/ing diagrams illustrate the 
 method: 
 
 Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre 
 film6s d des taux de reduction diffdrents. 
 Lorsque le document est trop grand pour etre 
 reproduit en un seul cliche, il est film6 d partir 
 de Tangle supdrieur gauche, de gauche d droite, 
 et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre 
 d'images n^cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants 
 illustrent la m6thode. 
 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
1 
 
 \ I 
 
 h 
 
 K^-. 
 
u 
 
 WHAT 
 DO THE JEaUITS 
 
 ? 
 
 f",l'ft!,lf 
 
 The Pros and Cons of the Qoestioo 
 
 A CONTROVERSY 
 
 BBIWBBN TBB 
 
 Rev. Father Egan, Thornhill 
 
 AND THB 
 
 Rev. Mr. PercivaL Presbyterian Mtnisteri 
 
 Ricnmond Hill 
 
 TO&OKTO "^ 
 
 The Catholic Rbvibw V«mi, 64 Adblaidm St. East '^ 
 
 mmmambBssstsasammaassi 
 
 •■■•-At 
 
Ac- 
 
 ^M^Z^Y^ 
 
 X 7^ 
 
 ^Q 
 
 c4 
 
 /V*^ 
 
 ^>7^ ^ .^'fe^f 
 
 P9l 
 
 V 
 
 ^ ^. /^ > 2. 
 
 :,?ii5«a. ■^i^.^^^■;f.■i^ ;„ .. 
 
^>^^^ I U/I^at do tl^e Je3uits 
 
 Seael;? 
 
 Jt^e pros ar)d Qoi?5 of t\)(^ Jesuit 
 
 Question 
 
 A CONTROVERSY 
 
 Between the Rev. Father Egan, Thornhill, andrtheJRev. 
 Mr. Percival, Presbyterian Minister, Richmond Hill. 
 
 [ j' 
 
 I 
 
 I 
 
 * TORONTO 
 
 Catholic Ebvibw Pbint. 
 1889. 
 
I* I 
 
 f 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 Chaptbr I.— Father Egan maintains that the Catholic 
 Church does not teach that " The End Justifies 
 the Means." 1 
 
 Chapter II.— Eev. Mr. Percival on Roman Dogmatics.... 4 
 
 Chapter III. — Roman Dogmatics answered and Father 
 Egan warns Mr. Percival against u sing second hand 
 quotations g 
 
 Chapter IV.— Rev. Mr. Percival accuses Father Egan of 
 using Side Issues, and charges the Catholic Church 
 with opposition to the Word of God in the vulgar 
 tongue 14 
 
 Chapter V. — Father Egan answers the charge of raising 
 Side Isssues, calls upon Mr. Percival to prove his 
 statements and detects his fraudulent quotation of 
 the PapalBrief 19 
 
 Chapter VI.— Rev. Mr. Percival's definition of a Jesuit. 
 He gives a Chronology of their banishments, and 
 urges several grave charges against them 25 
 
 Chapter VII.— Father Egan still ask for Proofs, and 
 explains the cause of the hostility of Infidels and 
 others to the Jesuits 29 
 
 Chapter VIII.— Rev. Mr Percival discourses on the use of 
 
 Relics in the Ca>:-olic Church 37 
 
Chapter IX. — Father Egan resolves to no longer stand 
 on the defensive, but to see how Presbyterianism 
 will stand being attacked 40 
 
 Chapter X. — ^Father Egan deals with Mr Percival's 
 authorities, and opens his attack on Presbyterian 
 Doctrine and Intolerance 42 
 
 Chapter XI. — Kev. Mr. Percival discourses on Mental 
 Bestriction as taught and practised in the Catholic 
 Church 48 
 
 Chapter XII. — Father Egan exposes Mr. Percival'suaeof a 
 condemned Proposition, and challenges him to an 
 Oral discussion 53 
 
 Chapter XIII. — Rev. Mr. Percival gives reasons for refusing 
 . an Oral Discussion and enters on the Beward 
 business 62 
 
 Chapter XIV. — Father Egan deals with Mr. Percival's 
 ideas of a gentleman, and assails the Westminster 
 Confession 65 
 
 Chapter XV. — The Westminster Confession and what it 
 
 logically leads to 69 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Some months ago, and during the heat of the controversy 
 which arose m the country in respect to the Jesuits and their 
 teaching, the Rev. Mr. Percival, the incumbent of the Presbyterian 
 Church at Richmond Hill, attributed to the Jesuits, inthecourseof 
 one of his sermons, the doctrine, or maxim, that the end justifies 
 the means. The statement was contradicted a day or two later 
 as untrue and unfounded, by the Rev. Father Egan ofThornhill 
 in a letter which he addressed to the Richmond Hill Liberal 
 To this the Rev. Mr. Percival answered that it was susceptible 
 of proof, and that he was prepared to affirm that "not merely 
 the Jesuit Society but the Roman Catholic Church, whatever 
 may be their theory on the subject, have only too often, by their 
 actions, given sad proof that they do believe in the doctrine that 
 the end does justify the means." The controversy that followed 
 is published in full in these pages, and the letters of each " 
 disputant are given without comment, and without addition 
 or emendation, but in the order, and in the manner in which 
 they originally received publication. They are submitted to the 
 
 '1 
 
public without further explanation, and without anythinp; in the 
 way of supplementary argument. The attention which iH at 
 present being manifested in the Dominion in regard to all that 
 pertains to the Jesuit (Question, the importance of the point 
 
 involved in the dispute, the directness with which the disputants 
 join issue, and the somewhat wide interest which their letters 
 attracted, has led to the publication of the controvrgy in a 
 permanent form. 
 
 ^^|]^>^ 
 
 
11 the 
 
 in at 
 
 that 
 
 point 
 
 ;ants 
 tters 
 in a 
 
\ 
 
 » w- ,»..w 
 
CONTROVERSY 
 
 BETWEEN 
 
 Father Egan and Rev. Mr. Percival 
 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 The Catholic Church does not Teach that the End 
 Justifies the Means. 
 
 I am informed on credible authority that in one of his 
 recent lectures on the Jesuit question, Eev. Mr. Percival has at- 
 tributed to that learned and illustrious society of Catholic Priests 
 the doctrine that the end justifies the means. 
 
 I may say at once that the Jesuits teach nothing that is con- 
 trary to the doctrines of the Catholic Church. The doctrine 
 that the end justifies the means is wicked, and is repudiated alike 
 by the Jesuits and the entire Catholic Church. I am told that 
 Mr. Percival gave some proofs to substantiate^ his charge against 
 the Jesuits, and the teachings of the Catholic Church ; proofs, 
 no doubt satisfactory to himself and to his audience, and claim- 
 ing to be from the writings of the Jesuits. 
 
 I presume Mr. Percival never saw the passages in the original 
 from which he took these proofs ; and erred, like the rest of that 
 credulous crowd, in pinning his faith to the sleeves of his fellow- 
 workers against the Church and the Jesuits. He trusted that 
 his audience would take his mere word for any anti-Catholic 
 statement he might make, and he has rewarded them by abusing 
 their confidence, and deceiving them. 
 
 The error is a serious one. A minister of the gospel, as he 
 claims to be, should have had a little more discretion — and I 
 may add, a little more conscience. It might be well for him to 
 take a lesson out of the moral theology taught by these wicked 
 Jesuits, and endorsed by the Church. They say it is a grievous 
 sin, not only to slander another, but also to deliberately expose 
 one's self to tb-^ danger of slandering him, by recklessly and with- 
 
out due inquiry accusing him of teaching what is blaspheraouc? 
 and subversive of the Ten Commandments. And the slander 
 acquires a tenfold intensity when such a doctrine is attributed, 
 not to one individual, but to thousands of men consecrated to 
 God, and in whose holy lives even a hostile world finds no matter 
 for reprcfach. 
 
 It is a proud distinction for the Jesuits that their enemies find 
 no valid weapons against them, and are compelled to resort to 
 falsehood and slander. They are in this point faithful represen- 
 tatives of the Church of Christ at this day, as she is of the pri- 
 mitive Church of the Apostles. Are our Protestant friends aware 
 that they are repeating against us the identical slanders that 
 were hurled against the Church in the days of St. Paul ? Then 
 the wicked Jews and lying Pagans charged her with holding the 
 maxim, that evil may be done for a good purpose. — Rom. iii. 8. 
 
 I call upon the Eev. Mr. Percival to prove from their own 
 writings, not by second-hand quotations, that the Jesuits teach 
 that " the end justifies the means." It will not do to quote gar- 
 bled texts from the Encyclopedia Britannica, or Chambers' En- 
 cyclopedia, or the infidel Paul Bert, or Littledale, or any but 
 one of their own authors, where the context may also be seen. 
 I shall leave the decision to any two professors of Latin, Protes- 
 tants at that, in the University of Toronto. Let him obtain this 
 decision and I shall surrender the entire case. Mind, isolated 
 texts will not do. It must be shown that the Jesuits teach this, 
 doctrine, or even its equivalent, from their own authors ; not- 
 from authors or authorities which have been manufactured for 
 them. 
 
 I have now before me the Text Book of Mora) Theology, used 
 in our Seminaries. It is by a Jesuit (Gury) . I shall give a spe- 
 cimen of his theology on the subject : — 
 
 Omnis clectiomali medii est mula; sed non e C(mrersin,onunselectio 
 honi medii est positive bona. This is the very contradictory of the pro- 
 position, the end justifies the means. 
 
 To prove this the quotation is sometimes made — Finis detenni- 
 nat prohitatim. actus. This does not mean " the end justifies the 
 means. " It means the end determines the probity of the action — 
 and from the context it will be seen that the author is referring 
 to actions indifferent, or at least not bad in themselves, for if 
 the action is malum in se, no end can justify it as we have seen 
 above. 
 
 The mistakes that are made in attributing false doctrines to 
 the Catholic Church are not always the result of ignorance or 
 neglect. They are very often deliberate misstatements, ranging 
 from the supprrsdo veri to downright mendacity. 
 
 Who has not heardthat Catholics are not allowed to read the 
 Bible '? That Catholics adore images, and are consequently 
 
11 
 
 idolaters, and all that kind of thing ? Why, a priest or a nun 
 cannot, since this crusade commenced, walk the streets of To- 
 ronto without being insulted. And all this in the interest of true 
 r el if I ion I 
 
 Take my word for it the day will come when this state of things 
 will bring a reaction, and the reaction has more than commenc- 
 ed. When thinking Protestants will ask themselves, " Cannot 
 our ministers attack the Catholic Church without misrepresent- 
 ing her? " They will ask themselves, " Does the end justify 
 the means'? " 
 
 Has Itev. Mr. Percival addressed even a mild rebuke to the 
 "hampions of Protestantism who piously raided the Catholic 
 celebratorsof St. Patrick'sDay, ai;d smashed the windows of Cath- 
 olic institutions for the love of God ? 01 1 ! I forgot that would 
 not be in accord with equal rights, or civil and religious liberty, 
 for which he is now clamouring. 
 
 It is something refreshing to find Protestants, and especially 
 Presbyterians, with the sad recollection of the Penal laws fresh 
 in our minds, talking about civil and religious liberty. I am of 
 opinion that Eev. Mr. Percival's idea of civil and religious lib- 
 erty would be, to have the Penal Code revived. 
 
 That the Jesuits teach, and that the Catholic Church holds, 
 this wicked doctrine, is false. This statement has been made in 
 our midst, and I cannot let it go uncontradicted. W^e will see 
 whether the Rev. Mr. Percival will come to the test which I have 
 proposed, and which I think no one will think unreasonable ; or 
 like a gentleman admit that he has been deceived. 
 
 I value the esteem of my Protestant fellow citizens for myself, 
 and tny co-religionists ; for the latter especially, who in many in- 
 stances are dependent for a living on the good will of their Pro- 
 testant employers. The doctrine that " the end justifies the 
 means " would justify Catholics in deceiving, robbing and even 
 murdering their employers and benefactors, provided, for ex- 
 ample, they thought it was for the cjood of the Church. 
 
 I appeal to the good sense of Protestants themselves. Is this 
 their experience of their Catholic neighbors and employes? Peo- 
 ple are very seldom better than they profess to be, and Catholics, 
 neither in theory nor in practice, follow this rule. AVhy then re- 
 peat and perpetuate this cry again? t them ? There are Catho- 
 lics in this neighborhood who had established for themselves 
 among their Protestant neighbors reputations for upright and 
 honorable integrity, of which Rev, Mr. Percival with his quasi 
 eloquent slanders cannot deprive them. 
 
 I am afraid, Mr. Editor I have trespassed too much on your 
 valuable space, but I shall watch Mr. Percival's answer, and 
 perhaps soon ask you for more. 
 
 J. J. Egan. 
 
 Thornhill, March 2Gth, 18H9. 
 
CHAPTER 11. 
 
 ROMAN DOGMATfCS. 
 
 REV. UR. PBRCIVAL DfiNIBS HAVING SAID 80, BUT STILL MAINTAINS 
 
 THAT I HE CATHOLIC CHURCH TEACHES IHAT 
 
 DOCTRINE. 
 
 Ili 
 
 In your issue of March 28th, I observe a communication 
 over the signature of "J. J. Egan, Thornhill. " I presume 
 that this is the Kev. J. J. Egan, Roman Catholic Priest. In this 
 communication the writer attacks me for making certain state- 
 ments, of which he says he has been informed on " credible au- 
 thority. " In other words, on the stretH/tli of mere hearsay, he has 
 rushed with Hibernian valor right into the thickest of the fray, 
 content to fall if need be so long as he falls fighting for glory. 
 Poor fellow ! He is actually " spilin ' for a fight, " and must 
 find a foe somewhere, even if he has to travel a long distance 
 out of his way to do so. 
 
 Now, what are the facts ot the case ? Simply these : I preached 
 a sermon, in my own church, and to my own people, on the 
 " Jesuit Question. " I did not consult Rev. J. J. Egan before 
 doing so, nor submit my sermon to him for inspection and ap- 
 proval. Probably this slight upon my part has made him mad. 
 But Mr. Egan forgets that a short time before he imported a 
 clergyman from Toronto to discuss this same Jesuit Question in 
 his church at Thornhill. With regard to what was said upon 
 that occasion, I do not know, for unlike Mr. Egan, I have not 
 been "' informed on credible authority, " and what's more, I don't 
 care. But some way I had the idea that this question, like most 
 other questions, had two sides to it, and as he had, through the 
 aid of another, presented one side, I certainly thought I might 
 venture to follow his example, and direct the attention of my 
 people to the other side. He is, therefore, in a great measure 
 responsible for my touching the subject at all. 
 
 I do not for a moment question the rh/ht of Mr. Egan to rush 
 into print in the manner in which he has done, but I question 
 very much the wisdom of doing so, p,nd, perhaps, he will have 
 some serious doubts in the same direction before I am done with 
 him. 
 
 A newspaper discussion is, to me personally, very distasteful, 
 but when I am thus grossly assailed, there is no other alternative 
 but to submit to the inevitable. 
 
 I wish also to call the attention of your readers to another 
 
fact, and it is this : To my remarks upon the subject I confined 
 myself exclusively to it. I dealt simply with the Jesuit Question, 
 and said nothing at all about the Eoman Catholic Church. Mr. 
 Egan, however, has gone beyond the narrow limits of the ques- 
 tion proper, and charges me with attacking the Catholic Church, 
 for he says that " the Jesuits teach nothing; that is contrary 
 to the doctrines of the Catholic Church. " He therefore makes 
 the Catholic Church responsible for the teaching and practice of 
 the Jesuit Order. It is well to bear this fact in mind, for I may 
 call upon him by and l)y to explain to your readers how it came 
 to pass that an infallible Pope, the Supreme Head of the Cath- 
 olic Church, should curse, with " bell, book and candle, " this 
 same " learned and illustrious society of Catholic Priests. " Was 
 it for teaching " doctrines that were in harmony with the Cath- 
 olic Church ? " We may enquire a little more fully into the mat- 
 ter in the future. 
 
 I would also remind your Roman Catholic readers, that if, in 
 this discussion (provided it goes on), their feelings should be 
 slightly hurt, they must thank the Rev. J. J. Egan for it, for 
 assuredly I should never have discussed the question in the 
 papers, had he not, by his injudicious attsicli, forced me to it. For 
 many of them personally I entertain the greatest respect, and 
 would be the last man to cause them needless pain. In this dis- 
 cussion I will carefully discriminate, in any statements, 1 may 
 make, between them and the peculiar dogmas of the church to 
 which tljey belong, and to which no doubt many of them are con- 
 scientiously attaclied. I shall deal with prinrij)h'fi, not with jx'f- 
 sons. When I am done, whatever they may think of me, one 
 thing I know, that my opinion of them as citizens will be just the 
 same as it was before I began. 
 
 Now, the main charge that Mr. Egan prefers against me is 
 that I advocated the doctrine that the Jesuits believed and prac- 
 tised the doctrine " that the end justifies the means, " and also 
 " that I gave some proofs to substantiate this charge against the 
 Jesuits, and the teachings of the Catholic Church. " All this he 
 has been informed " on credible authority. " It is a pity for him- 
 self that his " authority " was not a little more " credible. " In 
 reply to all this I have simply. to state, tJiat it in not true. I did 
 nothing of the kind. What I did do was simply to direct attention 
 to a letter that appeared in the Mail of the 5th of March, in 
 which the writer quotes some passages, among the rest the follow- 
 ing, from " Busembaum's Medulla Theologiie : " — " Ciiiu finis 
 est lieitKs etiam media sunt lieeta. " Also from same autlior : 
 " Cui lieitus est finis etiani lieent media. " From "• Laymen's 
 Theologire Moralis, " as follows : — " Cui eoneessus est finis, eon- 
 eessa etiani sunt media ad fine m ordinata. " From " Wageman's 
 Synopsis Theologite Moralis, " as follows ; — "Finis determinat 
 
6 
 
 prohitafcni orlnn. " From these passaji^Gs the writer in the Mail, 
 from \vl)()!ii J (juoted, contended that he is justified in fastening 
 this (liiiholical doctrine upon the Jesuits. As to whether he is 
 correct or not, I will allow Mr. Ef^an to li^ht the matter out with 
 him when and how lie pleases. Mr. Efjjan mai itains that th- e 
 passaj^'es, when taken in connection with their context, are cap- 
 ahle of an entirely diiferent interpretation. I am not disposed to 
 question the correctness of this statement. In fact I am quite 
 prepared to helieve, as Mr. Egan's statements would seem to 
 imply, that auihujuitfj is one of the principal excellences of Jesuit- 
 ical authors. Mr. E jean's rendering of the last passage, from 
 " Wageraann : " — " Finia (Jcicnidnat prohitafhx actus, " furnishes 
 a very good illustration of this. He says, " this does not mean 
 that the end justifies the means. If means the end (letenninesthe 
 jirohitu of an action. '' This, I suhmit, is a distinction without 
 much difference. In any case the end has something to do with 
 the act. He then goes on to state, " from the context it will be 
 seen that the author is referring to actions indifferent, or at least 
 not had in themselves. " Well, w^hat of all that '? How does all 
 that talk affect the statement that " the end does determine the 
 probity of an. act? " To say the least regarding it; there is cer- 
 tainly considerable ambiguity here. However, I need not spend 
 time in discussing this point. I never made this particular charge 
 against the writers of the Jesuit Society, and besides it is to me 
 a matter of great indifference as to what they may teach in their 
 text books — it is to me a question of much greater importance 
 to know how they stand in the light ofhistory, in relation to every 
 country in which they have obtained a foot-hold. " Actions speak 
 louder than words, " and I am prepared to atHrm and m'intain 
 that not merely the Jesuit Society, but the Roman L.ctholic 
 Church, whatever may be their theory on the subject, have only 
 too often by their actions given sad proof that they do believe in 
 the doctrine that the end does justify the means. We shall see as 
 we proceed. 
 
 It is certainly quite refreshing to read the homily Mr. Egan 
 has administered to me for what he considers the very lament- 
 able lack of those two very important commodities, discretion and 
 conscience. I hope I am found duly thankful. Of course, it never 
 for a moment strikes Mr. Egan that in the publication of this 
 precious effusion of his that he is affording the public a very good 
 illustration that as far as the first mentioned commodity is con- 
 cerned he is certainly not blessed with a superabundance of it. 
 I will not pass judgment on his conscience as he has on mine. 
 Mr. Egan says, " that people are very seldom better than they 
 , profess to be." This is quite true ; yet it is also equally true that 
 they sometimes profess to be much better than they are. When 
 I hear Rev. J. J. Egan giving vent to such strong expressions of 
 
 iliii 
 
affection and e.steem for " his Protestant friends, " I am forcibly 
 reminded of this : — If these expressions are true, then all I have 
 to say is, that he is much better than his creed. 
 
 Mr. Egan states that at present " a priest or a nun cannot 
 walk the streets of Toronto without being insulted. " in reply 
 1 simply state that I don't believe him. 
 
 He wants to know also why 1 did not address " a mild rebuke 
 to the champions of Protestentism, who piously raided the cele- 
 bj-ators of St. Patrick's day, and smashed the windows of Catho- 
 liii institutions for the love of God'? " I did not do so simply 
 because none of them belonged to my congregation, or were even 
 likely to be guilty of such conduct. If he wants to know what 
 my opinion is concerning those young men who are charged with 
 committing that offence, I can very soon give it to him. If guilty, 
 I believe that their actions were wrong, and deserving of punish- 
 ment. Yet, Mr. Egan must not lose sight of the fact that their 
 conduct is not for a moment to be compared to the cold-blooded 
 murder of poor Hackett, in the streets of Montreal, a few years 
 ago, by a Roman Catholic mob, or the cold-blooded murder of 
 some six or seven Orangemen in the streets of Harbor Grace, N. 
 F., some live or six years ago, when every one of the murderers 
 was allowed to go unwhipt of justice by a Roman Catholic jury, 
 in the face of the most damning evidence. I suppose Mr. Egan 
 will admit that this was all done to " for the glory of God ! " It 
 was very improper to break window glass, but it was very much 
 worse to commit murder. 
 
 Rev. Mr. Egan has been pleased to make an exhibition of him- 
 self before the public, and forfeiting his claim to be recognized 
 as a (fentlcman, by descending to scurrilous i)ersonalities. He calls 
 me " a quasi eloquent slanderer !" There is a lot of argument 
 in that kind of talk, isn't there ? I am sorry for this, for the 
 public were beginning to look upon him again as a gentleman. If 
 Mr. Egan goes on with this discussion I would advise him to 
 leave personalities, severely alone for the future. 
 
 In conclusion I wish to inform Rev. J. J. Egan that if he wishes 
 to enter into a discussion of this Romish question, I shall be 
 quite happy to accommodate him. He started it and he can have 
 it continued if he wishes it. For the present, 
 
 Yours in defence of truth, 
 
 W. W. Percival, 
 
 The Manse, Richmond Hill, April 3, 1889. 
 
