SWIFEE:
AULLORER)
SKALLIKIF
BROWNSON'S
Jenn
MIDDLE
BRUSHE
LIFE
GRAD
B
908
.B884
B88
V.2
1845-1855.
ISTOS
OD
134
ME:
#{M}
HAB
SE
E
BRE
AU
111
*}^!!!
1920
#
TH
MH
Î
JE.
JARE
POMA
21
MA!
12
DATA
:1
XOX!
MUSIK
MAANDELEN MIEST
***
NUMAR
1
1
A
INAPA
1.1
:!'.
ľ
*:
DATAREIDIN
ALERTE
B
}
LAND
19
T
1.
;'|'
}
}
TÍBE
MI
TE
ME:
4. !
1099
19
10
#!
}: 1
1.
14
17
}
AL
-}
101:
{|}
}:
1.
18
}
1!!
} }
J
, 1
1:1
1921
$
i
$1.
1.
{1}
Ba
MAMA
ti
1
!!
1:1
t
17;
7.7
1:1
}
1.1
GALAN
1.4.7ì⠀
30
*****
1
31112
111
Dili
"
12.
J;
霉
​}
[ ܐ ، ܐ ܕ ܐ ܐ ،
31
A
11:1
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
FATTEN:012R
$
WN1
**
11
NE?
ATEN
11
}}
2.2?
12.1
MATH
PATRONATING
***
**!!
{{***
100
!
1276)
13/07 |
****
VERDAG
!!
717
|H
1)
!!!**
PANTANETKI
·
!!
#ANT}
#A
事
​11
1:31
:}
HAND
KUMZAAR
25
11.)
******
1:1
:}}}
⠀⠀⠀⠀
1:1:1:
!
(+1
::}
Dra
}
J. BA
*22/1/1
PANA
1
201
1987)
**
11
܊ ܐ ܊ . . . . . . . . .
#M***
1:1⠀⠀⠀
atada
4440
ܐ ܪ ܕ
ܕ ܐ ܪ ܐ ܕ ܐ
****
Li
7
#hyd
1.
i
ܐ ܐ ܐ ܐ .
U
1
11
1 14
# #
H
::
↓
11
!!!!!!
11:
11.
121
INTERN
1-4.
*} {*
t
FUTAT
T
N
MO⠀⠀⠀
!!!
1
}
WELL!?!?!
!
"J
!!!
£44584
…].
MAI
114:1
VAAAAAA
**!!
}
}}}
20
!
|
⠀
100
}
11
i
141
1 *⠀⠀ 1:1}} 99
}};
?
941
!!
}}
1!!
NE
11
#An
ii
ין
A
售
​***
N
79
1170
11: #1
MON
!
23
ܐ . . . . . . . . . ، ܃
}
!!!
**
799
11
EAN:
1!:
، ! ؛
11:
199
A
1117
1 : 11
11.5%
CORTE
190
(a)
!
Pi
#4411t
}
3:
•
JU
11:1
H
BENALLA.
1:11:
1981
܇ ܕ ܪ ܐ ܐ ، ܐ
Taasi
Sa
1|'i
:i
!!
AUTA
رد
1:1
#ii
3
1 1117
!!
$117
DE
;}
6/15
4·6) 3.
::)
111
611
313
TE
4)
LA
fi
i
Tris
す
​jj
!
**
"}
CA
**::*
} ::}
MA
!!!!!!
1/
17
GAMEGAM
:
***:
BAAAAA
:|
ا را ;
، ܘ ܪ ، ܐ ، ، ܐ
!!!!
!!!!
Limi
*** 822122
Hi
11-11775
DOGTERAR!
Patil.
#
2
110014
1
PER
!!!!!!
A
12:09497
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀**
3247972710.112
***
"
3:20 421
****
}:
11114
}}}
11
}}
H
ܐ ، ، ܃ ܪ ܪ
}
#
}
. ܪ ܕ ܐ : ܐ ܐ ܐ ܐ ܐ ܐ ܐ ܐ ܕ ܐ ،
SGU
111.
*
"
BANANA
14!!!
!!!
1
3.1
7
15112
J:1
Fil
17
1
[⠀⠀⠀
THUAQHD! {54:
1:10}
Ma
}}!!
1:
Tel:
1:
COR
Ot
1:17:
!.}
#
6107
1341
141
FAZLAGA
AAAAAAAA
#2!}:
:!
17:0
?
M
44122
449
#1297**12.
19:
17
MAC!!!
}
3009
}
KAZA
;r;:
201
?
1
2*(**
JOANNATTA
******
ADGAME
19
MAGA
15
14
The i
ANALE!
UOBAU! 1
TELE
1
***
1:1
+421 1
!!!
10
}
$46!??!!!
BATHIN
JAANA
1:19:
18?!! 1.3.
**!
3417
@julia!)
} ⠀ ⠀ ⠀ ⠀ * * * * } *
2081441
******
15U VE
1:01
!
ܐ . . . . . . . . . . .
$!!!?! ⠀ ⠀⠀ ⠀ !!!!!!!!
6
3:1
trit
*****
1:
ONTARRANAT
/*!!! 2531
W
11:1
1/*!!!??!!!
1
MAHARA
12
1
#:)+
}}
Mil
j
וי
U!!! :!!!!!!!
1
b
!!!:4?!
1911 *****
"
*****
܊ ܊ ܐ
.1
܃ ܕ ܕ ܐ ܐ ܕ ܐ ܐ ܃
J
M
1}{\
1981 4
}:
Dan
!!
1
33)
犟
​+373
20121
**
23
11:
17806940
::}
1.
1) 4.
*:*:
#
MARZO FEUER
1
W!!:
DELTAICE:
Dijaman
MA
19119
#1):175!!
******
7.
!!!!!
Defe ;{; }
> }
AUDIA
*** 2012
};
12424
!!!! *****
HOTEL
****
******
1
SATI
if
܃ ܝ ܐ ܐ . ܐ . ܊ ،
ܪ ܐ ܐ ܐ
***.111111*
།
*********
#
kelet?!!!KIEM ZEAL
194
7710/
Na!!
1:
!!!
**
་
Įšť:
A*U!!!
PARAPHAj
ܙ ܪ ܕ
1:
1970
491
******
!!!!!
li
4 13
41
*****
HDM
**
⠀⠀⠀⠀
#16
14:
REKLA
21:41!
#1
2
"
!!!
1:
!!!
23
**
ana??
#!5)
22*64.
};!
#
***
UNCH
*****
## 7
****
*
···

1
Ap
MESTNEM AT
:
E
I
:
!
UNTRYZO
ARTES
LIBRARY
AVAZADAJ
1837
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
2
VERITAS
(40)
3. E. PLURIBUS UNUM :
SCIENTIA
OF THE
TUGUDA
PRZEM
SQUAERIS PENINSULAM AMOENAME
CIRCUMSPICE
AJAJAJAJAUSMUOTOIKEINDA
ORESTES A. BROWNSON'S
MIDDLE LIFE:
FROM 1845 TO 1855.
BY
nuo
HENRY F BROWNSON.
DETROIT, MICH.
H. F. BROWNSON, PUBLISHER.
1899.
12304
GAME
CONTENTS.
012-1
CHAPTER I. CONTROVERSY WITH PROTESTANTS,
II. CONTROVERSY WITH CATHOLICS,-NEWMAN,
III. SHAW,-GLOVER,-MCMASTER,
IV. TONE TOWARDS PROTESTANTS,-NO SALVA-
TION OUT OF THE CHURCH,-NATIVE-
AMERICANISM,—- KENRICK,— THE BISHOPS
AT BALTIMORE COMMEND THE REVIEW,
V. THE JESUITS, CUMMINGS,-HASKINS,-MILES,
MCCAFFREY, RODDAN,-SHANDY MC-
GUIRE.
A
**
VI. THE CATHOLIC PRESS,-CONVERSION OF BROWN-
SON'S OLDEST SON,-PURCELL,-KENRICK,
MCCAFFREY, MAJOR,
NEW YORK
LECTURES,--CUMMINGS.
Stad
-
VII. THE CATHOLIC OBSERVER, THE AMERICAN
REVIEW, SOCIALISM,--W. H. CHANNING,
-GREENE,-MATAPHYSICS, THE FRENCH
REPUBLIC,--MONTREAL AND QUEBEC,-
PHILADELPHIA.
-
VIII. WEBSTER,-THE COMMON LAW,-AMERICAN
LITERATURE, DANA,- LOWELL,- EMER-
SON,--BANCROFT,-- HAWTHORne,--Cooper,
-PARKMAN,--RELIGIOUS NOVELS,--Grant-
LEY MANOR, TEMPERANCE, CHINIQUY,—
HECKER,
IX. SLAVERY, THE FUGITIVE - SLAVE LAW,-
HIGHER LAW, — Parker,
SEWARD'S
CUBAN EXPEDITIONS,
X. THE FRENCH REPUBLIC OF 1848,-MONTALEM-
BERT,
PAGE.
I
34
63
91
121
153
197
240
278
315
1
•
CONTENTS.
XI. LECTURES IN ST. LOUIS, BALTIMORE,—MONT-
REAL,
XII. THE MERCERSBURY SCHOOL,-THE TRACT-
ARIAN SCHOOL,
INDEX,
XIII. HUNTINGTON, DONOSO CORTES,-KOSSUTH,—
NAPOLEON III, MONTALEMBERT, — O’-
CONNOR,
XIV. SHEPHERD OF THE VALLEY,-GARESCHE,-
FREEMAN'S JOURNAL, -L'UNIVERS, A
NEW CONSTITUTION SUBMITTED IN MASSA-
CHUSETTS, INVITATION TO LECTURE IN
THE IRISH UNIVERSITY,
G
-
C
Ada
A p
XV. BROWNSON ASSERTS THE SUPREMACY OF THE
SPIRITUAL ORDER, AND IS OPPOSED BY O'-
THOSE WHO
CONNOR AND PURCELL,
STOOD BY HIM,
XVI. THE KNOW-NOTHINGS,
JAN
BROWNSON'S POLICY
TO DEFEAT THEM, EVANGELICALS, THE
CATHOLIC MIRROR,-MITCHEL,-BANKS,-
CHANDLER, MCCLINTOCK,- CORRESPON-
DENCE ON THE POWER OF THE POPE,-O'
CONNOR ON THE BULL INEFFABILIS DEUS,
-SOME FOREIGNERS AGREE WITH BROWN-
SON,
XVII. BROWNSON DEFENDS AGAINST KNOW-NOTH-
INGS HIS RIGHT TO BE A CATHOLIC, AND
AGAINST CATHOLICS HIS RIGHT TO BE AN
AMERICAN,
-
XVIII. NEW ORLEANS, MOBILE, CINCINNATI,
EUROPEAN AFFAIRS,-PHILOSOPHICAL Es-
SAYS, CHANGE OF RESIDENCE FROM Bos-
TON TO NEW YORK.
M
-
340
360
398
438
485
528
567
607
643
1
#
+
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
CHAPTER 1.
CONTROVERSY WITH PROTESTANTS.
X
In a previous volume it has been related how
Orestes A. Brownson, born and bred among strict
Protestants, was, on reaching man's estate, led to
renounce the communion of the sects, and to reject all
belief in supernatural revelation; how little by little he
began to feel the want of some religion; how he
adopted and preached one of his own devising, till his
politics, his philosophy, and his theology brought him
to knock at the door of the Catholic Church, which
was opened to him by Bishop Fitzpatrick at Boston,
in October, 1844.
1
For some months before Brownson applied to the
Bishop of Boston for instruction in the faith he had
discontinued preaching. His only means of providing
for his large family was the income from his
lectures and from Brownson's Quarterly Review, of
which Review he was both editor and proprietor. This
Review had always discussed questions of philosophy,
politics, and general literature; but its character was as
much theological and religious as it was political or
literary or philosophical.
*Brownson's Early Life.
*
#
1
2
2
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
L
!!
#:
The question then arose in his mind whether he
should continue the Review, eliminating from its pages
all theological discussion, or seek a livelihood from
some other occupation. He was conscious of how
little he knew of Catholic theology. At the time that
he applied to the Bishop of Boston for religious
instruction, he had read no Catholic books except
Milner's "End of Controversy" and the Catechism of
the Council of Trent, and these only partially. He had
never seen and conversed with an intelligent Catholic
on the subject of religion the value of one hour in his
whole life; and of course, could have known very little
of what Catholicity really was. He guessed at its
leading doctrines from his knowledge of the Protestant
doctrines opposed to them; and though he often guessed
aright, he not seldom blundered. He believed that our
Lord was the son of God, that he lived and died for our
salvation, and had established a church to continue his
work, to teach all things which he had commanded her,
and he knew enough history to know that that church
was no other than the one, holy, Catholic, and apostolic
church. Knowing this, he was prepared to accept
whatever doctrines that church should propose to him
to be believed. The few months he had been under
instruction sufficed for the acquiring of so much of
Catholic doctrine as was necessary for baptism, but by
no means enough to fit him for the position of a
Catholic teacher.
He determined, therefore, not to discuss matters
pertaining to religion in the Review and as the
Review, without religious discussion, would be strange
and perhaps unwelcome to his old readers, and still
li
*
L
1
HE CONTINUES HIS REVIEW.
3
stranger and more unsatisfactory to himself, he was
inclined to take up the profession of law, for which he
had nearly, if not quite, all the necessary qualifications,
in which he had every reason to expect success, and
which he might, should he so desire, make the stepping-
stone to political advancement.
When Fitzpatrick was informed of this intention
he was very decided in his opposition, both on account
of his interest in Brownson and of his desires in relation
to the church. He believed Brownson likely to win
great success at the bar, but what, he asked, would it
amount to after all? One who had led so many astray
could only make reparation and atone for the evil done
by devoting his life to spreading the truth which God
had mercifully led him to confess. The best service he
could render to his country was to labor for its
conversion. The bishop was attached to this, the land
of his birth, and its constitution, and saw that Catholic
faith and practice were all that were needed to make
this country the most prosperous and beneficent on
earth. He did not look upon our republican form of
government as repugnant to Catholic principles, or
opposed to the maxims of the gospel; but he knew that
of all forms of government the republican or democratic
requires the most religious practice of the sublime
virtues of Christianity, and that only the virtue which
perfects man, and lifts his aim to the supreme good,
and the light of nature strengthened by the teaching of
the gospel, can furnish a solid foundation for the
republic.
The bishop was also aware that he had an earnest
and bold champion for Catholicity all ready for the fight;
4
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
and one was needed at that time. The mass of the
Catholics in the eastern states were immigrant laborers,
looked down on with contempt or hatred by the native
population; in danger of violence and mobs; their
churches and convents set on fire; whilst the descen-
dants of Catholic-American families timidly aimed to talk
and act in such way that their Catholicity should be
lost sight of, or at least forgiven if not forgotten. The
sectarian journals were unrestrained in their hostility
to Catholics and their religion, often misrepresenting
both, whether from ignorance or from malice. Here
was a field suited to Brownson and Brownson's Review.
A systematic study of Catholic doctrine was Fitz-
patrick's first requirement. For this purpose he chose
Billuart's Summa Theologica of St. Thomas, which he
set Brownson to reading, the Bishop being the teacher.
After that came St. Thomas's own Summa Theologica;
and then some of St. Augustine's Works. Fitzpatrick
was an admirable master in theology. He knew his
matter, could explain it clearly, was calm and authori-
tative in his exposition, and sound in his views. He
even went so far to the safe side as to forbid not only
innovation in doctrine, but even in exposition and
defence of truth. The effect of this extreme conser-
vatism of the Bishop's was to force Brownson, for the
eleven years that he wrote under Fitzpatrick's super-
vision, to ignore the principal line of argument by
which he had himself been influenced, and to restrict
hmself almost wholly to the arguments generally used
by controversialists. These arguments were forcibly and
clearly put, and were unanswerable, indeed; but the
most usual effect of such controversy is to silence an
#
PROTESTANT CONTROVERSY.
་
10
5
Brownson's
opponent rather than to convert him.
main purpose was the conversion of those outside of the
fold to the Catholic faith; the bishop desired their
conversion, though not very hopefully; but was intent
on stopping the anti-Catholic fury of the Protestant
journals. Brownson took the course marked out for
him by the bishop, and to some extent used the instru-
ments he prescribed. But no one well read in the
controversies that have been going on for nearly four
centuries between Catholics and Protestants will deny
that even on the Catholic side there is something
lacking of the strength, the earnestness, and the
success of the early fathers. Every age has its work
to do and has the strength, and the materials for doing
that work, if it will but use them. In the middle ages,
when Europe was nominally Catholic, there was hardly
a truth of philosophy or theology that was not set forth
and defended in one form or another, and scarcely an
objection against our religion that was not strongly
stated and refuted in the schools. But these truths
were set forth, and these objections refuted for scholars,
and for the Catholic rather than the Acatholic mind; and
the discussion was often more similar to the exhibition
of the joust or tournament than a battle for life or death
in real warfare.
Luther and his contemporaries brought the
discussion of the profoundest theological questions out
from the schools where they knew that their novelties
would be rejected when judged by professional
theologians according to the rules of theological science,
and appealed to an unprofessional public, or from
science to ignorance. The result has been the destruc-
A
1
6
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
4
ई
+
W!
*
32
tion of theological science among Protestants, the
rejection of the definitions and distinctions of scholastic
theology, and the substitution for the mysteries of faith
of a vague sentiment and a few propositions of natural
religion. The Catholic controversialist must now be
prepared to go before a fickle, impatient audience,
incapable of following long chains of syllogistic reason-
ing, and constantly growing more so, and argue his
cause against an adversary only intent on gaining a
verdict, and ready to resort to false assertions and
false reasoning whenever such may suit his purpose,
and to reiterate objections and calumnies that have been
a hundred times refuted.
Moreover, Protestants have no principles which
they are obliged, as one body, to maintain. There is
not an article of Protestantism which some eminent
Protestant has not yielded, nor a Catholic doctrine he
has not defended. It is generally supposed that
Protestantism professes two fundamental principles,
each essential to its very existence, namely,-1st, the
Bible is the original and only source of Christian faith,
and 2nd, the Bible is to be taken on and interpreted
by private judgment. These principles, or rules, are
incompatible one with another; and as the Bible so
interpreted, is nothing more than simply private judg-
ment, the only principle left for Protestantism to
stand on is mere private judgment or individual opinion,
which varies with every Protestant.
If the more reputable sects were the real bulwarks
of Protestantism, and there were no lower depths to
which the Anglican and Episcopal sects could retreat,
when driven from their more elevated position, there
PROTESTANTISM.
7
8
would be little difficulty in the case. But the real
strength of Protestantism is in the most advanced sects,
those which have moved furthest from Catholicity, and
nearest to the natural terminus to which the dominant
tendency of the Protestant world leads, and that is
rationalism, transcendentalism, pantheism, atheism,
nihilism, agnosticism. Even men who are up to the
level of their age in science and erudition admit, at
best, only the natural-supernatural order, and seek to
explain all the phenomena of man's religious life by
means of what may be termed natural, as distinguished
from Christian, mysticism. If so-called orthodox Protes-
tants profess to hold some things that are also held by
Catholics, it is not by virtue of their Protestantism, but
in spite of it that they so hold, and they will give up, or
consent to hold those doctrines simply as opinions hav-
ing no objective validity, rather than abandon the Protes-
tant movement. Hence it follows that there are and
can be no questions debatable between Catholics and
Protestants but such as pertain exclusively to the
province of reason. If reason finds sufficient evidence
that God has instituted a church to teach all nations
whatsoever he has revealed, it pronounces her infallible,
and acknowledges its obligation to accept, without ques-
tioning, whatever she teaches.
Brownson was satisfied that his doctrine of life and
of communion which had led him to the threshold of
the church was in no way incompatible with any
Catholic principle or doctrine; and though as a truth of
philosophy it could not bridge over the gulf between
the natural and the supernatural, it did, better than any
other philosophical doctrine, show the harmony between
;
8
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
the natural and the supernatural, and remove those
obstacles to the reception of the church, and her
doctrines on her authority, which all intelligent and
thinking men brought up outside of the church in these
days do really encounter.
At Fitzpatrick's dictation, Brownson suppressed
his philosophic theory, and by that suppression was
placed in a false position towards his former friends.
His readers had seen well enough whither he was
tending and were not surprised to find him professing
himself a Catholic. The doctrine which he had
brought out, and which they had followed, appeared to
them as it did to him, to authorize his action, and
probably not a few of them were making up their minds
to follow him; but they were thrown all aback the first
time they heard him speaking as a Catholic, by finding
him defending his conversion on grounds of which he
had given no public intimation, and which seemed
wholly unconnected with those he had published.
Unable to perceive any logical or intellectual connection
between his last utterances before entering the church
and his first utterances afterwards, they looked upon
his conversion, after all, as a sudden caprice, or rash
act taken from a momentary impulse or in a fit of
intellectual despair, for which he had in reality no good
reason to offer. So they turned away in disgust, and
refused to trouble themselves any longer with the
reasonings of one on whom so little reliance, could be
placed, and who could act without any rational motive
for his action.*
*
*This matter is explained at greater length in Brownson's Works, Vol.
v., pp. 165-175.
h
2
THE CHURCH QUESTION.
9
❤
J
Suppressing, then, his own method, he adopted the
usual method so satisfactory to those who already
believe all the conclusions to be proved, and which he
confessed he had never found effectual in the case of
any Acatholic not already disposed to become a Catholic,
or actually, in his belief, on the way to the church.
The first questions, therefore, were, whether Christ
actually established a church with authority to teach,
and, if so, whether that church was the Catholic or
some other church. The particular doctrines held by
Catholics as Catholics he neither held nor believed he
could establish independently of the authority of the
church teaching them. When it became necessary in
the course of the argument to defend any revealed
doctrine, he set it forth with clearness and precision,
and showed its consistency with reason and with the
entire system of Catholic truth; but did not claim for it
any authority beyond that of the church teaching it.
As far as possible he sought to put Protestantism on its
defence; but much of his controversial writing was
devoted to the answering of objections brought against
the church. To many the speculations and sophistries.
of the enemies of the church seem formidable; but
Brownson said he could see through their hollowness,
and to him they were a little stale. It had been with
a full knowledge of their exegesis, their criticism, their
theories, their speculations, systems, ideas, pretensions,
that he yielded his mind and his heart to the Catholic
Church. He had tried them all, found them wanting,
before he came into the church, and could feel no great
respect for, or confidence in them; yet their exposure
was highly necessary. In this exposure he said that
1
+
1
10
(6
..!
-
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
܀
he made it a point of honor and of conscience to
represent the views and arguments of his opponents
fairly, and to reply to them in the same manner.
Many a man may find in our pages his objections to
our views put in a clearer and stronger light than he
had himself put them. We make it a rule to meet an
opponent in his strength, not in his weakness, and
answer his objections in their real meaning, without
any chicanery, or the substitution of any false or collat-
eral issue. We write never to win a victory, but always
to elicit, defend, or recommend the truth, and we cannot.
understand how a Christian, or even a man who respects.
himself, can do otherwise; yet, we have rarely met a
man who, in arguing against Catholicity, consents to
meet the question on its merits. There is less, both of
candor and clear, sharp intelligence in popular writers,
and even writers of reputation, than is commonly sup-
posed. Some of the criticisms of our own religious.
friends, as well as enemies, confirm us in this. There
are few men who can write without prejudice, fewer
still, perhaps, who can go at once to the heart of a
question, and seize vividly and firmly the principle on
which it hinges." *
1
The policy of such Catholic writers as had taken part
in controversy with Protestants in this country before
Brownson's conversion, had been to assume an apologetic
tone and to labor to explain away as far as possible the
doctrines most offensive to Acatholics or lukewarm
Catholics, and to answer objections drawn from ecclesi-
astical history on a low ground; because, as long as the
Catholic body was small, the main object aimed at was
* Brownson's Works, Vol. vii., p. 455.
A HIGHER CATHOLIC TONE.
11
•
their defence against Acatholics, and the formation of
the public sentiment of the Catholic community was
only a secondary consideration. Brownson's object, in
which he was upheld by Fitzpatrick and others with
whom he took counsel, was to impart a freer and more
elevated tone to Catholic thought and discussion, and to
put those who objected to the church and her doctrines,
or to the papacy and its prerogatives, on their defence;
to bring out these doctrines in their strongest form and
assume the highest Catholic ground. It was thought,
when he was called to continue his Review, that Catho-
lic questions might and should be thenceforth discussed
with reference to the Catholic as well as the Acatholic
community; and it was believed that the higher the
tone of Catholics, the more salutary would be their
influence in checking the destructive radicalism of the
country, and the more advantageous it would be in the
long run to the cause of Catholic truth.
That this course was wise and salutary is not to be
questioned; but, again, Brownson was put in an un-
pleasant, if not a false position, not, this time, so much
with his old friends as with a part of the Catholic
community, who thought he went too far, and availed
themselves of the first favorable opportunity to try to
weaken his influence. Yet, on the other hand, nearly
all the bishops and a great majority of the other clergy
looked with favor on his course, and exerted their
influence to increase the circulation of his Review, and
to make his lectures successful.
In continuing Brownson's Review as a Catholic
periodical, the editor devoted his labor for several years
chiefly to controversy. His old friends, Emerson,
}
|
I
12
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
2
►
..
L
I
<
-
!!.
Theodore Parker, W. H. Channing, Sarah Margaret
Fuller, James Freeman Clarke, The Christian Register,
and The Christian Examiner, received much attention
from him, while Bishop Hopkins, Theodore Jouffroy,
Richard Hildreth, Dr. S. F. Jarvis, James H. Thorn-
well, Horace Bushnell, The Methodist Review, The
Episcopal Observer, The Mercersburg and Edinburgh
Reviews were also opposed for unchristian or anti-
catholic doctrines.
In his Review for October, 1844, Brownson had
sufficiently refuted the pretensions of the High-Church
Episcopalians; in the number for January, 1845, in
the article on The British Reformation, he proceeded
to refute Low-Churchism. The Protestant Episcopal
Bishop, Hopkins, of Vermont, had, in August, 1844,
requested Brownson to give a fair and candid reading
to his Lectures on the British Reformation, and if
they failed in justifying the principles of that reforma-
tion, it would, he said, gratify him to have his
error shown. Brownson endeavored to give him the
desired gratification in the article on The British
Reformation, in which he shows that on the grounds
assumed by the Bishop, the British Reformers are not
cleared of the charge of schism, that the establishment
they founded is not a living member of Christ's body,
*The Anglican Church Schismatic, Brownson's Works, Vol. iv., p. 567.
+ Works, Vol. vi., p. 568.
(
See the letter referred to, in Brownson's Early Life, p. 468. Hopkins
was by no means so diffident of his ability in other cases as he makes him-
self out in this letter. Six or eight years previously he had written a book
in which "the Church of Rome, at the present day, is compared with the
Church of Rome in her primitive purity," and addressed it to the Roman
Hierarchy." It was this book which drew from Bishop Kenrick, of Phila-
delphia, his great work on "The Primacy of the Apostolic See," written in
1837.
*
BISIIOP HOPKINS.
13
that they acted without authority, broke the unity of
faith, and they and their successors are guilty, not only
of usurping an honor to which they have not been
called of God, and not only of breaking the unity of the
orthodox faith and the Lord's body; but of leading
others astray, teaching them to do the same, confirming
them in their error, and perilling their salvation. In
conclusion, the Reformers were invited to send forward
a champion with some solid principle on which their
defence may be grounded. Hopkins's next attempt at
controversy with Catholics was made ten years later,
when he produced "The End of Controversy Contro-
verted,” in a series of letters addressed to his former
adversary, Bishop Kenrick, of Philadelphia, challenging
him to refute them. Kenrick's refutation is the well-
known "Vindication of the Catholic Church."
In April, 1845, Brownson refuted no-churchism, or
the doctrine which admits the church in name, but
denies it in fact, and which the more Protestant sects
were tending to, or had arrived at. The article was
entitled, "The Church against No-Church," and it
contains an argument which the writer had found very
effective in his own experience. Assuming that our
Lord had made us a revelation which, in order to be
saved, it is necessary to believe and obey, he demon-
strated that the Catholic Church must be accepted as
the Church of God, divinely commissioned to teach and
govern all men and nations in all things pertaining to
*From this work we learn that the "Letters on the British Reforma-
tion" were first intended to be delivered as lectures in the Episcopal
Churches of Philadelphia, but the Protestant Diocesan refusing to allow
Hopkins to deliver them, he gave them through the press.
+ Works, Vol. v., p. 331.
1
:
•
1
1
14
ليه
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
eternal salvation. Critics, both Unitarian and Episco-
palian, pronounced the argument incomplete, incon-
clusive, and wholly unsatisfactory, because he took the
fact of revelation for granted, and did not prove it
before proceeding to reason from it. The objection
would have been pertinent enough in one who denied
the fact of revelation, but was not so in the mouth of a
professed Christian; because every Christian believes
that God has made us a revelation, and no one can be a
Christian at all without believing so much at least. As
he addressed his argument expressly only to those who
professed to believe that God has made us a revelation,
the criticism was unjust, in that it blamed him for not
proving what he had not undertaken to prove. Yet the
criticism is instructive, and proves that the mass of
those outside of the church will, if hard pushed, fall
back on the no-religion of unbelievers. Hence, when-
ever one undertakes to prove the church affirmatively,
or to establish affirmatively her title, one must carry
the argument far enough back to meet the wants of
unbelievers, of those who deny everything that it is
possible to deny without denying denial itself.
It is not my purpose to enumerate here all the
reviewer's controversial articles, still less to give a
synopsis of each; but a word or two about the more
elaborate series on Bushnell, Derby, and Thornwell may
not be without use or interest.
1
M
The articles against Bushnell have not only a
value in a controvérsial way, but will contribute greatly
to an intelligent notion of the Catholic doctrine con-
cerning the Trinity, the Incarnation, and the Redemp-
* Works, vol. vii., pp. 1-116.
DERBY'S LETTERS TO IIIS SON.
15
•
tion; and even theological students have acknowledged
the aid they obtained from them. The articles on
Derby's letters to his son were written at Mr. Derby's
request, or rather, on his challenge. For, one day that
Brownson was in John P. Healy's office, Derby, whose
office was on the same floor of the building, came in
with his book, then first published, and handing it to
Brownson, said: "There! Refute that if you can.”
Brownson did refute it most thoroughly, and what is
more to be rejoiced at, the son, whose conversion to
Catholicity the father used every argument within his
reach to prevent, continued to follow the guidance of
the Holy Spirit leading him to his church.
The Reverend James H. Thornwell, Professor of
Sacred Literature and the Evidences of Christianity in
South Carolina College, published an essay against the
divine inspiration of those Books of the Bible which
Protestants denominate Apocryphal. This was replied
to by the Reverend Dr. Patrick N. Lynch in "The
Catholic Miscellany," of which he was one of the editors,
and Thornwell followed with twenty-nine letters cover-
ing nearly the whole ground of controversy between
Catholics and Protestants. The original essay, with
the substance of Lynch's articles, and the twenty-nine
letters, were put into a book, and published about the
beginning of January, 1845. As the argument on the
Presbyterian side was conducted with much ability and
learning, it aroused great interest with all denomina-
tions in the Palmetto State. Two of the letters to
Brownson, one from a Catholic, and the other not, will
show the importance attached to the book:
* Ibid, pp. 335-479.
† 46 Court street, Boston.
LI
}
S..-..
J
C
16
*
t
BEA
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
NEWBERRY C. H., South Carolina,
January 21, 1845.
..
-il:
O. A. Brownson, Boston:
DEAR SIR: Since my personal acquaintance with
you in September, 1841, in your goodly [city], I have
watched with intense anxiety your every movement, and
rest assured that that interest has not at all diminished
since your avowal of belief in the doctrines of the Faith
of the Catholics. I have been examining, though only
partially, not thoroughly, the distinctive characteristics
of Catholicism and Protestantism, for about eighteen
months past, and were there no other modes of faith
than Protestant-those styled orthodox-and Catholic,
I should not hesitate long between the two: for, as at
present advised, I should prefer the much abused, in
this country, faith of the Catholics. I have had the
pleasure of making the acquaintance of Bishop Rey-
nolds of Charleston, and Dr. Lynch also, and from them
I have derived much information which has thrown
great light on my mind with respect to subjects that
were hitherto quite obscure.
You, perhaps, are aware that about a year since a
controversy originated in this State in relation to the
Apocryphal Books, between Dr. Lynch and Professor
Thornwell of South Carolina College. Thornwell has
completed his task and published it in book form,
labelled on the back of the volume: "Arguments of
Romanists discussed and refuted." The work is re-
garded by the Presbyterians of this State as a complete
overthrow of the whole system of the Catholic Doctrine.
I have read a portion of the book, and though he is as
able as a man can be, on his side, yet there is a spirit
LETTER FROM HENRY SUMNER.
17
of bitterness and rancour perhaps which can only be
justifiable on the supposition that he is fully satisfied
that the Catholics are involved in gross and damning
error. I bring your attention to this book-for I am
anxious that you should examine it and review it in
your Review. It would be gratifying to many of your
friends, were you to do so; and to me especially. I
wrote to Messrs. Little & Brown, of your city, a few
days since, to procure the book and present it to you for
me. If you have not one, be so good as to call on them
and get it, and if you should, after examining it, come
to the conclusion, not to notice it, will you write to me
privately your opinion of it? But, before you deter-
mine, let me insist that you do review the work-for a
searching and powerful article on it and the subjects.
involved would be of essential service to the cause of
truth, not only here, but everywhere. You are engaged
in the great work of enlightening the human mind, and
of presenting the truth as you embrace it-let your
light shine—hide it not-and great may be the good
conferred on some mind which, like yours was, is now
seeking light.
The January number of your Review is before me.
I am highly pleased with its contents. The third and
fifth articles I have not yet read, but the others I have,
and I must say that "The Literary Policy of the Church
of Rome" and "Native-Americanism" are powerful
articles-that on "The British Reformation" is an able
paper.
I learned, a few days since, that you delivered a
lecture in Boston, the object of which was to show that
the only hope for the perpetuity of the institutions of
"
3
18
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
our country is to be found in the doctrines of the Catho-
lic church. I see something of this in the article on
"Native-Americanism "-and though not prepared to
agree with every sentiment therein advanced, I must
confess that Protestantism has failed, as Protestantism,
to effect much good for the people.
You will pardon this intrusion of an humble per-
sonage upon your time, which can be much better em-
ployed than in reading my weak conjectures.
My brother, A. G. Sumner, whom you saw last
September in Boston, will, on, the 1st of February next,
take charge of a paper called "The South Carolinian,"
published in Columbia. His health is good, and he
remembers you with pleasure.
Should I come North in a year or so, I shall be
sure to call on you, if living.
I am, yours respectfully,
HENRY SUMNER.
The other letter, which is here given, was from a
Catholic, as follows:
CHARLESTON, 31st January, 1845.
SIR: I have sent you a copy of Rev. Mr. Thorn-
well's recently published letters on the Apocrypha, hop-
ing that you will review them. He attacks, at length,
our fundamental dogma-Infallibility-and should be
answered. Our champion, Dr. Lynch, is so engrossed
by multifarious duties, that I do not believe he can pos-
sibly reply for a long time to come; although it is his
intention to do so when he can prepare a book. In the
meantime our doctrine might be fairly stated and main-
LETTER FROM BELLINGER.
19
tained; and our Holy Mother vindicated from the gross
calumnies that this fresh assailant has endeavored to fix
on her. These
These may be done in your Review, without
interference with Dr. L.'s intention and plans.
any
I have taken this step without consulting my friend,
A. P. F., and beg that you will consider it confidential.
Excuse me for remarking that your progress to-
wards Catholicity was watched by my family and self
with intense interest-because of the services which we
foresaw you would render to religion, and because, being
all of us converts, we could conceive and sympathize
with the state of mind and feeling through which you
were passing. Among your admirers there are none,
we are sure, who regard you with warmer sentiments
than we do strangers though we be. Strangers—and
yet brothers! For we feel, and know, that we are of
the same faith and Christian brotherhood with yourself;
and that we (however obscure) are combating in the
same fight in which you hold so conspicuous a position.
I am, my dear sir, your fellow-catholic and fellow-
convert,
JOHN BELLINGER, M. D.
O. A. BROWNSON.
A few lines at the end of the April Review an-
nounced the receipt of the book, and the intention to
review it. As the July and October numbers contained
no review of it, Dr. Lynch, on receipt of the October
Review, wrote:
CHARLESTON, S. C., Oct. 9th, 1845.
DEAR SIR:-The announcement contained in your
April number, if I mistake not, that you would devote
some pages of your excellent Review to an examination
7
Li
"
1.
11
20
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
of Professor Thornwell's book on "the Apocrypha "
caused us here to look with anxiety for your succeeding
numbers. An article from your vigorous pen on that
subject would be of great service to the cause of our
Holy Religion. We trust, and none more earnestly
than myself, that you have not changed your intention.
I have been urged to re-write and conclude my
letters and publish them in book-form, and I have prom-
ised to do so-the more readily as the subject is one of
every-day controversy between Catholics and Protestants,
and I am not aware of there being any Catholic work in
English devoted to its thorough consideration. I have
labored, too, some little at my task, but owing to the
overwhelming duties incumbent on me as pastor of a
congregation-the difficulty of finding books which I
wish to consult, and likewise my unskilfulness in turn-
ing odd half-hours to account, my progress has been,
and I fear still will be, very slow. If you will review
Mr. Thornwell's book, as I hope you will, I would feel
myself released from the disagreeable task of writing
against him, and would throw him overboard, and con-
fine myself to the subject. In this case, if it would suit
your views, I would republish your article in the same
volume, by way of an answer to him.
This letter of Dr. Lynch's removed any hesitation
on Brownson's part, or delicacy about interfering in
behalf of a combatant well able to hold his own against
any champion the Presbyterians could put forward, and
he reviewed Thornwell's answer to Dr. Lynch at great
length, in articles claiming interest both for the mat-
* Brownson's Works, vol. vi., pp. 427 to 519.
.**...
PROTESTANT OBJECTIONS.
21
ters discussed and for the strict logic with which Thorn-
well is refuted and Lynch sustained.
In other articles Brownson examined and refuted
the more prominent charges preferred and insisted on
in his own age and country by the popular chiefs of the
anti-Catholic party. The greater part of these charges
against the Catholic religion are of a character that can
have no weight with men who are really men of intel-
ligence and accustomed to think clearly, distinctly, and
for themselves. Many of them are founded on a total
misconception of the Catholic dogma or practice they
are intended to impugn, and would conclude nothing if
conceded; many more are unsound in principle and
such as cannot be urged against the church without
denying by implication the whole Christian revelation,
and even all human science. Much that is alleged,
especially from history, is irrelevant, or false in fact,
simple fiction, and not always even ingenious fiction.
The opponents of the church deal chiefly in unsupported
assertions addressed to popular ignorance, popular
credulity, popular prejudice, and popular passions, and
apparently study not to allege what is true, but what
the Catholic may find it difficult to refute. Unhappily
such is the low state of mental culture in the Acatholic
world, such the ignorance, the prejudice, and the pas-
sion of the people outside of the church, that whatever
is unblushingly asserted, though without a shadow of
evidence, is taken for gospel truth unless disproved.
Whenever the question relates to the church, the Prot-
estant waives the ordinary rules of law, logic, and good
sense, and proceeds on the presumption that every man
is to be counted guilty till he succeeds in proving his
22
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
||
il
innocence. The assertions of Catholics, which, when it
comes to assertions against assertions, are at least as good
as the assertions of their adversaries, count for nothing.
Anti-Catholic assertions, however unsupported or un-
scrupulous, are held to be worth more than irrefragable
proofs adduced by Catholics, and it would seem that the
anti-Catholic preachers, lecturers, and writers proceed
always on the assumption that Protestants cannot pos-
sibly lie, and Catholics cannot possibly tell the truth.
Hence it becomes necessary, in order to advance the
cause of true religion, and to undeceive the simple who
are unskilled in unravelling intricate sophistries, to take
up and patiently to disprove charges which rest actually
upon no foundation, and on their own account are not
worthy of a moment's consideration.
Much of the difficulty Acatholics profess to feel,
and perhaps really do feel, would be removed if they
would reduce their objections to their principle. In
most cases, all that is necessary to remove the objection
they bring is to analyze it and show the principle on
which it rests. The state of society in some countries.
where the Catholic is the predominant religion, it is
alleged, is not under the point of view of politics and
material prosperity all that it might, perhaps should,
be. Therefore, it is concluded, the church does not
promote the political and material interests of nations;
therefore she is not and cannot be the Church of God.
A good argument, if our Lord came, as the carnal Jews
expected, to be a temporal prince, and to reward his
followers with temporal goods; but a very bad argu-
ment in one who holds that he came as a spiritual
prince, to found a spiritual kingdom, a kingdom not of
SUN
PROTESTANTISM UNSCIENTIFIC.
23
this world, and who enjoins self-denial, and teaches his
followers to expect their reward only in heaven after
the close of this life. A pope, as temporal sovereign of
Rome, or in his private capacity, has given some evidence
that in either capacity he is neither infallible nor im-
peccable; therefore popery is a huge imposition, and the
church the synagogue of Satan.
of Satan. Vice and immorality
creep now and then, and here and there, into a religious
house, the clergy in particular times and places, live
more like men of the world than devoted priests of the
most high God, and numbers of the faithful do not rise.
in their morals far above the ordinary level of the better
class of Acatholics; therefore the church is the Mystery
of Iniquity, and the pope the Man of Sin. Yet the
Master said to his Disciples: "Have I not chosen you
twelve, and one of you is a devil?" Would you have
the church destroy the freewill of man, and leave him.
no merit in his obedience? Popes or councils, it is
alleged, have declared that an oath taken to the detri-
ment of the rights or interests of the church, that is,
against the law of God, is an unlawful oath and not
obligatory; therefore, the church denies the sanctity of
oaths, and authorizes perjury. As if a man could be
bound by an unlawful oath, or as if to break an unlaw-
ful oath could be perjury! If a man takes an oath to
murder his neighbor, must he actually murder him or
be a perjuror? To take such oath voluntarily and
deliberately is a sin, but the additional sin would be in
keeping, not in breaking it. In all cases like these the
bare reduction of the objection to its principle suffi-
ciently refutes it.
The Protestant mind in relation to religion is
24
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
exceedingly unscientific. It lacks unity, and Protes-
tants have no common principle on which they rest
their objections to the church. Their objections have
no logical order or sequence, have no mutual depend-
ence, and add nothing to enlighten and sustain one
another. They are brought from opposite principles,
and, if brought together, would be found to be recipro-
cally destructive. This for the most part escapes the
attention of Protestants themselves, because Protes-
tantism itself is illogical, unscientific, and incapable of
being reduced to systematic unity. There is science
only where there is unity, and Protestantism is essen-
tially a departure from unity, an earnest, even a terrible
protest against unity. It is and can be only multi-
plicity, variety, diversity, as its whole history demon-
strates. Its objections, then, to Catholicity must
necessarily lack a common principle, and even consist-
ency one with another, and this lack of consistency and
of a common principle will fail to strike the Protestant
mind, because the Protestant mind does not seek in
religion unity and consistency, but their opposites,
plurality and contrariety.
Protestantism is not all of one piece; it is a com-
pound of heterogeneous and mutually destructive prin-
ciples. It has never received, and never can receive a
scientific definition, for the simple reason that it has no
unity, no common principle. Some of the principles it
professes to hold, if carried out to their logical con-
sequences, would require a return to the old church and
to the Catholic faith; others, if logically developed,
would result in denying the supernatural, and the
assertion of rationalism, sensism, atheism, skepticism,
OBJECTIONS AGAINST THE INCARNATION.
25
nihilism. No possible definition of Protestantism by
anything that it is can include High-Churchism and
Unitarianism, and yet both are genuine Protestantism.
All attempts to define Protestantism, or to reduce it to a
common principle, have failed and must fail. Place its
essential principle in justification by faith alone, or
imputed righteousness; in the sufficiency of the Script-
ures or the Bible without note or comment; in private
judgment, private interpretation, or private illumination,
and you will include only a part of what passes and has
the right to pass under the name of Protestantism. The
only unity predicable of Protestantism is the unity of
negation. All Protestants agree in denying the truth
and authority of the Catholic Church, but unhappily in
nothing else; and hence their religion in its distinctive
character is a mere bundle of negations.
Only truth is one; all error is manifold, diverse,
and unintelligible save in the truth it misapprehends,
misinterprets, or misapplies. Extinguish Catholicity,
and Protestantism would be absolutely unintelligible.
There is not a distinctively Protestant doctrine that is
intelligible by itself, or has any significance save in the
Catholic doctrine or practice against which it is directed.
The doctrine of justification by faith alone, asserted by
Luther, is, as a distinctively Protestant doctrine, simply
the denial of the merit of good works, that is, works
done in grace, asserted by Catholicity; the assertion of
the sufficiency of the Scriptures is simply the denial of
Catholic tradition; the assertion of private judgment,
private interpretation, or private illumination is simply
•the denial of the authority of the Catholic Church to
teach, define, and declare the faith once delivered to the
!
2
26
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
4
:
}
saints. Protestant objections can be illuminated only
by Catholic doctrine, and are not really intelligible to
Protestants themselves till the Catholic doctrine and
practice are fully known and understood by them. As
these objections are intelligible only in Catholicity, so
they can have order and unity only in the order and
unity of Catholic faith and discipline.
All in Christianity clusters around or grows out of
the grand mystery of the Incarnation, God become
man, the Word made flesh. The whole distinctively
Christian revelation, as the peculiarly Christian life, is
in this exhaustless mystery, and the whole providence
of God from the beginning has been and is directed to
the preparing of men for it and bringing them to
acknowledge it, to adore it, to trust in it, and to profit
by it. The church is in the Incarnation, flows out from
it, and in some sense continues it, on earth. All doc-
trinal objections to the church, whatever their form, are
directly or indirectly objections to the Incarnation. The
first errors and heresies that arose among the professed
followers of our Lord and that have been condemned by
the church were errors and heresies that impugned this
great mystery. Undoubtedly the Incarnation presup-
poses the mystery of the ever-adorable Trinity, but the
doctrine of the Trinity, though early denied, was chiefly
denied as the briefest and most effective way of denying
the Incarnation, as the mystery of the Word made flesh,
the assumption of human nature by the second person
of the Trinity to be the nature of God. The Ebionites.
denied the Incarnation in asserting that our Lord was
only man and denying that he was also God; the.
Docetæ denied it by denying the reality of his body,,
EXPLAINING PREFERRED TO ARGUING.
27
and maintaining that he assumed a human body, there-
fore the flesh, and suffered on the cross, only in appear-
ance; the Arians did it by denying the proper divinity
of the Son, and making the Lord Jesus Christ in all
respects a creature; the Nestorians did it by asserting
in him both a human and a divine personality, the
Eutychians by absorbing the human in the divine and
asserting for him after the resurrection only one single.
nature, and that divine nature. So of all or nearly all
the other heresies condemned by the early councils.
Those objections which grow out of the denial or
misapprehension of the Incarnation by those who adduce
them would have been first considered, and then those
which arise only indirectly or remotely from the same
denial or misapprehension taken up and considered
afterwards and as nearly as possible in their order, so
that some method might be observed, and the objections
themselves be made the occasion of setting forth the
Catholic faith itself in its unity, and its several myste-
ries and dogmas in their natural order and mutual
dependence, thus resolving to a great extent the work
of refutation into the work of exposition, had this been
practicable. The controversial style and tone would
then have been avoided, and the genetic principle once
seized and established, it would of itself have solved all
doctrinal objections usually urged, and much facilitated
the correct understanding of those adduced from history.
But it is easily perceived that the necessity of replying
to objections as they were urged in the anti-Catholic
press left Brownson no opportunity to follow in all
respects the method here indicated. In much of his
controversial writing he was simply repelling attacks
28
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
.
!
G
1
upon the church, or answering objections urged against
her, where his sole business was to explain away these
objections, or to show that they were unfounded, or at
least irrelevant, and, instead of proving the claims of
the church to those who rejected them, to show that the
reasons urged were not conclusive against them, and
that the reasons Protestants gave for not becoming
Catholics were not sufficient to justify one in refusing
to enter the communion of the church. Those articles
of a more positive character seem much to be preferred
in which he sets forth the Catholic faith in its unity
and consistency; and although it may readily be con-
ceived that such as are confined chiefly to repelling
objections are not the most important, they have still
their use both inside and outside of the Catholic body.
These objections disturb the minds of some not very
well instructed Catholics who see not clearly how they
are to be answered, and they confirm the prejudices of
those who are without, intensify their hostility to the
church, and prevent them from investigating her title,
and making themselves acquainted with her teachings.
A comparison was sometimes made between Car-
dinal Wiseman's tone and manner in the Oxford con-
troversy and Brownson's, not at all to the credit of the
latter. I willingly concede Wiseman's learning, his
talents, his genius, his cultivated taste, and his rich
imagination; but what purpose would they have served
if he had been conducting, the defense of the Catholic
religion, not against sober-minded Protestants, really
attached to Christianity as they understood it, loving
the gospel more than they hated the church, and who,
if convinced that Protestantism was false, and Catho-
1
THE TRACTARIANS.
29
licity true, would not hesitate to become Catholics, but
against unreasoning bigots and fanatics, or else indif-
ferentists who regarded one religion as good as another,
Brownson
and, perhaps, no religion as best of all?
loved not harshness, took no pleasure in saying hard
things; but it was clear to him that if he would not
compromise truth and degrade a noble cause, he must
tell his noisy, declamatory, flippant, squibbing, and
unreasoning opponents just what they were, and refuse
to treat them as fair and honorable adversaries till they
mended their manners. He could not, as matters stood,
follow the admirable models of the Cardinal, if he would,
even if he had had the qualifications which would have
enabled him to do so. Yet this may be said in his
favor that wherever he found in an opponent the least
serious attempt at argument, or the least indication of
sincerity and honesty of purpose, he made it a point to
treat him with all courtesy and forbearance. Instances
to prove this are too multiplied in his works for any to
receive special mention.
The Tractarian controversy itself was one with
which Brownson had less sympathy than with any
other; for the question was never in his mind a ques-
tion between the Catholic Church and some other, but
always between the Catholic Church and none at all.
At any time for twenty years prior to his conversion, if
satisfied that our Lord founded any church at all, he
would have been satisfied that the Catholic Church was
the one, and that out of that there could be no salvation.
The thing, for him, always lay on the surface of his-
tory, and he had not been a minister for a year before
he preached a sermon against all idea of a Christian
30
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
I
AAM
Church, on the ground that the idea once admitted, he
could not stop short of Rome. The thing was as plain
to him as that two and two make four, and he could
never understand that Protestant state of mind which
rejected Catholicity and still claimed to have a church,
or that could dream of calling any church Catholic but
the church in communion with the See of Rome. When
subsequently he felt the absolute need of a church to
keep men straight, and enable them to save society and
their own souls, and found that man could not make
one, and that a church could not grow up of itself, he
was led to ask if Christ had not foreseen our wants and
founded a church. He had, on obtaining an affirmative
answer, nothing to do but to go to the Catholic Church,
and beg to be admitted as a member. No person was
or could be less fitted to sympathize with the Tracta-
rians, and nobody less than a Tractarian could sympa-
thize with him. Yet there were noble elements in that
movement, and under what seemed its childishness, its
absurdities, and its apparent inability to see anything
save through a distorted medium, or to draw a plain,
logical conclusion, there was a deep and earnest tone of
thought, a sincerity of purpose, a longing after truth
and true Christian communion, as facts have proved.
Wiseman, still Rector of the English College at
Rome, comprehended the movement and had hope from
it. He knew, what not every one ever knows, how to
make allowance for men brought up in error and seeing
the truth only dimly, as the man in the Gospel saw
men as trees walking. He would not break the bruised
reed, nor quench the smoking flax, and he met these
men in a kindly spirit. He yielded to them no point of
WISEMAN'S CONTROVERSIAL MANNER.
31
doctrine; he made no concessions, no compromises; but
he gave them full credit for their honesty and sincerity
of purpose, and encouraged them to hold fast every
truth they had attained; and firmly, determinedly, but
with courtesy, Christian meekness and gentleness,
pointed out and refuted their errors. Let any one read
to-day his essays on what was called the Oxford con-
troversy, and he can hardly fail to be astonished at the
wisdom and address as well as eloquence and erudition
with which he met the movement. A rougher, though
more energetic method of dealing with those men, like
that which Brownson was compelled to adopt towards the
sort of opponents he found in his own country, would
have repelled them, would have driven them back on
their errors, and probably lost to English Catholicity
all the fruits it has reaped from their movement. All
men are not alike in all things, and the sort of treat-
ment which would be just the thing to command the
respect of a bold, frank, strong-minded Vermonter or
Kentuckian, would have overwhelmed the delicate Ox-
ford student, and made him withdraw entirely into him-
self, as a snail within its shell; that is prior to his
conversion. After it, he ought to be able both to
receive and to give hard knocks without losing his
equanimity.
It is very certain, and Brownson felt it painfully,
that he was not always able to observe in his own
polemical writings, the traits that all admired in Wise-
man, for he had not such men as the Cardinal with
whom to carry on his controversy. He had to continue
his Review, and engage in the discussion of contro-
verted questions from the moment of his entrance into
i:
32
i
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
i
the church, before he had received any advantage from
Catholic discipline, while still ignorant of the ordinary
Catholic phraseology. He had to learn as he wrote.
Then he had to meet not a movement already advanced
far in the direction of the church, and to argue with
gentlemen and scholars who were honest and sincere,
who he felt were really desirous of knowing and em-
bracing the truth, and on whom he could hope to
produce a favorable impression. Some such undoubt-
edly there were and are in this country, but too insig-
nificant a portion to be considered in conducting a
controversy with the Acatholic public. For the first
nine years that he conducted his Review as a Catholic,
he asserted that in but one single instance had he met
a fair-minded and honorable opponent of Catholicity.
He had to address a community indifferent, fanatical,
bigoted, and to his most serious and elaborate argu-
ments on the most momentous subjects that can occupy
the mind or the heart of man, the gravest response he
was able to obtain was a newspaper squib, a joke as to
his frequent changes of opinion when a Protestant, or
at best a flippant and scurrilous article in some
magazine. So little seriousness, candor, and gravity
was there in the country that even Catholic journals,
when they felt called upon to dissent from some things
he had ventured to advance, pretty generally followed,
when they did not surpass, the tone of the Protestant
and secular press. How in such country, with such
opponents, is it possible to conduct an argument for the
church and against Acatholics in an elevated, dignified,
and courteous manner? Look into our Catholic jour-
nals, and see in what terms they speak of one another
WISEMAN'S CONTROVERSIAL MANNER.
33
when there happens to be a matter of difference between
them, and then think what must have been the tone
and temper of journals conducted by men who had none
of the discipline or graces of Catholicity to restrain
them. A man can discuss the questions Wiseman had
to discuss, and meet the arguments he had to meet, and
bear with the men he had to bear with, with some hope
that he is not laboring in vain, and that his words will
not return to him empty. Brownson had little reason
for hope of the sort, and sometimes felt that the most
he could hope to do was to keep up the tone and cour-
age of his own brethren.
The task of writing articles in reply to objections
often puerile, often no better than mere words, oftener
still irrelevant and founded upon ignorance, misappre-
hension, or misrepresentation of facts in the case, was
undoubtedly very disagreeable, and would have been
insupportable, if Brownson had not been sustained by
the hope of doing much good by removing some of the
obstacles which kept immortal souls separated from the
life-giving communion of the church of God. The labor
was great, wearisome, often disgusting, taxing his
patience to the utmost; but charity lightened it and
rendered it even attractive. No labor was too arduous
or too disagreeable to be performed by the true lover of
Him who died that men might live, which could in
any degree tend to bring men back to God, and promote
even indirectly the spread of truth and the liberation
of souls from the bonds of error and unbelief.
I
4
}
CHAPTER II.
CONTROVERSY WITH CATHOLICS.-NEWMAN.
BESIDES his controversies with Protestants, Brown-
son was involved in many discussions with Catholics,
beginning almost immediately after his reception into
the church, and carried on with great earnestness ever
after. Most of these were against doctrines or opinions
which he regarded as ultra-liberal, yet some against
ultra-conservatism and obscurantism. His views of the
matters discussed were afterwards upheld in many cases,
by Pius IX, Leo XIII, or by the Vatican Council.
The first and the most reluctantly engaged in of
these discussions with Catholics was on the question of
the development of Christian doctrine. Soon after
Brownson's reception into the church, John Henry
Newman made his profession of faith, and immediately
gave to the world an exposition of the course which his
mind had pursued in the transition from Anglicanism
to Catholicity, and which he believed would be of ser-
vice to others in similar circumstances, by removing the
objections to the church which he himself had raised in
his previous publications. A copy of this book, called
"An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine,”
fell into Brownson's hands, and the theory and all its
details were carefully and minutely studied. The con-
clusion of such study was the conviction that the theory
was false and inconsistent with Christianity. This
result of his examination he made known to Bishop
Fitzpatrick who, after sufficient reflection, requested
Brownson to refute the "Essay." Several other bishops
NEWMAN'S THEORY OF DEVELOPMENT.
35
also told him to do so; and every Catholic bishop,
priest, and layman in the country, so far as Brownson
could ascertain, rejected Newman's theory of develop-
ment, although some may have held to development in
another sense than Newman's with a view to maintain-
ing the definability of the Immaculate Conception,
which they saw not how to do without conceding
development. The first to write against Newman's
theory in this country was Bishop Purcell, who con-
demned it in "The Cincinnati Telegraph."
1)
Brownson's first article against Newman's theory
was published in his Review for July, 1846;† and in
January, 1847, a second appeared reviewing Spencer
Northcote's "Fourfold Difficulty of Anglicanism," in
which the same theory runs through the work. It
began now to look as if Newman was not alone in main-
taining his development theory, but a dangerous school
was forming among the recent English converts from
Tractarianism. This does not, however, seem to have
been generally suspected or appreciated. As it was
known that Newman wrote his essay before his conver-
sion, though he published it only after his reception
* Brownson's notes, preparatory to his review of Newman, begin in
this way: "Advertisement, written Oct. 6, 1845. The work is directed
to show that love of truth is no obstacle to seeking communion with the
Roman C. C.
▼
"Contains his retractions, previously published-Want of explicitness,
not heartv, indicates a great regard for his own reputation.
"P. S. Mr. N. would have expressed himself more accurately if he
had said it was originally his intention to have carried his work through
the press before taking the step, instead of before deciding to take it.
The book from beginning to end bears ample testimony to the fact that in
his mind the R. C. C. is the C. Xt. Mgr. H. tells me Mr. N. told him the
greater part of the work was written ten, now nearly eleven, years ago.
The work bears internal evidence to the contrary. The materials, we pre-
sume, were collected ten years ago, but the work must have been recast
since 1838, and the application of the theory in favor of Rome made too in
favor of the R. C. C. quite recently. Mr. Newman's submission of his
work is ambiguous, not frank, and leaves him at liberty to hold to it even
should the C. condemn it.”
† Works, vol. xiv., p. 1.
36
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
L
into the church, it was not subjected to so strict an
examination as a theory concerning Christian Doctrine
by a Catholic would have been. Many persons recog-
nized the truth of the assertion of that development
which no one disputes, and which was sufficient for all
the author's purposes, and interpreting the book accord-
ingly, gave it as orthodox a meaning as they were able
to. Where the expression was irreconcilable with
orthodoxy, they were inclined to be lenient in their
judgment because the author was not yet a Catholic
when he prepared it.
A letter of Bishop McCloskey's, in answer to one
from Brownson in regard to a lecture in New York the
coming winter and asking the Bishop's views on the
Development theory, shows that he regarded it very
much as I have just said.
NEW YORK, Dec. 16th, 1846.
DEAR SIR-I have been very dilatory in acknow-
ledging the receipt of your kind letter, and I have no
better apology to offer than that of the very best inten-
tions to have written to you long since. I shall be too
happy to return one "good turn," since so you have
been pleased to consider it, by another; but whether I
can do so now as effectually and successfully as when
vested with plenipotentiary powers, is a matter some-
what doubtful. Bishop Hughes, however, is desirous
that you should lecture again in New York this winter,
and if he will only lend his name and influence to the
furtherance of this object, your success will be doubly
sure, and I trust, more than doubly great. Meantime
I shall endeavor to "put the ball in motion," and when
it has attained its proper growth, you shall be duly
apprised of it.
LETTER FROM M'CLOSKEY.
37
As my humble opinion of Mr. Newman's book is
of little worth, it can hardly be worth while expressing
it. Indeed, I have never taken the pains to examine it
with anything like critical attention, and therefore it
would be unfair for me to pronounce a judgment on its
merits or demerits. From such attention, however, as
I did bestow upon it, I have derived no favorable im-
pression as to its soundness or orthodoxy-particularly
of its earlier chapters on the Probability, etc., of Devel-
opments. Certainly it contains numberless propositions
and assertions which could not come from the pen of
any thorough Catholic divine, nor would they now come,
at least in the same phraseology, from the pen of Mr.
N. himself.
All this, I think, your first article has sufficiently
proved. As to danger to be apprehended from the book
itself, I cannot say, that in this I fully agree with you.
It is not a Catholic book, and we are in no manner
called upon to defend it, nor have Protestants any right
to hold us responsible for any of its doctrines or asser-
tions-and as Mr. Newman is now a Catholic, and has
gone to the fountain-head for guidance and instruction,
I would rather wait patiently and leave it to himself to
deal with his own former errors, even as our friend Mr.
Brownson has done.
Hoping to see you soon, and wishing you mean-
while health and happiness, I remain,
Dear sir, very truly and sincerely in Xt,
† JOHN BISHOP OF AXIEREN,
Coadjutor of New York.
O. A. BROWNSON, Esq.
Your note to Mr. White was delivered.
38
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE
:
1.
The U. S. Catholic Magazine, of Baltimore, took
up the defence of Newman's Essay, and, as Bishop
O'Connor was one of its responsible endorsers, Brown-
son complained to him that the bishop was supposed to
be giving the weight of episcopal sanction to what he
regarded dangerous errors. In answer the bishop
wrote:
(No date; but postmarked Summit, Pa., Oct. 29.)
DEAR SIR:-I deferred answering your letter until
I should be able to do so with a little leisure and until
I could have time to look over the work of Newman
with the articles on the subject to which you refer.
This I have been unable to do up to the present moment.
I received your letter while we were in the midst of the
exercises of our synod. That was scarcely over when I
was hurried out of town and I have been ever since
tossed about without a moment to reflect or read with
any care any thing on that or any other subject. I
would have deferred still longer writing, but I did not
wish you should imagine that I would hesitate for a
moment in doing anything that could oblige you, and
therefore, to-night it will be to explain at least my delay.
Your own article was the only thing on the subject
which I had read through up to the time I received your
letter. I read it as I do all your articles with unmixed
pleasure. I had given but a hasty glance at Newman's
Essay. I did not give it anything like a perusal that
would warrant me in giving an opinion of the doctrine
he really undertakes to establish. I thought that in
some passages he appeared to teach a theory of develop-
ment such as you very justly condemn and very ably
L
LETTER FROM O'CONNOR.
39
sense.
refute, while in other passages I thought he seemed to
afford a clue for interpreting his meaning in a better
As I said above I have not had time to look into
the subject as carefully as I would have wished, and as
I intended to do before replying to your letter. I formed
a kind of theory or meaning for him which I thought
ought to be his theory if it was not the only meaning
in which I thought he could, as a Catholic, defend his
developments, viz: that the idea originally imparted
was more and more clearly expressed by its antagonism
to ever growing errors successively condemned, or its
application to new cases daily arising. The history of
this struggle will manifest itself in the written records
in the same form as a developing idea, and the problem
proposed by N. may be solved by showing the develop-
ment of the expression of the idea while the idea itself
substantially remained the same. Farther than this
there certainly can be no development in doctrine. If
one thing more than another has always been assumed
by our Theologians as certain it is that primitive faith
was not only true but perfect. Hence the proposition
was condemned that Christian morals may be better
learned from modern than from ancient writers. In
dogmatical facts which of their own nature imply a cer-
tain additional development or application, such as the
number of councils held, the fact of the Bishop of Rome
being the Vicar of Xt., that the doctrine of Jansenius,
the very one condemned in his book is identical with
the five propositions condemned, etc., the greatest diffi-
culty has been always felt to show how these must be
believed as de fide without any addition being made to
the original stock of doctrine; and it is looked upon as
40
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
f
one of the nicest effects of the Theologian's skill to
prove that in believing them he is adding nothing to
the original doctrine, and yet he must do it before he
can defend the church in requiring a belief in them.
I had not even heard of the article in the Magazine
until my attention was directed to it by your letter, and
it was only this afternoon that I was able to read it
through. It is certainly a small affair. I cannot, as I
said before, give anything like a well-grounded opinion
of Mr. N.'s meaning. It does appear to me that some
of the passages cited by the Magazine may lead to a
more favorable interpretation than other passages would
seem to indicate. But abstracting from the matter of
fact it certainly cannot be said that any development
has taken place in doctrine that makes our knowledge
of the doctrines of faith more full than that of our
ancestors, or that would enable us to say that the
church was not as well able to decide on any contro-
versy that ever could have arisen with the same pre-
cision and fullness that she can to-day or ever will.
The sanction which we have given to the Magazine was
not certainly a power of attorney to speak for us, nor do
I think that you should look upon the whole weight of
the Hierarchy or any of its authority as being brought
against you. As far as the editors continue faithful to
the same course which has deserved praise they will
receive it; if they act differently at any moment they
forfeit, and any one is certainly at full liberty to canvass
their positions without in the least supposing that he
gives the least opposition to the bishops.
*
I regret, dear sir, that I am unable now to enter as
fully on this subject as I would have wished, and as
LETTER FROM WARD.
41
you would, perhaps, have had a right to expect, but
rather than let you imagine that I had forgotten or
neglected to answer you I send you this as it stands.
We all derive too much pleasure and religion too much
advantage from your learned and vigorous pen not to
give you every assistance in our power. Believe me,
dear sir, yours faithfully in Christ.
+M. O'CONNOR,
Bishop of Pittsburg.
O. A. BROWNSON, Esq.
The Dublin Review for June, 1847, took up the
defence of Newman's Essay, in an article by W. G.
Ward. But before that Brownson received a letter from
Ward on the subject.
COTHAM PARK,
Surrey, England, April 7, 1847.
DEAR SIR: I take the liberty of addressing you,
though personally unknown, on the subject of an article
in the last Dublin Review on doctrinal developments, of
which I am the author. It is always very uncomfort-
able to me, in any case, to engage in merely external
controversy; but, of course, such a feeling is far stronger
in the present case considering that the other party in
the controversy is himself a Catholic, and one too for
whom it is impossible to entertain other feelings than
those of great respect and regard.
You will not, I am sure, suspect me of any wish to
deprecate whatever severity of language you may feel
bound to use in commenting on my article. The cause
of truth is paramount to all personal considerations.
On the other hand, as my article is public property, and
42
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
3
1
to be commented on publicly on its own grounds, so
you will understand this letter as private, and not a
subject for any public comment, though I need hardly
say I should feel it an honour and a favour if you were
disposed to answer me in private.
One principal reason then for writing to you is the
mere fact that it is so much more comfortable to myself
and seems more courteous towards you, that you should
know the name of your (friendly) opponent. Another
principal reason is that I wish to say a few words about
Newman; whose name, you will have seen, I have quite
passed over in my article. The fact is he has more than
once expressed to me his wish that I should not appear
before the public in any way as his advocate; one rea-
son of which wish is his great repugnance to the idea of
appearing to the world as leader of a school; than which
(both appearance and reality) nothing can be more dis-
tasteful to his feelings.
It could not, however, be otherwise than most pain-
ful to my own feelings (and I should think to those of
several others) to observe the light in which you seem
to regard him. For although you wish as much as
possible to separate off your comments on his book from
any reflections on himself, you must, I should think,
be almost aware yourself, that there is a certain tone of
grave censure towards himself personally. I would
especially instance your remarks on a little work pub-
lished by a convert from Protestant Episcopalianism, in
which you contrast his way of joining the church with
Newman's.*
* There was, perhaps, some reference to Newman in Brownson's notice
of Henry Major's Reasons for Acknowledging the Authority of the Holy
+4
LETTER FROM WARD.
43
The idea you seem to have formed is that he has
devised a theory in a wanton sort of a way, as a sort of
intellectual exercise, instead of submitting himself
humbly to the teachings of the Catholic Church as he
found it. I cannot but think that a statement of some
of the facts of the case will induce you, in some degree
at least, to modify this opinion.
N. began his high-church Anglicanism as a hearty
disciple of the Anglican Bishop Bull, the especial
opponent of every theory of development. Froude was,
I believe, the instrument of bringing him over to high-
church opinions, being a fellow of the same college and
intimate friend: he died, as you may very pos-
sibly know, in the year 1836, and Froude naturally
indoctrinated him with the opinions which he had
learned from his old tutor Keble.
a very
Now Keble was a sort of hereditary member of that
school in the Anglican Church, of which the chief
representative was Bull; and which upon the whole, in
my judgment, is by far the truest representative of the
formularies and symbolical books of the Anglican
Church taken as a whole. The principles of their school
were to regard Apostolical succession as an indispensable
condition to sacramental grace—to regard the Anglican
Church as their mother, etc., in virtue of its possessing
that succession-and to draw a distinction strongly in
its favour between it on the one hand and the Roman
See of Rome," in his Review for January, 1847. There is no mention of
Newman by name in the notice, but these words occur, "We are also
pleased to see that Mr. Major is a simple-minded convert, who comes to the
church to be taught, not to teach, and is willing to take the church as she
is, and on the grounds on which she has hitherto been taken. He brings
her no theory or ingenious hypothesis of his own, and laying it at her feet,
modestly assures her that it will give him great pleasure to find his thoughts
on the same subject coincident with hers. We like this."
-
44
R
1.
5
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
Catholic churches on the other hand, on these grounds
(1) that the faith does not admit of increase, and that
the whole office of the church is merely to guard and
transmit it; (2) that the Roman Church has gone
against this rule by defining various dogmas on Pur-
gatory, Transubstantiation, etc., which were merely
matters of opinion in the early church; (3) that the
Anglican Church at the Reformation reverted to its
original and legitimate functions and declined these
"Modern additions."
Should you have access to Newman's first books
on the "History of the Arians" and the "Lectures
on the Prophetical Office of the Church" (sometimes
called his "Lectures on Communion and Popular
Protestantism,") and should you care to look into them,
you would find many illustrations of what I have been
saying. Thus in the former he speaks with the deepest
reverence of Bull, and in the latter he comments in the
severest terms on Petavius for saying that the ante-
Nicene Fathers were not always unexceptionable in
their statements on the doctrine of the Trinity; and
calls him a parricide, etc., etc. In the same work ("The
Prophetical Office") he bases throughout his opposition
to the "Roman" church on the allegation that she has
added to the Faith; and cites in proof of this both his-
torical facts of the early centuries, and also acknowledg-
ments of Catholic writers themselves, such as that which
I have quoted in my article from the Benedictine edition
of St. Ambrose; also from Cardinal Fisher, Polydore
Virgil, etc.
Now my reason for mentioning all this is to show
that at that time he had been led by his natural and
LETTER FROM WARD.
45
legitimate course of studies to feel very strongly the
pressure of one particular objection against the modern
Catholic system of doctrine. That these studies were
very extensive no one can doubt who reads his works. I
believe I am correct in saying that before he became a
Catholic he had read through all the works of all the
Greek and all the Latin Fathers at least three times,
and that particular objection was that it was historically
evident that certain doctrines considered by the present.
"Roman" church as Catholic were not so considered by
the Early Church. This objection was stated most
clearly and prominently in the work I have mentioned,
and also in great numbers of other works. Any one
may see them who will look at the "Tracts for the
Times" or the various numbers of the "British Critic"
from the time Mr. Newman undertook its editorship
down to the year 1841.
Now here it is very important to observe that
although many Catholics paid the greatest attention to
these writings and various reviews of them appeared in
Catholic journals, no real attempt whatever was made
to meet this objection. The passages from Cardinal
Fisher, etc., were not disavowed nor accused of spurious-
ness nor yet were they plainly adopted and proclaimed
to be Catholic in this view. I, for one, felt this and
keenly at the time; even so late as 1841, when I paid
two days' visit to Oscott, I could not get Dr. Wiseman
to give me any definite answer at all on the subject one
way or the other. He would neither say that Newmam
represented antiquity unfairly, nor that he represented
it fairly. He said a great deal, and very well, in attack
of Anglicanism, but I could get no light at all on this
:
46
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
essential and prominent difficulty which one felt to be
in the way of Catholicism.
46
But before the year 1841 a further change had
taken place in Newman's mind, as he has since informed
a great friend of mine, an old Irish Catholic. This
change was directly caused by Dr. Wiseman's article
which appeared, I think, in the year 1840, paralleling
the Anglicans with the Donatists. From the time he
read that article, he felt there was one most decided
screw loose" in Anglican theology; he felt, and
strongly, that the Anglicans were in a position which
the ancient church would have regarded as schismatic;
from the time this view was presented to him the more.
he thought over the acts and words of the Fathers, the
more they seemed to corroborate that view. This, how-
ever, only placed him in a most cruel state of difficulty;
for it did not tend one step to remove his old objections
to the "Roman" Church, though it infused new objec-
tions to the "Anglican." No one can doubt that, from
that time at least, he was most anxious to find some
clew to extricate him from the labyrinth, yet no Catho-
lic was at hand to offer him any clew, and I cannot but
feel it an extreme injustice and cruelty that Catholics
who were silent when he was searching in their direc-
tion for some way of escape, should afterwards, when he
has found a way for himself and actually brought him-
self to the Catholic Church by help of it, be loud in
their objections to the legitimacy of that way. If this
be not the right way, why did they not, years ago, find
for him some other?
This observation, my dear sir, cannot be supposed
to reflect upon yourself, because you were not, I believe,
LETTER FROM WARD.
47
at that time a Catholic. But I do think that all who
find fault with his theory, should ask themselves this
plain question, "except for this theory, how could he
possibly have become a Catholic?"
Here, then, I confess, I do think that Newman has
some right to complain of your treatment of him. Here
we have a person of ability and thought, who has devoted
himself to the study of the Fathers, and who is most
anxious to find in them all possible agreement with the
present Catholic Church, and yet cannot, for the life of
him, read them any other way than as being either dis-
crepant or ignorant, on various matters which are now
ruled to be points of Catholic Faith. If on the one hand
it is historically clear that the Catholic Church of the
nineteenth century is the lineal heir of the Catholic
Church of the fourth century, it is equally clear histor-
ically (so he thinks) that the doctrine of the first named
church is in many particulars an addition upon the doc-
trine of the last named.
Now he may be right or wrong in this opinion;
but as long as it lasts, I don't see how he can possibly
open his eye to one aspect of history and close his eye
on the other. I don't see how he can possibly join the
church on the former historical fact until he has per-
suaded himself that in so doing he is committed to no
opinions which are inconsistent with the latter.
I can-
not, I confess, see the force of what you say as to his
duty of submission to the view which he finds most
common among Catholics of the present day. Why
does he join the church at all except that history seems
to him clearly to establish her claims; but history seems
to him, with fully equal clearness, to prove this alleged
:
48
:
፡
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
growth of doctrine. Should you then (to argue per
impossible) succeed ever so fully in showing to him that
his view is irreconcilable with the teachings of the
church, you would only throw him back on his original
perplexity and shake his whole Catholic faith to the
foundation. For no one believes what appears to him
contradictory to plain historical facts, seeing that a
cognisance of certain historical facts (according to your
own frequently professed opinion) is the necessary con-
dition of faith.
This then is the first consideration which I would
venture, with great respect, to put before you: I wish
you would fairly put before yourself his state of mind,
and ask yourself, how could he do otherwise than devise
a theory? What appeared to him the plainest facts
were opposed to the view more common among Catholics
at the present day: he could get no help from Catholics
on any side in solving their faith: what could he do
therefore, if he were to become a Catholic at all, except
to try and solve them himself?
There is, indeed, one concluding sentence in your
article which may be taken as intended to meet this
difficulty; but I confess I am quite unable to under-
stand it. I have not the article with me, but I think
you dwell on N.'s acknowledgment that the ante-Nicene
Fathers, fairly interpreted, support the Catholic doctrine
on the Trinity. But it is plain he never meant to
acknowledge (for in many parts of his work he has dis-
tinctly stated the reverse) that those Fathers held the
doctrine in question as distinctly and consistently as the
later Fathers, but that they held substantially the same
Faith, and even so much as this he does not acknowledge
·
1
LETTER FROM WARD.
49
in regard to the doctrines which concern Purgatory,
Our Blessed Lady, and several others that might be
named.
It is only fair then, I venture to suggest, that
"those who find fault with" his "interpretation of faith."
should be prepared to give their own; as he himself
urges, and this I cannot see that you have done.
(2.) Now as to the doctrine which N. finally adopted,
he was led towards it, not only by the process I have
described, but by another process which was going on
in his mind at the same time. For, whereas his main
study has ever been the early controversies on the
Trinity and the Incarnation, his own deeper and more
extended acquaintance with the ante-Nicene Fathers
made him more and more dissatisfied with Bull's view
of their statements on those doctrines. You may see
the extent to which this dissatisfaction at last proceeded,
if you care to look at his edition of St. Athanasius in
the "Library of the Fathers": so that he felt it neces-
sary to adopt some doctrine of development, if he would
keep intact the very "primary doctrines of Christian-
ity." He might, of course, have been right or wrong in
this again, but what I wish to urge is that it was an
opinion directly in contradiction to his preconceived bias,
and which must have been at first very painful and per-
plexing.
(3.) As far as I know and believe, his first idea of
the principle he afterwards adopted and carried out, was
derived from De Maistre "du Pape;" especially from
the passages I have quoted in the first article of the
new Dublin Review. In the article he wrote in the B.
Critic (I think in 1840), in reply to that of Dr. Wise-
5
50
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
:
man which I have already mentioned, he has stated that
principle and much in De Maistre's words. So that,
without here discussing the subject which is publicly at
issue between us, it is a matter of fact that it was from
a Catholic writer that he derived the general idea in
question. That he (N.) has carried it out much further
and more consistently than De Maistre I not only admit
but maintain.
Of course I am not prepared to defend every single
sentiment to be found in Newman's work. For instance,
the language he uses about the growth of private con-
fession seems to me in contradiction with the Tridentine
Decrees; and as far as I can find, I cannot think the
historical difficulty on that subject nearly so great as
he seems to have regarded it. I think, also, he has not
been so careful as might have been desired, to put for-
ward and explain the real and deep identity of doctrine
which has ever existed in the church. But on the whole
I warmly concur in the views contained in it; and feel
deeply grateful to its author. By the way, one other
objection I have to make to it, is that I think its tone
gives an idea, utterly the reverse of true, as to the his-
torical difficulties in the way of Catholics. I think my-
self that the historical argument for the continuous
identity of the church from the Apostolic age to the
present most clear, cogent, and irrefragable.
(4.) As far as I know, I should say nothing is
further from the truth than to suppose that the general
tendency of the converts to take up this doctrine arises
from a tendency to follow in Newman's steps. I believe
it originates in the circumstance that most of them have
been students of the Fathers, and all of them on terms
LETTER FROM WARD.
51
i
!
of familiar intercourse with such students, and that they
have been drawn to the theory very much in the same
way that Newman himself was. For my own part, I
have not myself any acquaintance with the Fathers, but
in the year 1842 I was asked by the editor of the B.
Critic to review "Goode's Divine Rule of Faith," a most
silly and weak work; but which contained a variety of
quotations from the Fathers which unspeakably sur-
prised me as appearing in so many ways inconsistent
with Catholic Doctrine. I made inquiries whether they
were genuine; and being answered in the affirmative,
proceeded to account for them (I may say) precisely on
the same principles and sometimes in the same words
which appear in my recent article. I really wish you
would look through that work; and again look through
Allies's work (which I also review) to see the sort of
difficulties with which Puseyite enquirers were met.
As to Allies, I am told, and believe it, that he has sent
over his book to a French Divine with whom he was on
friendly terms, and earnestly entreated him to supply
him with an answer to it; assuring him that he is bona
fide in search of the truth, and that a historical proof of
the recognition in the Fourth Century of the modern
Papal claims would make him a Catholic on the spot.
Surely those who find fault with our way of answering
such difficulties, should be very ready with an answer
on their own principles.
I must not however go on scribbling; and much that
is on my tongue (or rather I suppose I should express it
on my pen) to say, will come out, I imagine, in print,
should the controversy proceed. I should here confine
myself wholly to mere private matters. I will only
·
:
52
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE
therefore add that a particular friend of mine, a priest.
who was educated at Maynoth, assures me that he
always learned there principles substantially the same
with Newman's; and that, for his part, he thinks that
the prevalent tendency among Catholics to a different
opinion arises (1) from their neglect of deep theological
works and the substitution of compendia, and (2) from
the supposed exigences of controversy with Protestants,
who would, it is feared, wrest to their own purpose any
admission of doctrinal growth. My own studies (what-
ever their extent, which is but small) have been almost
exclusively in such writers as Suarez and Vasquez, and
I must say that almost in every page of such writers
one finds some direct or indirect recognition of New-
man's principle, "Such and such a doctrine is now of
faith," or "is now almost of faith," but before the
Council of "so and so" "was a contested point," etc.,
etc. I should also add that since writing my article I
have observed that Perrone in one or two passages
sanctions the principle of development. I quite ac-
knowledge that this seems inconsistent with other
passages of his work, so much so, that I hardly thought
it worth while to look through it. Dr. Wordsworth,
however, in a disgusting work he has lately written,
refers to one or two passages which I have verified; and
I have since found others. As you seem to have that
work, I would ask you to look through his observations
on "Original Sin" in the treatise "De Deo Creatore."
I have not the book here, or I would refer to the exact
passage.
My usual direction is "Old Hall Green, Ware,
England." The authorities of St. Edmund's College
LETTER TO WARD.
53
(the oldest Catholic college in England) having kindly
allowed me to build a house within their grounds. I
don't know whether you are ever likely to come to Eng-
land; but I trust, should you do so, you would not omit
to honor us with a visit. Your name is well known to
the students, and they have lately ordered your Review
to come regularly to them. I trust you would find that
English Catholics are not deficient in the hospitality
which is the proverbial characteristic of our religion.
I wished much to read your first article on Newman;
and have tried much, but in vain, to procure it. Could
you help me to do so? Dr. Wiseman sent me the sec-
ond in reference to my article on Allies.
I hope there has been nothing in this long letter
which can be taken to imply any harshness or dis-
respect; nothing certainly can have been further from
my intentions. And I beg to subscribe myself, my dear
sir, very faithfully yours,
W. G. WARD.
Brownson in acknowledging Ward's communica-
tion, wrote, in part, as follows:
BOSTON, Mass., U. S. A., Sept. 29, 1847.
MY DEAR SIR:-I was highly gratified to receive
your obliging letter telling me who was my friendly
enemy in the Dublin, and giving me a brief account of
the reasons which led Mr. Newman to adopt his theory
on Development. I thank you heartily for your favor,
and if I seem to have been somewhat dilatory in
acknowledging it, I beg you not to attribute it to any
want of respect, but solely to my want of leisure.
54
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
་་་
F
F
Hi!.
=
ii
I assure you, my dear sir, that the controversy in
which I find myself involved on the subject of Develop-
ment is no less painful to me than it is to you. Noth-
ing but my strong sense of duty, and the almost positive
commands of those who have the right to command me,
could have induced me to assume my present attitude
towards Mr. Newman and his friends. I have felt, and
still feel, that their theory is unsound and exceedingly
dangerous; and that I was not at liberty, through con-
sideration for the distinguished individuals who advo-
cate it, to suffer it to pass without doing my best to lay
open its real character.
You are mistaken in supposing that I proceed on
the idea that Mr. Newman "has devised his theory in a
wanton sort of way, as a sort of intellectual exercise."
Such an idea never entered my head. From my first
reading of the Essay on Development, I have taken sub-
stantially the very view of his case which you unfold
and confirm in your letter; and if I had not, I should
hardly have hazarded my strictures.
I have never
questioned his sincerity, or that of his friends; I have
never for a moment doubted that they really believe the
historical assumptions, which seem to them to demand
this theory, are well founded; and if well founded, I have
not been unable to understand that they must natu-
rally feel that some such theory as they put forth is
absolutely necessary for their explanation. I have not
arraigned their motives, and I have supposed myself to
be treating them, especially Mr. Newman, with great
personal respect and even tenderness. I have certainly
intended so to treat Mr. Newman; for I have looked
upon him as having devised his theory, not as a Catho-
LETTER TO WARD.
55
lic, but as an Anglican, and have not doubted that he
would abandon it in proportion as he became acquainted
with Catholic faith and Catholic life.
I certainly did think, and do still, that he and his
friends made a serious mistake in their theory, and even
in supposing any theory at all to be necessary. Their
inability to accept the church without their theory has,
I own, seemed to me to detract somewhat from the sim-
plicity of their faith; and their demand that she should
accept their theory, as the condition of their accepting
her, I have not been able to reconcile with that entire
self-surrender, which I have been taught she requires of
all who would be owned as her children. They seem to
me to have surrendered only on condition, to have in
their theory stipulated that they should be permitted to
retain their side-arms and to march out with the honors.
Or, in other words, you seem to me not to have believed
the church simply, but only inasmuch as you have
believed your theory, and therefore you do not seem to
me to have surrendered unconditionally. If I am right
in this, you have been unjust to God, unjust to the
faithful, unjust to yourselves, and may find it not amiss
to ask if after all your conversion does not, unhappily,
remain inchoate.
You began by taking a certain view of the primi-
tive teaching of the church; between that view and her
present teaching you have found a difference, a "dis-
cordance," as you express it. What then more natural,
you may ask, than that we should be unable to submit
to the church without some expedient for explaining
that discordance, and showing that after all it makes
nothing against her claims as the church of God?
56
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
What more natural, or more justifiable even, than that
having found such an expedient, we should insist on it,
and urge it upon the attention of our former friends,
and of the Doctors of the church, previously ignorant of
it, or afraid to adopt it? So, I doubt not, reason the
friends of the Theory to themselves, and you may ask
me, what I find in this to censure.
I will tell you, my brother. It is that you begin
with the assumption that your view of the primitive
teaching of the church is unquestionably the true view,
that in forming it you cannot possibly have erred. But
that view is only the common Anglican view; you have
adopted it, not as Catholics, but as Anglicans. Angli-
cans for these three hundred years have been urging it
against us, and for three hundred years our own divines
have, with one voice, denied it. Now, my brother, how
is it that it has never occurred to you that the Catholic
understanding of the Fathers may be deserving of as
much confidence as the Anglican; that it is possible,
after all, that you may be wrong in your view of the
primitive teaching of the church, and that, therefore, it
is possible that there is, in fact, no such discordance as
you pretend? What I complain of is your assumption
of the infallibility of your private judgment in deter-
mining the primitive teaching of the church, and that
since there is a discordance between her present teach-
ing and your view of her primitive teaching, collected
from your private interpretation of the Fathers, there
must needs be such discordance in fact, really existing,
and to be accounted for.
Where, my brother, did you or your friends get
that view of ante-Nicene doctrine? From the church,
•
LETTER TO WARD.
57
E
from her authoritative teaching to-day?
You will not
pretend it. Whence then? Evidently from your pri-
vate interpretation of the Fathers. Having thus obtained
it, you made it the criterion of ante-Nicene doctrine.
Allow me to ask, by what right? Whence, as a Catho-
lic, are you bound to take the doctrine of the church,
not in one age only, but in every age? Unquestionably,
from the church herself who is always and everywhere
the infallible authority by which to determine what she
always and everywhere teaches, as well as by which
to determine that what she teaches is the word of God.
As a Catholic you cannot distinguish between what she
teaches in one age and what she teaches in another.
For you the church can have no ages. She is one and
Catholic in time as well as in space, and, like eternity,
she has duration, but no succession. You must go to
her, as she is to-day, to learn what she taught before the
Council of Nice, no less than to know what she teaches
now. If you assert the alleged discordance, it must be
on her authority; you cannot say that she has varied
from age to age in her doctrine, taught in one age what
she did not in another, in one age doctrines repugnant
to those she has taught in others, unless she tells you
So. If she tells you so, that is enough; she then con-
fesses her own fallibility, abdicates her throne as the
church of God, and you need no theory, for none can
save her. If she denies it, teaches the reverse, you
cannot assert the discordance, without ceasing to be
Catholics. Here, my brother, is my objection to your
method, which, as I understand it, is essentially un-
catholic.
You tell me, that if I should succeed ever so fully
58
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE
i
in showing Mr. Newman that his view is incompatible
with the teaching of the church, I shall only "throw
him back upon his original perplexity, and shake his
whole Catholic faith to its foundation." In this I must
believe that you do Mr. Newman great injustice; since,
if not, he is no Catholic. I have, moreover, good author-
ity for believing that you wrong him; for he said some
months since, to a Rt. Rev. friend of mine, at Rome,
that he had no attachment to it, and was ready to retract
any portion of it which authority might require him to
retract. But do you not see, my brother, that in the
principle you adopt, you set up private interpretation of
the Fathers above the teachings of the church? *
One can hardly believe that a man of Ward's
standing and character could argue that because Catho-
lics were silent when Newman was searching for a way
into the church and left him to find his own way, they
were estopped from objecting to the legitimacy of the
way that he took, that way being, as Brownson was con-
tending, subversive of the church itself. And, further,
that no one should object to his theory-that theory
being attacked as anti-Christian-who was not prepared
to furnish another warranted to fit. The menace that
the refutation of his theory would perplex Newman and
"shake his whole Catholic faith to the foundation"
sounds strange in the mouth of a Catholic, and is as
little to the credit of the client as his advocate. Read-
ing it recalls the saying of Newman that he never gave
up his Protestantism; he only clothed it over with
Catholicism.
*This is all that can be found of Brownson's draft of a letter to Ward;
and the letter sent may vary from this draft.
B
NEWMAN'S THEORY.
59
But the letter and its writer's articles in the Dublin
Review were a clear admission that Newman's theory
was meant as Brownson understood it, and that he had
correctly stated its main points. It was this: That
the original revelation committed to the apostles, and
through them to the church, was imperfect, inchoate,
containing gaps to be filled up in the process of time by
the uninspired action of the human mind; and that it is
impossible to make a revelation which the uninspired
human mind can take in or apprehend, except through
long and laborious processes of thought, which can
go on only successively, and be completed only after
a considerable lapse of time; that Christian doctrine, or
the object embraced in the act of believing, is not the
revealed fact, but the mind's idea of it, always more or
less inadequate, or the form which the mind by its own
uninspired action imposes upon it; that it is no objec-
tion to a theory, that it degrades Christianity to the
level of sects and human philosophy; that no provision
was made in the. Apostolic revelation, as originally
delivered to the church, for infant baptism or post-bap-
tismal sins; that the sacrament of penance was not an
original Apostolic institution, but a development effected
after the establishment of the church, and after the
faithful had become corrupt; that purgatory was a
development effected subsequently to the first ages, as a
form of penance due for sins committed after baptism;
that the doctrine of the Trinity was only imperfectly
understood by the ante-Nicene Fathers, and not fully
formed till the fourth century, and that of the Incar-
nation remained imperfect till the sixth; and that
excepting some of the elements of the principal myste-
:
--
4.
...
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
ries, nothing is formally of faith till controverted, and
judicially defined and declared by the church. Other
propositions hardly less startling than these are con-
tained in Newman's Essay; but these are the principal
errors which Brownson attacked.
60
As Ward insisted that Brownson had no right to
attack Newman's theory unless he offered a better,
Brownson did so, although it was about as logical on
Ward's part as if a poet should say: You have no right
to find fault with that verse, unless you propose a better.
Brownson's theory, that of theologians generally, was
thus stated: The revelation made to and through the
Apostles was an explicit and perfect revelation of the
whole Christian faith,-save certain things which in the
time of the Apostles had not yet happened, and which
were formally revealed in the explicit revelation, as the
particular in the universal, or the part in the whole,-
and that this revelation was explicitly and completely
delivered over by the Apostles to their successors, and
has been at all times explicitly held and believed by the
church.
Brownson distinguished always Catholic faith or
doctrine from theology: the former is divine; the latter
a human science. The conclusions of theologians, save
when both premises are from revelation, and the argu-
ment by which they are obtained is purely explicative,
are not of faith, and cannot be insisted on as such.
"Pejorem sequitur semper conclusio partem."
When one of the premises is taken from revelation
and the other from natural reason, the conclusion has
only the certainty of natural reason, and cannot be
defined as of faith. He was perfectly willing to concede
{
BROWNSON'S VIEW OF DEVELOPMENT.
61
a development or growth in men's understanding and
appropriation of the faith, as subjected to the action of
their own minds; but a growth in the revealed truth,
objectively considered, cannot be supposed. The faith,
objectively considered, is infallible, and the church is,
by the assistance of the Holy Ghost, infallible in teach-
ing and defining it. But, except so far as actively
received and appropriated by our own minds, the faith
is to us practically as if it were not. In the reception
and appropriation of the faith our minds are not infal-
lible, our conception of it is always inadequate, often
mingled with errors. The church does not give us new
articles or dogmas of faith by her definitions; but con-
demns the errors that tend to destroy, or impair the
integrity of the original revelation. These definitions
cannot give us understanding, or render our conception
of the dogma, or even of the definition, adequate and
infallible. The church's work in society and in the
individual soul is to struggle to render the human con-
ception of the Christian idea less and less inadequate,
and to eliminate more and more the errors that mingle
with them, so as to advance nearer and nearer to the
perfect day, or to a full and complete realization in the
understanding, in individual and social life, of the whole
Christian idea, or the perfect formation of Christ within
us, and our perfect union with God, possible in its ful-
ness only in the beatific vision, the consummation
alike of creation and redemption.
*
This would seem to be all the development neces-
sary to relieve Newman's perplexities, and he might
have accepted it without having his Catholic faith
* Works, vol. xx., p. 373.
62
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
+
shaken to its foundation. That this was the basis of
Newman's theory is very likely; only captivated by the
predominant theory of progress, which has culminated
in evolutionism, and by vagaries of some unorthodox
Catholics, like Moehler and Doellinger, he embraced
Neander and Schleiermacher's theory of Protestant
growth of doctrine, and applied it to the Catholic faith.
Unfortunately Newman learned his theology in great
part before his conversion, and does not appear, since
his conversion, to have re-examined in the light of
Catholic teaching the theory he adopted, and might very
consistently adopt, while he was a Protestant. He must
have been far from aware of the terrible consequences
his theory involves, and if he could have been persuaded
to study the objections urged against it, he must have
held it in as much horror as does every Catholic theo-
logian who has taken the pains to understand it. There
is, however, such a vagueness about the theory, and his
statement of it is so indefinite and so fluctuating between
different principles that no one without very considerable
study can catch even a glimpse of its real character.
While opposing Newman's theory, Brownson enter-
tained the most kind and respectful feelings for its
author personally, whom he reverenced as a man of
acknowledged ability and learning, of deep and tender
piety, of sincere and fervent zeal, ready and willing to
do all in his power to save his own soul and the souls of
his countrymen, and it was for the special benefit of the
members of the school of Oxford Tractarians which he
had founded, and to prepare them to follow him into the
church that he intended and wrote his essay. The
theory was not new; for several years it had entered
J. COOLIDGE SHAW.
63
more or less into the minds and writings even of some
Catholics; but Newman gave it a definite shape, a tan-
gible form, in which it could be seized and refuted. The
Dublin Review defended it in two articles which Brown-
son answered, and there the discussion ended, for the
time, with a final article by Brownson, who, after wait-
ing six months for any further argument from his
adversary, and none appearing, made his final summing
up, saying that he left the matter to the decision of the
proper authorities.
CHAPTER II.
SHAW.-GLOVER.—M’MASTER.
AMONG the converts received into the church at
about the same time as Brownson, one from whom the
most distinguished achievements were looked forward
to, was J. Coolidge Shaw, a son of the elder Robert G.
Shaw, of Boston. Not long after his ordination as priest
he joined the Jesuits, and entered the Novitiate of their
order at Frederick, Md., in 1849. Some ten or so
months later, the Novitiate catching fire, Shaw was the
first to mount the roof, and receiving buckets of water,
handed up by the other novices, succeeded in extin-
guishing the flames. It was a cold evening and prob-
ably Shaw's clothing was more or less wet; but he
returned, as he was, to the usual exercises of the com-
munity until the regular bed-time.
This exposure
brought on an attack of pleurisy, from which he was
delivered only by death a little later.
64
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
On entering upon the study of theology, after his
conversion by Father Glover, Shaw wrote to Brownson
this letter:
TIVOLI, Oct. 14th, 1845.
MY DEAR SIR:-The hurry of departure prevented
my answering at once the very kind note which you
sent me with three numbers of your Review, but I have
been very negligent in not acknowledging them directly
to you until now, though I long ago asked Mr. Mc-
Intosh to thank you for me, in a letter which I learn
did not reach America till he had left. Of the Reviews,
I kept one, with many thanks, for myself, one I left at
St. Sulpice for M. Carrière, I think; he and the other
priests being unfortunately absent, as it was vacation.*
The third I gave to Father Glover, a noble old English
Jesuit in Rome, to whom, under God I owe my conver-
sion, and who has the soundest and profoundest mind
of any man I ever met. He read that and the other
numbers of 1844, and that for last July, which I after-
wards lent him; after remarking that he thought it too
much for any one man to undertake to produce so much
every year, and making a few verbal criticisms on such
expressions as "conclude to," "conceive of," "have a
fling at," and a few others; † that even the setting of so
precious a gem might be perfect in its slightest details,
he took off his spectacles, and said with great emphasis:
"This man astonishes me; he is clear and strong beyond
compare; that is the most masterly refutation of Kant
* The Sulpitians of the Paris Seminary and the students passed the
vacation at Issy, a short distance from Paris.
+ If there is such difference between the English and the American use
of our common tongue, it must be confessed that to-day, as well as in the
days of Lindley Murray, Boston retains its superiority.
:
LETTER FROM SHAW.
65
I have read.” And again, after reading several of the
articles a second time, he returned to the attack, "He
pleases me more and more," he said, "I think God
has raised him to hunt down and destroy the absurd
principles now in vogue in politics, in philosophy, and
in religion; but," and he went on very solemnly, "but,
his very greatness makes me fear for him; for unless
he be solidly grounded in humility, the success which
so great power applied to teaching the truth assures
him, will turn his head, and make him forget that he
has all from God, and none from himself. May he
remember that there have been Origens and Tertullians
as well as Augustines." I give you Father Glover's
remarks entire, because I think you would prefer them
So. He is not the only one in Rome who knows and
admires your work, but I think his judgment worth half
a dozen others; and permit me to add to his my own
warm admiration, and my happiness, and gratitude to
God for having made you His and ours; and may he
long preserve you for His holy service and the happi-
ness of your friends.
As you may suppose, a second year's experience of
religion, and that too in the very centre of Catholicity,
has only served to ground me more firmly in the faith,
and to fill me with an ever increasing longing for the
time when I shall be prepared to go on His mission
whom alone I love, and teach others to love Him; for it
seems to me that we to whom God has shown such
unspeakable mercy are in a peculiar manner commis-
sioned, like his great precursor, to go before the face of
the Lord and prepare His ways, "Ad dandam scientiam
salutis plebi ejus in remissionem peccatorum eorum, per
6
66
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
:
:
1
viscera misericordiae Dei nostri, in quibus visitavit
nos oriens ex alto, illuminare his qui in tenebris et in
umbra mortis sedent, ad dirigendos pedes nostros in
viam pacis." And oh, pray God for me, that I may not
be unmindful of His call.
I do not know our people as well as I could wish,
for I left home at 19, passed more than three years
abroad, and spent the 10 months after my return for the
most part quietly at Cambridge. I should think, how-
ever, that though they may be more ignorant of the
Catholic religion than any other part of the country,
and on that account may seem farthest from it, they
have, nevertheless, more solidity, more sound principle,
and more good will, than either the South or West, and
hence would make better and more earnest converts than
those who appear at first sight to be of more generous
nature, for I am inclined to think much of the warmth
at the South mere impulse and climate. But my inter-
course in Boston, etc., has been chiefly with Episco-
palians, Unitarians, and infidels, who are, I imagine, a
much better set than the Presbyterian and Methodist
part of the community. I wish you would give me
some more correct information as to the different sects,
and the general spirit of the N. E. people. The Uni-
tarians, infidels, etc., the most sensible, decidedly, are
best acted on by sound reasoning; the others, I suppose,
by the Bible, and by church history. Is it not so? The
four years of Theology stretch out before me intermi-
nably long, and intensely interesting as the study must
be, nothing I think would make me go through with
them, except obedience, and the sense of my inability
to be of any use till I have gone through a long prep-
LI
aration.
LETTER FROM SHAW.
67
Mr. Connelly* having spoken to Prince Borghese
of your Review, the Prince wishes to become a sub-
scriber; before the commencement of next year I will
send my
brother the necessary instructions for Mr.
Greene for the best manner of sending them, etc., etc.
Mr. C. was made a priest in July, he leaves us early in
the spring, else he would wish to subscribe himself. I
hope the number has not fallen off since you became a
Catholic.
If I can be of any service in giving you informa-
tion with regard to anything in Rome, it will be a
pleasure to me. Should I address you at Boston or
Chelsea? Please to direct to me, Collegio de' Nobili,
Rome, care of Baring Bros. & Co., London.
