Siete

Tee etre

 

 

 

Pate ear reet FH
ee a
}
> \
| hy
A
an
cf
\ ie,
fil
/ Af Of
' {

 

Cornell University Library

SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND

THE GIFT OF

Henry W. Saaqe

1891

 

 

 
The date shows when this volume was taken.

To renew this book copy the call No. and give to
the librarian.

| HOME USE RULES

 

 

All Books subject to Recall

All borrowers must regis-
ter in the library to borrow
books for home use.

All books must be re-
turned at end of college
year for inspection and

Limited books must be re-
_ turned within the four week
limit and not renewed.

Students must return all
books before leaving town.
Officers should arrange for
the return of books wanted
* during their absence from
town.

Volumes of periodicals
and of pamphlets are held
in the library as much as
possible. For special pur-
poses they are given out for
a limited time.

Borrowers should not use
their library privileges for
.. the benefit of other persons.

 

Books of special value
and gift books, when the

giver wishes it, are not
’ allowed to circulate.

 

Readers are asked to re-
port all cases of books
- marked or mutilated. 7

 

 

Do not deface books by marks and writing.

 

+

wii fin

7
A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS
 

 

BY THE SAME AUTHOR

THE FAITH OF OUR FATHERS
OUR CHRISTIAN HERITAGE
THE AMBASSADOR OF CHRIST
DISCOURSES AND SERMONS

 

 

 
A RETROSPECT OF
FIFTY YEARS

BY

JAMES CARDINAL GIBBONS
_ ARCHBISHOP OF BALTIMORE

VOLUME I

JOHN MURPHY COMPANY
PUBLISHERS
BALTIMORE NEW YORK
R. & T. WASHBOURNE, Ltd.
10 Paternoster Row, London, and at Manchester, Birmingham and Glasgow.

Ev.
TD
U7;
COPYRIGHT, 1916, BY JOHN MURPHY COMPANY ‘ D
Entered at Stationer’s Hall, London, England. ; 2
s

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED #
Published November 1916

h.2048 33

 

Press of JOHN MURPHY COMPANY, Baltimore.

pF

0
My ae
Neth
AFFECTIONATELY DEDICATED

Right Reverend Rector
The Faculty

AND THE

Benefactors

OF THE

CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION.

The following selections from my essays and
sermons published in two separate volumes, have
been put together, in the first place because I
thought that some of them might be valuable for
the history of the many years through which it has
pleased God to spare my life. I have lived a long
time, and I have lived through a very critical time.
Not only have I held office many years, but I have
held office during a time of transition, when the old
order was changed.

The few survivors among my colleagues in the
Episcopate can remember these strenuous times;
but in some of the Articles, notably the two
on the Vatican Council, I am speaking for a gen-
eration, which with the exception of myself, has
passed away. I am the last living Father of the
Vatican Council. Now, alone upon this earth, I
ean report what happened within those sacred
walls—not by hearsay, nor from books, but from
what I actually saw and heard. For this reason I
have not only included one Paper on the Vatican
Council, but I have published the diary which
years ago was sent to ‘‘The Catholic World,’’ and I
have supplemented it with a short introduction
explaining the events which took place after the

ix
x INTRODUCTION

last installment of my diary had been sent to them.

It was just at the time when I was made a
Cardinal by Pope Leo XIII that the rise of the
Labor Unions in America brought about what
might have been a crisis in the life of the Ameri-
can Church. For some.years the Church stood
at the crossroads. It had to choose between
allying itself with what looked like elements of
disaster and revolution, or consenting to a theory
of economics which could not be justified upon
Christian principles. The duty had been laid
upon it of preserving society, the rights of prop-
erty and at the same time protecting the rights of
individuals to the fruits of their labors; also of
protecting the poor from the encroachment of
uncontrolled capital.

The second contribution of this volume repre-
sents what I believed at the time to be the only
possible course for the Church to take. Amid how
many fears such a course was taken nobody now
can realize since Leo XIII has settled forever in his
wonderful encyclical ‘‘Rerum Novarum’’ the prin-
ciples of economics which are alone consonant with
the Gospel. It seemed as if in taking the course
which some of us took, and which is represented by
the document which I presented to the Holy See,we
were destroying the Church’s reputation for con-
servatism as well as her usefulness as a conserver
of society; that we Bishops of the Church of God
were making of ourselves demagogues and the har-
bingers of the ‘‘Red Revolution.’’

Each of the other Essays refers to subjects of
vital importance and interest to the material,
INTRODUCTION xi

political and moral welfare of the American peo-
ple, and I have included them because it may not
be uninteresting to the rising generation to know
what was thought on these subjects by one who,
after the service of God, has desired nothing so
much as to serve his country. —

There are few Americans living now who can
remember the things which I can. I followed Mr.
Lincoln’s dead body in procession when it was
brought to this city; I have seen every president
since his death, and have known most of them
personally; I was a grown man and a priest during
the Civil War when it seemed as if our country
were to be permanently divided. Very few people
now living have seen the country in such distress
as Ihave seen it. But I have lived, thank God, to
see it in wonderful prosperity and to behold it
grown into one of the great powers of the earth.
Younger men may tremble for the future of this
country, but I can have nothing but hope when
-. J think what we have already passed through, for
I can see no troubles in the future which could
equal, much less surpass, those which haye
afflicted us in bygone days. If only the American
people will hold fast to that instrument which has
been bequeathed to them as the palladium of their
liberties—the Constitution of the United States,—
and fear and distrust the man who would touch
that ark with profane hands, the permanence of
our institutions is assured.

In my time I have seen multitudes of Europeans
seeking this shore in search of liberty and hope.
xii INTRODUCTION

The men who were middle aged when I was young,
doubted and feared whereunto this might grow;
but I have seen men of foreign birth become one
with us, and I think it no more than justice that I
should call the attention of my countrymen to the
reason. The same power which welded the Latin,
Gaul, Frank, Briton and Norman into the Nation
of France; which welded the Briton, Saxon, Dane
and Norman into the Nation of England, has been
present among us and has again exercised its
benign influence in welding divers’ races into one
people: That power is the Catholic Church. If
there do not now lie over against each other in
this country hostile nationalities with different
languages, different points of view and different
aspirations, it is because those who have come to
us, whatever may have been their nationality,
have for the most part had one common, charac-
teristic—they have been Catholic Christians.

When I was young, men feared the Catholic
Church because they thought her foreign and un-
American. Yet I have lived to see their children
and their children’s children acknowledge that if
the different nations which have come to our
shores have been united into one people, and if
today there is an American people it is largely
owing to the cohesive and consolidating influence
of the christian religion of our ancestors.

But again, many men once amongst us feared
the Catholic Church because they thought her
opposed to liberty, yet if they had read history,
even superficially, they would have known that no
liberty which they possessed has come to them ex-
INTRODUCTION xii

cept through the agency of that Religion which
molded our barbarian ancestors into the civilized
nations of Europe. But for her there would have
been no civilization today, and without civiliza-
tion there could have been no liberty.

Nor has the Church affected those only who have
come to these shores and brought them into con-
tact with American ideals. She has attracted to
her communion multitudes of the native born, as
she does wherever she is free to preach the Gospel;
for she cannot speak to any man or woman of
European descent without awakening in his or her
mind the echoes of the faith of our fathers; for
that is the faith the Church teaches. Her faith is
the faith of the fathers, not alone of the immi-
grants, but also of the native born. For centuries
all our fathers were born to her in Holy Baptism
and died in her bosom.

T have included in this collection not only essays,
but many sermons. I have selected those sermons
which I believed would be most helpful to my
countrymen when J am gone. Most of these dis-
courses marked great anniversaries in the life of
the American Church; but in others the aim has
been simply to state the plain truths of the Gospel
so that ‘‘he who runs may read.’’ In the last ser-
mons included in this book—those on the Saints
and on The Life to Come—I have tried to give
expression to that hope, without which this earth
would be but a desert and the future but the black-
ness of despair.

My countrymen and my fellow Catholics will
forgive me if I seem to yearn over this Church and
xiv INTRODUCTION

people, but I do so because I believe both the
American Church and the American people to be
precious in the sight of God, and designed, each
one in its proper sphere, for a glorious future.
CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION . ...... 4%

Persona REMINISCENCES OF THE VATICAN
Councin .

Prerace to Extracts From My Dtary

During Vatican CoUNCIL .

THe First GicumenicaL CouncIL oF THE
Vatican, CHaprerRI . . . .

Tur Fist GcumenicaL, CouncmL OF THE
Vatican, CHaprer II. .

Tue First (icumentcaL Councin oF THE
Vatican, Cuapter IIT .

THe First GicumentcaL Councm oF THE
Vatican, Cuaprer IV... ..

Tye Fiest Gcumentoat Councit OF THE
Vatican, CoapvteR V. . ....s

xV

PAGES

ix-xiv
1- 29
30- 33
34- 63
64- 72
73- 95
96-139

140-168
xvi CONTENTS

THe Firsr GcumernicaL Councin or THE

Vatican, CHaptrer VI
Tur Kyicuts or Lazor .
THe CuurcH anp THE REPUBLIC .

Tue Cuaims oF THE CaTHOLIC CHURCH IN
THE Maxine or Tur RePuBLic

Inisa Immigration To THE UNITED STATES
Lyncu Law .

ParTRIoTIsM AND Pouitics . ....

. 169-185
. 186-209
. 210-234

. 235-264

265-283

. 284-296

. 297-320
PERSONAL REMINISCENCES OF
THE VATICAN COUNCIL
PERSONAL REMINISCENCES OF THE VATICAN
COUNCIL. *

F the Fathers who attended the Vatican
Council, very few are now alive. Indeed,
only those who were among the younger:

Bishops, as I was myself the youngest, can speak
from personal experience of the events which
took place during this memorable meeting of the
Shepherds of Christendom.

Although my youth imposed upon me a dis-
ereet silence among my elders, so keen was my
appreciation of my good fortune at being present
among these venerable men that I cannot remem.
ber to have missed a single session, and I was a
most attentive listener at all the debates.

The Council was held in the right transept of
St. Peter’s Basilica, which was partitioned off
and suitably furnished with all the requirements
for a deliberative body. Pope Pius IX presided
in person at the opening, as well as at all the
solemn sessions, and a bench of five Cardinals
presided at the business sessions, or general con-
gregations. At the close of the first selemn ses-
sion the Prelates passed out from the council

* This article on the Vatican Council was originally con-
tributed by me to The North American Review, in 1894.

1
2 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

chamber into St. Peter’s Church, and mingled
with the crowd of some 50,000 spectators. In.
advancing toward the front door of St. Peter’s
I became separated from Archbishop Spalding,
who always favored me with a seat in his car-
riage. I was as much bewildered as a stranger
would be in a London fog, and as I was utterly
unacquainted with the surroundings, I did not at-
tempt to find my way to the carriage, which was
awaiting us in one of the many court yards of the
Vatican. The rain was pouring down in torrents, a
carriage could not be secured at any price, and,
encumbered as I was with the impedimenta of cope
and mitre, a journey on foot to the American Col-
lege, a mile or more away was out of the question.
I applied in vain to the occupants of several car-
riages, but all the seats were engaged. At last,
when it was growing dark, a solitary carriage
remained on the piazza, occupied by a Bishop. It
was my last chance. I requested him to give me
a seat, and explained my helpless condition,
speaking to him in French, as that was the most
popular language among the Prelates. The
Bishop looked at me with a good-humored smile,
which seemed to say: ‘‘I think you understand
English quite as well as French.’’ And then
he replied to me in English: ‘‘The carriage, my
lord, is engaged for five of us, but we cannot
leave you stranded. We must make room for
you.’’ Rarely did our English tongue sound so
sweet in my ears, and seldom was an act of kind-
ness more gratefully accepted. My good Samar-
REMINISCENCES OF VATICAN COUNCIL 3_

itan proved to be a Bishop from the wilds of
Australia.

When the Council was convened in Rome, De-
cember 8, 1869, the Catholic Bishops of Christen-
dom, resident and titular, numbered about 1,200.
At an early stage of the Council, the number of
prelates in attendance was 737. Europe was
represented by 514 Prelates, North and South
America by 113, Asia by 83, Africa by 14, and
Oceania by 13 Bishops.

Every continent, every island of importance,
every nation on the face of the globe, except
Russia, was represented by its hierarchy. The
Bishops, kneeling together around the altar in
the council chamber, could exclaim with truth in
the language of the Apocalypse: ‘‘Thou hast
redeemed us, O Lord, to God in Thy blood out of
every tribe and tongue and people and nation.’’

No Prelates attracted more general attention
than the venerable Patriarchs and Bishops of the
East. I may here observe that the Oriental
Christians comprise two classes—the schismatics,
who separated from the Catholic Church chiefly
in the fourth, fifth and ninth centuries, and are
not now in communion with the See of Rome, and
the orthodox Christians, who acknowledge the
judicial supremacy of the Pope. Only the latter
had representatives at the Council, though the
former had also been invited by Pius IX, but
they chose to decline. These venerable Prelates
had nothing in common with their Western col-
leagues except their faith. Their peculiar rites
and ceremonies, their liturgical and popular lan-
4 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

guage, their dress and long-flowing beards,
stamped them with a personality of their own.
Some of them recalled to mind the Patriarchs of
old, of whom we read in the Sacred Scriptures;
and they might sit for a Moses or an Aaron. The
Eastern Christians in communion with the Holy
See are divided into the following rites: 1. The
Greek Rite, itself subdivided into pure Greek,
Italo-Greek, Roumanian, Bulgarian, Ruthenian
and Melchite Greek; 2. The Chaldean Rite; 3.
The Syrian Rite; 4. The Syro-Marionite; 5. The
Syro-Malabar; 6. The Coptic, subdivided into
Coptic proper and Coptic-Ethiopian.

- hese Orientals came from the banks of the
Tigris and Euphrates, the cradle of the human
family; from the banks of the Jordan, the cradle
of Christianity; from the banks of the Nile, the
home of the oldest historic civilization. They
came from Chaldea, from the lands of the Medes,
the Persians and the Abyssinians; from Mossul,
built near the site of ancient Nineveh, and from
Bagdad, founded not far from the ruins of Baby-
lon. They assembled from Damascus and Mount
Libanus, and from the Holy Land, sanctified by
the footprints of our Blessed Redeemer. What
a spectacle they presented; what reverence they
excited! Unchangeable as the hills and valleys
of their native soil, they wore the same turban,
and the same pale and thoughtful countenance
that their fathers wore in the time of John the
Baptist; they exhibited the same simplicity of
manners that Abraham did nearly four thousand
REMINISCENCES OF VATICAN COUNCIL 5

years ago, when he fed his flocks in the valley of
Mambre and gave hospitality to angels.

The Vatican Council incidentally affords us a
most striking and gratifying evidence of the
growth of our language among the nations of the
earth during the last three centuries, and of the
corresponding expansion of the Catholic relig-
ion throughout the English-speaking world. We
can form a just estimate of this increase by com-
paring the number of English-speaking Bishops
who attended the Vatican Council with the num-
ber of the same tongue at the Council of Trent,
which assembled three hundred and fifty years
ago. At the Council of Trent the whole conti-
nent of America was without a single represen-
tative, having been discovered only fifty years
before. Oceania was then a terra incognita.
There was no Bishop from Scotland. England
sent one Prelate and Ireland three to that Coun-
cil, There were, consequently, only four English-
speaking representatives at the Tridentine Synod.

At the Vatican Council there was an English
Episcopate numbering upwards of one hundred
and twenty members. Prelates speaking our
tongue assembled in Rome from England, Ireland,
and Scotland, from the United States and Canada,
from Oceania, the East Indies, and Africa.

Daniel Webster, in one of his speeches in the
United States Senate, speaks of England as—

“A pewer which has dotted the surface of the whole
globe with her possessicns and military posts, whose morning
drum-beat, following the sun and keeping company with the

hours, circles the earth with one continuous and unbroken
strain of the martial airs of England.”
6 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

We may not less confidently affirm that wher-
ever floats the British or the American flag, aye,
wherever the English language is spoken, there
also is raised aloft the banner of salvation; and
there, too, is announced in our own noble and
familiar tongue the Gospel of peace and reconcil-
jation. And I venture to hazard the prediction
that at the next Ecumenical Council, if held with-
in a hundred years, the representatives of the
English language will equal, if they do not surpass,
in number those of any other tongue.

The question naturally occurs to the reader:
What language was the medium of communica-
tion among so large and heterogeneous an assem-
blage speaking different tongues? I answer that
the Latin was the official language of the Council.

A few words may not be out of place here
explaining why the Latin is employed in the
Liturgy of the Western Church, and why it was
exclusively used in the debates of the Vati-
ean Council. When Christianity was established,
Rome was mistress of the civilized world. Wher-
ever the Roman standard was planted there also
spread the Roman tongue, just as the English
language is now diffused wherever the authority
of Great Britain or of the United States holds
sway. The Church adopted in her public wor-
ship the language that she found prevailing
among the people. And she has very wisely pre-
served it in her Liturgy, even after it had ceased
to be a vulgar tongue, as a dead language is not
subject to the gradual changes of meaning which
occur in a living tongue. The jewel of faith is
REMINISCENCES OF VATICAN COUNCIL 7%

best preserved in the casket of an unalterable
language.

In like manner we can easily perceive the util-
ity, I might say the absolute necessity, of the
Latin tongue in the deliberations of the Council.
Had the Bishops no uniform medium to express
their sentiments, the Council would have degen-
erated into a Babel of tongues. Public debate
would have been impracticable, even familiar
conversation during the intervals of recess be-
tween the speeches would have been impossible
to a great many, for the Bishops’ seats were ar-
ranged, not by nationality, but by seniority of
rank. But, thanks to the Latin language, which
all but a few Orientals understood, each Bishop
comprehended the discourses almost as clearly as
if they had been spoken in his native tongue.

While the speeches of all the Bishops were in-
telligible to the hearers, an attentive listener
could usually detect to what family of nations
the orator belonged. He could tell whether the
speaker was a Spaniard, a Frenchman, an Italian,
a German, or a Prelate of the English-speaking
world almost as readily as an Englishman can
distinguish a Scotchman from a Cockney or a
Yorkshireman. The pronunciation or accentua-
tion of certain words, the guttural sound or the
soft cadence was the shibboleth that revealed the
nationality of the speaker. Sometimes a pleas-
ant smile would play on the habitually grave coun-
tenance of an Italian Cardinal while listening to
the language of Cicero uttered with inflection and
pronunciation unfamiliar to his ears. The accom-
8 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

plished Bishop of Geneva began a speech with a
graceful apology for his French accent: ‘‘My
voice, Most Reverend Fathers, is French, but my
heart is Roman,’’*

So much for the language. Let us now look
more closely at the men. I think I am not exag-
gerating when I say that the Council of the Vati-
can has been excelled by few, if any, deliberative
assemblies, civil or ecclesiastical, that have ever
met, whether we consider the maturity of years
of its members, their learning, their experience
and piety, or the widespread influence of the De-
crees that they framed for the spiritual and moral
welfare of the Christian Republic.

The youngest Bishop in the Council was thirty-
six years old. Fully three-fourths of the Prelates
ranged between fifty-six and ninety years. The
great majority, therefore, had grown gray in the
service of their Divine Master. Several Fathers
of the Church, bent with age, might be seen pass-
ing through St. Peter’s Basilica to the council-
chamber every morning, leaning with one hand
on their staff, the other resting on the shoulder
of their secretary. One or two blind Bishops
could be observed, guided by their servants, as
they advanced to their posts with tottering steps,
determined to aid the Church in their declining
years by the wisdom of their counsel, as they had
consecrated to her their vigorous manhood by
their Apostolic labors. Several Prelates were so
much enfeebled by years and infirmities, and so

* Alloquor vos, Reverendissimi Patres, Gallico sermone,
sed Romano corde.
REMINISCENCES OF VATICAN COUNCIL 9

exhausted by travel, that they died martyrs to
obedience and duty on their way to the Council;
several others expired in the city or while re-
turning to their dioceses.

But to the gravity of years, the members of the
Council generally united profound and varied
learning. From their youth they had drunk at
the fountain of knowledge, and particularly at
that of sacred science. There was not a single
civilized language, scarcely even a tribal dialect
in vogue among any people or race, that was not
understood and spoken by some Prelate in that
assembly. Every Bishop was familiar with at
least two or three languages, and some of them
were capable of speaking from eight to twelve.
The Primate of Hungary informed me that he em-
ployed four different tongues in the administra-
tion of his vast diocese of a million souls, corre-
sponding in Latin with his clergy, and addressing
his mixed congregations in the Hungarian, Ger-
man, and Sclavonian languages. A Vicar Apos-
tolic from China, who sat next to me, said that
he was obliged to use six different Chinese dia-
lects in his Vicariate.

Where else could be found a single assembly
capable of discoursing in all languages under the
sun. Was not this spectacle suggestive of the
Pentecostal miracle? And well might the specta-
tors exclaim: ‘‘Behold, are not all these who
speak Galileans (or, at least, disciples of the
Divine Galilean), and how have we every one
heard our own tongue wherein we were born?
Parthians, Medes, and Elamites, and inhabitants
10 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

of Mesopotamia, Judea, and Cappadocia, Pontus,
and Asia, Phrygia, Pamphylia, and Egypt, and
strangers of Rome, Proselytes, Cretes, and Ara-
bians—we have heard them all speak in our
tongues the wonderful works of God.”’

They were men, too, of world-wide experience
and close observation. Each Bishop brought with
him an intimate knowledge of the history of his
country and of the religious, moral, social, and
political condition of the people among whom he
lived. One could learn more from an hour’s inter-
view with this living encyclopedia of divines,
who were a world in miniature, than from a
week’s study of books. An earnest and attentive
conversation with these keen-sighted churchmen
on the social and religious progress of their
respective countries was as much more instructive
and delightful than the reading of books, as a
personal view of magnificent scenery would be in
comparison with a description of it in the pages
of an illustrated review. The living words left
an indelible impress on the heart and memory.

And while I admired their learning and experi-
ence, I could not but venerate their apostolic
virtues. The great majority of the Prelates were
venerable, both by their years and by that which
they had accomplished in the service of Almighty
God, for many of them had endured trials and
hardships. Some were exiles from their Sees for
conscience’ sake; others were the successors of
martyrs, and were destined themselves to wear a
martyr’s crown. By the enforcement of the Falk
laws, or Kulturkampf, in Prussia after the Coun-
REMINISCENCES OF VATICAN COUNCIL 11

cil, Archbishop Melchers, of Cologne, afterwards
a Cardinal, was expelled from his See. By the same
laws, Archbishop Ledochowski, of Gnesen-Posen,
in Prussian Poland, afterwards the Cardinal Pre-
fect of the Propaganda, was imprisoned for two
years. St. Chrysostom says that Paul raised to
the third heavens was an object delightful to con-
template, but the Paul buried in a Roman dungeon
was still more worthy of our admiration. May
we not add that Ledochowski was a conspicuous
figure in the Council, but he was still more
admired in a Prussian prison?

But of all the Bishops assembled under St.
Peter’s dome none excited more sympathy and
admiration than the Prelates from China and
Corea, where persecution periodically breaks out.
To them might be literally applied the words of
the Apostle: ‘‘In journeyings often, in perils of
rivers, perils of robbers, perils from the Gentiles,
perils in the city, perils in the wilderness, perils
in the sea. In labor and distress, in watchings
often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in
cold and nakedness.”’

When traveling from Marseilles to Civita Vec-
chia by the Mediterranean, on my way to the
Council, I happened to get acquainted with a
Chinese Bishop. The expression of his pale
and thoughtful countenance, with a _ blending
of melancholy ‘and sweetness, can never be
effaced from my memory. His was a face
that told you at once of sufferings, privations,
and fortitude. He remarked to me on the steamer:
“T am glad that my journey is near its end, for
12 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

when I reach Rome I shall have traveled 23,000
miles.’? He had worked his way for weeks in
a zig-zag direction through the interior of China
till he arrived at the Yang-tse-Kiang, down which
he sailed to the mouth, thence made a circuitous
voyage to a French port, and finally proceeded
from Marseilles to Rome.

Another Bishop, Monseigneur Ridel, was also an
object of sympathetic interest. Three of his pred-
ecessors in the Episcopate besides several mis-
sionary priests had died martyrs to Christianity .
in Corea, two other Bishops of that country per-
ished from hunger and exposure, and the Bishop
himself, after returning-to Corea, was confined in
an infected prison for five months, and was saved
from a cruel death only by the intervention of
the French minister.

Whatever may be a man’s religious faith,
his heart will swell with emotion when he
contemplates a young levite leaving his native
land, his family and kindred, and _ volun-
tarily exiling himself in a distant country to
preach the Gospel to an unfriendly and a hostile
people, adapting himself to their habits and diet,
daily carrying his life in his hands and finally
succumbing to disease, or to the stroke of the
executioner. With very few exceptions, these
priests, after touching Chinese or Corean soil,
never return to their native country. The words
of Dante may well be applied to them—‘‘ All hope
abandon ye who enter here.’’

What heroism is more sublime than this? It
is a heroism not culled from the musty pages of
REMINISCENCES OF VATICAN COUNCIL 13

ancient hagiology, but occurring in our own days;
a heroism not aroused by the sound of martial
music, or the clash of arms in the battlefied, or
by the emulation of comrades, or the lust for fame
or territory; but a heroism inspired by their love
for God and their fellow-beings.

Let us now enter the council-chamber for a few
moments and observe the bearing of the Fathers
toward each other, as well as the leading features
of the debates, and then let us note a few of the
prominent speakers who took part in the discus-
sions. The conduct of the Bishops toward each
other was marked by mutual esteem and by good
temper that was rarely ruffled even when the most
burning questions were deliberated. The most
ample liberty of discussion prevailed in the Coun-
ceil. This freedom the Holy Father pledged at
the opening of the synod, and the pledge was
religiously kept. I can safely say that neither in
the British House of Commons, nor in the French
Chambers, nor in the German Reichstag, nor in
our American Congress would a wider liberty of
debate be tolerated than was granted in the
Vatican Council. The presiding Cardinal exhib-
ited a courtesy of manner and a forebearance
even in the heat of debate that was worthy of all
praise. I do not think that he called a speaker
to order more than a dozen times during the
eighty-nine sessions, and then only in deference to
the dissenting murmurs or demands of some
Bishops.

A Prelate representing the smallest diocese
had the same rights that were accorded to the
14 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

highest dignitary in the Chamber. There was
no limit prescribed as to the length of the
speeches. We may judge of the wide scope of
discussion from the single fact that the debate
on the Infallibility of the Pope lasted two months,
occupying twenty-five sessions, and was partici-
pated in by one hundred and twenty-five Prelates,
not counting one hundred others who handed in
written observations. No stone was left unturned,
no text of Sacred Scripture, no passage in the
writings of the Fathers, no page of Ecclesiastical
History bearing on the subject, no voice of tradi-
tion escaped the vigilant investigations of the
Bishops, so that the whole truth of God might be
brought to light.

It is true that, toward the end of the Council,
with the view of saving much precious time with-
out prejudice to the freedom of discussion, the
original rules were so modified that, on a petition
of ten Fathers, the President could propose and
the majority could decide to close the debate.

I well remember how, during and after the
Council, a good many writers in the public press
affected to be shocked and filled with virtuous
indignation that there should be any outburst of
feeling or even any display of parliamentary con-
tention in a Council of Catholic Bishops. With
the Mantuan poet, they exclaimed:

“‘Tantaene animis coelestibus irae?’

Had the deliberations been carried on in a
humdrum style, without criticism or opposition
on the part of the minority, the outcry against the
Council would have been all the louder. Then it
REMINISCENCES OF VATICAN COUNCIL 15

would be charged, with a fair show of reason, that
there was no spirit or manhood among the Fath-
ers; that they were so many figureheads ready to
bow at the nod of the Pope. The Bishops were
men with human feelings. They were freemen
fettered by no compact, bound by no caucus, filled
with a profound sense of responsibility to God
and their consciences. They were discussing ques-
tions, not of a political or transitory nature, but
questions of faith and morals, which would not
only influence the external conduct, but control
the internal assent of themselves and of the faith-
ful committed to their charge. As judges of faith,
it was their right, as well as their duty, to examine
the sacred records before registering their vote,
just as the judges of the Supreme Court examine
the statute and common law before rendering a
decision. If they had unanimously agreed on all
the great questions under consideration without
any diversity of sentiment or conflict of words,
they would have exhibited a spectacle unparalleled
in the annals of civil or ecclesiastical legislation.
The history of every great Council of the Church
has been marked by intense earnestness of debate.
There was not only discussion, but ‘‘much dis-
puting’’ in the Apostolic Council of Jerusalem.
There were scenes of controversy, not to say of
commotion, in the Ecumenical Councils of Nice,
Ephesus, Chalcedon, Constantinople and Trent.
Yet such incidents of verbal strife did not impair
the dignity nor lessen the authority of these mem-
orable conventions.

It may be of interest here to parallel the late
16 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

Council with the first Ecumenical Council held at
Nice in the year 325. The number of Bishops in
attendance at the Vatican Council was more than
double, but the outer circumstances of the Council
were much the same. In 325 the Peace of the
Church had just been obtained and it depended
at that time wholly upon the life of one man—the
Emperor Constantine—who was himself not yet
baptized, as indeed he was not until just before
his death. The political atmosphere, therefore,
was as much charged with electricity in the year
325 as it was in the year 1870, and society was in
a very unstable equilibrium. Just as the Peace
of the Church apparently depended upon the life
of one man, and he an Emperor, in 325, so in 1870
the peace of the Church again apparently
depended upon the life of one man, and he an
Emperor—Napoleon III.

Constantine had just freed the Pope, Saint
Sylvester, from the greatest danger and had
assured to him the liberty of the Apostolic See.
And in 1870 Napoleon JII was protecting the
Apostolic See from the spoliation of its temporal
dominions upon which its liberty of action then
depended, or at least seemed to depend.

In 325 the Church had just emerged from the
most terrible of the persecutions—that of Diocle-
tian—and it was far from certain that she would
not have to face a far more serious persecution if
the Emperor Constantine should die. In 1870 the
Church was just emerging from the conditions
engendered by the Penal Laws in England, and the
French Revolution on the Continent, and the pos-
REMINISCENCES OF VATICAN COUNCIL 1?

sibility of a persecution which actually took place
during the Kulturkampf seemed by no means
remote.

But the likeness of these two councils—the first
and the last—is not merely in their external cir-
cumstances, but the way in which the Fathers
arranged themselves in both Councils, on two
sides, is exactly parallel.

The question to be decided by the Council of
Nice was whether our Lord Jesus Christ was the
Son of God by nature or whether He was a
creature—the brightest of the archangels, if you
will, but still a creature. As everyone who is the
least acquainted with Ecclesiastical history is
aware, there was no doubt in the minds of the
Fathers on this point. All of them had received
by tradition from their predecessors and the Holy
Apostles that our Lord Jesus Christ was True
God of True God. The outright Arians could have
been counted on one hand.

In order to protect this universal teaching of the
Church it was thought necessary to declare that
our Lord was consubstantial with His Father, and
here a large number of Bishops proved themselves
Inopportunists. They did not doubt the truth of
the statement but they thought the word ‘‘consub-
santial’’ equivocal and likely to give a false
impression, and they were afraid that as a result,
the Ariang might be able to bring about a schism.
Nevertheless, apparently with very little feeling
for the scruples of these men, the actual word
‘‘consubstantial’’ was inserted in the Decree,
although the same object could have been attained,
18 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

as Cardinal Newman has told us, by defining the
Co-eternity of the Word, to which nobody but the
outright Arians would have had the slightest
objection. The result was fifty-five years of dis-
turbance, controversy and misunderstanding. *

The Inopportunist Bishops returned home, not
doubting the truth of the definition, but disliking
the phrases in which it had been defined, and feel-
ing sore at the manner in which the proceedings
had been carried on. The learned Bishops, for
instance, of Asia Minor and Cappadocia, felt that
they had been rather roughly handled by the
Alexandrian party who represented the extreme
of orthodoxy. And this feeling was not lessened
by the fact that the Archbishop of Alexandria
had allowed his secretary, a mere Deacon of 27
years of age, to monopolize a considerable portion
of the debate. This Deacon was Saint Athana-
sius, and many of the venerable Bishops of the
East never got over the unpleasant impression of
what they considered his youthful presumption,
although as Saint Athanasius’ life of persecu-
tion and suffering afterwards proved, it was only
his burning zeal and the necessity of the hour
which had forced him to the front.

* Whether Our Lord’s Divinity could have been defined as
Cardinal Newman thought is, of course, an open question.
Might there not have been danger of Tritheism? We are speak-
ing here of the Counci] of Nice from the few fragments which
have come down to us. If we had the acts perhaps we should
see that the Orientals had not as much cause for complaint as
they thought. But from what we know of the Council of Nice
as compared with the Vatican Council a far better argument
could have been constructed by the Arians against the Council
of Nice than the enemies of Papal Infallibility can bring
against the Vatican Council.
REMINISCENCES OF VATICAN COUNCIL 19

So at the Vatican Council there were a number
of Bishops, and a large number—indeed they were
an overwhelming majority, who thought the
definition necessary. Nor was there any Bishop
in the Council who doubted that the Holy Father
was the Doctor and Teacher of all Christians and
the center of Unity, so that to lose his communion
was to lose the communion of the Church of Christ.
For, this they had received by tradition from their
predecessors. I say there was not one who
doubted this, for the Arius of this controversy of
1870—Dr. Déollinger—was not present at the
Council. But among this number of Bishops there
were, on one hand, a few who \would have pressed
for an extreme definition. They wished to define
a strictly personal rather ‘than an official Infalli-
bility of the Roman Pontiff; and on the other
hand there was a very small number, indeed in
the last event it proved that there were only two
Bishops, who could not see that an infallible
teaching office was the inevitable consequence of
the teaching concerning the Roman Pontiff, which
they had received from their predecessors, and
which, as Catholics, they were bound to hand on
to their successors.

But there was undoubtedly a considerable body
of Bishops—some eighty in fact—who, like the
Oriental Bishops of theCouncilof Nice, doubted the
opportuneness of the definition. They vehemently
opposed the use of any extreme phrases and they
were most urgent in putting before the Fathers of
Council the difficulties which would ensue upon
the definition; the probable misunderstandings of
20 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

the Dogma, and the possible schisms which might
follow. But how different was their treatment
from that with which the Oriental Bishops were
treated at the Council of Nice! Their arguments
were heard with the greatest patience. Fivery one
of their objections was answered, not merely in the
debates of the Council, but in that explanation
which was attached to the Decree concerning the
way in which the Infallible Teaching Office of the
Roman Pontiff has been exercised during the long
history of the Church. Nothing therefore, can be
more untrue than to say that the Fathers of the
Council in 1870 were deprived of liberties which
were conceded to their predecessors in 325.

I have listened in the Council-chamber to far
more subtle, more plausible, and more searching
objections against this prerogative of the Pope
than I have ever read or heard from the pen or
tongue of the most learned and formidable Prot-
estant assailant. But all the objections were
triumphantly answered. When the audience in
Rhodes listened to Atschines repeating the
speeches he had previously delivered against
Demosthenes, they applauded him; but when they
heard the harangue of Demosthenes their plaudits
and admiration were redoubled. It was with
sentiments like these that the assembled Prelates
listened to the advocates of Infallibility after
hearing its opponents.

Besides the theological difficulties, there were
thinly veiled threats of future hostility to the
Church forwarded to Rome by some of the leading
governments of Europe if the Decree were
REMINISCENCES OF VATICAN COUNCIL 21

enacted; and some of the Bishops expressed their
fears that the definition would be followed by
schism in certain countries. Hvery dispassionate
reader, whatever may be his religious convictions,
must be profoundly impressed, as I was at the
time, with the fearless and serene conduct of the
great majority, who, spurning a temporizing
policy, the dictate of human prudence, were
deterred neither by specious arguments, nor
imperial threats, nor by the fear of schism from
promulgating what they conceived to be a truth
contained in the deposit of divine revelation.
Since the last vote was taken in the solemn session
of July 18, 1870, all the Bishops of Christendom,
without a murmur of dissent, have accepted the
decision as final and irrevocable.

In every deliberative body, both civil and
religious, there is always found a select number
who come to the front and are conspicuous among
their compeers by their acquired reputation, their
ability, or their eloquence. The Vatican Council
was no exception to this rule.

Among the Prelates who took a prominent part
in the debates, I shall single out a few who
impressed me as recognized leaders in the assem-
bly; though I may say in passing that there were
present many silent Solons, like the venerable
Archbishop McCloskey, of New York, and the
Bishop of Buffalo, whose voice was not heard in
the council-hall, but whose influence was felt in the
committees.

Cardinal Manning was, unquestionably, the
most attractive figure among the Episcopate of
22 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

England. His emaciated form and ceaseless
activity suggested a playful remark made to him
in my hearing by Archbishop Spalding: ‘‘I know
not how Your Grace can work so much, for you
neither eat nor drink nor sleep.’? He delivered
the longest oration in the Council, with one excep-
tion, and yet it hardly exceeded an hour and a half,
which is evidence of the usual brevity of the
speeches. The question is commonly put in
America: ‘‘How long did he speak?’’ In Hurope
they ask: ‘‘What did he say?’’ Cardinal Man-
ning’s discourse was a most logical and persuasive
argument, and, like all his utterances, was entirely
free from rhetorical ornament and from any effort
to arouse the feelings or emotions. It was a
Scriptural and historical treatise appealing solely
to the intellect and honest convictions of his
hearers.

Ireland had a distinguished representative in
the person of Archbishop Leahy, of Cashel, who
was perhaps, the most graceful orator among the
English-speaking Prelates. His reply to Cardinal
Prince Schwarzenberg, in the Infallibility debate,
was a masterpiece of sound reasoning and of
charming declamation tinctured with a delicate
flavor of Irish wit.

Archbishop Spalding, of Baltimore, and Arch-
bishop Kenrick, of St. Louis, were among the most
noteworthy Prelates from the United States.
Archbishop Spalding was a member of the two
most important committees, in which he was
busily employed. He delivered but one discourse
during the Council. Archbishop Kenrick spoke
REMINISCENCES OF VATICAN COUNCIL 23

Latin with admirable ease and elegance. I
observed him day after day reclining in his seat
with half-closed eyes, listening attentively to the
debates, without taking any notes. And yet so
tenacious was his memory that, when his turn
came to ascend the rostrum, he reviewed the
speeches of his colleagues with remarkable fidelity
and precision without the aid of manuscript or
memoranda.

Among the many illustrious French Prelates of
the Council, Monseigneur Darboy, of Paris, and
Monseigneur Dupanloup, of Orleans, held a con-
spicuous place. Archbishop Darboy was known
to enjoy the confidence and to share the sentiments
of the Emperor Napoleon on the leading questions
discussed in the Council. His heroic and untimely
death is still remembered by many. At the close
of the Franco-Prussian war, he was arrested and
imprisoned as a hostage by the Commune. Mr.
Washburne, our Minister to France made strenu-
ous, though fruitless, efforts to save his life. He
was cruelly shot in the prison of LaRoquette, May,
1871, and died, his hand uplifted in benediction,
and a prayer on his lips for his murderers. That
the post of Archbishop of Paris is as hazardous
as it is exalted, may be inferred from the fact that
Monseigneur Darboy witnessed the assassination
of two of his predecessors, Archbishops Affre and
Sibour.

Bishop Dupanloup was not only an eminent
churchman and a fearless defender of the faith,
but also a scholar whose literary attainments had
won for him a place among the forty Immortals
24 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

in the French Academy. Possessed of indefatig-
able energy himself, he gave, it is said, but little
rest to the clerical members of his household.
Among the many searchers after light and peace
who sought his counsel may be mentioned the
famous Prince Talleyrand, whom he had the con-
solation of reconciling to the church from which
he had long been estranged.

Another notable personage was Cardinal
Dechamps, Archbishop of Malines. His brother
Adolphus and himself filled analogous positions
in Church and State, the one being Prime Minister,
and the other Primate of Belgium. The Cardinal
brought with him to Rome the well-merited repu-
tation of a great pulpit orator. His clear and
well-modulated voice, his distinct enunciation, his
engaging and conciliatory manners and his habit
of judiciously emphasizing leading words and
phrases, revealed the practiced orator and com-
manded the unflagging attention of his hearers.

Baron von Ketteler, Bishop of Maynz, was as
distinguished a champion in the German Empire
as Dupanloup was in France. He was a graduate
of the University of Goettingen. His face was
disfigured by a scar, the result of a duel fought
in his university days. A statement has been made
which I could not verify, that the duel was fought
with Prince Bismarck. He had practised law for
some years before he took orders in the Church.
In the Council, von Ketteler was a decided
Inopportunist, while in Germany he was an earn-
est advocate of the independence of the Church
from the encroachments of the State. Not less
REMINISCENCES OF VATICAN COUNCIL 25

conspicuous in defence of infallibility was Bishop
Martin, of Paderhorn.

Cardinal Prince Schwarzenberg, Primate of
Bohemia, and Cardinal Simor, Primate of Hun-
gary were the two most influential churchmen of
the Austrian Empire. The double title of Prince of
the Realm and Prince of the Church, which Car-
dinal Schwarzenberg possessed, was still further
ennobled by a commanding presence, handsome
features, and the gift of eloquence. He strongly
contended against the opportuneness of the Decree
of Papal Infallibility, and expressed his apprehen-
sion that it might result in a schism in Bohemia,
a fear, however, which happily was not realized.

There is this striking analogy between the
Republic of the Church and the Republic of the
United States, that the son of a peasant is eligible
to the highest ecclesiastical preferment, including
the Papacy itself, just as the humblest citizen of
our country may aspire to the Presidency.

This truth is forcibly illustrated in the career of
Cardinal Simor. Unlike his Bohemian colleague,
he sprang from the people, and was proud of
recording the fact. He was a member of the Upper
House in the Hungarian Parliament, and his
experience in that Chamber rendered him one of
the most ready and effective speakers of the Coun-
eil. A touching incident of filial reverence and
greatness of soul is recounted of Cardinal Simor,
which reminds one of the respect that Solomon
paid to his mother when he descended from his
throne to greet her. On the occasion of the visit
of his mother to him in his palace at Gran, he
26 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

introduced her to several distinguished personages
of the Empire, with every mark of dutiful affec-
tion.

In the gravest assembly, an occasional diversion
is not unwelcome:

“A little humor now and then
Is relished by the best of men.”

And the mirth is all the more refreshing when
‘‘it is not in the bills,’’? and when its unconscious
author is in the most serious mood. One of the
Oriental Bishops who did not understand Latin,
undertook to deliver a speech. He wrote out his
address in his native Arabic, and had it translated
into the language of the Council by his Latin
secretary. He then read it in a loud monotone,
without any regard to accentuation, pronuncia-
tion, or punctuation, from beginning to end, with-
out comprehending one word of what he said. And
I think that the audience was as much in the dark
as the speaker. I am sure, however, that the
Bishop was not actuated by the ambition of some
Congressmen who, despairing of making an
impression on their colleagues, are content to have
their speeches printed in the Congressional
Record, and spread among their constituents
where they will do the most good.

I shall close these short sketches by a brief ref-
erence to Mgr. Strossmayer, Bishop of Bosnia,
who was reputed the most eloquent Prelate of the
Council. His name figured conspicuously during
and after its proceedings, and he felt obliged to
repudiate certain hostile sentiments toward the
REMINISCENCES OF VATICAN COUNCIL 2”

Holy See that had been falsely imputed to him.
His discourses were always sure to captivate, if
they did not convince, his hearers. His periods
flowed with the grace and majesty and musical
rhythm of a Cicero. By a masterly arrangement
of words, which the genius of the Latin tongue
allows so much better than our own, he would
bring out the strong points of his discourse at the
close of each sentence in some well-rounded
phrase. Occasionally in the heat of his oration he
would wander from his subject into a forbidden
field. An expression of disapproval would come
from some Bishops, and then the patient Presi-
dent, yielding to the remonstrance, would stretch
his hand toward the bell, the ringing of which was
the signal that the speaker was out of order.
When the Bishop would see the hand in close
proximity to the bell, he would dexterously return
to his subject, and thus avert the humiliation of
an admonition.

If I have made no special mention of the Bishops
of Italy and Spain, it is not from any lack of
materials, but from lack of space; for I am tran-
scending the limits I had prescribed to myself.
Not a few of the Spanish speaking Bishops from
South America, as well as from the mother-coun-
try, signalized themselves by their ability and
eloquence.

Of the College of Cardinals present at the Coun-
cil, and of whom none survive today, one was after-
wards the great Pontiff, Leo XIII. Although
Cardinal Pecci did not take part in the public
debates of the synod, he was one of its most influ-
28 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

ential members, and the weight of his learning and
administrative experience was felt in the commit-
tee to which he was appointed.

May it not be by a particular design of Provi-
dence that he who was to be elected the head and
judge of his brethren in 1878 should not have been
involved in their disputations in 1870, but that he
should enter into his high office, joyfully hailed as
the harbinger of peace and concord by Prelates
of every shade of theological opinion?

The year 1870 will be ever memorable for two
great events—the Vatican Council and the Franco-
Prussian war. Let us contrast the pacific gather-
ing of Christian Prelates with the warlike massing
of troops which immediately followed on the Con-
tinent of Europe. Hosts of armed men were
trampling the fair fields of France. The land was
reddened with the best blood of two powerful
nations The sound of their cannon-spread terror
throughout the country. Thousands of human
victims were sacrificed, and thousands of homes
left desolate; and after a lapse of nearly a quarter
of a century, the fires that were then kindled are
still smouldering, and the animosity engendered
by the struggle is not yet allayed.

A council of Bishops assembled in the name and
under the invocation of Heaven. They met
together, not amid the booming of hostile cannon,
but amid Hosannas and Te Deums. The
pursuits of agriculture and commerce were not
suspended during their sessions. The Decrees
they enacted for the welfare of the Christian com-
monwealth are in full force today among 230,000,-
REMINISCENCES OF VATICAN COUNCIL 29

000 people; and long after the framers of them
shall have passed away, they will continue to exer-
cise a salutary influence on generations yet unborn.

What does this prove? It proves that the pen
and the voice are mightier than the sword and the
cannon; that ‘‘peace hath her victories no less
renowned than war,’’—yea, victories more sub-
stantial and enduring. It proves that all schemes
fomented by national enmity and a lust for
dominion are destined, like the mountain torrent,
to spread ruin and desolation along their pathway;
while the deliberations of men assembled in the
cause of religion, like the Council of Bishops, or in
the interests of international peace, like Boards
of Arbitration, silently shed their blessings as the
gentle dew of heaven, and bring forth fruit in due
season,
PREFACE TO EXTRACTS FROM
MY DIARY
DURING VATICAN COUNCIL
PREFACE TO EXTRACTS FROM MY DIARY
DURING VATICAN COUNCIL.

HIE following extracts from my diary were

sent to The Catholic World during the time of

the Vatican Council. But if remember rightly
the last installment was written before the solemn
definition of the Dogma, although it was certain
that the Dogma would be defined.

In looking over them one might get the idea
that the Council was held in great peace and
quietness, although I mention in my last install-
ment the fact that some Bishops showed not a
little heat in arguing. Still one might not get
the impression that the excitement was such as
we know it to have been. As a matter of fact,
when my notes ended the excitement amidst which
the last sessions of the Council were celebrated
was only beginning. * The Church had to face a
great problem and settle a momentous question.
That question was no less than to determine where
the seat of Infallibility was: Was it in the Church
alone, or in the Pope alone, or in both together?

* The only part of the following chapters written after the
actual definition, was the account added to the last chapter of
the solemn session of July 18, 1870, in which the dogma was

promulgated. This explains why the last chapter is more
argumentative than historical.

30
PREFACE TO EXTRACTS FROM DIARY 31

What relation had the Pope to the Church and
the Church to him?

To many people who did not understand the
controversy, Papal Infallibility seemed an utterly
new departure. There were even a few Bishops
in the Council who did not see how plainly it
was contained in the deposit of Faith; though
it is hard now to see how they could have been
in doubt about it for a moment, for all of us
who had received the Episcopate had received
with it from our predecessors the tradition that
the Pope was the center of unity; that communion
with him was communion with the Catholic
Church; that to be separated from him was to be
separated from the Catholic Church; therefore
his doctrinal decisions were binding upon all the
faithful, and since he could separate anyone from
his communion he must be in possession of Infal-
libility if he were to demand an unconditional
acceptance of his teaching under pain of separa-
tion from the Church of Christ.

But most of the Bishops who opposed the deci-
sion did not do so from any doubt of the truth of
the dogma, but only from a feeling of the inoppor-
tuneness of the decision and the fear lest the gov-
ernments of Europe would use it, as the German
government did afterwards, as a pretext for
persecution, and lest the way into the Church
should be made hard for those multitudes of
people who were manifestly seeking the rest
and peace for their souls which they could only
hope to find in the Catholic Church. When, then,
the question of Infallibility came to be raised,
32 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

it was debated with great heat; not indeed in
the public sessions but in those private sessions
in which the Fathers discussed the dogma from
every point of view. Never have I heard such
plain speaking in my life; never have I seen
men apparently more violently attached to their
own opinions, nor less ready to give way to
their opponents. There were times, indeed, when
the excitement rose to fever heat, and when one
was reminded of some of the earlier Councils, as,
for instance, the Council of Chaleedon. But all
the excitement was but the outward and visible
manifestation of the burning zeal within, and
when once the decision was taken and the bull
containing it promulgated, not one Bishop of that
assembly forsook the See of Peter ead the Cath-
olic Church.

I remember a story told with regard i the late
Archbishop of St. Louis—the Most Rev. Dr. Ken-
rick. He was violently opposed to the definition,
not only because of what he considered its inop-
portuneness, but because he did not see that it was
part of the deposit of faith; nevertheless no sooner
was the decision promulgated than he most nobly
accepted it and published it in his diocese. Years
afterward somebody spoke of the Archbishop to
Leo XIII, and criticised his attitude during the
Vatican Council to the Holy Father, upon which
the Holy Father replied indignantly, ‘‘The Metro-
politan of St. Louis was a noble man and a true
Christian Bishop. When he sat in council as a
judge of the faith, he did according to his con-
science, and the moment the decision was taken,
PREFACE TO EXTRACTS FROM DIARY — 33

although it was against him, he submitted with
the filial piety of a Catholic Christian.’’

I have often thought since what a commentary
the proceedings of the Vatican Council would be
upon the opinions of those who say that in the
Catholic Church there is no freedom of thought,
and that we never see but one side of the question.
Certainly thought was never freer in the world
than it was within the walls of the Council Cham-
ber, and never was there a deliberative assembly
with greater freedom of debate than that enjoyed
by the Fathers of the Vatican Council.
THE FIRST
C.CUMENICAL COUNCIL
OF THE VATICAN
CHAPTER I
THE FIRST (ECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF THE
VATICAN, CHAPTER I. *

HE second month of the Vatican Council has
seen no interruption of its labors, nor of the
intense interest which these labors seem to
excite on every side. In truth, the intensity of this
interest, especially among those who are not
friendly to the council, would be inexplic
able, did we not feel that there is in reality a
struggle involved therein between the cause of
religion and the cause of irreligion. The meet-
ings of the prelates are private and quiet. The
subjects under discussion are, at best, only
vaguely known outside. The names of the speak-
ers may be learned. You may ascertain, if you
persist in the effort, that one bishop has a fine
voice, and was well heard; that another has an
exceedingly polished delivery; that a third is re-
markable for his fluency, and a fourth for the
classic elegance with which he spoke in Latin.
But all your efforts will fail to elicit a report of
the substance of the speech of any prelate. These
speeches are for the council itself—for the as-
*The following chapters cn the Vatican Council are the
joint production of Dr. Lynch, the learned Bishop of Charles-

ten, and myself, and sent by us from Rome to the Catholic
World.

34
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER I 35

sembled fathers to whom they are delivered—and
are not for the public at large. They are under the
guard of the honor of the bishops and the oath of
the officials, and are to be kept secret until the acts
of the council are lawfully published. And yet
‘“‘own correspondents,’’ ‘‘occasional correspond-
ents,’’ ‘‘special correspondents’’ and ‘‘reliable
correspondents’’ from Rome have failed not, day
after day, to fill the columns of newspapers—
Italian, French, English, German, Belgian and
Spanish and doubtless others also, if we saw them
—with their guesses and suspicions, their tiny
grains of truth and bushels of fiction. Ponderous
columns of editorial comments are often super-
added, as it were, to increase the amount of
mystery and the mass of errors. Even the brief
telegraphic notices seem to be often controlled or
made to work in this sense. The telegrams from
Rome itself ought to be, and we presume are, cor-
rect. The authors of a flagrant misstatement sent
from this city could be identified and held respons-
ible. But it is said that, outside of the limits of the
Pontifical States, there is a news agent who culls
from letters sent him for that purpose most of
those wonderful statements about the council
which the telegraph wires are made to flash over
Europe, and even across the Atlantic to America.
The result of all this on the mind of one in Rome is
ofttimes amusing.

Meanwhile the council moves on in its direct
course, like a majestic steamer on the ocean, un-
disturbed by the winds blowing alternately
from every point of the compass, and unheeding
36 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

the wavelets they strive to raise. Within the
council everything is proceeding smoothly and
harmoniously, some think more slowly than was
anticipated. But the fathers of the council feel
they have a great work to do conscientiously, and
they are engaged earnestly and in the fear of God
in its performance.

As yet a third public session of the council has
not been held, nor has any public announcement
been made of the day when it may be looked for.
But the time is busily employed. All the dis-
cources had been taken down and written out by
stenographers, with an accuracy which elicited the
commendation of such bishops as examined the
report of their own speeches. These reports were
likewise handed over to the committee, that no
remark might be overlooked or forgotten. All
will be taken into consideration and weighed,
together with further remarks before the commit-
tee, by the theologians who draw up the schema in
the Preparatory Committee. The committee is
charged to present the matured result to the
assembled congregation at the proper time, when
it will again be considered, perhaps discussed, and
finally voted on.

On January 14th the fathers again assembled
in a general congregation in the council hall.
Mass was celebrated at 9 a. m., as is always
done, by one of the senior prelates. At its con-
clusion the five presiding Cardinals took their
place. Cardinal De Angelis, the chief one, took
his seat for the first time, and recited the usual
opening prayer.
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER I 3%

At the previous congregation five of the depu-
tations of the council had been filled by election.
The sixth—that on oriental rites and on omis-
sions—still remained to be filled. Twenty-four
members were to be elected by ballot.

The election was held in the usual form. The
bishops had brought with them their ballots
already written out. Several attendants passed,
two and two, along the seats of the prelates, one
of them bearing a small wickerwork basket. Hach
prelate deposited therein his ballot. In a few
moments all had quietly voted. The baskets were
borne to the secretary’s table in the middle, in
front of the presiding cardinals. The ballots
were placed in boxes prepared to receive them.
The boxes were closed and sealed, to be opened
afterward before the regular committee for this
purpose, when the votes would be counted, and the
result ascertained.

The following prelates were elected:

Most Rev. Peter Bostani, Archbishop of Tyre
and Sidon, Maronite, Asia.

Most Rev. Vincent Spaccapietra, Archbishop
of Smyrna, Asia.

Most Rev. Charles Lavigerie, Archbishop of
Algiers, Africa.

Rt. Rev. Cyril Behnam-Benni, Bishop of Mous-
soul (Syrian), Mesopotamia.

Rt. Rev. Basil Abdo (Greek Melchite), Bishop
of Mariamne, Asia.

Rt. Rev. Joseph Papp-Szilagyi (Roumenian),
Bishop of Gross Wardein.
38 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

Most Rev. Aloysius Ciurcia, Archbishop of
Irenopolis, Egypt.

-Rt. Rev. Aloysius Gabriel de la Place, Bishop
of Adrianople, Bulgaria.

Rt. Rev. Stephen Louis Charbonneaux, Bishop
of Mysore, India.

Rt. Rev. Thomas Grant, Bishop of Southwark,
England.

Rt. Rev. Hilary Alcazar, Bishop, Vicar Apos-
tolic of Tonking.

Rt. Rev. Daniel McGettigan, Bishop of Raphoe,
Treland.

Rt. Rev. Joseph Pluym, of Nicopolis, Bulgaria.