8 
 
 CHAPTER ill. 
 
 ROMAN DOGMATICS ANSWERED. 
 
 FATHER EGAN PROOVES TO THE CONTRARY, AND WARNS MR, 
 PERCIVAL AGAINST SECOND-HAND 
 QUOTATIONS. 
 
 Having seen Rev. Mr. Percival's letter, headed " Roman 
 Dogmatics," I natm'ally expected to find an elaborate disserta- 
 tion on one subject of Dogmatic Theology. To my utter surprise, 
 however, I find that in so far as it was connected with Theology 
 at all, it referred altogether to another department, namely. 
 Moral Theology, or Ethics. Anyonewhohasever studied the very 
 preliminaries of Theology would have know this distinction, and 
 it is not a distinction without a difference either. However, I 
 shall let this pass over. He has fallen into more serious blunders 
 than this, as I sliall soon show. 
 
 He says that the report that he attributed to the Jesuits th& 
 doctrine "that the end justifies the means," is not true. In the 
 next sentence, however, he tells us he simply directed attention 
 to a letter which appeared in the Mail, on March 5th. 
 
 This I presume he did to refute the wicked Mail, defend the 
 Jesuits from its vile attacks, and show that they liad no such 
 wicked doctrine. The report then after all is not very untrue. 
 For what purpose, I would ask, did he call attention to this ar- 
 ticle in the ^[ail if he did not mean to endorse it'? In another 
 place he remarks that after all the end has something to do with 
 the act. Who denies this ? But with the context it is altogether 
 di^fferent from the sense he would put on it. He says at least 
 it is obscure. It ma}' be so to some, but to a theologian or philoso- 
 pher, it is quite clear. But even if it were ol)scure. a truly chari- 
 table person would be disposed to give it a liberal interpretation, 
 and not even suspect others of holding doctriner> subversi /e of 
 air morality and social order, till the proof was so clear that there 
 was no alternative. 
 
 Is this a manly way of getting out of the difficulty ? Let him 
 come to the test like a man, and prove it, or give it up without 
 an}' of this Uriah Heap sneaking way of beating round the bush. 
 
 He says that I make the Catholic Church responsible for the 
 teachings and practice of the Jesuits. Certainly, the Jesuits are 
 as amenable to the authority of the Church as any other of her 
 subjects, and he, before undertaking to lecture on the Jesuit 
 question, should have known as much. He will, perhaps, be 
 
 
9 
 
 rather surprised at this admission, but it is a new illustration, of 
 the old saying that " a little learning is a dangerous thing, " 
 and especially to persons undertaking to give public lectures on 
 subjects about which they know little or nothing. 
 
 He asks me to account for the fact of an infallible Pope curs- 
 ing the Jesuits with bell, book and candle. The question im- 
 plies that he considers it a fact that a Pope did curse the Jesuits. 
 Will the rev. gentleman furnish us with the authentic proof that 
 the Pope did curse the Jesuits at all ? Will he give us the authen- 
 tic proof that the Pope, if he did curse at all, used a book, a bell, 
 or a candle in this imprecatory operation ? If he cannot prove 
 the existence of this curse, let him not, for the time to come, sign 
 himself " Yours in defence of truth. " 
 
 I have already warned the rev. gentleman against the danger 
 of second hand quotations. When a writer quotes from an author 
 something as evidence, he should know for certain the truth of 
 his quotation. When something is invented for the author, when 
 his sense is perverted, either by additions, omissions, or garblings, 
 then the proceeding is entitled literary forgery. And when this 
 is exposed in a controversy, either political, literary, or religious, 
 the individual who is thus convicted is regarded, by men of high 
 honour, as hors dc conihaf. He is done. Neither is it enough to 
 say that the forgery was copied, and was not o)-iginal. The man 
 at the mercy of second authority should be very cautious. 
 
 The Mail has published an alleged oath of the Jesuits. The 
 Mail, which copies the oath, now stands for doing oo, procecuted, 
 and held to account before the law of the land. The Mail itself 
 has admitted that the oath cannot be proved to exist. The decree 
 by which it is made to appear that the Pope " has cursed the 
 Jesuits with bell, book and candle, " and condemned them, will 
 probably be found also — not to exist. Has the rev. gentleman 
 ever read the burlesque excommunication of Tristham Shandy ? 
 This is the meaningless verbiage to which people are treated. How 
 long are these fabrications of iniquity to do service in the cause 
 of intolerance ? 
 
 The rev. gentleman gives to his Catholic readers a timely warn- 
 ing, that if their feeling are hurt by his discussion of their 
 " peculiar (lof/mas, " they may thank Eev. J. J. Egan for it. H" 
 the dogmas of flicir church are correctly represented, their feelings 
 will not be hurt ; if not correctly represented, it will be my duty 
 to see to it. 
 
 Again he says : He is not disposed to question the correctness 
 of my statement when I say that the texts given to pi'ove the 
 doctrine attributed to the Jesuits, " the endjustiiies the means, " 
 are capable of an entirely different interpretation. Then he con- 
 tradicts himself and says : " In fact I am quite prepared to be- 
 lieve, as Mr. Egan's statement would seem to imply (I did not 
 
10 
 
 imply that), that ainhi(/iiif/f is one of the principal excellencies of 
 the Jesuitical authors. " Mr. Egan's rendering]; of the last passage 
 from Waj^eman, * Finis (h'tcrmivai pmhitatem actus,' furnishes 
 a very good illustration of this. He says this does not mean that 
 * the end justilies the means, ' it means ' the end determines the 
 prohity of an action.' I submit this is a distinction without a 
 difference. " I, on the other hand, submit therein a ureat differrnee 
 connected as I said with an action indifferent, or at least not 
 bad in itself, to procure an end, from placing an action bad in it- 
 self to procure an end. I shall illustrate my meaning by an 
 example : — One man, desirous of giving in charity, labors at his 
 ordinary avocation to procure the necessary means. Here his work, 
 which, as to its moral aspect, may be inditTerent in itself, derives 
 merits from the good end in view. Another man wishes to give 
 in charity, but in order to procure the means he commits murder 
 and robery. The good end in view does not justify these actions, 
 which are bad in themselves, for as I quoted before : — " Omtiis 
 electro mall medii est mala sed non a converso omnis electio boiii 
 mcdii es positira bona. " Translation : — " Every choice of evil 
 means is evil, but not every choice of good means is good. " So 
 the rev. gentleman calls this a " distinction without a difference." 
 If he has no intelligence to perceive a difference, he is not com- 
 petent to lecture on the subject, or if perceiving the difference he 
 has not the candour to admit it, the case is still worse. I leave 
 himself to decide. 
 
 And the rev. gentleman goes on : — " Actions speak louder than 
 words, and I am prepared to affirm and maintain that not merely 
 the Jesuit Society, but the Roman Catholics, whatever may be 
 their theory on the subject, have only too often by their actions 
 given sad proof that they do believe that ' the end does justify 
 the means.' " This all seems like childish prattle. There is no 
 sense in it. Surely the rev. gentleman does not mean it for ar- 
 gument. An}' school boy knowing the rudiments of logic 
 must be aware that we cannot proceed from the particular to the 
 universal, that is to say, from particular cases we cannot make a 
 general charge. But methinks I perceive here a hint at a threat 
 that if I should continue this thing he will expose all the abomi- 
 nations of Romanism. These have been now so often exposed by 
 Chiniquy, Maria Monk, Widdows, Fulton, &c., that I don't care. 
 In fact I am quite desperate on these points. In fact I think I 
 shall be able from Presbyterian sources alone to balance these 
 accounts when the test of historical truth can be applied, and in 
 every case the part of the Toronto University faculty who are 
 Protestant will be the judges. I know that the Catholic repre- 
 sentation there is not very large. Catholic and Jesuit aggression 
 not having yet gone so far as to monopolize that institution. We 
 have a good deal to be thankful for that we are allowed to live. 
 
11 
 
 ri'e. 
 
 I 
 
 se 
 in 
 ire 
 i-e- 
 on 
 Ve 
 re. 
 
 There was a time when, in a certain country and under the Brit- 
 ish constitution, the hiw did not suppose the very existence of a 
 Cathohc. But these were in the days of riril and irliiiimis lihcrti/, 
 not hke these degenerate days when Cathohcs and even Jesuits 
 can enjoy Hherty Hke other people. 
 
 How humihating to men of the J. L. Hughes stamp and the 
 bigots of the Ministerial Association, the results of the late vote. 
 They have raist;d the No Popery cry from one end of the land to 
 the other. The outcry has resounded from pulpit and press ; its 
 notes were fierce and sanguinary. They were worthy of the pal- 
 miest days of Titus Oates, Lord Gordon, or the Pigotists of the 
 present day — all inihued with the deepest hatred of the members 
 of the Catholic Church. When we reflect how untiring are the, 
 men engaged in this crusade, how many complexions it has as- 
 sumed, now boasting of their zeal for the purity of religion, now 
 parading their solicitude for our noble constitution, now threat- 
 ened with destruction by an insidious foreign influence, when we 
 reflect how unscrupulous are the men engaged in it, how many 
 glaring untruths they have boldly published, both from pulpit 
 and press, how many base forgeries, now known to be such, are 
 unblushingly perpetrated in the full light of day, and with the 
 enlightenment of the 19th century beaming in their faces, when 
 we reflect upon all this we are thankful that all they could ac- 
 complish was to inflame the passions of the ignorant to hate their 
 Catholic neighbors, and the ruffianly element to march at night 
 playing insulting party tunes and wrecking Catholic institutions. 
 But when it came to influencing the better and more enlightened 
 portion of our citizens, even the representatives of the people, 
 they could muster but a baker's dozen, called by Sir John Alac- 
 donald " the devil's dozen." 
 
 However, Rev. Mr. Percival did not expect any other result. 
 He prophesied that the Bill would not be disallowed. He proposed, 
 however, a practical solution out of the difficulty, and that was 
 to contribute money to the Presbyterians for the purpose of con- 
 verting the habitants. I have read such reports of conversions 
 by Mr. Chiniquy that the impression was left that they had all 
 gone over to Presbyterianism, but it seems a few are yet to be 
 converted, enough perhaps to be a real danger to the constitution 
 if not soon brought over fioni the wicked influence of Romanism. 
 I have it on reliable authority that he asserted that a girl con- 
 verted 500 Romanists into Presbyterians by distributing a few 
 Bibles amongst them. Why, if this be a fact, and the Bibles make 
 Presbyterians of them and not Methodists, why should not the 
 Bible make Methodists of these habitants ? Would their salvation 
 be as secure as Methodists ? Is there greater security in Pres- 
 byterianism? It would appear so, judging from Mr. Percival's 
 transition from the ministry of the one to the ministry of the 
 
IS 
 
 other. What will our Methodist friends say to this ? After all if 
 they are foreordained to be saved ..a Presbyterians, they will surely 
 go over in crowds ; if on the other hand they are predestined to 
 be lost as Catholics, they will remain obstinately as they are. 
 
 This doctrine, " the end justifies the means, " is wicked, and 
 we repudiate it. It has been published in all the papers, Father 
 Whelan, of Ottawa, has offered a reward of $500 to any one who 
 will prove that the Jesuits teach this doctrine. The reward was 
 offered a month a<^o, and no one has yet claimed it. 
 
 The only doctrine I ever knew attributed to any denomination, 
 approaching; this in wickedness, is the Calvanistic doctrine of 
 ^^oreordination. Tliis doctrine deprives man of all liberty, and 
 .lakes God the author of sin. So in that case it would be quite 
 useless to talk of end or means. Calvin called this the horrible 
 decree. Tlie doctrine transfers all responsibility of our moral 
 transj^ressions from the creature to the Creator. Whether true 
 or false in itself, it is opposed in its consequences, not only to 
 morality, but to the foundation of all moral laws. It teaches that 
 (jod Jnrt'ordaincd what ever comes to i)ass. Pass in review then 
 all the crimes that have been committed since the world l)ej^an, 
 including the first and last, and since they have mine to ]>a>iii it 
 follows that God had foreordained them. And since He had fore- 
 ordained them it follows that their perjjetrators could not avoid 
 committing; them. And since they could not avoid them, it fol- 
 lows they had no reason to l)e sorr}' for them, and since they had 
 no reason to be sorry for them, it follows there was no motive for 
 exertion to avoid them ; they will happen in spite of exertion. But 
 enough ; this is a wicked doctrine ; the consequences are awful. 
 
 The rev. gentleman says that the public were again beginning 
 to regard me as a gentleman. This would imply there was a time 
 when they did not, and soon after he puts me on my guard against 
 personalities. That's very good. He signs himself "Yours in de- 
 fence of the truth." Who is attacking the truth, or what truth 
 is he defending. Is not this begging the whole question with a 
 vengeance ? If he means all this, he is so very innocent, that 
 it's out among.st the babes in the woods he ought to be. Or can 
 it be that he is as some have hinted, will 1 say it, a Jesuit in 
 disguise? That at one time he insinuated himself into the 
 Methodist ministry, then having learned all about them, got on 
 to the Presbyterian, and is there now busy advert' --ing the Jesuits, 
 denouncing them so that the real truth about the n may come out. 
 If this should happen to be so, but I don't believe it, what rogues 
 the Jesuits must be — and he will return to the Jesuits, proclaim 
 himself an ex-Methodist, an ex-Presbyterien minister, and make 
 awful disclosures, like those of Maria Monk, Widdows and 
 Chiniquy. Would not that read like the pages of romance. 
 
 Like many others, Rev. Mr. Percival has of late been booming 
 
18 
 
 his church at our expense. I can readily believe that he has no 
 ill-will towards the Catholics. There are many who owe Catholics 
 no particular ill will, yet make a good living by slandering, mis- 
 representing and abusing them. The subject is always sure to 
 draw a crowd, and in this age of enterprise it is no wonder that 
 people should avail themselves of this popular craving to advertise 
 themselves, and promote their ends regardless of the means. 
 
 The rev. gentleman says that he was speaking in his own church 
 and to his own people. The nfTair was advertised ; many others 
 attended in consequence. Neither in his own church or any- 
 where, has a man a right either on his own authority or by false 
 quotations, to make assertions at variance with truth. His lecture 
 then was public, having been given in the church and advertised. 
 I or any one else have a perfect right to criticise his statements. 
 
 I am not at all agressive. Every one who knows me can 
 testify to that. But when a minister of the Gospel makes publicly, 
 unfounded statements about the Catholic religion, then, though 
 the mildest of men, it makes me somewhat mad, as he puts it. 
 If he had consulted me, I should have suggested a subject about 
 which he knew something — then he would not have made vil- 
 lains of the Jesuits and a fool of himself. 
 
 If then to my knowledge statements are made, within the 
 limits of this parish, either from the pulpit or through the press, 
 in which the doctrines or practices of the Church are mis- 
 represented, I shall be always ready in my humble way to task 
 my place, shall I say "in defence of truth?" 
 
 J. J. Egan. 
 Thornhill, April 8th, 1889. 
 
 ig 
 
14 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 Rev. Mr. Percival accuses Father Egan of raising 
 
 Side Issues. 
 
 GIVES A HUMOUROUS ILLUSTRATION, AND CHARGES THE CATHOLIC 
 
 CHURCH WITH OPPOSITION TO THE WORD OF GOD 
 
 IN THE VULGAR TONGUE 
 
 The Rev. Mr. Egan in his first latter, like his renowned 
 countryman of Donneybrooke Fair fame, came out flourishing 
 his intellectual shillaly, and shouting "now thread on the tail 
 ave me coat." But now it seems he does not like to have his 
 coat tail trodden on, much less his corns. Your readers may 
 have heard the story of a fellow countryman of the rev. gentleman, 
 who recently emigrated to America. A short time after landing 
 he sought employment from a farmer as a farm labourer. Upon 
 being questioned as to the extent of his knowledge of practical 
 agriculture, Patrick at once unhesitatingly declared that he knew 
 all about it in theory and practice. He was then taken out to 
 the field and asked to take hold of the plow, and told to plow 
 straight for that black steer on the other side of the field. The 
 farmer then left him. Shortly after, returning, he found that 
 Paddy had beenplowiug, in the most fantastic manner imaginable, 
 literally going here and there, and almost everywhere. Why, 
 Paddy," said the farmer, "what do you mean by such a piece of 
 work as this?" " Sure, sur," said Pat in reply, "you tould me 
 to plow straight for the baste, but the confounded spalpeen has 
 been moving about all the time, but its myself that's been going 
 straight for her." In his last let^ ^r the rev. gentleman has been 
 acting very much like the hiack steer ; "the confounded spalpeen 
 has been moving about all the time," and if I go "straight tor 
 him," I fear I will make a very crooked furrow. 
 
 Your correspondent has the special faculty of raising a great 
 number of side issues, in order, no doubt, to call otf the attention 
 of your readers from the main question under discussion. 
 First, we are treated to a very learned disquisition on the 
 difference between Dogmatic Theology and Ethics. I would 
 just state for the rev. gentleman's information, that I so headed 
 my letter because I expected to have to write a number of them 
 in answer to his silly whimperings, and for the most part would 
 have to treat on Dogmatic Subjects, and therefore concluded so 
 to head them all, not that in every letter I shall confine myself 
 
15 
 
 to this particular subject. The rev. gentleman's fitness to fill 
 with credit a chair of either Dogmatic or Moral Theology, and I 
 may add, of even common English, must certaintly rest upon 
 something better than his last letter. I fail to find it there. I will 
 give your readers a specimen or two later on. 
 
 In my last communication I intimated that my failing to con- 
 sult Rev. Mr, Egan, and submit my sermon to him for his 
 approval, had probably made him mad. I did not mean angry, 
 I used the word in its primary and ordinary meaning — innane. 
 Anger and madness are not synonymous terms. I now find that 
 in my diagnosis of his mental condition, I was quite correct. 
 The rev. gentleman says he is mad. "But when a minister of 
 the gospel makes publicly unfounded statements about the 
 Catholic religion then, though the mildest of men, it makes me 
 somcirhat macV This candid confession was not at all necessary. 
 Anyone reading his letters would come to the same conclusion. 
 I would suggest to the rev. gentleman's friends that they look 
 after him, and place him where all madmen should properly be 
 — in a lunatic asylum. 
 
 It is quite amusing to notice Rev. Mr. Egan's bid for a little 
 Methodist sympathy in the odious position in which he now finds 
 himself, as the result of his rashness. I know "our Methodist 
 friends" (as he calls them) a little better than he does. Mr. 
 Egan is quite welcome to all the sy^ipathy he can get in that 
 quarter. In order to accomplish his purpose the rev. gentleman 
 will evidently stick at nothing. He says, " I have it on reliable 
 authority (of course all his knowledge is authoritative) that he 
 asserted that a girl converted 500 Romanists into Presbyterians 
 by distributing a few Bibles amongst them." Let me have your 
 reUahlc authoHtif, Mr. Egan, please. I never said anything of 
 the kind, and I defy you to prove I did. What I did say was 
 that a girl sold 500 copies of the New Testament Scriptures in a 
 comparatively small village in Quebec." I said nothing about 
 the particular effect the circulation of the Word of God had upon 
 the people. That was a pure invention of " the least aggressive • 
 of men " — Father Egan — to serve a particular purpose. I men- 
 tioned the incident to show that very many of the habitants of 
 Quebec are anxious to obtain that which Rome carefully keeps 
 from them, viz., the Word of God. Whether the free circulation 
 of the Holy Scripture makes Methodists, Episcopalians or Pres- 
 byterians, is a matter of very little moment, so long as it makes 
 Christians, and it is sure to do that. One thing, however, is quite 
 apparent : it is not especially adapted to make Roman Catholics, 
 or ratify them in that faith, if they should be born in it. This 
 is clear from the well-known hictoric fact that Rome has always 
 been a strong opponent ^f the free circulation of the Bible in the 
 vulgar tongue. A considerable portion of Mr. Egan's letter is 
 
i 
 
 m 
 
 16 
 
 taken up in caricaturing " the wicked Calvinistic doctrine of fore- 
 ordination, " in which the writer demonstrates his utter ignor- 
 ance of the subject. It is no doubt too profound a question for 
 the Rev. J. J. Egan's shallow brain. As it is quite foreign, how- 
 ever, to the one at present under consideration, we will not now 
 discuss it. 
 
 " Our Methodist friends " have probably not quite forgotten 
 that the Eev. Mr. Morris, one of Mr. Egan's predecessors, trav- 
 elled a long distance out of his way to attack the Rev. Mr. Bre- 
 den, an esteemed Methodist minister, for having the audacity to 
 dare to presume to address a company of Orangemen on July 
 12th, 1868. He found, however, " that he woke up the wrong 
 passenger, " and received in return a well merited drubbing. 
 " Our Methodists friends, " incommon with all Protestants, know 
 very well that according to well known Roman Dogma they are 
 all " foreordained " by " my Lord of God, " the infallible Pope 
 of Rome, ifo f/o to hell straiciht without even the optioii of a sojourn 
 in Rome's heathenish, Purgatory. " Outside thechurch of Rome 
 there is no salvation, " and the Rev. Mr.Egan, with ail his gross 
 vulgarity, consummate duplicity, and general proficiency in hy- 
 pocrisy, has not the brazen faced hardihood to deny it. I dare him 
 to do it if he can. 
 
 I have spent so much time in chasing the " black steer " round, 
 that I find most of my space gone without even touching the 
 main question at issue. In the future I will take no notice of the 
 mad animaVs wanderings. His horns are not sharp, so fortunately 
 he is not in a position to do anj' one much harm. 
 
 But to come back for a moment to the Jesuits. The rev. gentle- 
 man is evidently at home on the endjustifying the means business. 
 He wrings the charges out of the quotation from Wageman, 
 and delivers himself of the following sentence, which for hrilliancij 
 and distinctiH'Hs I venture to say is hard to match : — " Connected, 
 as I said, with an action indifferent, or at least not bad in itself, 
 to procure an end, from placing an action bad in itself to procure 
 an end." This certainly settles the controversy on that head." 
 Your readers are all doubtless convinced by the rev. gentleman's 
 clear putting of the case. Having achieved such a brilliant vic- 
 tory in this instance, perhaps the rev. gentleman will be kind 
 enough to take up the other passage I gave him from Busem- 
 baum : — " Cum finis est licitiis etium medi sunt lueita." '* When 
 the end is allowable the means are allowable." Or perhaps he may 
 kindly tell your readers what Gaspard Hardato, a Spanish Jesuit, 
 means when he says: — " That a son may wish for the death of 
 his father, and even rejoice at it when it arrives, if his wish does 
 not arise from personal hatred but only from a desire of the pat- 
 rimony which his death procures him." Or what Father L'Amy, 
 a French Jeeuit, means when he says : — " That a Monk or ec- 
 
17 
 
 clesiastic may lawfully assassinate a calumniator who threatens 
 to impute scandalous crimes to the community when there is no 
 other way of preventing the execution of his purpose." These 
 will he sufficient perhaps for the present. When the rev. gentleman 
 has given your readers the henefit of his very lucid and clear ex- 
 planation, I may favor him with some others. 
 