I hope you will give me a place in your prayers, as
you have in mine, and may God grant you length of
days with all happiness and prosperity.
Truly yours in Christ,
J. C. SHAW.
O. A. BROWNSON, Esq., Chelsea.
Shaw came home in the summer of 1847, and tak-
ing an interest in the discussion of Newman's Develop-
ment Theory, wrote to Father Glover, at Brownson's
request, to inquire what his objections and those of the
other Fathers of the society were to Brownson's argu-
Father Glover explained them in the following
ments.
answer:
* I presume this was Pierce Connelly, who had been an Episcopalian
minister, and was ordained in the Catholic priesthood at the time men-
tioned by Shaw. His wife became a religious in England, and when Con-
nelly relapsed from the church he instituted proceedings in the English
courts to compel her return to him. These proceedings, which excited
great interest in 1849 and 1850, were not successful.
68
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
ROME, Aug. 17th, 1847.
Rev. and Dear SIR:-I give you the title, which
I trust will be due, when you receive this. I have just
received your favor of 13th July inst., and I am unwill-
ing to lose a post, which might make the difference of a
fortnight. Your reasons for remaining at Boston,
appear to me to be more cogent than any for returning
to Rome. The advanced
The advanced age of your parents, and their
extreme desires to retain you, weigh much with me. It
is a grace given them by Almighty God, which in your
absence they might not have. I think it is a filial duty
on your part to second as prudently as you can the
merciful designs of God. May they be crowned with
success.
I have not yet received from W. Clifford the two
numbers of Brownson's Review; so I must write from
memory. I have told you before, and I see no reason to
change my opinion, that the greatest part of Brownson's
critique on Mr. N.'s Development, is very just and can-
not easily be confuted. I see, however, that an attempt
has been made to confute it in the last number of the
Dublin Review. I have not seen the number, and prob-
ably shall not see it for some months. I am longing
for it. In the meantime, as Mr. B. desires to know my
opinion, poor as it may be, of his distinction into posi-
tive and negative development, I must candidly say that
I do not esteem it so happy, as many other of his dis-
tinctions. I should have preferred the distinction into
implicit and explicit.* I will try to explain my mean-
ing. The whole deposit of faith was delivered to the
}
* Glover first wrote intrinsic and extrinsic, and then altered these
words to those given above.
GLOVER TO SHAW.
69
Apostles, once for all; and this deposit, and all that it
implicitly contains, admits of no increase, or growth.
But who can fathom the depths of God's revelation?
Perhaps the Apostles themselves knew not all the riches
contained therein. From all we can gather from the
New Testament, it seems that the Apostles were content
with exacting from their converts an explicit act of faith,
on a few leading dogmas, and left the rest to be believed
implicitly, in such an article as this: "I believe the holy
Catholic Church." Now there can be no doubt that the
Apostles were enabled, on the day of Pentecost, to
expound, or develope, explicitly, any dogma to its
utmost extent, if there had been any need of it, as well
as their successors at any subsequent period. But it
does not appear that they did so, whereas their succes-
sors have developed explicitly many truths, which were
implicitly contained in the original deposit. Heresy is
generally the occasion of this explicit development; but
not always. The indwelling Spirit of Truth has often
enabled holy men, and simple women too, to discern
deep-lying truths, which had before escaped notice. At
first, no doubt, they were only the private opinions of
the favored individuals; and can only become explicit
developments when the church has set her seal on them.
Now this is not simply negative, but absolutely positive.
Again, when the church condemns any novelty, gener-
ally speaking, she is not content with a simple negation
of the error, but she gives a more explicit statement of
the truth, and introduces new terms to fix the precise
meaning of her teaching. Thus the church ever taught
the divinity of our Lord explicitly, and implicitly believed
Him to be consubstantial with the Father. Yet there
70
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
:
!!
Pa
can be no doubt, that many of the Ante-Nicene Fathers
made use of vague language, which could not be allowed
after the council had sanctioned the term opоovorov. The
same may be said of the terms deorozos, Transubstantia-
tion, etc. Now in all this there seems to me to be some-
thing positive. This is the sum of my objections against
the terms negative and positive. But I have no doubt
Mr. Brownson agrees with me substantially, so that the
dispute is about words only. I beg now to submit to
the consideration of Mr. B. another point in which his
zeal may have carried him too far. He somewhere
implies, if I mistake not, that Mr. Newman supposes,
that God has cast his revelation among men, to be can-
vassed, unravelled, developed, by the shere workings of
human reason. Now, I have reason to believe that Mr.
N. will deny this, however his language may be con-
strued into this meaning. Mr. N. professes to follow
the doctrine of Catholic Theologians, who certainly
admit an explicit development of doctrine; but no one
ever taught, or thought that this development was the
result of human reason only, but rather the work of the
over-ruling Spirit of Truth, who guides the church into
all truth, and the fulfilment of the promise. "He will
teach you all things and bring all things to your mind,
whatsoever I shall have said to you." The deposit of
faith, with all its hidden treasures, is in good keeping.
I have had no communication with our professors, and
therefore know nothing of their objections. I have
written simply what has occurred to my own mind. I
had first written intrinsic and extrinsic. I hardly know
yet whether that distinction might not equally serve my
purpose. I have not yet received the last number of
LETTER FROM M'MASTER.
71
B.'s Review; I feel much honored by his attentions;
and I will try to repay them in the only way I can, by
a memento in my poor prayers, and offering a few
masses for his intention. Thank God, I am now toler-
ably free from the gout. The supposed plot against the
Pope, which has made such a noise in the newspapers,
is a shere fiction, though the Roman people were, for a
few days, in great alarm. They are now returned to
their senses.
God bless you.
T. G.
REV. J. C. SHAW, Boston, U. S. of America.
James A. McMaster found fault with the course
taken by Brownson in his strictures on Newman's
theory, and besides charging personal motives for that
course, in the columns of the "Freeman's Journal," he
wrote very plainly in his private letters, of which such
as bear on the development question are here inserted:
NEW YORK, In Vig. Epiphaniæ, 1848.
MY DEAR SIR-New Year's is a fit time to close
up old scores and open new ones, and so I choose it to
write you what may very likely seem to you a saucy
letter as coming from so nameless an individual as
myself.
On returning from Europe in 1846, one of the first
things I read was your first article on Newman's Essay.
I felt surprised that N. had fallen into such gross
naturalism of expression as you charged upon him,
especially as he had, in previous of his writings, shown
himself very clear sighted as to the evils of such an
error-but as I had not read his book, I took it for
granted that he had made some inexcusable blunders.
72
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
L
L
I
1:
་
This did not prevent me from seeing that you also
made, in your first article, some mistakes-too long to
speak of here-and that you turned the edge of your
remarks much more against Mr. N. personally, than I
liked, or thought right. Still, I was even glad to see
a warning given against notions of naturalism which
have certainly affected many minds and writings that
pass in our day for orthodox. But when your second
article appeared, I was then sure that you interpreted
Mr. N. unfairly, and accordingly I read his book
through carefully, which till then I had not cared to do.
What I think of it would be of no importance to
state, except accompanied with reasons not to be written
in a short letter. What I have written thus far is pref-
atory to saying that I then concluded that you had
mounted (excuse me) anti-development as a hobby, and
like Bonnetty at Paris, and the Belgian Jesuit of
imagination exalté, who stands behind the editor of the
Journal Historique et Littéraire at Liege, in his crusade
against the University of Louvain-that you, too, would
make this the turning point of all your discussions for
five years to come. Under this impression, I resolved
that if you were going into a standing and wholesale
dispute with men, now Catholics, and with whom are
lodged many of my pleasantest recollections, and also
of my most fervent affections-why that was a private
and not a Catholic affair, and that you and your Boston
friends might settle it!
Thereupon I was not slow in expressing my opinion
that your Review was to be regarded as the organ, not
of Catholicism against anti-Catholicism, but of certain
private philosophical opinions, well worth reading, but
LETTER FROM M'MASTER.
73
I
by no means to be unhesitatingly admitted. If Catho-
lics in this country had enough of intellectual candor to
like what is good, and to distinguish what is not so,
do not know that I should care to change the issue—
but unfortunately name and reputation is, in this coun-
try, everything. And whether it be sermon or novel
what has lost its prestige has lost its value. Your
Review is certainly calculated to do a great deal of good,
and as experience has taught me that, however worth-
less I may be in myself, my opinions have always had
influence and produced effect, when I have expressed
them strongly, I am unwilling not to favor the circula-
tion and consideration of your Review. I am going,
therefore, to exert myself in its favor-but I want to
beg you to let alone that unfortunate topic, which has
done you more hurt, and in more ways than you know
of. I wrote to Ward some time ago, expressing sur-
prise that he should have taken up the matter in the Dub-
lin. I know that he had no more right to speak for
Newman and his opinions, than I have-which is the
reason, by the way, that he did not undertake to answer
your attack. I drew his attention to bearings of the
question at issue, which may very likely set him to
studying (and perhaps praying) instead of writing-a
consummation devoutly to be wished. The question
really at issue was explicitly discussed-and the pro-
position "that dogmas hidden and unknown to the
Early Church-though involved really in others ex-
plicitly then held and taught, have hitherto, and may
yet, beyond our present thought, be brought to light by
the Holy Spirit, and by the decision of the Holy See be
defined as de fide"-this proposition, I say, was main-
74
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
1.
|:
I
tained, and after passing through the hands of doctors,
and theologians, and censors, and qualifications, and
inquisitors, and universities, amid a fury of opposition
from Sorbonists and Bossuetites, and Jansenists, has by
ecclesiastical permission been printed in most of the
languages of Europe, and by a Papal rescript, has been
permitted to be translated into every language of Chris-
tendom, notwithstanding any local censures, and this
for the greater enlightenment of the learned, and edi-
fication of the faithful. And after the first storm had
passed away, once and again the question of the beati-
fication of the person who caused all the trouble was
moved at Rome, and the most learned of modern Popes,
Benedict XIV himself, after reading the folios which
contained the proposition and its defence, and also all
that was said against it-professed that he was much
edified by the writings, and felt a tender devotion
towards the venerable servant of God who was their
author.
I wish when you come on next to New York that
you would find a day to pass with me at my private
rooms, and we would look into this matter together-in
the meantime, for God's sake, don't say anything about
this letter to the worthy clergymen of Boston. When I
say that having both abroad and at home found learned
and spiritual priests who apprehend and approve my
own views of this whole question, I yet wholly conduct
myself practically, on the matter, according to the advice
and sentiments of a priest who, though learned, is, from
circumstances, or at least thinks himself, opposed to the
doctrines herein involved; and that I let the matter
mostly alone, and except sometimes with the priest last
LETTER FROM M'MASTER.
75
named, never discuss it. I have a right to be considered
in no danger myself, and for the rest have no inclination
to be myself discussed by persons to whom I owe no
allegiance. If you please to be offended with the impu-
dence that I have chosen to put into this letter, you
shall be at liberty, by dropping it in the fire, to get rid
of the whole affair-if otherwise, please reserve it for
yourself.
In ending, I beg to wish you a happy New Year,
and all the rewards, in this world and the next, that
your labors and trials may deserve, and in the love of
Jesus and Mary, remain, very sincerely,
Your humble friend and servant,
J. ALPHONS. MCMASTER,
In fest. Epiph.
P. S.
I am very glad that I forgot my letter of yesterday,
when I went out this morning. I have broken it
open to add this note. I have seen, this evening, your
January number, and like the appearance of it very
much-tho' what I least like is in the parts which I
most like. I spoke with Dr. Cummings, who mentioned
your willingness to come on and lecture here. We are
not of the namby-pambys* and will give you a better
reception than you had last year. Cummings is inter-
ested, and indeed proposed it first. You had better pre-
pare two or three lectures. Would not Fourierism be a
popular as well as good subject? You might make it
very interesting by giving a full and indulgent explana-
* An allusion, like latitudinarians, to Brownson's remark about his
Review: "It has not proved acceptable to political demagogues, to namby-
pambies, latitudinarians, and radicals; but we have reason to believe that
it has met the approbation of the bishops and clergy generally, as well as of
the intelligent laity."
76
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
:
:
tion of all that it professes to aim at and desire-and
then give the fatal reason for why it cannot succeed.
The reason is itself, it has seemed to me, a most worthy
theme for a lecture-I mean the extent and depth of the
corruption of our poor nature-so little approfounded,
and so habitually left out of sight, or evaded, even by
Catholic writers.
After seeing your present number, I feel quite peni-
tent for having written such a letter as I did yesterday,
but like other latitudinarians, I go on just the same as
before, and send it to you.
When you come on to New York, make up your
mind to stay for some time; change of air will not hurt
you, and beside: "Desidero enim videre vos ut aliquid
impertiar vobis-id est simul consolari in vobis, per
eam quae invicem est fidem vestram atque meam."
And so, commending myself to your prayers, in the
love of Our Blessed Lady, and of the Infant Jesus, whom
to-day we have been adoring, I remain ever very faith-
fully your humble servant and friend,
J. ALPHONS. MCMASTER.
O. A. BROWNSON, LL. D.
About two months later, McMaster wrote:
G
NEW YORK, March 17th, 1848.
MY DEAR SIR:-I hope you have got safely
through with the chief labors of preparation for your
April number,-if not, pray throw this letter aside with-
out thinking about it, if you like, without reading it till
you shall be quite at leisure. Poor Ward! I wonder
how you have disposed of him and his development.
Since I saw you I have been looking over your several
LETTER FROM M'MASTER.
77
1
articles, and I still confess it seems to me that you have
in the last modified your ideas of the difference between
implicit and explicit faith-that you have come a peg or
two towards agreeing with the "developmentists" as he
has moved on some pegs towards your checks and dis-
tinctions. I wish you could find it consistent to make
it still more so in your forthcoming article.
My object in writing you this morning is to advise
with you, or at least to advise you of a new project which
concerns myself. For more than six months I have
been urged by persons, in whose judgment, practical as
well as theoretical, I have been in the habit of putting
much confidence in other things, to set on foot in New
York a new Magazine. I, at first, felt reluctance to
engage in it, not from doubting its utility, but from dis-
like to undertake in my own person an affair so full of
embarrassments as I fear such a thing must be, in the
actual circumstances. From step to step, however, I
was led to think that such might be, and even seemed
to be the will of God, and at length I was induced to
broach the subject to the Bishop-not desiring from him
any previous approbation, but only his permission and
blessing. If you know New York and its Bishop as well
as I do, you would not expect that he would have been
pleased with the proposition-and in fact such was the
result of my first application. The Bishop, however,
thought over the matter, consulted with several persons,
and of his own accord two days afterward—that is, yes-
terday, reverted to the subject, gave his permission,
expressed his good wishes, and told me to "go ahead."
This is quite as much from him as I expected or
wished.
:
1
▪་।
j.
78
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
The next thing I wished to do was to apprise you
of it and ask your opinion. I am now sorry I did not
mention it to you when you were here, but the Bishop's
permission was so unlikely a thing, and I had so many
other things to talk with you about, that though I had
previously intended to speak of it, I let it drop as being
too little certain a thing to trouble your time with it.
My intentions as to its ultimate character are pretty
definitely settled, and I have a reasonable confidence in
its practical feasibility. I need not say to you that I
am determined it shall not interfere with the sphere or
interests of your Review. Did I believe it could at all
do so, I would not think of starting it on any account.
There is a certain monthly magazine [The U. S. Catholic
Magazine, of Baltimore], however, with whose success,
Deo favente, it may materially interfere. Indeed, my
object is to make it do the work which the other does
not do, though some of us think it ought to have done
so. My affair is intended to be practical, simple, asceti-
cal, and edifying for such good people as are not over-
stocked with brains, or at least, not trained to following
theological discussions. Namby-pambyism, Baltimore-
ism, and kindred miseries it will perhaps wail over in
private, may sigh over in a voice still audible—not more,
but above all, will carefully avoid in its own practice.
But enough of this-I intend it to appear every
alternate month, and to average a hundred pages per
number. You will smile at the name I have chosen for
it-possibly you may not like it—but it is indicative in
more ways than one of the tone I desire to reign in it,
and I like it-it is to be called simply "Ave Maria."
I have written all this to you because I wanted you
LETTER FROM BAYLEY.
79
to understand from the first the measure and scope of
my intentions-in certain respects at least. There is
much more necessary to say for a right understanding
of it—but a letter does not suffice. At your leisure I
will be gratified to know frankly what you think in the
matter.
Meanwhile believe me, with sincere respect and
affection, your obedient humble servant,
J. ALPHONS. MCMASTER.
O. A. BROWNSON, LL. D., Boston.
Nothing ever came of McMaster's intended “Ave
Maria," for before midsummer he had another project.
Bishop Hughes, too, was in want of an editor or pur-
chaser of the Freeman's Journal, as appears from the
following letter from his secretary, Rev. James Roose-
velt Bayley, afterwards Bishop of Newark, and still
later Archbishop of Baltimore:
"Private."
G
EPISCOPAL RESIDENCE,
NEW YORK, March 27th, 1848. J
DEAR SIR: The Rt. Reverend Bishop having
resuscitated the Freeman's Journal from the state of
debility into which it had fallen, is desirous of turning it
over into some good, safe hands. He has authorized me
to write to you to inquire if you would be willing to
take it out and out. Its affairs are in a very sound
state, no debt, and a good clean list of subscribers. It
would afford you at present a clear income of twelve or
fifteen hundred dollars, which might be doubled without
much difficulty. No one understands better than your-
self how great an instrument of good the Journal could
be made in proper hands. Without knowing your mind
J
2
80
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE
-
:
2
::
i
A
upon the subject, there is no need that I should enter
into details. If you should think well of the proposal I
will, of course, give you all the information you may
wish.
The Rt. Reverend Bishop desires me to present
you with his best respects.
I remain, with respect and affection,
Your obedient servant,
J. R. BAYLEY.
O. A. BROWNSON, Esq., Boston, Mass.
Before Hughes and McMaster came to a sort of
understanding and the latter bought the Freeman's
Journal, the new project was formed of which he writes
in June.
NEW YORK, June 12th, 1848.
MY DEAR SIR-I am much obliged to you for
your kind letter of last week, and especially for your
writing to me when you were so busy; but I am sorry
that you have forgotten the part that relates to the
agency for your Review here in New York. I hope you
will either come on yourself or else write definitively
about O'Flaherty before the 1st prox., as I am sure O'F.
can do more than he is now doing for you.
As regards myself, I think the affair is settled.
This month, or the beginning of next, I expect to start
an independent Catholic semi-weekly paper. Each
number will be one-fourth larger than the half of the
Freeman's Journal (mine will be folio, it is quarto), it
will say what I think best on political and other mat-
ters, without asking anybody's favor. The clergy, many
of whom have been spoken to, heartily approve of it, and
LETTER FROM M'MASTER.
81
as regards the Bishop, I shall tell him before I begin,
but neither ask nor expect his consent.
I may shock you awfully, but I do not consider
that it appertains any more to his jurisdiction than to
arrange the colors of the coats I shall wear during the
summer! To render this more clear, I shall take a
purely secular title, such as "New York Times," or any
better one that we may think of or, if you will, you sug-
gest in the meantime. I hope for it a wide circulation,
as it is to have no diocesan trammels nor responsibili-
ties; and as it is to give the news oftener, fuller, and
more correctly than the lumbering things that they call
"Irish papers." Our friend, George Hecker, is interested,
and volunteers to advance, or if need be, lose the money
necessary in the undertaking.
I might have formed a connection with several
periodicals in New York, and in the case of one, without
doing much violence to my feelings. I mean the
American Review, in which D. D. Barnard is the lead-
ing writer. Its conservative notions, though amazingly
rotten, admit of my saying a great deal under their
cloak. I wrote one article on "Fourierism" for the June
number, which stirred up the Tribune, and is said to
have done some good among those half inclined to Fou-
rierism. At any rate, it was a good deal talked of, and
much liked by those that call themselves conservatives.
I have written a longer article, which will appear
next month, on Switzerland. I will send it to you when
it appears, for there are some things in it that I think
good. . I would have sent you what I wrote on Socialism,
but I thought you would hardly care to read it, as you
understand the matter so much better than I, and
•
7
82
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
especially as it is patched-the editor of the Review
having asked me, after it was written, to make it twice
as long as he said first, and I not having time to re-write
it. I believe I will send it to you, however, and also the
comments of the Tribune in a slip which I will put
inside the Review. Should you care to notice it in the
Observer (about which I am honestly indifferent) I beg
you will not call me a Whig, which I am not.
I am
anxious no such reputation should attach to me when I
commence my own paper.
But, I repeat, I am not fishing for any notice of it
at all. I would not even be likely to see it, as I do not
get the Observer since I left the Journal. When I
commence my semi-weekly I shall ask the favor of an
exchange with it.
As regards European politics, my views would not
be worth much to you even if I could spread them at
length. I think decidedly cheerfully of them as a
whole. The wretched dotard of Naples may lose his
lying head, and I shall hardly be able to say that he
did not half deserve it-blood may flow freely elsewhere,
but I never supposed that such immense changes could
be made without disturbance. The Pope, I shall never
believe, is agitated and desponding. He may, no doubt,
be vexed. He may yet in good earnest be imprisoned,
but it will not take a whit from his moral power-it will
add to it; and if it strips him of his temporal power I
shall not cry out my eyes about it. Is that what you
call radicalism? If so, suspend your judgment till you
see my article on Switzerland and you will see my other
side.
I should like greatly to meet you, but shall never
LETTER FROM M'MASTER.
83
have time to go as far as Boston. But believe me ever
very respectfully and truly your humble friend and
servant,
J. A. MCMASTER.
Instead of starting an independent Catholic semi-
weekly journal, about a fortnight after writing the letter
just given, McMaster was back on the Freeman's Jour-
nal, now its proprietor as well as editor. The first num-
ber of Brownson's Review of which it had occasion to
speak, met with a reception from that paper which was
very surprising after the correspondence that had passed.
Brownson was at a loss to reconcile McMaster's public
animosity with his private professions of friendship and
esteem, and even McMaster thought proper to give some
explanation. He wrote:
NEW YORK, Sunday Evening July 16th, '48.
MY DEAR MR. BROWNSON:-You know that in
most events of this world there is a secret as well as a
public history, and that the former is not always the one
that looks fairest-perhaps my notice of your Review is
a case in point. The truth is I was sick when that
number of the Journal came out; I had written the part
of the notice that begins with the article on Recent
Events, which was the only article I had been able to
read; as I wanted the number noticed immediately I
sent to Dr. Cummings asking him to prefix a general
notice to what I had written, and so he, without reading
it, reviewed the article on Thornwell-he had good
intentions.
As to my part of it, I did read the article on Euro-
pean Events carefully, and on Father Rumpler object-
of
.
84
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
ing to my notice of it, I read it again, gaining the same
ideas as before. This is no doubt the point you par-
ticularly object to, my own fault, and I retract. I con-
fess I dislike some things in your article very much;
but they are matters of opinion. I think you will be
satisfied with a notice I have given anew of your article.
-which I wrote before getting your letter, but will
extend by a clause or two on the point of feudalism. As
to the Thornwell article, I will read it shortly, and give
a notice of it setting it forth justly.*
Now for a matter really of more importance to you:
I was sorry on many accounts not to have seen you on
your way through, but on no account so much as on
that of the business arrangements of your Review in
this city. I have mentioned this matter three times in
letters to you, and you have paid no attention to it. At
the risk of being thought meddling I press it anew.
Your interests are not attended to in New York. The
July number of the Review, like the April, lay for a full
week at Dunigan's after the first of the month; and this
irregularity is of itself a grievous injury to the circula-
tion of the Review. Every Mr. O'Rory, of the subscrib-
ers, will consider that the delay is an intentional pre-
meditated plot of yours to insult his dignity-or at least
he will act as if he thought so and it is certain to do
hurt.
I am anxious to see the circulation of the Review
doubled and tripled in New York, and I think it can be
done. An efficient and honest agent is the great desid-
eratum. I was going to have proposed to you to let us
* The Thornwell article here referred to by McMaster is the second of
the series and found in Brownson's Works, vol. vi., p. 452; that on Recent
European Events is in vol. xvi., at page 102.
J
养
​LETTER FROM M'MASTER.
85
manage the affair for you in our office. We must always
have a collector constantly employed for ourselves, and
as probably all your subscribers here are also ours, I
think our collector will be glad to attend promptly and
well to your affairs for 25 per cent. instead of 33.
And I, for my part, would look to it that all went on
right. We are not yet satisfactorily settled as to our
own agents, but you know the Heckers well enough to
know that all will be straight with the men who are
employed in their concerns. You understand me, that
my sole intention is to benefit the Review, and I hope
you will do something efficiently before the time of
another quarter comes round-otherwise, I am afraid
that some of the subscribers will drop off.
*
Do not send me a copy of your Review as I am
already a regular subscriber, and moreover Dunigan
sends a copy to the Journal. I think you misunder-
stood my speaking of an exchange when I was thinking
of a newspaper. I meant an exchange with the Catho-
lic Observer with which I thought you had something
, to do. Please also not to pay your letters when you
write to me.
I feel truly grateful to you for the kind wishes you
express toward me, and I will be very sorry ever to dis-
appoint them.
Believe me, dear sir, with deep affection and respect,
your very humble friend and servant,
JAMES ALPHONS. MCMASTER.
Even at the risk of seeming to introduce matters
foreign to the purpose of this book, it is hard to resist
* The Heckers having advanced McMaster the money to purchase the
Freeman's Journal with, looked after the business concerns of that paper.
"
¡
E
-
}
.1
86
•
il
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
the temptation to insert here McMaster's next letter, so
like him, and which tends to make better known one of
the persons with whom Brownson came frequently in
contact.
NEW YORK, Sept. 9th, 1848.
MY DEAR MR. BROWNSON:-I was very glad, in-
deed, to get your letter, and feel greatly obliged to you
for writing me so long an one. I shall not be able tó
send this till Monday evening at earliest as Dunigan is
in Philadelphia, and will not be back till Monday. It
is of high importance that your agency here be in other
hands as soon as possible, and no doubt, indeed I know
that Dunigan will have no objection. The list of right
belongs to him, but is in O'Flaherty's hands, and he
has turned out such a scamp that there will be no hopes.
of getting it from him. However, by asking, through
the Journal, subscribers to give notice of their names
and places, I think we can make them all out-any way,
the sooner we try the better. It seems best to me that
you should still let Dunigan have whatever subscribers.
he can get, and even continue him on the cover as your
New York publisher. What I want to manage and
increase is the list of regular standard subscribers in the
city. I want that they shall be satisfied by getting their
numbers promptly, and you by getting your money; and
this, I think, I can effect better than any other body.
But if special agents elsewhere will get additional num-
bers to dispose of, so much the better.
I assure you I more than feel gratified at the way
you speak of my noisy flash in the Journal. Generally,
of course, it is thought I am too hot and too heavy-and
in truth I have no idea of keeping up so much excite-
¿
LETTER FROM M'MASTER.
87
ment as is raised about it just now. But, in the first
place, I want to increase its circulation, and I find this
just the way to do it, as nobody who is anybody likes to
miss seeing a paper that presents each week among
other dishes one or two roasts. And in the second place
I knew as well as you did that the Irish never respect a
man till he appeals to their cowardice, and I want to
give them a most respectful threshing. The late hum-
bug about Ireland presented an admirable opportunity,
and if it had not been for the cowardice of one Irishman
I would now be occupying a higher place in Irish esti-
mation than I do. But unfortunately that Irishman
was Bishop of New York; and he prevented me follow-
ing up the anti-riot and murder lines on which I set out.
It was to no purpose that I demonstrated to him the
certainty of the insurrection turning out "in one or two
riots put down by the police without the interference of
the military," in which my very words came true. And
equally little use was it to show him that the present
indignation of the barbarians would be succeeded by a
veneration equally exorbitant when the hopes would be
so bitterly and laughably disappointed. The truth was
the Bishop was himself completely puzzled and had no
idea of considering any one possessed of more political
sagacity than himself. So finally, like a boy, on the
impulse given by one honest talk by Horace Greeley and
some other political wire-workers, he went off with them
to Vauxhall, and you know the rest. Next morning he
was heartily ashamed of what he had done, had not a
word of defence when I quizzed him, and ran off to
Halifax to get out of the way. He has returned just in
time to hear the Irish themselves say that the Journal
88
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
i
was right, politically speaking even, and the Bishop
wrong—and, alas for me! the former consideration takes
nothing whatever from the poignancy of the latter. All
the address and finesse that I know how to use only just
suffices to keep from an open hostility. It is easy to see
that he deplores the necessity by which he was cornered
into selling me the Freeman, or having it sink along-
side of a paper wholly independent of him; and you
know him well enough to understand that the character
and eminent success of the Journal, since I have had it,
does not render it more agreeable to him.
Well, I believe I know the Bishop well enough to
manage him yet, and a proof of it was in last week's
Journal. His article there I rehearsed to him in its
parts, told him it ought to be said, must be, and would
be,—and then persuaded him that it would come better
from him than from anybody else. He wrote it, but I
failed somewhat in my diplomacy. My little preface to
it, the sober remarks upon fortitude (of course considered
purely in the abstract) with which I brought up the
rear, and the scorcher from the Pittsburg Catholic on
the next leaf, altogether gave a very natural, even
chuckling look to the paper, but made the Bishop look
very sorry in his palinode. I did not intend this, but it
was so, and I ought to have been cautious enough to
have foreseen it. It increases by several degrees the
annoyance that the Bishop feels and shows. But my
course is taken with him. He is always managed by
some one; never acts independently. I am going to
undertake the job, and think the Bishop will never sac-
rifice me as he has done others-because I shall never
trust him, never directly oppose him, and never suffer
LETTER FROM M'MASTER.
89
him to cease fearing me. By the aid of God and of these
interesting dispositions-which I need not caution you,
that I do not proclaim on the housetop-I look to weath-
ering a good many storms, and being still editor when
the Bishop shall be entered into his eternal reward. I
dare say I shock you now, if I never have before. But
I differ essentially with you as to the nature of my
accountability to the Bishop of the place where I am.
In your case you have never had to distinguish what
you owe to your Bishop and what to your Confessor;
and it is a blessing you have not.
Entertain no fears as to my not liking anything
you shall write in your next number-on development
or anything else. If I do not like it I will very easily
lump it, as the old saying is, because I shall find so
much else to like.
You hurt me when you say that I do not greatly
esteem your writings. But you know that in the crowd
of business that presses me it must be very hard for me
to read, with the care your essays demand, your num-
bers as they appear, and especially when they are on
subjects foreign to such as I may be studying at the
time. I am no ways blind to our relative positions. Do
you not see in how many instances I have given the
Journal a tone that is rather yours than mine? Well,
this I do on purpose; every sensible man will see that
I am adopting your tone, and as I could avoid it, I think
this is an evidence that I in no wise slight the value of
the review, that is, of your writings. In every case be
you sure that I feel we must and shall pull together,
and for this I am ready to sacrifice more than you will
even require of me. I know how necessary it is we
should do so.
i
་
+
.i
90
.
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
But now I must allude to another subject. I am
frightened to hear that the Jesuits are creeping into the
city of Boston. Is it possible the Bishop has just now
again given them a church? I had thought you were
very sound on that subject. So far as I am able to see
or learn the Jesuits practice, in an exaggerated form,
most of the evils that we deplore in the clergy of this
country. And the dioceses at whose establishment they
have presided, as Baltimore and Bardstown have been
among the worst in the country. Once more, the Creti-
neau Joly affair in the magazine which springs from
Georgetown College, though penned by a brother of the
Jesuit, Father Jenkins, shows how they stand disposed
towards the Pope, now that he is not their humble ser-
vant. When I have the pleasure of seeing you again I
will give you some rare examples of Jesuit doings-par-
ticularly in New York where I am ready to admit that
they may be worse than elsewhere-but in the mean-
time, if you need the caution, look out for them!
Dunigan has returned. He thinks it best that
things remain as they have done till the end of the year.
I have concluded that this is best, also.
I am in great haste and can only commend myself
to your prayers, and remain most sincerely and respect-
fully your friend and servant.
J. ALPH. MCMASTER.
* The U. S. Catholic Magazine, published at Baltimore.
B
LETTER TO ALLEN.
91
2LMA
CHAPTER IV.
TONE TOWARDS PROTESTANTS.—NO SALVATION OUT OF
THE CHURCH.-NATIVE-AMERICANISM.—KENRICK.-
THE BISHOPS AT BALTIMORE COMMEND THE REVIEW.
In a preceding chapter reference was made to
Brownson's alleged harshness in controversy, and an
attempt made to explain the reason for such harshness
in his public controversies. What was then said may
apply to his manner of treating opponents in private
correspondence and conversation. One or two instances
will show what is meant.
!
The Rev. Joseph H. Allen, Pastor of the Unitarian
Church in Washington, a very old acquaintance and
correspondent of Brownson's, published ten Discourses
on Orthodoxy, in which he boldly "denounces as false
and mischievous all the doctrinal statements about
which men are divided, and insists that nothing should
be held essential, or even important, except such points
as nobody disputes." In reply to Brownson's criticism
of these discourses, Allen sent a long letter to him, set-
ting forth what]he understood to be the position assumed
by Catholics, and giving his objections to it, at the same
time begging to be corrected if he was in error. Read-
ing his letter, one is at a loss to find anything to blame,
except what in Brownson's eyes was hardly pardonable,
the usual inability of Protestants to set forth Catholic
teaching with clearness and accuracy. In answering
Allen's letter, there could have been no intention on
Brownson's part to bear heavily on his friend personally;
}
92
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
JER SE NEKOGARA
-
1
but his words are the harshest I remember in his corre-
spondence. His correspondent, like all who knew him
well, only thought them earnest.
"I hasten," he wrote October 28th, 1849, "to
acknowledge your favor of the the 25th inst. Your letter
appears serious, and as such I treat it. I doubt not that
you have persuaded yourself that you have seized my
meaning and that you really comprehend the position of
Catholics. Allow me to suggest, my young friend, that
you have a little of the defect which characterizes the
body of which you are a member, that of undertaking
to comprehend prior to apprehending, or of reflecting
before you have thought. This defect proceeds from
modern psychologism, in some aspects is characteristic
of the age, the precise defect which Bacon is understood
to have censured, transferred from the physical world.
Psychologism induces the habit of fixing the mind on
our intuitions as mere psychological phenomena, instead
of opening to the reality revealed in them. Under the
influence of this habit, you seek to compress what you
fancy an author would mean, if he understood himself,
into a formula of your own, rather than to open your
mind to apprehend and understand what he does mean.
In this way you can construct theories, but can make
no real progress in knowledge.
"You translate my statements of Protestantism
into a formula of your own; but did it not occur to you
that if my meaning had been what it is in your trans-
lation, I could have so expressed it that no translation
would have been necessary? Did it not occur to you
that I understood your language as well as you do your-
self, having spoken it for many more years than you
LETTER TO ALLEN.
93-
have, and that I understood my own language far better
than you do? Did it not occur to you that the necessity
you felt of translating my statement into one of your
own, might, after all, proceed from your not apprehend-
ing my statement?
"You say, making allowance for my position as a
Catholic, you can accept my statement of Protestantism.
I am not a writer for whom much allowance is requisite,
and I am very much in the habit of making my state-
ments in their greatest generality, that is, reference had
to the order to which they belong; and you may be
pretty sure if you undertake to express them in a
greater generality, you will essentially change them.
You understand me as saying, Protestantism is 'prin-
ciple rather than opinion,' 'of character rather than
position.' I do not use these terms, and in your manner
of understanding them, they do not and cannot express
my meaning. Negatively considered, Protestantism is
the negation of all principle or principles; positively
considered, it is the spirit of error, or simple, vulgar
pride. This is my statement; whether true or false is
not now the question; but it is a statement very differ-
ent from the one you represent me as making. The
only point on which you and I agree is that Protestant-
ism embraces no fixed or positive form of doctrine. To
embrace no fixed form of doctrine means, in my lan-
guage, to have no fixed principles: in yours, it means
having a fixed principle, but a principle that is drawn
out into no specific form of doctrine. Character, taken
absolutely, is with me always understood in a good, not
a bad sense, and means also something determinate; it
is not the genus or essentia, but the differentia. Taken
&
94
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE Life.
generally, I do not in my article allow that Protestant-
ism consists in character; because I expressly tell you
its differentia is pride. Now it is not as a Catholic, but
as a philosopher that I tell you Protestantism is the
spirit of error in general, growing out of the pride of the
human heart. Consequently, you must either accept or
reject my statement as I make it, and without any
allowance for my position as a Catholic."
The severity of the next letter seems not blamable.
A perfect stranger writes, in a small, close hand, seven
foolscap pages of arguments and objections to Catholic
doctrine and practice, which he says "have long been
hanging about" his "mind without meeting allay or
refutation," and requests "that you will have the good-
ness to return me your opinion with all the evidence
you may be in possession of on the subject." The letter
was dated "Worcester, May 5, 1846." This was the
answer:
BOSTON, May 7, 1846.
DEAR SIR-I have received a long, closely written
letter, signed Joseph Brigdon, proposing sundry queries
to me concerning the devotion which Catholics pay to
the Blessed Virgin and the Saints. The writer pro-
fesses to be a convert to the Catholic Church, like
myself. If he is a Roman Catholic, as he would per-
suade me, I commend him to his spiritual director and
his catechism for a solution of his difficulties. He, if a
Catholic, believes the infallibility of the church, and
knows that what she sanctions is just and right. If he
is not a Catholic, as he assuredly is not, I shall regard
it as time enough to reply to his questions when he pro-
poses them in his true character, and does not address
!
*
".
རྞ དྷ
LETTER TO A SEEKER AFTER FAITH.
me, a total stranger, with what he knows I must regard
as a false profession. He may be a Catholic in his
sense of the word; but, if he be really a member of the
Roman Catholic Church, he has not as yet learned the
simplest elements of the Catholic faith, and is ill pre-
pared at present for any other than simple elementary
instruction, which it will be much more convenient and
proper for him to seek of his pastor than of a stranger
and a layman.
I have the honor to be, etc.,
O. A. BROWNSON.
95
*
As a general rule, however, Brownson's answers to
inquiries about Catholic doctrine or practice were marked
by great patience in instructing and perfect kindliness
of tone. To an old Universalist friend who was inquir-
ing for the truth, and after reading all the books recom-
mended from the small catechism to Balmes's European
Civilization, wrote: "I exercise no faith; I cannot! I
know that faith without reason would make me a Mil-
lerite or Mormon. And you will say, perhaps, that I
am a Deist, an infidel. Then it is my misfortune. For
I do not believe there was ever a woman, especially a
single woman, with no family or children to fill her
heart, but wished for a God and Father in heaven, the
guardianship of Angels, and the communion of Saints."
In reply, Brownson gives some good advice for those
who have not faith, yet wish to have it. "I do not
expect," he says, "from you faith as yet.
you faith as yet. The work
now to be done is simply to remove the intellectual
obstacles you find to faith. Faith itself is supernatural,
is the gift of God, and is to be sought by earnest prayer.
It is a grace; but a grace which you will receive the
+
96
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
3
moment you cease to interpose any obstacle to it. You
have not to get it by your own unaided strength; but
you are to use the grace, which God gives to you and to
every one so as not to resist it. I can show you that it
is reasonable to believe, that you ought to believe, but I
cannot give you faith." He then proceeds to instruc-
tion on the difficulties proposed.
Although no large number of Brownson's friends,
either of the readers of his Review, or of those who
attended his Sunday exercises at the Masonic Temple,
accompanied, or followed him soon after into the Catholic
Church, still there were some whose conversion he was
the main instrument in bringing about. Of those at
Brook Farm, of whom this is true, two were ministers,
the Rev. William J. Davis, and the Rev. George Leach;
to them may be added Mrs. Ripley, wife of George
Ripley, the head of that community. After her con-
version she devoted herself almost wholly to spiritual
and corporal works of mercy; and her labors in New
York, especially at the institutions on the islands in the
East River, cannot yet be forgotten. Ripley himself
never became a Catholic; he hardened his heart on the
day when the voice was heard. After he had been for
some years one of the editors of the New York Tribune,
Brownson made a last attempt; but he put it off, saying
what his income had been the past and previous years,
and that he soon would have a sufficient amount saved
to support him when his occupation was gone, as it
would be when he became a Catholic, and that as soon
as that time arrived he would ask to be received into the
church. Thenceforth he seemed to drift further and
further away.
HE ASSERTS HIS RELIGION.
97
Some men and women in Boston came into the
church, led by Brownson's example and reasoning; but
continuing in their former business and occupations,
attracted little notice. Of the young women in whose
conversion he was instrumental, there were some who
became religious, notably two sisters and a cousin
named Peirce, who joined the nuns of the Visitation,
one of whom founded the Academy of Mt. de Chantal,
near Wheeling, and is to be ranked, as Sister Eulalia,
among the noblest women of the country.
Brownson, in travelling, and he travelled much, took
every occasion to turn the conversation with his com-
panions to the question of the true faith. Even on the
ferry boat between Chelsea and Boston, and if he met
persons at his barber's or butcher's, he commenced a
religious discussion. It is not to be supposed that
Brownson expected to make converts by these casual
arguments; nor will it do to attribute his fondness for
them to the idle wish to parade his skill in arguing, or
in turning others into ridicule or contempt. The real
motive must be sought in the desire strongly expressed
by the Bishop of Boston, and entertained by Brownson,
to do all in his power to elevate the tone of Catholics in
the United States. Two things the Bishop particularly
lamented, the timid tone of Catholics and their liberal-
ism. To counteract the former, Brownson everywhere
asserted his Catholicity publicly. At one time, he was
lecturing in Andover, Lawrence, Haverhill, and places
in that vicinity. At the hotel in Andover, one Friday
morning at breakfast, which all the guests of the house
ate in common, Brownson commanded a waiter in a loud
voice to send the landlord to him, and when the land-
}
':
8
98
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
lord came, Brownson inquired in a tone heard through-
out the room, "Why don't you have something in your
house that a Christian can eat?" The other said he
had beefsteak and other meats which he mentioned;
but his guest interrupted him by asking, "Why don't
you have fish? No Christian eats meat, on Friday."
Fish was soon procured, and the matter ended; but it is
very clear that Brownson aimed solely at asserting
boldly his Catholicity in the very hot-bed of puritanism.
Gradually the Catholic tone became less timid and apolo-
getic; Catholics seemed less ashamed of being Catholics,
and then Brownson called public attention less to his
religion in his travels, and occasional intercourse with
those whom he chanced to meet. As to Liberalism, the
Reviewer had had too much experience of it, and too
much toil to escape from it, to be in much danger of a
relapse; but even if it had been otherwise. the very
sound and conservative influence of his Bishop over
him, would have kept him from such danger.
His theological essays in the Review for 1845, and
the following nine years, were submitted to Bishop Fitz-
patrick before publication. To many writers it might
have been burdensome to undergo ecclesiastical censor-
ship; but the editor took a brighter view of the matter,
and was glad to read his articles to one who could both
protect him from doctrinal error, and discuss with him
intelligently the subject treated of. For years he had
been in the habit of reading his more important articles.
to his wife before they were sent to the printers, and
felt that he had derived benefit from her good sense and
calm, clear judgment. By this submission of his theo-
logical essays to Fitzpatrick, he was saved from fall-
一番
​SUBMITS TO CENSORSHIP.
99
ing into any erroneous statements of Catholic doc-
trine, which the neophyte may so easily fall into, and
had the satisfaction and the confidence resulting from a
consciousness of entire conformity to the orthodox faith.
In fact, if it was a burden to any one, it must have been
so to the Bishop, whose time was so needed for the
duties of his office, that it was no small matter for him
to hear and discuss, one or two or more long articles
every three months for nine or ten years. Nor did
Brownson view it differently, as the frequent expressions
of his gratitude and reverence towards the great Bishop
expressed in his writings on every opportunity bear
witness.
Saving his obligation to maintain the orthodox
faith, Brownson continued to discourse on all topics of
general interest, according to his ability, inclination,
and opportunity, holding himself free to follow the bent
or the humor of his mind in the selection of topics and
the manner of treating them, studying to deserve popu-
lar, favor, by doing nothing to court it; to deserve well
of the country, by laboring with an eye single to the
glory of God, and the good of man intellectually and
socially.
The mass of the American people were deeply
prejudiced against Catholicity, and at heart strongly
opposed to Catholics; and the course generally followed
by the latter was only likely to render them more pre-
judiced and more opposed. Nothing could tend more to
give Protestants a mean opinion of Catholics than for
these to be tame and apologetic in setting forth and
defending their faith. Brownson gave a Protestant lady
in Boston a lecture in favor of Catholicity by one of the
Plicity by
2
I
100
!!
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
She re-
most distinguished Bishops in this country.
turned it after reading it, with a note saying she could
not bear it, that it disgusted her to find a Catholic
apologizing for his religion, which, if true, needed no
apology; and if he believed himself divinely sent, he
should speak as one having authority."
The ground on which Brownson took his stand was
that the constitution and laws of this country placed the
Catholic Church on as high a level as any one of the
sects, whilst the appointment of God placed her infinitely
above them all. The Catholic was at home here; no
man had a better right to be here. He should stand
erect; let his tone be firm and manly, his voice clear
and distinct, his speech strong and decided. If Protes-
tants appeared delighted when they found us laboring
to soften the severities of Catholic doctrine, it was only
because in so doing we seemed to them to surrender her
infallibility. The conciliating and liberal expressions
of latitudinarians, however they may tend to diminish
hostility to the church as she now is, are an argument
against accepting her for what she claims to be; since
they imply progress, improvement, which is incompat-
ible with Catholicity and infallibility. Catholics, by the
very fact that they are Catholics, are freed from all
dependence on mere human policy. Their truest policy
is to have no policy at all. A liberal tone in treating
Protestants as, upon the whole, very good Christians,
not far out of the way, meaning right, perfectly well
disposed, in only inculpable error, and by no means
necessarily out of the way of salvation; and in showing
*This lady was later received into the church, of which she has now
been a member more than fifty years.
LIBERAL CATHOLICS.
101
ourselves ready to conform to prevailing modes of
thought, and anxious to throw off whatever appears
exclusive or rigorous, can only tend to make them dis-
trust our church or our own sincerity. Converts from
Protestantism were almost uniformly men who had
honestly and earnestly searched for the truth, and
Christ has assured us that such shall find it; and judg-
ing others by themselves, they as well as Catholics born
of Catholic ancestors, were apt to regard all Protestants
as honest and earnest in the love of truth.
Heresy is the deadliest of sins. To call Protestants
heretics in ill-humor or passion, for the sake of wound-
ing their feelings, is unjustifiable; but to call them so,
in reasoning against their heresies, because they are so
in fact, for the sake of leading them to reflect on the
danger to which they are exposed, is equally in accord
with truth and with charity. Not the severity of reason,
but the severity of passion must be avoided.
To this opinion, it was objected that, on the
authority of St. Francis de Sales, more flies are caught
with honey than with vinegar. Brownson replied: “This
is unquestionably true, but they who are familiar with
the Saint's works, do not need to be told that in his own
practice he gave considerable latitude to the meaning of
the word honey. Certainly, we ask for no more bold
and severe mode of presenting Catholic truth, or stronger
or severer language against Protestants, than he was
in the habit of adopting. Even the editor of his con-
troversial works did not deem it advisable to publish
them without softening some of their expressions. In
fact, much of the honey of the saints generally, especially
of such saints as St. Athanasius, St. Hilary of Poitiers
Madag
*
102
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
=
A
and St. Jerome, would taste very much like vinegar, we
suspect, to some of our modern delicate palates."
In discussing the great practical question of salva-
tion, in relation to his own age and country,* Brown-
son asks what are we authorized and bound by our
religion to proclaim to all those of our countrymen
whom our words can reach? Here are the great mass
out of the church, unbelieving and heretical, careless
and indifferent, and it is idle to expect to make any
impression upon them unless we present the question of
the church as a question of life or death, unless we can
succeed in convincing them that if they live and die
where they are they can never see God. Be it that
those without faith, if you will, are only bound to seek
it; it is fair to conclude that if there is one that does
not find, he is one who does not seek, unless we would
impeach the wisdom and veracity of God.
Brownson, in his essay on "The Great Question,"
shows that sectarians and infidels who continue know-
ingly such, are unquestionably lost, and while those
who are such through ignorance, in consequence of
never having heard about the Gospel, may be free from
the sin of infidelity, they are not therefore living mem-
bers of Christ's body and in the way of salvation. There
is no possible excuse for American sectarians. "They
who are brought up in the church, instructed in her
faith, and admitted to her sacraments, if they break
away from her, can be saved only by returning and
doing penance; and all who knowingly resist her
authority, or adhere to heretical or schismatical socie-
ties, knowing them to be such, are in the same category,
* Works, vol. v, p. 527. The Great Question.
NO SALVATION OUT OF THE CHURCH.
103
and have no possible means of salvation without being
reconciled to the church, and loosened by her from the
bonds with which she has bound them. Thus far all is
clear and undeniable. But even they who are in socie-
ties separated from the church, through ignorance,
believing them to be the church of Christ, according to
the authorities adduced, are wounded by sacrilege, a
most grievous sin, are destitute of charity, which cannot
be kept out of the unity of the church, and without
which they are nothing, and therefore, whatever may be
the comparative degree of their sinfulness, are in the
road to perdition, as well as the others, and no more
than the others can be saved without being reconciled
to the church. But these several classes include all our
countrymen not in the church, and therefore, as every
one of these is exposed to the wrath and condemnation
of God, we have the right, and are in duty bound, to
preach to them all, without exception, that unless they
come into the church, and humbly submit to her laws,
and persevere in their love and obedience, they will
inevitably be lost."*
The notion entertained by some writers (who
sought to soften and explain away the definition of a
general council, and therefore an article of faith), and
which they say originated with St. Augustine, in whose
writings I have never found it, and do not believe it can
be found, that one may belong to the soul of the church
without belonging to her visible body, is shown to be
untenable. The church is not a disembodied spirit, nor
She is the church, the living church, only by
the mutual commerce of soul and body. Their separa-
a corpse.
* Works, vol. v., p. 556.
Ĉ
104
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
tion is the death of the church just as much as the
separation of man's soul and body is his. Communion
with the body alone, on the one hand, does not suffice,
and, on the other, to suppose that communion out of the
body and independent of it is to fall into pure spiritual-
ism, simple Quakerism, which tapers off into transcen-
dentalism or mere sentimentalism. Either extreme is
the death of the church which is always to be regarded
as at once and indissolubly soul and body. They are
distinguishable, but not separable.
The distinction of theologians between the soul of
the church and the body of the church has been sadly
misapplied in the vain endeavor to excuse those who are
aliens from the body of the church, and with the result
that might have been foreseen of keeping them such
aliens. As a part of the human body may be dead, or
beyond the informing action of the soul, so may one
apparently, within the visible pale of the church, be cut
off from all communion with the church's vivifying
power; but as no one ever heard of a man's soul giving
life to other bodies or to matter outside of the body sub-
stantially united to the soul, the distinction only limits
the number of those who are in the way of salvation,
instead of extending it. As the only means of union
with the soul of the church is union with the body, out
of the church as the body of Christ there is no salvation.
No doctrine of Catholic faith has been more earnest-
ly insisted on by the Popes for a hundred years past;
and it was in obedience to the Holy Father who ordered
all Bishops throughout the world to maintain it that
the Bishop of Boston desired Brownson to write in its
defence. This he was ready enough to do; for before
NO SALVATION OUT OF THE CHURCH.
105
•
he was a Catholic he had believed it, and never for a
moment supposed that if our Lord established a church
at all, He did not intend that it should embrace all the
elect.
It would violate the whole plan and order of redemp-
tion and salvation in Christ, if we were to suppose sal-
vation possible without regeneration in Christ by the
Holy Ghost.
To be saved we must be spiritually
regenerated in Christ as we were naturally generated in
Adam, so that as the first man, Adam, is our natural
head, so the second man, who is the Lord from heaven,
of
be our spiritual head. We must be born again
may
Christ, so that he may be our father in the order of
grace, as Adam is our father in the order of nature. But
no one can have Christ or God for father who has not
the church for mother, as St. Cyprian with the consen-
sus of all the fathers tells us. The church is the body
of Christ, and inseparable from him; and the very fact
that she is inseparable from him, proves that no one can
be saved by him without her, and whoever is not saved
by him is not saved at all.
An excellent old Puritan lady said to Brownson one
day: "Do tell me why you became a Catholic?"
"Because I did not wish to go to hell," he replied.
"Did
you think you would go to hell if you did not
become a Catholic?"
"Yes, madam; I had no doubt of it."
"What, then, do you think will become of us
Protestants when we die?"
"If you die Protestants, madam, you will go straight
to hell."
"Do you believe that none. but Catholics can be
saved?”
106
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
;
L'
:
"None who do not die Catholics; for out of the
church there is no salvation."
"That is a hard doctrine."
"True, madam, but I did not make it, and am not
answerable for its severity, if severe it is."
"That is very true," said she, "and if you believe
it, you ought to assert it. You would show a great lack
of charity if, believing it, you should seek to conceal it,
or explain it away, and leave us to feel secure when you
believe we are not."
She reasoned justly, and there is no greater cruelty
to those out of the church than for Catholics to concede
directly or indirectly that they are or may be safe where
they are. Certain it is that though many bad Catholics
may be lost, none but Catholics can have any well-
grounded hope of salvation. It is for this reason, and
this reason alone, that we seek to bring all men to Christ
in the church, and are so grieved when any one dies out
of her communion. Every Catholic knows that out of
the church there is no salvation, and the lack of charity
would seem to be in withholding the truth as the church
defines it, and thus cooling the ardor of Catholic zeal
for conversion, and holding out a false hope to those not
Catholics.
The only thing that can conciliate is the truth, and
the only thing, the grace of God moving and assisting,
that can draw men to the church is the assurance that
it is only by believing and obeying her that they can
save their souls. Brownson had not wanted to become
a Catholic; he disliked the very thought of it; but he
believed he had a soul to be lost or saved, and if the
Bishop to whom he went for instruction had told him
NATIVE-AMERICANISM.
107
that it was well, but not necessary to be a Catholic in
order to be saved, a Catholic he had not become, and the
Bishop would have been made to give an account to God
for the loss of his soul.
Much of the anti-Catholic passion in the United
States was organized before Brownson's conversion, in
the year 1844, into the so-called Native-American party.
This party was not, as one should suspect from its
name, a party opposed to the admission of foreigners, as
such, to the rights of citizenship, but to the admission
of Catholics. As the majority of foreign immigrants
were supposed to be Irish, and these were nearly all
Catholics, it was chiefly opposed to the Irish. If an
Irish Protestant settled in the country, he mingled more
with the American people, and little or no opposition
was made to his naturalization. But the Catholic Irish,
because they were Catholics and held religion to be
man's chief concern, sought to settle near each other, in
a neighborhood where a church was, or might be erected,
and where they could receive the benefits of religious
service. Their apparent reluctance or inability to fra-
ternize with their Protestant fellow-citizens; the dread on
the part of native American laborers of competition; the
national English contempt for the Irish, transmitted to
Americans of English decent; American hatred of
Catholicity, and the political ambition of the Whigs,
were sufficient to account for the formation of this very
un-American party. But, besides these was the active
aid of many foreigners. One of the most zealous natives
was the notorious William Hogan, an excommunicated
priest, who advocated Native-Americanism in his lect-
ures in Boston and elsewhere; the Orangemen too did
*
"
is
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
them substantial service in the disgraceful riots, mur-
ders, and sacrileges perpetrated in Philadelphia in May,
1844.
108
Discussing the aim and measures of this party in
Brownson's Review for January, 1845, its editor said.
in reference to Daniel Webster, then a senator from
Massachusetts: "No words of condemnation are suffi-
ciently severe for the political aspirant who would
appeal to it (i. e., to the prejudice against the Irish).
Every friend to his country, every right minded man,
must frown upon it, and brand as an incendiary, as a
public enemy, the demagogue, whether in a caucus
speech in old Faneuil Hall or elsewhere, whether ad-
mired by the whole nation for his transcendent abilities.
or not, who should seek to deepen it, or even to keep it
alive. It is a sad day for the peace and prosperity of
the country, when your Websters and your Archers†
can so far lay aside their senatorial dignity, and so far
belittle themselves, as to appeal to this prejudice; and,
to avail themselves of it for political purposes, raise the
standard of Native-Americanism. The country, human-
ity, have a right to demand something better of these
men; and, if they do not retrace their steps, and atone
for their dereliction of justice and prudence, they will
not only be stripped of their hard-won honors, but sent
down to posterity amid the scorn and hisses of every
man in whose bosom beats an American heart."
Brownson, from the first, had no sympathy with
Native-Americanism. In the Essay just quoted from on
Native-Americanism, he set forth what he regarded as
!
* Works, vol. x, p. 17, Native-Americanism.
+ William S. Archer was U. S. Senator from Virginia.
A
NATIVE-AMERICANISM.
109
the principle and the destiny of this New World, with
which Native-Americanism was directly at war.
"We
have been accustomed," he wrote, "to trace the hand of
a merciful Providence in reserving the New World to so
late a day for Christian civilization; we have been in
the habit of believing that it was not without a provi-
dential design, that here was reserved an open field in
which that civilization, disengaging itself from the vices.
and corruptions mingled with it in the Old World,
might display itself in all its purity, strength, and glory,
and work out for man here on earth a social order which
should give him a foretaste of that blessed social order
to which the good hope to attain hereafter. We have
regarded it as a chosen land, not for one race, or for one
people, but for the wronged and downtrodden of all
nations, tongues, and kindreds, where they might come
as to a holy asylum of peace and charity. It has been
a cause of gratulation, of ardent thankfulness to
Almighty God, that here was founded, as it were, a city
of refuge, to which men might flee from oppression, be
free from the trammels of tyranny, regain their rights
as human beings, and dwell in security. Here all par-
tition walls which make enemies of different races and
nations were to be broken down; all senseless and mis-
chievous distinctions of rank and caste were to be dis-
carded; and every man, no matter where born, in what
language trained, or faith baptized, was to be regarded
as man, as nothing more, as nothing less. Here we
were to found, not a republic of Englishmen, of French-
men, of Dutchmen, of Irishmen, but of men; and to
make the word American mean, not a man born on this
soil or on that, but a free and accepted member of the
grand republic of men.
•
110
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
"The great principle of true Americanism, if we may
use the word, is, that merit makes the man. It discards
all distinctions which are purely accidental, and recog-
nizes only such as are personal. It places every man
on his own two feet, and says to him: Be a man, and
you shall be esteemed according to your worth as a
man; you shall be commended only for your personal
merits; you shall be made to suffer only for your per-
sonal demerits. To each one according to his capacity,
to each capacity according to its works. This is Ameri-
canism. It is this which has been our boast, which has
constituted our country's true glory. It is this which
we have inherited from our fathers; it is this which we
hold as a sacred trust, and must preserve in all its
purity, strength, and activity, if we would not prove
degenerate sons of noble sires; and it is this which
Native-Americanism, so called, opposes,—and because it
opposes this, no true American can support it."
At the same time that Native-Americanism broke
out against Catholics, especially Irish Catholics, a
clamor was raised against the Pope, the authority of the
Pope, allegiance to the Pope, and the intention of the
Pope to possess himself of this country. Some Catholics,
in order to escape the charges brought by Protestants
against the Popes, wished to restrict the papal power as
much as possible, and were disposed to concede far more
&
to Protestant prejudice and cant than was necessary.
Long before Brownson became a Catholic, and when
hardly less prejudiced against the church than were the
majority of Americans, he saw, and stated in his publi-
cations and lectures, that this inveterate hostility, which
for so many ages has been manifested against the
$
ป
THE PAPACY THE SHIELD OF FREEDOM.
111
papacy, proves that it stands in the way of tyrants and
of lawless passion; that it is, in fact, a shield interposed
between the many and the ambitious few, between the
masses and their oppressors. The violence with which
it is assailed is a proof of its utility, as well as of its
divine institution, and should make it as dear to the
statesman as to the Catholic. In their eagerness to con-
tradict the falsehoods propagated about foreign alle-
giance, he would not have Catholics betrayed into state-
ments which would restrict the ecclesiastical or the
papal authority further than the divine constitution of
the church and its free, unimpeded action will permit.
The papal authority, all know, does not extend to civil
matters, save by ordinance and consent of civil govern-
ments themselves; but all matters are so mixed up in
this life, and all here is so subordinated to the great
ends of our existence hereafter, that it is not in all cases
easy to draw the line, nor prudent to be over-particular
in saying where the spiritual authority begins or ends.
Submission in doubtful cases is better than resistance,
and individuals in their haste are full as likely to
encroach on authority as the Pope is to encroach on
liberty. The calamities which have afflicted the church
have all come from the effort to destroy its independ-
ence, to curtail its rightful authority, and to subject it
to the civil power. The complete independence of the
spiritual authority, its freedom from all dependence on
the civil authority, is the motto of every enlightened
friend of religion and of religious liberty.
That the Pope intends to possess himself of this
country is undoubtedly true. He would exterminate
error everywhere, by converting its subjects to the
112
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
-:
=
!
truth. He, as head of the church, does and must labor
incessantly to root out all error and to bring all to the
belief and to the profession of the true faith; but by
moral and spiritual, not physical and carnal force.
When the church, and the Pope as its head, shall have
accomplished this through its moral and spiritual in-
fluences, liberty may be a reality, and democracy not a
delusive dream. "In point of fact," he said, "democ-
racy is a mischievous dream wherever the Catholic
Church does not predominate to inspire the people with
reverence, and to teach and accustom them to obedience
to authority. You can have no government where there
is no obedience; and obedience to law, as it is called,
will not long be enforced where the fallibility of law is
clearly seen and freely admitted, and especially where
the law changes with every year, or is every year in
need of amendment. Reverence for law is in our coun-
try already down to the freezing-point, and threatens to
fall to zero, and lower. Very few of our countrymen
look upon obedience to law as a moral duty. While
such is our moral state, it is idle to talk of civil freedom.
We have already the germs of anarchy, which events
may not be slow to develop and mature. If we love
freedom (since freedom is impossible without a well-
ordered government, without the supremacy of law), we
cannot but seek the predominance of the Catholic
Church, for no other can teach and produce due rever-
ence and obedience."
After defending the Catholic Irish against the
attacks of Native-Americans, and wishing them to
cherish the memory of their native land and to retain
for it the warmest affections of the heart, he asks them
WHEREIN THE IRISH ARE TO BLAME.
((
to remember that they have not brought Ireland with
them to the land of their adoption. He tells them
plainly, but not unkindly, that no small portion of the
hostility against foreigners, and against Catholic Irish-
men in particular, is produced by the forgetfulness of
those who conduct the Irish press in this country; that
native Americans have sensibilities as well as Irishmen;
and those who write books or conduct newspapers should
be careful not to write or say ought gratuitously that
may tend to increase their hostility. "Irishmen in this
country have a double duty," he wrote in April, 1845,
a duty to the country they have left, and a duty to
the country they have adopted. We say not that they
are wanting in their duty to the country of their adop-
tion; but we do say, some of their writers—and we can-
not except our young friend, the author of the work
before us* conducting one of the leading Irish journals
in this country-manifest an unnecessary forgetfulness
of the fact that they are writing for American citizens,
and show occasionally an offensive want of respect for
American feelings. The Irish Americans constitute a
large and an important portion of our population. We
welcome them, and we wish them to find here a home,
a home which they may enjoy in peace and quietness.
We wish no distinction to be made between the native-
born and the foreign-born, between the descendants of
Irish parents and the descendants of English, Scotch,
French, or German parents: and we are confident no
distinction would be made, if our Irish fellow-citizens
did not themselves make it."
113
+
One of the first persons to assist the editor of
* O'Connell and His Friends, by Thomas D. McGee.
<<
#
9
114
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
Brownson's Review by valuable contributions was the
Bishop of Philadelphia. His first article was published
in April, 1846, and called "Christian Ethics." When
transmitting the article, the Bishop wrote:
DEAR SIR:-In compliance with your wishes I
have draughted an article for your Review, which I sub-
mit entirely to your judgment and correction. The
choice of subject was determined by the request of Dr.
Bellinger, of Charleston, that the excerpta of Dens, pub-
lished by Sparry, should be refuted. Unwilling to
encounter a foul adversary, I have chosen this indirect
means of meeting the difficulty, but as the matter is
delicate, as well as dry, I do not press its admission into
your columns. I offer it merely as an evidence of good
will. Wishing you every blessing, I remain,
Your faithful friend,
FRANCIS PATRICK KENRICK,
Bishop of Philadelphia.
Philadelphia, Jan. 13, 1846.
O. A. BROWNSON, Esquire.
In another letter, not dated, but which must have
been a year or two later, the same bishop seems to sug-
gest at the end that he should like to write something
for the Review, yet not to be certain that he is exactly
adapted to writing reviews. The greater part of that
letter refers to the antagonism of his organ, the Catholic
Herald, against Brownson. This is the letter:
DEAR SIR:-The best apology you can make for
neglecting to visit me on your return from the moun-
tain* is to make my house your home whenever you
* Mt. St. Mary's College, near Emmittsburg, Md.
LETTER FROM KENRICK.
115
come to this city, and you may be assured of a hearty
welcome. The part I now take in the C. Herald is
merely to indite some editorial, whilst the selection of
the matter is still in the hands of Mr. Major. At his
repeated solicitation I consented to aid him, with a view
to remedy some things which gave us all pain. It is
not very suitable to my position; but I saw no possi-
bility of securing the gratuitous service of another, or of
restoring the Catholic tone of the paper. The manner
in which your Review was noticed was not the least
objectionable in my opinion, since I always felt deeply
interested in your success, and highly approved your
uncompromising honesty, even when I conceived that
some expressions might bear qualification. You must
fear nothing from any notice I may take of the forth-
coming number, but if anything unfavorable should at
any time appear, you may be sure that it springs from
a different source. Mr. Major does not seem disposed
to write since he got some rebukes from friends, and he
pleads his business engagements. He is greatly to be
pitied. With a young wife and three children he cast
himself on us, and he felt aggrieved when the salary of
professor, which to meet his pressing wants was
granted, was reduced to a small sum, the utmost which
our struggling institution could afford. This seems to
be the secret cause of his embittered feelings, of which
such unhappy evidence has appeared in the Herald.
The paper does not yield what he anticipated when he
contrived to get it out of the hands of Mr. Fithian, for
whom we all felt sympathy. I have forborne complain-
ing, except on a few occasions, and I now hope that his
*
* Professor of Hebrew in the Seminary at Philadelphia,
N
2
116
#
=
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
good feelings will return. Mr. Allen* and his family
continue most fervent. I urged him to write for your
Review, but he found excuses.
I sent an extract from the Pittsburg Catholic con-
taining a long extract from your Review, in defence of
the Jesuits, for publication in the Herald, as an indirect
atonement for the wrong done you. Delicacy towards
him prevented hitherto any amende to the Freeman,†
who is not free from blame in the strife. On the
appearance of your next number, I shall seek the oppor-
tunity of doing you justice. I wish I could write for
you, but my style is too heavy and careless. I had
penned an article, which I submitted to my brother,
without succeeding in obtaining the Imprimatur. The
success of your Review, and your happiness and pros-
perity are dear to my heart. With sincere esteem and
attachment, I remain,
FRANCIS PATRICK KENRICK,
Bishop of Philadelphia.
O. A. BROWNSON, Esq.
After this the Bishop sent several articles of value
to the Review, and remained all his life one of Brown-
son's staunchest friends and supporters. After the
Plenary Council of Baltimore in 1849, he wrote this
letter of encouragement which was subscribed by all
the Bishops who had been at the Council:
DEAR SIR:-After the close of our Council I sug-
gested to our venerable metropolitan the propriety of
* George Allen, born near Burlington, Vt., was one of John H. Hop-
kins's clergymen. He became a Catholic in 1847. He was made a pro-
fessor of Greek in the University of Pennsylvania, and was well known
for his classical, scientific, and artistic attainments.
The N. Y. Freeman's Journal, edited by James A. McMaster.
LETTER FROM THE BISHOPS.
117
our encouraging you by our approbation and influence
to continue your literary labors in defence of the faith,
of which you have proved an able and intrepid advocate.
He received the suggestion most readily, and I take the
liberty of communicating the fact to you, as a mark of
my sincere esteem, and of the deep interest I feel in
your excellent Review. I shall beg of him and the
prelates who entertain the same views to subscribe their
names in confirmation of my statement.
Your very devoted friend,
FRANCIS PATRICK KENRICK,
Bishop of Philadelphia.
Baltimore, 13 May, 1849.
ORESTES A. BROWNSON, Esq.
+ Samuel [Eccleston], Archbishop of Baltimore.
+ Peter Richard [Kenrick], Archbishop of St. Louis.
Michael [Portier], Bishop of Mobile.
† Ant. [Blanc], Bishop of New Orleans.
T
John Joseph [Chanche], Bishop of Natchez.
John [Timon], Bishop of Buffalo.
M. O'Connor, Bishop of Pittsburgh.
Matthew [Loras], Bishop of Dubuque.
+ John M. Odin, Bishop of Galveston.
Martin John [Spalding], Bishop of Langone and
Coadj., Louisville.
M. de St. Palais, Bishop of Vincennes.
+ Wm. Tyler, Bishop of Hartford.
+J. B. Fitzpatrick, Bishop of Boston.
Richard Pius [Miles], Bishop of Nashville.
John Baptist [Purcell], Bishop of Cincinnati.
John Hughes, Bishop of New York.
Z
118
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
,
Li
Richard Vincent [Whelan], Bishop of Richmond.
† James Oliver [Vandevelde], Bishop of Chicago.
+ John M. Henni, Bishop of Milwaukee.
+ John [McCloskey], Bishop of Albany.
† Amedeus [Rappe], Bishop of Cleveland.
+ Peter Paul [Lefevere], Bishop of Zela, Coadj.
Admr., Detroit.
+ Ignatius Al. Reynolds, Bishop of Charleston.
† Andrew Byrne, Bishop of Little Rock.
This letter of the Bishops was doubly encouraging;
for while it assured Brownson of the good will and
approbation of the American hierarchy, its publication
increased the circulation of his Review. The character
of that Review, after its editor's conversion to the faith
was such as to cause a considerable number of its former
subscribers to withdraw their support, as it was not to
be expected of Protestants to continue to take and pay
for a work devoted to a cause against which they pro-
tested. The Review was so decidedly and exclusively
Catholic that it must depend mainly on Catholics for
support; although a much greater number of its Prot-
estant readers than could have been expected still kept
their interest in all its editor published. The number was
not large enough to sustain the Review, without other
assistance. From the first announcement of Brownson's
becoming a Catholic, many of the Catholic Bishops,
regular and secular clergy, and laity not only sent their
subscriptions but also labored to win others to its sup-
port. So much so was this that at the end of the year
1845 Brownson wrote: "The bishops and clergy have,
we believe, very generally approved our labors, and to
their liberal encouragement and support we are deeply
+
[
>
GOOD WILL OF THE CLERGY.
119
indebted. On them we must depend for the success of
the work, and against their wish we should be sorry to
have it succeed, if it could. It is only through them
we can receive or are willing to receive the support of
the Catholic public for any publication.
"We have aimed," he goes on to say of himself,
"to deserve the liberal support we have received; but
we are deeply sensible of the imperfection of our labors,
and are pained to think how far short our Review falls
of what a Catholic review should be. But, novice as we
are in the Catholic faith, we have done the best we
could. We have aimed to be true to the church, and to
be at least sound in the faith. We have not wished to
put forth any crotchets of our own, or to attempt to
improve the doctrines taught us. The Catholic church,
faith, and worship, as they are, always have been, and
always will be to the end of time, is what we have
embraced, what we love, what we seek to defend,—not
relying on our own private judgment, but receiving the
truth in humility from those Almighty God has com-
missioned to teach us, and whom he has commanded us
to obey."
Brownson had aimed to speak freely, frankly,
directly; but he had not aimed to trample on any one's
feelings, or gratuitously to offend the most delicate sen-
sibility. He could not always commend; he was obliged
sometimes to censure; yet not therefore was to censure
more to his taste than to commend. He knew that he
was an enemy to no one, and therefore took it for granted
he would make no enemies. Accustomed as he had
been to writing for Americans, it never entered his head
to suspect the touchiness of the conductors of the Irish
:
120
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
=
11
*
Catholic press in this country, and that the warning to
them just quoted in this chapter would be the occasion
of a hostility to be renewed every three months for the
rest of his life. True, more occasion was given of a like
kind in his review of Father Ventura's Oration on
O'Connell and other articles; in his honest expression
of his opinion of many books sent him for criticisms; and
in his free condemnation of the pusillanimity of Catholics
in one section of the United States; but the passage
referred to was the first of this nature. Not all these
enemies were by any means Irish; for the Majors and
McMasters were as bitter as the McGees. Nor were all
the Irish editors inimical to him; for Dr. Lynch and
Dr. Corcoran, of "The Catholic Miscellany," and one or
two others could dislike an opinion or an expression
without therefore abusing the author.
Some complained that the Review adopted a tone
unbecoming a recent convert and a layman; but with-
out justice. The editor of the Review was indeed a
recent convert and a layman; but he should not be
taken into the account, because the question was not
what it was or was not becoming in him to say, but
what was or was not becoming in a Catholic quarterly
review, and because it was well known that in religious
and theological matters he did not speak from his own
head, but under the revision of one who was neither a
layman nor a convert. Then, again, it was hardly
Catholic to look at the editor rather than at the doctrine
he advanced. If the doctrine was sound, it must be
held, let who will advance it; if unsound, its unsound-
ness was a sufficient reason for not holding it.
* Works, vol. x., p. 69.
!
THE JESUITS.
121
Brownson had never expected to please everybody;
he thought it necessary to discuss several vexed ques-
tions, which he knew could not be discussed without
grieving some worthy people; but the success of his
Review, owing to the interest taken in it by the bishops
and clergy, was greater than he had expected. The
approbation sent from Baltimore, increased that success,
at the same time that it encouraged the editor to con-
tinue to merit that approbation.
CHAPTER V.
THE JESUITS.—CUMMINGS.—HASKINS.—MILES.— M'CAF-
FREY.—RODDAN.-SHANDY M'GUIRE.
THE BISHOP of Boston, to whom Brownson first
applied for instruction in the faith, had been a Jesuit
until he was made a bishop. He founded and gave to
the order the Catholic college near Worcester, to which
Brownson sent his eldest four sons to be educated.
Brownson was frequently a guest at the Bishop's table,
and occasionally at the college. It was impossible to
meet Bishop Fenwick and the fathers at the college,
among whom was the Bishop's brother George, without
entertaining a high esteem for their intellectual culture
and feeling drawn to them by their eminent worth of
character. A Jesuit to Brownson seemed the personifi-
cation of the most exalted Catholic perfection. So much
as he had read of the Society of Jesus in history con-
firmed this opinion, for the lies some have written about
ז
122
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
÷
=
:
them were to him clearly lies; and just as he saw in
the violence with which the papacy was assailed a proof
of its utility, the avowed and secret hostility towards
the society felt or manifested by the advocates of un-
sound and heretical doctrines, or of false notions in
morals and politics, was evidence that the Jesuits had
done service to religion and society..
That the feelings of the Jesuits towards Brownson
were as friendly as his towards them, is attested by all
his intercourse with them in the different cities where
he met them from time to time, as well as by their let-
ters. One of these from the Superior of the Jesuit Mis-
sion may be sufficient to insert here as showing their
sentiments.
ST. MARY'S COLLEGE PAR LEBANON,
Marion County, Ky., 26 Avril, 1846. )
MONSIEUR: J'ai l'honneur de vous envoyer par la
poste deux opuscules, l'un du P. de Ravignan que vous
connaissez, l'autre du P. Cahour. Ce dernier a écrit
comme vous le verrez, pour réfuter MM. Michelet et
Quinet, et il l'a fait avec tous les ménagemens imagin-
ables et peut être avec un peu trop de politesse. Mais
les circonstances, la position de la Compagnie en france,
et le caractère de religieux dans l'auteur faisaieut au
P. Cahour un devoir d' adopter ce genre.
Veuillez, je vous prie, Monsieur, accepter ce petit
présent; je vous l'offre avec d'antaut plus de plaisir
que j'ai quelque espoir qu'il ne vous sera peut être pas
entièrement inutile pour le travail que vous annoncez à
la fin de votre excellent article sur l'histoire des Jésuites
par Mr. Crétineau-Joly.
Arrivé depuis peu de temps en Amérique et quoique
encore assez peu avancé dans la langue anglaise, je puis
1
".
LETTER FROM BOULANGER.
123
cependant déjà lire votre intéressante et si franchement
Catholique Revue. Dieu l'a déjà bénite, et nous le
prierons tous les jours de répandre de plus en plus ses
bénédictions sur l'auteur et sur ses travaux.
Il y a
peu de jours un avocat Protestant des envirous s'est
présenté ici à l'un de nos Pères: il lit votre Revue;
elle l'a éclairé, convaincu et determiné à rentrer avec
sa Dame, et très probablement d'autres membres de sa
famille, dans le sein de l' Eglise. Combien d'autres
pour la conversion desquels Dieu se sera servi de vos
écrits? Courage donc, Monsieur, et confiance, et Dieu
continuera à travailler avec vous et à vous soutenir !
Nous travaillerons de notre coté à faire connaitre et à
répandre votre excellent ouvrage, autant qu' il sera en
notre pouvoir.
•
Ayez, je vous prie, Monsieur, la bonté de ne pas
envoyer votre prachain No. de la Revue à St. Mary's
College, Ky., mais au R. P. Murphy ou à R. P. Thé-
baud au College de Rose-Hill, près de New York. Les
deux PP. y sont déjà depuis quelques jours, et nous
nous y rendrons tous dans le courant des mois de Juillet
et d'Aôut. Vous avez probablement appris que nous
nous disposons à quitter le Ky. pour nous charger du
collège de Mgr. Hughes à Rose-Hill.
Nous serions tous heureux, Monsieur, de vous y
recevoir si vos affaires vous permettroient de faire cette
petite course lorsque vous viendrez à N. Y.
Agréez les sentimens pleins d' estime et d'affec-
tion avec lesquels j'ai l'honneur d'être, Monsieur, votre
très humble et très obéissant serviteur.
C. BOULANGER, S. J.
MONSIEUR BROWNSON,
Rédacteur de la Quarterly Review.
1
124
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
Shortly before Father Boulanger wrote, Brownson
had defended the Jesuits in his Review, and not long
after he received Father Cahour's work he published a
review of it by a competent contributor. When the
Jesuits were driven from Rome in 1848, Brownson refer-
red to their expulsion in his Review, saying among
other things, "We cannot close this number of our
Review without expressing our indignation at the
expulsion of the Jesuits from Rome and other Italian
states, by the pretended friends of liberty and popular
institutions. Many people suppose that the Order has
been suppressed, in Rome, by the the papal authority;
but this is a mistake. The Holy Father simply advised
or requested them to withdraw to a place of greater
security, because he felt he should be unable to protect
them from the fury of the mob. Nothing, as far as we
have seen, has occurred to indicate the least unfriendli-
ness on the part of the Holy Father towards the Jesuits,
or the least want of confidence in them; but many acts
and words of his go to show that he holds the Order in
high esteem, and its members in warm affection. The
expulsion has not been the work of the papal authority,
nor has it been effected by the wishes of the friends of
religion and the church. It has been the work of radi-
cals and liberals,—a class of men inherently hostile, in
every part of the globe, to every man who places relig-
ion above politics, the spiritual power above the temporal,
order above anarchy, liberty above despotism, the state
above the mob.
"These Italian liberals show us, by their persecu-
tion of the Jesuits, what sort of men they are, the nature
of that liberty they are contending for, and what human-
THE JESUITS EXPELLED FROM ROME.
125
And further
ity has to expect from their movements."
on: "Who gave them the right to make war on peace-
able men, devoted to religion? What right have they
to freedom, which the Jesuit has not also."*
Father Thébaud, of St. John's College, Fordham,
formerly called Rose-Hill, thanked the writer for his
words in this way:
ST. JOHN'S COLLEGE, July 7th, 1848.
DEAR SIR AND DEAREST FRIEND :-I have just
received the July number of your Review, and I hope
you will allow me to thank you warmly for the short
article "on the expulsion of the Jesuits from Italy."
Thank God! there are men yet who feel and dare to
speak. We cannot but pray for our enemies; but we
rejoice to see the mask taken from the face of the ene-
mies of the church, of those who attack her through us.
"We have men amongst us-men passing for
Catholics even "--who do not see what you see and ex-
press so warmly; may they open their eyes before it is
too late.
In the name of all my brethren, of the Italian
Fathers and Brothers chiefly, I tender you my most
heartfelt gratitude. We have nothing to give you in
return but our prayers. God never turns from the
afflicted who pray to him. Yes, may God bless you and
preserve you yet a long time to defend his church.
Your sincerely devoted in Christ.
AUG. J. THÉBAUD, S. J.
O. A. BROWNSON, Esq.
This same July number of the Review contained an
*Brownson's Quarterly Review, July, 1848, p. 415.
126
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
article published in Rome by the Jesuit Father Tapa-
relli, which Dr. Cummings was so pleased with that he
proposed translating it for Brownson. In transmitting
it he sent the following very interesting letter:
BISHOP'S HOUSE, NEW YORK, May 23rd.
MY DEAR MR. BROWNSON:-Herewith I send you
.F. Taparelli's Dissertation on Prayer. I think my
translation pretty good, considering the difficulties I
had to overcome. The Dissertation I admire much. It
is eminently suggestive, and some of the thoughts are
new in their form. Perhaps some little touch here and
and there may not exactly suit you, but it is generally
very much in your line. It gives it pretty strong to
the heretics, whom you will remark it addresses by their
proper name.
If you
I have not added one syllable of my own.
should wish to make any remarks upon it, perhaps it
will be well. F. Taparelli was formerly Rector of the
Roman College, then Professor of Philosophy at Pa-
lermo. He is known for his philosophical writings in
Italy. He is an elder brother of the Marquis D'Azeglio
now commander of the National Guards in Rome, and a
distinguished author. Dr. Manahan will tell you all
about the Academia di Religion Cattolica, and the
Annals of Science and Religion. The number from
which I have translated the Dissertation contains an
article from the Boston Quarterly Review done into
Italian with editorial remarks laudatory in the highest
degree of said Boston Quarterly and Signor Brownson.
By the bye, if the friends of Pius IX do not carry him
out of Rome, as some folks fear, I intend to get another
proof that the doings of that same Quarterly are not
་
·
LETTER FROM CUMMINGS.
127
ignored in the Eternal City. They would have no
objection to present you with the cap of a Doctor of
Philosophy, a thing which you could only care about as
going to show that your sincerity and earnestness is
approved of there. It would bring also partially into
examination the Articles on Developmentism.
I have heard Mr. McMaster casually remark that
he expected an answer from you to a letter he addressed
to you not long since. His retirement from the Journal
was entirely spontaneous, and in all points fair and
honorable. I must say that I was sorry for it, for it
will be the death of that paper. But he could scarcely
have acted differently if he wished to be anything but
scissors-man. Mr. Bayley retired at the same time.
The paper is now conducted by John C. Devereux, a
young man of excellent intentions, but not possessed of
the strength necessary to keep up the reputation it
gained last summer. I can say of my own knowledge
that several of the leading periodicals in this city would
be very glad to have McMaster's pen enlisted in their
service.
I remain, dear sir, your sincere friend,
J. W. CUMMINGS,
St. Patrick's Cathedral, N. Y.
After Bishop McCloskey was transferred to Albany
in May, 1847, Brownson's annual lecturing visits to
New York were looked after principally by Cummings.
This in every instance involves some labor and respon-
sibility, but with Brownson the labor was considerably
augmented by his habitual carelessness and procrastina-
tion in matters of business. He was not always prompt
i
128
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
•
!!!
J
#
in answering letters, and when he was, his answer was
sometimes delayed in consequence of his distance from
the postoffice or of the mean service of that office in
Chelsea. Here are two letters from McCloskey, the
first of which shows what annoyance was given from
these causes.
"NEW YORK, Feb'y 21, 1846.
"MY DEAR SIR :-I am sadly puzzled to account for
our not yet seeing you in New York. We expected
you
here to lecture last evening. The Tabernacle was en-
gaged, notices given, tickets sold, etc.—but the storm
obliged us to announce a postponement-little dreaming
that there would be any disappointment as to your
arrival and our fixing with you another day. I wrote
to you about the 10th or 11th inst., to apprize you of all
our arrangements. Can it be that my letter was not
received? You were duly announced in the Freeman's
Journal and Truth Teller, which I presumed you were
in the habit of seeing.
"Now we know not what to say or do. Could you
make it convenient to come for some evening in the first
week of March? We could have the Tabernacle next
Thursday-but this would not allow us time to hear
from you, and give proper notice. Hundreds have
already purchased their tickets, and it would be a great
pity to disappoint them a second time. Write immedi-
ately."
The second indicates some of the difficulties and
perplexities connected with lecture arrangements in New
York.
LETTER FROM M'CLOSKEY.
129
M
NEW YORK, Feb'y 4, 1847.
O. A. BROWNSON, Esq.
DEAR SIR-I sent you a message by the telegraph
on Monday last, and not having as yet received any
answer, I take it for granted that the message has not
reached you.
Its object was to inform you that we have
discovered, to our great regret, that there will be so
many appeals in different ways to the Catholic people
next week, that it will be a most unfavorable time for
your lecture. There will be on one evening a ladies'
festival for the poor, on another a grand ball (a la New
York) for the suffering people of Ireland, and on another
a concert for the Half-Orphan Asylum-so that it will
be quite impossible to squeeze in your lecture, these
having taken prior possession. We have thought it
best to defer it until Thursday or Friday, 18th or 19th
inst. I hope one or other of these evenings will suit
you. Please answer without delay, and direct to Bishop
Hughes' box-in that way I shall receive it sooner. The
subject Bishop H. prefers is "the Revolutionary Spirit
of the Age."
10
With great esteem, I am, very truly in Xt.,
+ JOHN MCCLoskey,
Bishop, etc.
Dr. Cummings's first management of a lecture by
Brownson was of one delivered in February, 1848. He
attended to all the business details, including the collec-
tion and disbursement of money. The subject and its
divisions were announced in a letter to Cummings as
follows:
130
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
E
>
-=-=
BOSTON, Jan. 22, 1848.
REV. DR. CUMMINGS.
DEAR SIR-I sent you yesterday a telegraphic
dispatch saying that I would lecture on the 1st proximo.
Mr. McMaster and Dr. Manahan told me that you your-
self spoke of more than one lecture, but I thought one
would be as much as you would bear. However, as I
have given up my intention of visiting the western part
of the state, the matter is at your discretion, though I
still think one will be enough.
The subject I named was, "The necessity, means,
and prospects of the political and social regeneration of
Europe," which I can easily compress into one lecture
or expand into three. My purpose in treating the sub-
ject will be to distinguish between the assertion of the
necessity of reform in Europe and the assertion of the
modern doctrine of progress, and to show that the Re-
form has become necessary, not in consequence of the
progress of European society, but of the changes which
have taken place in the political order which formerly
obtained. This might make one lecture. The second
point will be to show that the Reform cannot be effected
without the agency of a divinely constituted power,
taking the lead, and moulding the existing chaotic ele-
ments into order, that is, the church. The third will be
to show that in the policy and movements of Pius IX,
there is an indication that the work is already com-
menced. These two points may be discussed in one
lecture each, or in a single lecture. The subject is
copious enough for three lectures; it may also be con-
*The word telegram, now found to be a convenient abbreviation, was
not used till six or eight years later, when it was first proposed, if my
memory is correct, by the N. Y. Herald.
1
LETTER TO CUMMINGS.
131
densed into two, and even into one. My preference
would be to give it in one, but make such arrange-
ment as you please. I can spare a week or ten days,
if necessary, providing you keep your promise, and
furnish me the article for my next number, and make
Dr. Manahan keep his promise, for both of which I
rely on you implicity, and without any shadow of mis-
giving. Do not, however, suppose because I have spoken
of two or three lectures, arrangements must be made for
them, or my feelings will be hurt; for I really prefer to
give only one.
Many thanks for the kind notice of my Review in
the Journal. There is an expression in it, however,
with which I am disposed to quarrel. The writer inti-
mates that Fourierism in the church might realize some
of its benefits. I do not quarrel with the thought, but
Fourierism is fundamentally opposed to the church, and
in any sense in which it could be in the church, save
as a heresy, it would not be Fourierism. But this, per-
haps, is hypercriticism.
Will you be so obliging as to write me what arrange-
ments are made as to the number of lectures, and believe
me with sincere respect, yours truly,
O. A. BROWNSON.
have the hand-
P. S.—Take care and not let L
ling of the proceeds of the lecture.
In transmitting his cheque for the proceeds of the
lecture, on April 14th, Cummings says: "I had no
idea that this money had been held back so long, and
only learned it through McMaster. I proceeded immedi-
ately to stir up our friends with efficacy usually personi-
fied in 'a long pole.'
!
ז'
|
1
132
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
"Next year, please God, things will have another
appearance. I needed the experience of one year to
learn how to direct the matter."
From this time on Cummings took charge of
Brownson's lecture arrangements, and he was a frequent
contributer to his Review. It was often complained of
in Brownson that he was lacking in policy, and no
doubt he was in the habit of plain speaking; but Cum-
mings was more so, and some of the most violent attacks
on the editor and his Review were occasioned by unpal-
atable truths plainly stated by Cummings. But he was
always sound in doctrine, vigorous in expression, and
his topics were seasonable. His peculiarities are quite
transparent in the letter which follows.
BISHOP'S HOUSE, NEW YORK, Sept. 1st.
DEAR FRIEND:-I owe you an apology for not
sending, or for not having sent my article for the Octo-
ber number of "Brownson." Ergo I apologize juxta
præmissa. ... Expect in about two weeks from date
what I am now concocting. I have been so very busy
with my new church, my dear Mr. Brownson, that the
time has passed like a dream. I propose to head
my article with the title page of Professor Palma's Eccle-
siastical History. The gist of the article will be an
exposé of the present state of that study, or rather
science. It will talk about the readers, and the writers
of Church History, and lay down some Brownsonian
principles in regard to them. Perhaps, without naming
him, there will be a gentle rap upon the venerable
knuckles of the author of the "Primacy of the Apostolic
See." The importance of Ecclesiastical, and especially
papal History, will be alluded to, and I would not make
F
4
LETTER FROM CUMMINGS.
133
+
affidavit that there will not be a very gentle insinuation
to the effect that it may be within the bounds of possi-
bility that the Apostolic See does not need to be patron-
ized, and apologized for by the sweet Catholic essayist.
The article might even venture so far as to bring in
some very gentle expressions, amounting to the state-
ment that the Apostolic See is infallible, and capable of
defending itself. The article will aim at influencing
the minds especially of clerical students and their system
of studies.
I would like to know what Father Brownson thinks
of my Lecture on Law. Several of the papers have
commented upon it. The Literary World devoted some
columns to it, the Catholic Magazine copied it, the
Catholic Herald (God save the mark) said it was not bad,
the New York Nation abused it horribly, the New York
Tribune positively refused even to mention it, the editor
of the American Review accepted it whole and entire,
the Freeman's Journal copied it, and the Boston Obser-
ver, the great uncompromising defender of fearless
Catholic principles, treated it just as it did my lecture
on "The Temporal Power of the Popes," i. e., passed it
over in silence. Is it that I am for the second time not
strong enough in defending Religion against Infidel
Protestants and Infidel Catholics? or is it that I am too
strong, and that the Observer having gone into cold
water and Father Matthewism cannot swallow me?
Be it as it may, I shall never abate one tittle of my
zeal in favor of "Old Brownson," as many of the New
York priests affectionately call you. My lecture on
Law asserted nothing that had not been previously ad-
vanced by St. Thomas and the "Review." The "Nation"
+
!
1
IT
134
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
=
.
says I am a bold man. Very well.
Very well. I was educated
theologically by Palma and Graziosi, and I know that
there is nothing in your Review they would not endorse,
and nothing in it unlike the spirit which it was their
dearest object to infuse into me and my fellow students.
If you will not stand by what little I may have occasion
to say in public and to print, then I will conclude that
I am to have no friendly readers at all. God bless you.
Believe me yours truly,
J. W. CUMMINGS.
Don't fail to read a lecture to the Herald (of Phila-
delphia) for its remarks upon developmentism. Oh tem-
pora, Oh mores !
Brownson's answer to Cummings is here given :
BOSTON, Sept. 5, 1849.
REV. J. W. CUMMINGS, D. D.
REV. AND DEAR SIR:-I thank you with all my
heart for your frank and whole-souled letter. I have
read your Lecture on Law, I need not tell you, with
the greatest pleasure. I like it hugely, and I have not
the least fault to find with it. It is bold and manly in
manner, strong and vivid in expression, and sound in
doctrine. It was much needed and will do great good.
For myself, my heart exulted as I read it, and I thanked
God that there was one among our Doctors who not only
perceives but dares tell, without any mincing of matters,
the truth which just now needs to be told, nay, continu-
ally repeated. I shall give a brief notice of it in my
forthcoming Review, although nobody can doubt what
my opinion of it must be. By the bye, you tell those
reverend Fathers who call me "Old Brownson," that I
#
LETTER TO CUMMINGS.
135
am not yet 46, that is to say, not yet in the prime of
life, and I cannot apply to myself “Wisdom is the gray
hair, and an unspotted life is old age." Pray, tell them
that I am not old, and not to call me so, unless they
wish me to call them young and verdant, if you will
forgive the apparent disrespect my saying so implies.
I do not know why they call me old, when I am not yet.
five
years of age, and shall not be till the twentieth of
next month, on which day* if you will say a pater or an
ave for me, I will hold it a great charity.
I like the account you give me of the article you
are preparing for the Review. It is just what is wanted,
and as your theology is sure to be sound, you need not
fear that your hints will alarm me. I might fear to say
all myself that should be said, for I am a layman, but I
will publish willingly what a Doctor of Divinity,—that
is, a Roman Doctor, will write on the topics you men-
tion. But I am sorry to say that I cannot publish your
article till January,—the last article, except the Literary
Notices for the October number, was sent to the print-
ers before the reception of your letter. The next num-
ber will be all the work of the editor; but I hope a
passable number. The last article I would have omitted,
but it was one that would not keep as yours will. I
shall have for the January number an article from Miles
and that and yours will relieve me, and give me time to
do something for my book, which I am writing.
I feel, Dr. Cummings, your kindness in writing for
my Review, and regret that I have nothing to offer
in return, but my thanks. Nevertheless, I know you
you
* The fifth anniversary of his reception into the church.
"The Licentiousness of the Press," Works, vol. xvi., p. 133.
Longfellow's Evangeline and Kavanagh.'
""
¡
!
1
136
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
know where to look for your reward. Articles like the
one you are preparing are very much needed, and I
have not the requisite learning to write them. I have
felt more than ever their necessity in reading the works
of the late Bishop England. These works have a vigor
and freshness that we do not find in the Primacy, but in
many respects they are worse. I can conceive nothing,
not absolutely heretical, worse than some portions of
them, and regret their republication. Gallicanism and
Latitudinarianism of the very worst sort are all pervad
ing, combined either with blarney or vituperation. If I
had had them before my eyes, and had directed my Re-
view expressly against the policy adopted by the Bishop,
I could hardly have done anything different from what
I have done. The difference between the Review and
the Works is as great as the difference between two
Catholics possibly can be. Yet the Bishops have virtu-
ally approved the Review.
How is my friend Mac? He certainly must have
taken some miff at me or my last number, for he
neglected to notice it in his usual manner. I hope he is
prospering, and that the Journal survives its temporary
difficulties; it is our best Catholic journal, and I have
liked it latterly better than ever.
The Observer and I are strangers. Mr. O'Brien, as
good a soul as ever lived, a man one must quarrel with
every day, and yet love with all his heart, has no edi-
torial tact. It never entered his mind that it would be
only proper to notice the Lecture on Law, or if it did, it
went out the next moment. But I am sure that his
neglect proceeded from no want of respect and affection
for the author, or dissatisfaction with the lecture, which
1
137
it is altogether likely he has never read. I doubt if he
has read more than two articles in my Review for as
many years. He probably saw the lecture, saw who it
was from, said to himself,—all straight, and being in a
hurry, sent it to the printers, and thought no more
about it. Do not, therefore, wax wroth against him.
You do not tell me how you prosper with your new
church.* Have you got it nearly completed? When I
wrote you last, I have a suspicion that I was half out of
sorts. Matters have not gone much better with me
since; but when one's revenues diminish one must
diminish one's expenses, and I trust I shall, through
diminished expenses, be gradually able to recover from
my embarrassments.
HE INVITES CONTRIBUTIONS.
Let me have your article before the middle of Octo-
ber, for I want to insert it as the first article in the new
volume.
Forgive my long rambling letter, and believe me,
yours with sincere respect and affection,
O. A. BROWNSON.
The desire to give greater variety to the readers of
his Review induced Brownson to invite a considerable
number of his friends to contribute something to its
pages, rather than that he was not willing and able to
write the whole number himself every three months,
and neither the manual labor of writing nor the mental
exercise of composing seemed ever to fatigue him. Once
he returned home from lecturing after the first of March,
with nothing written for the next number, and without
assistance he wrote the whole April number in time to
*St. Stephen's Church, 28th street, New York.
+ He had just lost about $300 by his agent in Philadelphia, and $500 for
the Catholic Observer.
}
138
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
have it printed and sent out several days before the end
of March, and the number was more than usually
praised by the journals. Many of his writings, how-
ever, were more studied than any one would suspect.
There are many of his articles that he began over and
over again, sometimes writing a few pages, and some-
times a great many, and then throwing them aside and
starting over again. Frequently, too, the whole essay
was rewritten from beginning to end. Such are found
among his papers written at every period of his age,
down to the very last. The only bodily exertion that
never seemed to fatigue him was that of writing, until
his hands and eyes began to give out. It was, then,
from no wish to gain relief, but solely to render his
Review more attractive and more useful that he sought
out every one who was likely to help on that work.
These generous fellow-workers are no longer living,
with the exception of the reverend Clarence A. Wal-
worth and one other not worth naming; for his contribu-
tions were of so little value that only natural affection
could have deemed them worthy of admission into
Brownson's Review.
Partly to preserve from oblivion those whom Brown-
son looked on as his friends, and partly because their
individuality had more or less bearing on his life, letters
from some of these are inserted in this work. In the
year 1848, the period which we have just been consider-
ing, Brownson was pleased with a lecture on the Albi-
gensian heretics by the reverend George F. Haskins, the
venerated founder of the House of the Angel Guardian
in Boston, and desired it for the Review. It is published
in the October number for 1848. Haskins wrote:
LETTER FROM HASKINS.
139
BOSTON, May 23rd, 1848.
DR. O. A. BROWNSON.
MY DEAR SIR:-In looking over the lecture again,
I am more than ever of my former opinion that it is
not worthy of publication in a periodical like your Re-
view. It might make a good series of articles for a
newspaper, and I think it would. If you will take the
trouble to look it over, you will see that it reads very
differently from what it sounded when delivered. Be-
sides, after all, it is a mere compilation, and not the
most skilful one either. The style, too, I preceive is
harsh and often out of joint, and in many places appears
more like a bungling translation than like an original
composition. The conclusion strikes me as stiff, awk-
ward, and far-fetched, as though the writer was at a
non-plus to find something to finish off with. It is for
these reasons that I do not feel courage to undertake
the task of making it what it ought to be, for I am sure
I should fail, and perhaps be in a worse pickle than be-
fore.
1
Still you are welcome to it or to any information it
contains (and there certainly is a good deal picked up
from many sources) if you feel disposed to make an
article or cause one to be made upon the subject of the
Albigenses. One important point was neglected in the
lecture, and that was a description of the person, char-
acter, and prowess of Simon de Montfort-that might
make a good conclusion for the article.
Most sincerely sir, your friend,
7.
GEO. F. HASKINS.
The first article contributed by George H. Miles to
the Review was on the subject of Mt. St. Mary's Col-
J
:
÷
:
#
140
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
1
lege. In a conversation with the president of that
school and Miles, who were in Boston in the summer of
1848, Brownson proposed to the latter to prepare such
article. As several months passed without his doing so,
Brownson referred to it in a letter to the president,
whose reply is pretty long, but contains much interest-
ing matter.
MT. ST. MARY'S COLLEGE, Dec. 15th, 1848.
O. A. BROWNSON, Esq.
DEAR SIR:—I thank you for your most acceptable
letter, for wishing earnestly to keep up an acquaintance
which I have found both pleasant and profitable, I still
needed encouragement to begin an epistolary corre-
spondence. I have already written to Miles to remind
him of his promise and urge him to keep it.
You have no doubt learned from the newspapers
the success of his first effort as a dramatic poet. He has
beaten all competition and won a thousand dollars,
which Forrest honestly paid him. None of the tragedies
offered obtained the first prize of three thousand dollars,
because none was suited to actual representation. The
second prize was awarded to George because his Moham-
med was the best dramatic poem. I explain this because
many of the public journals announce it, as if some one
else had won the first, and Miles only the second prize.
I read his Mohammed last May, and felt perfectly sure
that no writer this side of the Atlantic could equal it as
a poem. The young poet will not be tempted from his
profession as a lawyer. His literary laurels, at this early
stage of his career, may bring him into notice and draw
business to his office. He can write verse better than
prose.