Most Rev. Melchoir Nazarian (Armenian),
Archbishop of Mardin, Asia.

Rt. Rev. Stephen Melchisedeckian (Armenian),
Bishop of Erzeroum, Asia.

Rt. Rev. Augustin George Bar-Schinu (Chal-
dean), Bishop of Salmas, Asia.

Rt. Rev. John Flynn, Bishop of Toronto,
Canada.

Rt. Rev. John Marango, Bishop of Tenos,
Greece.

Rt. Rev. Francis John Laouenan, Bishop, V. A.
of Pondicherry, India.

Rt. Rev. Anthony Charles Cousseau, Bishop of
Angouleme, France.

Rt. Rev. Louis De Goesbriand, Bishop of Bur-
lington, United States.

Most Rev. Joseph Valerga, Patriarch of Jeru-
salem.

Rt. Rev. James Quin, Bishop of Brisbane, Aus-
tralia.
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER I 39

Rt. Rev. Charles Poirier, Bishop of Roseau,
West Indies.

His Eminence Cardinal Barnabo, Prefect of the
Propaganda, was appropriately named chairman
of this committee.

No one in Rome, or elsewhere, could be found
better qualified for this position than this eminent
and well-known cardinal, who has for so many
years, and so ably, presided over the congrega-
tion specially charged with superintending the
world-wide missions of the Catholic Church.

This election having been finished, the bishops
then entered on the examination of matters of
ecclesiastical discipline, several schemata, or
draughts, which had been presented to them
for private study some time before. It is the
ordinary usage of councils to examine matters of
faith and matters of discipline as nearly pari
\passu as can conveniently be done. It seems this
usage will be observed in the Vatican Council.
There is a fundamental difference between mat-
ters of faith and matters of discipline.

The faith of the Church is ever one—that origi-
nally delivered to her by the apostles. A council
cannot alter it. The errors or heresies prevail-
ing at any time, the uncertainty in some minds,
or other needs of a period, may render it proper
or necessary to give a fuller, clearer, and more

. definite expression of that faith on points contro-
verted or misunderstood. The question always
is, What has really been the faith held in the past,
from the beginning, by the Church on these
points? The answer is sought in the words of
40 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

Holy Writ, in the past declarations of the Church,
whether in the decrees of her councils or in the
authoritative teachings of her sovereign pontifts,
and in her traditions, as shown in the liturgies
and forms of prayer, in the testimony of her
ancient doctors and fathers, and in the concurrent
teachings of the general body of her pastors and
her theologians. The whole field of evidence is
searched, and the answer stands forth in noon-
day light; and the council declares what really
and truly has been, and is, the belief and teaching
of the Catholic Church on the question before it.
And that declaration is accepted by the Catholic
world, not simply on the word of men, however
great their knowledge or accurate and scrutiniz-
ing their research—nor simply on account of their
holiness of life, their sincerity of heart, or the
impartiality of their decision. These are, indeed,
high motives, such as the world must always
respect, and perhaps enough ordinarily to satisfy
human minds. But, after all, they are but human
motives.

The Catholic is taught to base his belief on a
higher motive—the divine assurance of our
Saviour Himself that he would always be with His
Church until the end of time; that He would send
the Spirit of truth to teach her all truth and to
abide with her forever, and that the gates of hell
should never prevail against her. Our ears catch
the words of the Saviour, ‘‘Whosoever heareth
you, heareth Me; whosoever despiseth you, des-
piseth Me;’’ and we know that the Church is thus
made the pillar and ground of truth, and that he
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER I 41

that will not hear the Church is like the heathen
and the publican. Hence on His divine word,
which must stand though the heavens and the
earth pass away, we accept the declarations and
teachings of the Church, through her councils, as
the continuation of the teaching of Christ Himself.

It is thus that the Vatican Council takes up
matters of faith, not to add to the faith, but to
declare it and to establish it where it has been
impugned or doubted or misunderstood. The
question is, What are the points on which the
errors and the needs of this age render it proper
and necessary to give a renewed, perhaps a fuller,
clearer and more emphatic declaration of the doc-
trine of the Church; and in what form of words
shall such declarations be expressed? To all
these questions the bishops are bringing their
calmest and maturest judgment. There will be,
as there must and should be, a free and frank in-
terchange of views and arguments, in all sincerity
and charity, even as in the council of the apostles
at Jerusalem, there was a great discussion before
the definitive result was declared with authority:
It hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us.
When, after such a discussion, the council shall
give forth its decisions and decrees, they will be
accepted by the children of the Church. They
will not be new doctrines. The Catholic heart and
conscience will recognize them as portions of that
faith which has heretofore ever been held.

But if faith is one and unchangeable, ecclesias-
tical discipline, at least in most of its details, is
not. The Church has received power to bind and
42 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

to loose, and necessarily has authority to estab-
lish a discipline, not simply for the purpose of
securing order within her fold, but to reach the
further and higher purpose for which she herself
has been established and exists. Men must not
merely believe the truth speculatively and with a
dead faith. They must, by practical obedience
to the law of God, by avoidance of sin through the
assistance of divine grace, by practice of virtue
and by holiness of life, be guided to keep the word
which they have heard, and so come to be saved.
This practical guidance is her discipline. The
general principles on which her action is based
are the maxims and precepts of our divine Lord
Himself, the character of the holy sacraments
which He established in His Church to be the
channels of grace, the institutions which came to
her from the apostles, and which she will ever
preserve, and those principles of right and moral-
ity which God has planted in the heart of man,
and of which her divine commission makes her. the
highest and most authoritative exponent. These
principles are sacred and unchangeable. But in
applying them to men there must be a large body
of laws and regulations in detail. These are of
her own institution, and form her ecclesiastical
discipline. She can revoke some, amend or alter
others, and add still others, as she judges such
action to be best adapted, under the ever-varying
circumstances of the world, to secure the great
end for which she must ever labor—the salvation
of souls.

As in all previous councils, so in this Vatican
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER I 43

Council, these matters of discipline have natur-
ally and unavoidably come up for consideration.

We said that, in the General Congregation,
held on the 14th of January, immediately after
the election of which we have spoken, the discus-
sion of them commenced. It was continued in
other congregations held on January 15th, 19th,
21st, 22nd, 24th 25th, 27th, 28th, 31st; February
3d, 4th, 7th, 8th, 10th, 14th and 15th. It is not
yet closed. So far ninety-five prelates have ad-
dressed the council on the various points of dis-
cipline that came under examination.

If the discussion on matters of faith was worthy
of admiration for the vast learning it displayed,
and the intellectual powers of the speakers, this
one on discipline was even more interesting for its
practical bearing and the personal experience, so
to speak, which it recorded. The questions came

-up whether this or that law of discipline, estab-
lished eight hundred or five hundred or three
hundred years ago, however wise and efficacious
at the period of its institution, could now be
looked on as sufficiently accomplishing its original
purpose; or whether, on the contrary, some new
law, proposed for the consideration of the prel-
ates, might not now be wisely substituted for it.
Bishops from every part of the world brought the
light of their own experience to illustrate the
subject.

Every portion of the world was heard from.
The East, through Chaldeans, Maronites and Ar-
menians. The West, through Italian, French,
44. A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

German, Hungarian, Spanish, Mexican, Peruvian,
Brazilian, English, Irish and American bishops.
The past was interrogated as to the reasons and
motives on which the olden laws were based, and
the special purposes they were intended to effect;
and the present, as to their actual observance and
effects in this century. Even the future was ex-
amined so far as men may look, into it, to con-
jecture what course the world was taking; and
what, on the other hand, would be the most proper
course for the Church to pursue in her legisla-
tion, in order to secure the fullest observance of
the laws of God, and the truest promotion of His
glory.

We might well be assured that, even humanly
speaking, such abundance of knowledge and ex-
perience, such careful examination of all the past
and present bearings of the subjects, such a keen,
calm scrutiny of the future would secure to the
Church from such men an ecclesiastical legisla-
tion of the highest practical wisdom, as well in
what is retained as in what is changed or added
as new. But, as Catholics, we should never lose
sight of that higher wisdom with which the Holy
Ghost, according to the words of Christ, and in:
answer to the prayers of the Catholic world, will
not fail to guide the fathers of the council.

It will thus be seen that during this month the
council has steadily pursued the even tenor of its
way, without any public session. In fact, no day
has as yet been assigned even as the proximate
date of the third public session. No one outside
the council seems able to say precisely what prog-
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER I 45

ress has been made in discussing and disposing
of matters. Still less can we say when the council
will close. There seems to be a feeling that the
discussions will continue until June, when the
almost tropical heat of a Roman summer must set
in. This will, of course, necessitate an adjourn-
ment until the close of October, when the bishops
would probably reassemble to continue their work.
Time only can show whether there is any truth
in this prognostication. Some of the bishops of
a more practical turn of mind, or more desirous
of returning scon to their dioceses, are striving
to find a mode of conciliating the most perfect
freedom of discussion with a more rapid progress
in the matters before the council. The most
sacred right in a council is freedom to state one’s
views on matters in controversy, and to uphold
them by all the arguments in one’s power. This
right has so far heen most fully enjoyed and
freely used. No plan that would take it away
would be entertained.

Every day in Rome now convinces a sojourner
more and more strongly of the unity, the catho-
licity, and the sanctity of the Church of Christ.
Faith that heretofore was almost extinct beneath
the ashes of worldly thoughts, here glows again
and bursts into a bright flame. Hlsewhere we
believed these truths; here we seem to behold with
our eyes, and to touch with our hands their real-
ity. No one can be privileged to mingle with the
bishops here without being impressed with their
perfect unity in all things declared and taught by
the Church, and with the undisguised readiness
46 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

or rather firm intention of all, to accept and to
hold and to teach all that, under the light of the
Holy Ghost, shall be declared of faith in this Vat-
ican Council.

To be fully impressed with this perfect unity
one must be privileged to mingle somewhat with
the bishops. But even the cursory glance of a
stranger sees the evidence of the catholicity of the
Church presented by the gathering of so many
bishops from so many portions of the world
around the central chair of unity. We will now
give a summary, almost official, which has just
been made out, classifying the prelates who have
attended, according to their nationalities and
dioceses.

EUROPE.

 

Austria: and: Ty rls acco awn sree 84 Sew ak 10
Bohemia and MOravia........ cee ccc e cece eee e eens 5
Tilyria and Dalmatia: icccs cca sae sies eae vs canes 13
Hungary and Galicia......... ccc cece cee eee eens 20
BBS U AT 5 es aatacss sues tea dl Seousnlonec deste Aeeeisn dS caniacanseebia avaay soeae We seuss 6
Ban CG sic s wigye o 8 es ee centers ORE eae ee eS 84
Germany, North Confederation............0000005 10
Germany, South Confederation................... 9
OBEN ze hoch 8G Seni dy ome RW te teem teow 189 ae ee Was 14
TRelan Gs ccs: tei ow eseteis woes Gaith we kre 0 sabes. 3: geen aaa ewe 20
Scotland. . 2
Greece... 5
Holland.. 4
Lembardy.... 3
WOT CC ao, 55 ciedg-€ Seassesie cto Gidud, Sond vaviend ees @utem be a. ravace eabieriesd'oe8.4 8
Naples, Kingdom Of......... cc cee cence cece cceees 65
mice end Malte. eens so ee ee 446064 KEKE LR ROR 13
Sardinia, Kingdom 0f............ cece cece cece eras 25.
Tuscany and Modena......... ccc eee eevee cnanae 19

States of the Church, including cardinals, and
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER I

at

all the bishops from Sees in those portions seized

by
Victor BHimaniiels onisccaes crate addi ecaiew ss oes 143
POT LUG aos. ads ctitisrcidy tore hha bs eS Sinners Spenendy Ase haste Qoob ihe, 8 2
SWATZOPL AIG wy iscsvd.c cuace 4:4 sais euarae coveted Ge dodeacdreevanete acineranee 8
SDA sicieg-g sie ivete seein us Annes Reel MaKiaeely Eke eam te 41
RUSS18 ore oe seaivce avi ve aie g kA Y eae wee BONS wae eee 0
TUBS Ba TOD 6 ee esse send eece aca trcnast ard eierane: areseaneile-e Gu 12
ASIA
China and Japan.......... cece cece nee Graabteneise-adans, 15
Hindostan and Cochin China, etc........0.c0ceee 18
Persad. secs cas eh E Les OES FASS OSs Kee Bae 1
MPU OY DIN ASI E 5 os ociasesend 5: stueciasa cape ieyeravn eh asetarg oabacenivdperinaees 49
AFRICA.
AUST ago cos ccrasach se 5G aceiairdi b Seals sorcueid 24, orsebesernaceieicss cine 18
Canary Islands and the Azores...........-0.0.00e 3
Hey pt ANd. TUNIS weiss. acceseed «eee se a scrauaes 6 stale a Wess ess ?
SOMO PANU or sais. 9 e-aueete: 1a Sree Sve donkey swielene ie be GR ees aE 1
Southern: Africawicicssccasin cea wae ees s ead «gomioe ss 4
OCHANICA.
Australia and the Islands of the Pacific Ocean..... 14
AMERICA.
Dominion of Canada, and other British Provinces
of North Americas sic csad cece ca wa see ed eee 16
WNited: ‘Statesin csc icvaie ca cere b ONG FORMATE EA 49
MORE CO's race tose ors sapeudrigb avainsd Quacaneiy.agevarel a3 Gapcese@ucubnn ia Bre BRR 10
Cu atem ala és i ie.cais aerate saweie a aie ed ee pan eerie Hie 4
WESE TIVO soci ascting tho ep hone Site ee sorts MaRS eer see oO 5
New: (GEANAG ass oe necees Gls wre wareene Sore ae eae a ges 4
HU CU OT ei eca da ieee eo eiia ics wih daa wR Nk eR we rae wee ates ts ise, 4
GUYANA 6 ieee aces 86 RR SARS ORE RE ee Re ee 1
VOMCZUC A.» cisneces assuage, cysiceneie onSiena wid ec Sae 8 RIA RNa a 2
POE Ue cased ro seh apecaauaiatiedtg- sw ageteee SoksblodyasGvevene ge ausuh ainG eh 88 3
BY BGI i 5 sce see e oS baie Gs ERE ARR ORES HREM Se teeceroed 6
BOW Via ine wasinsiesecaeate Beets winter eee Gare eseay sewer 2
Argentine Republic...........2e cere cee e ee eeeeeee 5
CHD F io os esc eerie Mae eee ee eaten Wend b ldaer eee 3
THAT IS, Hurope...... cece eee e cece eceeee 541
ACY ICG. «aes savaw ie eee ee eee eed ee 114
AS1As 6.0.9 ete es STS Oe eee 83
APTICE... cicava paca edad h ss Baa saree 14
OCCANICA.... cee cece eee ee eens 14
48 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

Divided according to rites they stand as follows:

TOI, TRIG sso at nee ener 706 Armenian................ 21
Greek Rite............005 3 Cha W6a i ype sos notussieweserde 10
Greek Bulgarian......... L. (Gyriatag ose ecece esas es 7
Greek Melchite........... 10 ‘Maronite... tesseeses 4
Greek Roumenian.......- D2 COP Giscisscnesscanainc wiscond-® avseus 1
Greek Ruthenian......... 1 —

766

Truly, it is such a gathering as no human
power could assemble. Only the Catholie Church
could effect it. No wonder that strangers from
every clime, especially devout Catholics, have
flocked to Rome these months as they never
flocked before.

The splendor of the ceremonies of our Holy
Church, as celebrated in Rome, especially in St.
Peter’s, is unequalled in the whole world. A
gray-haired ambassador was present some years
ago in St. Peter’s at the celebration of high mass
by the Sovereign Pontiff on Easter Sunday. He
had been present at two imperial and several
royal coronations, where every effort was made
to give a national magnificence to the ceremony;
had witnessed several royal marriages, and grand
court) celebrations of every character. But he
declared that everything he had ever seen sank
into insignificance before the grandeur and the
sublime magnificence of that high mass. Never
were the religious celebrations of Rome so impres-
sive as they have been, and are, during this coun-
cil, when the sanctuary is filled with more than
half a thousand prelates, Latin and Oriental, in
their rich and varied vestments. Strangers and
Romans alike crowd the grand basilica. Yet the
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER I 49

stranger often fails to see, what the Roman feels,
as it were, by instinct, that all this effort at splen-
dor and magnificence is purely and wholly a
tribute of man to honor the religion which God in
His love and mercy has given, and that no part
of it is for man’s own honor. If the stranger
would realize this truth, which is the soul of the
ceremonial of the Church, he has but to follow
these prelates from the sanctuary to their homes,
and witness the simplicity of their private lives.
Perhaps he will be shocked at the unexpected
discovery of what he would term discomfort and
poverty.

In such personal simplicity and _ self-denial
the Sovereign Pontiff himself gives the example
in the Vatican. The palace is very large;
but the libraries, the archives, the various mu-
seums, and the galleries and halls of paintings, of
statuary and of art, occupy no small portion of it.
Other portions of it are devoted to the vast work-
shops of the unrivalled Roman mosaics, others
still to the mint. The offices of the secretary of
state, and the bureaus of other departments
are there. The Sixtine and Pauline, and other
chapels are found in it; and the various officers
and attendants of the court have many of them
their special apartments. The Pontiff has his
suite of rooms, as well those of state as those that
are private. You enter a large, well-proportioned
hall, rich with gilding and arabesque and fresco
paintings. A company of soldiers might manouvre
on its marble floor. It is spacious enough to
receive the fullest suite of a sovereign who
50 . A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

would visit the Pope. In the next room—a
smaller and less ornamental one, yet in something
of the same style, and with a few benches for fur-
niture—a servant will take your hat and cloak.
In a third room you find some ecclesiastical at-
tendants. You pass through a fourth room of
considerable size. It is now empty. At times a
consistory or meeting of the cardinals for busi-
ness is held here; at other times an ascetic Capu-
chin father, with his tonsured head, his long beard,
his coarse brown woollen cassock fastened around
the waist by a cord, and with sandalled feet,
preaches to the cardinals and bishops and officials
of the court, and to the Pope himself. With the
freedom and bravery of a man who, to follow
Christ, has given up the world, and hopes for
nothing from man, and fears nothing save to fail
in his duty, he reminds those whom men honor of
their duties and obligations, and in plain, oft-
times unvarnished language, will not shrink from
speaking the sternest, strongest home truths of
religion. You pass through the silent hall in
reverence.

A fourth hall, with a better carpeting and toler-
ably warmed, is the ante-chamber proper, where
those are waiting who are to be admitted to an
audience of the Pope. In another smaller room,
opening from this one those are waiting whose
turn it will be to enter next; or perhaps a group is
assembled, if the Pope will come out hither to
receive them, as he sometimes does, when the
audience is simply one not of business, but simply
for the honor of being presented to him, and of
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER 1 51

receiving his blessing. All these which we have
enumerated are the state or ceremonial apart-
ments,

From the last one you pass to the private office
of the sitting-room of the Sovereign Pontiff. It is a
plain room, about fifteen feet by twenty, not lofty,
lighted by a single window, and without a fire-
place. Two or three devotional paintings hang
against the walls; a stand supports a small and
exquisitely chisseled statue of the Blessed Virgin.
At one side of the room, ona slight platform, is the
Pope’s armchair, in which he is seated, clothed in
his white woollen soutane. Before him is his large
writing table, with well-filled drawers and pigeon-
holes. On it you see pens, ink, sand and paper,
his breviary, perhaps, and one or two volumes,
and an ivory crucifix. A small case in the corner
of the room contains some other books, some ob-
jects of vertu, medals, and such articles as he de-
signs to give as mementoes. There is a thin car-
pet on the floor, and a couple of plain wooden
chairs are near the table.

Here Pius IX ordinarily spends many hours
each day, as hard worked as any bank clerk. He is
exceedingly regular in his habits. He rises before
five in summer, at half past five in winter. In half
an hour he passess to his private chapel, and gives
an hour and a half to his devotions, and to the cele-
bration of two masses; the first by himself, the
second by one of his chaplains. A cup of chocolate
and a small roll of bread suffice for his breakfast.
He at once passes to his office, and works for one
hour alone and undisturbed. Then commence
52 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

the business audiences of the heads or secretaries
of the various departments, civil and ecclesiasti-
cal; a long and tedious work, in which he gives a
conscientious attention to every detail. By half
past eleven A. M. he commences to receive bishops
and ecclesiastics, or strangers from abroad. This
usually ends by one P. M., when he retires for his
midday devotions, and for his dinner and repose.
This may be followed by more work, alone in his
office. At half past three in winter, at half past
four in summer, if the weather allows it, he gives
an hour and a half to a drive and a walk. Re-
turning home he takes a slight repast, and again
the audiences for business or for strangers com-
mence, and last until after eight. At nine punc-
tually he retires, to commence again the same
routine the next day. Such are his regular days.
At other times he must be in church, or must visit
one institution or establishment or another in the
city, spend an hour or two in ceremony or busi-
ness, and hurry home. Near this sitting-room is
a smaller room, where he takes his meals alone;
for, the Pope neither gives nor accepts entertain-
ments. His table does not cost more than thirty
cents a day. Not far off is his sleeping chamber,
small as the other, with a narrow bed and hard
couch. Truly, his is no life of ease and pampered
indulgence. There is a stern meaning in his title,
Servant of the Servants of God.

The same simplicity and austereness mark the
private life of the cardinals, There is now, in-
deed, an outward show, for they rank as princes
of the blood royal. There are the richly orna-
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER I 53

mented carriages drawn by brilliantly harnessed
horses, and attended by servants in livery, There
are the decorated state ante-chambers and halls.
_ All these things are for the public, and are pre-
scribed by rule. If a cardinal had not himself
the means to support them, he would be entitled
to a state salary for the purpose of keeping them
up. But back of all these may be found a plain,
almost unfurnished room, in which he studies and
writes, and a bed chamber—we have seen some
ten feet by twelve, carpetless and _fireless.
Ofttimes, too, the cardinal lives in the religious
house of some community, and then much of the
state can be dispensed with. But for the red
calotte which he wears on his head you often
could not distinguish him from the other clergy-
men in the establishment.

The same spirit seems to characterize the
bishops who are now gathered together in Rome.
All their splendor is in the Church and for re-
ligion. In their private life they certainly do
not belong to that class of strangers from whose
lavish expenditures in fashionable life the Ro-
mans will reap a rich harvest. They live together
in groups, mostly in religious houses or colleges,
or in apartments, which several club together to
take at moderate rates. Thus the Chaldean
patriarch, a venerable, white-bearded prelate,
near eighty years of age, with the other bishops
of his rite, and their attendant priests, all live
together in one monastery, not far from St.
Peter’s. Whatever the weather, they go on foot
in their oriental dress to the council, and when the
54 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

meeting is over, return on foot. Their stately,
oriental walk, their calm, thoughtful countenances,
the colored turbans on their heads, the mixture
of purple and black and green and red, in their
flowing robes, set off by the gold of their massive
episcopal chains, and their rich crosses sparkling
with diamonds, never fail to attract attention.
But one should see them in their home, which
they have made as Eastern as they could.

The orientals are exceedingly temperate in their
meals, and as regards wine, are almost ‘‘teeto-
talers.’? But they do love to smoke. As the vis-
itor is ushed into a room, where the only piece of
furniture is a broad-cushioned seat running round
along the walls, on which are seated a dozen or
more of long-bearded men, their feet gathered up
under them in oriental fashion, and each one
smoking a pipe a yard long, and filling the atmos-
phere with clouds of Latakia, he almost thinks
himself in Mossul. The pipes are gravely with-
drawn on his entrance, that the right hand may
go to the forehead, and the heads may bow. The
welcome, schalom, ‘‘peace,’’ is gravely spoken,
with perhaps a smile. He takes a seat on a divan
and is asked to take a pipe, if so minded. From
time to time the silence is interrupted by some
remark in a full, sedate voice, and intensely gut-
tural words of Chaldee or Arabic, whether on the
last debate of the council or on some new phase
of the Eastern question, it is probable the visitor
will never learn. But he has caught a glimpse of
quiet Chaldean life. Fourteen or fifteen of the
Armenian prelates, with the patriarch, live in a
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER I 55

not very dissimilar manner. But the Armenians
are much more akin to Europeans in their educa-
tion and character of thought. They are good
linguists. All of them speak Italian fluently,
many of them French, and some a little English.
Their society is agreeable and instructive, and is
much sought.

In like manner eighteen of the American
bishops are domiciled in the American College.
Some others are with the Lararists at their
mother house, others again are at St. Bridget’s
or St. Bartholomew’s, or with the Dominicans.
Those that have taken apartments have contrived
with a very few exceptions to live together in
groups. The English, the Irish, in fact, nearly
all the bishops have followed the same plan. Some
laughingly say that their college days have come
back to them, with their regularity and their ac-
commodations. But these are not quite as agree-
able at fifty or sixty as they were at the age of
twenty. Yet all feel, and none more thoroughly
than the bishops themselves, that this life of com-
parative retirement, of quiet and study, and of
continued and closest intercourse with each other,
must tend to prepare them, and to qualify them,
for the great work on which they are engaged.

Another special feature of Rome in this sea-
son, dependent on the council, is the frequency of
sermons in various languages, and of various re-
ligious services in the churches. Rome as the cen-
ter of Catholicity is never without a certain num-
ber of clergymen from every nation of Europe.
Each winter, too, sees thousands of visitors, Cath-
56 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

olics, Protestants and unbelievers, crowding her
streets, drawn hither by motives of religion,
science, of curiosity or of fashion. It was natural
that visitors should be enabled to listen to the
truths of our holy religion preached in their own
languages. This year it could be done much more
fully, and the opportunity has not been allowed to
pass by unregarded. For example, ‘‘The Pious
Society for Missions,’’ an excellent community of
priests,. established in this city over thirty years
ago by the saintly Abbate Pallotti, has the cus-
tom of celebrating the festival and octave of
Epiphany each year by appropriate religious ex-
ercises, and introducing sermons in several lan-
guages. 'This year they selected the larger and
noble Church of San Andrea della Valle, and con-
tinued their exercises for eleven days. The fol-
lowing was the program which they followed:

At 5.30 A. M. Mass,
6.00 A. M. Italian sermon and benediction.
9.00 A. M. High mass of the Latin rite,
10.00 A. M. High mass in an oriental rite (Arme-
nian, Greek, Copt, Chaldean, Roumenian,
Melchite, Bulgarian, Maronite, Armenian
again, Syrian, Ambrosian; ) ‘
11.00 A. M. A sermon in some foreign language—that

is Polish once, German twice, Spanish
twice, English six times, (Archbishop
Spalding, Father Hecker and Bishop
McGill, Bishop Moriarty of Kerry, Bishop
Ullathorne, and Archbishop Manning
were the English preachers.)

1.30 P. M. Hach day, a French sermon by a Bishop.

3.30 P. An Italian sermon and benediction.

6.00 P. M. Another sermon in Italian with benedie-
tion.

SS
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER I 5v

The sermons were all, of course, of a high order
of merit. The church was crowded morning,
forenoon, afternoon and evening.

French sermons have been continued ever
since, mostly by the eloquent Bishop Mermillod,
of Geneva and English sermons on Sundays and.
Wednesdays by Father Burke, an eloquent Domin-
ican of St. Clement’s and by Monsignor Capel.
During Lent there will be an additional series of
English sermons, to be delivered by the American
bishops.

On the 20th of January the American episco- - —

pate and the American College received from the
Holy Father a very signal and agreeable mark of
his good will. It was meant, one might almost
think, as a return visit on his part, in the only
way which court etiquette allows. He chose the
church of the college as the place where he would
pronounce a decree in the cause of the venerable
servant of God, John Juvenal Ancina, Bishop of
Saluzzo, in Northern Italy. In that church he
would, of course, be surrounded by the American
prelates, priests and students, and from the
church would pass to the college.

John Juvenal Ancina was born in Fossano, in
Piedmont, in 1545. Having finished his course
of collegiate studies, he graduated in medicine,
and for years practised that profession with great
ability, and greater charity toward the poor, to
whom he devoted himself. In course of time he
lost every near relative except one brother. Both
determined with common accord to enter the sanc-
tuary, and came to Rome for that purpose, and
58 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

there joined the Oratorians under St. Philip Neri.
John spent years in the priesthood, honored for
his learning, and still more for his piety and
sweetness and zeal in the ministry, which he ex-
ercised in Rome, in Naples and in Turin. Much
against hig will, and only after repeated injunc-
tions from the Pope, he was forced to accept the
charge of the Diocese of Saluzzo. He had been
the intimate and dear friend of St. Francis de
Sales for years of his priesthood, and their friend-
ship continued until the close of his short and
fruitful episcopacy. He died in 1604, and St.
Francis preached his funeral eulogy. He is the
one with whom the Saint had the oft-cited ex-
change of puns complimentary, ‘‘Tu vere Sal es.”
‘‘Immo, tu Sal et Lux.’’ The reputation of the
virtues of such a man could not die with him. Not
long after his death the episcopal authorities of
Saluzzo allowed and directed that full testimony
should be taken under oath, from those who lived
with him and knew him well, as to the truth of his
holy life. This was fully and searchingly done
throughout the Diocese of Saluzzo. Similar in-
vestigations were instituted, under similar au-
thority, in Rome, in Naples, and in Turin where
at different times he had lived, and wherever such
testimony could be found. The original deposi-
tions—and they are a large mass, and are still
extant—were sent to Rome. The Pontiff directed
that they should be laid before the proper tri-
bunal—the Congregation of Rites. They were
found to fulfil the requirements of the canons, and
to present such a prima facie case as would au-
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER I 59

thorize that congregation to proceed. This meant
that, after a certain lapse of time, during which
affection and human feeling might die out, and
any hidden truth might work its way to the light,
the congregation should go over the ground a
second time, taking through other persons a
second and independent mass of testimony. This
was done, and its results were compared with
those of the first mass of testimony. There was
no contradiction; but on the contrary, full and
ample confirmation. Still the opinion and belief
of the witnesses was not yet deemed of itself suf-
ficient. Taking the facts of his life, his words and
writings, and acts and habits, as they were thus
proved, they were all studied out and carefully
weighed in the scales of the sanctuary. There
was no hurry—there never is at Rome, as this
council fully shows—and the decision of the con-
gregation was not given until the year 1767. Then
came many political vicissitudes; first of North-
ern Italy, as it passed from the domination of one
power to that of another, and later the convul-
sions of all Europe consequent on the French rev-
olution. The whole matter slumbered until 1855,
when it was again taken up. The examination of
the life and acts was gone over again as before.
Step by step matters advanced until last Novem-
ber, at a general meeting of the Congregation of
Rites, held in the presence of His Holiness, it was
decided That the servant of God, John Juvenal
Ancina, had in his lifetime practised the theo-
logical virtues of faith, hope and charity, toward
God and his neighbor, and the cardinal virtues of
60 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

prudence, justice, fortitude and temperance, and
their accessory virtues, in an herowc degree.

It was to announce this decision, in a formal
decree, that the Pontiff came, on the 29th of Janu-
ary, the festival of St. Francis de Sales, to the
church of the American College. He arrived at ten
A. M., and was received at the portal of the college
by the rector of the college, and all the American
bishops now at Rome, and by a dozen others,
Irish, English, Scotch and Italian. He proceeded
at once to the church, which, though small is one
of the handsomest in Rome for its beautiful mar-
bles and fine statuary. The Pontiff knelt, while
one of his chaplains celebrated mass. The
bishops, all the American priests in the city, the
students of the college, and many Catholics from
the United States, and some other strangers filled
the little church. After the mass the Pontiff as-
cended to the throne prepared for him. Cardinal
Patrizi, prefect of the Congregation of Rites;
Cardinal Capalti, who had special charge of this
case, and Cardinal Barnabo, protector of the col-
lege, stood next to him. The formal decree was
read, proclaiming the decision, in virtue of which
we shall henceforth say, ‘‘the VENERABLE
John Juvenal Ancina.’’* The superior general

* When it shall have been established with the evidence
required by the Congregation of Rites that it has pleased Ged
to work two miracles, of the first class, after the death of this
venerable servant, through his intercession, a decree may be
issued stating that fact, and allowing his beatification. When
two other miracles of the same class shall have been proved
with the same certainty to have occurred, after his beatifica-
tion, the blessed servant of God may be canonized and enrolled
among the saints of the church.
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER I 61

of the Oratorians, to which community, as we have
said, he belonged, returned thanks in an eloquent
and brief discourse in Latin. The Pope then,
taking his theme from the life of the VENER-
ABLE bishop, addressed to the prelates present
a short and feeling discourse, in Italian, on the
character and virtues which should adorn a
bishop. Though he did not mention the council,
it was evident that the thought of it filled his
heart. He spoke of the servant of God whom he
had just declared venerable as imitating the apos-
tles. They, from being fishermen, were called to
be fishers of men; and he, too, from being a physi-
cian of the body, was called to be a physician of
souls, This holy man he showed to be a model of
bishops, and enlarged on the text of St. Gregory
the Great, that a bishop should be ‘‘in thought
pure; in deeds, eminent; in silence, discreet; in
word, useful; in the contemplation of heavenly
things, elevated.’’ ‘‘Who will ascend to the moun-
tain of the Lord? Let him be of pure hands and
clean heart.’? Let him be single-minded, doing
everything for the Glory of God, without any ad-
mixture of human motives. Let him be first in
all good works, so as to be a pattern to his flock.
He did not speak of that silence which means cow-
ardice, or indifference to whatever evil goes on in
the world. There is a time to speak, as well as a
time to be silent. The bishop must be useful in
words, speaking out boldly whenever it is for the
advantage of the Christian people. He must be
aman of prayer. What is the origin of the evils
62 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

which we see in the world? The prophet answers,
‘‘Because there is not one who thinketh in his
heart.’? The Pontiff dwelt for a few moments on
all these points, and in conclusion quoted &t.
Gregory again, who said, ‘‘I have given you a
beautiful picture of a bishop, though the painter
be bad.’’ ‘‘What the saint says out of humility,
I must say,’’ he added, ‘‘of myself in truth. But
pray for me that God may give me strength to
bear the heavy weight He has laid upon me. Let
us pray for each other. Do you pray for me; and
I call on the Almighty to bless you, and your
dioceses, and your people.”’

The words of the Pontiff were simple, because
full of devotion and truth; and the delivery was
exquisitely perfect, in the earnest, heartfelt, sub-
dued tones of his voice, and the chaste dignity of
his gestures. All felt that the Pontiff spoke from
his paternal heart.

The Bishop of Saluzzo, the successor in this
century of the VENERABLE Ancina, returned
thanks; and all proceeded from the church to the
grand hall of the college. The cloister of the
court yard and the broad stairways and corridors
were adorned with drapery, tapestry and ever-
greens. A splendid life-size portrait of His Holi-
ness, just painted by the American artist, Healy,
for the exhibition about to be opened, had been
sent to the college for the occasion, and was
placed in a prominent position. In the hall the
Pontiff again spoke a few kind and paternal
words, and Archbishop Spalding, in the name of
the American Church, clergy and laity, made an
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER I 63

address to the Pope in Latin. The discourse was
excellent in language and happy in thought. His
Grace referred to the fact that Pius VI had given
us our first bishop (Dr. Carroll, of Baltimore) ;
Pius VII had multiplied dioceses, and given us
our first archiepiscopal see; and he, Pius IX had
established six other archiepiscopal sees. So that
in a country where sixty years ago there was but
one bishop, there are now sixty, three-fourths of
whom are here in Rome to attend the general
council. Toward the end of his discourse the
good archbishop brought in a few touches of true
American wit. This is what Italians would
scracely hazard on such an occasion, and it
was to them unexpected. Even the Pope looked
for a moment puzzled, as if he could not conjec-
ture what was coming; but as he caught the point
a smile spread over his countenance, and the
smile developed into a hearty laugh.

The Bishops, the superiors, and students of the
college, the priests who were present, and the
laity, approached to offer their homage to the
Pontiff and receive his blessing. This over, he
departed, but not until he had declared that he
was delighted, more than delighted, with his visit.

Rome, February 17, 1870.
 
THE FIRST
CECUMENICAL COUNCIL
OF THE VATICAN
CHAPTER Il
THE FIRST CCUMENICAL COUNCIL OF THE
VATICAN, CHAPTER II.

NOTHER month of the Vatican Council has
passed by without any public session. There
has not been a general congregation since
February 22nd, when the twenty-ninth was held,
The absence of grand public ceremonials has
driven some of the newspaper correspondents to
turn elsewhere in search of sensational items. We
are no longer inundated, and at times amused, by
column after column of newspaper accounts nar-
rating speeches and events in the council that had
scarcely any existence, except in the fertile
imaginations of the writers. The outward calm in
‘Rome had produced its effect to no small extent in
the newspaper world.

This calm, however is by no means the calm of
inaction. Quite the contrary. At no time were
the fathers so assiduously engaged in the deep
study of the matters before them, or more earn-
estly occupied with their conciliar labors.

We stated in our last number that they were
engaged in the discussion of the subjects of dis-
cipline, on which several schemata, or draughts,
had been drawn up by preparatory committees of
theologians, in anticipation of the council. The

64
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER II 65

discussion was continued, on February 19th, with
six speakers, and was closed on the 22nd with
seven other speakers, when the fourth schema,
on discipline was referred,.as the preceding ones
had been, to the appropriate committee or deputa-
tion on matters of discipline.

Thus, within two months, since the Congregation
of December 28th, when the discussion began, one
schema on faith and four on discipline had come
up before the bishops; and there had been in all
one hundred and forty-five speeches delivered on
them. The experience of those two months had
made several points very clear:

First, the schemata, or draughts, as prepared
by the theologians, did not prove as acceptable to
the bishops as perhaps their authors had expected.
On the contrary, the bishops subjected them to
a very searching examination and discussion, criti-
cising and weighing every point and every expres-
sion; and seemed disposed, in a measure, to recast
some of them entirely.

Secondly, the mode in which this examination
had so far been conducted might, it was thought,
be improved, both in its thoroughness and in the
length of time it occupied. So far, all the prelates
who wished had spoken, one after another. The
sittings of the congregations usually lasted from
nine A. M. to one P. M., and became a great trial
of the physical endurance of many of these aged
men. The prelates could not refrain from asking
each other, What progress are we making? How
long will this series of speeches last?

Again, many of the speakers, unwilling to occupy
66 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

the attention of the congregation too long, strove
to condense what they wished to say, and some-
times omitted much that might have thrown addi-
tional light on the subject, or would be material
for the support of their views. Yet how could
this be avoided without extending the discussion
beyond the limits of endurance?

Still more, many prelates, whose mature and
experienced judgments would have been most valu-
able, would not speak; some, because they were
unwilling to increase the already large number of
speakers; others because their organs of speech
were too feeble to assure their being heard
throughout a hall which held over a thousand per-
sons in by no means crowded seats.

These points had gradually made themselves
manifest, and, the question had been raised, how
these difficulties could be met. Some suggested a
division of the prelates into a number of sections,
in each and all of which the discussions might go
on at the same time. But, after much consideration,
another method was resolved on, and was an-
nounced in the congregation of February 22nd as
the one to be followed in the examination and
discussion of the next schema, to be taken up by
the council.

The main points of these additional regulations
are the following: When a schema comes before
the council for examination, instead of the viva
voce discussion, which according to the first sys-
tem would take place in the congregations, before
sending it to the proper committee, if necessary,
the cardinals presiding shall fix and announce a
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER IT oY

suitable time, within which any and every one of
the fathers, who desires to do so, may commit his
view on it to writing, and shall send in the same
to the secretary of the council. Any amendments,
additions, and corrections which he may wish to
make must be fully and clearly written out. The
secretary must, at the end of the appointed time,
transmit to the appropriate committee, or deputa-
tion of bishops, all the remarks on the schema.
The schema will be examined and remodelled, if
necessary, by the committee, under the light of
these written statements, precisely as would he
done if the members had before them the full
report of the speeches made in the former style
before the congregation. The reformed schema is
again presented to the congregation, and with it a
summary exposition of the substance of the
remarks and of the amendments proposed. ‘‘ When
the schema, together with the aforesaid summary,
has been distributed to the fathers of the council,
the said presidents shall appoint a day for its
discussion in general congregation.’’ In parlia-
mentary usage, this corresponds to having the dis-
cussion, not on the first, but on the second reading
of a bill.

This discussion must proceed in the strict order
of topics, first generally; that is, on the schema
wholly or in part, as it may have been brought
before the congregation; then on the several por-
tions of it, one by one. The speakers who wish
to take part in the discussion must, in giving in
their names as before, state also whether they
intend to speak on the schema as a whole, or on
68 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

some special parts of it, and which ones. The form
of amendment, should a speaker propose one, must
be handed in, in writing, at the conclusion of his
speech. The members of the reporting committee
or deputation will, moreover, be free to speak in
reply, during the debate, as they judge it advis-
able.

The last four of these by-laws are the following:

XI. “If the discussion be unreasonably protracted, after
the subject has been sufficiently debated, the cardinals presid-
ing, on the written request of at least ten bishops, shall be
at liberty to put the question to. the fathers whether the dis-
cussion shall continue. The fathers shall vote by rising or
retaining their seats; and if a majority of the fathers present
so decide, they shall close the discussion.

XII. “When the discussion on one part of a schema is
closed, and before proceeding to another, the presiding
cardinals shal] take the vote of the general congregation, first
on the amendments proposed during the discussion itself, and
then on the whole context of the part under consideration.

XIII. “The votes, both as to the amendments and as to
the context of such part, will be given by the fathers in the
following mode: First, the cardinals presiding shall require
those who assent to the amendment of text to rise; then, by
a second call, shall require those who dissent to rise in their
turn; and after the votes have been counted, the decision of
the majority of the fathers will be recorded.

XIV. “When all the several parts of a schema have been
voted on in this mode, the cardinals presiding shall take the
judgment of the fathers on the entire schema under examina-
tion as a whole. These votes shall be given viva voce, by the
words, PLACET or NON PLACET. But those who think it

necessary to add any consideration shall give their votes in
writing.”

It is already evident that the first provision of
these by-laws or regulations is attaining its pur-
pose. At the congregation of February 22nd,
when they went into force, a certain portion of a
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER II 69

new schema, on matters of faith, was announced as
the next matter regularly coming up for examina-
tion, and the space of ten days was assigned within
which the fathers might write out their criticisms,
and propose any amendments to it, and send such
written opinions to the secretary. There was no
limit to hamper the bishops in the fullest expres-
sion of their sentiments. They might write briefly
oratgreat length as theydeemedproper. Moreover,
in writing, they would naturally be more exact and
careful than perhaps they could be in speeches
often made extempore. There would also be less
liability of being misunderstood. Moreover, many
more could, and probably would, write than would
have spoken. It is said over one hundred and
fifty did so write on this first occasion; so that,
in reality, as much was done in these ten days
as under the old system would have occupied
two months. The second portion, touching the
debate before the congregation, will, of course,
be effective and satisfactory. And it is confi-
dently hoped that the third portion, as to the
mode of closing the debate and taking the vote,
will, when the time comes for testing it, be found
equally satisfactory.

There is one question which excites universal
attention, perhaps we should rather say universal
talk, outside the council—the infallibility of the
Pope. It has become in Europe the question of the
day. Books have been published on it, pamphlets
discussing it are written every week, and England,
France, Germany and Spain have been deluged with
newspaper articles upholding it or attacking it—
70 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

articles written with every possible shade of learn-
ing and of ignorance, and in every degree of tem-
per, from the best to the worst. The articles are
what might be expected when the writers are of
every class, from erudite theologians down to
penny-a-liners, and when, if some are good and
sincere Catholics, many are by no means such.
Protestants have written on it, some in favor of
the doctrine, most of them agianst it. The
bitterest and most unfair articles, however, have
been, and are, those written by the political oppo-
nents of the Church; though how this precise
question can come into politics, any more than the
existence of religion, the divinity of the Saviour,
the infallibility of the Church, or any other point
of doctrine, we cannot see. But in Europe, if re-
ligion does not go into politics, politics, or at least
politicians and political writers, have no scruples
in going into religious matters. In fact, the most
advanced party of ‘‘progress, and enlightenment,
and liberty’’ proclaim that there should be no re-
ligion at all; that it narrows the intellect by ham-
pering freedom of thought, and enslaves man by
forbidding him to do much that he desires; and as
they think mankind should, on the contrary, be
free from all trammels; and as they hold it to be
their special mission to effect this liberation, they
systematically omit no occasion of attacking re-
ligion. For them one point is as good as another.
Anything will serve this class of writers. And,
unfortunately for religious news, much of what
appears in the press of Europe, and must gradually
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER II 71

be infused, in part at least, into the press in the
United States, is from such pens, and is imbued or
is tinged with their spirit.

We would not do justice to Rome and the coun-
cil if we omitted to mention a very interesting
event with which the council is connected, if only
as an incidental occasion. We mean the Roman
Exposition of Arts, as applied to religious pur-
poses.

The exposition was opened on the 17th of Feb-
ruary by the Pope himself, in the presence of the
commission for the exposition, a number of car-
dinals, some three hundred of the bishops, and a
large concourse of clergy and laity. He made an
impromptu discourse, touching chiefly on the true
progress which art has made under the inspira-
tion of religion and the patronage of the Church,
and in illustration referred to some of those un-
rivalled works of religious painting and sculpture
which are found in Rome.

Nothing could be more appropriate to the as-
sembling of so many bishops and priests and
pious laymen in Rome, drawn by the council, than
this exposition. Go when you will, you will find
many of all these classes spending hours in study-
ing a collection of religious works of every kind,
such as most of them have never seen. In size
and extent this exposition cannot, of course, com-
pare with those vast ones of London and Paris.
They sought and received objects of every kind.
This admits nothing that is not devoted to, or in
some way connected with, religion. It would cor-
Y2 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

respond, therefore, with one section of the Paris
Exposition in 1867. Considered in this light, it
does not, as a whole, fall below it; in several re-
spects it is superior.
THE FIRST
CECUMENICAL COUNCIL
OF THE VATICAN
CHAPTER III
THE FIRST C2CUMENICAL COUNCIL OF THE
VATICAN, CHAPTER III.

OR another month the Vatican Council has

pursued the path originally marked out for its

labors with a calmness and steady persever-
ance which no outside influences can disturb. In the
beginning of its sessions, sensational correspond-
ents described what they saw and what they did
not see—praised, mocked, or maligned as their
humors led them, or as their patrons desired, and
poured forth abundant streams of amusing anec-
dotes, acute guesses and positive assurances. The
correspondence of one week was found to contra-
dict that of the preceding week, and was itself
contradicted the week following. Now, though
wit, and drollery, and sarcasm may please for a
time, human nature, after all desires truth. And
as men saw these contradictions they came to un-
derstand how thoroughly untrustworthy were
these correspondents; and the writers, ever on the
alert to catch the first symptoms of popular feel-
ing, have, in great part, dropped the subject. The
only influence which such writings as these have
had on the prelates of the council was to supply
them with abundant topics for amusement in their
hours of relaxation.

%3
74 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

Another class of writers have all along treated,
and still continue to treat, of the council and its
action with earnestness of purpose, and are making
strenuous efforts to guide and control or to check
its course on subjects which they believe to have
come or which may come up before it. We speak
of those who are moved by religious or political
feelings. Day after day and week after week,
Italian, French, German and English newspapers
are taking one side or the other on these subjects,
and write on them, if they do not always discuss
them. At times you may find an article learned,
well written, replete with thought, and suggestive,
perhaps instructive. But generally the articles
are only such as may be looked for in a newspaper
—superficial and with an affectation of smart-
ness. However, their brilliancy, ofttimes only
tinsel, may please their world of readers; among
the bishops in the council they have, and can have,
no weight whatever. It would, indeed, be sur-
prising if they had.

Beyond the papers, there come pamphlets,
many of them ably and learnedly written. It is
to be lamented that too often the writers have
allowed themselves to be carried away by excite-
ment, and to use language which calls for censure.
Still they profess to discuss the questions gravely,
and to present the strongest arguments in favor
of their respective sides. We will not say that
such writings are not privately read and maturely
weighed by the fathers, and, in fact, carefully
studied, so far as they may throw light on sub-
jects of doctrine or discipline to be examined.

Me

tee
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER III %5

But they certainly have not had the power to ac-
celerate or retard, by a single day, the regular
course of business before the council.

Some weeks ago the papers of Europe were
filled with articles announcing the approaching
action of several governments, and the measures
they would take to influence the Pope and the
bishops, so as to control their action by the appre-
hension of possible political results. What pre-
cise amount of truth and what amount of exag-
geration there was in the vast mass of excited
utterances on this subject, we are not yet able to
say. Perhaps it may hereafter be discovered in
sundry green books, red books and yellow books.
This much is certain: The council was not even
flurried by it. We are certain that in all the
debates, not the slightest reference was ever made
to the matter. As we write the whole subject
seems to be passing into oblivion. Even those
who spoke most positively only a few weeks ago
seem to have forgotten their assertions about the
intended interference of this, that, or the other
government.

There is a majesty in this calm attitude of the
Sovereign Pontiff, and of the council, which does
not fail to command the respect even of world-
lings and unbelievers. They can with difficulty,
if at all, comprehend the great truth on which it
is based and which produces it. The Catholic
would scarcely look for any other attitude from
our prelates. The bishops of the Catholic Church,
assembled in council, are not politicians or ser-
vants of the world, seeking popularity or fearing
16 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

the loss of it. They fear not those who can slay
only the body, but Him who can slay both body
and soul. They are assembled in the name of
Christ our Lord, to do the work to which He ap-
pointed them. They must proclaim His doctrines
and His precepts; they must promote the exten-
tion of His kingdom, and must zealously and un-
ceasingly seek the welfare and salvation of souls
for whom He shed His blood on Calvary. They
are men, and as subjects or citizens, they are
bound to give, and each in his own home does give,
unto Cesar all that is Cesar’s. But they are
Christian bishops, and they must not fail to give,
and to instruct and call on all men to give unto
God the things that are God’s. Assembled in the
Holy Ghost, they do not seek to discover what is
popular—what may be pleasing or what contrary
to the opinions, or prejudices, or passions of
today, whether in the fulsome self-adulation,
because of our vaunted progress, or in the in-
trigues and plans of worldly politics and national
ambitions. They stand far above all this folly,
and are not plunged into this chaos. They have
to set forth clearly the one divine truth of revela-
tion which has been handed down from the begin-
ning, and which they see now so frequently im-
pugned and controverted, or set aside and forgot-
ten. It is precisely because the world is setting
it aside, that this council has met and will speak.
Our divine Saviour Himself declared that the
world would oppose the teachers of His truth as
it had opposed Him. The history of the eighteen
hundred years of her existence is, for the Church,
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER III U7

but a continuous verification of that prophecy.
The fathers of the Vatican Council cannot lose
sight of the lesson thus given. It should purify
their hearts and strengthen their souls. For they,
of all men, must believe most truly and earnestly
in the truth and the reality of Christianity and
the greatness of the work in which they are en-
gaged. Hence, when the murmurs or the clamors
of the world come to their ears they are not filled
with fear or with surprise. Of all miracles, they
would look on this as the greatest, that, as the
Vatican Council speaks, the passions and earthly
interests and prejudices of men should at once
die out or grow mute, and that no voice should be
heard in opposition, no arm be raised to arrest or
thwart, if it could, the work of God. This they do
not look for. Opposition must come, and they
must not fear it, nor shrink from encountering it
while at their post of duty. As they become con-
scious of its approach, they can but gird them.
selves the more energetically to their work, and
seek the guidance and strength of which they have
need from on high.

When we closed our last article the prelates of
the council were busily engaged, in accordance
with the new by-laws, in writing out their obser-
vations and criticisms on several draughts that
had been put into their hands. This work, so far
as then required, was finished on March 25th.
But on the 18th the meetings of the general con-
gregations, or committees of the whole, were re-
sumed, and have been held since then on the 22d,
23d, 24th, 26th, 28th, 29th, 30th and 31st of March,
18 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

and April 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 12th and 19th,

The business of the council has entered on a
new stage. Our readers will remember that early
in December last, the first draught or schema on
matters of faith was placed in the hands of the
bishops; and that after some weeks of private
study it was taken up for discussion in the gen-
eral congregation held on the 28th of December.
In our second article we gave some account of the
character of this discussion in which no less than
thirty-five of the prelates took part. At its con-
elusion the draught was referred for ememdations
to the special committee or deputation on matters
of faith, to which were also sent full reports of all
the discourses in the discussion. This committee
held many meetings, and went over the whole mat-
ter two or three times with the utmost care, hear-
ing the authors of the draught, and weighing the
arguments and observations made in the gen-
eral congregations. They divided the schema or
draught into two parts, and now reported back
the first part amended, containing an introduction
and four chapters, with canons annexed.

This new and revised draught, so presented
to the bishops—in print, of course, as are all
the conciliar documents—was again to be sub-
mitted to a renewed discussion and examination,
first in general on its plan as a whole, and
then by parts, first on the introduction, and then
successively on each of the four chapters which
composed it. A member of the deputation or
committee on faith opened the discussion by
speaking as the organ of the committee, and ex-
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER III 79

plaining and upholding what they had done.
Many other fathers took part in the lively discus-
sions which followed. The speeches were very
brief and to the point, only one of them exceeding
half an hour, and several not lasting more than
five minutes. Those who wished to speak sent in
their names beforehand to the presiding cardi-
nals, as on former occasions, and were called to
the pulpit in their regular order. The spokes-
man of the committee, or, in fact, any other mem-
ber, might, during the course of the debate, take
the pulpit to give some desired explanation or to
reply to a speaker. All who wished to propose
further amendments or changes, were required to
hand them in, in writing. This the speakers gen-
erally did at the conclusion of their discourses.

When at length the discussion on any special
part was terminated, that portion of the schema
and all the proposed amendments were referred
again to the committee. The amendments were
printed, and a few days after, in a general con-
gregation, the whole matter would come up for @
vote. The committee announced which of the
amendments they accepted. They stated briefly
the reasons for which they were unwilling to accept
the others. The fathers then voted on each
amendment singly, unless, indeed, as sometimes
happened, the author, satisfied with the explana-
tion or replies given, asked leave to withdraw it.

This chapter or portion of the schema was then
again printed with the amendments that had
been thus adopted; and it was again submitted as
a whole to the vote of the fathers.
80 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

,

All these votes were taken without unnecessary
expenditure of time. When a question was pro-
posed, all in the affirmative were called on to rise,
and to remain standing until their number was
ascertained. They then sat down, and all in the
negative were in their turn summoned to rise, and
to remain standing until they were counted.

As there are usually over seven hundred prel-
ates present and voting, it is clear that if the
numbers on each side are nearly even, there might
be some difficulty in settling the vote. But the
circumstance did not occur. It so happened that
on every vote the majority was so preponderating
in numbers that an actual count was not necessary.
It is said that only on one occasion they were
nearly evenly divided. The important question
happened to be whether the insertion of a certain
comma between two words in the text before them
would make the sense more distinct or not. The
division of the sentiment on so small a matter
caused some amusement; but it was evidence of
the painstaking care with which even the mi-
nutest points are scrutinized.

When the introduction and each one of the chap-
ters, with its accompanying canons, had been thus
separately passed on, the entire schema as a whole
was submitted to the fathers for a more solemn
and decisive vote.

This was first done in the congregation of the
12th, in the following manner: The secretary
from the lofty pulpit called the prelates one after
the other, according to their rank and their sen-
iority, naming each one by his ecclesiastical title.
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER III 81

The cardinals presiding were called first, the other
cardinals next, then the patriarchs, the primates,
the archbishops, the bishops, the mitred abbots and
the superiors of the various religious orders and
congregations having solemn vows. As each prel-
ate was called he rose in his place, bowed to the
assembly and voted. The form was Placet, if he
approved entirely; Placet juxta modum, if there
were any minor point of which he was unwilling to
approve; or Non Placet, if he disapproved. In the
second case he handed in a written statement of his
opinion and vote on that point, and assigned the
reasons which moved him to this special view. The
assessors of the council immediately received
their manuscripts, and delivered them to the pre-
siding legates. As the name of each one was
called, two or three of the officials, stationed here
and there in the hall, repeated with clear, bell-like
voices the form of words used by the prelate in
voting, so that all might hear them, and that no
mistake could be committed as to anyone’s vote.
The whole procedure occupied about two hours.
When it was over, the votes were counted before
all, and the result declared. This was in reality
the most solemn and formal voting of the bishops
on the matter so far before them. Each one’s
judgment is asked, and he must give it. It was
evident the bishops voted after mature study, and
with an evident singleness and simplicity of heart
before God.