 The Rev. Mr. Egan calls in question my statement that the 
 Jesuits ever came under the ban of the Pope, and demands proof. 
 We shall certainly gratify him. Dr. Mosheim, in his Church 
 Historij, page 710, says : — " The Jesuits affected to believe (and 
 probably many of them thought) that Clement would not dare 
 to suppress their Order. But in the fifth year of his pontificate, 
 he resolved, in defiance of all clamour and menaces of the zealots, 
 to disembody the fraternity, and amalgamate its members with 
 the unprivileged mass of society. He declared it to be his opinion 
 that the order had ceased to answer the ends of its institution, 
 and that the members, by the impropriety of their conduct, their 
 loose casuistry and their mischievous arts, had forfeited all claim 
 to further encouragement. A bull for the annihilation of the 
 society was therefore promulgated, its colleges were seized and 
 its revenues confiscated. Lorenzo Ricca, the refractory general 
 of the order, was sent to the Castle of St Angelo, and died in 
 confinement." Is this satisfactory ? The bull of Pope Clement 
 XIV, was dated July 21st, 1773. I would like to give it to you in 
 full for Eev. Mr. Egan's benefit, but it is too long for your space. 
 I will give an extract or two. The Pope says : — " We have omitted 
 no care, no pains, to arrive at a thorough knowledge of the origin, 
 the progress, the state of that regular order commonly known as 
 the company of Jesuits." He then goes on to accuse them of 
 having adopted, in certain places, certain idolatrous ceremonies 
 in cont impt of those approved of by the Catholic Church and 
 with teaching certain doctrines which the Holy See had pres- 
 cribed as scandalous and contrary to good morals. He then calls 
 attention to the fact that his " dearly beloved sons in Christ, 
 the kings of France, Spain, Portugal and Sicily, found them- 
 selves bound to the necessity of expelling and driving from their 
 states, kingdoms and provinces these very companions of Jesus, 
 persuaded that there remained no other remedy to so great evils, 
 and that this step was necessary to prevent the christians from 
 rising against one another, and from massacring one another in 
 the bosom of our common Mother, the Holy Church." He con- 
 cludes as fellows : — " We do out of our certain knowledge, and 
 in the fullness of our Apostolical power, suj^press and abolish 
 the said company, and that the name of the company shall be, 
 and is forever extinguished and supressed. Our will and pleasure 
 is, that these our letters shall fore rcr to all eternity he valid, per- 
 manent and effieatious." 
 
I; 
 
 18 
 
 We shall see what the Eev. Mr. Egan has to say to this well 
 established historic fact. I warn him, however, not to follow in 
 the footsteps of the Eev. Mr. Hand, and say that " this vaa 
 only a piece of diplomacy demanded by the peculiar exigencies 
 of the times." That's altogether too thin. He will have to manu- 
 facture something better than that. Perhaps, with his charac- 
 teristic efifrontery, he will deny the existence of the document. 
 We shall see. These are the gentlemen who, having been dclih- 
 erateli/ kicked out of all Catholic countries again and agam, by 
 Popes, Princes and Kings, are now coming over to America, like 
 the third plague of Egypt (j'our Bible readers will remember 
 what that was), again to repeat the peculiar tactics for which 
 they are justly condemned by the impartial testimony of history. 
 
 The Eev. Father Egan evidently has derived a great amount 
 of consolation from the recent vote in Parliament on the ques- 
 tion of disallowance (in fact I know of nothing that could give 
 him greater pleasure, unless it be the repeal of the Scott Act) 
 but its a long road that has no turn in it. This vote has not 
 been an unmixed evil by any means. It has opened the eyes of 
 the Protestants of this Dominion, and given them to understand 
 clearly by whom they are actually ruled. It's worth paying a 
 round sum for the possession of this knowledge. 
 
 This vote has not been looked upon as an unmixed good by 
 many of the more intelligent Eomanists, by any means. Le 
 Canadien, the leading Dominion Government organ at Quebec, 
 and which is supposed to reflect to a large extent the views of 
 Cardinal Taschereau, in a recent issue concludes an article on 
 the subject as follows — " The papal diplomacy in this instance 
 has been changing, illogical and inconsequent. These vacil- 
 lations, inconsequences, contradictions, have created a bad effect 
 in this country, and we pray God that such a spectacle may 
 never again bo seen here." 
 
 The rev. gentleman concludes his letter with the following 
 proclamation : — " If then to my knowledge statements are made 
 within the limits of this parish, either from the pulpit or through 
 the press, in which the doctrines of the Church are misrepresented, 
 I shall be always ready in my humble way to take my place, 
 shall I say for the defence of the truth." It is to be earnestly 
 hoped that all Protestant ministers residing within the bounds 
 of the parish aforesaid will take due notice and govern themselves 
 accordingly. Perhaps in his next the Eev. ]\Ir. Egan will kindly 
 define the limit or extent of his parish, so that those living out- 
 side it may breathe freely. 
 
 For the present, yours in defence of truth. 
 
 The Manse, lUchnwnd Hill. 
 
 April im, 1886. 
 
 W. W. Percival. 
 
19 
 
 CHAPTEK V. 
 
 Father Egan Answers the Charge of Raising Side 
 
 Issues ^ . 
 
 CALLS UPON MR. PERCIVAL AGAIN TO PROVE HIS STATEMENTS, DE- 
 TECTS A FRAUD IN THE QUOTATION OF THE PAPAL BRIEF 
 CALLS FOR PROOF THAT THE CHURCH IS OPPOSED 
 TO THE BIBLE AND INVITES HIM TO A 
 FRIENDLY DISCUSSION OF THE 
 ^BIBLE QUESTION. 
 
 As Rev. Mr. Percival commenced his last letter by re- 
 lating a humorous anecdote of a countryman of mine, I may be 
 permitted to tell another. Though my anecdote may not be 
 quite so humorous, it will be, I am sure, more appropriate. 
 Hearing two Frenchmen arguing some point, and not under- 
 standing their language, the Hibernian exclaimed, "I don't know 
 what they are saying, but I know very well who is getting the 
 worst of the argument — the man who has lost his temper." It 
 is evident the rev. gentleman has quite lost his temper, and I 
 pity whoever finds it. 
 
 His letter reminds me of Swift's meditations on a broom stick; 
 it is a specimen of that diffusive, empty style, wherein a great 
 deal is said, and nothing proved. Vox ct praetcra mliil ("A 
 sound and nothing more"). I am indeed sorry, by reason of the 
 matter in discussion (if indeed there is anything now under 
 discussion), to find that he has descended so low. People will 
 be disgusted to find that a person in the garb of a clergyman 
 cannot conduct a controversy in a manner becoming the dignity 
 of a christian gentleman, and a suliject of vital importance. 
 There is no argument in that kind of thing. But I shall not 
 follow him in Billingsgate. The depths to which he has de- 
 scended give hira that impunity, which, perhaps, he has been 
 seeking. Could any one imagine that his last letter was written 
 by the courteous disciple of Chesterfield, who warned me against 
 personalities, and declared he would deal with principles, not 
 with persons? 
 
 He says that I have the special faculty of raising side issues 
 in order to direct attention from the main question under dis- 
 cussion. Now, what is the main question under discussion, and 
 how far has he kept to it? Shall I repeat it? That in his own 
 
20 
 
 I : III: 
 
 church, to his own people he quoted the Mail of March 5th to prove 
 that the Jesuits, and consequently the Catholic Church, taught 
 the wicked doctrine that the end justifies the means, a doctrine 
 so subversive of all moral law that persons professing it would 
 be unfit for civil society. I call upon him to give authentic proof 
 of this statement, and he answers by saying that after all the 
 end has something to do with the action. Here indeed he made 
 a slight advance to the question under discussion, but did not 
 get quite to it. And because I have called upon him for proof 
 of this accusation, which is a gross calumny, and asked him to 
 have the proof endorsed by the Toronto University, he complains 
 that I grossly abused him. I have called upon him for proof 
 of his assertion that the Pope did curse the Jesuits with book, 
 bell and candle. Did he rush to the University, and like a man 
 bring forth the proofs? Not a bit of it. What does he do in- 
 stead? He tells a yarn about a steer, and then steers away 
 from the subject as fast and as far as it was possible. Then he 
 goes on to say that I have been raising side issues in order to 
 draw attention from the question under discussion. These proofs 
 were the points under discussion, and he has carefully shunned 
 them, reminding one of the bird which flies in every direction 
 when its nest is invaded, except near the spot where the nest is 
 located. 
 
 It is true that as a matter of expediency the Jesuits were 
 suppressed as a society. In the Brief, however, of their 
 suppression there is not one word condemning them or their 
 doctrines. They were allowed to disperse and join the ranks 
 of the secular clergy as priests in good standing. 
 
 Mr. Percival says the Pope in his rescript goes on to accuse 
 them of certain idolatrous ceremonies in contempt of those 
 approved of b}^ the Catholic Church, and with teaching certain 
 doctrines which the Holy See had proscribed as scandalous and 
 contrary to good morals. You are at your old work of mis- 
 representation again, Mr. Percival. If he can get the Professors 
 of the University to show from the Brief (not a Bull, as Mr. 
 Percival calls it) that he states the truth in the above sentence 
 as it is, I shall give him one hundred dollars for his trouble. 
 There is a chance. He is wrong, and he knows it. There is no 
 good faith in an error like that. Does he depend on tricks like 
 this for the success of the cause he advocates? 
 
 What will the Presbyterian congregation think of their minister 
 who, when called upon to substantiate these statements, has no 
 answer to give but abuse, so low, that the amenities of ordinary 
 civilized society forbid me to notice, much less to follow him to 
 such depths of vulgarity. Would not the rev. gentleman have 
 been better employed in proving his statements, as people expected 
 than finding fault with a sentence in which some words were 
 
21 
 
 tnce 
 
 )le. 
 
 no 
 
 like 
 
 iter 
 no 
 
 |ary 
 
 to 
 
 ive 
 
 Ited 
 
 [ere 
 
 omitted, and which would have been rectified if I had had an 
 opportunity of seeing the proof sheet. When a man tries to 
 make capital out of an accident like that it can be easily seen to 
 what straits he is driven. 
 
 I ask now, who has l)een keeping from the point ? I have in- 
 deed in my last letter been rambling, not like ray countryman 
 after a hcast, but, after one who I considered at least as having the 
 cultivation of a gentleman, though perhaps mistaken or deceived 
 in regard to certain facts or doctrines. The Catholic Church 
 does not teach her Theology through the Mail, nor is her history 
 impartially stated in Mosheim, as he will find. I call upon Kev. 
 Mr. Percival again for authentic proof of his statements, or let 
 him honestly say that these proofs are not to be found. It is 
 not by teaching abominable doctrines, such as he attributes to 
 her, that the Catholic Church has acquired intluence which she 
 holds, and of which i^e is so jealous. 
 
 I am sorry that I was misinformed about the conversion of 
 500 inhabitants, and I hereby retract my assertion to that effect, 
 on the ground that I was deceived. I shall not need in future 
 to rely on hear-say, as I have the gentleman's own words in 
 print. I think, however, it would be difficult to find a com- 
 paratively small village in Quebec, 500 families, without copies 
 of the Bible. It is astonishing, however, how much better the 
 clergy of the Presbyterian Church know Catholic theology and 
 the condition of Catholic people, than the Catholic clergy, whose 
 duties and avocations l)ring them in much closer connection 
 with these matters. In fact the thing is almost incredible. 
 
 He says that Eome has always been a strong opponent of the 
 free circulation of the Bible in the vulgar tongue. That is 
 simply another calumny. Will he prove the assertion '? I know 
 I can prove to the contrary. He saj^s whether the free circulation 
 of the Scriptures makes Methodists, Episcopalians or Pres- 
 byterians is of very little moment, so long as it makes christians, 
 and it is sure to do that. Is it because the Presbyterians do 
 not regard Catholics as christians that they take such pains to 
 circulate the Bible amongst them? It would seem so. 
 
 The rev. gentleman has got out of the Dogmatic business 
 ingeniously. But suppose we return to it for a while, and as he 
 says he Ims been anticipating some Dogmatic gymnastics, I 
 shall gi\e him a chance of exercising his skill in that department. 
 We shall watcli carefully to what use he will put tliis opportunity. 
 
 I shall ask him a few questions suggested by the last sentence 
 of his which I have quoted. If hitherto we have been groping 
 in the dark on matters so important, it will become him much 
 more to enlighten us, and, in a charitable, gentlemanly manner, 
 reconcile us to his views, than slander us, call us hard names, 
 and tell us our brains are too shallow to understand these things. 
 
22 
 
 i iiii; 
 
 It will be admitted that people with shallow brains have souls to 
 save, and are capable of ac(iuiring the knowledge necessary to 
 that end, unless, indeed, they are " fore-ordained," in which 
 case they are all ri<j;ht anyhow. 
 
 The historian Froude has said, that if the Protestant religion 
 had l)een presented to the Irish in a less oflensive manner it is 
 probable they would all have embraced it. But no ; it was pre- 
 sented to them at the point of the sword ; they were told they 
 were idolaters, that they were not allowed to read the Bil)le, 
 and all that, as we are told now. They knew to begin with that 
 this was not true. And then the Penal Code in all its fury and 
 barbarity was enacted against them. At the very iirst step the 
 people were prejudiced against a religion presented to them in 
 that wav. 
 
 1. Will Mr. Percival explain to us how it is that the Bible is 
 sure to make christians? Suppose a Pagan found a Bible, how 
 does he know it is a Bible? How could Mr. Percival prove to 
 him its inspiration? Does the Bible prove its own inspiration 
 to the Pagan? Is the authority which proves the inspiration of 
 the Bible infallible? Yes or no? 
 
 2. If it is a matter of no consequence provided one is a 
 christian whether he is an Episcopalian, Methodist or 
 Presbyterian, will the gentleman tell us if all the contradictory 
 doctrines held by these denominations are reVealed by God in 
 the Scriptures ? Is it the same whether he Ijelieves, for example, 
 in fore-ordination or not? If God has revealed this doctrine, 
 are the Methodists who reject it just as well oft"? Or does he 
 consider that some people are at liberty to disbelieve what God 
 has taught? Is this what the rev. gentleman would call liberty 
 of thought ? 
 
 The Calvinists teach that there are two sacraments. There are 
 no sacraments according to Quakers. Episcopalians teach that 
 there is a real distinction between Bishops and Presbyters. 
 According to the Westminister Confession there is no such dis- 
 tinction. According to the Methodists there is a hell for the 
 wicked. There is no hell according to the Universalists, &c., 
 &c. All these are christians and Bible christians at that. It is 
 all right then, provided one is a christian, to disbelieve, per- 
 haps, what God has taught? And some of these must, for 
 oontradictory propositions, according to philosophy, cannot at 
 the same time be true. 
 
 By answering these questions, and proving his own pro- 
 position that it is a matter of very little moment, &c., the rev. 
 gentleman will have a good chance of removing many little 
 difficulties in the way of reconciling us to his views. But please, 
 now, Mr. Percival, be nice, and don't get into a rage for nothing 
 at all. I vould not vex you' for anything. Being the 
 
 m 
 
28 
 
 i)ie, 
 
 mildest of men, you know, I hate to see you in a passion, when 
 it's information, and logic, and coming to the point I want from 
 you. Give us these things and we can be the best of friends, 
 and we'll like you so much, Mr. Percival. 
 
 As to the question that the Catholic Church teach that the 
 end justifies the means, in his first letter he denies having said 
 anything of the kind ; in his last letter he attempts to prove it. 
 How is this? What will those think now who have heard him 
 speak, and read his letters? How, consistently witli truth, 
 reconcile these statements? When tho faculty of Toronto 
 University decide that the Jesuit authors teach that doctrine, 
 they will get five hundred dollars for their trouble. But they 
 are too cautious to risk their reputation as scholars and 
 gentlemen by perverting garbled quotations to such an end. 
 
 I do not care whether the Jesuits or any other Catholic 
 institution ever got one cent of this money or not. I am sorry 
 that the aftair has caused the revival of so much bigotry, for 
 bigotry has no head, and cannot think, lias no heart, and can- 
 not feel ; her decalogue is written in the blood of her victims. 
 
 Notwithstanding the exertions of the leaders of this crusade, 
 the movement has commenced to languish, and its discordant 
 notes of hatred are fast dying away. Sober and considerate men 
 of all denominations are astonished at the ))lind malignity of the 
 preachers who figured at recent meetings, and they have turned 
 in disgust from the loathsome spectacle of christian ministers 
 exciting the worst passions of their ignorant dupes, and malting, 
 " openly," statements at variance with truth. 
 
 We are told in natural history that the serpents, near the 
 close of the summer, when they become blind with excessive 
 venom, strike recklessly at every object that presents itself, 
 often inflicting mortal wounds on themselves. Now, if this 
 venom is expended, and he can settle down to discuss the 
 question about the Bible which he introduced, and give us some 
 enlightenment on these matters, 1 shall be glad to accomodate Mr. 
 Percival by taking up his arguments. 
 
 I cannot follow him through all the side issues that he has 
 raised, such for example, as the Scott Act. This is a question 
 to which I have given very little attention, but I know that like 
 every scheme that is made a hobby by the fanatics of the 
 Ministerial Association, it is opposed by the people and defeated. 
 Whether this opposition on the part of the public is on the merits 
 of the question itself, and because, after the experiment, they do 
 not think the Scott Act has promoted the cause of temperance, 
 or because it is advocated by the Ministerial Association, I can't 
 say. 
 
 I must bring this letter to a conclusion, though I have been 
 
 liged to leave many side issues untouched. I must return in 
 
24 
 
 my next to the question of exclusive salvation. I shall be glad 
 of such opportunities to explain the Catholic doctrine, but I 
 must not intrude on all the space needed to hunt every hare 
 that is started on my path. With time and patience, and with 
 truth and justice at my side, I expect to get through, nor can 1 
 be frightened ])y aljuse to al)andon my purpose. 
 
 Yours, Etc., 
 
 J. J. Egan. 
 Thornhill, April 22nd, 1880. 
 
 M 
 
 NOTE 
 
 It ia sometimes urged, and I admit with some reason, that no good can come 
 of controversies like the cue at issue, that no conversions will be made, t^c. I 
 am willing to admit all that, but we Catholics cannot lose much anyhow. Noth- 
 ing can be brought up against us that the Protestant public are not already 
 familiar with. Frauds like Widdows, who is now serving a ten years' term in 
 the Penitentiary at London, have made fat livings by slandering us. In a con- 
 troversy it will bo seen there is another side to the question. We will have an 
 opportunity of speaking for ourselves, an opportunity which rarely presents 
 itself of reaching our Protestant neighbors, and placing matters before them in 
 altogether a new light, and exposing the tactics which are used against us. 
 
 Besides our opponents if they have any self respect, will be more guarded in 
 their statements, when they tind that they are liable to be called to task. 
 
 It is a humiliating situation for one who would desire to be regarded as a 
 man of honor, to be detected iii a deliberate falsehood or misrepresentation. I 
 think bigotry and falsehood should be stamped out, and those who busy them- 
 selves in sowing discord should be frowned down. 
 
 It will be said these things create bad feelings. No doubt they do, but whose 
 fault is it ? Must Catholics always meekly submit to this rude insolence for 
 the sake of peace ? I am convinced we are often attacked because our enemies 
 calculate en impunity. If they had any fear the business would not p\y, or 
 serve their purpose, they would be more careful. 
 
 I make this explanation in answer to some friends. Catholic and Protestant, 
 who do not like that a controversy should degenerate to mere personalities,. 
 but for my own part I shall be careful to guard against rash statements. 
 
 J. J. E. 
 
 J »i 
 
26 
 
 CHAPTEK VI. 
 Roman Dogmatics. 
 
 REV. MR. PERCIVAL's DEFINITION OF JESUITS. A CHRONOLOGY OF 
 
 THEIR BANISHMENT, AND SEVi-^-RAL GRAVE CHARGES ARE 
 
 URGED AGAINST THEM. 
 
 idy 
 
 in 
 
 con- 
 
 an 
 
 in 
 
 in 
 
 Ls a 
 I 
 sm- 
 
 086 
 
 for 
 
 lies 
 
 or 
 
 nt, 
 
 63^ 
 
 I will now resume the consideration of the Jesuit Question. 
 Wliat is a Jesuit ? He is a mere machine, without the rifjiit to 
 exercise his own judgment in any case. The General's will must 
 be his will. He must go where he is sent, and do whatever his 
 chief may ditate. He is to ask no question to seek no reasons, 
 but simply to obey. When commanded by his superior to send 
 the Spanish Armada to overthrow England, or to blow up the 
 English Parliament with gun-powder, or assassinate King Henry 
 of France, or poison Pope Clement, or shoot the Prince of Orange, 
 or enjoin Charles IX. to perpetrate St. Bartholomew's massacre, 
 or Louis XIV. to revoke the Edict of Nantes and deluge France 
 with the blood of her choicest sons, he mmt simph/ obey. Should 
 he be detected in the act, and get his miserable neck stretched, 
 he may then be canonized as a saint, as was Garnish, the Jesuit 
 chief of gun-powder plot fame. (See Humes His. Vol. III., ch. 
 40.) Here are his instructions : — He '' must regard the Superior 
 as Christ the Lord, and must strive to acquire perfect resigna- 
 tion and denial of his own will and judgment, in all things con- 
 forming to the will and judgment of that which his superior wills 
 and judges, * * * and let every one persuade himself that 
 he who lives under Obedience should be moved and directed, under 
 Divine Providence, by his Superior, just as if he icere a corpse, 
 which allows itself to be moved and led in every direction." (See 
 Nicoline b. 80 to 56, Steinmetz Vol. I., p. 351. His. of the So- 
 ciety of Jesus Daurignac Vol. I., p. 14. Encj'clopredia Americana 
 Vol. II., page 198.) 
 
 From the above facts, which cannot be successfully disputed, 
 your readers will soon see that a number of men, under despotic 
 control at Piome, cannot otherwise than be inimical to the lil)- 
 erties of any community where they may obtain a foothold. 
 That this has been their record, the impartial testimony of His- 
 tory abundantly corroborates. If they are, as certain parties 
 . would have us believe, the sweet innocents, with angelic tempe- 
 raments and incandescent piety, whose only object is now, and 
 ever has been, to spread abroad the knowledge and spirit of 
 
26 
 
 Christ, the Divine Saviour of men, then I ask (and I think I 
 have f;ood reasons for askinj?), how comes it that History ijresents 
 them to us in sucli an odious H^^ht ? 
 