He is "of imagination all compact." Still, I
LETTER FROM M'CAFFREY.
141 ·
think he can aid you materially and, if I can make him
help you, you shall not want his help.
You have to knock under to me as a political
prophet. Moreover, I won a dozen cigars from my
brother, on the bet that Pennsylvania would give Taylor
five thousand more votes than Cass. I found all our
clergy from Boston to Emmitsburg wrong in their poli-
tics, except Father McElroy. He was wrong four
years before, but I'm never wrong, therefore, I will
venture another prediction. If the Whig party forget
that General Taylor elected their ticket—if they imagine
that they elected Taylor, they are doomed four years
hence to a more hopeless defeat than they have ever yet
sustained. They have succeeded in spite of themselves,
and unless their president shall rule them with the iron
will of Andrew Jackson, they will share the fate for
evermore of the old Federalist party. Let them attempt
to restore the bank or raise the tariff and they fall from
power to rise no more. The veto power will sustain
itself the people at large have no objection to it.
Neither the iron interest nor any other business interest
ruled the vote of Pennsylvania. The Dutch blood
warmed to the old hero, as it warmed before to Jackson,
and even to Harrison. Then I am told the Quakers all
voted for Taylor as the representative of a pacific foreign
policy. The shameful injustice and pitiful blundering
of the present government in regard to Mexico called
for a rebuke, and having lately got through Mr. Polk's
*
* McElroy had been with the army in Mexico as a chaplain, and his
political foresight may have resulted from his desire for the success of his
former commander.
In 1852 the electoral vote was 42 Whig to 254 Democratic; the popular
vote was 1,601,474 D., and 1,386,578 W.
142
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
message, I would add that a change of dynasty was
needed, if only to shorten the public documents.
I'm afraid that, touch the Irish as you will, unless
you tickle their vanity, you will stir a hornet's nest. I
am altogether Irish, "barring that I wasn't born in my
native country." Their nationality is intense, touchy,
suspicious, unreasoning, morbid-as irritable and as
easily hurt as a patient in inflammatory rheumatism.
Their devotion to their religion and its clergy deserves
all praise. And they have many other redeeming qual-
ities, as you know. The purity of their women is de-
servedly proverbial. An Irish woman, cultivated and
refined, when truly religious, is the most glorious being
in human form, pure and fervent as an angel, merry as
a bird, and all heart and soul, of untiring activity and
boundless charity.
Bishop Hughes and Bishop O'Connor, perhaps also
my old preceptor Bishop Purcell, would join you (I
should think) in an effort to save their countrymen from
demagogues and their own folly. I will tell
mind after I have read your article.*
you all my
Perhaps we Americans, as a body, are just as wed-
ded to our peculiar follies as the Irish, with this differ-
ence only, that as a prosperous and conquering nation,
we never feel that rankling sense of oppression and in-
justice, which is at once the torment and consolation of
the Irishman in all cases whatsoever, whether you smile
at his brogue or starve him for the support of luxury.
At all events, when you denounce democracy and trace
its origin to the devil, I suspect you will find that you
have raised the devil in earnest.
Shandy McGuire. Works, vol. xvi., p. 144.
LETTER FROM M'CAFFREY.
143
#
I have read your socialistic views at the time you
edited the Boston Quarterly Review. It seems to me
that you never were a true Socialist, Fourierist, or what-
ever the theory is called. You had strong, ill-regulated
feelings—the ignis fatuus shone bright and beautiful to
your eyes—you ran after it in hot haste, fancying it was
the saving truth and shouting spyza; but you could not
sp720;
long remain in such a mire, dazzled by such glimmer-
ing lights,-mere exhalations of a fallen, dead, corrupt
humanity; and you were all the while looking for better
things. You were struggling upwards and admitting
new rays of truth into a darkened mind, but one in
which God saw and into which he inspired some will-
ingness to receive the light of Heaven.
•
-
I have also read your refutation of Fourierism and
have wished that you should again take up the subject
and discuss it much more thoroughly. You have per-
fectly satisfied the Logician, that the fundamental and
all-pervading principle of the system is anti-Christian,
therefore false, impious and baleful, but the popular mind
—and indeed the great majority of your readers need an
exposure of the parts as well as of the whole. We all
need instruction, which you can give us. The ablest
opponents of pagan errors and apologists of primitive
Christianity were often converted pagans. St. Augus-
tine as a Theologian derived profit from his early wan-
derings among the mazes of heresy. It strikes me, that
the cry for social reform, for "la république sociale,"
shows among other things a sense of the utter inability
of political institutions to make men happy-shows
what you seem once to have felt-a yearning after the
church. I do not speak of the leaders, the philosophers
F
Jala
•
I
:
:
!
144
|
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
of the movement, but of the crowd, who know their
misery and want a remedy. Socialism has come forth
at the devil's bidding to turn their eyes away from the
fountains of life and lure them to perdition.
What a commentary on Socialism the indisputable
fact that the closer men are crowded together, the more
corrupt they become, unless the "salt of the earth” be
there to prevent putrefaction—and alas, with it, they are
bad enough! Vices are much more contagious than
virtues. Even religious communities are but too apt to
degenerate.
I long to see you handling the thesis: "No moral-
ity without the infallible church." Protestant infidelity,
or any other modern infidelity, is worse than the old
pagan infidelity, inasmuch as the former confronts the
truth of God and denies it, the latter had lost it in the
natural progress of man's corruption and degradation.
Yet he who in Terence's Heauton timoroumenos drew
thunders of applause by his "Homo sum, humani nihil
a me alienum puto," had exposed his infant child, whose
accidental preservation and discovery forms part of the
plot and interest of the play. Infanticide was a thing of
course among Greeks and Romans, as I believe it is
among the Chinese, and it is becoming common with
us. Madame Restell escapes any real punishment. In
England they have found it necessary to hang such a
woman, according to late papers. Other crimes too hor-
rible to name are on the increase. Chastity is not a
Protestant virtue-vide Laing and parliamentary reports
on the rural districts of England. What but the moral
teaching of the church, the priesthood, the confessional,
can save the world from a lower depth than the lowest
LETTER FROM M'CAFFREY.
145
+
reached by paganism? Your Channings and Parkers
are poor successors to Plato and Socrates. Yet among
the old heathens the people believed, while the philoso-
phers doubted and disputed. Deity, immortality, future
rewards and punishments were sentiments or convictions
with the people-they were questions for the philoso-
phers. Our whole system of mercantile business is one
of fraud-all candid merchants will acknowledge it.
Custom-house oaths are proverbial. Doctors murder the
unborn infant. Lawyers plead any case and use any
plea. All things are fair in politics. Governments
must sustain themselves by falsehood and crime. Jurors
swear to try a man according to the law and facts, and
yet decide against both, from conscientious scruples.
The world is flooded with demoralizing books. Parental
authority is almost extinct. Opinion governs all. "Woe
to the world, I pray not for the world-the world is.
altogether seated in iniquity." Yet men's consciences
must be regulated either by a God-established church or
a godless world.
My object in boring you with these scraps of specu-
lation is to set your mind agoing in a particular direc-
tion. You need not, however, and I guess you will not,
be much influenced by my fancies. Every one to his
own hobby.
I am considered a thorough Brownsonian; but I
have noticed that even those, who always find you ultra,
grow less cautious and timid in upholding the truth
by reading your Review. I find fault sometimes with a
phrase, but not with your views and spirit. Did you
not say in your last number: "The church abhors mixed
11
146
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
:
Tw
marriages?" I think the phrase too strong. I con-
demn you out and out for the phrase "to go for a meas-
ure," or a principle, or something of the kind. . “I go
for Taylor," or "I go for the greatest good of the great-
est number," is political slang. I find it glorious sport
to criticise the critic, review the reviewer. Let me only
catch you in a logical fallacy or a clear heresy, and you'll
see how I'll crow over you.
I pray you remember me to your good Bishop and
the warm hearted clergy around him, whose genial hos-
pitality and extraordinary kindness I will never forget.
I wish they would give me an opportunity to repay it.
A metaphysical article, not too abstruse, would
have interest for some of your readers. A true science
of Philosophy is all important for us and you can com-
mand the respectful attention even of Protestants to
such discussions.
1
If I have tired your patience, you invited the inflic-
tion. So I offer no excuse, but beg you to believe me,
with great respect and esteem, truly your friend,
JOHN MCCAFFREY.
McCaffrey having written to Miles, as he says at
the beginning of the letter just given, the latter lost no
time in preparing his article, and wrote at once to
Brownson.
O. A. BROWNSON, Esq., Boston:
MY DEAR SIR:-Yesterday morning I had a letter
from my Godfather, the Rev. John McCaffrey, remind-
ing me of a promise I made you in the summer, which,
* Brownson said: "The church abhors mixed marriages, and if she
sometimes tolerates them in order to avoid a greater evil, she refuses them
her benediction. She never ceases to admonish her children to avoid
them." Works, vol. xix,, p. 257. I call that sound Catholic doctrine.
MT. ST. MARY'S COLLEGE.
147
like most promises, has never been fulfilled. When
you asked me for an account of the Mountain, I thought
you did it chiefly in compliment to the President; and
when you asked me to contribute to your Quarterly, I
felt that it was a privilege conferred on me, and not a
favor asked from me. I went to Cape May and con-
sumed the summer in recruiting my health; in the fall
I launched into the Taylor campaign. In the intervals I
had to labor to keep myself alive. I am more independ-
ent now, and will work for you as I would work for my
Godfather himself. If you find my manuscript accept-
able, the compliment will be the greatest that has ever
been paid me. Please answer this, and name a subject
with one or two hints, and I will go right straight at it.
My dear sir, I am very grateful for the warm in-
terest you take in me. I can only offer you in return
the warm love and great respect of a poor, miserable
sinner, who wishes by his pen to make Catholicity poor
amends for the injury of his example. It has been my
good fortune to be often loved by those whose virtue
should make them avoid me; but I think that my grati
tude has been increased by the knowledge of my un-
worthiness. Please present my best respects to your
family and to Bishop Fitzpatrick, and believe me ever
yours very truly,
2
GEORGE H. MILES.
BALTIMORE, Dec. 18th, 1848.
The article on Mt. St. Mary's college was published
in the April number of Brownson's Review for 1849, and
in the same number appeared a notice of the "History of
Maryland, from its first settlement, in 1634, to the year
1848," by a Catholic gentlemen educated at that college,
4
148
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
}
who had not the manliness to mention his Alma Mater
or any other Catholic college in the State, but only
named one or two feeble institutions under Protestant
control that hardly any one had ever heard of before.
Miles's article was timely as amends for the historian's
neglect. It was just such want of courage in regard to
Catholic matters which McMaster called Baltimoreism,
and which made Brownson say that "a hundred Balti-
more Catholics wouldn't have the spunk to chase a wet
hen from her nest.". Other contributions of Miles to
the Review deserving of special mention are his criticism
of Longfellow's Evangeline and Kavanagh (January,
1850) and the ode on Inkerman (October, 1855).
The Reverend John P. Roddan was one of the most
voluminous as well as valuable contributors to the
Review. Brownson's first acquaintance with Roddan
may be said to date from the Autumn of 1848, when he
received the following letter from the young ecclesias-
tical student:
Propaganda, ROME, Oct. 14, 1848.
HON. SIR-Excuse the liberty of one a stranger
to you.
I hope that I shall not be always, and I have
no claim upon your attention other than the fact that
our lives are devoted to the same high object.
I wish to call your attention to an affair in which
I believe that you are already as much interested as
man can be. I mean the establishment of an ecclesias-
tical library for Boston, and especially for the Seminary,
which, as I believe, is in fieri. God knows that America
has need of such libraries; perhaps no city needs one
so much as Boston does, considering the peculiar char-
acter of the enemies with whom we have to deal.
LETTER FROM RODDAN.
149
When I was in Boston I did not know enough of
theology to be able to say whether we had a good library
or not. My impression is, that we were unfortunate
gentlemen in reduced circumstances, so far as books
were concerned. Mr. Williamson's library contained a
great many books which may be had in America at any
time, but it has been removed, and the Bishop's library
was destroyed. I do not recollect any other.
Besides, we should have a library which will be
subject to the Bishop pro tempore, and to him alone.
Two circumstances served as indices by which I
could arrive at a knowledge of the real state of things.
When Americans visit the library of Propaganda, they
invariably exclaim, What a great library it is! Now it
does not contain more than 20,000 volumes, and its chief
value consists in the rarity of the editions of the Fathers
and Scholastics. In Rome it is a small library.
The other fact is this: When your Review of
October arrived in Rome, it was read by a great many
people. Some observed to me, what sort of a library
have you in Boston? Mr. Brownson quotes Perrone
and Billuart, elementary authors, as though they were
Fathers! He cannot get Vasquez, and it would seem
that for Suarez he has to depend upon some quotations.**
I knew that you must have access to all the theo-
logical books that Boston possesses; so I held my
tongue. This being the case, I began to think of put-
ting in execution a project which I have nourished for
some time, to appeal to some of the influential Catho-
lics of Boston, and see whether they would not author-
*This is said in Brownson's reply to Ward, Works, vol. xiv, p. 90,
et seq.
1
か
​150
į
A
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
"','"
O. A. BROWNSON, LL. D.
ize me to collect suitable books. My fellow students
from America do so, but I have not the requisite author-
ity, nor the money.
I have written to two men eminent for their charity
and for their public spirit, Messrs. Carney and Nichols.
They can do this, but will they? To leave nothing
untried, I thought of writing to you and to one or two
others; knowing that you could induce these gentlemen
to do something, confident that you would if an oppor-
tunity should occur. If they do it, the new library
would go by their name, I suppose.
Good books are selling daily. There is now on sale
a small collection in Propaganda, but it is valuable.
Among other books is the Bibliotheca Patrum, now out
of print.
A decent little library might be collected for $500,
but I should want one or two thousand. The Biblio-
theca would cost about $50, the Bollandists, Baronius, the
Councils and the Bulls are the heavy works. S. Thomas,
S. Augustine, S. Chrysostom, and the greater Fathers
and Doctors cost $10 and $20. A philosophical collec-
tion would cost nearly $100; $500 would do something;
$1,000 would bring a good library; $2,000 would com-
plete one.
41
I beseech you, then, to say a word to the Bishop
and to these two gentlemen, if you can. You, of all
others, know how important the thing is, and any
attempt at proof would be an insult.
Most faithfully yours,
JOHN P. RODDAN.
LETTER FROM BOYCE.
151
After he was ordained a priest, and returned to his
native country, Roddan was settled at Quincy, Mass.,
with one or two missions near by. In addition to his
pastoral duties, he was for some years editor of the Pilot,
and wrote many articles for the Review. It was a com-
mon thing for him to go to Chelsea before noon on a
Monday and discuss with Brownson the questions in
which they were both interested, with a very few hours'
intermission for rest at three or four o'clock in the
morning, until the Wednesday afternoon. None of
Brownson's friends, unless Dr. Cummings be an excep-
tion, agreed so completely and understandingly with all
his political, social, religious, and philosophical views.
His mind was quick, clear, and deep; his expression,
whether speaking or writing, flowing and easy, and
plain to understand. He wrote articles on the Italian
and Hungarian Revolutions, etc. The main defect of
his style was its extreme diffuseness, arising perhaps.
from his long residence in Italy; but a strange contrast
to Brownson's strong conciseness. It would hardly be
believed that the compiler of "The Young Catholic's
Fifth Reader" gives as the only specimen, in the entire
series, of Brownson's style an article by Roddan on “St.
Peter and Mahomet." Was this the result of malice or
of ignorance?
The Reverend John Boyce, pastor of the only
Catholic church in Worcester, was not a contributor to
the Review; but as there has been occasion to refer to
the criticism of his book, it is as well to say here that
he published his very entertaining novel, "Shandy Mc-
Guire," full of fun and frolic, but written for a serious
and noble purpose, in 1848. In sending the first of the
152
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
two parts in which the novel first appeared, “Paul Pep-
pergrass," the author, wrote:
WORCESTER, Sept. 7, '48.
DEAR SIR-I send you the only copy of "Shandy
McGuire," 1st part, I can procure, and even that has
been already somewhat thumbed.
Mr. Dunigan, in his letter of to-day, says he had a
copy to send you, but on reflection thought it better to
wait for the second part and send both together. He
thinks, as I do, that your review of the entire work is
likely to be more favorable than your review of the first
part. But if you say anything of this 1st part—parce
peccatis in misericordia tua. I suppose you have seen
the Truth Teller's review-if you permit me to use such
a term-if not, read it for your instruction.
I think it would be well to have the lecture early
next month. I hope to see you soon at your residence.
In the meantime, believe me yours very sincerely,
JNO. BOYCE.
•
O. A. BROWNSON, Esq.
On receipt of the complete work, Brownson wrote
his article on Shandy McGuire, in which he highly
extols the novel, which, he says, could have been written
by none but an Irishman, and a Catholic Irishman, and
which presents the Irishman to us as he is and as he
ought to be. The reviewer soon passes from commen-
dation of the work as a story, to consideration of the
higher purpose of the author, and discusses the Irish
and Ireland. He knew well enough, and if McCaffrey
had not been at the pains of saying it, everybody in
* Works, vol. xvi., p. 144.
M
DEMOCRACY.
153
America knew, that to touch this subject was to stir up
a hornet's nest. Brownson believed Boyce's book an
indication that now that Smith O'Brien and the Young
Irelanders' insurrection, which could never have gained
anything for national freedom, had failed, the genuine
Irish voice would be heard the voice of enlightened
patriotism, of manly feeling, sound sense, and practical
judgment. Not from the melodious wail of Moore,
exciting compassion, but killing respect; not from
bombastic orators and ignorant editors, turning even
Irish virtue and nobility into ridicule; but from the true
Irishmen who represent the sober sense and enlightened
judgment, the faith and piety, the reasonable hopes and
practical tendencies of the nation, when they come for-
ward and are able to place themselves at the head of
affairs, must Ireland look for the redress of her griev
:ances. In the course of this article Brownson discusses
allegiance to the British Crown, repeal of the Union,
separation, landlords and land tenure, with a view solely
to Ireland's good, and in a tone of practical statesman-
ship which ought to commend this essay to the study of
her children, and with a friendliness that only the most
absurd oversensitiveness could find fault with.
CHAPTER VI.
THE CATHOLIC PRESS.—CONVERSION OF BROWNSON'S
OLDEST SON.—PURCELL.-KENRICK.—M’CAFFREY.-
MAJOR.—NEW YORK LECTURES.—CUMMINGS.
DEMOCRACY, as it exists with us, every sensible
man knows, is a great humbug, the people are led as
much as they are under any other form of government;
154
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
མ
the leaders are different, more numerous, more hungry
and more despotic. Party organizations, party usages,
caucuses, conventions and nominations prior to elections,
in wards, towns, counties, states, and the nation are
contrivances of damagogues to govern the people and
derive a profit from them, as they are not capable of
managing for themselves. Wealth, learning, rank, and
power are all trusts to be executed for the well-being of
the people. The shameful abuse of these trusts has
given a pretext to radicals for carrying on a war against
them. The people need and may receive the benefit of
law, yet cannot all be lawyers. So of medicine, so,
above all, of theology. Is it to be supposed that all
men understand the science of government by nature.
and without study?
Discussion of great questions of government in a
congress of statesmen, on the merits of the question,
where each party is obliged to seek for and to confine
himself to the truth, is necessary in any but a despotic
government, and its results are beneficial. The con-
testants are there held in check, are forced to be exact
in their statements, and close and rigid in their deduc-
tions; for the slightest error, they know, will be detected
and exposed. But before a popular audience, the part-
ies, knowing that the tribunal is incompetent to decide
the question on its merits, are free, so far as exposure is
concerned, to seek only a verdict, and consequently, to
hold themselves free and to resort to any methods that
will secure it. False assertions and false reasoning, if
they will weigh with the public, will answer their pur-
pose as well as the truth. One party may detect the
falsehood or the sophistry of the other, but what of that?
THE CATHOLIC PRESS.
155
In the appeal to the people, the falsehood is reasserted,
the sophistry reproduced, and, as likely as not, with
triumph.
Making those judges who should be learners ren-
ders them proud, conceited, arrogant, turbulent, and
seditious. The unreasoning, undisciplined, and con-
ceited multitude, incapable or impatient of following
step by step a long and closely linked argument, de-
manding some mental training and application, reject
as heavy, uninteresting, and therefore worthless, what-
ever is profound, goes to the bottom of things, treats a
subject scientifically, or transcends their capacity. The
newspaper press, to meet the popular demand, must be
light, shallow, and trashy, or else it will be looked upon
as not worth reading at all. Hence Brownson said, if
it were an open question, whether we should or should
not have a newspaper press, he was by no means sure
he should not vote in the negative. But it is not any
longer such question. If Catholic editors do not employ
the press to diffuse Christian doctrine, and to defend the
rights of the church and the freedom of religion, as well
as social order and the rights of man, no small portion
of the modern world will be abandoned to demagogues,
infidels, and heretics, or, in a word, to the socialism of
the age.
With these views of journalism, Brownson pub-
lished in his Review for January, 1849, an article
on the "Catholic Press," " in which he gently criti-
cises the Catholic editors in this country. They
now and then forgot their place, and seemed to regard
themselves as commissioned to superintend the bishops
*Works, vol. xix, p. 269.
156
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
7
and clergy, and to dictate their policy. He would have
the press act as the servant of the church, under her
direction. Not counting the Boston Pilot, the Truth-
Teller, the Nation, etc., which, though owned and con-
ducted by Catholics, were devoted chiefly to secular
matters, there were ten English, two German, and one
French weekly Catholic journals in the United States,
conducted, in general, with learning, spirit, and ability.
In all but one or two there had been a manifest improve-
ment in the last two or three years. They had assumed
a bolder, freer tone, and taken wider and correcter views;
especially the Freeman's Journal, the Pittsburg Catho-
lic, and the Propagateur Catholique, of which the first-
named was, in his judgment, already superior to the
London Tablet.
Perhaps it would have been better for Brownson,
who, while impervious to condemnation by the secular
and acatholic press, had since his conversion been most
sensitive to any criticism on the part of bishops or epis-
copal organs, not to have mentioned the names of the
first and second of these last three journals; for the
other eight Catholic papers were far from believing
themselves less deserving of commendation than those
named, and joining with those which had been set aside
as secular or national, though conducted by Catholics,
brought something very much like McCaffrey's hornet's
nest about the reviewer's head.
As to the Catholic Herald, of Philadelphia, it made
very little difference to Henry Major, the editor, what
Brownson wrote. He was embittered, if not crazed,
by his disappointment after he became a Catholic. He
published his reasons for joining the church, and
22
HIS ELDEST SON COMES TO THE CHURCH.
157
Brownson's favorable criticism of the book, which W. G.
Ward complained of in a letter given in a previous.
chapter, was ineffectual to placate him. He had per-
sistently manifested his hostility, and was no more un-
friendly after than before this neglect to appreciate him
at his own valuation. Many years afterwards, when the
Reverend Dr. John M. Forbes abandoned the church,
and went back to the Episcopal communion, of which he
had been a member before his conversion, that com-
munion received him back as a minister, in spite of his
"apostasy." On learning of this decision, Major went
back too, and resumed his former clerical character. I
believe, though, that he recanted again before his death.
The Catholic Telegraph, of Cincinnati, had never
seemed very friendly to Brownson, though Bishop Pur-
cell, who had the principal hand in its management, had
on several occasions manifested much affection for him,
and no cause is known for any disagreement or resent-
ment. In fact, when the Bishop tried to find one, he
was very hard put to imagine one. To go back to their
early correspondence, it may be remembered that Brown-
son's eldest son had sailed for Calcutta before his father's
withdrawal from his Unitarian pulpit. Returning
home in the early part of the year 1845, he was amazed
to find his parents Catholics, and went immediately to
Ohio, where his mother's sister and her husband, Good-
rich, had an academy. They received him gladly, and
put him to teaching. Mrs. Goodrich, like her brothers,
belonged to the sect which used to be called Christians.
Orestes, with all his prejudices against the Catholic
church, had, as all Protestants have, doubts about
† Brownson's Early Life, p. 317.
* Ante, p. 42.
158
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
religion, and talked much with a Mr. Powell, the minis-
ter, on the subject. Unable to tell how far the minister
was right or wrong, he asked his father what he thought
and what answer he could make to some things the
minister said, so that he might have both sides of the
argument to reflect upon. In answer to several letters,
his father wrote him :
1:
August 28, 1845.
癜
​MY DEAR SON:-I have received your letters. I
thank you for them, and am glad to hear you are well.
I should have answered your letters before, but have
been so busy I have really not had time.* If you wish
to investigate the subject of religion, you must go to
work methodically. You must know what you are
after, and have some leading principle to guide you.
What do you mean by the question, Was the first
church founded at Jerusalem? There was no first, no
second church founded. There has never been but one
church. This church began when man fell in the Gar-
den, continues to the consummation of the world. It
came down through the Patriarchs, the Jews, and the
Catholic Church. The Jews believed as we believe, only
they believed in a Saviour to come, and we in a Saviour
that has come, and their sacrifices were types or figures
of the real or true sacrifice which we now have.
The Christian church, as distinguished from the
Jewish, began unquestionably at Jerusalem. Nobody
denies this, or thinks of denying this. The church was
at Jerusalem before it was at Antioch, and it was at
Antioch before it was at Rome, though it was at Rome
*Of course, he had time for an ordinary letter; but not for a discussion
of the matters involved.
1
LETTER TO HIS SON.
159
1
before it was at Constantinople. The precedence is not
claimed for the church of Rome because it was prior in
point of time to all other churches, but because it was
the See of St. Peter, to whom belonged the primacy
among the apostles, and because it received from the
chair of St. Peter the principality or chiefdom, as St.
Irenæus, who lived in the second century and was the
disciple of Polycarp, who had been instructed by the
blessed Apostle John, tells us. St. Peter, by establish-
ing his See at Rome, made Rome the centre of unity for
the church, and made the Roman church in the person
of its Bishop, as the successor of St. Peter, the mother
and mistress of all the churches. This is the doctrine
as laid down by all the ancient doctors and fathers of
the church, as can be easily proved, and has been over
and over again.
What Pope John of Constantinople you mean, I
know not, but if you mean St. John Chrysostom, in the
fifth century, you will find that, though Bishop of Con-
stantinople, he did not claim to be pope, and wrote ex-
pressly in defence of the authority of the See of Rome.
You say, from the best information you can get, St.
Gregory the First was the first pope. What do you say
of St. Leo the Great, St. Celestinus, Sixtus III, Boni-
face I, St. Zosimus, St. Damasus, St. Julius, and St.
Sylvester, all predecessors of St. Gregory, and as much
popes as he was, claiming, exercising, and conceded as
much authority as he was? We have a list of all the
popes, the date of each one's accession, and of his death,
down to the present Pope Gregory XVI. The notion
that Pope Gregory was the first pope is abandoned by
all intelligent Protestants themselves, and if your Camp-
X
160
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
:
ti.
bellite minister told you otherwise, he is either alto-
gether ignorant of ecclesiastical history, or he did not
deal honestly with you. While
While I wish you to take no
assertion of a Catholic without his giving you authority
for it, I must beg you to be extremely on your guard
against the assertions you meet with in Protestant writ-
ers. I make myself no assertion to my son that I am
not fully able to prove. If I was base enough to try to
deceive others, I trust he will not believe me base enough
to deceive him. John Jejunator, the Pope John you
probably mean, did not claim to be pope, or superior to
Gregory I, but universal bishop, which the pope is not,
and which is a title and office unknown to the church.
Gregory was one of the best men that ever lived.
I wish you to study and act on the exhortation of
Col. II, 8: "See that no one deceive you by philosophy
and vain fallacy, and the tradition of men, according to
the rudiments of the world, and not according to Christ."
This is an exhortation I beg you, my dear son, never to
forget. The church prohibits you from suffering your-
self to be carried away by philosophy, the pride of human
reason, or man's wisdom, she denies the authority of the
traditions of men, and tells you you are not and cannot
be bound by them, but only by the tradition that is
according to Christ. All else is vain fallacy. But what
is tradition according to Christ, that is, the Christian
doctrine as received from or delivered by Christ himself?
Who will tell you that? Rev. Mr. Powell? What evi-
dence can he give you of that? How can he assure you
that he is not giving, instead of the doctrine of Christ,
his own doctrine? The Bible? But what assurance
can he give that what he gives is the Bible, and not
LETTER TO HIS SON.
161
:
merely his interpretation of it? Your own judgment?
But how can you be certain that you yourself may not
mistake the true sense of the Bible? Neither he nor
you are infallible.
You will observe, my son, that the text does not
condemn tradition, but only the tradition of MEN. If
the tradition the church requires you to believe be the
tradition of men, you, of course, will reject it, but you
must first be assured that it is a tradition of men, and
not a revelation from God, before you have the right to
reject it. She says she received it from God, and you
must first show that she is worthy of no credit, before
you can tell her she does not tell the truth. Tradition
means something delivered or handed down, and the
Christian revelation itself is a tradition, and if you mean
to reject all tradition, you must reject that. Thus says
St. Paul, 2 Thess. II, 14. "Therefore, brethren, stand
firm, and hold fast the traditions which you have learned,
whether by word or by our epistle." Tradition may be
written or unwritten, it matters not which. What you
are to beware of is not tradition, written or unwritten,
but the tradition of men, for you are to receive as faith
only what God has revealed. But on this point you
will find some further remarks in my next Review.
I cannot give the meaning of the canon you cite,
for I cannot read it in your writing, and you have given
me no reference so that I can find it elsewhere. Fur-
thermore, canon law is not a matter of faith, and is not
necessary to be understood in order to be saved. It
requires a special study to master canon law, as it does
to master the civil law or the common law,. and before
any particular canon can be interpreted it is necessary
3-
12
162
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
YA.
.
to know the general rule for interpreting canon law, and
the particular occasion for enacting the canon in ques-
tion. As you seem to have turned your attention to the
canon law, will you tell me where the canon you cite
can be found? Whether it is genuine or spurious?
now in force, or whether it has been repealed? Will
you tell me when it was enacted, by whom, and on what
occasion, and for what purpose? Whether by a pro-
vincial, national, or ecumenical council, or by the pope?
All this must be known before the canon can be inter-
preted, and this I cannot know till you tell me where I
am to find it. But, my son, it will be worth while, if
the canon is quoted against you, to ascertain if they
who quote it know all this, for Protestants make great
and laughable blunders when they undertake to deal
with canon law. It is a subject none of them under-
stand. But the real question for you to settle, is, did
Jesus Christ found a church, and give it authority to
teach? If so, which of the so-called churches is it?
Your Aunt Dolly's church dates, I believe, from Alex-
ander Campbell, and has no historical existence prior to
him. In the mean time give her and her husband my
love, and a father's thanks for their kindness to you.
Give our love to Uncle Jesse and aunt. We are all
well. Your mother remembers you in her prayers and
her love for you is sleepless. Be a good boy, and God
bless you.
YOUR FATHER.
The Goodriches wanted Orestes to teach French.
Orestes knew very little of the language, and so it was
thought best that he should go to some school where it
was correctly taught. On inquiry, they were informed
-
S
LETTER FROM PURCELL.
163
that French was better taught at St. Xavier's College
in Cincinnati than anywhere else in Ohio. Orestes
accordingly went to the Cincinnati college, and his
father wrote to the Bishop soon afterwards to request
him to interest himself in the matter. The Bishop's
letter was written at once.
CINCINNATI, Sept. 18th, 1845.
DEAR SIR-I had the pleasure of receiving, last
evening, your letter of the 13th September. Bishop
Fenwick will probably have informed you that I had, in
part, anticipated its contents, by introducing your inter-
esting son and namesake at the St. Xavier's College,
where he now boards and pursues his studies under the
care of the good fathers S. J. Rev. Father Elet, Rector
of the college, received him affectionately, and under
his enlightened and judicious training I have no doubt
that Orestes will be diligent in studies, successful, vir-
tuous, and happy.
The pecuniary arrangement for board and tuition
will be easily made. You, dear sir, are not, I believe,
of the "Plutocracy," as Sidney Smith would say, and
even if you had belonged to that, much or little favored
portion of our race, your late sacrifices at the shrine of
truth must have commenced, at least, to place you in a
different category. I, therefore, beg that you will have
no anxiety on the score of expenses for this son, unless
it be for clothing and books, but leave that matter in the
hands of Father Elet, who will be happy in attending to
it, without inconvenience to himself, or to you. But of
this he will, doubtless, speak to you himself, officially.
Orestes seems fond of conversing on the subject of
;
!!
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
religion with one of the students of the Theological
Seminary. All begin to like him much. One of the
number, Mr. De la Croix, recently from France, will
give him private lessons in French; and similar facili-
ties will be afforded of acquiring an acquaintance with
chemistry, theory and practice, as Mr. Goodrich re-
quested.
164
We should have been much gratified if it had been
in your power to visit us last July, when you were this
side of the mountains. Another time, as we have now
better grounds for hope, we expect to be more fortunate.
If you are as good at praying as you are at writing,
it must be worth something to get a pater and ave from
you. Do, kind and dear sir, say a short prayer for the
success of the Holy cause in the west, and especially in
Ohio, and believe me to be, with best wishes for your
own happiness, with great regard.
Your obedient servant,
† J. B., Bishop of Cincinnati.
ORESTES A. BROWNSON, Esq.
Soon after the Bishop wrote again.
CINCINNATI, Dec. 9, 1845.
DEAR SIR:-I should have sooner announced to
you the glad tidings of the baptism of your beloved son,
Orestes Augustine (Augustus) Xavier, on the feast of
St. F. Xavier. I had the very great happiness of per-
forming the ceremony in his behalf and that of a very
interesting young man from Natchez, his school fellow
of his own age or thereabouts, at the invitation of the
Rev. J. Elet. His fellow-students, many of whom
******
LETTER FROM PURCELL.
165
received the Holy Communion at the Mass which fol-
lowed, assisted at the affecting scene, and doubtless
while they remembered their own baptismal engage-
ments, united with the neophytes in promising to love
God with their whole heart, and their neighbor as
themselves, and in abjuring the devil, the world and the
sinful desires of the flesh. I need not assure you that
Orestes, in a matter of so much importance for his
temporal and eternal welfare, was not induced to take a
single step without being first convinced that it was
right to do so, and this, not by any human persuasion,
but by the Divine grace. Your prayers have thus been
crowned with success, your example has been faithfully
followed, the son that had strayed from his home has
returned to it, the son that was dead has come to life
again.
One of the professors in the college, and a very
pious and worthy lady, Mrs. Lucy O'Shaughnessy, a
convert to our Holy Faith from Quakerism, were the
sponsors of Orestes. It was a happy day at St. Xavier's.
In a conversation with the principal of the college,
some two weeks since, I discovered with regret that I
had, to a certain extent, mistaken the terms on which he
had received Orestes, and unwittingly led you into the
same mistake. It seems he intended charging half-price
for your esteemed son, whereas I hoped he would make
no charge. I had deeded all the property to the fathers,
gratis, and leave them at perfect liberty to employ its
resources and extend the facilities the college affords
according to their own sense of right.
Your kind felicitations on the dedication of my
cathedral, I beg to assure you, I deeply feel and most
!
166
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
.
gratefully acknowledge. It was a heavy undertaking,
and it is not yet, nor will it be for many years, com-
pleted. It is much, however, that it can be occupied.
How cordially do I respond to your eulogy on Rt.
Rev'd. Dr. Fitzpatrick. I had the pleasure of his
acquaintance when he was in the Seminary at Paris,
and of hearing the opinions of his worthy superior and
professors, as well as of his fellow students, respecting
his virtues and his extraordinary capacity. May God
preserve him such for many, many years, and grant us
many like him!
It may not be amiss to say that in the report of the
dedication of the Cincinnati Cathedral, but especially in
the article describing it, in the Baltimore Catholic Maga-
zine, there are some serious inaccuracies. The plasterer
with whom I made the contract was a Catholic, though
he had a Protestant partner, and none others would do
that part of the work cheaper, or could do it better. My
residence was not presented to me. I have to pay for it
every cent.
How difficult it is, even when means of
knowledge abound, to be always accurate; and what
marvel when this is so, that history contains so much—
as the Indian said—to be told another way!
God bless and prosper you in all things for His
glory! May we fight the good faith [fight?] in our
various fields of labor and according to our measure-
and meet in heaven!
Yours most respectfully,
J. B., Bishop of Cincinnati.
ORESTES A. BROWNSON, Esq.
Such having been the relations between the Bishop
and the editor, as these letters indicate, Brownson
鳘
​4
F
LETTER FROM PURCELL.
167
remonstrated with the Bishop concerning the hostility
shown towards him by the Cincinnati Catholic Tele-
graph in speaking of his Review for January, 1849, as
well as the course of that paper generally in his regard.
The substance of his letter is sufficiently indicated by
the Bishop's reply.
CINCINNATI, Jan. 25th, 1849.
DEAR SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the
receipt of your esteemed letter of the 16th inst. A few
days previously I had requested Rev. Mr. Whelan, who
resides with me, to send you my own and one or two
others' subscriptions to your much prized Review. As
the Conahans have discontinued their former business,
and with it the agency of the Review, my brother will,
if you approve, and as long as you cannot do better, be
your agent here. If not now too late, he will, as he
anticipates your approval, or rather, thinks it already
expressed in your letter to me, publish a notice to that
effect in this week's "Telegraph." Of course, he neither
asks, nor expects, any pecuniary compensation.
I am surprised at the remark which you make:
"The only notice I have ever seen of it (the Review) in
the C. Telegraph was a severe censure," etc., for two
reasons, first, because I know it to have been highly
extolled in the Telegraph—and large demands made
from time to time on its contents for the instruction and
edification of the readers of the Telegraph. And sec-
ondly, because I do not believe it possible that the un-
compromising Reviewer who visited poor Bryant with
such "
severe censure," and almost thrust back the
Oxford developmentists among the heretics, and was
1
168
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
66
free to find fault with Bishop Kenrick's not having
taken stronger grounds in a former edition of his work
on the Primacy, was himself so sensitive as to call that
severe censure" which was hardly meant (by me, for
I did write it) for censure at all. And if it caused you
any pain and regret, as indeed you assure me it did, I
myself feel pain and regret as far as God sees that I
have done wrong in writing or inflicting it; and, in this
view, sincerely humble myself and ask your forgiveness,
which I am sure you are too good a Christian to refuse.
The truth is, Beloved and Honored Friend, without
pretending to know as well as you who were "to the
manner born," what suits the Protestant mind of New
England, or of the rest of the Union, I did fear that for-
getful of the spirit and the traditions of a Cheverus and
a Matignon, your Journal was likely to revive, though
infinitely its superior in talent, the "Jesuit" of unhappy
memory. I might have been wholly in sin in yielding
to this fear, or holding to this opinion-and I may be
now wrong in expressing it to you, for I very much dis-
trust my own judgment in such matters, and I should
not wish it to be hastily adopted by any one. But I do
declare it after all, for what it may be thought to be
worth.
It is not convenient for me just now, to refer to the
numbers of the Review and the Telegraph to which you
have made reference, nor is this necessary. You
reply, as the Metrop. Magazine did, that you had thrown
in sufficient caveats against the meaning I attached to
your words.
words. Those caveats escaped my notice at the
time, and all I can remember of your words now is that
you broadly asserted that "marriage was a sacrament
}
瞿
​LETTER FROM PURCELL.
169
•
when blessed by the church," implying that it was not
such when not blessed by the church. I will not argue
with you whether this can fairly be called an open
question; for I write only to assure you of my humble,
it is true, but, nevertheless, sincere admiration of your
learning, virtues, and zeal, and my desire that your
excellent Review may be as well sustained and as
extensively circulated as it deserves. As to the second
point to which you have referred, I entirely concur in
the view of it taken in your letter.
There are other matters of which I should like to
speak to you-but to write of them is inexpedient. I
wish we could see you once here. Because we could
not get the right kind of orator for our St. Peter's
Benevolent Society Anniversary, we preferred having
none. But, if we had had the good luck to have you,
how gratified we should all have been. This theme-
provision for destitute female orphans-would open up
to a mind like yours the inexhaustible riches of the
Catholic church, and I have no doubt that your sojourn
in this city would add largely to the subscription list of
the Review, and I have an hundred dollars subject to
your order—for you are poor as we all are whenever your
arrangements will admit of your honoring us, in the
mid-west, with a visit. The time most agreeable to you
will suit us, and we shall be an hundred fold more
delighted if, in addition to a discourse, or oration, on the
subject adverted to, you would address a Cincinnati
audience on any other or others in which Catholics and
Protestants need enlightenment. Fret not at any little
contradiction you may encounter in the church or from
*This was in an article from an occasional contributor.
}
170
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIfe.
:
((
sincere Catholics. You are no better than our Common
Master-not better than "Cephas"-not better than
Fénelon or Bossnet, etc., etc. If any man will come
after me, says the Saviour, let him take up his cross
DAILY and follow me." I have my own share of the
heavy load just now; but "I know whom I have trusted."
"In Cœlo quies."
With profound respect, your humble friend and
servant.
J. B., Bishop of Cincinnati.
O. A. BROWNSON.
On the same day on which Purcell wrote this letter,
the Bishop of Philadelphia wrote Brownson that he
could not control Major, of the Catholic Herald.
DEAR SIR:-I have forwarded to-day by Adams'
Express an article on the Girard College, which, if it
suit your Review, is at your disposal. Professor Allen
gives me hopes that he will aid you, although his views
as to persons and things—for instance the poet Wood-
worth [Wordsworth ?]-may, he fears, present contrast
rather than variety.
I penned a favorable notice of your last number for
the Herald, but the altum vulnus of the editor did not
allow him to publish it. He complains of being cruelly
treated by the Catholic press. My sympathy for him
in his pecuniary difficulties induces me to bear what in
any other circumstances would have determined me to
dissolve all relation with him. As he has noticed some-
what favorably the enlargement of the Observer, a kind
word in the columns of that paper might operate as
balm.
LETTER FROM KENRICK.
171
It will encourage you to know that your article
"Church or No Church," has led a physician (I cannot
recollect his name) to embrace the faith at Georgetown,
as Father T. Mulledy assured me.
A young man, 25 years of age, son of the late Mr.
Alston, member of Congress from North Carolina, lies
here at the point of death. He has embraced the faith,
and is in excellent dispositions. The brother and sister-
in-law of Charles Bellenstein, whose sudden death was
related in the Herald last month, have followed his
example in entering into the church. But of these facts
it is better to say nothing in the papers.
With sincere wishes for your health and happiness,
I remain your faithful friend in Xt.,
FRANCIS PATRICK KENRICK,
Bishop of Philadelphia.
Philadelphia, Jan. 25, 1849.
ORESTES A. BROWNSON, Esq.
The article on Girard College, referred to in the
last letter, was published in Brownson's Review for
April, 1849. In February, Kenrick made some addi-
tions, but the matter was already in type and they were
therefore not inserted. If Kenrick's miscellaneous
writings should ever be collected in a volume, these
additions ought to be made in that essay.
Dr. McCaffrey's criticism of the articles on the
"Catholic Press" and on "Shandy McGuire" given in
the following letter, are interesting and worth consider-
ing in connection with those articles; and as they were
written solely for Brownson's benefit, are probably more
candid than most newspaper reviews.
A
172
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
:
MT. ST. MARY'S COLLEGE, Jan. 17th, 1849.
O. A. BROWNSON, Esq.
*
DEAR SIR: I have read your last Review with great
interest and close attention. You have disappointed
me. I expected to find something wrong, something to
differ about in your article on Ireland, if nowhere else.
One or two of your assertions strike me with surprise.
I doubt, though I may not be able to disprove them.
Their inaccuracy would not, however, affect your main
argument. P. 75 you say: "The English landlord
has as much legal power to oppress his tenantry as has
the Irish landlord,” etc. The tenant's right to occupy
his farm, I had thought, was much better secured in
England than in Ireland, and better in some parts of
Ireland-Ulster v. g. than in others. This I had in-
ferred not merely from the declamation of repealers, but
from glancing at parliamentary motions and discussions.
I do not want to put you on your defence, but to pre-
vent the repetition of an error, if it be one, which soph-
istry might turn to its advantage.
I do positively contradict your statement at the
bottom of page 68 -that the abominable measures
adopted for the suppression of the Catholic religion have
been abolished in both countries by the Catholic Relief
Bill. I know not how many penal laws yet remain on
the statute book—dead letters indeed-but they will not
repeal them-and the Repeal Bill itself contained some
new penal laws. It excludes the Regular Clergy, for
example, from Great Britain. Probably you know these
things better than I do. Still your assertion is incor-
* Works, vol. xvi, p. 162. † Vol. xvi, p. 155.
LETTER FROM M'CAFFREY.
173
rect, and supposes justice done, where foul injustice still
remains.
I have always agreed with you in holding that con-
stitutions grow, are not made. I have taught it for
years, but have made few, very few disciples. It must
be taught the more carefully and perseveringly. I have
taught, in direct contradiction to the Declaration of
Independence, that governments derive their powers
from God, not from the consent of the governed.
But even Catholic students of Theology can often see
the 2+2 without finishing the equation. Figures, facts,
and logic are the weakest things in the world when
opposed to prejudice or passion.
I was one of O'Connell's admirers, yet found much
to condemn in him. I fear the evil results of his
course may far outweigh the good-the hatred of the
Saxons, the irrational Celtic pride,—the reliance upon
speechifying and menacing parades,—the intolerance of
difference of opinion, etc.
Humanly reasoning, I see little hope for Ireland,
save in the downfall or humiliation of England. The
English Catholics are a nerveless set, and English Prot-
estants, whether bigots or sceptics, are very heartless
towards their Celtic brethren. Irishmen, I fear, cannot
be reasoned, coaxed, or whipped into any rational be-
havior towards the sassenach. The misfortune is, that
by trying to cure them of their errors, you incur their
ill-will. If any good can be done, now is the time and
you are on the track. Three or four
Three or four papers are in
wake. I have just read Bishop Hughes' Pronuncia-
mento. I thank you for his declaration that this cry of
Liberty "is a nuisance."
your
174
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
!
They are just getting up a new paper in New York
to be called the People. I read its prospectus to these
words: "Republican institutions are the ultimate des-
tiny of man," and threw it into the fire. Some Irish
refugees, with that Yankee Robinson, are to conduct it.
Then there is the Nation, by T. D. Magee; then the
Boston Pilot and N. Y. Truth-Teller. The fault in
dealing with them is this: We say they have done
harm, and if they do not amend, they must be put down.
If they do not amend? But they will not—and cannot
amend. Their editors
Their editors and contributors are men of
wrong opinions and bad principles. Therefore, never
hereafter mention or even allude to them, except as
things to be condemned for the evil they have done, and
to be avoided for the evil they will do. I can see why a
bishop or pastor may not feel bound to touch this nui-
sance; but I cannot understand how you or the Free-
man's Journal can affect to hope any good from them.
I find that on page 15* "A miserable demagogue
alleges that she is anti-democratic, etc."-you have not
expressed your meaning clearly. I may deny that the
church is anti-democratic, as you in fact deny it, and
maintain that she is neither democratic nor anti-demo-
cratic. And I may entertain the objection thus far,
without "raising politics above religion, without subject-
ing church to state."
To complete my list of criticisms, I must request
you to insert the preposition after the verb help, when it
precedes the infinitive mood. I don't remember where,
but somewhere in your recent number, you have omitted
it, and it seems not accidentally or typographically.
*Works, vol. xix., p. 283.
LETTER FROM M'CAFFREY.
175
As to socialism, all good men must thank you for
dragging it into light and giving it so many mortal
thrusts. Your experimental knowledge of it enables
you to pierce through its many disguises and to trace
the one monster evil in its various workings and mani-
festations. I did not for a long while know how to
account for the modern cant of all light literature and
boarding-school misses, which may be summed up in
one pet phrase, "This is a beautiful world." What
little I have read of Bulwer is infected throughout with
socialism and only excited my disgust. Dickens, with
so few ideas, and unconscious of any system, is helping
the bad cause and all English poetry of the present day,
I suspect, nearly all recent poetry is in the devil's
service.
McSherry has not sent me a copy of his History of
Maryland, but I learn from the newspapers, that it is
for sale, and will get one. If you or any of your friends
desire to review it fully, do so without hesitation. I will
not have time to do anything for your next Review,
having already engaged to preach a charity sermon, yet
to be written, and another set sermon, and being truly
overwhelmed with occupations as president, professor,
and pastor. McSherry graduated here with high honour
and has lent his talents freely to the service of religion.
Miles is at work for you. He is a good boy and never
disobeys me.
This form of an important argument strikes me as
useful. What is it that we obey, when we obey the law
or magistrate? Not a piece of parchment, not a man
our equal, and no man-not the will of the majority
(for neither in the general nor in state governments is
i
176
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
{
((
this result always procured);—not the people unorgan-
ized, for they can neither make nor repeal a law, neither
make nor unmake a magistrate,-not an' abstract idea
called the state, the government,-our farmers and
mechanics don't deal in abstractions. What then?
The will of God. Governments then derive their
powers, not from the consent of the governed, but from
God. In rendering to Cæsar the things which are
Cæsar's, we are rendering to God the things which are
God's, for it is God who says render to Cæsar the
things which are Cæsar's." I have been scrutinizing
your arguments, hunting in vain for a flaw. Is there
any flaw here? This was part of my sermon last Sun-
day night—a sermon for which Protestant democrats
would have turned me away, for they will not obey God,
any more than Protestant Whigs, or Nativists. Apropos
of democracy, when you execrate it, you must explain
a little more. Do not tire of repeating definitions. I
agree with you, that democracy, as it stands in the
popular mind-as it is understood by at least four-fifths
of us and by nearly all in Europe-means among other
things, rebellion-resistance to established authority;
but as it does not technically mean that, nor necessarily
-and as the people never define their own ideas, you
would at least do well to define them for us-and more-
over a definition repeated and learned by heart is often
the whole argument, I do not wish that you should try
to rescue the term, for that would be labor lost. Yet,
as it is a name of power and a name dear to many, touch
it prudently.
I find the religion of most Protestants in this sec-
tion of the country may be thus stated: Almighty God
↑
LETTER FROM M'CAFFREY.
177
should protect us in our person, property, and comforts;
should prevent or punish severely murder, robbery, and
theft. If He do so, He does his duty and we are willing
to say thank you; for the rest we don't want to have
much to do with Him. If we go to church, it's out of
custom, or for the women's sake. If we try to pray
when we are in danger or dying, it's because we are
scared. As for those a little more religious than com-
mon-they gain a certain social standing and influence
by it; it brings them business; it wins them votes
sometimes it furnishes the theatre they want to display
their peculiar talent or tact.
With us as yet they keep their old names, Presby-
terians, Methodists, Unitarians, etc., and not many
Unitarians professed out of Baltimore. Yet most of the
men, in their freer moments, acknowledge that they
belong to the big church, i. e. that all religions are
alike, etc. There is a sprinkling of pure infidelity.
Men and women, who regard the Bible as a fiction,
not noisy nor obtrusive, but decided.
They are all moving after you Yankees, non passibus
æquis. New England leads-let her move in the right
direction, we will certainly profit by her movement.
Commend me to your Bishop and my other friends,
and believe me, most respectfully and truly your friend,
etc.,
JOHN MCCAFFREY.
Another letter from McCaffrey, some six months
later, expresses some opinions, which, coming from one of
his character and in his position, should carry weight
and command attention. Brownson certainly attached
+
…
13
178
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
much importance to his friend's views of religious
affairs.
MT. ST. MARY's College, July 6th, 1849.
MY DEAR FRIEND :-I am sorry your very welcome
letter didn't reach me a day sooner. It came to hand
just after I had bid my godson farewell. I have, how-
ever, written to him according to your wish. He will
write for you, if he can consistently with more press-
ing duties. I may communicate to you as a matter of
confidence, that George contemplates the necessity of
supporting, by his own labor, his father's large family.
He is one of the very few youths that I have been able
to train as I would desire to train all committed to my
charge, and I would regret much if he should be com-
pelled to desert the fields of literature for the hard
drudgery of his profession. Such, it is to be feared, is
his fate for some years to come.
I am anxiously looking for the July number of
your Review.
Review. If I venture to criticise you, you know
in what spirit I do it. I have found myself too often
in the wrong, in criticism as in everything else,
to be an idolater of my own opinions. Be sure that I
will avail myself of your permission to find fault with
you, when I can and ought, or think I ought.
As regards St. Vincent's Manual, and the obnoxious
note, I doubt whether it will be in my power to have the
note omitted. I called the attention of Murphy, the
publisher and proprietor, to the numerous gallicisms and
other such defects which disfigure the work, and prom-
ised him, at his urgent request, to note all such faults
as I may wish to see corrected. Whether he will, at my
request, expunge Mr. White's annotation, is exceedingly
LETTER FROM M'CAFFREY.
179
doubtful. While you and I believe the note does in
effect teach fatal heresy, many good men and learned
divines see in it nothing but a statement theologically
accurate and well adapted to remove an objection which
operates to hinder some weak minds from submitting to
the authority of the church. When Judas (whom our
Lord knew to be a traitor) exclaimed, "Ut quid perditio
haec? Potuit hoc venumdari multo et dari pauperibus;"
Jesus was content with correcting him in words, reasoned
with him, taught the truth in opposition to the false and
immoral sentiment of the corrupt apostle, and still gave
him every opportunity and full grace to retrace his steps
and, if he only would, to sit upon a throne in heaven,
one of the blessed twelve for all eternity.
On the last Sunday of our scholastic year, in con-
formity with custom, I addressed the students chiefly,
and took for my subject Obedience. In illustrating the
obstacles to the practice of this all important virtue, I
remarked that "Now every traitor is a patriot-every
rebel a hero." If Lucifer's revolt were to occur in our
day, and we could be informed of the outbreak of the
insurrection and progress of the war, the public sympathy
would be with the rebellious archangel; the approving
voice of our people would be in favor of the revolt, and
against "the almighty power and tyranny of God." As
a good symptom of the state of feeling among those who
heard me, I must say that all concurred in the truth of
my remark.
?
May I venture to tell you that your letter before
me (not anything you have ever published since you
became a Catholic) leads me to suspect that you are still
somewhat influenced by the Puritanical, and also infidel
180
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
notions of perfectibility? Did not the Puritans in
Europe, but especially in New England, aim to found
the perfect kingdom of Christ on earth? Did they not
hope to establish a church in which men enjoying the
gift of inamissible grace, would be free from all sin, and
serve God here, as the angels do in Heaven? Was not
this their motive in instituting such a theocracy as they
could? And is not this the justification of their harsh
intolerance? I cannot enter into their feelings and
motives. Perhaps you can, or rather could. Am I
altogether wrong? It has for years past seemed clear
to me that the oppression of the church by the state has
been the chief cause of the evils of society, and was pre-
paring the way for the scenes we now witness. Why
did the French and Spaniards lose all their colonies in
the west? Were they not at home and abroad so jealous
of the influence of Rome as virtually to nullify the
authority of St. Peter's successors? Were not court
minions raised to all the high places in the church?
Was not Canada, were not South America and Mexico
thus surrendered to a corruption beginning with the
clergy and spreading rottenness through all the people?
As to education, I do not see that the Jesuits or any
body of men could counteract the pernicious, all-per-
vading influence and active control of the infidel or
semi-infidel governments of Europe during the past cen-
tury. I throw out these notions as hints. Your read-
ing and observation may enable you to decide where I
am in doubt. I know how far you are from sympa-
thizing with any of the vile crew that have continually
assailed the Jesuits. You have defended nobly the
noble sons of St. Ignatius, and no man has given harder
LETTER FROM M'CAFFREY.
181
knocks to the false theory of progress and perfectibility.
But we are all of us at times, when things go wrong,
strongly tempted to blame what is least blamable, and
knowing what Catholics ought to be and ought to do,
and what divine grace offered them most abundantly
would lead them to be and to do, we are amazed and
scandalized at the inefficiency and worthlessness of vast
numbers of them.
Engaged in the task of educating American boys,
I find that very few indeed have been taught by their
parents to obey and sacrifice self-will to duty. Parents
generally tell me that their boys are honourable and
will not lie. I find that about one in a hundred never
lies. I find that in three cases out of four, the children
rule the parents, and ultimately study what they
please, leave school when they please, and at home
do what they please. Boys, I find, have two distinct
and often contradictory-consciences. I use the word
for want of a better. A lad resists his teacher, and
defies authority-he is sure of the sympathy and
applause of the majority of his companions. He
most solemnly asseverates before me-before his
parents, that he has done nothing but what he believes
it to be right to do. I know that, if he goes to confes-
sion the next hour, he will accuse himself of this same
act of disobedience, make acts of contrition for it, and
resolve never to repeat it, and that without any other
promptings than those of his true, Catholic conscience.
In all the evils, then, which prevail everywhere in
society-in all the contradictions which shock us in the
behavior of Christians, I behold but two causes at work,
nature and grace.
1
182
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
晷
​Any institution, in which a large number of young
persons are crowded together, will become a sink of
iniquity, a perfect hot-bed of vice for most of them,
unless they be watched over with incessant care, unless
authority be inflexibly maintained, and unless religion
restrain and guide the young minds and hearts. None
but priests or nuns will or can well discharge all the
duties of Catholic preceptors. Secular priests are with
difficulty brought and held together for the purpose of
carrying on educational institutions. Monastic societies
alone can supply the want. Mt. St. Mary's is the only
institution which now remains under the control of
secular priests. I see clearly the advantages which the
religious orders have over us, and look upon it as a
special providence that has sustained our institution
amid all difficulties. Many persons are now disposed
to blame the Jesuits as having failed totally in forming
the minds of European youth to Catholic principles and
conduct. I blame the world, the flesh, and the devil. I
argued my side of the case against a brace of bishops at
a social meeting in Baltimore during the National
Council. I did not know whether I convinced them;
they certainly did not convince me.
I suspect the children of this world will always be
found wiser in their generation than the children of
light, and I bear in mind the awful question of our
Saviour, "When the son of man comes, think you, will
he find faith on earth?"
As a body, our Catholic population in this country
can easily be made to think aright on the great ques-
tions in temporal affairs to which their religious princi-
ples directly apply. I am sure that nobody in our
LETTER FROM M'CAFFREY.
183
congregation (in spite of the newspapers) has an errone-
ous opinion respecting the character of the Roman
Republic and its triumvirate. Bishop Hughes seems
to be directing admirably the Catholic mind in New
York on this and kindred questions. We want, besides
your Review, such periodicals as the Freeman's Journal.
We undoubtedly also want such a Catholic literature as
you describe and make us long for. But with a few
more periodicals such as yours and McMaster's, we can
get along for the present with our adult Catholic popu-
lation. Unfortunately, we have few books for the young
and must let them form their minds in great part on
such writings as would please a heathen no less than a
Catholic.
I have no confidence in my powers as a writer,
otherwise I certainly would have contrived to furnish
you with something before this. Most probably I want
industry more than anything else. I mean
to try.
Whatever I may offer you, it will be for you to do with
as you think proper.
We are now honored with a visit from the saintly
and pleasant Bishop of Buffalo. I should rather say
the Sisters are, for he is preaching their retreat and
stays chiefly with them. I shall talk over some ques-
tions with him, and arouse myself to write a review if I
can—a thing I never did before. I wish you all possible
success, and never lose an opportunity of getting you a
new subscriber, not more, however, for your sake than
for the benefit of those to whom I commend your
Review.
I am, with sincere respect, truly your friend,
JOHN MCCAFFREY.
;
184
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
In the first half of the same year (1849) was
published Kenrick's revised translation of "The Four
Gospels," which was followed at intervals by the rest of
the Bible. On this occasion he wrote:
DEAR SIR:-The substance of your letter which
reached the city in my absence, has been communicated
to me by a friend whom I had authorized to open letters
addressed to me. I regret exceedingly the limited cir-
culation of your valuable Review, and shall feel happy
in favoring it to the utmost of my power. Several
clergymen, whom I spoke to on the subject, have
promised me to subscribe. Mr. Major resisted all my
efforts to urge its claims for patronage through the
columns of the Herald, offering, however, to make peace
if the Review were sent to the office.
Reverend Mr. Bailey, of the diocese of New York, is,
I understand, familiar with Bibliography, and with the
varieties of the English versions. I should not, how-
ever, wish any one to review my book under any restric-
tions or influence, which might interfere with fair
criticism. Puffing or flattery is not my object. There
are many things to be corrected in the work, some of
them mere errors of the press, such as "speak of
you,"
instead of “to," in a passage of St. John, printed after I
had gone to Baltimore; others my own, arising from a
want of fixed views, or inadvertence. Uniformity in the
use of "ye" in the nominative case, neglected in St.
Matthew in the rendering of "generatio" where it
signifies age or race; and
age or race; and "tabernacula" sometimes
rendered "huts," after Dr. Lingard, and once "taber-
nacles." In the use of "shall" or will," I have fol-
lowed him, although he departs widely from the old
"
(6
GA
LETTER FROM KENRICK.
185
translators. Professor Allen discovers an Hibernicism
in a note "useless trees" used for fire-wood. On the
whole I have reason to desire not to be reviewed, but
the work is fair game for the literary sportsmen. I
deprecate any collusion. My only wish is to prepare
for an improved version to be adopted after due delibera-
tion, by my colleagues.
Mr. Sanderson, of the Towanda bar, formerly a
Universalist preacher, cherishes the memory of your
acquaintance with great warmth. He called on me dur-
ing my visit there.
With sentiments of high esteem and cordial attach-
ment, I remain, dear sir, your constant friend,
FRANCIS PATRICK KENRICK,
Bishop of Philadelphia.
Choconut, July 7, 1849.
ORESTES A. BROWNSON, Esq.
Early in the year 1849, Brownson was expected to
lecture as usual in New York, and the lecture was given
February 14th. McMaster wrote:
MY DEAR MR. BROWNSON-I am very late in
giving notice of the time we hope to have you here to
lecture. If you can lecture on Thursday, the first of
February, and I suppose one day is to you as good as
another, we will be ready for you. We will go on on
the supposition that you will come and lecture on that
evening. How well the lecture will succeed I cannot
promise. There are so many excitements now on foot
here, and so little life for anything good, that it will be
difficult to get up the requisite interest. We will do
what we can.
186
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
-
C
-:
....
**
As I happen to have received eight dollars for your
Review, I send it to you. Will you please, when you
come on, to bring the four numbers of 1848, as one
whose subscription I have received has the Review for
1847, and wants last year to make up. Please remem-
ber this.
server.
I send along with this a note for the Catholic Ob-
It incloses two dollars from an acquaintance of
mine for the Catholic Observer. Please give it to Mr.
O'Brien.
Believe me, most sincerely, and with respect, your
humble friend and servant,
JAS. ALPH. MCMASTER.
NEW YORK, Jan. 20th, 1849.
Please answer as soon as possible.
McMaster's letter was not received till the 24th,
and the same day came a telegram from Cummings fix-
ing a different date, as appears from Brownson's letter to
Cummings.
BOSTON, Jan. 25, 1849.
REV. DR. CUMMINGS.
DEAR SIR-I received yesterday a note from Mr.
McMaster telling me that the arrangement was made
for me to lecture on Thursday, the first of February.
Shortly after I received a telegraphic dispatch from
yourself that the tabernacle was engaged for me on
either the twelfth or the thirteenth of the month. I
hardly know how to consider the two statements. But
as yours was dated subsequently to his, I suppose that
the arrangement he announced is postponed. I can
come-or go on to New York on one of the days just
LETTER TO CUMMINGS.
187
A
as well as the other, and therefore the 1st, 12th, or
13th is to me a matter of perfect indifference, and I leave
it to you to make the arrangements precisely as you
find it most convenient. My subject will be Religious
Liberty. My own impression is that Friday, the 12th,*
may be the most convenient. But fix on the day your-
self, only let me know in season to get to your city in
time. If you will just mention this to my friend Mac
you will oblige me, and this will be a reply to his
note, for I shall not come—or go-for the 1st, unless I
hear from you again. If his arrangement remains good,
a telegraphic dispatch on Tuesday will be in season.
Will you be so obliging as to make my humble
respects to your bishop, whom I am growing to love and
reverence every day more and more?
I hope your health is good, spirits also, and that
you have not turned your back upon my humble Re-
view. One good turn always deserves another. You
have done me several good turns in writing for me, and
therefore are bound to do me several more. Do not
think of disputing my logic, which is based on the prac-
tical, if not on the speculative reason.
Yours with great respect,
Cummings's answer was this:
O. A. BROWNSON.
BISHOP'S HOUSE, January 29th, 1849.
DEAR MR. BROWNSON :-Owing to your delay in
answering my telegraphic dispatch I have not been
able to retain the Tabernacle for the days mentioned.
* Friday, by the calendar, must have been the 16th; but the letter is
given as written. It looks very much as though the writer, in referring to
the calendar had, in his near-sightedness, looked at January instead of
February. The 12th of January that year was a Friday.
188
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
}
This is of little consequence, however, for it is now
finally engaged for February 14th. Please then to be
in New York in time to lecture on Wednesday, the
fourteenth day of February. There has been no other
move made in this matter by Mr. McMaster or anybody
else, and the mention you make of some previous
arrangement is altogether a mistake. Several had
spoken of the propriety of arranging it for you, and I
was hoping it would be attended tó ere this, and this is
the cause of its being delayed until now.
You may
have heard that I am engaged in building a church,
an occupation which keeps me very busy. This is the
reason why I desired some other person should take the
lecture in hand. This also is the reason why I do not
hope I shall be able to contribute for some time to the
Review. Far from turning my back on the Review or
its glorious old editor, I promise you I will continue to
do
my best to procure friends for the one and subscrib-
ers for the other. I consider I have a right to dislike
here and there some of the little accompaniments of the
principles you enunciate, but I take this occasion to say
that as a Roman Catholic, I defy any theologian in the
United States or any other states, to lay his finger on
any statement (in the numbers of the Review which I
have seen) written by your pen since you mended it
with the Catholic pen-knife, which he can prove to be
unsound in doctrine, or unedifying in its tendency. I
think that I have written rather too much during the
last two years, and I desire to keep out of print for some
time if I can, but so far from being opposed to the
Review or its course, when my new parish is organized,
I would without the slightest difficulty recommend it
•
!
!
LETTER FROM CUMMINGS.
189
from the pulpit. I hope this is being explicit enough
to persuade you that I am not likely to be influenced
unfavorably towards you or the Review, although there
are some of its unessentials that I don't care about swal-
lowing. I hope it will go ahead more and more every
day. There are many questions yet which it can
deliberately take up and which will lend it variety with-
out changing its tone.
There is a lecture of mine in the last Freeman's
Journal which please read and endorse. I am glad to
see that my volatile friend, McMaster, works well with
you.
He is a boy yet, and is alternately an emphasizer
and a shuffler, as I have often told himself. But he has
good stuff in him and will, I hope, live to be a great
man, or at least what in this bad age is perhaps more,
an honest man, which last he has commenced to be
boldly enough already.
Wishing you every blessing, I have the honor to
be, my dear sir, yours sincerely,
J. W. CUMMINGS,
St. Patrick's Cathedral, N. Y.
Do not forget Wednesday, February 14th.
The letter which follows, from the same writer,
tends to show that the Editor and Lecturer was a little
negligent in matters of business.
NEW YORK, June 8th, 1849.
DEAR MR. BROWNSON:-I deferred writing to you,
as I had intended, in the expectation of seeing you in
New York. Perhaps after the publication of your next
number you will be able to spend a few days with us.
190
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
You must excuse me for not having contributed to the
forthcoming number, according to your request and that
of
my friends in Boston. I have been kept so busy with
my little church, that it would have been impossible for
me to prepare an article worthy of a place in the Review.
However, in spite of what the aversion of flesh and blood
to close labor may suggest, I will be honest where I
ought to be generous, and record against myself the
promise to give you an article for the next quarter.
Nothing but sickness shall prevent me from keeping
my word.
During my trip to Washington I did all I could for
the Review. In that city it is most wofully unattended
to. I am sure that a good agent would find many sub-
scribers for you, as almost every one I spoke to on the
subject manifested the most friendly disposition towards
yourself and your efforts. Rev. Mr. James Donelan
promised me that were a good agent provided for it, he
would do all in his power to assist him. He added that
he had allowed his own name to fall from the list of
subscribers merely on account of the provoking irregu-
larity with which the Review was served. He admired
your writings very much, and even though not a sub-
scriber manages to read each number as it comes out.
He will subscribe for it immediately if he can be sure
that it will be served punctually. I would advise
you to
write him a note on the subject of the Review's temporal
interests. I am more and more convinced that your,
Review does not receive half the support it would
receive had it a proper corps of agents.
I must recall to your mind the kind promise made
when you were in New York, that you would let me
*
•
LETTER FROM CUMMINGS.
191
have the volumes I want to complete my set. I have
1844-'47-'48 and '49. Could '45 and '46 be had for love
or money?
!
I think the Review stands as well now as it has
done for any time past. During the last year or so
there has been nothing exciting or extra-orbital in its
career, no fearful insinuation that Protestants have not
as good a chance to go to heaven as anybody else, or
that the church is able to get along without a committee
of Repealers, Democrats and Jacobins to keep her
straight. At least, if there have been in the Review
any such hazardous and novel propositions, either people
begin to suspect there may be some truth in them, or
that they are not to be met with open war. Besides this,
the bishops and clergy become every day more ready to
aid the Review, and feel increasing confidence in your-
self. I hope you will not let your courage fail on
account of the little difficulties which may obstruct your
path. The surest sign that God had given you up or
forgotten you would be the fact of your having every
thing your own way. If my church were to be built
without some hard scrapes every three or four weeks, I
should be terribly afraid that it was unblest. A little
salt in your grog every now and then will do all the
more to preserve you from corruption.
Father Macdonough is wrathful against you on
account of your neglect to acknowledge the receipt of
what money he sent you. When I see you I mean to
scold you in a friendly manner for having left me
uneasy in like manner as to the receipt of my inclosure
to you.
The projected mammoth organ of Catholicity in this
FOR
192
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
11
!
city, concerning which overtures were made to you, has
died away in smoke long since. I could wish mention
had never been made of it. Mr. Reilly is trying harder
and harder every day to change the concluding letter
"n" of his surname into an "1." He is succeeding so
well that I begin to think he was Devin only by a mis-
print beforehand. The People and the Nation, however,
both do good, inasmuch as one (to use a new phrase
current in this city) Sullivanizes the other. Your
former friends of the Associationist clique seem to be
growing every day more puny, more vile, more moon-
struck, more God-forsaken, and devil-possessed than
before. What can be the mysterious dream—the spent
electricity-the drunken impotency-the infantine blas-
phemy that ties these seemingly honest, but unscrupu-
lously malicious men up in a hard coil of Satan's caudic-
ular appendage? The more I study them the less I
can make of them, and the more I find they deserve to
be hated, the more I am inclined to pity them.
Excuse this lengthy and nonsensical epistle, and
believe me your friend and servant,
J. W. CUMMINGS,
St. Patrick's Cathedral, N. Y.
Brownson's reply to Cummings is here given :
BOSTON, June 23, 1849.
•
REV. J. CUMMINGS, D. D.
Rev. and DeaR SIR:—I owe you a thousand apolo-
gies for not having acknowledged your remittance in
season, which came safe to hand, the exact amount of
* Devin O'Reilly.
A
LETTER TO, CUMMINGS.
193
which I do not now recollect, but it was more than I
expected. About that time I had severe domestic afflic-
tion,* and when that was over, I no longer remembered
anything about it. The Rev. Father McDonough sent
me $150, for which I thank him, but to my shame I
have not acknowledged. I shall do it, Deo volente, Mon-
day, for I am devoting two or three weeks to letter-writ-
ing. I beg you, however, to intercede with him for my
forgiveness. All my excuse in his case is the same as
in yours, and therefore good for nothing. I confess
my fault, and make all necessary promises of future.
amendment. But the simple truth is, I can more easily
write an essay than set about writing a letter.
For your kind letter I thank you. I am embar-
rassed, but not precisely discouraged or low-spirited.
The fact is, I lose over five hundred dollars on account
of the Catholic Observer, and about three hundred by
the failure of one of iny agents. This loss embarrasses
me and renders it impossible for me to get on without
some two or three hundred dollars assistance, besides
the one hundred Bishop Fitzpatrick will advance me by
the first of July. If I take this money from the Review,
I cannot meet my notes on its account; and if I do not,
I have nothing but my credit on which to support my
family, which I have already pushed as far as I can, in
a good conscience. I have no fears but the Review and
what I can get by lecturing and so forth will give me
an ample support after next October. My difficulties
are, so far as I can see, confined to the next three or
four months, chiefly to the month of July. If I had
* His fifth son, George, died on Holy Thursday, 1849, of scarlet fever,
in the ninth year of his age.
I
+
:
14
:
C
194
C
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
been treated as I should have been, in the case of the
Observer, I could have got along without trouble, but
the gentleman mostly concerned is utterly unable to
keep his promise. There is the sole embarrassment I
feel.
As to the standing of the Review, I think what
you say is correct. It has been somewhat neglected,
but the neglect can be repaired by the beginning of
another volume, and even with its present list of sub-
scribers, it would support me, since after this year my
prospects are that for six or seven years to come my
expenses will not be so much into seven or eight hun-
dred dollars a year as they have been for the last five
years. You can readily understand then that my
apprehensions are chiefly for the next few weeks, and
which, stopping the Review would not in any degree
relieve.
I state the matter to you thus frankly, because you
are entitled to my full confidence. What I really want
is the assistance of some two or three hundred dollars
in the month of July next, for which I must trust to
Providence and my friends. If I get that, as I trust I
shall, there appears an open sea and plain sailing before
me.
I thank you for your promised article, and shall
rely on it. The July number is all from my own pen.
I am inclined to hope and to think that you will like
the number. It is pretty free, perhaps bold, and even
liberal, in your sense. I am true to the principles of
the Review, but I have presented some topics under
more popular aspects than usual, and probably will
LETTER TO CUMMINGS.
195
appear more secular and less monastic in my tone.
There is slight trace of the Dr., Gioberti, and a strong
one of O. A. Brownson himself, when writing from him-
self rather than according to order. "The Great Ques-
tion," and the Middle Ages are discussed, and I think
in a sense you will accept, with as much frankness and
boldness as the times will admit. Indeed, I expect the
number to take. When it comes out favor me with your
criticisms, and you need not fear wounding my sensi-
bility; for, though I am as thin-skinned as a flayed eel,
and should be as mad as a March hare for two seconds
and a half, if you should be savage upon me, you would
have nothing to apprehend for any longer period.
Moreover, the matter concerns more than myself.
wish, very quietly, to make the Review Roman Catholic,
and must rely on the Romans for instruction. The
Review is a sort of joint-stock concern, you know, and
its purpose is to get as far as possible the whole policy
here on the Roman track; not, however, on that of the
Roman Republic, for which our friend the Doctor has a
little too much affection. No war is to be made on the
Jesuits, but the Review must not be Jesuitical, and it
must be the organ of the Seculars rather than of the
Regulars. The thought I adopt is to baptize the
secular, and to promote Catholic secular culture, so tell
me what you think on this point. How far I am right,
and take the right view, and wherein I err.
I
Forgive me this long and rambling letter, and
*“Civil and Religious Toleration," Works, vol. x., p. 207, and The
Church in the Dark Ages," p. 239.
"
196
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
14
believe me, your much obliged and sincere friend and
very humble servant,
O. A. BROWNSON.
The lecture on Law which Cummings requested
Brownson to notice, was taken note of in the Review at
considerable length and with great commendation. It
was published in pamphlet form, but with most pervert-
ing errors; the Freeman's Journal reported it better.
Considering the times when the lecture was given, it
was most opportune, though there are no times when
the truths therein set forth do not require emphatic
teaching. He raised no question as to forms or consti-
tutions of government; but brought out the ethical
aspect of law itself as common to them all. He showed
that human law to be obligatory must be a transcript of
the law of God, for it derives its obligation only from
the will of God, as expressed in the natural or the
revealed law. Consequently, he concluded that law is
ethical, and cannot be resisted without sin, and therefore,
that the "mobocratic" spirit, the spirit of revolution,
which denies the sacredness of law, cannot be encour-
aged by a Catholic, nor, indeed, by one who would pos-
sess even natural morality. But at the same time that
his doctrine binds us to obey the law, it binds the law-
makers to enact nothing not in strict conformity to the
law of God. It then protects liberty on the one hand
and authority on the other. This is the true Catholic.
* There is in the latter part of this letter what its writer calls "a slight
trace of the Dr. (Cummings) and Gioberti." The thought is perceptible in
the articles to which he alludes, and in the sense of Cummings and Gioberti,
the baptizing of the secular, and the promotion of Catholic secular culture,
smack of the liberal view of civilization, from which he quickly withdrew
and kept aloof until some ten years later, when he accepted it, as will be
shown when we come to that period.
THE CATHOLIC OBSERVER.
197
doctrine on the subject, and had been distinctly set forth
in the article, "Authority and Liberty," in the Review
for April of the same year; but to have it eloquently
defended by a young, learned, and popular priest, who
put religion above politics, went far to rebuke the
Catholic and other editors who were carried away by
the rebellious spirit of that era of revolution, and of
whom some were said, in reciting the Lord's prayer, to
say, "Thy republic come."
CHAPTER VII.
THE CATHOLIC OBSERVER.—THE AMERICAN REVIEW.
SOCIALISM. W. H. CHANNING.- GREENE.— META-
PHYSICS. THE FRENCH REPUBLIC.-MONTREAL AND
QUEBEC.-PHILADELPHIA.
REFERENCE to the Catholic Observer, of Boston,
has been made by one or two writers of letters contained
in the previous chapter, which might lead one to sup-
pose that Brownson was the editor of that journal. But
such was not the fact.
When he became a Catholic, there being no church
in Chelsea, the most convenient church for him to
attend was either the church under charge of Rev.
George F. Haskins, in Boston, only a few minutes' walk
from the ferry, and where he went most frequently, or
another in East Boston, a couple of miles off, to which a
road led over a bridge. It was at the latter church that
his wife and the youngest four of his children were bap-
tized by the pastor, Rev. Nicholas O'Brien. This was a
* Works, vol. x., p. III.
"
1
198
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
2.
:
:
GT X.
1
priest of rare acquirements, who had been a fellow-
student of Bishop Fitzpatrick in the seminary before
they were ordained priests. Considerable intimacy had
grown up between O'Brien and Brownson, and this
intimacy became closer after O'Brien, about the end of
the year 1847, was transferred from East Boston to the
Cathedral. O'Brien was eager to be the editor of a
Catholic journal, obtained the Bishop's consent, and
promise of assistance from several priests in Boston,
and was only hindered from starting his paper by the
want of both money and credit. At O'Brien's solicita-
tion, Brownson consented to aid O'Brien, not with
money, which he did not possess, but with credit, which
he did have. Brownson accordingly made a contract
with the firm of Andrews & Prentiss to issue the paper
at low rates, to be paid weekly, O'Brien being editor and
manager. The name of the paper was "The Catholic
Observer." It was published every week, and soon
gained a fair circulation. Brownson contributed to it
regularly, or at least frequently, and was regarded by
many, who were aware of his responsibility in connec-
tion with it, as the real conductor. O'Brien soon proved
himself utterly unfit for his position as manager and as
editor. He neglected to pay the expenses of the publi-
cation regularly, and Andrews & Prentiss were often
obliged to call on Brownson for money months in
arrears. As editor, he did such poor work, not so much
from incompetency as from inapplication, that the fail-
ure of the paper was sure to follow. In fact, McMaster,
in a letter dated May 2d, 1849, wrote to Brownson:
"How does the Observer come on? I am afraid it will
accumulate debts, and I do not think it is now in the
LETTER FROM WHELPLEY.
199
way of succeeding. There is not sufficient care in the
editorial department." The Catholic Observer soon
after expired, involving Brownson in considerable
pecuniary loss.*
This same year, 1849, Brownson was invited to
contribute to the American Review. While visiting
New York, about the middle of February, for his lect-
ure in the Tabernacle, he met the editor at McMaster's.
In one of McMaster's letters it will be remembered
that he mentions his writing for this, the principal
Whig Review in the United States. A fortnight, or so
later, Brownson received a letter from the editor of that
Review, which led to his writing for it.
NEW YORK, March 5th, 1849.
MR. BROWNSON:
DEAR SIR: I regretted much that it was impossi-
ble for me to enjoy another conversation with you, after
the agreeable meeting at McMaster's. To renew con-
versation at some future day on the topics which then
interested us will be highly agreeable to myself at least.
The conversation of a thinker is not so common a lux-
ury to me but that every interview of the kind marks
the day and circumstances in that record of happy
events which a man carries in the treasure of his mem-
ory.
The occasion of my writing at this time is to open
a correspondence with you in regard to the Journal of
which I have the political conduct. I have every reason
to think that your sentiments and opinions on subjects
* O'Brien by degrees "went to the bad," but finally through the noble
effort of Rev. Sylvester Malone, of Williamsburg, N. Y., was rescued from
degradation, reconciled to the authorities in the church and permitted to
pass the remainder of his life in penance and seclusion.
"
-
200
:
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
strictly national and constitutional will find a ready
echo in the hearts and understandings of many of my
readers. If, therefore, it would be agreeable to you, for
the compensation of $50, to furnish an article on the
veto power, its value and importance, a conservative and
philosophical article, I shall be glad to publish it anony-
mously.
I am, sir, very respectfully yours,
JAMES D. WHELPLEY,
Editor American Review.
If the proposition is agreeable, please let me have
the article for May-to be ready April 15th-twelve
pages of the American Review.
To this, Brownson at first made no reply directly to
Whelpley; but sent a message through McMaster, to
whom he had occasion to write. McMaster wrote back :
MY DEAR MR. BROWNSON:-I was very glad to
get your letter, but very sorry that you should feel it
necessary to write to contradict` a story that gave me no
uneasiness whatever. I never thought of tracing the
story to you. I knew, however, that it was quite pos-
sible it might have sprung from the Bishop. Whether
it did or not I have no means of knowing. He spoke to
me about the rumor, but I cut it short by saying I knew
nothing about it, and did not care to trace it. I knew
while you were here, and even before it, that there was
something brewing, and of course supposed it would be
something "grand" and impracticable.
I am fully convinced of the propriety of the course
you recommend for our journalism, and I purpose striv-
ing to reduce it to practice. I am much indebted to you
LETTER FROM M'MASTER.
201
for your article in the Observer; it was very kind,
and I feel in no ways offended with it.
The matter of education which you introduce in
your letter, is one that I doubt if we would agree upon.
My firm opinion is that any possible form of education
in mixed schools must produce and perpetuate the con-
tinual aposťasy of the great body of Catholic youth. I
would rather keep them in the worst Irish schools, or
out of school altogether. The civilization of this coun-
try is greater than that of Ireland, but it is a heathen
civilization; and I do not believe that the Apostles
would ever have told the faithful of their days to send
their children to pagan schools-no matter how much
more civilized they might have been than the Christians.
I rejoice that you are again on terms with Dr.
Manahan. If we are to do anything in these times, it
must be by making abnegation of many personal feel-
ings, and overlooking everything not essential to the suc
cess of truth, in the views or characters of those we have
to deal with. The crucifixion of our natural sentiments
and affections is the thing requisite. For my part, I do
not find the principle abstruse to the intellect-I find it
simply hard to practise in detail.
The lecture that I delivered in Boston was so
entirely unfinished a thing that I could not think of its
occupying a place in your Review as it stands, and I
fear it would be impossible for me to finish and correct
it so as to make it fit; moreover, it is altogether too
rhetorical for an essay. It would absolutely have to be
re-written and re-arranged to make it pass as a review
article, and I have my whole time pre-engaged for six
months to come. When you want that subject treated
202
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
of you are perfectly possessed of the materials, and in a
few hours could prepare an article very much better
than I can do. I feel, in fact, that it is only out of
regard for me personally that you ask it, and to one of
my temper the courtesy is in no wise necessary.
I yesterday met Whelpley on the street and deliv-
ered your message. His reply was that he had in
his letter requested a direct answer to the points he
mentioned in it, and that he would like to have this.
from you: That you would no doubt write to him soon
and then he would make further agreements.
Believe me, with sincerity, your humble friend and
JAS. A. MCMASTER.
servant,
NEW YORK, March 18th, 1849.
Brownson accordingly sent an answer to Whelp-
ley's proposal. He said he could only write as a
Catholic, and according to the principles of his faith
which he applied to political as well as to the rest of
moral science. He therefore made some objections to
the proposal, which are sufficiently obvious from Whelp-
ley's reply.
NEW YORK,
OFFICE OF THE AMERICAN REVIEW,
April 16th, 1849.
MY DEAR SIR:-I have just opened yours in
answer to mine of some weeks since. Mr. McMaster
delivered your message to me, but as the political writ-
ing for the Review was supplied for the month, and for
that following, I preferred to wait your more explicit
answer.
LETTER FROM WHELPLEY.
203
I believe the conservative Whigs of the new school
will have no quarrel with your politics. I, at least,
have none and there would, of course, be no Catholi-
cism (or what Protestants call Romanism) in a purely
political article—at least such is to be predicted in the
case of a man who has had your experience and has
seen the world from so many points of view. If men
can be taught to venerate the established law and con-
stitution, that is at least one step forward toward the
end you seek.
Your proposition, to send such matter as you
please, is very agreeable, with the reservation added
that it be used only if it seems well adapted to the
Review. If not, it will be returned without delay.
Not intending to bias your choice, I will, however, say
that the "Veto Power" lacks a defender, and that the
"Limits of the Executive Power," are not yet estab-
lished in any philosophical manner, for this govern-
ment.
Wishing you the prosperity that good men seek,
and the consolation given to the just, I am, sir, with the
truest respect, your obedient servant,
JAMES D. WHELPLEY.
· P. S.-I am at a loss what title to use in directing
to you. I have, therefore, sent this to your name alone,
which many think needs no addition.
O. A. BROWNSON, Esq.,
Editor of Brownson's Review, Boston, Mass.
An article on "The Presidential Veto" was pre-
pared, and sent to the editor of the American Review,
whose acknowledgment of its reception was as follows:
I
་
1.
*
..
204
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
*
i
OFFICE OF THE AMERICAN Review,
June 27th, 1849.
MR. BROWNSON:
DEAR SIR-I have delayed answering yours, until
I could carefully study and understand the article you
sent, in company with some trusty brains, quick to
catch faults and appreciate excellencies.
We agree with you mainly, but find fault with
some few sentences, that bear too hard, and too roughly
"the people."
upon
I propose to you, therefore, to
allow me to draw the pen through a few lines, and
expressions; not to castrate, but only to temper your
article. I should not dare, coward that I am, to pub-
lish it as it stands.
Awaiting your permission to do this, or your orders
to have it returned, I am, sir, very respectfully and
sincerely yours,
JAMES D. WHelpley.
I believe sir, you are right in defining your own
position, Conservative Whig with a dash of Federalism.
I am myself Conservative Whig with a dash of Democ-
racy. Perhaps I shall grow wiser with advancing
years.
*
Please let me know whether you are well acquainted
with Mr. Webster, and could easily say something to
him for me. My acquaintance with him is but slight.
Brownson's article on the veto was published in the
American Review of August, 1849; but the number
containing it was not received by him till long after.
When he saw how it had been mutilated, he made his
displeasure known to Whelpley, who answered :
LETTER FROM WHELPLEY.
205
NEW YORK, Oct. 30th, 1849.
MR. BROWNSON,
ster.
DEAR SIR:Your letter of Oct. 22d is before me.
I have first to thank you for speaking to Mr. Web-
He has since written to me, and the object for
which I wished to have your personal application seems.
to have been gained. I mean to say his attention is
aroused. I was at a loss whom to apply to for such a
service, and could not go to B. myself.
I cut out the bitter parts of your article. Perhaps
you remember a certain Democratic Review that was,
and the ire excited in certain quarters by certain articles
of yours.
Great as I esteem the power of your mind
(and who does not that knows it?) I could not let you
write for me without the very privilege which you
demur to, that of cutting out the bitter parts. You
would have put a colocynth apple into the mouths of
the Whigs.
Perhaps you will ask: "Why then did you not let
me know sooner?" To that I answer, that I did not
perceive (through my natural slowness) the whole force
of the thing, until I had the article nearly ready for the
press. The parts preceding those rejected were suitable
-excellent-convincing-those that followed I had read
but hastily, and in the intervals of a hot and somewhat
irrelevant discussion with two gentlemen who contro-
verted your positions. On a cooler view of the matter,
my better judgment, or what seemed a better judgment,
made me do the thing which displeases you.
I have to regret the errors in the article, but you
are certainly mistaken in supposing that they destroy
the sense of the article to any great extent. Your MS.
206
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
was found to be very difficult to read. I was seriously
ill at the time of its publication and was obliged to trust
the reading to another. I barely escaped with life and
an injured constitution from an attack of cholera, or
what is called by that name.
A combination of unlucky circumstances have ren-
dered this passage between us somewhat unpleasant;
and yet, were you here, I should seek your society and
conversation with the same confidence and good feeling
as at first.
I believe that you are right in saying that a polit-
ical editor should be an autocrat-he is either that, or
he is a tool. That the decrees of an autocrat should be
always just is impossible, unless he be a god. My own
place as the ostensible organ of a party, has involved
me in so many contests (in which I have not always
come off with a clear conscience), I am in a manner
case-hardened, but by no means in the condition of
Editor John Smith, who declared that he had been so
long the representative of others, he had no opinions
left that he could call his own. My position, though a
partisan one, is indeed purely independent,--but there
is a saying, "Be ye wise as serpents and harmless as
doves." I believe that it is sometimes as necessary to
the success of a good cause to be silent as it is to speak
the truth.
Very respectfully and truly yours,
JAMES D. WHELPLEY.
P. S.-The Review has been sent regularly to you.
through an agent who it seems has neglected his duty.
It will be sent, until a better agent can be got, to your
name, simply through the P. O.
ASSOCIATIONISTS AND SOCIALISTS.
207
In his Review for April, 1850, Brownson inserted
the veto article with this notice prefixed to it.
"This article was originally prepared for the
American Review, at the request of the talented and
accomplished editor of that highly respectable journal,
and in great part appeared in its number for August
last. But as the editor omitted certain portions, and as
his printers greatly disfigured, by serious typographical
errors, the portions accepted, the writer of the article
wishes us to insert it as it was originally prepared;
which we do without any hesitation, for its views are
our own.-[ED. B. Q. Review.]"
In 1848 and 1849, Brownson devoted much atten-
tion to a matter then of increasing, and to-day of almost
absorbing interest;-perhaps more properly called two
questions, though so closely allied as to be nearly
identical, the question of labor organization and asso-
ciation, and socialism. His views in this regard have
been sufficiently set forth in his "Early Life," and the
conclusions at which he arrived after long and painful
struggle. The only remedy for the uneasiness, the
suffering, the longing of modern society must be found
in religion, and it is idle to expect it from associations,
from legislative enactments, or from the abolition of
governments and of laws. The religion, too, which
provides a remedy, is not the manufactured article
paraded by voluntary conventions of men of more or
less agreement in opinion; but the religion embodied
in a church with real and infallible truth, with real, life-
giving sacraments, the body of Christ, the abiding-place
of the Holy Spirit.
* Works, vol. x., p. 38.
† 1b. pp. 79, 137, 169.
208
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
پی
Two of the articles on socialism were a criticism of
a discourse before the Associationists delivered by the
Reviewer's former brother in the Unitarian ministry,
the Reverend Dr. W. H. Channing. Of Channing per-
sonally, Brownson wrote: "There are few men outside
the church for whom we have a warmer personal affec-
tion, or a more sincere esteem, than we have for the
author of this discourse, a nephew of the well known
and lamented William Ellery Channing, the warm-
hearted philanthropist and elequent Unitarian minister.
He is a man of singular purity of mind and sweetness
of disposition-earnest, self-denying, brave-with more
than his celebrated uncle's learning, and occasionally
with more than that uncle's eloquence. We have
known him for years, and, before our conversion, we
loved him as we loved few men, and hoped more from
him, with a single exception, than from any other man
with whom we were associated, or whom we were per-
mitted to include in the number of our personal friends.
We love him not less now, though our personal inter-
course with him has been nearly interrupted, and we
have ceased to have any sympathy with his views, plans,
or movements."*
It is plain from the passage quoted
above, and from many others here and there when
reviewing the writings of his former associates, that
when Brownson separated himself from the Unitarian
ministry to seek a home with those who had been
strangers, though he did not choose to expose to the
world the sacrifice he made for the sake of truth, yet it
was not without anguish of heart that he saw the ties
severing which had united him so closely with the most.
* Works, vol. x., p. 137.
-
LETTER FROM GREENE.
209
intelligent men and women of New England. Their
language, thoughts, and patriotic aims were similar; or
if at times there were differences of literary, political, or
religious opinions, each was willing to allow the rest
the same freedom he claimed for himself, and was
incapable of wilfully misunderstanding and misrepre-
senting another. Brownson was, moreover, a thorough-
going American, not blind to the faults of his country-
men, but hopefully striving with all his might for the
accomplishment of the great mission which he believed
the United States had been given in the cause of the
elevation of mankind. All these things he counted
loss for Christ.*
Another Unitarian minister, the son of an old
friend, one in whom Brownson had taken a great inter-
est, had his reasonings and speculations submitted to a
severe, but not unfriendly criticism, at about the same
time as Channing. This was William B. Greene,
whose name, however, did not appear as the author of
the book to which he refers in the following letter:
BROOKFIELD, MASS., Jan. 24th, 1849.
DEAR SIR:-I send you herewith a copy of my
"Remarks on Science of History, etc." I requested
Mr. Crosby to send you a bound copy, and I know not
whether he has done it; but if you see fit to cut up the
book, I had rather you would expend your destructive
energies on these loose sheets. We are all well here,
my wife and two children seem to find the country air
agree with them. I like Brookfield very much. By the
* Philipp, iii., 7.
Crosby & Nichols, of Boston, were the publishers.
暑
​2
.:
15
210
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
way, I notice in your last number, page 95," the words:
"There is an invincible logic in society which pushes
it to the realization of the last consequences of its prin-
ciples." Now, how do you reconcile that sentence with
the general tenor of your remarks against the logical
character of history with which you favored me some
time since, in father's office? Again, you charge the
Socialists with endeavoring to reproduce in what should
be Christian ages, the heathen religions and morality:
it "may or may not" (as you say) be the result of my
stupidity, but I really cannot see how the religion and
morality you maintain in the article in question, differs
from the religion and morality which were known among
the heathen, before our Lord came. The doctrine of the
authority, supremacy, and infallibility of the church
was certainly acknowledged among the ancient corpora-
tions of priests; and the theory of liberty and that of
the nature of evil, which you set forth on the 113th and
the three or four following pages,† seems to me to be
identical “in the last analysis" with the views main-
tained by the stoics-good doctrine, as Leroux says, for
a slave, but inapplicable at the present time when there
is more freedom among men than there was in former
ages. But my criticism may very possibly come from
my want of comprehension. As Webster says of Inger-
soll: "He has not, as we would say, a screw loose, but
is loose all over;" so I am afraid you would say of me
that I am not a mere heretic, but heretical all over-for
my conscience suggested to me, when I was reading
your description of socialism as the ne plus ultra of
* Works, vol. x., p. 83.
+ Works, vol. x., pp. 97 et seq.
"
METHOD OF PHILOSOPHIZING.
211
heresy, that I belonged to the most abandoned wing of
the socialist faction. In fact, I am a regular thorough-
going heretic, for I accept all the doctrines of the church
as I explain them.
Excuse me for writing as I do, but you and I have
had so many plain talks in times past, that I cannot
speak with you without endeavoring to come to the
point. I confess I regret that there is so wide a gulph
between us, for there is no one with whom I desire more
to labor side by side than with you. We were together
once, much to my profit, and I freely confess that I owe
more to you, philosophically and theologically, than I
do to any other five men living; and I never shall cease
to hope that we may come together again. But this
letter is too long already. Please give my best respects.
to your wife and children, with my especial love to
Elizabeth,* who I think has not forgotten me, and
accept my best wishes for your health, strength, and
prosperity, according to body, soul, and spirit.
As always, very truly your friend,
W. B. GREENE.
Greene's book was the first metaphysical work that
Brownson reviewed after his conversion. Since his refu-
tation of Kant in 1844, he had had very little to say
about metaphysics, except so far as applied to theological
matters in his Review; but he had been studying in
his mind and revising his philosophical system. Under
the influence of Pierre Leroux's writings for two or
three years before he became a Catholic, he had been
the first to introduce that philosopher to the American
* Miss Peabody.
M
¿
1.
÷
=
I
!!
212
=
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE Life.
public. He was indebted to Leroux for much that was
sound and for much that was not sound in his phi-
losophy. It was Leroux that led him to substitute the
ontological for the psychological method of philoso-
phizing; and he now found that the former method leads
to pantheism, just as the latter leads to egoism or
atheism. Each is sophistical; for each starts from a
single term of the ideal judgment, and from a single
term nothing else can be deduced. Logic is impossible
without two terms and their nexus: Omnipotence itself
would have no creative power, but would forever remain
unproductive unity, unless the principle of multiplicity
-first and final cause and the medium of both-the
principle, the end, and the mediator-were necessary
relations in the very Godhead, of whom, through whom,
and unto whom are all things.*
As almost always happens with those who come to
learn the defect of either psychologism or ontologism,
that they rush from one extreme to the other, Brown-
son from 1842 to 1844 should be classed as an ontolo-
gist. During the next four years, re-examining his
principles, he came to the conclusion that either the
psychological principle or the ontological, exclusively
taken, is destructive of philosophy which must rest
equally on both in their logical, that is, their real rela-
tion. He therefore asserts: Being,-real and necessary
being, not the abstract being of Rosmini and the ontolo-
gists,—creates all that exists. In the review of Greene's
* Rom. xi. 36 —I am well aware that the Vulgate reads, ex ipso, et per
ipsum, et in ipso, not in ipsum; but the Greek has e autov, as have the
Greek fathers, and King James's translators, and as it is hardly to be.
doubted, St. Paul wrote it.
NO DIRECT INTUITION OF GOD.
213
book* the formula is demonstrated to be intuitive, a
priori, preceding all judgments a posteriori, and ren-
dering them possible. "It is possible," he says, "to
obtain this synthesis, the adequate philosophcial for-
mula, only as it reveals and affirms itself a priori in
direct and immediate intuition, in which we ourselves
are but simple spectators." The intuition here described
is plainly not empirical, but pure, or ideal, a distinction
more clearly set forth and insisted on in later writings.‡
Another point of importance not explained with suffi-
cient clearness in Brownson's article "An a priori auto-
biography" is what he meant by the ideal intuition of
being. There are expressions in this and some of the
succeeding articles on metaphysics, which would indicate
that he asserted intuition of God directly and immedi-
ately. Certainly he never intended at any period of his
life to teach that man has direct and immediate intu-
ition of God, as God; but he had maintained from the
first moment that he began to write on philosophy, that
man has intuition of absolute ideas, not derived from
experience, of the good, the true, the necessary, and
that these are not mere abstractions of the mind operat-
ing on concrete objects of experience, which are bad or
imperfect, false or contingent, and he further held
-
*“An apriori Autobigraphy," Review, January, 1850, p. 1, Works, vol.
.i, p. 214.
+ Works, vol. i., p. 241.
Attention is also called to the passage quoted, which was written in
1849, because Rev. A. F. Hewit in "The Catholic World," said that
Brownson never made the intuition ideal, until frightened into it by the
Syllabus of Pius IX, attached to his encyclical of December 8, 1864.
Hewit would perhaps have changed the date to the condemnation of
Guenther and his school, March 30, 1857, but for the fact that he himself
was maintaining something very much like "Immediata Dei cognitio,
habitualis saltem, intellectui humano essentialis est ita ut sine ea nihil
cognoscere potest, siquidem est ipsum lumen intellectuale," the first of the
condemed propositions of Guenther, during the interval from 1857 to 1865.
Of this more further on.
A
214
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
.
that these are identified by reflection with God, the true,
the good, the necessary, the infinite, and therefore, the
intuition of these is virtually, though not formally,
intuition of real and necessary being, and that real and
necessary being is God.
I
It was not as a mere speculation of philosophical
inquiry, or for the purpose of exhibiting dialectical
ability that Brownson wearied over these matters.
very much doubt if a mistake in matter of faith is as
fertile in errors as one in the principles of philosophy.
Catholics can easily correct dogmatic errors, if they are
docile to the decisions of the church; but an error in
the very starting point of philosophy may overthrow all
belief, and apostasies without end may be traced to the
discrepancy between the philosophy and the theology
taught for centuries past. Dr. Cummings had devoted
much study and great ability to the subject of Catholic
education, and the opinion he expresses in a letter given
in this chapter, that the pantheistic or else egoistic
starting point of philosophy taught in our colleges and
universities is not only incontrovertibly fatal to the
political principles of youth, but equally deplorable for
its effect on dogmatic theology, is worthy of serious
meditation.
Just after finishing his article on Greene's a priori
autobiography, Brownson speaks of it in a letter to Cum-
mings, in the following terms:
G
BOSTON, Oct. 22, 1849.
Rev. and DeaR SIR:—I have been waiting impa-
tiently for the last three weeks for your promised article.
I want it very much, and pray you to let me have it as
soon as you can conveniently, at least to let me know
LETTER TO CUMMINGS.