The special matters urged in the written and
conditional votes were again, and for the last
time, examined by the committee on matters of
82 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

faith, who reported the result of their discussion
in the congregation of April 19th, and the precise
form of words was settled, to be decreed and pub-
lished in the third public session, which will be
held on Low Sunday.

It thus appears that nothing will be put forth
by the council without the fullest study and ex-
amination.

1. The schemata, or draughts, as presented to
the council, are the result of the studies and con-
ferences of able theologians of Rome, and of every
Catholic country.

2. The schema is subjected to a thorough de-
bate before the general congregation, or commit-
tee of the whole, or under the by-laws, it is placed
in the hands of each one of the bishops, and every-
one who thinks it proper gives in writing his re-
marks on it, and proposed his amendments.

3. The schema, and these remarks and pro-
posed amendments, are carefully considered by
the deputation to whom they are referred, whose
office it is to prepare for the council a revised and
amended draught. The twenty-four members of
the deputation are picked men, and the examina-
tion and discussion of the subjects by them has
proved to be all that the fathers looked for—most
thorough and searching.

4. Again, on their revised report, the matter
is a second time brought before the general com-
mittee, and is again discussed by the fathers, who
are at liberty still to propose further changes and
amendments. As a matter of fact, these turn
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER III 83

mostly on minute details and on forms of expres-
sion.

5. Again, in the light of those proposed amend-
ments, it is examined and discussed by the com-
mittee, who make their final report, accepting or
not accepting the several amendments, and assign-
ing to the congregation the reasons for their deci-
sion on each point. They thus enjoy the privilege
of closing the debate.

6. Then follows the voting. One portion of
the schema is taken up. The amendments touch-
ing it, so reported on by the committee, are one
by one either adopted or rejected, and then the
whole portion is passed on. One after the other,
the remaining portions are taken up, and acted on
in the same manner. The amendments are first
disposed of one by one, and then each portion is
separately voted on. Finally, all the parts as sep-
arately adopted are put together, and on the whole
schema so composed, a more solemn vote is taken
by ayes and noes.

This concludes the, so to speak, consultative
action of the council on that schema. It is now
ready for a solemn enactment and promulgation
in the next session of the council.

The time is approaching when the first portion
of the decisions and decrees of the Vatican Coun-
cil will be given to the world in the third public
session, to be held on Low Sunday. Already
enough has come to light to let us know the gen-
eral tenor of what we shall soon hear.

The state of the world, and the errors and evils
to be met and condemned in this nineteenth cen-

|
84 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

tury by the Vatican Council, are very different
from those which all previous councils were as-
sembled to resist. The heresies then to be encoun-
tered, denied this or that doctrine in particular,
and erred on one or another point. But they all
admitted the existence of God, the reality and
truth, at least in a general way, of a revelation
. from heaven through Christ our Lord, and the
obligation of man to receive it, and to be guided by
it in belief and practice. Now, the world sees but
too many who go far beyond that. Then, so to
speak, the outposts were assailed. Now the very
citadel of revelation is attacked. Schools of a
falsely called philosophy have arisen which, with
a pretended show of reasoning, deny the existence
of God, of spiritual beings, of the soul of man,
and recognize only the existence of physical mat-
ter. Or if they speak of God, it is by an abuse of
terms, and in a pantheistic sense, holding Him to
be only the totality of all existing things, a per-
sonification of universal nature; or else, if they
wish to be more abstruse or more unintelligible,
God is, according to them, the primal being, a
vague and indefinite first substance, by the
changes, evolutions, emanations, and modifications
of which all existing things have come to be as
they are. Many are the phases of materialism,
pantheism, and theophantism in which German
metaphysicians revel, and call it high intellectual
culture. The pith of all of them is atheism, the
denial of the real existence of God.

The English mind is, or believes itself to be,
more practical and matter-of-fact. It does not
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER III 85

wander through the dreamy mazes of German
metaphysics, It has no taste for such excursions,
But there is a school in England which, under the
pretence of respecting facts, reaches practically the
same sad results. It tells its disciples of what has
been termed the philosophy of the unknowable and
unintelligible, and declares that man, possessed
only of such limited powers of knowledge as ex-
perience proves us to have, cannot conceive, can-
not really know, cannot be made to know, any-
thing of God, the self-existent and absolute, eter-
nal, infinitely wise and infinitely perfect, and that
these words are merely conventional sounds, in
reality meaningless, and conveying no real thought
to the mind.

Hence, he is to be held at once the wisest
philosopher and most sensible man who discards
them altogether, who throws aside all these
useless, cloudy, unintelligible subjects, and oc-
cupies himself with the immediate and actual
world around him, of which alone, through his
senses, his experiments and his experiences he
can obtain some certain and positive knowledge.
This they call independence and freedom of
science. In many minds it would be pure atheism,
if pure atheism were possible; in many others it
has produced, and is producing, a haziness of
doubt, and an uncertainty on all these points
touching the existence and the attributes of God,
which in practice leads to almost the same result.

The French mind is active, acute, sketchy, im-
aginative, logical and practical. On a minimum
quantity of facts or principles it will construct a
86 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

vast theory. If facts are too few to support the
theory, imagination can readily supply all that
are lacking. The theory, if logically consistent,
must be reduced to practice; opponents must stand
aside or be crushed down. The theory must rule.
From the days of Voltaire, if not before, France
has seen men deny religion under the guise of
teaching philosophy. The sarcasms, and at times
the brilliancy of their writings, have made French
authors the storehouse from which infidels in
other nations draw their weapons. Too full of
confidence in their powers of mind to accept the
English system, and to acknowledge there is any
subject they cannot master; too impressionable
and practical to live in the cloud of German
metaphysical pantheism, the French philosophers
are prone to deify man, instead of universal
nature. Whether they follow Comte, or whether
they devise some other theory, it is generally man
they place on the throne of the Deity. This worship
‘of man, this spirit of humanitarianism, and this
belief in the progressive and indefinite perfectibil-
ity of mankind, which they hold apart from and in
antagonism to the belief which worships God as
the Creator and Sovereign Lord, and places man
the creature subject to him, runs practically
through many a phase of their character in mod-
ern times.

These three systems—of course more or less -

commingled in their sources—have been extended
to every portion of the civilized world. The Ger-
man system has passed into Denmark, Holland
and Sweden; the French into Italy, Spain and
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER III 8%

Portugal, and in some measure through them, into
South América.

In the United States we have been com-
paratively free from them. We owe it, probably,
to the fact that with us all men are so busy trying
to amass fortunes that they have little time
and less taste for such abstruse speculations.
On the whole, the bulk of our people have a firm,
unshaken belief in the real truth of Christianity as
a revealed religion. Although very often men are
exceedingly puzzled to know what are the specific
doctrines, still they have not lost the traditions of
their fathers, and have not fallen into positive
unbelief. How long these words will remain true,
who can tell? Luxury, and the general demorali-
zation becoming so familiar, and the systematically
defective education of our youth will soon perhaps
place us in the van of those nations who seem to
have been given up to the foolishness of their
hearts.

Meanwhile the Church knows that she is debtor
to all—that her mission is to preach the Gospel of
Christ to all nations. Seeing in what manner so
many are going astray, so far as even to deny the
God that made them and redeemed them, and
knowing that He has sent her as a messenger from
Him to them, she raises her voice, and, in clear,
Steady, clarion tones that will ring through the
world, she proclaims again that He is the one true
God, eternal and almighty, the Creator whom all
men must know and must serve, and unto whom
they will all have to render a strict account. This
assembled council is itself evidence, clear as the
88 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

noonday light, of her existence, and her office in
the world. Men may not shut their eyes to the
fact. Her words are clear: ‘‘He whom ye deny,
exists, and speaks to you through me. He whom
ye scoff at is your Creator and Lord, from whom
ye have received all that ye have. He whom ye
deride, is long-suffering, and wills not your death,
but that ye repent and come to Him. Through
me He admonishes, He invites, He warns you.”’

Will these men hearken to her voice, or, rather,
the voice of God through her? Does not the God
they would deny give, as it were, sensible testi-
mony of His existence, His power and His author-
ity, evidence which they cannot ignore or overlook
save by a wilful and deliberate effort on their part?
They cannot fail to see the Church claiming to be
His. Her unbroken existence through eighteen
centuries, and her continued growth and advance
despite opposition, and, still more, despite the
quiet natural forces of all human agency, external
and internal, which under the ordinary laws of
human things would have sufficed to disrupt and
to destroy her a hundred times, an existence and
a growth which could have proceeded only from a
supernatural power, and which constitute a stand-
ing miracle in the history of the world, demand
their attention and their respect. Her claim to
be divinely founded and divinely supported, they
must not scout with flippancy. They must at
least receive it with respect, and examine its
grounds.

The most solemn assembly of that Church, the
most imposing assembly the world has looked
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER III 89

on, an assembly authorized by the organization
which He gave to that Church, and, therefore,
authorized by Him, speaks to them in His
name and by His authority. Will they receive
the message, or will they turn away? Some there
are who would not believe, if one rose from the
dead. But we may hope and pray that others
will hearken to the words of the Lord, and learn
that to know and fear the Lord is the beginning of
true wisdom. Above all, we may hope that many
who have not yet advanced too far on the danger-
ous road, may become aware of their danger and
their folly, and return to the paths of true and
salutary doctrine.

Next to those who, following the systems we
have indicated, or on any other grounds pretend
to do away with the existence of God, come those
who admit His existence, but do not admit that He
has given a revealed religion to mankind. It is
unnecessary to go over the various groups into
which they may be divided. There always have
been, and will be, men who will try by one huge
effort to throw off the yoke of religion. And
what is there for doing which, men will not try to
assign some reason? In the last century, and the
early portion of the present one, men sought such
reasons in the alleged contradictions of the Scrip-
tures, in the mysteriousness of Christian doctrine
and the inability of the human intellect to compre-
hend them, in the procrustean systems of ancient
history which they invented, or in the alleged de-
fects of the evidences of Christianity, or, finally,
in their pet theories of metaphysics. At present
90 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

the tendency is to base the rejection of revealed
religion on its alleged incompatibility with the dis-
coveries of natural sciences in these modern
days. Geology, anthropology, i in fact, the natural
sciences with scarcely an exception, have been in
turn laid under contribution or forced to do serv-
ice against the cause of revelation. We have
men appealing to this or that principle or fact as
an irrefragable evidence by modern science of the
false pretentions of Christianity.

To all such the church, the pillar and ground of
truth, the organ of Christ our Lord on earth, will
speak. It is not her office to enter into the de-
tailed discussion of scientific studies, and to make
manifest the errors of fact into which these men
have fallen, or the fallacy of their deductions.
This she leaves to scholars who, in their pursuit
of earthly science, do not cast away the knowl-
edge they have received of divine truth. Such
Christian scholars have replied to the sneers, and
gibes, and sarcasms of the last century, and have
shown the utter worthlessness and absurdity of
the arguments then brought forward against
Christianity by men who claimed to speak on the
part of science; and there are now others answer-
ing with equal fulness the more modern objec-
tions. The Church might, indeed, have left it to
time and the progress of learning and science to
vindicate her course, and to refute the objections
raised against her teaching. For, as a matter of
fact, the grand difficulties brought forward half
a century ago, excite but a smile now, as we see
on what an unsubstantial foundation they rested.
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER III 9

And a very few years to come will, we may be
sure, suffice to overturn many a pet theory of to-
day, with its vaunted arguments against reve-
lation. New discoveries will lead to new theories,
that may or may not give rise to a new crop of
difficulties, for man’s mind is limited, and cannot
reach the truth on all sides, but the champions of
religion will consign the present difficulties to the
tomb of the Capulets. To that tomb generation
after generation of these so-called scientific objec-
tions are passing. The Church does not undertake
to teach astronomy, geology, chemistry or physics.
Natural sciences are to be studied by man, in the
use of his own reason and the exercise of his nat-
ural faculties. These things God has left to the
disputations of men. The Church does not despise
these discussions and researches. She does not
repress them nor oppose them. Quite the con-
trary. She has ever protected and fostered
science,

One of the most beautiful and instructive
chapters in her earthly history would be that
which tells how, from the school of Alexandria, in
the days of persecution, down the entire course of
ages, she has ever sought to promote and foster
science. She may with pride point to her canons
and laws enacted for this purpose in every cen-
tury. She may recount the long catalogue of
schools, colleges and universities established by
her in every civilized land of Europe, and wher-
ever she planted her foot; and to the religious
houses of her clergy throughout the stormy mid-
dle ages, the chief, almost the only safe homes of
92 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

learning. Many of the universities which she
founded have in the course of ages been destroyed
by kings and nobles, who filled their own purses,
or repaired their wasted fortunes, by the seizure
of endowments given for the free education of all
that might come to drink of these fountains of
learning.

What university was ever suppressed by any act
of hers? None. She encourages science. But at
the same time she says, ‘‘God has given man rea-
son and understanding to seek after and to attain
knowledge. It is a great and noble gift, to be
prized and used rightly, and not turned to an evil
purpose. Ifa father place in the hands of his son,
as a gift, a weapon keen and bright, shall that son,
with parricidal hand, turn the blade against his
father? Beware not to turn these gifts of God
against God Himself. Use them not as pretexts
to deny His existence, or to shake off His author-
ity, or to impugn Tis truth when He speaks.”’

In giving this admonition the Church is acting
in her full right. She is in the certain possession
of that higher divine truth which her heavenly
Founder has placed in her charge, to be carefully
guarded and preserved until the end of time, and
to be ever faithfully preached. The Church, hold-
ing with certainty this divine deposit of the
revealed truth, must not be compared, either
in theory or in practice, with any private
individual or society of individuals, who hold
and profess religious doctrines on the authority
of their own reason and judgment, or of their
private interpretation of the Scriptures. In such
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER III 93

a case of this, these doctrines are simply beliefs,
opinions of men avowedly liable to error in this
very matter. They, therefore, stand on the same
level as to the certainty or uncertainty of being
true, with the other human judgments in the fields
of natural science or human knowledge which may
rise up in opposition to them. The two sides are
fairly matched, and either may ultimately prevail.

But, on the contrary, the Church claims not
merely to hold opinions, but, under the guiding
light of the Holy Ghost, to have certain and infal-
lible knowledge of the truths of divine revelation.
Nothing that contradicts these established ‘and
known truths can she admit to be anything else
than error, In the contest between them, the truth
must prevail. This is the theory on which the
Catholic Church stands, and in which, in reality,
all Christianity is involved. The experience of
eighteen centuries confirms it fully in practice.
Never once in all that period has the Church of
Christ had to revoke a single doctrinal decision,
on the ground that what was believed to be true
when uttered, has since been proved to be false as
the progress of science has thrown fuller light on
the subject.

In the early days of her existence, Celsus and
the other philosophers of that classical period
raised manifold objections from reason and such
knowledge of nature as they possessed. Their
objections accorded well with the public opinion
of the time, and were hailed with applause.
But the time came when they were felt to
be of no force, and now they are entirely for-
94 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

gotten; and the truth they impugned, and were
intended to overthrow, stands stronger than ever.
The Gnostics, with their varied and fanciful sys-
tems of conciliating the power and goodness of
God with the presence of evil in the world, and
guided, if we listen to their boasts, by the highest
light of man’s reason, brought forward many ob-
jections, then deemed specious, They and their
arguments, too, have passed away, and the Cath-
olic truth stands. So it has been in every age
until the present time.

Christ has protected His Church, so that shi
shall make no false decision as to faith. It is
only in virtue of that protection that she claims
the paramount authority to speak. Under it
she has been appointed to speak, and must speak,
if she would not be recreant to her duty. She
does not repress science; she saves it. She does
not shackle reason; she preserves it from error
and ruin. How often is the way of science a
narrow ridge, with deep gulfs on either side!
Feeble man walks along the narrow crest with
trembling limbs, or crawls on dubiously and
slowly, in the dark. The Church of Christ cheers
him on. She does not bear him over the perilous
path; but holds aloft the torch of revealed truth
to guide him as he advances, and warns him to
proceed by its light, and not to rush heedlessly on,
lest he fall into the abyss.

And yet should we not expect that the same
spirit of insubordinate pride which leads reason to
deny the existence of God, or His Divine Provi-
dence, or the fact of divine revelations, or embold-
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER III 95

ens feeble, ignorant man to measure, as it were, his
feeble intelligence against the infinite wisdom of
God, should also not refrain from charging the
Catholic Church with being an incubus on the hu-
man mind, with narrowing the intellect and fetter-
ing the reason, with restricting our liberty of
thought, narrowing the field of science, and dwarf-
ing the whole intellectual man?

But time does her justice. She can point to
Origen, Clement of Alexandria, St. Jerome, St.
Augustine, St. Thomas of Acquin, St. Anselm,
Duns Scotus, Suarez, Vasquez, and the mighty
minds of the past. She may point to her children,
clergymen and laymen, now standing in the front
ranks of every branch of science. What the past
ages gave, what the present gives, too, the future
will as surely not fail to bestow.
THE FIRST
(ECUMENICAL COUNCIL.
OF THE VATICAN
CHAPTER IV
THE FIRST C@CUMENICAL COUNCIL OF THE
VATICAN, CHAPTER IV.

OLY Week in Rome! How many Christian
hearts have yearned for it, have looked
forward to it in hope! How many recall it

among the sweetest and most precious memories of
the past! In this sacred city, and in this most
solemn season, a spell is thrown around the faith-
ful pilgrim; or, rather, he is released in a great ©
measure from the delusive spells of the world.
Mind and heart, and, we might also say, the body,
too, seem to live in a new world, in which the all-
absorbing thought and affair is the grand mystery
of what God has done in His infinite power and
love to redeem this fallen race of men.

What emotions must fill the Catholic heart as,
after perhaps a long and weary journey, one is
rapidly borne on by the train from Civita Vecchia,
and knows at last that within one hour he will be
in Rome. The yellow Tiber is flowing by the rail-
way track, sluggishly and silently, on to the sea.
At intervals antique-looking barges, with high-
peaked prows and high stems, are floating down,
heavily laden with boxes of statuary and of mar-
bles, or of other works of art—it may be, of books
or of baggage. A couple of oars suffice to keep

96.
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER IV 9%

the vessel in mid-channel, or to accelerate its mo-
tion. Perhaps, if the course of the sinuous river
allows it, a huge lateen sail on a heavy stump of a
mast helps it onward. Perchance, too, a tiny
steamer meets him, puffing its way downward; or
the train overtakes another vessel breasting the
stream and towing up three or four barges, each
larger than itself. The eye travels across the
classic river, and roams over the rolling surface of
the campagna, and takes note of the many ruins
that dot its surface, mostly relics of the mauso-
leums and massive tombs with which the Romans
of old were wont to line their roads leading from
the city for miles and miles. At length Rome is at
hand; across the Tiber you see the new St. Paul’s
extra muros, rising like a phoenix after the con-
flagration of 1823, and not yet entirely finished.
The great apostle was buried here after his mar-
tyrdom. Here his body has ever been venerated.
Some day, you may come hither, and in the splen-
dor of that church look down into the confession
to catch a glimpse of the interior of the under-
ground crypt, and the sarcophagus within it,
in which lie his mortal remains, and read the large
letters on it, Paullus Apostolus Martyr,, ‘‘Paul the
Apostle and Martyr.’’? On the lofty summit of
the front, plainly visible, is the gigantic statue of
the apostle himself, bearing the emblematic sword
—as if standing sentinel and guarding the ap-
proach to the Holy City, which he consecrated by
his preaching and his death.

Soon you are on the bridge over the stream,
and all eyes are turned to the left, where above
98 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

the city walls, now visible, and the roofs of the
houses, and the cupolas of many churches, you
see for a moment or two the majestic dome of
St. Peter’s towering over all. The road runs
around the walls of the city for some distance
before entering, and St. Peter’s is soon shut
out from view, only to be replaced by the majestic
front of St. John Lateran’s, near at hand.
But on the other side you see more clearly than
before the campagna with its multitude of ruins,
and the Sabine and Alban Mountains. In
the clear atmosphere you can distinguish the vine-
yards and olive groves, and dark forests, and cities
and towns and pleasant villas. Along the cam-
pagna, from the foot of these hills, there stretches
for miles on miles, like a huge centipede, a long
line of dark and jagged masonry, borne aloft on
massive piers and arches. It is an old aqueduct,
or, as your guide-book tells you, three aqueducts
in one. You dash through one of those arches,
and the panorama is changed.

Other mountains in the distance, with other
cities and towns, other ruins on the campagna—
the ancient basilicas of St. Lawrence and St. Agnes
near at hand. At length you pass through an arch-
way of the wall into the city. St. John Lateran’s
is again before you. Not far distant is the Church
of Santa Croce; and St. Mary Major’s, with its
cupolas, its medieval belfry, and its obelisk, is
even nearer. The balmy breeze of the afternoon
brings to your ear the sweet chime of its many
bells. You are on the Quirinal hill, and can look
over some portion of the city, with its belfries, and
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER IV 99

cupolas, its red-tiled roofs, and many windowed
houses. Near by are massive ruins. The excava-
tions of the railway track have unearthed broken
columns, frescoed walls of ancient rooms, and
masses of travertino masonry, belonging to the
walls which Servius Tullius, the fifth king of Rome,
built around the city.

Issuing from the depot to seek your hotel, you
are at once before the ruins of the baths of
Dioclesian, and the Cistercian Abbey, and the
Church of St. Mary degli Angeli. Your way leads
by churches, palaces, ruins, obelisks, statues and
ever-gushing fountains, through a maze of narrow
streets with sharp turns. You understand that
these streets were not laid out and the houses
built on clear ground. The houses stand more or
less on the foundations of older buildings that
have perished, and follow, to a limited extent, the
course of those fondations. As for the streets,
they do as they can, under the circumstances, and
seldom have the same breadth and direction for
three hundred yards at a time. Hverything tells
you of olden heathen Rome that has perished, and
of a new Rome that has risen in its place, not to
be compared to its predecessor in size or in earthly
magnificence, but infinitely superior in spiritual
and moral grandeur.

Without an hour’s unnecessary delay you seek
St. Peter’s. A glance of wonder at the vastness
and majesty of its approaches, of its front, and its
portals, is all you will give now; for the heart is
filled with a sense of that glory of which all this,
great as it is, is but a figure. You pass through
100 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

the vestibule, large as a magnificent cathedral,
push aside the heavy curtain before the inner door,
and you are within the grand basilica. The light
is evenly diffused and soft, and comes through
unseen windows. The temperature is pleasant.
If outside you found the day cold and unpleasant,
here the atmosphere seems warm and agreeable.
If outside it was hot, here you feel it cool and re-
freshing. As you look at the vast expanse of the
building, you wonder at the solitude. It seems
almost vacant; although, if you could count them,
there are hundreds moving about, or kneeling
here and there in silent prayer, and scores are
entering or going out. As you advance up the
broad and lofty central nave there come from a
chapel on the left the rolling sounds of an organ,
and the chorus of many voices, as canons are

chanting the daily vespers in their own chapel. |.

Further on, from the other side, you hear the
murmuring of many voices. A long line of pilgrims,
or members of some confraternity, have come

in procession to pray in St. Peter’s; and as they
kneel before the altar, perhaps a hundred devout
men and women from the parish, or those acci-
dentally in the church, have gathered around
them and have knelt and joined in their chanted
hymns and prayers. On still you proceed, until
you are beneath the lofty dome itself, and have
approached the oval railing of marble which is
united to the grand altar, and on which ever burn
a hundred and forty-two lamps. You look over
into the opening in the marble pavement, which
is called the confession of St. Peter’s, and you
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER IV 101

see below the floor of the ancient church, and im-
mediately under the present high altar stands the
chief altar of that church. Though you do not
see it, you know that still deeper, and below that
altar, is a small chamber in the earth whose floor
and sides and arched roof are all of large blocks
of dressed stone—travertino—and that in that
vaulted chamber stands the marble sarcophagus
which contains the remains of St. Peter, the chief
of the apostles, the founder and the first bishop
of Rome, who was crucified under Nero, in the
year 67, on the hill near by, and whom pious
Christian hands reverently buried in this very
spot, ever since sacred to the followers of Christ.
Then it was an obscure spot, outside the city,
near certain brickyards on the Aurelian Way.
Now it is covered by the grandest temple which
the world ever saw on which all that man can
give is offered and consecrated to the service of
religion and the glory of God.

A poor, humble, simple-minded fisherman on
the Lake of Genesareth, in Galilee, whom men
called Simon, was chosen by our Lord; his name
was changed to Peter, a rock—for on that rock
the Church of Christ would be built; to him were
given the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and he
was charged with the duty of confirming his
brethren in the faith. At the command of his
Lord, and in the power of the divine commission,
he went forth to his work of zeal and of trials.
Like his divine Master, poor, persecuted, cruci-
fied, he was the instrument of God for mighty
things, Empires and kingdoms have perished;
102 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

but the Church still stands. Dynasties have suc-
ceeded dynasties, and have passed away like the
shadows of clouds in spring; but the line of suc-
cessors of St. Peter continues unbroken. The in-
tellect and study, the passions, the violence, and
the inconsistency of men have changed all things
human, again and again, within eighteen cen-
turies; but there remaineth one Lord, one faith,
one baptism, one Church of Christ, against which
the gates of hell cannot prevail. And here, today,
you stand at the earthly center of that spiritual
kingdom, by the tomb of him to whom Christ gave
promises which must ever stand true, though
heaven and earth pass away. You cannot but
kneel and pray with all the fervor of your heart,
taking no account of others near you, nor of the
passage of time. And when at length earnest
prayer has brought calm and holy joy to your
soul, you may rise and look up into the dome, ris-
ing four hundred feet above you, with mosaics of
evangelists, and prophets, and angels, archangels,
and all the grades of the celestial host, until in
the summit, amid a blaze of light, the ‘‘ Ancient
of Days’’ looks down from heaven, in power and
majesty, blessing the worshippers of earth, and
bending forward to receive the prayers of all who
come to this holy and consecrated temple to pour
forth their supplications and entreat His mercy.

You may examine the grandiose proportions of
nave and transept and aisle, the mosaics, and mar-
bles, and statues, and saints; you may go forth
into the vast vestibule guarded at one extremity
by an equestrian statue of Constantine; and at
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER IV 103

the other by one of Charlemagne; you may linger,
as you look again at the mighty square in front
of the basilica, with its magnificent ever-flowing
fountains, so typical of the waters of life, its
colonnades stretching away hundreds of yards on
either side, like arms put forth to embrace the
roultitudes of the children of men, and the lofty,
needle-form Egyptian obelisk in the center
pointing toward heaven. On its summit is a
bronze casket, containing a portion of the true
cross on which the Saviour suffered death; and
at the base is an inscription, brief in words, and
here most sublime in its appositeness. Your
heart takes in the full meaning as you read,
Christ reigns; Christ rules; Christ has conquered.
May Christ defend us from every il.

This is the spirit, the keynote, as it were, of
Christian Rome. We might say, also, that it is
the animating principle of her temporal existence.
For, save as the center of the Catholic Church
and the See of Peter, Rome would quickly perish.
On the hills of the campagna and on the slopes of
the mountains around, may still be seen faint ves-
tiges of cities and towns that were illustrious,
centuries before Rome was founded. They have
utterly perished. Others of the same class seem
to drag out a lingering existence, as obscure vil-
lages, of no importance, whose names no one men-
tions, and whose ancient history is known only
to antiquarians. Many a desert, forest, or plain
can show ruins to rival those of the seven hills,
Florence, and many a modern city, ean boast of
galleries of the fine arts and museums to rival, if
104 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

not to surpass, most of those in Rome. No, it is
not for her antiquity, nor for her grand ruins of
past ages, nor for her painting and sculpture,
her marbles and mosaics, that Rome stands un-
rivalled in the world. These are but accessories.
Neither they nor any mere human gift can suffice
to explain the mystery of her survival, despite so
many convulsions and shocks, and her continued
and prosperous existence, where all around her
has sunk into decay and ruin. Were there no
other course of life, these would soon fail her.
The treasures of art and antiquity in her galler-
ies, and museums, and public buildings would
soon be shattered by spoliation or conquest, and
she would be left desolate and stricken like her
crumbling ruins.

It is the moral power of Christianity which
gives her a life and a strength beyond that of the
_ sword. It is the presence of that Pontiff who is
the visible head of the Church, and the center of
Catholic unity and of spiritual authority, which
saves her from the fate of other cities. Her true
source of life is her religious position. When,
centuries ago, the Popes, wearied out by the
tumults of the people and the turbulence of the
barons, withdrew for peace sake, and abode for
seventy years in Avignon, Rome dwindled down
to a little better than a village of ten or fifteen
thousand souls. The Romans spoke of that time
as a Babylonian captivity. With the return of
the Pontiff prosperity was again restored.

When, in the early part of the present cen-
tury, Pius- VII was borne away and held captive
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER IV 105

for years in France, and Rome was annexed to
the French empire, the population of the city
quickly sank to one hundred and thirteen thou-
sand, and was rapidly diminishing. When he re-
turned, in 1814, it began to rise again, and today
Rome has nearly doubled that population. Were
the Sovereign Pontiff to be driven into exile to-
morrow, Rome would again, and at once, enter on a
downward career of misery and ruin. In twenty
years she would lose all her treasures and half of
her population. All this is clear to the Romans
themselves; all the more clear from the fate which
has overtaken those cities of the states of the
Church which were annexed to the kingdom of
Italy, eight or ten years ago.

But we must not wander away into such consider-
ations. That theme, though most important to the
Romans and often on their lips, is of too worldly
a character. For this month, at least, we leave
it aside, and join that immense crowd of stran-
gers who have filled Rome, drawn hither to look
on the council, and to unite in the solemn offices
of Holy Week, more solemn and imposing this year
than perhaps ever before, on account of the vast
number of bishops uniting in their celebration.

Once the German element used to stand promi-
nent before all others in the crowd of strangers
that flocked to Rome for Holy Week; afterward
the English, and latterly the Americans became
conspicuous. This year, although they were prob-
ably as numerous as ever, they seemed to sink
into the background before the vast number of
French who filled the Holy City, and who, almost
106 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

without exception, had come in the spirit of earn-
est, fervent Catholics. They were fully as numer-
ous and fully as demonstrative as at the centenary
celebration in 1867. Their coming was announced
by the ever-increasing numbers who, each day that
a general congregation of the council was held,
gathered at St. Peter’s at half-past eight A. M.,
to see the bishops enter, or at one P. M., to see
them come forth from the council hall.

In ordinary times the Pope and cardinals cele-
brate nearly all the offices of Holy Week, not in
St. Peter’s, which is left to the canons and clergy
of that basilica, but in the Sixtine chapel, which
is the Pope’s court chapel, so to speak, within the
Vatican palace. It is as large as a modern Amer-
ican church. About one-half igs railed off as a
sanctuary for the Pontiff, and the cardinals and
their attendants, and for the other clergymen who
are required, or are privileged, to attend the serv-
ices in this chapel. The remaining half, assigned
to the laity, will hold four or five hundred seated
or standing, as the case may be. The number de-
siring to enter is so great that often a seat can be
obtained only by coming two or three hours be-
fore the time for commencing the services. This
year, if the bishops were to be present, the whole
chapel would have to be used as a sanctuary, and
no room would remain for any of the laity. To
avoid this embarrassment, and the consequent dis-
appointment of thousands, it was settled that this
year the papal services of Holy Week should be
celebrated, not in this Sixtine chapel, but in St.
Peter’s itself, where, besides all the bishops, ten
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER IV 107

thousand others might attend, and seem only a
moderate-sized crowd grouped close to the sanc-
tuary.

To St. Peter’s, then, on Palm Sunday morning
came the papal choir, and half a thousand bishops,
archbishops, primates and patriarchs, the cardi-
nals, with their attendants, and the Holy Father
himself, for the blessing of the palms and the
other services of the day. They were substan-
tially the same as the services in ten thousand
other churches of the Catholic world that day.
But here there were, of course, a splendor and
magnificence that could be rivalled nowhere else.
The palms to be blessed lay in masses regularly
arranged near the throne of the Pontiff. They
seemed scarcely to differ from the branches of
our Southern palmetto. On many of them the
long leaves were fancifully plaited, so as to repre-
sent a branch surrounded by roses, lilies, leaves
and crosses. The Catholic negroes that came to
the United States from San Domingo years ago
used to do something similar.

There is an interesting story about these palms.
On the 10th of September, 1586, Fontana, the
architect and engineer of St. Peter’s, was to lift
to its present position in the middle of the square
before St. Peter’s the immense unbroken mass of
stone which formed an Egyptian obelisk that had
been erected in the amphitheatre of Nero, and still
stood not far off, its base buried in the earth that
centuries had accumulated around it. It was a
mighty, a perilous work, to transport this obelisk
three hundred yards, ever keeping it in its upright
108 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

position, and at the end to lift it up and plant it
on the lofty pedestal. Pope Sixtus V and all Rome
were there to look on. In default of steam engines
and hydraulic rams, not then invented, Fontana
used a high scaffolding, ropes, blocks and tackle,
and windlasses and hundreds of operatives. Any
mistake or confusion as to orders or delay in
executing them might overthrow the immense pil-
lar, and prove disastrous to the work, and fatal,
perhaps, to scores of lives. In view of the emer-
gency, a kind of military law was proclaimed,
whereby all'lookers-on were to keep silence, under
penalty of death. Fontana, standing aloft, gave
his orders, the wheels were turned, the ropes
tightened, the mighty mass slowly moved on, the
pedestal was reached. The obelisk was lifted up.
Hours rolled on, and still it rose gradually, but
truly. At length it stood within a few feet of its
destined position. But it would go no farther.
The ropes bearing the strain of the weight for so
many hours had stretched, and some were threat-
ening to snap. Fontana stood pale and speech-
less at the impending disaster, which he now saw
no way of averting. Suddenly a clear, manly
voice was heard from out of the crowd, ‘‘Wet
your ropes! Wetyourropes!’’ Fontana at once
seized the happy thought. The ropes were wetted,
swelled and contracted to their original state, and
soon the hugh obelisk stood upright and firm on
the solid pedestal, and the daring work was
crowned with complete success. Meanwhile the
officers had seized the man that cried out; he was
brought before the Pope, who thanked him and
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER IV 109

embraced him. He was asked who he was, and
what reward he desired. His name was Bresca, a
sailor from San Remo, near Nice. His family
owned a palm grove there, and the reward he
asked was the privilege of supplying St. Peter’s
every year forever with the palm branches to be
blessed and used on Palm Sunday. It was granted.
Nearly three centuries have passed, but the fam-
ily of Bresca is still at San Remo, has still palm
groves, and every year there comes a small vessel
from that port laden with the palm branches for
St. Peter’s. May it continue to come three hun-
dred years hence.

The Holy Father, in that clear, sweet and ma-
jestic voice, for which he is remarkable, chanted
the prayers for the blessing of the palms. To the
blessing succeeded the distribution. One after
another the cardinals gravely advanced, the long
silk trains of their robes rustling on the carpets
as they moved forward; each one receiving a
palm branch; the oriental patriarchs, the pri-
mates and a number of the archbishops and
bishops, as representatives of their brethren, fol-
lowed after the cardinals, and received each his
branch. Meanwhile the choir was singing the ex-
quisite anthem, ‘‘Pueri Hebraeoruwm,’”’ appointed
for that occasion. It was a simple, yet a most
effective and thrilling scene. The cardinals stood
in their long line, the rich gold ornamentation of
their chasubles shining brightly on the violet
silk; on their heads, the mitre or the red calotte
of their rank. Before each one stood his chap-
lain in dark purple, holding the decorated palm
110 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

branch like a lance. In the middle, as the lines
of Oriental and Latin prelates, in their rich and
varied robes, approached the Holy Father, or re-
tired, each one bearing his palm branch, there
was a perpetual changing and shifting and inter-
mingling of colors, as in a kaleidoscope. Near
the Pope stood the senator and other civil offi-
cers of Rome, in their medieval mantles. The
Swiss Guard, in a military dress of broad stripes,
red and yellow, or black and yellow, some of them
wearing steel corselets and breastplates, and all
wearing the plumed Tyrolean military hat;
stood motionless as statues, holding their bright
halberds upright. The Noble Guard, in their rich
uniform, stood here and there; and on both sides,
line after line of bishops, robed in cappa magnas,
formed a massive and imposing background.
Add to all these the religious orders, Carmelites,
Dominicans, Franciscans of every family; Augus-
tinians, Benedictines, Cistercians, Canons Regu-
lar, Theatines, Servites, Crociferi and. many
others, each in the costume of his order or con-
gregation, and all bearing branches of blessed
palm. Add still the continuous chanting of those
unrivalled voices and the indistinct bass murmur
or rustling of the vast crowd. It was a scene
which carried one away. You did not strive to
catch every note of Palestrina’s beautiful compo-
sition. It was enough to drink in the sound. You
scarcely thought of reciting the words of prayer
—there are none assigned for the time of dis-
tribution specifically—you found it easier to
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER IV 111

indulge a train of devotional thought, and to unite
with it something of pious admiration.

Next followed the procession in commemora-
tion of the solemn entry of our Saviour into Jeru-
salem, five days before His Passion. Leaving the
sanctuary, the long lines of singers, of the religi-
ous orders, of bishops and prelates, and of cardi-
nals, and finally the Pope with his attendants,
passed down the nave of the church, out by one
door into the vestibule, and, returning by another
into the church, again came up the nave and en-
tered the sanctuary. The strains of the ‘‘ Gloria,
Laus, et Honor,’’ the hymn for the procession,
always beautiful, and infinitely more so when
sung today by this choir, swelled as the proces-
sion approached you, became fainter and sweeter
as it passed on. You caught but a faint murmur
of melody while they were in the vestibule, and
the notes rose again as the procession entered the
church and moved slowly onward to the sane-
tuary.

Then came the high mass, which an archbishop
celebrated, by special permission, at the high
altar. Without such permission no one save the
Holy Father himself celebrates there. During
the mass the entire history of the Passion of our
Lord, as given in the Gospel of St. Matthew, is
sung. On Good Friday the same history is sung,
as given by St. John. Perhaps no portion of the
chants of the Church in use at the present day is
as ancient and venerable as the mode in which
the Passion is chanted. The old classic Greek
style is preserved, and, fundamentally at least,
112 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

the melody must be Grecian, although perhaps
somewhat changed to suit our modern gamut.
The ordinary mode is to distribute the whole
among three singers, one of whom chants all the
narrative or historical portion. Whenever the
Saviour speaks, a second singer chants His words.
A third singer comes in at the proper time to
chant whatever is said by others. In the Sixtine
chapel, and here on St. Peter’s day there is a
slight change made, which, from its appropriate-
ness and effective character, we cannot but look
on as in part, at least, a return toward the origi-
nal idea of such a chant. One singer, an exquis-
ite tenor, took up the narrative portion in a reci-
tativo, closing each sentence with the modula-
tions with which many of our readers must be
well acquainted. A baritone voice, one of the
richest, smoothest, most majestic and most plaint-
ive and sympathetic we ever heard, chanted the
Saviour’s part. There was not in it a note that
we had not heard before scores of times, but
never as they were now chanted. One could, it
seemed, listen to him forever; when he closed one
sentence, your eye ran along the page to mark
the verse, at which you would hear him again.
As he uttered the words you drank them in, in
their sense rather than in the music, realizing
something of their pathos and majesty. It was
as if in truth you stood near Him in Gethsemane,
before Annas, and Caiphas, before Pilate; as if
you walked with Him along the sorrowful way,
as if you stood so near the cross on Calvary that
every word He spoke, every tone of his voice, en-
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER IV 113

tered your heart. Years cannot efface from our
minds the memory of that wondrous chant. It
seems still to ring in our ears. The portions
usually assigned to a third singer are here dis-
tributed among several, who chant singly, or to-
gether, as the words are spoken by one, or by sev-
eral, or by a multitude. Thus, a soprano and a
contralto unite to sing the words of the two false
witnesses. The mutual contradiction of the wit-
nesses is indicated by the irregularity of the time,
and the discords that are repeatedly introduced.
When the crowd cries out, ‘‘ Away with him; cru-
cify him; we will have no king but Cesar,’’ the
whole choir bursts forth. You hear the trembling
shrill tones of age, the hissing words of irate
manhood, the shrill trebles of excited women, the
full incisive words of the priests, and the clamors
of the unthinking rabble. When they cry, ‘‘ THis
blood be upon us and upon our children,’’ the
voices, full at the beginning, grow tremulous and
weaker as they proceed, and some are silent, as if
reluctant to pronounce the terrible words of the
imprecation. And when the soldiers, after scourg-
ing the Saviour and putting on His head the
crown of thorns, place the reed in his hands and
kneel before him, saluting Him, Hail, King of the
Jews, the words are sung by three or four voices
with a softness, a sweetness and an earnestness
which would make you think that, for the mo-
ment, and in spite of themselves, they felt the
divine truth of the words they intended to utter
in mockery.

In the entire circle of music there is nothing so
114 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

sublime and so touching as the Passion of our
Lord, sung by the papal choir in St. Peter’s.

On Tuesday, in Holy Week, a general congrega-
tion of the council was held in the usual form.
The fathers voted on the entire draught, then be-
fore them, either placet, placet juxta modum, or
non placet.

On Wednesday, Thursday and Friday after-
noons the bishops attended in St. Peter’s at the
office of the Tenebre. On each occasion twenty-
five or thirty thousand persons about half filled
the church to hear the lamentations, and, above
all, the far-famed Misereres heretofore only to be
heard in the Sixtine chapel.

The papal choir.is composed of about twenty-
five singers. Basses, baritones, contraltos, tenors,
and sopranos, all chosen voices of the first qual-
ity, and all trained for years in the special style
of singing of this choir, different from that of any
other we ever heard, and in the peculiar tradi-
tions as to the precise style in which each of their
principal pieces should be executed. They say
themselves that without this special training the
mere notes of the score would by no means suffice
to guide another choir, at least so as to produce
the marvellous effects which they attain. They
have in their repertory over forty Misereres,
composed by their different maestri, or chiefs,
during the last three centuries. Not more than
four of these are placed by them in the first rank.
On Wednesday that by Baini was sung; on
Thursday that by Allegri; and on Friday one by
Mustafa, the present leader of the choir.
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER IV 115

‘Besides the artistic excellence which the
few trained to analyze and examine such compo-
sitions can alone discover and discuss suitably,
there is a something about these Misereres which
all can feel, and which is far more religious in its
character. Once enjoyed, it is never forgotten.

As the long office of matins and lauds is slowly
chanted, psalm succeeding psalm, and lamentation
following lamentation, the lighted candles on the
triangular candelabrum are all gradually extin-
guished save one, and then, one by one, those on
the altar. The shades of evening are coming on.
The light of day has become almost a twilight,
adding a mysterious indefiniteness to the immen-
sity of the vast edifice. Only through the glory,
or circular stained window in the apsis of the
basilica there comes in a golden light from the
western sky. The cardinals and bishops are all
kneeling in their places, the multitude of twenty-
five thousand that have waited two hours for this
moment are hushed to dead silence. A _ wail-
ing voice is heard—faint, sad, almost bursting
into sobs—Have mercy on me, O God! Another
and another joins in the entreating ery. It
swells and rises, sometimes in passionate, loud
supplication, sometimes lowered to broken tones,
scarce daring to hope, until an angel voice leads
on, According to Thy great mercy. Verse after
verse the wailing, pleading prayer continues in
combinations of matchless voices, and in harmon-
ious strains. The multitude listens, suppressing
their breathing lest they may lose a single one of
the silvery tones. Some are kneeling, others who
116 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

have not room to kneel in that closely-packed
crowd, stand with their heads sunk on their
breasts. Allare silent, yet many a moving lip tells
you they are repeating the words with the singers,
that they may more fully drink in the sense and
the appropriateness of the music. When the last
verse closes there is a sigh, as if they waked from
a trance and found themselves in this life again.

On Thursday, Friday and Saturday there were
the usual services in St. Peter’s in the forenoon.
On the first day the bishops were required to at-
tend in white copes and mitres. A cardinal sang
high mass, after which came the usual proces-
sion of the Blessed Sacrament, which is conveyed
from the main altar to a repository prepared to
receive it. This year the chapel of the canons
was used for the purpose. Cross and candles and:
incense led the way. The canons and beneficiar-
ies and other clergy of St. Peter’s followed, each
one bearing a lighted waxen candle, and respond-
ing to the chanted hymns of the choir. A certain
number of archbishops and primates came next,
and after them the cardinals, all likewise with
their lighted tapers. The Pontiff himself bore
the Blessed Sacrament, under a rich canopy of
gold cloth, upheld on eight staffs of silver gilt,
borne by his attendants. Cardinals and clergy,
Swiss Guard and Noble Guard walked slowly on
either side; the heads of religious orders fol-
lowed, bearing their lights; and after them, not
two and two, as the regular procession had
walked, but more closely pressed together, came
the hundreds of bishops. The church, at least
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER IV 117

the half of it toward the altar, was packed and
jammed. Not without some effort had the Swiss
and the lines of soldiers kept a small passageway
clear for the procession from the main altar to
the chapel of the canons. As the sound of the
well-known hymn, the ‘‘Pange lingua,’’ was rec-
ognized, and the procession started, all who could,
Inelt; those who had not room to do so, bowed
reverently until the Pontiff had passed and had
entered the chapel, and the amen of the closing
prayer rang through the church.

At once there was a rushing to and fro of the
thirty thousand people in the church, one-half
seeking to pass out to the square in front or to
ascend to the broad summit of the colonnade on
each side of it; for the Pontiff would, in a few
minutes, give the solemn pontifical blessing from
the loggia, or baleony, over the main door of St.
Peter’s, the other half took the occasion to oc-
cupy the vacant space closer to the main altar,
striving to secure the best positions from which
to witness, as well as they could, the ceremonies
to follow in the sanctuary, after the blessing, and
trusting that on Easter Sunday they might be
able to behold and to receive the blessing with
grander ceremonial than today. The Holy Father
and the cardinals came forth from the chapel,
and, leaving for a time the basilica by a side door,
passed into the Vatican palace, and from thence
to the vast hall immediately over the vestibule of
St. Peter’s. Borne in his curule chair, he ad-
vances to the loggia, or open balcony projecting
in the middle toward the square, and looks out on
118 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

the city, and on the thousands below that kneel as
he stands erect, and raising both arms aloft to-
ward heaven, calls down on them the blessing of
God the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost.
The solemn and sweet tones of that majestic voice
ring through the square, and the words are heard
distinctly by the multitudes. A cardinal reads
and publishes the indulgence, and the Pontiff and
the cardinals retire.

Back into the church the mass of people come,
a living torrent. In twenty minutes the cardi-
nals and the bishops are again in the sanctuary,
while the movement and rustling of the moving
and struggling crowd fills the church with the
sound as of a deep, continuous and subdued bass
note. At one side of the large sanctuary, which
is about one hundred and thirty feet deep, and
seventy-five broad, an ascent of eight or ten steps
leads to a broad platform visible to all. On this
platform attendants move about, preparing all
that is necessary for the next portion of the cere-
mony, the mandatum, or washing of feet. Soon
a line of thirteen figures, dressed as pilgrims in
long white woollen robes reaching to the instep,
ascend to the platform, and the attendants con-
duct them to the seats that are prepared. They
are priests from abroad who have come to Rome,
and all eyes are turned to inspect them as they
stand ranged in a line. One is an old man stooped
with age, with large, piercing dark eyes and
heavy eyebrows, long aquiline nose and high
cheek bones, and ruddy cheeks. The olive tint of
his skin looks darker by contrast with his ample
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER IV 119

flowing beard of patriarchal whiteness. He is
from the East. Perhaps those two other younger
ones, with full black beards, are from the East
likewise. To judge by his almond eye, the long
and regular features, and the darkish skin, an-
other was an Egyptian. Of a fifth there could be
no mistake, He was from Senegambia, in Africa,
and his surname was Zamba, or, as we call it in
America, Sambo. His jet black skin, his negro
features, the blue spectacles he wore, and his in-
stinctive attitude of dignity made him the most
conspicuous in the number. They entered, wear-
ing tall white caps, in shape something like stove-
pipe hats without any rim, and with a tuft on the
summit; long white dresses of the shape you may
see in the miniatures of illuminated manuscripts
written a thousand years ago; and even their
stockings and shoes were white as their dress.
As all were ready, the Pontiff enters, and the choir
intones the antiphon, ‘‘Mandatum novum’’—‘A
new command I give you.’? Some preliminary
prayers are chanted, and the Pontiff, putting off
the cope, but retaining his mitre, is girded with
an apron, and ascends the platform. An attendant
unlaces the shoe on the right foot of the first
pilgrim, and lets down the stocking. Other attend-
ants present the ewer of water and the towels;
the pontiff, stooping down or kneeling, washes the
‘instep, dries it with a towel, and kisses it. While
the attendants raise the stocking and lace the shoe,
the holy father gives to the pilgrim a large
nosegay, which in former times contained a coin
to aid him on his journey homeward. He did the
120 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

same one by one to all of them. During this touch-
ing ceremony, the choir continued to sing anthem
after anthem; but few present did more than
listen vaguely and enjoy the sound, so preoccupied,
or rather so fascinated, all seemed to be by a
ceremony so rarely used in the church, and so fully
recalling our divine Saviour’s act and instruction
before the Last Supper. Few have ever seen it
in church, save as today here in St. Peter’s, on
Holy Thursday. It may be said to be carried out,
too, on a larger scale and in a practical way, all
these days in Rome. There is a large institution
here called La Santissima Trinita dei Pellegrini,
where, during Holy Week, thousands of poor pil-
grims, who have come on foot, and reach Rome
weary and foot-sore, are received, and supplied
with two meals a day and beds for three days and
nights. There is one department for the men,
and another for the women and children. Each
evening, after the conclusion of the services in
the churches, they return to the institution.
Cardinals, bishops, priests, and laymen in num-
bers, nobles and private individuals, are there,
and wash their feet (thoroughly) and wait on them
at the table. In the female department princesses,
duchesses, and ladies of every degree and station,
titled and untitled, are there to perform the same
offices for the women and children. All these ladies
belong to several charitable confraternities and
associations in the city; and by one of their rules
no one of them is allowed the privilege of uniting
in this work in Holy Week unless she has, during
the past year, paid at least a stated number of
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER IV 121

charitable visits to the prisons and hospitals. We
do not know whether the men have the same admir-
able rule.

After the washing of the feet in St. Peter’s, the
Pope retired, and the pilgrims followed. The
services in the church itself were over. But there
was something else, which as many as could,
wished to see. The Pope was to serve the pilgrims
at table. In the large hall mentioned above as
being situated over the vestibule of the church, and
from which the Pope went out to the loggia to give
the blessing, a long table had been prepared and
decorated. Soon the pilgrims entered and stood
at their places; and the hall was filled with thou-
sands of spectators. The Pontiff came in, attended
by three or four cardinals, his own attendants, and
a number of bishops. He said the grace, and a
monsignore read a portion of the Scriptures, and
then continued to read a book of sermons. Mean-
while, the pope was passing to and fro, from one
end of the table to another, helping each one to
soup, to fish, and to wine; and finally, giving them
his special blessing, he retired. The services had
commenced at 9 A. M.—It was now 2 P. M.

The holy oils were blessed, not in St. Peter’s,
but in St. John Lateran’s; for St. Peter’s is the
cathedral of the Pope as Pope and Bishop of the
Catholic Church. St. John’s is his cathedral as
Bishop of Rome.

On Friday morning the offices in St. Peter’s were
precisely the same as in every other cathedral,
differing only in the presence of the sovereign
pontiff and the cardinals, and the large number
\

122 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

of bishops, who attended, robed in purple cappa
magna, The ‘“improperia,’’ sung while the Pope,
the cardinals, and the bishops approached to kneel
and kiss the cross, is accounted the masterpiece of
Palestina. It is unequalled in its expression of
tenderness and of sorrowful reproach. Sung as
it was by that unrivalled choir, on this day, when
the church is desolate and stripped of all orna-
ments, and the ministers at the altar are robed in
sombre black; when burning lights and the smoke
of incense are banished from the sanctuary; when
one thing only is presented—the image of the
crucified Redeemer; one theme only fills prayers,
anthems, and hymns alike—the sorrows and death
of our Lord on Calvary—its effect seemed over-
powering. You thought not of the wondrous
charm of the voices; you heeded not the antique
melody or the skilful harmonies as word after
word, clearly and distinctly uttered, fell on your
ear; the music rendered more clear and emphatic
their sense, as it sunk into your heart. You felt
that the reproaches of the loving and forgiving
Saviour were addressed to you personally, and
you bowed in sorrowful confusion as well as in
adoration, while you saluted him in the words
of early Christian worship, Agios O Theos.
During the service, that portion of his Gospel
in which St. John narrates the history of the Pas-
sion, was chanted in the same manner as had been
the narration by St. Matthew on the preceding
Sunday. Prepared as all were, by the services of
the days past and by the sublime ‘‘Improperia’’
we had just heard, words cannot express the awe
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER IV 123

which came on them as they listened to this vivid
recitation in music of that grand drama of Good
Friday on the summit of Calvary. It is on such
occasions, and with singing like this, that one
realizes what force and truth and majesty there
is in perfect music, inspired and consecrated by
religion.

On Saturday the bishops were divided between
St. Peter’s and St. John’s. In the latter church,
besides the usual services, there were also the in-
struction of the catechumens, the baptism of con-
verts with the form for grown persons, and at
the mass, a grand ordination, at which tonsure,
all the minor orders, sub-deaconship, deaconship
and priesthood were conferred on those who had
been examined and found worthy of the grades to
which they aspired. In all, they were about sixty.

From Thursday until Saturday all the bells of
Rome had been silent. There was a visible shade
of sorrow on this city, a public grief, as it were,
for the tragedy of Calvary. But in view of the
joyous resurrection close at hand, this silence of
sorrow is soon to pass away. It was near eleven
A. M. when the high mass commenced at St.
Peter’s. At the Gloria a signal was given, and
the gigantic Bourdon and the other bells of the
basilica broke into a grand peal. The guns of St.
Angelo answered, and, quick as sound could
travel, all the thousand bells of all the steeples
and belfrys of Rome, without exception, joined in
the clamorous, yet not unpleasant or unmusical,
chorus. The rooks and ravens, and doves and
swallows flew to and fro, frightened from their
124 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

nests, half-stunned, and utterly distracted. When
the pealing chorus ended—and it lasted for a full
half-hour—Rome had put off her sadness, and
friends were exchanging the happy salutations of
Easter.

In the afternoon an Armenian bishop celebrated
high mass, according to his rite, at four P. M.
in one church, and, at the same hour, a Chaldean
prelate celebrated high mass according to his rite
in another. In the earlier centuries this mass of
the resurrection was celebrated by all after mid-
night on Saturday night. The Orientals have
brought it forward to Saturday afternoon; the
Latins have gradually advanced it to forenoon.

Sunday dawned, a bright, clear, pleasant, cloud-
less Italian Spring day. At an early hour car-
riages of every kind were pouring in long lines
over every bridge across the Tiber, and hurrying
on to St. Peter’s, and tens of thousands were mak-
ing their way thither on foot. By nine o’clock
the sanctuary is filled with bishops robed in white
copes and mitres, and with cardinals in richly-
adorned white chasubles. Soon the Swiss Guard
take their places, and the Noble Guard appear in
their richest uniform. Lines of Pontifical Zouaves
and other soldiers, keep a lane open up the middle
of the church, through the immense crowd of, it
was estimated, forty thousand persons, from the
door of the sanctuary. One tribune on the south
side of the sanctuary was filled with members of
the various royal families now in Rome, some on
a visit, some staying here permanently. On the
other side was a tribune for the diplomatic corps,
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER IV 125

which was filled with ambassadors, ministers resi-
dent and envoys, in their rich uniforms and cov-
ered with jewelled decorations.