 Before their suppression hy Pope Clement XIV. they were 
 driven out of the following' countries, by the respective f^overn- 
 raents, at the dates mentioned : — Sara^ossa, 1555 ; La Palintine, 
 155() ; Venice, 15(58 ; Avif,'non, 1570 ; Portugal, 1578 ; England, 
 1579, again in 1581, and yet again in 1586 ; Japan, 1587 ; Hun- 
 gary, 1588 ; Bordeaux, 1580 ; France, 1594 ; Holland, 159(5 ; 
 Tournon, 1597 ; England, 1(501, again in 1(504 ; Denmark, 1006 ; 
 Venice again, 1412 ; Japan again, 1(5;}0 ; Bohemia, 1618 ; Mora- 
 via, 1(519 ; Naples, 1622 ; China and India, 1(523 ; Malta 1634 ; 
 Piussia, 1723 ; Savoy, 1729 ; Paraguay, 1733 ; Portugal again. 
 1759 ; France again. 1764 ; Spain, 1767 ; the two Sicilies, 1767 ; 
 Parma and Malta, 1 'S. 
 
 After their supjireonion by Clement, they were driven out of 
 Eussia again, 1776 ; France agahi 1804 ; Grisons, Swiss Canton, 
 1794 ; Naples again, 1806 ; France again, 1810. 
 
 Neither can it be maintained truthfully that the society im- 
 proved any after their restoration by Pope Pius VIII. in 1814 (I . 
 will allow your readers to reconcile as best they can the consist- 
 ency of one infallible Pope ciirsinn, and another infallible Pope 
 IdesHuin, the mine men), for since that date they have been expelled 
 from the following countries : — Belgium, 1816 ; France, 1819 ; 
 Ptussia, 1820 ; Colleges in France, 1831 ; Spain, 1835 ; France 
 again, 1845 ; Switzerland, 1847 ; Bavaria, 1848 ; Naples and Pa- 
 pal States, 1848 ; Paraguay, 1858 ; Italian towns, 1859. 
 
 Beyond question, their conduct must have been bad in the 
 extreme, before such intensely Romish countries as France and 
 Spain would kick them out of their Dominions again and again. 
 Thesearethe " learned and illustrious society of Catholic Priests." 
 that certain parties in our midst would hold up before the pub- 
 lic as the embodiment of every excellency. 
 
 But, perhaps, it may be contended, that during the past few 
 years tliey have repented of their former crimes, or else all the 
 old criminals have gone to purgatory, or some other place, where 
 they will probably i)e even worse off, and that the new genera- 
 tion of Jesuits are all that they claim to be themselves, and that 
 their friends claim for tliem. But even this, I am sorry to say, 
 is not correct, or at least we have no evidence that it is. Per- 
 haps there is no statesman to-day that stands higher in the 
 estimation of our Roman Catholic fellow-citizens, than does the 
 Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone. His opinion will, possibly, have 
 some influence with them. In an article in the Contemporari/ 
 Her id a- for June, 1876, the Right-Hon. gentlem m brings the 
 following charges against the society: — " (1) Its hostility to 
 mental freedom at large; (2) its incompatibility with the thought 
 
27 
 
 vary 
 
 the 
 
 to 
 
 3;ht 
 
 and movement of modern civilization ; (3) its pretensions apiainst 
 the state; (4) its pretensions against parental and conjugal 
 rights; (5) jealousy, abated in some quarters, of the free cir- 
 culation and use of Holy Scriptures; (O) and <h' facto alienation 
 of the educated mind of the country in which it prevails ; (7) its 
 detrimental offects on the comparative strength and morality of 
 the states in which it has sway; (8) its tendency to sap veracity 
 in the individual mind." In the above mentioned article Mr. 
 Gladstone discusses these points with his usual ability. 
 
 A remarkable discussion took place in the French Chamber in 
 1879 on this subject. During the discussion it was clearly proved 
 that the society held the same doctrines now that it held from 
 the beginning. That it taught the Divine right of Kings; that 
 the liberty of the press was a dangerous thing ; that it attacked 
 tlie Revolution and glorified the Revocation of the Edict of 
 Nantes; that it denounced trial by jury; and condemned liberty 
 of conscience and worship. The result of that discussion was 
 that the Jesuits were expelled from the educational institutious 
 of France. 
 
 I stated that Pope Clement XIV. probably fell a victim to 
 Jesuitical malice. I made the statement on the following 
 grounds: — Cardinal De Birnis, who had been Minister of Louis 
 XV. of France, shortly after the Pope's death, wrote thus: 
 "When others shall come to know as much as I do, from certain 
 documents which the late Pope communicated tojme, the sup- 
 pressiongiof the Jesuits) will be deemed very just and necessary. 
 The circumstances which have preceded, accompanied, and fol- 
 lowed the death of the late Pope, excite equal horror and com- 
 passion." And speakingof Pope Pius VI., who was the immediate 
 successor of Clement XIV., he said: "The Pope has certain 
 moments of frankness, in which his true sentiments show them- 
 selves. I shall never forget three or four efl'usions of his heart 
 which he betrayed when with me, by which I can judge that he 
 was well aware of the nnhappn end of his predecessor, and that lie 
 was anxious not to run the same risks.'' (See Apund Nicolini 
 pages 419-420.) Carmenin says: ' "The dispatch of the 
 ambassador of Spain relates, in its fullest details, the exami- 
 nation of the dead body, which was made the day succeeding 
 his death, and adds to the irrefutable proofs of the poisoninrj of 
 the pontiff, and the guilt of the Jesuits.'' (Carmenin Vol. II., p. 
 898.) 
 
 With your unprejudiced readers, I think I have made out my 
 case, and have cLarly demonstrated that the history of the 
 Society of Jesus will not stand the light of investigation, that 
 its record is a bad one, and its presence in our country, and 
 more especially the manyfavours showered upon it by the (jovern- 
 ment, is a just cause for anxiety on the part of all who have the 
 welfare of the country at heart. 
 

 28 
 
 I will therefore close my present letter with an extract from 
 the Montreal daily Sta?- of the 25th inst.: "It is intimated that 
 Mr. Mercier is going to the Old Country, and it is said that his 
 presence was required at Eome to discuss Jesuit aflfairs some 
 months ago, ' the highest quarters at Eome inclining to the 
 opinion that the recent Quebec grant to the Jesuits was im- 
 prudent, seeing the condition of affairs in Canada,' Whatever 
 the opinion of the Papal authorities may have l)een some months 
 ago in regard to the wisdom of making the grant — and it seems 
 that there was more foresight at Rome than at Quebec — it is evi- 
 dent that they have still less reason now^ to thank Mr. Mercier 
 for, in arousing the feelings of the people over this unfortunate 
 affair. There was no need of his throwing this brand among a 
 people w^ho were living amicably together. The upshot has been 
 that he has done the Jesuit Order more injury than benefit, and 
 has been the cause of an agitation being started which may yet 
 do something to clip the w'ings of French Canadian aggrandise- 
 ment and restrict the privilege of the Catholic Church. If these 
 results should follow, tho Papal authorities at Eome will have 
 Mr. Mercier to thank for it. He declined to listen to the advice 
 of that eminent representative of the Church, Cardinal Tasche- 
 reau, and persisted in playing his own game, not for the good of 
 the Church, nor yet for the good of the French Canadian people, 
 but in order to help on his own political ends." 
 
 If I am under the necessity of writing again, I will, in my 
 next letter, discuss the Eomish Dogma, of Mental I{<'S''rration, 
 and will endeavor to show your readers that it is about on a par 
 with the " very wicked doctrine " of the end Justijying the vieans. 
 
 For the present, yours in defense of truth. 
 
 T;'. W. Percival. 
 
 The Manse, Eichmond Hill. April 30th, 1889. 
 
29 
 
 ■ CHAPTER VII. 
 
 Father Egan still asks for Proofs 
 
 AND EXPLAINS THE CAUSE OF HOSTILITY ON THE PART OF INFIDELS 
 AND OTHERS TO THE JESUITS. 
 
 Sir — I heartily congratulate Eev Mr. Percival on his partial 
 recovery from the billious attack from which he must have been 
 suffering when he penned his letter of the 18th ult. Has he been 
 using Mrs. Winslow's Soothing Syrup? It is said to be very good 
 for some people. With this improvement in health, his temper 
 is also somewhat better, though there is still room for improve- 
 ment. He has given himself over of late to a kind of lawlessness 
 of speech, and been practising his morbid recklessness on the Je- 
 suits. Or can it be that the few doses which I have administered 
 have helped to tone him down, and bring him to suavity and 
 humility as becomes a gentleman of his profession. It is a mercy 
 to give such people a strong dose, to stop them in their reck- 
 less career. 
 
 Under the ordinary missionary process of Bible expostulation, 
 I have no doubt the gentleman wold turn out a theological des- 
 perado, but I have hoi^es that a few more doses will still more 
 regulate his bile, tone his liver, and make him really pleasant. 
 Though his temper is slightly improved, I regret to say that his 
 logic remains about the same ; if anything it is worse. I wonder 
 if he were to swallow a volume of Whately's Logic would it cure 
 him of that malady ? I am very much in favor of mild treat- 
 ment for all the ills that flesh is heir to, but there are acute dis- 
 eases that roots and herbs cannot reach, and if Eev. Mr. Percival 
 does not recall and give up his rash, unfounded and slanderous 
 statements against the Catholic Church, I must quit my usual 
 mild ways and administer stronger doses, to effect, if possible, 
 a radical cure. 
 
 He says I have not given a single instance of his ill temper. 
 Of course I have not. He has given plenty of such instances him- 
 self, and made it unnecessary for me. 
 
 Now, what is the matter under discussion and how has he met 
 my arguments ? 
 
 1st. He has stated that the Jesuits, and consequently the 
 Catholic Church, teach the doctrine that " the end justifies the 
 means." I denied that, and called for the proofs, and in answer 
 he accuses me of steering. In order to understand this queption. 
 
30 
 
 it would be necessary to have studied the whole tract, De actihus 
 hnuaius. In that tract the fundamental principles are laid down, 
 and the different kinds of human actions grouped, and when the 
 whole tract is gone over, it will be seen that the texts, which the 
 rev. gentleman has quoted, refer to means not bad in themselves, 
 and consequently do not teach that doctrine. It is quite evident 
 he has never studied the tract in question ; it is probable he 
 never even saw the outside of the book in which it is contained, 
 and it is a marvel how much he pretends to know about it. He 
 has got his ideas at second-hand, and has been deceived, but the 
 worst of it is that he wants to remain deceived, and get others 
 to share in the deception. Another man would have given up 
 the whole thing long ago, but no, like Goldsmith's Schoolmaster : 
 
 " For e'en though vanquished he could argue still." 
 
 Since he has not procured the endorsation of the University 
 to his charges, I am willing to give him another chance. Let him 
 appoint a time and place, bring a number of intelligent gentle- 
 men with him, and I shall place the standard author (Gur}^, 
 used in our seminaries as text book, and if he can, when the 
 whole tract is seen, prove from it the odious doctrine that " the 
 end justifies the means," I give up. If, on the other hand, I 
 cannot prove the contrary, it will be seen also. This is the pro- 
 position which I called in question. This is the test that will 
 show a manly attitude on his part, and not that mean snivelling 
 and garbling, and bringing up new accusations before the first 
 is proved, which has excited the disgust and contempt of every 
 one, even of those who would otherwise be friendly to his cause. 
 Is it any proof to discover a sentence in which some words were 
 omitted '? I did not charge the printer with the omission ; the 
 omission was my own. What of it ? 
 
 Any doctrine held by the Catholic Church, she teaches it, and 
 teaches it boldly. She does not hold the doctrine that " the end 
 justifies the means," therefore she does not teach it. How often 
 do we read in newspapers of Presbyterian ministers being vailed 
 by certain congregations, because the teachings of these minis- 
 ters are supposed to be in harmony with those of the congrega- 
 tion. The question is not so much whether their teachings are 
 the truth or not, but if they harmonize. Christ said to His apos- 
 les go teach all nations, but now that commission seems to be 
 reversed. It would seem that now the commission is, go, let 
 every one teach you what interpretation you must put on the 
 Bible. If, however, for teaching anything at variance with truth, 
 you are called to task, you may prudently call that a " minor 
 2)()int," and give it up rather than get discharged by your congrega- 
 tion. Some time ago w^hen a Presbyterian minister, Pev. Mr. 
 
31 
 
 Uing 
 
 first 
 ivery 
 Luse. 
 were 
 the 
 
 and 
 end 
 ften 
 
 dh'd 
 nis- 
 
 are 
 
 |)08- 
 
 be 
 
 let 
 
 I the 
 
 tth, 
 |«or 
 
 Macdonnell, of Toronto, denied the Dogma (mind this belongs to 
 the department of Dogma) of everlasting punishment, or as Mr. 
 Briggs humourously puts it, knocked the bottom out of hell, he 
 soon caved in when he found that he was in danger of losing his 
 living. I wonder was a new bottom put into the infernal regions 
 when Mr. Macdonnell gave his assent ? If the Jesuits had acted 
 with the same prudence and caved in to suit Kings and Emper- 
 ors they would not have been banished out of so many countries. 
 But it is in denouncing the abominations, indolatries, tyranny, 
 superstitions, and heathenish Purgatory of Eomanism that Pres- 
 byterian clergy rise to the dignity of teachers, and manifest real 
 courage and bravery. 
 
 2nd. I have demanded proof that the Pope did curse the 
 Jesuits with bell, book and candle. No proof. 
 
 3rd. He has stated that the Pope in his rescript goes on to 
 accuse them of certain idolatrous ceremonies, ka. 
 
 I have asserted the falsehood of that sentence in language 
 which no one able to maintain the attitude he had taken could 
 have ignored. If he had, as he said, the Brief before him I 
 charge him with having deliberately falsified it to suit his pur- 
 pose, and, after that, he purposes giving us a lecture on Mental 
 Keservations as practised in the Church of Eome. It may turn 
 out to be like some of hisother lectures. We shall see. 
 
 By the way, he calls this a Romish Dogma. This question 
 does not belong to Dogmatic, but to Moral Theology — please call 
 things by their proper names, Mr. Percival. Though all his 
 letters are headed Dogmatics, not one paragraph of Dogma is in 
 them. How is this after all the promises ? 
 
 4th. He stated that the Catholic Church is opposed to the cir- 
 culation of the Bible in the vulgar tongue ; that the Bible is sure 
 to make christians; that no matter what denomination, provided 
 they were christians, &c. I asked him (1st) to give proof that the 
 Catholic Church was opposed to the circulation of the Bible — no 
 proof; (2nd) that it is of little moment what kind, kc. ; (3rd) if 
 some people are at liberty to deny perhaps what God has taught 
 in the Scriptures, and if not, how reconcile with objective truth 
 contradictory doctrines. 
 
 These questions are very impertinent, I am aware. He has 
 indeed given a most intelligent answer by calling them minor 
 points, unworthy of his notice — and in future he will despatch 
 them by treating them " iciih silent contempt.'" There are other 
 and weightier reasons, Mr. Percival, which make you cautious in 
 approaching these questions, besides their being minor jioints, 
 and you know it, and though the silent contempt business has a 
 pompous sound, no one would be deceived by it. I do not think 
 you a) e quite satisfied with it yourself, as clearing you out of the 
 difficulty, but it is the safest policy under the circumstances. 
 
32 
 
 Now, if these are secondary points, what would the rev. genleman 
 call matters of real importance ? 
 
 You were right when you said I wanted to draw you into the 
 discussion of these^^minor points. You knew what a mess you 
 would get yourself into in discussing these same minor points. 
 Is not the question of the inspiration of the Scriptures worthy of 
 the rev. gentleman's notice '? Is this a minor point too ? It 
 seems that what gives him most trouhle is the omission in that 
 sentence. But though such omissions may sometimes he attend- 
 ed with disastrous results, still it has nothing to do with the in- 
 spiration of the Scriptures, or with " the end justifying the 
 means." But I must not forget that he charges me with wand- 
 ering away from the subject, to which he keeps so closely. 
 
 Having himself introduced the Bible question, I asked him a 
 question relative to its inspiration. No doubt his congregation, 
 and the public in general, expected an intelligent answer, and 
 so far have been disappointed. Will the gentleman have the face 
 ever again to assert publicly that the Catholic Church is opposed 
 to the Bible ? 
 
 That the Jesuits were suppressed is true ; that many accusa- 
 tions were made against them is true. That these accusations 
 were proved is untrue ,• that the Pope accuses them, as Mr. Per- 
 cival asserts, is untrue^. He merely mentions that the accusa- 
 tions were made. Why did Mr. Percival change some words in 
 the quotations from the Brief of suppression ? To suit his pur- 
 pose. Why did he put language into that Brief which it does 
 not contain ? And then why does he build up arguments on the 
 corruption of the text which he has made ? Does he not accuse 
 the Jesuits of tactics like these and how does it come to be lawful 
 for Mr Percival '? Is this honest '? The fact of the matter is that 
 men of his calibre look upon anything as justifiable that militates 
 against the Catholic Church. They look upon anything gained 
 that is taken from her. They will any day extend the right hand 
 of fellowship to infidels, ex-monks, or any one who steps forth as 
 a no-popery champion. They reject no story, no matter how 
 loathsome, provided it is against the Catholic religion. Does 
 " the end justify the means." 
 
 The troubles of the Jesuits commenced in France, when they 
 made Louis XV. and his mistress, Madam de Pompadour, their 
 enemies. The Jesuits, being the Court Chaplains, insisted on 
 having the scandalous intimacy of the King with her broken 
 up. Kings are not accustomed to be thwarted in their affairs, 
 love or otherwise, and the Jesuits were banished for having done 
 their duty. The enemies which the Jesuits had thus made, led 
 by Voltaire and D'Alembert, were determined on the overthrow of 
 the Jesuits, who, on account of their zeal and ability in the cause 
 of religion, were regarded as formidable enemies of the revo- 
 
83 
 
 they 
 their 
 3d on 
 roken 
 Fairs, 
 done 
 led 
 low of 
 pause 
 fevo- 
 
 lutionary designs of the infidel philosophers of the day. The 
 infidels fiung themselves into the struggle agrinst the Jesuits 
 with terrible earnestness^ gathering up for this supreme effort 
 all their energies. Voltaire devoted to this all the faculties of 
 his mind, and all his power of derisive ridicule and scathing sar- 
 casm. He said, writing to Helvetius, in 1764 : — " Once we have 
 destroyed the Jesuits, that infamous thing (the christian religion) 
 w4ll be only child's play for us." The infidel writers published 
 all manner of lies about the Jesuits, and these are the lies now 
 adopted in the crusade against them. 
 
 This is a fair specimen of the reasons for which the Jesuits 
 were banished from so many countries where infidel secret so- 
 cieties held power, and this is the company in which Rev. Mr. 
 Percival is willing to find himself in attacking them. In quoting 
 these calumnies that have been sent b roadcast about the Jesuits, 
 I could excuse him on the ground that being deceived himself he 
 may have looked upon them as having come on good authority, 
 but when he deliberately alters the text of the Pope's Brief, 
 which he says he has befor^ him, in order to suit his purpose, 
 the idea of his (food faith and honcstij in the matter vanishes, and 
 no soft language will suffice to characterize this flagrant breach 
 of truth. Before I get through I hojje to show the Protestant 
 people of this locality how their confidence is abused, and their 
 intelligence insulted, by some who pretend to instruct them on 
 the tenets and history of the Catholic Church. These calumnies 
 have been sent over the world on the wings of an untiring press, 
 and the truth comes slowly limping after them. They have been 
 often repeated, but thougli as often contradicted, it is difficult to 
 nail every lie in particular. 
 
 He says that the Dogmas of the church consign Protestants 
 to an endless hell. What the Catholic Church teaches is that 
 "Outside of the true Church of Christ there is no salvation." 
 I believe that nearly all the Protestant denominations have 
 adopted the creed of St- Athenasius as a standard of faitli, and 
 that creed commences in these words : — " Whoever shall be 
 saved before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic 
 faith, which, unless every one<lo hold whole and entire, he shall 
 perish everlasthigly." St. Paul says : — " For without faith it is 
 impossible to please God." — Heb. 11 : 1(5 ; and our' Lord, Mark 
 16 : 16 : — " He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, ' 
 but he that believeth not shall be condemned." Christ estab- 
 lished a visible church and said emphatically : — "He that will 
 not hear the church let him be to thee as a heathen and pub- 
 lican."— Luke 10: 16. 
 
 I could multiply texts to this effect. This does not look as if 
 Christ had left i)eople at liberty either to embrace His religion or 
 not. The Church does not teach that Protestants will be lost, but 
 
34 
 
 she teaches that all who refuse to accept the true faith by doing so 
 incur the guilt of mortal sin, and thereby lose their soul. If a 
 person is in good faith in his error, that is, if he has never had 
 an opportunity of knowing the truth, he is considered by the 
 church in good faith and as one of her children, and if he has 
 lived according to what he has believed to be the true law of 
 God, he will be saved as if he were a Catholic. I think this is 
 fair. 
 
 What would you have, Mr. Percival? Would you have estab- 
 lishments, improperly called churches, instituted by every Tom, 
 Dick and Harry, on a par with the true Church of Christ '? 
 Would you give those who are urged by ambition, vanity, or 
 even worse, to form a new religion that Christ never taught, in 
 fact contradicting Christ, as good a claim to salvation as those 
 who have believed on God's infallible word, what He has taught, 
 and tried to fulfil His precepts '? We are just as much obliged 
 to believe what God has taught as we are to obey His command- 
 ments. I have shown that nearly all Protestant sects hold the 
 same doctrine. You will find nearly the same doctrine, but 
 much more rigid and uncharitable, and Presbyteriar: like, in the 
 Confession of Faith which I have before me. — Page 125, ques- 
 tions 60, 61, 62, &c. 
 
 Mr. Percival says he has punctured me with the keen lance 
 of his sarcasm. That's how he proved from Jesuit authors that 
 *' the end justifies the means," and got the University to endorse 
 him. He has done wonders. If he had punctured me with 
 sound logic it would go father with intelligent readers than what 
 he calls sarcasm. 
 
 Mr. Percival complains that I. called him a " lying devil." 
 What I said was 'that there were lying devils going around the 
 country deceiving the people and misrepresenting the Catholic 
 Church. I did not refer to him in particular. I have not spoken 
 as severely as St. Peter, who seems to have had in prophetic 
 view, and described exactly, some of the preachers of the present 
 day. He says in his epistle, chap. 2 : 1, 2, 3 : — "But there 
 were also false prophets among the people, even as there shall 
 be lying teachers among you, who shall bring insects of perdition, 
 and deny the Lord who bought thfem bringing upon themselves 
 swift destruction." " And many shall follow their luxuries, by 
 whom the way of truth shall be blasphemed. And through 
 covetousness and feigned words they shall make merchandise of 
 you." Let the readers please look over this second chapter. 
 
 How delicate the rev. gentleman's feelings are, while he him- 
 self is slandering Catholics without mercy, calling in the aid of 
 infidels for that purpose, and even going the length of altering 
 words in the Papal Brief. If he does not quit this I shall be 
 obliged to give up my usual mild and courteous style, and use 
 language that will exactly express my meaning. 
 