215
how soon you can send it, and the probable number of
pages MS. it will be. I have a literary article from
Miles, which I shall publish in my next number, and
also an article on the "Worship of Images," from Phila-
delphia,* and very good. I have just written a pro-
found and masterly article, of course, on metaphysics,
or the first philosophy, which I shall expect you to be
enraptured with, for it is in the sense and spirit, if I
mistake not, of your favorite Gioberti. How much I am
really indebted to Gioberti I do not know. I have read
the first four chapters of his Introduzione allo studio
della Filosofia, and the reading has constantly cleared
up my views, and without it I certainly should not, and
perhaps could not, have written it. I make in a note
all suitable acknowledgments, at least all that just now
it can be prudent to make, both as it regards the public
and myself, because he is in bad odor, and I do not
know whether I agree with him throughout or not.
I had last summer, spring rather, my mind called
back to my metaphysical studies, by learning the philos-
ophy taught by Father Sopranis in Worcester College.
Inter nos, I will say that it struck me that it was essen-
tially unsound, and my son told me he found it leading
him, in spite of himself, to pantheism, and that he was
able to save himself only by making his act of faith. I
suggested to him some objections to it, which he pre-
sented to the professor, for which the professor called
him in class an infidel and a blasphemer, this led me to
re-examine the subject, and I have done it by the aid of
Gioberti.
Many years ago I came to the conclusion that it was
* By Bishop Kenrick.
ܢܐ
+
216
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
辛
​impossible to think without the presence of the intelli-
gible, and, therefore, that the intelligible cannot be
sought and found by the intellect, but must present and
reveal itself. Hence, I drew the conclusion either no
intellection, no knowledge, no philosophy, or the intelli-
gible reveals and affirms itself to us, or that the prin-
ciples of philosophy, which it is the province of method
to apply to the solution of special problems, can be
obtained by us only as they are divinely revealed to us
in direct and immediate intuition. I also came to the
conclusion that from the simple conception of being,
ens reale est, it is impossible to deduce the conception
of existences, and therefore either dead pantheism or
autotheism, or direct and immediate intuition of exist-
ences, that is of the formula, ens reale creator est.
This formula contained all the necessary principles of
philosophy, and as what is known intuitively is a
genuine revelation of the intelligible by itself, I simply
said the principles of philosophy are and must be
divinely revealed, and to pretend that we ourselves seek
and find them is to deny the possibility of philosophy,
and to place it on the route to scepticism and nihilism, or
nullism. There I stopped, and for four or five years
was employed in the study of theology, and took the
philosophy I found mingled with the theology in the
authors I studied, without tracing it back to its founda-
tion, or examining it to see if really sound or not. But
when I found the Catholic professor virtually adopting
Cartesianism, and sending his students out destitute of
the intelligibility or principles of philosophy, to seek
them, and attempting to demonstrate them, when by the
very supposition, he had no principle of demonstration,
V
LETTER TO CUMMINGS.
217
I was startled, and recalled to my old philosophy, and
led to suspect that a man may be a very orthodox theo-
logian, so far as he relies on faith, but a very heterodox
philosopher. Gioberti confirmed me in my suspicions,
and I have turned metaphysician once more, with what
success, it is not for me to say; but I have struck at the
whole fabric of modern philosophy, and have endeavored
to revive the philosophy of St. Augustine and the great
fathers and doctors of the church. It is possible I shall
disturb a hornet's nest, but my bishop has given me his
imprimatur.
Indeed, the more I reflect on the subject, the more
evident it appears to me that we owe many of the errors
of modern times to the unsound philosophy of Catholic
theologians. Has it ever occurred to you that modern
radicalism is nothing but the development of Gallican-
ism transferred from the church to the state, or that
principle of Gallicanism which derives the infallibility
of the papal decision from the subsequent assent of the
church? Is it not possible to detect the germs of all we
have now in philosophy, in politics, and even in theo-
logy to oppose, in our own authors? Have heretics
ever done anything more than seize and develop some
principle emitted by orthodox doctors? It strikes me
all heresies have their seminal principles among our-
selves, and are effectually refuted only in correcting our
own philosophy, intellectual, moral, and political.
But I am running into a dissertation, when I
intended only a brief epistle. I regret to learn that the
wind did not spare your church. But the good Father
would try your faith and your patience. He has had
his purpose in it, and a good purpose. So I trust you
↓
;
€
:
I
#
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
will feel no discouragement, but as St. Paul and his
companions, when they came in sight of the Three
Taverns,* thank God and take courage, although labor
and martyrdom were before them. Remember, me
reverently and affectionately to the Bishop, his grace
that is or is soon to be, kindly, cordially to my friend
Mac, and believe me truly your friend in Xt. and
obedient servant.
O. A. BROWNSON.
218
REV. J. W. CUMMINGS, D. D.,
St. Patrick's Cathedral, N. Y.
Unable to keep his promise made in June, to pre-
pare an article for the October Review, Cummings
makes excuse that he was too busy.
NEW YORK, October 26th, 1849.
DEAR FRIEND-I have been kept so busy since I
wrote to you that I have not been able to mature the
article on Ecclesiastical History. I must, therefore, beg
your indulgence again. But I do not intend to beg
off altogether. I will be in Boston to lecture on the
15th of November, and as the lecture is a pretty good
one, and will be fairly written out by that time, I hope
it will answer for an article. The subject is "Religion
in Society." We might put the title of the "Solution
de Grands Problèmes" at the head of the article, and
pave the way for Mrs. Ripley's translation. We have
not yet wound up with the Appletons, and cannot say
whether they will publish it or not.
I am delighted to hear of your article (An a Priori
Autobiography) on the starting-point of metaphysics. I
have never been able to see anything on the subject in
*Acts xxvii; 15.
1
LETTER FROM CUMMINGS.
219
the courses of philosophy but a vibration from egoism
to pantheism; and if, as you say, the effect of these
crude ontological systems is fatal to the political prin-
ciples of European youth (an incontrovertible fact), I
can assure you that it is not to be less deplored from its
influence on dogmatic theology. You are at work again
to write the first letter on the old Aristotelian tabula
rasa. Are you aware of a great dispute very near akin
to your subject between Rosmini on the one side, and
Galluppi on the other, and subsequently Gioberti? It
arose in consequence of Rosmini's proposed system of
innate ideas. Your investigation lies back of it, for
they virtually admitting the necessity of the intelligibile
in some more available shape than Cartesianism, Con-
dillacism, or Kantism, had been able to present it in,
were ever busy about the how it was presented, not
exactly the what. As I never read Gioberti's Intro-
duzione, perhaps I do not use your expression precisely
in the sense you take it, but I have often studied the
subject, and spoken of the evil consequences of its vague
and gratuitous presentation by what are called Treatises
of Catholic Philosophy. If we could get rid of panthe-
istic philosophy, and the heathen literature which our
youths in college go through as a preparation for it,
the Political Reformers would not find so many gulls
amongst the younger portion of European ex-Collegians
and University boys.
*
Excuse my hasty letter, and prepare yourself for
many anxious questions when I shall have the pleasure
of seeing you in Boston. We will then also arrange
matters for your lecture in New York.
Believe me, yours sincerely and respectfully,
J. W. CUMMINGS.
220
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE
•
-
:
::
On receipt of this last letter from Cummings,
Brownson wrote him:
BOSTON, Oct. 30, 1849.
MY DEAR DR. CUMMINGS:-I am greatly obliged
to you for the promise of the article, and shall rely on
it. Nevertheless, do not abandon the one on Ecclesias-
tical History. It is much wanted.
As to the Solution de Grands Problèmes, I am
afraid if only the first part is published, it will not take
well. The first volume is a little dull, and does not
promise all the work turns out to be. When I recom-
mended Mrs. R. to translate it, I had not read it. I am
now reading it. The work is not precisely what, but it
is more than I expected. If the Appletons will publish
it, it will have a grand sale; if only one of our publish-
ers issue it, it will drag heavy. It is a good book, but
it does not compare with Balmes. I wish the Appletons
could be induced to publish an edition of Hanford's
translation of Balmes. It is the book for our times, and
every nerve should be strained to get it before the
American public. It does for Protestantism under the
political and social, what Moehler does for it under the
dogmatical, and Gioberti under the philosophical point
of view. Gioberti has injured himself by attempting to
make his philosophy subsidiary to his politics, and I
fear that his war upon the Jesuits and hatred of Austria
will prevent his philosophy from receiving the considera-
tion that is its due; but as far as my knowledge extends,
Moehler, Balmes, and Gioberti are the three great
authors of our times, and whose writings are the
maga-
zine from which the rest of us must draw our ammu-
nition in fighting heresy. Moehler has for ever silenced
C
LETTER TO CUMMINGS.
221
the dogmatic pretensions of Protestantism, Gioberti its
philosophical, and Balmes its social and political. Ger-
many, Italy, Spain have each spoken. These three
authors, very unlike, each the representative of the
genius of his nation, seem to me to have instaurated the
polemics of the century, and their works, that is, Moeh-
ler's Symbolik, Gioberti's Introduzione allo Studio della
Filosofia, expurgated of some things not connected with
his philosophy [and Balmes's Protestantismo comparado
con el Catolicismo] are the three which it is of the
greatest importance now to have studied by both Catho-
lics and Protestants. All three are, from their respec-
tive points of view, judgments calmly and deliberately
pronounced on Protestantism, in the name of human
reason, and by men who were competent to pronounce
the final judgment of mankind.
I have said these men have instaurated the polemics
of the 19th century. It would, perhaps, be more true
to say, they have closed the controversy and pronounced
judgment, leaving us nothing to do, but to carry the
judgment into execution. It is remarkable that no one
of them adopts the old polemical tone. It is not the
advocate that speaks, it is the judge, simply summing
up the case and applying the law. Is not this fact sig-
nificant? Judgment is not pronounced till after death.
Is it not, therefore, evident that Protestantism is dead,
that is has viritually fallen into the past, and that men
unconsciously think and speak of it as a thing that
was? Fuit Ilium. Look where you will, men are
writing, not the annals, not the chronicles, but the his-
tory of Protestantism, and history is a record of the past.
There is no history of the church; you have annals,
►
H
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
chronicles, and history of this or that event, but none of
the church proper, for she is living. The tone or man-
ner adopted by these great men, in speaking of Protes-
tantism, is in my view an instructive fact, for it indicates
their consciousness of having the whole fact before them.
222
I am glad to find you sympathizing with me in
my philosophical aspirations. I have not read Galluppi,
not do I know the ground he takes in opposition to
Rosmini, but Rosmini's doctrine I believe I know, and
if I do, I reject it. I go against innate ideas, and for
direct, immediate intuition, I agree with Rosmini that
l'ente is the forma of the intellect, but I differ from him
as to its being l'ente in genere, and make it l'ente reale.
I do not make the idea of being innate, but suppose real
being to reveal itself immediately to our intellect in
direct intuition, and by this revelation our intellect is
constituted, not vis intellectiva, but intellectus or vis
intellectiva that intellects, that is, intellect in actu, or
the vis exerted and completed in act. It is not innate,
for it is not in the psychological faculty, but is the
object of that faculty, and present to it as its object,
perhaps, at as early a period as the advocates of innate
ideas themselves contend. The vis intellectiva is in
potentia in regard to its object, the intelligible, and can
act only as the object presents itself to it as the intelli-
gible, as we cannot see without seeing somewhat, nor
without something visible to be seen. The advocates of
innate ideas, make the idea, not the intelligible object,
essential and indispensable to every act of intelligence,
but, if I understand them, the inneity of the intellect
itself, which in the fact of knowledge is presented, not
in the object known, but as an element of the subject
་
LETTER TO CUMMINGS.
223
♣
knowing, and which the subject, as Leibnitz contends,
supplies from its own funds. I would rather say, since
the idea is God, that we are born in it than that it is
born in us.
I see Mac charges Gioberti's philosophy with being
a subtle Lamennaisism. I think he is absolutely wrong
in this. If he had said there is subtle Lamennaisism
in the book, he might, perhaps, say something in his
defence, but there never was a philosophy more directly
opposed to Lamennaisism than Gioberti's, as I under-
stand them. I will not swear by Gioberti as a man or
a politician, but as a philosopher I will till better
informed, but he needs to be read with care, and to be
correctly understood, for he can easily be made to say
what he does not.
But I am wearying you with my nonsense. I
trust I shall see much of you when here.
Yours truly,
O. A. BROWNSON.
The lecture on "Religion in Society" was pub-
lished in Brownson's Review for January, 1850, under
the form of a review of Solution de Grands Problèmes,
mise à la portée de tous les Esprits, Par l'Auteur de
Platon-Polichinelle. The same author, I think, wrote
the "Onguent contre la morsure de la Vipère noire,
composé par le Dr. Evariste Gypendole, Ancien Chirur-
gien Major de la Vieille Garde, Médecin Consultant du
Roi de Lahore, etc., which Bishop Fitzpatrick translated
in great part, for the April Review, 1845. The author's
real name was Martinet. The "Solution de Grands
Problèmes" in Mrs. Ripley's translation received the
title of "Religion in Society."
224
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
Perhaps the most offensive articles, to a large num-
ber of Brownson's readers, not excepting those on the
Irish movement," were his efforts to combat the prevail-
ing liberalism of the day by his articles on Authority
and Liberty, on Civil and Religious Toleration,‡ and
on the Licentiousness of the Press.§
The revolutionary spirit of 1848 was as active in a
large class of American Catholics as with the European
radicals, and it was strengthened with the notion very
extensively entertained by them that the state is inde-
pendent of the moral or spiritual order, the worst of the
four Gallican assertions of 1682. He therefore shows
that the state's independence of the spiritual order,
embodied in the church, is pure despotism. A still worse
despotism threatened society in the radical spirit, whose
principles are subversive of all order and must eventuate
in the destruction of both church and state. La Mennais
and his associates proposed an alliance between Catho-
licity and radicalism, and though promptly condemned
by Gregory XVI, the poison went on spreading far and
wide in the Catholic body. Outside of that body,
Brownson had for years preached the democracy of
Christianity when he was a liberal, a radical; for he
had studied the subject, and regarded the policy as
highly favorable to the views he then held, and as hos-
tile to all in church and state to which he was himself
opposed; and it was not difficult for him when he had
ceased to belong to the "movement," and had become a
Catholic, to see that it was directly hostile to everything
he must, as a Catholic, uphold as dear and sacred. He
* Shandy McGuire, vol. xvi., p. 144, and Ventura's Funeral Oration on
O'Connell, vol. x., p. 69.
† Ib., p. 207.
Sxvi., p. 133.
+ Vol. x., p. III.
4
THE CATHOLIC PARTY IN FRANCE.
225
had detected it before the French revolution of February,
1848, in the speeches of Montalembert and in the writ
ings of Lacordaire, and had condemned it in Ventura's
oration on O'Connell, and if anything could have shaken
his Catholic faith, the shouts of viva Pio IX from Protes-
tant, infidel, and socialistic throats would have done it.
Long before the revolution of 1848, Brownson had freely
censured the French Catholics, not for opposing the
government in Louis Philippe's reign, as though their
motives were not justifiable, or the ends sought not
legitimate and desirable, but for the manner in which
they conducted their opposition, and the spirit and ten-
dency they indirectly and unintentionally encouraged,
yielding too much to the so-called liberals, and not
sufficiently careful to mark the line which separates
loyal and conservative from factious, radical, and des-
tructive opposition. In the article on the Licentious-
ness of the Press,* Brownson tells the French that
their government must be either Catholic or Socialistic;
for there are but two principles in French society,-
the Catholic principle and the Socialistic, and no gov-
ernment can live that does not strictly conform to one
or the other of these. Socialist it cannot be, for social-
ism is incompatible, as he shows, with the existence of
human society. France seemed to be pretty thoroughly
aroused to the dangers of socialism, or red-republicanism,
and the danger he foresaw was from the party of
Tocqueville, the minister of foreign affairs. "These
men" he described as "destitute of all true statesman-
ship: they are mere theorists, who have not the sense
to perceive that a policy that might be admissible when
* Works, vol. xvi, p. 133.
16
226
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
: ·
the question is the gradual restriction of an authority
too unlimited for liberty, must be wholly misplaced
when the question is the reconstruction of power and
the re-establishment of order. They are not exactly
socialists; they are not exactly democrats; they reject
and accept a little of all parties, and pass for moderate,
judicious men; but being men without any consistent
principles of their own, men of compromise, neither
exactly one thing nor another, and appealing to no great
and commanding principle in the national mind or
heart, they cannot but prove themselves utterly impo-
tent to found a strong and stable government, such as
France now needs."* Montalembert's acceptance of the
Reviewer's criticism was expressed in a letter dated
January 28, 1850, in which he says: "Je suis complète-
ment et en tout de votre avis. J'ai aimé et j'aime en-
core la liberté; mais je reconnais, avec vous, que j' ai
trop souvent, confondu sa cause aver celle de la Révolu-
tion. Je suis occupé maintenant à réparer le mal
auquel j'ai très involontairement contribué, et je m'
efforce d' extirper du Camp Catholique l' esprit révolu-
tionnaire que la polémique et l' influence délétère de
l' atmosphère politique ou sociale où nous vivons y ont
fait pénétrer. J'ignore si mes amis et moi nous réus-
sirons dans cette rude tâche; mais j' y consacrerai tout
ce qu'il me reste de force et de courage; et après avoir
lutté pendant vingt ans contre l' idolâtrie gallicane, qui
confondait l'autel avec le trône, je lutterai vingt ans
encore, s'il le faut, contre l' idolâtrie bien plus révol-
tante encore qui veut nous faire adorer la démocratie
comme la conséquence du Christianisme. J'ai toujours
* Ib. p. 142.
UDAN
LETTER FROM MONTALEMBERT.
227
détesté la démocratie, par instinct d'abord, et mainten-
ant par raison, et par suite de l' expérience que nous
vaut l'histoire contemporaine, des maux incalculables
dont ce principe politique est la source. Je vous sais
un gré infini de m'avoir prouvé, par votre exemple, que
l'on peut être même républicain sans être démocrate.
Ce n'est pas que je crois ou que je tienne à la durée de
la république en France. Mais la république n'est
qu' une forme, plus ou moins légale, plus ou moins salu-
taire, du gouvernement temporel. La démocratie est
un principe radicalement incompatible avec la nature
humaine, avec la nature sociale, et surtout avec
l'Eglise Catholique. La démocratie est la fille du
rationalisme. Elle n'est au fond autre chose que le
socialisme: et c'est sous ce dernier nom qu' il convient
surtout de l'attaquer. Je résume tout ce que je pense
à ce sujet per ce mot que j'ai recueilli de la bouche du
plus docte et du plus distingué de nos prélats (lui même
fils de laboureur), l' archevêque de Reims, 'La démo-
cratie est la grande hérésie du XIXe Siècle.'
"Je ne sais si vous avez lu dans l' Ami de la Re-
ligion d' Octobre 1848 les deux lettres que j'ai écrites
contre la funeste pensée qu' avait conçue alors le P.
Lacordaire et ses disciples de proclamer une alliance
entre l'Eglise et la Démocratie dans leur journal,
1' Ere Nouvelle, qui est heureusement tombé."
The same writer says in a letter written on Easter
Sunday, 1850: "My satisfaction and my edification have
been so great that I think I cannot better employ some
moments of this Holy Day than in thanking you ex imo
corde for the good you have done me. I am happy to
state that I am in perfect unison with you. Nothing
228
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
can exceed nor indeed equal, in my opinion, your most
judicious, because most righteous, appreciation of men
and things in Europe. I can but admire how the light
of Faith and Prayer can illuminate, at so many thou-
sand miles distance the events and characters of our
hemisphere.
*
"I have been particularly struck and affected by
your reflections on the different success which attends
on those who denounce authority and those who defend
it. (April, 1847, pp. 139-141.) I can feel the pungent
PP.
truth of all you say on this subject, as I am at present
the object of great obloquy and almost complete derelic-
tion on the part of the Catholic public of this country,
because ever since the fate of the Swiss Sonderbund in
1847, I have perceived and proclaimed the danger of
that false liberalism which has corrupted the whole of
Europe, and has crept into the core of Catholicism both
in France and Italy. The Univers itself, although free
from many of the follies and flatteries which distinguish
the school of F. Lacordaire and his associates, can and
will not forgive me for having said that we had all gone
too far in our opposition to regular and civil authority,
during the last reign. A journalist can do no wrong,
is the axiom of our cotemporaries; alas! I think the
contrary would be truer: a journalist can do no good!
Exceptions like you, my dear sir, can only but prove the
rule. I trust you will not have allowed yourself to be
led astray by the denunciation of the Univers against
our new law on Education. I assure you that this law
(which was neither framed nor suggested by me, but
which I have adopted and defended out of submission to
* Works, vol. vi, pp. 285 6.
•
LETTER FROM MONTALEMBERT.
229.
the superior intelligence of Mgr. Dupanloup and M. de
Falloux), that this law, I say, is as good as possible, and
quite sufficient to enable the clergy to give all the edu-
cation required here, if our clergy has zeal and devotion
enough to make use of the immense rights and privi-
leges they are invested with by the new legislation. But
it is much more easy and convenient to read, and even
to write, newspapers and pamphlets, as we have done for
the last twenty years, against government and minis-
ters, than to make the best of those instruments which
providence allows us to find at hand. Compare our law
with the famous Bill of Catholic Emancipation in Eng-
land, and you will be astonished at the conquest we
have achieved. The ungrateful violence we have expe-
rienced on the part of so many Catholics is to me a proof
of the value of our work, imperfect and incomplete as it
is, like everything human, and particularly like every-
thing political in our days. I trust you will have read
the last pamphlet of the Bishop of Langres on this
vexata quæstio, which I send you per post. I am eager
to know how and whether I can address you per post
books or printed documents. I recommend to your
most sympathetic attention our last publication: the
Speeches and Letters of Sr. Donoso Cortés, Marquis of
Valdegamas. You will be delighted with them."
The pamphlet, referred to in this letter, by Mgr.
Parisis, Bishop of Langres, and Member of the French
Assembly, was a very full explanation of the Law on
Education, which although unnecessarily complicated,
and far from perfect, Brownson regarded as on the whole
a great gain for religion, and likely to have a salutary
effect in its practical workings as against socialists and
230
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
=
E
⠀
Է
enemies of public order. The Holy Father, in permit-
ting the bishops to coöperate with the government in
carrying it into effect, exhorts them, where the result of
the law would be mixed schools, to establish separate
schools for Catholics, and admonishes them "to call
often to the recollection of the faithful the fundamental
dogma-out of the Catholic Church there is no salva-
tion." At least three times already had Pius IX, the
fourth year of whose reign was not yet completed, urged
the bishops and clergy to impress on the faithful the
absolute necessity of the Catholic faith to salvation. He
failed, however, to check the growth of latitudinarianism
in the United States. Brownson had been abused by
some Catholics for insisting on the Catholic dogma, and
was to be more so hereafter. It was in view of this
dogma also that he found fault with the anonymous
editor of "St. Vincent's Manual," who in a note ex-
plains away the text of Pius IV's Profession of Faith,
and Dr. McCaffrey, while agreeing with him, felt
unable to get the publishers to cancel the obnoxious
commentary. At the present time, scarcely any Catho-
lic periodical in this country, published in English,
accepts the dogma, without such qualifications as make
it futile.
The fear of wounding Protestant susceptibilities by
any insinuation that those out of the church are not
just as much in the way of salvation as are Catholics,—
namby-pamby Catholicity, as Brownson termed it,-was
found in Lower Canada as well as here. Brownson had
never lectured in that province till the spring of 1850,
when he received an invitation through James Sadlier,
the publisher, to deliver a course of lectures in Montreal.
LETTER FROM SADLIER.
231
Brownson replied, accepting the invitation subject to the
approval of the Bishop of Montreal, Mgr. Bourget, and
gave the titles of the proposed lectures. In reply Sad-
lier wrote:
MONTREAL, 15 March, 1850.
DEAR SIR:-On receipt of your note I waited on
his Lordship the Bishop of Montreal, and he not only
gave his permission, but he is delighted at the idea of
your coming. At the same time he suggested to you
the propriety of changing the name of your first lecture,
as he thought the name might probably deter many
Protestants from attending,-still he thought the same
lecture might be delivered under a different name.
The policy of the church here is, when treating
points of dispute between them and the sectaries, to ex-
cite as little angry feeling as possible. Some think
they stretch those peace resolutions a little too far,
especially as the Protestants are unsparing in their de-
nunciation of the church. I thought it well to mention
this matter to you, not that his Lordship intimated even
in the remotest degree anything of the kind, but I know
that instructions to that effect are given to the clergy
and I thought it well that you might be acquainted with
the fact.
Every person to whom I have spoken, Protestant
and Catholic, seems pleased with your coming. The
New-Englanders particularly, notwithstanding your
"embracing the errors of popery," are somewhat proud
of you, and you will find a large number of them
amongst your audience.
1
1
:
232
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
You will be kind enough to drop me a line on
receipt of this.
I am yours respectfully,
J. SADLIER.
O. A. BROWNSON, Esq., Boston.
As soon as the last proofs of the April Review were
corrected, the editor started for Montreal to fulfil his
engagement there. To one born and bred in the United
States, Montreal seems very much more like a European
than an American town, and presents many objects of
interest to the visitor. The people, too, are different in
many of their ways of thinking and acting from those
in the towns where Brownson had hitherto lectured or
visited. He was pleased with his experience there, and
for many years after repeated his visit. The last lec-
ture of the course had been set for Tuesday, April 16th;
but the Friday before a request was made for one more
lecture on the 18th, which Brownson gave. On the
19th he took the boat for Quebec where the Abbé
Taschereau, afterwards Archbishop of Quebec, and some
of his friends had made arrangements for a repetition of
the Montreal course of lectures. From Quebec he
returned to Montreal in time to witness the celebration
of the Feast of the Ascension with much pomp in the
large church of Nôtre Dame, leaving for Boston the
next day, and reaching home on Saturday, May 11th.
Among the friendships formed by Brownson in Mont-
real, it is pleasant to recall those with Mrs. James Sad-
lier, the well-known author; with A. La Rocque who
procured him a long list of subscribers to his Review
and whom Brownson assisted by advice and information
in the plan he was then engaged in of establishing a
LETTER FROM CLERK.
233
3
House of Correction and Refuge under the management
of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul; and with George
E. Clerk, whose father is said to have been the original
Jonathan Oldbuck. It was proposed while Brownson
was in Montreal to start a Catholic journal in the
English language; the plan was put in execution a few
months later, and Clerk became the editor. His long
and valuable service on the "True Witness" deservedly
place him in the foremost rank of Catholic editors.
His letter to Brownson when it was decided to start the
new paper will interest his former readers, at least.
MONTREAL, July 3d, 1850.
MY DEAR SIR :-You, I trust, will excuse the lib-
erty I take in thus addressing you. As members of
the church of Christ we have a bond of union which
renders unnecessary the vain formalities of a mere
worldly acquaintance. When you were in Montreal
you were aware that it was proposed to establish an
English Catholic Journal to repel the attacks made
against us by our Protestant and infidel enemies. Since
your departure the matter has not been allowed to lie
idle; the Bishops have taken it up warmly, and have
requested me to undertake the superintendence of the
newspaper to be called the "True Witness." His Lord-
ship of Montreal, knowing your zeal for everything
connected with our Holy Religion, held out to me hopes.
that, perhaps, you also would from time to time be
induced to favor us with your support, perhaps occa-
sionally a few lines from your pen. For you may be
assured that your chaff will be of more use to us than
any other man's wheat. I therefore take the liberty of
forwarding you a prospectus, which has been published
:
234
÷
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
here, as a manifesto of our objects and of the reasons.
which have induced the Catholics of Canada to take up
arms in their own defence. Now, what I would ask is
this, that you would sometimes be good enough to favor
me with your views, with your advice. As an old
soldier, I a recent recruit, ask instruction as to the mode
of carrying on the spiritual warfare in which I am
about to be engaged-to be allowed to have the honor
of reckoning you amongst our correspondents, with or
without, the sanction of your name, as to you may seem
the more appropriate. Could you recommend any
peculiar mode of study or of argument to be adopted,
you would confer a great favor upon me.
I have just had the pleasure of reading your July
number, which only increases in me, and I may say in
all who read it, the desire that we be again favored with
another visit, that we may again have the pleasure of
hearing you take up your testimony in the cause of
truth.
We hope to be able to get about 1,000 subscribers
to our proposed paper, and when the subscription list
shall have been made up to that amount, the first num-
ber will make its appearance. Allow me to recommend
myself and the undertaking to your prayers, and believe
me, my dear sir, very respectfully yours,
GEORGE EDWARD CLERK.
In September Sadlier wrote:
t
MONTREAL, Sept. 24, 1850.
DEAR SIR: His Lordship, the Bishop of Montreal,
was speaking to Mr. La Rocque a few days since, when
he expressed a wish that you would come and deliver
some more lectures here this fall or winter. I am sure
I
LETTER FROM SADLIER.
235
that you would attract much larger audiences than you
did on your former visit. Many persons have been
speaking to me on the subject and all are of the same
opinion. If you can come without great inconvenience
to yourself, do so. Your lectures last winter have done
a great deal of good to Catholics as well as set a number
of Protestants inquiring. The "True Witness" has
already over 1,000 subscribers and the list is increasing
daily. The proprietors (Messrs. Clerk and Sharing)
have purchased type and a press, and have a very nice
office, and there is no doubt of their success, if they are
only careful.
Hoping that you are in the enjoyment of good
health, I am yours respectfully,
J. SADLIER.
O. A. BROWNSON, Esq., Boston.
In the latter part of October, and the first part of
November, Brownson lectured again in Montreal to
increased numbers of intelligent listeners. In one of
these lectures while condemning the practice of divorce,
the lecturer proclaimed a view regarding marriage
which he had put forth in the Boston Quarterly Review
when he was a preacher, that marriage is a contract
between two parties to live together till death shall part
them; that an agreement to live together till one or the
other shall ask for a divorce is nothing else than legal-
ized concubinage; and if the parties so mean to agree,
even though the words may be "till death shall part
them," it is not marriage. At the next session of the
Canadian Legislature a divorce bill was introduced, and
in the discussion of the subject in the journals Brown-
son's declaration was greatly distorted, as is shown by
•
236
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE
the following communication from the Editor of the
"True Witness: "
MONTREAL, May 31st.
DEAR DOCTOR:-I would not trouble you to notice
the impertinencies of Protestant papers; but when a
journal, nominally at least Catholic, and giving itself
the air of being a quasi organ of the ecclesiastical
authorities, presumes to repeat and endorse these calum-
nies, the case is different.
A discussion has arisen as to the propriety of
Catholic members of our Legislature voting for a
Divorce Bill. The Canadien, by repute a Catholic
organ,-in reality the mere organ of the Ministry,-
takes the affirmative and insists!!! that Protestant mar-
riages are voidable because their validity is rejected by
the Church. Our funny friend cites also one Dr.
Brownson as having publicly stated in his lectures in
Canada "That Protestant marriages were null, and, at
bottom, nothing but concubinage." These expressions
were indeed attributed to you by the Protestant papers
of Canada, to whom I gave a flat contradiction. But
now that this same story is repeated in a Catholic
paper, the affair is more serious, and it would be well if
you would write to me, as soon as possible, contradict-
ing this monstrous statement of the Canadien.
That amongst unbaptized persons no valid mar-
riage-sacramental marriage-can be contracted, is
certain; and it is also certain that too many of the
Americans are unbaptized, and therefore incapable of
contracting Christian marriage. But this is not the
question. You are made to say, that Protestant mar-
riages are but concubinage. It is this I would wish
you to contradict, once for all, in the True Witness.
LETTER FROM KENRICK.
237
I wish I could flatter myself with the hopes of
soon seeing you again. All here are well, and desire to
be kindly remembered.
Believe me, yours sincerely,
GEORGE E. Clerk.
O. A. BROWNSON, Esq., Boston.
Bishop Kenrick wrote an article on Bishop Eng-
land's Works for Brownson's Review for April, 1850,
and accompanied it by this note:
MY DEAR FRIEND:-I send by the express the
promised Review of Bishop England's Works, leaving
it entirely to your judgment whether to suppress or to
publish it, and to omit portions or give it in full.
The anecdote about the interment scene may be trivial.
The attack on Gallicanism may arouse some slumber-
ing foe.
We hoped to have had the pleasure of a visit and a
Lecture, but have lately understood that you had
declined. I regret that there was no active friend here
to make the arrangements and urge you to compliance.
To me your visits will be always most gratifying. The
loss which you have suffered by your agent induces
me to beg your acceptance of the inclosed contribution
to your indemnification. It is too bad to be swindled
out of the subscriptions.
I hope your health and spirits are good, and your
resolution firm not to abandon the good work. The
Charleston Mercury does justice to its high literary
character. The C. Mirror has a handsome notice of it,
but unnecessarily complains of the praise given to the
philosophical genius of Gioberti. Mr. Major is now
1
}
238
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
1
i.
sole editor of the Herald. He noticed this number of
the Review by anticipation.
With sincere esteem and attachment, I remain,
Dear Sir, your constant friend,
FRANCIS PATRICK KENRICK,
O. A. BROWNSON, Esq.
Bp. Pha.
PHILADELPHIA, Jan. 28, 1850.
In connection with Kenrick's reference to the loss
sustained by the defalcation of the Philadelphia agent
for the Review, a letter from his vicar general, the
Bishop elect of Savannah, though not consecrated till
three months later will show how much annoyance
was caused the Editor by the necessity of selecting
Catholic agents. Had he, on becoming a Catholic, con-
tinued to send his Review to those who had previously
distributed it, and when more agents were in demand
selected established houses he would very likely have
found a larger circulation among those who were not
Catholics, and, so far as concerns Catholics, if they sub-
scribed for the Review, they did so because they wanted
it, not because the agents, as a rule, did much to gain
subscribers. The pecuniary loss from defalcation of
agents, first, and later on, of his New York publishers,
and the London publisher of the English edition of his
Review, was large, and to one who could so ill afford it,
very serious.
Bishop Gartland's letter was as follows:
PHILADELPHIA, August 19, 1850.
MY DEAR SIR:-I am indebted to you for the cur-
rent year of your Review.
Review. Some weeks ago Mr. Ful-
|
LETTER FROM GARTLAND.
239
lerton called upon me for the amount, but I declined
paying him, because I concluded that either you had
withdrawn your agency from him, or else you were not
aware that he had been compelled by his want of suc-
cess to abandon the book business. I do not know that
he exactly failed-but it was the next thing to it. In
case you change your agency, I think either Mr. Cum-
miskey or Mr. McGrath would suit you, and would be
safe. The latter, I think, would serve your purpose
best. Or how would it do to ask Appleton or Penning-
ton to be your agent?—both houses of high standing—
and although Protestants, I think they would accept
the agency-Pennington particularly I think would. I
think it would serve the Review to have it in the hands
of such men. Inclosed you will find $6, for which you
will please forward me a receipt for the present year
and the year following. Or if you can let me have the
first volume of the old series-I mean the volume for
'44-which I have not-probably not having been a
subscriber at that time-if then you can let me have a
copy of that volume, let $3 go for it, and the balance for
the present year, and send me the receipt accordingly.
You will also please forward me the July number for
the present year, as it has not yet reached me.
pose Mr. Fullerton, if he is still your agent, declined
leaving it, as I had declined paying him for reasons
already stated. I knew that you had lost by Cunning-
ham, and I feared that you were destined to lose by
Fullerton also. It is well if you have not. I think he
is at present engaged in job printing. His brother-in-
law, Mr. Murphy, of Baltimore, gave me to understand
that he had lost considerably by him. Mr. F. I believe
!
d
I sup-
■
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
240
to be a well-intentioned and worthy young man-but
he has not true business habits.
Truly yours, etc.,
HAWTHORNE.
Th
CHAPTER VIII.
WEBSTER.— THE COMMON LAW.― AMERICAN LITERA-
TURE. DANA.-LOWELL.-EMERSON.—BANCROFT.—
COOPER.
C
F. X. GARTLAND.
PARKMAN.
RELIGIOUS
NOVELS.-GRANTLY MANOR.-TEMPERANCE.-CHINI-
QUY.HECKER.
IN regard to our foreign relations during Fill-
more's administration, it was said that the Whigs were
more democratic than .the Democrats. The anti-monar-
chical sympathies of the president and his secretary of
state were avowed on every occasion. Webster adopted
the policy of Canning and Palmerston, and wanted to
intervene everywhere, if not by armed force, at least by
diplomacy and public opinion, by exertions to create
and foster a public opinion hostile to monarchical gov-
ernments, and by encouraging the subjects of such gov-
ernments to attempt to subvert them. His theory of
the sovereignty of the people, in the Jacobinical sense,
which is now the prevailing theory with nearly every
one who has influence in forming the public opinion of
the country,—not only political office-seekers, but even
high Catholic dignitaries,—is pure political atheism.
That Webster sympathized with the socialistic ten-
dencies of the age in their developments, or wished to
weaken the foundations of law and order, is not to be
÷.
WEBSTER'S ANSWER TO HÜLSEMANN.
241
supposed; but there is no doubt that he was a deter-
mined enemy of all governments not based on popular
sovereignty, and held it to be the duty of our govern-
ment to use its influence to revolutionize them and
establish popular institutions in their place. In his
celebrated letter to the Austrian Chargé d'Affaires at
Washington, Brownson shows that Webster, after all
his study of the principles of government, was unable
to vindicate the lawfulness of our own without appeal-
ing to the detestable principles of European conspira-
tors, Jacobins, red-republicans, socialists, Carbonari,
Free-Masons, Illuminati, or Friends of Light, and con-
tending that these cannot be denounced without includ-
ing those of our own constitution and government;
that this distinguished lawyer and statesman, in a
grave official document addressed by him as Secretary
of State to the representative of a foreign court in
defence of the American government and people, did
identify their principles with those of the European
rebels and revolutionists, thus asserting the indefeas-
ible right of the people, or part of the people every-
where to conspire, rebel against monarchy, in utter
disregard of law, or historical right, for the sake of
establishing democracy.
The Reviewer's refutation of that state paper in
his Review for April, 1851, was one of the most forcible
and logical arguments the writer had ever presented to
the public, and he felt great satisfaction at the opportu-
nity of meeting Webster in his own peculiar field and
engaging with him with the weapons of his choice.
After Webster's death, which happened in the autumn
*Webster's answer to Hülsemann, Brownson's Works, vol xvi., p. 178.
17
242
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
|
!
T
I
of 1851, it was stated that a Mr. Hunter, a gentleman
employed in the Secretary of State's office, was the real
author of the Hülsemann letter, and later that Edward
Everett wrote it; but the truth seems to be that both
Hunter and Everett prepared drafts from which, espec-
ially Everett's, Webster completed the letter, intended
to "tell the people of Europe who and what we are, and
awaken them to a just sense of the unparalleled growth
of this country.
2288
Discussing Webster's speech on Mr. Clay's resolu-
tion, in the Senate of the United States, March 7, 1850,
Brownson says it "does the distinguished orator more
credit as a man and as a statesman than any other he
has ever made. It was worthy of his station and of the
occasion, and, in the circumstances in which it was
delivered, rises above mere intellectual greatness, and
approaches the morally sublime. The orator rises to
the full dignity of the American senator, above all sec-
tional prejudices, and all party interests and personal
ambition, to those high moral and constitutional princi-
ples which so many lose sight of, but which should ever
animate and guide the American statesman."
No man
in the country was more strongly opposed to chattel
slavery, or would go further, within the limits of the
Constitution, to repress and even abolish it. But in his
home politics he was no fanatic, no revolutionist, no
mad philanthropist, who, in pursuit of a particular
good, was ready to trample down by the way a thou-
sand fold more good than he could possibly gain in
gaining the particular end he was seeking. Brownson
and Webster were equally opposed to the institution of
*Webster's letter to George Ticknor, Jan. 16, 1851.
WEBSTER'S DOMESTIC AND FOREIGN POLICY. 243
slavery and to the abolitionists' plan for getting rid of
it at the expense of law and Constitution.
# (6
In questions of foreign policy, they were far apart.
Webster aimed at the expansion of democracy abroad,
wherever the power of the United States was capable of
extending it. Brownson was as ardent a supporter of
republicanism for his own country without seeking to
impose it on the rest of the world. In reviewing Web-
ster's Works which were published a few months before
his death, Brownson expresses a very candid and not
wholly unfavorable judgment of Webster as a lawyer
and an orator. "When he speaks as a lawyer," he
wrote, according to the principles and maxims of the
common law, what he says is remarkable for its good
sense, its profound truth, and its practical wisdom; for
then he speaks in accordance with the teachings of our
holy religion which forms the basis of that law; but
when he leaves that, and undertakes to discuss ques-
tions which lie further back, he is the disciple of Hamp-
den, Sidney, Locke, and Rousseau, and proceeds from
principles which he did not learn from the law, and
which are utterly repugnant to it. This is not a pecu-
liarity of Mr. Webster; it was equally the case with the
elder Adams, and, indeed, with the whole of the old
Federal party; and it was this that prostrated them,
notwithstanding their personal respectability and prac-
tical wisdom, before their less scrupulous, but more
logical and self-consistent rivals, headed by Thomas
Jefferson." "Mr. Webster is a lawyer, and we are sur-
•prised that he should attribute the freedom and prosper-
ity of our citizens to our political institutions, instead of
* Works, vol. xix, p. 346.
7
X
244
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
attributing them, as should be done, to the common law,
or the system of jurisprudence brought here by our
fathers, and inherited from the England that was before
the Reformation. It is the common law, with the inde-
pendent judiciary under it, which Mr. Webster has on
more occasions than one so nobly and so powerfully
defended, that constitutes the real ground and support
of our liberties. Take away the common law, either
by substituting a written code for it, or by suffering its
principles to be tampered with by the legislatures of the
several states as has been done by those that have
adopted the Maine Liquor Law, for instance, and destroy
the independence of the judiciary by rendering the
judges elective for a brief term of office, and re-eligible,
and you will soon find that your political forms are im-
potent to preserve the freedom and prosperity of the
citizen. Yet an independent judiciary is discovered to
be anti-democratic, and the tendency is now everywhere
to sweep it away; public opinion is setting in with a
strong tide against the common law, and it is discovered
to be democratic to abolish it, and substitute for it an
inflexible written code, with new and inept systems of
practice, which, while they increase litigation, render
justice generally unattainable, except by mere chance."
Webster's application of the common law to the consti-
tutionality of legislative enactments received unbounded
commendation from Brownson, who placed the real ex-
cellence or glory of our institutions, not in the form of
our political organization, as is too often assumed, but
in the principle which Webster successfully defended
in the Dartmouth College case. This principle, on
which he rested his argument, is, that chartered elee-
Ma
WEBSTER'S DEFENCE OF THE COMMON LAW.
245
mosynary institutions, including all educational institu-
tions founded and endowed by private liberality, are
private corporations; and that all the rights of private
corporations, or rather that all private rights, or rights
of private individuals, whether personal or corporate, are
determined or defined by the common law, and are
inviolable, so that any legislative enactment which in-
fringes them is for that reason alone, unconstitutional
and invalid. "Deny this principle, maintain that pri-
vate rights, whether of persons or things, are creatures
of the political power, and subject to the will of the
legislature, and you convert the government at once
into an arbitrary government, a government of mere
will, under which there is no real liberty, no solid
security, for either person or property, and this just as
much where the will that obtains is the will of the
majority, as where it is the will of only one man,—just
as much where the form of government is democratic
as where it is monarchical."* Much of the article
from which these extracts are taken, is devoted to dis-
coursing on the merits of the common law, which was
the real source of England's greatness, both before and
since the Reformation, though statesmen and histo-
rians do not perceive it. In the same article Webster's
rank as a writer and an orator are discussed very thor-
oughly, and full justice is done to the greatest of
American orators. 'We shall look in vain," says the
writer, "in the whole range of American secular liter-
ature for works that can rival these six volumes before
us." Mr. Webster is free from the ordinary faults of
even the more distinguished of the literary men of his
((
((
*Ibid., p. 356.
+
246
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE
Pap
country. American literary taste is in general very
low and corrupt. Washington Irving and Hawthorne
have good taste, are unaffected, natural, simple, easy,
and graceful, but deficient in dignity and strength;
they are pleasant authors for the boudoir, or to read
while resting one's self on the sofa after dinner. No
man who has any self-respect will read either of them
in the morning. Prescott is gentlemanly, but monot-
onous, and occasionally jejune. Bancroft is gorgeous,
glowing, but always straining after effect, always on
stilts, never at ease, never natural, never composed,
never graceful nor dignified. He has intellect, fancy,
scholarship, all of a high order, but no taste, no literary
good breeding. He gesticulates furiously, and speaks
always from the top of his voice. In general, we may
say of American literature that it is provincial, and its
authors are uncertain of themselves, laboring, but
laboring in vain, to catch the tone and manner of a
distant metropolis. They have tolerable natural parts,
often respectable scholarship, but they lack ease, dig-
nity, repose. They do not speak as masters, but as
forward pupils. They take too high a key for their
voice, and are obliged, in order to get through, to sing
in falsetto.
From all faults of this kind Mr.
Webster is free.
He appears always greater
than his subject.
He has, through his natural
modesty, which is one of the most striking traits in his
character, and thorough cultivation, the power of for-
getting himself, and of not thinking of the impression
he is making on others with regard to himself, and con-
sequently he is able to employ the whole force of his
intellect, imagination, and learning in stating, illus-
WEBSTER AS AN ORATOR.
247
·
His elocu-
trating, and embellishing his subject.
tion and diction harmonize admirably with his person
and voice, and both strike you at once as fitted to each
other. His majestic person, his strong, athletic frame,
and his deep, rich, sonorous voice, set off with double
effect his massive thoughts, his weighty sentences, his
chaste, dignified, and harmonious periods. . His
words are pure English, and the proper words for the
occasion, the best in the language; and his sentences.
are simply constructed, never involved, never violently
inverted, but straightforward, honest, sincere, free from
all modern trickery. We know in the language no
models better fitted for the assiduous study of the
young literary aspirant who would become a perfect
rhetorician, or master a style at once free and natural,
instructive and pleasing, pure and correct, graceful and
elevated, dignified and noble.
Burke is the
English writer with whom we most naturally compare
him. As an orator he is far superior to Burke, as a
profound and comprehensive thinker, perhaps, he falls
below him; as a writer he is as classical in his style, as
cultivated and as refined in his tastes, and simpler and
more vigorous in his expression. In many respects
Burke has been his model, and it is not difficult to
detect in his pages traces of his intimate communion
with the great English, or rather Irish statesman, who,
perhaps, taken all in all, is the most eminent among
the distinguished statesmen who have written or
spoken in our language. We have no thought of plac-
ing Mr. Webster above him; but he surpasses him in
his oratory, for Burke was an uninteresting speaker,
and in the simple majesty and repose of his style and
•
248
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
manner. Burke is full, but his fancy is sometimes too
exuberant for his imagination, and his periods are too
gorgeous and too overloaded. Now and then he all but
approaches the inflated, and is simply not bombastic.
The only modern writers, as far as our limited
reading extends, who in this respect equal or surpass
Mr. Webster, are the great Bossuet and the German
Goethe, though we must exclude Goethe's earlier writ-
ings from the comparison. The simple, natural majesty
of Bossuet is perhaps unrivalled in any author,
ancient or modern, and in his hands the French lan-
guage loses its ordinary character, and in dignity,
grandeur, and strength becomes able to compete suc-
cessfully with any of the languages of modern Europe.
Goethe is the only German we have ever read who
could write German prose with taste, grace, and ele-
gance, and there is in his writings a quiet strength
and majestic repose which are surpassed only by the
very best of Greek or Roman classics. Mr. Webster
may not surpass, in the respects named, either of these
great writers, but he belongs to their order."*
Lowndes, Hayne, Calhoun, and John Quincy Adams
had gone, Clay was dying, and Webster was the last
survivor of the great men of that generation, inferior,
indeed, to the Washingtons, Adamses, Hamiltons, and
Madisons of the generation before them, but far supe-
rior to those who were to step into their place. Webster,
it is true, was not supposed to be so near his end, and
his friends were striving to secure his nomination as
the Whig candidate for President; but his wasted
countenance and sunken eyes, as I remember him in
*Works, vol. xix., pp 356-377.
RICHARD H. DANA.
249
that summer of 1852, were proofs that his end was near.
Another Boston man, of literary attainments of
a high order, and a contemporary of Webster, for whom.
Brownson had great esteem, was Richard H. Dana, son
of Francis Dana, Chief Justice of Massachusetts, and,
by his mother, a grandson of Wm. Ellery, and therefore
a cousin of the great Unitarian, William Ellery Chan-
ning. Dana was one of the projectors and chief
managers of the North American Review, and for a
time associated with his cousin, Edward T. Channing,
in its editorship. His earliest writings were published
in that periodical, the only one of its class in this coun-
try that ever attained to anything more than mediocrity.
When Dana's prose and poetical works were published
in a complete edition, Brownson reviewed them with
great care, bestowing high praise for grace of style,
clearness and force of expression, and in the political
essays, for conservative belief in the necessity of law as
the only guaranty of liberty. In Dana's criticism
of the Edgeworths, Brownson says that the sound sense
and just and acute observation of the critic are sur-
passed only by his wit and humor; his review of the
earlier writings of Washington Irving is pronounced
fair and discriminating; and Brownson knew nothing
finer, more tasteful, acute, and just in the whole range
of literary criticism than his remarks on Pope and his
poetry. Delighted to find Dana doing justice to Swift,
who, in spite of his faults both as a man and as a writer,
of his coarseness, profanity, and cynicism, was taller by
the head and shoulders than any of his literary contem-
poraries, Brownson takes occasion to say that Swift,
among all the celebrated writers of Queen Anne's reign,
250
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE
གས་
瞎
​·
is the author for whom he has the most esteem and
affection; that he confesses his rare genius, his satirical
wit, his strong masculine sense; and he has a profound
respect for his political sagacity and wisdom.
With Dana's high praise of Wordsworth's verse
Brownson could not agree; for though Wordsworth may
have formed a pretty just notion of what poetry should
be, he spent his life in a vain attempt to realize it, and
if he deserves credit for forcing poetry to step down
from her stilts, "he will have to answer for not a few of
the sins of the more recent schools of the Brownings,
the Barretts, the Tennysons, the Lowells, and their fel-
lows, with which our present youthful generation is so
grievously afflicted." If Dana unduly raised the repu-
tation of Wordsworth, he more than made up for it by
overthrowing those Boston idols, the utilitarian Edge-
worths. His influence on those who were to influence
others was great, and will continue to affect our litera-
ture, even when his writings shall no longer be read.
Among the younger candidates for literary celeb-
rity, none was more aspiring than the abolitionist and
philanthropist, J. R. Lowell, like Dana, a member of a
family which had given Massachusetts some distin-
guished citizens. An early production of his was
called The Vision of Sir Launfal, reviewed by Brown-
son in 1849. The review was severe, and justly so;
for the object of the poem was to show that morality
does not belong to the rational, but to the sensible part
of man's nature. "Mr. Lowell, he says, "has a lively
fancy, a quick eye for material beauty, or, as we say,
the beauties of nature, and considerable facility of
* Works, vol. xix, p. 338. † Works, vol xix., p. 308.
JAMES R. LOWELL.
251
"
expression. He can see and express the beauty of a
daisy, of the bee collecting honey, of cows feeding in
the pasture, of the cock clapping his wings and crow-
ing, and even something of the life of a spring morn-
ing, the sultriness of a summer noon, and of the golden
hues of an autumnal sunset; but beyond or above he
does not appear able to go. When he aspires, he falls;
and when he seeks to express the beauty of moral
truth, he only proves that he has never clearly and
distinctly beheld it. His glory is that he believes in
moral truth, that he believes that there is the divine.
and eternal idea back of the ever-changing appearances
which flit past his vision; but his misfortune is, that
he has never beheld it, that he has, at best, caught
only a partial and transient glimpse of the objects
around him, in the night, when a sudden flash of light-
ning for an instant furrows the darkness which
envelops them. With solid training under the direc-
tion of religion and sound philosophy, which should
have given elevation to his soul, clearness to his view,
firmness to his will, and sanctity to his aims, he would
have been a poet. He has no complaint to bring
against Nature. He has, if we may so speak, genius
enough potentially, and artistic genius, but has neither
been subjected to the discipline, nor has he submitted
himself to the serious and patient labor of thought,
necessary to reduce the potentiality of his genius to act.
Alas! We must say this, not alone of Mr. Lowell,
but nearly all our contemporaries, in this superficial
and frivolous age.
And of the poem itself, the critic
says: "Mr. Lowell has materially changed the char-
* Ibid., pp. 314–315.
.
252
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
1
E
1
acter of the old legend. In the original legend, the
knight, after performing his devotions and preparing
himself for the search, went forth in pursuit of the
Holy Grail, and the poet simply narrated his advent-
ures, and his success or his failure. Mr. Lowell dis-
penses with the devotions, with the actual pursuit and
adventures, and contents himself with making his
knight see a vision. This alteration is characteristic
of the difference between the early romantic age and
our own. The old knights of romance, whatever the
defects of their lives, and they were rarely perfect
models,—were always devout, always retained and loved
the faith, and if they sinned were ready to do penance,
the next best thing to not sinning; and they really did
go abroad, were active, ready, and able to encounter
danger and to endure fatigue. They lived and acted in
the open world, out of doors, among real objects. But
the moderns stay for the most part in doors, repose on
soft couches, and dream. Their adventures all pass in
their sentimental reveries; their heroic deeds, and
knightly conduct, are visions."*
A collection of R. W. Emerson's poems, published
in 1847, Brownson pronounced the saddest book he had
ever read. "In the poem entitled Threnody," says
Brownson, "all becomes sombre and dark, vague and
misty, and-what is rarely the case with Mr. Emerson
—words, words with no distinct meaning, with scarcely
any meaning at all. The verse flows on, but the sense
stands still. The father's heart recoils from the pit of
annihilation; the proud, unbelieving philosopher scorns
to yield to the sweet hope of immortality. The father
* Ibid. p. 309.
R. W. EMERSON.
253
·
shrinks with horror from the thought that his bright-
eyed boy is lost to him forever; the transcendentalist
disdains to believe in an uprising of the dead. What
then shall he say? What hope can he indulge, what
solace dare trust? The bright-eyed boy is not all
extinguished. What was elemental in him could not
die, and he lives absorbed in the infinite, as a drop in
the ocean!"* "Thou here revivest the old Hindu
dream, stripped of its self-coherence, reduced to an
absurdity so palpable that the veriest child can detect
it; and this thou claspest as a spiritual balsam to thy
torn and bleeding heart, and wouldst gravely persuade
us that it is a sovereign remedy, that it heals thy
wound, and makes thee whole, a man, a hale and joy-
ous man again. 'Hearts are dust, hearts' loves
remain,'—remain when hearts are no more! O my
brother, how true it is that when we turn our back on
God and his word, esteem ourselves wise, and boast
that we have been taught
'Beyond the reach
Of ritual, Bible, or of speech'
we become-fools! . . . . Alas! we are not ignorant of
the blindness and deafness of those who are without
faith, or of the strange illusion which makes us obsti-
nately persist that we both see and hear. There is some-
thing weird and mysterious in the thoughts and feel-
ings which come to us unbidden when we leave faith
behind, and fix our gaze intently upon ourselves
as upon some magic mirror. The circle · of our
vision seems to be enlarged; darkness is trans-
formed to light; worlds open upon worlds; we send
* Works, vol, xix., p. 199.
3
254
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
+
}
keen, penetrating glances into the infinite abyss of
being; the elements grow obedient to us, work with us.
and for us, and we seem to be strong with their
strength, terrible with their might, and to approach and
to become identical with the source of all things. God
becomes comprehensible and communicable, and we live
an elemental life and burn with elemental fire. The
universe flows into us and from us. We control the
winds, the waves, the rivers and the tides, the stars
and the seasons. We teach the plant when to ger-
minate, to blossom, or ripen, the reed when to bend be-
fore the blast, and the lightning when to rive the hoary
oak. Alas! we think not then that this is all delusion,
and that we are under the influence of the fallen angel,
who would persuade us that darkness is light, that
weakness is strength, that hell is heaven, and him-
self God. Under a similar influence and delusion
labors the author of these poems. There are pas-
sages in them which recall all too vividly what we,
in our blindness and unbelief, have dreamed, but
rarely ventured to utter. We know these poems;
we understand them. They are not sacred chants;
they are hymns to the devil. Not God, but satan, do
they praise, and they can be relished only by devil-
worshippers."*
Another friend whom Brownson severely criti-
cised was George Bancroft, who had also, for a short
period, been a Unitarian minister. The publication
of the fourth volume of the History of the United
States was made the occasion of an article in the
Review for October, 1852. Mr. Bancroft is, says the
* Ibid, p. 201. Works, vol. xix, p. 382.
1
GEORGE BANCROFT.
255
Editor, "unquestionably one of our most distinguished
men. He is an accomplished scholar, a man of a high
order of intellect, and a brilliant and facinating writer.
He is a hard student, enthusiastic in the cause he es-
pouses, devoted to his principles, and ready to sacrifice
himself with the zeal of the missionary for their dissemi-
nation. But, although he has studied the history of
the United States with praiseworthy care and diligence,
and although the discriminating reader may obtain
much true history from his learned and brilliant vol-
umes, we are not prepared to assign him the highest
rank among genuine historians. Properly speaking, he
does not write history, nor even commentaries on his-
tory; he simply uses history for the purpose of setting
forth, illustrating, confirming, and disseminating his
speculative theories on God, man, and society. The
history he writes is not written for an historical end,
and the facts he relates are grouped and colored in sub-
serviency to his unhistorical purposes." This applica-
tion of preconceived fancies, caprices, theories, or preju-
dices to the explanation of historical facts, and the
adaptation of the latter to the illustration and support.
of the former, is a fault common to most modern writers
of history, to Herder, Kant, and Hegel, to Cousin, Gui-
zot, and Michelet; and even Carlyle and Macaulay
give us for history their speculations on what is not, but
according to their theories ought to be, history. They
profess to give facts, and along with what they give for
facts, so interwoven with them that none but a disciplined
mind can separate them, they insinuate into the unsus-
pecting reader their false and pernicious speculative
theories.
S
1
256
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
-
*
This fault is shown by his critic in Bancroft's
narrative of the failure of Shaftesbury and Locke's
Carolina constitution, in his account of Salem witch-
craft, and in what he says of Quakers. But the most
important exposition of Bancroft's infidelity as an his-
torian is furnished by the Reviewer's analysis of the
opening chapter of the volume before him,† by which
he shows that the author makes nearly as many mis-
representations as he writes paragraphs.
Some Catholics, finding Bancroft apparently prais-
ing the Jesuits and Lord Baltimore, had been favorably
disposed towards this History, but Brownson shows
that in both cases the commendation is at the expense
of their religion.‡
Bancroft had written to Brownson: "I want criti-
cism: I have taken so much pains to be accurate, that
I am willing and desire to have my book proved in the
furnace."§ If one remembers the story of Gil Blas
and the archbishop, one may believe that however
much criticism is desired, it is not always palatable.
Nathaniel Hawthorne was another friend whom
the Reviewer spared not. In reviewing (October, 1850)
The Scarlet Letter, he says: "Genius perverted, or
employed in perverting others, has no charms for us,
and we turn away from it with sorrow and disgust.
We are not among those who join in the worship of
passion, or even of intellect.
The story is told
•
* If the reader will refer to Brownson's Early Life, p, 188, he will find
that Bancroft called special attention to what he had written of Locke and
Shaftesbury and of Quakers.
+ Bancroft's History of the United States, vol. iv., pp. 3-13 (1st. Ed.).
In his last edition, I believe both passages are so altered as to omit
the commendation.
Brownson's Early Life, p. 188.
HAWTHORNE AND COOPER.
:
,
257
with great naturalness, ease, grace, and delicacy, but it
is a story that should not have been told.
There
is an unsound state of public morals when the novelist
is permitted, without a scorching rebuke, to select such
crimes, and invest them with all the fascinations of
genius, and all the charms of a highly polished style.
In a moral community such crimes are spoken of as
rarely as possible, and when spoken of at all, it is
always in terms which render them loathsome, and
repel the imagination.
"Nor is the conduct of the story better than
the story itself.
The adulteress suffers not
from remorse, but from regret, and from the disgrace
to which her crime has exposed her. The min-
ister . . suffers also,
but not from the fact
of the crime itself. . Neither ever really repents
of the criminal deed; nay, neither even regards
it as really criminal, and both seem to hold it to have
been laudable, because they loved one another,—as if
that love itself were not illicit and highly criminal.
It is not their conscience that is wounded, but their
pride. Their (the old Puritans') treatment of the
adulteress was far more Christian than his (Haw-
thorne's) ridicule of it."*
Yet, apart from moral and religious objections,
Brownson always ranked Hawthorne high. In 1842
* As one who in early life was a good Puritan, I think there were as
many, among those I heard speak, who thought a crime was in being
found out, as that it was in the wrongful act. Perhaps the reason of this
opinion was that, if found out, it was a sin against society. But in my
days Puritanism had developed far beyond what it had been in Hester
Prynne's time. In fact, the notion of God was beginning to be that
preached by Channing and Emerson; and there was a meaning in the
report of a Boston morning paper-The Atlas, I think-that a certain
minister's prayer was "the most eloquent ever addressed to a Boston
audience."
18
258
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
2
he had said: "His mind is creative; more so than that
of any other American writer that has as yet appeared,
with the exception, perhaps, of Washington Irving;'
and in 1852, when reviewing The Blithedale Romance,
he pronounces Hawthorne the first writer, in his favorite
line, our American literature can boast.
Inferior to Hawthorne in the high finish of his
work, Cooper was, in Brownson's estimation, greatly
superior in respect of the sound and healthy tendency
of his writings, especially his later writings. As works
of mere amusement, his earlier works are superior to
his later productions, but for depth of thought, solidity
of principles, and high moral aims and tendency,
they are far inferior. His later works, in which he
attempts to correct the foibles, errors, and dangerous
tendencies of his countrymen, are preferable to those of
his earlier works in which his principal moral aim was
to defend our character and institutions against the
aspersions and prejudices of Europeans. "We will not
say that he has performed the delicate task he under-
took with as much adroitness, amiableness, and tender-
ness as was possible, but he has labored at it in a free,
noble, and manly spirit, and deserves the warm grati-
tude of his fellow-citizens. The press, as was to be
expected, since it could not ignore, has assailed him
with a spite, bitterness, and meanness worthy of itself
and of him. To fall under the condemnation of the
American press, as it now is, with a very few excep-
tions, is a high honor, for it has no appreciation of
manliness or nobleness of character, and no real knowl-
edge of the various subjects on which it pronounces its
judgments. Mr. Cooper will live in the hearts of
GEN
#
LETTER FROM DE SMET.
259
his countrymen when his newspaper assailants are as if
they had not been.”*
In contrast with Cooper's high-wrought Indian
romances, Brownson awards the highest praise to Fran-
cis Parkman for the fidelity and pains with which he
collected authentic materials for his History of the
Conspiracy of Pontiac, for the rare felicity with which
he worked them into one of the most truly historical
volumes ever issued from the American press.
In a
rich, animated, varied, flexible, and dignified style, with
real historical genius, he has given a just appreciation
of the Indian character, which he had studied in the
Indian's own village and wigwam.
The only fault found with Parkman's History was
his skepticism as to the Indian's capabilities for civili-
zation, and his doctrine that it is idle to attempt to con-
vert him from paganism and to incorporate him in the
Christian family. The contrary has been so clearly
proved by the experience of Catholic nations that but
one conclusion can be come to, namely, that some other
method than that of the United States government and
Protestant missionaries must be resorted to. In this
connection I append a letter, from which the signature
has been detached, but which I judge to be in the hand-
writing of the Jesuit Father, P. J. De Smet, who had had
a longer and more intimate and extensive knowledge of
Indians than Parkman.
WASHINGTON, on the 2nd of June, 1852.
MR. BROWNSON, Editor of the Quarterly Review.
SIR-I take the liberty to suggest to your wisdom
to insert in the next number of your invaluable Review
* Works, vol. xvi., p. 339–340.
4
!
260
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
(if it be not too late) an article on the scanty remains of
so many once powerful Indian tribes living in the
United States.
At such a juncture of time and affairs, this article
will have a very salutary effect for the welfare and sal-
vation of these poor Indians. The American people
who possess their immense and so rich country are
naturally predisposed to commiseration towards them.
The government is at last decided to take some steps to
relieve their miseries and try to civilize them. Many
sums of money have been appropriated for their educa-
tion, but among the measures to be adopted for that
purpose none but material measures are mentioned in
the report of the Commissioner of Indian affairs on that
subject.
The only one civilizing principle is neglected,-the
word Religion is not even pronounced, under pretence
to exclude what is termed sectarian spirit.
Some infidel teachers or bigoted ministers, in which
the Indians have repeatedly declared they have no confi-
dence, will be again sent among them; whilst they
will be refused those teachers they like and they have
desired to obtain in vain. After more than twenty
years of experience and of complete failure, the govern-
ment ought to be fully convinced of the incapacity
of the Protestant system to
system to civilize these
civilize these poor
people. Immense sums of money have been expended
by the government and by the people of the U. S.
rather to the prejudice than for the benefit of these
Indians. Very few Catholic missionaries have received
a part of these public funds, and their success is very
sensible and well known to the government. It is a
RELIGIOUS NOVELS.
261
fact admitted at all hands, that Catholic Missionaries
have more influence over the Indians than all others,
and that they have been always and everywhere more
successful. Their system and their worship convey a
great deal easier the Christian ideas even to the weaker
capacities.
I was struck at hearing some Indians calling the
Protestant religion the religion to be done, and the
Catholic, religion ready made.
It is a fact also that many Indian tribes have
applied to the government for Catholic teachers in
their schools, and that their wishes have been always
resisted. These abuses may cease, and before few years
a remarkable change may take place in the miserable
condition of so many Indians of our far West.
Please, Sir, to accept my excuses for writing with
so much hurry, I am starting.
Brownson not only criticised his old Protestant
friends with severity, but he was at the same time
engaged in finding fault with his new co-religionists.
Perfectly aware that by alienating both those from
whom he had parted without bitterness and those who
had welcomed his coming among them with joyful
confidence, he was jeopardizing his prospects of world-
ly success, he never hesitated to blame what he
thought blamable, or to praise what he deemed praise-
worthy. He had passions like other men, strong pas-
sions; but his love or aversion for an author person-
ally did not often, if ever, so pervert his judgment.
as to prevent his perceiving the moral or religious
tendency of a work, and if this was bad, no literary
merit could atone for the evil.
t
262
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
..
2.
!
The Catholic novels which fell under the Review-
er's notice usually consisted of two distinct portions,
of religious discussion and a love story. "They offer,'
he says,
"a certain quantity of light and sentimental
reading, on condition that one consents, without a wry
face, to take a certain dose of theology, which, if he is
well, he does not need, and which, if he is sick, is not
enough to do him any good. Moreover, it may be set
down as a general rule, that they who are seriously
disposed would prefer taking the theology by itself, and
those who are not so disposed will skip it. The one
class will regard the light and sentimental as an imper-
tinence; and the other the grave and religious as a bore."*
The effect of reading sentimental love-tales is manifest
in the diseased state of the public mind, and in the grow-
ing effeminacy of character and depravation of morals.
"Your inveterate novel reader cannot love, in any
worthy sense of the term. Her heart is blasé before
she is out of her teens. Her whole being, body and
soul, heart and mind, inside and out, from top to
bottom, is diseased, full of wounds and putrefying sores.
She has no health, no soundness, no strength to bear
even the application of a remedy. She may talk
charmingly, vent much exquisite sentiment; but if you
want to find true warmth of heart, genuine affection, or
a noble and disinterested deed, go not near her. It is
this morbid sensibility, this enervating and corrupting
sentimentality, which the popular literature of the day
encourages, that we oppose, and every enlightened
censor of morals does and must oppose."+
"The authors of religious novels seem, in general,
* Works, vol. xix., p. 144.
† Ibid, p. 146.
))
M
I
RELIGIOUS NOVELS.
263
to take it for granted that the appeal to the senti-
mental, to the class of passions and interests appealed
to by novelists, in general, is harmless, if made in
juxtaposition with an argument for religion. But we
cannot but regard this as a mistake."*
"The religious
will not neutralize the sentimental, and the sentimental
is the worst possible preparation for the religious.
Amusement, relaxation has its place, and may be inno-
cent and sanitary. But the sentimental is no relaxa-
tion, is no
no amusement. It kills amusement, and
substitutes the heart's tears for the heart's joy."+
These religious novels he calls literary hybrids, under
the relation of art, as offensive as a picture in which
the painter joins the beautiful head of a maiden to the
body and tail of a fish. From the point of view of
Catholic theology, he finds still more to condemn in
most of these novels, because in trying to explain and
qualify Catholic doctrine so as to elude objections to it,
they weaken, if not entirely destroy, its force and
meaning, and seek to present Catholicity in its resem-
blance to, rather than in its contrast with, Protestant-
ism, as if men would abjure Protestantism for the sake
of receiving it back under the name of Catholicity.
If novels belong to the sphere of art and are sub-
ject to the rules of art, the religious novel must be sub-
ject not only to the laws of art, but also to those of
religion. But religion is never a development of nature,
or the natural exercise or affection of the human. It is
always supernatural and divine. The church has pro-
duced and fostered art, but not for the sake of art, nor
for the sake of pressing the senses, sentiments, and
* Ibid, p. 144. † Ibid, pp. 149–151.
•
M
..
1
264
|!
E
{
:
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
imagination into her service; but for the sake of com-
municating, through every possible means, her own
supernatural life. No art is religious, save in so far as
it embodies the supernatural life of religion as the
principle of the interest it excites, or of the gratification
it affords. "If no dangerous topic," says the Reviewer,
"is made the subject of its interest, if it be the expres-
sion of the religious life of the author, if it make the
supernatural its principle and end, the work, though in
the form of a novel or fictitious narrative, may be writ-
ten and read without detriment, nay, with profit, to
religion, and that, too, even when its subject is not
expressly a sacred subject, and nothing is said directly of
or for faith or piety. But all other novels, even though
professedly religious, we must regard as dangerous;
and the fewer we have of them, and the less they are
read, the better.” *
Tested by the strict standard thus set up, it may
well be supposed that most of the Catholic novels.
reviewed should be pronounced deficient, if not highly
offensive. Of Grantley Manor, by Lady Georgiana
Fullerton, he says in his Review for October, 1848,†
"In a purely literary point of view, one may object,
however, a too visible effort at intense writing, a want of
calmness and repose, and the attempt to give us a vivid
impression of the exquisite beauty of her heroines by
dissecting and limning it feature by feature, instead of
leaving it to be depicted by the imagination of her
readers from the effects it is seen to produce on those
within the sphere of its influence, the common faults
of modern novelists, which prove, not their strength, but
* Ibid, pp. 243-4. + Works, vol. xix, p. 244.ˆ
·U
LADY G. FULLERTON.
265
their weakness. There is, also, too much sighing,
weeping, and shedding of floods of tears, as well as too
much embracing, kissing of hands, foreheads, cheeks,
etc., etc. The latter might have been left to the expe-
rience or the imagination of the reader, and the former
should have been relieved. We are as loath to see lit-
erature as beauty in tears, which add to the charm in
the one case no more than in the other.
"But we have graver faults to find with Grantley
Manor.
We complain, not that her ladyship
has abstained from theology, but that she has not
abstained, not that she has not introduced religious
topics, but that she has introduced them, and in a false
light, so as to mislead her readers, unless they happen
to be well instructed, and strictly on their guard. She
brings religion upon the scene; she makes Catholics
and Protestants, as such, actors in her plot; and it has
obviously been a leading purpose with her to exhibit
the Catholic spirit in its relations with Protestants, and
to show the practical effects of Catholicity in forming
the minds and hearts, and in prompting and directing
the conduct, of those brought up under its influence.
She not only introduces the Catholic religion,
but she approves in her Catholic characters, from first
to last, things which the church abominates, and
appears to commend them for things which even her
catechism would teach her the church positively forbids.
Errors and inaccuracies are less excusable in
popular writers than in others, and if her ladyship was
not well enough instructed in her religion to be able to
avoid them, she had no business to introduce it. Who
compelled her to touch upon religious topics, or to
1
=
:
·
L
266
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
write upon matters of which she knew nothing? If
she could not state her religion with accuracy and
precision, what right had she to state it at all? It is
enough to have our holy religion misrepresented and
falsified by its enemies, without having it travestied by
its professed friends. No doubt the author thought she
was breathing the living soul of Catholicity into her
novel, and, while seeking to interest or amuse the
public, she would be rendering a service to the cause of
Catholic faith and piety. But she reckoned beyond her
means. She was too recently from the ranks of heresy.
Her Catholicity evidently is not genuine, and her book
reminds us of the Niebelungenlied, the national epic of
the Germans, a pagan story, conceived in the true
pagan spirit, and transmitted, body and soul, from
pagan times, but dressed out, by some half-convert of
the thirteenth century, in a Christian garb. The
Niebelungens are genuine pagans, only they hear mass
and bless themselves after the Christian fashion. So
is Grantley Manor a Protestant tale, conceived and
executed in a Protestant spirit, and will find few
admirers except among Protestants, and Catholics who,
from breathing the atmosphere of heresy and the study
of heretical literature, are themselves more than half
Protestant. Its Catholics are amiable, cultivated, and
respectable Puseyites, who happen to have been born
and brought up under Roman instead of the Anglican
6 Branch' of the church."
Some Catholics agreed with Brownson in thinking
his standard of Catholic stories and novels none too
strict, and Patrick Donohoe, a Catholic publisher of
Boston, on reading the plan he suggested, offered a
TEMPERANCE AND TOTAL ABSTINENCE.
267
prize for the best tale written in accordance with it,
and appointed the Reviewer as the judge to decide on
the merit of the competitors, and to award the prize.
Several tales were sent in, some of them of considerable
merit, but Brownson awarded the prize to Willy Burke,
by Mrs. James Sadlier, of Montreal, as being the most
in accordance with the plan he had suggested. It was
not often that he praised a work written by a woman,
for he was not in general partial to feminine literature;
but in this case he was obliged to surmount his
prejudice, and to pronounce Willy Burke an admirable
story. Similar praise was given to John O'Brien, by
Rev. John T. Roddan, and Loretto, by George H. Miles.
Both Roddan and Miles were contributors to Brownson's
Review.
Brownson's views on Temperance, and the total
abstinence from intoxicating drinks, were sufficiently
set forth in his “Early Life." He continued, after he
became a Catholic, to deliver "Temperance Lectures,"
and his zeal in this cause was none the less earnest.
because he condemned some fanatical legislation,-in
fact, looked not at all to legislation for the cure of
intemperance,—and contended that natural rights, such
as that of property, were not to be sacrificed or violated
under the guise of law. But his sympathy with all
rational attempts, by moral suasion, by the aid of public
opinion, by force of example, by associations bound
by pledge and consecrated by religion, to restrict the
ravages of a vice productive of poverty and crime, was
well known. There were many persons, in his judg-
ment, that were bound in conscience to total abstinence;
those, for instance, whose experience had taught them
268
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
•
2:
1
:
:
it was necessary in their case, and such as by their
position could not use wine without leading others to
abuse it. The so-called reformed drunkards who
turned temperance lecturers he likened to the Acadian
exile in Arkansas, who, being scalped by the Indians,
tried to persuade his fellow Acadians that they would
find it much to their benefit to part with their scalps.
There is usually something unbalanced in the mind of
a man who makes a hobby of a single idea, especially
if he be a priest ordained to teach others all the things
which Christ has commanded. Because a man's father
died drunk in a gutter is a very good reason why he
should take precaution against a like ending; but it is
not a reason for his insisting that all others should be,
not merely temperate, but entire abstainers from what
he may not be able to use without abusing. These
thoughts are suggested by a letter from Rev. C.
Chiniquy, who starting as an apostle of temperance,
has just terminated his career as an apostate priest.
The most reasonable, as it is the most charitable judg-
ment that can be passed in his case is that his hobby,
or monomaina, developed into a mental condition where
moral responsibility ceased. He wrote:
*
MON CHER MONSIEUR:-Pardonnez à un de vos
plus dévoués amis, comme à un de vos plus sincères
admirateurs, de vous prier de vouloir bien arrêter un
moment votre noble intelligence sur une question qui
me semble digne des méditations du philosophe et du
chrétien: Les sociétés de Tempérance considérées au
point de vue Catholique.
Vous savez, sans doute, que depuis 20 ans un
nombre considérable de Canadiens émigrent vers les
LETTER FROM CHINIQUY.
269
!
Etats-Unis; ils y forment aujourd'hui une population
de près de 150,000 âmes. Ils sont tous Catholiques,
mais malheureusement un grand nombre d'entre eux
sont les deshonneurs de la religion par leur ivrognerie.
Plusieurs vénérables Evêques des Etats-Unis m'ont
demandé d'aller au secours de ces infortunés.
Mais c'est vous, mon cher Monsieur, qui allez déci-
der si je devrai, ou non, aller travailler à enroler sous
les bannières de la Tempérance ceux de mes compa-
triotes que le démon de l'ivrognerie tient dans ses
chaines parmi vous.
Je sais qu'il y est parmi les Catholiques des Etats-
Unis des nombreux et justes préjugés contre la Société
de Tempérance. Le Protestantisme, en s'emparant de
l'idée éminemment chrétienne et Catholique qui a d'abord
donné la vie à ces sociétés, semble l'avoir dénaturée et
fanfarée. Mais rien de surprenant en cela ;-le Protes-
tantisme, vous l'avez prouvé mieux que personne, souille
et profane tout ce qu'il touche. Il était donc tout
naturel, qu'en prêchant le sacrifice des boissons eni-
vrantes, les ministres de l'erreur sortissent des bornes
du vrai pour pousser les peuples dans la voie de l'erreur
et du mensonge.
Mais tandis que le Protestant parcourt les vastes
champs de l'absurde et du fanatisme par rapport aux
sociétés de Tempérance, est-ce que nous Catholiques,
nous ne pourrions pas faire voir au peuple ce qu'il y a
de grandeur, de puissance, et de sainteté dans le sacri-
fice qu'un Catholique fait des boissons lorsqu'il unit ce
sacrifice à celui de Jésus-Christ sur la croix, et qu'il se
l'impose pour obtenir du ciel la conversion des ivrognes?
Oui, Monsieur, voilà, il me semble, une question
digne de votre plume, et de votre haute intelligence.
Uor M
↓
£
761
"
270
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
Je l'ai vu de mes propres yeux, et vous me l'avez
dit vous-même, l'ivrognerie des Catholiques, (Clergé
comme Laiques) est un des grands obstacles à l'avance-
ment de notre sainte Religion en Amérique. L'usage
immodéré des boissons enivrantes est comme un mur
que Satan a élevé pour empêcher une foule de per-
sonnes d'entrer dans le sein de l'Eglise Catholique.
Abattons ce mur, et nous arracherons à l'enfer des
milliers de victimes. Les boissons enivrantes sont pour
nous Catholiques ce que sont les sombres nuages qui
traversent le ciel dans un join de tempête. Ces nuages
obscurcissent les rayons du soleil, et nous dérobent sa
splendeur; ainsi les boissons enivrantes dans une foule
de localités, obscurcissent et dérobent aux yeux des
Protestants la lumière ineffable que le Catholicisme est
appelé à répandre sur la terre. C'est au souffle inspiré
de votre foi ardente et de votre puissante logique que
ces sombres nuages disparaitront.
Je prends la liberté de vous addresser deux exem-
plaires du petit trayail que j'ai fait sur cette question.
Cet ouvrage, quoique bien imparfait, et écrit trop à la
hâte, pourra peut-être vous être utile.
Kabelga
Si, comme je l'espère, vous faites disparaître les
justes préjugés que les folies du Protestantisme avaient
soulevés contre les sociétés de Tempérance, et si vous
donnez à ces sociétés la sanction de votre génie, en les
montrant au point de vue Catholique, alors, j'irai avec
bonheur prêcher à mes pauvres compatriotes des Etats-
Unis, pour les faire enroler sous les saintes bannières
des sociétés de Tempérance Catholique. Autrement
mon travail serait une pure perte.
Si cette lettre n'était pas déjà longue, je vous dirais
Mчyou
LETTER FROM CHINIQUY.
271
(
avec quel nouveau plaisir je vois arriver tous les trois
mois votre admirable Review. Comme les Protestants
doivent être en colère contre vous, à chaque coup de
massue que vous leur donnez, et comme le Démon doit
vous en vouloir pour les nombreuses victimes que vous
ne manquez pas de lui arracher tous les jours par vos
écrits! Mais aussi combien les anges de Dieu doivent
vous aimer, et comme le Bon Dieu doit vous bénir pour
tout le bien que vous faites, avec sa sainte grâce!
Pour moi, il ne se passe un jour sans qu'au saint
autel je ne prie le Dieu des miséricordes de vous bénir
et de vous conserver longtemps pour l'intérêt de la
vérité.
Pardonnez-moi, mon cher Monsieur, cette trop
longue lettre, que je vous prie de regarder comme confi-
dentielle.
J'ai l'honneur d'être Monsieur, votre respectueux
mais tout dévoué ami et admirateur,
1851.
C. CHINIQUY, Ptre.
Longueuil, near Montreal, Canada East, 3 Février,
Brownson's very dear friend, now the Reverend I.
T. Hecker, who had joined the congregation of the
Most Holy Redeemer, in Belgium, and had later been
employed in giving missions in England, returned to
this country in 1851, and at once wrote to inform
Brownson.
Jesus, Mary, Joseph, St. Alphonsus!
MY DEAREST FRIEND:-It is with greatest pleas-
ure that I announce to you my arrival at New York
after a boisterous passage of 52 days via France.
It would be a great gratification to me to speak
O
1
272
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
IN
with you. I hope some arrangements will be made in
such a way that I shall have the opportunity of visiting
you at your residence. Perhaps you will be coming on
here shortly? If this should be the case, or if you
should likely be from home within a short period, will
you do me the favor to inform me as early as you can
make it convenient?
Will you have the goodness to present my humble
respects to your Rt. Rev. Bishop? I beg on my knees.
his fatherly blessing. Remember me kindly and affec-
tionately to Mrs. Brownson, your dear wife, and to all
your children, and such friends as you may chance to
meet.
A
You can easily imagine. why I cannot say anything
except my arrival and my desire to see and speak with
you, for if I began to speak what I have to say, I fear I
never should end, and if that, I should find I had said
nothing. The experience you have acquired since I
have been abroad, and what I have gained, would not
only be gratifying, but I feel convinced eminently use-
ful for us both to communicate to each other.
Yours affectionately and truly,
I. TH. HECKER, C. SS. R.
Sat., 22. March, 1851.
German Catholic Church, Third Street, near Avenue A.
To O. A. BROWNSON, Esq.
Ž
Hecker was able to make the desired visit to Chel-
sea in the summer following. In the meantime he was
occupied principally in mission work, as described in a
very interesting letter as follows:
LETTER FROM HECKER.
273
•
Jesus, Mary, Joseph, St. Alphonsus!
LORETTO, May 15, 1851.
MY DEAR FRIEND.-I cannot help giving you some
account of our labors since our arrival and the good
Almighty God pleases to work through us poor instru-
ments, knowing your interest in our labors and the
pleasure you will take in hearing of the fruits of them.
You have heard of the mission at St. Joseph's.
Eight and ten fathers were engaged in it. The mission
lasted a fortnight; 6,000 confessions were heard and
communions given. The effect of the ceremony of the
renewal of the baptismal vows was touching and won-
derful. The people suddenly burst into tears, and for a
time, the preacher could not make his voice heard for
the noise of their babbling. The consolation of the
congregation after mission was beyond all expression;
and the good pastor of St. Joseph desired nothing so
much as to engage us to repeat yearly our mission
which of course we couldn't. Tho it is a rule of
ours to make a renewal after a certain lapse of time.
Three days after our mission in New York we were
on our way to our mission in the place at Loretto; a
village situated in a valley on the top of the Alleghanies.
Its site is picturesque and beautiful. It was founded by
Prince Gallitzin. He spent his fortune and his life,
which was one of great austerity and apostolic, in
building up this place. The population of the town-
ship is about 2,300, all Catholic excepting three
families. The people nearly all Americans by birth.
You can from this easily imagine what a fine field we
had to work in, when we began the mission. Our
greatest difficulty was in the beginning in getting the
↓
19
274
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
people to attend the exercises-both in the morning at
seven, and the evening at five. The first few days
everything dragged heavily. But at length the people
became aroused, and from that moment the mission
went on better and better until the close. Those who
lived at a great distance took lodgings in the village
near by and remained till the mission ended. The dis-
position of the people was such as to excite our aston-
ishment. The conversions among the hardest and
most abandoned sinners were remarkable.
You can
judge from the fact that every person in the parish
made the mission except two, a father, a free-mason, and
his son. Between 1,500 and 1,700 confessions were
heard and communions given. Ten Protestants were
converted, and we left only two Protestants in the
village, a man and his wife, the daughter of a parson.
Sometimes the scenes were such as to excite laughter.
One old sinner had come determined not to be moved.
He heard a sermon of one of the fathers, and on
coming out he was heard to say, scratching his head:
"That preacher beats the devil." And so it was, for
he was converted. Another famous dare devil sort of a
fellow, the very thought of whom in connection with
the confessional or any other act of piety was the most
ludicrous of all incongruities, was caught, I afterwards
was informed, in our procession carrying a battle axe.
Our B. Lady, too, did not fail to show her powerful
intercession. One poor woman came with fear of her
husband killing her when she returned. He was a
drunken wretch. She was told to go and pray to our
B. Mother and Queen of Heaven, and behold her
husband met her on her way returning and fell on his
LETTER FROM HECKER.
275
knees and begged her pardon, and came and did his
duties! But I must describe to you in a few words the
closing ceremony, the plantation of the cross. We all
assembled in the church on Sunday afternoon at 3:30
to recite the Rosary. The procession then was formed
outside of the church. First came the processional
cross with the boys, then the men carrying a large
cross 41 feet long entwined with garlands of flowers
borne by 60 of them; on each side of the cross was a
file of soldiers with a band of music; then came 20
or 30 Franciscan brothers of the third order with their
cowls; then the clergy: after them the missioners in
their habit, followed by the Sisters of Mercy, and these
by the girls and women. The number of the proces-
sion was about 4,000. We marched through the
village to the site of the cross with music, and there
we blessed and erected the cross in a most conspicuous
place. The farewell sermon was preached at the foot
of the cross and the papal Benediction given. It was
a novel scene for America, a famous one for our holy
religion, and one which never will be forgotten by those
who witnessed it. The cross overlooks the whole
village, and when you look that way you will always
see some one or more saying their five paters and aves
to gain the indulgence of 10,000 years which is
attached to the missionary cross.
Sunday next we begin a mission in Hollidaysburg,
about 40 miles from here. After that I don't know
where we shall be sent, as the Cathedral of Pittsburg is
burnt down, for we were to give a mission there. But
if I have leisure, I hope to be able to get to see you.
Remember me affectionately to your wife and family.
4.
-
276
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
1
I beg earnestly your and their prayers, I do not forget
you in mine.
And believe me yours sincerely and affectionately
in the sacred hearts of Jesus and Mary, and poor
servant in Christ.
I. TH. HECKER, C. SS. R.
To O. A. BROWNSON, Esq.
Hecker and Brownson had much that interested
them to converse about on the occasion of Hecker's
visit in the summer of 1851; but the visit is principally
memorable for the fact that Brownson, confiding in
Hecker's spiritual training in a religious community,
gladly received the advice his friend.communicated for
regulating the interior life. In regard to meditation
this advice agreed with Brownson's inclination as
perfectly as though it had been expressly invented for
that purpose. For years Brownson had been trying,
under direction of the Bishop of Boston, to learn the
art of pious meditation. The bishop, following the
rules of St. Ignatius of Loyola, wanted his penitent to
proceed methodically, according to the principles and
practice explained in the "Spiritual Exercises." With-
out presuming to give out any opinion of my own on a
matter of this kind, I think I may safely say that since
the first half of the sixteenth century, at least, masters
of spiritual life have almost unanimously concurred
with the founder of the Society of Jesus. On an
untrained and speculative mind there may be imposed
a restraint that is irksome; but without proper direction
in mental prayer, the magni passus of the meditator
may be extra viam. Hecker's advice to his friend was:
"So long as one remains in the presence of God during
LETTER FROM HECKER.
277
the time of meditation, it matters little how he passes
the time. He may not be aware of doing anything at
all autant mieux. St. Anthony says that the best
prayer is when one does not know that he prays.
Follow your attrait in prayer; no one ever advanced in
spiritual life contre son attrait. The best prayer for
each one is that in which he succeeds best, from which
one draws the most profit, it matters not what sort of
prayer it may be called. Let us not be afraid of big
names; if God gives us the grace of contemplation,
even in the beginning, as he does to some souls, let us
not through a false fear reject it, but correspond to his
goodness by a generous confidence. If he leaves us in
dryness and darkness let us endeavor to be equally
willing to suffer, but never give up the exercise of
meditation."
Above all, Hecker practised and preached enthu-
siasm. "We can do no good," he said, "without
enthusiasm." By religious enthusiasm he understood
"the activity of the passions supernaturalized," and
"this is brought about by a thorough discipline-an
ascetic life." Hecker also presented his friend with a
"discipline," and promised him a cilice,† for which, he
said, he would have to wait till he could get time to
make one himself, as the Brothers in his convent did
not know how to make them. He probably forgot
about the cilice; the discipline remained ever unbloody.
* An instrument of penance made of knotted cords.
A hair-shirt.
-
L
278
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
J
*
SLAVERY.
M
CHAPTER IX.
THE FUGITIVE-SLAVE LAW. SEWARD'S
HIGHER LAW.-PARKER.—CUBAN EXPEDITION.
FROM the beginning of the year 1845 till the close
of 1848, Brownson's study and writing and lecturing
had been, if not exclusively theological, at least exclu-
sively directed to religious purposes as their immediate
end. The predictions of his old friends that he would
turn back to Protestantism in six months were falsified,
and people no longer repeated their old nonsense about
his "changing with every moon." Since he left
Protestantism he had escaped the lunar influences to
which he was formerly subjected, and came under
those of the Sun of Justice, which are not liable to
variation.
Commencing with the year 1849, Brownson pro-
posed to give his Review a more popular character, to
enter more largely into the discussion of the great
practical questions of the day, and to aim to adapt it to
a wider class of readers. He would not, as a Catholic,
blink the great political and social questions which
were then agitating the public mind both at home and
abroad, and these questions received more attention
from him thereafter than he had previously given
them. It seemed of importance to the community that
those questions should be freely and boldly discussed
in the light of Catholic faith and morals, and that a
Catholic journal that should so discuss them would, if
it found here and there an enemy, never want friends.
DISCUSSION OF POLITICAL QUESTIONS.
279
The time had come when Catholics must begin to
make their principles tell on the public sentiment of
the country. Heretofore, they had taken their politics
from one or another of the parties which divided the
country, and had suffered the enemies of their religion
to impose their political doctrines on them; but it was
time for Catholics to begin to teach the country itself
those moral and political doctrines which flow from the
teachings of their church. Catholics were at home
here, wherever they might have been born; this was
their country, and as it was to become thoroughly
Catholic, they had a deeper interest in public affairs
than any other class of citizens. The sects are only
for a day; the church is forever. Brownson cared
little how the elections went, for that was a small
affair; but he could never, as a Catholic, be indifferent
to the moral principles which enter into the laws and
shape the public policy of the country.
"I have," he said, "for some time almost entirely
neglected my old political readers. This has not been
owing to any want of patriotism, nor to any indifference
to political questions in their appropriate sphere. But
I have had as much as I could do to acquire that'
acquaintance and familiarity with Catholic theology
necessary to conducting with respectability the theolog-
ical department of my Review. Moreover, I was un-
willing to commit myself on great political questions.
until I had been able to review my old political system
in the light of my new faith; for I have always held
religion above politics, and that every man is morally
and intellectually bound to conform his politics to his
religion. This review I have to some extent made, and
!
280
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
have found very little to alter or modify in the prin-
ciples and doctrines I held when last I addressed my
readers on political subjects. My journal will there-
fore have again its political department, and I shall
assume the right of an American citizen to give freely
and with entire independence my views on any political
topic I may chance to look upon as worth discussing."
Brownson was no advocate of slavery; he was no
apologist of the slaveholder; he held that slavery is an
evil, and that we should labor to get rid of it; but in
such way only as would not lead to a greater evil. Yet
he did not concede that it was malum in se, or contend
that a man by owning slaves necessarily forfeited his
Christian character. The church does not sanction
slavery, nor does she command its abolition as an act of
justice. She commands the slave to be obedient for
God's sake, and the master to treat his slave with kind-
ness and humanity, and then remits the whole matter
to the operation of Christian charity on the hearts of
both the slave and his master. Great as the evil of
slavery might be, the evil of disunion, or the disrup-
tion of the union of the states, would be incalculably
greater, and consequently, however much he was opposed
to slavery, and however desirous to remove it, he would
not attempt its abolition by any measures incompatible
with duty to the Constitution, or with the peace and
prosperity of the Union.
That ground was taken in on essay on slavery in
the Boston Quarterly Review for April, 1838, and was
uniformly maintained by him. Even in his most radi-
cal days he never admitted that it is lawful to do evil
* Works, vol. xv, p. 45.
ABOLITION OF SLAVERY.
281
I
that good may come; that it is ever permitted to break
up a political or social order for the sake of getting rid
of an evil which is found to exist under it. His doc-
trine had always been that evils existing under a social
or political order are to be removed by and in consonance
with that order, never by its destruction, and, when not
so removable, are to be patiently submitted to as a less
evil than its destruction. He was never of the no-gov-
ernment sect; never, strictly speaking, a revolutionist;
he never held that it can be lawful to resist legitimate
authority, or that it is permissible, for the sake of social
or political melioration, to break up an established order
of things. He never dreamed of the possibility of
effecting reforms in contravention of law, or held the
false notion that liberty and order are antagonistic.
He was never so blinded as not to see that order is the
only possible condition of freedom, or that order is
impossible without government. If from time to time
he emitted opinions that implied the contrary, he never
saw or believed they implied it when putting them
forth..
He always conceded and maintained slavery to be
an evil, and an evil of which it was highly desirable to
get rid; but he always insisted that it was one of those
social evils that it was lawful to remove only in accor-
dance with fidelity to the Constitution and the federal
Union, and that in so far as it could not be removed we
were not in any respect to meddle with it. That law
which bound him to support the Union, to preserve our
political order inviolate, was paramount to any law
which could bind him to labor for the emancipation of
the slave.
+
282
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
He early declared himself opposed to all extension
of slave territory. He held that where slavery already
existed by local laws, there it must be left, and the
federal government and non-slaveholding states had no
right to interfere with it, but were bound to fulfil in
regard to it all the stipulations of the Constitution: but
the accession of new slave territory, or the extension of
slavery into new territories, where it had no legal
existence, he steadily resisted as far as could be by
constitutional and legal means. Opposed to the Mis-
souri compromise on principle, after it had been agreed
to, he thought it binding, if not in law, at least in honor
and conscience, on North and South; and when Texas
was admitted with that compromise he considered the
question as to Texas settled. As to California and
New Mexico he saw that slavery could never go there
any more than to New England. The climate, soil,
and productions were such as to prevent it from being
profitable, and there was no need of provisos to keep
it out.
The mad schemes of the abolitionists, the illegal
and destructive policy which they wished to pursue,
hypocritically veiled with a thin gauze of philanthropy
for "a man and a brother," as they always termed the
black slave, were easily seen through by Brownson;
they were essential to distinction, or the attainment of
power, place, or notoriety. Only in times of violent
agitation, when passion usurps the place of reason, and
the community is distracted by lawless confusion could
little men and miserable demagogues, the Greeleys,
Schoulers, Garrisons, Burleighs, Fosters, Palfreys,
Manns, Sewards, Chases, Yulees, and Toombses, rise
SEWARD'S HIGHER LAW DOCTRINE.
283
to importance. What they most feared was the settle-
ment of the question. At the same time (September,
1850) with the admission of California, Congress passed
a new fugitive-slave law, which asked for by the South
and enacted in its interest, was of little or no practical
benefit to the South; but aroused passions and pro-
duced controversies and even riots; and greatly embit-
tered the mutual hostility of the two sections of the
country. Many even of those who insisted on carrying
out the provisions of that law, as required by the
Constitution of the United States, and among these was
Brownson, regarded the South as having blundered in
their demand for an act which could only render the
institution of slavery more odious at the North, and
eventually tend to overthrow that whole institution.
In the debate on the bill in the Senate, W. H.
Seward, one of the New York Senators, refused to vote
for it, although necessary to carry out an express
Constitutional provision, on the ground that to give up
a fugitive slave is contrary to "the higher law," the
law of God. The cry of northern abolitionists was
thenceforth, The Higher Law! whilst their opponents'
papers North and South were filled with sneers at the
higher law doctrine, and in many instances denied the
principle itself. Brownson and Seward had become
well acquainted with each other when they both.lived
in Auburn twenty years earlier, and there were a great
many matters on which they thought alike; but their
sympathies were strongest on the question of Free-
Masons. A few years before the disappearance of
William Morgan, Brownson had taken the first three
degrees of Masonry; but his belief that that body had
284
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
•
:
I
4
..
V
authorized and executed Morgan's murder because he
revealed the secrets of the order, and he was assured
by one of the highest Masons in the country that it
had done this,-compelled him to look upon the
Masonic order in a new light. He had supposed
Masonry to be a social, benevolent society, with a good
deal of tom-foolery, it is true, but altogether harmless.
After the murder he ceased to visit a lodge, and though
he did not openly denounce its spirit and practice, he
condemned it as un-American and hostile to freedom
and the administration of justice. As Seward was the
leader of the Anti-Masonic party, in western New York,
Brownson did all in his power to push him forward.
The anti-Masonic movement carried Seward on, and
when his party was merged in the Whig, Seward was
elected Governor of New York, the first Whig, I think,
to obtain that office. While Governor, Seward refused
to surrender on the requisition of the Governor of
Virginia some seamen charged with abducting slaves,
giving as the ground of his refusal that one state could
not force a requisition on another for acts which were
not offenses at law in the state upon which the requisi-
tion was made, and which, he added, were generally
esteemed as humane. Seward's reasoning was good in
this case, but ceases to be so in the case of slaves
themselves by virtue of the Constitutional provision for
their return.*
Both the misapprehension and the denial of a
higher law called for explanation and argument, and
*
Governor Seward's attempt to settle the school question with Bishop
Hughes is creditable to him. The Bishop loudly complained that the
text-books in the public schools were hostile to Catholics. Thereupon
Seward requested him to make such alterations as would render them
acceptable, to which Hughes replied that he had other matters to attend to.
SEWARD'S HIGHER LAW DOCTRINE.
285
===
Brownson devoted an article in his Review for January,
1851,* to its consideration. He commented, in the first
place, on Seward's inconsistency, which had been
already objected to him in the Senate, in holding office
under the Constitution and swearing to support it, and
at the same time declaring it overruled by the higher
law of God.
He agreed entirely with Seward and the abolition-
ists and free-soilers, as to the fact that there is a
higher law than the Constitution. The law of God is
supreme, and overrides all human enactments, and
every human enactment incompatible with it is null
and void from the beginning. To this every Christian
is bound to hold even unto death. But who is to
decide whether a special civil enactment is or is not
repugnant to the law of God? If each individual, as
they claimed, had the right to decide for himself, this
would place the individual above the state, private
judgment above the law, and deprive the government
of all authority. Private judgment in religion has ever
overthrown all church authority where it is admitted;
transferred to civil matters, it would equally put an end
to all civil authority, and establish the reign of anarchy
or license. If the state is authorized to decide, the
state is absolute, and the very principle of the higher
law is denied. There is nothing to which Protestants
can appeal from the action of government but their
private interpretation of the law of God. They are
therefore in a dilemma, and must either assert individu-
alism, which is the denial of all government, or civil
despotism, which is the grave of all freedom. Catholics,
* Works, vol. xvii., p. 1.
286
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
on the contrary, have always a public authority, which,
as it is inerrable is never oppressive, to guide and direct
them; they alone enjoy the privilege of being at once
freemen and loyal subjects.
As to the condition of the slaves, the writer says:
((
*
Conceding the evil of slavery as it exists in this
country, it is far from certain that it is an evil that
would be mitigated by emancipation, or that emancipa-
tion would not be even a greater evil. The negroes
are here, and here they must remain. This is 'a fixed
fact.' Taking the American people as they are, and as
they are likely to be for some time to come, with their
strong Anglo-Saxon pride, Anglo-Saxon prejudices, and
Anglo-Saxon devotion to material interests, and hatred
or disregard of Christian truth and morals, it is clear to
us that the condition of the negro as a slave is far less
evil than would be his condition as a freedman. The
freed negroes amongst us are as a body, to say the
least, no less immoral and heathen than the slaves
themselves. They are the pests of our northern cities,
especially since they have come under the protection
of our philanthropists. With a few honorable excep-
tions they are a low, degraded, filthy set, steeped in
vice and overflowing with crime. Even in our city,
almost at the moment we write, they are parading our
streets in armed bands, for the avowed purpose of
resisting the execution of the laws. Let loose some
two or three millions like them, now held in slavery,
and there would be no living in the American commu-
nity. Give them freedom and the right to vote in our
*This was the opinion of many honorable and Christian gentlemen
who owned slaves in the South; and how correct they were the history of
that section since the civil war sufficiently illustrates.