A burst from the band of silver trumpets over
the doorway of the church told us that the Holy
Father was entering. Down the lane through the
vast crowd might be seen the cross slowly advance-
ing. Then was heard the voice of the choir of
the canons, welcoming the Pontiff to the basilica,
and then aloft, higher than the mass that filled the
church, he was seen slowly borne on in the curule
chair, robed in a rich cope of white silk, heavy
with gold embroidery and wearing the tiara.
Slowly advancing, and giving his blessing to the
multitudes on either side, he reached the chapel
of the Blessed Sacrament, descended from the
chair, and, with the cardinals accompanying him,
and his other attendants, knelt for some moments
in adoration. Then, rising, he ascended the chair
again, and the procession pursued its way through
the crowd, now more closely packed than ever, to
the sanctuary. Here the Pontiff descended again
to his robing throne at the epistle side of the
altar, The choir commences the chanting of the
psalms of terce and sext. Meanwhile the Pontiff
was robed for mass, and the cardinals, the pa-
triarchs and primates, and a certain number of
the archbishops and bishops, as representatives
of their brethren, paid him the usual homage.
This over, solemn high mass commenced in the
usual form. After incensing the altar at the In-
troit, he passed to his regular throne at the end of
the sanctuary, just opposite the altar, and fully
126 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

one hundred and twenty feet distant. There be-
side him stood a cardinal priest and two cardinal
deacons; the senator of Rome, in his official robes
and cloak of yellow and gold, with his pages of
similar costume, the conservatori of the city; and
on the steps, around the throne, stood, or were
seated some twenty assistant bishops; on either
side six lines of seats stretching down to the altar
were occupied by the cardinals and by a great
mass of prelates, Latin and Oriental, all in the
richest vestments appropriate to this, the greatest
festival of the Church.

Never was solemn high mass celebrated with
more splendor in St. Peter’s than on this Easter
Sunday. To be privileged to assist at it amply
repays many a one for all the time and all the
fatigue of a journey to Rome. The Holy Father
officiates with a fervor and intense devotion which
lights up his countenance. The venerable Cardi-
nal Patrizi, who stood by his side, was the very
personification of sacerdotal dignity. The mitred
prelates in their places, many of them gray-haired
or bald, or bent with age and labors, seemed ra-
diant with the holy joy of the occasion. The mas-
ters of ceremony and the attendants moved
gravely and reverently, as their duties called them
from one part of the sanctuary to the other. Even
the vast crowd of forty or fifty thousand that
filled the church were penetrated with reverent
awe, and sank almost into perfect stillness. Noth-
ing was heard save the noble voice of the Sov-
ereign Pontiff chanting the prayers, and the re-
sounding strains of the choir. After the subdeacon
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER IV 127

- had sung the epistle in Latin, a Greek subdeacon,
in the robes of his Greek rite, sung it in Greek; and
similarly a Greek deacon followed the Latin deacon
in chanting the Gospel. A musical antiquarian
would have found in the peculiar modulations of
their chant, traces of the ancient Eastern style of
music, going back, perhaps, in those unchanging
people to the days of Greek classic civilization.
The most impressive moment in the mass was cer-
tainly the elevation. At a signal you heard the
voice of the officers giving the command, and the
thud on the floor as companies of soldiers simul-
taneously grounded arms, and every man sank on
one knee. The Noble Guard, too, sank on one
knee, uncovered their heads and saluted with their
bright swords. The Swiss Guard stood erect and
presented arms. In the sanctuary, of course, all
were kneeling. There was a sound like the rush-
ing of a wind through a pine forest as the vast
multitude strove to sink down, too. And then
came a dead silence over all. As the Pontiff
raised aloft the sacred host, turning toward every
quarter of the church, there came, faint and soft,
and solemn at first, and gradually stronger and
more emphatic, the thrilling tones of those silver
trumpets placed over the doorway and out of
sight. Their slow, majestic melody, and their
rich accords, and the repeated and prolonged
echoes of those notes of almost supernatural
sweetness, from chapels and nave and dome, pro-
duced an effect that was marvellously impressive.
As if fascinated by them, no one moved from his
kneeling position, or even raised his head, until
128 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

the last note of the strain and its receding echoes
died away, and the choir went on to intone the
““Benedictus qui venit.’’

At the conclusion of the mass the Pope unrobed,
put on his cope and tiara again, and retired in the
same manner as he had entered. At once the vast
mass of people began to pour forth from St.
Peter’s to make their way to the front; for the
Pope would soon give his solemn benediction urbi
et orbi—to Rome and to the world. We have
already described the square before St. Peter’s
It is about fifteen hundred feet long, and averages
nearly four hundred feet in breadth. All during
the mass it had gradually been filling up, and
when now new torrents of men came pouring out
of the church, the whole place became so packed
that one standing on the lofty colonnade on the
side of the Vatican and looking down on the
square, perceived that only here and there even
small portions of the ground remained visible,
such was the closeness with which men and women
stood packed together. Especially was this true
on the vast esplanades more immediately before
the church, and the broad steps leading up to it.
Here were gathered all who wished to be as near
as possible to the Pope during the blessing, or to
get a sight from this elevation of the vast basin
of the square thoroughly packed with human be-
ings. Nor was the multitude confined to the
square alone; on the colonnades, on either hand,
stood thousands and thousands as in favored posi-
tions. Every window and balcony looking out on
the square was thronged. Every roof had its
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER IV 129

group, and away down the two streets leading up
the square from the bridge of St. Angelo the
crowd appeared equally dense. A military man
present, whose experience had qualified him to
estimate the large masses, judged that there were
present at least one hundred and twenty thousand
persons. Mingling among them, you heard every
language of Europe, many of Asia, and, it was
said, half a dozen from Africa. It was a repre-
sentation of the world which the Pontiff would
bless. From all this multitude, standing in the
bright sunlight, which a north wind rendered not
disagreeable, came up a roar, as it were, of rush-
ing waters, mingling the hum of so many voices
with the blaring of an occasional military trumpet
from the troops, and the neighing of horses.
Soon the regimental bands are heard to salute
the approach of His Holiness, invisible as yet to
the crowd. <A score of mitred prelates appear at
the large Balcony of Blessing. They look out in
wonder and admiration at the scene below, and
retire to allow another score to view it; a third
group does the same. These are the bishops who
have accompanied the Pope from the sanctuary
to the Vatican, and from the Vatican thither. Of
the others, some are down on the square with
the people, more on the colonnades, in places —
reserved for them, After the bishops the ecar-
dinals are seen to fill the balcony once or twice,
and then the Pontiff himself comes into view,
borne forward on his curule chair. He is out on
the loggia itself. Ordinarily, besides the orna-
mental drapery which we see decorating the col-
130 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

umns and architrave and tympanum, and the rail-
ing in front, there projects overhead a large awn-
ing to screen him from the sun. But today the
north wind does not allow it to stand. He is
scarcely inconvenienced by the rays of the sun as
they are reflected from his rich gold-cloth mitre,
studded with precious stones, and from the mas-
sive gold embroidery of his cope. The military
music has ceased, and there is the silence of awe
and earnest expectation. Those that are near
hear the tones of someone chanting the Confiteor
beside the Pontiff. Two bishops hold the large mis-
sal, from which he chants the prayers in a clear,
rotund and musical voice. The people are kneel-
ing, and twice is heard the response of united
thousands—Amen. The book is laid aside. The
Pontiff rises and stands erect, looks up to heaven,
and with a majestic sweeping motion, opens wide
his arms and invokes on all the blessings of
heaven. His voice is given forth in its very fullest
power, and even at the furthermost end of the
square the kneeling crowd sign themselves with
the sign of the cross as they distinctly hear the
words: ‘‘Benedictio Dei omnipotentis, Patris, et
Filu, et Spiritus Sancti, descendat super vos
et maneat semper.’’ May the blessing of the
Almighty God, the Father, the Son, and the Holy
Ghost, descend upon you and abide with you for-
ever. And then there came a swelling Amen. As
the Pontiff sank back on his chair, the kneeling
crowd arose, and there burst forth from every
portion of it a loud acclaim of vivas, of good
wishes, of acclamations, that died away only as
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER IV 131

he retired from view, and as the cannon of St.
Angelo commenced the national salute.

It was a ceremony fitted by its majesty and its
magnificence to close the grand ceremonies of the
Easter Week. Art cannot do it justice. Paint-
ing, tied down by the laws of perspective, cannot
portray what the eyes see on every side, and does
not pretend to give the words of solemn prayer, of
impressive benediction, and the outburst of accla-
mation which we heard. Words must fail to con-
vey the emotions that filled the hearts of thou-
sands that day at the sublime and moving spec-
tacle. It was a sensible testimony of the holiness,
the authority and the unity of the Church of
Christ, a testimony to which not even an unbe-
liever, if present, could remain indifferent.

It took nearly two hours for that crowd to de-
part. The cardinals, the royalty, the nobles, and
many of the bishops in carriages, made their way,
at a snail’s pace, along the streets leading to the
old Roman Atlan Bridge across the Tiber, now
known as, the Bridge of St. Angelo. Others
more in a hurry, went out by the Porta An-
gelica, so as to cross the Tiber at the Ponte Molle,
two miles north of the city, and then re-enter by
the Porta del Popolo; and others again turned
southward, following the streets along the river,
and crossing it at the suspension bridge, or at
some of the bridges lower down. And so, within
two hours, all reached their homes without a sin-
gle accident, without a single quarrel, without a
single call for the interference of the police.

But it was for many of them only to return with-
132 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

in a few hours. On Haster Sunday evening oc-
curs the grand illumination of the facade and
dome of St. Peter’s. As the shades of evening
fell on the city, silvery lights began to mark the
lofty cross, and the glow along the huge ribs of
the mighty dome, and to map out the lines of the
windows and doors, the columns, cornices and
tympanums, and the architectural ornaments and
projections, to illuminate clock faces and the
coats-of-arms above them, to sparkle along the
minor domes, and to stretch away on either side
in regular lines along each colonnade, diffusing
everywhere a gentle light, and bringing into prom-
inence, with a fairy-like witchery, all the lines of
the pile before you. There are about five thou-
sand two hundred of these lights. They are made
of broad, shallow plates of metal or earthenware,
containing a certain amount of prepared tallow
and a lighted wick, and surrounded by a cylinder
of paper, colored and figured. From this lantern,
as it may be called, the lights come diffused, sub-
dued and white; hence the Romans call this the
silver illumination, The square was filled, though
by no means as in the morning, with crowds look-
ing, wondering and admiring. At a quarter past
eight the large bell of St. Peter’s began to chime.
As the very first stroke came to our ears a tiny
blaze was seen to dart up a guiding wire to the top
of the lofty cross, and a clear, bright flame burst
forth, and glowed on the summit; downward the
tiny flame flew, lighting two others on each arm of
the cross, and then downward lighting still others
along the stem. Invisible hands caused other
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER IV 133

such little flames to flit rapidly hither and thither
like glow-moths, all along the dome, the front, and
both colonnades around the square. Wherever
they seemed to light for an instant there a bright
flame sprung into existence. In just twenty-
three seconds, and long before the clock had half
struck the hour, eight hundred of those bright yel-
low flames had almost eclipsed the first ones, and
the building stood forth in the silver illumination.
It was a sight, once seen, never to be forgotten.
Whoever first conceived the idea of this instan-
taneous change of illumination was a poet in the
truest sense of the word.

As we have already stated, the third public ses-
Sion was fixed for April 26th, Low Sunday. At
nine A. M. the cardinals, patriarchs, primates,
archbishops, bishops, mitred abbots and superiors
of religious orders were in their places. The coun-
cil hall had been restored to the original form in
which we had seen it on the day of the opening.
All the changes to fit it for the discussions of the
general congregations were removed. The Noble
Guard and the Knights of Malta were on duty as
custodians of the assembly. Cardinal Bilio cele-
brated a high mass, as had been done in each of
the previous sessions. At its termination the
Gospel was enthroned on the altar. The Holy
Father intoned the ‘‘Veni Creator Spiritus,’’ and
the choir and united assembly of prelates sang
the strophes alternately to the conclusion of that
sublime hymn. The Pontiff, chanted the opening
prayers, and all knelt when the Litany of the
Saints was intoned in the varied and well-known
134. A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

antique melodies of the Gregorian chant. At the
proper place the Pontiff chanted the special sup-
plications for a blessing on the council, and the
chanters and the assembly, and, in fact, thousands
of the audience, joined in the swelling responses.
At their conclusion the special work of this session
commenced. According to the olden time ritual of
councils, all in the hall, not belonging strictly to the
council, should at this point be sent away, and the
gates be closed, that in their voting the fathers
might be free from all outside influence, and each
might speak his mind, unswayed by fear or favor.
But if, in stormier times, when clamorous mobs
might invade a council hall, such precautions were
necessary ; here today they are certainly not neces-
sary. There is no need to close the wide portals
against these thousands who have gathered to look
with reverence and rapture on this venerable as-
sembly. Let the doors then stand open to their
widest extent, that all may see. And it was a scene
worth coming to behold, as many had done, across
oceans and mountains to look on. The pillars and
walls of the noble hall were rich with appropriate
paintings, with mosaics, and statuary, and mar-
bles. At the furthest end, on his elevated seat, sat
the venerated Pontiff, bearing on his head a
precious mitre, glittering with jewels, and wearing
a cope rich with massive golden embroidery. On
either hand sat the venerable cardinals, arrayed in
white mitres, and wearing their richest robes of
office. In front of them sat the patriarchs, mostly
Easterns, in the rich and bright-colored robes of
their respective rites, and wearing tiaras radiant
‘

VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER IV 135

with brilliants and other jewels. Down either side
of the hall ran the manifold lines of primates,
bishops, archbishops and other prelates, all in
white mitres, and in copes of red lama; all save the
oriental prelates, who wear many-colored copes
and vestments, and rich tiaras, ever catching the
eye of the spectator as they sat scattered here and
there in that crowd, and excepting also the heads |
of the religious orders, who wear each his appro-
propriate dress of white, or of black, or of brown,
or mingle these colors together. The contrast
and play of various colors in all these vestments
give a brilliancy to the whole scene, much beyond
that which the uniform white of the first two ses-
sions had yielded.

But what mattered the color of their vestments,
when one considered the venerable forms of the
bishops themselves. They sat still, and almost as
motionless as so many marble statues. Now and
then some aged prelate, with bald head and snow-
white locks, would lay aside for a few moments the
heavy mitre, that perhaps was pressing his aged
brows too heavily. All these seemed motionless.
‘Their countenances, composed and thoughtful,
told how thoroughly they, at least, were impressed _
with the importance and solemnity of their work.

In the middle stood the altar, rich and simple,
on which lay enthroned the open book of the Gos-
pels. Nearby stood the light and lofty pulpit of
dark wood.

Into this pulpit now ascended Monsignor Valen-
ziani, Bishop of Fabriano and Matelica, one of the
assistant secretaries, and in a voice remarkable
136 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

for its strength and distinctness, and not less so
for its priduramce. read with most appropriate
emphasis and with the musical intonations of a
cultivated Italian voice, the entire Dogmatic Con-
stitution, from beginning to end. It occupied just
three-quarters of an hour.

At the conclusion he asked: ‘‘Most eminent
and most reverend fathers, do you approve of the
canons and decrees contained in this constitu-
tion?’”’

He descended from the pulpit, and Monsignor
Jacobini, another assistant secretary, took his
place to call for the votes of the fathers, one by
one.

‘‘The Most Eminent Constantine Cardinal Pa-
trizi, Bishop of Porto and Santa Rufina!’’

The aged cardinal rose in his place. We heard
his answer, PLACET;—I approve. An usher
standing near him repeated, Placet; a second one
on the right-hand side repeated, Placet. And from
the ushers again we heard echoing through the
hall, Placet! Placet! Placet!

“The Most Eminent Aloysius Cardinal Amat,
Bishop of Palestrina!’’

_ The aged cardinal rose slowly, and in a feeble

voice replied, PLACET. And from the ushers
again we heard echoing through the hall, Placet!
Placet! Placet!

Thus there could be no mistake as to the vote,
and not only the notaries, but all who wished
could keep a correct tally.

Cardinal after cardinal was thus called in or-
der and voted; then the patriarchs, each one of
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER IV 137

whom, rising, declared his vote, and the ushers
repeated it loudly. Placet! Placet! Placet!

Then on through, the primates, the archbishops
and bishops, the mitred abbots, and the heads of
religious orders, admitted to the right of suffrage.
Where a vote was given the three ushers invari-
ably repeated it. Sometimes when a name is
called the answer is, dBHEST—he is absent. In
all, six hundred and sixty-seven votes were cast,
all of them in approval, not a single one of them
in the negative. Not a few of the bishops had ob-
tained leave to go to their dioceses for the Holy
Week and the Easter festivities, and had not yet
been able to return to the council. We know of
one who, after two weeks of hard work at home,
had travelled all Saturday night on the train, and
had reached Rome only at nine A. M.Sunday morn-
ing. He had at once said mass privately in the
nearest convenient chapel, and, without waiting
for even the slightest refreshment, had hurried to
St. Peter’s, that he might take his place among
his brethren and record his word ‘‘Placet.’’ The
whole form of voting occupied about two hours.
It was, in truth, a solemn and most impressive
scene. There was a pause at the end, while the
notaries counted up the votes, and declared the re-
sult. This done, the Pope spoke aloud: ‘‘The
canons and decrees contained in this constitution,
having been approved by all the fathers, without
a single dissentient, we, with the approbation of
this holy council, define them, as they have been
read, and by our apostolic authority we confirm
138 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

them.’’ It was the official sanction sealing their
force and truth.

The Pontiff paused for a moment, evidently
struggling with the emotions of his heart, and
then continued in an impromptu address in Latin,
which we caught as follows:

‘‘Most reverend brethren, you see how good and
sweet it is to walk together in agreement in the
House of the Lord. Walk thus ever; and as our
Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ on this day said to
His apostles, PEACH, I, His unworthy vicar, say
unto you in His name, PEACE. Peace, as you
know, casteth out fear. Peace, as you know, closes
our ears to words of evil. May that peace accom-
pany you all the days of your life. May it console
you and give you strength in death. May it be to
you everlasting joy in heaven.’’

The bishops were moved, many of them to tears,
by the dignity and the paternal affection with
which the simple words came from his heart. He
was himself deeply moved.

Other prayers were chanted. The pontifical
blessing was given, and the Pope intoned the Te
Deum. The choir, the bishops and the thousands
of priests and laity in the church, who had looked
on this solemn act of the Church just executed,
joined in with their whole heart and soul, and
swelled the grand Ambrosian melody, making it
roll throughout the church, and calling echoes
from every chapel and arch, from nave and tran-
sept and dome. And with this concordant song
of gratitude to God, the third session of the Vati-
can Council was appropriately closed.
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER IV 189

The Pontiff departed, accompanied by some of
the cardinals, by the senator and conservatori of
Rome, the masters-at-arms of the council, and the
attendants of the pontifical household. Soon the
prelates and cardinals moved slowly from the vast
council hall into the church, unrobed in a chapel
set apart for the purpose, and wended their way
homeward, and the third public session of the
council was over.

Since Low Sunday the general congregations
have resumed their sittings, and the committees on
matters of faith and on matters of discipline have
been busily engaged. Matters from the latter
committee have already been rediscussed, and
some preliminary votes have been taken. It is
understood that ere long the committee on mat-
ters of faith will report back to the general con-
gregation another schema on the Church, in the
course of which the infallibility of the Pope, of
which so much has been written and said, will at
last come formally before the council. Should
this be the case, we may be sure the whole subject
will be examined with the care and research which
its importance requires, and which the dignity and
learning of the fathers demand. The result will
be that decision to which the Holy Spirit of truth
will guide them.

Rome, May 8, 1870.
THE FIRST
CECUMENICAL COUNCIL
OF THE VATICAN
CHAPTER V
THE FIRST (2CUMENICAL COUNCIL OF THE
VATICAN, CHAPTER V.

HE preamble and first four chapters of the

dogmatic constitution de Fide Catholica

having been irrevocably disposed of in the
public session held on Low Sunday, are now before
your readers and the world.

The withdrawal of the veil of secrecy from this
portion of the schema has removed from the eyes
of many, the scales of doubt and misgiving, blinded
as they were by the repeated statements of cer-
tain newspaper correspondents; and as future
decrees come to light, they will equally confound
the pretensions of the false prophets, and amply
repay the patient hope of the faithful.

The Vatican Council took a fresh start on the
following Friday, April 29th. In the general con-
gregation of that day, the fathers passed from
faith to discipline, and began to discuss the
reformed schema on the Little Catechism.

After the mass, which was said by the Arch-
bishop of Corfu, the council was addressed by
Mgr. Wierzchleyski, Archbishop of Leopoli, in
Galician Poland, who spoke in the name of the
deputation of discipline, of which he is a distin-
guished member.

140
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER V 141

Speeches were afterward made by the Cardinal
Archbishop of Bordeaux, Cardinal Rauscher of
Vienna, and by the Bishops of Guastalla, Saluzzo,
and St. Augustine, Florida.

The next morning, Saturday, the 30th, the dis-
cussion was resumed. The Archbishop of Avig-
non, and the Bishops of Lucon and Parma made
some remarks on the general features of the
schema. The prelates were followed by the dis-
tinguished Bishop Von Ketteler of Mayence, the
Bishops of Plymouth and of Clifton in England,
and the Bishops of Treves in Germany, all of
whom confined themselves to some particular
points of the document. The last speaker was
the Bishop of Seckau in Germany, a member of
the deputation.

As the rules of the council authorize the mem-
bers of the deputation to reply to the observations
of the fathers at any stage of the discussion, the
committee avail themselves of that privilege by
making the final speech, which in ecclesiastical
convocations, as well as in civil meetings, is gen-
erally the most telling one.

At the conclusion of the remarks by the Bishop
of Seckau, the president declared that the debate
on the Little Catechism was closed, and that the
vote would be taken on the following Wednesday,
on all the amendments proposed. In the congre-
gation of Wednesday, May 4th, the Bishop of
Tyre and Sidon celebrated mass in the peculiar
and impressive form of the Maronite rite. The
president asked the prayers of the fathers for the
venerable Bishop of Evreux in France, who died
142 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

in his seventieth year, and survived only two days -
after returning home from the council.

Permission was granted to nine foreign bishops
to return to their sees. Among them were the
Bishops of Arichat and Charlottetown, in British
America. The regular business commenced with
a second speech by the Bishop of Seckau, who
reviewed all the amendments proposed in the pre-
ceding congregation. The final vote was then
taken on the Little Catechism as a whole. Each
bishop voted viva voce, The term placet was
used by the prelates who gave unqualified appro-
bation to it; placet juzta modum by those who
had some modification to propose, while assent-
ing to its general features; and nonplacet by those
who dissented from the measure. The total num-
ber of votes given was 591.

The Little Catechism, which has received no

small share of public attention, now ‘‘lies over’’
till the final seal of approbation is stamped upon
it at the next public session.
- The general congregations were resumed on
the 13th. After the usual religious exercises,
leave of absence without the obligation of return-
ing was granted to the following prelates:

The Bishop of Gezira, Mesopotamia, Syriac
rite; the Bishop of Ferns, Ireland; the Bishop of
Goulburn, Australia; the Bishop of Puno, Peru;
the Bishop of Santiago, Chili; the Archbishop of
Marasee, Cilicia, Armenian rite; and the Bishop
of Mardin, Chaldea, Armenian rite.

The oral discussion then commenced on the great
and fundamental question de Romani Pontificis
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER V 143

Primatu et Infallibilitate, which is comprised in
a preamble and four chapters, and which forms
the first part of the Ggemate constitution de Ec-
clesia Christi.

These four chapters ad already passed through
several manipulations before being submitted to
oral discussion. First, the text had béen dis-
tributed to the fathers, who in due course of time
transmitted their observations upon it to the depu-
tation de fide. These observations were then
maturely examined by the members of the deputa-
tion, and a printed report of their views on them
was sent to the residence of each bishop.

The Bishop of Poitiers, in the name of the
deputation, opened the discussion with a lucid
exposition and vindication of the substance and
form of the text. With this lengthy and learned
speech closed the congregation of the 13th of May.

Next day, the debate was resumed. The Vener-

able Constantine Patrizi, Cardinal Vicar of Rome,
and, with the exception of Cardinal Mattei, the
oldest member of the Sacred College, commenced
the discussion. He was followed by the Arch-
bishop of San Francisco, United States; the
Archbishop of Catania, Italy; the Archbishop of
- Messina, Sicily; the Bishop of Dijon, France; the
Bishop of Vesprim, Hungary; the Bishop of
Zamora, Spain, and the Bishop of Patti, kingdom
of Naples.

On Tuesday, the 17th, Archbishop Dechamps,
Primate of Belgium, addressed the fathers in the
name of the deputation. Speeches were also
delivered by the Bishops of St. Brieux, France;
144 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

Santo Gallo, Switzerland, and of Rottenburg,
Wurtemberg. The president announced the death
of the Bishop of Olinda, in Brazil, and recom-
mended him to the prayers of the council.

Wednesday, the 18th. The Archbishop of Sar-
agossa opened the discussion, representing the
deputation. The other speakers in the congrega-
tion were all cardinals namely Cardinal
Schwarzenberg, Archbishop of Prague, Bohemia;
Cardinal Donnet, of Bordeaux, and Cardinal
Rauscher, of Vienna.

Thursday, the 19th. Cardinal Cullen of Dublin
was the first speaker, and was succeeded by the
Cardinal Archbishop of Valladolid, Spain, and by
the Greek-Melchite Patriarch of Antioch.

Friday, the 20th. The Primate of Hungary
had the advantage of the opening speech. The
venerable Dr. McHale came next. ‘‘The Lion
of the fold of Juda,’’ as he is called, looks as hale
as a man of forty-five, though he is a bishop
since 1825, The Archbishops of Corfu and Paris
occupied the pulpit during the remainder of the
session.

Saturday, the 21st. Archbishop Leahy, of
Cashel, reviewed some of the preceding speeches
as a delegate of the deputation and was followed
by the Bishops of Strasburg, Forli, and Castella-
mare, Italy.

Intense and unwavering interest was manifested
in each of the foregoing congregations, both on
account of the grave character of the subjects
under deliberation, and the eminent prelates that
took part in the discussion. I wish that, together
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER V 145

with the names, I were permitted to give also the
living words which fell from the lips of these
learned and eloquent prelates. They would prove
to you that the Christian oratory of the fourth and
fifth centuries is re-echoed in the nineteenth, and
that it is confined to no nation, but extends over
the length and breadth of the Catholic world.

The longest speech yet pronounced in the coun-
cil was delivered by the Cardinal Archbishop of
Dublin, who spoke for an hour and forty-two
minutes. Its length was the more remarkable, as
Cardinal Cullen trusted to his memory, and
illustrated his discourse by an abundance of facts
and figures.

It is well known that all the bishops not only
have the same faith, but speak the same language
in council; and, with the exception of the orientals,
and members of religious orders, they wear the
same episcopal garb. Yet is it worthy of remark
that, in spite of this uniformity in dress and
language and outward mien, scarcely has a prelate
opened his mouth from the pulpit when his
nationality is at once discovered. He utters his
shibboleth, which reveals him to his brethren as
soon as Ephraim was betrayed to Galaad.

You will hear a bishop whisper to his neighbor,
“‘That speaker belongs to the Spanish family of
nations.’’ He hails either from the mother country
or from one of her ancient colonies of South
America, or Mexico, or Cuba. How does he know?
He forms his judgment not merely from the little
green tuft you see on the crown of the speaker’s
birettum or cap, but chiefly from his pronunciation.
146 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

He will detect the Spaniard at once by his guttural
sound of qui, and his lisping placet, besides many
other peculiarities of utterance.

The Spaniards and their South American and
Mexican cousins, though models of episcopal
gravity, have not acquired the reputation in the
council of generally being the best models of
elocution. Their delivery is said to be sometimes
indistinct, and their pronunciation so peculiar
that, like the rose in the wilderness, they waste
the odor of their wisdom on the desert air. Gems
of thought fall, indeed, in profusion from their
lips, but they escape occasionally in the too vapid
current of words.

There are several bishops of Spanish origin,
however, who have distinguished themselves alike
by distinctness of utterance and by a remarkable
fluency. Among others, I might mention the
Bishop of Havana, the Bishop of Guamango, in
Peru, and S. Concezione, in Chili.

The next speaker is evidently an Italian. You
know it from the musical sentences, -which flow
from his lips in such a smooth and measured strain
that he almost appears to be reciting a select piece
of Virgilian poetry. He might seem, were not his
classical style so natural to him, to be aiming at
making a good impression not only on your mind
and heart, but also on your ear. Whenever the
letter c is followed by e or 1, he gives it the soft
sound of ch, as in our English world cheerful; and
he is careful to soften down every word which
would sound harsh or grating. Sometimes, indeed,
a prelate will adopt for the nonce the Roman style
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER V 147

of pronunciation; but nobody is deceived. Jacob’s
voice is recognized, though he tries to clothe his
words in the form of his brother’s.

It is almost impossible for an Italian bishop to
make a speech without a formal introduction and
peroration, either because of his respect for his
hearers or for the great classical masters. He
may protest he will be brief, but that word has a
relative meaning. But it must be admitted that,
for delicacy and refinement of thought, for
fecundity of ideas, and clearness of exposition,
some of the Italians have seldom been surpassed.

The prelate now before you, as you can tell at
once, belongs to the Teutonic family. He is an
Austrian, or Prussian, or Bavarian, or perhaps a
Hungarian. The German pronounces g hard
before e or i, contrary to the usual practice of
Latin speakers. He makes sch soft before the
same vowels, pronouncing, for instance, the word
schema as if it were spelled without a c. Hence
the gravity of the English-speaking bishops is
occasionally relaxed, on hearing schematis sound
as if it were written shame it is.

The German is more tame in delivery than either
the Italian or the Spaniard. His colder climate
tends to subdue his gestures, as well as to mod-
erate his sensibility. He is not so fond of dealing
in compliments as the Italian speakers, but goes
at once in medias res. He is generally short and
precise, and more inclined to appeal to your head
than to your heart. At the same time, religious
and logical, the sublime superstructure of his faith
is built upon the solid foundation of common sense.
148 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

If a French prelate were not known by his rabat,
he would be easily distinguished by his utterance
of Latin. He has a strong tendency to shorten
the infinitive in the second conjugation, and to
lay a particular stress on the last syllable. There
is indeed no bishop in the council who is so readily
recognized by his voice as the Frenchman. Every
one can say to him what the Jews said to St.
Peter: ‘‘Surely thou art one of them, for thy
speech doth discover thee.’’ But, like Peter, he
has no reason to be ashamed of the discovery;
for his speech is not less pleasant than peculiar.
He is no exception to the cultivated taste of his
countrymen. He is generally well understood,
for he speaks distinctly, and is listened to with
pleasure, because to solid learning he unites an
animated and a nervous style.

For obvious reasons, a continental writer would
be the fittest person to pronounce a correct judg-
ment on the style and latinity of the English-
speaking prelates of the council.

I will venture, however, an observation. Though
the style of the American, English, and Irish
prelates may have less claim to merit for polish
and studied classical Latinity, their discourses
will certainly compare favorably with those of
their episcopal brethren from other parts of the
globe, in strength of argument, in clearness of
expression, as well as in their telling effect upon
their discriminating audience.

The bishops of these countries adopt what is
called the parliamentary style. They are usually
concise, and always practical. They are in earnest.
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER V 149

They look and talk like men fresh from the battle-
field of the world, who have formidable enemies
to contend with, and come before the council well
stocked with experimental knowledge. They con-
tent themselves with a brief statement of the
measure they propose, and a summary of the rea-
sons best calculated to support it, without occupy-
ing the council with elaborate disquisitions.

The number of the English, Irish, and American
bishops up to the present, who have delivered oral
discourses before the Vatican Council is compara-
tively small. It must not, however, be inferred
from this that the other prelates of these nations
have all remained inactive spectators, for many
of them have handed in written observations on
the subjects under deliberation.

The following are the English-speaking fathers
who, up to the present date (June 2d), have
addressed the council:

Archbishops Spalding, Kenrick, and Purcell,
and Bishops Whelan and Verot, United States;
Archbishop Connolly, Nova Scotia; Archbishop
Manning, and Bishops Ullathorne, Vaughan, Clif-
ford, and Errington, England; Cardinal Cullen,
and Bishops Leahy, McEvilly, and Keane, Ireland.

None of the Scotch or Australian bishops have
as yet spoken.

Comparisons have been drawn between the
Council of the Vatican and the United States Con-
gress. Perhaps it woild be easier to point out
the lines of divergence than those of resemblance
‘between these two deliberative bodies.

As to the relative ages of the members of the
150 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

Council and the members of Congress, the former
are decidedly in advance of the latter. I have
taken the pains to refer to the Annuario Pontificio
for 1870, which gives the age of nearly all the
bishops of the Catholic world. From this book I
learn that the oldest bishop in the council is in
his eighty-fifth year, while the youngest bishop,
the Vicar Apostolic of North Carolina, is thirty-
five. The Archbishop of Lima, who was prevented
by infirmities from coming to Rome, is the dean
of the entire episcopacy, being now in his ninety-
sixth year. Thus we see that both extremes of
age meet on the American continent; North Amer-
ica having the youngest, and South America the
oldest representative of the episcopal hierachy. |

Of the thousand bishops now in the church, fully
three-fourths are between the ages of fifty-five
and ninety-six. The ages of the other fourth range
between thirty-five and fifty-five. Scarcely half
a dozen of these prelates are more advanced in
years than the Holy Father, who yet exhibits
more physical endurance and mental activity than
any bishop ten years his junior.

So much for a comparison as to age. Next as
to the speeches in both assemblies. The bishops
embrace a wider field in their discourses than our
congressmen. They are circumscribed by no limits
of country. They make laws which bind the con-
sciences of over two hundred millions of souls—
Europeans, Americans, Australians, Asiatics, and
Africans; while Congress legislates for scarcely
one-fifth of that number, and these confined
within a portion of a single continent. Hence, in
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER V 151

this single aspect of the case, the great ecclesias-
tical synod as far excels the Federal Congress of
the United States as Congress itself surpasses the
New York Legislature, or this latter, the city
council.

The speeches of the Vatican Council are usually
much shorter than those delivered in Congress.
The addresses of the fathers seldom exceed half
an hour,* except those of the members of the
deputations, whose remarks generally embrace a
critical analysis of the questions before the council
and a review of the amendments proposed by the
bishops, usually occupying about the space of an
hour. The reason for this brevity is obvious. No
prelate would wish to be guilty of the bad taste of
occupying unnecessarily the precious time of his
_ brother bishops. He is fully convinced, on ascend-
ing the pulpit, that every word he says will be
carefully weighed in the balance by a discriminat-
ing body of judges, who are influenced only by
sound logic, and not by plausible rhetoric.

Besides their brevity, I might perhaps also add
that the speeches of the fathers are characterized
by more personal independence, sincerity, and
earnestness of tone, than those of some of our
legislators in Washington, while it must be ad-
mitted that public opinion commonly attributes to
the episcopal character a high order of virtue. Yet,
apart from this consideration, we may find a rea-

*The speeches on the Primacy and Infallibility of the
Roman Pontiff have exceeded in length those delivered on
the preceding subjects, their average duration having been
forty-three minutes up to the present date, June 2nd.
152 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

son for this difference in the fact that our national
representatives have more temptations to sin
against singleness of purpose than the prelates of
the council. Besides the members on the floor of
the House and Senate, there are often well-filled
galleries ready to hiss or applaud according to
the prejudices of the day, and we know how human
nature dreads the finger of scorn and loves the
popular plaudits. There is a political party which
must be sustained per fas et nefas, and though
last, not least, there are dear constituents to be
conciliated.

The fathers of the council have no such tempta-
tions to withdraw them from the strict line of
duty which conscience dictates. All their general
congregations are so many secret sessions. There
are no frowning or fawning galleries to allure or
to intimidate. There is no party lash hanging
over the bishops’ heads; for they have no private
measures to propose in behalf of their ‘‘con-
stituents.’’ Indeed, one of the rules of the council
requires that every bill brought before it must
necessarily affect the general interests of the
church, and not the special wants of any particular
diocese or country.

The consoling unanimity which marked the pub-
lic session held on Low Sunday, seems to have
put an effectual quietus on the erratic correspond-
ent of the London Times, for he no longer, like
another Cassandra, utters his prophetic warnings
to the council, since the fathers, on the occasion
alluded to, by a single breath demolished all his
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER V 153

previous predictions about the threatened rupture
of the assemblage.

Directed, no doubt, to view every thing in Rome
with distorted vision, this writer literally fulfilled
his instructions. If he met bishops walking to St.
Peter’s, he would despise them as a contemptible
set. Should they prefer to ride, they were, in his
estimation, pampered prelates crushing poor
pedestrians under their Juggernaut. Should a
schema be approved by the bishops after a brief
discussion, they were pronounced by our seer, a
packed jury, the obsequious slaves of the Pope.
If the discussion happened to be prolonged, he
would solemnly announce to his readers the exist-
ence of an incipient schism among the fathers.
The truth is, the gentleman could never ascend
high enough to comprehend the true character of
the bishops. He could not associate in his mind
independence of thought and the fullest freedom
of debate with a profound reverence for the Holy.
Father.

Upon every question, from the beginning of the
council, there has been prolonged and animated
discussion. A council necessarily supposes dis-
cussion ever since that of Jerusalem. Deprive an
cecumenical synod of the privilege of debate, and
you strip it at once of its true character and the
bishops of their manhood. No stone was left
unturned that the whole truth might be brought to
light.

But if there has been ‘‘in dubtis libertas,’’ there
has been also ‘‘in necessariis unitas.’’ There is
no Colenso in the Council of the Vatican. With
154 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

regard to doctrines of the Catholic faith already
promulgated, there has not been a whisper of dis-
sent. A bishop might as well attempt to pull
down the immortal dome of Michel-Angelo sus-
pended over his head, as touch with profane hands
a single stone of the glorious edifice of Catholic
faith.

There has been also ‘‘in omnibus caritas.’’
Never was more dignity manifest in any delib-
erative assembly. A single glance at the council
in session, from one of the side galleries, would
at once impress the beholder not only with the
majesty of the spectacle, but also with the mutual
respect which the members exhibit toward each
other, and the patient attention with which the
speakers are listened to, often under a trying
ordeal of several hours’ continous session. As
for violent scenes, there have been none, except
in the imagination of some correspondents; nor
bantering, nor personalities; nor collisions be-
tween the presidents and speakers. Since the
commencement of the discussion of the present
schema, upward of sixty fathers have already
spoken, only one of whom was called to order—
and he at the end of his discourse, because, in the
judgment of the president, he had broached a sub-
ject foreign to the debate. In a word, there is
learning without ostentation; difference of senti-
ment without animosity; respect without severity;
liberty of discussion without the license of vituper-
ation.

May 23d, the congregations were resumed. The
Opening speech was delivered by the Armenian
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER V 155

Patriarch, The Bishops of Mayence, Angouleme,
and Grenoble occupied the attention of the fathers
during the remainder of the session.

On the following day, permanent leave of
absence was granted to eight prelates, among
whom were two Canadians, namely, the Bishop of
St. Hyacinthe, and the coadjutor of Dr. Cooke,
Bishop of Three Rivers, lately deceased. The
council was then addressed by the Bishop of Sion,
Switzerland, one of the deputation, and by the
Bishops of Urgel, Spain, S. Concezione, Chili, and
Guastalla, Italy.

In the congregation of the 25th, England and
Ireland had the whole field to themselves, the only
speakers being Archbishop Manning and Bishops
Clifford and McEvilly. Dr. Manning’s reputation
as an English speaker is established wherever the
English language prevails. His Latin oration in
the council, which was not much shorter than that
of His Eminence of Dublin, exhibited the same
energy of thought and the same discriminating
choice of words which are so striking a feature of
his publie discourses. Dr. Manning has a com-
manding figure. His fleshless face is the personi-
fication of asceticism. His sunken eyes pierce
you as well as his words. He has a high well-
developed forehead, which appears still more
prominent on account of partial baldness. His
favorite, almost his only gesture, is the darting of
his forefinger in a sloping direction from his body,
which might seem awkward in others, but in
him is quite natural, and gives a peculiar force to
his expressions. His countenance, even in the
156 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

heat of an argument, remains almost as unimpas-
gioned as a statue. He knows admirably well how
to employ to the best advantage his voice, as well
as his words. When he wishes to gain a strong
point, he rallies his choicest battalion of words, to
each of which he assigns the most effective posi-
tion; while his voice, swelling with the occasion,
imparts to them an energy and a power difficult to
resist.

The next congregation, the sixtieth from the
opening of the council, was held on the 28th, the
speakers being the Bishops of Ratisbonne, St.
Augustine, Csanad and Gran Varadin in Hungary,
and Coutance in France. At the close, the presi-
dent announced that the fathers henceforth would
meet at half-past eight A. M. instead of nine.

The fathers assembled again on the 30th. The
Archbishop of Baltimore delivered the opening
speech, which lasted about fifty minutes. He
spoke without the aid of manuscript, confiding in.
his faithful and tenacious memory. He was suc-
ceeded by the Bishop of Le Puy in France, Basel
in Switzerland, Sutri and Saluzzo, Italy, Constan-
tina, Algiers, and the Vicar Apostolic of Quilon,
on the Coast of Malabar.

The following day, indefinite leave of absence
was granted to Bishops Demers of Vancouver, and
Hennessy of Dubuque, and the newly consecrated
Bishop of Alton was permitted to remain at home.
The Archbishop of Utrecht commenced the debate,
being the first of the bishops of Holland that has
addressed the council; the other speakers were
the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, the Bishop of
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER V 157

Trajanopolis, the Archbishop of Cincinnati, who
spoke without notes, and the Archbishop of Hali-
fax. The death of the saintly Apostolic Arch-
bishop Odin, of New Orleans, was announced. The
venerable prelate finished his course among his
kindred near Lyons, on the auspicious festival of
the Ascension.

The sixty-third general congregation was held
on the 2nd of June. The speakers were the Arch-
bishop of Fogaras, Transylvania, Roumenian rite,
and the Bishops of Moulins, Bosnia, Chartres and
Tanes.

At the close of the session, the death of the Rt.
Rev. Thomas Grant, Bishop of Southwark, Eng-
land, was announced. Dr. Grant was born of
English parents in Ligny, in the diocese of Arras,
France, November 25th, 1816, and was promoted
to the episcopal dignity June 22nd, 1851. He was .
much esteemed by his English brethren in the
episcopacy for his profound learning and solid
judgment, as well as for his amiable disposition.
He was one of the deputation on oriental rites.

Thus far, fourteen general congregations have
been held on the four first chapters of the Dog-
matic Constitution of the Church of Christ. Sixty-
one fathers have already spoken on the general
aspects of the question, leaving forty-nine prelates
who have declared their intention to speak on the
same subject. As soon as the draught of the
schema in general has been sufficiently discussed,
the debate will commence on each particular
chapter.

As our readers would like no doubt, to form a
158 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

more intimate acquaintance with the venerable
bishops now assembled in council, especially with
those who play a more conspicuous part in its
deliberations, I propose in the present number
to give a brief sketch of a few of the twenty-four
fathers who constitute the committee on faith.

It is quite unnecessary to our present purpose
to speak of the two American prelates belonging
to this deputation, namely, the Archbishops of.
‘Baltimore and San Francisco, who are well known
in the United States, and whose learning, zeal,
and piety are not only gratefully acknowledged at
home, but fully appreciated here, as the merited
honors conferred upon them testify.

I will commence with Aloysius, Cardinal
Bilio, president of the deputation on faith, and
one of the five presiding officers of the council.
He was born May 25th, 1826, at Alexandria, the
celebrated fortified town of Piedmont, which of
late years has played so important a part in the
history of northern Italy. His father was of a
noble family. At the early age of fourteen, the
youth, already remarkable for great piety and a
maturity of character beyond his years, asked to
be admitted into the congregation of St. Paul,
founded by the venerable Antonio Zaccaria. He
was received as a student and postulant, and
devoted himself to study with an earnestness
which soon broke down his health, apparently
never very strong. He was obliged to suspend
his studies for several years. In fact, for a time
it was. thought his health never would rally. At
last, however, he did recover, and at once returned
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER V 159

to the purpose from which his mind and heart had
never wandered. Having finished his course and
received ordination, he was made in turn professor
of Greek, of rhetoric, and of mental philosophy in
the college of Parma, and afterward in the
university of the same city.

It is the custom of the religious orders and con-
gregations which devote themselves either entirely
or in great part to teaching, first by a long and
thorough course of study to prepare carefully
their younger members for future labors in the
professorial chair, and then in their early years
of teaching, to appoint them from one chair to
another, through the whole cycle, perhaps. So
Father Bilio was sent from Parma to Caravaggio,
and then to Naples, ocecupying various chairs, and
finally was made professor of theology and canon
law in the Barnabite College of Rome. His pro-
fessorships were for the world outside his con-
gregation. Within it his brethren recognized his
high personal qualifications, and elected him to
- various offices in their congregation, until at length
he was made assistant-general.

Rome could not fail to appreciate qualities and
talents like those of this learned and exemplary,
religious and able man. He was pressed into serv-
ice in many of the departments for transacting
religious affairs, and finally, June 23rd, 1866, he
was named cardinal. He presided over one of the
sub-commissions of theologians, who studied out
and prepared the draughts for the council, and he
is chairman of the special committee or deputation
160 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

of twenty-four prelates to treat of all matters
relating to faith.

With the single exception of Cardinal Bona-
parte, Cardinal Bilio is the youngest member of
the Sacred College.

France, the eldest daughter of the Church, is
represented in the deputation by Bishop Pie, of
Poitiers, and Archbishop Regnier, of Cambrai.

Louis Francis Desire Edward Pie was born at
Pontgouin, in the Diocese of Chartres, the 26th of
September, 1815. Ordained priest in 1839, he ex-
ercised at first the functions of curate of the Cath-
edral Church of Chartres; and in 1845 the bishop

-of that diocese appointed him vicar-general, not-
withstanding his comparative youth.

From that period the young priest was ranked
among the most distinguished preachers of
France, and was heard with great success in dif-
ferent cities of that country. His panegyric of
Joan of Arc, which he preached at Orleans, is one
of his best discourses.

Named Bishop of Poitiers under the presidency,
he took possession of his see in December, 1849.
He was then only in his thirty-fourth year, an un-
usually early age for conferring the mitre in
Europe.

Bishop Pie directed his eloquence and zeal on
various occasions against two sorts of adversar-
ies—those who sap the foundations of faith itself
by reducing everything to naturalism, both in re-
ligion and society, and those who attempt to
weaken Catholicity by the ruin of the temporal
power. Against the former the Bishop issued
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER V 161

three Synodal Instructions on the Principal
Errors of the Present Time. Against the latter
he wrote, three years before the last Italian revo-
lution, his Synodal Instruction on Rome Consid-
ered as the See of the Papacy, in which he ably
refuted the sophistries of those who sought the
demolition of the temporal power.

Those best acquainted with the Bishop of Poi-
tiers say that his pulpit oratory is characterized
by an authority, brilliancy and force of argument
worthy of St. Hilary, whose successor he is.

In personal appearance Bishop Pie is prepos-
sessing. His round, full face, without a wrinkle,
and his auburn hair, make him seem much younger
than he really is. Though stout, and even in-
clined to corpulency, he is quick and active in his
movements.

He speaks with admiration of the late Bishop
of Boston, with whom he studied at St. Sulpice,
Paris. The Sulpician fathers have been accus-
tomed to select as catechists in the parochial
church some of their ablest and most promising
students. To both seminarians a class was as-
signed, and the Bishop of Poitiers says that his
American friend, afterward Bishop Fitzpatrick,
always excelled in his position.

Emmanuel Garcia Gil, Archbishop of Sara-
gossa, in Spain, was born in St. Salvador March
14th, 1802.

Having completed his literary studies in his
native land, he passed through his philosophical
and theological course in the diocesan Seminary
of De Lugo. In 1825 he entered the Order of St.
162 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

Dominic, in which he made his religious profes-
sion November 1, 1826.

He was ordained the following year, and imme-
diately after the responsible position of professor
of philosophy and theology in the convents of the,
order at De Lugo and Compostello was assigned
to him.

Expelled in 1835 from Spain, with all the mem-
bers of his order, he soon returned to his post at
De Lugo, where for thirteen years he filled the
chair of philosophy and divinity in the seminary
of which he was successively director and vice-
rector.

Having subsequently devoted himself to the
more active pursuits of the ministry, he labored
with great success in preaching the Word of God,
and in the administration of the sacraments.

Appointed to the See of Badajoz in December,
1853, he was consecrated in the city of De Lugo
by the Archbishop of Compostello; and five years
later, at the request of the Spanish government,
he was transferred to the Archiepiscopal See of
Saragossa.

Among his fellow-members of the Committee
on Faith Mgr. Garcia Gil has the merited reputa-
tion of being profoundly conversant with the writ-
ings of his great master, the ‘‘Angel of the
Schools,’’ and hence he is called among them the
St. Thomas of the deputation.

Another prominent member of the committee
is Mgr. Hassoun, Patriarch of Cilicia for the Ar-
menians. He was born in Constantinople June 13,
1809, of Armenian parents. He passed through
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER V 163

his elementary course in his native city, and com-
pleted his studies in Rome, where, in 1832, he ob-
tained the degree of doctor of divinity. A few
months later, having been ordained priest, and
named apostolic missionary, he was sent to
Smyrna, where he devoted himself to the Armen-
ian christians of that city. Removed thence to
Constantinople, Father Hassoun exercised the
ministry in several churches, and filled the office
of chancellor in the archiepiscopal palace. Chosen
by the primate as vicar-general and visitor of the
diocese and province, the young Armenian priest
was unanimously elected by the assembly of hig
nation, civil prefect of the Armenian Church, in
which office he was confirmed by the Ottoman
Porte.

In 1842 he was appointed coadjutor to the pri-
mate of Constantinople, with the right of succes-
sion; and on the death of the latter, in 1846, he
was chosen to fill the vacant see.

On the 16th of September, 1866, the Armenian
archbishops and bishops assembled in council pro-
claimed Mgr. Hassoun Patriarch of Cilicia, with
the title of Anthony Peter IX. The Holy Sce con-
firmed the nomination, and decided that in future
the patriarchal see of Cilicia and the arch-prima-
tial see of Constantinople, which hitherto were
separate and independent, should form one patri-
archate, under the title of Patriarchate of Cilicia,
with residence at Constantinople.

By his exertions the episcopal hierarchy was re-
established in 1850 in the ecclesiastical province
_ of Constantinople, and a special see for the Ar-
164 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

menians erected in Persia. He has succeeded in

‘building in the Turkish capitol, and endowing a
seminary to serve for the whole ecclesiastical
province. In 1843 Mgr. Hassoun founded the
first female convent in the same capitol; and we
may well imagine the degree of pious audacity
that was required to plant this colony of virgins
in the midst of the Sultan’s seraglios. This in-
stitution is devoted to the education of young
girls, and to the instruction of women abandoning
schism. The convent has sixty nuns, who educate
three hundred poor girls, besides some resident
scholars.

The patriarch, by an imperial firman, is charged
with all the civil and ecclesiastical affairs of the
Armenians, who are subjects of the Ottoman em-
pire. He gratefully acknowledges the kind dis-
position always manifested towards him by the
government of the Sublime Porte, which has ex-
tended to him every facility for carrying out the
works of his ministry.

Victor Augustus Isidore Dechamps, one of the
most prominent members of the deputation de
fide, was born at Melle, Eastern Flanders, in the
chateau of Scailmont, December 16th, 1810. His
early education was intrusted to private tutors,
under the eyes of his father, who was a laureate
of the ancient University of Louvain. He after-
ward completed his studies of humanity and phil-
osophy with his brother, Adolph, who was succes-
sively Belgian minister of foreign affairs and
minister of state.

In the national movement, from which sprung
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER V 165

the independence of Belgium, the two brothers,
though yet young, distinguished themselves as
publicists during this glorious epoch of patriot-
ism.

In 1832 M. Dechamps entered the Seminary of
Tournai, studied afterward in the Catholic Uni-
versity of Mechlin, and concluded his theological
course at Louvain, where he was ordained priest
December, 1834, by Cardinal Sterckx.

Having soon after joined the Redemptorist con-
gregation, Father Dechamps made his novitiate
in 1835. Five years later his career as a preacher
began, and in this capacity he greatly distin-
guished himself.

After the death of Queen Louise of Belgium, in
obedience to the express desire of that pious prin-
cess, he was charged with the religious instruc-
tion of the royal princes, and of the Princess Char-
lotte. Rev. Father Dechamps was named Bishop
of Namur September, 1865. Two years later he
_was transferred to the archdiocese of Mechlin, in
which Brussels is included; and since the opening
of the council he has been elevated by the Holy
See to the primacy of Belgium.

Monsignor Dechamps has written several val-
uable works, the most important of which are:
The Free Examination of the Truth of Faith; The
Divinity of Jesus Christ; The Religious Question
Resolved by Facts; or Certainty in Matters of
Religion, Pious IX and Contemporary Errors;
The New Eve; or, Mother of Life, all of which
have been translated into most of the languages
of Europe.
166 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

The style of Archbishop Dechamps is calm, con-
cise and profound, blending with an attractive
unction. His round and pleasing countenance
bears upon it the stamp of intellect and energy.
Like so many of his gifted countrymen, the prel-
ate of Mechlin unites in his person the mental
activity of the Frenchman with the solidity of the
German.

John Baptist Simor, Archbishop of Strigonium
and Primate of Hungary, was born August 24th,
1813, in the ancient Hungarian city of Fehervar,
which is memorable in history as being the
place where the kings of Hungary were formerly
crowned and buried.

He pursued his philosophical course in the
archiepiscopal lyceum of Magy-Szombatm, and
his course of theology in the University of Vienna,
which honored him with the title of doctor of
sacred theology. After the successful comple-
tion of his studies, he was ordained priest of the
archdiocese of Strigonium in 1836.

Appointed, first, assistant pastor of a church in
Pesth, Father Simor soon after received a pro-
fessor’s chair in the university of that city, and
subsequently filled several responsible positions,
both in the government of souls and in instruct-
ing the more advanced candidates for the min-
istry in a higher course of theology.

On the 29th of June, 1857, he was consecrated
Bishop of Gyor, and ten years later, on the demise
of Cardinal Scilovszky, Bishop Simor was chosen
to succeed that eminent prelate as Prince-Primate
of Hungary and Archbishop of Strigonium.
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER V 167

Besides his ecclesiastical eminence, the Primate
of Hungary has had distinguished state honors
conferred on him. He is the first member of the
king’s privy council. By established law the cere-
mony of crowning the king devolves exclusively on
the primate; otherwise the coronation is not con-
sidered legitimate. The Bishop of Veszprim
crowns the queen. The present Emperor, Fran-
cis Joseph of Austria, received the crown of the
kingdom of Hungary from the hands of Arch-
bishop Simor, on the vigil of Pentecost, 1867, in
the presence of an immense assembly of people
from all parts of the kingdom. The primate is
moreover ex-officio chief secretary and chancellor
of the sovereign of Hungary. He is also first
magistrate of the county, or Department of Stri-
gonium. Hungary contains fifty-two of these de-
partments, each presided over by a chief magis-
trate.

He has also a seat in the General Assembly, or
Parliament, of Hungary, a privilege which is en-
joyed in common with him by every Catholic
Bishop of the kingdom. Many other preroga-
tives were inherent in the primatial dignity till
they were swept away by the revolution of 1848.

Monsignor Simor informed me that the faithful
of his diocese number a million of souls, com-
prising three distinct nationalities, Hungarians,
Slavs and Germans, who speak as many distinct
languages,

The primate is consequently obliged, in the vis-
itation of his diocese, to employ these three
tongues. In corresponding with his clergy,
168 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

whether Hungarian, Slavonic or German, he in-
variably uses Latin, of which he is a perfect mas-
ter, and which, till a recent date, was the common
language of the greater part of Hungary.

Rome, June 2, 1870,
THE FIRST
CECUMENICAL COUNCIL
OF THE VATICAN
CHAPTER VI
THE FIRST G(:CUMENICAL COUNCIL OF THE
VATICAN, CHAPTER VI.