DniB IS 
 
 •■ 
 
 estab- 
 
 , ' 
 
 Tom, 
 
 
 irist ? 
 
 
 ty, or 
 jht, in 
 
 
 those 
 aught, 
 bliged 
 mand- 
 
 
 oldthe . 
 
 
 3, but 
 
 
 in the 
 
 
 ques- 
 
 
 i lance 
 
 ■ 
 
 •s that '• 
 
 
 idorse 
 
 
 3 with 
 
 
 1 \Yliat 
 
 
 levil." , . 
 
 
 d the 
 
 ■ 
 
 tholic 
 
 
 poken .• 
 
 
 )hetic • 
 
 
 esent " 
 
 
 there 
 
 
 shall 
 
 
 Ution, 
 
 
 selves 
 
 
 8, by • 
 •ough 
 kc of 
 
 
 M. • 
 
 him- 
 
 
 lid of 
 
 
 ering 
 ill be 
 
 
 \ use 
 
 
 35 
 
 By the way, his open letter is like a lady's postscript — by far 
 the most important part. In this letter he says that I asked 
 for proof that the Jesuits ever came under the ban of the church. 
 No, Mr. Percival, I never denied that they were suppressed. 
 "What I denied was that they were condemned or cursed, and 
 when you attempted to prove that they were, you were guilty 
 of a fraud so dishonourable, that were I to characterize it as it 
 deserves, you would say I was naughty, and that my language 
 was not parliamentary. 
 
 He says that in future he will treat me with silent contempt. 
 ! please don't Mr. Percival. That's too hard to bear ! And 
 you may take it into your head to treat my arguments too, as 
 you have done so far, with silent contempt. That would be 
 better policy. He has introduced the Bible, and tells us, with- 
 out giving proof, that it is sure to make Christians, &c. He 
 advocates the circulation of the Bible amongst Catholics, and 
 when we ask for some information which we fancy he would 
 gladly give to those whoni he regards as benighted papists, he 
 has recourse to the silent contempt business, and tells us these 
 are minor points. I wonder if he exactly represents the views 
 of Protestants when he calls them minor points ? If they are 
 minor points, why so many divisions, involving such important 
 consequences on account of these same minor points '? Or is he 
 the judge of what are minor, and what essential points? At all 
 events there is a principle involved that cannot biB considered 
 minor, and that is whether God has taught certain truths in 
 His revelation, and then left men at liberty to explain away 
 these truths and sport with them, as they dare not with the 
 truths contained in Euclid or arithmatic, without making them- 
 selves ridiculous. Thus faith is reduced to mere opinion, and 
 Christ never gave an opinion. He taught the truth. 
 
 I have no prejudice against Protestants. Prejudice is un- 
 reasonable. I respect every man's honest convictions. If I had 
 been born of Protestant parents, and received a Protestant edu- 
 cation, it is likely I would be honestly what I was brought up to 
 be ; but when I find men, supposed to be educated, who ought 
 to know better, determined to follow the bent of their prejudices 
 rather than the clear evidence of truth ; when I find such men 
 trying to prop up their course by means which they know to be 
 dishonest, I cannot help calling in question their good faith. 
 They remind me of a Dutchman in the neighbourhood of New- 
 market, who remarked to a neighbour that he had been to the 
 market the Friday previous. " The market was not on Friday," 
 said the neighbour, "but on Saturday." " Did I say Friday ?" said 
 the Dutchman. "Yes," said the neighbour. "Then if I said Friday 
 I'll stick to it." So right or wrong he was determined to stick to 
 what he had first committed himself to. The philosophy of a 
 lie, according to Mark Twain, is to stick to it. 
 
1 ! 
 
 36 
 
 That book of dates, copied into his last letter, and of which 
 the letter was chiefly composed, has already appeared in the 
 Mail newspaper, and been duly answered in the House of Com- 
 mons. Towards the end of his letter, not the postscript, he 
 says : — *' With your unprejudiced readers I think I have made 
 out my case." Of course he has made out his case, and a strong 
 one at that. Any man who can compose a portion of a Brief for 
 an infallible Pope, can make out any case he undertakes. Small 
 thanks to him to make out a case when he can with very little 
 trouble get an infallible Pope to back him up in any statements 
 he chooses to make. 
 
 Whatever the gentleman may or may not be, he has a posi- 
 tion here which actually gives, or ought to give, to his state- 
 ments some weight with the community, and as long as he con- 
 tinues to misrepresent the Catholic Church, I cannot afford to 
 treat him with silent contempt. Let not the gentleman charge 
 me with not taking up all his points. Even the space would 
 not allow the discussion of every point to which he has been 
 steering. I shall try and do the best I can. I expect to give 
 him enough, if he has not got it already. He has got over some 
 strong arguments by telling us a yarn about a black steer. Will 
 he kindly in his next tell us a bear story. I am not particular 
 about the colour of the bear, whether he is black or white. If 
 there is no argument in it it will at least have the merit of being 
 entertaining, and will frighten nobody, being only on paper. 
 
 J. J. Egan. 
 
 
 Thornhill, May 7th, 1889. 
 
 mmm^^ 
 
4f9^ 
 
 37 
 
 CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 Relics. 
 
 REV. MR. PERCIVAL ON RELICS IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. 
 
 With regard to the various frauds of which the Church of 
 Eome has been guilty, we do not intend to say much in these 
 letters ; not that there is not much to say, but because it is, to 
 a certain extent, foreign to our object, which is to deal prin- 
 cipally with Romanism in its relation to Civil Society and Gov- 
 ernments. I might occupy columns of your paper in describing 
 the multitude of " Lying Wonders," to which the Roman Church 
 has had to resort, in order to impose upon the credulity of her 
 too confiding people. Take the subject of Relics, for instance. 
 A large octavo volume might be filled, and then the list would 
 probably be defective. In the Cathedral of St. Peter, at Rome, 
 they have an arm of St. Lazarus ; a finger and an arm of Ann, 
 the Holy Virgin's Mother ; also the head of St. Dennis, which 
 he caught up and carried the distance of two miles after it had 
 been cut off. This was quite a remarkable feat, was it not ? 
 In France they have only four heads of John the Baptist. In 
 Spain, France and Flanders, they haye eight arms of St. 
 Matthew, and three of St. Luke. In the Lateran church, in 
 Rome, they have the entire heads of St. Peter and St. Paul, and 
 the convent of the St. Augustines, at Bilboa, the holy monks 
 have a large part of St. Peter's head, and the Franciscans a 
 large part of St. Paul's. At Burgos they have the tail of Ba- 
 laam's ass (possibly they may have the head of some animal at 
 Thornhill), a part of the body of St. Mark, and an arm and a 
 finger of St. Ann. At Aix la Chapelle they have two teeth of St. 
 Thomas ; part of an arm of St. Simeon ; a tooth of St. Cath- 
 • erine ; a rib of St. Stephen ; a shoulder blade and leg bone of 
 St. Mary Magdalene ; oil from the bones of ^t. Elizabeth ; 
 bones of Sts. Andrew, James, Matthias, Luke, Mark, Timotheus 
 and John the Baptist. Perhaps it is for the purpose of carry- 
 ing all these sacred relics that Rome h&.sjive legs of the ass upon 
 which our Saviour rode into Jerusalem. 
 
 Bones, however, are not the only precious mementoes — in 
 almost any chapel in Europe, and also in many in Canada, may 
 be found pieces of the true cross on which our Lord was crucified. 
 If these were all collected, no doubt they would form enough of 
 lumber to construct one of the largest dwellings in Canada. 
 And of nails, out of the true cross, I have no doubt some of 
 hem might be found even in Richmond Hill. In Rome they 
 
38 
 
 'J 1 1 
 
 have also the cross of the good thief ; also the entire table on 
 which our Lord celebrated the Pascal SuOT>^' In a recent 
 publication called " The Living Euchanst Manifested by- 
 Miracles," (written by a good Catholic) the author assures us, 
 "that this is the table of the Lord, and on which the world's 
 Redeemer and God, Jesus, offered the first eucharistic sacrifice." 
 On the same authority we learn that in the Cathedral of Val- 
 encia, in Spain, they have "the cup in which His blood was 
 first laid, the chalice elevated from the table by His divine 
 hands." " At St. Mark's, in Venice," says the same author, 
 "the knife used by our Lord in touching, not cutting, the bread, 
 is exposed each year, on Holy Thursday, for the veneration of 
 the faithful." 
 
 They have even more wondertul mementos than these. In 
 raore than one Cathedral they have specimens of the manna of 
 the wilderness, and -a few blossoms of Aaron's rod. In Rome 
 they have the very ark that Moses made, and the rod by which 
 he wrought his miracles. At Gastonbury they have the iden- 
 tical stones which the devil tempted our Lord to turn into bread. 
 In another of cheir chapels they have the dice employed by the 
 soldiers in casting lots for the Saviour's garments. They have 
 also St. Joseph's axe and saw ; St. Anthony's mill stone, on 
 which he crossed the sea (he must. have made 18 miles an hour) ; 
 St. Patrick's staff, by which he drove out the toads and snakes 
 from Ireland ; St. Ann's comb ; St. Mark's boots ; a piece of 
 the Virgin's green petticoat ; St. Anthony's toe-nails ; and 
 " the parings of St. Edmund's toes." But this does not begin 
 to exhaust the very interesting collection. They have a vial of 
 St. Joseph's breath, caught as he was exercising himself with 
 the very axe and saw now in their possession. They have also 
 hair from the heads of most of their saints, and twelve combs, 
 one from each of the Apostles, with which to dress it. And 
 what is more wonderful still, the combs are declared to be " all 
 nearly as good as new." They have also a* small bit of the 
 rope with which Judas hanged himself ; the nose of an angel ; 
 a rib "of the word made flesh ; " "a quantity of the identical 
 rays of the star which led the wise men to our infant Saviour ; " 
 Christ's seamless coat ; a wing of the archangel Gabriel, ob- 
 tained by the prayers of Pope Gregory VII. ; the beard of Noah ;, 
 a piece of the very same porphyry pillar on which the cock 
 perched when he crowed after Peter's denial, and even the comb 
 of the cock. And then they have what we should consider the 
 most valuable gem of the entire collection, viz : — " One of the 
 steps of the ladder on which Jacob, in his dream, saw the 
 heavenly host ascending and descending." 
 
 Rome has certainly done a large business in the relic line. 
 The above will answer as specimens. If your readers would 
 
39 
 
 like more extensive information on the subject, we refer them to 
 the book mentioned above — "The Living Eucharist Manifested 
 by Miracles," by George Keating, London, A.D. 1869. 
 
 But this rubbish hurts no one, unless it is the simple people 
 who are thus imposed on by the Church, in which they have im- 
 plicit faith ; but when it comes to other subjects, such as the 
 Church Dogma on " Mental Restrictions," then it becomes an 
 entirely different matter. This is a question in which we are all 
 interested, Protestant as well as Romanist, for if tl;ie Dogma of 
 the Church of Rome on this subject was universally received, 
 and acted upon, the very foundation on which Civil Society rests 
 would give way, and the whole system would fall to pieces. The 
 attitude of the Church of Rome with regard to Civil Govern- 
 ment, and its very ingenious device of " Mental Restrictions," 
 in order to surmount difficulties, is a question to which the 
 majority of your readers have probably devoted but little atten- 
 tion, but it is one of fundamental importance, I feel that justice 
 could not be done to it in this letter, without trespassing unduly 
 upon your space. I will, therefore, reserve it for my next. 
 
 Yours in defence of truth, 
 
 W. W. Percival. 
 
 The Manse, Richmond Hill, Mai) 13th, 1889. 
 
40 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 Father Egan Resolves to no longer stand on the 
 
 Defensive 
 
 BUT WANTS TO SEE HOW PRE8BYTERIANISM WILL 
 STAND ATTACKING. 
 
 Note — This letter appears in the same issue as the last, dated May 10th. 
 It is a letter expressing Father Egan's resolution no longer to remain on the 
 defensive, but proceed to carry war into Africa, for the purpose of showing 
 how fair Presbyterians can defend their standards. It speaks for itself. 
 
 I think the pubHc must be getting tired of the Jesuit Ques- 
 tion. Rev. Mr. Percival has been making serious charges against 
 them, and against the Church in whose service they are honored 
 and zealous ministers. Whether he has sustained these charges 
 or not, I leaye the public to judge. If the rev. gentleman will ^ 
 now take up the Bible as a Rule of Faith, I shall be happy to 
 discuss the matter amicable with him. If he will not choose 
 this latter course, I am not disposed any longer to remain on the 
 defensive, as I have been for the past few weeks. 
 
 Suppose now, for the sake of variety, that I enter the sanc- 
 tuary of the Presbyterian religion, attack it as he has the Catho- 
 lic religion, and take it down from its pedestal, on which people 
 of moderate information have been accustomed to regard it as 
 the " beau ideal " of all that is friendly to Civil and Religious 
 Liberty, and lay it open by dissection. 
 
 I have plJi-chased recently, and have been reading, the Con- 
 fession of Faith, which is, I understand, the standard of Pres- 
 byterian doctrine. From t^ d the history of the past, as 
 the manifestations of thp .u time, I can lay before the 
 public the anatomy o^ ^jrianism, and show that, not- 
 withstanding its long sanctimonious visage to which its 
 advocates point with su^xi confidence, there is the deadly seed 
 of intolerance and persecution in every joint and muscle of its 
 whole frame and structure. The Presbyterian clergy to-day are 
 clamouring for Civil and Religious Liberty, when their object is 
 to raise unjust hatred and prejudice against Catholics, and de- 
 prive them of every liberty, as Presbyterians are bound in con- 
 science to do, according to their own teaching,. as found in the 
 Confession of Faith, which says (See National Covenant, page 
 260, &c.) : — " That papistry and superstition may be utterly 
 suppressed. And to that end they ordain that all papists and 
 all priests be i^uni&hed with manifold civil and ecclesiastical 
 

 41 
 
 pains as adversaries to God's true religion, preached, and by 
 law established, within this realm," &c., &c. Though other 
 religious denominations have persecuted in the name of religion, 
 I am not aware that there is another denomination who holds 
 it as a tenet revealed by God that they are obliged in conscience 
 to remove allfahe lyonhip, except the Presbyterians. Let Rev. 
 Mr. Percival and the public read the Confession of Faith, and 
 see how much of that religious tolerance they will find there, 
 for which they are clamouring. Let us at once have some 
 Eoman Dogmatics, or a paraphrase on the Confession of Faith. 
 I do not charge Presbyterians in general with bigotry. There 
 are plenty amongst them whose good human nature has elevated 
 them above the narrow-mindedness of Calvinism. I have good 
 friends amongst Presbyterians, as liberal and good neighbours 
 as can be, but it is in spite not because of their PresbyterianisLa 
 that they are liberal. Even amongst their clergy, I am quite 
 willing to admit, there are gentlemen of finished education, of 
 delickte truth, and of elegant courtesy in their social character 
 on most other points, but in reference to Catholicity they are 
 not ashamed to utter statements too gross to be told. These 
 are the gentlemen at the bottom of the No-Popery cry of the 
 present day, trying to create national and religious discord, as 
 their predecessors have done in times that are past. 
 
 J. J. Egan. 
 
 . Thornhill, May 16th, 1889. 
 
 i.\. 
 
 are 
 ;t is 
 
 de- 
 3on- 
 
 the 
 l)age 
 lerly 
 land 
 lical 
 
42 
 
 CHAPTEE X. 
 
 Father Egati deals with the Authorities on which Mr. 
 Percival makes his Statement. 
 
 A 
 
 EPITOMIZES THE PRESENT STATE OF THE CONTPvOVERSY, AND 
 
 OPENS HIS ATTACK ON PRES^ "BRIAN DOCTRINE 
 
 AND INTOLERANCE. 
 
 Eev. Mr. Percl/al's last letter reminds me of Bob Ingersoll's 
 Lecture on Skulls, and, like that lecture has a tendency, even 
 though not intended by Mr. Percival, to propagate infidelity. 
 There is nothing more painful to me than to be obliged to give a 
 direct contradiction to a gentleman of the clerical jjrofession, 
 but I sincerely wish, for the sake of the cloth, that he would 
 pay more attention to the truth of his statements. He should 
 inquire more into facts before he makes such statements as, 
 " In France they have four heads of John the Baptist," then 
 speaks of eight arms of St. Matthew and thi-ee of St. Luke. 
 Again the wing of the archangel Gabriel, the steps of Jacob's 
 ladder, the rays of a star, &c., &c. 
 
 These are yarns of French and Italian Ciceronies, who poke 
 fun at their dupes, whom they know, by experience, will swallow 
 any story, no matter how improbable, about the Catholic re- 
 ligion, and in return pay a few francs for the entertainment. Is 
 there any one, except Mr. Percival himself, that could believe in 
 the presence in France, or anywhere else, of what cannot possibly 
 have any material existence, such as an angel's wing, a step of 
 Jacob's ladder, or the rays of a star ? He may entertain the 
 Sunday School children with such narratives, though it is no 
 food spiritually or intellectually even for them, but when he se- 
 riously pens such nonsense for the reading public, the thing is 
 too silly for refutation. The Bev. gentleman seems to have 
 acted upon it as a principle, that in all which relates to the 
 Catholic Church, a thing is more or less true in proportion to its 
 improbability, and that these things alone are absolutely certain 
 of which it can be demonstrated that they could not by any 
 possibility have happened. This principles has so far relieved 
 him of all responsibility in regard to the rules of Logic and The- 
 ology — matters which evidently never gave him much trouble. 
 And now when we find skulls and bones, and all such trumpery, 
 dancing in such fantastic confusion through his brain, the con- 
 viction forces itself upon us that instead of being afflicted with 
 
48 
 
 re- 
 Is 
 e in 
 sibly 
 ep of 
 the 
 no 
 se- 
 l; is 
 ;.ve 
 the 
 oits 
 tain 
 any 
 eved 
 The- 
 ible. 
 'ery, 
 con- 
 vvith 
 
 biliousness, which deprived, him of his natnral suavity, he must 
 havo been laboring under the horrors of a nightmare when he 
 wrote his last letter. At all events it is clear that his zeal has 
 ran away with his discretion, and that his hatred against the 
 Catholic Church is more intense than his love for the truth. 
 
 Who this Keating is, from whom he professes to quote, I do 
 not know,, I have never heard or read of him, either as a good 
 Catholic or as an author. I have read of an impostor of that 
 name, who went around fooling Protestants, giving no-Popery 
 lectures, collecting money to evangelize Catholics, and laughing 
 in his sleer\'es at his dupes. The last I read of him was that he 
 had been sent to the Penitentiary for embezzlement. 
 ' Rev. Mr. Percival says he could occupy many columns of your 
 paper in describing the multitude of lying wonders. Of course 
 he could, and probably will, from the same and similar sources, 
 for the business has paid t\'ell in the past, but I think it will be 
 at a discount here in the future. 
 
 Once more, what is tuG matter under discussion, and how does 
 the controversy stand ? 
 
 Some weeks ago Rev. Mr. Percival was drawing great crowds to 
 his church, and acquiring great reputation for evangelical wit, 
 learning and piety, by elegantly slandering tho Jesuits and their 
 teachings, and by setting forth in his sermons, with all their 
 harrowing details, the astounding abominations of the Church 
 of Rome, powerfuUj' illustrating her superstitions, and warning 
 his flock of thp dangers which threatened them through her ag- 
 gressions. Things were going on serenely for him, when I dropped 
 on the scene, and spoiled all his fun, by calling on him to prove 
 statements by which he was creating unjust prejudice au'ongst 
 neighbors. From that day to this his glory has baen gradually 
 fading away, and it looks now as if it were predestined to become 
 a vanishing quantity, 
 
 1. Rev. Mr. Percival -has stated that the Catholic Church 
 holds the doctrine " that the end justifies the means," and not 
 only that, but that whenever she found it convenient, has acted 
 upon that principle. I denied that charge, and called upon him 
 to prove it, or retract. No proof. 
 
 2. He has stated that the Catholic Church is opposed to the 
 circulation of the IBible in the vulgar tongue. I denied that, asked 
 for proof, and offered to discuss amicably the Bible question with 
 him ; and, as he would say himself, he is " as silent as the grave." 
 
 3. He says the Bible is sure to make christians. I have asked 
 him how '? No answer ; but I fancy he has a lurking suspicion 
 that it could receive material assistance from the Westminster 
 Confession and the Rev. Mr. Percival in the christianizing pro- 
 cess. 
 
 4. He says it matters not what denomination of christians 
 
t 
 
 44 
 
 'mm 
 
 comes of Bible reading (except Catholics, of course), provided 
 they are christians. I have asked him to reconcile with this 
 statement the numerous contradictory doctrines which involve, 
 according to philosophy, error on the part of some. To say that 
 true and false creeds have a right to equal deference, is to des- . 
 troy all distinction between the true and the false, and to put 
 truth and error on equai terms. Sane intellects can never do 
 this. We may honor, it is true, the honesty of a man who hap- 
 pened to be in error, but we cannot on this account respect the 
 error itself. To these matters he answers by assuring us they 
 are minor poinU. and thus he despatches them with nilent contempt 
 
 5. He says the Pope cursed the Jesuits with book, bell and 
 candle. I asked for proof. No proof, but in quoting the Brief 
 of their suppression, which was never denied, he altered it, and 
 by doing so placed himself horn de combat. Of course, like many 
 others of his class, he thinks there is no need of proof for charges 
 made against Catholics. In fact to ex^. "t any such proofs 
 would be to cramp the human intellect, and militate against 
 liberty of thought. Instead of keeping to these matters and dis- 
 cussing them as though in the interests of truth, he gives us 
 a lecture on skulls and bones, part of which lecture carries its 
 own contradiction on the face of it. 
 
 As he has so far offered no proofs of his assertions, I might 
 have opposed my assertions to his, but no. I preferred to draw 
 him out and give him plenty of that rope he so facetiously re- 
 ferred to in his last letter. I am perfectly satisfied with the ex- 
 periment, and I think it ought to show our Protestant friends 
 the species of warfare that is carried on against fhe Catholic 
 Church. It orght to show them that no statement is considered 
 too improbable against her and her doctrines, and that the 
 accusations of even men calling themselves ministers of the 
 gospel are not, in her regard, to be relied upon with implicit 
 confidence. 
 