SLAVERY AND ITS ABOLITION.
287
I
!
•
elections, and the whole country would be at the mercy
of the lowest and most worthless of our demagogues."*
As to the fugitive-slave law. Catholics have no
difficulty; for the law is necessary to secure the fulfil-
ment of an obligation imposed by the Constitution, and
as the church has never decided that to restore a fugitive
slave is necessarily against the law of God, they are
bound to obey the law, and cannot, without resisting
God's ordinance and purchasing to themselves
damnation, refuse to obey it. St. Paul did more than
this law requires, for he seems to have sent Onesimus
back before Philemon asked for him.
Various attempts were made to execute the new
fugitive-slave law in Boston as soon as it went into
effect in the autumn of 1850. The first case was that
of one Crafts and his wife; but the officers did not
succeed in making the arrest, and it was supposed that
the fugitives had been shipped off to England by the
abolitionists and free-soilers; in the second case, that of
Shadrach, an arrest was made, but the fugitive was
rescued from the custody of the United States marshal
by a mob, and probably escaped to Canada. In the
third case, that of Sims, the fugitive was arrested early
in April, 1851. Precautions had been taken against a
rescue by a mob, black or white; and it was determined
to deliver him up to be returned to his master in
Savannah, Ga. This probability threw the abolitionists
into a perfect frenzy. They held public meetings, and
made inflammatory appeals to passions already excited,
and would most likely have attempted another rescue
by force, if the vigilance of the police and the military
* Works, vol. xvii., p. 3.
288
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
under arms and properly posted had not made it too
dangerous to attempt. The friends of the Union and
of law began to feel certain that something would be
done to wipe out the disgrace which Boston had
incurred from the fanatics; and the fanatics were
correspondingly mortified and disappointed. This was
the condition of matters on the roth of April, 1851,
fast day in Massachusetts, when Theodore Parker, at
the Boston Melodeon, delivered a sermon on "The
Chief Sins of the People," the chief of which sins was
suffering the law to be executed.
In criticising Parker's sermon in his Review for
July, 1851, Brownson disclaims all sympathy with any
species of slavery, and professes deep and true devotion
to freedom; hence he has no quarrel with the free-
soilers for being hostile to slavery. He informs
Theodore Parker, Wendell Phillips, Gerritt Smith,
William Lloyd Garrison, Robert Rantoul, and Abby
Folsom, that the love of freedom and hatred of slavery
did not come into the world with them, and would
suffer no great diminution if those choice spirits were
to die and leave no successors. He opposes them, not
for opposing slavery, but for the principles and methods
by which they oppose it. Parker, he says, "plainly
counsels resistance to the laws, downright treason, and
civil war,-only not just yet. The hour is not yet
come, and armed
and armed resistance might be premature,
because just now it might be unsuccessful. The traitor-
ous intention, the traitorous resolution, is manifest, is
avowed, is even gloried in, and nothing is wanting to
the overt attempt to carry it into execution but a fair .
The Fugitive Slave Law," Works, vol. xvii., p. 17
XX
SLAVERY AND ITS ABOLITION.
289
prospect of success. And what is of a more serious
consequence, the party of which this fierce declaimer
is an accredited organ, is in power in this state and has
the governor and the majority of the representatives in
both houses of Congress. It rules or misrules the
great state of Ohio; it is numerous in Pennsylvania,
almost the majority in New York, triumphant in
Vermont, and we can but just not say, also in New
Hampshire. Its principles are entertained by men who
do not profess allegiance to the party. Nearly every
member of Congress from this state, with the exception
of Mr. Appleton, of this city, is in reality as much of a
free-soiler as Horace Mann or Robert Rantoul. Mr.
Winthrop, the Whig candidate for the Senate, was not
a whit sounder than Mr. Sumner, his successful free-
soil competitor, and would have made a far more
dangerous Senator. The party has absorbed in its
bosom all the separate fanaticisms of the free states;
and all who, like ourselves, have watched its growth
since 1831, are well aware that it has been steadily
advancing, that it has never lost an inch of ground
once gained, and that it has never for a moment met
with a serious check. It is as certain as anything
human can be, that, if it is not speedily resisted, and
resisted as it never yet has been, it will in a short time
possess the power in nearly all the free states, and
consequently in the Union itself.
"We assure the public,-and it is the point we wish
particularly to impress upon our readers, that the
abolition of negro slavery is only an incident in free-
soilism. Neither the free-soilers nor we can foresee
where they would stop. Combining as they do in one
•
*
20
290
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
all the several classes of fanatics in the country, and
being the party opposed to law, to constitutions and
governments, certain it is they would not stop so long
as there remained a single safeguard for individual
freedom, or a single institution capable of imposing the
least restraint upon lawless and despotic will. No doubt
there are honest, but deceived individuals in the party
who will not go all lengths with it; but they will be
impotent to restrain it, and the party itself, augmenting
its forces as it marches, will on whithersoever its
licentious and despotic principles lead, unless effectually
resisted by the sounder part of the community, or by
the merciful interposition of divine Providence.
"The essential principle of the free-soil party, that
which gives it so terrible a vitality, is not, we repeat,
exclusively or mainly opposition to slavery. Half
unknown to itself, it is a party organized against law in
all its forms, against all principles and maxims of the
past, and all the religious, moral, social, and political
institutions of the present. It is a party formed against
the common reason, common sense, and common
interests of mankind. With the cant of religion and
morality on their lips, its leaders are, almost to a man,
infidels and blasphemers, as well as traitors and
disorganizers. They carry their zeal for reversing so
far as to seek to reverse the natural relation of the
sexes, to dishonor woman by making her the head, and
sending her to the legislature, the cabinet, or into the
field to command our armies, and compelling man to
remain at home, and nurse the children, wash the
dishes, make the beds, and sweep the house. Already
are their women assuming the male attire, and begin-
ABOLITIONISM A FORM OF RADICALISM.
291
ning to appear in our streets and assemblies dressed
out in full Bloomer costume; and little remains for the
men but to don the petticoat and draw the veil over
their faces.
"Let no man accuse us of exaggeration. We do
not exaggerate in the least, and are only giving our
readers a sober statement of the spirit and tendency of
the great movement party of our times,-red-republicans
and socialists in France, Italy, and Germany, progres-
istas in Spain, radicals in England, free-soilers and
abolitionists, just now in the United States,-destruc-
tives everywhere, borne forward by the under-current of
nearly all modern societies, glorified by all the popular
literature of the age, defended by the newspaper press
generally, and with us in the free states already able to
blast the reputation of almost every public man who
ventures to assail them. We speak of a party which
we have long known, and which, we grieve to say, we
ourselves, when we had more
had more influence with our
countrymen than we can ever hope to have again,
supported, under more than one of its aspects, with a
zeal and an energy worthy of a better cause.
Alas! men
are often powerful to do evil, but impotent to repair it.
Now that our eyes are open, and we are able to see the
mischief we did, we have no power to undo it, and if we
are permitted to speak out freely and boldly, as we do
against the party, it is because that party can afford to
let us say what we please. No voice raised against it
seems to be any longer heeded, and if a man of standing
and weight in the community assails it under one of its
aspects, he must save himself and friends by giving it
a new impetus under another, as we see in the case of
+
292
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
Mr. Webster, who apparently writes his letter to the
Chevalier Hülsemann to atone for his speech in the
Senate Chamber on the 7th of March, 1850. He
appears to have felt that the only way in which he
could obtain a popularity for the administration, to
balance the popularity lost by its adhesion to the
compromise measures, was to express sympathy with
radicalism and revolutionism abroad. In this he may
have judged patriotically, if not wisely and justly, for
to sympathize with foreign radicalism is less dangerous
to us for the moment, than to sympathize with domestic
radicalism. Now it is the progress and triumph of this
wild radical party that the South really dread. They
see it under the free-soil and abolition aspect, but also,
though less clearly, perhaps, under other aspects, and
they see that they have everything to fear, and nothing
to hope from it. Hence, the firmness with which they
insist, and we too ought to insist, for we are as deeply
interested as they, on the faithful execution of the
fugitive-slave law; for if the party cannot be success-
fully resisted on this law, it is idle to think of resist-
ing it at all. We and all the members of the Union are
then without protection, and at the mercy of the worst
and most frightful despotism, under the name of liberty,
that it is possible to conceive." *
The Reviewer then proves against Parker that the
law which he opposes is not unjust, but, as Chief
Justice Shaw, of the Supreme Court of Massachusetts,
said, in expressing the unanimous opinion of the Court,
not only constitutional, but necessary, and one which
Congress was bound to pass. In discussing the duty of
*Works, vol. xvii., pp. 21-27.
INTERVENTION IN OTHERS' AFFAIRS.
293
the state to intervene for the question could not be as
to its right to intervene-Brownson expresses an
opinion on the intervention, in matters which do not
concern them, of the American people, which was
always a great blot on our national character, and time
has been far from effacing. He said: "There
may be
cases when we are free to intervene, and others when
we are bound to intervene; but the former are not
numerous, and the latter are very rare. The experience
of our Puritan ancestors proves this very clearly as to
individuals, and that nothing is worse than to make
every individual in a community the guardian of the
morals of every other individual.
other individual. It leads every one to
mind every one's business but his own, establishes a
system of universal espionage, and sacrifices all indi-
vidual freedom and independence. It destroys all sense
of individual responsibility, precludes all firmness and
manliness of character, and superinduces the general
habit of consulting, not what is true, what is right,
what is duty, but what is popular, or rather, what will
escape the censure of one's neighbors. Whoever knows
what our society was under the strict Puritan regimen
knows well how fatal to virtue is the system. The
New Englander of to-day bears but too many traces of
the system, which makes him but too often a hypocrite
at home or in public, and somewhat of a rowdy in
private or abroad. The whole system out of which
free-soilism undeniably springs, is false, of immoral
tendency, and founded on a misapprehension of the
nature of man and the government of God. We must
leave scope for individual freedom; we must trust
something to individual responsibility, and place our
{
294
'BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
e
main reliance on the principles we early instil into
individuals, the religious influences with which we
surround them, and the workings of their own con-
sciences. It will not do to keep them always in
leading-strings, or under lock and ward. If we do, we
shall never have any strong or masculine virtue; never
have any men on whom in the hour of temptation and
trial we can rely. No doubt, outbreaks of passion, of
wild and exuberant spirits, there will be; no doubt,
disorders will occur, scenes of personal violence will be
exhibited, scandals will be given; but these things,
however much to be deplored, no human foresight or
power can prevent, and we must make up our minds to
bear with them. To attempt, as Calvin did in Geneva,
and as our fathers did in New England, to guard
against them by an all-pervading espionage and minute
legislation, descending even to prescribe the fashion of
cutting the hair, only substitutes a darker and more
fatal class of vices and crimes, such as can be practised
in solitude or carried on in secret. We must bear with
them,-knowing that, if there is less virtue than we
wish, what virtue there is will be genuine, and able to
abide the test."*
Free-soilers and abolitionists assumed that the end
justifies the means. Proposing a
Proposing a lawful end, the
emancipation of the negro slaves in the United
States, they rightly asserted that negroes are men and
brothers, sprung from the same original stock, redeemed
by the same sacrifice, as the whites, and equally endued
with immortal souls to be saved or damned; that all
men, under the law of nature, are born free, and slavery
* Ubi Supra, pp. 30–31.
PROPERTY IN OTHERS' SERVICE.
295
But
is the normal condition of no man or race of men.
from this it by no means follows that no man, in any
circumstances whatever, can have a good title to the
bodily services of another; for this would be to deny
the father's property in the services of his child, the
master's in those of the apprentice, and might be
extended to property in the services of soldiers, sailors,
and others who serve for hire. If you say that in the
last class of instances the property is founded on a
contract for hire, it may be argued that services
rendered the slave by the master, benefits conferred
upon him, care taken of him in his infancy, maintaining
him, nursing him in sickness, and providing for him in
old age are valuable considerations on which to imply a
contract sustaining the master's title.
At any rate, where the state authorizes slavery, or
recognizes property in slaves, the master has a title
whatever it be against the slave, that is good against
the state. If
If the public has by its laws permitted
slavery, recognized the master's title as good, it cannot
in justice abolish it without full indemnification. If
the state has legalized a wrong, it may undoubtedly
undo it—is even bound to do so, but not at the expense
of the individual citizen. The abolitionist, therefore,
who called upon the public authorities to emancipate
the slaves without just compensation to the masters,
called upon it to commit gross injustice; and he at the
same time contended that compensation would itself be
a wrong, as it would recognize the title of the master.
The worst thing about free-soilism or abolitionism,
and what Brownson most execrated in it, was that it
was only a form of the miserable fanaticism, calling
t
296
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
})}
itself philanthropy, and which was indulged until it
became unmanageable. This moral pestilence has
infected our whole society and turned a large portion of
our citizens into madmen. It has destroyed our judg-
ments, our moral life. It rages in the legislature and
in the halls of justice, and spits its venom from pulpit
and press, overawing the well disposed, browbeating
into silence the sober-minded, and making even the
brave quail before it. The men who cannot be reformed
by the doctrines, sacraments, discipline, and worship of
the church, are not going to be reformed by moral-
reform societies, temperance societies, state education,
or any other of the methods the philanthropy of
the age suggests. "Even your temperance societies,
says Brownson," seldom do more than expel one vice
by introducing another, and not always a lesser vice.
Save so far as you can make a man a good Christian,
you cannot eradicate a single vice from his heart, except
by planting another in its place. The drunkard leaves
off drinking, but takes to chewing opium, or becomes
sober only to become avaricious, simply exchanging
inebriety for avarice. You do not get rid of the hydra
of evil by lopping off one of its many heads, nor does
the lopping off of one head prepare the way for lopping
off another. You must drug the monster himself, and
destroy his inward vitality, which nothing but the
grace of God through the sacraments of the church can
do. Almighty God founded his church for the express
purpose of destroying evil, of delivering men from vice,
sin, and iniquity, and it is no unreasonable stretch of
modesty to doubt our ability to add anything to its
perfection, or to its efficiency. He knew at least as
THE CUBAN EXPEDITIONS.
297
well as we what was needed, and what would answer
the purpose; he was as well disposed as we to cure the
vices of society; and it would seem to be no more than
reasonable for us to be contented with his work, and to
rely on it as the only efficient means of reform, and of
good, whether social or individual."
Closely allied with the question of slavery and its
abolition, was the desire on the part of many southern
advocates of slavery and its extension for the acquisition
of the island of Cuba. Possession of this island had
long been coveted by a considerable portion of our
population, who had induced or aided Cubans to revolt
from Spain. They hoped to acquire Cuba as they had
acquired Texas, and accordingly they set on foot within
our territory a military expedition to assist the
pretended Cuban patriots to revolutionize the island.
The expedition commanded by Narciso Lopez was
repulsed from Cardenas, and effected its escape to the
United States, to return when it should become more
powerful. Politicians proclaimed the "manifest destiny"
of this country to annex all neighboring territory not
owned by a great power. The press generally favored
the movement, or if they opposed it, they did so because
of their free-soil or pro-slavery proclivities. In these
circumstances, Brownson wrote and published in his
Review for October, 1850, an article on the "Cuban
Expedition," in which he denounced it on the ground
of injustice to Spain, of its being a violation of the laws
of nations, the faith of treaties, the rights of sovereignty,
and the rights of property. He told the American
people that they cannot hold and act on principles which
* Works, vol. xvi, p. 272.
298
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
justify the expedition without placing themselves out of
the pale of civilized nations, and authorizing the civi-
lized world to treat them as a nest of pirates, and to
make war on them as the common foe of mankind.
Mrs. Anita George, the accomplished author of
"The Queens of Spain," expressed her satisfaction in a
note which is inserted here:
DEAR SIR:-During my late visit to New York, the
October number of your Review was handed to me by my
esteemed friend and countryman, Señor de San Martin.
The perusal of the article on the "Cuban Expedition"
immediately inspired the wish that I might be per-
mitted to express viva voce to the writer the feelings of
enthusiastic admiration and fervent gratitude it had
awakened in me. This manifestation of approbation
from one among the many, and that one a woman, will
be of little moment to you, but it will be exceedingly
gratifying to me to have an opportunity of giving
utterance to sentiments that are shared by those whose
good opinion is of far more importance.
The courage
you have displayed in exhibiting in their true light the
tenets that, if acted upon, would stamp eternal disgrace
on the American name, is deserving the highest praise,
and the generous and frank vindication of the aspersed
character of my countrymen secures you the esteem
and respect of the wise and good of all nations. Had
honesty, honor, justice, and truth many such cham-
pions, it were well for humanity. But alas! in this
case, and especially in this country, the voice of the
majority—ever that of ignorance and error-is, I fear,
adverse to reason and right,
reason and right, and your eloquence
becomes a veritable heroism.
THE CUBAN EXPEDITIONS.
299
With sentiments of the highest regard, I remain
respectfully your obedient servant,
Boston, Mass., 3 Dover St.
Jan. 5, 1851.
ANITA GEORGE.
O. A. BROWNSON, Esq., Chelsea..
In the summer of 1851, Lopez sailed in command
of a new expedition, which effected a landing in Cuba,
where, after several engagements with detachments of
Spanish troops, in which several Spanish officers and
soldiers lost their lives, they were defeated, and those
not killed were taken prisoners.
While the contest with the invaders continued,
Colonel Crittenden, son of the Kentucky. Senator of
that name, and his party of fifty men, apparently
attempting to effect their escape from the island were
captured by a Spanish war-steamer, and on their con-
fession that they had formed part of the gang that had
landed and had shared in their acts, they were very
properly executed. When the news of the execution
reached the Gulf States, atrocious outrages were
committed on Spaniards and Spanish property, at New
Orleans, Key West, and Mobile.
Soon afterwards the Spanish minister to the United
States addressed the following communication to
Brownson:
Private.
NEW YORK, 4th September, 1851.
DEAR SIR-It has been my most anxious desire,
for some time past, to go to Boston for a few days in
order to see you-not only that I might have the pleas-
ure of making your acquaintance, but also that I might
300
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
have had an opportunity of conversing with you on the
present state of affairs in regard to Cuba. My occupa-
tions, however, make this impossible, and it is therefore
by writing only that I can make you the following
request. I am extremely desirous that you should
consent to write for the ensuing month an article upon
the invasion of Cuba by the American pirates or
patriots, and the present state of things in this country
as connected with these piratical attempts-such as the
excesses committed in New Orleans, the forcible entry
of the mob into our Consul's house, the robbery and des-
truction of his important papers, the tearing down of
the Spanish cafés-furniture destroyed-and the inmates
barely escaping with their lives. Of all this I could
send you the official accounts, but you have probably
seen them in the public papers.
With regard to the insults said to have been com-
mitted in Havana upon the dead bodies of the fifty men
who were shot, they are wholly without foundation, and
are invented by those who hesitate at no falsehood in
order to deceive the infatuated adventurers whom they
induce to join them. Had the story been true, it would
have proved what they are so anxious to conceal, the
fury of the mob against those who thus wantonly attack
a quiet and peaceful country.
Should it be consistent with your opinion and
principles to write an article of this nature, I would
venture merely a few remarks-which you might per-
haps, to a certain extent, introduce. For instance-
when a state cannot control her citizens and prevent
them from repeatedly invading a friendly country, what
is the remedy prescribed by the law of nations?
•
THE CUBAN EXPEDITIONS.
301
(according to Wheaton-to all who have written on the
subject.) Is it not that the state to which the
aggressors belong is obliged to pay to the injured state
the expenses caused in its defense, and the damages
occasioned by their disobedient subjects?
Again, in a confederation of states, if one of the
states is injured by a foreign power, do not all of them
unite to avenge the wrong?
If South Carolina were
invaded, would not the whole Union go to her rescue?
And when the South is in open war against Cuba, is
not pro contra all the Union obliged to pay for the
wrongs inflicted upon a nation at peace with the Union?
-or will it henceforth become the law of nations in
regard to the United States-to make war on the
aggressive state, and nevertheless to preserve peace with
the rest of the Union?
Whilst I merely throw out these hints, I am well
aware that your own views and your own knowledge of
the subject require no assistance from me. Still, if you
should consider it advisable that we should converse
together upon the subject, previous to the publication
of the article, it would give me great pleasure to see
you here (No. 65 Broadway) as for the present, business
detains me here in New York.
But at all events I trust that you will be kind
enough to answer me as soon as convenient, and beg
you to believe in the high esteem with which I remain
sincerely yours,
A. CALDERON DE LA BARCA.
Brownson received this letter just as his youngest
son, the only child born since he had been a Catholic,
was taken from this world in the sixth year of his age.
302
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
The boy was one whose loss was deeply lamented by
the family, and naturally Brownson's reply to Calderon
was delayed for some days. As the Review for October,
however, was already in the hands of the printers, it
was too late for the proposed article to be prepared for
that number. It was published in January following.
Calderon's next letter was this:
*
NEWPORT, 19th Sept., 1851.
DEAR SIR: I thank you very much for your
letter, and truly sympathize with you in your domestic
affliction. A very much smaller calamity than that
which you have experienced would more than excuse
you had you not answered me for a much longer period.
I do not think the delay of any importance. Per-
haps even the article may then be more comprehensive,
and will have time to render it more worthy of your
high reputation; presenting in a true light, which will
at least be appreciated by all honest men, the great
moral question, as well as that of the law of nations,
which is therein involved.
you
As to our meeting, it would give us great pleasure
to receive you here at any time, should you have leisure
to come and spend a few days with us. But, otherwise,
as soon as my health and occupations permit me, I
shall endeavor to go to Boston myself, and shall then
have the pleasure of calling to see you.
Although my experience of republics has by no
means done away with my prejudices against that form
of government, or induced me to change my mind as to
the political system in which I was born, I think as far
as regards simplicity and plain dealing, you will find me
* Piratical Expeditions against Cuba, Works, vol. xvi. p. 298.
1
LETTER FROM CALDERON.
303
esteem,
quite as good a republican and quite as plain a man as
you are yourself,—and of this I trust, my dear sir, to
convince you if I have the good fortune of making with
you the more intimate and personal acquaintance which
I wish for.
Meantime, I beg you to believe me, with great
Very truly yours,
A. CALDERON DE LA BARCA.
The article was not yet written when Calderon
sent the following statement of his case.
10th November, 1851.
MY DEAR SIR:-I have just received your letter of
the 3rd instant, and although my mind is at this
moment as painfully anxious as at any moment of my
agitated life, I hasten to answer it.
I regret much to hear that you have been suffering
in your health, and hope you have quite recovered.
Believe me, dear sir, that the more I read your writings,
and the more I know of you, the more sincerely I desire
to make your acquaintance.
(Private). This is perhaps nearer at hand than
you imagine—from causes which from the moral prin-
ciples which pervade your works you would hardly
dream of.
In the name of my government, of the laws of
nations, and of all known moral laws, I am asking in
the most courteous, but firm manner, what? That
reparation should be made to our flag, dragged through
the mud and publicly burnt, with every mark of con-
tempt, in New Orleans,—also to sixty-seven poor
shipwrecked men, women and children, who were nearly
304
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
lynched at Mobile, because they were Spaniards—and
saved from death with much risk and expense,—also
indemnification to those unarmed and unoffending
Spanish subjects, whose shops were broken into, plun-
dered, and destroyed, at Key West.
And what reparation do I ask? That a few guns
shall be fired upon the return of the consul, either to
him or to the Spanish flag-as a public demonstration
of regret on the part of this government for the outrages
committed by an American mob-and that a handful of
dollars shall be decreed for the relief of those destitute
Spaniards whose only crime was that they were the
countrymen of those noble souls who lost their lives in
defending their homes invaded without any provoca-
tion!
And the demigod is endeavoring to frown me, or
to persuade me into submission. A prompt reparation
would have shown him to be a just, high-minded, moral
statesman. The most fatal results would have been
instantly and wisely prevented by his doing so-but he
prefers to pander to the popular injustice and to the
gross and foolish pride of the mob,-and to lose the
reputation which he enjoys all over the world, for the
sake of a few votes-which, after all, he will not even
have, through this means, at least.
Perhaps I am uncharitable; perhaps he is actuated
by higher motives-but such is my opinion; and one
thing is certain-if the Spanish consul is not received
with proper public demonstrations, even were I willing,
I cannot continue my diplomatic functions in this
country.
* Daniel Webster, Secretary of State.
LETTER FROM CALDERON.
305
God only knows, my dear sir, the sincerity with
which I pray, and as a friend beg you to pray for me,
to be spared the sorrow of withdrawing from this
country on this account. And as I speak to you in
confidence, almost as in confession, I can assure you
that my sorrow is only caused by the misery which
may result from this step to my fellow-beings. In a
worldly point of view, my departure would be beneficial
to me. I should acquire popularity with the party
which now accuses me loudly of submitting to American
influence. I should, perhaps, be rewarded, sooner or
later, for having made what would be considered a
personal sacrifice (and it would, in fact, be a sacrifice).
But I look to another source of approbation, and I
grieve to be the instrument, however innocent, of a
fatal rupture.
But to the point. What I would say is this:
What is prescribed by the law of nations?-the law of
God? Not to injure your unoffending neighbor.
When you cannot prevent this, and your citizens or
subjects do so to a friendly people even while you are
assuring that people that they have no cause to be
alarmed-what is your duty, besides punishing the
offenders? Certainly, to say to the offended power,
against whom you have no cause of complaint, “I
regret what my subjects or fellow-citizens have done.'
If your servants or children had injured the property of
your neighbor, you would express this regret even after
punishing those who had so offended. You would
endeavor to heal the wounded feelings of your neighbor
-to meet him in a friendly spirit-to express in the
presence of other neighbors your regret for the bad
"
21
306
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
.......
The law of
conduct of your family or dependents.
nations and of morality is the same in this. The U. S.
have to offer ample compensation to the robbed and
insulted Spaniards-that is easy enough-and for this
government a mere trifle.
But our flag has been dragged through the mud-
burnt in the public square with every mark of brutal
contempt that could be devised. Our consul's office, in
spite of treaty stipulations and of his exequatur, has
been broken into-his papers, archives, and personal
property plundered-and a mischievous use made of his
official correspondence.-That (this government may
say) we cannot repair.—It is true; but you may disavow
it-and this in the manner usual amongst nations-
Let some twenty-one guns be fired when the insulted
flag is hoisted.-To this it will be replied that American
dignity forbids it.-Well, then-let the same consul, or
another, be sent-and when he arrives, let one of the.
federal authorities go on board the ship, and welcome
him, and then from the fort, from a ship, or from the
remotest mountain, if they prefer it, let twenty-one
guns be fired-and then the breach is healed-we are
friends once more-confidence is restored-and Spain
ceases to entertain the irritating conviction that you not
only conspire to rob her, but that you slight and despise
her, and intend to let the world know your contempt for
her. If you do so, remember that such was Napoleon's
mistake. Remember that una salus victis nullam
sperare salutem. Believe that Heaven will not permit
without punishment such a wrong to be done to a
nation. Rob and insult her without provocation, even
while she permits your citizens to hold property, admits
LETTER FROM CALDERON.
307
your ships, and (thank God, we are Catholics) while
her soldiers divide their bread with you, support you,
cure your wounds, and look upon you as brothers, the
moment you no longer injure them. Observe the
remarkable firmness displayed by the Spanish authori-
ties in Cuba and how they find means of preventing
your citizens from being molested by a populace driven
almost to madness by the news of the insults offered
to their flag-their consul-their fellow-citizens, and
(to your shame be it spoken!) even to poor ship-wrecked
women and children.
The life of one of our most chivalrous youths has
been taken by your people-and many mothers, wives,
and children are left destitute and miserable for the
rest of their lives, victims to the revolvers of your moral,
freedom-loving, high-spirited youths!
Our Spanish soldiers go to church.
There they
honor their dead, there they say those paters and aves
at which you laugh. There they obtain from God and
his Holy Mother the grace of fortitude, and they
forgive, they are Catholic in spite of you-who would
make them Anglo-Saxon Unitarians, or Nothingarians.
And the demigod does not see, my good friend,
that in doing prompt, and ample justice, he would gain
fame, and would make true liberty beloved, and give
a rank amongst moral nations to this America, which
the world admits to be very great and wealthy--but
which almost all honest and virtuous people are begin-
ning to regard as an aggregation of the most dissolving
passions and errors.
Meanwhile, I struggle with the man-and although
I hope that God will assist me in the end, without great
308
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
success. I used to admire him, and like him, as I do
almost all Bostonians. He has used all means to shake
my resolution, but without avail, and by the assistance
of Heaven, I shall keep firm and persevere, trusting
that, should I be forced to suspend my diplomatic
relations here, the natural consequences of that step
will be brought about by no rashness of mine, and will
not weigh upon my conscience.
Were I gifted with genius, I would in the article
in question-
I. Establish the principle of the law of nations,
supported by Ward, Vattel, Wildeman, (Institution of
international law, lib. 2, chap. 1st, of the state of war)
-a late work.
"The invasion of territory, or other violent aggres-
sion (such as that of New Orleans, Mobile, and Key
West), or the gathering of forces with the manifest
purpose of aggression, or the violation of any legal
right (the consul's exequatur), the breach of any legal
duty, followed by the refusal of satisfaction, is lawful
ground for war."
I would maintain on moral and religious principles,
that this is the case. I would inculcate this doctrine-
bring some cases to its support-and ask them, more-
over, what the United States would do, if the American
consul, American citizens, American flag, had been
treated in Habana as ours have been treated in New
Orleans, Key West, and Mobile. When I have put
this question to the honest Fillmore, he has always
answered, "We should have asked (demanded, he might
have said) reparation and compensation." When I
have put the same question to Mr. Webster, his answer
THE CUBAN EXPEDITIONS.
309
was, "I do not know what we should have done, or
would do."
I would quote the Article 6th of our Treaty of
1795, also the Article 10th of the same, and then ask
all the most sophistic lawyers in the world, how it is
possible, in the face of these articles, to refuse satisfac-
tion and reparation, how it is possible that the property
of the vessel Fernando 7°, on which these poor ship-
wrecked people were, is not restored although part of it
consisted in military accoutrements, and is in the
possession of American officers.
Mme. Calderon joins me in every expression of
esteem and regard with which I am sincerely your
friend,
A. CALDERON DE LA BARCA.
I have dictated the above. I hope you will pardon
me for not copying it, I have so much to do. Excuse
whatever you do not find correct or so well expressed as
you will express it.
After discussing the case of the Cuban expedition
in its bearings, and showing the violation of inter-
national and natural law, Brownson arraigns the
president and his secretary of state for the former's
message to congress, and the latter's official correspond-
ence, for the enunciation of principles which justify
such expeditions. Our government and people in their
own minds, held it lawful for whoever willed, to
make war on monarchical governments. Those who
influenced public affairs and gave tone and character to
the country, were ingenious, skilful, energetic; but
destitute of all sense of religion or morality, lawless,
grasping, vicious; and those who possessed the natural
virtues were without influence in public affairs.
310
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
The United States government was the more
cautious in its proceedings in this affair, as there were
more than 160 prisoners, most, if not all, American
citizens, captured in Cuba and carried to Spain, where
it was understood they were to be sent to the mines.
This government ordered the salute to the Spanish flag;
the Queen of Spain pardoned the prisoners, as Calderon
had the satisfaction of informing the secretary in
January, 1852. He wrote soon after to Brownson:
WASHINGTON, 31st Jan'y., 1852.
MY DEAR SIR:—I am just arrived from a journey
to Albany to beg the pardon of one of my countrymen
who was to be hanged just when the news of the pardon
by my queen had been spread all over the land. I have
obtained a reprieve, and hope to succeed after many
prayers, in obtaining a pardon.
That circumstance, united to an operation which I
have had performed in my mouth, has prevented me to
write to you sooner. Your article I did not read before.
I thank you for it. I wish only it had appeared three
months sooner. But good, sound principles are of all
time.
I expected to go to Boston, but had no time. I
wish very much to make your acquaintance.
With renewed thanks, I remain, Dear Sir, very
truly yours,
A. CALDERON DE LA BARCA.
O. A. BROWNSON, Esq.
A letter on this matter written by Mrs. Calderon
contains much worth preserving both in this connection
and for its own sake:
LETTER FROM MRS. CALDERON.
311
JACKSON HILL (Near Washington), 1st August.
DEAR SIR:-Mr. Calderon had the pleasure of
receiving yesterday a letter from Mr. Reggio, enclosing
a note from yourself, upon the subject of his request to
you—and as he is even more than usually occupied,
being obliged to go to town every day upon important
business, he has desired me to write to you in his name
-and to express his great satisfaction and the obligation
he is under to you for consenting to write the article in
question, convinced as he is that no one could do it
equal justice.
Were Calderon fortunate enough to be near you,
nothing would be easier than to place all the despatches
relative to the affair at your disposal, but being volumi-
nous and belonging to the archives of the Legation, he
cannot, of course, send them away. In the correspon-
dence brought before Congress very few of his notes
were made public; the rest were kept back.
To remedy this difficulty as much as possible,
Calderon thinks he may venture in strict confidence to
send you a translation of the last dispatch received from
his government, which will give you the views taken by
Spain upon the subject. As the despatch is private, he,
of course, sends it you very confidentially and with the
request that you will either return or destroy it, when
you have made what use you think proper of it. As it
is very long, I am afraid it will take me some little time
to translate, which will make this answer later of
reaching you than it otherwise ought.
Next, as La Crônica, a Spanish paper published in
New York, has been constantly in the habit of publish-
ing a correct account of these transactions as they
312
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
occurred, Calderon will immediately write to the editor,
requesting him to collect all the newspapers relating to
the affair, and to forward them to you. The Courrier
des Etas-Unis has also stated the facts very correctly,
and added some very good reflections upon them.
Without pretending to give you an outline of his
views upon the subject, certain of the correct judgment
which you will form upon it, Calderon would merely
take the liberty of remarking that there are some
points on which he thinks you will naturally insist, and
that had he the time or the talent necessary for writing
such an article, he would especially express his indig-
nation at that desire utterly destructive of all morality,
and utterly contrary to every maxim of religion, of
taking possession of the property of others, with or
without pretext, and at that thirst for gold which seems
to amount to a mania, and which must be satisfied at
any cost.
He would speak of the impunity of the pirates
who attacked Cardenas, and who after committing
murder and robbery, are now insolently boasting of
their crimes, and openly declaring their intentions of
forming another expedition as soon as possible, and
their assurances that they are now making every
preparation for it, and this in public, at the seat of
government, and in the presence of Senators, proving
that they are well aware of the state of public feeling
in this country; of the boldness with which the
prisoners lately released from Contoy, are now declar-
ing that the invasion of Cuba was their sole object;
of the association in their crimes, on the part of the
governors of states, and men in office in this country;
proved by the facilities afforded to these pirates in
LETTER FROM MRS. CALDERON.
313
setting off upon their lawless expedition, and by their
impunity on their return; and of that pervading love
of money, proved in the condemnation of the Creole
only because it can be sold, and is therefore profitable.
He would remark upon the diabolic hypocrisy with
which Lopez, Gonzalez, and other runaways from
justice, conceal their ambitious designs and love of
plunder, under a pretended love of liberty, in which
name they violate every human and divine law,-of the
tendency which all this has to throw discredit in every
part of the civilized world, upon the institutions of this
country, of the hatred thus excited against this
nation, in Habana and Spain,-the ruin of so many
families, the crimes and bloodshed which must be the
result of these piratical invasions, terminate how they
may,-commerce destroyed,-that beautiful island laid
waste, and made a theatre of robbery, murder, and every
vile passion.
So far, Calderon has used every effort, so far as the
limits of his duty have permitted, to calm the irritation
of all parties, and has endeavored to make morality and
religion the basis of his representations, rather than
mere political expediency, yet even the praises which
have been indiscreetly given him here, have been
injurious to him at home, as tending to make them
fear that he may have submitted to too much from this
government.
He desires me to add that if he had the good
fortune to be personally acquainted with you, and if
you were aware how heartily he acknowledges your
superiority to himself as a writer, he would not fear
your misconstruing his motives, and would venture to
314
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
request you to send him a copy of your article before it
is published, in case he might be able to point out any
fact which might escape you, or correct any date which
might not be exact. He is convinced that this article
will be republished throughout the world, and every-
where read with interest; that it is one which will
greatly serve the cause of morality, which will console
more than one good man now afflicted by the actual
state of society, and which 'may, perhaps, rescue from
the path of perdition some young Americans led astray
by bad example and false principles, and that by it the
world will see that there are men in America who value
virtue more than gold or conquest, and above all have
the courage to confess it.
If you could point out any other way in which Mr.
de Calderon might be useful to you in regard to this
article, it would give him the greatest pleasure. Ever
since he has become acquainted with your Review, he
has looked forward with impatience for each succeeding
number, and always calls you the Balmes of America.
Will you allow me, dear sir, to express my own
pleasure in being permitted to make acquaintance with
you, even through the medium of correspondence? As
a Catholic and a convert, I feel a daily increasing
interest in the welfare of my adopted country, the most
Catholic country on the face of the globe, and I cannot
help thinking that amongst the motives which have
made the Mexican war and the invasion of Cuba
popular, there is mixed up a vague antipathy to the
Catholic religion, the false idea that Catholicism and
liberty are incompatible, and probably amongst the
worst of the adventurers a lurking notion of the riches
to be found in the churches and religious houses.
THE SECOND FRENCH REPUBLIC.
315
But I shall not trespass longer upon your time,
and begging you to remember me respectfully to the
Bishop, I remain with Mr. Calderon's best regards,
Yours truly and respectfully,
FANNY CALDERON DE LA BARCA.
In his next visit to Washington, Brownson saw
much of the Calderons; and he came to regard the
Spanish minister as a man of more than common
ability and character, and to entertain a high esteem
and friendship for him; the more so that on most
subjects there was great conformity of opinion and
feeling on both their parts.
CHAPTER X.
THE FRENCH REPUBLIC OF 1848.—MONTALEMBERT.
THE affairs of Europe had been more prominently
discussed in Brownson's Review since the upheaval of
1848 than before that period, and those of France, in
importance in themselves, and in their influence on the
whole Christain world, merited the first place. In an
article published in July, 1851, on The French Re-
public, the Editor asserts some doctrines which even
to-day are worthy of the consideration of a large class of
French statesmen and their followers, who, because they
cannot have what they would, will not have what they
might. They seem to confound often the adminis-
tration of the government with its constitution. Grant-
ing all they say against the present and preceding
administrations of the republic of '70, to be true, as it
* Works, vol. xvi, p. 252.
316
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
undoubtedly is, the question naturally arises, whose
fault is it that it is so? France, the oldest son of the
church, the most Christian nation, is not an infidel
country, nor are the majority of her people freemasons;
not even one is in five thousand. The French, like all
Celtic nations, seem to regard loyalty as due to the
person, not to the office; whereas the German peoples,
including the old Franks, obeyed the king they had
chosen to lead them in war; but in the intervals of peace,
were masters of their own persons and property. No
king, pope, or priest can have by the law of nature, or
by the Christian law, any dominion over any man,
except vicariously, as the representative of God, and the
trustee of power. "Ministers may be variously
appointed," says the writer, according to the various
constitutions of different countries; they may obtain office
hereditarily, or by popular election; but always their
ultimate right to govern derives from God, and they
hold it only as his delegates. They are therefore bound
to exercise it according to his will, that is, according to
the laws of eternal justice. This is what we mean by
the jus divinum, and holding this, we hold that whoso
resists government in the discharge of its legal functions
resists the ordinance of God, and purchases to himself
damnation.
"But God authorizes government and invests it
with the right to govern for the public good, not for the
private good of the governors, and hence power is a
trust, and therefor amissible. It may be forfeited, ast
any other trust, for it may be abused, and it is abused,
whenever it is exercised for a private end, in opposition.
*Ib. p. 254.
THE SECOND FRENCH REPUBLIC.
317
to the public good. It may be lost, also, without the
particular fault of its depositaries, by such changes in
human affairs as render it impracticable or impossible
for them to continue to exercise it compatibly with the
peace and welfare of the public, or so as to secure the ends
for which government is instituted. In France, the old
public order has, by successive revolutions, been com-
pletely broken up, and the French statesman is now
free, and even bound, to take that course which is most
in accordance with the true interests of his country,
without reference to the rights of particular families,
deriving from an order which has in fact passed away.
He is free to support the republic, in total forgetfulness,
as it were, of the hereditary claims to reign of the
Bourbons or of the Bonapartes, and ought to do so, if in
the providence of God and the mutations of human
things the republic has become the only practicable
order, or the best practicable government for his
country; for there is a broad difference between heredi-
tary personal rights and hereditary personal trusts;
between overthrowing a monarchy for the sake of
establishing a republic, and supporting a republic after
monarchy has been overthrown; between struggling to
sustain a monarchy that is assailed, and struggling to
restore a monarchy that has fallen. The first want of
France is government, and its second want is wise and
efficient government, able alike to protect itself and the
freedom of the subject; and the duty of the French
statesman is to provide for these wants in the best and
speediest manner now practicable. If they can be best
provided for by monarchical restoration, royal or imperial
in the elder or the younger branch of the Bourbons,
318
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
then he should labor for such restoration; if they can
be best provided for by the republic, princely under
Louis Napoleon, or citizen under General Cavaignac,
then such republic should be accepted and supported.
We regard France, since the revolution of February, as
to the constitution of political power, as to a great
extent thrown back under the law of nature, and as not
only free, but bound, to reconstitute government in
the manner best adapted to her future welfare, and the
question for her to settle is, not the claims of princes,
but the political constitution she needs to preserve
herself from becoming a prey to the socialists and
red-republicans."
The article from which this is extracted discusses
the course of parties in France under the republic and
recommends a change of the constitution so as to render
Louis Napoleon re-eligible, or else to prolong his term
to eight or ten years. The latter suggestion was
adopted.
In a letter dated Paris, May 14th, 1851, Montalem-
bert writes:
MY VERY DEAR SIR:-Our pagan ancestors used
to say: Major e longinquo reverentia, and when I
see how fairly and how truly you judge our European
disputes and dangers, I am tempted to change the ancient
saying into this: Major e longinquo sapientia. I assure
you,
without compliment, that I have not yet met with
one, who, on the whole, has better views of our state of
things and persons than yourself. This means, as you
will understand, that I am completely of your opinion
on almost every subject, and can only admire how, at
such a distance from men and measures, you contrive
LETTER FROM MONTALEMBERT.
319
to sift their value as you do. But I am convinced that
prayer and meditation can give a sort of preternatural
insight into worldly matters as well as spiritual truths,
when they are directed by a pure and profound intention
to serve the cause of truth and of God's Holy Church.
A few observations you will of course allow. Your
judgment on Gioberti is really too indulgent: had you
but read the works whose titles you mention, I should
perfectly understand the moderation of your language;
but you surely have known his conduct at Rome and
during the whole course of recent Italian events:† you
have surely heard of his preface to the second edition
of the Primato and of his most infamous work called the
Gesuita Moderno. Except La Mennais, no priest, I
think, in our times, has more scandalously profaned his
sacred character. He is now living in Paris, quite
divested of every sacerdotal exterior or interior virtue.
The pride and paganism of this man, as exemplified in
his early writings, you have most excellently denounced:
a second article on his latter works and acts, would be,
I think, of great use to the Catholic public in America.
Another distinguished Italian ecclesiastic, Father
Ventura, has nearly fallen a victim to the morbus demo-
craticus, of which the Roman revolution was such a
striking symptom; he is here, and still professes most
absurd opinions on the temporal interests of the Roman
* The meaning is: had you read only the works, etc.
an
† A man must be hard to please who calls the judgment on Gioberti
too indulgent, and Brownson was generally supposed to be severe, even
too severe, in his criticisms; and it would be difficult to find in his writings
instance when he has brought more varied and damning charges.
against an author than he does in the one referred to by his correspondent
on Vincenzo Gioberti in his Review for October, 1850 (Works, vol. 11, p.
IOI). He says substantially all Montalembert does, except as concerns his
being divested of interior virtue: that the Reviewer does not allude to.
320
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
state, and on the conduct of the Holy Father, whose
confidential friend and adviser he was for some months
in 1847.
But in the pulpit his language is most
eloquent, most sound, and most orthodox: he is by far
our best preacher. Very different from Gioberti, he is an
enthusiastic admirer of the middle ages, and therefore
too severe upon the infirmities of modern governments,
which are too often, not the consequences of their bad
will, but of the destruction (anterior to them) of Catholic
sociability and rational hierarchy. With respect to the
middle ages, I have been most deeply gratified to see
page 445** your noble retractation of the former view you
took on this most important subject,-so that now we are
completel d'accord on this point, the only one upon
which I had apprehended some diversity of views
between us.
* Vincenzo Gioberti, Works, vol. 2, p. 137. "The author tells us,
that in civilization there is, besides the religious element, the human
element, and his pretence is, no doubt, that the human element of civiliza-
tion was more perfect among the cultivated gentiles than it is among the
moderns. This view, we ourselves took when we wrote the essay on The
Church in the Dark Ages (vol. x, p. 239); but the study of Gioberti's own
dialectics which we have since made, has of itself served to convince us
that it is not true, and that the Christian cannot consistently entertain it.
Civilization he makes the creation of the priesthood, and, as we have seen,
he identifies it with religion; then in civilization proper there is and can be
no human element distinguishable from the religious; for it is only as
instructed and informed by the sacerdotal culture than man is, or can be,
civilized man. The sum total of the life of a so-called civilized country is,
no doubt, a mixed result, composed of a religious and a human element,
but this life. in so far as distinguishably human, is defective, and not yet
civilized. Thus far religion has not been able to subdue the human
element, and transform its acts into religious acts, therefore into civilized
acts. If the priesthood creates civilization, then civilization cannot be a
mixed result of the human and the divine, in any other sense than is
religion itself as exhibited by man a mixed result, but must be a pure
result of the religious element acting on and subduing the human. Then,
again, if man is in his normal state only in the Christian society, how can
it be possible for the human element to attain a more perfect and exquisite
development out of that society, and therefore, as Gioberti contends, as
well as we, disjoined from the true human race,-the human race living in
the unity of the ideal, therefore in communion with God,-than it can or
does in that society itself? If this were so, we should be obliged to assume
that the abnormal is more perfect and exquisite than the normal,-a
monstrous paradox.
LETTER FROM MONTALEMBERT.
321
Your judgment on Hungary and Austria is the
more meritorious as it must meet with immense contra-
diction on your side of the Atlantic as well as ours.
My personal acquaintance with the country and the
people of Austria and Hungary have led me to the
same appreciation of the Hungarian revolt in 1848.
And I can but admire your extraordinary perspicacity
in thus forming your view of this momentous contest
while you had nothing but Hungarian special pleadings
and Hungarian romances to guide you. But I must
confess that you seem to me too severe against the
Hungarian nation in the past, and especially against
their aristocratical laws and manners. I go so far as to
admit that of all governments aristocracy in itself is
the best, and that wherever, as in Hungary, an aristoc-
racy has kept true to its military courage and social
energy, it ought to be maintained, even at the expense
of humanitarian theories, and so-called equality of
rights. In the same number in which you so merci-
lessly belabor the Hungarian nobles for their wicked
behavior towards the peasantry, you are obliged to take
the defense of slavery in the southern states of your
own confederation, and surely the slaves in Virginia or
Carolina are more to be pitied than the sclaves in
Transylvania. Neither can I admit the value of the
distinction which you attempt to draw between the
cause of Hungary fighting against Austria, and
2
*It has already been pointed out how far Brownson was from defend-
ing slavery as a southern and local institution; but the reader who will
refer to his Works, vol. xvii., p. 1, in the article on The Higher Law, to
which Montalembert refers, he will find not only what has been the teach-
ing of St. Paul and his successors, but a very clear foresight of what was
brought about sixteen years afterwards by the American Congress when it
knowingly placd party interests before those of the country. In a democ-
racy, after it has acquired full sway, politicians are just as ready as grand
monarchs to exclaim: Après moi, le déluge.
22
322
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
America fighting against England. The Hungarians
were not, as the Americans, the descendants and
dependents of the nation against whom they rebelled,
and they have declared over and over again that they
resisted tyranny, not royalty. I believe they were
mistaken, but their theory of insurrection was at least
as legitimate as that of the insurgents of 1776. I also
claim some indulgence for the poor Poles, who, having
been outlawed by civilized and monarchical Europe, for
no other crime but for having loved and bled for their
noble old country (whose murder was the first triumph
of revolution in Europe), cannot be expected to remain
an orderly, satisfied people, and have naturally enough.
fallen a prey to the crimes and follies of German and
French democrats. Their guilt is great, but that of
their conquerors and oppressors still greater. The
irretrievable fault of Poland, as well as of Hungary
(and in this latter case most inexcusable), has been to
allow the holy and just cause of nationality and mod-
erate traditional freedom to be absorbed and corrupted
into revolutionary democracy, and to have contracted an
alliance with revolutionists who are the necessary foes
of every liberty and of every historical right or memo-
rial in the world. Austria, as you most justly say,
deserves the sympathies of all honest men: her tri-
umphs over foreign and domestic foes, due to the
admirable traditionary spirit of her army, and sanctified
by the recent emancipation of the church from Josephist
trammels, is by far the most splendid and consolatory
page in cotemporary history. But I am afraid ere
long she will have new dangers to encounter. Her
bureaucracy, and her fatal tendency towards centrali-
LETTER FROM MONTALEMBERT.
323
zation, will pave the way for a future and not very
remote outbreak of revolution. Prince Schwartzenberg
is not, I am afraid, the man to wage war against
administrative revolution. Prince Windischgrätz, I
apprehend, would have done better.
The state of France is still enveloped in the
deepest incertitude. If one were to judge from a
merely human standing, there would be no chance of
salvation for us. Instead of profiting by the lesson
given to us from above in 1848, all the old parties,
being delivered for a time, thanks to the President and
his government, from the fear of an immediate triumph
of socialism, have set to their old work again, with the
most melancholy forgetfulness of past crimes and past
misfortunes. Thiers, Molé, Guizot, are playing together
against Louis Napoleon exactly the same game that
they used to play one after the other against Louis
Philip. Others, like your old friend, Victor Cousin,
uphold and maintain the revolutionary doctrines of
1789 and 1830 with a sort of diabolical perseverance in
perversity. But what is most to be lamented and to be
astonished at, is the folly of the legitimist party. These
poor simpletons, instead of thanking God for their
preservation from the fangs of terrorism, and instead of
blessing Him for the unexampled and unexpected
success of Catholic interests, as demonstrated by the
Education Law and the Pope's restoration, think that
nothing is of any use or any good unless they get back
a king, and their own king, Henry V. The immense
mass of the people will not hear of this prince, not
because he is a king, but because he is the king of
party, and of the most unpopular party in France; and
324
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
strange to say, the legitimists imagine that poor King
Henry V., if once brought back, could last and live
with a democratic constitution, universal suffrage,
which they have always been the first to claim and
approve of, and a parliamentary government, like that
which destroyed his grandfather in 1830 and his uncle
in 1848. So that instead of lending their considerable
strength to the present honest and very tolerable
government, in order to make it better, and to insist on
its fortifying moral and religious interests at home and
abroad, their only policy is to overturn the President
and prevent his re-election, for fear that his re-election
should delay the return of their prince. The Orleanists
are working in the same way, in order to get the
regency of the Protestant and rationalist Duchess of
Orleans, and the republicans do their best to obtain the
same result, because they hate the President for not
having unbridled democracy, and for having restored
the Pope. So that you have everywhere this noble
axiom proclaimed as the rule of all political tactics:
AVANT TOUT, il faut faire sauter le Président! Most
likely they will succeed, but the President, if destroyed,
can only be succeeded by socialism, as I have tried to
demonstrate in my last speech. Our prospects would
therefore be most cheerless if we were not encouraged
to hope more than ever in God's mercy, on account of
the really astonishing change which is gradually taking
place in the religious disposition of the people.
Although far from offering the picture of a really
Christian people, it is now an undeniable fact that since
1848 the church has taken a considerable hold on the
minds and hearts of thousands who formerly ignored or
LETTER FROM MONTALEMBERT.
325
hated her. The spiritual fruits of the Jubilee have been
most abundant. The number of colleges and schools
opened by the clergy, Jesuits, etc., since the education
law is prodigious. The Jesuits alone have already
more colleges than when they were suppressed by
Charles X. Religious communities of women and of
men are everywhere springing up, and their number
and success would be infinite if we could but obtain a
slight modification of the law against mort-main. This
change we should have conquered undoubtedly if the 150
legitimist representatives had taken their ground on this
and similiar questions, tendering their support to govern-
ment on condition that such and similar concessions
should be made to the church. As it is we must wait
with patience and confidence for some new manifestation
of the Almighty's omnipotence and omniscience. My
great effort at present is to prevent the clergy from
being drawn away from their higher and impartial
standing by legitimist delusions. The Univers, after
a temporary deviation, having returned to the right
path, I trust we shall succeed.
I send through Messrs. Bossange, two or three
volumes, Ist, the Ere des Césars by Romieu (not a
Catholic), but a very bold and intelligent judge of our
situation; 2d, France et Lorraine, by M. de La Tour, a
great friend of mine, a Breton who has been in the
Austrian army, and will open to you a new and true
perspective in history; 3d, a most remarkable work,
called Restauration de la France, by Blanc St. Bonnet,
which I am sure you will appreciate and admire as it
deserves to be, barring one or two ultra royalist chap-
ters at the end.
-܂
326
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
With renewed thanks for your kindness, and
renewed admiration for all your labors (including your
excellent literary notices and criticisms), I remain, my
dear sir, your very affectionate friend and obedient
servant,
LE CTE DE MONTALEMBERT.
The Marquis de Valdegamas, Mr. Louis Veuillot,
Mr. de La Tour, and myself, have conceived the plan
of a Catholic Quarterly Review for Europe and the
whole Catholic world, published in French and at Paris,
as the central point of all that is both good and bad in
our present state of society. This periodical would be
especially devoted to historical and literary judgments,
and drawn up in the strictest ultramontane and anti-
democratic principles. If you could ever become a
contributor to this future Review, or allow us to trans-
late your essays, either published or unpublished, in
America, we should be very grateful, as your mind is
so congenial to ours, and your name would then cease
to be a stranger to so many European Catholics.
The article which called forth Montalembert's
remarks about Austria and Hungary, was one of several
on the same subject, contributed by Rev. John P.
Roddan, of whom mention has already been made in
previous chapters of this work. Brownson coincided, to
some extent, with the criticism of Roddan, as appears
from his next letter to Montalembert, dated June 30,
1851, in which he says: "In my Review for July,
which you will, I hope, receive with this, you will
perceive that I have devoted an article to French
politics, based on your speech of February 10, a copy
of which yourself or some other friend had previously
LETTER TO MONTALEMBERT.
327
sent me. You will find, I think, that I have adopted
your views. I urge the maintenance of the Republic,
and its re-election or prolongation of the powers of the
President, Prince Napoleon, not because, in itself con-
sidered, I think a republic the best for France, but
because I look upon it as at present the only practicable
government for her. You will find in the same number
two other articles, the I. and the V., in which I have
endeavored to point out some of the evils and dangers
of democracy in the United States, and which seem to
me inseparable from that form of government.
"I accept, and so does the writer, your criticisms.
on the Hungarian article. I am not myself the author
of the article. It was written by one our most promis-
ing young priests, educated at the Propaganda, and
ordained at Rome in 1848, and who came home almost
a Mazzinian, and quite enamored of the European
revolutionary movements. But he has become a convert
to sounder views, and is now a pretty good conservative,
although a little too much of a republican. I saw the
faults in the article you point out, but could not very
well correct them, and as the article was designed as an
argumentum ad hominem, addressed to those of my own
countrymen who defend the Magyars on the ground
that they are democrats, I thought it best to let it pass,
although in some respects not in accordance with my
own view. The same writer is preparing me another
article on the subject, in which he will bring out the
other side of the question.
"Whether the American revolt from the British
crown in 1776 was justifiable or not, I am not in my
*Cooper's Ways of the Hour, Works, vol. xvi., page 326, and The
Fugitive Slave Law, vol. xvii., p. 17.
328
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
own country called upon to discuss. In my ownl
personal judgment, it was not; and I date the legality
of our proceedings from the acknowledgment of our inde-
pendence by Great Britain in 1783, as I think you can
collect from my Review for April last, if you do me the
honor to read my remarks on Mr. Webster's letter to
the Chevalier Hülsemann. My countrymen, almost to
a man, justify that revolution on the ground of the
sacred right of revolution,-a ground not generally
assumed by the insurgents themselves, and I have
simply wished to deny that right and to show to my
countrymen that their defense is to be based on another
principle, namely, that George the Third was a tyrant,
and the tyranny of the prince absolves the subject, as
contended by the congress of 1776 in the Declaration of
Independence. * This may not distinguish our
insurgents from the Hungarians, in point of fact, but it,
certainly does, if, as Mr. Webster assumes, the Hunga-
rians, rebelled, not against tyranny merely, but against
royalty.
"I can hardly agree with you that the slaves of
Virginia and Carolina are more to be pitied than the
sclaves of Transylvania. I am no friend to negro
slavery, but I am satisfied that slavery is the best estate
possible for the negroes in this country at present, and
I do not think that their condition as slaves is upon the
He says:
* The principle that the prince's tyranny absolves the subject, so often
insisted upon by Brownson, has been asserted by many Popes; but the
most explicit declaration of the principle that I know of, is by Pope
Nicholas the First, about the middle of the ninth century.
verumtamen videte utrum reges isti et principes quibus vos subjectos esse
dicitis, veraciter reges et principes sint. Videte si primum se bene regunt,
deine subjectum populum; nam qui sibi nequam est, cui alii bonus erit?
Videte si jure principantur: alioqui potius tyranni credendi sunt, quam reges
habendi: quibus magis resistere et ex adverso ascendere, quam subdi
debemus. Labbe, Concil. Tom. viii, p. 487.
LETTER FROM LA TOUR.
329
.66
whole worse than that of the great body of the opera-
tives in our factories. The free negroes can only be a
degraded caste among us."
The book by St. Bonnet, de la Restauration
Française, was reviewed by Brownson in his October
number for 1851, with much praise of the author's
faith, earnestness, and intelligence. On the whole, the
Reviewer deemed the work fitted to exert a salutary
influence; but he condemned the author's theory of
progress and development, which he shows to be false
and unchristian. I met the author in Paris soon after
the Review for October, 1851, had reached there, and
he expressed himself as highly gratified by the
criticism, and seemed thankful that his error as to
development" had been pointed out.
De la Tour's work, Lorraine et France, was
reviewed in the January following. In the meantime
the author wrote to Brownson:
TRÉGUIER, (CÔTES DU NORD) 29 Septembre, 1851.
MONSIEUR: J'ai prié M. de Montalembert de vous.
remercier de vos encouragements; il m'invite à vous
adresser moi-même mes remerciments et à vous
expliquer mes pensées; j'obéis bien volontiers à cette
invitation, car je ne saurais trop vous exprimer ma
reconnaissance et mon estime pour les services que
vous rendez à la cause sociale et catholique. Je doute que
vous trouviez, dans votre pays même, un grand nombre
d'intelligents apréciateurs, ou bien le niveau du cœur
et de l'esprit est plus élevé aux Etats-Unis qu'en
France: mais n'eussiez-vous que deux ou trois cents.
d'intelligents et zélés lecteurs, vous formeriez en eux
* Works, vol. xiv., page 197.
330
BROWN,SON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
un bataillon sacré, capable de résistance au mal et
l'expansion du bien; et je crois que l'Amérique aura
bientôt grand besoin d'une telle phalange, pour com-
battre chez elle l'orgueil national, le protestantisme, et
le matérialisme égoïste qui découle finalement de ces
sources-là.
CS-
Votre définition de l'origine du protestantisme me
semble parfaite. Oui, après l'orgueil naturel du cœur
humain, il est né de la renaissance du paganisme et de
l'indépendance de l'état à l'égard de l'église, c'est-à-dire,
de l'athéisme politique. Cette dernière expression me
paraît tout-à-fait vraie. L'Univers serait sauvé s'il la
comprenait; il ne faudrait que cela aux peuples et aux
princes pour être grands, bons, et heureux; car ils se
remettraient en la main de Dieu qui récompense au
centuple, même ici-bas, ses enfants dociles.
Mais pour arriver là, il faudrait changer complète-
ment l'esprit et le cœur du siècle; il faudrait le
ramener, par la foi, à l'amour et au service de Dieu et
du prochain. Il faudrait d'abord dégager les éléments
de la vrai doctrine en théologie, en philosophie, en
histoire, en pédagogie, en politique. Il faudrait élever
le niveau de l'instruction et de la composition du clergé,
transformer les universités, comprimer la presse anar-
chiste, cesser de singer dans ce qu'elles ont de mauvais
les institutions anglaises, pour arriver à détruire l'esprit.
de discussion et d'indiscipline .qui tend à faire régner
dans toute l'Europe le socialisme, cette formidable
hérésie du XIXe siècle.
Quels sont les éléments d'action pour refaire au
siècle une âme chrétienne? ils sont si rares et si faibles.
que nombre d'hommes de talent croient plus sûrement
LETTER FROM LA TOUR.
331
utile d'aller évangeliser les nègres et les Chinois que
de se consacrer aux missions européennes. La majorité
des honnêtes gens a pour idéal cette république payenne
que St. Augustin décrit dans la cité de Dieu (1. ii,
ch. xx), un état de choses où régnent la paresse et les
vils plaisirs: il est bien juste que les trouble-fête
socialistes se chargent de leur offrir la réalization de
ce noble idéal. La doctrine fait défaut partout, même
chez les catholiques. Ils ne comprennent pas même
que c'est la décadence de l'église et de l'aristocratie qui
a livré le monde moderne à la force et à l'orgueil, et
qui a permis à ces passions d'effacer les obstacles que
le morcellement des peuples, la variété des institutions,
la hiérarchie des classes et des corporations opposaient
à l'autocratie des princes et à la centralization exagérée;
d'où devaient provenir les tendances à l'universel répu-
blicanisme rationaliste. Parmi les catholiques les plus.
érudits, la plupart sont encore les apologistes de ces
faux grands hommes du XVIIe siècle dont la politique
demi-payenne a organisé l'idolâtrie complète du siècle.
suivant. Richelieu, entr'autres, ce restaurateur du pro-
testantisme, du prussianisme et du josephisme, ce
cardinal, qui, dans son testament politique, se glorifiait
d'avoir abaissé le saint empire et par conséquent la
papauté, sans avoir recours à l'alliance ottomane, qu'il
déclarait pourtant légitime, ce grand mais funeste
génie, les catholiques français l'admirent particulière-
ment; et dans l'Univers même on a pris contre moi la
défence de cet opprimé. [Hier encore un savant docteur
en théologie cherchait à me prouver que Richelieu avait
eu plus de mérites que d'erreurs. Il est vrai que j'ai
exagérée l'attaque, en ne tenant pas assez compte des.
332
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
motifs d'excuse; mais, malgré ces motifs, je persiste
à penser que cet homme a été un terrible démolisseur,
et que le nombre, l'ardeur de ses apologistes, parmi
les catholiques, montrent particulièrement que nous
avons perdu le sens de l'histoire chrétienne. La
doctrine, comme la foi, sa mère, est la clef de
toute lumière et de tout bien. Si elle n'est pas res-
taurée dans les esprits et les cœurs, les hommes conti-
nueront à se rapetisser et les institutions à s'amoindrir:
on ne saura ni enseigner ni organiser, ni commander,
ni gouverner, ni obéir: par conséquent aucun pouvoir
ne sera stable, et on verra des nations brillantes, comme
les Français, des nations prodigieuses, comme les
Anglo-américains, n'avoir de fierté que pour la révolte
contre les autorités nécessaires, de soumission que pour
l'esclavage sous le joug de la révolution.
Force est donc de se mettre à l'œuvre pour essayer
de faire entrer un peu de doctrine parmi les catholiques,
dont le cœur est encore plus ouvert que les autres, par
la Grâce, à l'enseignement chrétien. Et comme il est
impossible qu'un homme seul accomplisse cette tâche,
nous devons chercher les moyens de condenser et de
généraliser l'essence des plus remarquables travaux
catholiques écrits dans les Deux Mondes. C'est pour-
quoi, depuis quelques mois, M. de Montalembert et
plusieurs de ses amis sont frappés de la nécessité de
créer à Paris une revue catholique universelle, qui
apprendrait aux pionniers de la renaissance chrétienne
à se connaître, à s'estimer, à s'entr'aider, et qui amènerait
peu à peu l'organisation d'une association académique
dont l'action grandirait certainement si elle avait
quelque durée. Mais la réalisation de ces vœux est
LETTER FROM LA TOUR.
333
bien difficile, pour le temps prochain. La violente
hostilité des aveugles légitimistes contre M. de Monta-
lembert, les folles attaques de l'Univers contre lui
à propos de la loi de l'enseignement, la trahison de
MM. de Falloux et Dupanloup, qui ont tourné contre
lui l'Ami de la Réligion, après l'avoir crée, sous ses
auspices et par son nom: toutes ces défections, toutes
ces déceptions ont profondément découragé et momenta-
nément affaibli l'homme qui doit être le pivot de toute
politique chrétienne en France. La même défection
des légitimistes a motivé les intrigues de MM. Thiers,
Changarnier et autres, les hésitations des conservateurs
bonapartistes; et notre malheureux pays est dans une
telle confusion que nul ne peut compter sur un lende-
main. Chacun est obligé de lutter à son poste. Pour
moi, je m'épuise dans le journalisme provincial pour
tâcher de conserver à la foi, contre les ultrà-légitimistes
et les socialistes, le cœur de ma Bretagne, dans l'espoir
qu'elle pourrait opposer encore une certaine résistance à
l'anarchie, et faire flotter contre le socialisme la ban-
nière marquée de la Croix. Nous ne pouvons tâcher
sérieusement de réaliser à Paris nos projets de Revue,
de propagande doctrinale et d'histoire catholique, que si
nous avons un répit un peu prolongé, et quelques
espérances d'avenir.
Je regrette infiniment d'être obligé de me dépenser,
depuis trois ans, dans le journalisme, alors que j'aurais
dû me borner à des recettes d'instruction pour entrer
ensuite, bien armé, dans la lice historique. S'il me
reste des yeux et des forces, peut-être essaierai-je bien-
tôt le récit de la révolution de Hongrie pour me
préparer à de plus graves travaux historiques. J'ai
334
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
habité ce pays pendant six ans ; et j'ai été émerveillé dé
la façon dont vous avez saisi le caractère général de ses
habitants. Cependant je crois que vous avez été un
peu trop sévère à l'endroit de la majorité de la noblesse
magyare. Les deux tiers de la haute aristocratie sont
demeurés attachés à l'Autriche; mais comme elle réside
peu dans ses terres et laisse les paysans entre les mains
de misérables employés, ce secours a été peu efficace.
Parmi la noblesse secondaire et les gentilshommes pay-
sans beaucoup ont été séduits, comme la noblesse
française en '89, par un faux libéralisme, et se sont
prêtés, pour ce motif, à l'émancipation des paysans.
Mais il est vrai que toute cette race a prétendu assu-
jettir les Slaves et les Roumans; cet orgueil indomp-
table des Magyars est un des dangers de l'Europe;
car, par là, la Russie trouvera toujours des alliés en
Hongrie.
Continuez, je vous prie, Monsieur, à fortifier
M. de Montalembert par vos critiques et vos encourage-
ments. Votre voix aura de l'empire sur lui; car vous
l'avez blâmé quand tous le louaient, et loué quand
beaucoup le blâmaient, et il a reconnu que vous aviez
parfaitement raison.
J'écris aussi aujourd'hui au Prince Windischgrätz
qui est bien digne de votre considération.
Je serais charmé, Monsieur, de recevoir quelquefois
de vos nouvelles et de vos conseils.
Puisse Dieu continuer à faire de vous un instru-
ment de miséricorde et de vérité!
Agréez, Monsieur, l'expression de ma plus haute
considération et de mon dévouement en N. S.
G. DE LA TOUR.
LETTER TO MONTALEMBERT.
335
On receipt of this letter, Brownson proceeded to do
what he was able to towards the encouraging of Monta-
lembert; but when the following letter was finished
and directed it must have got mixed with papers which
always lay in apparent confusion on the writer's desk.
In arranging these papers after his death, this forgotten
letter was found:
BOSTON, U. S., Nov. 15, 1851.
success.
MY DEAR COUNT:-I have just received a very
kind and interesting letter from your friend, M. de la
Tour, for which I must thank you as well as him. I
regret to learn the contemplated Review is postponed.
It is much needed, and I am sure would meet with
Mr. de la Tour tells me that you are some-
what discouraged. I do not like to hear of discourage-
ment. I have had all my life-time to fight against
powerful odds, but I have never seen any way to do,
but to keep on fighting. No man ever yet stood up for
truth and justice, God and heaven, but he had to
complain of opposition from all quarters. He is sure
to be opposed, and to be deserted by friends, and left to
struggle on almost single handed. God sends him this
trial to prove him, and to let him see that his strength
is in the Almighty, and not in himself. We may fight
with varying success, but if we keep on fighting, we
shall triumph in dying and no man really triumphs
before. Success in that hour is certain, if we persevere,
and we may well, when we have done our duty, trust
our cause, our beloved country, to the providence of
God. I see my own country rushing to moral destruc-
tion as fast as it can; I do what I am able to arrest it,
and I leave the rest to God, who I know loves my
336
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
more for its good than I am.
the cause of your country to Him
heart be sad, nor your strength fail.
the wisdom of your career grows in
you deserted and thwarted.
country more than I do, and is disposed to do infinitely
Spera in Deo, commit
and let not your
My confidence in
proportion as I see
Yes, my dear Count, it is perhaps consoling to
both of us, that the fate of our respective nations.
depends on the disposal of Heaven, not 011 our
individual exertions, and that we shall have to answer
only for the zeal and firmness with which we have
labored to serve them. It is comfortable to believe in
God, and to feel that we have no responsibility beyond
our individual fidelity. You are not obliged to succeed;
it is enough to deserve success.
You are engaged in the old war between Christanity
and heathenism, that is, the still older war of the spirit
and of the flesh, transferred from the bosom of the
individual to the political and social field,—a war that
will never cease as long as the world stands. We fight
under a disadvantage, because our worst enemy is in our
own camp.
The state, for the last two or three
centuries, even in Catholic countries, is heathen, and
the mass of our Catholics in political and social matters
are veritable pagans, asserting the independence and
supremacy of the secular order.
The Catholic states-
men of Europe have prepared the present state of things
by their endeavors to weaken the papacy, to convert the
church from the Catholic to the national church, and
subject it to the temporal power. Their policy is the
natural policy of all statesmen, and the consequences of
it are now beginning to be seen; but you cannot expect
LETTER TO MONTALEMBERT.
337
any very considerable number of politicians to become
wise, and therefore you must expect the majority of
them, no matter of what party, to oppose you, if you
insist on anything like Christian politics.
I have great tenderness for your old legitimists,
but I consider them unable to retain power, if they
could get it, or make a wise use of it if they could keep
it. In religion they may be good Catholics, but in
politics they are far enough from being good papists.
They may disavow their old Gallican traditions, yet
were they in power they would revive and act on them.
I had hoped M. de Falloux had risen above the preju-
dices of his class, and was prepared to adopt a wise and
generous policy for the times. But it seems that he is
not. I am at a loss to understand what can have
induced Mgr. Dupanloup to oppose your policy. You
sacrificed much to him and M. de Falloux. What is it
they want? What is it they hope? The more I study
your French politics, the more am I convinced of the
folly and madness of attempting to make Henry V.
King of France. I have no republican prejudices; I
abhor democracy; but I own that I wish to see Louis
Napoleon re-elected president, and that if you restore
monarchy, it should be in the family of the Bonapartes
rather than in that of the Bourbons. Your new France
must have a new dynasty, for, humanly speaking, it
would never be contented with the old, and it seems to
me that the legitimists themselves might see this. I
respect the principle of legitimacy, but I do not believe
a nation is obliged to sacrifice itself to the interests of
any family.
I suspect that our government and that of Great
23
338
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
Britain have come to an understanding to lend at least
their indirect influence to the continental revolutionists,
and mainly with purposes hostile to the papacy.
Unless something should breed a quarrel between them,
you may consider them allied to spread red-republican-
ism, and the only safety, under God, I can see, is for
Catholic Europe to form intimate alliances with
Austria, and thus form a power sufficient to check the
further advances of the monarchical absolutism of
Russia, on the one hand, and the American democratic
absolutism, on the other. I think an alliance of this
sort more practicable with the Bonapartes than with
the Bourbons; for the Bourbons, I fear, would incline
to monarchical centralism, and push Austria further in
the very direction in which she has already gone too
far. My opinion is that Great Britain supports our
democracy, and that the two great enemies to social
order and Christian freedom are the United States
backed by England, and Russia. Our next election,
however, will in all probability throw the whigs out of
power, and install the democrats, who are no friends to
England, and will be more conservative than a whig
government, in our foreign relations, because they can
afford to be. This may be some slight gain, but it will
be only momentary. You have, then, two enemies to
guard against, and it seems to me that your combina-
tions must be formed with Austria. France and
Austria can combine all Catholic Europe.
As far as we can here judge, you are likely to
have stormy times this coming 1852, but I trust in
God will be able to resist the socialistic movements.
We are to give Kossuth an ovation here, and show to
you
LETTER TO MONTALEMBERT.
339
the world what fools and madmen we are. The lion
must have his day. The popular tide runs too high in
Kossuth's favor for us to be able to resist it; but I
trust we shall survive it. Your European diplomats
would do well to keep an eye on this country. I have
written for my January number of the Review an
article on Lorraine et France as much in M. de la
Tour's spirit as my censor, who happens to be an
admirer of Richelieu, would suffer to pass. I hope it
will meet M. de la Tour's approbation.
*
Since I wrote you last I have been much out of
health, and I met with some discouragements, and can
much better point out to others how to keep their
courage up, than keep up my own. But I work on as
well as I can, do the best I am able, without finding
half-a-dozen friends who cordially co-operate with me.
I have seen the time when I could speak and make
myself heard throughout my country; now I speak,
and almost the only echoes that come back to cheer me
are from noble and sympathizing souls in other
countries. Nevertheless, the truth can wait, and no
true and seasonable word is ever spoken in vain.
I shall be happy to hear from you as often as you
can find it convenient to write me.
I need your
counsels, your advice, and perhaps sometimes your
rebukes. I look upon myself as a humble soldier in
the little army of which you are one of the leaders, and
my wish is to receive and obey orders. All who are
engaged in fighting the heathenism of the day, for
social order and Christian freedom, should act as far as
possible in concert. When you write me, I will thank
* Bishop Fitzpatrick.
!
340
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
you, if there is no impropriety in your doing so, to name
me some of the more influential of the legitimists.
Forgive me for troubling you with my poor thoughts,
and accept the assurances of my profound respect and
affectionate esteem,
O. A. BROWNSON.
VICOMTE DE MONTALEMBERT.
CHAPTER XI.
LECTURES IN ST. LOUIS.—BALTIMORE.-MONTREAL.
DURING the winter of 1851-2, Brownson's principal
lectures were given in Baltimore and St. Louis. The
first decided on were the St. Louis course of four, to
which a fifth was added by request of those who attended
the rest.
The Archbishop of St. Louis wrote him in relation
to the proposed lectures in that city as follows:
ST. LOUIS, 27th, Oct., 1851.
ORESTES A. BROWNSON, Esq.
DEAR SIR: I have been requested by some very
excellent Catholic gentlemen of this city to inform you
that they have placed in my hands $250 subject to your
order at sight. They will address a letter to you by
this day's post, in which they will explain the nature of
the commission they have given me.
I shall be very
happy if they are successful in their application to you,
as, besides more important considerations, it will afford
me the occasion of becoming personally acquainted with
one whom I most sincerely respect. Should you accept
LETTER FROM GARESCHE.
341
their invitation, you will confer on me a favor by send-
ing me a telegraphic dispatch to that effect.
I am, dear sir, with great esteem, your obedient
servant in Xt.
PETER RICHARD,
Abp. of St. Louis.
The invitation from the committee does not very
materially differ from many others, but may be worth
preserving as a record of the religious activity of the
laity in those times: it is also the first communication
Brownson received from one who became a very strong
friend, as did also his two equally distinguished brothers.
St. Louis, Mo., 28th October, 1851.
ORESTES A. BROWNSON, Esq., LL. D.
DEAR SIR:-The undersigned appointed by the
Catholics of this city, a committee to organize for the.
ensuing winter a course of Catholic lectures and select
the lecturers, have the honor to address you in this
capacity.
The plan upon which these lectures are to be
organized, is to have but three or four lecturers and
each of these to deliver a course of not less than four
nor more than six lectures upon the subject they may
select.
The object of these lectures is twofold:
First to dissipate prejudice.
prejudice. Such is the studied
effort of Protestantism to poison from their infancy the
minds of its votaries, that we believe many now dissent-
ing from us would at once enter the pale of the church
could a successful effort be made to dispel their
prejudices. They are taught to believe the church
hideous, that history proves it to be so, for for them
342
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
history has been shamefully interpolated with slanders.
There are many questions inappropriate to the pulpit,
suited only to the lecture stand, the importance of
which, however, is only second to those which treat of
matters of faith. To dispel, then, Protestant prejudices
and to awaken Catholic fervor by the defense of the
church and the exposure of falsehoods of which it has
been the intended victim, is one of our objects.
The second purpose is, that if these lectures prove
successful, the proceeds be applied to the erection of a
"Catholic Institute Hall" wherein all our
all our Catholic
benevolent societies may meet, where we may group
our libraries and where we can hold our fairs, our
suppers, and our lectures. So warmly does our
estimable and loved Archbishop approve of this part of
our project that he has promised us a lot (of ground)
and moreover that he would of his own limited means
subscribe for the purpose. With such objects in view,
can we not have the weight of your powerful assistance
and will you not consent to give one of the proposed
courses? Our Archbishop has already written to make
of you the proposed request. Though personally
unknown to you, we rely upon him, upon the cause we
advocate, and upon your well known zeal and devotion
for the spread of Catholicity, that you will reply
favorably. In the event of your acceptance, you can
name your own time when the course to be delivered by
you shall commence.
We have the honor to be your friends and very
obedient servants,
a
ALEX. J. P. GARESCHE,
For Joseph E. Elder, Joseph O'Neil, Richard F. Barry,
and A. J. P. Garesché, Committee on Lectures.
LETTER FROM KENRICK.
343
In answer, Brownson wrote that he could not spare
the time and labor of travelling to St. Louis and
delivering four lectures for the sum mentioned in the
Archbishop's letter, and stating the terms on which he
would accept the invitation. In reply Kenrick, who
seems to have thought that he had written what he had
not, sent the following communication:
ST. LOUIS, 19th November, 1851.
ORESTES A. BROWNSON, ESQ.
DEAR SIR: I have already apprized you by the
telegraph, that the committee have accepted your terms.
Indeed, I fear that you have misunderstood my letter,
in which $500 was mentioned, one-half of which was
placed in my hands, subject to your order. Be this
as it may have been, the committee authorize me to say
that you shall have $400 above all your expenses to
St. Louis, while here, and back to Boston. The com-
mittee are well aware of fully indemnifying you for the
loss of time and labor which a journey to St. Louis,
especially at this season of the year, implies. I hope
that you will be able to give some lectures in Cincinnati
on your way to St. Louis, and that your arrangements
will permit you to extend your visit to this city for two
weeks, as it would be scarcely possible to procure a full
attendance on four nights of one week: two lectures a
week are as much as could be well given. As you have
intimated your willingness that I should choose among
the different titles you suggest as appropriate to the
intended lectures, I would prefer the title, Catholicism
and Civilization, to either of the other two mentioned in
your letter, as more in keeping with the character
which it is designed to give the embryo association,
344
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
than one having a controversial character. It has been
suggested to me that your presence would be likely to
add some names to the subscription list of your admi-
rable Review, and that it would not be amiss were your
publisher to send some additional numbers of the next
number to his agent in this city. I shall be very glad
of the occasion which your visit will afford me of
becoming personally acquainted with one whom I most
sincerely esteem, and whose masterly vindication of our
common faith causes me frequently to thank God for
the grace conferred upon you, and through you, I
doubt not, on many others.
I remain, dear sir, yours very truly in Christ,
+ PETER RICHARD,
Abp. of St. Louis.
Brownson began his course of lectures in St.
Louis, which were extended to five, on the subject of
Catholicity and Civilization, early in January.
The lectures were a sort of running commentary
on the text, "Seek ye, therefore, first the kingdom of
God, and his justice; and all these things shall be
added unto
unto you." (Matt. VI., 33.) The lecturer
maintained that all true civilization is of Catholic
origin, and that all nations in the ancient world became
barbarous in proportion as they departed from the
patriarchal religion, and that all modern nations tend
to barbarism in proportion as they recede from the
Catholic Church. He did not maintain this thesis
precisely as an argument for the church, for he con-
tended that the church is spiritual, instituted, not for
the civilization of nations, but for the glory of God in
the salvation of souls; he maintained it because it is
ST. LOUIS LECTURES.
345
historically true and because it is a conclusive argument
against the carnal Judaism into which the world has
lapsed, and which proposes simply material civilization
and temporal well-being as its sole end.
In explaining the meaning of liberty, he spoke of
the different senses in which that word is used: 1st, as
the freedom of the people, or the collective mass, to
govern; 2nd, as the freedom of reason and will; and
3d, as the freedom of passion,-the sense in which the
word is commonly taken in our times.
Democracy is freedom from tyrants, but it is not
freedom from demagogues. The people may be free to
govern in a democracy; but it does not follow that the
individuals are free. The right of the majority to
govern is destructive of individual liberty. We have
lost personal freedom; we are surrounded by philan-
thropic committees who won't leave us even a chance.
to breathe; we have reformers who come into our
sleeping-rooms, our sitting-rooms, our ovens, and our
kneading-troughs, like the frogs of Egypt. These men
never take up a question on its merits; they have no
respect for individual liberty. They control men by
abolition societies, Maine-liquor laws, and humbugs of
If they can only bring a majority real or
fictitious to their support, they suppose they have the
right to make the individual yield to them.
By the
tyranny of public opinion, individual freedom is
destroyed, though popular liberty is preserved.
that sort.
"Whoever has watched the tendency of these
things, knows that, though there is no law against
liberty of speech, there is in reality no nation where
there is so little freedom of thought and speech as in
346
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
the United States." Here the speaker was interrupted
by a storm of hisses and groans mingled with very
determined applause: the noise lasted for a minute or
two, during which time Brownson crossed his arms and
very calmly looked his audience in the face. When
order was partially restored, he continued: "If a proof
of my assertion were needed, I would ask no better than
that hiss." (Loud applause.)
The liberty which revolutionists want; what they
sought in the revolutions of '48, was not the liberty to
do right, to do the will of God; but the liberty for
themselves to govern, or not to be governed at all;
liberty to follow their own inventions, to live as they
chose, and to have no one to call them to account.
Therefore, down with the church! down with the state!
and up with liberty, fraternity, and equality!
In treating of liberty in the sense of liberty of
reason and will, the speaker showed the fallacy of the
common notion that license is liberty carried to excess,
and despotism authority so carried; and that liberty
and license, authority and despotism, not only differ in
degree, but in kind. Authority is the government of
reason and will combined: despotism, the government
of will alone. Authority is the government of law;
that is, of will regulated by reason. For authority you
want freedom of reason and will; but for despotism,.
only will, or in the last analysis, passion. Civil liberty,
then, is the condition of a state in which law rules;
despotism, of a state in which will governs, the mere
will, whether of one man, of a few men, or of many
The government of the majority, of the minority,
or of one man,—all these, when governments of mere
men.
C
ST. LOUIS LECTURES.
347
will, are inconsistent with liberty, He then proceeded
to prove, by adducing historical facts, that the Catholic
church has always been favorable to civil liberty; that
she has always opposed the liberty of passion. She has
always opposed absolute government, and said to kings
and princes when they forgot themselves: Remember
that you yourselves are subject to the King of kings.
and Lord of lords; that you hold your power from
him; that your office is a trust to be discharged for the
benefit of those committed to your rule, and if you use
it to oppress them, you forfeit the right to govern and
become tyrants, oppressors, no longer kings and rulers.
And when they refused to yield to the claims of reason
and justice, she did not hesitate to excommunicate
them. The church opposed royal omnipotence: she is
also opposed to popular or parliamentary omnipotence.
She alone confers civil liberty, and in Protestant
countries we find very little of it. Since the Reforma-
tion there has been less civil liberty in Europe than
before; and since that event, men have been more free
in the south and west of Europe than in the north.
The conclusions of the lecturer were neither flatter-
ing nor acceptable to the carnal Jews and gentiles who
listened to them. If his conclusions were sound, and
nobody pretended that they did not follow irresistibly
from his premises, and if what he alleged to be facts,
were really facts, the boasted progress and intelligence
of the modern un-catholic world could be regarded only
as false intelligence, worse than no intelligence at all,
and a progress towards barbarism, if not arrested,
destined to end in savagism. The secular and secta-
rian press, with one or two honorable exceptions, kept
348
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
up during the delivery of the lectures a continual fire
against the lecturer and his assertions, and even sought
to crush him beneath the weight of his own writings.
prior to his conversion, and which he had long since
retracted. But this was not enough. The lectures
were listened to by large numbers of the most respecta-
ble and influential classes of the city, with deep interest,
almost with enthusiasm. Nowhere had the lecturer
ever found a more intelligent audience, or been listened
to with more manifest respect and sympathy. Some-
thing was necessary to be done to counteract the
influence of his decidedly anti-Jewish and anti-gentile
lectures. So, at their close, a number of anti-Catholic
citizens of St. Louis invited Hugh A. Garland, a
Virginian, and former admirer of Brownson's writings,"
but at this time a resident of St. Louis, where he was
endeavoring to restore by the practice of law the fortune
he had lost in unsuccessful speculation, to deliver a
course of lectures in reply to them, and to tell the
people what they were to believe as to the compati-
bility of Protestantism with civilization. Garland
accepted the invitation so far as to consent to give a
course of lectures on the same subject, or at least some
branches of it. During Brownson's visit at St. Louis,
his relations with Garland were friendly and affec-
tionate, as they had long been, and their intercourse
was frequent and pleasant. In his lectures Garland
alludes to Brownson only in the most complimentary
terms, and nowhere professes to reply to him, or to do
more than go over a part of the same ground in the
light of Protestantism. As he sent a report of his
* See Brownson's Early Life, p. 308.
CONSERVATISM OF THE WEST.
349
lectures to Brownson, the latter made them the subject
of criticism in his Review for April, 1852, in which,
though giving the author credit for much reading, deep
thought, and eloquent language, he condemns their
confused, chaotic, and undigested character, and shows
that they are illogical, inconsistent, and assert princi-
ples which overthrow his proposed thesis.
Brownson was very agreeably surprised at much
that he saw and heard at St. Louis and during his trip
thither and return. He heard more sound doctrine on
government west of Cincinnati than he had ever heard
discoursed before in his whole life, and he returned
home with the conviction that the real hot-bed of
radicalism and ultraism of all sorts was in New Eng-
land, and the influences which were ruining the country,
as far as they were indigenous, were exerted by New
England and New Englanders. It was pretty manifest
to him that the Southern states were, to a great
extent, conservative and he found the great valley of
the Mississippi less radical than he had supposed it to
be. It was becoming pretty well understood in both
those sections that radicalism, revolutionism, abolition-
ism, and fanaticism were all at bottom one and the same
thing. It was a painful admission on his part, for he
loved and honored Massachusetts. But he declared
that the virtues of our Puritan ancestors lie buried with
them in their graves, and only their vices, their errors,
their objectionable qualities survive. In the free-soil
and democratic coalition, he said, we had the spirit of
German reformers and the old French convention,
John Calvin and Jean Jacques Rousseau, combined.
* Works, vol. x., p. 411.
350
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
In his return from St. Louis, Brownson delivered
other lectures. The course at Baltimore was very
similar to that at St. Louis, with the exception of the
last lecture, which was on Kossuth. Soon after arrange-
ments were made for his lectures in St. Louis, George
Miles and T. Parkin Scott made arrangements for a
course to be delivered in
be delivered in Baltimore. The formal
invitation was sent on Dec. 13th, 1851, with a letter
inclosed from the new Archbishop of Baltimore.
BALTIMORE, 12th Dec., 1851.
Dear Friend:-Mr. Miles has just given me the
gratifying intelligence that you will pass through this
city on your way westward in some short time, and that
you have consented to tarry a few evenings in order to
deliver some lectures. It will gratify me much,
and contribute, no doubt to promote truth and sound
principles. You will find me the same sincere admirer
and friend as when in the city of brotherly love.
Yours devotedly,
FRANCIS PATRICK KENRICK,
Archbishop Baltimore
ORESTES A. BROWNSON, Esq.
Miles also wrote:
BALTIMORE, December 13, 1851.
MY DEAR MR. BROWNSON:-I have thought it
better for form's sake, and in order that the correspond-
ence may appear officially in the illustrious Catholic
Mirror, to give our simple conversation the dignified
invitation in which it will now reach you. The Arch-
bishop says,
on your way westward." I shall explain
((
BALTIMORE LECTURES.
351
to him that it is on your way eastward from St. Louis.
He only misunderstood me. Can't you lecture for us
on this heathen Kossuth or Kossack?
The compensation, at least, $100 per lecture; any
surplus, of course, to you; but that guaranteed.
Yours most truly,
•
G. H. MILES.
On the inside page is written :
MY DEAR SIR:-Mrs. Scott has promised that she
will have two rooms prepared, one for you, and the
other for Dr. McCaffrey,-and he will meet you here.
Do me the favor to let me know from you immediately.
Very respectfully and truly yours,
T. PARKIN SCOTT.
BALTIMORE, 13 December, 1851.
MR. BROWNSON.
Reaching his home in Chelsea at the end of
January, Brownson devoted February and part of
March to preparing the April number of his Review.
As he was always anxious to have the Review in the
hands of subscribers on this side of the Atlantic by the
first day of each quarter, it was necessary that the last
pages of what printers call "copy" should be in their
hands a fortnight beforehand. During his absence his
great friend, Roddan, had done much for the next
number, but he was still further relieved by an
unlooked for contribution from the President of Mt. St.
Mary's College, who had so often hesitated to send
anything of his own, though sincerely desirous of being
useful. With his article McCaffrey sent the accom-
panying letter:
352
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
MOUNT ST. MARY'S COLLEGE, March 8th, 1852.
O. A. BROWNSON, Esq.
DEAR FRIEND:-I have not forgotten my almost
obsolete promise to write something for your Review.
Looking over an old essay or lecture on "Reason and
Revelation," written in February, 1844, I thought it
would do for a review. My greatest difficulty was to
find the book to be reviewed. Luckily, my attention.
fell upon a volume of discourses by Ventura, the title
of which I have prefixed to this article. This way of
proceeding is, I have been told, conformable to the most
approved practice of Reviewers. Not one syllable of
my essay has been changed to suit it to the present
purpose, except the necessary substitution of we for I,
and striking out one or two short sentences. Not
having had time to read the book reviewed, I could not
say more of it than I have done at the close. By
glancing at the table of contents, I perceived that it
was, nevertheless, the book for my Review.
Now if you think what I send you worthy a place
in your Quarterly, insert it-and if it spare you any
labor, or give you any pleasure, I shall rejoice: if you
think it will not do, burn it. I shall be content with
either decision. Should you prefer to modify or remodel
the thing, you are equally welcome to do that. My
only object is to help and gratify you, if I can.
Should you choose to publish the essay or review,
I must then ask you the favor, if it be compatible with
your publisher's arrangements, to send me some eighty
or a hundred copies of the paper containing it. The
reason for the request is, that having some time last
month read this same article as a lecture (mutatis
LETTER FROM M˚CAFFREY.
353
mutandis), I was called upon for a copy for publication.
This I declined, but I then conceived the idea of giving
it to you, and promised the applicants, should it be pub-
lished to give them some copies.
I have addressed my communication according to
your general direction "To Brownson's Quarterly
Review, Boston, Mass." So you will get a package
with my name on the outside, by the same mail with
this.
I hope the approaching council of bishops at
Baltimore will draw you in this direction, and I hope
moreover you will do us the pleasure of revisiting the
mountain. I shall not go to Baltimore this spring,
unless I be required for some purpose that I cannot
now anticipate. Here you are always welcome, and
your appearance will be greeted with particular
pleasure by your sincere friend,
JOHN MCCAFFREY.
James Sadlier, the Montreal publisher, being in
Boston soon after Brownson's return from St. Louis,
spoke about a course of lectures to be given in Montreal
in April, and after his arrival home the invitation of the
Catholic Institute was received and accepted.
The Catholic Institute of Canada exerted a power-
ful influence for good, by combining the efforts of
Catholics to secure their political rights which were
withheld in some instances, as in the matter of education
in Upper Canada. In that province where the Catholics
were reckoned at about 170,000, they supported Bishop
de Charbonnel, of Toronto, whose struggle for separate
schools was greatly aided by the unity of action among
Catholics. The Catholic Institute of Toronto was
24
354
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
founded in August, 1852, and by the end of that year,
there were twelve others in Upper Canada. That in
Montreal was opened in 1850; that in Quebec in the
autumn of 1851. They all received the approbation
of the church authorities; gave their support to all
proceedings to further the general interests of Catho-
lics; labored by lectures, libraries, and mutual corres-
pondence for the instruction of Catholics. Amuse-
ments, except cards, were allowed; local and party
politics were excluded from discussion. The bishops
were joined by the institutes in Lower Canada in
petitions to the legislature of Upper Canada for
separate schools entirely under Catholic control. The
good accomplished by these societies in our neighbor-
hood must cause regret that it has been impossible to
unite the Catholics of the United States in support of
purely Catholic interests. Brownson's lectures before
the Montreal Institute being decided on, Sadlier wrote:
MONTREAL, 28 March, 1852.
DEAR SIR-I received your note in reply to mine
some days since. I am rejoiced, as well as all your
friends that I have seen, that you have consented to
deliver another course of lectures for us.
The committee of the Catholic Institute meet
to-morrow afternoon to make preparations for the
lectures. I suppose the subjects will be the same as
you decided on when I was in Boston, that is, Why am
I not a Protestant? and Why am I a Catholic?
I need not say how happy Mrs. S. and myself will
be to have you and your daughter make your home
with us during your stay.
MONTREAL LECTURES.
355
Mrs. Donahoe has written to say that she intends
coming on with you.
We will advertise your first lecture for the 15th.
Perhaps the secretary of the Institute may write you, if
he has anything to communicate after the meeting. I
do not know whether it will be necessary or not until
it takes place. The Protestants begin to grumble a
little at your coming. They have never forgiven you
for your last course of lectures. I tell them you intend
finishing them now completely.
Madam wishes to be kindly remembered to Mrs. B.
I am yours respectfully,
J. SADLIER.
On his way to Montreal, Brownson visited Capt.
Tucker, Capt. Marryat the entertaining novel writer's
brother-in-law, whose invitation is inserted here as
introducing a matter of which a word should be said in
passing.
BURLINGTON, VT., April 8th, 1852.
O. A. BROWNSON, Esq.
MY DEAR SIR:-I see by the Montreal papers that
you are expected to deliver a course of lectures in that
city during the present month. You may recollect a
promise you made me when last we met, that you would
at least pass the night with me, and if you find it
consistent with your arrangements and your inclination
I shall be most happy to receive a longer visit from
you. Perhaps you might induce the Bishop to
accompany you, and then we should stand a chance of
passing the Easter holidays in a legitimate manner,
* Wife of Patrick Donahoe, of Boston.
Easter Sunday came on the 11th.
356
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
"with the benefit of clergy." * Besides this, I want to
have a good laugh at you and with you over poor Father
O'Callaghan's "greatest effort of the age," as he calls
it. Some of the proof sheets I have. According to
him, you are in a dreadful dilemma, finding fault with
you for what you do not say, blaming you for what you
omit to say which you have said, and condemning you
for what you do say which are the words of other people.
It is a remarkable instance of the justice of divine
providence in permitting a man to make a fool of
himself, relying on his own resources, prompted by a
most rebellious will. I am fearful, however, that in
this instance, a more worldly and a more sinful
"animus" actuates him.
You will not retard your arrival at Montreal by
staying the night with me, as the trains run no farther
than St. Albans, and remain in St. A. for the cars next
morning from Burlington. I recommend the Rutland-
Burlington route in preference to the Vermont Central.
Hoping soon to have the pleasure of seeing you, I
remain with much respect,
Yours sincerely,
N. A. TUCKER.
The Reverend Jeremiah O'Callaghan's book, of
which Tucker writes, was a good-sized S-vo. volume
entitled, "The Atheism of Brownson's Review." In it
the author had collected pretty much every false and
atheistic expression of the writers reviewed, and these
* The writer may or may not have understood the meaning of "Benefit
of Clergy," but a misapprehension of the expression is so common that it
seems a work of mercy to say here, that Benefit of Clergy was the
exemption of clergymen from secular process. In England clergy-
men were all who could read, and capital punishment was, at a subsequent
period, when clerical exemption from criminal processes was abrogated,
commuted in case of clerics to branding.
JEREMIAH O'CALLAGHAN.
357
he published as the doctrines of Brownson's Review,
giving the page and volume where they were found.
O'Callaghan was almost the only priest in the state of
Vermont at this time, and was complained of by some
of his parishioners to his Bishop, Fitzpatrick of Boston,
for some of his peculiarities, one of which was his
refusal to admit to the sacraments any one who received
interest for the loan of money, the sinfulness of which
he essayed to prove in a book against usury. Fitzpatrick
did not have any priest he could conveniently send to
replace him at the time, and soon after, De Goesbriand
was nominated Bishop of Burlington, and the matter
was left to him. He did nothing. As to the libel on
Brownson's Review, Fitzpatrick said Brownsou had
criticised others, and it was only fair that he should be
criticised himself. With great mental and moral gifts,
Fitzpatrick's want of bodily health deprived him of
activity in the government of his diocese, where things
were allowed to run very much as they might.
After finishing his course of lectures, Brownson
consented to prolong his stay in Montreal, at the
request of the Catholic Institute, in order to deliver, for
the benefit of that society, a lecture upon the policy of
Louis Napoleon. This lecture was given in the Bon-
Secours Market, April 29th.
He began by saying that he felt his position, as an
American citizen, called upon to speak on such an
exciting topic, before British subjects, as a very delicate
one. He hoped that he might be able to treat the
subject without giving offence to the loyalty of his
audience; and at the same time, without making any
concessions unworthy of a citizen of that great republic
358
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
As a
of which he was proud to call himself a citizen.
Catholic, and from a Catholic point of view, would he
approach the subject, and should therefore avoid offend-
ing either the loyal or national feelings of any of his
auditors.
After asserting that the best form of government.
is that which legally exists in any country, which has
grown with the people's growth, sprung from their
interior life, the speaker contended that obedience is
always due to the legal government, and rebellion
against it is sinful and unlawful. The object for which
government was constituted was the good of the gov-
erned, and only when laboring for that end were
governments fulfilling their lawful functions. When
they neglected, or acted in violation of these, govern-
ments ceased to be legal, and if no other means of
obtaining redress exist, resistance to them is certainly
lawful, because they have degenerated into despotisms,
and it is lawful to resist despotism. By this he did not
mean that the individual had the right to stand up and
pronounce a government illegal. Governments must
be presumed to be in the right, unless the individual
can appeal to some higher authority than his own
caprice or private judgment.
The lecturer passed in review the events wihch
had occurred in Europe since February, 1848, and
compared the state of Europe at that epoch with its
state in November, '51. The beginning of the re-
action against revolutionism he dated from Windisch-
gratz's action at Prague in the summer of 1848; it was
continued by Radetzky's defeat of Charles Albert's
revolutionary hosts in Italy; but it did not commence
LECTURE ON LOUIS NAPOLEON.
359
in France till the inauguration of the Prince-President;
for Cavaignac merely tampered with revolution and the
passions of the rabble until the Assembly made him
virtually the dictator. Louis Napoleon proclaimed
peace, disavowed all intentions of revolutionary propa-
gandism, and checked the spread of dangerous doctrines
in France; on all occasions he showed himself the
friend of religion, of education, of law and order; and
that peace was preserved throughout Europe during the
eventful years of 1849, '50, and '51, was owing more to
Louis Napoleon than to any other man in Europe; and
a debt of gratitude is due him from every friend of law
and order, and of liberty, which cannot exist without
law and order. Still he was only able to maintain a
truce, for it could hardly be called peace, and by the
end of 1851, it was evident that the government of
France could no longer effect its purpose. The great
want of France was a strong executive. The constant
squabbles betwixt the president and the assembly, daily
becoming more serious, threatened, sooner or later, an
open rupture in which the triumph of the legislature
would be the immediate signal for civil war. The
president proved himself equal to the emergency, and
by his coup d'état of the 2d December rescued society
from the catastrophe with which it was threatened.
The speaker did not pretend to be a prophet, or to
predict what would be the president's future course.
He hoped, but he feared also, for power is dangerous to
the possessor, and it is so easy to find pretexts for
grasping more. Louis Napoleon's relations with the
church and his behavior towards her had been unexcep-
tionable, but it was not impossible that he might adopt
360
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
measures which she would feel called upon to condemn
and to oppose; but, the lecturer said in conclusion,
"Let us accept the good that he has done, suspend our
judgment for the future; and applaud him in so far as
he has pursued, and continues to pursue, the path of
truth and justice, law and order."
CHAPTER XII.