HE proceedings of the Vatican Council have

reached a stage that allows us to witness

again its external splendor and imposing
presence. Grand and most august as it certainly
is, still everything that strikes the eye fades away
as one thinks of its sublime office, of its important,
unlimited influence and effect.

The question that for more than a year has
agitated all circles of society; that for the past
three months has been a subject of exciting debate
among the fathers of the council, could not have
been of greater weight. It is one of those truths
essential to the existence of the Church, and had
it not been practically acknowledged among the
faithful throughout the world, Christianity, unless
otherwise sustained by its Author, would have
been an impossibility. The vital point examined
was the essence of the union of the Church, to
determine dogmatically in what it consists, who or
what is the person or body that can so hold and
teach the faith as to leave no doubt of any kind
whatsoever regarding its absolute divine certainty.

Up to the present day the infallibility of an
ecumenical council, or of the whole Church dis-

169
170 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

persed throughout the world, has been recognized
as the ultimate rule by all who lay claim to ortho-
doxy; but with that council, or with that Church
dispersed throughout the world, as a requisite—
sine qua non—was the communion and consent of
the Sovereign Pontiff. Where he was with the
bishops there was the faith; no matter how many
bishops might meet together and decree, if Peter
was not with them, there was no certainty of be-
lief, no infallible guidance. Nay, their decrees
were received only in so far as approved by him.
Ubi Petrus, ibi ecclesia, was the formula recog-
nized by tradition. In a word, where Peter was,
there was to be found infallible teaching; where
Peter was not, there neither was the teaching in-
fallible. None in the Church ever thought of
gainsaying this. But there came a time when
writers went so far as to say that the Pope could
be judged by the other body of teachers, the
bishops; and this followed naturally from a mis-
trust in the unfailing orthodoxy of the Sovereign
Pontiff. The greater phases of this movement
are well known. The Council of Constance had
hardly closed when the Council of Basel put in
practice the principles broached by its predeces-
sor, and deposed the reigning head of the Church,

putting in his stead Amadeus of Savoy, with the .

title of Felix V. In the midst of this confusion
Eugenius IV held the Council of Florence, in
which the remarkable decree was published that
declared the Pope the Vicar of Christ, the ruler of
the flock, and the doctor of the universal Church.
Those of the French clergy who clung with ten-
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER VI 171

acity to the principles of Basel refused to receive
this decree, under pretence of the unoecumenical
character of the Council of Florence. The Jan-
senists availed themselves of the advantage this
pretext gave them. Although eighty-five French
bishops wrote in the year 1652 to Innocent X, ac-
cording, they say, to the custom of the Church, in
order to obtain the condemnation of these heretics,
the latter still held their ground, and were able to
accuse the French Assembly of 1682 of inconsist-
ency, in attempting to force on them a decision of
the Pope, whom the assembly itself declared falli-
ble. The celebrated Arnold taught that the re-
fusal of its approbation to a papal decision on the
part of one individual church was enough to make
the truth of such a decision doubtful.

We shall try to give some idea of the import-
ance of the question of papal infallibility by a
parallel development of two opposite teachings in
a rapid sketch.

The cardinal principle of Gallicanism is the de-
nial of the inerrancy of the Sovereign Pontiff in
his solemn ruling in matters of faith and morals
when teaching the whole Church. Anyone who
attentively looks at the question must see the close
connection of the primacy with the claim of un-
erring certainty in teaching. The domain of the
Church is in faith, in spirituals; temporals being
secondary, and the subject of legislation only in
so far as necessarily bound up with the former.
The only reason why a teacher can lay claim to
obedience is because he teaches the truth, and this
is especially the case where faith and conscience
172 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

are concerned. If the Sovereign Pontiff have not
this faculty of teaching the truth without danger
of error, then he cannot demand implicit submis-
sion. The Church dispersed throughout the world,
being infallible, cannot be taught by one who is
capable of falling into error. The ordinances,
therefore, and decrees of the Pontiff, being inti-
mately connected with faith, and issued on ac-
count of it, must follow the nature of the submis-
sion to his teaching. But, as this latter, in the
Gallican view, is not obligatory unless recognized
as just by the whole Church, so neither are the
ordinances and decrees to be looked on as binding
except under a like reservation. It follows from
this, clearly and logically, that the supremacy of
the Pope can be called supreme only by an abuse
of terms; consequently, first, the texts of canon
law and of the fathers that teach a perfect su-
premacy are erroneous or false, and have no foun-
dation in tradition, which is the truth always,
everywhere and by everyone held in the same
way; second, the texts of Scripture that refer to
Peter are to be restricted to him personally, or,
when seeming to regard his successors, are to be
interpreted in a sense not favorable to the idea of
a perfect supremacy. The Pope thus becomes
amenable to the Church; he is the divinely consti-
tuted center, nothing more; the official representa-
tive of the bishops of the whole church dispersed
throughout the world, which alone is the ultimate
eriterion of truth. He can, therefore, be judged
by the bishops, be corrected by them, deposed by
them, and his asserted right to reserve powers to
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER VI 173

himself to the prejudice of ordinaries, or to legis-
late for dioceses other than his own, is to be set
aside, <A species of radicalism is thus introduced
into the Church. Even the bishops themselves
are not to be looked on as infallible judges of the
faith of their flocks, and the faithful themselves, or
the people, become the ultimate judges of what is
to be held as of faith. Instead of being taught,
they teach; instead of being a locus theologicus,
they become the ecclesia docens; and the teachers
and rulers become the ruled and taught. As the
people themselves are liable to be swayed by the
influence and teaching of artful men, we have in
consequence a weak and uncertain rule to go by;
weak because of the moral impossibility of know-
ing the sense of the whole Church, for even the
members of an cecumenical council might not
exactly represent the faith of their individual
churches; uncertain because of the facility with
which in past time the people of many individual
churches have been led astray.

‘As we write it seems as if we heard some indig-
nant protest against what we have just said. We
reply that we do not refer to individual opinions;
many Gallicans refused to go the length of their
ptinciples, a sense of danger alarmed their piety
and put them on their guard. For our part, we
treat of the principles themselves, and deem per-
fectly consequent what we have asserted. It
would be an easy matter to illustrate it with facts
of the present as of the past; but it would be be-
yond our scope just now.

Any student of history will have no difficulty
174 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

in recalling the manner in which defections from
the Church have been brought about, and the
errors of those who once seemed columns of the
temple. The inadequacy of the Gallican rule is
still further shown by its practical inconvenience,
It is fortunate that in the early Church it had no
place whatsoever. Peter, being then recognized as
the head and teacher of the Church, all contro-
versies were referred to him, and by him they
were settled. Petrus per os Leonis, per os Aga-
thonis locutus est; so spoke the fathers of Chalce-
don and of the Sixth Council. Suppose for a
moment it had been otherwise; suppose, when the
Pelagian heresy arose, it had been necessary to
hear the voice of the whole Church scattered over
the earth—this being the rule—the whole Church,
not any one part, was to give the doctrine from
which it was not lawful to depart. Zosimus was
but one bishop; so, too, was Innocent I; Augus-
tin was only one learned man, and Prosper of
Aquitaine, a Christian poet and polished scholar,
but only one other father after all. Those who
wrote with them bore witness each for his own
particular church. What had become of the
Church of Scythia, of Lybia, of Ethiopia, of
Arabia? Who had penetrated into the Indies,
or set sail for the islands of the sea, or reached
the far-off coasts of the Sinenses? Who was to
explain with accuracy to those distant Chris-
tians the cunning dealing of Celestius and Pela-
gius, that had deceived the vigilance of the
Eastern fathers, and lay bare the hypocritical
professions that had misled even Zosimus? Who
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER VI 175

was to bring back the opinion or belief of these
isolated churches without danger of misunder-
standing or misinterpretation? Those were not
days when communication was easy. Weeks and
months amid all kinds of dangers and uncertainty
were required to reach even those places that lay
near the shores of the Mediterranean. It was
physically impossible to ascertain with unerring
sureness the belief or condemnation of those far-
off Christians; and as long as their assent was not
given there was no adequate rule of faith. Con-
sequently, there was no prompt or efficacious
means of correcting error; the means at hand were
of uncertain worth, therefore not sufficient to use
against heresy, that could always appeal to the
universal church dispersed throughout the world,
and when condemned by those near, fly to the
probable protection of those at a distance, without
the least possibility of ever knowing the belief of
those to whom they appealed.

In the meanwhile, heresy crept into the flock,
established itself there; for there was none to
cast it forth; and the fold became tainted. Thus
from age to age Christianity would have been a
mass of error, the truth being obscured or suffo-
cated by the weight of falsity from the want of a
prompt, practical means by which heresy could
be detected and crushed at its birth. Happily no
such state of things existed; the chair of Peter
was the abode of truth; it was set up against error,
and the quick ear and intuitive eye of Christ’s
Vicar heard and saw the evil, and met it at the
outset, .
176 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

The doctrine which teaches the opposite of what
we have been describing, and which is now of faith,
clears up all difficulties, and comes to us in all the
beauty and consistency that adorns truth. Jesus
Christ has made Peter and his successors the
foundation of the church. He has given to him,
and to each of those who succeeded him, of his
own firmness, and strengthened his faith that it
fail not, that he may confirm his brethren. In
this office of confirming his brethren, Peter holds
the place of Christ, and acts in His name. The
gift he possesses, however, is not one of inspira-
tion; but he is assisted and kept from erring in
his judgment of what is contained in the revela-
tion made by Christ toman. To arrive at a knowl-
edge of what that revelation is, he seeks in his
own church, and according to the need, in the
churches everywhere that he may know their tra-
ditions. The judgment he makes is infallible, and
in promulgating it he lays down the tenets of faith
for the whole church. Hence he becomes the
immovable rock upon which the faithful are
builded, he is the centre around which they revolve,
the orb from which they receive the light of faith.
Hence he has subject to him the minds of all, and
the character of his primacy becomes more clear
and fully evident. It is no longer a mere point of
visible communion, but an active power placed by
God to rule, with unfailing guidance in faith, and
with a consequent spiritual intuitiveness, that
makes him discern what is for the good of the
church at large throughout the world. Hence all
are bound to obey him in what regards the faith
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER VI 177

and teachings of Christ; whosoever is against him,
is against his Master.

Hence, too, by a direct consequence, there can be
no power set up against his; all the bishops of
the church depend on him, receive their jurisdic-
tion from him, and can exercise it only at his word.
What a sublime picture of unity, of order, and
of strength! As an army in array, the church
advances to do battle against the foes of Christ,
never more successful, never more glorious, than
when her children, recognizing their dependence,
and harkening to her voice, with one mind and
with one heart follow the leadership of Peter. No
wonder this spectacle struck the unbelieving mind
with astonishment, or made the gifted writer of
England burst forth into the glowing description
so familiar to all!

The difference of opinion that existed among
the bishops on the subject of the infallibility, is
known throughout the four quarters of the globe.
What was the cause of it? If anyone imagines
that all who joined in opposing a definition from
the outset were actuated by the same motives, he
would certainly be wide of the mark. While the
main point of the controversy was held by the
ultramontanes without exception, and there was
but the one question as to the formula to be used,
the opposition, as they were generally called, taken
all together, had no fixed principle of accord, save
an agreement to disagree with the defining the
doctrine as of faith. To analyze the constituent
parts of this body we shall class them according
to ideas.
178 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

The first class comprised those who, believing
the doctrine themselves, or at least, favoring it
speculatively, did not think it capable of definition,
not deeming the tradition of the church clear
enough on this point.

A second class, the most numerous, regarded the
definition as possible, but practically fraught with
peril to the church, as impeding conversions, as
exasperating to governments. For the sake of
peace, and for the good of souls, they would not
see it proclaimed as of faith.

All of these dissident prelates, we are bound to
say, acted with conscientious conviction of the
justice of the cause they defended. They were
bound in conscience to declare their opinions, and
to make them prevail by all lawful influence. If
on one side or the other of this most important
and vital question, any went beyond the limits
of moderation, or used means not dictated by
prudence or charity, it is nothing more than might
have been expected in so large a number of per-
sons, of such varied character and education.
Instead of being shocked at the little occurrences
of this nature, we should rather be struck with
admiration at the self-restraint and affability
which were shown, despite the intensity of feeling
and strength of conviction. In a word, that the
Council of the Vatican did not break up many
months ago in disorder and irreconcilable enmity,
is because it was God’s work, and not man’s; it
was because charity ruled in it, in spite of defects,
and not the passions that govern the political
debates of men. The earnest desire all had of a
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER VI 179

mutual good understanding was evinced on occa-
sion of the speech of a well-known cardinal which,
though not approved by all, gave evidence of a
sincere desire for conciliation and agreement. The
effect was remarkable; a thrill of pleasure went
through the assembly, for the moment each one
seemed to breathe freely, and to hail his words as
harbingers of peace in the midst of excitement and
anxiety.

It was shortly after this incident that the
closure of the general discussion on the four chap-
ters of the present constitution took place. The
regulations provide for this contingency, making it
lawful for ten prelates to petition for the closing
of a discussion, the proposal being then put to the
vote of all the fathers, and the majority deciding.
In this case, a desire not to interfere with remarks
which bishops, for conscientious reasons, proposed
to make, kept this regulation in abeyance, and it
was only after fifty-five speeches had been listened
to, that one hundred and fifty bishops sent in a
petition for closing, believing there would be ample
time and opportunity for everyone to speak and
present amendments when the schema would be
examined in detail. An overwhelming majority
voted the closure. It seems difficult to understand
how this could be found fault with. Had there
been no further chance to speak, there would have
been reason undoubtedly to claim hearing, or com-
plain of not being heard. But, as has been seen
since, there have been discussions on each part of
the schema; and on the last chapter, regarding the
doctrine of infallibility, one hundred and nine
180 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

names were inscribed for speaking, of which num-
ber sixty-five spoke, the remainder by mutual con-
sent abstaining from speaking; thus of their own
accord putting a stop to a discussion in which it
was morally impossible to say anything new. It
seems surely to be a strange assertion to say there
has been any real infringement of the liberty of
speech in the council, when there appears to have
been so much of it that the members themselves
grew weary of it.

While we are on this subject, we wish to speak
a little more fully, as the freedom of the council
has been publicly impugned in two works, pub-
lished in Paris, against which the presidents and
the fathers have thought proper formally to pro-
test.

The grounds of the accusation are chiefly three:

1st. The appointment of the congregation, the
members of which were named by the Sovereign
Pontiff, and who received or rejected the postulata,
or propositions, to be presented to the council for
discussion.

2nd. The dogmatic deputation having been com-
posed of those in favor of the definition, and the
members having been put on it by management;
moreover, this deputation exercised a controlling
influence in the council.

3rd. The interruption of those who were giving
expression to their opinions, in the exercise of
their right to speak.

First, with regard to the congregation. In the
early numbers of The Catholic World for the cur-
rent year, an account of the composition of this
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER VI 181

body is given, as well as the reasons forits appoint-
ment. It may be seen that, although possessed
of sovereign powers over the church, defined as
belonging to him, by the Council of Florence
among others, there was no disposition to exercise
coercion on the part of the Pope, who, in con-
trolling the action of the council in this way, was
only making use of a right the whole church
acknowledged. Moreover, the composition of this
body was itself a guarantee of justice and zeal for
the general welfare. That there were not named
for it those who were known to be hostile to what
has just been declared of faith, was nothing more
than natural. Moreover, when these high ecclesi-
astics had admitted postulata, their work was
over; the propositions passed into the control of
the fathers, and were decided by vote.

The answer to the second objection is easier
even. This deputation was elected by the fathers
themselves; and as the large majority favored the
teachings of Rome, they elected none who was
opposed to them. As for the accusation of man-
agement, we must say that persons who understood
well the tendencies of the prominent men of all
parties, naturally, as happens in all such large
bodies, directed the choice of candidates, and the
final vote of the fathers settled the matter. It is
hard to see how the rights of any were violated.
This deputation, from the merit of those that com-
posed it, could not be without great weight in the
council; and when we consider that it was the
choice of the large majority, and was in harmony
with the views of the majority, it is not wonderful
182 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

that it controlled to a great extent the votes of
those composing the council.

The third objection is one that must be treated
with great delicacy, for two reasons—because of
the impossibility of knowing all the circumstances,
and because those who are accused are in a posi-
tion that prevents them from justifying them-
selves. The presidents were named to act for the
Sovereign Pontiff, to preserve due order, to see
that the discussion was limited to the matter in
hand, and to prevent anything that might tend to
disturb good order, or diminish respect for the
authority and person of him they represented. If,
in the discharge of their duty, they displeased
those they addressed, this was to have been
expected; if also they in any way did not observe
the due mean, so hard to reach in everything
human, one should excuse, if needful, the defect,
when especially the great merits, the distinguished
services, the known virtue, and high position of
these cardinals are taken into consideration.

We have mentioned the fact of the closure of
the discussion on the fourth chapter by mutual
consent of those whose names were inscribed to
speak, This was immediately followed by vot-
ing. The first three chapters were soon gotten
over; the fourth is the one that contains the doc-
trine on the infallibility, and it met with more
opposition.

On Saturday, July 11th, was held the general
congregation, in which the details of this portion
of the schema were up for approval or rejection.
On this occasion the voting was by rising simply,
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER VI 188

and against the definition there were forty-seven
votes.

On the 13th sitepiilice general congregation was
called to vote, according to the regulations, on the
whole schema, by name, with placet, or placet
juata modum, or non placet. The register, it ap-
pears, stands as follows: Four hundred and
fifty-one placets, 62 placets juxta modum, and ee
non placets,

Some of these placets juxta modum recom-
mended the insertion of words that would make
the decree clearer and stronger. The schema was
accordingly altered, and the amendments were
retained in the general congregation held Satur-
day, July 16th.

On Sunday morning wag distributed a momitum,
by which the fathers were notified that the fourth
public session would be held on Monday, July
18th, at nine o’clock.

The 18th of July will henceforth be a memora-
ble day in the history of the Church. At nine
o’clock precisely His Eminence Cardinal Barili
began a low mass, without chant. At the end
of it the small throne for the gospels was
placed on the altar, and upon it the copy of the
sacred Scriptures. In a few moments the Sov-
ereign Pontiff entered, preceded by the senate and
by the officers of his court, and, after kneeling a
few moments at the prie-dieu, went to his throne
in the apsis of the aula. The customary prayers
were recited by him; the Litany of the saints was
chanted, and the ‘‘Veni Creator Spiritus’’ in-
toned, the people present taking part; after which
184 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS.

a Bishop ascended the pulpit and read the schema
to be voted on, and finished with asking the fathers
whether it pleased them. Monsignor Jacobini
next, from the pulpit, called the name of each
prelate assisting at the council. Five hundred
and thirty-four answered placet, two replied non
placet, and one hundred and six were absent, some
because sick, the far greater number not wishing
to vote favorably.

As soon as the result was made known officially.
to Pius IX, who awaited it in silence, but with
calmness, he arose, and in a clear, distinct and
firm voice announced the fact of all, with the ex-
ception of two, having given a favorable vote,
wherefore he continued, by virtue of our apostolic
authority, with the approval of the Sacred Council,
we define, confirm and approve the decrees and
canons just read. Immediately there arose mur-
murs of approbation inside and outside the hall,
and, increasing, it swelled into bursts of congratu-
lation, and a Viva Pio Nono Papa infallibile.
We shall not say anything regarding the pro-
priety of such proceedings in a church; but there
are times when feeling is so powerful as to
break through all ideas of conventionality. As
soon as all were quiet, with unfaltering voice and
excellent intonation the Pope began the Te Deum.
It was taken up alternately by the Sistine choir
and those present. At the Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanc-
tus, the people took up the part of the Sistine
choir, and kept it to the end, alternating with the
bishops, and with a volume of sound that com-
pletely drowned the delicate notes of the papal
VATICAN COUNCIL, CHAPTER VI 185

singers and which, if not as musical as their chant,
was far more impressive. The session ended with
the apostolic benediction from the Holy Father,
accompanied by an indulgence for all assisting, in
accordance with the custom of the Church. Thus
passed one of the most momentous and remarkable
occasions the world has ever witnessed, a day
henceforth memorable in the annals of the Church
and of mankind, the results of which the human
mind is scarce capable of grasping.
THE KNIGHTS OF LABOR
THE KNIGHTS OF LABOR.

PREFATORY NOTE,

FEW words of explanation will be necessary

that the reader may understand the causes

which led up to my presenting the following
document to the Sacred Congregation of the
Propaganda.

Ever since the Reformation the democratic and
co-operative institutions of medieval Europe have
been upon their death-bed. In the year 1500 most
Englishmen, for instance, owned their own homes,
but by 1600 between two-thirds and three-fourths
only were still in possession of their own lands.
By 1700 one-half still had the economic buttress
of a home behind them; but by the year 1900 less
than one-tenth of the population possessed all the
land of the country.

And what is true of real property is true also
of the means of production. Trade and business
in the middle ages were conducted on the prin-
ciples of mutual help and assistance, and unlim-
ited competition was never thought of. But with
the breaking down of the corporate feeling of
united Christendom, methods of business were
introduced which would have seemed deeply
immoral 100 years before.

186
KNIGHTS OF LABOR 18%,

The discovery of the new world with its abound-
ing riches and consequent opportunities for
exploitation was another factor which greatly
increased the evil. But what brought these
economic evils to a head was the invention of
machinery in the last half of the eighteenth and
the first half of the nineteenth century.

Those who live in these days cannot conceive
the state of society in the seventies and the
eighties. The money of the country was not only
concentrated into the hands of a very few people,
but by means of this money this small oligarchy
was put in the position of getting complete control
of our free institutions. The mass of people dis-
possessed of land and of the means of pro-
duction, and retaining only a figment of politi-
cal power, were by no means satisfied with this
arrangement. All the more so as large numbers
of the working people, that is to say the dispos-
sessed, were members of the Catholiu Church, and
among Roman Catholics there is and must always
be a memory of a better tradition which preserved
to every man as much individual liberty as was
compatible with the rights of his fellow men.

Accordingly numerous societies for the protec-
tion of the working man rose during the adminis-
tration of President Cleveland—societies to which
working people began to adhere more and more
steadfastly as their only protection from economic
slavery, but which were vehemently attacked
upon the other side as destructive, revolutionary
and even anarchic; and indeed the oppression of
the wealthy was driving the poor into excesses of
188 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

which the anarchist riots of Chicago were but one
example.

These societies could not long escape the wise
oversight of the Church, and it was a foregone
conclusion that in a few years the principle of
such organizations of working people must either
be approved or condemned. On the one hand
great numbers of Ecclesiastics were alarmed at
the revolutionary principles which undoubtedly
disgraced some members of the trade unions; the
more so as many of them were at least nominally
secret societies. So great was this alarm in
Canada that the Canadian Bishops obtained from
the Holy See a condemnation of the Knights of
Labor for Canada. But if many Bishops were
alarmed at what they considered the revolution-
ary tendencies of these associations, many other
Bishops, including Cardinal Manning and myself,
were equally alarmed at the prospect of the
Church being presented before our age as the
friend of the powerful rich and the enemy of the
helpless poor; for not only would such an alliance,
or even apparent alliance, have done the Church
untold harm, but it would have been the boule-
versement of our whole history. Moreover, to
us it seemed that such a thing could never take
place. The one body in the world which had been
the protector of the poor and the weak for nearly
1800 years, could not possibly desert these same
classes in their hour of need.

It was under such circumstances that I con-
sulted with Mr. Cleveland, President of the United
States, and Mr. Pouderly, who was President of
KNIGHTS OF LABOR 189

the Knights of Labor, and at a meeting of the
Archbishops of the country I asked Mr. Pouderly
to tell their Graces exactly what the obligation of
secrecy consisted in. This he very kindly con-
sented to do, and he showed us plainly on that
occasion, first, that secrecy was only enjoined
upon the members by a simple pledge, and not by
an oath; secondly, that this secrecy was only
approved by the society of the Knights of Labor
in so far as it was necessary to protect their busi-
ness from enemies; thirdly, that there was nothing
in the obligation of secrecy which would prevent
any individual manifasting his conscience in the
tribunal of Penance privately, or which would
prevent the heads of the order from giving the
necessary assurances and manifesting everything
_ to competent ecclesiastical authority even outside
of confession.

Only two out of the twelve Archbishops were
for condemnation; the rest agreed with me that
we must do all in our power to prevent any such
condemnation of the Knights of Labor in our own
country, as would drive them into the camp of
revolution.

Accordingly when I sailed for Europe in 1887
to receive the Cardinal’s Hat it was part of my
mission to present the plea of organized labor,
which I did by presenting the following document
to the Cardinal Prefect of Propaganda. I cannot
say that the task which I had imposed upon my-
self was an easy one, but I am thankful to say that
it proved not an impossible one, and that the
190 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

Knights of Labor in the United States were not
condemned.

It was a great consolation to me when a few
years afterward the late Pontiff, Leo XIII annun-
ciated the principles which underlie the Church’s
moral teaching with regard to economies, in his
famous Encyclical ‘‘Reruwm Novarum.’’ *

‘“To His Eminence Cardinal Simeoni, Prefect of
the Sacred Congregation of the Propaganda:
‘“‘Your Eminence—In submitting to the Holy
See the conclusions which, after several months
of attentive observation and reflection, seem to
me to sum up the truth concerning the association
of the Knights of Labor, I feel profoundly con-
vinced of the vast importance of the consequences
attaching to this question, which is but a link in
the great chain of the social problems of our day,
and especially of our country.

“In treating this question I have been very
careful to follow as my constant guide the spirit
of the encyclical letters, in which our Holy Father
Leo XIIT has so admirably set forth the dangers
of our times and their remedies, as well as the
principles by which we are to recognize associa-
tions condemned by the Holy See. Such was also
the guide of the Third Plenary Council of Balti-
more in its teachings concerning the principles to
be followed and the dangers to be shunned by the

*In preparing this Memorial, I gratefully acknowledge

the valuable aid of the venerable Archbishop Ireland, of St.
Paul, and of Rt. Rev. Bishop Keane, who were then in Rome.
KNIGHTS OF LABOR 191

faithful either in the choice or in the establish-
ment of those various forms of association toward
which the spirit of our popular institutions so
strongly impels them. And, considering the evil
consequences that might result from a mistake
in the treatment of organizations which often
count their members by thousands and hundreds
of thousands, the council wisely ordained (n. 225)
that, when an association is spread over several
dioceses, not even the bishop of one of these dio-
ceses shall condemn it, but shall refer the case to
a standing committee consisting of all the arch-
bishops of the United States; and even these are
not authorized to condemn, unless their sentence
be unanimous; and in case they fail to agree unan-
imously, then only the supreme tribunal of the
Holy See can impose a condemnation: all this in
order to avoid error and confusion of discipline.

‘“‘This committee of archbishops held a meeting
towards the end of last October, at which the asso-
ciation of the Knights of Labor was specially
considered. ‘Tio this we were not impelled by the
request of any of our bishops, for none of them
had asked it; and I must add that among all the
bishops we know of but two or three who desire
the condemnation. But our reason was the im-
portance attached to the question by the Holy See
itself, and this led us to examine it with all pos-
sible care. After our deliberations, the result of
which has already been communicated to the
Sacred Congregation of the Propaganda, only two
out of the twelve archbishops voted for condemna-
tion, and their reasons were powerless to convince
192 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

the others of either the justice or the prudence of
such condemnation.

“In the following considerations I wish to state
in detail the reasons which determined the vote
of the great majority of the committee—reasons
whose truth and force seem to me all the more
evident after this lapse of time; nor will I fail to
do justice to the arguments advanced on the other
side:

“1. In the first place, though there may be
found in the constitution, laws and official declar-
ations of the Knights of Labor things that we
would not approve, still we have failed to find in
them those elements so clearly pointed out by the
Holy See which would class them among con-
demned associations:

“‘(a) In their form of initiation there is no
oath.

“*(b) The obligation to secrecy by which they
keep the knowledge of their business from ene-
mies or strangers is not such ag to hinder Cath-
olics from manifesting everything to competent
ecclesiastical authority, even outside of confes-
sion. This has been positively declared to us by
their chief officers.

‘*(c) They make no promise of blind obe-
dience. The object and laws of the association
are distinctly declared, and the obligation of
obedience does not go beyond them.

‘*(d) They not only profess no hostility against
religion or the Church, but their declarations are
quite to the contrary. The third Plenary Council
commands (n. 254) that condemnation shall not
KNIGHTS OF LABOR 193

be passed on any association without the previous
hearing of its officers or representatives. Now,
their president, when sending me a copy of their
constitution, declared that he is a devoted Cath-
olic; that he practises his religion faithfully, and
receives the sacraments regularly; that he belongs
to no Masonic society or other association con-
demned by the Church; that he knows nothing in
the organization of the Knights of Labor contrary
to the laws of the Church; that, with filial submis-
sion, he begs the pastors of the Church to examine
their constitution and laws, and to point out any-
thing they may find objectionable, promising to
see to its correction. Assuredly, there is in all
this no hostility to the authority of the Church,
but, on the contrary, a disposition in every way
praiseworthy. After their convention, held last
year in Richmond, he and several of the principal
members, devout Catholics, made similar declara-
tions concerning the action of that convention, the
documents of which we expect to receive shortly.

‘*(e) Nor do we find in this organization any
hostility to the authority and laws of our country.
Not only does nothing of the kind appear in their,
constitution and laws, but the heads of our civil
government treat with respect the cause which
such associations represent. The President of
the United States told me personally, a few weeks
ago, that he then had under consideration a pro-
posed law for the amelioration of certain social
grievances, and that he had had a long conversa-
tion on these topics with Mr. Powderly, the Presi-
dent of the Knights of Labor. The Congress of
194 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

the United States, in compliance with the views
presented by President Cleveland in his annual
message, is at present engaged in framing meas-
ures for the improvement of the condition of the
laboring classes, in whose complaints they ac-
knowledge that there is a great deal of truth. And
our political parties, far from considering them
the enemies of the country, vie with each other in
championing the evident rights of the workmen,
who seek not to resist or overthrow the laws, but
only to obtain just legislation by constitutional
and legitimate means.

“These considerations, which show that in
these associations those elements are not to be
found which the Holy See has condemned, lead us
to study, in the second place, the evils which the
association contends against, and the nature of
the conflict.

“2. That there exist among us, as in all other
countries of the world, grave and threatening
social evils, public injustices which call for strong
resistance and legal remedy, is a fact which no one
dares to deny—a fact already acknowledged by
the Congress and the President of the United
States. Without entering into the sad details of
these evils, whose full discussion is not necessary,
I will only mention that monopolies, on the part
of both individuals and of corporations, have
everywhere called forth not only the complaints
of our working classes, but also the opposition of
our public men and legislators; that the efforts of
monopolists, not always without success, to con-
trol legislation to their own profit, cause serious
KNIGHTS OF LABOR 195

apprehensions among the disinterested friends of
liberty; that the heartless avarice which, through
greed of gain, pitilessly grinds not only the men,
but even the women and children in various em-
ployments, make it clear to all who love human-
ity and justice that it is not only the right of the
laboring classes to protect themselves, but the
duty of the whole people to aid them in finding a
remedy against the dangers with which both
civilization and social order are menaced by avar
ice, oppression and corruption.

‘Tt would be vain to dispute either the exist-
ence of the evils, or the right of legitimate resist-
ance, or the necessity of a remedy. At most a
doubt might be raised about the legitimacy of the
form of resistance, and of the remedy employed
by the Knights of Labor. This, then, is the next
point to be examined.

‘*3, It can hardly be doubted that, for the
attainment of any public end, association—the
organization of all interested—is the most effica-
cious means—a means altogether natural and just.
This is so evident, and besides so comformable to
the genius of our country, of our essentially popu-
lar social conditions, that it is unnecessary to insist
upon it. It is almost the only means to invite
public attention, to give force to the most legiti-
mate resistance, to add weight to the most just
demands.

‘‘Now, there already exists an organization
which presents innumerable attractions and
advantages, but with which our Catholic working-
men, filially obedient to the Holy See, refuse to
196 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

unite themselves; this is the Masonic Order, which
exists everywhere in our country, and which, as
Mr. Powderly has expressly pointed out to us,
unites employers and employed in a brotherhood
very advantageous to the latter, but which num-
bers in its ranks hardly a single Catholic. Nobly
renouncing advantages which the Church and con-
science forbid, our workingmen join associations
in no way in conflict with religion, seeking noth-
ing but mutual protection and help, and the legiti-
mate assertion of their rights. Must they here
also find themselves threatened with condemna-
tion, hindered from their only means of self-
defense?

‘*4. Let us now consider the objections made
against this sort of organization.

“‘(a) - It is objected that in such organizations.
Catholics are mixed with Protestants, to the peril
of their faith. Naturally, yes; they are mixed
with Protestants at their work; for, in a mixed
people like ours the separation of religious creeds
in civil affairs is an impossibility. But to suppose
that the faith of our Catholics suffers thereby is
not to know the Catholic working men of America,
who are not like the working men of so many
Kuropean countries—misguided children, es-
tranged from their Mother, the Church, and re-
garding her with suspicion and dread—but intelli-
gent, well-instructed and devoted Catholics, ready
to give their blood, if necessary, as they continu-
ally give their hard-earned means, for her support
and protection. And, in fact, it is not here a
question of Catholics mixed with Protestants, but
KNIGHTS OF LABOR 197

rather that Protestants are admitted to share in
the advantages of an association, many of whose
members and officers are Catholics; and, in a coun-
try like ours, their exclusion would be simply
impossible.

‘*(b) But it is asked, instead of such an organ-
ization, could there not be confraternities, in
which the working men would be united under the
direction of the clergy and the influence of relig-
ion? J answer frankly that I do not consider this
either possible or necessary in our country. I
sincerely admire the efforts of this sort which are
made in countries where the working people are
led astray by the enemies of religion, but, thanks
be to God, that is not our condition. We find that
in our country the presence and direct influence
of the clergy would not be advisable where our
citizens, without distinction of religious belief,
come together in regard to their industrial inter-
ests alone. Short of that we have abundant means
for making our working people faithful Catholics,
and simple good sense advises us not to go to
extremes.

‘*(c) Again, it is objected that, in such organi-
zations, Catholics are exposed to the evil influ-
ences of the most dangerous associates, even of
atheists, communists and anarchists. That is
true, but it is one of those trials of faith which our
brave American Catholics are accustomed to meet
almost daily, and which they know how to face
with good sense and firmness. The press of our
country tells us, and the president of the Knights
has related to us, how these violent, aggressive
198 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

elements have endeavored to control the associa-
tion, or to inject poison into its principles; but
they also inform us with what determination
these machinators have been repulsed and beaten.

‘‘The presence among our citizens of those
dangerous social elements, which have mostly
come from certain countries of Europe, is assur-
edly for us an occasion of great regret and of
vigilant precautions; it is a fact, however, which
we have to accept, but which the close union be-
tween the Church and her children that exists
in our country renders comparatively free from
danger. In truth, the only thing from which we
would fear serious danger would be a cooling of
this relationship between the Church and her chil-
dren, and I know nothing that would be more
likely to occasion it than imprudent condemna-
tions.

““(d) <A specially weighty charge is drawn
from the outbursts of violence, even to bloodshed,
which have accompanied several of the strikes
inaugurated by labor organizations. Concerning
this, three things are to be remarked—first,
strikes are not an invention of the Knights of
Labor, but a means almost everywhere and always
resorted to by the working classes to protect
themselves against what they consider injustice,
and in assertion of what they believe to be their
just rights; secondly, in such a struggle of the
poor and indignant multitudes against hard and
obstinate monopoly, outbursts of anger are almost
as inevitable as they are greatly to be regretted;
thirdly, the laws and the chief authorities of the
KNIGHTS OF LABOR 199

Knights of Labor, far from encouraging violence
or the occasions of it, exercise a powerful influence
to hinder it, and to retain strikes within the limits
of good order and of legitimate action.

‘*A careful examination of the acts of violence
accompanying the struggle between capital and
labor last year leaves us convinced that it would
be unjust to attribute them to the association of
the Knights of Labor, for this association was but
one among the numerous labor organizations that
took part in the strikes, and their chief officers uscd
every possible effort, as disinterested witnesses
testify, to appease the anger of the multitudes,
and to hinder the excesses which, therefore,
in my judgment, could not justly be attributed
to them. Doubtless, among the Knights of
Labor, as among the thousands of other working
men, there are to be found passionate or even
wicked men who have committed inexcusable
deeds of violence, and have instigated their asso-
ciates to the same, but to attribute this to the
association would, it seems to me, be as unreason-
able as to attribute to the Church the follies or
the crimes of her children against which she
strives and protests.

“‘T repeat that, in such a struggle of the great
masses of the people against the mail-clad power,
which as it is acknowledged, often refuses them
the simple rights of humanity and justice, it is vain
to expect that every error and every act of violence
can be avoided; and to dream that this struggle
can be hindered, or that we can deter the multi-
‘tudes from organizing, which is their only hope
200 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

of success; would be to ignore the nature and
forces of human society in times like ours. Chris-
tian prudence evidently counsels us to hold the
hearts of the multitudes by the bonds of love, in
order to control their actions by the principles of
faith, justice and charity, to acknowledge frankly
what is true and just in their cause, in order to
deter them from what is false and criminal, and
thus to turn into a legitimate, peaceable and benefi-
cent contest what might easily, by a course of
repulsive severity, become for the masses of our
people a dread volcanic force like unto that which
society fears and the Church deplores in Europe.

‘“‘Upon this point I insist strongly, because,
from an intimate acquaintance with the social
conditions of our country I am profoundly con-
vinced that here we are touching upon a subject
which not only concerns the rights of the working’
classes, who ought to be especially dear to the
Church which our Lord sent forth to preach His
Gospel to the poor, but with which are intimately
bound up the fundamental interests of the Church
and of human society for the future. This is a
point which I desire, in a few additional words,
to develop more clearly.

‘5. Whoever meditates upon the ways in
which divine Providence is guiding mankind in
our days cannot fail to remark how important is
the part which the power of the people takes in
shaping the events of the present, and which it is
evidently destined to take in molding the desti-
nies of the future. We, behold, with profound
regret, the efforts of the prince of darkness to
KNIGHTS OF LABOR 201

make this power dangerous to the social weal by
withdrawing the masses of the people from the
influence of religion, and impelling them towards
the ruinous paths of license and anarchy. Hither-
to our country has presented a spectacle of a most
consolingly different character—that of a popu-
lar power regulated by love of good order, respect
for religion, by obedience to the authority of the
laws, not a democracy of license and violence, but
that true democracy which aims at the general
prosperity through the means of sound principles
and good social order.

‘*In order to preserve so desirable a state of
things it is absolutely necessary that religion
should continue to possess the affections, and
thus rule the conduct of the multitudes. As
Cardinal Manning has well written, ‘A new task
is before us. The Church has no longer to deal
with Parliaments and princes, but with the
masses and with the people. Whether we will or
no this is our work; we need a new spirit and a
new law of life.’ To lose influence over the peo-
ple would be to lose the future altogether; and it
is by the heart, far more than by the understand-
ing, that we must hold and guide this immense
power, so mighty either for good or for evil.

‘‘Among all the glorious titles which the
Church’s history has deserved for her, there is
not one which at present gives her so great influ-
ence as that of ‘Friend of the People.’ Assuredly,
in our democratic country, it is this title which
wins for the Catholic Church not only the en-
thusiastic devotedness of the millions of her
202 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

children, but also the respect and admiration of
all our citizens, whatever be their religious belief.
It is the power of this title which renders perse-

~» eution almost an impossibility, and which draws

towards our Holy Church the great heart of the
American people.

‘‘And since it is acknowledged by all that the
great questions of the future are not those of
war, of commerce or finance, but the social ques-
tions—the questions which concern the improve-
ment of the condition of the great popular masses,
and especially of the working people—it is evi-
dently of supreme importance that the Church
should always be found on the side of humanity—
of justice towards the multitudes who compose
the body of the human family. As the same Car-
dinal Manning has wisely written, ‘I know I am
treading on a very difficult subject, but I feel con-
fident of this, that we must face it, and that we
must face it calmly, justly, and with a willing-
ness to put labor and the profits of labor second—
the moral state and domestic life of the whole
working population first. I will not venture to
draw up such an act of Parliament further than
to lay down this principle. These things (the
present condition of the poor in England) cannot
go on; these things ought not to goon. The accu-
mulation of wealth in the land, the piling up of
wealth like mountains, in the possession of classes
or individuals, cannot go on. No commonwealth
can rest on such foundations.’ (Miscellanies,
Vol. 2, p. 81).

“In our country, above all, this social amel-
KNIGHTS OF LABOR 203

ioration is the inevitable programme of the future,
and the position which the Church should hold
towards it is surely obvious. She can certainly
not favor the extremes to which the poor multi-
tudes are naturally inclined, but, I repeat, she
must withhold them from these extremes by the
bonds of affection, by the maternal desire which
she will manifest for the concession of all that
is just and reasonable in their demands, and by
the maternal blessing which she will bestow upon
every legitimate means for improving the condi-
tion of the people.

‘*6. Now let us consider for a moment the con-
sequences which would inevitably follow from a
contrary course—from a course of want of sym-
pathy for the working class, of suspicion for their
aims, of ready condemnation for their methods.

‘‘(a) First, there would be the evident danger
of the Church’s losing in popular estimation, her
right to be considered the friend of the people.
The logic of the popular heart goes swiftly to its
conclusions, and this conclusion would be most
pernicious both for the people and for the Church.
To lose the heart of the people would be a misfor-
tune for which the friendship of the few rich and
powerful would be no compensation.

“‘(b) There would be a great danger of ren-
dering hostile to the Church the political power
of our country, which has openly taken sides
with the millions who are demanding justice and
the improvement of their condition. The accu-
sation of being un-American—that is to say, alien
to our national spirit—is the most powerful
204 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

weapon which the enemies of the Church can
employ against her. It was this cry which
aroused the Know-Nothing persecution thirty
years ago, and the same would be used again if
the opportunity offered. To appreciate the grav-
ity of this danger it is well to remark that not
only are the rights of the working classes loudly
proclaimed by each of our two great political
parties, but it is not improbable that, in our
approaching national elections there will be a
candidate for the office of President of the United
States as the special representative of the popu-
lar complaints and demands.

‘‘Now, to seek to crush by an ecclesiastical con-
demnation an organization which represents more
than 500,000 votes, and which has already so re-
spectable and so universally recognized a place
in the political arena, would, to speak frankly,
be considered by the American people as not less
ridiculous than rash. To alienate from ourselves
the friendship of the people would be to run great
risk of losing the respect which the Church has
won in the estimation of the American nation,
and of forfeiting the peace and prosperity which
form so admirable a contrast with her condition
in some so-called Catholic countries. Angry
utterances have not been wanting of late, and it
is well that we should act prudently.

‘‘(e) A third danger—and the one which
most keenly touches our hearts—is the risk of
losing the love of the children of the Church, and
of pushing them into an attitude of resistance
against their Mother. The world presents no
KNIGHTS OF LABOR 205

more beautiful spectacle than that of their filial
devotion and obedience; but it is well to recognize
that, in our age and in our country, obedience
cannot be blind. We would greatly deceive our-
selves if we expected it. Our Catholic working
men sincerely believe that they are only seeking
justice, and seeking it by legitimate means. A
condemnation would be considered both false and
unjust, and, therefore, not binding. We might
preach to them submission and confidence in the
Church’s judgment; but these good dispositions
could hardly go so far. They love the Church,
and they wish to save their souls, but they must
also earn their living, and labor is now so organ-
ized that without belonging to the organization
it is almost impossible to earn one’s living.
‘“Behold, then, the consequences to be feared.
Thousands of the Church’s most devoted chil-
dren, whose affection is her greatest comfort, and
whose free offerings are her chief support, would
consider themselves repulsed by their Mother,
and would live without practising their religion.
Catholics who have hitherto shunned the secret
societies, would be sorely tempted to join their
ranks. The Holy See, which has constantly re-
ceived from the Catholics of America proofs of
almost unparalleled devotedness, would be con-
sidered not as a paternal authority, but as a harsh
and unjust power. Surely these are consequences
which wisdom and prudence counsel us to avoid.
“‘7, But, besides the dangers that would re-
sult from such a condemnation, and the impracti-
cability of putting it into effect, it is also very
206 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

important that we should carefully consider an-
other reason against condemnation, arising from
the unstable and transient character of the organ-
ization in question. It is frequently remarked
by the press and by attentive observers that this
special form of association has in it so little per-
manence that, in its present shape, it is not likely
to last many years. Whence it follows that it is
not necessary, even if it were just and prudent, to
level the condemnations of the Church solely
against so evanescent an object. The social agi-
tation itself will, indeed, last as long as there are
social evils to be remedied; but the forms of or-
ganization meant for the attainment of this end
are naturally provisional and short-lived. They
are also very numerous, for I have already re-
marked that the Knights of Labor is only one
among many labor organizations.

““No strike, then, at one of these forms would
be to commence a war without system and with-
out end; it would be to exhaust the forces of the
Church in chasing a crowd of changing and un-
certain spectres. The American people behold
with perfect composure and confidence the prog-
ress of our social contest, and have not the least
fear of not being able to protect themselves
against any excesses or dangers that may occa-
sionally arise. Hence, to speak with the most
profound respect, but also with the frankness
which duty requires of me, it seems to me that
prudence suggests, and that even the dignity of
the Church demands that we should not offer to
America an ecclesiastical protection for which
KNIGHTS OF LABOR 20%

she does not ask, and of which she believes she
has no need.

**8. In all this discussion I have not at all
spoken of Canada, nor of the condemnation con-
cerning the Knights of Labor in Canada; for we
would consider it an impertinence on our part to
meddle with the ecclesiastical affairs of another
country which has an hierarchy of its own, and
with whose social conditions we do not pretend
to be acquainted. We believe, however, that the
circumstance of a people almost entirely Cath-
olic, as in lower Canada, must be very different
from those of a mixed population like ours; more-
over, that the documents submitted to the Holy
Office are not the present constitution of the or-
ganization in our country, and that we, there-
fore, ask nothing involving an inconsistency on
the part of the Holy See, which passed sentence
‘localiter et juxta exposita.’

“It is of the United States that we speak, and
we trust that we are not presumptuous in believ-
ing that we are competent to judge about the
state of things in our own country. Now, as I
have already indicated, out of the seventy-five
archbishops and bishops of the United States,
there are about five who desire the condemnation
of the Knights of Labor, such as they are in our
own country; so that our hierarchy are almost
unanimous in protesting against such a con-
demnation. Such a fact ought to have great
weight in deciding the question. If there are
difficulties in the case, it seems to me that the pru-
dence and experience of our bishops and the wise
208 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

rules of the Third Plenary Council ought to suf-
fice for their solution.

‘Finally, to sum up all, it seems to me that the
Holy See could not decide to condemn an associa-
tion under the following circumstances:

‘1, When the condemnation does not seem to
be justified either by the letter or the spirit of its
constitution, its law and the declaration of its
chiefs.

*°2. When the condemnation does not seem
necessary, in view of the transient form of the
organization and the social condition of the
United States.

‘3, When it does not seem to be prudent, be-
cause of the reality of the grievances complained
of by the working classes, and their acknowl-
edgement by the American people.

‘‘4. When it would be dangerous for the repu-
tation of the Church in our democratic country,
and might even lead to persecution.

‘5. When it would probably be ineficacious,
owing to the general conviction that it would be
unjust.

‘*6. When it would be destructive instead of
beneficial in its effects, impelling the children of
the Church to disobey their Mother, and even to
enter condemned societies, which they have thus
far shunned.

‘“‘7, When it would turn into suspicion and
hostility the singular devotedness of our Catholic
people towards the Holy See.

‘*8. When it would be regarded as a cruel
blow to the authority of bishops in the United
KNIGHTS OF LABOR 209

States, who, it is well known, protest against
such a condemnation.

‘Now, I hope the considerations here presented
have sufficiently shown that such would be the
effect of condemnation of the Knights of Labor
in the United States.

‘‘Therefore, I leave the decision of the case,
with fullest confidence to the wisdom and pru-
dence of your Eminence and the Holy See.’’

J. CARD. GIBBONS,
Archbishop of Baltimore.
Rome, February 20, 1887.
THE CHURCH AND THE
REPUBLIC
THE CHURCH AND THE REPUBLIC. *
1?

IXTEEN millions of Catholics live their
lives on our land with undisturbed belief in
the perfect harmony existing between their

religion and their duties as American citizens. It
never occurs to their minds to question the truth
of a belief which all their experience confirms.
Love of religion and love of country burn together
in their hearts.

They love their Church as the divine spiritual
society set up by Jesus Christ, through which they
are brought into a closer communion with God,
learn His revealed truth and His holy law, receive
the help they need to lead Christian lives, and are
inspired with the hope of eternal happiness. They
love their country with the spontaneous and
ardent love of all patriots, because it is their
country, and the source to them of untold bless-
ings. They prefer its form of government before
any other. They admire its institutions and the
spirit of its laws. ‘They accept the Constitution
without reserve, with no desire, as Catholics, to
see it changed in any feature. They can, with a
clear conscience, swear to uphold it.

* Reprinted from The North American Review,

210
THE CHURCH AND THE REPUBLIC 211

With an appreciation, the greater because their
fathers or they themselves have known persecu-
tion—in the British Isles, in Germany, in Poland
and elsewhere—they prize both the liberty they
enjoy as citizens, and the liberty assured to the
Church. The separation of Church and State
in this country seems to them the natural, inevit-
able and best conceivable plan, the one that would
work best among us, both for the good of religion
and of the State. Any change in their relations
they would contemplate with dread. They are
well aware, indeed, that the Church here enjoys a
larger liberty and a more secure position than in
any country today where Church and State are
united. They have a deep distrust and a strong
dislike of the intermeddling of the State with the
concerns of religion; and such a restriction as the
Church was obliged to endure in France, binding
the Pope to choose Catholic bishops only from
among the candidates presented to him by unbe-
lieving government officials, seems to them—not
fully appreciating the difficulties of the situation
—a scandal and a shame. They most assuredly
desire never to see a like system introduced into
the government of the Church in America. No
establishment of religion is being dreamed of
here, of course, by anyonc; but, were it to be
attempted, it would meet with united opposition
from the Catholic people, priests and prelates.

Catholics feel at home among their countrymen.
They are conscious of an unstained record of
loyalty, of patriotic self-sacriice, and of ‘aw-abid-
ing behavior. Their dearest ambition is to live
212 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

in peace with all, to antagonize no class; they are
conscious of no barrier separating them more
than any other element of the population into a
class apart. Strong in the knowledge that an
overwhelming majority of their fellow-citizens
understand and appreciate them, they usually
ignore the occasional insults directed to them by
a small and rapidly decreasing section of the com-
munity not yet emancipated from ancestral mis-
conceptions and prejudices, and still wedded to the
conviction that the Gospel is to be propagated by
slander and the fomentation of religious strife.

This form of religious propaganda Catholics
know to be abhorrent to the spirit of every true
American; and on that spirit they rely to nullify
the spasmodic efforts of bigotry; for, though a
large proportion of the non-Catholics do not
sympathize with Catholic doctrines, this dissent
is not carried over into political or social life.
Men have learned in this country to disagree pro-
foundly without rancor or bitterness. With no
compromise of principle on either side, moral
worth, sterling character, kindly qualities of mind
and heart bind together in good-will, admiration
and friendship the lives of those who do not wor-
ship at the same altar. The non-Catholic Ameri-
can would receive with a contemptuous smile or
an indignant gesture any suggestion that his
Catholic friend, or business associate, carried
hidden in his heart some sinister tenet that gave
the lie to his life, and might at any moment oblige
him to turn traitor to the Republic.

The Catholic himself feels, as he has learned
THE CHURCH AND THE REPUBLIC 2138

from the lips of his own revered and trusted
teachers of religion, that the more faithful he is
to his religion, the better and nobler citizen will he
be. That religion and patriotism could ever come
into conflict in his bosom, seems to him an utter
impossibility; and in the religious principles
which he has received in common with his fellow-
Catholics, he sees the surest defense of the State
against the forces of disorder and lawlessness,
and the insidious influences that work for the
overthrow of our Christian moral] standards in
private and public life.

Such are the conditions that exist, in themselves
admirable, and gratifying to the statesmen, to
the churchman, to the lover of religion and coun-
try; to all who rejoice in the spread of good-will
and peace among men. Who would dare to intro-
duce religious strife among us, to disturb this
peace, and set the torch to the Temple of Concord?

i.

Of this body of American citizens living such a
life and imbued with such sentiments (of which
there are almost as many proofs as there are
Catholics), two synods of Protestant ministers
have deemed it just and wise to proclaim to the
country that Catholics cannot be trusted with
political office; that they cannot sincerely sub-
scribe to the Federal Constitution; that their
loyalty is illogical, being contrary to the teaching
of the Church; that their religion is opposed to
American liberties; and that they themselves,
214 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

kept in the dark by their religious guides, are
ignorant of the true nature of their Church’s doc-
trines. In sounding forth these charges to Amer-
ican Catholics, and to the country in general, they
declare themselves inspired, not by religious an-
tagonism or the desire to profit. by a good oppor-
tunity, but solely by patriotic solicitude for the
permanence of American institutions.

Charges so contrary to the abiding convictions
of American Catholics, and so hurtful to their
deepest affections, are naturally resented; yet
they do not appear to have excited any commo-
tion among us. It would indeed be a grave mat-
ter if these utterances expressed the judgment. of ©
the American nation, indicated its sentiments
towards our Catholic citizens, and preluded a
departure from the national policy of religious
liberty and equality before the law. Happily, we
know this is very far from the fact. The truth
is, we believe, these ministers not only do not
represent the American attitude toward us, but
would meet with determined opposition if they
attempted to carry with them even their own con-
gregations. They have good cause to complain, as
they do, of the apathy of their co-religionists.
Catholics are convinced that the nation recognizes
its own voice in President Roosevelt’s letter to
Mr. J. C. Martin rather than in the pronounce-
ments if provoked. There they hear the ring of
genuine Americanism; and they catch in the other
the echo of old cries, of which they have long
grown weary.
THE CHURCH AND THE REPUBLIC 215

ITT.

It can be pleasant to none of us to be called
upon, not only to prove our title to convictions
which have guided us through life, but to show
cause why we should not be deprived of the com-
mon political rights of human beings in our own
native land. However, I feel obliged to speak
out; and if I should speak with warmth on one or
two points, it will be because I feel the proposal
made deserves the strongest reprobation, and is,
moreover, entirely unworthy of men in the posi-
tion of those from whom it emanated. I have no
desire to inflict pain, but I cannot avoid character-
izing the action of the synods as it deserves.
Against the gentlemen themselves I can feel no
animosity. They are excellent men in many re-
spects, no doubt, and mean to be good citizens. I
am sure, though their spirit does not tend to
sweeten American life as much as we might desire,
they help to purify and raise its tone, and to keep
religion alive in the hearts of their people, and I
can only wish them well.

The Catholic religion, as they understand it, is
in conflict with the Federal Constitution, and with
the object of our institutions; Catholics, then,
ought not to be trusted with political office. Ac-
cordingly, Americans should seek to exclude
Catholics from the chair of the President, who is
called upon to enforce the Constitution; from the
Supreme Bench, whose duty it is to interpret it;
from the Senate and the House of Representa-
tives, which have the power to change it. And
216 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

as the chief evil dreaded from Catholics is a
modification of the existing relations between
Church and State, a power theoretically reserved
to our State Governments, no Catholic should be
chosen Governor, State legislator or judge of a
supreme State court. This is the scope of their
meaning, though not all explicitly avowed. It
would logically be desirable to deny Catholics the
right to vote, and with men in the frame of mind
their attitude suggests, the realization of this
desire in the statute books, and of their complete
programme, would only be a matter of their pos-
sessing sufficient power and judging the act politi-
cally expedient.

Now this proposal to exclude Catholics from
office—for it is no mere theory, but a practical
programme earnestly recommended to the Ameri-
can public by two solemn assemblies—is advo-
cated expressly in the interest of religious liberty
and for the sake of preserving the Federal Con-
stitution. That document says: ‘‘No religious
test shall ever be required as a qualification to any
office or public trust under the United States.’’
Just understand here, however, remark these
Lutheran and Baptist synods, an amendment, or
rather let us say, a little clause which brings out
the sense with admirable clearness: ‘‘Provided,
of course, that this provision be not understood to
apply to Roman Catholies.”’