 What, now, will the people of Eichmond Hill think of the 
 champion of Presbytorianism in that vicinity, who a few weeks 
 ago denounced the teachings of the Catholic Church, and called 
 loudly on the people to unite against the aggressions of Eoman- 
 ism '? What of his sincerity, when he cannot sustain a single 
 charge which he has made, and the only time he attempted to 
 do so is detected in a fraud ? Is not his insincerity apparent to 
 ail ? And insincerity in a public teacher is an offence which 
 honest men cannot tolerate ; he who is guilty of it is unworthy 
 of the slightest consideration, and should, like all other frauds, 
 be exposed, that the credulous and unwary may not be deceived. 
 An honest man, even when in error, is at par in the estimation 
 of his fellow-men, but one who is not is always at a heavy dis- 
 count, even when he happens to tell the truths 
 
 .£H^ 
 
45 
 
 le 
 ad 
 
 to 
 
 to 
 h 
 
 What, I would ask, have relics to do with the question under 
 discussion ? One would think that Mr. Percival's last letter 
 was written or copied from some tourist's note book, by the 
 gentleman who told the black steer yarn, and accused me of so 
 often keeping from the subject. 
 
 Of late the Presbyterian clergy have devoted themselves to 
 the preaching of religious and political hatred among citizens in 
 this country, where the rights of all are equal. They are trying 
 also to get the other Protestant denominations to join them in a 
 crusade against Catholics. I believe that a great many sober- 
 minded Presbyterians have beheld with regret and mortification 
 the proceedings of the rev. agitators of their sect. 
 
 The Westminster Confession of Faith is, I understand, the 
 standard of Presbyterian doctrine. It is claimed by Presby- 
 terians that every doctrine taught by it is revealed by God in 
 the Scriptures. In the National Covenant, page 286, it is 
 declared that Presbyterianism " is the only true faith and religion 
 pleasing to God and bringing salvation to man." " And (it 
 continues) therefore we abhor and detest all contrary religion, 
 but chiefly all Papistry in general, and particular heads, even 
 as they are noiv damned, and confuted by God's word and the 
 Kirk of Scotland." Page 269. " And all magistrates, sheriffs, 
 &c., on the one part are ordained to search, apprehend, and 
 punish all contraveners." For instance Act 5, Par., &c., James 
 VI., " and that, notwithstanding of the King's Majesty's license 
 on the contrary, which are discharged, and declared to be of no 
 force, in so far as they tend in any wise to the prejudice and 
 hinder of the execution of the Acts of Parliament against Papists 
 and the adversaries of true religion." 
 
 This precious document ordains also, that the King at his 
 coronation shall make solemn oath to practice and protect the 
 only true religion according to the Confession of Faith, and shall 
 abolish all false religion contrary to the same. 
 
 In the Solemn League and Covenant, page 277, we find the 
 following paragraph : — " That we shall in like manner, without 
 respect of persons, endeavour the extirpation of Popery, Prelacy 
 (that is church government by Archbiohops, Bishops, Deans, 
 Chapters, Archdeacons and all ecclesiastical officers depending 
 on the hierarchy), superstition, heresy, schism, &c., lest we 
 partake in other men's sins and thereby receive their plo,gueH," 
 &c. 
 
 According to the Confession of Faith, Larger Catechism, page 
 15B, tolerating a false religion is reckoned a sin against the 
 second Commandment of God, and since Presbyterianism, 
 according to the same Confession, is the <>vli/ true religion, it 
 follows that Presbyterians sin against the second Commandment 
 by tolerating any religion except their own. 
 
46 
 
 The Confession tells us that the "visible church consists of 
 all those throughout the world that profess the true religion, 
 together with their children, and is the Kingdom of the Lord 
 Jesus Christ, the house and family of God, out of which there is 
 no ordinary possibility of salvation." Whence it follows that 
 those who do not profess the true religion do not belong to the 
 " Church of our Common Lord." Now the true religion, ac- 
 cording to Presbyterian belief, consists in the doctrines of the 
 old and new testaments — and the book called the Confession of 
 Faith contains the doctrines taught in the Holy Scriptures. 
 Consequently all who do not belong to Presbyterianism are to be 
 extirj)ated here and lost hereafter. Presbyterianism is in a bad 
 fix in this country. The second commandment forbids them, 
 under pain of sin, to tolerate a false religion, and the Confession 
 requires them to persecute all who do not belong to the Kirk, 
 the church of our Common Lord, but the constitutions of the 
 country require them to tolerate all religions, and let the church 
 of our Common Lord take care of itself. Presbyterians hold, 
 not only as a doctrine, but as a Commandment of God, that 
 they are bound to remove all false worship. If therefore they 
 are bound to do this, what other religion will remain, after they 
 h^ve begun to keep the second commandment. Every other 
 religion but their own is a false worship, and as they are bound 
 to remove all false worship, it follows they are bound to remove 
 all othet religions. 
 
 Even now, without a single legitimate motive to stimulate 
 them, they are attempting to rob their Catholic fellow citizens 
 of the civil and religious rights guaranteed by the laws of the land ; 
 other denominations of Protestants are used by them as cat's 
 paws and will no doubt in due season receive their merited but 
 unwelcome recompense at the hand of predominant Presbyteri- 
 anism. They are the favored class. With the decree of election 
 and reprobation as a patent of impunity in the other world, for 
 actions done in this, they have conscientious facilities for the 
 accomplishment of projects, dictated by private and sectarian 
 ambition, which are denied to those who hold as a doctrine that 
 their conduct in this life will have a serious influence on the 
 judgment of their souls in ihe life to come. And these are the 
 people who are now talking of religious toleration, and are calling 
 for equal rights for all. I see by the newspapers that recently 
 an overture was made for the modification of the Confession of 
 Faith. This overture was made on the ground that the phra- 
 seology of certain' sections of the Confession does not accurately 
 express the living faith of the church, c. g. eections 3, 4, and 7 
 of Chap. IIL, which see. Now section 3 reads ; " By the decree 
 of God for the manifestation of His glory some men and angels 
 are predestined unto everlasting life, and others foreordained to 
 
47 
 
 the 
 the 
 
 2;el8 
 to 
 
 everlasting death." The Confession of Faith, or Presbyterian 
 standard, declares that at the time it was drawn up that Pres- 
 byterianism was perfect and the only true religion. It asserts 
 moreover that every doctrine taught in the Confession was re- 
 vealed by God. Now if every doctrine in the Confession was re- 
 vealed by God, by what right would the Presbytery modify or in 
 anyway alter them, unless a new revelation has been made to the 
 Presbytery. If, on the other hand, there is reason to suppose 
 that all these doctrines were not revealed by God, as those men 
 imi^ly who asked for a change, how is it that the latter remain 
 in connnunion with the Presbytery or are allowed to remain ? 
 It is alleged that they do not express the living faith of the 
 church, ^ut if God has revealed them it is the duty of the liv- 
 ing church to correspond with what God has revealed, and not 
 have His revelation changed to suit the living faith of the Pres- 
 bytery. But it is alleged in the overture that " Moflnrn Biblical 
 research has thrown additional light on ceitain portions of the 
 Scripture, making it undesirable that iliey should be used as 
 proof texts in the connection in which they stand in the Confession." 
 From this it appears that it takes God Almighty a long time to reveal 
 Plis will to the Presbytery or to fmd out what will suit them. What 
 trash in the name of religion ! And these are the people who 
 are everlastingly crying out against the errors of the Catholic 
 Church, which has accepted what God has taught, and leaves it 
 as God gave it, never presuming to alter what God has left in 
 the deposit of revelation. i 
 
 Still Eev. Mr. Percival heads his letters " Roman Dogmatics," 
 when there his not a word of Dogma in them, calls Mental Re- 
 striction, Dogma, when it is not so. Signs himself yours in defence 
 of truth, when he has been frequently detected in falsehoods, and 
 in general has been, during this correspondence, indulging in 
 antics which must bring nothing but pain and mortification to 
 his friends. Why do not some of his friends urge him to think 
 deeper than the surface, give him a knowledge of the true prin- 
 ciples of probity, impart to him a proper sense of the importance 
 of truth, and induce him to forego buffoonery when dealing with 
 sacred questions ; such friends would confer on him a great boon. 
 In any other cane I have no doubt he would have cautiously 
 weighed the consequences of committing his name to the malig- 
 nant charges he has made, but a Presbyterian Clergyman, im- 
 bued with the spirit of Calvanism, loses all prudence, all sense of 
 justice and truth, when dealing with matters pertaining to the 
 Catholic religion. 
 
 I remain yours in detecting and exposing falsehood, 
 
 J. J. Egan. 
 Thonihill May 22nd, 1886. 
 
If 
 
 
 m 
 
 48 
 
 CHAPTEE XL 
 
 Mental Restriction. 
 
 REV. MR. PERCIVAL ON MENTAL RESTRICTION AS TAUGHT AND 
 PRACTICED IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. 
 
 In this letter I propose to enquire into the somewhat j)eeuliar 
 teachings of the Komish Church, according to some 3f her 
 standard authors, relative to the subject of " Men till Eestric- 
 tions." Your readers will, I think, agree with me, that there is 
 nothing more sacred, or more binding to a man's conscience 
 than an oath, by which we appeal to God, the fountain of divine 
 knowledge and power, that the statement which we are about to 
 make is " the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth." 
 It is, therefore, of the greatest importance that our views on this 
 subject should be clear and distinct. 
 
 As oaths are imposed for the safety of the party administer- 
 ing them, they, most certainly, should be interpreted as he under- 
 stands them. The person under oath has no right to make any 
 mental reservation, but to declare the whole truth, precisely in 
 the manner that the truth is expected of him. And we submit 
 that on no other principle would we ever know what to expect 
 or believe from a witness.. This is the simple belief of the 
 Protestant Church on this subject, and it must surely commend 
 itself to the intelligent approval of all. But how is it with re- 
 gard to the Jesuits and the Church of Eome? Let me give your 
 readers the statements of some of her pronounced and most in- 
 fluential writers on the subject. I have no wish or desire at all 
 to misrepresent the attitude of the Eoman Church regarding 
 either this or any other subject, but when I find her authors 
 making distinct statements, I have no altsrnative but to accept 
 them. I do not think that I will be contradicted when I state 
 that Peter Dens is one of the standard commentators on the 
 laws and moral theology of the Romish Church. Anj^thing he 
 may state must certainly be authoritative. His works are pub- 
 lished in Latin, in eight volumes, and are manifestly designed 
 for the instruction of the priesthood alone. 
 
 Dens lays it down as the law of the Church that the right of 
 the Pope, as the ultimate superior and sovereign, is reserved in 
 every oath. We also find him instructing the faithful that the 
 Pope has the power of withdrawing or prohibiting what is in- 
 cluded in an oath, and that ich en he doc ft so, it in no longer included. 
 It will be quite- apparent that under such a law the Church of 
 
49 
 
 re- 
 
 hors 
 •eept 
 itate 
 the 
 ghe 
 pub- 
 ined 
 
 of 
 
 icl in 
 
 the 
 
 in- 
 
 ded. 
 
 of 
 
 Eome has but to demonstrate to its people that a constitution 
 or law of any State or Government is opposed to the welfare of 
 the Church, when it becomes then their religious duty to treat 
 the oath they have taken to obey such constitution or law as no 
 oath at all, but rather perjury. For the accomplishment of the 
 same purpose, he inculcates and defends the doctrines of " men- 
 tal restriction," and " ambiguity and equivocation." It will be 
 quite beside the mark for my opponent to say that Dens lays 
 down the abstract proposition, in general terms, that it is un- 
 lawful to lie in any event. This is quite true, but it is also 
 equally true that in each special case as it arises, rules are fur- 
 nished, by which the faithful are to decide what is and what is 
 not a lie. 
 
 According to this author, " mental restrictions " are of two 
 kinds — purely mental and real. As regards real restriction he 
 says : — " Eeal restriction occurs when the declaration is false, 
 if we regard the words alone ; but circumstances concur which 
 signify that something to be secretly understood, which the 
 speaker keeps in his mind, and which, being secretly understood, 
 the declaration is true. " Eestrictio realis occurist, dum enun- 
 tiato, spectatis solis verbis, falsa est, sed ciraimstantue concurrunt, 
 (fUOB significant aliquid esse suhintdli gendmn, quodloquens in mente 
 tenet, et quo subintellecto, enuntiate est vera" Dens, Vol. IV., 
 No. 244, p. 399. 
 
 What will your intelligent readers think of this specimen of 
 Catholic Moral Philosophy ? But perhaps we may be told that 
 this is only the opinion of one man, and is not endorsed by the 
 Church. But this will not do, for we have this rule receiving 
 the sanction and approval of one of the infallible Popes, Inno- 
 cent XL, which gives it the full sanction of the Catholic Church. 
 In a proposition laid down by him he said : — " If any, either 
 alone or before others, whether asked or of his own accord, or 
 for the purpose of sport, or for any other object, swears that he 
 has not done something which in reality he has done, by under- 
 standing within himself something else which he has not done, 
 or a different way from that in which he has done it, or any 
 other truth that is added, he iocs not really lie, nor is he pur- 
 jured." '' Prohatur etiavi i ^amnatione hnjns prop, S6, Innoc, 
 XI : Si quis vcl solus vet c ram aliis, siveinterrt)gati(s, sire sponte 
 propria, sive recreationis causa, site quocumque alio fine, juret se 
 non fecisse aliquid, quod re vera fecit inteiligendo intra se aliquid 
 aliiid, quod non fecit, vet aliam ah ea, in qua facit, vel quokvis aliud 
 additum, rcvcra non mentitur ne est perjuris." Dens, Vol. IV., 
 p. 306-310 
 
 It will be perceived at a single glance how wide these rules 
 open the door for falsehood and perjury ; in their practical 
 working their effect must be to completely destroy all confidence 
 
50 
 
 lii. 
 
 between man and man and exterminate all faith and integrity. 
 This is one of the abominable methods which *' that learned and 
 illustrious society of Catholic Priests " have made use of in 
 order- to accomplish their wild dream of universal empire. But 
 it is not the only one by any means. The Romish doctrine of 
 " Ambiguity and Equivocation " is about on a par with their 
 Mental Restriction theory. This theory briefly stated amounts 
 to this : — That if a proposition is susceptible of two meanings 
 then one may he expressed ivhcn it is not meaM, and the other, ivliich 
 is meant, may he reserved in the mind. Here we have it as plain 
 as language can make it : — " An equivocation of this kind does 
 not contain a lie, in whatever sense it may be received ; because 
 the external words truly signify that sense which the speaker 
 has in his mind, and thus differs from a purely mental reserva- 
 tion, in which the external words do not contain the mental 
 sense." " Hajusmodi cequivocatio non continet mendacium, in 
 qaocmnque sensu accipiatur, quia verha extorna vere sicmificant 
 ilium senswm, qunn loqaens in mente hahct, ct sic differt a restric- 
 tione nuse mentali, in qua verha externa non continent sensum 
 mentalemy Dens, Vol. IV., p. 311. 
 
 If these rules do not form a part of the Jesuit system of 
 ** mental reservations," I should then very much like to know 
 what they do mean. Perhaps the renowned champion of 
 Eomanism at Thornhill, or some of his many assistants, will 
 enlighten your readers on the subject. Sanchez, 'one of the 
 fathers, says : — " A man may swear that he never did such a 
 thing (though actually he did it) , meaning within himself that 
 he did not do so on a certain day, or before he was born, or 
 understanding any other such circumstances, while the words 
 which he employs have no such sense as would discover his 
 meaning." The reason given by him and Filiutius, another 
 father, is that "it is the intention that determines the quality of 
 the action." They even furnish us with a surer method of 
 avoiding falsehood : — " After saying aloud, I swear that I have 
 not done that, to add in a low voice, to-day ; or, after saying 
 aloud I swear, to interpose in a whisper, that I say, and then 
 continue aloud, that I have done that." And Escobar, another 
 and greater of the Jesuit fathers, lays down the following de- 
 moralizing rule in reference to promises not confirmed by an 
 oath: — "Promises are not binding when the person making 
 them had no intention to bind himself." That is, in plain Eng- 
 lish, 'in the opinion of this good Jesuit, you can lie as much 
 as you please, if you have no intention to keep your pro- 
 mise when you make it, then according to our code of ethics, it 
 is not a lie at all. (See " Provincial Letters " by Pascal letter 
 IX., p. 277.) 
 
 With regard to oaths with heritics, the Church of Rome has 
 
[ integrity, 
 earned and 
 
 use of in 
 ipire. But 
 iloctrine of 
 
 with their 
 d amounts 
 3 meanings 
 )ther, which 
 it as plain 
 5 kind does 
 d ; because 
 the speaker 
 ial reserva- 
 the mental 
 ndacium, in 
 ; significant 
 'rt a restric- 
 lent sensum 
 
 , system of 
 lie to know 
 lampion of 
 [stants, will 
 one of the 
 did such a 
 limself that 
 IS born, or 
 the words 
 iscover his 
 IS, another 
 e quality of 
 method of 
 hat I have 
 ifter saying 
 and then 
 ar, another 
 )llowing do- 
 med by an 
 jon making 
 plain Eng- 
 e as much 
 your pro- 
 of ethics, it 
 ascal letter 
 
 f Rome has 
 
 51 
 
 expressed views in very positive terms. We find Pope Gregory 
 IX., announcing without a blush the impious doctrine, that 
 " Christians should not regard the sanctity of an oath towards 
 him w^ho is the enemy of God, and who tramples under foot the 
 decrees of the Church." Coremorvin, Vol. I., p. 140. 
 
 These ultramontane doctrines, so clearly taught by standard 
 writers of the Church of Eome, are beyond all question, sub- 
 versive of the essential principles that bind civil society together. 
 It is high time for Protestants to get their eyes opened, and I 
 have no doubt that many of the more intelligent Roman 
 Cptholics will be disposed to ask the question, " are these things 
 really so ? " I have demonstrated that they are ; let him prove 
 they are not who can. 
 
 If the Rev. Mr. Egan does not redeem his promise, made in 
 his letter of April 11th, and defend his church, I must come to 
 the conclusion that in his opinion, no successful defence can be 
 made, or that he is conscious of his own incapacity to make it. 
 It is to me quite repulsive to be compelled to attack a prostrate 
 Antagonist, for that is the Rev. gentlemen's present position as 
 far as the question under discussion is concerned. 
 
 With regard to the doctrines of the Presbyterian Church, they 
 are quite capable of defence, but as that is not the question un- 
 der discussion, I must therefore for the present decline to enter 
 into it. 
 
 When Mr. Egan states that the Presbyterian Church is " at- 
 tempting to rob their Catholic fellow citizens of the civil and 
 religious rights received by the laws of the land," he states that 
 which is positively and most emijhatically untrue, aud when he 
 made the statement he knew that it was false. Why did he not 
 produce evidence to confirm his statement ? Does he suppose 
 the public will accept his simple statement as authoritative? If 
 so, he is much mistaken. This is in perfect harmony with the 
 course he has pursued all through this discussion. He expects 
 the public to accept his bald statements, unsubstantiated by 
 proof. I now publicly challange him to produce a single proof, 
 that either the Presbyterian or any other Protestant Church in 
 Canada has ever sought " to rob their Catholic fellow citizens 
 of their civil or religious rights." We cheerfully concede to them 
 all the civil and religious rights we claim for ourselves, hut no 
 more. 
 
 Mr. Egan in his frenzied zeal against Presbyterianism has 
 overshot the maik, and he actually exalts it to a pinnacle of power 
 and influence in this land, that it has never had the blind pre- 
 sumption to arrogate to itself. Note well his statement. He 
 says " other denominations of Protestants are used by them as 
 cats paws and will no doubt in due season receive their merited 
 but unwelcome recompense at the hand of predominant Presby- 
 
M.'fl 
 
 t 
 
 52 
 
 terianism." We hope our Episcopal, Methodist and other Pro- 
 testant friends will have a due appreciation of the very unique 
 compliment thus conferred upon them by the Eev. J. J. Egan 
 If they are pleased, we Presbyterians, certainly have no reason 
 to complain. 
 
 I am not altogether without hope that the Rev. Father Egan's 
 study of the Confession of Faith may yet be the means of leading 
 him away from the errors of his church, for according to his own 
 confession, he is not a Roman Catholic hi/ intcUujrnt amviciion 
 hilt only hy the accid'nit of hirtli, for in his letter of the 9th inst. 
 he says, " if I had been born of Protestant parents and received 
 a Protestant education it is likely I would be honestly what I 
 was brought up to be." 
 
 He complains that in my last better I have held up some of 
 the many peculiarities of his church to ridicule, and dismisses 
 the whole subject (as he has done every other subject) with a 
 single wave of the hand. All that I have to say is, if the church 
 of Rome does not wish to be held up to ridicule, it must then 
 cease to deal so extensively in the ridiculous. I can introduce 
 the rev. gentleman to a citizen of Toronto who is prepared to 
 affirm that when he was in Rome, in one of the churches there 
 he was shown two skulls of St. Peter, one a little one and the 
 other a big one, and when he asked for an explanation of this 
 somewhat mysterious phenomenon he was very gravely assured 
 that one was the skull of St. Peter when he was an infant, and 
 the other was his skull after he had grown to manhood. He 
 thinks that this subject has a tendency " to propagate infidelity."' 
 I have no doubt he is quite correct, and this probably accounts 
 for the fact that we find in France, and other Roman Catholic 
 countries that infidelity is rampant. I frankly confess that were 
 I compelled to make a choice between believing all the absurdities 
 of Romanism, and believing nothing, I should unhesitatingly 
 prefer the latter. 
 
 As the Rev. Mr. Egan is very anxious for me to prove that 
 the church of Rome is opposed to the free circulation of the Bible, 
 I shall be happy to accommodate him in my next. 
 For the present. Yours in defence of truth. 
 
 W. W. Percival. 
 The Manse, Eiclimond Hill, May 27th, 1889. 
 
Pro- 
 nique 
 Egan 
 eason 
 
 53 
 
 CHAPTEE XII. 
 
 ilgan's 
 fading 
 is own 
 vv-iioii 
 1 inst. 
 iceived 
 what I 
 
 Dme 
 
 of 
 
 smisses 
 with a 
 church - 
 st then 
 troduce 
 lared to 
 !S there 
 and the 
 L of this 
 assured 
 nt, and 
 d. He 
 ideUty.'' 
 Iccounts 
 atholic 
 at were 
 lurdities 
 atingly 
 
 Ive that 
 |e Bible, 
 
 PIVAL. 
 
 
 Father Egan again deals with Mr. Percival's Proofs. 
 
 EXPOSES HIS USE OF A CONDEMNED PROPOSITION TO PPtOVE WHAT 
 
 IT DOES NOT PROVE, AND SHOWS THAT HE HAS 
 
 NO NEED OF ASSISTANCE BY CHALLENGING 
 
 MR. PERCIVAL TO AN ORAL 
 
 DISCUSSION. 
 