THE MERCERSBURG SCHOOL.—THE TRACTARIAN SCHOOL.
*
In his first article on "The Development Theory,"
in July, 1846, Brownson showed the very remarkable
affinity between John H. Newman's theory and Professor
Philip Schaff's. Schaff was a young man, lately from
Berlin, with superior abilities, attached to the German
Reformed Theological Seminary at Mercersburg, Pa.
His fundamental principles were nearly the same as
Newman's, though stated with greater clearness and
distinctness, and he logically concluded in favor of
Protestantism whilst Newman came to the opposite
conclusion.
Schaff's book, from which Brownson quoted, was
called "The Principle of Protestantism in its Relation to
the Present State of the Church," and he was understood
by Schaff to intimate a purpose of discussing the
Mercersburg movement at greater length. Schaff
accordingly wrote to Brownson in that connection, as
follows:
* Works, vol. xiv, p. 10.
LETTER FROM SCHAFF.
361
MERCERSBURG, Pa., the 8th of Feb. 1847.
DEAR SIR--I see from the last number of your
periodical, p. 128, that you intend to say something of
the movement that is in progress among the Reformed
Germans in Pennsylvania. At the same time I judge
from your article on Newman's Theory of Development,
that you have probably not seen yet our publications
succeeding the "Principle of Protestantism." During
the last year Dr. Nevin, my worthy colleague, has pub-
lished a very valuable book on the Eucharist, under the
title "The Mystical Presence, a Vindication of the
Reformed or Calvinistic View on the Eucharist,"
Lippincott & Co., Philadelphia. The same publishers.
issued a small treatise of mine: "What is Church
History, a Vindication of the Theory of Organic
Development." Mr. Lippincott was ordered, I think, to
send you a copy of both works, but probably has not
done so.
He was rather unfortunate with our publi-
cations, inasmuch as they seem not to have circulated
where we should like to have them circulate most, in
New England. Probably some bookseller in Boston
keeps some copies, but they have not been announced,
as far as my knowledge goes. I have just no copies on
hand, else I would forward them to you immediately.
We are convinced that the subjects treated in these
works are worthy of a thorough discussion, although
we best know at the same time that they have been
by us treated in a very imperfect manner. The
resolutions of our synod sustaining us thus far against
our opponents, have, of course, not settled the question
Gam
* See Works, vol. xiv, p. 10, where the identity of Schaff's theory and
Newman's is pointed out.
362
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
scientifically. All we wish is a fair and earnest.
discussion in order to bring out the truth and nothing
but the truth for the benefit of Christ's Church. Now
I judge from the general character of your Review that
you would write a more careful and elaborate article on
these subjects than I generally meet in the Protestant
press of this country. But the mere "Principle of
Protest." and my little address on Dante would not
enable you to do justice to yourself and the subject.
I therefore respectfully ask you to put yourself in the
possession of said works, before you write the intended
article, at least of Dr. Nevin's book, where you will find
some hard things about Puritanism, which perhaps may
arrest your attention.
Excuse the liberty I have thus taken, although
personally unknown to you. I read your Quarterly
with much interest, and although our positions, of
course, are very different, I am too much convinced of
the shallowness of much of our present Protestantism,
not to see the force of many of your arguments.
I am, dear sir, respectfully yours,
PHILIP SCHAF.
As some time had elapsed without Brownson recur-
ring to the Mercersburg movement, owing partly
to the embarrassing position in which he found himself
of admitting the theory on which Schaff and Nevin
defended their Protestantism, or renewing the assault
on the theory as upheld by nearly all the Catholics of
Great Britain, Dr. Nevin started the controversy
* I may as well say plainly as obscurely hint that in my opinion
English-Speaking Catholics are very apt to carry into religion the principle
by which their countrymen here and abroad, have succeeded so marvel-
ously in business operations, to look mainly to "what pays. The defence
of developmentism on the ground that, if it was not altogether orthodox, it
97
THE MERCERSBURG REVIEW.
363
$
with an article on Brownson in the Mercersburg Review
for January, 1850. The article was ably written, in a
tone and spirit as creditable to the writer as acceptable
to his opponent.
With rare fairness and candor he
endeavored to state Brownson's arguments for the church
correctly and to urge only grave and solid matter
against them. He concedes at the outset that, those
arguments are conclusive against popular Protestantism,
taking private judgment, with or without the Bible, as
the rule of faith; and that the Protestantism which he
has attacked, whether called high-church or low-church,
Presbyterianism or Methodism, and which has no
reply to make but cant and sophistry, is and long has.
been the dominant form of Protestantism, and the only
form that has been set forth prominently as the rival of
Catholicity. But, he contended, there is a higher doctrine
than either Protestantism or Catholicity which if
Brownson had known and appreciated, he would not,
in rejecting rationalism or Unitarianism, have gone
to the opposite extreme, abandoning private judgment
for authority, instead of seeking and finding the doc-
trine which reconciles and preserves both. To this
Brownson replied that the doctrine proposed is in sub-
44
made converts, is an indication of the view taken too often by those in
England and by the corresponding school lately condemned in this country.
How little care is taken to preserve the integrity of faith is every little
while evident in a most patent manner. Not long since, when Leo XIII
published an encyclical "On the Condition of Workingmen," a transla-
tion, said to have been made by one of the best-known bishops of Great
Britain, was circulated throughout this country by the authority of our
bishops, in which the Pope is made to say that all men are by nature
children of God and heirs to the kingdom of heaven, and I never heard of
anyone objecting to this denial of Christianity. In this very month that
I write this (June, 1899) the Jesuits recite daily in public, in their church
here, and I presume elsewhere, too, a litany of the Sacred Heart which
they say has been approved by the Holy Father, containing these words:
Heart of Jesus, substantially united to the Word of God, have mercy on
us" and they claim to have distributed about four thousand printed.
copies of it in their parish.
364
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
stance, though not in all its details, the same which he
advocated in 1842-1843, and established his Review
expressly to explain, propagate, and defend.
"The attempt to reconcile private liberty," he
answers, "and public authority did not escape us. This
reconciliation in a supposed higher doctrine than either
Catholicity or Protestantism was the precise problem
with which we were engaged for the ten or twelve years
next preceding our conversion. The attempt to get a
satisfactory solution of this problem is the key to all
our writings and sermonizing during that long period,
and no greater mistake can be committed than to sup-
pose that, even when we were a Unitarian, we accepted
in theory, however closely we may have followed it in
practice, the Protestant rule of private judgment. We
never, after 1832, and before that we were too young to
be of any account, adopted individualism, but uniformly
opposed it, and contended, as our published writings
bear witness, for a Catholic authority both in church
and state, although we erred grievously 'as to its seat
and constitution. Indeed, if there is a single problem
that we have studied with any degree of thoroughness,
it is this very problem which our Mercersburg friend
accuses us of having neglected, namely, the reconcilia-
tion of the so-called rights of the individual mind with
legitimate public authority. At no period after we
began to be known as a Unitarian were we any more
prepared to give up authority than we were to give up
liberty; or when, if it should appear that we could not
retain both, and that one or the other must be sacrificed,
we would not have sacrificed liberty rather than author-
ity. It shows no little want of acquaintance with our
THE MERCERSBURG REVIEW.
365
personal history, and a gross misapprehension of our
published writings, to assert that we went in our con-
version from extreme rationalism to Catholicity, or
from extreme individualism to authority. We went to
the church from a theory which was invented to retain
them both, and to reconcile them systematically and
really one with the other.
"We may not have exhausted all possible theories.
for the reconciliation of liberty and authority,—in the
reviewer's language, 'the liberty of the individual
subject with the binding force of the universal object,'-
but we were not ignorant of 'the new religious principle
and theory' which he proposes, and which he says 'the
case demanded for its solution.' If we understand him,
he advances little that cannot be found, in substance, in
our publications prior to our conversion, and if we did
not know that the theory had been advocated by several
eminent German authors, and that it was entertained
by him, in part, at least, at as early a day as by our-
selves, we should be half tempted to suspect him of
having plagiarized it from our own writings. Of
course, we are far from pretending that we set it forth
with the systematic fulness and consistency, or with the
philosophic depth of thought, the various learning, and
the clearness and vigor of expression, with which he
does, for in these respects we readily confess our infe-
riority; but we did set it forth in its principles, and in
what he has said we have found nothing that has taken
us by surprise, or with which we do not seem to our-
selves to have been tolerably familiar. Whether true
or false, adequate or inadequate, we are greatly deceived
if the theory has not once been ours, and if we have
366
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
!
abandoned it, we must still be treated with some leni-
ency, since the reviewer winds up his article against us.
by virtually conceding, with a candor that does him
honor, that, after all, it is rather a statement than a
solution of the difficulty.""
Nevin's objections to Brownson's argument for
Catholicity were that it made Christianity, as the
supernatural object of faith, objective, not subjective;
placed the supernatural above the sphere of the natural;
and made faith, in so far as subjective, the mediate,
instead of the immediate apprehension of the matter
believed. His view of faith he expresses to be the
direct and immediate communication of our nature with
the higher world, in virtue of its original capacity.
The power is in us by nature; Christianity is only the
influence which calls it into exercise. He denies that
Christianity is a supernatural revelation of truth or
doctrine to the human mind, and asserts it is but the
expression of the thought of believers. In the realiza-
tion of Christianity itself, in the constitution of the law,
the mind of the believer is active and autonomous.
Consequently, there is no conflict of private judgment
and religious authority, for the latter is made identical
with the former. Consequently, also, there must be a
constant growth or development of Christian doctrine,
as the minds of believers grow and develop in their
conception or apprehension of the higher world and
their expression of such conception. He sees the hand
of God in Protestantism; for even supposing that it "is
destined to prove a failure, still it would be in the
highest degree unphilosophical and irrational to deny
* Works, vol, iii., p. 52.
THE MERCERSBURG REVIEW.
367
its significance, at least in this point of view, as the
medium of the transition of the church to a better and
brighter state, that could not have been reached without
such a period of inward contradiction going before.”
The Mercersburg Reviewer's
Reviewer's arguments and
objections were discussed in all their important
details in Brownson's Review for April, 1850; and
in the Mercersburg Review for the May following,
Nevin returns to the argument in the same excellent
tone which was remarked in his first article; but in
trying to explain his doctrine in such manner as to do
away with the objections that it denies the matter of
faith and of all truth to be such except by the act of
the mind, and that it is pantheistic, he seems only to
involve himself deeper and deeper in the mire. This
Brownson proves in his reply in his Review for July
of the same year. The two articles here mentioned
on the Mercersburg theology, gave occasion to their
author to explain some very elementary notions which
were usually misunderstood by contemporaneous writers,
who, since the prevalence of the modern psychological
theory in philosophy, which starts from the subject
alone as the principle of science, tend logically to
subjectivism. As there is no possible transit from the
subject to the object, or from the object to the subject,
except by making them identical, whoever proceeds.
from either alone must deny the other, or assert both at
the expense of logic. The only philosophy which con-
forms to the order of knowledge as well as to that of
reality, starts with both subject and object in their real
relation and synthesis. An error of Brownson's,
* Works, vol. iii, p. 51. + Works, vol. iii, p. 90.
368
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
which frequently occurred in his writings until a year
or two later than this period, was the mistake of con-
founding supernatural and superintelligible; for as he
afterwards explained, much that is natural is super-
intelligible.
Nevin's developmentism was very much the same
in theory as that of the English converts from Tracta-
rianism; only in applying his principle he found that
the development of Christian doctrine was not in
the direction of Catholicity, but rather of German
Reformed Calvinism. Aside from the philosophical
errors he had fallen into, in common with nearly all his
contemporaries, Nevin made the mistake of the
Tractarians in endeavoring to draw their knowledge of
Christianity directly from the early writers of the
Christian church. The Christian doctrine is there,
sure enough, but not so easily discerned by one who
leaps backward over sixteen or eighteen centuries, as
by one who travels the road back with his eyes open
and observing every mile-post. The present age does
not understand, or at least, does not feel at home in the
midst of the scholastic theology of the 13th century;
but it can hardly appreciate the teaching of the early
fathers without the training of the middle ages in
distinctness and exactness of thought and expression.
It would have been of great use to Nevin to have gone
through the necessary training before his study of the
Fathers; but in spite of his lack of that, his essays in
the Mercersburg Review on the Apostles' Creed, Primi-
tive Christianity, the Incarnation, and St. Cyprian, are
among the most remarkable and profound in our
language.
NEVIN'S THEORY.
369
t
Believing that the Incarnation is the central fact
of Christianity, from which all that is distinctively
Christian radiates, he began to detect a significance in
the sacraments, and to regard them as the means by
which we are brought into living union with the life
of the Word-made-flesh. Following out this with rare
erudition and invincible logic, he found himself forced
to accept the Catholic theory, so to speak, of the church
with its priesthood. Brownson, thinking he was deterred
from entering the church, on the threshold of which he
was lingering, by timidity, by mental habits, by associa-
tions, or by not finding Catholics in their practice
coming up to what he considered a proper standard,
attempted to help him and to urge him on by private
exhortation.
•
Nevin's explanation of the state of his mind is
very candidly given in reply to a letter from Brownson:
MERCERSBURG, August 18, 1852.
MY DEAR SIR:-Your friendly communication of
the 9th inst. is thankfully acknowledged. I am glad to
know that you and others in the Catholic Church take
an interest in my welfare and pray for my conversion
to what you consider to be the truth; for it is my own
daily cry to God and to his Son Jesus Christ, that if
this way of yours be in fact the glorious vision which
gladdened the hearts of saints in the beginning, it may
not remain hidden to me, as it is "to them who are
lost," but that I may have power "before I go hence
and be no more," fully to see it and courageously to
acknowledge it before the world. Some Protestants are
praying for me too in their way. All round I have no
objection to this; and I may add that I would most
25
370
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
gladly enjoy also the intercession of the Saints in the
other world, and particularly of the Blessed Virgin, if
such benefit be at all possible for the exiled children of
Eve in this valley of tears.
My article on Cyprianic Christianity I have meant
to be mainly historical; though it breathes throughout,
I know, a strong sympathy with its subject over against
the reigning Protestant theory of the church at the
present time. In my next article, already in type, the
matter is made still worse by the admission that this
Cyprianic doctrine was not peculiar to him or to the
third century, but goes far back to the time of the
Apostolical Fathers, and underlies the whole structure
of the church. You ask how I can set this in any
rational harmony with the cause of the Reformation.
My answer is, frankly, I see not how it can be done in a
fully satisfactory way, and it is no part of my plan or
purpose to attempt anything of the sort. My object is
merely to hold up facts, to bring home, if possible, to
others, the actual difficulty of the case, to challenge, as
it were, an explanation, from whatever quarter it may
My own position is that of an anxious inquirer,
far more than that of a dogmatic teacher. I write
generally, indeed, under no inconsiderable pressure and
pain of spirit.
come.
My Protestantism, you will see thus, is of the
poorest sort. I am no longer fit for the defence of the
interests in any vigorous style. For this reason, any
controversy of a public sort in its behalf, either with
yourself or any other champion of Romanism, ought to
be in other hands. I find so much of truth and right
on your side, and so much of falsehood and wrong on
LETTER FROM NEVIN.
371
ours as usually held, that I have no heart for any con-
troversy of the sort, and dread being betrayed by it into
the misery of making common cause with principles
and tendencies which all good Protestants, no less than
Catholics, are bound to oppose and hate.
If Protestantism is to be upheld, it is only in view
of its being the historical succession of what Christian-
ity was in ancient times-a Providential development,
not without necessary violence, which is to be regarded
as itself only a process still (not by any means pleasant)
towards a better state of things to come. It would be
much, if our American thinking could be forced to see
and feel this alternative. You will observe, that I do
not venture of late to commit my own mind to it with
any absolute assertion. It is presented only hypotheti-
cally. If our cause may stand, then it must be in this
general way and no other.
But all this negative difficulty with Protestantism
is no positive conversion to Catholicism. I wish at
times it were so, and that it were possible for me to be
fully and firmly assured, that this in its modern form
carries in it still the powers and privileges claimed by
the Early Church. If asked at the same time to say
precisely what considerations stand in the way of such
an acknowledgment, I find it not easy to return any
clear answer. The difficulty rises sometimes in one
form, and sometimes in another. Where a whole habit
of thought, kept up for many years, is to be set aside,
in favor of another, altogether different, it becomes very
hard to distinguish between intellectual conviction and
the force of mere custom as such. My general posture
is not so much that of any distinct issue with Catholi-
372
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
cism, the solution of which might carry the whole
question for my understanding, as it is one rather of
inability to bring the question to any such issue, a
state of perplexity and doubt which I am not prepared
yet to bring to an end.
I shall look with interest for your promised article
on the Virgin Mary. I read Liguori's not long since;
but it only troubled me; he carries the matter so far;
and his "examples" are often so extravagant. If the
worship of the Virgin be so necessary, the medium,
some say, of all grace to the world-why do we not find
it in Cyprian and the fathers of the second century?
Has there been a growth of doctrine here? You
deny development in Dr. Newman's sense, but what is
to be made then of the caution shown now, in bringing
in the article of the immaculate conception? If it has
always been part of the explicit faith, why any hesita-
tion or question about its proclamation at this time?
This I offer as a mere specimen of my difficulties.
Another is found in the supposed degradation of some
Catholic countries, Sicily, for instance, and parts of
Italy. The force of this objection has been somewhat
broken, indeed, in my mind, but still I cannot shake it
off entirely.
With sincere regard yours,
J. W. NEVIN.
O. A. BROWNSON, BOSTON.
Brownson replied to Nevin's letter August 23rd,
1852. His observation on the devotion of Catholics to
the Blessed Virgin Mary are worth considering as a
very succinct exhibition of Catholic doctrine. As to
the work of St. Alphonsus on the Glories of Mary, he
LETTER TO NEVIN.
373
always tried to defend it. It is, however, beginning to
be thought that it would have been just as well if that
holy doctor's books had never circulated beyond
the kingdom of the Two Sicilies.
Brownson wrote in part:
"I have read with great interest and much satisfac-
tion your very kind and confiding letter of the 18th
inst. The account you give me of your present position
and state accords perfectly with what I had supposed,
and gives me good hope that ere long you will be
relieved from your present perplexities, and have no
doubt as to the truth of the Catholic Church as it is.
In the meantime I see no better or more proper course
for you, than the one you are pursuing. You are
praying for more light, and acting according to the
light you have, which is all you can do, and your
articles are helping onward the cause of truth.
"I can understand perfectly your state of mind
toward us, for it has once been my own.
There are
many things in the church as imperfectly seen and
understood by even well-disposed persons outside, that
seem strange and not free from objection, and which
would seem equally so to us within if we had not the key
to their real significance and were able to see them in an-
other light. I can easily understand the difficulties such
a work as St. Liguori's Glories of Mary must create in
the mind of a well-disposed inquirer, and I myself am
not able always to find his language such as suits my
colder and more languid piety, although I am never
disturbed by any difficulty in reconciling it with
dogmatic truth. The worship of Mary, however, is
reducible to two or three very simple points. In the
374
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
first place, it is the simple veneration we pay to all
saints according to their rank and dignity, and this vener-
ration has its reason in the fitness of reverencing the
grace of God, by which they are saints, in its effects as
in its principle, in the stream as well as in the fountain.
It is in reality only the overflowing of the love we have
for the Redeemer, flowing over from him upon all the
redeemed. Of course, as we hold Mary the highest in
the hierarchy of saints, we pay her the highest venera-.
tion which we can pay to any creature. In the second
place, we pay a peculiar honor to Mary as the Mother
of God, because in so doing, we express firmly our faith
in the Incarnation, and honor that mystery. As the
Son of God was made flesh from her womb, from her
flesh, she has an intimate connection with that mystery,
therefore with our redemiption, and as so connected we
honor her as we can honor no other creature, and the
honor we render her redounds, and is intended to
redound, to the honor of the Incarnation.
"The Catholic doctrine is that Mary did not
become the Mother of God without her own free consent,
and that by this consent she concurred in the mystery
of the Incarnation, and therefore in the mystery of
Redemption and the salvation of mankind. This will
explain to you a large class of expressions which you
will meet with in our authors. As it was only by the
Incarnation in her womb that grace flowed to us, and
as this Incarnation was not without her voluntary con-
currence, she is said, and truly said, to be the only
medium through which the graces which flow from the
Incarnation flow to mankind. I think you will find a
key here to many of the difficulties you encounter.
So, w
THE ENGLISH DEVELOPMENTISTS.
375
Another point to be considered is the true filial relation
that through the Incarnation was created between the
Son and the Mother. This relation was real, for Christ
was true man, really born of the flesh of the Virgin, and
was as much Mary's Son as any son is the son of his
mother. That relation, too, is and must be an abiding,
an everlasting relation."
To believe Schaff and Nevin, the reformers of the
sixteenth century never separated from the life-stream
of Christianity, which, springing from Christ, had
coursed uninterruptedly through the Catholic Church
until the sixteenth century, and from that time on in
some one, or all, of the sects; and one may well ask, if
their theory be accepted, why they are not, like New-
man's Montanists, merely anticipating the church,
bringing out and insisting upon certain aspects of truth
before the church has reached them in the regular
course of development. During the three or four years
that had elapsed since his articles on Newman's theory
of development, Brownson had only incidentally
referred to that theory. But early in 1852 he received
a copy of the Reverend John Brande Morris's "Jesus,
the Son of Mary," for criticism. The recent conversion
of the author, his evident Catholic intentions and
general correctness might, to some extent, protect him
against personal reproach for some unsoundness of
doctrine; but they could be no reasons why that
unsoundness should not be pointed out and condemned.
It was all the more important to do this, for that
unsoundness belonged not to that author alone, but to
a school of which he was a member. That school,
though founded outside of the church, in the bosom of
376
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
Anglicanism, by the conversion of its founders, was in
danger of being brought within the church. Its doc-
trine appeared to be the ground on which the founders
of the school renounced Anglicanism, and they seemed
to fancy that they could still adhere to it, and as Catho-
lics set forth and defend it. From their talents, learn-
ing, and piety, they exerted no small influence on our
Catholic literature, and, if not resisted in the outset,
might build up among us another school like the Her-
mesian in Germany or the Lamennaisian in France.
The age was fond of novelties, given to speculation,
to theorizing, and predisposed to the reception espec-
ially of a theory which promised to remove difficulties
in the way of what was assumed to be truth, and to
facilitate the conversion of those assumed to be in
error. The Catholic population undoubtedly shared,
to some extent, in the tendencies of the age, and was
more or less affected by what is called the spirit of the
times, and if an opportunity was offered them of com-
bining reverence for religion, zeal for the salvation of
men, with the love of novelty, there were many among
them who would not readily let it pass. It became
therefore a duty, at the risk of misconstruction and
personal odium for the Catholic Reviewer, if the post he
occupied was not exactly self-assumed, to expose the
dangerous novelty, faithfully, and, if need be, with
severity.
It may, perhaps, appear a little remarkable, that
Brownson rarely, if ever, reviewed a publication by
one of the converted Puseyites without finding more or
less fault with it. His undisguised contempt for Pusey-
ism, which he considered the least rational of all the
THE ENGLISH DEVELOPMENTISTS.
377
irrational forms of Protestantism, no doubt, tended to
prejudice him against a class of converts, who coming
into the fold of the church announced that they
brought their Protestantism with them; only, they
clothed it over with Catholicity, as Newman said speak-
ing of himself. There is, moreover, in every real
American a natural dislike of what we term the "insular
arrogance" of the English, who look upon themselves as
the standard by which all others are to be measured.
The English nature is practical, grasping, overbearing,
and applied to the acquisition of material wealth and
power succeeds beyond that of any nation of the present
age; but when they enter the higher regions of thought,
their want of the power of logical reasoning becomes
apparent. From Hamilton and Mansell, Huxley and
Spencer, to Newman and Morris, Brownson said he
found hardly one, if even one, who did not attempt to
construct a syllogism without a major premise, or else
without a middle term. This logical deficiency is not
common in the continental countries of Europe, nor
even in the United States, except where it is assumed
by or imposed upon those who are bent on overthrowing
the truths of religion or sapping the foundations of
social order.
The conformed Puseyites, moreover, wrote with
narrow and local views, in reference to a particular
state of things in their own country and a small
number of persons immediately around them; not in
reference to the spirit of the age and the great bulk
of the uncatholic world. They lived in an insular
world of their own, a peculiar world, one which is
nowhere else to be found, and of which it is not easy for
•
378
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
a stranger to form a just conception. They adopted a
line of argument, and used a language which they
supposed best adapted to its peculiar mental habits and
tastes, and which seemed fitted for the moment to win
minds and hearts to the church, without any thought to
the sense which would be given to their words when
read out of that narrow circle, or the embarrassments
they might occasion to those who, on this side of the
water, for instance, were like them engaged in the great
combat against heresy and infidelity. England was all
the world to them, and the Tractarians were all
England. Writing with this insular view, with sole
reference to the peculiarities of these Tractarians, in a
language which, though in its vocabulary common to
them and us, is in its sense peculiar to the Tractarian
school, it would not be strange if they were sometimes
misapprehended, and supposed to be asserting as abso
lute truth, as truth for all countries and all times,
what they themselves regard as only truth in England,
and even there only for the present moment.
Brownson strove to convince his insular friends
that truth on an island is truth on the continent, and
that no principles which are unsound on the continent,
or which are un-Christian in America, can really serve
to advance Catholicity in the Island of Great Britain.
Different arguments according to the diversities of time
and place, are no doubt lawful, and even necessary; but
all our arguments, however diverse, should rest on a
principle which is universally true. He did not
complain that English Catholics used arguments in
defence of Catholicity or against Protestantism which he
did not think of any use here; but he did complain of
THE ENGLISH DEVELOPMENTISTS.
379
them when they used arguments which, though
temporarily advantageous there, were yet false in
principle, and extremely embarrassing here. He com-
plained of the American Catholic who, to recommend
his church to his countrymen, contended that she is
democratic, because that is not true in fact, and must
embarrass every Catholic living under a monarchy.
Just so he complained of those Catholic controversialists
abroad who sought to recommend her to their govern-
ments by showing that she favors monarchy, for that as
far as it goes, outlawed us. It was easy to avoid both
difficulties, by simply adhering to the strict truth,
namely, the church supports the legally established
order of all countries, therefore republicanism here, for
that is the legal order, and therefore monarchy where
monarchy is the legal order. We should not only
defend the truth, but always seek to defend truth with
truth, for error will always be found a poor support of
truth, and truth is of no time or place, but of all.
<--
It must be confessed, then, that Brownson read the
productions of the converted Tractarians with the
presumption against them, and held them unsound
wherever they did not give conclusive evidence to the
contrary. This, perhaps, was a chief reason why his
judgment was often less favorable to them than was
that of many other Catholics. No doubt, this rule is
the reverse of that which is usually insisted upon, and
it is one that should by no means be ordinarily adopted
with regard to Catholic writers; but it strikes me as
the only safe rule to be adopted with regard to the
writings of men converted at a mature age. I hold that
the writings of every recent convert, including Brown-
M
380
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
son himself in the number of recent converts, should be
read with the presumption against him, at least, till
he has given full assurance of his having thoroughly
divested himself of his whole heretical or unbelieving
life. Conversion, in spite of Newman's assertion to the
contrary, is a double process, and consists in putting off
the old as well as in putting on the new man,- -in
unlearning error as well as in learning truth. Now the
process of unlearning is the most difficult of all, and
often we find converts who have unlearned nothing, and
have merely added the Catholic dogmas to their pre-
vious Protestantism. In stating the express dogmast
and definitions of faith they will be full and exact, but
the moment they undertake to explain them, that is,
show their relation one to another and to human science
in general, or construct the science of theology, they
reproduce their former life, and give us the most grave.
and subversive errors. They will not formally deny
the faith, but in matters not immediately of faith, they
will lay down principles and maintain conclusions
wholly incompatible with faith. This often happens
with Catholic authors who are not converts, especially
with those who have been brought up in a Protestant
community and formed intellectually by the reading of
Protestant literature. But it happens far oftener to
converts who come into the church only at an adult. age.
This, which is likely to happen to a greater or less
extent with all converts, was more especially so in the
* It is intended in a later volume to touch, at least in passing, on a
school in the United States, in many respects the counterpart of the
developmentist school in England; but as I may by that time find this
work swelling to too great bulk to repeat in reference to the so-called
"Americanists," what I say here, the reader is begged to remember and
apply it there.
THE ENGLISH DEVELOPMENTISTS.
381
case of the converted Tractarians. Those converts
formed a peculiar school before their conversion, and
came into the church as a school, retaining not a few of
their Tractarian peculiarities. They were all nice men,
very highly cultivated and refined, and had probably
always been strictly moral men. They did not appear
to have come to the church because oppressed with the
burthen of sin, because they wished her saving waters
to quench the flames of hell, already kindled in their
bosom; they did not appear to have come to her that
they might have life, but that they might have it more
abundantly. They appeared
They appeared to have come to the
church chiefly for æsthetic and intellectual reasons; not
because they could not attain to sanctity in the estab-
lishment, where they were, but because they could not
satisfy their tastes and intellectual wants, nor attain to
heroic sanctity out of the church. They came, appar-
ently, not that they might commence and live the
Christian life, but that they might continue that life
begun in the establishment and live it in its perfec-
tion. They therefore only continued their Tractarian
life under new and more favorable auspices. Conse-
quently, they looked upon Catholicity simply as the
complement of Tractarianism morally and intellectually.
Their conversion was simply the aggregation of
Catholicity to Tractarianism, or the grafting of certain
Catholic dogmas and rites upon Anglicanism. Hence
they thought and wrote as they had done before, saving
they accepted certain things which then they had
rejected. Not supposing they had anything to unlearn,
not remembering that they were to begin anew as little
children, they took their historic and patristic reading
382
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
+
prior to their conversion as correct, and instead of
revising it, and interpreting history and the fathers by
the light of Catholic faith and theology, they simply
invented theories to explain difficulties which haye no
existence to the Catholic, and which never existed save
in the imagination of heretics.
This mistake of supposing that all that is requisite
to conversion is to be "clothed upon" with Catholicity,
is one into which converts from Anglicanism are
peculiarly liable to fall. Anglicanism, especially in the
Tractarian form, has certain resemblances to Catholicity
which deceive many, and often lead the Anglican to
imagine that it is Catholicity as far as it goes; that it
and the Catholic Church start from the same point, are
identical in principle; and differ only in the fact that
the one enjoins more, and the other less. Hence the
convert from Anglicanism looks generally upon his
former life simply as defective, not as
wrong in
principle, but simply as falling short of the standard of
perfection. He supposes every Anglican has or may
have as an Anglican, if he is in good faith, enough of
positive Christian virtue to save him. But Brown1so11
regarded all this as a mistake. The Anglican estab-
lishment is not merely a schismatical church, but it is
no church at all; for it has no priesthood, as the church
herself teaches in denying the validity of Anglican
orders, and treating the Anglican bishops and ministers
as simple laymen. The truth is, Anglicanism and
Catholicity do not differ merely as more or less, but as
two radically distinct and eternally irreconcilable
systems; they lie in different orders, start from different
principles, and lead to opposite conclusions. They are
THE ENGLISH DEVELOPMENTISTS.
383
separated by a broad and deep gulph over which there
is no natural bridge. No doubt, the Tractarian converts.
received many graces while in the Anglican establish-
ment, but they were graces to bring them out of it into
the church that they might begin and live the Christian
life, not to enable them to begin and live that life in
that establishment. They no doubt, as they boasted,
practised many virtues at Littlemore and elsewhere;
but they were no more the distinctive Christian virtues
than are the virtues often practised by the Quakers, or
than were the virtues practised by many of the ancient
heathen. Nothing is to be concluded in favor of an
heretical communion from the apparent virtue of some
of its members; for the higher class of purely human
virtues are not easily distinguished externally from
many of the Christian virtues, and Satan can, no doubt,
go to great lengths in enabling one to simulate the
virtues, the affections, and even the raptures of the
Christian. The art of discerning spirits is not possessed
by every one, and is not acquired at will. The fact is,
the Tractarian no more lived the Christian life in his
Tractarianism than does a Unitarian or a Mormon, and
conversion in his case, as much as in theirs, implies a
change of life in its very principles, the commencement,
not the perfection of the Christian life. This fact the
Tractarian converts overlooked on their coming into the
church and hence they assumed the airs of full grown
men, instead of humbling themselves as little children,
and gave us for Catholicity a strange compound of
Tractarian philosophy and Catholic dogma. Hence the
Reviewer was fully justified in regarding their works
with distrust, and giving them an uncatholic interpre-
384
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
tation, whenever the language used did not necessarily
demand a Catholic sense.
I speak of the converted Puseyites as they appeared
to Brownson in the writings they published immedi-
ately after their reception into the church; I am far
from alleging that my remarks could be justly applied
to many of them a few years later. It was great
damage that they did not put off their Protestant
philosophy and speculations before they put on Catho-
licity; but the greater part of them were gradually
divesting themselves of their Tractarianism. Newman's
later publications breathe a far more Catholic spirit
than did his Essay on Development, and retain only
faint traces of his peculiar theory, just enough to show
that he had not rejected or essentially modified it,
without, however, wishing to obtrude it on the church.
Doubtless, he owed it to Brownson, to himself, and to
the public either distinctly to disavow that theory or
else to relieve it of the very grave objections which
were urged against it; but absolute perfection was not
to be expected even in Newman. He, no doubt, found
the theory very convenient in dealing with a certain
class of Protestants immediately around him, and did
not trouble himself with the embarrassment its standing
before the public with the sanction of his name after he
was a priest, a doctor, and the superior of a clerical
community, might cause those dealing with other and
far more numerous classes of Protestants, or the injury
it might do to the faith of thousands who cared as little
for Anglicanism as Brownson himself.
The Oxford converts also failed to commend
themselves to the Reviewer in consequence of their
THE ENGLISH DEVELOPMENTISTS.
385
undeniably retaining the false philosophy in which
they had been educated. Unless they use their and
our mother tongue in a sense at least unusual in this
country, they adopted a system of philosophy which is
at best only a disguised Kantism, and which really
recognizes no objective truth. In Newman's produc-
tions and those of all his school with the exception,
perhaps, of two or three, it seems to be laid down as an
axiom that truth is relative, or at least depends solely
for its form on the human mind, and would wear a
different form if our minds were differently constituted.
This, if it does not absolutely discard all objective
truth, at least denies all objective certainty, and neces-
sarily reduces the infallibility of faith to a mere
subjective infallibility, a doctrine wholly incompatible
with Catholic theology. Evidence, in their view, except
demonstrative evidence, never gives certainty; the most
it can establish is a high degree of probability. Dis-
carding certainty from all but mathematical reasoning,
they seek to establish merely the fit, the congruous, not
the necessary. Their great reliance in reasoning is on
the argument from congruity, and the nexus they
recognize between the premises and the conclusion is
that of fitness, not that of necessity. This logic, trans-
ferred to morals, substitutes the Greek voos for the
Latin ler, and makes the basis of morality the fit, not
the obligatory. Hence there is a certain vagueness in
all their teachings, an indecision in their statements,
and an inconclusiveness in their reasonings. They
seldom state and establish a thesis, seldom leave it
certain what is their real meaning, and very often leave
it doubtful whether they have any distinct and positive
meaning at all.
26
386
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
Besides the faults common to all the school, the
Reviewer complained of many more, peculiar to Morris's
volumes. His review of Morris was published in July,
1852, and was the occasion of Newman's breaking his
long silence for the first time in connection with his
theory. It was not, however, to defend, explain, or
disavow his doctrine; but to complain that a personal
attack had been made on him by the article, and that it
was only by a layman, not by a Doctor of Theology.
Brownson replied by a letter to the Dublin Tablet, the
journal in which he had read Newman's letter. He
wrote:
TO THE EDITOR OF THE DUBLIN TABLET.
BOSTON, October 15th, 1852.
DEAR SIR:-A friend has called my attention to a
note in your paper of the 18th of September last, from
the Very Rev. Dr. Newman, to which I beg you to
permit me to offer a brief reply, as it has been called
forth by some remarks in my Review which you were
so obliging as to copy into your excellent journal.
Of the tone and temper of Dr. Newman's note, and
the severe charge it brings in its closing paragraph
against me personally, I have nothing to say, for he is
a priest and I am only a layman, and if the charge
against me is untrue, it is nothing severer than I
deserve to have said against me. Yet I regret that the
illustrious writer should have broken his silence for the
first time against me in defence of his personal
character, which I have never attacked, instead of his
doctrinal tendencies, which I have attacked, and labored
to prove, are subversive of the Christian religion; for I
had supposed it to be always a characteristic of the
LETTER TO THE DUBLIN TABLET.
387
Catholic doctor to be more sensitive to charges against
his doctrine than to charges against his person.
If Dr. Newman had done me the honor to read
what I have written in regard to him and his school, he
would have seen that I have from first to last been
careful to distinguish between the man and the author.
I have never doubted his Catholic intentions; I have
never entertained the least doubt of the sincerity of his
faith, or that of his disciples. I have uniformly
expressed my full confidence in the purity of their
motives, and professed warm love and reverence for
their personal virtues. Both he and they do themselves
great injustice when they construe what I have said
into attacks on their personal characters, or fancy that
I am moved in what I write by any personal hostility
to them. I am not their judge, and in no instance have
I presumed to judge them, at least unfavorably. They
have entirely misapprehended the state of my own
feelings towards them, and if I have not been as eulo-
gistic in my remarks on them as others have been, it is
because I have not dared express the admiration and
esteem I felt, lest I should give countenance to doctrinal
tendencies which I regard as likely to prove dangerous.
to the purity and integrity of Faith.
I have freely and frankly pointed out the errors of
the development school, or what appeared to me to be
errors, as I have the right to do, and as I was bound to
do. Dr. Newman, when he wrote his Essay on
Development, was not a Catholic, and when I first wrote
against it he was only a layman like myself. He had,
indeed, been a Protestant minister, and so had I, and
there was nothing in our relative positions that made it
388
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
improper for me to review his book. I could not dream
that by doing so I should touch his personal feelings, or
incur the charge of being personally hostile to him. I
supposed that he, like myself, had no wish but to know
and obey the truth, and it is with no less surprise than
pain that I have found myself regarded as his personal
enemy.
I am, I very well know, a layman, and write on
religious and theological subjects, which no layman has
of himself the right to do. But I do so at the request
of the ecclesiastical authorities of my country, and
I never publish an article, written by myself, on
theological questions, without first submitting it to my
own Bishop, or a competent theologian approved by
him. I do not presume of myself to teach, for I well
know that I have no authority to teach.
Dr. Newman's doctrine of development was sub-
mitted here to a close and rigid examination, not by me
only, but by Bishops and professional theologians. I
have only censured what they bid me censure, and I
am responsible only for the manner in which I have
done what they instructed me to do. Under these well-
known circumstances Dr. Newman can hardly excuse
himself for not replying to the charges I have preferred
against his doctrine, either on the ground that the
charges are not preferred by a theologian, or that they
are charges against his person.
The only thing that operates here to Dr. Newman's
disadvantage is his refusal to explain himself publicly
with regard to his doctrine which has been publicly
controverted, and his apparent disposition to regard
attacks on his doctrine as attacks on his person. His
Ka
LETTER TO THE DUBLIN TABLET.
389
silence in this respect is not edifying, and, if continued,
will lead to suspicion even of his motives. What is
asked of him is, to tell us whether we have rightly
apprehended his meaning; and if we have not, to set us
right; and if we have, to tell us how that meaning can
be compatible with Catholic Faith. There is no Catho-
lic who wishes a quarrel with him, and all, I can assert,
that I aim at is, to be at once just to him and to
Catholic truth. I have no theory of my own that
his interferes with, and I seek only to defend the
tradition of Faith as it has come down to us from the
beginning.
I have written at greater length than I intended.
I have simply wished to prevent a false issue from
being made up before the public. I have had no fair
play before the British public, for very few Catholics on
your side of the water have seen what I have written;
and in every instance which has fallen under my notice
in which your journals have attempted to reproduce my
views, they have misrepresented them. Even you
yourself, in your notice of my review of Mr. Morris's
book, did not deal fairly by me; you reproduced the
passages which bore against Dr. Newman and the
converted Puseyites, but you did not reproduce even
one of the many passages which prove at a glance that
I bring no such charges as you and Dr. Newinan
imagine. Is it that we deceive ourselves when we
imagine that we speak a common language? Is it that
you do not understand American, and that I do not
understand English? I am half inclined to suspect
that there is something of the sort, for I have full con-
fidence in your personal kindness towards me, and your
390
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
disposition to be just to every man.
be, allow me to subscribe myself,
However this may
Your sincere friend and most obedient servant.
O. A. BROWNSON,
Editor of Brownson's Quarterly Review.
The Archbishop of Westminster having expressed
regret that the American Reviewer should have found
so much fault with the distinguished English convert,
Brownson said: "We are well aware that we have
given his Eminence pain by the course we have felt it
our duty to pursue with regard to the theory of develop-
ment. But we found that theory used by non-Catholics
to the prejudice of the church, favored by some
Catholics, and threatening to form a dangerous school
within the fold, and we felt called upon to enter our
feeble protest against it. We did not think the doc-
trine immediately dangerous enough to demand the
official interposition of authority, especially in England,
where we presume importance is attached only to the
element of truth which all concede that it contains; but
we did think, and so did a large number of our illustri-
ous prelates, that some Catholic writer should under-
take to refute it, and set the faithful on their guard
against it, especially here, where its error was the only
thing practically important, and favoring, as it could
not fail to do with us, the dominant heresy of the age.
But as we have reason to think that the purpose
for which we wrote has been effected, and that the
theory in the sense we have opposed it will be silently
dropped, we do not apprehend that any occasion will
arise hereafter for renewing the discussion. At any
rate, we feel that we have done all that can be reason-
1
PIUS IX ON DEVELOPMENTISM.
391
ably asked of a lay journalist, and that, should the
theory be reasserted, we are under no obligation to take
any further notice of it. We shall therefore leave it in
the hands of the pastors of the church to take such
action or no-action on the subject as they judge neces-
sary or expedient."
When Pope Pius IX determined to declare the
immaculate conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary a
dogma of Catholic Faith, it is reported that the Letters
Apostolic containing the definition were prepared for his
signature on Newman's theory, and that the Holy
Father rejected them for that reason, ordered the substi-
tution of those of December 8th, 1854, beginning with
the words, Ineffabilis Deus. The infallible Pope in this
dogmatic definition says 011 the development of
Christian doctrine: For the Church of Christ careful
guardian and defender of the dogmas deposited with her,
never changes anything in them, diminishes nothing,
adds nothing, but with all care tries, by faithfully
and wisely treating whatever was anciently taught, and
the Fathers' faith planted, to file and scrape (Limare et
expolire) it, that those ancient dogmas of heavenly
doctrine may receive evidence, light, distinctness, but
retain their fulness, integrity, their peculiar nature,
and only increase in their own kind, that is to say, in
the same dogma, sense, and belief." Therefore he
declares, pronounces, and defines, that the doctrine of the
immaculate conception, which the Divine words, vener-
able tradition, the perpetual sense of the church ( Divina
eloquia, veneranda traditio, perpetuus ecclesiæ sensus
* So also St. Leo the Great says: "Catholica fides quæ est singularis
et vera, cuique nihil addi, nihil minui potest." Epist. 165. cap. ii.
392
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
declarant.) distinctly indicate, has been revealed
by God, (Esse a Deo revelatam.)
The origin of the errors of Newman and his school
Brownson thought was in their method of studying
theology wrong end foremost. He believed that the
study of Catholic faith and theology should begin with
the catechism. From that he would proceed to the next
briefest compendium, to the scholastics, and, when these
were mastered, to the fathers; because the key to the
fathers is in the scholastics. Without this preparation,
without the key which unlocks the sense of the fathers,
one is almost as likely to misapprehend and wrest them
to his own hurt as he is the Scriptures themselves.
"They were written at a remote period, with special
reference to the peculiar controversies, states of mind,
and modes of thought at the time, and the reader who
alights on them without a previous accurate knowledge
of the chief points of Catholic theology will find them
filled with obscurities and bristling with difficulties
which he will hardly be able to solve or clear up.
"Our Tractarian friends, brought up to look upon
contemporary Catholics as an ignorant, feeble, cunning,
credulous, and superstitious set of mortals, far inferior
in learning, talent, and morals to themselves, and
accustomed to regard the scholastics as dealing mainly
in vain subtleties and distinctions without a difference,
very naturally passed from the study of their jejune
Anglican theology to the study of the fathers, whom
they were forced to read through the spectacles of their
more famous Anglican divines. They thus not only
had not the requisite preparation for studying them,
but had views and habits which wholly unfitted them
ENGLISH AND AMERICAN DEVELOPMENTISTS.
393
for studying them, with even passable success. They
have come from the fathers down to the scholastics,
whom they have studied not profoundly, and have
interpreted them by the fathers, instead of interpreting
the fathers by them. Hence their theory of develop-
ment, and other errors, adopted to reconcile the fathers.
and the later theologians." *
A like cause produced a like effect in the Mercers-
burg school, of which Nevin and Schaff were the leaders,
both highly distinguished for their researches into the
doctrines and history of the early period of Christianity.
Intelligent and earnest-minded, they saw that unless
they could find outside of the present Catholic Church
some ground on which they could stand, different from
that of vulgar Protestantism, they had no alternative but
either to become Catholics or to rush forward into abso-
lute infidelity. This ground they sought in historical
development. The members of this school proved
beyond doubt or cavil that Protestantism, if Christian,
must be the development and the continuation of the
Catholicity of the ages preceding that of the reformers;
but they neither proved nor attempted to prove that it
was, or show how it could have been. They only prove
that Protestantism is a development and continuation of
principles and tendencies which may be detected in
mediæval history; that the reformers invented nothing;
that they only developed and continued a movement
which had commenced long before them. They assumed
that every principle and tendency subsequently accepted,
developed, and continued by Protestantism, was a sound
Christian principle and a good tendency. But this was
* Works, vol. xiv., p. 182.
܀
394
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
not only begging the question, but was an inconsist-
ency; for they conceded that the medieval church was
the true Christian church, and these principles and
tendencies were undeniably repudiated by her; and
therefore to develop and continue them was anything
but to develop and continue the Catholic Church or the
Christian religion.*
The antichristian spirit of the age denies God as
first cause in creation and in revelation. The develop-
mentists who deny Christ as "the author and finisher
of our faith," only seem to me to introduce into
Christianity what is asserted by the age in regard to
man's creation. Modern science, at most, recognizes.
God only as creating germs which complete themselves
by their own internal law or force. Globes, suns, stars,
minerals, plants, animals, and man himself, are only
the development by their own intrinsic force, of prime-
val gases, the origin of which is outside of the field of
the knowable. This heathen doctrine of progress, or of
evolution, makes man in whole or in part his own first
cause, and so far as first cause, his own final cause,
which takes from morality its foundation. So far as
man is a joint author with Christ of Christian faith,
that faith is not divine, and is no part of Christianity.
I do not find in Richard Simpson's letters to
Brownson any reference to Newman or his theory; but
the following extract from one of his letters to Hecker
seems intended for the benefit of the Reviewer.
CLAPHAM, April 4th, 1853.
1
* See
p. 183.
(4
The Mercersburg Hypothesis," Brownson's Works, vol. xiv.,
Hebr. xii, p. 2.
SIMPSON'S LETTER TO HECKER.
395
DEAR FATHER HECKER:
An edifying member of our congregation, one
whom I used to see making the way of the Cross every
day in Lent has just told me that he is going to turn
Yankee, and is off to New York (going to face your
country, as you would say?) tomorrow morning. I am
afraid that this short notice will prevent my writing
much, as I am off to Liverpool in about two hours,
where I have to give a lecture tomorrow. I hope that I
shall not make an ass of myself, and do any damage to
that which I wish to assist. I was reading Brownson's
essays when the invitation came, so naturally enough
I chose rather a Brownsonian subject, to wit, private
judgment. By the bye, talking of Brownson, did you
write the first article on Father Gury in the number for
July last year? * It reminded me so much of your
talking, but I have not sufficient experience to know
whether to call the points Heckerisms, or whether they
are characteristic of people under the Brownsonian and
other Yankee influences,-in the same way as we o11
this side of the water cast our thoughts into Newman's
moulds.
I hope that Brownson will review Newman on
University Education. It is a capital book, and I think
that B. ought to admit that he has given (p. 348) quite
a sufficient explanation, not of what he means by his
book on Development, but of the limits to which he
carries his doctrine. "The notion of doctrinal knowl-
edge absolutely novel, and of simple addition from
without, is intolerable to Catholic ears, and never was
entertained by any one who was even approaching to an
* Hecker was not a contributor to the pages of Brownson's Q, Review.
L
396
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
understanding of our creed," etc., etc. Christian
Truth is purely of revelation, that revelation we can
but explain, we cannot increase, except relatively to our
own apprehension.
""
(C
I think that B. owes Newman a notice of this, for
he has certainly continued to spy out in his book a
good deal that no one else I have heard of ever
managed to extract from it. I think posterity will judge
of their quarrel as it has done of that between Plato and
Aristotle; that the latter, though the most acute and
most formally logical, has failed to see what the former
intended, and had therefore misapprehended him
Yours affectionately,
R. SIMPSON.
Perhaps it was in view of Simpson's quotations in
this letter, from Newman, that Brownson wrote in his
next number, that for July, 1853: "Our last article
on Developmentism, which seems to have given some
offence, was written and printed before Dr. Newman
had had his trial; otherwise, we may say, it would have
been written somewhat differently, for it is not, we
hope, in our disposition even to appear to bear hard on
those whom an unjust world oppresses." "We have
seen no reason to retract anything we have written
against Developmentism; we do not feel that any over-
ture of peace is due from us
is due from us; but we do feel we have
done all our duty, and are free to drop the subject;"
"and that, should the theory be reasserted, we are
* The trial was for libeling the Rev. G. Achilli who had gone from the
Church to Anglicanism. Newman was found guilty and condemned to pay
a considerable fine and heavy costs. Even The Times called the judgment.
a violation of justice, and Catholics in England and some on the Continent,
being of the same opinion, contributed the amount necessary to satisfy the
judgment.
THE VATICAN COUNCIL ON DEVELOPMENTISM.
397
སྭ
under no obligation to take any further notice of it."
He likewise said he had reason to think "that the
theory in the sense we have opposed it will be silently
dropped."
To conclude for the present, the consideration of
the Development theory advocated by so many of the
converts from Anglicanism, I quote the condemnation
of their doctrine by the council of the Vatican, though I
am well aware that after that condemnation a new
edition of Newman's Essay was published in which
the doctrine was retained in all its force.
The Vatican Council says: Neque enim fidei
doctrina, quam Deus revelavit, velnt philosophicum
inventum proposita est hmanis ingeniis perficienda,
sed tanquam divinum depositum Christi Sponsæ tradita,
fideliter custodienda et infallibiliter declaranda. Hinc
sacrorum quoque dogmatum is sensus perpetuo est
retinendus, quem
semel declaravit Sancta Mater
Ecclesia, nec unquam ab eo sensu, altioris intelligentiæ
specie et nomine, recedendum. Crescat igitur et
multum vehementerque proficiat, tam singulorum,
quam omnium, tam unius hominis, quam Ecclesiæ,
ætatum et sæculorum gradibus, intelligentia, scientia,
sapientia; sed in suo duntaxat genere, in eodem scilicet
dogmate, eodem sensu, eademque sententia."
* Coustitutious Dogmaticæ, Sess. iii. Cap. 4. De Fide et Ratione,
Denzinger, Enchivridion, Ed. 1888, p. 392.
398
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
CHAPTER XIII.
HUNTINGTON.—DONOSO CORTÉS.-KOSSUTH.—NAPOLEON III.
((
-MONTALEMBERT.—O'CONNOR.
AMONG the American converts to the Catholic
Church, hardly any, if indeed any, has surpassed J. V.
Huntington, previously an Episcopalian minister, in
purely literary ability. Rather deficient in philosophical
training, and somewhat morbid in his sensitiveness,
he was peculiar in his theory of art and in his taste.
At about the time of his conversion he published a
novel, "Lady Alice, or the New Una," which was
severely criticised by the papers generally. The nature
of their censures and the author's defence sufficiently
appear from a letter he wrote soon afterwards.
CORNER OF CLINTON & REMSEN STS., BROOKLYN,
Feb. 5, 1850.
MY DEAR MR. BROWNSON:-I promised to send
you, with a copy of Lady Alice, my own view of that
celebrated work. I fear I shall hardly do it justice, but
I will try. I have not sent it you before, because I was
desirous to get you the first edition, in which I have
not succeeded.
Lady Alice was not in its original conception, a
religious novel" at all. It was meant to be a love
story, for I thought that love was the proper theme of
the novelist, and that a true picture of love according to
its idea, would both delight more than the factitious or
LETTER FROM HUNTINGTON.
399
sensual passions generally described, and be of whole-
some tendency. The primary manifestation of the
consciousness of sex is reserve. Love is the voluntary
sacrifice of inward reserve in favor of a chosen one,
approved by the imagination, elected by the will. Love
then presupposes chastity, and chastity presupposes the
consciousness of sex. Love, taken thus in its simplest
conception, is not concupiscence, for it existed before it
in the bowers of Paradise. Human nature is incom-
plete without love in this sense, although since the
Incarnation, the spouse of chaste souls is the Son of
God, to whom (to whom otherwise the sacrifice were
vain) holy virgins dedicate their chastity.
My design was to make this idea, which (it is true)
I have rather seized in an imaginative way, than drawn
out into a form of reflection,-my design was to make it
pass into a beautiful form, as if it had been realized in
our time. Hence the artifices employed to unclothe, as
it were, my principal characters by endlessly varying
their costume, and stripping their imaginary position of
the very circumstances which belonged to it. I have
been accused of adoring wealth, rank, blood, etc.
Nothing can be more opposite to the truth. Lady Alice
is rather the apotheosis of art and poetry, of genius
and sympathy. The very things which the intensely
artificial system of English life creates and kills, I have
clothed, as it were, in the insignia of the factitious,
social superiority which they adore. I have made, on
the other hand, a daughter of nobles, one of the lilies of
an aristocratic line, descend into the humble life of a
struggling artist, and become like a wild-flower by the
dusty roadside of common life, in order to become
400
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
interesting, which she never could have been by
remaining in her boudoir.
Now for the minor motives of the book. 1. There
is not a scene of guilty passion in Lady Alice. Three
scenes are commonly objected to by critics who thus
unconsciously betray themselves: the opening scene of
the book, that in the gondola, the discovery of Fitzalan
by Clifford. These scenes all have the interest of
passion, I admit: they were meant to have; but not of
sin. Really one would think that even a Protestant
might penetrate the design of an author writing thus.
2. In every modern English novel, almost without
exception, you will find vice treated as a part of mascu-
line education. In Lady Alice, as in some romaunt of
Catholic times, inviolable chastity is not only ascribed to
the hero, but is made the secret of his superiority. The
whole secret of Una's successful disguise is attributed
to the loss of spiritual discernment on the part of her
friends, who know her and yet know her not, because
their conscience is not purified. Observe Louise de
Schönberg intuitively recognizing this when the
discovery takes place:
"When Alice's own hair at length fell in profuse
waves around her, Claribelle kissed those golden tresses
-her ancient care; but Louise stood with hands folded
on her breast, scarcely lifting her eyes to meet her
friend's glance." Lady Alice, B. viii. ch. viii.
I do not deny that all love-painting (if it be true)
is liable to abuse; but that it is inadmissible in litera-
ture, I will not admit even to you, my dear sir. I do
not understand the Review, however, as taking ground
that would condemn Spenser, Shakespeare, and the Bible
LETTER FROM HUNTINGTON.
401
itself. And I maintain that the plain speaking in
Lady Alice is wholesome, as it can plead the highest
example. Protestants (as one who knows them has
said to me) will do the vilest things without scruple or
remorse, but they cannot endure to hear the most inno-
cent things said. "All things are clean to the clean,
but to them that are defiled, and to unbelievers nothing
is clean; but both their heart and their conscience are
defiled."
The religious theory of "Lady Alice" is of course
a perfect unreality, but considered as unfolding a very
real state of mind it is instructive. The result proves
that I was sincere, as I think many others are in hold-
ing "Roman" doctrine in the Protestant church. I
painted not from imagination. I had actually practised
for years what I represented my heroine as practising
at Rome. It is well there should be a delineation of
this phase of pseudo-catholicity. It springs naturally
out of the Episcopalian system; it is a logical conse-
quence of the High-Church principles carried out; and
it may serve, as the Episcopal church is serving, to
break down the puritanism of our poor, self-satisfied
countrymen preparatory to their embracing the faith.
Of course, I do not defend all the crude views of
morals and expediency thrown out in a book which I
wrote when I was not a Catholic. I condemn, on the
contrary, as extravagant and undiscriminating the
ground taken in regard to amusements. I think, or
rather, I know that I have expressed myself inaccu-
rately in regard to duelling, which I always abominated,
it is true, but in treating of which I failed to distinguish
between the institution of chivalry sustained by the
27
402
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
church, and an abuse of it, against which the church,
having Christ crucified always in her heart, ever pro-
tested. My idea was that the privilege of using the
sword, as a trust, in defence of oppressed innocence, was
inherent in the old European conception of a nobility;
and so far my principle was indubitably just; I only
misapplied it.
I beg you will excuse this hasty outline of what I
should say of "Lady Alice," if I felt myself called upon
to say anything, and believe me, my dear Mr. Brownson,
faithfully and affectionately yours,
J. HUNTINGTON.
O. A. BROWNSON, Esq.
For the moment Brownson refrained from criticism
of the author of "Lady Alice;" perhaps he hoped that
its author's new life might operate a change in his
views of art, literature, and morals. It would seem that
Huntington, agreeing with some French writer, Voltaire,
I believe, that "la vertu s'est enfuie des cœurs et s'est
refugiée sur les lèvres," had come to the conclusion that
virtue could only be driven back to the heart by exiling
it from the lips. Soon after, that is, about the end of
1850 or beginning of 1851, Huntington published
"Alban, or the History of a Young Puritan," and in
1852 "Forest," a sequel to Alban, and in 1853 a
second edition of "Alban." Both these novels were
written after the author's conversion. Of them Brown-
son said: "Whatever may be thought of his books, he
is himself, we are sure, a most estimable and pure-
minded man. The passages objected to in "Alban,"
we are confident, sprung from no pruriency of fancy,
but from the author's theory of art, which seems to
GRA
HUNTINGTON'S NOVELS.
403
have been learned chiefly in the studio of the painter or
the sculptor. He has apparently written in accordance
with his theory, which he has not in all cases applied
precisely as intended. The author's theory of taste is
not ours, and he presents as the principal what we
would at most only tolerate as accessory. We never
tolerate description, whether of external nature or of
the human person, for mere description's sake. We
allow no more description than is necessary to explain
the positions of the actors, or to assist the action of the
piece. We think it repugnant to the laws of true art
for a writer, every time he has occasion to introduce a
woman, to stop and give us a full-length portrait of her,
the color of her hair, the form of her eyebrows, the cast
of her features, the pouting or not pouting of her lips,
the shape of her bust, the size of her waist, with
remarks on the flexibility of her limbs, and the working
of her toes. Dr. Huntington seems to have thought
differently, and hence the passages which have given
offence. His great strength lies in description, in
which he excels, not in the conduct of a story or the
development of character. In his volumes we find
much that is absurd, much that is silly, and a great
deal that wants vraisemblance; but after all, the most
fastidious critic must allow him a very high order of
ability, and passages and scenes of rare beauty and
interest." And again: "There is no question that
Alban is a work of ability, perhaps we should say
genius, and it has many beautiful and touching scenes,
and much fine description. We wish we could com-
mend it without reserve; but, after all, the present
edition is no great improvement of the first. It is not
404
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
that any of the scenes, descriptions, or expressions are
in themselves offensive to modesty, and very few per-
sons would be so fastidious as to object to them, if the
author did not pause to defend them, or to suggest
the very thoughts they would not suggest, by telling us
that they are modest, and no reasonable person can find
fault with them. The author sins by his bad taste and
lack of judgment, not by impurity of heart. He forgets
that nature has her unseemly as well as her seemly
parts, and that not all that is natural is. fit for public
exhibition. The novelist has a perfect right to appeal
to nature to give interest to his work, but it should be
honest, not dishonest nature. There is no doubt that a
nude figure may be chaste, and that a figure may be
immodest though draped to the heels and to the throat.
All depends on the spirit the artist breathes into his
creation and the expression he gives it, and we appre-
hend that the objection to the author is not that his
figures are nude, for that they are not, but that he fails
to animate them with a perfectly chaste spirit, and to
clothe them with a perfectly chaste expression. But
even the most chaste figures ever produced by an artist
may be made the occasion of immodest thoughts, if the
artist invites you to pause before it, and convince your-
self that it is modest, and not immodest. The author,
we are sure, means well, but he is a little fussy where
women are concerned, and is too fond of adjusting their
corsages, tying on their slippers, or smoothing the folds
of their petticoats, and not contented with indulging his
fussy disposition, he looks you very innocently in the
face, and tells you there is nothing improper in all this,
for he means nothing. Perhaps there is not, but he
would do better not to challenge us to discuss it."
HUNTINGTON'S REPLY.
405
This comparatively mild criticism was published
in Brownson's Review for July, 1853. Huntington
wrote a communication, signed J. V. H., which appeared
in the Truth-Teller of New York on the 16th of the
same month.
The Freeman's Journal and one or two
other Catholic papers were attempting to set up a cry
against the Review, and Huntington begins by saying
that it is a good time for him to join in and have his
say, as "he has a bone to pick with its editor, on his
Own account." But instead of defending his own
novels, or attacking the Reviewer's theory of literary
criticism, he makes war on Brownson's philosophical
doctrines, which he did not understand, and conse-
quently often represented him as holding the very error
he was striving to refute. But the main portion of
Huntington's letter to the Truth-Teller is devoted to
a defence of the Civiltà Cattolica against Brownson's
attack. The matter was this.
Juan Donoso-Cortés, Marquis of Valdegamas and
Spanish Ambassador at Paris, addressed a letter to the
Heraldo of Madrid, April 15th, 1852, on parliamenta-
rism, liberalism, and rationalism, in which the writer
said: "I acknowledge no human right, and hold that,
strictly speaking, there is no right but divine right.
In God is right, and the concentration of all rights; in
man is duty and the concentration of all duties. Man
calls the utility which he derives from the fulfilment by
others of their duties to his advantage his right, but
the word right on man's lips is a faulty (viciosa)
expression, and when he goes further and erects this
faulty expression into a theory, the tempest is let loose
upon the world."
406
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
La Civiltà Cattolica, a semi-monthly magazine
established by the Jesuits at Rome in 1851, inserted the
entire letter in its issue of May 15th, with a general
approval, but objecting to calling the word right on
man's lips "a vicious expression," and substituting for
vicious the epithet imperfect, and even that it says it
hardly dares use. It then goes on to argue that to
deny man rights by real participation of the divine
right would lead to pantheism or else to the system of
occasional causes, and reasserts the doctrine it had
previously defended in an article on the "Idea of
Right," in July, 1851.
*
(6
As this subject was one which Brownson regarded
as fundamental in ethics, and on which he had thought
and written much, and especially in his Letter to
Protestants, he would not lose the opportunity
presented by defending the Marquis of bringing out
his own understanding of the basis of morals, and
exposing the defect of the ethical system defended by
the Civiltà. We are very far," he
very far," he says, "from
regarding the word right in every sense as a vicious
expression when adopted by man, but our contempo-
rary's note fails to convince us it is not vicious in the
sense intended by the author of the letter, or that in
changing viciosa into imperfetta he has merely softened
the expression of the text, without changing the system
of the author. The Italian critic and the Spanish
statesman do not, as it strikes us, adopt the same ethical
philosophy, and explain the ground of rights and duties
by the same method.
The critic says he agrees
perfectly with the author that right in man is very
* Works, vol. v, p. 270.
RIGHTS AND DUTIES.
407
different from right in God, and that it originates
essentially in the order which the Creator has
established in the universe, and the obligation man is
under of conforming thereto.' But we see not how this
can be, for, if we understand him, the Marquis denies
all human right, and his precise doctrine is, that man
has no rights at all, that all rights are God's rights,
and that man has only duties, and of course duties,
strictly speaking, only to God. The Marquis denies,
strictly speaking, all human right; his critic asserts
human right, though he concedes that it is only an
imperfect right, as all the forces of second causes are
imperfect, inasmuch as they all depend on God as their
first cause. The difference is not one of exaggeration,
but one of system, and the question is, which system
ought to be adopted?" *
Brownson was reluctant to dispute any doctrine
asserted by the Civiltà Cattolica; for he had high
respect for the piety, zeal, and learning of the Society
of Jesus, whose organ it was, and a hearty sympathy
for its great design which was to vindicate Catholic
civilization, and to show the utter imbecility for good
and the destructive character, under the point of view of
civilization, of Protestantism and its off-spring, ration-
alism and socialism; but moral, religious, and even
political considerations prevented him from recognizing
human rights properly although imperfectly so-called.
The writers in the Civiltà sustained themselves
and opposed their enemies with science and profound
thought, but without that freshness, originality, and
energy which the times demanded. Error is in a per-
* Rights and Duties, Works vol. xiv. p. 294.
܀
408
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
petual state of development, and is constantly changing
its forms, and the forms of the truth and of the expres-
sions opposed to it require to be changed from time to
time. These excellent writers seemed not to be fully
aware of this fact, and to adopt a style of discussion and
a form of expression better adapted to the discussions.
as they were carried on two centuries ago than as they
are required to be carried on now. Truth is never new,
never old, but always one and the same. We do not
want new truths to oppose to novel errors as they arise;
and the same truth always suffices. But that truth
needs to be presented under new aspects and in new
forms of expression in order to meet the novelties of
error. Denial is carried further in our days than it
appears ever to have been in any previous age, and
what two hundred years ago would have been received
as an axiom by all parties is now called in question,
and has to be demonstrated. The current teachings of
philosophy, then sound because qualified and restricted
in the minds of both teachers and pupils by certain
principles which nobody dreamed of disputing, have been
seized upon by more recent speculators, who, rejecting
the qualifying principles originally held, make them
the basis of ethical and political doctrines as false as
they are fatal to the individual and to society. It can
hardly be doubted that on many points of philosophy
and politics both St. Thomas and Suarez writing to-day,
in view of the specific forms of contemporary errors,
would greatly modify some of their expressions, and
give a greater prominence to some, and a less promi-
nence to other aspects of truth than they have done in
their works. The errors they had to combat were, no
RIGHTS AND DUTIES.
409
doubt, the same at bottom that have to be combated
now, but they then manifested themselves under other
forms. The main thing in politics St. Thomas had to
guard against was sedition or rebellion on the part of
subjects, and tyranny and oppression on the part of
rulers: the prominent errors that Suarez and also Bel-
larmine had to combat were the doctrines of the divine.
right of kings and passive obedience, advocated by the
Protestant ministers in England and the opponents of
the League in France. The doctrine of the divine
right of kings was then asserted with a double object,
that of denying the spiritual authority of the supreme
pontiff over temporal princes, and the right of the
people in the name of religion to resist the temporal
ruler who failed in his obedience to the church of God.
Those great doctors had nothing to fear from the
sovereignty of the people, and had no pressing occasion
to guard against the tyranny of the people. They
could well say then, and apprehend no danger from
saying, that the political sovereignty under God resides
in the multitude. Their doctrine, as they understood
it, I need not say was sound, but when it came to be
embraced by men predisposed to democracy, their lan-
guage assumed another meaning, and was understood
to authorize the doctrines held by our modern liberals.
We cannot, then, use their language to-day, without
important qualifications which exclude the errors which
it now apparently authorizes. Their doctrine is not to
be questioned, at least by ine; but their language which
expressed the truth to the understanding of their age,
and excluded the dominant errors of their times, owing
to the changes of error, does not fully on this point
410
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
express the truth which they held to our age, nor
directly oppose the dominant errors of our times. This
fact should be particularly borne in mind by the readers
of the excellent work of Balmes on Civilization. Balmes
himself does not seem to have duly considered it, and
very few readers predisposed to democracy can read his
extracts from St. Thomas, Bellarmine, and Suarez
without fancying that he has the authority of these
great Catholic doctors on the side of modern liberalism.*
The doctrine of Valdegamas appears somewhat
startling at first, but the more it is examined, the
sounder it will appear. The Marquis was a man of the
world, and in his youth, like Brownson, a liberalist, and
had in this respect an advantage over his critic who had
never known the popular errors of the day, save as he
had seen them in others. The great masters of thought,
learning at the foot of the Crucifix, do not need to have
experienced in themselves great errors in order either
to understand them or be able to adopt the best method
of refuting them; still for ordinary men, though well
read in the schools, it is some advantage to have had to
struggle with them as great practical questions in their
own intellectual and moral life. One should know that
the Marquis had been a liberalist, if he did not tell us
so, by the felicitous manner in which he opposed to
liberalism the precise truth which condemns it, and in
the precise form in which it was needed to
condemn it. By the same token one should think
his critic knew the error and the opposing truth mainly
as he had learned them from reading and conversation.
He understood well that the age was diseased, he knew
* See Works, vol. xiv, pp. 298–9.
RIGHTS AND DUTIES.
411
very well the general character of the disease and in a
general way the remedy, but he did not seem to know
the precise form of the disease nor the exact specific to
be applied to remove it. In short the Civiltà did not
seem fully to comprehend the nature of the enemy it
was fighting. The age is further gone in unbelief,
sunk to far lower depths of unreason than it seemed to
imagine, and requires more searching efforts to recover
and bring it back to the comparatively rational ground
on which unbelievers and misbelievers stood two
hundred years ago than the good Fathers seemed to
think necessary. Brownson thought they did not com-
mence their war upon the rationalists and revolutionists
of the age quite far enough back, and conceded them
too much in the outset, and that they would do little to
arrest the progress of rationalism and revolutionism in
the Italian peninsula as long as they conceded to their
opponents that man has rights which he holds from
nature and only mediately from God, the very starting-
point of all rationalism and of all political radicalism.
The view which Brownson took, politically applied,
denies the "sacred right of insurrection," and is opposed
to the revolutionary and social despotisms which modern
demagogues labor to erect in the name of what they call
the "Rights of Man," but it neither abridges the just
powers of government nor favors tyranny. Assuming
certain so-called rights of man, the demagogues erected
on them a theory as incompatible with liberty as with
social order and good government; and it was to be able
to combat these demagogues successfully that led him
to deny that strictly speaking man has any rights.
Politically applied, Brownson's doctrine undoubtedly
412
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
denies the rights of human government, but only by
converting these rights into trusts, which destroys the
very foundation of despotism and establishes in principle
true liberty. The basis of oriental despotism is that
human government is a human right, that power is held
as a right, not as a trust, and that it is the right of one
man; the basis of democratic despotism is the same,
with the difference that the power to govern, instead of
being the right of one man, is the right of every man,
as expressed in the doctrine of universal suffrage as a
natural and inherent right; of aristocratic despotism it
is the assumption that the power is the right of the par-
liamentary body. In all these forms of government we
contradict the despotic principle and affirm the principle
of liberty the moment we deny power, however consti-
tuted or in whose hands soever lodged, to be a human
right, and affirm it to be a trust. The government does
not govern in its own right, on its own authority, but
the authority of God, who creates the trust, and is bound
to govern according to the conditions annexed. These
conditions, since annexed by God himself, must be wise,
just, and good, as is his own law; and consequently the
government will be wise and just and good so long as it
conforms to them; and when it ceases to conform to
them, that is, when it violates its trusts, forfeits them,
and the subject is absolved from his allegiance, because
the duty of obedience is to God, and to the government
only as authorized by God to govern, and of course
ceases the moment the government loses that authoriza-
tion. This, at least in principle, provides ample security
against the despotism of human government.
vides also for the stability of government and the good
D
It pro-
RIGHTS AND DUTIES.
413
order of society; because to all the usual motives for
obedience to government drawn from natural sources,
it adds the obligation of religion. The obedience of the
subject is due to God, and to the state as the minister of
God and because God commands him to give it to the
state. To disobey the state in the legal or authorized
exercise of its powers is to disobey God.
Religion as well as political science confirms the
truth of the doctrine Brownson was contending for. If
our duties, he argues, are not all duties to God, why are
we required to refer all our acts to God, either expressly
or habitually? If I owe a duty to my neighbor in his
own right, wherefore is it necessary for its perfect dis-
charge to look beyond my neighbor and refer it to God?
God did not make me for my neighbor, nor my neighbor
for me.
He did not create the universe either in part
or in whole for itself. He created all things for himself
alone. He is the sole last as he is the sole first cause of
all things. All activity of second causes is in the second
cycle, that of return to God as final cause. This return
is not a right, it is a duty, and necessarily a duty, in its
formal character of duty, to God, and to him alone. It
is my duty to return to God as the sole end for which
he made me, and this is all my duty. It is clear then
that all our duties are, strictly speaking, duties to God,
and consequently right in the mouth of man, save as
the vicar, minister, or agent of God, is a vicious, not
merely an imperfect expression; that human rights are
not mere imperfect rights, as is every participated being,
but no human rights at all. They are simply God's
rights and man's duties.
Brownson, therefore, maintained, not that man in
414
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
no sense has rights, but that he has no inherent, indefeas-
ible, natural rights, deriving their character of rights,
that is, their binding force as law, from man himself,
because nature or second causes have and can have in
themselves no proper legislative authority. He denied
that the natural law derives its character as law, or its
binding force from nature, and asserted that it derived
that character or that force solely and directly from the
command or will of God. Taking right in the sense of
jus, he shows that it is legislative, that it imposes and
defines duty, which it is beyond the sphere of nature to
do, and which belongs only to him from whom is all
power, as St. Paul tells the Romans. Huntington,
coming, as has been said, to the aid of the Civiltà
Cattolica in the columns of the Truth-Teller, taking
right in the sense of rectum, or what is reasonable
proper, fit, or convenient, asserts that it is the eternal
reason or wisdom of God, and therefore as men partici-
pate reason they have participated rights. But right in
this sense is only declarative of what is proper, right, or
decent and what is not, of what is law for the under-
standing, and confounds right in this sense with right
in the sense of jus, of what is obligatory, legislative,
law for the will; and assumes that whatever may be
predicted of right in the one sense is true of right in
the other sense. This is not altogether peculiar to'
Huntington, but is a common sophistry with ethical
writers, and his communication to the Truth-Teller
furnished Brownson a good opportunity to explain the
error in his reply which appeared in his Review for
October, 1853.
#
* Works, vol, xiv, p. 317.
PAGANISM IN EDUCATION.
415
*
In France the Univers defended Cortes's position,
while the Ami de la Religion assailed it; consequently,
for once Brownson agreed with the Univers. In
general, however, he had few views in common
with Louis Veuillot. In the controversy concern-
ing the use of Pagan classics as text-books, his
sympathies were with the Ami de la Religion, which
opposed the extreme views of the Abbé Gaume who
favored the substitution of the Scriptures and the
Fathers, and not with the Univers which sustained the
Abbé. Whether in other circumstances, Brownson
giving his opinions without being influenced by the
Bishop of Boston, would have written as he did in his
criticism of Gaume in April, 1852, may be questioned.
But Fitzpatrick was always inclined to measure the
effect of any thing on others by its effect on himself,
and he certainly had received no injury from the study
of the Greek and Latin pagan authors. Moreover he
had come from the Sulpitian Seminary in Paris, and
had unbounded confidence in and reverence for the Ami
de la Religion and its editor, the Abbé Cognat. He,
therefore, was inclined to take its side in the controversy,
and, wishing Brownson to do the same, represented to
him that it was condemning the church, popes, bishops,
and great teaching orders who had allowed the classics
to be used for the last four hundred years in Catholic
schools, to maintain that they tended to produce pagan-
ism in society. This was the point most insisted on in
his review of Gaume, and he admits that prior to his
conversion, and for several years after, he entertained
to their full extent the views defended by the Abbé, and
* Paganism in Education, Works, vol. x, p. 551.
416
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
#
in which Cardinal Gousset, Count de Montalembert, and
many admirers of the middle ages concurred. "The
Abbé Gaume," he says, "is free to maintain that it
would be well, and that under existing circumstances it
is necessary, to banish the ancient Greek and Latin
classics from our schools; but not, in our judgment,
that the paganism of modern society has resulted from
their use, and that in suffering them to be used the
church has acted as unwisely as the artist who, wishing
to cast a hero, poured his molten metal into the mould
of a horse."
In another question, arising at about the same time,
Brownson was led into writing what he afterwards.
regretted by the same excessive confidence of his bishop
in the Ami de la Religion, and this time he was unfor-
tunately induced to criticise Donoso Cortés unjustly, or
at least more severely than he afterwards thought just.
Cortés published at Madrid, in 1851, his grand essay,
"Catholicism, Liberalism, and Socialism," and Louis.
Veuillot published in his Bibliothèque Nouvelle de la
Religion a French version of the book. The Abbé
Gaduel, Vicar-General of the Bishop of Orleans, in the
Ami de la Religion, criticised it severely, charging on
the author grave errors concerning God, the Trinity,
original sin, and free will, which he endeavored to
prove by extracts, which if not modified by the context,
seemed to sustain his criticism. Brownson had not
seen the essay, but only Gaduel's extracts and com-
ments, and was informed by Fitzpatrick that the critic
was "a profound theologian, one of the best theologians
in France, truly modest and unassuming, and a most
worthy man, not likely to bring the grave charges he
DONOSO CORTÉS AND GADUEL.
417
does without at least some reason." When Cortés read
the charges against him, to which a friend called his
attention, as he had been so much engrossed with his
duties as ambassador as not to have seen them, he wrote
to that friend (January 23, 1853) a letter which was
published in the Univers on the 28th, in which he says,
"I need only to know that I am accused of falling into
so great a number of heresies to declare that I condemn
whatever the Holy Catholic Church, whose submissive
and respectful son I have the happiness to be, has con-
demned, condemns, or may hereafter condemn in others
or myself. To make this declaration, I have no need to
wait till the church herself speaks; it is enough that a
single man accuses me of error."
}}
To this Gaduel answered in the Ami de la Religion,
that there was no doubt of Cortés's disposition, but it
was his duty to have his book examined to see if it
contained the errors alleged against it.
Brownson, in his discussion of the matter, very
fortunately did not discuss the doctrine apparently con-
tained in Gaduel's extracts, but he censured Cortés for
not causing his book to be examined. Cortés expressed
himself as much pained by Brownson's remarks, and a
copy of the essay was soon after sent him by A. Calderon
de la Barca. The very first thing after the title page is
a conspicuous notice, five lines long, but occupying the
entire page, saying that the work has been examined in
its dogmatic part by one of the most renowned theolo-
gians of Paris, a member of the famous school of the
Benedictines of Solesmes, and that the author has
conformed to all his observations. In addition to this
examination, Cortés wrote to Gaduel that his letter
28
418
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
published in the Univers was not all, nor was it ever
considered by him all he owed to the public, and assured
him that he had already submitted his work to the
proper authorities for examination. In the Review for
July, 1853, Brownson criticises the essay in a suffi-
ciently favorable spirit; but Donoso Cortés expired in
the beginning of May.
—
In December, 1851, Louis Kossuth, the Hungarian,
landed in the United States. He had been liberated by
Turkey through the interposition of the British and
American governments, and brought hither on the
U. S. Steamer Mississippi as the guest of the nation.
The President, in his annual message to Congress,
dated December 2d, professed to lay down a neutral
policy as that of the government, and at the same time
ordered Kossuth to be greeted on his arrival with a
national salute, recognized him as Governor Kossuth,
recommended him to Congress, and virtually asked for
him an official reception by the nation.
In criticising the President's message, Brownson
said: "The government has really let loose one of the
most dangerous characters now living. The President
knew in the outset that this man was a traitor, and one
to whom it is a profanation to apply the term patriot;
he knew before sending his message to Congress that
he was a turbulent spirit; that he would only abuse his
liberty to stir up insurrections, to teach the people
insubordination to their magistrates, and to renew his
efforts to dismember an empire with which we profess
to have relations of peace.
The President must
be presumed to be well acquainted with the present
* Philosophical Studies on Christianity, Works, vol. iii, p. 151.
KOSSUTH IN THE UNITED STATES.
419
state of things in Europe. He knows, then, we must
presume, that throughout all Europe there is a grand
conspiracy, with its central government at present in
London, and its ramifications extending even to this
country,—a conspiracy organized avowedly for the pur-
pose of revolutionizing by violence every monarchical,
and indeed every legally constituted government in the
civilized world. The supreme chief of the conspiracy is
not Louis Kossuth, but Joseph Mazzini, an Italian
refugee, who lately obtained in England a loan of ten
millions for carrying on his revolutionary purposes, and
whose agents, we are informed, are in the United States,
organizing associations under his authority and that of
his colleagues, and collecting funds in aid of the con-
spiracy. The conspirators of all countries are embraced
in the same grand organization, under one and the same
central junta, or revolutionary government. The Presi-
dent, no doubt, knows all this, and he further knows,-
it would be disrespectful to him not to suppose it,--that
the conspiracy is armed not merely against monarchy,
but against all legitimate authority, against all religion
except an idolatrous worship of what is blasphemously
called the GOD-PEOPLE or the PEOPLE-GOD, against all
morality, all law, all order, and indeed against society
itself. These are the principles the President terms
'liberal principles,' and the struggle of this conspiracy
to carry out their principles and realize their infamous
purposes is what he terms 'a struggle against oppres-
sion.' It must be so, for this conspiracy embraces the
whole revolutionary party we hear of in Europe, or to
which the President can have any reference."
Knowing this fact, and taking Webster's answer to
420
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
(6
Hülsemann in connection with the message, it was easy
to understand the President's policy. On our side
are these conspirators of all nations banded together,
and moving in concert, as if directed by a single will,
and on the other are the several governments, and the
friends of society, civilization, and morality. It seems
to be agreed on all hands, that during this 1852 the
two parties are to meet in mortal combat, and decide on
the battle-field the terrible questions at issue, and on1
which side victory will incline seems now, even to the
most sanguine, to be a matter of doubt. * Now the
President's neutral policy, as we understand it, is, that
if in any particular nation the government is able to
sustain itself, and put down the rebels, and vindicate
the rights of authority, we may regret it indeed, but are
not to deem it our duty to interfere to save our friends.
from this sad termination of their hopes; nevertheless,
we are to insist that the rebels shall have fair play, that
they shall have the moral influence of our countenance
and of our loudly expressed sympathy, and that no
third party shall be called in to assist in suppressing
them. Austria may whip rebellious Hungary or any
other of her provinces into submission, if she can; but
she shall not call Russia in to help her to do it, and
Russia is not to be suffered to take part in the quarrel,
even if invited by Austria. But suppose neither Russia
nor Austria respects our anxiety on the subject, and
pays no attention to our protests? The President says
not what we shall do then, but that we shall resort to
*This was publishsd January 1, 1852, and written some weeks earlier,
before the news of Louis Napoleon's coup d'état of Dec. 2, had reached
this country. By his energetic action the French President destroyed the
hope for a speedy revolutionizing of Europe, and gave a fatal blow to
Kossuth's agitation here.
KOSSUTH IN THE UNITED STATES.
421
'the Anglo-Saxon alliance', and shout 'England and
America against the world', and thus our neutrality
become armed intervention, is not impossible. This in
certain quarters seems to be contemplated, and possibly
may take place, if Mr. Webster remains Secretary of
State, and Lord Palmeston retains his place in the
British cabinet.
"Now we would most respectfully ask whence it
comes that we are to be the second, or the bottle-holder,
of universal rebeldom? Wherefore is it that our gov-
ernment should be 'anxious' for the success of rebels,
traitors, assassins, conspirators against God and man?
The President either knows the principles and character
of the European revolutionary party, or he does not. If
he does not, he is inexcusably rash in espousing their
cause, and expressing his official sympathy with them;
if he does, as it is but decent respect to his official posi-
tion to assume, then he knows that they are the common
enemies of the human race, whose success would be the
paralysis of religion, the destruction of civilization, the
triumph of anarchy, and the return of barbarism. He
must know this, and yet he gives them his official sanc-
tion, and goes to the extremest verge of prudence in
their defence ! . . . . Moreover, the President must be pre-
sumed to know thoroughly the doctrines of his friends,
for we cannot suppose he would press them to his official
bosom as his dear and loving friends if not well
acquainted with their principles. He knows, then, that
they proclaim the Fraternity, the Solidarity, as Kossuth
expresses it, of peoples. Now this means, in the doc-
trine of the sect, that revolutionists of all countries and
nations make but one brotherhood, or are bound together
422
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
in solido (all standing for each, and each for all).
Whenever the standard of rebellion is raised, the people
of all nations have the right, and are bound, to flock
around it and aid their brothers. This is what is meant
by the brotherhood or the solidarity of the peoples, and
Kossuth, by his free use of the word solidarity in his
speeches, shows that he has been initiated into the
mysteries of the sect. As for Kossuth, we care not for
him. He is not the man, unless we are greatly mis-
taken, to make any lasting impression upon Yankees.
He is eloquent and clever, and, like all our modern
revolutionists, has a great command of words, vulgarly
termed the 'gift of the gab;' but he is not a man of the
higher order of intellect. He lacks the ingredient of
downright honesty of purpose, has too much to say of
himself, and wears his principles quite too loosely. He
will not elect our next president, nor induce us to
engage in a war with either Austria or Russia. We
shall have a good time with him, feast ourselves, have
our own jollification, let him laugh a little at us in his
sleeve while we laugh a good deal at him in ours, and
then-cast him off."
In October, 1852, Brownson was able to say that
the result had verified his prediction about Kossuth.
"He landed amid salutes of artillery and the shouts of
congregated thousands, and proceeded to his quarters as
a nation's guest, with a half-regal train, and amid the
pomp and honors due to a conquering hero. He was
hailed as the champion of liberty, the confessor, almost
the martyr of humanity, termed the great representative
man of the age, and by some,-we shudder to write it,-
a new Messiah come to regenerate and save mankind.
KOSSUTH IN THE UNITED STATES.
423
Religious and secular presses aside from the Catholic
journals, were, with singular unanimity, loud, even
vociferous, in his praise; only the New York Courier
and Enquirer, and the Boston Daily Advertiser having
from the first the courage to maintain the truth against
him.
A few short months passed away, and the
nation's guest,-welcomed by President, cabinet, and
congress, feasted and toasted by members of the senate
and house of representatives, by state governors and
legislatures, by cities, towns, and committees,—under
an assumed name of Alexander Smith, crept stealthily
on board a steamer at New York bound for England,
leaving his board bill to his landlady unpaid. The
country had played out its play, had enjoyed all the
excitement, fun, and frolic he could furnish them, and
thought it time to break up the masquerade. He
embarked from New York last June, amid the perfect
indifference of the American people, and there is now a
very general conviction that he really is—what the
Archbishop of New York so opportunely pronounced
him-a humbug. Greeley's Tribune and Raymond's
Times are the only journals of any note that still make
a show of adhering to him. The Kossuth plume has
drooped, the Kossuth hat will soon go, if it has not
already gone, out of fashion, and there will be few
willing to remember that they ever shouted a welcome
to the Magyarized Sclave. All this we foresaw last
January, and knowing him and our countrymen as we
did we could easily foresee it."
In January, 1850, in a public address in New York,
Brownson denounced Kossuth and the Hungarian rebel-
lion, and was rewarded with a hiss; in June, 1852, he
424
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
did the same thing in the same city, and was applauded
to the echo.
In November, 1852, Brownson was announced to
deliver a lecture for the Young Catholics' Friends
Society at the Boston Melodeon, on "Charity and Philan-
thropy." Two gentlemen belonging to that society
came to Mt. Bellingham to accompany the lecturer to
the hall, and during the drive informed him that the
news had been received in the afternoon by the steamer
that Louis Napoleon had been elected Emperor of the
French. Thereupon Brownson, turning to his son who
was with him, said: "I feel much inclined to change my
subject to-night, and lecture on the new Emperor."
Arriving a few minutes later at the Melodeon, Brown-
son, at the opening of his address, informed his audience
that in consequence of the news brought by the Cunard
steamer, he had decided to speak on the subject of the
new empire, and for two hours he discussed the past and
future of Napoleon III. He might, the speaker said,
take Charlemagne for his model, or he might choose to
follow in the path of his uncle; but it was certain that
if he took the latter course, he would fall as speedily and
as deeply as that tyrant did. The struggle in France,
as elsewhere throughout Christendom, the lecturer
asserted, was between Catholicity, in its genuine Roman
sense, the Catholicity of the Dark Ages, if you will,
which asserts the supremacy of the spiritual order, and
the obligation of both sovereigns and subjects to obey
in all things the law of God as interpreted by his
church; and Socialism, or red republicanism, which
asserts the supremacy of the secular order, the subjec-
tion of the soul to the body, will to appetite, reason to the
LECTURE ON NAPOLEON III.
425
passions, and makes terrestrial felicity man's last end.
These are the two parties, each with its principles
well defined; each fully aware of its own meaning; each
with a distinct and determinate object before it; and
each devoted to its object, heart and soul. The war is
between these two parties. These are the combatants,
and one or the other of these must win or lose the
victory. Your old-fashioned Gallicans and your mod-
erate Republicans are mere followers of the camp,
swelling the numbers on either side, but encumbering
its movements without adding anything to its effective
strength. A year ago, all appearances were that victory
for a time would be carried by the socialists, and European
society and civilization fall back into barbarism. The
prospect was civil war, confusion, and anarchy in all
the continent of Europe. Louis Napoleon, by his
famous coup d'état, seized the reins of government
in France, employed it against the enemies of order,
and turned for the time the scale against them, much
to the joy of all good men throughout the world. For
the present the socialists are defeated, and there is
gained a respite which may be improved to re-establish
society and social order on a solid and permanent basis.
But although a powerful reaction is going on in Europe
against the socialists, it would be worse than idle to
suppose that socialism is extinct in France, or in any
European state, or that all danger to be apprehended
from the revolutionary party has passed over. Socialism
still exists in France and throughout Europe; it has
been defeated for the moment, perhaps disheartened, but
not annihilated. If the existing governments improve
the opportunity wisely, and place themselves in normal
426
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
1
relations with the church, the reaction against socialism
will prove to be permanent, and the victory recently
won to be decisive. But society and civilization are not
for their own sakes; they are for the Spiritual and
Eternal, and therefore are in their very nature subordi-
nate to the church,-the only true society, the only true
civilization. They depend on the church, and can be
promoted or secured only in proportion as she is free
and independent, and cheerfully submitted to by sover-
eigns and subjects as the sole guardian and interpreter
of the law of God in all things. If the European
sovereigns forget this fact, if they fail to recognize that
the mission of the Christian prince is to be the armed
defender of the church against all external enemies,
and seek to use the respite granted them only to render
their power absolute, to establish despotism as the
remedy against anarchy, they will find that socialism is
not dead, and that at such moment as they think not it
will break out anew with resistless fury; for there is
too much life, too much vigor, in the people of every
European, at least of every Catholic state, to suffer
them to sink down quietly under an oriental despotism.
There are two things against which, as a Catholic, I
declare eternal hostility; namely, the despot and the
mob, despotism and anarchy. The first exists wherever
there are no restrictions on the power of the prince, and
he is regarded as the sovereign lord and proprietor of
his subjects; the second, where there is no authority
which any one feels bound in conscience to obey.
Written constitutions, parliamentary bodies, all the
contrivances of human wit and wisdom to restrict the
power of the ruler, or to bind the subject to obedience,
LECTURE ON NAPOLEON III.
127
are of themselves insufficient to maintain authority
against anarchy, or liberty against despotism. The
legitimate authority of the prince, and the just liberty
of the subject, wrangle as you will, are practicable only
under the supremacy of a divinely instituted and super-
naturally assisted and protected church. To enslave
this church, or not to recognize her authority and secure
her freedom and independence of action, is at once to
destroy the authority of the prince and the liberty of
the subject, or to convert authority into despotism, and
liberty into license. We have had for years to insist
on this great truth in favor of authority against the
people in rebellion; I hope we shall not now have to
insist on it against rulers seeking to reign as despots.
The great purely human instrument that God appears
to have used in staying for a time the torrent of
socialism, and in rendering the re-establishment of
order in Europe possible, is Louis Napoleon Bonaparte,
now Napoleon III., and perhaps, for the moment, the
most important secular sovereign in the world. As
President of the French republic, he has been the
instrument of much good, and the French people, in
gratitude for the essential services that he has rendered
to the cause of social order, have permitted him, as it
appears, to re-establish the empire and to assume the
imperial crown. They seem to have believed that only
by so doing could they repress socialism, and maintain
fixed and permanent government. Whether they have
done wisely or not, time alone can determine. Napoleon
III. is an extraordinary man, and has thus far proved
himself the enemy of the socialists, and not hostile
to religion. It is not easy to see what, after the coup
428
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
..
d'état of last December, France could do but place him
on the throne of his uncle. Certainly I do not regret
the Bourbons of either branch. Their day is over.
They forgot their mission as Christian princes, placed
France before the church, and themselves before France,
and France has rejected them. I regret not the late
republic, for I never believed it would stand; although,
I confess, I wished it to have a fair trial, and should
have been better pleased to see its constitution amended
than abolished. But the revival of the empire brings
with it fears as well as hopes. Napoleon the First was
a great man, a great conqueror, but he was not a
Charlemagne. He restored the Catholic worship in
France, and in concert with Pius VII. he put an end to
the schism of the French church; he arrested the revo-
lutionary madness, restored social order, and saved
French society from utter annihilation. So far he did
nobly, and deserved and received the thanks of the
whole Catholic world. But this he did as First Consul,
not as Emperor. As Emperor, I am aware of nothing
he did that deserves the gratitude or the memory of
mankind. God gave him the mission, in concert with
the successor of Peter, to reconstruct Christian Europe,
but he proved unfaithful to it. He ruled as a despot,
not as a Christian prince. The respect he paid to
religion was the respect of a politician, not of an humble
and devout son of the church; and he evidently served
it not for its own sake, but only for the purpose of
making it a tool for the establishment of his power.
He adopted in church and state the policy of the degen-
erate Greeks of the Lower Empire, from whom, it is
said, he was descended, and followed the example of
LECTURE ON NAPOLEON III.
429
·
Frederick Barbarossa, Henry Plantagenet, Philip the
Fair, and Lewis the Fourteenth, instead of that of
Charles Martel, Pepin, Charlemagne, and St. Louis.
He sought to make the reigning Pontiff the accomplice
of his despotism, and failing in this, he stripped him of
his states, and dragged him from prison to prison, till
indignant Europe rose as one man to liberate him, and
send his persecutor to die a prisoner on the barren rock
of St. Helena. He was false to his mission, and God
rejected him, and overthrew his empire. God permitted
the Bourbons to return, and gave them an opportunity
to retrieve their former faults. They only proved that
they had forgotten nothing and had learned nothing in
adversity, and he again rejected them. He now offers
to the nephew of the rejected Emperor, under the
direction of the Supreme Pontiff, the mission of recon-
structing Christian Europe, shaken by a century of
infidelity and sixty years of revolution. Will the
nephew be faithful to his mission? Will he tread in
the footsteps of Charlemagne, or in those of his uncle?
If the former, we have everything to hope; if the
latter, he has everything to fear. Which he will do,
perhaps it were not difficult to guess; but it is best
to leave him to develop his own policy, for whatever
fears for the freedom aud independence of the church
and the cause of civil liberty in France may be enter-
tained, no good can be effected by expressing them. I
wish, indeed, that the Catholics of France before con-
senting to inaugurate him as Napoleon III., had taken
the precaution to obtain a further guaranty than his
simple will against civil despotism; and I think the
part of prudence for Catholics everywhere to let it be
A
430
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
clearly understood that they do not identify the cause
of Catholicity with any King or Cæsar, and that they
hold themselves free to commend the new French
Emperor so far as he serves the cause of religion and
society, and to disown him so far as he may prove
hostile to them. Catholicity cannot sustain the despot
any more than it can sustain the mob. If Napoleon
turns despot, as I pray God he may not, there will
before many years be a new social out-break in Europe,
and perhaps it is not too soon for us to prepare for
resisting a new liberal reaction.
The new Emperor's policy soon began to manifest
itself, as is shown by the following letter then on its
way from Montalembert:
BRUSSELS, Nov. 12th, 1852.
MY VERY DEAR SIR:—I have as usual to thank
you for the continuation of the extremely valuable
present you are kind enough to favor me with by send-
ing to me your Quarterly Review. I have been particu-
larly struck in the last number I have received by your
most excellent considerations on the difference between
Roman Law and Common Law, and the influence of this
distinction on the whole course of history. Nothing
can be more fatal to the dominion of a real Catholic
spirit in the policy of any country in the world, than
the influence of that system of laws which was so well
resumed by the pagan axiom of the great Roman jurist:
Quod principi placuerit, id legis habet vigorem. This
bad and dangerous doctrine, which was so eagerly caught
up by Frederick Barbarossa and Philip the Fair, in their
* See "The Works of Daniel Webster," Brownson's Works, vol. xix.,
p. 343, etc., and especially p. 358.
LETTER FROM MONTALEMBERT.
431
struggles with the church of the Middle Ages, is now
become once more the fundamental axiom of French
legislation! It has found a very able and clever ex-
pounder in Mr. Troplong, 1st President of the Court of
Appeals of Paris, and who is one of our future Emperor's
chief advisers and advocates. In his address to his
court, in last April, on taking the new oaths, he very
. logically and scientifically proved that an egalitarian
despotism, such as that of the Roman Emperors, was the
only effective and durable triumph of democracy in the
world; and he has been selected, as you see, to draw up
the report of the Senate in favor of the new Empire
which is to be set up on the model of Rome's degenerate
Cæsardom. The former pride and revolt of France
against the truth and the freedom of God's holy church,
has but too well deserved the cruel humilation which
she has now to endure. But what is still more afflicting
is that the Catholic cause should appear as an
accomplice in what is now going on in France. I trust
that your manly and vigorous spirit will not have been
led astray by the deplorable attitude and language of
the Univers, who after having declared in 1848 that
royalty was at an end forever, and in 1850 that the
Count de Chambord was the only chance of salvation for
France, now becomes the herald and incense-bearer of
the new-fangled despotism which our unhappy country
has adopted as a preservative against socialism! The
bishops who have eulogized the President in such
strong language, during his recent peregrinations, I do
not pretend to judge: their position is difficult, and they
may have good reasons for seeking to gain the favor of
the sovereign. But I am most strenuously opposed to
432
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
the shameful desertion of the Univers and other
Catholic periodicals from the ground on which we have
all stood for the last twenty years, and on which we
have gained such unexpected victories. I have
endeavored to give my arguments against this new
system of Catholic absolutism, in a volume which I have.
forwarded to you through Messrs. Bossange, and of
which six thousand copies have been sold since its
publication on the 26th ult. I shall be most anxious
to know your opinion on this most momentous subject,
as there is no one whose judgment I rank higher than
yours. I have annexed to this last production of mine,
a speech on the budget, which will explain to you the
miserable and derisory constitution which our new
master has granted us; also my Discours de réception
at the French Academy in last February. This oration
was written before the revolution of last December, and
was intended by me to give a lesson of modesty and
prudence to the legislative Assembly then in existence;
but as I had taken care to protest against democracy
and revolution, and to proclaim the rights of Christian
freedom and independence, when spoken after the coup
d'état, it was looked upon by His Imperial Highness's
Ministers as a piece of rank opposition, and some of the
leading passages struck out by the censorship. These
passages, however, have been reintegrated in the copy
I sent you; and you will thus be able to judge of what
is now called opposition in this country.
It would be too long for me to state all the reasons
which I have for my utter want of confidence in the
moral worth of Napoleon III. and his system. I
know him well: I stood by him with more decision than
LETTER FROM MONTALEMBERT.
433
any one during his quarrel with the honest but foolish
majority of the Assembly; and even after his coup
d'état as long as there appeared to be any danger of a
renewed attack of socialism. I thought it my duty to
do all I could in order to ensure his victory. But since
I have seen him use his omnipotence to inflict on the
cause of justice and property, in the case of the house of
Orleans, an injury which the triumphant socialists in
1848, refrained from attempting, I have felt it equally
my duty to stand aside from any connection with his
policy. He has on his side done nothing to bring me
back. I have seen enough of him to know that he
neither understands nor desires the real freedom of the
church-he has granted and may still further grant her
insignificant favors and trifling advantages, but I should
be much mistaken if he ever does anything for the real
and permanent interests of religion, for the freedom and
dignity of the church, which is still entrammelled in
the laws of his uncle. I had requested him after the
2nd of December to make use of his dictatorship in order
to repeal all these obsolete, but ever dangerous laws,
but he declined to do so. As it is, there is not a single
liberty, not a single right, of which the church is at
present in possession, that is due to him. All are due
to our own struggles and victories previous to his
accession to the power he is at present invested with.
The language of the Univers and its adherents has
done already a great deal of harm, and greatly con-
tributed to weaken the influence of religion in the
minds of those whom the events of 1848 had led to
reflect on the vanity of all social institutions without
religion. The old prejudices against the identity of
29
434
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
clergy and despotism are all revived. Prudent
Christians will do well to think already of the best
means to avoid the perilous consequence of the liberal
reaction which will most probably follow the present
mascarade.
I remain, my dear sir, your very faithful friend
and servant.
CTE. DE MONTALEMBERT.