Such restrictions on religion have always been
felt to be incompatible with American ideas, and
have fallen, though sometimes only after a long
struggle, before the force of the real American
THE CHURCH AND THE REPUBLIC 21%

spirit. ‘‘When the Constitution came before the
State Conventions, * * * in Massachusetts
alone was a dread of liberty expressed. Major
Lusk ‘shuddered at the idea that Roman Catho-
lics, Papists and Pagans might be introduced into
office, and that Popery and the Inquisition may
be established in America.’ ‘Who,’ answered the
Rev. Mr. Shute, ‘shall be excluded from natural
trusts? Whatever answer bigotry may suggest,
the dictates of candor and equity, I conceive, will
be, none.’’’* The Puritan clergyman carried
his point, and Massachusetts endorsed the Fed-
eral Constitution. Most of the State constitu-
tions, however, were not at first characterized by
the same perfect liberty. Seven of them debarred
Catholics from office or citizenship; six expressly,
one by requiring naturalized citizens to abjure
any foreign ecclesiastical allegiance. Unitarians
in one State, Jews and unbelievers in several,
were likewise subjected to civil disabilities. But
in the course of time all restrictions against adher-
ents of any religion were swept away. The re-
moval of these civil disabilities has always, I
believe, been considered a triumph of the Ameri-
can spirit; and the Lutheran and Baptist synods
will find it difficult to persuade the public to write

* Cobb, “The Rise of Religious Liberty in America,” p.
608. In regard to the persecution directed against Catholics in
Colonial times, Mr. Cobb says: “Of all the religious legisla-
tion in the Colonies nothing was more absurd than that
against Roman Catholics. One would suppose that the Roman
Church was a constant and threatening foe to Colonial Insti-
tutions. The fact was far otherwise.” Pp. 450-451. See also
“Maryland, the Land of Sanctuary,” by Right Rev, William
H. Russell.
218 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

their synodical concept of religious liberty and
civil equality upon our statute books. They will
not attempt it. I have sufficient confidence in the
enlightenment and good will of our American citi-
zens, to be convinced that the clauses discriminat-
ing against Catholics which had been incorporated
in some State constitutions in Colonial times, and
which have been since expurged, shall never be
revived, but shall forever lie buried in their ig-
nominious graves,

That Americans in general do not believe in
these synodical principles is shown at every elec-
tion, when, as Mr. Roosevelt has pointed out, dis-
tricts predominantly Catholic have repeatedly
elected Protestants to office, and vice versa, Cath-
olics have been chosen by several strongly Prot-
estant States as their Chief Magistrates, or as
their representatives in the Senate. Presidents
of the United States have shown no lack of confi-
dence in them, calling them into their cabinet,
designating two of them to the exalted post of
Chief. Justice of the United States, and charging
them with important posts at home and abroad.
Religious issues have sometimes been injected
into campaigns; never, however, by Catholics, so
far as I can recall; but everyone has a feeling that
it is unfortunate and un-American. It has been
done mostly in secret, for its authors were
ashamed of the light.

It is a new thing, for the present generation at
least, to see the chief authorities of important
religious bodies advocating the exclusion of loyal
American citizens from office on the sole ground
THE CHURCH AND THE REPUBLIC 219

of their religious allegiance. This act will be
writ indellibly in the annals of our country in the
chapter entitled ‘‘Religious Intolerance.’’ And
in the same chapter, history ought to record that
the action, entirely clerical in origin, received no
manifestation of sympathy with its aim or spirit
from the laity, who thus earned the blame of their
leaders. (in things spiritual, but not in politics),
and the approbation of the American people.
There must be no tampering with the delicate
machinery by which religious liberty and equality
are secured, and no fostering of any spirit which
would tend to destroy that machinery. Religious
passions are deep and strong; and any man in his
senses who knows human nature or knows the
history of Europe, and has at heart the future
peace and happiness of our country, whatever his
belief, will do nothing to introduce religious strife
into the politics of America. Religious tolerance
is not the easy superficial virtue it seems in these
placid days; intolerance in the dominating party
tends to produce intolerance in the injured party.
Then religious peace is near an end, unless strong
restraints be used. The spirit of the country has
changed much in half a century, and it would be
very difficult to arouse such fanaticism as I saw
in the Know-Nothing days. Prudent men, men
who are far-sighted, especially if they are in posi-
tions of responsibility, will work for peace and
harmony. Such has always been the attitude of
our Catholic hierarchy, and, with few exceptions,
of our priesthood. I know not what to think of
220 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

men, putting themselves forward as the leaders
of large religious bodies, who counsel the Ameri-
can people to depart from that policy which has
promoted peace and good-will among us and has
made us illustrious among nations for our spirit of
liberty and liberality. What good can they hope to
accomplish?

They say Catholicism and loyalty are logically
incompatible; but if, as they acknowledge, they
are felt in fact to be compatible, should they not
rejoice? Do they wish to force Catholics to be
disloyal? Or do they—ah! perhaps the motive
lies here—do they wish to force Catholics to re-
nounce the Pope and become good Protestants?
But no, their motive is purely patriotic. Taking
Catholicism even at their worst estimate of it,
then, should they be willing to introduce into
American life all the bitter and hard feeling that a
political war on Catholics would certainly precip-
itate? Willing to incur great and inevitable pres-
ent evils to ward off a danger centuries hence that
they cannot believe real? Willing to punish hence-
forth and forever honest good Catholics whom
they themselves acknowledge to be loyal Ameri-
cans, because their descendants of the dim distant
future might have an opportunity—they would
not grasp it, confess even these fearful ones—to
overturn American liberties? We may well smile
at the shuddering of Major Lusk; but the pro-
posal of these men in this age is inexcusable.

I am speaking in no tone of deprecation. We
have nothing to fear for ourselves, We are strong,
THE CHURCH AND THE REPUBLIC 221

not only in our own union and strength, but in the
broad American spirit of fair play and love of
liberty; and, I may be permitted to add, in our
confidence that God destines the Catholic Church
in this country to be the bulwark of law and order,
of liberty, of social justice and purity. But I
speak that I may put forth whatever strength I
have to crush this detestable spirit of intolerance
which, if it gained strength, would wreck the peace
of the country and root out charity from the
hearts of men.

‘‘Let us uncover the hatchet!’’ shouts an ex-
cited Lutheran organ. Brothers, bury it. Far bet-
ter for you and for the country if, when well out
of sight of the Fatherland, you had silently
dropped your hatchet into the deep.

Still, I do not deny that among some men who
would oppose political discrimination against
Catholics as unjust, unwise and unnecessary there
remains a certain dread of Catholicism. They ac-
knowledge that the Catholic Church in this coun-
try is an immense force for the public welfare,
raising up native Catholics as patriotic Americans
and moulding her foreign-born elements into a
homogeneous people. The very sense of her
strength, indeed, is in great part the cause of the
dread; they fear the danger of a collision between
the State and a Church whose head is a foreigner,
and believes himself the representative of God
upon earth, Catholic teaching, American prin-
ciples of Government and the existing facts will
show how baseless is this apprehension.
222 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

Ty,

The distinction between the civil and the eccles-
iastical powers is very firmly established in Cath-
olic teaching. ‘‘The Almighty,’’ says Pope Leo
XIII, ‘‘has appointed the charge of the human
race between two powers, the ecclesiastical and
the civil; the one being set over divine, the other
over human things. Each in its kind is supreme,
each has fixed limits within which it is contained,
limits which are defined by the nature and spe-
cial object of the province of each.

Pius IX approved a pastoral of the Swiss
bishops which teaches the same doctrine, that
civil magistrates are ‘‘invested in their own do-
main with a full sovereignty,’’ and that to them
‘‘we owe obedience and respect in all things mor-
ally permitted and belonging to the domain of civil
society.’’? This is but common Catholic doctrine.

The Church, then, holds that the civil govern-
ment has divine authority, just as has the eccles-
iastical; that the limits of each are fixed by the
nature of its purpose; that within these limits
each power is supreme; consequently, that the
Church cannot intermeddle in affairs purely civil,
nor the State in affairs purely ecclesiastical; and
that members of the Church are bound to obey the
State, within its own domain, in all things that do
not contravene the moral law.

This distinction of the two spheres or zones of
authority, as I may call them, lying in the very
nature of their object, remains even if all the mem-
bers of the State be Catholics. Cardinal Tarquini
THE CHURCH AND THE REPUBLIC — 223

a Jesuit writer of authority, states this clearly.
‘Civil society,’? he says, ‘‘even though every
member of it be a Catholic, is not subject to the
Church, but plainly independent in temporal
things which regard its temporal end. * * *
This is proved by reason. For, whatsoever is
done in temporal matters, having in view a tem-
poral end, is outside the domain of the Church.
Now, it is a general rule that no society has power
beyond its own scope. * * * Hence it follows
that the State, although it be composed of Catho-
lies, yet in temporal matters and from a temporal
point of view, is by no means subordinate to the
Church, but quite independent of her.’’

The establishment and the maintenance of this
distinction is one of the greatest contributions of
the Catholic Church to civilization. To us, in the
twentieth century, the distinction seems obvious,
almost self-evident; but in the ancient world re-
ligion was a mere function of the State. To the
long struggle of the Papacy during the Middle
Ages it is due that Christianity has not sunk into
a Byzantine servitude. Guizot, the Protestant his-
torian and statesman, gives to the Popes the credit
for having ‘‘proclaimed and maintained the dif-
ference between Church and State, the distinction
of the two societies of the two powers; of their
respective domains and rights.’’

That in waging this titanic war the Popes
always kept strictly within their legitimate
domain, and even used their spiritual powers
with the gentleness of pastors, Catholic historians
are not concerned to maintain; Popes are human,
224 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

and it is plain from history that some of them did
not always act moderately, wisely and in the
spirit of Christ. But they had to do with a crude,
brutal power which would have enslaved religion;
and in a fierce struggle for the life of the Church
such mistakes, humanly speaking, were inevitable.
Only in defining doctrines for universal belief are
the Popes infallible. They have been unflinching
in maintaining the independence of a spiritual
realm upon earth; and those who are so ready to:
pardon the mistakes of the great men of history
whose work has uplifted humanity ought to be
able to find some condonation for the occasional
excessive claims of Popes, when it is realized that
their efforts alone saved Europe from spiritual
bondage.

When the Reformers rejected the authority of
the Church, the distinction between the two powers
was lost to them. The Church of England be-
came subjected to the despotism of Henry VIII.
The latest of the long series of humiliations which
this connection has thrown on the Church of Eng-
land is very recent. After maintaining for gener-
ations that the law of God forbids a man to marry
his deceased wife’s sister, and prohibiting her
ministers from celebrating such a marriage, she
is obliged to retract her ancient discipline because
it has pleased Parliament, in which sit Atheists
and Agnostics, to declare such marriages lawful.
The State rules the Church. Lutheranism, so
bold in its first outburst, became the creature of
the civil powers before Luther’s death; it remains
so to this day. Zwingli handed over religion to
THE CHURCH AND THE REPUBLIC = 225

the care of the civil powers. Calvin went to the
other extreme. He attempted a theocracy, failed,
of course, and his religion likewise was committed
to the keeping of the State. Every National Prot-
estant church has been the creature of the State,
subject to it in doctrine, ritual, discipline and gov-
ernment. Only the dissenting sects have been able
to maintain a certain independence, and none of
them were averse to union with the State which,
with Protestantism, has always meant the subjec-
tion of the Church to the State.

The history of the Schismatical churches of the
East repeats the same story. The Patriarchate
of Constantinople was first the creature of the
Byzantine Emperors, and then of the Mohamme-
dan Sultan. The Church of Russia is the servant
of the Tsar. The churches of the Balkan States,
each in turn, broke away from the Patriarchs of
Constantinople with the cry, ‘‘No head but
Christ,’’ only to fall under the despotism of the
State.

If history points a lesson, then, it shows that the
subjection of the religious to the secular authority,
has ever followed separation from the Church of
Rome. Now it will be objected that if Protestant-
ism leans too much towards subservience to the
State, the Catholic Church, on the other hand, has
often acted strongly against the State, especially
in the Middle Ages. I grant it, but I hold it was
justified by the consent of nations and the public
law of that day. Take the England of that period,
for example: ‘‘As regards national feeling,’’
226 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

says the latest and most scientific Protestant his-
torian of the English Reformation.” ‘‘the people
evidently regarded the cause of the Church as the
cause of liberty. That their freedom suffered
grievously by the abolition of Papal jurisdiction
under Henry VIII there can be no manner of
doubt.”’ Again: ‘‘That Rome exercised her
spiritual power by the willing obedience of Eng-
lishmen in general, and that they regarded it as
a really wholesome power, even for the control it
exercised over secular tyranny, is a fact which it
requires no very intimate knowledge of early Eng-
lish literature to bring home to us.’’+ And Gaird-
ner adds that the separation was brought about
by the power of a ‘‘despotic king’’ against the will
of the people. In other countries, too, as the same
writer says, the Popes were on the side of liberty
and the people, against the despotism of the
Crown. The Papacy was then universally consid-
ered the embodiment of justice and liberty upon
earth. The Hague Tribunal today is a very faint
image of the political function and power of the
medieval Papacy; and it is but a voice, while the
Pope was a living power, restraining and civiliz-
ing society. ‘‘It is impossible,’’ says the Angli-
can Dean Milman, ‘‘to conceive what had been the
confusion, the lawlessness, the chaotic state of the
Middle Ages without the medieval Papacy.’’ In
an age of democracy and liberty, some gratitude,
might be expected for the most powerful defender

*Gairdner, “Lollardy and the Reformation in England,”
p. 6.

flb., p. 5.
THE CHURCH AND THE REPUBLIC 227

of the people and of liberty; yet the very success
of the Papacy in their defence is the ground of the
prejudice that exists against it.

¥.

The political authority exercised by the medie-
val Popes, then presupposed a united Christen-
dom, and was part of the universally recognized
international law. Yet, legitimate and beneficial
as it was, it was seized upon by the Reformers as
one of their chief arguments against the Papacy,
and became one of their pretexts for repudiating
Rome’s spiritual authority. Ever since, the same
weapon has been persistently and effectually em-
ployed by Protestant writers and divines against
the Catholic religion. In consequence there are
many persons today who, while they are profoundly
impressed and attracted by the beauty, the disci-
pline, the deep spiritual influence, and efficient
moral force of the Catholic Church, yet hesitate to
enter, simply because of their views regarding the
political power claimed by the Pope in the Middle
Ages. The power was lost when the unity of
Christendom on the rise of the modern States
ceased to be a fundamental principle of the law
of nations; and when Germany, France, Russia,
England and America shall be welded into a
world-wide Christian confederation on the plan of
the Holy Roman Empire, then, and not before,
need statesmen discuss the possibility of a revival
of the medieval Papacy.

Catholics, then, may subscribe to the fundamen-
228 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

tal article of English Protestantism. ‘‘The Pope
of Rome hath no jurisdiction in this Realm,’’ if
it be understood of the realm of purely temporal
affairs; and while we insist that he has the right
to the free exercise of his spiritual authority over
Catholics, we believe that in civil matters which do
not contravene the moral law, we Catholics owe a
full and unreserved allegiance to the civil authori-
ties. The same Divine Voice, as I have often
preached in the discharge of my pastoral office, *
which gives us the command to render unto God
the things of God, gives us the other command, of
equally binding force, to render unto Cesar the
things of Cesar.

But an objection is repeatedly cast up to Cath-
olics which, repugnant though it is to my inmost
feelings of loyalty and reverence towards the
Holy Father, I must take into consideration; for
utterly impracticable and absurd as it is in our
eyes, it seems to haunt the minds of many outside
the Church. Suppose, it is said, the Pope were
to issue commands in purely civil matters, should
not Catholics be bound to yield him obedience?
The Pope will take no such act, we know, even
though it is a part of Catholic Faith that he is
infallible in the exercise of his authority; but were
he to do so he would stand self-condemned, a
transgressor of the law he himself promulgates.
He would be offending not only against civil
society, but against God, and violating an author-
ity as truly from God as His own. Any Catholic

*See'e. g. the sermon on “Obedience to all Lawful Author-
ity’ in my Discources and Sermons on Various Subjects.”
THE CHURCH AND THE REPUBLIC 229

who clearly recognized this, would not be bound
to obey the Pope; or rather his conscience would
bind him absolutely to disobey, because with
Catholics conscience is the supreme law which
under no circumstances can we ever lawfully
disobey.

Some controversialists in this country, gravel-
led for matter of complaint against the Papal
dealings with America, have invented the fable
that Pius IX recognized the Southern Confeder-
acy. Of course the facts refute them, as the Pope
merely extended to Mr. Jefferson Davis the cour-
tesy which one gentleman owes another of ad-
dressing him by his official title. They cling to the
serviceable fable; and proceed to shudder at the
thought of what might have happened if, in the
crisis of our Civil War, the President had been a
Catholic. Let me relieve them by stating what
would have occurred. A Catholic President
would act, under the circumstances, precisely as
Abraham Lincoln; he would treat the recognition
with a respectful silence, and continue to prose-
cute the war to the best of his ability. If he acted
otherwise he would be a traitor to his conscience
and his God, to his country and to the Constitu-
tion which he had sworn to uphold. And he would
have Catholic theological teaching at his back.

The Jesuit Cardinal Bellarmine says: ‘‘In order
to resist and defend oneself, no authority is re-
quired. * * * Therefore, as it is lawful to
resist the Pope if he assaulted a man’s person, so

it is lawful to resist him if he assaulted souls or
troubled the State, and much more if he strove to
230 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

destroy the Church. It is lawful, I say, to resist
him by not doing what he commands and hinder-
ing the execution of his will.’’ My venerable and
learned predecessor in the See of Baltimore,
Archbishop Kenrick, speaks in a similar strain;
the Pope’s ‘‘power was given for edification, not
for destruction; if he used it for love of domina-
tion (quod absit) scarcely will he meet with obe-
dient populations.”’

We may put aside, then, as an absurdity the
injurious supposition that the Pope would ever
interfere in purely civil affairs. But is there not a
twilight zone over which both Church and State
put forth claims? True; and I grant that here
a collision of authorities comes more within the
horizon of possibility. But the Amercan concept
of government and of liberty puts this hypothesis
outside of the range of practical affairs. ‘That
concept, as I understand it, is that the Govern-
ment should leave as large a liberty as possible to
individuals and to bodies within the State, only
intervening in the interests of morality, justice
and the common weal. There are forces at work in
the country, I know, that tend to paternalism and
Cesarism in Government; but true Americanism
recognizes that these forces would bring disaster
on American liberties. So long as these liberties,
under which we have prospered, are preserved in
their fulness there is, I assert, no danger of a col-
lision between the State and the Catholic Church.

The admission, however, of the merely theoreti-
eal possibility of such a collision keeps alive the
apprehension of timid Protestants, and is suffi-
THE CHURCH AND THE REPUBLIC 231

cient to determine some of them to deprive Catho-
lies forever of the honor of the Presidency. But
if no man were to be considered eligible for the
Presidency unless we were certain that under no
conceivable circumstances would his conscience
come into conflict with any possible legislation,
then the first consideration to qualify a man as
candidate for the office would be that he should
have no conscience at all.

‘‘But,’? many Protestants say, ‘‘we obey our
conscience; you obey the Pope.’’ Yes; we obey
the Pope, for our conscience tells us that we ought
to obey the spiritual authority of the Pope in
everything except what is sinful. ‘‘But,’’ they
reply, ‘‘we do not believe that any human power
should come between the human conscience and
duty.’’ Neither do we; but while you believe in
private judgment, we believe in a religion of
authority which our conscience tells us is our law-
ful guide and teacher in its own sphere. You say
that you believe in religious freedom. Do you,
however, interpret this freedom to apply only to
yourselves; or are you willing to conceive that to
others likewise is to be left the freedom to follow
their consciences? You can conceive a State
passing laws that would violate your conscien-
tious convictions. Would you accept these laws,
or would you resist them as your fellow-religion-
ists in England recently resisted an education law
of which they did not approve? J think you would |
not prove false to your religious convictions.

Were the State to attempt to compel Orthodox
Jews to accept the Sunday for the Sabbath, or to
232 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

abandon certain Levitical observances which are
sacred in their eyes, they would not be worth their
salt if they did not resist this encroachment on
their rights. Similarly, for example, if the State
should forbid us Catholics to continue our paro-
chial schools, we should resist to the uttermost;
for we hold that, while the State has the un-
doubted right to compel her future citizens to
receive a certain degree of education, she has no
right to deprive them of the daily religious influ-
ence which we deem necessary for their spiritual
and eternal welfare, as well as for their proper
training in the duties of citizenship. In any such
essay by the State to establish Casarism, Catho-
lics would behave precisely as any other conscien-
tious body would behave. They would not think
it necessary to await instructions from any source.
We believe in the sacredness and supremacy of
conscience; and rulers of the world, from Nero to
Clemenceau, have found the Catholic conscience
to be a wall of adamant.

VI.

It cannot be regarded as strange that Protest-
ants should feel free to assail the Catholic Church
regarding her position on the Union of Church
and State. Wherever in Europe the opportunity
presented itself, the various Protestant churches
united with the State; nay, rather, they threw
themselves at the feet of the State and said:
‘‘Rule thou over us. Be thou our King and our
Prophet.’’ But the Catholic Church has always
THE CHURCH AND THE REPUBLIC — 233

retained her spiritual independence; her union
with the State has always been an alliance of inde-
pendent powers, not the subjection of a vassal to
her liege lord. Her doctrine on the subject has
been this; in a country wholly or predominantly
Catholic, the most desirable relation is the friendly
union and co-operation of Church and State,
neither power sacrificing its liberty and each
acknowledging the other. 'That this is the ideal
relation, provided liberty be assured to those not
of the established Church, no sensible man can
deny. The Catholic Church states in form of
doctrine what all history shows to be inevitable—
that where the Church and State are practically
two names for the nation, viewed as a body of
worshippers and as a political entity, it is impos-
sible to prevent an intimate union. If my Prot-
estant friends will show me a free nation that
really believes in one religion and has no union of
religion with the State, I will believe the Catholic
doctrine unwarranted.

But while the union is ideally best, history as-
suredly does not prove that it is always practically
best. There is a union that is inimical to the inter-
ests of religion, and consequently to the State; and
there is a separation that is inimical to the inter-
ests of religion, and consequently to the State; and
there is a separation that is for the best interests
of both. In our country separation is a necessity ;
and it is a separation that works best for the inter-
ests of religion, as Mr. Taft recently stated, as well
as for the good of the State. I fully agree with him,
and I can understand, too, and sympathize with the
234 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

great Catholic leader of France, the Count de
Mun, who recently exclaimed: ‘‘In America sep-
aration means the reign of liberty; in France the
reign of impiety.’’

American Catholics rejoice in our separation of
Church and State; and I can conceive no combina-
tion of circumstances likely to arise which should
make a union desirable either to Church or State.
We know the blessings of our present arrange-
ment; it gives us liberty and binds together priests
and people in a union better than that of Church
and State. Other countries, other manners; we do
not believe our system adapted to all conditions;
we leave it to Church and State in other lands to
Solve their problems for their own best interests.
For ourselves, we thank God we live in America,
‘‘in this happy country of ours,’’ to quote Mr.
Roosevelt, where ‘‘religion and liberty are natural
allies.”’
THE CLAIMS OF THE CATHOLIC
CHURCH IN THE MAKING OF
THE REPUBLIC
THE CLAIMS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IN
THE MAKING OF THE REPUBLIC.

What can make a man so good a citizen as the
religion which teaches him the oneness of truth,
fidelity to God, to his country, to marriage, to con-
science, and applies itself directly every day to
strengthening those forces which conserve or purify
society and exalt the soul?—Geo. Parsons Lathrop.

First in discovery, first in the establishment of
Christianity, first in the organization of civil govern-
ment, first in proclaiming religious toleration.

HE United States grew out of the colonies

established on the Atlantic seaboard, and also

out of those portions of the continent that
were purchased from [Tiuropean countries and
gained by conquest. To state fully that the Cath-
olic Church has contributed to the making of the
United States, it is necessary to say what she
has done, not only since, but also before the act
of Independence, in the territories now comprised
in the Union. Has she helped to break ground as
well as to plant and foster the growth of the
tree of liberty?

To the Catholic Church must of necessity be
attributed all that was done in the New World
since Columbus until the rise of the Reformation.
After the event of Protestantism in the world, she

235
236 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

did not cease her work in this continent; but it has
been fertilized by the sweat and blood of Catholic
explorers, founders of colonies and missionaries,
not only in South America—which field, however,
I leave aside as being out of our theme—but also
from the Canadian borders to the southermost
coast of Florida, from the Atlantic to the Pacific
Ocean.

All over these United States you will meet the
monuments of their passage. The work of the
Catholic Church in this land during this period
might be distributed under the following heads:
Discoverers, Founders of Colonies, Explorers,
Missionaries, Writers. Of course a full treat-
ment of this matter is beyond the limits of this
paper. I can only make a few suggestions.

De Soto discovered the Mississippi and named
it in honor of the Holy Ghost. Marquette threaded
it for a great distance and dedicated it to the
Immaculate Conception. Hennepin ascended to
the Falls which he named in honor of St. Anthony
of Padua. Ponce de Leon named Florida to com- |
memorate its discovery on the Feast of the Resur-
rection. Ayllon named the Carolinas the land of
St. John the Baptist, and bestowed on the Chesa-
peake the name of St. Mary. New Mexico bears
the name given by a Catholic missionary 300 years
ago. In one word they were Catholic navigators,
who gave Catholic names to river, bay, promon-
tory, cape, from the river of St. John in the south
to the river of St. Lawrence in the north.

Maryland counts among her founders the Cath-
olic Sir George Calvert, Lord Baltimore, and
CHURCH’S WORK FOR THE REPUBLIC 237

Cecilius Calvert, the second Lord Baltimore. The
Catholic Colony of Maryland was the first home
on this continent of civil and religious liberty.
- Don Pedro Menendez de Aviles was the founder
of a colony in Florida; Antoine de la Motte Cadil-
lac the founder of a colony in Michigan; Vincennes
the founder of a colony in Indiana; La Salle, of
a colony in Illinois; St. Ange, of a colony in
Missouri; Touti, of a colony in Arkansas; Iber-
ville, of a colony in Louisiana; Sauville, of a colony
in Mississippi; Bienville, the founder of Mobile;
Don Juan de Onate, of New Mexico; Don Gasper
de Portola, of California.

The first great explorers were Champlain, who
named the Lake in Vermont; Pierrot and Nicol-
let, on the upper lakes; Duluth, on Lake
Superior; Louis Joliet, Robert Cavelier de la
Salle, La Verendrye, Coronado, Font, Garces,
Kuhn, Saint Denys, in other parts of the land.
By these men the valley of the great lakes, the
valley of the Mississippi and the plains to the Gulf
of California were made known before the English
colonists had any definite knowledge beyond the
Alleghenies.

Not only were Catholics the first explorers, but
they were the first geologists and botanists of the
territory within the limits of the present United
States. Le Moyne found the salt springs of
Onondaga, the Franciscan Joseph de la Roche
d’Allion the oil Springs of Pennsylvania, Jesuits
the copper of Lake Superior and the lead of Illi-
nois, a Jesuit identified the ginseng, Hennepin
238 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

was one of the first to note our beds of coal, Father
Mare the mines of turquoise.

This is but an incomplete list of explorations
made by the Catholics before the Revolution. It
proves, however, that they had left no important
portion of our territory hidden and unknown from
Europe; their reports and relations of their voy-
age are the evidences of their discoveries.

Catholic priests came with Columbus and his
followers in trans-Atlantic voyages. A priest -
sailed with Cabot from Bristol in 1498. Mission-
aries came with Ponce de Leon in 1521 to min-
ister to the intended settlements in Florida and
to labor for the conversion of the Indians.

In 1526 two friars of the order of Saint Dominic
came with the colony of Vasquez d’Ayllon, estab-
lished at or near the site of Jamestown, Va., which
settlement was afterward abandoned. In 1558
eight priests came with De Soto and perished in
the marches of that discoverer across the country.
In 1542 the Franciscan Juan de Padilla began a
mission among the Indians of New Mexico and
fell a martyr to his zeal. The mission, however,
was re-established and kept up by the Francis-
cans. In 1696, five were massacred; in 1751, many
Catholic Indians were killed by their pagan fel-
lows, and the missions were destroyed.

In 1702, the Jesuit Nicholas Foucault was mur-
dered by the Indians on his way from Arkansas
to Mobile. In 1729, the Jesuit Du Poissen and
with him a lay brother was murdered while going
to New Orleans. The Jesuit, Antonius Senat,
chaplain to Vincennes, was burned at the stake
. CHURCH’S WORK FOR THE REPUBLIC 239

by Chickasaws in Mississippi, Palm Sunday, 1736.
Three Dominicans, Luis Cancer, Diego de Tolosa,
Juan Garcia, were massacred by Florida Indians
in 1549. Pedro Menendez founded St. Augustine,
Florida, in 1565, and with him were Franciscans,
Jesuits, and a secular priest, Mendoza Grajales.

A year after the founding of St. Augustine, a
Jesuit, Pedro Martinez, was killed by the Indians
at Cumberland. In 1571, two Jesuit fathers, J. B.
de Segura and Luis de Qurios, with four lay broth-
ers were butchered on the banks of the Rappa-
hannock, Va. In 1597 four Franciscans were
slain in Florida, and one, Francesco de Velascola,
in Georgia, while Francesco de Avila was enslaved
by the savages.

The labors of these missionaries were not with-
out fruit for the time being, but we must confess
that the results were not permanent. The natives
associated with the religion preached by them,
the greed and cruelties of the Spanish invaders.
At this period, as in later times, the Christians
themselves were the obstacle to the success of the
missions among the red men.

In New Mexico a better result seemed to have
been gained down to the middle of the seventeenth
century, when the Indians, exasperated by the
conduct of the Spanish Governor, and excited to
fanaticism by the medicine men, turned on the
Spaniards and slew 21 Franciscans. In 1682 three
priests left by LaSalle at the mouth of the Missis-
sippi were massacred. In 1721 Brother Jose Pita
was slain in Texas, and in 1752 Jose F. de Ganza-
bel at San Ildefonso in the same State; in 1757,
240 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

Father Silva, near the Rio Grande, and in 1758
Fathers Terreros and Santiesteban and Melina at |
the Apache mission.

The history of the MISSIONS IN THE
NORTERN STATES is not quite so early, but is
of more interest to us and is better known. In
1604 a chapel was built on De Moorts or Neutral
Island, in the present State of Maine. The settlers
were removed the following year to Nova Scotia.
In 1611 Father Biard offered Mass on an island
in the mouth of the Kennebec. Two years later,
in the attack made on LaSaussaye’s settlement,
near Mt. Desert, Fathers Biard, Quentin and
Masse suffered various fates. In 1641 Isaac
Jogues and Charles Reymbault planted the cross
at Sault Ste Marie, Michigan. Jogues was mas-
sacred in 1649, near Auriesville, Montgomery
county, New York, by the Mohawks.

In 1680 the Franciscan Gabriel de la Ribourde
was slain by the Kickapoos in Illinois. In 1706
Constantine Deshulles was shot by the Ottawas
while engaged in a mission of peace to that tribe
from the Miamis. In 1728 Louis Guigras was cap-
tured by Indians near Lake Pepin, and was saved
from death by adoption into the tribe. In 1736
Peter Aulneau was slain at the Lake of the Woods.
In 1724 Father Rale was slain by the English and
the Mohawks at Norridgewock. |

Few of these missions had any permanency
for the same reasons that rendered the work of
the missionaries ineffective in the Spanish Col-
onies. The Whites, with their vices, undid what
the missionaries, with their heroic and disinter-
CHURCH’S WORK FOR THE REPUBLIC 241

ested zeal, tried to do. Such we know is the state
of things today in our Indian missions. The con-
version of the barbarian races in the early cen-
turies of Christianity was effected under quite
other conditions.

The Church has not been untrue to her mission
of teaching nations, nor has she at any time failed
to find apostles ready at her call; but Christian
peoples and Governments, instead of seconding
her efforts, have put obstacles in her way, seem-
ingly more intent on selfish aims than on the
spread of truth and the salvation of souls. On
them, not on her, rests the responsibility of fail-
ure in gaining to Christianity the aborigines of
this continent. Future history will count our
Indian wars and our Indian policy a sad commen-
tary on our Christian civilization.

Naturally those discoverers, founders of colon-
ies, explorers and missionaries, must have left
behind them a very large amount of literature
concerning the countries now comprised within
the United States. It would be a very difficult
task to make out a complete bibliography of
American literature before the Revolution; this
much is certain at first sight, the largest share of
such literature must fall to the credit of Catholic
writers. The introduction to the first volume of
the ‘‘Narrative and Critical History of Amer-
ica,’’ edited by Justin Winsor, deals with Ameri-
cana in Libraries and Bibliographies, and with
Early Descriptions of America and Collective
Accounts of the early Voyages thereto. For
242 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

further information on this point I refer the
reader to this most learned work.

However, to give an idea of the vast amount of
literature that had been produced on America
before the period of the Revolution, I transcribe
one item from page 4 of the above-named intro-
duction.

“‘M. Terneaux Compans, who had collected—as
Mr. Brevoort thinks—the most extensive library
of books on America ever brought together,
printed his ‘Bibliotheque Americaine’ in 1837 at
Paris. It embraced 1,154 works arranged chron-
ologically, and all of them of a date before 1700.’’

From works written on or in the Indian lan-
guages by Catholic missionaries a long catalogue
might be made out. I will name a few: Works
in the Timaquan language of Florida, by Father
Francis Pareya, O. S. F., printed between 1612
and 1627, including a grammar, catechism, pray-
ers; Sagard’s Wyandot Dictionary, 1632; Father
White’s books on the Maryland language, written
soon after 1634; Bruya’s Mohawk works, the
Onondaga Dictionary; Garnier’s Seneca and
Cayuga books; Rales’ Abnaki Dictionary, Le
Boulanger’s Illinois Dictionary and Cathechism,
Garcia’s Texan Manual, the works of Sitjar,
Cuesta and other California missionaries.

All these were published before the independ-
ence of the Colonies. Works of the same kind by
Catholic missionaries since the Revolution down
to the present day would swell the list to an incon-
venient length. When came the uprising of the
colonies and the war for independence, our coun-
CHURCH’S WORK FOR THE REPUBLIC 248

try stood in need of loyalty in the masses, states-
manship in the leaders, money in the treasury,
and fighting men in the field. Out of a popula-
tion of 3,0000,000 at that time the Catholic Church
counted not more than 30,000 members. How-
ever, of loyalty, statesmanship, money and men
she furnished more than her share.

I leave aside the help that France and Spain
gave to the struggling colonies, and speak only of
what our Catholic forefathers at home did for
their country. Their loyalty to their native land
was not, and has never been questioned; Toryism
was not found among them; they had fled English
misrule and tyranny; they were anxious to break
off entirely with the land that only by a misnomer
could be called the Mother Country.

Although Catholics had fared ill at the hands
of their fellow-colonists; although in all the colon-
ies they were oppressed with unjust penal laws;
although on the very eve of the War of Independ-
ence an outbreak of bigotry ran through the land
on the occasion of the compliance of England to
the treaty with France, in virtue of which, religi-
ous liberty and protection were guaranteed to
Canada; although Methodists, with John Wesley,
sided with England, and a very large portion of
the Episcopalians took the same course, and
Quakers, conscientiously averse to war, remained
neutral, the Catholics spontaneously and univer-
sally adhered to the cause of independence.

Every Catholic was a Whig. Look into Sa-
bine’s ‘‘American Loyalists’? (Boston, 1847).
You will find there not one single Catholic name.
244 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

Catholic’ Indians were animated with the senti-
ments of their white co-religionists, and in the
North and in the West, under the lead of their
own or Canadian chiefs, took to the field against
England in the cause of liberty. Canada without
a doubt would have thrown her lot in with ours
at that period had not New York politicians, led
by John Jay, drawn the Continental Congress
into the fatal mistake of denouncing the Cana-
dians and their religion for the liberty England
had granted them. As it was, the men of St.
Regis marched forth under Captain Lewis, and
the army counted two regiments of soldiers from
Canada.

Maryland, Pennsylvania, New York, Indiana,
Illinois furnished Catholic recruits out of all pro-
portion to their number in the total population.
The failure of the British to raise a Catholic regi-
ment during their occupation of Philadelphia, in
spite of extraordinary inducements, is evidence
of the deep patriotism of the Catholic population
in those days. Although before the war Catho-
lies were debarred from holding a commission in
the militia, yet many speedily rose to high posi-
tions in the Continental army, and were among
the most trusted of Washington’s aids. The roll
of those Catholic officers is a long and glorious
one.

On the seas the great Commodore of our Navy
was ‘‘saucy Jack Barry’’! To detach him from the
American cause Lord Howe offered him 15,000
guineas and the command of the best frigate in
the English Navy. ‘‘I have devoted myself,’’
CHURCH’S WORK FOR THE REPUBLIC 245

was the answer, ‘‘to the cause of America, and
not the value and command of the whole British
fleet can seduce me from it.’’

Not only in the field and on the quarter-deck,
but also in the council rooms did Catholics have
worthy and remarkable representatives. These
put at the service of their country not only their
wisdom, but their wealth. Charles Carroll, of
Carrollton; his cousin, Daniel Carroll, a brother
of Archbishop Carroll; Thomas Fitzsimmons, a
wealthy merchant of Philadelphia, and Thomas
Sim Lee were all prominent examples of patriot-
ism during the Revolutionary War, and Charles
Carroll of Carrollton was a signer of the Declara-
tion of Independence.

The Catholics of that day were as one to one
hundred and twenty in numbers. Both in council,
and especially in war, they contributed far beyond
their share in the winning of liberty and the form-
ing of this country. One of the reasons Benedict
Arnold gave for his treason was that his zeal for
Protestantism would not permit him to remain in a
service which constantly brought him in contact
with Roman Catholics. After the election of
Washington to the Presidency, an address on
behalf of the Catholics of the country was pre-
sented to him signed by Rev. J. Carroll, Charles
Carroll, Daniel Carroll, Thomas Fitzsimons —
and Dominic Lynch. In his reply to this address
Washington concluded with these words: ‘‘I
hope ever to see America among the foremost
nations in examples of justice and liberty. And
I presume your fellow-citizens will not forget the
246 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

patriotic part which you took in the accomplish-
ment of their Revolution and the establishment of
their Government, or the important assistance
which they received from a nation in which the
Catholic faith is professed.’’

When the Father of his Country came to the
end of his glorious life Archbishop Carroll, in a
circular letter to his clergy, dated December 29,
1799, thus writes: ‘‘We Roman Catholics, in
common with our fellow-citizens of the United
States, have to deplore the irreparable loss our
country has sustained by the death of that great
man who contributed so essentially to the estab-
lishment and preservation of its peace and pros-
perity. We are, therefore, called upon by every
consideration of respect to his memory and grati-
tude for his services to bear a public testimony
of our high sense of his worth when living, and
our sincere sorrow for being deprived of that
protection which the United States derived from
his wisdom, his experience, his reputation, and
the authority of his name.’’

In all subsequent wars that our country has had
to undergo, the American armies have swarmed
with Catholic soldiers, and have produced a long
line of officers who have reached the highest posi-
tion of command. Of the service of Catholics in
our Civil War I need not speak; the memory of
them is living in the land.

Not only Catholic soldiers and sailors, officers
and chaplains, but also our Sisters of Charity, on
the field and in the hospital, have proved our loy-
alty to the country and demonstrate better than
CHURCH’S WORK FOR THE REPUBLIC 247

many words, long statistics and eloquent deserip-
tion what the Church has done for the United
States in the trying days of the fratricidal war.
Catholics were then but a small percentage of the
whole population. Our contribution to the armies
raised was far beyond that proportion. But it is
not necessary to insist; no one questions the serv-
ice we rendered them.

It is well known that in the War of 1812 the
Catholics of New Orleans welcomed back to the
city the victorious hero of the battle that decided
the fortunes of that crisis, General Jackson, and in
his presence celebrated in the Cathedral a solemn
service of thanksgiving to Almighty God.

Just as in the War of Independence Rev. John
Carroll, afterward first Bishop of Baltimore,
went on a political mission with the commission-
ers appointed by Congress to secure the neutral-
ity of Canada, so also in our Civil War Arch-
bishop Hughes, of New York, and Bishop Do-
menec, of Pittsburgh, performed confidential
missions to European powers, and it is certain
that Archbishop Hughes helped to secure the
neutrality of France, and Bishop Domenec that of
Spain.

The Catholics came out of the struggle for inde-
pendence a hundred and forty years ago with an
honorable record. It is a remarkable coincidence
that the organization of the American Church,
begun in the appointment of John Carroll to the
See of Baltimore, was contemporaneous with the
organization of the United States, completed for
248 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

the time being by the election of George Washing-
ton to the Presidency.

The struggle had educated ‘ie American people
up to the idea and understanding of religious lib-
erty. Laws discriminating against Catholies dis-
appeared from the statute books of most of the
States, and liberty of worship gradually was pro-
claimed everywhere. ‘The two clauses of the Con-
stitution, one providing that ‘‘Congress shall not
require any religious test as a qualification for
office under the United States,’? and the other
providing that ‘‘Congress shall make no laws
respecting an establishment of religion, or forbid-
ding the free exercise thereof,’’ exerted a power-
ful moral influence on the States, and infused a
new spirit into their several Constitutions.

On the other hand, the dominant idea in the
mind of Bishop Carroll, who was as great a
statesman as he was a churchman, an idea that
has remained the inspiration of the Church, and
has dictated all her policy of the last century, as
recorded in the legislation of the three National
Councils of Baltimore, was absolute loyalty to the
letter and the spirit of the Constitution of the
United States.

Bishop Carroll did not wish to see the Church
vegetate as a delicate exotic plant. He wished it
to become a sturdy tree, deep-rooted in the soil, to
grow with the growth and bloom with the devel-
opment of the country, inured to its climate, brav-
ing its storms, invigorated by them and yielding
abundantly the fruits of sanctification. His aim
was that the clergy and people should be thor-
CHURCH’S WORK FOR THE REPUBLIC 249

oughly identified with the land in which their
lot is cast; that they should study its laws and
political constitution, and be in harmony with its
spirit. From this mutual accord of Church and
State there could but follow beneficent effects
for both.

I have already stated what the Church did for
the country in times of war. I now go on to out-
line briefly what benefits she has bestowed in the
fairer fields of peace, education, industry and
benevolence, These are the proper fields for her
action. In these lie her nobler triumphs and
greater gifts to man.

Among the greatest services that may be ren-
dered to a nation is the increase of its industrial
and producing population—of that class which,
by labor and thrift, contribute to the growth not
only of the numbers, but also of the wealth of the
country. In 1776 the Catholics were about 25,000,
or 1-120th of the entire population; in 1790 they
were 32,000, or 1-107th of the population.

Progressively they grew in numbers until today
they are at least 16,500,000, or almost one-sixth
of the population. During thirty years prior to
1876 the Irish contributed over 2,000,000 to the
country. The Germans came next, but for some
years the emigration from Germany outnumbered
that from the British Isles; a large proportion of
the German contingent is Catholic.

At the present time the Italian and Hungarian
arrivals are more numerous, combined, than either
the Irish or the German, taken singly. Besides
immigration, there have been other sources of
250 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

increase which must be eredited to the Catholie
element; accessions by the annexation of Louis-
iana, California, Texas and New Mexico, and the
birth rate.

The birth rate in the United States is all in
favor of the Church. The Trish, the Catholic Ger-
mans and the Canadians are proverbially prolific;
and there are other reasons which we may not
enter upon here, and which point to an entirely
disproportionate increase of Catholics in the near
future.

This is especially remarkable in the New Eng-
land States. During the heated controversy upon
the school question in Massachusetts, a Protestant
writer in one of the leading magazines counseled
moderation to her co-religionists, on the ground
that Catholics would soon make the laws of Mas-
sachusetts. Their birth rate in that State was
to that of Protestants in the proportion of four
and a half to one; and the example of Massachu-
setts would appear to be finding imitation through-
out the States.

The increase of clergy and churches hag kept
pace with the increase of population. In 1790 we
had one Bishop, 30 priests and a proportionate
number of churches. Today we count 14 Arch-
bishops, of whom 3 are Cardinals; 97 Bishops,
19,572 priests and 15,163 churches.

It goes without saying that a certain amount of
property is necessary to the carrying on of the
Church’s work, and that such property must have
grown apace with our numbers. The property of
the Church is not wealth, strictly speaking, if by
CHURCH’S WORK FOR THE REPUBLIC 251

wealth is understood accumulated or surplus capi-
tal. We cannot be said to have wealth, since our
churches, our educational and charitable estab-
lishments are not sufficient for our numbers, and
are yet in a struggle for bare existence.

What may be the value of the property held by
the Catholic Church today we have no certain
means of telling, and await with some curiosity
the verdict of the late United States census on
that point. Individual Catholics, though not nec-
ognized among the great millionaires of the land,
have grown wealthy.

One hundred years ago, when Georgetown Col-
lege was founded, $100 was considered a munifi-
cent donation; a few years ago when the Catholic
University was founded in Washington donations
of $10,000, $20,000, $50,000, $100,000, and one sin-
gle donation of $300,000 were forthcoming. In
St. Paul, Minn., a man, a Protestant himself, yet
the husband of a Catholic and the father of a
Catholic family, made to Archbishop Ireland the
princely gift of $500,000 for an ecclesiastical insti-
tute of learning.

In 1789 there was but one Catholic educational
house in the land, Georgetown College. Today
there are 85 ecclesiastical seminaries for the
training of candidates to the priesthood, 210 col-
leges, and about 685 female academies. This
vast system of secondary education is crowned
by a National school of the highest grade, the
Catholic University of America, lately opened at
Washington, and destined in a short time to be a
erowning and completing of all the branches of
252 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

learning begun in the primary and pursued
further in the secondary schools of the Catholic
educational system. For, if the Church in this
land has such a system, it is forced to it by the
necessities of the case.

I go into no controversial considerations on the
school question; I simply state a fact; the public
school as now conducted, admirable as it certainly
is in point of instruction, cannot fully satisfy the
Catholic idea of education. Catholics, therefore,
are driven to the hard necessity of fostering a
system of Catholic primary schools—a hard nee-
essity, since they must add to the taxes they pay to
the public school system of the country, large con-
tributions for the building and running of their
own schools. Thereby they are rendering to their
country a double service.

For every child they educate in the Catholic
schools they spare to the State a proportionate
expense. To every child they educate in the Cath-
olic schools they impart the essential principles
of good citizenship, religion and morality. I
prove this latter assertion by words of George
Washington:

‘‘Of all the dispositions and habits which lead
to political prosperity, religion and morality are
indispensable supports. In vain would that man
claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor
to subvert these great pillars of human happiness,
these firmest props of the duties of men and citi-
zens. The mere politician, equally with the pious
man, ought to respect and to cherish them, * * *
CHURCH’S WORK FOR THE REPUBLIC 253

And let us with caution indulge the supposition
that morality can be maintained without religion.

‘*Whatever may be conceded to the influence of
refined education on minds of peculiar structure,
reason and experience, both forbid us to expect
that national morality can prevail in exclusion of
religious principles. It is substantially true that
virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popu-
lar government. This rule, indeed, extends with
more or less force to every species of free govern-
ment. Who that is a sincere friend to it, can look
with indifference upon attempts to shake the
foundation of the fabric?’’

Catholics have today in the United States 5,588
parochial schools, giving education to 1,497,949
children. Taking together our secondary schools,
academies and colleges, our primary schools,
parochial schools proper, and certain of our char-
itable institutions, the chief work of which is the
bringing up of orphans, I think I am safe in as-
serting that we educate nearly 1,600,000 children.

Of late years a movement which has become
very widespread in England is beginning to take
on respectable proportions in this country; it is .
known as the University Extension, and is an
' effort to extend to the masses and popularize even
higher education. Something of the kind is in
existence among Catholics, and has been for some
time past.

In many cities there are Catholic literary socie-
ties, made up mostly of young men, graduates of
our colleges and high schools. These are, as it
were, an extension of secondary education. More-
254 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

over, in almost every parish there is in existence,
or there is being formed, a Reading Circle, which
is as the extension of the elementary school. It
is evident from what I have stated in this para-
graph that the Church favors the education and
the continual intellectual development of her
members, and in so far renders valuable service
to the Republic.

The negroes are our fellow-citizens, the Indians
are the wards of the nation; whoever labors for
the welfare of these two classes of fellow-men
does service to his country. For them what has
the Catholic Church done, and what is she doing?
In a sermon preached on the occasion of the Balti-
more Centenary, Archbishop Ryan spoke some
solemn words on these two questions.

‘*T believe,’’ he said, ‘‘that in the last century
we could have done more for the colored people
of the South and the Indian tribes. I believe that
negro slavery and the unjust treatment of the
Indians are the two great blots upon the Ameri-
ean civilization. So I feel that in the Church,
also, the most reasonable cause for regret in the
past century is the fact that more could have been
done for the same dependent classes.”’

Too true. But there are signs of a revival of
the zeal in these two fields of missionary work.
Not many years ago a noble-hearted woman, Miss
Drexel, devoted herself and her very large for-
tune to the negro and Indian missions, and an-
nually the sum of $70,000 or $80,000 is contributed
by the Catholics of the United States to the same
purpose.
CHURCH’S WORK FOR THE REPUBLIC 255

Present statistics show that 200,000 negroes
are members of the Catholic Church; that they
have 110 places of worship, 156 schools, giving
education to 16,000 children; 26 orphanages and
charitable institutions. One hundred and eighty-
three priests minister to the Catholic colored pop-
ulation, and lately a college and ecclesiastical
Seminary have been established in Baltimore,
appropriated exclusively to the training of can-
didates for the priesthood, who: will devote them-
selves entirely to the Negro Catholic missions.

There lies before the Catholic Church a duty
toward the colored population of the United
States which she will not neglect, and in which,
once she gives herself earnestly to the task, suc-
cess cannot fail to attend her efforts.

We have seen in the beginning of this paper
how heroically the early Catholic missionaries
labored and died in the task of converting the In-
dian tribes to Christianity. The obstacles that
were then in the way of complete success increased.
with the flow of white settlers, and are in full
operation today, with the addition of a political
situation anything but favorable.

Indians are not considered to be free men, but
the wards of the nation. Religious liberty, in the
sense we understand and enjoy it, is not among
the rights accorded to them. The policy of the
Government has not heen always uniform in this
respect. At one time the tribes were parcelled
out for religious and educational training among
various religious bodies, and Catholic Indians
were assigned to non-Catholic ministers and
256 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

teachers, The present administration seems in-
clined to adopt a system not less unfavorable to
the work of the Church—that of Governmental
schools, from which all Christianity, or at least
all Catholic Christianity, will be excluded. How-
ever, the good sense of the American people may
interfere with the complete execution of that plan.

At the present moment statistics of the
Church’s work among the Indians stand thus:
Catholic Indians, about 100,000; churches, 260;
priests laboring exclusively among them, 164;
schools, 68; pupils in Catholic schools, 5,000.

I can speak only briefly of the charities under
Catholic supervision. We count in the United
States numerous charitable institutions directly
under the control of the Church, and in the hands
of men and women who are exclusively devoted by
vows of religion to the many works of Christian
benevolence.

There is no phase of human misery and afflic-
tion for which the Church does not provide some
antidote, some alleviation. She has foundling
asylums to receive and shelter abandoned infants,
orphan asylums to be homes for children whom
death has left without father or mother, hospitals
for every species of bodily and mental disease,
Magdalen asylums or Houses of the Good Shep-
_ herd for the shelter and reclaiming of women
who have fallen victims to their own weakness, or
to the false promises of the seducer; reformator-
ies for boys that have taken the first step in the
path of vice, or are exposed to its dangers; re-
treats for the aged, where men and women with-
CHURCH’S WORK FOR THE REPUBLIC 25%

out homes find on the threshold of the grave a
refuge from the storms of life, and a novitiate to
prepare them for eternity.

Besides the charitable institutions which are in
the hands of religious men and women, there is a
very large number of societies, beneficent in their
character and aims, the management of which is
left in the hands of Catholic laymen who compose
their membership, though more or less under the
sanction and control of their respective pastors.
Such are the Mutual Benevolent Societies; their
aims are very much alike, but their names are
many and various and their aggregate member-
ship runs up into the hundreds of thousands.
These societies very naturally are formed on lines
of nationality; they are Irish, German, American,
Polish, Canadian, etc.

In contrast with these Mutual Benevolent Asso-
ciations is the St. Vincent de Paul Society, which
is based on no national lines, but is strictly Cath-
olic, being made up as to membership of all
nationalities, and doing its work among all with-
out distinction of race or color. Almost every
parish in cities has a St. Vincent de Paul Society
attached to it.

The members of this admirable association visit
personally the poor in their homes, inquire into
their condition, and distribute aid where it will do
the most good. They give their services gratu-
itously, and the means to accomplish their work
are gathered by voluntary offerings and by con-
tributions bestowed by themselves in such a man-
258 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

ner that no member knows what his neighbor
contributes.

Of late years the care of immigrants landing in
New York has attracted the attention and engaged
the sympathies of our Catholic Associations.
This work is only at its beginning; already two
houses, one for German, the other for Irish immi-
grants, have been opened in New York, to serve
as bureaus of information and temporary lodging
places. The work of colonizing immigrants in
the Western States and Territories has been un-
dertaken and carried on with great success by
colonizing societies,

The great social problem is that of capital and
labor; many are the schemes that have been put
out to solve the problem. But they are all par-
tial and incomplete remedies, because they look
only to the material and temporal interests of
man, and man after all is something more than a
being of matter and time. He is a being under a
higher dispensation, under the law of Christian
charity. All social schemes based on the assump-
tion that man’s good lies in the natural order
alone, must fail. The brotherhood of man is a
dream unless it be founded in the Fatherhood of
God. In the Christian dispensation in which we
live the natural order cannot stand without the
support of the supernatural order. The Catholic
Church is the authorized representative and expo-
nent of the supernatural order. True, it is not
her official duty to devise special social schemes
for special social disorders; but it is her duty to
see to it that all schemes devised are founded on
CHURCH’S WORX FOR THE REPUBLIC 259

Christian principles, and do not antagonize the
law of nature and the law of God.

An illustration of her position in this social
question of labor and capital was given a few
years ago, when, on the representation of the
American Hierarchy, the Holy Father forebore
to take action against the Knights of Labor, thus
admitting that labor has its rights in the face of
capital, and is justified in asserting those rights
as long as the means employed are not against

natural justice or divine law.

On that occasion a very great service was ren-
dered to the country, to the laboring masses and
to the capitalist class also. For is it not better
for capital to find itself in the presence of moral
right and force than in the presence of physical
might and brute force? That service is but the
earnest of many to come in the same line for which
the country may have to bless and thank the Cath-
olic Church. She above all religious bodies
has the authority to speak frankly the truth to all,
rich and poor, and the moral power to enforce
that truth on the prouder classes and on the hum-
bler but more dangerous because more aggrieved
masses.

One great evil that threatens the American peo-
ple is divorce. Divorce means contempt of the
marriage bond, avoidance of the responsibilities
and duties of family life; it means the sapping of
society at its very sources. The nation where
divorce is of wide extension and long continuance,
must perish. Such is the verdict of logic and his-
tory. The Catholic Church never allows complete
260 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

divorce, but allows for certain good reasons ‘‘lim-
ited divorce,’’ or separation from bed and board.

This limited divorce is hardly known or sought
after by non-Catholics; for out of 328,716
divorces granted between the years 1867 and
1886, only 2,099 were limited divorces, and no
doubt many, if not all, of these were granted to
Catholic parties. That was a revelation to make
a lover of his country pause in saddest musing,
the report made on order of Congress by Carroll
D. Wright. Within twenty years 328,716 divorces
had been granted in the United States. Within
that period the population had increased 60 per
cent., the divorces 157 per cent.