 Last \veek we were treated by Eev. Mr. Percival to a lengthy 
 ■dissertation on Mental Restriction in the Catholic Church. No 
 doubt he would be pleased to find that the Catholic Church 
 teaches that lying is sometimes justifiable, for such doctrine is 
 one he stands very much in need of. The principle of Mental 
 Restriction is not a Roman Dogma. It is not a dogma at all. 
 The fact is that the Catholic Church does not command her 
 children at all tiixies and on all occasions to speak all the truth 
 they may happen to know, but she does command them never 
 to speak anything but the truth. She teaches them that when 
 they use words, which by their natural force convey a false sense, 
 they speak falsehood, whatever may have been their secret mean- 
 ing, and that knowingly and intentionally to use language cal- 
 culated to deceive the hearer, to convey to him a false meaning, 
 or a meaning different from that in the mind of him using it, is 
 to lie and to sin against God. The rev. gentleman who, in his 
 letter, asserts the contrary, is guilty of the very offence he would 
 fasten upon her, and has no excuse for his conduct. If he is 
 ignorant of her doctrine, he speaks rashly ; if he is not ignorant, 
 he is guilty of a wilful falsehood. 
 
 As far as I am aware Protestants hold and practice mental 
 restriction the very same as Catholics. The only difference is 
 that some Protestants turn up their sanctimonious visages in 
 ))ious horror of it, and make very slovenly attempts to use it for 
 the sake of creating prejudice against Catholics, while they them- 
 selves have no scruple to tell downright lies. I have known cases 
 of Protestant culprits, before Protestant judges, being asked, 
 ■" Do you plead guilty or not guilty? " they have answered, 
 " not guilty," though they were meaning, " it is your business 
 to find out." I have never known such evasions to be reproved 
 from the pulpit in any Protestant church, and this is a case of 
 mental restriction pure and simple. What would Mr. Percival 
 say to it ? Let him tell us. 
 
< it. 
 
 t^i^ I 
 
 64 
 
 Again a priest is asked about something of which he has know- 
 ledge in the confessional: he can answer that he knows nothing 
 about it, that is, nothing that he can tell. A servant says, the 
 gentleman or lady of the house is not at home, meaning not to 
 be seen. I ask, are cases of this kind confined to Catholics alone, 
 or, are they ever known amongst Protestants ? I ask is it not 
 necessary that professional men, and others, should have some 
 way of evading impertinent questions, a straight answer to which 
 would compromise their clients, or injure others, without telling 
 a lie, which is essentially a sin and can't be lawful on any ac- 
 count ? This is wfll understood amongst intelligent and well 
 bred people. The thing like many others is liable to abuse, but 
 even the abuse is not confined to Catholics. 
 
 To prove with what conscientious facility Catholics can lie, 
 deceive and swear falsely, Eev. Mr. Percival says that " the 
 infallible Pope Innocent XL, gives his full sanction to that kind 
 of prevarication in the following proposition laid (hncn by Itim : 
 " If any, either alone or before others, whether asked or of his 
 own accord, or for the purpose of sport, or for any other object, 
 swears that he has not done something which in reality he has 
 done, by understanding something else, which he has not done, 
 or a different way from that in which he has done it, or any 
 other truth that is added, he does not really lie, nor is he per- 
 jured." " The Rev. gentleman has the same proposition after 
 in Latin, and the preample is : — " Prohatur cliam ex damnatione 
 Jmjns prop 36 Innoc XI. Si quis vel solus," c'tc. What will be 
 the surprise of yours readers who may not have already noticed 
 it, to find this very proposition was not laid down except to be 
 condemned by Innocent XL, and that it proves the very contrary 
 to what Mr. Percival would conclude. This appears from the 
 words in which the proposition is introduced — ex damnatione 
 liujus prop — which means from the condemnation of this propo- 
 sition. Such a consummate-piece of stupid ignorance it would 
 be hard to find, as to quote a condemned proposition, to prove 
 the very contradictory of what it does prove. And he asks with 
 a flourish what will your intelligent readers think of this si)eci- 
 men of Catholic moral philosophy — and I ask what will your 
 readers think of this specimen of supine ignorance. He goes 
 on, " If these rules do not form a specimen of the Jesuit sys- 
 tem of mental reservation, I should like to know what they do 
 mean." They do not, form a specimen, and Mr. Percival has 
 already sufficiently demonstrated his own ignorance to show that 
 he is not a competent judge. Perhaps, he says, the renowned 
 champion of Romanism at Thornhill, or some of his many^ as- 
 sistants, will enlighten your readers on the subject "^ have no as- 
 sistants: Ineednone. On what authority, I ask, does nemake that 
 statement ? I have asked him before to discuss some of these sub- 
 
55 
 
 know- 
 othing 
 ^s, the 
 not to- 
 5 alone, 
 3 it not 
 e some 
 3 which 
 
 tellhis 
 my ac- 
 rid well 
 ise, but 
 
 can lie, 
 it " the 
 lat khid 
 by hhn : 
 r of his 
 object, 
 he has 
 )t done, 
 ,, or any 
 i he per- 
 3n after 
 nnatione 
 will be 
 noticed 
 »t to be 
 iontrary 
 from the 
 linialioue 
 propo- 
 , would 
 ■jO prove 
 Isks with 
 Is speci- 
 lill your 
 iHe goes 
 juit sys- 
 Ihey do 
 Ival has 
 low that 
 kiowned 
 y as- 
 /enoas- 
 ike that 
 Lese sub- 
 
 jects or all, and he did not accept my challenge. Now I am prepared 
 at any moment, on any platform, without a moment's preparation, 
 to discuss any or all the subjects within the range of Moral or 
 Dogmatic Theology with him. Then I shall have no one to 
 assist me, and I promise to show up his ignorance of these sub- 
 jects even more than I have already done. "What do you say to 
 that, Mr. Percival ? He does not state the doctrines of Catho- 
 lic Theology correctly, on these nor on anyothermatters. It would 
 be an endless task to follow him in all his erroneous statements. 
 
 Pie has been entirely misled by relying on the authority of 
 Pascal and other writers of his stamp. He refers us to Pascal's 
 Provincial letters for an exposition of Catholic morality. He 
 might as well refer us to Voltaire's Philosophical Dictionary for 
 an exposition of the morality of the Gospel. Pascal was a Jan- 
 senist, not a Catholic. The Provincial letters are witty, but 
 v/icked, a tissue of lies, forgeries, and misrepresentations from 
 beginning to end, as has been amply proved over and over again. 
 I doubt if ever Mr. Percival read Pascal in the original, but by 
 quoting him in this connection he makes it manifest that he is 
 entirely unacquainted with the literature of modern philosophy. 
 
 He says, that according to my own confession I am not a Cath- 
 olic by conviction. I do not think that meaning can be justly 
 derived from the remark in my last letter. I think Mr. Percival 
 had better not make such remarks, as it might be easily retorted 
 that there were other reasons besides conviction, that brought 
 him over from the ministry of the Methodist, to that of the Pres- 
 byterian, church. ^. 
 
 The original question under discussion was, whether the 
 Catholic Church teaches the doctrine that the end justifies the 
 means. Now we have got over mental restriction, passing over 
 in silent contempt the ISible and other such minor points. Be- 
 hold how serenely we have been steering. Once upon a time, as 
 an Irish judge was presiding at a case of murder, the person said 
 to have been murdered walked into court, and the jury at once 
 declared the prisoner acquitted. To their utter amazement, 
 however, the judge pronounced sentence of death on the prisoner, 
 saying, " if he did not commit this murder, he stole my grey 
 mare six years ago, and he must hang anyhow." So if the 
 Catholic Church does not teach that the end justifies the means, 
 she has relics, skulls and bones, the wing of an archangel, the 
 step of Jacob's ladder, mental restrictions, and several other cor- 
 ruptions and errors, which must go the way of all false ivorship, 
 according to the second commandment as explained in the West- 
 minster Confession of Faith. Take care Mr. Percival how you 
 meddle with the alleged errors of Rome, for if they were all re- 
 formed too soon not a Presbyterian minister in Canada but 
 •would be thrown out of employment inside of one year. With 
 
'i ' 
 
 56 
 
 foreordination as a patent right there would no longer be any 
 need of those ravishing discourses on the errors of Rome, which 
 were always sure to draw a crowd to the Presbyterian church. 
 
 So far Mr. Percival has not proved a single charge against 
 the Church of all that he has made ; neither did he retract. 
 Neither has he attempted to refute a single argument of mine. 
 Therefore, every charge that he has not proved after due warn- 
 ing, I look upon as a lie, and I look upon as conceded to the 
 cause of Catholic truth every argument that he has not even 
 attempted to refute. 
 
 Consequently, when he states that the Catholic Church 
 teaches that the end justifies the means, I put that down as lie 
 No. 1. 
 
 He says that the church is opposed to the circulation of the 
 Bible— lie No. 2. 
 
 He says the Pope cursed the Jesuits with bell, book and 
 candle — lie No. 3. 
 
 He says the Pope accused the Jesuits of teaching doctrines at 
 variance with those of the Holy See — lie No. 4. 
 He says that the Pope charged the Jesuits with having adopted 
 certain idolatrous ceremonies — lie No. 5, &c., &c. 
 
 As to the number of lies to be found in his letters their name 
 is legion. He speaks of the citizen of Toronto who was shown 
 two skulls of St. Peter, &c. I have seen myself in Pome, cicero- 
 nies who, for the sum of one franc, would show Mr. Percival, or 
 any other Pre-byterian minister whom he could stuff with such 
 silly nonsense, a dozen skulls of St Peter. Mr. Percival ought to 
 have more sense than to use such yarns as arguments. 
 
 Eev. Mr. Percival in his estimation of the Jesuits' teachings 
 betrays only his ignorance or malice, or both. The character 
 he ascribes to them he will find in its perfection in his own minis- 
 ters, and the best definition of f/csM/tJcaZ in the proper acceptation 
 of the term is a Presbyterian minister, the antithesis of a Jesuit. 
 Mr. Percival illustrates and accepts in his letters every element 
 of what he calls Jesuitism, except their well known scholarly 
 attainments. 
 
 Every one who has had any experience of the Presbyterian 
 clergy is aware that the principle that the end justifies the means 
 is the one on which they act, whether they avow it or not. No 
 one can read their writings against the church, even Mri Perci- 
 val, without perceiving that the principle of mental reservation, 
 or in plainer terms the right to lie, for the purpose of advancing 
 their object, is the principle which they practically adopt and 
 hold in constant requisition. Who ever heard of a Presbyterian 
 minister who was not ojf'iciallif the very impersonation of pride, 
 cant, hypocrisy, bigotry and cruelty. If such a one ever was, 
 we may be sure he did not live and die a Presbyterian. The" 
 
^terian 
 I means 
 No 
 1 Perci- 
 r^ation, 
 mcing 
 l)t and 
 fterian 
 prick, 
 |r was, 
 The' 
 
 67 
 
 proof of this is found in Mr. Percival's own letters, as also in the 
 Confession of Faith. Take his estimate of Jesuitism, change 
 the name, and it is a faithful picture, as far as it goes, of the 
 proud, arrogant, bigoted, deceitful and persecuting Presbyterian 
 minister. 
 
 He says the doctrines of the Presbyterian Church are quite 
 capable of defence. That is indeed a brilliant defence and being 
 merely a gratuitous assertion is worthy of Mr. Percival. No 
 doubt if he only knew what these doctrines will be a few months 
 hence, he would be quite willing to defend them, but he does not, 
 and he thinks it better to pass them over in that off-handed way. 
 In any case they would be pretty sure to suffer by his defence, 
 as every doctrine he has so far attacked has gained by his oppo- 
 sition. What the Presbyterians will do with the Confession of 
 Faith, every doctrine in which they have regarded a.^ revealed by 
 God, it is hard to say, but if the Holy Ghost himself were to 
 appear in person to the Presbytery to make to them a special 
 revelation, they would be sure to send him back some clauses for 
 amendment. 
 
 He says Pope Gregory IX. announced the impious doctrine 
 that Christians should not regard the sanctity of an oath towards 
 him who is the enemy of God, &c. That very proposition was 
 condemned by Gregory IX. That is another specimt of stupid 
 ignorance or malice, and withal a specimen of Presbyterian tactics 
 in controversy. 
 
 Againhe says, "These ultramontane doctrines, soclearly taught 
 by writers of the Church of Rome, are beyond all question subver- 
 sive of the essential principles that bind civil society together." 
 Yes, if they were what he represents them ; but look at the means by 
 which he attempts to prove they are." He continues, " It is 
 high time for Protestants to get their eyes opened." There is 
 an appeal to bigotry. And then look at the means by which he 
 would prove that the church teaches these doctrines. He quotes 
 propositions, which being condemned, prove the very opposite. 
 Does the end justify the means ? Or does he quote the proposi- 
 tion and commit such a terrible blunder because he did not un- 
 derstand the Latin preamble, ex damnatioue Juijns propositionis. 
 If so, why did he not consult one of the Higli School teachers 
 who know Latin and who would not refuse this slight service. 
 Even the Jesuit Gury himself, chap. 3, no. 29 teaches omnis 
 electio medii malii est mala. All choop'" " of a bad means is 
 bad. 
 
 He says, ** We cheerfully concede to them (Catholics) all the 
 civil and religious rights we clftim for ourselves, but no more." 
 You do not, Mr. Percival, concede these thing cheerfully. If 
 you do, how do you keep the second commandment, which 
 obliges you to remove all false worship ? Which means, accord- 
 
 :\ -^ 
 
68 
 
 ing to your Confession of Faith, every worship except the Pres- 
 byterian, the only true one. If you would concede to us the 
 same rights, what is to become of the law laid down in the 
 Confession, which obliges you to inflict manifold civil and eccles- 
 iastical pains on priests and Papists as the adversaries of true 
 reh'gion. If you would grant us the same rights, why are you 
 trying by condemned propositions, false statements, literary 
 frauds and other means so dishonorable than an honest man 
 would die of shame if he were detected in them, to prove that 
 we hold doctrines, to use the words in the lu,st paragraph of your 
 letter, subversive of the essential principles that bind society 
 together. And then you hint " it is time for Protestants to get 
 their eyes opened," and since you have proved that Catholics 
 are not fit for civil society, you would have them deprived of the 
 rights natural to ordinary citizens. I sincerely hope that one 
 of the modifications to be introduced into the Confession of 
 Faith may be that Presbyterian ministers may no longer be 
 obliged to slander us, create prejudice against us, and all this as 
 a means of " removdng all false worship," according to each 
 one's place and calling. Now, Mr. Percival's place and calling 
 is preaching, and he mast manage that so as to remove all other 
 systems of religion. They may expunge that from the Confession , 
 as the laws of the land do not allow them to persecute, and the 
 Presbyterian clergy, the disciples of the cruel, bigoted, narrow- 
 minded Calvm (that is as far back as their apostolic succession 
 dates) do not like to see these laws a dead letter. 
 
 He says intelligent Roman Catholics will be disposed to ask 
 the question, " are these things really so'? I have demonstrated 
 that ^'i^y are, let him prove they are not who can." No. Mr. 
 Percival, you have not demonstrated that they are, but when 
 you quoted condemned propositions you proved the contrary, and 
 if you did not understand that they were condemned propositions, 
 it appears to me that what you particularly demonstrated was 
 your own ignorance. The glory of stirring up, or causing to be 
 stirred up, religious hatred, (what a contradiction) belongs to the 
 Presbyterians. The other denominations of whom the gentleman 
 has made an artificial parade, are no doubt persuaded that we 
 are wrong in our belief. Our conviction is precisely the same 
 in regard to their creed, but they are in the main content to 
 allow us to conduct our affairs in our way, and we certainly do 
 not disturb them in the management of theirs. Not so the zealots 
 among Presbyterians. Believers in their own election, and in 
 the exclusion of all others, they seem to thinlc that God has 
 commanded them to take charge of all the rest of mankind. 
 
 Mr Percival has stated that it matters not what denomination 
 a person belongs to provided he is a christian. If so why did he 
 not remain a Methodist, if it made no matter? Perhaps it was 
 
 II 
 
59 
 
 to seek higher degrees of christian perfection, but Methodists 
 say that this was not the precise reason. Of course I can't tell. 
 It is quite evident, however, that Mr. Percival never received 
 a regular educational course. He appears like one who has been 
 accustomed to entertain Sunday School children with narratives 
 savouring of the marvelous and not having been called to task, 
 has got accustomed to make statements regardless of their truth, 
 or otherwise. If he had received a fair college training, suppos- 
 ing average talent, he never would have fallen into the blunder 
 of quoting condemned propositions, which only defeat his own 
 purpose, or would never quote any but recognized standard 
 authors to prove his thesis. Having again and again been 
 convicted of literary forgeries, he comes to the front once more 
 apparently in utter disregard of his humiliation, showing thereby 
 that he is anything but a man of refined sensibilities. Does he 
 know what is the meaning of the preamble, ex damnatione liujus 
 prop ? If he does, why does he quote the prop ; if not, why should 
 he quote Latin about which he evidently knows nothing. Why 
 does Mr. Percival make such quotations which bring nothing but 
 ridicule on himself. Should he not have more respect for the 
 intelligence of his readers, or does he suppose that everyone is 
 as ignorant as himself? I am really sorry to be obliged to speak 
 in this style to one supposed to be a minister of the gospel, but 
 I find that nothing but plain language will cure him. 
 
 He has proved to his own satisfaction by condemned pro- 
 positions, that the church teaches doctrines subversive of social 
 order, but I can prove, not by principles repudiated by Presbyteri- 
 ans, but by those contained in the Confession of Faith, that 
 Presbyterians teach doctrines subversive of social order. I do 
 not say these doctrines are carried out as far as the only true 
 Presbyterian Church would desire, because they cannot. Should 
 the Confession be amended, it may turn out that God does not 
 teach here in Canada at all what he taught the Kirk in Scotland 
 in 1561. If the modifications are made it will thereby be 
 admitted thaf the Holy Ghost made a mistake when he taught 
 them that they must remove all false worship, though I fancy 
 if they could put that doctrine into practice they could easily 
 conclude that the Holy Ghost was right then. This remmds 
 me of what a certain man, worsted in an argument by a text 
 from St. Paul, replied. He said, "There exactly is where Paul 
 and I differ." As long as the Holy Ghost reveals to the 
 Presbytery the doctrine of persecution, he is all right as long 
 as they can carry these doctrines into practice, but when they 
 cannot, there is where they and the Holy Ghost differ. 
 
 The community in this country is made up of people professing 
 different creeds, all of these creeds false, according to Presby- 
 terian doctrine, except its own. Now, since all these practice 
 
60 
 
 false worship, and since Presbyterians are bound to remove all 
 false worship, it follows that they are bound to make a clean sweep 
 of the whole of us, except themselves. They are bound to this 
 ''according to each one's place and calling." Consequently, the 
 minister in the pulpit, the author in the press, the teacher in 
 the school, the merchant, the judge on the bench, the juryman 
 in the box, in a word, all Presbyterians according to the com- 
 mand of God, as explained in the Confession of Faith, are bound 
 to remove all false worship — Conf. Q. 108, p. 150 — and con- 
 sequently teach doctrines subversive of social order. 
 
 In this supposed commandment of God (for God never made 
 a commandment for Presbyterians which he did r ' ^. make equally 
 for all denominations) is to be found the solution of that rest- 
 lessness, that turbulence and domineering which has stood forth 
 in the uniform history of Presbyterians, as a moral problem, 
 exciting the curiosity of those who were unacquainted with the 
 doctrinal principle from which it emanated. Suppose each de- 
 nomination were to make for itself such an obligation, and then 
 say that God had imposed it. What would be the consequence 
 on the hypothesis that all should try, as all would be bound to 
 keep the commandments of God. This doctrine as unequivocally 
 stated in their standards, ifreduced to practice would not tolerate 
 an individual of another creed in the land. 
 
 I think I have proved to any impartial reader, according to 
 the strict rules of logic, that Presbyterians teach doctrine sub- 
 versive of the principles which bind civil society together. This 
 is preciselj' what Mr. Percival charges Catholics with. To make 
 this clear I shall put it in the shape of a syllogism. Any deno- 
 mination that teaches as a tenet revealed by God that they are 
 bound to exterminate all other denominations, teaches in a 
 mixed community principles subversive of civil society. And 
 since Presbyterianism in its present standard, the Confession of 
 Faith, teaches this doctrine, consequently they teach doctrines 
 subversive of order in civil society. Mr Percival thinks that 
 studying the Westminster Confession of Faith is likely to make 
 me a Presbyterian. He will be a better judge of that when I 
 shall have got through explaining to him and others the Con- 
 fessio , of Faith. 
 
 I shull conclude this letter by an extract from a letter which 
 appeared in the Globe of May 27th, in reference to the Relics 
 of the Cross. — , 
 
 In a controversy recently waged not a hundred miles from Toronto, one of 
 the contestants found himself reduced to the necessity of ridiculing certain 
 phases of the other's belief. In the course of a lengthy denunciation of Cath- 
 olic veneration of relics he committed himself to a statement which concerns 
 not Catholics alone, but all who wear the Christian name. He declares : — 
 
 In almost every chapel in Europe, and also in many in Canada, may be found 
 
of 
 in 
 Il- 
 ls 
 
 61 
 
 pieces of the true Cross on which our Lord was crucified. If these were all 
 collected no douht they would form lumber enough to construct one of th© 
 largest buildings in Canada. 
 
 As a Catholic, I protest against any nan being called a christian who would 
 dare to sliow so infidel a spirit as the language of the above paragraph betrays. 
 Only the more ignorant infidels now urge this objection against the authenticity 
 of the existing relics of the Holy Cross. Will you allow me to repeat to this 
 christian minister who dons infidel armour, a reply which it may be pure waste 
 of time to give him, but whose force even infidels have owned. In the " Anti- 
 quary " of June, 1887, may be found the following: 
 
 M. Rohauld de Fleury has made a list of all the relics of the Cross in Europe 
 and Asia of which he can find any .ecord, and the sum amounts to 3,941,975 
 cubic millimetres — a very small part, indeed, of what would be required to 
 make a cross. 
 
 A simple calculation shows that 3,974,975 cubic millimetres are equal in Eng 
 lish measure to 0,139,217 of a cubic foot or to 240,5()72 cubic inches long, and 
 four inches square on the end (4 x 4 x 15), of which the learned editor of the 
 Antiquary might well say — A very small part of what would be required to 
 make a cross. 
 
 I intended commenting on the deplorable ignorance of the gentleman who 
 made the horrible assertion quoted at the head of this letter, but, as it has 
 occured to me that he may not have known that he was ignorant, I refrain, and 
 Conclude with an expression of my admiration for his fine audacity in making 
 the assertion at this time of day, an audacity worthy tha best of the infidel 
 encyclopmdists of the Voltairian era. 
 
 I remain yours in detecting and exposing falsehood, and clerical 
 ignorance. 
 
 J. J. Egan. 
 Thornhill, June 4th, 1889. 
 
 ie 
 I 
 
 cs 
 
 ' ) 
 
 

 62 
 
 ill 
 I: rl 
 
 ^■:.ik 
 
 ,1 
 
 ;i 
 
 I iiliiiiii '1 
 
 CHAPTER XIII 
 
 Mr. Percival Refuses an Oral Discussion. 
 