My political career being at present closed, I am
going to devote myself exclusively to my former
historical and monastic studies, as much as 111 V
shattered health and fortune will allow me so to do.
Pray always address your communications which I trust
will be as frequent as possible, to Paris, Rue du Bac, 40.
Brownson's observations on the difference of the
civil and the common law, to which his correspondent
alludes in the foregoing letter, were appropriately
inserted in a review of Webster, the great champion of
our common law; but he may also, when making them,
have had in his mind the request at the end of the
following letter lately received from the Bishop of
Pittsburg.
PITTSBURG, March 31, 1852.
DEAR SIR :—I have got myself into a regular scrape
with my lecture on the Influence of Catholicity, etc.
Besides the small fry, two of our biggest guns have
divided between them the labor of attacking me.
The chief man in the Presbyterian Theological
Seminary is to come out with a reply next week. I
must take the liberty of requesting you to assist me, in
supporting some of my positions. I hope you will have
no difficulty in laying your hand on some document that
LETTER FROM O'CONNOR.
435
can be produced to show the decay of Protestantism in
France since the beginning of the first revolution, or in
any way to show the Protestant population of the two
periods. I would feel much indebted also if you could
supply me with some works by which I could support the
statement made regarding the present condition of the
Protestant Church throughout the world. The "Presby-
terian looking for a church" is very light on Scotland
and gives few proofs of his statements regarding the
Presbyterians of Ireland. Any thing that would enable
me to bring the charge home to either or both of those
bodies would be most useful. You will oblige me by
asking Mr. Roddan to be kind enough to supply me
with any documentary evidence he may think likely to
become necessary. He may easily guess the course
the argument is likely to take. Though I do not
intend to allow myself to be dragged into a pitched
battle, a manly defense of Catholic truth may be
productive of good results at the present moment.
The main difficulty, I feel assured, will turn on
"religious liberty." I am afraid you would feel inclined
to help me in what I should consider the wrong way as
far as that is concerned. However, your experience
may enable you to point out to me some works that
would be useful. I will feel much obliged for anything
you could spare me the loan of, and I will promise to
return any books you send. I am very badly provided
with the kind of books likely to become necessary in
such a controversy.
Though I think your view of the common law in
its connection with Christianity is somewhat different
from what I expressed, I am under the impression that
436
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
1
you modified somewhat your opinion of the comparative
excellence of the Justinian code. I would be glad and
obliged if you gave me, though it were but briefly,
your opinion of the general accuracy of the views
expressed in my lecture, especially those bearing on the
origin of the civil institutions of the country.
I remain, dear sir, yours faithfully in Christ.
†M. O'CONNOR,
O. A. BROWNSON, ESQ.
Bishop of Pittsburg.
Brownson's opinion of O'Connor's lecture was
flattering enough. In answer he wrote April 5th, 1852:
"I this morning received your letter, and have this
evening read the lecture to which you allude. You ask
me to give you my opinion of it. I am exceedingly
difficult to please, and it is rarely that I find the subject
you have handled treated so as to satisfy me. Your
lecture does satisfy me, and I have read it with intense
delight, and I trust not without profit. You may be a
trifle more of a republican than I am, and may not think
it so necessary to guard against being understood as
favorable to modern democracy, as I do, but you have
taken high ground, and as I believe, both right and
tenable ground; and permit me to say, you are the
first and only prelate or priest in the country who, to my
knowledge, has taken when treating the subject what I
considered the right ground. The Archbishop of New
York proved his thesis, but, with so many concessions
to Protestants, that I was not pleased with his perform.
ance, and all who, so far as I know, have touched it,
have virtually conceded that our institutions are of
Protestant origin, and limited themselves to proving
by reference to historical facts which I regard as
ANSWER TO O'CONNOR.
437
of questionable merit, that Catholics will never let their
religion take precedency of their patriotism or their
democracy.
"This may be said arrogantly, and in a tone that
ill becomes me, but it is not so meant, and nothing more
is intended than the frank confession of an opinion,
which, if I ought to renounce it, I am ready to renounce,
and beg pardon of God and man for. I took the same
ground that you have taken in my lectures at St. Louis,
and I had previously done so in Montreal and in
Philadelphia, and you may be sure I was gratified to
find it taken and so ably sustained by the Bishop of
Pitts burg.
"There is no essential difference between your
estimate of the common law and my own.
You speak
of the principles and the spirit of that law, and have
reference to its precepts or enactments. I had refer-
ence to the common-law practice, modes of procedure,
etc., and in this sense I have been disposed to give
preference to the civil law, though in that I am not very
decided. The rogue can more easily escape conviction.
under the common law than under the civil law, but
the innocent is probably better protected. As to the
provisions of the two systems, I think upon the whole
the English system is to be preferred, though in some,
instances where there is a difference, I think the
advantage is with the civil law. The civil law
The civil law presumes
every man a free man, and every man claiming another
man as a slave, must prove his claim; and although the
Supreme Court of the United States has decided that
such is the presumption of law here, the common law, I
am told, knows no such presumption, and a man of a
438
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
class usually held in slavery in the state must prove
that he is a freeman. The civil law legitimates the
children born before marriage, if the parents subsequently
marry; the common law bastardizes them. These are
the only two instances I at this moment recollect in
which I am inclined to prefer the Justinian code."
CHAPTER XIV.
SHEPHERD OF THE VALLEY.—GARESCHÉ.—FREEMAN'S
JOURNAL.-L'UNIVERS.—A NEW CONSTITUTION SUB-
MITTED IN MASSACHUSETTS.
INVITATION
ΤΟ
LECTURE IN THE IRISH UNIVERSITY.
JUST about the time that Brownson, with the
assistance of the better class of Catholic journals, and
with the aid, or rather under the leadership of Arch-
bishop Hughes and most of the bishops and other
clergy, had succeeded in freeing the Catholic body
from the European revolutionary madness, came Napo-
leon's election as Emperor, which was followed by a
great reaction, influenced greatly by the Paris Univers
toward absolutism. They disliked the tone of distrust
in which Brownson had spoken of the new emperor,
and some who had been inclined to agree with him in
his opposition to radicalism, did not share his unwilling-
ness to identify the cause of the church with that of
the French Empire. His western friends were less
carried away by the change of the wind than the writers
and speakers east of the Alleghanies. The editor of the
Shepherd of the Valley, also a convert to the Catholic
LETTER FROM R. A. BAKEWELL.
439
faith, was mild in his dissent, though he had published
an article by a contributor, which Brownson did not
like. His letter may be found interesting.
ST. LOUIS, January 7, 1853.
DEAR MR. BROWNSON:-I received the Review
yesterday evening. So far I have only glanced it over,
and read the remarks on Napoleon III. at the head of
the Literary Notices.* I don't understand how you
can think any kind of a republic in any way suited for
Frenchmen, and I cannot conceive why it is necessary
to speculate upon the possible wrongs which the
Emperor may perpetrate. You yourself admit that he
came honestly to his place, that his elevation was a
necessity, and that he has acted decently so far. Why
should we not be as generous to him as to other men?
When I rose from reading the article, I said to myself,
"Dii avertite omen!" it is a kind of superstition of
mine; but you are not a prophet after all, and I don't
see why I should be uneasy in my mind. If Napoleon
does do the decent thing for ten or twenty years, what a
jolly good thing it will be for all of us.
I do not apologize for writing to you, because it is
really very little trouble to read a letter, and I do not
ask you to answer mine. I wrote to your publisher for
the numbers of the Review which I received. I got
this number by mail. I am glad of that, for otherwise
I do not get it at all. I was at a dinner party at Mr.
Alexander Garesché's yesterday (you recollect him,
perhaps, I dined there with you when here), and we all
drank your health with enthusiasm—it made the wine
•
This was the substance of the lecture just given in Boston, already
referred to.
440
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
taste better, it really did. There is no one who more
sincerely rejoices at all honors paid to you than I do.
But your reward is not to be of this world.
If you think, as I gather from a very kind letter,
I had from Rev. Mr. Roddan, any of my remarks in the
paper disrespectful, I am very sorry: it matters nothing
to you what I say, but it matters a great deal to me
what you think. There is no one living whose good
opinion I would rather have than yours; no man whom
I more respect; no man who has more entirely my
sympathy and love. There are many better capable of
appreciating you and feeling what you are worth; but
you have been worth everything to me. There was
one short notice about that unhappy business with
Father Newman which I regret, and I have regretted it
still more since I saw Mr. Lucas's comments upon your
excellent letter to him. But I do think you have a
kind of personal prejudice against Mr. Newman, as an
Englishman and a Puseyite, two things which I
I am
sure you dislike. If Mr. Newman had been the man to
say G-d-n you to the woman who refused his
blessing, according to your story," you would have
omitted some things in your Development articles. I
am sure of that. But can he correct the habits of a
lifetime? If his superstition is gone, his prim face and
manners are pardonable.
My denunciation of Meagher last week has not
hurt the paper much. Some of my Irish constituents
were enraged; but it will pass. The Archbishop was
* Brownson enjoyed a story he repeated about an Englishman, a
convert, and a priest, who, coming from church one morning was met by a
woman who he supposed wanted his blessing and giving it her, said,
God bless you." But I am a Protestant," she said.
God damn you,
then," said the jolly clergyman.
""
"
LETTER FROM R. A. BAKEWELL.
441
much pleased with it; indeed, thought it was my duty.
I think I should not have ventured it if he had not
gone as near as he ever goes towards intimating to me
a wish on the subject. Meagher is a humbug, every
way a humbug. Why has not the Pilot said so long
ago? Donahoe was afraid, I suppose. Donahoe will
have a jolly grill in Purgatory for the evil he has done.
I neither forgive nor trust him yet; but Mr. Roddan, in
spite of Donahoe, is doing incalculable good. Really it
is sublime to see a man sacrifice himself so, "become
all things to all men in order that by all means he may
gain a few." However, I wish the Pilot would keep
out of the far West. It is a useless wish, I know. But
the Pilot must necessarily be a more popular paper
than anything I can get up here, and may sink the
Shepherd yet. Our post-office arrangements are so bad,
all the news gets here in the Pilot two days before the
Shepherd appears. I see no help for this. Did you
see that in the Univers about Cahill? He is another
humbug, and a very disgusting one, to me.
I longed
to put that slap in, but the Irishmen everywhere seem
to worship Cahill. It is very strange. I wish I was
an Irishman: it would be worth a little fortune to me.
Many of that nation here will think I am prejudiced
against it, and almost create the feeling they hate by
their continual manifestations of petty jealousy and
dislike. On the whole, however, I am treated with
much kindness here, and the paper is more likely to
live than die. If it does die, I shall not quit the
business, for I like it, and will move elsewhere and try
it again.
•
·
* Patrick Donahoe was the proprietor and manager of the Pilot: Rev.
John P. Roddan, the editor.
442
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
I know nothing of metaphysics, and I wish to
study, but have no one to direct me how to set to
work.
I have labored under that misfortune all my
life. I have always been under teachers whom I could
not trust, and yet I am sure I have every disposition to
yield myself up when I can find a superior worthy of
respect. If you could find time at some odd moment to
give me some direction how to set to work—to advise
me in any way about my studies you would only do
directly what you have been indirectly doing since
January, 1848.
I feel ashamed of having spoken so much about
myself and of having trespassed so much upon your
time. But I remember how kind you were when here,
and I believe you will forgive me. If I have trespassed
upon you, "I have done this thing in the simplicity of
my
heart." Emerson is here. I have not heard him
yet. Some Unitarian cousins of mine are considerably
exercised about him. They think it very pious, as
good as preaching: perhaps it is. The Unitarians here
are the wealthy sect. Their preacher, Mr. Elliott, is
the most popular of our preachers. I am rather glad of
it. They are drawing crowds from Brothers Anderson
& Co. Father Smarius is in New York, he is a very
good man. He is obliged to study and keep quiet.
That is all he wants. In five years I think we shall
hear of him. What is beautiful, he always speaks with
affection and respect of you, and you did lay yourself
out to wound him in his tenderest point when you were
here.
I am, dear Mr. Brownson, with great respect, your
affectionate friend and servant.
R. A. BAKEWELL.
LETTER FROM A. J. P. GARESCHÉ.
443
In answering Bakewell's letter, Brownson could but
express how strange it seemed that his health should be
drunk at Garesché's table just after the appearance in the
Shepherd of the Valley of an adverse criticism which
he supposed was written by the same Garesché. That
this was a mistake is shown in the following letter.
ST. LOUIS, Mo., 29th Jany. 1853.
ORESTES A. BROWNSON, ESQ.
DEAR SIR:—It has been my purpose for some
weeks past to write to you, but unfortunately such has
been the pressure of business that I could not succeed
in the fulfilment.. I say, for some weeks past, not that
you are not constantly in my thoughts, for you are, but
I know so well the extent of your correspondence, that
I felt that I had no right to intrude without a motive.
I suppose you have already heard of Mrs. Dr. Papin's
death. It was sweet and touching in the extreme.
Repeatedly during her last hours she said to Father
Damen, "Oh, how sweet to die in the Catholic Church!"
and begged of Father Damen to persuade Mr. Garland
to become a Catholic. Mr. G. * is borne down by this
second calamity. You know, some eighteen months
since he lost another daughter, Mrs. Farrar.
Mrs. Dr. Linton has at last become a Catholic.
Some two or three week's since she was taken very ill,
and human respect had to bow to conviction. She was
baptized by Father Damen and (I am happy to say) is
improving in health.
Bakewell, meeting me this morning, tells me that
* Hugh A. Garland. The reader of Brownson's Early Life may
remember the beautiful affection for his daughters when the father pro-
posed to send them to Brook Farm, which he expressed in his letter to
Brownson, at p. 308.
1
444
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
it was unexpected by you that your health should be
drunk at my table. More unexpected to me was your
remark. I was not the author of the article in the
Shepherd; it was from the pen of my cousin. I never
read it, but yet know that whatever might be its
language, his feelings towards you are always those of
friendship and respect. He is too sincere a Catholic to
permit himself to have other feelings than those in
your regard; so that had the dinner been at his table,
your health would have been as welcome a sentiment
as it was at mine.
We had no lectures this year, for the simple reason
that a committee was appointed who were compelled to
report every week, and felt themselves authorized to
decide nothing. Next year another result will, I hope,
be shown. Besides, justice to the committee requires
the statement that the subject was mooted too late in
the season. Next year, then, I hope we shall have the
pleasure of again welcoming you to our hospitalities.
Mrs. Garesché will exact the fulfilment of your promise
to her [to be the guest of the Gareschés during his
stay].
Louis Napoleon is to me an anxious thought, for I
should so much wish to see the present state of things
continued, that the rising generation, moulded after the
doctrines of Religion, might supplant the impious gen-
eration that now exist. Louis Napoleon recognizes.
that it is France's love of repose that gave him his
throne, and all his professions are for peace, but then
again all the préparatifs pour la guerre are so manifest
as to excite alarm. I was much pleased (pardon me,
but I mean not to be presumptuous) with your article
on this subject.
?
MC MASTER'S STRICTURES.
445
Que Dieu protége la France is my prayer, for I
look upon it as synonymous with "foster and protect
the church."
Mrs. Garesché begs to be kindly remembered to
you. With sentiments of profound respect, your friend
and very obedient servant,
ALEX. J. P. GARESCHÉ.
McMaster, as one might suppose from his surname,
had to have some one in [cujus] jurare verba magistri,
and looking abroad for him, he found two such,
Bonnetty and Veuillot. Not so original in his thoughts
as his admirers believed him to be, he was a strong
echo of the opinions of others, so far as he compre-
hended them. He swore by Bonnetty, and yet it is
doubtful if he could have told why he adhered to him
any better than Huntington could enunciate the differ-
ent doctrines of Donoso Cortés and the Civiltà Cattolica.
All, or nearly all, our editors of Catholic periodicals,
seem to think, after they have met with a certain
amount of success on one or more questions, so as to be
looked up to by some of their subscribers as authority,
that they are competent to write on every science as
masters. Not that they have not a latent consciousness
of their inferiority on many subjects, but they would
not willingly permit their readers to believe that any-
body knew more about anything than they. Not
Catholic journalists only, but all journalists in this
country seem to have this notion. It is said, and it
seems in many instances true, that European editors
distribute subjects according to the capacity and especial
studies and attainments of writers; but here the notion
of equality is so universal that the practice is that any
-
2.
446
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
one who can put words into sentences, whether gram-
matically or not, has, by virtue of our educational
system the necessary knowledge and intelligence to
discuss whatever is to be discussed. It is not to be
wondered at that where everything is taught, super-
ficially it is true, in our public schools, and nothing is
taught much more thoroughly in our higher institu-
tions of learning, that both writers and readers should
be well content that it is so. The uneducated mass are
the judges, and what is above their comprehension is as
if it did not exist, or was false. When writers and
readers are about on the same level of ignorance, there
must be good accord; and when the writer borrows
ideas from a foreign source, and gives them forth with
the weight of the authority he has acquired with his
readers, if these may not understand them any better
than he, they are apt to take them on his authority
unless they contradict what their religion or their
nationalism requires them to hold. But McMaster's
following of Louis Veuillot and the Univers was more
prominently, because more frequently, exhibited in the
Freeman's Journal. He had the same zeal and earnest-
ness; the same rashness and imprudence, the same
deference to papal, and want of respect for episcopal,
authority. He took for his model a journal of which
Brownson said he should judge it had studied its ethics.
of controversy in the school of Pascal or Voltaire; and
when its opponents were distinguished Catholics, it
forgot truth and decency in their regard, and resorted
to wit, sarcasm, ridicule, sneers, misstatement, perver-
sion of meaning, and impugning of motives, as seemed
to it necessary or convenient. No fault should be
MC MASTER'S STRICTURES.
447
found with the Univers for supporting the new imperial
government of France, nor is it to be blamed for advo-
cating absolute government for that country, if such
government was then and there necessary; but to
advocate it as a necessity for all countries and for all
times, as the normal political order, to labor to erect
absolutism into a dogma of faith, and to sneer at con-
stitutional liberty and representative government, was
to compromise such Catholics as lived under republican
or constitutional governments, and to place them and
their religion in a false position. So long had Catho-
licity and absolutism been associated that the conviction
was very general that Catholicity has a natural
inclination for despotism, and that the church is
incompatible with liberty. In vain would Brownson
write elaborate essays, or deliver eloquent lectures to
prove that his religion is the grand support of civil
freedom. His opponents had only to cite against him
the conduct of the French prelates, and the columns of
the Univers and its followers here and in Great Britain,
as a practical refutation of his essays and lectures. If
he pointed to the deeds of French Catholics from 1830
to 1852, he would be told that those deeds were now
disowned and repudiated by the accredited organs of
Catholic public opinion. The Catholic journals, and
most of all, the Freeman's Journal, sent forth such a
burst of indignation when Brownson questioned the
infallibility of Louis Veuillot, that he said it could not
have been greater if he had questioned that of the Pope.
In May, 1853, Dr. White, editor of the Metropolitan
Magazine, invited Brownson to comment on the recent
contest between the Univers and the Archbishop of
448
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
Paris. Perhaps he would have commented on the affair
any how.
PIKESVILLE, May 12, 1853.
DEAR SIR:--It was my intention to send you an
article on Mr. Wallis' "Spain" before this; but my
occupations have prevented me from preparing it as
soon as I wished. The article will be ready by the
18th inst. when I will forward it, in the hope that it will
not be too late for insertion in your July number. It
will occupy about twelve or fourteen pages of your
Review. Should you have made all your arrangements
for the July number, you will oblige me by dropping
me a line to inform me of it, and in that case I will
retain the article on Mr. Wallis' book for another time.
I hope you will not forget your promise to write
something for the Metropolitan, on the topics which I
suggested when you were in Baltimore. I shall be
much pleased also, to see something in your July
number in reference to the Univers controvery. Mr.
Mc-[McMaster] seems to consider the encyclical of
the Pope a perfect triumph for the Univers; but I do
not see how it can be so construed.
the Review on this point will be
interest.
The comments of
looked for with
Wishing you every success in your good work, I
remain your humble servant and friend.
CHARLES I. WHITE, D. D.
DR. O. A. BROWNSON.
The article on Wallis's Spain was published in
July. In the same number, the Reviewer shows that
the Pope's encyclical letter to the Prelates of France,
exhorting them to restore and maintain peace among
LETTER TO MC MASTER.
449
themselves, and to encourage laymen of truly Catholic
spirit to write books and edit journals in defence of
religion,-did not touch the merits of the case of the
Univers. The Archbishop prohibited the Univers,
Veuillot appealed to Rome,
Rome, and Rome neither
confirmed nor reversed the censure. The censure was
not for any doctrine, Brownson said, but "for its
inopportune discussions, its violent and sarcastic
manner towards its Catholic opponents, the ridicule and
contempt it was in the habit of showering upon those
ecclesiastics, whatever their rank or respectability, who
ventured to question its opinions or statements, and its
want of proper respect for the episcopal character and
office."⠀
Veuillot gave assurances that the Univers
would study to avoid the things the Archbishop had
felt it his duty to censure. The Archbishop of his own
accord, as he says, removed the interdict, and thereupon
the Univers thanked the Archbishop, promised to
amend its errors, and to labor to do nothing in the
future that might displease him.
On receipt of Brownson's July number, the N. Y..
Freeman's Journal, in its issue of July 7th, contained
an article from McMaster's pen, which Brownson cor-
rectly regarded as highly offensive to him personally.
The nature of that article is sufficiently evident from
the following observations written by Brownson on the
10th of July, 1853.
JAMES A. MCMASTER, ESQ.
DEAR SIR:—I must beg you to correct some of the
errors into which you have fallen in your last Thurs-
day's paper in regard to myself and my loyalty as a
Reviewer.
* Works, vol iii. p. 151.
30
450
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
You say that you regret that I have felt myself at
liberty "to give a running commentary or an interpre-
tation to the recent encyclical of the Holy Father." I
might dispute the fact, for my statement with regard to
that encyclical was nothing but a brief summary of its
contents. But call it what you will, I made it only to
correct the false impression in regard to it given by the
comments of your own journal and kindred prints.
You shouted victory for the Univers, and I took the
liberty of showing that as between the Univers and the
Archbishop of Paris there was neither victory nor
defeat for either party, as was obvious from the
encyclical itself.
You accuse me of reading the Univers and M.
Bonnetty only in the pages of the Ami de la Religion.
If you believe so yourself, allow me to set you aright.
My censures of the Univers were founded on what I
read with my own eyes and in its own columus, and in
the columns of the Freeman's Journal. You should
not imagine that you are the only individual in the
United States that has access to the Univers. You are
entirely mistaken in regard to my feelings towards the
Univers. The only passage I ever saw in it unfriendly
to myself I charged to your Journal which had misled
it. I have never wished to see that paper discontinued,
but I have wished to see it conducted with a more
Catholic temper and with more consideration for those
Catholics who do not happen to agree with it in all its
opinions.
I have read the Univers in the New York Free-
man's Journal far more than in the Ami, and it is from
your own Journal, aside from his own writings, that I
LETTER TO MC MASTER.
451
derive all my knowledge of M. Bonnetty's philosophy.
I am not in the habit of judging authors I have not
read, and if I speak of one whom I have not read, or on
the representation of another, I always say so. You
accuse me of never having read a single article of M.
Bonnetty, treating of the rights and competence of
reason, from beginning to end. The accusation you
yourself personally know to be untrue. For I read
from his own periodical one such article to you in your
OW11 room, and forced you to acknowledge that he
changed from traditionalism to rationalism, and from
rationalism to traditionalism according to the exigencies
of his argument, conceding at one moment all his
opponent asked, and at the next reasserting all his
opponent denied. I have not read all that M. Bonnetty
has published—have you ?—but I have read him, in his
own periodical, the Annales de la Philosophie Chrétienne,
on all the points on which I have criticised his doctrine.
I have had also your statement of his philosophy as
contrasted with that of the Catholic rationalists, and I
am not at liberty to suppose that you undertook to
expound to me M. Bonnetty's philosophy without
understanding it. I have studied his philosophy as I
learned it from his own writings, from his own state-
ment and defence of it against Dom Gardereau and
Father Chastel, and my understanding of it coincides
with the statements of it heretofore given in the Free-
man's Journal.
Instead of telling your readers you did not believe
I had ever had a volume of his works in my possession.
for six hours in my life, it would have been more to
your purpose to have convicted me of misstating his
452
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
doctrine, a thing you have not done, or to have shown
that my criticism was unjust, also a thing you have not
done. Had you done this, you would have served both
your friend and yourself. As it is, you have merely
tried to abuse me without vindicating him,—a very
uncatholic mode of conducting a controversy.
You virtually charge me with borrowing from M.
Nicholas the principles and ideas of Bonnetty, and then
using them to relieve M. Bonnetty of the embarrass-
ments under which I suppose him to labor. This
renders you as near merry as I ever saw you. I am
grieved to spoil your sport. But the principles and
ideas in question, whether Bonnetty's or not, happen to
have been held and published by me in my Review
before ever I heard of M. Nicholas or read a line of
Bonnetty. I brought them out in my Review for
October, 1851, in the same connection and almost in the
same terms, showing how they solved the difficulties of
both traditionalists and rationalists. You found serious
fault with them then; you never hinted that they were
Bonnetty's, but simply misstated them and abused me
for spelling Bonnetty's name with an i instead of a y.
You accept my doctrine on the subject now, and call it
Bonnetty's; but you cannot have forgotten that on every
previous occasion when I have brought it out, you
snarled at it, and abused me for it. You cannot have
forgotten the hour after hour we have disputed on the
doctrine, and I assure you that I am very glad to reckon
on you as a convert, notwithstanding the ill grace with
which you avow your conversion.
I never lay a wager, for it is against my principles,
* Page 441.-Works, vol. iii, pp. 140, et seq.
LETTER TO MC MASTER.
453
and a wager at best is a very indifferent sort of an
argument, but I will hold myself very much obliged to
you, if you will produce either from M. Nicholas or
M. Bonnetty, or any of his friends, anything like a
clear and distinct recognition of the doctrine I have
stated in my last Review and which you accept, by
which I propose to reconcile the traditionalists to
Catholic rationalists. The passages you have cited
apparently with such a purpose do not touch the point.
Between what you give as Bonnetty's doctrine, and
mine as I myself state and explain it, not as you inade-
quately and very inaccurately reproduce it, there is a
wide difference. You may find in M. Nicholas and in
M. Bonnetty the want of the doctrine I maintain on the
subject; but you will, unless I greatly deceive myself,
hardly find the doctrine itself.
No doubt, M. Bonnetty asserts in words "the
validity of human reason for knowing the truth, and
distinguishing truth from error," but the question
lies not there. Can he, with his doctrine that we can
know principles even in the natural order only as
supernaturally revealed and taught us, consistently so
assert? If he can, how? Give me, if you can, from
his writings, or those of his friends, an answer to these
two questions, and especially the last, and I will
acknowledge that I have done injustice to your French
friend.
After all, you seem to me to have taken up the
defence of M. Bonnetty with unnecessary warmth. I
have no hostile feelings towards that distinguished
writer. Convict me of having done him injustice, and
I shall be ready to take the earliest opportunity to
454
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
make him all the reparation in my power. I regard
him as an able man, as a man of considerable reading,
who has glimpses of great philosophical truths, which
in these days is much; but I do not happen to regard
him as a metaphysician. But not to be a metaphysician
is no sin; it is only an inconvenience when one insists
on writing or talking of metaphysics.
You attack with great severity the Abbé Cognat,
the principal editor of the Ami de la Religion. I know
nothing of his personal character, and I am not gen-
erally well posted up in Parisian or even New York
gossip. As a writer, the Abbé does not lack ability,
and as far as I can judge, and I am impartial, since I
agree with neither, he has the better of the argument
against Bonnetty; but you are quite mistaken in sup-
posing that I have formed my judgment of M. Bon-
netty's system from his representations.
C
In conclusion, I think, on reperusing your notice
you will perceive that it was undignified, ungentlemanly,
rash, and unchristian, as unworthy of you as undeserved
by me. If you wish for war with me be manly enough
to declare it openly, and act above board. I neither
seek nor reject your friendiship: your feelings or your
conduct towards me personally are matters of indiffer-
ence to me; but for the sake of the cause we both
profess to have at heart, I should be pleased to to see
you more disposed to keep the solemn promise made to
me over a year ago, and that you would express your
dissent from my views when you have occasion to do so
without imitating the "veriest swab of the radical press,
in those gentlemanly terms due from one Catholic editor
to another. I do not think, were you to do so, that you
>>
THE MASSACHUSETTS CONSTITUTION.
455
would sink in your own estimation or in that of the
public, and I am sure Catholic interests in this country
would not suffer from it. You seem to me to have chosen
a bad model, and to defend Catholicity in a Protestant
spirit, proceeding on the principle that the end justifies
the means. I wish for your own sake and for the
sake of the cause you would correct this, and study to
defend henceforth the truth in a truthful manner.
I have the honor to be etc.
O. A. BROWNSON.*
After having for many years kept himself aloof
from local politics, Brownson thought in 1853, that all
good citizens, who understood the danger which Massa-
chusetts was in of having its constitution very seriously
impaired, should exert their influence against the pro-
posed change. These objections to the amendment are
set forth in the following letter, published in the Boston
Courier, a Whig journal, with some prefatory remarks
commending "it to the careful consideration" of its
readers.
CHELSEA, October 17, 1853.
J. P. HEALY, Esq.,
MY DEAR SIR-I was much pleased to learn
from our conversation the other day that your views of
the proposed amendments to the Constitution so fully
coincide with my own. It is, I assure you, no slight
gratification to find my strong repugnance to them
shared by one so well qualified, both in a legal and a
political point of view, to judge of their real character
and tendency.
Allow me to hope, my dear sir, that you will not
MS. Draft of letter.
456
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
fail to use your full influence with the public to secure
their rejection by the people in the approaching election.
This is no time for any one, who regards the honor of
the Old Bay State, or the credit of representative
government at home or abroad, to be silent or inactive;
and I deeply regret that such is the estimation in which
I am held by my fellow-citizens, that I can only record
my individual vote against these uncalled-for and
dangerous amendments. Such is not the case with
you. You have influence, and I beg you to use it.
In my early life, destitute of experience, and
carried away by a blind enthusiasm, I indulged some
radical tendencies and encouraged them in others, for
which I humbly ask pardon of God and my country-
men. I knew not what I was doing, and the evil I then
did unhappily renders me impotent now to do much
good. But I have learned as my head has grown
gray with years and reflection, and especially from
deplorable developments of radicalism during the past
few years, that nothing can be more fatal to the public
virtue and social well-being than the continual change
and alteration of the constitution of the state. The
very idea of a state is of something fixed and perma-
nent, generating and regulating motion indeed, but
remaining itself always immovable and at rest. It is
this immobility, this permanence amidst all the changes
of human affairs and fluctations of human passions and
opinions, that makes it, as it were, a second Providence,
that endears it to our hearts, inspires our confidence,
commands our loyalty, and renders submission to its
enactments a pleasure as well as a duty.
It is possible that time and its vicissitudes may
THE MASSACHUSETTS CONSTITUTION.
457
now and then demand some modifications of the orignal
Constitution; but if so, they should always be as few
and as slight as possible, and introduced with a delicate
and most reluctant hand. The Constitution should be
regarded as sacred and inviolable, and as long as it
is possible under it to secure the great ends of civil
society, it should be held to be fixed and unalterable.
The evils accruing must be great and intolerable to
warrant its alteration; no human government call
prevent all evils and inconveniences; under the best
government the wit of man can devise there will always
be much to be endured, and seldom are we able by
constitutional changes to guard against one class of
evils without opening the door to another no less grave.
Perfection in anything human is never to be expected,
and as long as the evils can be endured without
sacrificing the great purposes of our existence, it is
better to endure them than to attempt to redress them
by rushing upon a wild sea of experiments.
We have thus far been able to live, and even to
thrive under our old Constitution, and nothing indicates
that we might not continue to do so. The Constitution
says, in its preamble, that "the end of the institution-
the maintenance and administration of government-is
to secure the existence of the body politic; to protect it
and to furnish the individuals who compose it the
of enjoying in peace and tranquility their natural rights
and the blessings of life." Will any one pretend that
this end has not thus far been secured in this state,
and more amply, perhaps, than in any other common-
wealth, ancient or modern? But it is, according to the
Constitution itself, only when this end is not secured
power
458
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
that "the people have the right to alter the government
and to take measures for their safety, prosperity, and
happiness." The only case in which the Constitution
authorizes the people to alter the government has not
yet arisen, and therefore these proposed amendments
are unconstutional and unjustifiable. The people,
undoubtedly, have the right to make the Constitution
and to institute government; but when they have once
made it, and instituted the government, they are bound,
collectively and individually, by it, and have no right
to alter or modify it, except in those cases recognized by
the Constitution itself, and in the mode it prescribes.
There is certainly no urgent necessity for amending
the Constitution under which we enjoy the blessings of
life in as high a degree as it is in the power of civil
government to confer, and without such urgent neces-
sity no amendments are authorized by the Constitution.
To touch that sacred instrument for slight or trivial
causes, is the part of folly, not of wisdom; and to expose
the Constitution to be tampered with according to the
whims or caprice, the passions or opinions, the favorite
theories or the selfish purposes of whatever party hap-
pens for the time to be predominant, is to deprive it of
its character as a Constitution, to render all firm and
stable government impracticable, to abandon the state
to the mercy of ever-fluctuating parties, passions, and
opinions, and in the end to sacrifice civil society itself.
If it were true, as it is not, that some modifications
of the Constitution are desirable, the present is no time
for introducing them; party divisions are now too
numerous, party spirit runs too high, and the people
are too much influenced by the demagogues, who, much
THE MASSACHUSETTS CONSTITUTION.
459
+
to their own astonishment, have had the principal con-
trol of public affairs during the last two or three years,
to render the attempt safe or prudent. The people are
not now sufficiently calm and sober to judge with their
usual practical wisdom and good sense what amend-
ments are or are not desirable. They are too much
under the influence of the interests and the passions of
the moment to decide wisely on matters of such grave
importance; and prudence would therefore counsel us
to postpone the altering of the Constitution to a season
of greater calmness and sobriety, and of fewer party
divisions and less party excitement.
But I object not only to the time, but also to the
mode in which these proposed amendments are brought
before the people. Our fathers loved liberty and hated
anarchy. They sought to establish a constitutional
government which, while strong enough to govern,
should yet be too weak to oppress. They organized
such government according to their wisdom and ability.
They did not claim absolute perfection for their work,
nor wish absolutely to exclude all future amendments.
But while they permitted amendments to be made, if
they should become absolutely necessary, they wished
to make their introduction difficult, and at the same
time to avoid the terrible necessity of resorting to revo-
tion, whether violent or peaceful.
The mode in which the proposed amendments are
brought before the people contradicts their aim in both
respects. This mode is that of a convention, and the
vote of a simple majority of the people. According to
it, a simple majority of the voters can change the Con-
stitution when and as they please. If this be so, there
460
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
can be little more difficulty in altering the Constitution
than in repealing an ordinary legislative enactment,
and a constitutional provision will not essentially differ
from such enactment. All then that would be neces-
sary on the part of the majority wishing a confessedly
unconstitutional law, would be simply to begin by
altering the Constitution, which at most could occasion
only a brief delay. This would render the majority
absolute, and remove all effectual constitutional check
on their arbitrary will, directly in contradiction of the
fundamental idea of constitutional government. The
object of the Constitution is not merely to confer on the
majority the power to govern, but to limit their power,
and to protect the rights of minorities and individuals.
But if the Constitution itself be placed under the power
of the majority, alterable at their pleasure, minorities
and individuals have no constitutional protection, and
are at the mercy of the arbitrary and irresponsible will
of the majority. The government is then no longer a
constitutional government, but a government of arbi-
trary will, aud therefore a despotism, as decidedly so as
that of the Grand Turk.
The convention was undeniably convened for the
purpose of making a simple majority suffice to alter the
constitution. The act convening it passed by a bare
majority of the legislature, a bare majority of the people
approved that act, and the proposed amendments, if
adopted, will be adopted only by a bare majority.
Hence, a bare majority in high party times and under
the influence of selfish demagogues, ignorant of the
simplest elements of political science, may, when they
please, change the fundamental law of the State. You
THE MASSACHUSETTS CONSTITUTION.
461
and I, then, who happen to be in the minority, have no
constitutional protection; we hold our rights, our
property, our conscience, our wives and children, and
our lives at the mercy of any party or faction that
happens for the time being to be able to command a
majority of votes. And this is what is called liberty,
progress, keeping up with the spirit of the age! I
cannot believe that this noble old Massachusetts, the
mother and nurse of American institutions, has become
so dead to her past glory, so forgetful of the free and
lofty principles she has hitherto professed, or so insen-
sible to the honor of republican government, as to
sanction this base attempt to destroy our liberties by
adopting these proposed amendments. I persuade
myself that something of her old fire still burns in her
bosom, and that as she resisted à l'outrance, the mad
attempts of a trans-Atlantic tyrant to reduce her to
political slavery, she will be no less prompt and resolute
to resist the modern attempts of her own degenerate
sons, with un-American hearts and principles, to reduce
her to still more ignoble slavery,-the slavery of the
mob.
However, the amendments come before us from an
illegal and revolutionary body. I raise here no question
as to the abstract right of revolution, but I will say, and
I think you will not contradict me, that these amend-
ments are revolutionary in their source, and that we
cannot vote for them without sanctioning a revolution.
The convention which proposed them was an illegal and
unconstitutional, and therefore a revolutionary body, as
much so as the suffrage convention of Rhode Island.
The constitution, I grant, may be altered, but not
-
462
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
without revolution, except by its own authority, and in
the mode which it itself prescribes. A convention for
amending it, unless convened by its authority, is not
legal, but revolutionary. The convention which framed
these amendments was not so convened, for there is no
provision in the Constitution authorizing a convention of
the people for any purpose whatever. The constitutional
mode of amending the Constitution in most of the
states of the Union is by way of a convention of the
people, but such is not the constitutional mode adopted
in Massachusetts. The Constitution of this State
provides another method for its own amendment, and it
is only in that method that it can be amended without
revolution. You know, my dear sir, that I have the
highest legal authority in the Commonwealth for my
assertion, and it has been said, and I have reason to
believe truly said, that more than one of our eminent
jurists refused to accept seats in the convention on the
ground that they held it to be an unconstitutional, and
therefore a revolutionary body.
I am aware that it is said by the friends of the
convention that the Constitution prescribes another
mode only in the case of specific amendments, and
that there is no constitutional mode but that of a
convention for the general revision of the Constitution.
This is, no doubt, the fact. But since the Constitution
provides only for specific amendments, and does not
authorize a convention for its general revision, it
follows that only specific amendments are constitutional,
and that the people have excluded and intended to
exclude all others. The argument, if it proves any
thing, proves that the Constitution provides only for
THE MASSACHUSETTS CONSTITUTION.
463
specific amendments, and that no others are possible
without a revolution, which is precisely what I contend.
As the convention was a revolutionary body, and as
these amendments do not come before me in the mode
prescribed by the Constitution, I cannot vote for them
without sanctioning a revolution and violating that very
Constitution which, as a good citizen, I am bound to
support, if need be, even to the sacrifice of my life.
Massachusetts has always prided herself on being
an order-loving and a law-abiding state. Is she
prepared at the bidding of a few demagogues, who are
incapable of seeing beyond the interests and passions of
the moment and who have only their selfish prejudices
to subserve, to forego what has hitherto been her honest
pride and her honorable distinction, and sanction the
wild and revolutionary doctrines of the day by adopting
these uncalled-for, unjustifiable, and dangerous amend-
ments? Is the glory of this old Bay State, the home of
our interests and affections, and whose honor you and I
feel is our own, to pass away forever? Let us not
believe it. Let us hope that she still loves freedom, is
still attached to constitutional government, and that she
will cover her enemies and the enemies of republican
institutions with confusion.
But even if I could make the impossible supposition
that these amendments come before the public in a
constitutional mode, I could not vote for them. I do
not see in them the broad good sense, the calm judg-
ment, the deep practical wisdom of the sovereign people,
seeking to provide for the future peaceful and salutary
government of the state: I see in them only the low
cunning and subtle craft of party seeking to provide for
464
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
its own domination. They indicate no statesmanship,
no honest purpose, no regard for principle. I see in
them only the hand of the demagogue. They are
unstatesmanlike, for they attempt to incorporate into
the Constitution, in those sections devoted to the
organization of the militia as well as in several others,
matters which should be left to the ordinary legislation,
and which were evidently attempted to be inserted in
the Constitution only for the purpose of securing votes
for the proposed amendments. Through them all, so
far as they are of any importance, there runs the low
policy of short-sighted politicians which looks only to
the temporary success of party, and never embraces the
genuine and permanent interests of a Commonwealth.
Almost all these proposed amendments are framed
in the immediate and temporary interests of the present
Coalition, and more especially to the Free-Soil section
of the Coalition. Free-Soilism may be a magnificent
thing, but how long is it likely to last? Whatever it
may be in itself, or whatever people may think of it, it
is but a temporary thing, not one of the great and per-
manent interests of the Commonwealth, needing to be
recognized and provided for in the Constitution. The
Wilsons, the Boutwells, the Griswolds, the Butlers, are
no doubt, important personages, but they are mortal,
and will die one of these days. They will pass away
and perhaps leave no issue. That may be a calamity,
but it is not likely that the Commonwealth will pass
away with them. It will probably survive them, and
its great and permanent interests remain, and it is
* The Democrats and Free-Soilers had coalesced in Massachusetts two
years before, and were in power in that state.
THE MASSACHUSETTS CONSTITUTION.
465
precisely for these interests the Constitution ought to
provide.
Parties in a constitutional state are inevitable, but
the Constitution ought never to be made by them, nor
for them. It should be above them, over them, con-
trolling them, and saying to them even in the pride of
their power,
"Thus far, but no further." They should
be kept under, never suffered to get into, the Constitu-
tion. Nothing is more unstatesmanlike than to frame
a series of amendments to the Constitution for the
express purpose of elevating the Free-Soil party to
power, and furnishing it with the means of cramming
down the throats of a reluctant people all the insane
and dangerous fanaticisms unhappily so rife amongst
us. It is bad enough to have these fanaticisms obtain
in the community to the great discomfort of all quiet
and sober people, without giving them a constitutional
sanction. No sober man, I should suppose, whatever
his party or his favorite ism, would wish to have the
Constitution tampered with for such a narrow, tempo-
rary, and unworthy purpose.
Yet this purpose is apparent in all the more
important of the proposed amendments, and manifests.
itself in what would be the most amusing contradiction,
if the subject were not so grave. Take the provision
with regard to representation. The Convention sees.
that Free-Soilism cannot be sure of the Senate, if
Senators are chosen according to the present mode, and
so they propose to district the state for the Senate, each
district choosing only one Senator. The principal
strength of the Free-Soil party lies in the small country
towns, so it is proposed to augment, relatively, their
31
466
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
representative power, and to diminish that of the cities
and larger towns. In organizing the Senate, the Con-
vention insists on the principle of equality; in
organizing the House of Representatives, it turns its
back on equality and insists on the most outrageous
inequality. Wherefore? Simply because Free-Soilism
cannot obtain a majority without "rotten boroughs."
Yet to make the purpose the more apparent, the
Convention provides for districting the state for repre-
sentatives after 1855, the time allotted, I suppose, for
the duration of Free-Soilism. If the district system
for representatives is proper for 1856, why is it improper
for 1854? Who sees not that the whole proceeding has
another purpose than the one avowed? I will not dwell
on the attempt, for party purposes, to augment the power
of the small towns and to diminish that of the large
towns and cities, but I cannot help remarking the
singular feature of making the Senate (regarded as the
higher,) the lower branch of the government. Under
the proposed system, the Senate represents the people,
and the lower house represents corporations.
The same motive is apparent in the proposed
changes of the tenure of the Judiciary and in the
function of jurors. The Convention did not dare go so
far as to make the judges elected by the people; but
they struck an equally effective blow at the independ
ence of the judiciary in altering the tenure of office
from during good behavior to a brief term of years, and
providing for the reappointment of the judges, thus
disposing them, as they wish to be reappointed, to favor
the party that happens to be in power. Here the
Convention adopt one of the principal grievances com-
THE MASSACHUSETTS CONSTITUTION.
467
plained of against the British Crown, and which led to
the war of independence. The judges have been
much in the way of Free-Soilism and kindred
fanaticisms. It was necessary, therefore, not only to
strike a blow at their independence, but also to break
their power. This the Convention propose to do by
giving the jury the right to determine the law as well
as the fact. This throws the whole judicial power into
the hands of the jury, and reduces the judge to little
more than a mere chairman, whose duty is simply to
preserve order.
I have no leisure to pursue this analysis any
further. But consider what would be our condition if
these proposed amendments should be adopted. A
solemn sanction will be given to the principle, that a
simple majority is competent to alter the Constitution
when and as they please, and also that they may do it
not only without, but in defiance of, a constitutional
provision. The provisions, then, proposed by the Con-
vention for the future alteration of the Constitution,
even if adopted, will bind the majority no more than
the present, and the Constitution therefore virtually is
abrogated, and constitutional government abandoned.
The majority for the time being may govern as it
pleases.
Add this to the destruction of the independent
judiciary, and the conversion of the judges into politi-
cians and demagogues, and the clothing of any twelve
irresponsible jurors, chosen by lot, with the supreme
judicial authority of the Commonwealth, and tell me
what protection can we count on for justice, for liberty,
for vested rights, for property, or for life. The judge,
468
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
if even disposed, has no judicial function; that is
transferred to the jury, who know little of law, and
who, we may be sure, will never find the law in favor
of one they wish to condemn, or against one they would
acquit. We should henceforth be governed not by law,
but by the will of an irresponsible majority; justice.
will be dispensed not according to law, but according to
the passions or the prejudices of jurors. The law will
not govern, but the mob, led on by the art and craft of
low, selfish, and contentptible demagogues. That, sir,
is what the proposed amendments will prepare the way
for. They are directly opposed to the principle and
end of constitutional government, and if I had the
public confidence as I once had it, and when I deserved
it far less than I do now, I would thunder this in the
ears of my fellow-citizens, day and night, till election
time.
Forgive me the warmth with which I speak, for
I feel deeply; forgive me also for having trespassed so
long on your time, and believe me,
Very truly and sincerely yours,
O. A. BROWNSON.
Brownson and Healy were most intimate friends,
Healy being a cousin of Brownson's wife; but though
one called himself a Democrat, and the other a Whig,
there was a stronger bond of friendship than that
affinity, growing out of concord of opinion on every-
thing connected with the principles of free govern-
ment, and the science of law. Healy's sound judg-
ment was recognized by Daniel Webster (his law
partner), and by all the best lawyers of Boston.
Whenever Brownson had occasion to discuss a question
LETTER FROM NEWMAN.
469
at all connected with law, domestic or international, he
made it his practice to consult Healy, and was often
indebted to him for references. When he addressed the
letter to him it was, of course, for publication, and the
opponents of the proposed changes in the constitution
urged Brownson to address the people in the principal
towns of the State in opposition to them. For the two
or three weeks immediately preceding the election in
November, Brownson had the satisfaction of "thunder-
ing in the ears" of his fellow-citizens his objections to
the alterations; which he did with such force that the
defeat of the amendments was attributed to him more
than to any other one person.
S
About the beginning of 1854, Brownson was in-
vited by the Rector of the proposed Catholic University
of Ireland to lecture on geography, as is more fully
set forth in the letter here given :
EDGBASTON, BIRMINGHAM, December 15, 1853.
SIR :-You will not be surprised that the persons
engaged in the task of starting the new Catholic
University of Ireland, should betake themselves to the
United States for aid in doing so, or that they should
direct their eyes towards a writer so well known and so
highly endowed as yourself.
Of course we feel it impossible to offer you any
inducement sufficient to lead you to connect yourself
personally with the institution, nor indeed are we our-
selves yet in a position to make such an offer to any
one.
But we have thought we might still avail our-
selves of the name and assistance of various eminent
Catholics, in a way which it is possible both for them
and for us to contemplate.
470
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
1
What I take the liberty of asking you, is, whether
you would consent to accept the office of Lecturer
Extraordinary for (we will say) a year. I am asking
the like favor of Dr. Döllinger of Munich, and others of
similar literary distinction. The office would not
involve residence, but only the delivery of one or two
courses of lectures, as might be convenient to the
lecturer. And the year proposed would be that running
from the autumn of 1854 to the autumn of 1855.
The subject which I should propose to your accept-
ance would be one of such surpassing interest and
breadth that I am often surprised that it is not put
more prominently forward in Collegiate establish-
ments. We never omit a professorship of astron-
omy, but how much more fertile a subject of thought is
the province of geography! Viewed under its different
heads, as physical, moral, and political, it gives scope
to a variety of profound philosophical speculations,
which will at once suggest themselves to your mind.
It treats of the very stage and field of all history; of
the relation of that field to the characters of nations, to
social institutions, and to forms of religion, of the
migrations of tribes, the direction and course of con-
quests and empires, the revolutions and extension of
commerce, and the future destinies of the human race.
This is the subject I offer to your acceptance.
any
Should it fall into your views to offer us your aid
in the way I propose, I am sure a course of lectures on
such subjects as those which I have set down, from
so brilliant a writer, would be thronged by the educated
classes of Dublin, classes at once numerous and highly
intelligent, and would be of great moment and effect in
LETTER FROM ACTON.
471
the commencement of a great, an anxious, and a most
religious undertaking.
You are the first person to whom I have applied,
and hoping I may succeed in my object, I am, Sir,
your faithful servant,
To DR. BROWNSON,
JOHN H. NEWMAN,
Of the Oratory.
&c., &c.
Had Newman proposed the history of philosophy,
or the philosophy of history as the subject of the lect-
ures, it is very possible that Brownson would have
accepted the offer; but aside from the fact that he had
not made it a special study, geography with him was
not allowed to have had so much influence on morals
and religion as is pretended by a large number of
speculators on this matter, and as Newman's expres-
sion, taken in connection with his well known views,
might seem to imply. Sir John (now Lord) Acton pro-
posed, however, one easy solution of the difficulty, in
case the subject was not changed, and one often resorted
to by public speakers-not only in universities, but
generally everywhere-of treating of any matter they
please without regard to the text, or to the subject
which they are supposed to be explaining. He wrote:
MUNICH, Saturday, May the 13th, 1854.
DEAR DR. BROWNSON :-Since September the in-
tention of writing to you to thank you for your great
kindness to me and to renew an intercourse which has
afforded me so much pleasure and instruction, has
never been absent from my mind. I have always put
it off as a great treat, as a boy keeps a tart a while
472
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
before he eats it. An occasion for writing now presents
itself, and I take it with the greatest delight. I have
just returned from England, where I have been spend-
ing several weeks. I was told there by some of New-
man's friends that he has written to you to request
your coöperation in starting a Catholic University
which is so much wanted and wished for among us.
On my arrival this morning your son confirmed this
report to me, and gave me to understand that you
would not be disinclined to come over if the subject
proposed for you to lecture on was more suited to your
tastes and your studies. I cannot say how glad I am
that there is a prospect of thus bringing you over for a
time at least, and I cannot help adding the particle
of influence I may possess as being more intimate with
you than anybody else in England, and as being most
profoundly convinced that you would find this a most
happy opening. I will undertake in the first place to
remove your difficulty about the subject-matter of your
lectures, for I am quite certain that they would be too
happy to let you lecture on opossums if you chose to
communicate your good things in that way. The vast
field of philosophy will be yours, and you will have an
opportunity of making philosophical questions familiar
to a nation hitherto barely acquainted with them, and I
thank God for the good fortune of my countrymen in
being initiated in that magnificent science by you of
all men living. I am
living. I am sure you will see how much
may here be done for the glory of God, and I do most
sincerely hope that nothing will prevent its being done.
I can speak with perfect confidence of the facilities.
which will be given you to choose your own subject, for
LETTER FROM ACTON.
473
I am intimately acquainted with Newman's closest
friends, and I know the immense price they attach to
the prospect of an alliance with you in this work. I
will write at once to them on this point, and this
obstacle, if not already removed, as I know not what
communications you have had with Newman, will at
once disappear. It is very probable that this University
may be exceedingly effective in promoting Catholic
learning and Catholic literature in England and Ire-
land. Nobody can give it such an impulse as you.
Assuredly the part you take in this work will not
be the least meritorious of your actions, nor the smallest
claim on our gratitude. I only regret we have nobody
to do for history what you can do for philosophy.
Let me remind you how deficient the Irish and even
the English Catholics are in sound moral principles of
politics, and what the country and the cause will gain
if you imbue them with such treasures
tained in your articles on Rights and Duties, for an
instance out of many, and in those last admirable dis-
courses of an old fogie. We have no such old fogies
in England. Alas! you are well aware that the only
students of philosophy in England (of course I always
include Ireland), are those disciples of the Germans
who maintain and read the Westminster Review.
They are not wanting in numbers, they are not de-
ficient in men of talent like Carlyle. They are numer-
ically always increasing, and their doctrines are
developing themselves and deteriorating by sure de-
grees. Who can resist their progress? All the world
as are con-
K
***
Uncle Jack and His Nephew, or Conversations of an Old Fogy with
a young American." Works, vol. xi., p. 165, &c.
شد
*
474
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
knows that Protestantism is no match for Infidelity,
and offers no weapons to refute it. We Catholics have
no philosophy; no philosophical writers exist among
us. Indeed, it is pretty certain that they would not
be worth much if we had them. I know not how
they could have grown up.
You alone can prepare
us for the great controversies by founding among us.
a school and arming it with the principles of a sound
philosophy. I believe that the historical proof ought
to accompany the philosophical proof, and that we can
well use both the History of Philosophy and the
Philosophy of History. In choosing History for my
occupation through life I am actuated by a hope of
following your example in another field, and I hope
that according to the measure of my powers I may
be of some service in my time by promoting the
knowledge of the great truths that are taught in the
History of the World. Independently of your lectures,
I am sure it will be an excellent thing if you come
over to Europe. Your intercourse will be as an
infusion of new blood in many societies, in Dublin, in
London, in Paris, and in other places. There are many
who will be very glad to know you, and very many
who will be all the better for it. Neither do I think
you will have any reason to regret it for yourself.
I think you will find it a great satisfaction to know
several persons in Europe. You will be able to make
yourself more accurately acquainted with much recent
literature than it is possible to do at a distance. I
believe you will find that there are many persons who
have deserved a great local reputation, but whose
books do not get beyond a certain limit, for books.
LETTER FROM ACTON.
475
travel very slowly, with a few exceptions, from nation
to nation; and there are many good things which wise
men keep to themselves and that do not find their
way into books, and that one gathers in conversation.
I am confident, for instance, that in the matter of
political philosophy I could make you acquainted with
German writers whose fame has never crossed the
Atlantic, but who would please you as much as
Radowitz. Long before Newman wrote to you, when
I used often to recall the happy hours I spent with
you at Emmittsburg and at Boston, and to reflect on
the excellent things you told me, and on your great
kindness, and to read your essays, the idea came
constantly into my mind that it would be a great
thing if you came over to Europe, and particularly to
Germany, for that you could here collect much that
you could afterwards use to the great advantage of the
church. It seems to me that there is no science
nobler than one which has no name in literature,
than the science of Burke and Maistre, and Donoso
Cortés. I believe that a system of laws for those that
govern and for those that are governed, a system of
political philosophy, if there is no better expression,
that such a system remains to be drawn up by a
philosopher who should know all the truths that those
great writers have discovered, and who should reconcile
all the scattered fragments with each other by theories
derived from the certain doctrines of the church;
such a system as Montalembert speaks of in his life
of Donoso Cortés as being a medium between the
theories of Gioberti and those of Bonald. Is not such
a work a fit undertaking for you who have contributed
476
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
so much to it in your Essays? I sincerely wish a
speedy birth and a long life to the philosophical letters.
which you told me were in preparation. They will be
a proof that your Review does not prevent you from
carrying on a large work at the same time. Then I
venture to hope that when you have crowned your
studies in one line with that book you will also set the
crown to your Essays in political philosophy by such
a work as I speak of. A writer may influence and in-
struct both his contemporaries and posterity. By
means of a review he can exercise a much more con-
stant and prolonged influence on his own time than
by sending forth a single book. But a journal can-
not live like a book. It is too voluminous, much of the
interest is temporary, much is merely local. Even
such a collection of essays as you have published, and
will I hope publish several more, must become after a
time a literary curiosity to a certain degree, and cannot
continue to have the same effect as a book which is one
whole, both in matter and in form as a work of art.
Therefore, although any essay you write on the prin-
ciples of politics deserves to be preserved in a collective
edition, no quantity of them will be as good as a single
work exhausting the subject and complete in its parts.
I believe that besides your fame as an historical person-
age in America, your most desirable and deserving
reputation in literature would be founded on such a
task as this. This thought has often crossed my mind
since we parted, and I am sure you are of all men the
most fitted for the undertaking. I have often wished
to send you some German works on these subjects, and
I have given Dolman one or two for you.
But you
* The London publisher of an English edition of Brownson's Review.
LETTER FROM ACTON.
477
must first of all come to Europe and make acquaintance
with the books and the writers here. To inspect the
action of the European forms of government would
itself probably interest you. I have spoken on these
subjects perfectly freely and openly, mindful of our
conversations and trusting that you will not think my
confidence presumptuous or my friendship intrusive.
Your writings, your conversation, and your individu-
ality have afforded me matter for long meditations, and
this thought has always appeared to me so natural that
I have ventured to communicate it to you. Many good
books have owed their origin to the solicitations of
persons hardly better fitted to appreciate them and
hardly more intimate with the author than is the case
with me, and I am encouraged by the promise you have
already made me of writing on the Mormons. One
satisfactory result at least I looked forward to, namely,
a letter from you. If I do not provoke you to write a
book or an article, I hope at least I shall provoke you to
write a letter.
I hope you have not forgotten your promise of
collecting for me a complete set of your Review, and of
keeping your eye on materials for Professor Döllinger's
work on the Reformation. I shall be very glad to
know whether I can execute any commissions for you,
and whether you would like more works of Radowitz or
others of the same kind. If you have not seen Gratry's.
work De la Connaisance de Dieu, you should order it
from Paris. More volumes are to appear on Logic and
Psychology. It is far superior to many works you
notice. Indeed, I have sometimes regretted that you
devote so much attention to writers of so little general
*
478
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
importance, but I explain it by circumstances connected
with the teaching of philosophy in the American
schools. I hope you will divide your cloak among your
sons and friends, and letting them deal with the Civiltà.
Cattolica and the Ami de la Religion, will turn your face
towards Europe and your attention to the achievement
of a great work. I might fill sheet after sheet with
matter of little importance but that I should be glad to
talk to you about, but I will add nothing incongruous
to the seriousness and tediousness (I fear) of my letter,
and will only renew my assurances of deep gratitude
towards you and I need not say what profound admi-
ration.
Trusting that you will sometimes think of me with
kindness and that you will not forget me in your
prayers, I remain, my dear Dr. Brownson, most affec-
tionately and sincerely yours,
JOHN DALBERG ACTON.
The Catholic journals in the United States very
generally approved the proposed lecturing by Brownson
in the Irish University. Their tone was about the
same as one here quoted:
"DR. BROWNSON.-We rejoice to hear that this
gentleman's talents and services have been acknowl-
edged by the offer of a chair in the Irish University.
No compliment could be better deserved than this spon-
taneous act on the part of the University authorities.
towards the first of writers on this continent. Mr.
Brownson, should he accept the office thus tendered,
will fulfil its duties with credit to himself and vast
benefit to the institution which designs to raise him to
an honorable and prominent place in the faculty. The
LETTER FROM NEWMAN.
479
University, in selecting Mr. Brownson, acknowledges in
the most delicate and touching way the claims of Amer-
ican Catholics on favors within its gift. And we rejoice.
that the selection of the University in this case is such
as to give satisfaction to all who have contributed any-
thing towards the institution itself. The change in the
position of Mr. Brownson, should it occur, will not
interfere with the publication of the Review. We have
given our opinion of it freely before, though this opinion
was not always favorable. We would consider even the
temporary suspension of the Review little less than a
literary calamity."
Brownson's letter to Newman, objecting to the
subject of Geography, was replied to as follows:
16 HARCOURT ST., DUBLIN, June 6, 1854.
MY DEAR SIR-I thank you very much for your
kind letter, which I received a few days ago. As to
what you say about myself, I deeply feel that this is a
day above all others in which the children of Holy
Church need to be united, and bear upon her enemies
with their entire and concurrent force. Much more
should those be one, who have been so wonderfully
brought out, each in his own way, according to the will
of Sovereign Love and Power, from darkness to light.
If there is one misery greater than another, it is divis-
ion among Catholics, when their walls are beleaguered
by the united powers of darkness. If we have traitors
among us, of course let them be duly dealt with, but in
cases where treason is not suspected, let us interpret
each other's words in meliorem partem, and aim at
cultivating that charity which "thinketh no evil.” As
for me, these are the sentiments which I have ever felt
480
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
1
towards you, and it is a great satisfaction to me, and I
feel grateful to you, to find that you reciprocate those
sentiments towards me.
Of course it disappointed me that you did not see
your way to assist us in the University in the way I
pointed out. Theology and metaphysics will, I suppose,
be given by the Bishops to Ecclesiastics. The
Philosophy of History is already in the hands of a man
of ability and name. It has struck me you would not
be disinclined to take the chair of Philosophy of
Religion, or the Evidences of Xtianity, or of the Notes
of the Church, especially as viewed in reference to the
needs of this age. This would open upon you the
fields of logic and of history, in both of which you are
so well practised. Would not the subject you mention
of Civilization come into it, without going into the
subjects of theology or metaphysics, which, as I have
said, the Bishops will reserve for Ecclesiastics? Again,
the mythical theory and its attendant errors are now
making their way in these islands,--are we Catholics
secure from the infection-any logical or historical
attack upon them would be of the greatest service to us.
As to politics of the day, I suppose it will be our
prudence to abstain from so exciting a subject.
Excuse this short and unceremonious letter, and
believe me, my dear Sir, with true esteem, very sincerely
yours in Xt,
-
JOHN H. NEWMAN,
Of the Oratory.
LETTER FROM NEWMAN.
481
DR. BROWNSON, &c., &c.,
Boston, United States.
The subject of his lecture being made satisfactory,
Brownson accepted Newman's invitation in July,
though he was still uncertain when he would be able
to go Dublin. On receiving Brownson's acceptance,
Newman was puzzled what to say or do in the matter,
for an opposition to Brownson's lecturing, which he had
not expected, was manifested in Ireland. He wrote in
reply:
ORATORY, BIRIMINGHAM, August, 23, 1854.
DEAR SIR-My delay in answering your letter of
July 11 is not owing to me. I sent it to Ireland at once,
and had it back only yesterday evening. By the same
post, I received letters from different places which have
perplexed me very much, as well as surprised me,—so
that now that I write to you, I write, to my great disap-
pointment and concern, with considerable difficulty.
But I will neither delay my answer, nor be otherwise.
than open and straightforward in what I have to say.
I am urged then, now for the first time, in quarters
to which I cannot but listen, to ask you whether it
would be inconvenient to you to postpone your visit
here, on the ground of some offence which happens to
have been taken just now, in America, and, I believe in
Ireland, at something you have lately written.
It will be a serious loss to us, if you cannot take
part in our undertaking; and I know I have no right
to suppose you will consent to come at all, if I take a
liberty so great as to ask you to postpone your coming.
But still I must take things as I find them; and, since
it rests with me to do what is at once unpalatable to me
32
482
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
:
in itself and apparently uncourteous to you, I think it
best to state the case as it really stands, trusting that I
may not, besides my own disappointment and inconven-
ience, have the additional misfortune of disobliging
you.
I might offer some mere excuse for proposing a
postponement, but I think you will be better pleased
that I should speak the plain and entire truth. I
earnestly trust that this change of purpose on our part
may not put you to inconvenience. I am very sorry to
see, on looking again at your letter, that you have
recalled your son from Munich apropos of your coming
to Europe.
I am, dear Sir, with much respect, your faithful
servant in Christ,
JOHN H. NEWMAN,
Of the Oratory.
Newman's letter was no disappointment to Brown-
son, who wrote him to that effect:
BOSTON, September 12, 1854.
VERY REV. AND DEAR SIR:-The postponement
you request would not put me to the least inconven-
ience, and is in fact what I desired and should myself
have requested. I could not possibly have made my
arrangements to visit Europe during next year, and I
want at least a year to prepare my son to take charge
my Review during my absence.
of
G
The request to postpone my visit will make no
difference with me as to my readiness to visit you
should the present storm blow over. But my own
belief is that you will best consult the interests of the
University by having it understood that I am not to be
LETTER TO NEWMAN.
483
I need not
connected with it in any way or manner.
say that what I call the Irish party both here and in
Ireland, here especially, are by no means pleased to see
an Englishman at its head, and they would in no manner
consent to have me connected with it as a lecturer.
They would raise the cry that the University is intended
simply to Anglo-Saxonize the Irish. My name, I see,
would only serve to increase the distrust of those
already disposed to suspect the University, and would
add to the embarrassments of your most difficult and
delicate position. I want to save my own honor as
much as possible, and also to consult the interests of the
University. I think therefore that you had better, if
the thing can honestly be done, as my acceptance was
conditional, allow me to announce that I finally decline.
I do not like to do so without your permission, but I think
it will be best for all parties that I should.
If you
think proper, such an announcement may be made in
Ireland. I assure you that the Irish party, for whom
in a great measure the University is designed, have
always disliked me, and will never accept me. The
storm which recently broke out here, is only the
expression of long pent up feelings. I am censured
severely by a distinguished prelate, who appears before
the public as your most ardent admirer, for having
written against your Essay on Development, when he
himself urged me through the Bishop of Boston to do
I say then very frankly that I am certain
that it will be for your comfort and for the interests of
the University to have it understood that I am under no
circumstances to be connected with it.
so.
* MS. draft. It is very likely that in the letter as sent, this allusion
to Archbishop Purcell was omitted.
484
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
Newman's reply was as follows:
MOUNT SALUS, DALKEY, Sept. 27, 1854.
(My direction is Dublin—this is a watering place.)
MY DEAR SIR :-Your welcome and generous letter
came yesterday, and I lose no time in answering it.
I cannot prevail on myself to give the coup de
grace to an arrangement, which I still hope will come
into effect, by putting the notice in the newspapers.
which you propose. There are so many changes in
men's minds, and public affairs are at present in that
uncertain state, that it is not at all improbable that
our present difficulty may blow over, and when it had
done so, I should be vexed to have committed myself.
I shall not fill up the Professorship which I offered to
you, and we will see the turn things take. At the
same time, I do not mean to say a word to inconvenience
you, or to oblige you to consider it a suspended en-
gagement, or to hinder your entertaining a renewal of
my proposition as a really de novo matter.
What you say about "Loss and Gain" has given
me heartfelt satisfaction, and I know such friends of
mine as you are kind enough to contemplate will be
as much pleased as I am at your message.
i
AUTHORITY AND LIBERTY.
485
CHAPTER XV.
BROWNSON ASSERTS THE SUPREMACY OF THE SPIRITUAL
ORDER, AND IS OPPOSED BY O'CONNOR AND PURCELL.
—THOSE WHO STOOD BY HIM.
(6
THE Bishop of Pittsburgh was right in saying, in
the letter quoted in chapter xiii, that any assistance
Brownson might give him in regard to religious
liberty" would be in what the Bishop considered "the
wrong way." There was a radical difference, one of
principle, between them on this point. Brownson, after
years of thought on the subject, had become confirmed
in his doctrine that there was only one medium of the
reconciliation of civil and religious freedom with
authority. "All liberty," he wrote in his Review for
April, 1849, "is in being held to no obedience but
obedience to God; and obedience to the state can be
compatible with liberty only on the condition that
God commands it, or on the condition that he governs
in the state, which he does not and cannot do, unless
the state holds from his law and is subject to it. To
deny, then, the supremacy of the church in temporals
is only to release the temporal order from its subjection
to the divine sovereignty, which, so far as regards the
state, is to deny its authority, or its right to govern,
and, so far as regards the subject, is to assert pure,
unmitigated civil despotism. All authority divested of
the divine sanction is despotic, because it is authority
without right, will unregulated by reason, power
disjoined from justice. Withdraw the supremacy of
* Authority and Liberty, Works. vɔl, x.. pp. 128-129.
486
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
the church from the temporal order and you deprive
the state of that sanction, by asserting that it does not
hold from God and is not amenable to his law; you
give the state simply a human basis, and have in it
only a human authority, which has no right to govern,
which we are not bound to obey, and which it is
intolerable tyranny to compel us to obey."
Beginning with January, 1853, for five successive
numbers, Brownson developing and explaining this
doctrine, discusses thoroughly the relations of the
temporal order to the spiritual. In defending the
rights and powers of the spiritual order in relation to
the temporal, and of the church, as the representative
of the spiritual, in face of the state, the representative
of the temporal, he never confounded the two orders,
merged one in the other, or denied the substantive
existence of either-he simply asserted that the
temporal exists not for its own sake, but for the
spiritual, and that the spiritual order is by its own
nature supreme over the temporal. If, then, the
temporal is for the spiritual, if the spiritual is supreme
over the temporal, if the church represents the
authority of the spiritual, and if the pope be the
supreme head of the church by divine right, then the
pope must have supreme authority over the temporal
order, and therefore the power to judge princes in
temporals, not indeed precisely as temporals, but as
spirituals. The power of the pope to depose princes
was defended as of divine right; but at the same time
was explained to be the right of the pope as supreme
head of the church to judge whether the state does or
* Works, vol. xi., pp. 1-114.
THE TEMPORAL AND SPIRITUAL ORDERS.
487
(6
does not conform to the conditions of its trust, and to
pronounce sentence accordingly. The prince incurs
deposition, not by the will or legislation of the pope,
but by virtue of the natural law, or the law of God,
under which he holds, and what is known as the
deposing power of the pope is simply judicial and
declarative. What he does is to declare and apply
the law of God to the particular case, and what he
decides is the spiritual question involved, and therefore
in doing it, he transcends not the limits of his spiritual
functions. The power of the pope in regard to princes
is limited by the law of God; but of that law he is the
guardian and judge for states as well as individuals, and
therefore has the right to judge of its infractions by
princes as well as by subjects, and both are bound by
his judgment, and ought to give practical effect to his
sentence; but if they refuse, the pope uses only
spiritual arms to compel them, for he has no other.
He can pronounce the sentence of forfeiture, and declare
subjects absolved, but practically there his power
ordinarily ends."
In the beginning of 1854, the Reverend Dr.
Charles I. White retired from the editorial manage-
ment of the Metropolitan Magazine, of Baltimore, and
was succeeded by Huntington, whose animosity towards
Brownson has already been alluded to. Huntington
himself was not very strong in argument, and so he
called for aid on his sponsor, the Bishop of Pittsburgh,
who at once, forgetful of his great friendship for
Brownson, turned violently against him, because he
regarded the assertion of ultramontane doctrine a slur
*Works, vol. x., p. 122.
•
1
488
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
on the bishops of his native country who took an oath
which he seemed to think inconsistent with that
doctrine. In the Metropolitan for February and
March, 1854, he set forth what he pretended was
Brownson's view, and argued against it, and went so
far as to maintain propositions which the bishops of
this country would probably have taken notice of if
asserted by any one of less authority.
While lecturing in Buffalo in February, 1854,
Brownson and O'Connor, who was also there, talked
over the question, and the only agreement was to the
effect that the bishop proposed to let the controversy
end where it was, and this Brownson said he was
perfectly willing to do. But on reaching Chelsea, he
found a note from his bishop (Fitzpatrick) telling him
it was necessary that he should reply to the Metro-
politan. Fitzpatrick had sailed for Liverpool, on his
visit to Rome, and could not be consulted, and so
Brownson, in his April number, replied to O'Connor,
defending and explaining his views.
As to the bishop's oath, Brownson said he could
take it himself; but he wouldn't: it was with him rather
a matter of taste or a sense of propriety than involving
faith; for he recognized in the state the same liberty
and independence of action that he did in the individual
in matters of private and domestic economy. Within
the limits of the moral law, as interpreted and applied
by the church, the state, like the individual, is free to
act as it pleases. He claimed no authority for the pope
to interfere with the constitution of a state not repugnant
to the divine law, or to disturb the rights or relations
of property as settled by the same law.
LETTER TO O'CONNOR.
489
To the charge of the Metropolitan Magazine that
Brownson made the temporal power of the popes a
dogma of faith, the Reviewer replied, that although in
his opinion it is not very remotely conected with faith
he had only declared his belief that Catholic dogma
requires us to maintain at least the indirect temporal,
authority of the popes, or to forswear our logic; by
which he evidently meant, not that it is a Catholic
dogma, but a strict logical deduction from it. "This
may be the case," he said, "and yet one who denies it
not be a heretic; for the church does not hold a man to
be a heretic because he happens to be a bad logician.'
>>
Upon reading the article in the Metropolitan Maga-
zine for July, replying to him, Brownson wrote to the
writer, the Bishop of Pittsburgh, that he had read it with
both surprise and pain.
"When we separated," he said, "last February at
Buffalo, I fully intended not to reply to your previous
article; but on reaching home I found directions left for
me which I was not at liberty to disregard, and which
made a reply on my part my duty. I replied as I
thought, as I certainly intended, in a perfectly respectful
manner, and in a way that I thought would not provoke
a rejoinder. I hoped that the controversy would be
suffered to drop. I did not believe you would take
offence at what I had done, and I intended to avoid all
future provocation. I have therefore to find you
disposed to continue the controversy, after I had pretty
clearly intimated that I would not press my doctrine.
"I have been pained also at the tone of your reply,
which strikes me as harsh, and not such as I had a
right to expect. Your article seems intended to make
490
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
an end of me, and rouse up the indignation of the whole
Catholic public against me, rather than elucidate the
question. It strikes me as unfair and unkind, and to
assail me with passion rather than with argument.
"In a controversy of this sort, you cannot, Rt.
Rev. Sir, be ignorant that you have every advantage,
and I every disadvantage. You have the advantage of
me in learning and ability, and above all by your sacred
character, and high position as a bishop and prelate of
the church. You can write against me with all the
freedom of a layman and all the authority of the bishop,
and I can only speak as a humble layman to a spiritual
superior. The terms are not equal. You can bring
popular and national prejudice to bear against me, and
I can avail myself of no extraneous help.
"In your article you do not give me fair play before
your readers.
You charge me with doctrines and
consequences which I disavow, which in my article I
reason against, and use your great ability to hold me
up now to the ridicule and now to the indignation of
the public.
"Permit me to ask, what am I to do? My charac-
ter, my reputation, my means of subsistence are
threatened. Of this I would not complain if I had
broached a novelty, far less a heresy. The doctrine
I have defended, if not precisely of faith, is one which I
am at liberty to hold, and can hold without reproach.
What then am I to do? I can hardly believe that you
could have expected when writing your article against
me that I would suffer it to go unanswered.
“Private interests certainly are not to be considered
when duty to the church requires us to speak. But
LETTER TO O'CONNOR.
491
may I ask if you really wish me to discontinue my
Review? If it really be your design to force me to
discontinue it? You know perfectly well that I cannot
sustain it against your opposition even if I should be
willing to do so.
"I do not believe, after the many proofs I have had
of your paternal regard for me, that such is your wish.
Why then write in the manner you do against me?
You are opposed to the discussion of the question.
There is a simple and easy way to get what you wish
without ruining me and mine. Convince me, you will
not. If Rome decides against me, of course, I shall
know that I am wrong, and shall take pride in retracting.
For though err I may, a heretic I will not be. You
have only to write to my bishop, and tell him what
doctrines you do not wish to have broached or discussed
in my Review, and I assure you that I will be governed
entirely by his orders, or his known wishes. I naturally
look to him, and I have never knowingly gone counter
to any suggestions of his. The articles to which you
take exception were read to and approved by him before
they were printed, and I have his positive assurance
that he wished them published. If I had not known
that such was his wish, I should not even have written
them. When bishops disagree, what is a poor layman
to do?
Do nothing, do you say? Why not follow
the advice of his own bishop rather, especially when
that bishop is both his bishop and his director? Why
am I to be governed by the Bishop of Pittsburgh rather
than by the Bishop of Boston? Shall I follow simply
my own judgment? I had enough of that as a
Protestant, and moreover, I have a very mean opinion
праздни
.
492
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
of my own judgment. What better can I do then than
submit myself to the direction of my own bishop?
And when I do ought I to be assailed or denounced by
another bishop?"
In the columns of the Pittsburgh Catholic, his
diocesan organ, O'Connor answered this letter by
expressing his dissatisfaction with Brownson's doctrine
on this and some other matters, and called forth the
following letter from Brownson :
BOSTON, August 1, 1854.
To the Editor of the Pittsburgh Catholic:
DEAR SIR :—I have just read your article devoted
to me, in your paper of last week. For the kind and
considerate tone in which you speak of me personally
-the tone of a Christian gentleman, and which I
have seldom been greeted with in any one who differed
from me-you must permit me to thank you with tears
of gratitude in my eyes. I do not know why it is that
my brethren, who differ from me, usually express their
difference in a harsh, sneering, contemptuous tone, or
why they almost always make it a personal affair, and
refuse me the ordinary courtesy due from one gentleman
to another. In the present storm of indignation which
I have unwittingly excited, I am happy to acknowledge
The Metropolitan Magazine, The Catholic Herald,
and The Pittsburgh Catholic, honorable exceptions to
the general rule of a portion of the Catholic press of
the country, in my regard, when they do not agree
with me.
I beg you to permit me an observation or two on
some of your remarks. I think I can bear admonition
* Ms. Draft.
LETTER TO The Pittsburgh Catholic.
493
and rebuke without anger towards him who administers
it, and if I know myself, which is very doubtful, I am
better pleased with it than with praise, of which I have
had more than I desire. I believe I was myself in my
own Review the first to rebuke the praises bestowed on
me by the Catholic press on the occasion of my
conversion. I came into the church because constrained
by the grace of God, because I felt on my conscience
a load of guilt which was more than I could bear,
because I had need of her, and saw that I had and could
have no hope outside of her communion. I did not.
think she had need of me, and I have never rated my
literary or intellectual abilities so high as to regard
them of any importance to her in this country. I did
not dream of holding in the Catholic world the place so
much above my merits which has been assigned me.
Requested to continue my Review by several of the
American bishops, I consented to do so, and have
continued it up to this time, not so well as I could wish,
but as well as I could, being what I am.
I have worked hard, I have studied diligently, and
I have always acted under advice, and never published
an article written by myself, without first submitting
it to my bishop, or to a theologian appointed by him
to examine my articles, except now and then a literary
criticism or my literary notices. In almost all
instances I have consulted him, or in his absence the
theologian appointed, as to the propriety of discussing
the topic, before proceeding to write. This was
especially the case with
with regard to the topics of
exclusive salvation, religious liberty, developmentism,
and the power of the popes in regard to temporals.
+
•
494
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
The article on the temporal power of the popes in my
April Review, and those on Native-Americanism, and
Education in my July number, were submitted to the
revision of the theologian appointed by the Bishop of
Boston as my censor during his absence. I have
never refused to make any alteration required, or to
suppress any article which the authority I consulted
suggested it would be better not to publish.
I say not this, Sir, to throw any responsibility
from my shoulders on those of another, but to show
you that I do not arrogate to myself quite so much
as I am accused of doing. The Bishop of Boston, in
whose diocese I live, is the Catholic Church to me, at
least in the first instance, and I am not aware that
there is any higher voice through which the church
speaks to me, except that of the Holy Father; and the
Bishop of Boston, except where his own authority is in
question, is to me the legitimate interpreter of the
voice of the Holy Father himself. Now I am not so
ignorant as to pretend that this gives the stamp of
authority to what I publish, or that it should screen
me in the least from having my opinions called in
question; but it should, I think, screen me from having
my Catholic loyalty impugned, and save me from the
charge of setting myself up as a preceptor of Catholics
here or elsewhere. If I have ever assumed the airs
of a preceptor or placed myself in opposition to the
pastors of the church, I unquestionably deserve rebuke;
but if I have done so, it is unwittingly. If the pastors,
however, themselves disagree, I suppose that all that
can be asked of me is that I follow my own. With
regard to the unpleasant controversies in which I am
LETTER TO The Pittsburgh Catholic.
495
involved, I wish to make a remark or two. If those
who oppose me will permit me to do so, I shall drop
the controversy on the power of the pope in regard to
temporals after offering, indirectly, a reply to the
article in the Metropolitan for last July. This I cannot
in justice to myself or my readers avoid doing, because
that periodical charges upon me doctrines which I am
not conscious of maintaining, and makes me responsible
for inferences which I deny, and I do not think the
writer of the article against me would wish me to
remain under the stigma of maintaining views which
I do not. He has either misunderstood me, or I have
not understood myself, for I certainly do not under-
stand the doctrine I defend as he does, and should not
defend it if I did.
The article on Native-Americanism I do not under-
stand at all as they who denounce it seem to understand
it. I cannot account for the sense they attach to it,
and I certainly know that that sense is not mine, and
I do not believe it warranted by my language. In the
sense they condemn it, it is morally impossible that
I could have written it. I have not seen an objection
against anything I myself have said fairly interpreted,
according to what seems to me to be the natural sense
of my words, and my known antecedents, and the
proper presumptions in the case.
For instance, I say
'naturalization is a boon." This is objected to, but
not in the sense I say it. I say "it is a boon, not
a natural right." Evidently all I mean by its
being a boon is that it is not a thing which the
immigrant has a right to demand, but some-
* Works, vol. xviii. p. 281.
496
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
thing which a nation may concede or withhold
according to its own judgment of what is expedient or
inexpedient. Whether the word boon was happily
chosen or not, belongs to mere verbal criticism, for it is
clear from the explanation I give that this is my
meaning. Naturalization, in the sense in which I used
it, includes suffrage and eligibility, which the reader
of
my Review must be aware, I do not hold to be natural
rights of even natural-born citizens. They are trusts
which may be conceded or withheld according to the
will of the nation or civil society. To the sense in
which I say naturalization is a boon I have heard no
objection. If I had used the word to imply that it is
a favor conferred on the immigrant without any
resulting advantage to the nation, I might have been
blamed; but I do not so use it, as is evident from the fact
that in that very article I concede its advantage, so far
as the Catholic portion of the immigrants are concerned,
whom, whether Irish or German, I place at the head of
American citizens, as the most truly conservative body
in the country. Similar remarks I might make in
regard to all the other points for which I have been
blamed. I find no fault with people for opposing my
views whenever they think them erroneous or unjust;
what I complain of is, having opposed as mine, views
which I do not hold, which by no rules of interpretation
I am acquainted with can be fairly deduced from any-
thing I say.
As to the article on education, all I have to say is
that it was written to let Protestants understand that
Catholics, though opposed to the common-school system,
* Works, vol. x, p. 564.
LETTER TO The Pittsburgh Catholic.
497
are not opposed to education, and that non-Catholics
overrate the power of even their common-school system
to pervert our children, that we can, along with many
evils, derive from their common schools, as they are
managed in this locality, more advantage, and that they
are decidedly better for us than no schools at all. That
they are better than Catholic schools, or as good as good
Catholic schools, it never entered into my head to assert,
for I should not think it could ever enter into any
Catholic's head. I began by asserting that
upon the
principles involved all Catholics are agreed. I wrote
the article with reference, not to Catholics, who had
better advisers than I, but to non-Catholics. I was not
aware that as far as I discussed the question it was no
longer "an open question," and I thought I kept clear
of all interference with the movement going on in the
country for Catholic education. I certainly intended to
do so.
Here in Boston I know our children go to the
public schools with the permission of the bishop, and
with no harm to their faith or piety, as I am assured by
those who are best able to judge. If I went counter to
the decision of the Holy Father, or to any decree of our
own national council, I did so in my ignorance, and am
ready to retract it in specific terms, and as publicly as
possible when duly informed of the respect in which I
have done it. Whatever else Catholics may have to
complain of in me, they shall never have that of a
schismatical or heretical disposition, or of a disposition
to persist in error. I cannot promise that I shall never
err, for I am human, but I can promise that I will
retract, reprobate, and condemn as heartily as any one
can wish any error into which I may have fallen, the
+
33
498
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
moment that authority bids me. Let any one formula
my errors and transmit them with the decisions they
countervene to my bishop, and let him present the
list to me, and nothing more will be needed, whatever
the subject to which they relate.
I pray you, Sir, to excuse these extended remarks,
written in self-vindication, and which under the circum-
stances, I hope will not be found to merit censure for
their egotism. I may be proud, and probably am, but
I do not think my pride is precisely of the sort you
suppose. However, no man knoweth himself, or
whether he deserves love or hatred. For the fair and
honest words you have said, though differing from me,
especially at a moment when gross injustice has been
done me in various quarters, I thank you, and beg leave
to subscribe myself, your most obedient servant.
O. A. BROWNSON.
O'Connor, in replying in the Pittsburgh Catholic,
misstates and distorts what Brownson had written, with
the same want of fairness which he had manifested in
the Metropolitan. He said:
"We do not see the necessity of throwing the
whole odium which attaches to this or any other
article, on his bishop, who, we think, never meant to
assume any greater responsibility than what might
arise from the assurance that the Review contained
nothing contrary to faith or morals. Nothing more
than this is implied in the approbation which a bishop
may give to any periodical, and whether the Bishop of
Boston may continue in future to pronounce on the
merits of articles before publication or not, it is better
for Mr. Brownson not to shrink from bearing the whole
responsibility alone."
O'CONNOR'S OBJECTIONS.
499
Some women are able to reason like men; but to
make things even, many men argue like women.
The bishop censures Brownson for what he claims to
be errors in faith and morals. Brownson in defending
himself says he has done all in his power to avoid
such errors; but, conscious of his own incapacity, he
has caused what he wrote to be revised by his bishop
or a competent theologian, not in order to shift the
responsibility from himself, but to prove that he is not
guilty of the arrogance that has been charged upon
him. The bishop, with this statement before his eyes,
says it is unfair to throw the odium of responsibility
on another, which any one reading his letter must
know he did not do, or try to do. O'Connor says that
the Bishop of Boston's approbation only gives the
assurance that the Review contained nothing against
faith or morals. What more was wanted? When he
adds, "it is better for Mr. Brownson not to shrink
from bearing the whole responsibility alone," if he
means anything, in the circumstances, he means that
it would be better not to submit articles' to revision.
What Brownson said in reference to his article on
Education, in the letter, is fully borne out by the
article itself; yet the bishop insinuates a repetition of
his charge that the Reviewer maintained that the
common school-system was better than a system of
Catholic schools. One who only about a year before
had borrowed matter for a lecture from Brownson's
published lectures, and sent a printed copy with a
request to be informed what he thought of it, might
very likely be so deficient in fairness and candor.
Not much better did Brownson fare with those
500
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
outside of the church, when he announced that he
submitted his writings to ecclesiastic censorship. A
few extracts from a specimen article on the subject
may not be misplaced here.
"Professor Brownson has been regarded not only
as a man of capacious intellect, but as of a bold and
fearless spirit, of American instincts, and beyond all
individual control. It has been a mystery with those
who knew him, who admired his genius, how a mind
vigorous by nature, and so highly cultivated, of such
a broad scope, and of such a philosophic character,
could embrace these vagrant and degenerating theories,
and advocate them with such earnestness. But the
mystery is solved by this unblushing declaration of a
blind subserviency to the Roman Bishop who claims
to be his master. When he left the faith of his fathers,
and took upon
himself the yoke of Rome, he
surrendered the free spirit with which he was imbued,
and voluntarily placed the stamp of bondage upon
the divinity that stirred within him. He gave up to
Rome what was meant for mankind, and instead of
thinking, or writing, or acting as a free man, as one
who was endowed with transcendent intellectual power
for noble purposes, he became the slave of a Jesuit,
the servile instrument of a propagandism at war with
the religious freedom of his countrymen, at war with
republican institutions, and opposed to progress in all
that relates to popular advancement, or the elevation of
the millions.
"This declaration of Mr. Brownson is the more
deplorable because in intellectual power and attainments
he is infinitely superior to his bishop or his 'CENSOR',
PURCELL'S OBJECTIONS.
501
of a grasp of mind altogether beyond either. His
voluntary submission to their dictation would be recon-
cilable with the peculiarites of human character were
their positions reversed. Were theirs the vigorous
intellect, the diligent inquiry, the sleepless industry,
and the indomitable will, and his, the medium capacity,
the inert intellectual action, the fondness for indulgence,
and the love of ease, in that case we could charge to
natural weakness what is now attributable to voluntary
degradation, to a just consciousness of inferiority what
can only be induced by a servile submission of a slavish
though powerful spirit. He is an American man, the
son of American parents. His fathers were among
those who perilled all for freedom, for security against
spiritual as well as civil bondage, for independence, not
that of civil institutions and civil government alone,
but intellectual and spiritual independence of all men
who should sit under the shadow of the government
that they perilled so much to establish."
Bellarmine's work on the papal power was placed
on the Index by command of Sixtus V because it did
not go far enough in its advocacy of that power:
Brownson was declared deserving of excommunication
by the Archbishop of Cincinnati for asserting the same
doctrine, on the ground that he went too far. Yet the
same Archbishop, before the articles were written, in
conversation on the subject with Brownson, assured him,
"You cannot go too far for me.'
too far for me." The first journal in
the United States to censure Newman's theory of
development was the Cincinnati Telegraph, and the
article was by Bishop Purcell. Yet he censured Brown-
son for writing against that theory. He com-
502
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
plained of an article on Bishop England's Works
which was written by Archbishop Kenrick of
Baltimore, and charged Brownson with trying in his
letter to the Pittsburgh Catholic, to shift responsibility
for his articles on his bishop. Purcell called the
doctrines of the articles he censured "Vagaries" of
Brownson, and predicted that before long he would fall
like Origen, Tertullian, La Mennais, Rosmini, Gioberti,
and Veutura, if he were thwarted in his peculiar
theories; and plainly intimated that only the habitual
forbearance of the church to proceed to extreme
measures against offenders as long as there is room for
the least hope of amendment, prevented his being
severed from the communion of the faithful.
Brownson knew that he was not obliged to
recognize the voice of authority in a newspaper editor
or an anonymous journalist; but if the honest endeavor
to be strictly orthodox, if drawing his doctrine from
the standard Catholic authors, if the unreserved
submission of what he wrote to the proper authority
for revision, could not secure a Catholic publicist from
such charges and insinuations, which affected his honor
as a man and his loyalty as a Catholic, he felt that his
usefulness was at an end. He had embraced the
church because he believed she had a papal consti-
tution, had a visible head on earth, the representative
of him who is "King of kings and Lord of lords,"
and he could hardly suspect that any one would regard
him as warring against her interests by opposing those
misguided or timid Catholics who were in the habit
of disclaiming in her name one of her strongest titles
to our love and reverence, and asserting principles
LETTER TO The Catholic Telegraph.
503
which emancipate the state from the law of God, and
justified the most unmitigated civil despotism. The
view he defended was that of Bellarmine and Suarez.
How then could Purcell term it one of his "vagaries"?
Certainly he had no right to anathematize anonymously
in a newspaper what the church then tolerated, and
has since asserted in a general council. The mildness
and humility with which he remonstrated with the
Archbishop in his letter to the "Telegraph," show that
his faith was invincible.
BOSTON, August 22, 1854.
To the Editor of the Catholic Telegraph.
MESSRS. EDITORS:-In your paper of the 19th
inst., you make some statements, or express certain
fears, with regard to me, on which, as they affect not
only myself but also my relations to the Bishop of
Boston, I trust you will permit me to offer through
your columns a few brief remarks.
You seem to gather from a recent letter of mine to
the Pittsburgh Catholic, that I seek to shelter myself
from criticism by throwing the responsibility of the
errors my writings may contain upon the Bishop of
Boston, or the theologian he may select to examine my
manuscript before publication. In this
In this you do me
great injustice. I alone am responsible for whatever
errors of thought or expression may be found in my
writings. I hope I have too much delicacy, as well as
too much principle, to insinuate in any shape that
my highly venerated bishop, or any theologian of his
selecting, is answerable for them. What there is in
my Review that is good is due, directly or indirectly,
to the Bishop of Boston and his theologians; what
there is erroneous or objectionable is due to myself.
504
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
If you had done me the honor to read my letter
to the Pittsburgh Catholic, I think you would have
perceived that I allude to the fact that I always, with
insignificant exceptions, submit my articles to the
revision of the bishop, or of a theologian designated by
him, before publishing,-not to throw the responsibility
on the shoulders of another, nor to prove that they
contain no errors, but to show that I am not justly
charged with bringing out "vagaries" of my own, or
with a want of docility or submissiveness to authority,
-in a word, to prove my Catholic intentions, which
you and others have impugned. This is all the fact
proves. It leaves you free to criticise my writings as
you please, but it does not leave you free to impugn my
Catholic loyalty, or to charge me with an heretical or
even an arrogant disposition.
You intimate that I express a determination, in
the conduct of my Review, to abide by the decision of
my own bishop, regardless of the other bishops in the
country. In this again you misapprehend me. The
Bishop of Boston, under the Holy Father, is the
Catholic Church to me, for he is my pastor. If I have
fallen into any errors which require public retraction, I
expect the requirement to be made to me by him, or
through him, as the legitimate authority in the case, so
long as I live in his diocese. But to attribute to me a
determination to disregard the wishes of the other
bishops in conducting a Review which circulates in
their diocese, is to make me somewhat a greater fool
and less of a Catholic than anybody who knows me is
likely to believe.
Your fears that I shall array one portion of the
LETTER TO The Catholic Telegraph.
505
hierarchy against another, I think are entirely ground-
less. The Bishop of Boston would by no means suffer
me to do so, were I able and disposed to do it; and I
assure you that I would not do so if he would permit
me. I may be involved in a controversy without
intending it, but I shall never persist in a controversy
offensive to the pastors of the church.
*
I have been unexpectedly engaged in a controversy
with the Metropolitan on the papal power, but that
controversy will not be continued on my part. In my
October number will appear a conversation between
"Uncle Jack and His Nephew," in which the subject
comes in incidentally, and what I wish to be understood
as holding on the subject is stated as clearly as I am
able to state it, but I think not in a form or temper to
provoke a rejoinder. But with that Conversation I
shall drop the discussion, whatever may be said against
me, or however the doctrine may be distorted, and I held
up to the derision or horror of the Catholic public. I
am willing at all times to sacrifice my right of self-
defence for the sake of religion.
The subject of Native-Americanism was discussed
in an article in my last number. The article has
been singularly misunderstood and furiously assailed.
My next Review will contain an article explaining
what I did mean, and showing that there was nothing
in it to offend any Catholic, in whatever country he
was born or educated,——at least as I understood my
own meaning. I have not heard or seen an objection
to anything that I put into my article. The inter-
pretation given to it by my Irish Catholic friends is
* Conversations ix and x, Works, vol. xi.
506
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
a perfect surprise to me. But the explanatory article
I have alluded to will end all I have to say on the
subject. I have said also all I have to
say on
education. If any bishop objects to what I have said,
I will insert most willingly his objections, if he will
write them out, or cause them to be written out, and
without note ΟΙ comment of mine. This should
suffice to allay your fears.
You are now writing against me for things which
I said in my articles on the Development question.
I have long since dropped that controversy. I did so
of my own accord. I have not changed my views of
the theory itself, but I am fully satisfied that enough
has been said. There is, I believe, a mutual good
understanding and a mutual good feeling between
Father Newman and myself, and it seems to me that
there is, after he and I have come to a good under-
standing, no especial call to castigate me for things
which I said in that controversy. I am happy to say
that my fears of the noble Oxford converts were to a
great extent unwarranted, and I can assure them that
they have nowhere a sincerer, warmer, or more devoted
friend than the Editor of Brownson's Quarterly
Review. If there ever was the danger I apprehended,
it has now passed away, and nobody need fear ever
hearing me again speaking a word in depreciation of
a convert, whether at home or abroad. If there is
anything of that sort to be said, I will leave those
who call themselves native-born Catholics to say it.
I hope I have learned wisdom on this score.*
* Naturally the opposition he was encountering from those "native-
born" Catholics drove him to seek greater harmony with converts.
LETTER TO The Catholic Telegraph.
507
In some of your previous numbers you accuse me
of misrepresenting Kenelm H. Digby. I had been
informed by a priest who professed to know, that he
was an Englishman and a convert. I shall take the
earliest opportunity to correct my mistake. I do not
think that the passage you cite from the Mores Catholici
invalidates my general judgment of that work; but if I
have done the author injustice, I shall not hesitate to do
him justice. I shall take the earliest opportunity to
reëxamine the point. When I wrote my article I had
read only the two volumes of the Cincinnati edition,
and I was unable to procure the whole work. I have
all the volumes now. My purpose in the article was
not so much to review Digby as it was to deprive the
Unitarian writer I was refuting, of the use he made of
his works against the church of the Middle Ages.
By the way, in criticising in a late number of your
paper that same article, you fall into the same mistake
in regard to me that you accuse me of in regard to
the excellent and most learned author of the Mores
Catholici. You cite from the article a passage which
you characterize as untenable on Catholic principles.
You probably were not aware that in a subsequent
number of the Review the doctrine you object to is
retracted, and the passage acknowledged to be suscep-
tible of an erroneous sense. I am always ready to
correct my errors when I discover them, or they are
pointed out to me, as this was by the illustrious Count
Montalembert, who expressed himself perfectly satisfied
with what he was pleased to call my "noble retraction."+
* In the English edition, which was complete. That of Cincinnati
contained only two-thirds of the work.
+ The passage can be seen at the bottom of p. 257, vol. x, of Brownson's
Works, It is qualified on p. 258. See this work also, p. 320
508
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
You have also censured me for blaming the galli-
canism of the late Bishop England. I am responsible
as editor, but not as writer. The review of Bishop
England's Works was written by one of the most
illustrious members of the American hierarchy, who
knew and loved and esteemed the learned and eloquent
prelate.
I pray you to excuse the length of these remarks,
and believe me perfectly willing to be held responsible
for all the errors that may be found in my writings.
I do not think you have treated me generously or justly.
Time, I trust, will prove to you that you have
altogether mistaken my character, and that your distrust
of me is at least as unfounded as mine was of the
Developmentists. I have no wish to continue my
Review a moment after it ceases to be useful to the
cause of religion. I can beg, I can starve, but I cannot
consent to be a cause of division among brethren.
Whenever my own observation convinces me, or the
pastors of the church hint to me, that the continuance of
my Review will be a disservice to the cause of Catholicity
in this country, it will cease to appear, and in such case
I am sure the Bishop of Boston would require me to
stop it.
I shall not claim the insertion of these remarks in
your journal as an act of justice to me; yet I shall feel
much obliged to you if you will insert them. I do not
suppose you are governed by any other motives than
zeal for religion. You believe me untrustworthy and
dangerous to the church, and therefore believe it your
duty to denounce me. I have nothing to say to this,
except that I pray God that you may find you have
THE CATHOLIC TELEGRAPH.
509
judged me harshly, and treated me with unmerited
severity, and also that I may have the grace to bear
the castigations I receive as a Catholic should bear
them. I have the honor to be, Messrs. Editors, your
most obedient servant.
O. A. BROWNSON,
Although this letter is addressed to the editors, its
tone shows that the writer felt he was writing to the
Archbishop, who was the real anthor of the "philippics"
against him in the Telegraph. The actual editors at
that time, if I mistake not, were the Archbishop's
brother Edward, and Rev. Sylvester H. Rosecrans, D. D.
They were the editors soon afterwards, and I think they
were at this time. Now Edward Purcell and Brownson
couldnot agree and the latter had lost all respect for
the former, beyond that which was due to any one who
had received priestly ordination. Rosecrans was as
amiable and as good-hearted a man as I ever knew;
but on his return from Rome a few years before,
Roddan had brought him to visit Brownson at Mt.
Bellingham, when they got into a discussion on philos-
ophy. As they passed in to dinner Brownson was heard
to remark to the young doctor of divinity: "You have
the muddiest head on metaphysics I ever met with."
Having occasion to write Brownson, he alludes to this,
apparently without animosity, though it very likely
affected his work as an editor.
CATHEDRAL, CINCINNATI, Oct. 25, '53.
O. A. BROWNSON, LL. D.
DEAR SIR :—On the strength of an acquaintance
begun, continued, and ended in a metaphysical discus-
sion I take the liberty of writing to you now a note in
舟
​510
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
behalf of the Cincinnati Young Men's Catholic Literary
Institute of which I am the "Clerical Director." They
wrote to you some two months ago, inviting you to deliver
a lecture for them at your leisure. As they have received
no answer, I fear either that their letter never was
received, or that it was not properly written. Will you
please to inform me whether I am right? I understand
that you are going to St. Louis this winter. Could
you not give us a lecture on your way?
Your Obed't Servant in Christ,
S. H. ROSECRANS.
The tone of this note does not necessarily imply
that the writer cherished any resentment; yet it is
not inconsistent with such supposition, and Rosecrans's
course towards Brownson in after years, rather
confirms it. As to the Archbishop's opposition, no one
can believe that it was caused by the advocating of
doctrines he had himself desired put forth, as on
development and the papal power, but must be
attributed to the same cause as that of the Irish
Catholics generally at that period.
In publishing Brownson's letter, the Catholic
Telegraph half reiterates, half retracts its former com-
plaints, and concludes: "We, however, unequivocally
acknowledge our own sins and imperfections, and we
willingly recall all expressions that in our conscientious.
strictures savored rather of harshness than of courtesy
and charity. To others we extend the indulgence we
feel we must crave for ourselves, and we particularly
desire the continuance and wider circulation and success
of the ablest Quarterly in this hemisphere, at least;
convinced that in future its services to religion will
LETTER FROM BAILLARGEON.