The different aspects of this statistical report
deserve study. Out of these many aspects I wish
to present one that has a bearing on the main pur-
pose of this paper. In Connecticut there was in
the year 1874-75 one divorce for every 8.84 and
8.81 marriages. Gradually this proportion dimin-
ished to one divorce for every 13.09 marriages in
1886. In Vermont the proportion was in 1874-75
one divorce to 14.97 and 14.26 marriages; in 1886
one divorce to 20.06 marriages. In Massachu-
setts in 1878 one divorce to 22.54 marriages; in
1886 the proportion was one divorce to 31.89 mar-
riages. Meanwhile in all the other States the
proportion was on a steady increase.

Now the question is, how account for the de-
crease in the above-named States? Here is the
account in one word: The increase of the Cath-
olic population in those States. It is well worth
CHURCH’S WORK FOR THE REPUBLIC 261

while quoting a remark of Mr. Carroll D. Wright
on this point:

‘‘However great and growing be the number of
divorces in the United States, it is an incontest-
able fact that it would be still greater were it not
for the widespread influence of the Roman Cath-
olic Church.”’

The only remedy to this terrible evil is a return
to the legislation of the Church, which is the legis-
lation of Jesus Christ Himself, on matrimony.

The Divine institution of a day of rest from
ordinary occupations and of religious worship,
transferred by the authority of the Church from
the Sabbath, the last day, to Sunday, the first day
of the week, has always been revered in this coun-
try, has entered into our legislation and customs,
and is one of the most patent signs that we are a
Christian people.

The neglect and abandonment of this observ-
ance would be sure evidence of a departure from
the Christian spirit in which our past national
life has been moulded. In our times, as in all
times past, the enemies of religion are the oppo-
nents, secret or avowed, of the Christian Sabbath.
A close observer cannot fail to note the dangerous
inroads that have been made on the Lord’s Day
in this country within the last quarter of a cen-
tury. He renders a service to his country who
tries to check this dangerous tendency to desecra-
tion.

It would not be difficult to show that the observ-
ance of Sunday is fraught with the greatest social
blessings; as proof, look at the social ills that
262 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

have befallen those Christian nations that have
lost respect for it. Solicitous to avert from the
United States those disastrous consequences, the
Catholic Church has been a strenuous upholder of
the sacred character of the Lord’s Day. On no
point has she been more clear and emphatic in her
legislation, recorded in her Plenary Councils, and
notably in the Third Plenary Council held in Bal-
timore in 1884. It is to be hoped that all her
children in these States, casting aside the abuses
of the European lands whence they come, may
accept loyally and carry out thoroughly that salu-
tary legislation.

Akin more or less to all the foregoing ques-
tions, intimately bound up with the observance of
Sunday, with the sufferings of the laboring
classes, and with education, is the question of Tem-
perance. The greatest statesmen of all times
have seen in drunkenness the direst plague of
society, the main source of its crimes and pauper-
ism.

However, to pass on to more relative consider-
ations, if he who seeks to stay and remove the
curse of drink is to be accounted a social benefac-
tor, then we may claim that attribution for the
Church. The legislation of the Council of Balti-
more is precise and vigorous in this matter; Cath-
olic Total Abstinence and Father Mathew Socie-
ties are everywhere in the land. Some years ago
in a brief address to Archbishop Ireland, the Holy
Father, Leo XIIT, gave his approbation, in words
that cannot be misunderstood or misinterpreted,
to total abstinence as an efficacious remedy for
CHURCH’S WORK FOR THE REPUBLIC 263

intemperance, and to total abstinence societies as
being engaged in a work beneficial to the State
and the Church. Pt

If it be objected that many Catholics are delin-
quent in this matter to the wishes of the Church;
our answer is that, unfortunately, the State does
not co-operate with the Church in this important
question; that laws against drunkenness and legal
restrictions on the sale of intoxicants are allowed
to be violated; that what is called the necessities of
politics are at war with the spirit of christianity
the virtues of the citizen, the good of the social
body; that this is a case in which corrupt politics
and the loose administration of law shelter the
unfaithful or the less worthy children of the
Church from her salutary influences and com-
mands, The only effective and permanent remedy
against the abuse of intoxicating drink, is to be
found in the enactment of judicious laws regulat-
ing its sale, rigidly executed by the civil authori-
ties, and reinforced by moral and religious
sanctions, directly appealing to the individual
conscience.

No constitution is more in harmony with Cath-
olic principles than is the American. And no
religion can be in such accord with that constitu-
tion as the Catholic. While the State is not ab-
sorbed in the Church, nor the Church in the State,
and thus there is external separation, they both
derive their life from the same interior principle
of truth, and in their different spheres carry out
the same ideas, and thus there is between them a
real internal union. The Declaration of Inde-
264. A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

pendence acknowledges that the rights it pro-
claims come from God as the source of all gov-
ernment and all authority. This is a fundamen-
tal religious principle in which the Church and
State meet.

From it follows the correlative principle that as
God alone it the source of human rights, so God
alone can efficaciously maintain them. This is
equivalent to Washington’s warning that the
basis of our liberties must be morality and relig-
ion. Shall, then, the various Christian churches
have influence enough with the millions of our
people to keep them in morality and religion?
No question can equal this in importance to our
country. For success in this noble competition
the Catholic Church trusts in the commission
given her by her Divine Founder to teach and
bless ‘‘all nations, all days, even until the end of
the world.’’ For guarantee of the spirit in which
she shall strive to accomplish it, she points confi-
dently to history’s testimony of her unswerving
assertion of popular rights, and to her cordial
devotedness to the free institutions of America
constantly manifested, in word and in work, by
her Bishops, her clergy and her people.
IRISH IMMIGRATION TO THE
UNITED STATES
IRISH IMMIGRATION TO THE UNITED
STATES. *

T is more than one thousand years ago that

good Walafrid Strabo spoke of the migratory

tendencies of the Irish people: ‘‘Quibus mos
peregrinands paene in naturam conversa est.’’
Since then they have certainly not belied the judg-
ment of the old magister, and the annals of the
Continent are proof that every nation and every
city of Europe, especially since the downfall of
the Irish State at the beginning of the seventeenth
century. We read with astonishment that nearly
a million of Irishmen fought and perished in the
service of the French crown, and we instinctively
add to that number all those who followed the
wavering fortunes of Spain, Austria and Russia
during the same epoch, not to speak of the minor
powers of Europe. In the seventeenth and eigh-
teenth centuries Ireland seems to have been, like
Switzerland in the fifteenth, a pepiniére of swords-
men and lancers, an inexhaustible source of war-
like men,

The discovery of the New World opened up to
the Gael, as to all other European peoples, bound-
less occasions for the satisfaction of the spirit of
adventure, and when the domestic struggle for
political independence that fills and consecrates

* Republished from the Irish Ecclesiastical Record, Feb-
ruary, 1877.
265
266 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

the sixteenth century in Ireland, was over, and
the great earls had fled in despair, we see the
Irish Gael appearing in the New World, in con-
stantly growing numbers, and exercising upon
its fortunes no despicable influence. Tradition
has it that Miles Standish was an Irishman and
a Catholic. Sir Thomas Dongan of Cork, ‘‘a far-
sighted and able man,’’ was Governor of New York
towards the end of the seventeenth century, and in
the course of the eighteenth,many a stout ship bore
its hundreds of Irish immigrants into the ports
of Philadelphia, New York, New London and Bal-
timore. Colonial development, war, foreign com-
merce, domestic discontent, religious oppression
were among the causes that filled with Irishmen
the vessels that regularly sailed from Dublin,
Cork and Londonderry. Their descendants, un-
happily, are lost to the faith today by no fault
of theirs. It is sad to think of the religious priva-
tions of men like Daniel O’Sullivan, the Kerry
school-master, who penetrated the wilds of New
Hampshire about the middle of the eighteenth
century, and became the progenitor of the revolu-
tionary Sullivans and of other families famous
today in the New England States. During the
eighteenth century, the colonial ports were never
without their fair proportion of Irishmen, for the
sea has ever been as dear to the men of Erin as to
the men of England, and they may praise with
equal zeal:

This happy breed of men, this little world,
This precious stone, set in the silver sea,
Which serves it in the office of a wall,

Or as a moat defensive to a house.
IRISH IMMIGRATION 267

It is certain that Northern New York and Penn-
sylvania received large accessions of Gaelic Cath-
olics in the first half of the eighteenth century,
both Scotch and Irish Gael. Scarcely a month
passes that the newspapers of the period do not
chronicle the arrival of hundreds. In the latter
half of the century New London, in Connecticut,
was a favorite port of entry for Irish immigrants,
and the eastern portion of that State was largely
settled by Irish, though of Protestant faith. The
revolutionary war brought many Irishmen to the
colonies, for several of the British regiments were
entirely composed of the Gael. On the American
side a good portion of the soldiers were Irishmen,
according to the testimony of General Lee, cited
by the British General Robertson before the Com-
mittee of the House of Commons, in 1778. In this
country we are familiar with similar evidences
of George Washington and of Verplank, not to
speak of the famous phrase of Parke Custis, the
adopted son of Washington, that ‘‘in the Revolu-
tionary War Ireland furnished one hundred men
to any single man furnished by any foreign
nation.’’

Coming down from the earliest English settle-
ment of this territory, there is in the United .
States, especially in Virginia and New England.
a deep strain of Gaelic blood, one of whose sources
is the steady kidnapping, during the seventeenth
century, of thousands of Irish girls and boys,
brought over to the West Indian Colonies and to
Virginia and New England in particular. The
curious researches of Mr. John Prendergast in
268 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

his Cromwellian Settlement of Ireland, and the
‘permits’? of Cromwell in the ‘‘State Papers”’ of
England, are irrefragable proofs of this practice.
Nevertheless, neither this infusion of Gaelic blood,
nor the great number of eighteenth century Irish
redemptioners (temporary bondsmen), nor the
other sources of Irish immigration previous to
the opening of the nineteenth century, would ever
have brought about the marvellous results that
have since come to pass through the mighty exodus
of almost an entire people from the venerable seat
of its history and its power. This exodus is yet too
near us, and its results are yet too personal and
present, to permit my discussing it from a philos-
ophical point of view. Hence I shall confine myself
to some facts, and to such considerations as seem
best fitted for the direction of those who intend
in the future to cast in their lot with the great
Republic of the West, the world’s great bulwark
of liberty without license, and individual freedom
without anarchy or despotism.

We are told by Dr. Edward Young, formerly
Chief of the United States Bureau of Statistics,
that ‘‘prior to the year 1820 no official records
were kept of the influx of foreign population to
this country.’? The same official estimates that
between 1776 and 1820 the aggregate immigration
was about 250,000. The entire population of the
colonies at the opening of the war was about
3,000,000, one-third of whom were probably born
on the other side of the Atlantic, while the parents
of a large portion of the remainder were among
the early immigrants. If we apply to this first
IRISH IMMIGRATION 269

period, when immigration statistics were unknown,
the ratio of proportion which has steadily obtained
Since then between the emmigrants from the Brit-
ish Isles, we shall conclude that from 1776 to
1895 Ireland contributed fully seventy per cent.
of the emigration from the political island-
world of Great Britain. The total trans-Atlantic
immigration to the United States since 1820, from
all parts whatsoever, is put down at 17,708,331.
Of this vast number the British Isles have con-
tributed, during these seventy-six years, 6,743,783,
in the following proportion:

IPA ec gedeeie exe ews 3,723,356
England. ............:2,647,230
SCOMAMG, 6 44c004evsaas 873,197

In the same period Germany contributed 4,940,-
538; Norway and Sweden, 1,136,875; Austro-
Hungary, 716,266; Italy, 680,568, and France,
392,359, It is to be noted that the strength of the
Irish immigration antedates that of most other
European nations, and relatively to all, was long
enormously in advance, when we consider the
small bulk of the population whence it has been
drawn. Premising that the total population of the
United States according to the census of 1890, was:
62,622,250, and that of this number 53,332,063
were native born, 9,290,167 foreign born, that 55,-
157,210 were white and about 7,470,040 were black,
it may be of interest to the readers to note the
following table, in which the Bureau of Statistics

ae
?
270 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

has tabulated the arrivals from Ireland by decades
since 1820;

1820-1830..........00% 50,724
1830-1840............. 207,381
1840-1850......2..000- 780,719
1850-1860............. 914,119
VSOU MOTO, cicvaciae nae 435,778
1870-1880.......20000- 436,871
1880-1890........ 0000. 655,482
1890-1900............. 403,496
1900-1910...........4. 369,755
1910-1915............. 168,592

4,422,917

This enormous Irish immigration to America is
fully appreciated only when we remember that
Canada, Australia, South Africa, the West Indies,
and all the English colonies have been drawing
heavily for their increase of population on the
ever-teeming bosom of Ireland.

We must remember, too, that the nation which
furnishes this multitude of immigrants is now
one of the smallest on the earth, and that in less
than fifty years it has sunk in population from
about eight to considerably less than five million
souls. Yet, strange phenomenon, while the nation
has dwindled, the race has increased beyond all
imagination, and it is calculated that today there
are in the world no less than 20,000,000 men of
direct Irish descent.

Our Treasury statistics show that the Irish
IRISH IMMIGRATION 271

immigration is drawn from that element of the
population which furnishes the natural increase
of any people. Between June 30, 1892, and June
30, 1893, out of a total of European immigration
of 488,832, there came from Ireland 49,233 souls.
Of that number 2,781 were under fifteen, 1,929
over forty, and 44,523 between fifteen and forty
years of age. Of this number, 21,435 were males,
and 23,088 were females.

In the decade 1880-1890, the Irish immigrants
under fifteen were 93,308; over forty, 48,085;
while those between fifteen and forty numbered
515,089. Thus Ireland contributed in ten years
to the population of the United States about one-
ninth of her own actual brawn and sinew, her
grace and her gentleness. And the most ancient
social organism of Europe is still pouring west-
ward an endless stream of men and women, to
those regions of Hy-Brasil that Brendan, doubt-
less, gazed upon, and whose sands the holy feet
of Ailbe may have trodden!

In twenty-five years the United States has re-
ceived from Ireland probably one-fourth of her
actual population, as the following table shows.
The figures are taken from the latest Treasury
statistics (1915) and the years begin and end on
June 30:—

(OE once nusietenwents 77,342
1689 inv agertewaucte. oli 76,432
es statues anemecseacs 81,486
1884.00... cece eee eee 63,344
272 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

re 49,619
TEST. gos emenasmouseaves 68,370
i rns 73,513
1889.00... eee eeee eee 65,557
VODs apeacusananevsxy 53,024
OOH ica actetchch cite ane 55,706
CC res 55,467
NEP). 5 <eecumsinbawsin ices 49,293
1894.00... cece eee ee eee 33,904
POO Sic eacrcncce-kusdaihed 5,888
1896......c cesses cues 40,262
LRT: cucraiacsuarimats 28,421
DO cect eich oats 25,128
1899.0... eee e cece eee 31,673
1900.00... cee ee ee eee 35,730
TOO). cestemuccnantdchaesoar 30,561
. 1902... 0... cee eee eeee 29,138
1008, voc auscoewas sex 35,310
POO acts assy ine eae 36,142
1905.00... eee eee ee eee 52,945
TOOE: senoacicvatomss case ore 40,959
1907.0... eee eee eee ee 38,706
WOO js doccues ese ace cares 36,427
1909... ieee cece eee ee 31,185
1910. vzacexernvagaces 38,382
ON earn ca eget ce 40,246
VOLE sia da vwigccnancacens 33,922
1918; cs cscacvwawesnews 37,023
TOI sccmetare pareotecn sas 33,898
OID naciaseciiteainea pac 23,503

1,560,231
IRISH IMMIGRATION 278

The greater part of this immigration has been
and is yet drawn from the laboring classes, though
it is pleasing to note that Ireland sends us, propor-
tionately, as large a percentage of professional
and skilled labor as any other nation. Our immi-
gration laws are becoming more exacting as the
nation awakens to certain dangers inevitable from
the uncontrolled inpouring of European and
Asiatic humanity, and today paupers or persons
without any visible means of support, or likely to
be a charge to the State, are rigidly excluded.
Contract laborers are also excluded in the interest
of our own multitude of workingmen, and the
trend is towards a still more sweeping legislation.
It is not likely, however, that the doors of the
United States will ever be shut to those human
elements that have brought growth and great-
ness in the past, and are in harmony with the
fundamental principles and the spirit of the prin-
ciples of the American State; whose responsibili-
ties it is true grow greater with every decade, but
whose possibilities open ever more widely to the
eye of the patriotic citizen.

Where have these multitudes of Irish gone, and
what are they doing? They are everywhere, in
manufacturing New England and New York, in
mining Pennsylvania, in the agricultural Middle
States and the Northwest, on the Pacific slope, in
the South Atlantic and Gulf States. There is
today scarcely an American hamlet in which the
blood of the Milesian is not represented. The Irish
are exceedingly numerous in many of our great
cities, such as New York, Chicago, Brooklyn,
274 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

Philadelphia, Boston and others. In the Southern
States, for obvious reasons, their number is not
so great at present, but with the increasing pros-
perity of this favored region we may expect soon
to see a larger influx of the children of Erin. In
many Western States, in communities that have
sprung up within this generation, and in which
ancient prejudice is weak, or comparatively
unknown, the Irish enjoy a high degree of con-
sideration and are among the prominent pioneers
of this wonderful complexus of young and vigor-
ous States. In the older States the social and
religious dislike that once operated to the detri-
ment of the Irish is disappearing rapidly, owing
to several important reasons, chief among which
is the ease with which the Irish immigrant merges
into the political and social life around him, bring-
ing with him the now common language, and accus-
tomed from youth to a life of political activity and
responsibility, and to the exercise of most, if not
all, of the rights of a freeman.

No man born out of the United States may be
president or vice-president; but in the Senate and
House of Representatives, on the judicial bench,
in the army and navy, in the civil service, is an
ever-growing number of men of Irish descent who
shed lustre on their origin, and are beyond
reproach, as men and citizens. In education, law,
journalism, literature, the plastic and applied
arts, they hold foremost places, and their ardour
and generosity lend much zest and color to our
national life. More than one critic of our man-
ners notices a certain indescribable something in

!
IRISH IMMIGRATION 275

the American character borrowed from long and
close contact with the Irishman, perhaps one ex-
pression of the strain of Irish blood that surely
exists here from a very early date.

The presence of the Irishman may be traced all
over the United States, if only by the nomenclature
of towns and cities. And many of their names
date from the last century, while others are of
yesterday. But in every State, in the oldest as
in the newest, there are communities whose first
settlers were numerous and affectionate enough
to perpetuate in the New World the sweet name
that recalled all they had sacrificed in the Old.

Very naturally, I will be asked what advice
ought to be given the intending immigrant from
Ireland. I might answer by referring to the nat-
ural advisers at home and here, as well as to the
admirable literature which has grown up about
this question in past years. Fr. Stephen Byrne,
the works of Thomas D’Arcy M’Gee, John
Maguire, M. P., and Bishop Spalding, as well as
the reports of the Colonization Society, contain
invaluable suggestions, and are far from being
antiquated. The files of the older Catholic news-
papers, like the Boston Pilot, the New York Free-
man’s Journal, the Philadelphia Standard and
Times, and others, contain much valuable advice
and direction, that any student of this question
might well ponder over and digest before writing
on it ex professo. I can only offer a few general
suggestions, of a moral and political character,
leaving to others the more practical and economic
view of this grave problem.
216 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

1. The Irish immigrant ought to be a model
of the natural virtues. He is usually a Catholic,
and if the supernatural life of grace is not raised
upon a foundation of natural virtue, he is apt to
give a false impression of the nature, scope and
value of his religion. He must, therefore, adapt
himself to the land in which he seeks ‘a refuge,
and he must remember that he owes a debt of
gratitude to that country which opens wide its
doors to him, and places within easy reach what
is today the greatest of civil privileges, Amer-
ican citizenship. He leaves a land where as yet
he is debarred, directly or indirectly, from many
things that his heart desires, but that his race or -
religion, or both, prevent him from enjoying. He
comes into the chief state of the New World, and in
five years he walks a king among men, clothed
with the panoply of free citizenship, with the right
of suffrage, active and passive, eligible to every
office but the highest, from which, however, his
children are not debarred. The very magnificence
of this American political generosity makes many
foreigners forget that it is a boon pure and simple, .
to which they have no right, and which may be
curtailed or denied as easily as it has been lav-
ished.

2. The American people admire thrift, perse-
verance, business honor, faith of contracts. Their’s
is a mighty commercial state; but it is no nation
of shopkeepers, if by that be meant a ‘‘gross, vul-
garian’’ soul. They love the virtues that adorn
the days of peace, but they are surely not deficient
in those that befit the strenuous period of war.
IRISH IMMIGRATION 277

The energy which elsewhere is spent on mighty
armaments and on mutual checkmating, is here
expended on the forces of nature. From the mill-
dam that treasures the ‘‘power’’ for the New
England factory to the wonderful harnessing of
Niagara; from the turnpike and canal-to the great
iron roadways that bind the Atlantic and Pacific
across a stretch of three thousands miles; from
the modest steamboat of Fulton to the modern
liner or dreadnought, there has been in this coun-
try such a continuous development of all the busi-
ness and commercial virtues as the world has
never seen. What if there be excesses or dangers?
Every healthy body has its crises, its perils, and
states are not free from them. But the recupera-
tive powers of this state are beyond calculation,
for deep in the hearts of the vast majority of its
citizens are planted religious conscience, belief in
one God and His revelation, admiration and prac-
tice of virtue, natural and scriptural, charity and
forbearance, belief in a future life of rewards and
punishments.

3. There is here no public legalized blasphemy,
no ostentatious violation of the Sunday rest, no
cynical disregard of the claims of virtue, nor will
the immigrant see here the idea of God and His
guiding Providence relegated to the family or the
individual. This nation of over one hundred and
one millions reads with gladness and piety the
annual formal message of our President, wherein
God, Providence, Prayer, Christianity are for-
mally allowed and commended to every citizen.
The American heart is, therefore, a religious, nay,
278 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

a Christian heart; and in that heart lies the
panacea for the crescent ills of our political life.

4, It will not be amiss if I say here a few words
on good citizenship. The Irish immigrant who
arrives on our shores beholds before him a most
varied political life, in which ward, town, city,
county, state, and nation play each a role of ab-
sorbing interest. He is already half fitted by his
language, domestic political training, and certain
innate tendencies or qualities, to enter into this
life. He usually does, and with no small share of
success, for the Irish race has developed the world
over, a rare political capacity, as the history of
the English colonies alone will show, or a cursory
view of the foreign relations of England in this
century.

On this blessed soil of freedom the Irish
immigrant needs to cultivate every civic virtue,
interest in all public problems, conscientious study
of public issues, the sense of union for the com-
mon weal, unprejudiced devotion to the growth
of the State, incorruptible exercise of the sacred
right of the ballot, which is the holy fountain of
our political life and well-being, and to poison or
trifle with which is to cut at the root of our State.
The laws guaranteeand promise to protect the free
exercise of the right of suffrage, and condemn any
unwarranted interference with it. They provide
for secret balloting, and they have left nothing
undone to place the individual voter in a position
to register his personal, conscientious opinions.

Nor shouldanyoneimagine thatit is a slight thing
to cast a vote against one’s conscience, or as the
IRISH IMMIGRATION 279

result of a barter or trade. Beside the scandal,
there is the wrong done to the popular sovereignty,
the Majestas Americana, which is endangered by
no act so much as by the corrupt use of the ballot,
an act which more than any other tends to justify
the enemies of our State and our institutions.

5. It would not be proper for me to recommend
publicly to immigrants any particular part of the
United States. But it will not be out of place if
they are recommended not to immigrate without
some definite knowledge of where they are going,
and what they expect to do. This is a dictate of
natural prudence. There was a time when the
Irish laborer alone controlled the labor market in
the United States; but that day is gone, and this
honorable labor is now contended for among us by
many other European, and even Asiatic nationali-
ties, driven to our hospitable shores by sorrowful
circumstances, not dissimilar to those which motiv-
ated the coming of so many children of Erin. For
various reasons they are often successful com-
petitors in the lower kinds of labor; and while
this forces the Irishman to go up in the social
scale, it often deprives the arriving immigrant of
that sure and permanent support which he could
once count on during the first years of his Ameri-
can life.

6. When he can command it, the immigrant
ought to bring with him a sum of money as large
as his means or circumstances will permit. This
would be wise, even in a new colony. It is much
more needed in these times, when the great cities
are becoming congested, and sudden economic dis-
280 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

turbances frighten the world of commerce and
business into inactivity. It takes means also to
cross the great stretches of the country, to pur-
chase land, stock it, and live until the land is
productive. Some of our staples have lately
fluctuated greatly in value—for temporary and
artificial reasons, all believe; nevertheless the
penniless emigrant, who expects to live by the land,
is gravely affected by these conditions, much more
so than the native farmer, whose employed chil-
dren, distant connections, familiarity with the
country, may enable him to weather the storm.
Ordinarily speaking, capital invested in the United
States is most productive. There are many hun-
dreds of millions of English capital here—in our
railroads, bridges, mines, mills, breweries, and the
like; and there is no reason why those who have
capital in Ireland should not invest it here with
great profit, especially if they come in person to
superintend its employment. I recall more than
one instance where Irishmen have prospered
greatly on funds they brought with them and
invested in some of our American enterprises.
Perhaps someone will ask what I think of Irish
immigration in general. Ought the Irish to stay at
home, or ought they emigrate very largely, and
especialy to the United States? Itis a grave prob-
lem. Ireland is a very ancient nation, with a very
glorious history, and her race of men is pre-emi-
nently adapted to the soil on which they live.
Divine Providence seems to have matched the
lovely fertile island with a population of brave
and industrious men, and pure and beautiful
IRISH IMMIGRATION 281

women. Surely this has not been in order to tear
them roughly from the farm and the hamlet, the
mill and the forge, the cradle and the spinning
wheel, to scatter them like the leaves of the forest
or the sands of the sea. The natural development
of any race is on the ancestral soil, where nature
and tradition are the venerable nurses of manhood
and womanhood, where the racial virtues are nat-
ural and frequent, and the racial vices most
easily extirpated or counterbalanced. Then, too,
history is a great magician, and throws still over
every feature of the landscape, as well as over the
whole ‘‘sweetest isle of the ocean,’’ an irresistible
charm, in which it is hard to tell what element
prevails the most—the deep human love of one’s
accustomed haunts, of ‘‘the cabin-door fast by the
wild wood,’’ or the ineffable devotion that feeds
. and grows upon the awful sorrows which beset it;
the sweet sense of kinship with the long lines of.
clan-ancestry that fade off into the dawn of his-
tory, or the ineradicable passionate longing to see
secular injustice righted, and the harp of Innis
fail once again ‘‘strung full high to notes of glad-
ness.’? Whatever be its component elements,
there is no gainsaying the material charm of Ire-
land, and in the chain which binds her children
to her it is, perhaps, not the least resistful of the
links.

Yet this same history shows us the Irish race
as possessed beyond all others with the spirit of
the world-wanderer. The earliest reliable utter-
ances of their history bear witness that they were
seafaring, adventurous people; and since their
282 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

conversion to Christianity there can be no doubt
that this spirit has been heightened and conse-
crated by religious ardor for the propagation of
Christianity. Willingly and unwillingly, wittingly
and unwittingly, they have been a people of mis-
sionaries longer than any other race. No other
people ever gave themselves en bloc to Christian
missions as they; no other people ever suffered for
their Catholic faith as they. And when, with the
dawn of this century, the remarkable movements
began which have today produced some 130,000,000
of English-speaking people, and been the chief
element in the renaissance of Catholicism from its
Continental tomb, it was the Irish who were the
pioneers, they being then almost the only English-
speaking Catholics, and devoting themselves the
world over to the planting of the Catholic faith,
the support of its claims and its missionaries, and
the sustenance of the Papal authority. They are
no longer the only English-speaking Catholics,
though they are yet nearly everywhere in the
majority; but we would be base and ingrate to
forget that it was they who bore the brunt of the
struggle for many decades of this century.

I would not, therefore, discourage Irish immi-
gration, because there are at stake more than
economic considerations. There are at stake the
interests of the Catholic religion, which in this
land and in this age are largely bound up with the
interests of the Irish people. God’s hand is upon
them, going and coming; and I prefer to believe
that He who harmonizes the motion of the planets
and the flow of the tides, is also First Agent and
IRISH IMMIGRATION 2838

Prime Mover in those no less mysterious move-
ments by which peoples pass from one land to
another, even as Israel went down out of Egypt
into Canaan, or the Wandering Nations came out

of the frozen North and overflowed the Roman
Empire.
LYNCH LAW
LYNCH LAW.

(The frequency with which alleged criminals are
summarily executed by mob violence, in certain
parts of the country, is an ample apology for this

paper.)

HOSOEVER sheddeth man’s blood, his
blood shall be shed.’’ It is a law of nearly all
Christian and civilized nations based on the
Mosaic ordinance, that all deliberate murderers
and other atrocious criminals shall expiate their
transgressions by the death penalty. The blood of
the innocent victim, like the voice of the blood of
Abel, calleth to heaven for vengeance.—Gen. IV.
But private individuals, how exalted soever
may be their station and influence in the commu-
nity, or how grievous soever the offence, cannot
constitute themselves the agents for punishing
the guilty. A claim of this kind would destroy
or imperil security of life, and lead to indiscrimi-
nate bloodshed.

The prerogative of exacting life for life, sad
blood for blood, is vested exclusively in the pub-
lic authorities who are charged with maintaining
the peace and good order of the Commonwealth.
The power of the civil functionaries and the source

284
LYNCH LAW 285

of their authority are thus stated by the Apostle
of the Gentiles: ‘‘The civil magistrate beareth not
the sword in vain. For he is God’s minister, an
avenger to execute wrath upon him that doth
evil’? He acts in the capacity of the representa-
tive and delegate of God, who has the power of
life and death over all His creatures.

But even civil rulers are forbidden to make an
arbitrary use of their prerogatives, at least in
times of peace. Their powers are strictly defined.
They can pronounce sentence of death only after
a judicial verdict has been rendered. The Consti-
tution of the United States expressly provides
that no person may be condemned to death till
declared guilty after a judicial trial.

The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution de-
clares that ‘‘No person shall be deprived of life,
liberty or property without due process of law.’’
This beneficent clause is most comprehensive in
its scope, for it guarantees a fair trial to every
culprit, no matter how atrocious his crime, or
humble his station in life.

All executions by Lynch Law are, therefore, a
direct and flagrant violation of the Constitution.
Every lover of his country’s fair name must feel —
a sense of shame and sorrow when he is forced to
- admit that the murder of criminals by popular
violence is of frequent and almost weekly occur-
rence in the United States. Nor are these acts of
vengeance confined to one particular section of
the land.

According to a report by a responsible writer
whose statements have not been questioned, there
286 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

were two thousand cight hundred and seventy-five
lynchings from 1885 to 1903, inclusively; and
there are but five states in the Union in which
these illegal acts did not occur. The States ex-
empted from the crime of lynching are Massachu-
setts, New Hampshire, Vermont, Rhode Island
and Utah.

Lynching is a blot on our American civilization.
It lowers our civic and moral standard in the esti-
mation of foreign nations; it is a standing insult
and menace to the majesty of the law of the land;
it usurps the sword of authority from the consti-
tuted powers, and places it in the hands of a reck-
less and irresponsible mob.

In arouses a blood-thirsty spirit in man; it in-
flames the savage element in our nature. You
might as well attempt to chain the lightning, and
hush the thunderbolt of heaven as to repress a
crowd, once their fury is excited to wreak ven-
geance on an alleged malefactor.

TI admit that there are exceptional times and
circumstances when summary executions may be
tolerated and condoned; when, for instance, a ter-
ritory is suddenly occupied by a mixed and hete-
rogeneous population, and is in a formative state;
when the civil law and the usual machinery and
appliances of a stable government are not yet
established. On occasions like this, the recog-
nized leaders of the people may punish notorious
criminals in the interests of social order.

Upwards of sixty-five years ago such a state of
things existed in California, when gold was first
LYNCH LAW 384

discovered in that region, and when adventurers
flocked thither from various parts of the globe.

A Vigilance Committee was organized to punish
outlaws without the usual forms of law. But it
is manifest that this method of chastising offend-
ers cannot be tolerated in a State where the
courts of justice are in free operation.

Lynching and all arbitrary deeds of vengeance
by irresponsible persons without legal proceedings
have been the fruitful source of feuds and san-
guinary conflicts in some sections of our country.
We are all familiar with the bloody struggles car-
ried on for a generation between two families on
the borders of Kentucky and West Virginia. The
partisans of one clan began by murdering a mem-
ber of the other to avenge some grievance. The
aggrieved family retaliated by killing one or more
of the other tribe; and they in return made repri-
sals by the massacre of some of their adversaries.
And so the contest has been kept up almost to the
present day, until both clans have been well nigh
exterminated.

How much bloodshed and violence would have
been spared if the contending parties had re-
course to the established tribunals, or had ob-
served the law of forgiveness of injuries incul-
cated by the Founder of the Christian religion!

What aggravates the crime of Lynch Law is the
circumstance that not unfrequently it sentences
to death an innocent person, while the guilty
party escapes. Cases of mistaken identity and
ungrounded suspicion are liable to occur when we
consider the excited frame of mind of the un-
288 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

happy victim of violence and lust, and the eager-
ness of an outraged community to avenge an
atrocious and brutal crime. I can recall a nota-
ble instance of the lynching of innocent men. In
May, 1902, the wife of a station-master was found
murdered in a small town in South Carolina.
Three negroes were suspected of the crime. They
were hanged to trees, and their bodies were rid-
dled with bullets. Some time afterward the hus-
band of the murdered woman, overcome by re-
morse, confessed on his death-bed in the presence
of his physician and several witnesses, that he
was the murderer, and that the accused negroes
were absolutely innocent of the deed.

If it is a grave miscarriage of justice to allow
the guilty to go unpunished, it is far more crimi-
nal to deprive of life an unoffending man. The
legalized murder of a guiltless individual is an
act of violence to Justice herself. Better that ten
guilty men should escape than that one man
should unjustly suffer.

Unfortunately, also, the lynching of one indi-
vidual is sometimes. attended by the accidental
and promiscuous slaying or wounding of bystand-
ers in the conflict which arises between the mob
and the officers of the law.

If Lynch Law were substituted for the law of
the land, no citizen would be secure from violence
or death. The leading men of the community, if
not restrained by conscience, would wield an influ-
ence like that which was swayed by Barbarian
chiefs or Oriental despots, who could assassinate
with impunity every harmless commoner that
LYNCH LAW 289

stood in the way of their lawless ambition or las-
civious passions. They could easily trump up
charges against the object of their hatred or
malice, and suborn a hired band of retainers to
avenge a fancied crime.

Another deplorable result of lynching is that
public sympathy is sometimes withdrawn from
the innocent victim of lust and murder, and is
transferred for the time being to the brute who
outraged and killed her. Her defenceless condi-
tion, her agonies and cries for help, her vain
entreaties, her dishonor worse than death, culmi-
nating often in torture and murder in order to
cover the crime—all this horrible picture fades
from view, and is almost forgotten, while the
iniquity of the human fiend is condoned or pal-
liated on account of the lawless manner in which
his crime was expiated. He often becomes the
hero of the hour, and is regarded by some even
as a martyr. And while the malefactor’s crime
is almost lost sight of, and he becomes the object
of morbid pity, popular denunciation falls on the
heads of those who participated in his summary
execution.

Had the wretch expiated his offence by the ordi-
nary process of the civil courts, his trial, convic-
tion and execution, attended with all the solemn-
ity of judicial proceedings, would have appeased
the righteous indignation of the community,
would have vindicated the majesty of the law, and
would have served as a terror and salutary warn-
ing to evil-doers.

If indeed the illegal and violent infliction of the
290 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

death penalty on criminals had a deterrent effect
on other evil-disposed persons, and acted as a
warning to them, that circumstance, while not jus-
tifying Lynch Law, might at least offer some
excuse or palliation for its exercise. But expe-
rience shows that it rather increases instead of
diminishing the calendar of crime. Far from ter-
rorizing the colored race, who are the usual suf-
ferers from hasty executions, it inflames them
with indignation, and incites them to perpetrate
deeds of violence on the weaker sex as much from
a spirit of vengeance, and from a triumph in the
humiliation of their victims, as from a desire to
gratify their animal passions.

Let us now examine into the principal grounds
of excuse for the exercise of Lynch Law, and sug-
gest a remedy for the social evil.

One of the causes of hasty and violent execu-
tions without the forms of law, is the needless and
often irritating delay in bringing a notorious
criminal to the bar of justice, and the infliction of
punishment inadequate to the enormity of the
offence.

An infamous negro named George White vio-
lated and then butchered almost beyond recogni-
tion a young lady in Delaware. A prompt trial
of the self-accused malefactor was reasonably
expected to appease the public, exasperated as
they were by the horrible outrage. But they were
grievously disappointed by the announcement
that the culprit would not be tried for three
months, and the result was a summary execution
attended with the most revolting circumstances.
LYNCH LAW 291

It appears that this same White had been twice
before convicted for rape in Pennsylvania. If he
had received a due measure of penalty for his
former transgressions, he would not have been let
loose to prey like a wolf on other folds, and if he
had been accorded a speedy trial in Delaware, the
community would have been spared the awful
scenes which occurred when he was burned at the
stake.

A certain man, whose name I need not mention,
was found guilty of murdering the husband of his
paramour with the connivance of the victim’s wife,
so that the assassin and his accomplice might con-
tinue their life of sin with greater freedom.

While the adulterous criminal was confined
in prison awaiting the execution of his sentence,
he was visited by some ladies, who manifested
their sympathy for him by adorning his
cell with flowers, and supplying him with deli-
cacies. He won the hearts of these emotional
women by uttering oracular sentences worthy of
Socrates or Aristides.

Finally they made an appeal to the Governor
for his pardon, which was granted on the sole con-
dition that he should leave the State.

On his release from prison he soon discovered
that an outraged public did not share in the sen-
timental compassion of his visitors, and in a few
days afterwards, stricken with remorse, he com-
mitted suicide, and thus became his own execu-
tioner.

The difficulty of procuring a sentence of convic-
tion against the accused after he is tried, and the
292 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

frequency with which noted criminals are known
to escape the meshes of the law, especially in jury
trials, have created in the public mind a distrust
of our criminal jurisprudence, and offer an incen-
tive and temptation to have recourse to the wild
justice of revenge. In 1900 the Mafia, a lawless
secret society of Sicilian origin, spread terror
among the inhabitants of New Orleans by their
frequent deeds of bloodshed. The members of
the society considered it dishonorable to seek re-
dress by appealing to the established courts of
justice, but always avenged a wrong by secret
murder. They assassinated the chief of police at
his own door. Nine members of this infamous
band were arrested and tried for the murder of
the brave and popular guardian of the law. They
were all acquitted.

Some of the leading citizens, incensed at the
miscarriage of justice, shot down these nine mem-
bers of the Mafia, and how much soever we may
reprobate the drastic remedies applied by the citi-
zens, it is gratifying to say that since these violent
measures were adopted the hydra-headed monster
has never again lifted its head in the Crescent
City.

Yet another crying evil and incentive to lynch-
ing is the wide interval that so often interposes
between a criminal’s conviction and the execution
of the sentence, and the defeat of justice by need-
less procrastination. Human life is indeed preci-
ous and sacred, but the effort to guard it has gone
beyond reasonable bounds. It is blessed to be
merciful, but mercy should not be exercised at the
LYNCH LAW 293

expense of justice and social order. Misplaced
clemency often works infinite harm to the com-
munity.

Of late years the difficulty of carrying out the
judgment of the court (in murder trials espe-
cially) has greatly increased from the widened
application of pleas in bar—notably that of insan-
ity. When a conviction has been reached, innu-
merable obstacles generally stay the execution.
The grounds of exception allowed to counsel, the
appeals from one court to another of higher jur-
isdiction, involving an enormous expense to thé
commonwealth, the long periods of time interven-
ing between the terms of the higher and lower
courts, the impossibility of recalling the original
witnesses by reason of their death or removal to
distant parts of the country, the apathy or fading
interest of the friends of the prosecution, the un-
tiring efforts of the advocates and partisans of
the accused, the facility with which signatures for
pardon are obtained, with the final application
for mercy to the Governor—or Board of Pardons
—all these circumstances have combined to throw
around the transgressor an extravagant protec-
tive system, and have gone far to rob jury trials
of their substance and efficacy.

When the crime of the accused has been mani-
festly proved, and no extenuating circumstances
can be advanced, the lawyers for the defence have
often recourse to the plea of insanity as a last
resource. Medical experts are always available
to testify to the moral irresponsibility of the cul-
prit, bewildering the jury by their technical
294 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

phrases. This subterfuge not infrequently suc-
ceeds in defeating the ends of justice, though the
sanity of the guilty party had never before been
called in question.

I can recall a recent instance in which a man
was convicted of a heinous crime. The insanity
dodge was successfully availed of. He was com-
mitted to an asylum from which he soon after-
ward escaped with the aid of his relatives, and
no effort has since been made to rearrest him at
his home.

A sovereign remedy for the suppression of
lynching and for the restoration of the law’s
supremacy is found in a speedy trial and con-
viction of the accused, if he is found guilty, fol-
lowed by the rigorous execution of the sentence.

It would be a great blessing for society if our
law-makers were to revise the criminal code now
in force, and to sweep away, or at least consider-
ably diminish the barriers which interpose between
the crime and its punishment. A prompt execu-
tion of the verdict would strike terror into evil-
doers, and satisfy the public conscience.

But it is far more merciful to stop crime than
to punish it by legislation. It is better to remove
a cause than to repair its evil effects. From data
before me, I infer that about seventy per cent. of
those who perished by lynching in the Southern
States between 1885 and 1903 belonged to the
colored population. If the deep-rooted antipathy
between the white and the black races were
removed or assuaged, these violent executions
would be considerably diminished.
LYNCH LAW 295

This blessed result can be accomplished only by
submission to the teachings of the Gospel which
proclaims the equality of all men before God, with
whom ‘‘there is neither Gentile nor Jew, circum-
cision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian nor Scy-
thian, bond nor free, but Christ is all in all. Col.
IIT-11.

If the American people were religiously im-
pressed with the Gospel truth, that we are all,
without distinction of color, children of the same
God, brothers of the same Christ, that we were
all redeemed by His precious blood, that we are
all descended from the same aboriginal parents,
that we were created for the same eternal destiny,
that Christ is our ‘‘Peace-maker, breaking down
the wall of partition,’’ which divides nation from
nation, tribe from tribe, so that we might be all
one family guided by the supreme law of charity—
if we were all controlled by these principles, then
indeed the reign of vengeance would exercise less
sway among us.

In the two lower counties of Maryland, the white
and the black population are nearly equally
divided, and the great majority of both races pro-
fess the Catholic religion. I have had frequent
occasions to visit these counties in the exercise
of the sacred ministry.

Before divine service began, I have been de-
lighted to observe the whites and the blacks
assembled together on the church grounds, and
engaged in friendly and familiar intercourse.
Then they repaired to the church, worshipping
under the same roof, kneeling before the same
296 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

altar, receiving the Sacrament at the same rail-
ing, and listening to the words of the same Gospel.

This equal participation in spiritual gifts and
privileges has fostered the feeling of good-will
and benevolence which no human legislation could
accomplish. I never witnessed anywhere else the
white race so kind and considerate to the colored,
nor the colored race so respectful and deferential
to the white; for there was no attempt in these
weekly gatherings to level the existing social dis-
tinctions. As far as my memory serves me, the
records of these two counties have never been
stained by a single instance of an outrage and a
lynching.
PATRIOTISM AND POLITICS
PATRIOTISM AND POLITICS. *

HAVE no excuse to make for offering some
reflections on the political outlook of the
nation; for my rights as a citizen were not

abdicated or abridged on becoming a Christian
prelate, and the sacred character which I profess,
far from lessening, rather increased, my obliga-
tions to my country.

In answer to those who affirm that a churchman
is not qualified to discuss politics, by reason of his
sacred calling, which removes him from the polit-
ical arena, I would say that this statement
is true in the sense that a clergyman as such
should not be a heated partisan of any political
party; but it is not true in the sense that he is
unfitted by his sacred profession for discussing
political principles,

His very seclusion from popular agitation gives
him a vantage-ground over those that are in the
whirlpool of party strife, just as they who have
never witnessed Shakespeare’s plays performed
on the stage, are better qualified to judge of the
genius of the author and the literary merit of

* Republished from the North American Review, April, 1892.

29”
298 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

his productions than they who witness the plays
amid the environment and attractions of stage
scenery.

It is needless to say that I write not merely as
a churchman, but as a citizen; not in a partisan,
but in a patriotic, spirit; not in advocacy of any
particular party, but in vindication of pure gov-
ernment. There is a moral side to most political
questions; and my purpose here is to consider
the ethical aspect of politics, and the principles of
justice by which they should be regulated. In
view of the Presidential election coming on, the
remarks I am about to offer are, it seems to me,
specially opportune.

Every man in the Commonwealth leads a dual
life—a private life under the shadow of the home,
and a public life under the egis of the State. As
a father, a husband, or a son, he owes certain
duties to the family; as a citizen, he owes certain
obligations to his country. These civic virtues are
all comprised under the generic name, patriotism.

Patriotism means love of country. Its root is
the Latin word Patria, a word not domesticated
in English. The French have it in patrie; the
Anglo-Saxon and Teutonic races have it literally
translated in Fatherland. ‘‘Fatherland,’’ says
Cicero, ‘‘is the common parent of us all: Patria
est communis omnium nostrum parens.’’ * It is
the paternal home extended, the family reaching
out to the city, the province, the country. Hence,
with us Fatherland and Country have come to be

* De Fin III, 19.
PATRIOTISM AND POLITICS 299

synonymous. Country in this sense comprises
two elements, the soil itself and the men who live
thereon. We love the soil in which our fathers
sleep, terra patrum, terra patria, the land in which
we were born. We love the men who as fellow-
dwellers share that land with us. When Dom
Pedro, emperor of Brazil, died in Paris, he was
laid to his last sleep on Brazilian soil, which he
had carried away with him for that very purpose.
Let a citizen from Maine meet a citizen from Cali-
fornia on the shores of the Bosphorus or on the
banks of the Tiber, they will, at once, forget that
at home they dwelt three thousand miles apart.
State lines are obliterated, party differences are
laid aside, religious animosities, if such had
existed, are extinguished. They warmly clasp
hands, they remember only that they are fellow
American citizens, children of the same mother,
fellow-dwellers in the same land over which floats
the Star-Spangled Banner.

Patriotism implies not only love of soil and of
fellow citizens, but also, and principally, attach-
ment to the laws, institutions, and government of
one’s country; filial admiration of the heroes,
statesmen, and men of genius, who have contri-
buted to its renown by the valor of their arms,
the wisdom of their counsel, or their literary fame.
It includes, also, an ardent zeal for the main-
tenance of those sacred principles that secure to
the citizen freedom of conscience, and an earnest
determination to consecrate his life, if necessary,
pro aris et focis, in defense of altar and fireside,
300 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

of God and Fatherland. Patriotism is a universal
sentiment of the race:

“Sreathes there the man with soul so dead
Who never to himself hath said,
‘This is my own, my native Jand!’”

A certain philosophical school has taught that
love of country has its origin in physical comfort.
Ibi patria ubi bene. But is it not true that one’s
country becomes dear in proportion to the suffer-
ings endured for it? Have not the sacrifices of
our wars developed the patriotism of the Amer-
ican? In fact, it is the most suffering and perse-
cuted races that are endowed with the deepest
patriotism. We may even go so far as to say that
the rougher the soil, the harsher the climate, the
greater the material privations of a land, the more
intense is the love of its inhabitants for it. Wit-
ness the Irish peasant. And are not the Swiss in
their narrow valleys and on their steep mountain
sides, the Scotch on their rugged Highlands, the
classic models of patriotism? Nay, the Esquimanux,
amid the perpetual snows that hide from his eyes
every green spot of earth, loves his home, nor
dreams of a fairer.

Patriotism is not a sentiment born of material
and physical well-being; it is a sentiment that the
poverty of country and the discomforts of climate
do not diminish, that the inflictions of conquest
and despotism do not augment. The truth is, it
is a rational instinct placed by the Creator in the
breast of man. When God made man a social
being, He gave him a sentiment that urges him to
PATRIOTISM AND POLITICS 301

sacrifice himself for his family and his country,
which is, as it were, his larger family. ‘‘Dear are
ancestors, dear are children, dear are relatives and
friends; all these loves are contained in love of
country.” *

The Roman was singularly devoted to his coun-
try. Civis Romanus sum was his proudest boast.
He justly gloried in being a citizen of a republic
conspicuous for its centuries of endurance, for
the valor of its soldiers, for the wisdom of its
statesmen, and the genius of its writers. One of
its greatest poets has sung: ‘‘It is sweet and
honorable to die for one’s country.’’+ So execr-
able was the crime of treason regarded that the
traitor not only suffered extreme penalties in this
life, but he is consigned after death by Virgil to
the most gloomy regions of Tartarus. ¢

Love of country shows itself in the citizen by
the observance of law and the good use of political
rights, and in those that, for the time being, gov-
ern, by justice and disinterestedness in their
administration. Ministers of religion manifest
their patriotism, not only as citizens, but also as
spiritual teachers and leaders of the people, by
inculcating the religious, moral, and civic virtues,
and by prayer to the throne of God for the welfare
of the land. ‘‘I desire, therefore,’’ wrote St. Paul

* Cari sunt parentes, carl liberi, propinaui, familiares, sed
omnes omnium caritates patria una complexa est. (Cicero,
De Off., 1, 17).

f Dulce et decorum pro patria mori. (Horace B. III.
ODE II).

¢Vendidit hic auro patriam, dominumque potentem im-
posuit. Fixit leges pretio atque refixit. (A®neid, B, VI.)
302 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

to his disciple Timothy, ‘‘first of all that supplica-
tions, prayers, intercessions, and thansgivings be
made for all men; for kings and for all that are in
high station, that we may lead a quiet and peace-
able life in all piety and chastity; for this is good
and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour.’’ *

The Catholic Church in our country is not
unmindful of this duty. A prayer composed by
Archbishop Carroll to beg Heaven’s blessing on
the land and its rulers, a masterpiece of liturgical
literature, is recited every Sunday at the solemn
service in some parts of the United States, and
notably in the Cathedral at Baltimore, in which
the custom has rarely ceased since it was intro-
duced by Baltimore’s first Archbishop over one
hundred years ago.

To the soldier, patriotism has inspired the most
heroic deeds of courage and self-sacrifice. The
victories of Debora, Judith, and Gedeon, achieved
for God and country, are recorded with praise in
Sacred Scripture.

The stand of Leonidas inthe pass of Thermopylae
with his three hundred Spartans against the mil-
lion Persians of Xerxes; the boldness of his
answer to the oriental monarch’s summons to lay
down arms, ‘‘Let him come and take them;’’ the
recklessness of his reply to the threat, that so
numerous were his foes that the very heavens
would be darkened by their arrows, ‘‘ ’T is well.
We shall fight in the shade;”’’ the fierce battle; the
fall of almost all the Grecian heroes; the total
defeat of the Persian host—are commonplaces of
history, and themes of the schoolroom. That day
PATRIOTISM AND POLITICS 303

ranks among the great days of the world. Had
Xerxes triumphed, Europe had become Asiatic,
and the trend of history had been changed.

The three calls of Cincinnatus to the Dictator-
ship from the solitude and cultivation of his
Sabine farm, his three triumphs over the enemies
of the Republic, kindled not in his breast the fire
of political ambition. When the foe was repelled
and his country needed him no longer he laid down
the sword of command for the plow, left ‘‘the
pomp and circumstance’’ of the camp for the quiet
of his rural homestead, like him whose grave hal-
lows the hillside of Mount Vernon—two notable
instances of patriotism, making men great in peace
no less than in war. Need I recall Regulus, Hora-
tius Cocles, Brutus, the first consul, whose heroic
and patriotic deeds have been the exultant theme
of the classic authors of Rome?

Patriotism finds outward and, so to say,
material expression, in respect for the flag that
symbolizes the country, and for the chief mag-
istrate who represents it. Perhaps, it is only when
an American travels abroad that he fully realizes
how deep-rooted is his love for his native country.
The sentiment of patriotism, which may be dor-
mant at home, is aroused and quickened in foreign
lands.

The sight of an American flag flying from the
mast of a ship in mid-ocean or in some foreign
port, awakes unwonted emotion and enthusiasm.

The interest which an American feels in a presi-
dential election, or in any other important domestic
304 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

event, is intensified when he is abroad. When I
was travelling through the Tyrol, in 1880, I had a
natural desire to find out who had been nominated
for the Presidency; but in that country news
travels slowly. On reaching Innspruck, I learned
that Mr. Garfield was the nominee. I got my
information from an American student buried in
the cloisters of a seminary, to whom the outside
world was apparently dead. I never discovered
and I dare say his professors never knew how he
obtained his information. But the news was cor-
rect.

Americans are in the habit of visiting Rome
every year in large numbers. The greater part of
them on their arrival instinctively repair to the
American College. Perhaps, the name of the col-
lege attracts them; perhaps, also, the conscious-
ness that they will hear their mother-tongue. And
when they enter its portals, where they are always
sure to find a warm welcome from the genial rector,
their eyes are gladdened by the familiar features
of the ‘‘ Father of his Country.’’

Love of country, as I have described it, which is
fundamentally an ethical sentiment, and which was
such in all nations, even before Christian Revela-
tion was given to the world, and which is such
today among nations that have not heard the
Christian message, is elevated, ennobled, and per-
fected by the religion of Christ. Patriotism in
non-Christian times and races has inspired hero-
ism even unto death. We do not pretend that
Christian patriotism can do more. But we do
say that Christianity has given to patriotism and
PATRIOTISM AND POLITICS 305

to the sacrifices it demands, nobler motives and
higher ideals.

If the virtue of patriotism was held in such
esteem by pagan Greece and Rome, guided only
by the light of reason, how much more should it
be cherished by Christians, instructed as they are
by the voice of Revelation! The Founder of the
Christian religion has ennobled and sanctified
loyalty to country by the influence of His example
and the force of His teaching,

When St. Peter was asked by the tax-collector
whether his Master should pay the tribute money
or not, he replied in the affirmative, and the penni-
less Master wrought a miracle to secure the pay-
ment of the money, though He was exempt from
the obligation by reason of His poverty and His
divine origin; for if the sons of kings are free
from taxation, as Christ Himself remarked on that
occasion, the Son of the King of kings had cer-
tainly a higher claim to exemption.

The Herodians questioned Jesus whether or not
it was lawful to pay tribute to Cesar. By this
question they sought to ensnare Him in Iis words.
If He admitted the obligation, He would have
aroused the indignation of the Jews, who deemed
it unlawful to pay tribute to a Gentile and idola-
trous ruler. If, on the other hand, He denied the
obligation, He would have incurred the vengeance
of Rome. He made this memorable reply, which
silenced His adversaries: ‘‘Render to Cesar the
things which are Cesar’s, and to God the things
which are God’s.”’
306 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

The Apostles echo the voice of their Master:
**Let every soul be subject to higher powers; for
there is no power but from God. Therefore, he
who resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of
God; and they who resist, purchase for themselves
damnation. Render, therefore, to all their dues:
tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom
custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom
honor.’’* ‘‘Be ye subject to every authority for
God’s sake, whether to the king as excelling, or to
governors as sent by him for the punishment of
evil-doers, and for the praise of those who do
well.’’? + This short sentence, ‘‘There is no author-
ity but from God,’’ has contributed more effectu-
ally to the stability of nations and to the peace
and order of society than standing armies and
all the volumes ever written on the principles of
government. It ennobles obedience to constituted
authority by representing it, not as an act of
servility to man, but of homage to God. It sheds
a halo around rulers and magistrates by holding
them up to us as the representatives of God. It
invests all legitimate laws with a divine sanction
by an appeal to our conscience.

If the Apostles and the primitive Christians had
so much reverence for the civil magistrates in
whose election they certainly had no voice; and
if they were so conscientious in observing the
laws of the Roman Empire, which often inflicted
on them odious pains and disabilities, how much
more respect should the American citizen enter-

* Romans, xili.
qi. Peter, ii.
PATRIOTISM AND POLITICS 307

tain for the civil rulers in whose election he
actively participates! With what alacrity should
he fulfil the laws which are framed solely for his
peace and protection and for the welfare of the
Commonwealth!