 FINDING THAT FATHER EGAN DOES NOT COME UP TO HIS IDEAL OF 
 A GENTLEMAN, HE DECLINES ENTERING WITH HIM ON AN 
 ORAL DISCUSSION. — ENTERS ON THE REWARD 
 BUSINESS, AND WINDS UP DETRMINED 
 TO TREAT FATHER EGAN's 
 FUTURE EFFUSIONS WITH 
 SILENT CONTEMPT. 
 
 In last week's issue the Eev. Mr. Egan inflicts upon the public 
 four columns of trash, made up of low pot house yarns, vile per- 
 sonal abuse, glaring falsehoods, and blatant blasphemy. When 
 a controversialist has to resort to such weapons in order to de- 
 fend his cause, his case must indeed be desperate, and his stock 
 of arguments very low. Whilst I have no objection to discuss 
 this question, on its merits, in a gentlemanly manner either 
 through the medium of the press, or on the platform, yet I would 
 like to have a (jentleman for my opponent, and that the Rev. 
 J. J. Egan does not come in this category, is quite apparent 
 from his last letter. He furnishes us with a good illustration of 
 the truth of the old Roman proverb : — " Those whom the Gods 
 would destroy, they first make mad." Mr. Egan will remember 
 that that last word means insane 
 
 When Mr. Egan says that Pope Gregory XI. condemns the 
 proposition referred to in my last letter, he states that which is 
 positively false, and he must know it, if he knows anything about 
 the matter, which I very much doubt. Just look at his position 
 for a moment. He would have his readers believe that Dens 
 brings forward a Pope to condemn a proposition containing senti- 
 ments that he himself repeatedly advocates. That looks very 
 reasonable does it not ? That is just what you would expect an 
 intelligent Jesuit like Peter Dens to do, would you not ? Surely 
 a man must be in a very hard plight when he has to resort to 
 such a miserably silly subterfuge to try and get out of a diffi- 
 culty when he is fairly cornered. The method of escape was a 
 bold one, and well worthy of the reputation of the Thornhill 
 priest. Yet what better could you expect from a man who, in 
 this enlightened nineteenth century, has the unblushing effront- 
 ery to maintain, as Mr. Egan does in his last letter, that a lie is 
 
 i i 
 
 J 
 
r^ 
 
 63 
 
 not a deliberate intention to deceive another. Such conduct demon- 
 strates the possession not only of the greatest mental torpor, but 
 of moral paralysis as well. The public can now easily under- 
 stand why Mr. Egan can pour out falsehood without the slightest 
 twinge of conscience, as his last letter domonstrates that he has 
 not even the most remote conception of what truth means. 
 
 As usual Mr. Egan takes up nearly the whole of his letter 
 with side issues. He says ibat Protestants lie as well as Eoman 
 Catholics, and gets off some silly talk about jjrisoners at the bar, 
 &c., &c., &c., but what has that to do with the question ? Ab- 
 solutely nothing. The question was not whether Protestants 
 do or do not lie as well as Poman Catholics, hut rather as to what 
 constitutes a lie in ethics. This is the question, and it must be 
 quite apparent to the public that Mr. Egan's views in regard to 
 the matter are in perfect accord with the views maintained by 
 Peter Dens, and the rest of the Jesuits. I may also add that 
 throughout this discussion his conduct has been in perfect har- 
 mony with his sentiments. 
 
 As any individual, or denomination, upon whom this illiterate 
 fanatic pours out the phials of his abuse and falsehood, will only 
 rise proportionately high in the estimation of the right-thinking 
 and more intelligent portion of the community, I therefore, per- 
 sonally, and the Presbyterian Chuich as a body, regard his ob- 
 probrious epithets, and low bar-room vulgarities, in the light .of 
 compliments, rather than otherwise. 
 
 Mr. Egan may, therefore, continue his eruptions as long as he 
 pleases and vomit forth his black and burning streams of abuse 
 and falsehood ; they shall go ,unnoticed by me in the future. A 
 sense of self-respect will prevent my having anything more to 
 do with a man who, according to his own statement, can recog- 
 nize no difference between truth and falsehood. 
 
 Mr. Egan concludes his letter by transcribing some absurd 
 twaddle that appeared in some of the Toronto papers, evidently 
 written by a Pomish Priest who had not the manliness to sign his 
 name, or even give his correct initials. Permit me to direct 
 Mr. Egan's attention to the following clipping from the " Am- 
 erican Protestant ";it will elibrd him a good chance to make mo- 
 ney :— 
 
 TO ALL ROMAN CATHOLICS. 
 
 $100 REWARD. 
 
 To any Roman Catholic who will find in the New Testament a single in- 
 stance of private auricular confession to either Priest or Apostle. 
 
 $200 REWARD. 
 
 To ony Roman Catholic who will point.out a single passage in the Scriptures, 
 which states that the Bishops of Rome, either as the successors of St. Peter, 
 
■' 
 
 i ■ w: 
 
 64 • 
 
 or in any other character, were to be in their succession the Heads of the Uni- 
 versal Church. 
 
 , S300 REWAED. , • 
 
 To any Roman Catholic who will prove from the scriptures that the use of 
 images was recommended either by Christ or his Apostles. 
 
 $400 REWARD. 
 
 To any Eoman Catholic who will show by the Scriptures, that Christian 
 Bishops and Priests are forbidden to marry. 
 
 5500 REWARD. 
 
 To any Roman Catholic who will discover in the Scriptures a single instance 
 of an Apostle of Christ offering up a prayer to God through Christ to be deliv- 
 ered from eternal flames by the merits and intercession of a Saint 1 — See R. 
 Miss. I, p. 527. 
 
 $1,000 REWARD. 
 
 To any Eoman Catholic who will furnish a single text of Scripture in which 
 Christ or His Apostles, or the evangelists, call the blessed Virgin Mary, " the 
 Queen of Heaven," " the Empress of the Universe," '• the Mediatrix between 
 God and man " ; or in which the Apostle prayed, or directed tho Church to 
 pray to her at all. — See R. Breviary. 
 
 Roman Catholics obtain money by the sale of prayers, beads, wax dolls, im- 
 ages, medals, scapulars, and numerous other trinkets, and pretending to grant 
 indulgences and deliver souls from purgatory. Why not earn a trifle by furnis- 
 hing proof texts in favor of Romanism ? 
 
 J. G. White, 
 , • • Stanford, 111 
 
 I reraain, Yours in defence of truth, 
 
 The Manse, Eichmond Hill, June 10th, 1889. 
 
 W. W. Percival. 
 
 11 
 
 ill 
 
65 
 
 CHAPTEKXIV . 
 
 Father Egan deals with Mr. Percival's Idea of a 
 
 Gentleman. 
 
 CONCLUDING LETTER. 
 
 In his letter of the 30th ult., Rev.Mr. Percival promised to 
 prove that the Catholic Church was opposed to the circulation of 
 the Bible. Since then, however, he has made two important 
 discoveries, which preclude for him in future the possibility of 
 his having anything more to do with me. The first discovery 
 is that I am not a gentleman, and secondly he has suddenly 
 conceived most exalted sentiments of self respect. It is indeed 
 a great loss to him thathedidnotmuchsooner make these, or some 
 other discovery, that would give him a reasonable excuse before 
 the public for declining to enter upon a polemical controversy. It is 
 a pity his self respect did not come to his aid before he commenced 
 to make false statements, now known to be such; before he com- 
 menced to falsify authorities, and commit literary forgeries, of 
 which he has been plainly and duly convicted. 
 
 Rev. Mr. Percival's idea of a gentleman is somewhat unique, 
 and as to the individual it must be distinguished, whether he 
 is a Catholic Priest, or a Presbyterian minister; for in his 
 estimation this makes quite a difference. If a Priest; he would 
 show his good breeding, by allowing his Church to be slandered, 
 her doctrines misrepresented, and her children insulted, without 
 a word of protest. If on the other hand, he is a Presbyterian 
 minister, he can caluminate, falsify quotations, alter Papal Briefs, 
 quote condemned propositions, to serve his purpose — in a word, 
 lie without stint, in measure, about Catholics, and still be, not 
 only a gentleman and a scholar, but deserve honorable mention 
 in Foxe's Book of Martyrs, for suffering the cruel persecution of 
 having his frauds and forgeries exposed. Behold what immunity 
 is enjoyed by those who are foreordained to elictism ? as Presby- 
 terians are, who alone, belong to the "Church of our common 
 Lord." 
 
 Thus by malignant falsehood, have these clerical gentlemen 
 sought notoriety in the service of God, and their conduct on this 
 subject, has long since formed a topic of condemnation, and has 
 by its excess, and extravagance nauseated public taste, and be- 
 yond all doubt, raised the spirit of inquiry in the detection, of 
 this indecent imposture and now universal exposure. 
 
 1 1 
 
■ 
 
 R 
 
 ii 
 
 I 
 
 Confession of 
 
 ', it follows 
 
 inake these 
 
 not vary the 
 
 66 
 
 He could not afford, to meet me on a platform, because, for- 
 sooth, as he alleges I am not a gentleman. Gcntlemaii or not, 
 I could easily show, when brought face to face, with theological 
 works which he undertook to review, how little he knew about 
 them. He never read these works, perhaps, never saw them, 
 he could not translate, much less understand one- page of them 
 as is evident, and yet he has the cool, placid audacity to 
 criticise them. 
 
 Since however, according to the Westminister 
 Faith, everything that comes to jmss is foreord 
 that the decree went forth that Mr. Percival &. 
 cowardly attacks on Catholics, and that he cou 4 
 style of his warfare, to the extent even of sometimes telling the 
 truth. It was, likewise, foreordained that I should expose his 
 forged mistatements, and as neither of us could resist the decree 
 of the Almighty, no blame attaches itself to either of us, and 
 we can cry quits. But he wants a gentleman to discuss with.; 
 I am afraid we shall have to scn^l a great way off to procure one 
 who will come up to his ideal. 
 
 In the beginning of our correspondence I gave him some good 
 advice; but not believing, perhaps, that I meant to be friendly 
 towards him, he, like a wayward boy, did not mind, and the re- 
 sult is that he has fallen repeatedly into the pits which he dug 
 out for himself. I warned him against second hand quotations, 
 and he would not mind. I advised him, in regard to his public 
 lectures, to select subjects about which he knew something; and 
 he will have reason for many a day to bewail in the bitterness 
 of his heart, that he did not take my advice. It is an old saying 
 that children should not play with edged tools. It is very danger- 
 ous amusement for children, because they do not realise the 
 danger of such tools. Theology is a dangerous thing for some 
 people to play with, and especially for those who know nothing 
 about it. We have had recently a strikmg illustration of this 
 truth in Richmond Hill. 
 
 I am told that some people are very much displeased that this 
 controversy should have taken place ; they feign to be scandalized 
 that clergymen should quarrel after this fashion. While Mr. 
 Percival was drawing large crowdsto his church by slandering and 
 misrepresenting Catholics, it was all right; but when the tables 
 began to turn, and his frauds were exposed, these christian people 
 began to discover that such controversies are uncharitable and 
 do not make conversions either way. In other words, Mr. Per- 
 cival should have had his own way. 
 
 I now ask any candid reader, has he proved one of his state- 
 ments, or met one of my arguments ? The controversy arose 
 because I called upon him to prove his statement that the Church 
 teaches that the end justifies the means. Has he proved that ? 
 
67 
 
 'er- 
 
 I leave the public to judge. He charges me with raising side 
 issues, but I ask, who introduced the Scott Act, the Bible, relics, 
 bones, skulls, mental restriction, &c., &. '? and if I followed him 
 in these matters it was because if 1 had not done so he would 
 have said it was because I could not. Just as I say now that if 
 he did not take up the Bible, or the Westminster Confession, it 
 was because he dare not. And still he talks as if he had proved 
 everything, and pretends he has great confidence, like the boy 
 who whistles when passing a grave yard to keep up his courage 
 and make believe he is not a bit scared. 
 
 It is strange that Mr. Percival should have quoted a proposition 
 cdhdemned by Innocent XI., to show that Innocent XI. approved 
 of the doctrine which he condemned. He made the Pope as 
 ridiculous as he made himself when he said that be had never 
 stated of the Jesuits that they taught that the end justifies the 
 means, and in his next letter tried to prove they did teach that 
 doctrine. This is a strange world. The Prop, in question is 
 No. 26, not 30. Propositiones DamnaUe A. S. S. Papal Innoccntv) 
 XI. Feria V die 2 Martil 1779. It is page 618 of Gury Vol. 2. 
 I can show it to any one who calls, or I will leave the Vol. on 
 exhibition in Eichmond Hill if desired. 
 
 As long as Mr. Percival confines himself to preaching Pres- 
 byterianism, blasphemous though that creed is in its consequences, 
 I have no inclination to interfere, but when he misrepresents the 
 Catholic religion, I shall draw the line there. 
 
 As to the rewards which he has published. Suppose lunder- 
 took to prove these matters from scripture, who would be judge 
 as to whether they were proved or not '? We find among Pres- 
 byterians some quoting scripture to prove, for example, the doc- 
 trine of foreordination, and others quoting scripture to prove the 
 contrary. Mr. Percival being judge, he would not, no matter 
 how clearly I had proved these doctrines, decide in my favor. 
 
 Mr. Percival accuses me of " blatan*t blasphemy," because I 
 demonstrated the blasphemous tendency of the Confession of 
 Faith. I promised to review the Confession, and intended doing 
 so at some length if this controversy continued. I shall give 
 one letter on the subject distinct from this. I had been a long 
 time on the defensive, but at length I decided to carry war into 
 Africa. For that purpose I took to studjdng the Westminster 
 Confession, and it will l)e seen it has not made me a Presbyterian. 
 
 With this letter I shall close, and I submit it to the readers 
 whether my opponent has not utterly failed to prove any charge 
 he has made against the Church. He has indeed urged against 
 her some of the misrepresentations oi 3 past three hundred 
 years, wielded with all the force which ignorance of, and pre- 
 judice against, our real doctrines could impart. But what has 
 he done besides ? Even in this has he ever planted his foot in 
 

 lb 
 
 ^ 
 
 68 
 
 Bj, fixed posit i (HI from which he has not been driven by force, not 
 of assertion, but of facts, authorities and argument ? Even in 
 point of literary courtesy and polite language, I do not shrink 
 from the candid judgment even of the Presl)yterian reader him- 
 self. It is to be admitted, that when he made false statements, 
 or quoted authorities which are untrue, I pointed this out in i)lain 
 language, calling a spade a spade. But for this, the blame be- 
 longs to him, not to me. 
 
 •For the rest, with all good wishes for his l)etter knowledge of 
 the sadly calumniated religion, which he has assailed, as well as 
 for liis happiness here and hereafter, ^. . 
 
 I remain yours in chastising bigotry. 
 
 J. J. Egan. 
 Thornhill, June 17th, 1889. 
 
 ill 
 
 m\ 
 
 m 
 
 
69 
 
 not 
 in 
 ink 
 m- 
 its, 
 ain 
 be- 
 
 of 
 L as 
 
 CHAPTER XV. 
 
 The Westminster Confession 
 
 AND WH.VT IT LOGICALLY 
 LEADS TO. 
 
 It is not my purpose to discuss the whole of the Westminster 
 Confession of Faith. It is only the article to which objection 
 has been made recently by some of the most brilliant minds of 
 the Presbj'terian denomination that I wish to subject to critical 
 review. 
 
 Article III. of chapter III. reads as follows : — " By the decree 
 of God for the manifestation of His glory some men and angels 
 are predestined into everlasting life, and others foreordained 
 to everlasting death. 
 
 This foreordination, according to the Confession of Faith, pro- 
 ceeds not on the ground of merit or demerit in the individual 
 foreordained, but is absolutely independent of all provision on 
 the part of God of such merit or demerit in the individual, for 
 the article II. of the same chapter declares : — 
 
 " Although God knows whatsoever may or can come to pass 
 upon all supposed conditions, yet hath He not decreed anything 
 because he foresaw it as future, or as that which would come to 
 pass upon such conditions." 
 
 According to the teaching of these articles contained in the 
 Presbyterian Faith, God's decrees do not depend or any contin- 
 gencies that may happen. If a man goes to heaven it is not be- 
 cause he has lived a virtuous life on earth, nor because he has 
 believed the truths of the natural and supernatural order, nor 
 because he has kept the moral law engraved by the finger of God 
 on every man's heart, nor because he has followed the dictates 
 of conscience, nor because he has observed the commandments 
 of God, luit simply and only because God has decreed that he 
 should go to heaven. If that same man trampled all the laws 
 of God and man under foot, if he committed every imaginable 
 crime that a depraved heart could conceive, if he were a blood- 
 thirsty murderer, a besotted drunkard, an unprincipled thief, a 
 filthy polygamist, if he heaped crime on crime, till the wicked- 
 ness of Sodom and Gomorrah were all concentrated in himself, 
 and persevered in his diabolical malice till the last breath of life 
 had left him, and died without repentance, he would go to heaven 
 all the same. 
 
 Consequently, according to the Westminster Confession of 
 Faith, it does not matter a row of pins, as far as eternal destiny 
 is concerned, what kind of life a man leads on earth. If he is 
 predestined to heaven, he will get there even if he is as wicked as 
 
w 
 
 W 
 
 70, 
 
 Lucifer, and if he is predestined to hell he will go to hell, even 
 if he is as good and holy as a seraph that stands before the throne 
 of God. 
 
 Is it possible that men could put such a doctrine in practice ? 
 Fletcher of Madely, who published seven volumes, checks to 
 Antinomian Galvanism, in vindication of John Wesley's change 
 in religion, quotes an hon. member of Parliament : — " Once my 
 brother " he says * 'but now my opponent, who maintains in his pub- 
 * lished treatise that murder and adultery do not hurt the elected, 
 but even work for their good. My sins, " he adds, "may displease 
 God, my person is always acceptable to him. Though I should 
 outsin Manasses himself, I should not be less a pleasant child, 
 because God always views me in Christ. Hence in the midst of 
 adulteries, murders, and incests he can address me with : ' Thou 
 art all fair my love, my undefiled, there is not a spot in thee.' 
 It is most pernicious error of the schoolmen to distinguish sin 
 according to the fact, not according to the person. Though I 
 highly blame those who say let us sin that grace may abound, 
 yet, adultery, incest and murder shall, upon the whole, make 
 me holier on earth and merrier in heaven." 
 
 According to the Confession of Faith, heaven is not a reward 
 of virtue, and hell is not a punishment of sin. It is vain to hold 
 out heaven as an encouragement to lead a life of godliness, and 
 to threaten the punishment of hell as a check on wickedness. 
 Either I am predestined to heaven, or I am predestined to hell. 
 If I am predestine'I to heaven, any evil I may deliberately choose 
 to commit cannot change the decree, and deprive me of the 
 happiness that awaits me. Why, then, should I put myself to 
 the trouble of steering after godliness ? Why pray *? Why go 
 to church ? Why be pure and charitable, and humble, and hon- 
 est, and sober ? If J am predestined to hell, where would be the 
 use in trying to avert what cannot be averted '? Why should I 
 keep the law of God who is determined to damn me if I have 
 kept all his commandments, just as mercilessly as if I had broken 
 them all '? If this article of the Faith be true, then why have a 
 Bible and read it *? If I am predestined to heaven I may pitch 
 the Bible to the dogs, and in its stead amuse myself with reading 
 dime novels ; I will get to heaven all the same. If I am predest- 
 ined to hell, the using of all the Bibles on earth will not keep 
 me from falling into it. Why have churches, gorgeous and ex- 
 pensive ? Why have ministers of religion and pay them high 
 salaries "? What use is it to preach the gospel to people who 
 will get to heaven without it, and cannot avoid hell with it ? 
 This article of Presbyterian faith, laid down in tlie Westminster 
 Contession, if logically carried out, must convert the human race 
 into a race of monsters. Can such a faith be the outcome of 
 divine insp .ration, or is it not rather the work of cruel and blood- 
 
,.*^v" n.i 
 
 reward 
 to hold 
 s, and 
 edness. 
 3 hell, 
 choose 
 of the 
 self to 
 liy go 
 d iion- 
 he the 
 onld I 
 I have 
 )rolven 
 have a 
 ' pitch 
 eading 
 edest- 
 keop 
 id ex- 
 lii high 
 le who 
 ,ith it ? 
 linster 
 race 
 )me of 
 1 hlood- 
 
 I 
 
 71 ' • 
 
 thirsty men, such as John Calvin was, who could conscientiousv 
 burn at the stake those that differed from him in religious opin^" 
 oris ? 
 
 What amuses us most of all is that the Presbyterian ministers, 
 who all subscribe to the Confession, whether they believe it or 
 not, are the very ones who have been howling loudest against 
 Jesuits, and attributing to them teachings subversive of morality. 
 If the doctrines laid down in chapter III. of the Westminster Con- 
 fession are not subversive of all morality, I w^ould like to know 
 the meaning of morality in the Presbyterian sense. I am sure 
 no Jesuit has ever taught that a man shall get to heaven against 
 his will, or that a man will be damned whether he deserves it or 
 not. 'No Ultramont'ine has ever taught that God has determined 
 to damn a certain definite numl)er of intelligent beings whom He 
 has himself created, and to damn them irrespective of their 
 merits or demerits, and for no other reason but to manifest is 
 glory. If God is just and can condemn no one except for His 
 own deliberate sin, and the Presbyterian doctrine as laid down 
 in the Westminster Confession is true, then it follows that God 
 is the deliberate author of sin. He forces intelligent beings to 
 sin and then condemns them for their sin, which they cannot 
 avoid, because He does force them to it ! Did human mind ever 
 conceive anything more hideous than this ? 
 
 " God " says the Confession, " from all eternity did by the 
 most holy council of His own will, freely and unchangeably ordain 
 whatsoever comes to pass." Therefore, if a man is a Papist, God 
 so ordained it ; and if he is a Jesuit, God so ordained it ; and if 
 God so ordained it, what right have Presbyterians to growl about 
 i^ ? If everything that comes to pass was ordained by God, then 
 i( was ordained by God that Mercier should pass the Jesuit 
 Estate's Bill, and what right have Presbyterian ministers to 
 howl about it ? 
 
 Who are the elect ? W' .o, of course, but the Presbyterians, 
 being assured of their preordination m eternal life by the fact 
 that they are fallen in Adam and redeemed in Christ. No one 
 is redeemed except the elect (Art. VI), but they certainly hold 
 that they are redeemed or saved. All others being ordained for 
 hell ought to be helped to hell as promptly as possible, so as not 
 to deprive God of that glory which He deserves from the decreed 
 damnation of them. Therefore, all others, and especially 'Pap- 
 ists, must be exterminated, and that glory given to God, which 
 is accoiding to the Westminster Conljssion, to be derived from 
 their eternal damnation. I think this reasoning is logical, but 
 I hope the articles in the Confession which justify such reason- 
 ing may be greatly modified. 
 
 J. J. Egan. 
 ThornhiU, June 17th, 1889.