The deification of the State in pagan times
rested on a principle contrary to reason, and
exacted sacrifices destructive of the moral worth
of the citizen. The State absorbed the individual.
It was held to be the proprietor and master of
the citizen, who was only an instrument in its
hand, to be used, cast aside, or broken at will.
Christianity knows how to conciliate patriotism
with the exigencies of man’s personal dignity.
Social perfection, or civilization, is in that form of
government that secures to its members the
greater facility for pursuing and attaining their
end in life. That is the Christian notion of the
State, and the American also, as laid down in the
Declaration of Independence. It is stated therein
that government is for the citizen, to secure to him
his inalienable rights—that is to say, rights that
are his and are inalienable by virtue of the
supreme end marked out for him by the Creator.

Again, unlike pagan civilization, which despised
the foreigner as a barbarian and a foe, Christian
and American civilization sees its ideal in that
universal charity revealed to the world by Christ,
who came to teach the brotherhood of all men in
the Fatherhood of the One God. Patriotism and
cosmopolitanism are not incompatible in the Chris-
tian. They find a model in the religious order, in
the Catholicity and unity of the Church. And
308 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

even in the political order, the United States offers
a miniature picture of the brotherly federation of
nations—forty-four sovereign States, sovereign
and independent as to their internal existence, yet
presenting to the rest of the world a national unity
in the Federal government.

And, indeed, when we reflect on the happiness
and manifold temporal blessings which our polit-
ical institutions have already conferred, and are
destined in the future to confer, on millions of
people, we are not surprised that the American
citizen is proud of his country, her history, and
the record of her statesmen.

Therefore, next to God, our country should hold
the strongest place in our affections. Impressed,
as we ought to be, with a profound sense of the
blessings, which our system of government con-
tinues to bestow on us, we shall have a correspond-
ing dread lest these blessings should be with-
drawn from us. It is a sacred duty for every
American to do all in his power to perpetuate our
civil institutions and to avert the dangers that
threaten them.

The system of government which obtains in the
United States is tersely described in the well-
known sentence: ‘‘A government of the people,
by the people, for the people;’’ which may be
paraphrased thus: Ours is a government in which
the people are ruled by the representatives of
their own choice, and for the benefit of the people
themselves.

Our rulers are called the servants of the people,
since they are appointed to fulfil the people’s
PATRIOTISM AND POLITICS 309

wishes; and the people are called the sovereign
people, because it is by their sovereign voice that
their rulers are elected.

The method by which the supreme will of the
people is registered is the ballot-box. This is the
oracle that proclaims their choice. This is the bal-
ance in which the merits of the candidates are
weighed. The heavier scale determines at once the
decision of the majority and the selection of the
candidate.

And what spectacle is more sublime than the
sight of ten millions of citizens determining, not
by the bullet, but by the ballot, the ruler that is to
preside over the nation’s destinies for four years!

“A weapon that comes down as still

As snowflakes fall upon the sod;

But executes a freeman’s will,

As lightning does the will of God;

And from its force nor doors nor locks
Can shield you, ’tis the ballot-box.”

But the greatest blessings are liable to be per-
verted. Our Republic, while retaining its form
and name, may degenerate into most odious
tyranny; and the irresponsible despotism of the
multitude is more galling, because more difficult
to be shaken off, than that of the autocrat.

History is philosophy teaching by example. A
brief review of the Roman Republic will teach us
how it prospered so long as the citizens practised
simplicity of life and the civil magistrates admin-
jgstered even-handed justice. Avarice and ambition
proved its ruin.*

* Primo pecuniae, deinde imperii cupido crevit: ea quasi
materies omnium malorum fuere. Sallust. Catalin ¢. x,
310 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

The avarice of the poor was gratified by the
bribery of the rich; and the ambition of the rich
was fed by the votes of the poor.

In the latter days of the Republic, bribery and
corruption were shamefully practised. Marius
was elected to the consulship by the purchase of
votes and by collusion with tthe most notorious
demagogues. Pompey and Crassus secured the
consulship by intimidation though neither of them
was legally qualified for that office. The philoso-
phy of Epicurus, introduced during the last years
of the Republic, hastened the moral and mental
corruption of Rome. The loss of the political
autonomy of Greece, which preceded that of
Rome, may be traced to the same cause. To the
early Romans the oath was sacred, and perjury
a detestable crime. We find in a letter of Cicero
to Atticus a curious incident that shows how far
the politicians of his day had departed from for-
mer standards,

‘‘Memmius,’’ he writes, ‘‘has just made known
to the Senate an agreement between himself and
an associate candidate for the consulship on the
one hand, and the two consuls of the current year
on the other.’’? It appears that the two consuls
agreed to favor the candidacy of the aspirants on
the following terms: The two aspirants bound
themselves to forfeit to the consuls four hundred
thousand sesterces if they failed to produce in
favor of the consuls three augurs who were to
swear that in their sight and hearing the Plebs
(though such was not the fact) had voted the
law Curiate (Lex Curiata), a law that invested the
PATRIOTISM AND POLITICS 311

consuls with full military powers; and also if they
failed to produce two ex-consuls who were to swear
that in their presence the Senate had passed and
signed a certain decree regulating the provinces of
each consul though such was not the fact.* What
crowding of dishonesty in this one transaction!
Can the worst kind of American politics furnish
the match of this slate gotten up regardless of
truth and oath?

Cato failed to be elected consul, although emin-
ently worthy of that dignity, because he disdained
to purchase the office by bribes. Ceasar had so
far debauched the populace with flattery and
bribes and the soldiers with pensions, that his
election to the office of chief Pontiff and consul
was easily obtained.

During the Empire, elections were usually a
mere formality. Bribery was open and unblush-
ing. Toward the end of the second century the
Empire was publicly sold at auction to the high-
est bidder. Didius Julianus, a rich senator, ob-
tained the prize by the payment of $620 to each
soldier of the Pretorian guard. But he was exe-
cuted after a precarious and inglorious reign of
sixty-six days.

The history of the Roman Republic and the
Roman Empire should be a salutary warning to
us. Our Christian civilization gives us no
immunity from political corruption and disaster.
The oft-repeated cry of election frauds should not
be treated with indifference, though, in many in-
stances, no doubt, it is the empty charge of

* Book IV., Letter XVIII.
312 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

defeated partisans against successful rivals, or the
heated language of a party press.

But after all reasonable allowances are made,
enough remains of a substantial character to be
ominous. In every possible way, by tickers insidi-
ously printed, by ‘‘colonizing,’’ ‘‘repeating,’’ and
“‘nersonation,’’ frauds are attempted, and too
often successfully, on the ballot. I am informed
by a trustworthy gentleman that voters will with-
hold their suffrage from their political opponents
only on condition of exacting compensation from
their own party candidates. The evil would be great
enough if it were restricted toexamplesof thiskind,
but it becomes much more serious when large
bodies of men are debauched by the bribes or
intimidated by the threats of wealthy corpora-
tions.

But when the very fountains of legislation are
polluted by lobbying and other corrupt means;
when the hand of bribery is extended, and not
always in vain, to our municipal, state, and
national legislators; when our law-makers become
the pliant tools of some selfish and greedy cap-
italists, instead of subserving the interests of the
people—then, indeed, all patriotic citizens have
reason to be alarmed about the future of our coun-
try.

The man who would poison the wells and springs
of the land is justly regarded as a human monster,
as an enemy of society, and no punishment could
be too severe for him. Is he not as great a crim-
inal who would poison and pollute the ballot-box,
PATRIOTISM AND POLITICS 318

the unfailing fount and well-spring of our civil
freedom and of our national life?

The Ark of the Covenant was held in the highest
veneration by the children of Israel. It was the
oracle from which God communicated His will to
the people. Two cherubim with outstretched wings
were placed over it as sacred guardians. Oza
was suddenly struck dead for profanely touching
it. May we not, without irreverence, compare the
ballot-box to the ancient Ark? Is it not for us the
oracle of God, because it is the oracle of the peo-
ple? God commands us to obey our rulers. It is
through the ballot-box that our rulers are pro-
claimed to us; therefore, its voice should be
accepted as the voice of God. Let justice and truth
like twin cherubs, guard this sacred instrument.
Let him who lays profane hands upon it be made
to feel that he is guilty of a grievous offence
against the stability of government, the peace of
society, and majesty of God.

Our Saviour, filled with righteous indignation,
seizes a scourge and casts out of the Temple those
that bought and sold in it, and overturns the tables
of the money-changers, saying: ‘‘My house is a
house of prayer, but you have made it a den of
thieves.’’ The polling booth is a temple, in which
the angel of justice holds the scales with an even
hand. The political money-changer pollutes the
temple by his iniquitous bargains. The money-
changer in Jerusalem’s Temple trafficked in doves;
the electioneering money-changer traffics in human
beings.

Let the minister of justice arise, and, clothed
314 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

with the panoply of authority, let him drive those
impious men from the temple. Let the buyers
and sellers of votes be declared infamous; for,
they are trading in our American birthright. Let
them be cast forth from the pale of American
citizenship and be treated as outlaws.

I do not think the punishment too severe when
we consider the enormity and far-reaching con-
sequences of their crime. I hold that the man who
undermines our elective system is only less crim-
inal than the traitor who fights against his country
with a foreign invader. The one compasses his
end by fraud, the other by force.

The privilege of voting is not an inherent or
inalienable right. It is a solemn and sacred trust,
to be used in strict accordance with the intentions
of the authority from which it emanates.

When a citizen exercises his honest judgment in
casting his vote for the most acceptable candidate,
he is making a legitimate use of the prerogatives
confided to him. But when he sells or barters his
vote, when he disposes of it to the highest bidder,
like a merchantable commodity, he is clearly vio-
lating his trust and degrading his citizenship.

The enormity of the offence will be readily per-
ceived by pushing it to its logical consequences:

First, once the purchase of votes is tolerated or
condoned or connived at, the obvious result is
that the right of suffrage becomes a solemn farce.
The sovereignty is no longer vested in the people,
but in corrupt politicians or in wealthy corpora-
tions; money instead of merit becomes the test of
success ; the election is determined, not by the per-
PATRIOTISM AND POLITICS 316

sonal fitness and integrity of the candidate, but
by the length of his own or his patron’s purse;
and the aspirant for the office owes his victory,
not to the votes of his constituents, but to the
grace of some political boss.

Second, The better class of citizens will lose
heart and absent themselves from the polls, know-
ing that it is useless to engage in a contest which
is already decided by irresponsible managers.

Third, Disappointment, vexation, and righteous
indignation will burn in the breasts of upright
citizens, These sentiments will be followed by
apathy and despair of carrying out successfully a
popular form of government. The enemies of the
Republic will then take advantage of the existing
scandals to decry our system and laud absolute
monarchies. The last stage in the drama is polit-
ical stagnation or revolution,

But, happily, the American people are not prone
to despondency or to political stagnation, or to
revolution outside of the lines of legitimate
reform. They are cheerful and hopeful, because
they are conscious of their strength; and well they
may be, when they reflect on the century of ordeals

through which they have triumphantly passed.
They are vigilant, because they are liberty-loving,
and they know that ‘‘Eternal vigilance is the price
of liberty.’ They are an enlightened and prac-
tical people; therefore are they quick to detect
and prompt to resist the first inroads of corrup-
tion. They know well how to apply the antidote
to the political distemper of the hour. They have
the elasticity of mind and heart to rise to the
316 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

occasion. They will never suffer the stately temple
of the Constitution to be overthrown, but will
hasten to strengthen the foundation where it is
undermined, to repair every breach, and to read-
just every stone of the glorious edifice.

In conclusion, I shall presume to suggest, with
all deference, a brief outline of what appears to me
the most efficient means to preserve purity of
elections and to perpetuate our political independ-
ence.

Many partial remedies may be named. The
main purpose of these remedies is to foster and
preserve what may be called a Public Conscience.
In the individual man, conscience is that inner
light which directs him in the knowledge and choice
of good and evil, that practical judgment which
pronounces over every one of his acts, that it is
right or wrong, moral or immoral. Now, this light
and judgment which direct man in the ordinary
personal affairs of life, must be his guide also in
the affairs of his political life; for he is answer-
able to God for his political, as well as his private
life.

The individual conscience is an enlightenment
and a guide; and it is itself illumined and directed
by the great maxims of natural law and the con-
clusions which the mind is constantly deducing
from those maxims. Now, is there not a set of
maxims and opinions that fulfil the office of guides
to the masses in their political life?

The means which I propose are:

First, The enactment of strict and wholesome
laws for preventing bribery and the corruption
PATRIOTISM AND POLITICS 31%

of the ballot-box, accompanied by condign pun-
ishment against the violators of the law. Let such
protection and privacy be thrown around the poll-
ing booth that the humblest citizen may be able
to record his vote without fear of pressure or of
interference from those that might influence him.
Such a remedy has already been attempted, with
more or less success, in some States by the intro-
duction of a new system of voting.

Second, A pure, enlightened, and independent
judiciary to interpret and enforce the laws.

Third, A vigilant and fearless press that will
reflect and create a healthy public opinion; such
a press guided by the laws of justice and the
spirit of American institutions, is the organ and
the reflection of national thought, the outer bul-
wark of the rights and liberties of the citizen
against the usurpations of authority and the injus-
tice of parties, the speediest and most direct
castigator of vice and dishonesty. It is a duty of
the citizens of a free country not only to encour-
age the press, but to co-operate with it; and it is
a misfortune for any land when its leading men
neglect to instruct their country and to act on
public opinion through this powerful instrument
for good.

Fourth, The incorporation into our school sys-
tem of familiar lessons embodying a history of
our country, a brief sketch of her heroes, states-
men, and patriots, whose civic virtues the rising
generations will thus be taught to admire and emu-
late. The duties and rights of citizens along with
reverence for our political institutions should like-
318 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

wise be inculcated, as Dr. Andrews, President of
Brown University, recommends in a recent article.
‘There is danger that the country whose history
is not known and cherished will become to the
masses only an abstraction, or, at best, that it will
be in touch with them only on its less lovable side,
the taxes and burdens it imposes. Men lost in an
unnatural isolation, strangers to the past life of
their nation, living on a soil to which they hold
only by the passing interests of the present, as
atoms without cohesion, are not able to realize
and bring home to themselves the claims of a
country that not only is, but that was before them,
and that will be, as history alone can teach, long
after them.

Fifth, A more hearty celebration of our national
holidays.

The Hebrew people, as we learn from Sacred
Scripture, were commanded to commemorate by
an annual observance fheir liberation from the
bondage of Pharoh and their entrance into the
Promised Land. In nearly all civilized countries
there are certain days set apart to recall some
great events in their national history, and to pay
honor to the memory of the heroes who figured
in them. The United States has already estab-
lished three national holidays. The first is con-
secrated to the birth of the ‘‘Father of his Coun-
try;’’ the second, to the birth of the nation; and
the third is observed as a day of thanksgiving to
God for His manifold blessings to the nation. On
those days, when the usual occupations of life are
suspended, every citizen has leisure to study and
PATRIOTISM AND POLITICS 319

admire the political institutions of his country,
and to thank God for the benedictions that He has
poured out on us as a people. In contemplating
these blessings, we may well repeat with the Royal
Prophet: ‘‘He hath not done in like manner to
every nation, and His judgments He hath not
made manifest to them.”’

If holidays are useful to those that are to the
manner born, they are still more imperatively
demanded for the foreign population constantly
flowing into our country, and which consists of
persons who are strangers to our civil institutions.
The annually recurring holidays will create and
develop in their minds a knowledge of our history
and admiration for our system of government.
It will help, also, to mould our people into unity
of political faith. By the young, especially, are
holidays welcomed with keen delight; and as there
is a natural, though unconscious, association in
the mind between the civic festivity and the cause
that gave it birth, their attachment to the day will
extend to the patriotic event or to the men whose
anniversary is celebrated.

Sixth, The maintenance of party lines is an
indispensable means for preserving political pur-
ity. One party watches the other, takes note of
its shortcomings, its blunders and defects; and it
has at its disposal the means for rebuking any
abuse of power on the part of the dominant side,
by appealing to the country at the tribunal of
the ballot-box. The healthiest periods of the
Roman Republic were periods of fierce political
strife. The citizens of Athens were not allowed
320 A RETROSPECT OF FIFTY YEARS

to remain neutral. They were compelled to take
sides on all questions of great public interest.
Not only was every citizen obliged to vote, but the
successful candidate was bound to accept the office
to which he was called, and to subordinate his
taste for private life to the public interests.

England owes much of her greatness and liberty
to the active and aggressive vigilance of opposing
political camps. Political parties are the out-
come of political freedom. Parties are not to be
confounded with factions. The former contend
for a principle, the latter struggle for a master.

To jurists and statesmen these considerations
may seem trite, elementary, and commonplace.
But, like all elementary principles, they are of
vital import. They should be kept prominently
in view before the people, and not obscured in a
maze of wordy technicalities. They are landmarks
to guide men in the path of public duty, and they
would vastly contribute to the good order and
stability of the Commonwealth if they were indeli-
bly stamped on the heart and memory of every
American citizen.
INDEX

ABDO, Rt. Rev. Basil (Greek
Melchite) Bishop of Ma-
riamne, Asia, 37.

AUschines, 20.

Affre, Archbishop of Paris at
cne time, 23.

Agios O Theos, 122.

Alexandrian Party, 18,

Alexandria, School of, 91.

Alcazar, Rt. Rev. Hilary, Bish-
op, Vicar Apostolic of Ton-
king, 38.

Amat, the Most Eminent Aloy-
sius, Cardinal, Bishop of
Palestrina, 136.

Amadeus of Savoy, 170.

America, Christian character
of, 277.

American Armies, many Cath-
olics soldiers in, 267.

Largely composed of Irish-
men, 267.

American College, reception of
Holy Father by, 57-304.

American Catholics, Union and
Strength of, 221.

American people, hearts of,
drawn toward Church, 202.

Not prone to despondency,
315.

American spirit, 217-221.

American loyalists, Sabine’s,
243.

American flag, 308,

 

Ancina, John Juvenal, Bishop
of Saluzzo in Northern
Italy, 57.

A short biography of, 57-58.
Declared Venerable, 60.

Anarchist, riots of Chicago,
188.

Annuario Pontifico for 1870,
150.

Anglican Church, separation
of, from Rome, 226.

Apostolic Council of Jerus-
alem, 15.

Arabia, church of, 174.
Archbishops, committee of, 191.
Armenian Bishops, 48.
Arnold, 171.

Ark of the Covenant, $13.

Asia Minor and Cappadocia,
Bishops of, 18.

Athens, citizens of, 319.

Austria and Tyrol, Bishops
from, 46.

Augustine, Saint, 174,

BAIRD, Father, 240.

Ballot box, 309.

Baltimore, Lord, 236.

Barili, Cardinal, 183,

Barnabo, His Eminence Cardi-
nal, Prefect of the propa-
ganda, 39.

Barry, Jack, bribe offered him
by English, 244.

321
B22

Bar-Schinu, Rt. Rev. Augustine
George (Chaldean) Bishop
of Salmas, Asia, 38.

Behnam-Benni, Rt. Rev. Cyril,
Bishop of Moussoul (Syr-
ian) Mesopotamia, 37.

Belgium, Bishops from, 46.

Bells of Rome, 123.

Ballarmine, Cardinal, 229.

Bienville, 237.

Bilio, Aloysius, Cardinal, 133.

A short biography of, 158,
etc.

ae fate in United States,
2

Birth rate in New England
States, 250,

Bismark, Prince, 24.

Bohemia and Moravia, Bishops
from, 46,

Bostani, Most Rev. Peter, Arch-
bishop of Tyre and Sidon,
(Maronite) Asia, 37.

Boston Pilot, 275.

Brazilian Bishops, 44.

Bresca, and the erection of the
Egyptian obelisk, 108-109.

British failure to raise Cath-
clic regiment in Philadel-
phia, 244.

Bruya’s Mohawk works, 242.

Burke, Father, 57.

Byrne, Father Stephen, works
of, 275.

CONSTITUTION of the United
States, Palladium of our
liberties, 215.

Catholic Church, welding to-
gether of different peoples
into one nation, 221.

Not foreign or un-American,
222.
Not opposed to liberty, 226.

 

INDEX

Catholic Church, the great
agent in Americanizing
the foreign born, 227,

Cabinet, members of, frequent-
ly Catholics, 218.

Cadillac, Antoine de la Motte,
237,

Cesarism, forces that tend to,
230-232.

Calvert, Cecilius, 237.
Calvert, Sir George, 236.
Calvin, 225.

Cancer, Luis, 239.

Capel, Monsignor, 57.

Canadian neutrality in War of
Independence, 247.

Carroll, Archbishop, letter to
clergy on death of Wash-
ington, 246.

Prayer composed by, 802.

Charles of Carrollton, signer
of Declaration of Inde-
pendence, 245,

Daniel, 245.
Rev. John, first Bishop of
Baltimore, 247-248,
Catholics, American, unstained
record of loyalty, 211.

Conscious of no' barrier sep-
arating them from other
citizens, 212.

Catholic Bishops of Christen-
dom, number of, in 1870, 3.

Number in attendance at Vat-
ican Council, 3.

Catholic Church encourager of
Science, 91-92.

Faith of, always one, 39.
Friend of the people, 201,

Immense force for publie
welfare, 221,

Peace of, 16.
Protected by Christ, 94.
INDEX

Catholicism, dread of, 221.

Catholics refused civil rights
in seven different states,
217.

Frequently elected by Prot-
estant constituencies, 218.
Sixteen millions American
citizens, 210.
Love of country and Church
among, 210.
American, at home among
their countrymen, 211.
Persecutions endured by, 211.
Early settlers massacred,
238-239-240.
Every one a Whig, 243.
ae discriminatingagainst,
Generosity of, in the United
States, 251,
Missions, history of, in the
Northern States, 240.
Population in America in
1776, 249.
Institutions cf learning, 251.
University of America, 251.
Religion, interest of, 282.
Catholic Colony of Maryland,
first home of civil and re-
ligious liberty, 237.
Catholic loyalty, charges
against, resented by Cath-
olics, 214.
Religion and patriotism, no
conflict between, 213.
Workingmen of America,
196.
Cato, $11.
Celsus, 93.
Celestius, 174.
Centenary celebration, 1867,
106.
Chair of Peter, abode of truth,
175.

 

823

Chaldean Bishops, 43.

Champlain, 237.

Charlemagne, statue of, 108.

Charities, Cathclic, 256.

CharbonneauxX, Rt. Rev.
Stephen Louis, Bishop of
Mysore, India, 38.

Chief Justices of the United
States, twice Catholic, 218.

— and Corea, Prelates of,

Church of Christ, unity, Cath-
olicity, sanctity of, mani-
fested in Rome, 45.

me and ground of truth,

Church and State, separation
of, 211,

Change in their relations
contemplated with dread
by American citizens, 211.

No danger of collision be-
tween, in America, 230.

Union of, 232.

Ideally best, not always
practically best, 233.

Church in America, enjoys
greater liberty than in
many other _ countries
where both are united, 211.

Not untrue to her mission
of teaching naticns, 240.

Church, property of, in United
States, 250.

National Protestant, 225,

Schismatical, 225.

Cicero, letter to Atticus, 310.

Cincinnatius, 303,

Civil authority, Catholics owe
unreserved allegiance to,
228,

Ciurcia, Most Rev. Aloysius,
Archbishop of Irenopolis,
Egypt, 38.
324

Cistercian Abbey, 99.
Clergy, increase of, 250.
Presence and direct influence
of, in civil affairs not ad-
visable in America, 197.
Cleveland, President, societies
during his administration,
187-188-194,
Clifford, Bishop, 155.
Colonization Society, 275.
Compans, M. Terneaux, Ex-
tensive library books on
America, 242,
Congregation of rites, 58.
Constantine, Emperor, 16.
Statue of, 102.
Constitution, American, in
harmony with Catholic
practices, 263,

Constitution of the United
States, Fifth Amendment
of, 285.
Coronado, Catholic Explorer,
237,
Council of Basel, 170.
Councils of Baltimore, three
national, 248.
Council of Baltimore, Third
Plenary, 190-192.
Chalcedon, 32.
Chalcedon, Fathers of, 174.
Constance, 170.
Florence, 170-181.
Sixth General, 174,
Cousseau, Rt. Rev. Anthony
Charles, Bishop of Au-
gouleme, France, 38.
Creeds, religious, separation
of members in civil af-
fairs impossible, 196.
Cullen, Cardinal of Dublin, 144.

Custis, Parke, tribute to Ire-
land, 267.

 

INDEX

DARBOY, Monsignor,
bishop of Paris, 23,

Davis, Mr. Jefferson, 229.

d’Ayllon, Vasquez, 238.

De Angelis, Cardinal, Chief of
the. five presiding Cardi-

nals at the. Vatican Coun-
cil, 36.

de Aviles, Don Pedro Menen-
dez, 237.

Dechamps, Victor Augustus
Isidore, Cardinal, Arch-
bishop of Malines, 24.

Victor Augustus Isidore,
Primate of Belgium, 143.
Victor Augustus Isidore,
Short biography of, 164.
de Avila, Francesco, 239.
De Goesbriand, Rt. Rev. Loufs,

Bishop of Burlington U. 8.,
38.

Deification of the State, 307.

de la Place, Rt. Rev. Aloysius
Gabriel, Bishop of Adri-
anople, Bulgaria, 38,

de la Ribourde, Gabriel, 240.

Demosthenes, 20.

de Onate, Don Juan, 237.

de Padilla, Juan, Franciscan,
238,

de Portola, Don Gasper, 237.
De Poissen, 238,

de Romani Pontificis Primatu
et Infallibilitate, 142-143,

Deshulles, Constantine, 240.
De Soto, 236,

de Tclosa, Diego, 239.

de Velascola, Francesco, 239,
Didius Julianus, 311.

Diocletian, persecution of, 16.
Baths of, 99.

Discoveries, Catholie, 236.

Arch-
INDEX

Discovery of the New World,
economic effects of, 187.
Divorce, complete, disallowed
by Catholic Church, 260.
Decreases where Catholics
increase, 261.
Evil threatening the Amer-
ican people, 259.
Statistics of, in different
_ parts of the country, 260.
Dogmatic constitution, de Fide
Catholica, 140.
de Ecclesia Christi, 148.

Of the Church of Christ, 157.
Dollinger, Dr., Arius of con-
troversy of 1870, 19.
Domenec, Bishop, helped se-
cure neutrality of Spain,

247,

Dongan, Sir Thomas of Cork,
Governor of New York,
266.

Donnet, Cardinal of Bordeaux,

Drexel, Miss Katharine, life
and fortune to Negro and
Indian Missions, 254.

Dupanloup, Monsignor, Arch-
bishop of Orleans, 23.

EASTERN CHRISTIANS in
communion with the Holy
See, 4.

Egyptian obelisk, 103.

Contains a relic of the True
Cross, 103.

Inscription on, 103.

Put in place by Fontana,
107-108.

Blection, means of preserving
purity of, 316.

England, Bishops from, 46.

Church of, 224.

England, 320.

 

325

English Bishops, 44.

English Immigration, Statis-
tics of, 269.

Epicurus, philosophy of, 310.

Episcopalians, 243.

Ethiopia, Church of, 174.

Hugenius IV, 170.

Explorers, Catholic, 236.

Explorers, monuments of the

passage of all over the
United States, 236.

FAITH, objections to,

proved by time, 90.
Difference between matters

of, and discipline, 39.

Father Mathew Society, 262.

Federal Constitution, Protes-
tant ministers claim Cath-
olics in conflict with, 213-
215.

With regard to Catholics,
216.

Felix V, 170.

Fitzsimmons, Thomas.

Flynn, Rt. Rev. John, Bishop
of Toronto, Canada, 38.

Font, Catholic Explorer, 237.

Foucault, Nicholas, Jesuit, 238.

Founders of Colonies, Cath-
olic, 236.

France, Bishops from, 46.

French Bishops, 43.

Clergy, refuse to receive de-
crees of the Council of
Florence, 171.

Immigration, statistics of,
269,

Prelates, 23.

Revolution, 16.

dis-

GAIRDNER, 226.

Gallicanism, cardinal prinel-
ples of, 171, ete.
326

Gallicanism, refutation of, 171.
Garces, Catholic Explorer, 237.
Garcia, Juan, 239.

Garnier’s Seneca and Cayuga
books, 242.

Georgetown College, 251.

German Bishops, 44.

Germany, Bishops frem, 46.

German immigration, statis-
tics of, 269.

Gil, Emmanuel Garcia, Arch-
bishop of Saragosia, Spain,
161.

Short biography of, 161, ete.

Guigras, Louis, captured by
Indians, 240.

Guizot, Protestant historian
and statesman, 223,

Gloria Laus et Honor, proces-
sional hymn, 111,

Gnostics, 94.

Good citizenship, 278.

Good Shepherd, Houses of, 256.

Grajales, Mendoza, 239.

Grant, Rt. Rev. Thomas, Bish-
op of Southwark, England,
38-157.

Greece, Bishops from, 46.

HAGUE, Tribunal of, 226.

Hassaun, Monsignor Patriarch
of Cilicia for the Armen-
jans, 162.

A short biography of, 162,

etc.

Hebrew people, 318.

Hennepin, Catholic Explorer,
236-237,

Henry VIII, despotism of, 224,

Herodians, 305.

Holland, Bishops from, 46.

ae vee in Rome, Tuesday,

 

INDEX

Holy Week, Wednesday, 114,

Description of service,
Thursday, Friday and Sat-
urday, 116.

Tennebrea, 114.
Misereres sung, 114.
Blessing of Holy oils, 121.

Mass of the Presanctified,
121.

Easter Sunday, 123,

Solemn High Mass celebrat-
ed by the Pope, 126, ete.

Pontifical blessing, 128, etc.

Hughes, Archbishop of New

York, helped to secure neu-
trality of France, 247.

Hungarian Bishops, 44.

Hungarian Catholics in United
States, 249,

Hungary and Galicia, Bishops
from, 46.

IBERVILLE, 287.

Illyria and Dalmatia, Bishops
from, 46.

Improperia, masterplece of
Palestrina, 122.

Indians, Church’s work among
the, 256.

Catholics, statistics of, 256.

Indian language, bocks in and
on, 242.

Indians, religious liberty not
guaranteed by our consti-
tution, 255.

Priests working among, 256.
Infallibility of the Pope, 69-139.

Books published on cutside
of the Vatican Council,
69-70.

Innocent I, 174.
Innocent X, 171.
Invaders, Spanish, 239.
INDEX

Immigrants, Catholic Society
for protection of, 258.

Irish, 266.
Irish, advice to, 275.

Trish, necessary qualifica-
tions of, 276.

Irish, distribution of, 273.

Irish, statistics of, 268-270-
271.

Irish, in general, 280.
Irish, by decades, 270. -
Ireland, Archbishop, 262.
Settlement of, Cromwellian
treatment of, 268.
Irish Bishops, 44-46.
Children kidnapped during
17th century, 267.
Gael, good influence in New
World, 266.
People, 265.
Population, decrease of, in
Ireland, 270.
Wonderful increase of, race,
270.
Redemptioners in the 18th
century, 268.
Traits in American charac-
ter, 275.
Irishmen in civil service posi-
tions, 273.
In French service, 265.
Italian Catholics in the United
States, 249.
Italy, Bishop of, 27-43.
Jackson, General, welcomed
back by Catholics of New
Orleans, 247.
Jacobini, Monsignor, 184.
Jamestown, first Catholic set-
tlement near, 238.

32”

Jogues, Isaac, Catholic mis-
sionary, 240. -

Joliet, Louis, 237.

KENRICK, Archbishop, of St.
Louis, 22-32-230.
Knights of Labor, Association
of, 186-199.
Aggressive elements among,
198.
Canadian Bishops alarmed
by, 188.
Condemned for Canada by
Holy See, 188.
Consequences which would
follow condemnation cf,
203, ete.

Holy See could not decide to
condemn, 208.

Objections to, 196.

Only two Archbishops for
condemnation of, 189.

Outbursts cf violence not at-
tributable to, 199.

Not contrary to laws of
Church, 1938.

President of, devout Cath-
olic, 193.

Reasons fer not condemning,
191.

Richmond convention, 193.
Knights of Malta, 133.
Know-Nothing Days, 219.
Kuhn, Catholic Explorer, 237.
Kulturkampf, 10-17.

LABORING classes, Church
eareful of the rights of,
200.

Labor organizations,
eral nature of, 206.

Laouenan, Rt. Rev. Francis

ephem-

Jansenists, 171.

Jay, John, leads New York po-
liticians, 244,

John, Bishop, Vicar Apos-
tolic of Pondicherry, In-
dia, 38.

 
328

La Santissima Trinita dei Pel-
legrini, institution of, 120.

La Salle, Catholic Explorer,
237.

Lavigerie, Most Rev. Charles,
Archbishop of Algiers,
Africa, 37.

La Verendrye, Catholic Explor-
er, 237.

Leahy, Archbishop of Cashel,
Ireland, 22.

Ledochowski, Archbishop of
Gnesen-Posen, imprisoned
for two years, 11.
Lee, Thomas Sim, 245.
General, 267.

Le Moyne, Catholic Explorer,
237.

Leo XIII, Cardinal Pecci at
the time of the Vatican
Council, 27.

_ Leo XIII, 32-190-222-262.

Lewis, Captain, Canadian regi-
ments, 244.

Liberty, cause of, cause of the
Church, 226.

Lincoln, Abraham, 229.

Literature, Catholic, concern-
ing countries now com-
prising the United States,
241-242.

Lombardy, Bishops from, 46.
London Times, 152.
Low Sunday, 133.

Loyalty of Catholics in Amer-
ican Revolution, 243.

In War of Independence, 243.

Lusk, Major, opposed to Cath-
olics holding office, 217.

Lutheranism, 224.

Lybia, Church of, 174.
Lynch, Dominie, 245.

Lynch Law, excuses for, 290.

 

INDEX

Lynch Law in different States,
285.

Remedies for, 294.

Violation of, 285.

Summary executions, 286.
Lynching, a blot on American

civilization, 286.

Cases of, 290.

Deplorable result of, 287-289.

Fruitful source of feuds, 287.

Of innocent men, 288.

MAFIA, Secret Society, 292.

Maguire, John, M. P., works
of, 275.

Mandatum, or washing of feet,
description of, 118, etc.

Manning, Cardinal, Archbishop
of Westminster, England,
21-22-188-201-202,

Speech by, 155.

Maranga, Rt. Rev. John, Bish-
op of Tenos, Greece, 38.

Marius, 310.

Maronite, Bishops, 43.

Maronite Rite, 141.

Marquette, 236.

Mest Bishop of Paderhorn,

Martinez, Pedro, 239.

Martyrs, Catholic, 239.

Maryland, lower counties of,
295.

Masonic Order forbidden by
Church, 196.

Massachusetts gives religious
liberty to Catholics, 217.

Masse, Father, 240.

Melchers, Archbishop of Co-
logne, expelled from his
See, 11.

Melchisedeckian, Rt. Rev.
Stephen (Armenian), Bish-
op Erzeroum, Asia, 38.
INDEX

Menendez, Pedro, 289.
Mermillod, Bishop, 67.
Methodists, 243,

Mexican Bishops, 44.

Middle Ages, 225.

Mighty minds of the past, 95.
Milman, Dean, testimony to

the value of the Papacy,
226.

Missionaries, Catholic, 236.

Monopolies, individuals and
corporations, 194.

Mosaic ordinances, 284.

McCloskey, Archbishop of New
York, 21.

McEvilly, Bishop, 155,

McGee, Thomas D’Arcy, works
of, 275.

McGettigan, Rt. Rev. Daniel,
ee of Raphoe, Ireland,

McHale, Dr., Archbishop, The
ae of the Fold of Juda,

NAPLES, Kingdom of, Bish-

ops from, 46.
Napolean, Emperor III, 16.
National holidays, 318-319.
Nazarian, Most Rev. Melchoir
(Armenian), Archbishop
of Mardin, Asia, 38.
ere and Indian Missions,
254.
Negroes, Catholics, statistics
of, 255
Priests working among, 255.
New London, favorite port of
Irish immigrants, 267.
New York Freeman’s Journal,
275.
Northers, settled largely by
Irishmen, 267,

 

320

Nice, Council of, compared

with Vatican Council, 16,
ete.

Dogmatic Decree of, 17.

Different parties in the, 17.

Oriental Bishops present at,
20.

Oriental Bishops, treatment
of, at, 20.

Nicolet, Catholic Explorer, 237.
Noble Guard, 110-124-133.

Norway and Sweden, statistics
of immigration, 269.

O’SULLIVAN, Daniel, Kerry
schoolmaster, 266.

PALLOTTI, ABBATE, 56.

Palms, blessing of, by Pope,
109, ete.

Papacy, embodiment of justice
and liberty, 226,

Medieval, political function
and power of, 226.

Papal Choir, 114.

Infallibility, thought a nov-
elty by those who did not
understand, 31.

Papp, Szilagyi, Rt. Rev. Jos
eph (Roumenian), Bishop
of Gross-Wardein, 37.

Passion according to St. John,
description of, 122.

Passion, method of chanting,
111, etc.

Parliament, 224.

Parochial Schools, 232-253.

Pareya, Father Francis, works
in the Indian language,
242.

Party lines, maintenance of,
necessary to preserve po-
litical purity, 319.
330

Patrizi, the Most Eminent Con-
stantine, Cardinal, Bishop
of Porta and Santa Rufina,
136-143.

Paternalism, forces tend to,
280.

Patrictism, 298-299-300.

Inculcated by St. Paul, 301.
Catholic Church, 302.
Our Lord, 305.

The Apostles, 306.

And cosmopolitanism not in-
compatible, 307.
Roman, 301.
Pelagian Heresy, 174.
Pelagius, 174.
Penal Laws in England, 16.
Pennsylvania, settled largely
by Irishmen, 267.
Peruvian Bishops, 44.
Petrus per os Leonis, per of
Agathcnis Locutus est, 174.

Philadelphia Standard and
Times, 275.

Pie, Louis Francis Desire Ed-
ward, Bishop of Poitiers,
160.

Short biography of, 160, etc.

Pierrot, 237.

Pious Society of Missions, 56.

Pius VII, 104,

Pius IX, daily life of, 51-52-
222-228,

Preaches at American Col-
lege, 60-61-62.

Pluym, Rt. Rev. Joseph, of
Nicopolis, Bulgaria, 38.

Poirier, Rt. Rev. Charles, Bish-
2 of Roseau, West Indies,

Pompey and Crassus, 310.

Ponce de Leon, 236.

 

INDEX

Pontifical Zouaves, 124.

Popes, infallible only in Di-
vine doctrine, universal
belief, 224.

Pouderly, Mr., President of
Knights of Labor, 188-193.

Priests, Catholic, with Colum-
bus, 238

Cabot, 238.
Ponce de Leon, 238.
Prendergast, Mr. John, 267.

Prince of Darkness, dangerous
power of, 201.

Propaganda, Sacred congrega-
tion of, 186-191. ©

Prosper of Aquitaine, Chris-
tian poet, 174.

Protestants, apathy of, in con-

troversy with Catholics,
214.

Frequently elected by Cath-
olic constituencies, 218.
Protestant ministers, two syn-
ods of, 213.

Proposals made by, deserve
the strongest reprobation,
. 215,

Opposed to Catholic Church,
represent no large section
of public opinion, 214.

Claim Catholic religion op-
posed to American liber-
ties, 213.

Providence, Divine ways of,
200.
Public conscience, 316.

Pueri Hebraeorum, sung by
choir, 109.

QUAKERS, 243.
Quentin, Father, 240.

Quin, Rt. Rev. James, Bishop
of Brisbane, Australia, 38,
INDEX

RALE, FATHER, 240.
Rale’s Abnaki Dictionary, 242,

Rauscher, Cardinal of Vienna,
144,

Reading circles in most par-
ishes, 254,

Reformation, economic effects
of, 187.

Reformers, Protestant, 227.
Reject authority of Church,
224,
Religious Intolerance, 219.

Regiments, British, largely
composed of Irishmen, 267,

Republic, dangers of our, 309.
Rerum Novarum, 190.
Reymbault, Charles, 240.
Rhodes, 20.

Ridel, Monsignor, Vicar Apos-
tolic in Corea, Barely es-
caped Martyrdcm, 12.

Robertson, British General 267.
Roman Exposition of Arts, 71,
Empire, 311.
Republic, 309-311-819.
Christianity spirit of, 104.
Holy Week in, 96.
~ Roosevelt, President, Letter to
J.C. Martin, 214.
Roosevelt, President, 218-234.
Ryan, Archbishop, cn treat-
ment of Negroes and In-
dians, 254,

SABINE and Alban Mountains,
98.

Sagard’s Wyandot Dictionary
(Indian), 242.

San Andrea della Valle, Church
of, 56.
Santa Croce, Church of, 98.

Saragossa, Archbishop of, 144.

 

331

Sardinia, Kingdom of, Bishops
from, 46.

Sauville, Cathclic Explorer,
237.

Schema or Debate on Little
Catechism, 140-141-142.
Schism, ever results in subjec-
tion of the Church to civil

authority, 225.

Schwarzenberg, Cardinal
Prince, Primate of Bo-
hemia, 22-25.

Archbishop of Prague, Bo-
hemia, 144.
Scotland, Bishops from, 46.
Statistics of Immigration,
269

Scythia, Church of, 174.

Senat, Antcnius, 238,

Servius Tullius, Fifth King of
Rome, 99.

Shakespeare’s plays, 297.

Sibour, Archbishop of Paris at
one time, 23.

Sicily and Malta, Bishops
from, 46

Simeoni, Cardinal, Prefect of
Sacred Congregation of
Propaganda, 190.

Simon, 101.

Simcr, John Baptist, Cardinal
Archbishop of Strigonium,
and Primate of Hungary,
25.

A short biography of, 166,
etc.

Sisters of Charity, loyalty to
country, 246.

Sistine Chapel, called Chapel
of Pope, 106.

Sixtus V, Pope, 108.

Social evils, 194.

Society, state of, in 70’s and
80’s, 187.
832

Solemn Pontifical Blessing as
given on Maundy Thurs-
day, 117, ete.

Sovereign Pontiff, address by,
138.

Center of unity of the
Church, 19.

Doctor and Teacher of all
Christians, 19.
Personal simplicity and self-
denial of, 49.
Sovereign Pontiff, 170.

Spaccapietra, Most Rev. Vin-
cent, Archbishop of Smyr-
na, Asia, 37.

Spain, Bishops of, 27.

Spalding, Archbishop of Balti-
more, 2-22-275.

Spanish Bishops, 44.
St. Agnes, Basilica of, 98.

St. Ange, Catholic Explorer,
237.

St. Anthanasius, 18.

St. Denys, Catholic Explorer,
237.

St, Francis de Sales, 58.
St. John Lateran’s Church, 98.
St. Lawrence, Basilica of, 98.

St. Mary of the Angels, Church
of, 99.

St. Mary Majors, Church of, 98.
St. Paul’s without walls, 97.

St. Paul, burial place of the
great Apostle, 97.

Body still venerated there,
97.

Gigantic statue of, 97.
St. Peter, line of successors of,

St. Peter’s Church, 2-98.
Description of, 99, ete.
Tilumination of, 132.

 

INDEX

St. Vincent de Paul, Society
of, 257.

State, no right to command in
religious matters, 231.

Standish, Miles, 266.

Strabo, Walafrid, 265.

Strosmayer, Monsignor, Bish-
op of Bosnia, reputed the
most eloquent of the Vat-
ican Council, 26.

Sunday, day of rest, Divine
institution of, 261.

No violation of, 277.

Observance of, decreed by
Third Plenary Council of
Baltimore, 262.

Supernatural order, Catholic
Church authorized repre-
sentative and exponent of,
258.

Supremacy of the Pope, 172.
Swiss Guard, 110-124-133.

TAFT, Mr., 233.

Talleyrand, Prince, 24.

Tarquini, Cardinal, doctrine of
civil allegiance, 223.

Tonti, 237,

Total Abstinence Society, 262.

Trade Unions, 188.

Tradition of the Church, means
of ascertaining in Cicu-
menical Councils, 39-40.

Tuscany and Modena, Bishops
from, 46.

Twilight zone, 230.

OBI Petrus, ibi ecclesia, 170.

United Statesand Colonies, 235,
Government of, 308.

Presidents of, confidence in
Catholics, 218.

University extension, 258.
INDEX

VATICAN COUNCIL,American
Bishops, manner of life in
Rome, 55.

American College, 2.

Armenian Patriarch and
Bishops, manner of life in
Rome, 54-55,

Armenian rite, Bishops pres-
ent at, 48.

Average age of Bishops pres-
ent at, 8.

Bishops, private life of, 53.

Bishops who opposed the,
Decree, 31.

Blind Bishops present at, 8.
Cardinals, private life of,
52-53.

Careful explanation of the
Decree and the removal of
all objections, 20.

Catholic Bishops of Christen-
dom, number of, in 1870, 3.

Chaldean Patriarch and
Bishops, manner of life in
Rome, 53-54.

Chaldean Rite, Bishops pres-
ent at, 10.

Comparison with U. S. Con-
gress, 149.

Coptic Rite, Bishops present
at, 1.

Harnest attempt to combine
perfect freedom of discus-
sion with celerity in de-
spatching business, 45.

English-speaking Fathers
who addressed the Coun-
cil, 149.

Errors condemned by, 83-84.
Different phases of, Eng-

lish, 84-85.
French, 85.
German, 86,

 

333

Vatican Council, denials of,

revelation condemned, 89.

Evidence of the growth of
the English language, 5.

Fourth public session of,
July 18th, 183.

Freedom of Council, accusa-
tions against liberty of,
180.

Freedom of debate a sacred
right in Council, 45.

Frequency of sermons in
various languages, 55.

General congregations, 43.

Greek- Bulgarian, Bishops
present at, 48.

Greek Melchite Rite, Bish-
ops present at, 48.

Greek Rite, Bishops present
at, 48.

Ruthenian Rite, Bishops
present at, 48.

a Bishops present at,

Infallibility of the Pope, two

months’ debate on, 14.

Interference with by Euro-

pean governments, 20.

Interference by European
governments announced

by leading newspapers, 75.

Latininity of American, Eng-
lish and Irish Prelates,

148.

Latin Rite, Bishops present

at, 48.

Different methods of pro-
nunciation among the
Fathers at, 7-145.

Liturgical language of the
West, 6.

Official language of, 6.

Tongue, necessity of the
use of, 7.
334

Vatican Council, liberty of dis-
cussion pledged by the
Holy Father, 13.

‘Made no addition to the
Faith, 41.

Maronite Rite, Bishops pres-
ent at, 4.

Matters of discipline serl-
ously considered, 43.

Not unalterable, 41-42.

New rules of debate at, de-
scription of, 66 to 69.

Newspaper reports during,

"78.

Number of Bishops in at-
tendance at, 3.

Number of Bishops from
Africa at, 3.

Asia at, 3.

Eurcpe at, 3.

North and South America
at, 3.

Oceania at, 3.

Number of English-speaking
Bishops present, compared
with those of Council of
Trent, 5.

mcg Bishop attending, 85-

Oriental Catholics, peculiar
rites and ceremonies, 3.

Oriental Rites, subdivisions,
4.

Oriental schismatics not rep-
resented at, although in-
vited by Pius IX, 3.

Pamphlets written for and
against, 74.

Papal Infallibility, causes of
difference cf opinions
among the Bishops, 177.

Papal Infallibility, explana-
tion of Dogma, 169, etc.
Main points held by Ultra-

montanes, 177-178.

 

INDEX

Vatican Council, opposition,
different opinions of, 177-
178.

Votes of Fathers on ques-
tions of, 183.

Patriarchs and Bisheps of
the East, 3.

Reasons for oppositicn, 31. -

Russia not represented by
Diocesan Bishop, 3.

Same. year as Franco-Prus-
sian War, 28,

Schema on matters of Faith,
78.
Manner of discussion upon,

78-79,
Manner of voting on, 80,
ete.

Speeches of Bishops taken
sows by ' stenographers,

Syrian Rite, Bishops pres-
ent at, 7.

Third public session of, 133,
etc.

Varied learning of the Fath-
ers at, 9.

Veiled threats of, 20.

Veiled threats announced by
newspapers, 75.

Yeungest Bishop, Vicar Apos-
tolic of North Carolina, 35-
150.

Valenziani, Monsignor, Bish-
op of Fabriano and Matel-
ica, 135.

Valerga, Most Rev. Josenh,
Patriarch of Jerusalem, 38,

Vatican, description of, 49, etc.

Venice, Bishops from, 46.

Verplank, 267.

Victcr Hmanuel, Bishops from
territory seized by, 47-48.

Vincennes, 237.
INDEX

von Ketteler, Baron, Bishop of
Mayence, 24-140.

Votes, purchase of, 314.

Voting, privileges of not an in-
herent right, 314.

Solemn and sacred trust, 314.

WASHBURNE, Mr., Minister
to France in 1871, 23.

War of 1812, 247,

Washington’s aids, Catholics
among, 244,

Washingtcn, election of, to the
Presidency, 248.

Washington’s testimony to loy-
alty of Catholics, 245.

Opinions on religion and
morality, 252.

 

335

White, Father, book on Mary-
land language, 242,

Whites, vices of principal ob-
stacles to conversicn of
Indians, 240.

Wierzchleyski, Monsignor,
Archbishop of Leopoli in
Galician Poland, 140,

Winsor, Justin, Catholic his-
torian, 241,

Wright, Carroll D., 260.

Writers, Catholic, 236.

ZOSIMUS, 174.
Zwingli, 224,

YOUNG, Dr. Edward, United
States Bureau of Statis-
tics, 268,
 

WELCOMED BY CRITICS EVERYWHERE

 

Lite of Cardinal Gibbons

Sat sokt eae

RAUNT TONie
ag ea AN
America’s INTERESTING
Foremost IMPORTANT
HISTORICAL
Churchman ies

 

By ALLEN S&S. WILL, A.M., Litt. DD.

figure in world affairs, both religious and secular,

than most of those who come in contact with him
are aware. It is Gibbons the builder, the constructive
churchman, the believer in the institutions of his native
land, upon which the author lays stress, and there can be
no doubt that Dr. Will bas succeeded in painting a fine
word picture of one of the greatest men of his time.

H’ shows the Cardinal as he is and has been, a greater

 

One Volume, Octavo Size, 430 Pages, 17
Full Page Engravings, Bound in Buck- 2 00 Net
ram, Bevelled Gilt Top. Price. . . . 2

 

NE?
Half Morocco, Uncut Edges, Gilt Top .. $3.50
Cardinal Red, Morocco, Solid Gold Edges 5.00

 

JOHN MURPHY CO., Publishers, BALTIMORE, MD.

 

 

 
 

BEACON LIGHTS
$Hlaxims of Cardinal Gibbons

By
Cora Payne Shriver

THis tittle manual as a per-

petual calendar, will be
most valuable to those who
wish to mark each day by
some thought or aspiration
that make for the betterment
of themselves and of their
fellow-men.

Square 16 mo.
In Cardinal Red Leather
Gilt Top
Each Book in a White Box

Price $1.00 Net

 

 

  

From the Writings
and Speeches of
Cardinal Gibbons

FREFERRING TO THE
Church, The Family,
Politics, Education, The
State and Labor, Pre-
pared under direction of
the Faculty of St. Mary’s
Seminary, Baltimore.

   

12 mo. 192 Pages
In Cardinal Red Leather
Gilt Top
Each Book in a White Box

Price $1.00 Net

 

JOHN MURPHY CO., Publishers, BALTIMORE, MD.

 

 

 
 

 

Ge Ouatume of Prelates

OF THE

Catholic Church according ta Roman Etiquette

By the
REV. J. A. NAINFA, S.S.
Professor of Church History and Liturgy,
St. Mary’s Seminary,
Baltimore, Md,

This is the only book published in the English language
on the matter of Prelatial Etiquette. It will be found valu-
able and interesting to Prelates and Clergy and the public
at large, who may wish to know something about the uni-
form which the Catholic Church, like all other constituted
bodies, imposes upon her ministers. With regard to the
yarious costumes worn by Prelates the will of the Church
has been that modifications, however excellent and in some
respects justifiable, should not be left to private fancy;
for she clearly foresaw that, after a short lapse of years,
such toleration would practically do away with a unity at
once beautiful and instructive, therefore she has laid down
poe regulations that should not be lightly put aside,

wo of the Roman Congregations, that of Rites and Cere-
monies, are especially commissioned to watch over the ex-
eee observance of these rules and to secure their preserva:

on.

Such a manual seems almost a necessity, when we con-
sider that tailors and others in making ecclesiastical cos-
tumes, very often follow their own tastes, fancies, designs,
etc., instead of the very clear and precise rules of ecclesias-
tical etiquette. Even our good Sisters and pious ladies who

enerally make presents to the clergy in the form of
irettas, “rabbis,” surplices, cottas and other articles of
clerical dress, need to be informed that the material, color,
shape, trimmings, etc., are regulated not by the rich taste
and generous liberality of the giver, but by ordinances of
the Church.

All the parts of the Prelatial costume are treated in sue-
cession. The work begins with a general introduction, giv-
ing short, but substantial, indications on the different
classes of Prelates who are entitled to wear a special cos-
tume. This introductory study is followed by a chapter
treating in general of the materials and colors prescribed.
After this comes the special study of all the pieces of the
Prelatial habit, from hat to shoes. At the end some suc-
einct principles are given_concerning ecclesiastical heraldry,
the titles to be pen to Prelates, and the special privileges
peenene to such ecclesiastics as are honored with the title
° octor. '

ONE VOLUME, 12M0., ILLUSTRATED, CLOTH.
PRICE, $1.50 NET.

 

John Murphy Co., Publishers, Baltimore, Md.

 

 
 

 

NEW LARGE TYPE EDITION

 

Lives of the Saints

The Lives of the Fathers, Martyrs
and other Principal Saints; Com-
piled from Original Monuments
and other authentic records

ILLUSTRATED
With the Remarks of Judicious Modern

Critics and Historians

BY THE

REV. ALBAN BUTLER

To which is prefixed an account of the Life and Writings
of the Reverend Author, interspersed with ob-
servations on some subjects of Sacred or
Profane Literature mentioned
in his writings. By...

CHARLES BUTLER, Esq.

Barrister of Law

This is the best edition of the Lives of the Saints pub-
lished. It is printed from clear type, on fine white paper,
and substantially bound in ribbed cloth.

LARGE OCTAVO, 2 VOLUMES, PRICE, $4.00
LARGE OCTAVO, 4 VOLUMES, PRICE, $5.00

 

John Murphy Co., Publishers, Baltimore, Md.

 

 
A NEW AND REVISED
EDITION OF

THE ROMAN MARTYROLOCY

Brought Down to Date and Adapted to the Calendar
of Saints in the Church of the United States by a Priest
of Saint Sulpice, at St. Charles’ College, Maryland

This Edition accords with the copy printed at Rome in 1845,
under the auspices of Pope GREGoRY XVI. Translated from
the latin with an Introduction by Most Rev. Francis Patrick
Kenrick, D.D., Late Archbishop of Baltimore,

The Roman Martyrology is an official and accredited record,
on the pages of which are set forth in simple and brief, but
' impressive words, the glorious deeds of the soldiers of Christ
in all ages of the Church; of the illustrious Heroes and
Heroines of the Cross, whom her solemn verdict has beatified
or canonized.

It is a consoling evidence of progress in the spiritual life
of this country, to find the Martyrology published in English.
and thereby made accessible, in its rich treasures of Sanctity,
to all classes of our population. It will prove highly edifying
and useful, not only to the members of our numerous religious
Communities of both sexes, but also to the Laity generally.
Every day has here its record of Sanctity; and there is
scarcely a Christian, no matter how lowly or how much
occupied, who may not be able to daily peruse, with faith and
with great profit, the brief page of each day’s model of
Holiness.

ONE VOLUME. LARGE 12mo. CLOTH.
PRICE $3.00 PER COPY.

JOHN MURPHY COMPANY, Publishers, Baltimore, Md.