511
→
infinitely outweigh the imperfections and defects
which, in spite of the best intentions, are found to
mingle with everything human."
The hostility to Brownson for asserting the
supremacy of the spiritual over the temporal was far
from being universal. The Shepherd of the Valley
in St. Louis, edited by Bakewell; the Abbe Perché, who
was later Archbishop, editor of the Propagateur
Catholique; and the Catholic Miscellany of Charleston,
edited by Dr. Lynch and Dr. Corcoran, were the most
prominent of the supporters of that doctrine in the
periodical press; but there were many, perhaps a
great majority, of the bishops and other clergy who
adhered to the same view. Bishop Baillargeon wrote:
QUEBEC, 17 Janvier, 1854.
DEAR SIR:-" You don't go too far"-I tell you
vos écrits sont utiles à tous: aux bons Catholiques,
qu'ils éclairent, et qu'ils affermissent; aux tièdes et
aux lâches, qu'ils stimulent, et qu'ils font rougir; aux
protestants mêmes, qu'ils confondent, et qu'ils épou-
vantent.
Then I tell you again, "You don't go too far."
Tales ambio defensores veritatis. Je ne cesserai donc
point de prier Dieu, qu'il vous conserve, et qu'il
continue de vous assister dans votre travail. Et il
continuera, parceque vous plaidez sa cause avec courage
et noblement. Et la Vierge, la douce Vierge Marie,
notre Mère, que vous invoquez avec tant d'amour et
de confiance, vous viendra en aide dans vos combats
pour le Seigneur, en la vie et à la mort. Fiat, fiat,
ce sont les voeux que je forme pour vous au com-
mencement de l'année, les souhaits que je vous adresse,
512
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
dans la haute estime avec laquelle j'ai l'honneur d'être,
Monsieur, votre très-humble et très-obéissant serviteur,
C. F. BAILLARGEON, Evêque de Tloa, C. Q.
À MR. O. A. BROWNSON, Esquire,
à Boston.
Several of the American bishops, without entering
into a discussion of the questions in controversy, took
occasion to express to the Reviewer their sympathy and
good will at about this time. Bishop Loras, of
Dubuque, wrote: "Permit me to unite myself to many
others in offering to you, in the name of the church,
the tribute of my gratitude for what God does, through
your excellent paper, for the triumph of his holy
Spouse," and concludes: "I would say more were I
not afraid of making you lose one single instant of that
valuable time which you devote so usefully to the glory
of God, the welfare of his church, and the salvation of
many a soul." Bishops Van de Velde, of Chicago, and
Rappe, of Cleveland, invited him to lecture in their cities,
promising to do their best to have large audiences; the
latter added, "I will be very much pleased if you
remain in our house during your stay in Cleveland."
The approbation of his general course by Mgr.
Malou, conveyed in the following letter from the great
Missionary among the Indians, was prized by
Brownson:
ST. LOUIS UNIVERSITY, May 27, 1854.
DEAR SIR:—In my visit to Belgium, in the course
of last year, I had the honor several times of conversing
with one of the most eminent and distinguished prelates
of that country, Monseigneur Malou, Bishop of Bruges,
who felt great interest in all the ecclesiastical affairs of
LETTER FROM TWO JESUITS.
513
the United States, who reads with the greatest pleasure
every number of your interesting and masterly
Quarterly Review, which he is able to obtain. He
looks upon you as the great champion of our holy
religion in America. He desired me most particularly
to present to you, in his name, his best respects and
kind wishes, and charged me with several of his works,
to be presented to you. These works were contained in
a box, which remained in the wreck of the Humboldt,
but were afterwards saved, and lately received by me.
This accounts for the delay of sending them at this
distant period. I charged your friend, Mr. Linsay,
with the little package, who leaves St. Louis on a visit
to Ireland he will either hand it to you personally or
will send it on by express from New York.
You will confer a favor on me, and a most pleasing
one on Monseigneur Malou, by acknowledging the
receipt of the works he sends you.
I remain with profound respect and esteem, dear
Sir, your humble and obedient servant,
P. J. DE SMET, S. J.
O. A. BROWNSON, ESQ., Boston.
On the next page, and facing an engraving of the
new University of St. Louis, is the following from the
Father Provincial.
DEAR FRIEND:-Fr. De Smet insists on my adding
a line. This, you will say, is not very friendly—to
write only because it is insisted upon. All I can say is
that he often insists in vain; so that my compliance in
the present instance implies at least preference. Gladly
do I avail myself of the occasion to express my satis-
faction at your having been invited by Dr. Newman,
34
514
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
and at your not having accepted-at least, so say the
papers. The motives of my satisfaction I prefer
reserving for our first tête-à-tête, which I hope will not
be long delayed.*
You see that the building fever has infected us, as
well as our neighbors. Really, the plan and purposes.
of the new edifice justify the outlay of $35,000, but the
"knowing ones" say that by selling land (or lots near
the city) to cover that expense, we prove but indifferent
business men. Be it so. The Irish say that "Dominus
Vobiscum" never starved. At any rate, we shall have a
hall for Dr. Brownson when he comes again to
strengthen and unfold the Catholic element of St.
Louis.
May the Holy Ghost be with you and yours in Him.
W. S. MURPHY.
The Rev. Thomas S. Preston, a convert, wrote:
NEW YORK, April 6th, 1854.
MY DEAR DR. BROWNSON:-I have derived so
much profit from the reading of your Review, and
especially from the articles on the supremacy of the
spiritual order, that I can hardly help taking the
liberty of saying so at a time when these very articles
are assailed. I desire therefore in this private and
confidential manner to acknowledge to you my debt of
obligation. It seems to me that this very subject, far
from being out of place, lies at the very foundation of
the evils that afflict society. Neither can I have any
clear view of the sphere of temporal power, unless it be
subordinate to the spiritual. You will pardon me for
* The motives were probably those expressed in Brownson's letter to
Newman, p, 483.
LETTER FROM BAKEWELL.
515
I am,
ob't servant,
saying this, as I have been often tempted to say it
before, but have been restrained by the fear of
intrusion. It is, however, no more than justice that
one who is attacked should hear from his friends. I
have every reason to know that your Review is doing
an important work, and I pray God long to preserve
your life and give you the gifts necessary for your
most valuable labors.
with sincere respect, your humble and
this:
THOMAS S. PRESTON.
Bakewell's account of opinions in St. Louis was
ST. LOUIS, February 18, 1854.
DEAR MR. BROWNSON:-I do not write only to
inform you of the birth of my daughter, although I
begin my letter by that. Her name is Marie Josephine
Octavie; the rest of the Litany of the Saints my pious
wife holds in reserve for the day of her confirmation.
She was born three weeks ago to-day, and baptized the
day after her birth. She is a fine, healthy child, and
her mother, who has been doing well in every respect
ever since, left her bed to-day for the first time since
she was brought to it by the unmistakable declaration
of independence of the little Republican.
Your article on "Schools of Philosophy" is
attracting very great attention here. The Archbishop
speaks of it in the highest terms of admiration; he
it requires to be studied, and he has not done with
it yet. Father De Smet has forwarded it to one of the
famous philosophers of the Society, and Bishop Miège
says
* Works, vol. 1, p. 276.
516
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
hopes that the Civiltà Cattolica men will do their best
against you. You have no warmer friend and admirer
than Bishop Miège, and he told me to-day that your
articles on the Spiritual and Temporal Power ought
to be translated into French and presented to the Pope.
He says that those who are raising an outcry about it
here, would soon hear what Rome has to say on the
matter, and that he is certain that your course would
meet with the warmest approbation of his Holiness.
There is a storm brewing against you, I am sure, and I
believe now that the Metropolitan will be the organ
from which it will burst. The Archbishop thinks that
Bishop O'Connor wrote the article against you in the
last number, and is the author of the one with which
you are threatened. The Archbishop will stick by you,
I am sure; but except him and Bishop Miège, all the
clergy, Jesuits, and others with whom I have spoken,
are unanimous in saying,
"You go too far." I never
heard any one take your part so gallantly as did Bishop
Miège to-day, and he is quite indignant at your
opponents and especially at the premonitory squib of
Bishop O'Connor in the Metropolitan.
Bishop Miège told me that he heard from Mgr. Pur-
cell in passing through Cincinnati recently, that Major of
the Herald is about to return to his vomit and wallow
again in the mire of Puseyism. I can hardly believe it,
but, except so far as Major himself is concerned, it
would do no harm, and would be a blow to the
Kawtholics who patronize his paper and hold him up as
a model of courteous Catholicity.
*
* A way of spelling Catholics, invented, I think, by Roddan in the
Boston Pilot, to designate political Catholics in the Custom-House, who
pronounced the word in the English, not in the Irish and American way.
LETTER FROM BAKEWELL.
517
I dare say I have told you nothing new in what
I have said, but I am sure we are going to have a
fight here against Gallicanism before it is done.
I had a visit to-day from a poor devil of an Epis-
copalian parson of Chicago, named McKeon; he
wants to become a Catholic, but he has a wife and
five children and no money but that derived from his
ministry. He will take courage yet, I think, but I
do not know what he can do to support his family.
He wishes to keep dark about his intentions, and if I
understand him rightly, has made them fully known
to no one but myself. He called on the Archbishop
and I hope will make his confession before he leaves
St. Louis. Is there anything he could do in Boston?
He is apparently a fair specimen of his class, and
quite young. Between his conscience and his comforts
he seems to have a hard struggle.
The Rev. Mr. Gassaway, of this place, on his way
to Quincy to lecture against "Spiritual Despotism,"
that is, against God and yourself, was blown up on
the Kate Kearney. He has probably taken a bitter
lesson on spiritual despotism by this time.
The papers have not abused you since you left,
Dr. Rice having declined a challenge from the Spiritual
Rappers, has been laughed at by the whole town.
Dr. Linton,* has written an answer to Rice, of which
you have probably received a copy, and is gone to New
Orleans. The people here have got a little scared at
the excitement stirred
stirred up by your
up by your attacks on
Protestantism, and the women at least wish you at
the deuce. The excitement has been very great
* William Linton, Editor of the Chicago Tablet.
518
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
certainly, and very wholesome. But our people are
not near so spunkey as I hoped, and I was wrong in
the opinion of their character I gave you.
My wife
desires to be very kindly remembered to you, and I am,
dear Mr. Brownson, your most faithful and devoted
R. A. BAKEWELL.
Another young friend, whom Brownşon highly
esteemed, and who has since become well known in the
world of letters, in a letter which is here given entire,
expressed the sympathy of a descendant of an old
Catholic as well as American family.
WASHINGTON, D. C., Feb. 17, 1855.
DEAR SIR-I take the liberty of sending you
a speech delivered in the N. Y. Legislature on the
subject of Ecclesiastical Tenure, in which you will
find quotations from your Review on pp. 25 and 26.
The first paragraph quoted on p. 25 is certainly mis-
quoted, and it appears to me that the speaker mis-
applied your remarks entirely. You will see at once
that this is a subject of vast importance to the Catholic
Church in this country. I fear there is little doubt of
the intention of the Massachusetts Legislature to enact
a similar law, and many other states will follow the
example. A few schismatic Catholics have awakened
this feeling against one of the most vital points of
discipline in the church, and I think it important that
the true views of Catholics should be made known.
Of this, however, as well as the manner of doing it,
you can best judge.
I cannot let this opportunity pass without return-
ing my thanks to you for the pleasure and instruction I
derived from your articles on Native-Americanism and
LETTER FROM CLARKE.
519
Know-Nothingism. They gratified me exceedingly.
The outcry against them has been discreditable to the
parties and very injudicious. I would have written to
you at the time had I not felt that my feeble voice
could add nothing to the testimonies of encouragement
you were then receiving from the Catholic American
public.
But it seems to me, Doctor, that there is a weak point
on the Catholic side of the recent discussions on the
Temporal Power of the Pope. I read in the "American
Organ" (the K. N. paper at Washington) a complete
refutation of Mr. Chandler's speech in Congress by a
writer who simply quoted from your Review. Also a
Methodist preacher answered Father Maguire's Lecture
by quotations from papal Bulls and Ultramontane Catho-
lic writers. You will see at once that the weak point lies
in the unfortunate fact that there are two opposing
views on Temporal Power prevailing among Catholics
themselves. Our enemies cannot be silenced as long
as they can answer Catholics out of the mouths of
Catholics. Mr. Chandler and Fr. Maguire can never
refute Know-Nothingism as long as they deny the in-
direct Temporal Power of the Pope. I think there is no
practical advantage in discussing the question of
Temporal Power, but our enemies have forced us into
the controversy, and we ought to maintain the Catholic
side, and not the Protestant side. Now the theory of
the indirect Temporal Power properly explained and
illustrated, can by no means offend against American
nationality or any other nationality. This is the only
*
* The Reverend Bernard A. Maguire, S. J., President of Georgetown
College, and later at the head of the Jesuit Missions in the eastern States.
He died in 1887.
520
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
answer that Catholics can consistently make against our
accusers, and the only one we can successfully maintain.
So far from being inconsistent with the allegiance due
from the citizen to the Constitution, the belief in the
indirect Temporal Power properly understood but adds
to the vigor of temporal allegiance to the state.
Excuse this intrusion upon your valuable time.
know of no one so suited for the task of proving that
the opinion of the indirect Temporal Power is entirely
without danger to the loyalty of Catholics.
I
With great respect and esteem I remain as ever
yours truly,
RICHARD H. CLARKE.
O. A. BROWNSON, ESQ.
Another young friend, George H. Miles, of whom
mention has been repeatedly made in this volume, wrote:
Hip! Hip! Hurra!!! Hurra for your article on
Nativism—your mild, tender, paternal warning to
young Ireland.
Thanks for an attitude that can
alone preserve us, who are willing to fight, from
menaced massacre. I'll stick by you to the death, and
have already, for the first time in my life, planted a
firm foot and dared friend and foe to come on." And
a little later: "I declined association with the
Metropolitan, chiefly because they are impertinently
attacking you.'
One more letter from a distinguished Catholic
author must be inserted here.
((
VICE-CONSULATE OF FRANCE,
CINCINNATI, July 15, 1854.
SIR-I have read with painful surprise several
paragraphs in this week's Catholic Telegraph with
reference to yourself.
LETTER FROM MELINE.
521
Statements and language such as these articles
embody cannot fail to excite the horror and indignation
of every Catholic truly attached to his church, and
desirous of her progress in this country.
The attacks of sectaries and infidels are to be
expected—but the malice of one of our own faith, who
would deny you the poor boon an unrelenting code
gives the criminal-that of presumption of innocence
until proof of guilt-is surely matter for sad and
serious reflection.
Not doubting that you will find in your own
integrity of faith and strength of purpose the triumphal
refutation of so scandalous an imputation as the
Editor of the Catholic Telegraph seeks to cast upon
you, I have the honor to subscribe myself your friend
and well-wisher,
JAMES F. MELINE.
ORESTES A. BROWNSON, BOSTON.
The Archbishop of New York made no public
attack on Brownson, at this time; but in a friendly,
though earnest, communication, expressed privately his
dissatisfaction of two of his articles on the power of the
pope, thinking they were inopportunely published,
and different in doctrine from what the Review had
previously held. Brownson wrote in reply that the
fact that the assertion of a truth aroused opposition
was a proof of its opportuneness, rather than the
contrary, and denying that there was any difference
between his present and former doctrine on the subject,
"In what respect you think I have changed," he
you do not specify, but you say I have abandoned
my former ground. Is it not as likely that you
wrote "
522
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE life.
have misapprehended my real meaning as it is that
I have changed without knowing it? I am the best
judge of my own meaning, and I tell you that I have
in no respect changed or modified the doctrine of my
Review on the papal question, and I deny the right
of any man, be he who he may, to say that I have.
What you really mean to accuse me of, I do not
know."
The Archbishop's answer is quite characteristic
of the writer.
NEW YORK, July 7, 1854.
MY DEAR MR. BROWNSON :—I do not think that I
should have written to you, if I could have foreseen that
my remarks would have afflicted you as much as your
letter would seem to indicate. I fear that not much can
be gained by private correspondence on the subject, for
experience teaches us, that written language is often-
times liable to be misapprehended by the reader,
whereas, if the writer were present to explain, the
misunderstanding might easily be removed. I fear
very much that the two articles alluded to will give
occasion to much injurious speculation, and prove
detrimental to the Review, which I was amongst the
first to encourage, and shall be amongst the last to give
up. You may be sure that I never doubted the purity
of
your intentions or the uprightness of your motives
in publishing them. Still, whilst all things are lawful
some things are inexpedient, and among them I cannot
help numbering these two articles. To recall them
now, is, as you remark, impossible,-to discuss them
would be making bad worse. . And if they should ever
be alluded to by me, or any other Catholic writer, I
LETTER FROM HUGHES.
523
should wish it done in a style and manner so remote as
not to seem to have any direct bearing on the topics
discussed. I am sorry to say that more than one of
your subscribers have spoken to me on the subject, and
with feelings of regret, kindred to those which the
perusal of them awakened in myself. For my own part,
I am decidedly opposed to any notice being taken of
them in our Catholic papers. But I fear that the enemy
will not allow them to escape. I would wish the
subject to be dropped, and as far as depends on me, it
shall not be alluded to either in writing or in conver-
sation. I am exceedingly sorry if I have occasioned
you pain,—that would be far from my intention. And
even though I may be myself mistaken, I would have
you not to be in the least discouraged by what I have said.
I regret that it is not convenient for you to spend a
week or ten days with us; but I hope I shall have the
pleasure of seeing you in the course of a little time.
So far as I am concerned, the matter is now at an end,
and I have only to assure you of the continued friend-
ship and good wishes, with which I subscribe myself
your devoted friend and servant in Christ.
† JOHN, ABP. of N. York.
ORESTES A. BROWNSON, ESQ., Boston.
The previous winter, Brownson lectured in Cincin-
nati, St. Louis, Louisville, and other places. The
Bishop of Louisville had warmly welcomed him into
the church, in a letter written at the time of his conver-
sion. His invitation to lecture in Louisville shows that
no change had yet come over his sentiments in the
convert's regard.
524
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
+
LOUISVILLE, November 15, 1853.
DEAR SIR:-Many Catholics of this city, myself
among the number, feel a strong desire to hear you
lecture here; and in their name and my own I invite
you to do so during the ensuing winter. When I had
the pleasure of seeing you in Louisville nearly two
years ago, we conversed on the subject, and you were
pleased to give us hopes that we should have the
gratification of more than a transient visit at no distant
period. My absence in Europe during the whole of the
past winter prevented my urging the invitation upon
you at that time; but I trust that at present it may suit
your arrangements to do us all this favor.
As you are announced to lecture in St. Louis about
Christmas, you could take Louisville en route, but I
hope you will be able to give us some days.
Have the kindness to return me a favorable answer,
and to mention the probable time of your visit; also the
subject of your lectures, if you can decide on it before-
hand.
Please present my warmest regards to your illus-
trious bishop, and believe me to remain very faithfully
yours,
+M. J. SPALDING,
Bp. Louis.
O. A. BROWNSON, ESQ.
In the autumn of 1854, Brownson gave courses
of lectures in Chicago and Milwaukee, and single
lectures at some cities on the the way thither and back.
Linton, of the Tablet, in a note on the subject of the
Chicago course, refers to some of the controversies then
carried on. Linton's paper and Bakewell's were the
two that stood strongest in Brownson's support.
!
LETTER FROM LINTON.
525
CHICAGO, ILL., October 7, 1854.
DEAR MR. BROWNSON:-I have just sent you a
telegraphic dispatch, informing you that your lectures
will commence on the 10th and finish on the 16th of
November.
Under the head of "Answers to Correspondents,"
I shall allude to the matter of "Digby." The Catholic
Telegraph is, in my opinion, unworthy of notice. I was
sorry that you noticed it. Your idea of the Metropoli-
tan is just the same as I expressed in a letter to
Murphy & Co. some time ago, who had the impudence
to write to me complaining that I did not puff it up
enough. The liberal Gallican clergy are using their
exertions to have it supersede your Review. I hope
you have not lost much pecuniarily by the article on
"Native-Americanism."
In pleasant anticipation of soon seeing you in the
"Garden City," I remain your sincere and devoted
friend,
WM. LINTON.
In no place did Brownson find such interest in the
questions he was discussing in his lectures as in
St. Louis. Much of this, no doubt, was due to the
character of the Catholics whose families had been
prominent there, and had exerted great influence on
the tone of the city. His lectures stirred up much
excitement, as has been said, and the result was
examination of Catholic doctrine by Protestants, and
consequently, numerous conversions. Garland's own
daughter's conversion has been told in one of Garesche's
letters, and from time to time his letters announced the
526
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
reception into the church of some one whom Brownson
had met in St. Louis. Thus a few months after
Brownson's visit, he writes, under date of April 15th,
1854: "It may
afford you pleasure to know that Miss
Hull (whom you met at Dr. Van Studdeford's), has, in
the face of bitter opposition from her family, become
Catholic. She showed her appreciation of the impor-
tance of the step by entering the Convent of the
Visitation for a retreat of nine days. On the last day
(Saturday), she was baptized, and the next morning
received Holy Communion. Dr. V. is in statu quo. I
would be delighted if, sparing time from your avocation,
you would drop him a line. He would appreciate it as
a favor, and with the influence you have over him it
might be the means of perfecting the work of his con-
version."
In his way to Chicago and Milwaukee, while near
Chatham on the Great Western Road, one of the most
disastrous accidents occurred. Those who escaped
injury, among whom was Brownson, were working to
relieve the suffering, when one of the most active in
this work asked if any one had any brandy for one of
the sufferers. Brownson offered his flask, and the
gentleman, on taking it, inquired to whom he should
return it. Brownson gave his name; whereupon the
other said, "If I fail to find you, ask for Thomas F.
Meagher." This led to an acquaintance that, on
resuming their journey, made them better known one
to another.
It was in this same year, 1854, that Brownson
wrote "The Spirit-Rapper," published in the autumn
by Little, Brown & Co.. The author, in describing it,
THE SPIRIT-RAPPER.
527
F
(6
says:
"It is not a novel; it is not a romance; it is
not a biography of a real individual; it is not a
dissertation, an essay, or a regular treatise; and yet it
perhaps has some of the elements of them all, thrown
together in just such a way as best suited my con-
venience or my purpose." The
The book explains the
phenomena of so-called Spiritualism, or, as Brownson
preferred to say, Spiritism; and maintains the
connection of spirit-rapping, or spirit manifestations,
with modern philanthropy,
philanthropy, visionary reforms,
socialism, and revolutionism," as must necessarily be
the case, if all are begotten by the same father. From
a literary point of view, the author felt that the book
was open to criticism, and he furthermore felt that his
criticisms of others rendered him a fair mark for shafts
of retaliation. His apprehensions on that score were
not realized. Rev. John Boyce, author of the
Spaewife, had said to Brownson, when he criticised
this novel with considerable severity,
"Wait till you
write a novel, and see how I can criticise it." Just
after the "Spirit-Rapper" was published, they met at
the Bishop of Boston's dinner table, and in the course
of the talk, Brownson laughingly said to Boyce, "Now
you have the opportunity you have been waiting for,
and I shall look for something worth reading as a
criticism." Boyce replied very seriously: "No, that
is a good book, and I would not say a word that might
tend to defeat the purpose for which it was written."
528
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
CHAPTER XVI.
THE KNOW-NOTHINGS.—BROWNSON'S POLICY TO DEFEAT
THEM.—EVANGELICALS. THE CATHOLIC MIRROR.
- BANKS.
CHANDLER.
MITCHEL.
M'CLINTOCK.
CORRESPONDENCE ON THE POWER OF THE POPE.-
O'CONNOR ON THE BULL INEFFABILIS DEUS.—SOME
FOREIGNERS AGREE WITH BROWNSON.
THE attacks on
Brownson's Review in 1854,
made by a certain class of bishops, editors, and their
followers were not confined to his advocacy of the rights
of the spiritual and papal power, and its necessity as a
defense against despotism. He had also to fight almost
single-handed to defend against Catholics his right to
be an American, and against Americans his right to be
a Catholic.
Recent occurrences had given additional vigor to
the so-called Native-American party, based on opposition
to foreigners and to Catholics. In the last election for
President, much was said about Scott, the Whig
candidate, being a Native-American, and the attempt
was made to offset this accusation by the objection that
Pierce was from a state which deprived Catholics of
equal privileges with Protestants. Whatever effect this
may have had on the votes of foreign-born citizens, the
fact was that after Pierce's election, and he was elected
by an almost unanimous vote of the electors, Irish
Catholic newspapers, boasted that they had elected him.
The Whigs believed that they owed their defeat to the
THE NATIVE-AMERICANS.
529
votes of the naturalized citizens, who had been induced
by the demagogues of the other side to go in a body
against them, and very naturally felt their sentiment.
of nationality offended, and their resentment kindled
against the naturalized citizens. These citizens formed
in some respects, as it were, a people by themselves,
organized and drilled companies of their own, with
foreign sympathies and antipathies; were repre-
sented by a press, discussing freely and without
moderation all questions of internal and external policy,
circulating almost exclusively among themselves, and
loudly boasting their ability to throw out or throw in
either of the two great parties at will, and to elect or
defeat any candidate for the Presidency as he was or
was not acceptable to them. They went further, and
declaimed against Native-Americanism, vituperated or
ridiculed under the name of "Natyvism" the strong
feeling of nationality possessed by every American,
denounced it as anti-republican or anti-democratic,
claimed all that is noble or commendable in our past
history, whether in literature or in science, art or
industry, war or politics, as the work of Irishmen, and
poured out the accumulated wrath of ages upon the
Anglo-Saxon race from which the majority of us
had sprung, representing it as incapable of any thing
great or good, and as fruitful only in works of darkness.
That a storm of Native-American indignation should
result was to be expected.
Brownson knew that the Anglo-Americans were
abundantly able to take care of themselves. He spoke
in the interest of the foreign-born population when he
warned them against provoking a contest with native-
35
530
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
Americanism, and against confounding proper native
American feeling with anti-Catholic feeling; for the
two feelings were at bottom essentially dictinct, and it
was clearly for the Catholic interest to keep them so.
The alliance of the American sentiment of nationality
with the anti-Catholic feeling was an accident, mainly
due to the fact that those who had most offended that
sentiment were presumed to be Catholics. In fact, the
first paper started by the Native-American party as its
special organ was conducted by Catholics of American
descent; and the greatest strength of the new party,
known as "Know-Nothings," was in Louisiana and
Maryland.* Brownson had himself, immediately after
his conversion, made the mistake of confounding those
two feelings; but even then he warned the foreign
population against engaging, even for their own defence,
in the controversy excited by the Native-American party;
because, however well meant their words and true at
bottom, they produced a different effect from that
intended. What the Irish should have aimed at was
not to excite pity for their country's misfortunes, but
rather to prove that they had the energy and manliness
to take part in the work then and there to be accom-
plished.
Brownson had a strong affection for the Irish
Catholics, as he had shown repeatedly in his writings
both before and after he became a Catholic; he
undoubtedly spoke as their friend, and not their
enemy, on the present occasion. "The great majority
of them," he said,† are quiet, modest, peaceful, and
loyal citizens, adorning religion by their faith and
* The Native Americans, Works, vol. xviii, p. 281.
+ Works, vol. xviii, p. 259.
THE KNOW NOTHINGS AND THE IRISH.
531
•
piety, and enriching the country by their successful
trade or their productive industry. But it cannot be
denied that hanging loosely on to their skirts is a
miserable rabble, unlike anything which the country
has ever known of native growth-a noisy, drinking,
and brawling rabble, who have, after all, a great deal
of influence with their countrymen, who are usually
taken to represent the whole Irish Catholic body, and
who actually do compromise it to an extent much
greater than good Catholics, attentive to their own
business, commonly suspect, or can easily be made to
believe. The real Anglo-American people are
staunch, uncompromising republicans, and prefer death
to slavery, but they are naturally sober in their views,
moderate in their demands, and loyal in their hearts.
They are naturally an orderly and law-abiding people.
They are not loyal to men, but they are loyal to law,
and no people are better disposed to understand and
respect the laws. In declaring and winning their
national independence, they attempted no Utopia; they
sought in their institutions to guard alike against the
despotism of authority and the license of the subject.
In all they did there was a wise moderation, a sobriety,
and a good sense, which proved that they had in them
the elements of a great, free, and noble people. In this
respect, there is a marked difference between them and
every considerable class of immigrants, except those
of the old English stock. The Irish . . . have never
acquired the American respect for law as a civil enact-
ment; and though loyal by nature, they require the
law to be embodied in a person, and represented by a
chief.
532
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
"Now whoever knows the history of our country
knows that the radicalism from which it has so much
to apprehend has been favored by the mass of foreigners
poured in upon us. It was at a very early day power-
fully seconded, we may almost say introduced, by
Protestant Irishmen from the north of Ireland. The
editors who so disgraced the Republicans in their con-
tests at the close of the last century and the beginning of
the present, with the old Federal party, honored by
being the party of Washington and Adams, were for
the most part Irishmen, who had caught their inspira-
tion from French Jacobinism, and not being able to
fasten it upon their own country, came hither to blast
with its sirocco breath the rich promises of our young
republic. When this is considered, and also that
our country has become, as it were a refugium pecca-
torum of all nations, to which all the miscreants of
Europe may flock and carry on their war against the
peace of nations and social order, mingle foreign politics
with our own, and make the merits of candidates depend
on their views of O'Connell, Kossuth, Smith O'Brien,
Kinkel, Mazzini, Ledru-Rollin, Louis Napoleon or
Francis Joseph, Nicholas of Russia or the Sultan of
Turkey, it can surprise no one that there should be in
our midst a powerful Native-American party, filled with
hostility to foreigners. . . There is a real danger
that it will not do either to deny or to disguise; but
that must be bravely met in some way, if we are to
remain a model republic, a well-ordered republic, and
not to degenerate into the government of the mob."
If the Native-American party had planted itself on
the high ground of real Americanism, or on the right of
THE KNOW-NOTHINGS AND THE IRISH.
533
a nation to preserve its own national character, it would
have met with success, and with the support of hundreds
and thousands of the most intelligent and influential of
our public men. Unfortunately it took its stand on the
ground that the public had the right to determine what
should or should not be the religion of individuals, and
directed its opposition, not to foreigners in general, but
to Catholic foreigners in particular, who were the most
conservative of all, and from whom the least danger
was to be apprehended.
}
Brownson, therefore, declared that he would not
oppose Native-Americanism if it would only be impartial
and not discriminate against Catholics; and he urged
foreign Catholics themselves to consider whether it
would not be wiser and more for their interests to be
themselves excluded from citizenship than that the most
dangerous class of immigrants, imbued with the infidel
and anarchical principles of European revolutionists,
and carrying on amongst us their machinations against
legitimate authority and social order in a language
which very few of our countrymen were able to under-
stand, should be placed on an equality with natural-
born citizens.
Hardly was the Review for July, 1854, received by
the editors of the Irish and Catholic papers, before there
was another howl, worse than that against the assertion
of the supremacy of the spiritual order. The first
respectable journal in the assault was the Freeman's
Journal. McMaster, its editor, was born in this
country; but seems to have been very greatly exasper-
ated by the aspersions cast on the north of Ireland
radicals. Brownson did not mind much what appeared
534
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
-
-:
•
:
in McMaster's paper at this time: it had said already so
much against him that its power seemed to be lost, and,
as usual where vituperation and abuse are carried to
great excess, they rather injure their author than his
victim. The article, however, was copied in the
Baltimore Catholic Mirror, which likewise published a
a very offensive personal attack by a correspondent on
Brownson, calling forth the following letter:
BOSTON, July 11, 1854.
To the Editors of the Catholic Mirror.
GENTLEMEN :—I regret that you should have
inserted in your paper of the 8th inst., the article
headed Dr. Brownson and Native-Americanism, for I
cannot but think that on cool reflection, you will see
that it was uncalled for, and unjust to you and me.
I am surprised that you should not have seen the
impolicy, to say nothing more, of denouncing an
American Catholic publicist for expressing himself as a
loyal American citizen, for that is really the purport of
your article, certainly as the non-Catholic public will
understand it. An impudent fellow, when I first
became a Catholic, called me, because I had become a
Catholic, a traitor to my country, and I knocked him
down for the insult. The standing charge against us
is that our religion is anti-American, and what have
you done but confirm that charge, which you and I
both know to be false, in the minds of those who bring
it? Do you not see that you give them occasion to say,
"It is as we said. Dr. Brownson has had the audacity
to speak as an American citizen, and here are the
Catholics out upon him in full cry." The fact that a
native American Catholic deals the blow only makes
LETTER TO The Catholic Mirror.
535
the matter worse, because they will say, What but his
Catholicity could have induced him to denounce his
brother Catholic for his American symyathies?"
I think, gentlemen, here is an aspect of this
question you did not consider. If it was imprudent for
me to write as an American, it was somewhat imprudent
for you to denounce me in no measured terms for so
doing.
((
The temper displayed by your correspondent is not
precisely to my taste. It is not that of a gentleman,
much less that of a Catholic. I have committed no
crime, I have fallen into no heresy, I have desecrated
no holy thing. The most you can say is that you and
I differ in opinion on a secular question of some
importance. Now there are as many chances that I am
right as there are that you and your correspondent are.
You have no right to impugn my motives, or attack me
as if I was seeking to overthrow the Catholic Church in
the United States. All you had a right to do was with
courtesy, in Christian tone and manner, to point out
what you thought was erroneous in my statements,
or inconclusive in my reasoning. Is that what you
have done? That article of mine on Native-American-
ism was submitted to a Catholic theologian appointed
by the Bishop of Boston to examine my articles during
his absence, and was approved by him before it was
placed in the hands of the printers. This should at
least save me from personal abuse, and from being held
up to the indignation of the Catholic community by a
professedly Catholic journal. The views of that article
have been uniformly asserted in my Review ever since
July, 1845, the first year of its existence as a Catholic
536
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
Review. Why cry out against me now rather than on
former occasions? Moreover, the Boston Pilot, the
leading Irish Catholic Journal in the United States, has
published the same views, and did so long before my
article appeared. Why single me out instead of that
influential journal? Is it it because I happen to be an
American and a convert?†
Your correspondent speaks of my venting my
spleen against the Irish. How does he know that I
have any spleen against the Irish? I have never
flattered the Irish. I have addressed them as Catholics,
and I shall not be driven to do otherwise hereafter. I
have seen the warm susceptibilities of the Irish heart
played upon by foreign and native-born demagogues,
till my blood has boiled with indignation; and I shall
never, for the sake of any base and selfish purposes,
imitate those demagogues. My acts must speak for
themselves. If ever I let an opportunity pass of render-
ing them a service, either at home or abroad, when in
my power, then let me be called their enemy, but not
till then. I may err in my judgment as to what is
for their service, but that I am their enemy is false
as hell. Why should I be their enemy? Have I
ever received any injury from them? Have I ever
received from the great body of them in this country or
elsewhere anything but benefits? Does your corre-
spondent suppose me incapable of gratitude?
I do not believe that a man must be an Irishman,
•
* Written by Rev. John T. Roddan, the Editor, who was also the
theologian selected by the Bishop as Brownson's censor in his absence.
+ There had lately been considerable discussion in the Catholic papers
as to the merits. rights, and duties, respectively of Converts and "Old
Catholics," in which it was maintained by some that converts should be
restricted to learning, and restrained from teaching Catholic doctrine.
LETTER TO The Catholic Mirror.
537
a German, or a Frenchman, in order to be a good
Catholic; for I believe that God hath made of one blood
all nations of men, and that we are all his offspring.
I do not attach much importance to the distinctions of
race, which, in my judgment, are simply accidental
and superficial, and if I have ever insisted on the respect
due in this country to the dominant nationality, there
has been a reason for my doing so, which I should
think could be divined without supposing me to have
any hostility to any other race.
I have shown in my article, for which I am so
unmercifully handled by your correspondent, who, if
he has not the merit of charity, seems to have, in a
large measure, that of its opposite, that I have no
spleen against the Irish or any other class of foreign-
born Catholics. I except the great body of Irish and
German Catholics from the charges I bring against
foreigners, and I place them in the front rank of
American citizens. If your correspondent had suc-
ceeded in understanding my article, he would have seen
that the foreigners I complain of are the foreign
radicals, chiefly the Protestant Irish, and the non-
Catholics of the continent of Europe. Nobody with
whom your paper has any sympathy is attacked by me,
or whom the Catholic Mirror can defend consistently
with its title. I have attacked no Catholic foreign-
born citizen or resident. I have charged the growing
radicalism of the country to foreigners and foreign
influence, but I have said that Catholic foreigners are
precisely those on whom we must depend to neutralize
that radicalism. Why has your correspondent, and
why have you yourself, taken no notice of this fact,
T
538
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
but attacked me as if I had attacked with good set
purpose all foreigners indiscriminately? If you think
the case at best is bad against me, why try to make
it worse than it is?
Your correspondent will have it that what he
calls my charges against foreigners are unfounded,
and yet he concedes that they are true in the case of
some. Well, have I said they were true in the case of
all? Have I not said to the contrary? I shall enter
into no vindication of my statements discreditable to
certain classes of non-Catholic or merely nominally
Catholic foreigners. I shall be most happy to find
myself proved to have been in the wrong, for I have
no wish to find others in fault.
These remarks have extended, gentlemen, to a
greater length than I intended. I could not, however,
make them shorter. Allow me to say that I think
that you and others have been unnecessarily alarmed,
have cried out before you were hurt. I cannot persuade
myself that there is any thing that anybody save
radicals and red-republicans need be angry at in what
I have said, and certainly said with very different
views and feelings from what you have supposed. I
had a motive which I supposed would be patent to every
Catholic; but it seems that in this I overrated their
sagacity, and of course must suffer for my mistake.
The end I had in view was, I am sure, such as every
Catholic who is, and every foreigner who wishes to
become, a citizen of this Union, would have heartily
approved; and believing that I enjoyed the con-
fidence of the Catholic public, I felt very sure of
accomplishing it. But I was mistaken; and by the
The Catholic Mirror AND BROWNSON.
539
ï
hastiness and passion of my Catholic friends it has been
defeated.
But allow me, gentlemen, to conclude by calling
your attention to one or two facts, which should be
known without telling them. We Catholics are in a
small minority, and the sentiment of the country is
strongly anti-Catholic. Every measure that we oppose
as hostile to us, the country will favor and adopt, and
every measure we support as favorable to our interests,
it will reject. I am sorry that it is so, but so it is; and
I think that in regard to matters which depend on
popular votes, and in which we are interested as
Catholics, the more quiet we keep the better it will be
for us.
Your ought from this to understand me.
I have the honor to be your obedient servant,
O. A. BROWNSON.
The Editor of the Mirror, in commenting on this
letter, said, “In it he says some bitter things, the truth
of which only adds to their bitterness. It cannot be
denied that some of our contempories have treated Mr.
Brownson with too much harshness. One of them has
even gone to the intolerable length of questioning the
sincerity of his Catholic faith . . . . Our only regret is
that... we inserted, though far from endorsing it, the
N. Y. Freeman's Journal's very severe commentary on
Mr. Brownson's article." But the Mirror could only look
at the matter from the Irish point of view, and would
not understand, or would not accept, any more than the
Irish Catholic journals generally, the very wise plan by
which Brownson sought to head off the Know-Nothing
movement, by confining the Catholic opposition to
what concerned Catholics as such. If the Catholics had
540
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
said to the Native-Americans: Repeal, if you will, the
naturalization laws; only interfere not with religious
freedom, and make no distinction on account of religion,
they would have been supported by the people generally;
for, however anti-Catholic they were in those days, the
love of religious freedom was too strong to be easily
overcome. It was on that principle that the Know-
Nothings were finally defeated; and they would never
have become so strong as they did become, if they had
not had the sympathy of both the anti-Catholic and
the anti-foreign feelings. It would not have been
necessary to sacrifice the foreigners for the sake of the
Catholics; because the party would have been too weak
to be formidable with only the anti-Catholic sentiment
to uphold it. But even if he was wrong in this belief,
had Brownson succeeded in separating the question of
Catholics from the question of foreigners, and the
naturalization laws been repealed so as to exclude all
foreigners, Catholicity would have suffered nothing,
and the nation escaped evils, ever increasing, and not
yet at their greatest growth.
Brownson's article maintained that nativism, or
love of our native land, is natural to all mankind,
including Americans; that it was not becoming
immigrants to sneer at or otherwise outrage that senti-
ment, and that it was the policy of the enemies of our
religion to make it appear that the Catholic body in this
country was entirely foreign; consequently, by the
Catholic opposition as a body to Native-Americanism
in the abstract, they assumed the attitude of foreigners,
and threw themselves into the very position their
enemies were laboring to put them in.
THE POWER OF THE POPE.
541
They went further, and threw "a tub to the
whale" by insinuating and charging that all the
excitement was attributable to Brownson's defence of
the supremacy of the spiritual over the temporal. The
anti-Catholic press jumped at the suggestion; but not
exactly as had been expected. While citing Brownson's
claims for the power of the popes, they uniformly
insisted that his Review, from which they quoted, or
pretended to quote, was the recognized organ of the
Catholic Church in the United States. The principle
for which Brownson contended, that nations as well
as individuals, governments as well as those governed,
are subject to the law of God,-was one which few
would openly deny; but when Brownson further de-
clared that the church, and therefore the pope, was
the authorized interpreter of this law, they understood,
or pretended to understand him to maintain the right
of the pope, a foreign power, to dictate to us the course.
to be pursued in all civil and political matters. How
much more consistent with national independence was
their claim that each individual was such interpreter?
In
Books, sermons, speeches, and pamphlets were
published to prove that Brownson's Review, which
was proclaimed to be the authorized Catholic organ,
advocated "temporal allegiance to the pope.
reply to the charge of allegiance to a foreign potentate
Brownson explains that in some countries, as formerly
in England, which were fiefs of the Holy See, the
pope was lord paramount; but this country never
having been a fief of the sort, the pope has no feudal
* Reviews of two of those books-" Romanism in America" and
"The Papal Conspiracy Exposed"-may be read in Brownson's Works,
vol. vii., p. 508 and 543.
542
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
#
claims over it, and his authority over Catholics in this
country is simply his authority as spiritual head of the
church, an authority in an order above the state and
distinct from it; and therefore obedience to that
authority can never conflict with obedience to the State.
Here the state disclaims all authority in the spiritual
order, and recognizes the perfect freedom and inde-
pendence of religion. It does not tolerate all religions,
for the power to tolerate implies the power to suppress;
but it recognizes the equal rights of all religions.
These rights are not grants from the state; it does not
confer them,-it respects and protects them. In
acknowledging the equal rights of all religions, the
American system acknowledges that the state has no
authority in spirituals, and therefore in religious
matters has no claim to the obedience or allegiance of
any of its subjects or citizens. Hence, as the
pope has
only authority over Catholics in the spiritual order, no
obedience he can exact of them, or which they owe
him, can ever conflict with any obedience which the
state with us even claims as its due.*
At the Massachusetts State Council of the Know-
Nothingst August 7th, 1855, at Springfield, a plat-
form was adopted, the sixth article of which contained
these words: "We rebuke in indignant terms such
sentiments as these, put forth by the representatives of
the papal power :-that "Protestantism has no rights
in the presence of Catholicism; that 'religious liberty
is only to be endured until the opposite can be estab-
lished with safety to the Catholic world'; and that
* Works, vol. xviii., p. 345.
† The name by which the party opposed to Catholic foreigners was by
this time designated,
***
THE KNOW-NOTHING STATE COUNCIL.
543
'the Catholics of America are bound to abide by the
interpretation put upon the constitution of the United
States by the Pope of Rome.""
Brownson replied to the Know-Nothings in the next
number of his Review, that for October:
蓄
​"Protestantism has no rights in the presence of
Catholicity.' This sentence is, we believe, from our
Review, and was written by its editor. We do not deny
it, and are prepared to stand by it. But we have never
said, 'Protestants have no rights in presence of
Catholics. Between the two assertions there is a
distance. We speak as a Catholic, and as a Catholic
we of course hold Catholicity to be the true and the
only true religion. We do not concede Protestantism
is or possibly can be true. In the mind of a Catholic
there is no room for doubt, and on this point there is
nothing left to be settled. Catholicity is true, and
Protestantism, as its contradictory, is and cannot but be
false. We do not admit the possibility of our being wrong
in this, or of Protestants being right. We are as certain
that we are right as we are that we exist, or that it
is impossible for God to lie; and as certain as we are
that we are right, so certain we are that Protestantism
is a huge error, a satanic delusion. Now, an error can
never have any rights in presence of truth. Protestant-
ism can have none in presence of Catholicity." * The
two other sentences in the platform were sheer forgeries.
The Evangelical portion of the Know-Nothing
party, in strict concert with Exeter Hall, which, unable
to use doctrinal instruction, moral suasion or the
sacraments, in the contest with Catholics, is forced to
Works, vol. xviii, p. 355.
544
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
resort to the civil arm and to demand legislation against
them, is shown to be acting according to its very nature
and necessities. "We are," say the Evangelicals, "the
saints, and to us God has given the government of the
World. We alone, of all the children of men, have
rights, and hence with those not joined to us we may do
as we please." Evangelicalism has then in its own
view the right to suppress by violence, without regard
to the individual or personal rights, whatever it chooses
to regard as sin or evil. Having no moral means, it is
obliged to resort to the civil force or fail of its end. All
its philanthropy, all its better affections, perverted by
its principle, urge it to act the tyrant and the
persecutor. And to do so is not an exception, is not an
inconsequence, an aberration from its principles, but to
act in strict and logical conformity with them. It is a
necessity of its nature. There is not a single reform,
of whatever name or nature, that it is able to effect
without a resort to force, because it has no moral means
that are adequate. Hence it is that under its influence
every thing wise and good turns to evil. All that is
sweet in human nature it sours, or ferments into an
intoxicating draught. It cannot meliorate the political
and social condition of mankind without violence,
trampling on natural and vested rights, and asserting
the principles of the most odious tyranny. It cannot
seek the emancipation of the slave without despotism
to the master. It cannot labor to suppress intemper-
ance, that crying evil, without its prohibitory legislation,
which sacrifices individual freedom, and violates the
rights of property, sacred in every civilized state. It
has only one method of proceeding. This is to begin
THE WAYS OF EVANGELICALISM.
545
by agitating the public mind for the reform it wishes,
and then through its agitation and affiliated associations
to get possession of the legislature, and make a law
enforcing it. It must do so, because it has not the
sacraments or spiritual means by which it may reach
the heart and remove evil by purifying its source.
The whole history of the philanthropic and reform
movements of the day proves it, and therefore that
Evangelicalism is deadly hostile in its own nature to
both civil and religious liberty. The great truth that
this age needs to learn is, that civil and religious liberty
must stand or fall together, and that neither has any
support save in the doctrine, the discipline, and the
sacraments of the Catholic Church; for save by this
means there is and can be no harmonizing of nature
and grace, liberty and authority. Out of Catholicity
either nature is denied, as with Evangelicals, or grace is
denied, as with the rationalists; and to deny either is to
render our civil liberty practically impossible.
"The Evangelical, otherwise called the Puritan
party, played a conspicuous part in what is called the
Reformation. Imported into England originally by the
Lollards, and subsequently from Geneva, that Rome
of Protestantism, it attained to power under Cromwell,
received a check in the Restoration, was successfully
appealed to in the Revolution of 1688, and sunk into
insignificance till revived and reinvigorated by Wesley
and Whitefield. In this country it was predominant in
nearly all the colonies on their early settlement, but
had been shorn in great measure of its power prior to
the assertion of our independence of the crown of Great
Britain. It made a rally under the elder Adams, but
36
546
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
i
i
was defeated by the election of Mr. Jefferson in 1800,
and fell into a minority. It has never had the control
of the general government, and rarely has it ever been
in power in any of the state
of the state governments. But ever
since the rise of Methodism, under John Wesley, in the
last century, it has been with us and in Great Britain
steadily on the increase. It has worked in secret as
well as openly, and with a perseverance worthy of the
cause it professes to be, but is not. It has availed
itself, with consummate address, of every popular
incident or movement that seemed capable of being
made to operate to its advantage. It has obtained the
control of nearly all the great philanthropic move-
ments of the day, directs your abolition and temperance
societies, and enlists in its service the great mass of
British and American infidelity. It has its affiliated
societies for every kind of object subsidiary to its main
purpose, spread as a vast network over the whole land,
and has succeeded in making itself important to
politicians. In a word, it has practised, and still
practises, all the arts which it falsely and calumniously
lays to the charge of the Jesuits and the Catholic
hierarchy. It has once more, in the vicissitudes of
modern history, become formidable, and may be
regarded as now on the point of seizing the political
power in both Great Britain and the United States.
"It is this Evangelical element, a singular com-
pound of cant and hypocrisy, of cunning and impudence,
of philanthropy and hate, of infidelity and fanaticism,
that renders the Know-Nothing party dangerous, and
this element enters into both sections or divisions of
the order, and is that which distinguishes the so-called
?
THE WAYS OF EVANGELICALISM.
547
American party from the ordinary Whig party of the
country. In this Know-Nothing organization, Evan-
gelicalism hopes to accede to power. That it will
succeed we are unwilling to believe, and if it were
confined to our own country we should confidently
count on its failure, for though it constitutes the life
and vigor of Protestantism, it is very far from com-
mending itself to the whole Protestant body. But the
Evangelicals of the United States and of the United
Kingdom constitute only one and the same people,
acting in concert under the guidance of the same
leaders, and its victory or defeat in one is its victory or
defeat in the other. .
"What we Catholics have now to do in Great
Britain and the United States is to defend civil and
religious liberty against the conspiracy of Evangelicals,
led on by such men as Lord Shaftesbury, Achilli,
Gavazzi, the Beechers, the Clarks, and the Ned
Buntlines, aided, no doubt, by all the cunning, subtlety,
and malice of Satan. In this grand contest it will
serve little purpose to show that we are friendly to
civil and religious liberty; we must take higher ground,
and show from incontrovertible facts and arguments
that Evangelicalism is in its very nature and tendency
in the last degree hostile to every species of rational
liberty, and that it is only on Catholic ground that
either civil or religious liberty can be sustained. We
must hurl back on these Evangelical canters and
snifflers the charges which they falsely allege against
us and our religion. Let there be no timidity, no
trimming, no compromise. They are the party opposed
to civil and religious liberty, ingrained tyrants and
"
548
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
:
despots, who are ready to march to power over the grave
of all that is dear and sacred to the human heart, all
that is liberal and ennobling in human culture, all
that is cheerful and recreating in human society, all
that is true and holy in religion. We can speak to the
public as well as they, and we must undeceive those
whose confidence they have abused, and rally anew the
real friends of British and American freedom.”
Instead of acting as Brownson advised, a large
number of Catholics and Catholic journals, many of the
latter Episcopal organs, adopted the plan of appeasing
Know-Nothing hostility by denouncing Brownson
and his doctrine of the rights of the spiritual
order. John Mitchel, famous for his advocacy of the
use of vitriol against the troops in case of a street-
conflict, in his native Ireland, and of the reopening of
the slave-trade in this country, had escaped from Botany
Bay to New York at the end of 1854. He started in
New York a weekly journal, called "The Citizen", said
to have about 50,000 subscribers almost from the start,
most of whom were Irish Catholics. No journal seems
to have had so much influence with the Catholic Irish
in the United States as Mitchel's; and when he, a very
late arrival on our shore, explained the nature and
cause of the Native-American or Know-Nothing fury,
his judgment was of great weight with his Irish
sympathizers. He addressed a long communication to
Brownson, in The Citizen, a few extracts from which
will suffice for the whole. "It is a bad world, Doctor,'
he said, "and the time is out of joint. A Native-
American party you approve; but the Native-American
* Works, vol. xviii., pp. 375-380.
}}
?
JOHN MITCHEL'S LETTER.
549
party is all wrong. In respect it hates foreigners, you'
like it very well; but in respect it especially hates
Catholic foreigners, it goes much against your stomach.
In respect it knocks men down, look you, it fits your
humor well; but in respect it knocks down the wrong
man, it is tedious.
Why will it set fire to the
churches of its best friends? Why will it be hand in
glove with German and Hungarian Revolutionists?
Why hoot Bedini, and cheer Gavazzi, and hearken to
the the trump of the Angel Gabriel? Why will it not
come to you, and clothe itself in a soutane, and get at
small tonsure on the top of its head, and comport itself
like an Anglo-American penitent before its confessor?
"It will cost you much pains, I apprehend, to set all
this right; especially as you, Doctor Orestes, you more
than any one living man, have aroused and kindled
this strong anti-Catholic, and therefore anti-Irish spirit
in America, by your ultra-Catholic and anti-republican
teachings and writings. Innumerable and disgusting
Shepherds of the Valley and Freeman's Journals have
been a brood of your begetting; and on the part of my
Irish fellow-countrymen, I accuse you of so misrepre-
senting them and their church before the American
people, that any republican nation could not but look
on them and all their ways with suspicion and
abhorrence.
"How easy it would be to turn you inside out now
-and to point out in the pages of your own Review
the very doctrines which have alarmed the genuine
republican spirit of this country, and have given to the
native party whatever genuine vigor it possesses!
Since '48, you have regularly enlisted yourself on
¦
550
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
3
the side of all the tyrants of Europe, regularly exerted
yourself to cry down all attempts of the down-trodden
people everywhere to throw off royal and imperial
yokes, and become as American republicans.
"And all your miserable echoes at the Press, from
the Mississippi to Boston Bay, vied with you in
adulation of Austria, and in heaping infamous names
on the gallant republicans of Italy and France :-nay,
they improved on your doctrine of intolerance (for you
could not restrain the fools within the bounds of your
prudent example), until the land reverberated with
anathemas on liberty; and men might almost fancy
they heard the thunders of the Vatican bursting on the
Alleghanies, and saw the tide of the Mississippi
reddened by the fires of the Inquisition.
"This, I say, has been your work, Doctor Orestes;
hence has come whatever of bitterness and ferocity is
to be found in the Native-American party; this out-
rageous caricature of Catholicity, held up to America
by you (after you had tired of all the other religions),
has been the principal spring, and is the only excuse
for the furious anti-Irish spirit which is now raging.
"One leading idea of the Native-American party
is alone sufficient to prove this. They say there must
be drawn a distinction between Citizens of America,'
and 'subjects of the Pope.' They have got the idea—
it was from you and your echoes they caught it-that
a Catholic must be a bad citizen. And if you and your
echoes were true exponents of Catholicity, they would
be right. In that case I would make no scruple to
avow that no Catholic is fit to be a citizen of any
country; and, not content with disfranchising, I would
exterminate them."
(
CHANDLER ANSWERED BY MC CLINTOCK.
551
Nathaniel P. Banks, a Know-Nothing member of
Congress from Massachusetts, charging the Catholics
with holding the doctrine defended by Brownson of the
supremacy of the spiritual order over the temporal, and
urging that this doctrine was incompatible with the
loyalty of the subject and the independence of the State,
Joseph R. Chandler, a representative from Pennsyl-
vania, and a Catholic, replied to the member from
Massachusetts, January 11th, 1855. His reply was
little more than the repudiation of Brownson and his
views, and the assertion sustained by the authorities he
cited, that the pope claims no civil jurisdiction by
divine right out of the Ecclesiastical States, from which
he pretended to conclude the entire independence of the
temporal power. The Rev. Dr. John McClintock, a
Protestant divine of rare intelligence, learning, and
ability, and editor of the Methodist Quarterly Review,
replied to Chandler in his work called "The Temporal
Power of the Pope," and containing Chandler's speech
and "Nine Letters stating the prevailing Roman
Catholic Theory in the language of the Papal Writers."
The author proves that the attempt to ward off the
objections of non-Catholics to the papal power on the
ground assumed by Chandler is idle: and by copious
quotations from Brownson shows that the power he
claimed for the pope is not temporal, but spiritual, and
that it is only a power in regard to temporals, claimed
for him as the representative of the spiritual order on
earth. "Every one knows," says McClintock, "that
the pope never claimed any civil or political authority
out of his own dominions. The question is, whether
he has an indirect temporal authority' over the kings
"
552
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
2
and people in virtue of his spiritual authority.
More just to Brownson than his Catholic opponents,
McClintock stated his doctrine fairly, easily showed
that it was the doctrine of Catholic theologians, with
the exception of a small and daily diminishing school
of Gallicans, hardly worth taking into the account. It
is true, he thought the mere statement of the doctrine
of the supremacy of the spiritual order over the
temporal,-what he termed "an abominable doctrine,'
})
((
ܕ
܀ ܙܙ
-would seem odious enough to his readers. So far as
Methodists, or Evangelicals, were concerned, he was
right in so thinking; for these would enslave conscience
had they the power, and make right and wrong mere
creations of the civil government provided they controlled
the government; but the Puritans, who founded the
Massachusetts colony, not the Plymouth-Rock Pil-
grims of the Old Colony-based their whole system on
this doctrine; for this they left their homes in England,
that they might enjoy their natural rights in a com-
munity where the moral order was superior to the civil
and independent of it. If there is any truth which the
convictions of the American people, their intelligence
and spirit clung to, it was the doctrine that we must
obey God rather than man, the supremacy of the
spiritual, the moral, the religious order. It is the basis
of the Declaration of Independence, of all our Bills of
Rights, and it was, though misapplied, the principle on
which the Abolitionists relied in their appeal to the
Higher Law." It was, too, the principle underlying
the American love of religious liberty, freedom of
conscience, on which the opponents of Know-Nothingism
* McClintock's Temporal Power of the Pope, p. 120.
CORRESPONDENCE ON CATHOLIC ALLEGIANCE.
553
From
successfully combatted religious proscription.
every corner of the United States, during the Know-
Nothing controversy, Brownson received letters from
persons whom he had never known, or even heard of,
inquiring about the Catholic doctrine of allegiance to
the pope, or inclosing slips cut from Know-Nothing
papers which contained pretended quotations from his
Review, asking if these were genuine. Many of these
letters were answered, and were followed by replies to
the effect that the answers were satisfactory; or that the
writer was determined to defend the rights of Catholics,
as thereby he indirectly defended his own,; or that he
would not see the right of conscience struck down; and
in no case have I found an instance of a letter
expressing dissent from the doctrine in the Review,
once it was fully explained. The battle against
Know-Nothingism was really fought, as Brownson had
desired and advised from the first, on the question of
religious freedom, and the opposition to foreigners fell
with the political opposition to Catholics. Mitchel,
Meagher, McGee, etc., with some of the Episcopal organs,
kept up
their abuse of Americans and laudation of the
Irish; but they were not much heeded, nor did they
have any perceptible influence on the result.
ܐܝܕ
It may be as well to insert here a specimen of the
communications on the subject of Know-Nothingism,
received by Brownson, and his answer.
POOLSVILLE, MONTGOMERY COUNTY,
MARYLAND, October 1st, 1855.
TO ORESTES A. BROWNSON.
SIR-You will permit us, Americans by birth,
and Protestants by profession, to address you a few
lines.
554
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
The period of our election draws near, political
discussions run high, parties are bitterly arrayed
against each other, and public meetings, and political
speeches have become the order of the day.-We are
democrats, and consequently opposed to the destructive
party called Know-Nothings.
In all the public meetings of K. N. their text from
the beginning to the end of the address, is the pope--
Brownson (yourself) and Catholicity. Now, Sir, we
wish to be just to our adopted Catholic fellow-citizens.
You are accused of writings derogatory to our principles
as Americans, and to our institutions. These charges
we do not believe, and in order that we may be able
effectually to contradict such charges, we beg that you
will enable us, by some means, written or printed, to
put our accusers to shame, and brand them with the
lies for which K. N. is so prolific. We beg also, that
you will, if possible, send us your Review containing
allegiance to the pope and your strictures on the speech
of Mr. Chandler of Pa. delivered in defence of Catholic
principles during the last session of Congress, etc., etc.
We therefore submit the following questions to
you, hoping they will at once receive a cordial and
sincere reply, to be forwarded to our postmaster.
1. Are you the acknowledged organ of the Catholic
Church in the United States?
2. Do the Catholic bishops in the United States
acknowledge your Review as the propounder of Catholic
faith?
3. Do you believe, or did you ever assert in your
Review, that the Catholics of the United States owed
temporal allegiance to the pope-of Rome?
CORRESPONDENCE ON CATHOLIC ALLEGIANCE.
555
4. Do you believe, or did you ever assert in your
Review, that the principles contained in the speech of
Hon. Mr. Chandler were not the principles of the
Catholic Church?
You will please excuse the liberty we take, and as
you must know, our intentions are honest and good,
we will hope for a speedy reply to the above interroga-
tories, and beg to subscribe ourselves, Respectfully,
your fellow-citizens. T. RANDOLPH HALL; BENJAMIN
F. REID; GEORGE W. CHISWELL; WILLIAM A.
CHISWELL; C. N. MOSSBURG; HOWARD GRIFFITH.
The answer follows:
BOSTON, Oct. 8, 1855.
GENTLEMEN :—I have received yours of the 1st
inst., and should have replied much earlier had I not
been absent from home. I appreciate your motives, and
receive your request in the spirit in which it was made.
I cannot send you the number of my Review in which
I have asserted allegiance, if you mean civil allegiance,
to the pope, because I have published no such number.
I have never asserted, out of the Papal State, any civil
authority or jurisdiction for the pope, or any other than
spiritual allegiance to him as the duty of Catholics.
They who have accused me, whether Catholics or non-
Catholics, of maintaining that Catholics owe civil
allegiance to the visible head of their church, have
grossly misrepresented me.
The accusation that I have published writings
derogatory to our institutions and principles as Ameri-
cans, is false. I have uniformly, on all occasions,
defended the institutions of my country, and contended
that every American citizen is bound in conscience to
-
*.
556
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
defend them against every attack upon them, let the
attack come from what quarter it may. I am not a
revolutionist or a radical. I am conservative, and
believe it my duty to lay down my life, if need be, in
defence of American institutions. and liberties
bequeathed us by our American ancestors. I am bound
to this as a patriot and as a Catholic.
Allow me to say, gentlemen, that there never was,
and never can be a more ridiculously false charge than
that brought against us as Catholics of hostility to
American liberty and disloyalty to republican institu-
tions. We are men and Americans as well as you,
and yield to none of you in our love of liberty or of
country. Our religion condemns every species of
tyranny, because all tyranny is a violation of the law
of God, and it makes it our duty to be peaceable
citizens and loyal subjects. We cannot be disloyal to
the republican constitution of this country without
violating our duty as Catholics. In countries where
despotism reigns men may lawfully by lawful means
seek to change the government, and establish institu-
tions which guaranty the rights of man; but in this
country we have those institutions, and our duty,
whether we are Catholics or non-Catholics, is to
preserve them, and to secure their free development
and wise and just application. This, gentlemen, has
always been, and always will be, the uniform tenor of
my writings.
•
To your first question : "Are you the acknowl-
edged organ of the Catholic Church in the United
States?" I answer explicitly,
only acknowledged organ of the
No, I am
No, I am not. The
Catholic Church in the
CORRESPONDENCE ON CATHOLIC ALLEGIANCE.
557
United States, as elsewhere, if we speak strictly, is the
pope, and in communion with him the bishops, each in
his own diocese.
To your second question: "Do the bishops of the
United States acknowledge your Review as the
propounder of Catholic faith?" I answer, as an authori-
tive propounder of the faith, 110; as generally
conforming in its doctrine to the Catholic faith, yes,
otherwise they would censure it as heretical,
You ask in your third question: "Do you believe,
or did you ever assert in your Review that Catholics in
the United States owed (owe) temporal allegiance to the
Pope of Rome?" I answer, Never.
I answer, Never. I owe obedience
to the pope only as the spiritual head of my church,
and I assert for him as such only a spiritual authority.
Nevertheless, I have maintained and maintain that this
spiritual authority extends to the morality of temporal
things, that is, to temporal things, in so far, and only
so far, as they are spiritually related or have a spiritual
character; that is, so far as to have the right to
pronounce for the Catholic conscience, whether they do
or do not conform to the law of God; for the pope as
head of the church is the interpreter and judge for
Catholics of the divine law, natural or revealed. To
explain myself. The people of this country had on
their gaining their independence the right to adopt such
a form or constitution of government, not repugnant
to natural justice or the law of God, as seemed to them
good; this constitution, when adopted, is obligatory
upon me as a Catholic citizen, and not being repugnant
to the divine law, is as obligatory on the pope in his
relations with us as upon me. Then every law made in
|
•
λ
558
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
conformity to it is obligatory on my conscience, and
consequently on the conscience of the pope; for what
binds the conscience of the simple believer binds alike
the conscience of bishop and of pope. The pope has
recognized the American constitution as compatible
with the law of God. Suppose the supreme court
decides the fugitive-slave law to be constitutional, then
I am bound in conscience to obey that law, and the
pope cannot dispense me from my obligation to obey.
Suppose, however, the constitution or a law passed
under it should command me to be an idolater, a
Mormon, a Mahometan, or a Presbyterian, the pope
would have the right to forbid me to obey it, and to
declare the law, and the constitution in so far as it
authorizes such a law, null and void for the Catholic
conscience, because repugnant to the law of God. But
in either case, you will preceive, gentlemen, that I
assert no civil or temporal jurisdiction for the supreme
pontiff, for I extend his authority only to the decision
of the spiritual question involved in the temporal.
You ask, finally, if I believe or have asserted in my
Review that the principles contained in the speech of
the Hon. Mr. Chandler are not the principles of the
Catholic Church? This question will be best answered
by the first article in my last Review a copy of which
I send you. I have never asserted and do not maintain
that Mr. Chandler's principles are incompatible with
Catholic faith; I only maintain that in the sense in
which the public will understand him and in which not
unlikely he understands himself, he sets forth, not
Catholic doctrine, but the opinion of some Catholics,
The Temporal Power of the Pope, Works, vol. xi, p. 137.
4
1
CORRESPONDENCE ON CATHOLIC ALLEGIANCE. 559
which as a Catholic he may hold, but is not obliged to
hold. I regard his speech as evasive, and as not
meeting the question fairly and frankly. The real
question is not whether the pope claims civil or temporal
jurisdiction over Catholics in the United States, for
that cannot be pretended; but whether the spiritual
authority of the pope is incompatible with the freedom
and independence of the state in its OW11 order.
Conceding that when the temporal and the spiritual
come in conflict, the temporal, not the spiritual must
give way, or when religion and politics come in conflict,
politics, not religion,
not religion, must yield, I say, and say
fearlessly, that it is not, and all Catholics without
exception agree that it is not. Every Catholic does and
must maintain the freedom and independence of the
secular authority in its own order.
•
Thus, gentlemen, I have endeavored to answer
your questions frankly and without evasion or reserve,
because I am bound to declare my faith when it is
necessary, and I have no opinion which I wish to
conceal or to explain away. I know that the charges
brought both against my church and even against
myself are false. I am an American by birth and
education, and I yield to no man in my love of my
country or in my loyalty as a citizen. I know that my
religion is favorable to liberty, and commands me to be
loyal to American republicanism. Personally, I belong
to and support the same political party that you do.
But I claim the divine, the natural, and the civil right
to be a member of the Catholic Church, to worship God
by believing what she teaches, and doing what she
commands. This right may be denied me. I may be
i
!
560
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
persecuted unto death for daring to exercise it, but I
shall never surrender it. I recognize your undoubted
right as American citizens to be Protestants, and I
demand of you to recognize equally my right as an
American citizen to be a Catholic, uncensured and
unquestioned. This right is the basis of all true
freedom, and he is no true American, no true man, who
will not, if need be, die in its defence.
I have the honor to be, gentlemen, your most
obedient servant,
O. A. BROWNSON.
It would almost seem as
as though some of our
illustrious prelates were more sensitive to the attacks
of the Know-Nothings upon their native country than
to those upon their religion. Mr. J. Mudd, of Cin-
cinnati, wrote Brownson:
"A short time since I addressed you a letter ex-
pressive of my own feelings as also of those of my
brother-in-law, J. W. Piatt, Esq., in relation to your
article on Naturalization and Native-Americanism. T
find no difference of opinion on these topics among our
Native-American Catholics, whether clerical or lay;
and there will be none.
"Our friends of the Catholic Telegraph and
Advocate have gained themselves no great credit in
their attempt to crush your Review and to suppress
the circulation among us of the Boston Pilot, which,
said the editors of the Telegraph and Advocate, will
sink as sure as the Royal George if it sustains the
views of Brownson. Since the going forth of that
edict, the Pilot has found no resting-place in the book-
store of Walsh, from which have been industriously
LETTER FROM HECKER.
561
(
circulated among the Irish Catholics of Cincinnati the
paper with wrong name, the Irish-American,' and the
still more diabolical sheet of Mitchel, Meagher, & Co.,
which has constantly abused the Catholic hierarchy,
and proceeded so far in its impiety as to speak of Jesus.
Christ, the incarnate Wisdom of God, as a convict."
Even the holy Bishop of Pittsburgh felt his charity
grow cold towards his former friend, and late opponent,
as appears from a letter of Hecker's.
J. M. J. A.
MY DEAR FRIEND:-On Thursday last I left
Pittsburgh with Bishop O'Connor for Cincinnati. On
the way we talked on several topics, among others
when we arrived at Cincinnati was that of Development.
You know that B. O'C. was at Rome at the declaration
of the dogma of the I. Concep. of our B. Lady. He told
me that at the assembly of the bishops he made some
objection to certain words or statements in the Bull as
it was read to them on account of its seeming to
countenance that view of development which he
considered false. This drew out Perrone, who made a
speech of a half hour's length defining what he
considered the true and false doctrine on this point.
Bishop O'C. took notes of P.'s speech and has them at
home. Some of the Italian prelates wondered what B.
C. was driving at, when Dr. Grant of Southwark rose
and said some words about Dr. Newman, and they saw
then. The words in the Bull were changed.
Bishop O'Connor says there is a capital statement
of the true doctrine of development in the Bull, but as
we could not find the document, he was not able to
point it out. The Latin Bull and not its translation
37
562
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
A
:
must be read to find it. He said also that Perrone held
precisely the same doctrine as he did on this point.
And B. O'C. expressed his satisfaction of your course
in regard to that controversy. He also told me that he
thought of sending you a note on this subject, but I think
he feels too sore about his recent discussion with you to
do it, though I urged him to write. The last number
of your Review he considered as one of your best.
But there is another reason for my writing this
note. It is this. The Irish prelates and priests have
become mighty tender on the point of nationality.
Your dose on Native-Americanism has operated on
them, and operated powerfully, and especially at the
west. They felt sore, and let me add also weak from
its effects. You gave an additional dose in another
form in your article on the Questions of the Soul.
Perhaps if you knew that the first dose had not
ceased operating you would not have administered
another so soon. The truth is, I fear, that there
may before long come a collision on this point in our
church. The American element is increasing steadily
in numerical strength, and will in due time pre-
dominate; and at the present moment on account of
the state of the public mind, has great moral weight,
and this in itself must excite unpleasant feelings on
the other side. Is it not the better part of wisdom
at the present moment, for us to abide our time, and
say no more than we can help? I think what you
have said is doing its work, and will effect it, and
perhaps without further effort. I would not have you
modify a word that you have written, but my wish
has been to give you a hint of the state of feeling
A
LETTER FROM HECKER.
563
existing on this subject, having the opportunity of
seeing pretty extensively the prelates and priests of
the church, and all sides. It was generally rumored
that you would make an onslaught on Chandler in this
number, and nothing of the kind being found in it,
gave general satisfaction.
You cannot imagine with what delight I have heard
different persons speak of the gratification they
found in your last number, detecting something, they
knew not what, in its tone that pleased them. I feel
quite assured that you have adopted the right course, and
caught the right spirit, to accomplish a vast deal of
good to our people in the church as well as out.
I enclose also a sort of program of another book if
you think well of it. Let me have a line from you if it
meets your approval.
Yours affectionately in the S. hearts of Jesus and
I. TH. HECKER.
Mary.
Address VERY REV. T. BUTLER,
Lexington, Ky.
1
1
April 16.
The dissatisfaction among the Irish in America, on
account of the articles just referred to, was by no means
so general as might be inferred from what has been
said of a certain class of them. Many of the clergy of
Irish birth or parentage spoke boldly and strongly in
their defence, as well as numbers of laymen, who
knew that that the picture was faithfully drawn. One
of the plainest-spoken of these wrote as follows :
FORT WINNEBAGO, WIS., July 29th, '54.
O. A. BROWNSON ESQ.
DEAR SIR:-Enclosed are $1c-for two years
1
564
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
subscription for myself (M. R. Keegan), and one year
each for Rev. J. D. Roche and Charles H. Moore,
Portage City, Wis. The three can be sent in one
package, marked "Portage City, Wis."
I have been a regular subscriber for the Review
since it has become Catholic, and often felt how deeply
I was in your debt for the firmness with which I was
able to speak on subjects, on which without your
Review I would be totally in the dark, if not in down-
right error. I will only here mention two cases,-
Invincible Ignorance and free-soilism. And yet I
learned my meaning of "invincible ignorance" from
what were considered good Catholic authorities, who
had turned it into a Catholic panacea for quieting
Protestant consciences in their errors. I sat down a
strong free-soiler to read your article on the Higher
Law, and ended by raising my hands and heart in
prayer to God to bless and protect you long for the
good of religion. Indeed I did not get half through
when I felt my cheeks burning that I should have been
so wofully misled.
But the tenor of your article on Nativism and the
manners and habits of Irish Catholics in America is
what causes me to trouble you with this scroll. I am
forty-five years old, twenty of which I have been in this
country; have mixed largely and seen much of the
character of my countrymen, and I have always seen
with regret that the great body of Irish Catholics were
led by the nose by such as the Boston Pilot calls
"Kawtholicks," composed of Masons, Oddfellows, and
office-hunting demagogues. This class of persons have
on public matters in this country taken the place
LETTER FROM KEEGAN.
565
occupied by the priests in Ireland, so far as the Irish
are concerned; and the natural result of Nativism and
Know-Nothingism is what any reasonable man would
look for. If this were exclusively a Catholic country,
and were the Irish to pursue the like clannish course,
the feeling then would be as bitter against them as it is
now, for I have known native Catholics, good and
practical, where I resided in Pennsylvania, as bitterly
opposed to letting Irishmen vote, until they could go
as men and not as sheep to the polls, as any Protestant
bigot I ever met. But what is to be done? The Irish
are so accustomed to have leaders that they know not
how to do without them. And how will you get rid of
the Kawtholicks? for after all, these are the real
enemies, and the cause of nearly all the mischief.
The other great evil is the common-school system,
which in this state is going to be overwhelming, and
around which all the bigotted, infidel, radical, and
popularity-seeking are gathering with a frantic energy
that leaves little or no hope for justice to be heard or
listened to for a single moment.
With one of the questions, dear sir, you have
grappled, and while many of those whom you are
benefiting will revile and denounce you, every good and
patriotic Catholic, of whatever country he be, will pray
to God for your success and personal happiness.
I am, my dear sir, yours truly and respectfully.
M. R. KEEGAN.
:
The Propagateur Catholique, of New Orleans,
edited by the Rev. N. J. Perché, having joined in the
onslaught on Brownson's Review, the Abbé Adrien
Rouquette, author of La Thébaide en Amérique, and
817-1
566
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
..
3
other works, expressed his dissent from that journal
as follows:
MANDEVILLE, ST. TAMMANY, La., 7 Fév., 1855.
MR. O. A. BROWNSON.
MON CHER MONSIEUR:-Je ne puis pas résister
plus longtemps au désir de vous écrire, pour vous
témoigner ma haute estime, ma vive sympathie et mon
entière adhésion aux doctrines que vous avez émises
dans votre Revue. Depuis quelques mois, j'ai été, si
non étonné, du moins indigné du ton de la presse
catholique et des attaques dirigées contre vous. C'est
le sort inévitable et glorieux de tout écrivain qui ose
dire la vérité abstraction faite des susceptibilités indivi-
duelles ou nationales. Votre article sur le "Nativisme
Américain" était nécessaire; je n'y trouve pas une
syllabe à blâmer; la publication de cet article a été un
acte de grand courage. Je sais, Monsieur, que mon
opinion est peu de chose; mais vous me pardonnerez de
vous l'exprimer au milieu des circonstances doulou-
reuses où votre âme se trouve, quelque fortement
trempe qu'elle soit. Je crois accomplir un devoir; je
n'ai pu résister à l'impulsion de mon cœur. Je tiens
aussi à vous dire, dans la crainte que vous puissiez
penser le contraire, que je n'ai jamais eu aucune part à
la rédaction du "Propagateur Catholique," j'en désap-
prouve l'esprit et la forme, en beaucoup de choses.
Ainsi, donc, sachez bien que je suis entièrement
étranger à ce journal.
Croyez, mon cher Monsieur, que je ne vous oublie
pas dans mes prières, et veuillez recevoir de nouveau
1
LETTER TO HILTON.
567
l'expression de ma haute considération et de ma pro-
fonde sympathie.
Votre très-humble serviteur.
A. ROUQUETTE.
P. S.-Je vous ai envoyé par la poste les "Saintes
Voies de la Croix," par Marie Bourdon. Ce volume
contient, selon moi, toute la science des saints.
CHAPTER XVII.
BROWNSON
DEFENDS AGAINST
RIGHT TO BE A CATHOLIC, AND AGAINST CATHOLICS
HIS RIGHT TO BE AN AMERICAN.
KNOW-NOTHINGS HIS
THAT there was some ambiguity in his language
in the article on Native-Americans, Brownson himself
admitted; though he insisted it was not such as to
conceal his real meaning from any careful reader, who
ought to have been able to distinguish what he
expressed as his own opinion of foreigners from what
he said was the opinion of Americans generally. In a
letter to Judge Hilton of Cincinnati, dated Boston, July
26, 1854, he wrote:
"I have been surprised, I confess, at the manner
in which my article on Nativism has been understood,
and at the whirlwind of wrath it has raised up against
me. I have reëxamined my motives in writing it; I
have re-read the article itself in the light of newspaper
comments on it, to see if I had by some blunder said
what I did not mean; but without finding anything,
even on their own avowed principles, to justify
the wrath of its opposers, or to give me even a clew to
568
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
their misunderstanding of it. Either they or I and those
who understand my article as I do are laboring under
a gross delusion. Either I cannot understand the plain
natural sense of my own language or they do not;
which is the mad and which the sane party, I shall not
undertake to decide, for I might be outvoted, as was
poor Tom of Bedlam.
66
Pray tell me, my dear friend, what it is I have
done? I must have done something horrible, or surely
there could not be raised such a furious outcry against
me. 'Why,' it is said, 'you have shown your
sympathy with the Know-Nothings, and the Native-
American party.' That is false. I have done no such
thing, and every one who will read my article with his
eyes half open will see to the contrary. If they say
this, there is no reasoning with men who ascribe to you
the contrary of what you yourself say. I have con-
demned that party in no measured terms; but I have
endeavored to show what in the foreign-born population
enables it to appeal with some effect to American
national feeling. I have denounced that party as
anti-American, and led on chiefly by non-Catholic
foreigners. But it makes an appeal to American
national feeling. If we, who oppose it, outrage, in
opposing, this national feeling, or without showing that
we have a respect for this feeling, we strengthen that
mischievous party by giving it the support of American
nationality. To attempt to wrest from that party its
only important support, was not assuredly to show my
sympathy with it.
"But you have attacked the whole foreign popu-
lation, especially the Irish Catholics?' There is not a
LETTER TO HILTON.
569
(
word of truth in this. You have tried to bring the
Irish into contempt, and have contended that they must
give up their own nationality and be absorbed in the
Anglo-American nationality.' I have said no such
thing. 'You have boasted the superiority of the
Anglo-Saxon race, and have placed them above all
others.' False, false, and as false as anything can well
be. You have introduced into the Catholic family in
this country, hitherto so quiet, the quarrel of races.'
False again, I have done no such thing, for not one
word have I written to prove that I as a Catholic
prefer one race to another.
(
my
"How such charges as these can be founded on
article on Native-Americanism is what I am utterly
unable to comprehend. I wrote my article in my
quality as an American natural-born citizen, looking
at the state of my country as it is, and the dangers
which threaten it, and especially with reference to the
hostility that had been excited between native Ameri-
cans and the foreign-born population, whether
naturalized or simply resident. My main purpose
was to explain the causes which had produced this
hostility, to censure on either hand where I thought
censure due, and to offer such advice to either party
as I thought judicious and opportune. In reading
over last evening my article I perceive that I possibly
may not have been in all cases careful to distinguish
in describing what the country generally exacts
of foreigners and what I myself contend it has a right
to exact, and what it regards as an offence in them
and what I myself so regard; but I think still that a
candid reader would have found me sufficiently clear,
570
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
L
and would not have laid to my account what I give
as the views of my non-Catholic countrymen. The
only excuse I can find for those who bring these
charges is perhaps in one or two passages some little
obscurity on this point. I sometimes speak simply in
the name of my countrymen generally, and simply
describe their views and feelings, and sometimes in my
own; and I suppose the impugners of the article over-
look this fact. They take all I say in the name of
non-Catholic Americans as what I mean to maintain as
my view, and then take what is really given in that
article as my own views and feelings, either as so much
soft soap for Catholic foreigners meaning nothing, or as
specimens of my facility in self-contradiction. There
was no need of this; and a candid reader, even if the
matter had been obscurely expressed, would have given
me the benefit of the more favorable construction.
"The question of Native-Americanism is one which
I have to treat both as a Catholic and as a natural-born
American citizen. When I treat it as a Catholic, I
have the susceptibilities of the great body of my
countrymen to manage; and when I treat it as a
natural-born American citizen, I have the susceptibil-
ities of the great body of my Catholic brethren to
manage. Of course, the question for me is a delicate
one, and yet no one but one like me can properly treat
it under both relations. I felt this, but as my attach-
ment to my Catholic brethren was well known to be
sincere and ardent, and as my Americanism was beyond
question, I thought I might discuss the question freely,
and with some profit to both sides. But it seems that
I was mistaken so far as my Catholic friends have been
-
LETTER TO HILTON.
571
concerned, and the Americanism on which I relied to
gain me a hearing and some credit with my non-
Catholic countrymen, especially those, and there are
many such,—who love their country more than they
hate popery, has been construed by the larger portion
of the Catholic press into an attack on the nationality
of foreign-born Catholics. There is in this not only
uncharitableness, but very great folly; for it tends to
confirm the impression I have labored to remove,
namely, that Catholicity is un-American, and cannot be
nationalized without a destruction of
of American
nationality.
"I believe that there is an American nationality,
and that this nationality is and will be determined, not
indeed without modification from other sources, by
those I call Anglo-Americans. I do not say that this
is a good or evil; I do not say whether I regard this
nationality as better or worse than others; I merely
state that it will be ours, and that it is impossible to
make it otherwise. As a fact, I contend that this
American nationality has a wonderful absorbing power,
and gradually assimilates to itself all foreign nation-
alities that meet it on our soil, and thus tends to mould
the whole population of the country of whatever race or
country born into one homogeneous people. This I
insist on as a fact, not as that which ought or ought
not to be, but as a fact important to be known and
considered by all immigrants. I do not say they ought
to lose their nationality, but I say they must and will.
They cannot help it, if they would. Therefore, the
sooner they acquiesce in it the more prudent, for the
American nationality is intolerant, and respects.
J
572
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
nothing opposed to itself. Here are no principles laid
down, but a simple statement of facts.
(C
Suppose these facts to be as I state, it is clear
that any attempt to resist the American nationality,
any conduct likely to offend it, expressions calculated
to wound the national sensibility, or any efforts to
prolong their own nationality beyond the period it
would remain in the natural course of things, together
with a conduct regulated by reference to foreign
interests instead of American, would be highly
imprudent on the part of the foreign-born population,
and would not only be useless, but tend to excite hostile
feelings, and perhaps hostile acts, against them. Now
this is what I have said to the foreign population, and
have specified the principal particulars in which I think
they have failed, and have conducted imprudently, that
is, imprudently for themselves. In this specification of
particulars, I have stated facts, or I have not. If I have,
why blame me? If I have not, why not calmly point
out my errors, without getting into a passion with me?"
The Germans made little or no complaint against
Brownson's doctrines at this or any other time in his
life. The only one who expressed to him his dissatis-
faction was the Austrian Jesuit Weninger, who thought
the Reviewer was advocating the theory of Kossuth,
and feared he would prove another La Mennais. The
following is his letter, written about the last of August,
1854.
In Cho colendissime atque charissime Domine!
Legi articulum in præclaro opere tuo "Quarterly
Review," et non possum tibi nou communicare magnam
, animi afflictionem quam exinde concepi.-Perlegi,
LETTER FROM WENINGER.
573
credas mihi, eadem ipsa hora, qua ab amico mihi novus
hic tractatus porrigebatur, illum, quem anno 1845
aliquando rectissime scripsisti, et vix oculis meis fidere
poteram,—Obstupui quomodo fieri poterat, ut mens tua
tam perspicax, et tam ingenuum post novem
annorum circulum in novam plane et miserandam
erroris sphæram agi potuerat. Nunquam profecto
animo tuo inesse suspicabar, tam humilem terrestrem
plane et ut ita dicam Kossuthianum Patriotismum, quem
cum tanta injuria civium tuorum Catholicorum publice
manifestare non dubitasti. Dixi nunquam id
suspicabar; potius legendo in ephemeridibus te contro-
versiæ esse implicatum propter illum articulum, et viso
responso tno, quo declaras te male fuisse intellectum,
credidi verbis tuis, tibique condolebam. At perlegendo
ipsum tractatum tuum, vidi te omnino Patriotismo in
sensu supradicto esse affectum, qui minime Catholicus
dici potest, imo prorsus acatholicus et mere mundanus
est, teque prorsus indignus.-
Hoc ut tibi paucis probem in memoriam tibi revoco.
solemne et præclarissimum effatum S. Basilii M. in suo
ad minas Valentis responso, qui ei exilium ex patria
minabatur; atque ita S. Doctor et fidei Confessor.
"Quid? Tu mihi exilium minaris; numquid ignoras
latam terram esse meam, et me illam quam tu dicis esse
patriam meam, nou dicere esse meam?-Audiendo
hæc Imperator exclamabat: nunquam sic homo mihi
locutus est. Cui Basilius: Forsitan nunquam cum
Episcopo locutus es. Sic ferme quantum memoria
teneo. Doctor ille, quibus tam præclare exprimit
sensu, quo pectus christianum replent respectu sensus
Patriotismi, videlicet: Christiano, filio Dei in terris,
574
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
i
་
P
་
tota terra patria et simul exilium est-totum genus
humanum una natio,- Profecto, sic jam Psalles
clamabat: "terram dedit filiis hominum" ;-et quoties
hic aliique Prophetæ pronunciabant futurum esse ut,
gentilium, qui una quasi natio considerabantur, et
judæorum ex altera parte separatio per Christum
aliquando finem sit habitura, totumque genus
humanum in unam quasi nationem familiamque sit
conflandum, cujus Patriotismus futurus sit-sensus
cœlestis absque nationum distinctione. Ita Prophetæ
considerabant statum generis humani in terris, juxta
consilium Divine Providentiæ ordinandum, quantum
ex ipsa est, tanquam ektypon cœlestis Prototypon,
nempe Jerusalem civitatis sempiternæ absque nationum
discrimine. Ideo Apostolus Gentium S. Paulus
Patriarcham Abraham non tantum patrem fidei, sed
patrem nationum appellat, nempe per Christum, per
quem paries solvenda sit, et soluta fuit, qua gens
judaica, qua natio separata fuit ab aliis nationibus,
totumque genus humanum sit quasi gens et natio una,
ubi non est Judæus nec Græcus, nec liber, non ser-
vus, sed omnes sint semen Abrahæ hæres promis-
sionum." Ita in Ep. ad Rom., Ephes. et Galatas,-Novi
equidem has promissiones proxime pertinere ad statum
filiorum Dei, in regno Dei, quæ est Ecclesia; at huic
statui respondeat
respondeat quoque oportet status externus
generis humani juxta spiritum fidei, ut populi diversi
sint tamen natio et familia una, cujus parens et Pater
in terris sit Christi vicarius, et Judex supremus, ut tu
ipse tam præclare, erudite et recte observasti, in tua
doctrina de Romani Pontificis suprema inter Christianos
auctoritate. De hoc sublimi Christiano-catholico
LETTER FROM WENINGER.
575
patriotismo, quem aliquando in tuo tractatu
Native-Americanism" ipse defendebas præclare, nunc
lamentabili ratione in lutum communis hominum
mundanorum affectus delapsus es, ita ut ore tuo
teipsum judices per ea quæ olim scripsisti. Applico
tibi tua ipsius verba : "This is (no) Americanism (but
true Catholic patriotism of mankind). It is this which
has been our boast, which has constituted our church's
true glory. It is this which we have inherited from
our fathers; which we hold as a sacred trust, and
must preserve in all its purity, strength and activity,
if we would not prove' degenerate sons of noble sires';
and it is this which (your article on Native-Ameri-
canism, so-called, now) opposes, and because it opposes
this, no true Catholic can support it, even no true
American !" Sane, neque Catholicus neque homo,
qua homo, potest admittere doctrinam, quæ hominem
fratrem hominis et filium Dei, eo quod non sit super
eadem gleba terræ natus, vel ex determinata stirpe,
excludit a societatis humanæ juribus, cui qua homo
jungi jus habet naturale, quod jus naturæ funda-
mentum est juris gentium; non vero e contra. Socrates
et Plato id probe intellexere et Cicero ipse, quamvis
gentiles. Hæc observatio directe retundit nova tua
asserta, non in principiis juris gentium, sed in
inordinato patriotismo fundata, quem ut semi-ethnicum
et semi-judaicum merito rejicimus.
merito rejicimus. Modus insuper
quo tu advenas cives velis tractari, induceret novum
genus servitutis, et recte cives tales appellarem white
slaves," essent enim rem accurate examinando (quod
tibi alias tam consuetum est) toti positi in arbitrio
dominorum a quibus gubernantur, in quo recte caracter
A
((
"On
1
576
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
1
:
essentialis servitutis cernitur. Habeo itaque contra te,
quod cum legitima tua priori cogitandi ratione etiam
primam tuam charitatem reliquisti. Ipse tractatus hic
recens tam acerba amicis tuis oggerit in facie
inimicorum, ut ipsa charitas te jam magis attentum
reddere debuerat, priusquam in facie totius regionis
tibimetipsi contradicere consultum duceres.-Caeterum
non tam error singularis mihi adeo displicuit in te,
homines enim sumus, quam animi tui comparatio, quam
in hoc tractatu manifestas, et eo magis ingrate me
affecerat, quia mihi semper eras longe charissimus.
Admirabar in te haud minus intellectus præstan-
tissimam aciem, quam cordis nobilitatem et animi
roborem. Scripsisti semper in ordine philosophico et
theologico tanta cum securitate, ut nullum tibi parem
in laicis unquam legerim noverimque. Gaudebam
tantopere Dominum suscitasse in hac terræ parte tam
strenuum catholicæ veritatis athletam. Et ecce lego
nunc a te hæc verba scripta: "After God, our first
and truest love has always been, and we trust always
will be, for our country." Itane? ergo revera magis
amas post Deum, Patriam.-Magis quam Deiparam,
magis quam cœlum et angelos, magis quam Ecclesiam,
quam concives cœlestes, magis quam animas Christo
sanguine redemptas, magis quam homines-confratres.
Sic revera animo constitutus es? Dolerem.
Dolerem. Dicam
quid senserim legendo hunc tuum tractatum novum.
Recordabar epistolæ Rev. Abbatis Geramb reducis ex
Palæstina, quando de lapsu lamentabili infelicis "de
la Mennais" audiebat, in qua epistola sic ad eum
scribit : "Non credidi quæ in ephemeridibus legi, sed
legendo ipsa tua recentiora scripta totus exhorrui
$}
LETTER FROM WENINGER.
577
audiendo quasi penes me super terram alarum
strepitum, de cœlo delapsi cherubim.”—Absit,
avertatque Deus te hac via abiturum. Nec timendum
tale quid post datam nobilem et humilitatis sensu
refertam declarationem tuam. Quod autem abiturus
sis ex patria mihi videtur quasi permissio Dei, ut si
fiat, exul a Patria doleas, quæ erronee in favorem
Pseudopatriotismi scripsisti.-Miraberis me litteras ad
te dare, clarissime Domine, utpote qui tibi quasi ignotus
sum, vidi te tantum semel in collegio S. Ludovici; at
cum prius diu in theologicis et philosophicis disciplinis
versabar in Europa, conscientiæ mihi duxi ut, quæ in
hac controversia sentiam tibi candide communicem.
:
Scripsi ea in itinere currente calamo, qui qua
Missionarius inde a sex annis omnes congregationes
germanicas et gallicanas ininterrupta serie in statibus
occidentalibus percurro; parcas, quæso defectibus
dictionis, parcas libertati qua usus sum. Solus-soli
scripsi. Tuus in Ch° sincerus amicus.
F. X. WENINGER,
Doctor SS. Theologiæ S. J.
Brownson wrote in answer to Weninger:
BOSTON, Sept. 5, 1854.
REV. AND DEAR SIR-I have received your letter
postmarked September the first, and sincerely thank
you for it.
for it. Your severity, I trust, I take in the spirit
you desire, although I do not think that I deserve it.
I am deeply pained to find myself so misapprehended.
It is against nationalism that my recent article was
intended, not in its favor. I agree with you almost
entirely in your doctrine, and am not a little surprised
to find it set forth as opposed to mine.
33
578
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
F
All I contend is that under Catholicity certain
national distinctions do and will obtain, and within
certain limits the preference for one's own country, as
for one's own family, is permissible and to be respected.
In America, on American soil, the American nationality
is the nationality, if any, that has the right to
predominate. My object in writing was not to defend
the American nationality against Catholicity, but to
caution my foreign-born Catholic friends against
opposing their foreign nationality to it. My Irish
Catholic friends by obtruding their Irish nationality
have aroused the hostility of the American nationality.
This is the mischief. As against their nationality, I
say American nationality is in the right; but as against
Catholicity, no nationality can be in the right.
The contradiction between my article on Native-
Americanism in 1845, and the article you censure, does
not exist to my understanding. I am simply in the
two articles treating the same subject from different
points of view, and with different purposes. In my
article in 1845 I wished to defend the foreign-born
population against Native-Americanism: in my article
for last July my main purpose was to admonish the
same population not to offer it any gratuitous offence.
The question now is not the same as it was in 1845, for
it is since then that the immigration has become so
large, and that so large a portion of it has been non-
Catholic, I might very well refuse to defend in 1854
what I was quite willing to defend in 1844, yet I hold
fast to every principle laid down in my article in 1845,
and am not conscious of being less Catholic now than
then.
LETTER TO WENINGER.
579
I say, "after God, our first and truest love has
always been and, we trust, always will be, for our
country." I say this in order to show our foreign-born
friends that their foreign patriotism cannot be exhibited
here without coming in contact with the American, and
to assure my non-Catholic countrymen that I do not, in
becoming a Catholic, lose any thing of my patriotism,
in so far as patriotism is lawful. But allow me to say
that I am astonished at the interpretation which you
put upon this assertion. I never meant, and the
language warrants no such meaning as you suppose.
The expression "after God," in my understanding of it
includes after my religion, its objects, its principles,
and its precepts, our first and truest love is given to our
country, that is, of things pertaining to the temporal
order, our country has the first place in our affections.
I do not think you can find any heresy in this.
Indeed, Reverend Sir, has not the foreigner rather
the theologian dictated your letter to me? May you not
have failed to put yourself in my position, and to
consider what it was necessary and proper for me to
say in order to prevent my non-Catholic countrymen
from drawing from my words a false inference with
regard to Catholicity?
I may have fallen, as you suppose, and fallen as
La Mennais fell, for no man knoweth
man knoweth whether he
deserve love or hatred. I own I have lost some of my
first fervor with regard to a portion of the American
Catholic body. They have so misrepresented and
denounced me, and are so ready to seize every oppor-
tunity to blacken my character, that I do not feel that
lively confidence in them that I did. They have
580
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
!
:
wronged me, and brought all manner of contradictory
objections against me, and I am only a poor, frail,
mortal man. But if I know my own heart, I have lost
nothing of my Catholicity. I love the church more.
and more every day. I know that he who stands
should take heed lest he fall, and I never feel that I
may not fall, but I have no wish to fall. The church
is my mother. I have no one else, and I take it for
granted that the abuse I am receiving is given me as a
trial of my virtue. I pray God that I may make a
right use of it. I have no resource but in him, for
man it seems has deserted me.
Forgive me, Rev. Sir, for writing you in English,
as I am unable to write in any other language, and
believe me your most obedient servant in Christ.
O. A. BROWNSON.
Brownson wrote this letter, but it bears no mark
of having ever been folded. The reason why he did
not send it was very possibly his not knowing where
Weninger was to be reached, as the good Jesuit's letter
no more told where than when he wrote. The next
letter gives the time when it was written, but the place
is a little indefinite. It runs thus:
P. Ch. Clarissime atque in Ch". colendissime
Domine!
Nescio utrum litteræ ad Te, colendissime Domine,
pervenerint, in quibus meum de tuo relate ad cives
advenas prolatum judicium acerbe satis improbabam.—
Inde ab illo tempore
illo tempore novis illustrationibus, bis
genuinum sensum principiorum relate ad quæstionem
agitatam clarius exposuisti, et gaudeo. Sic enim re
dilucidata nihil prorsus invenio quod censuram
|i
LETTER FROM WENINGER.
581
mereatur, sed omnia apparent non tantum sana, sed
etiam saluberrima, et valde prudenter suggesta.
Unum quod dolendum, hoc est: tuum de hac delicata
quæstione judicium non statim ab initio tam dilucide
et caute fuisse prolatum. Utique post tot data a Te,
doctissime Domine, documenta doctrinæ sanæ et animi
imperterriti, securius loqui potuisti, memor S.
Augustini effati ratusque Te a catholicis confratribus
non aliter quam Catholice intelligi; interim Divina
Providentia ad majus Tuum meritum per humiliationis.
lavacrum consilia aliter direxit.-Nisi enim Dominus
ita ordinasset ipsa illa prudentia quæ Te ad scribendum
Articulum compulsit, indicare debuisset periculum
malæ interpretationis, nisi cautissime et planissime
expositus in lucem prodires.
Miraberis utique quid me in specie impulserit, ut
Tibi, colendissime Domine, hac de re scriberem, qui
Tibi ignotus, etiam nulla apud Te existimatione valeo?
Paucis dicam: plurimum Te in Domino colebam et
amabam, itaque perægre ferebam, ut a Te aliquid
minus castigate dicatur.—
Non puto me in calicem tribulationis, quam Tibi
Dominus porrexit, guttam amaritudinis immiscuisse,
propter defectum anctoritatis; interim, quia nescio quo
modo ad Tibi meum judicium communicandum tunc
inductus fui; officii mei esse censeo, ut et hoc per novos
duos articulos correctum judicium Tibi, colendissime
Domine, communicem.
Ne dubites me ad Aram pro Te Tuaque familia
Sacrum et Sacrosanctum Sacrificium Missæ oblaturum,
ut Te Cum Tuis charis longe conservet ad augenda
merita tua, et ad bonun sanctæ Matris Ecclesiæ in hac
582
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
..
terræ parte, omnibusque gratiis Te cumulatissime.
donet, ut aliquando ut fortis Athleta Christi promeritam
coronam victoriæ felix obtineas.
Commendo me Tuæ piæ memoriæ, me meaque
opera in Ministerio sacro precibus Tuis commendando.
Totus Tuus, Colendissime Domine, in Ch° Amicus.
F. X. WENINGER, TH. D.
In Statu Indiana,
31 Januarii, 1855.
Among the editors of Catholic papers in the United
States there was probably no one for whom Brownson
had more respect and liking than the Reverend Dr.
Corcoran, of the United States Catholic Miscellany,
published at Charleston, S. C. He and Dr. Lynch were
the editors until about the time of Bishop Reynolds's
death at the beginning of 1855, after which I think
Lynch was administrator until his appointment
as bishop. Whether he or Corcoran was the author of
the articles against Brownson in their journal, I know
not, but think it very likely to have been Corcoran,
because Brownson expostulated with him in reference
thereto. In his letter to Corcoran he says the very fact
he is a free frank-spoken man should teach him that he
is not a splenetic man, or one that can harbor hard
feelings long against anybody. Indeed, nothing could
be truer. If Brownson had any anger against any one
he never nursed it, but said what he wanted to say,
and "having got rid of his bile," as his expression was,
he was at once in the best of humors. In concluding
his letter to Corcoran he said:
"I think the Irish a little touchy, and I think it
very bad policy for them, in a country like ours, to
เ
LETTER TO CORCORAN.
583
ه.
be always throwing their nationality in our faces if we
happen not be Irish ourselves. I think they are as much
bound to respect my American nationality as I am to
respect theirs.
I do not like their claiming the right in
their organs to run down all nationalities but their own,
and then cry out as if a great wrong were done them, if
the calumniated nationalities remind them gently that
they who live in glass houses, etc. It is impossible for
you to conceive how offensive in this respect they are
to the American convert, who is discarded by his own
countrymen because a Catholic, and distrusted and
abused by his Catholic friends, if he deems it his duty
to retain his American sympathies and not make
himself a foreigner in the land of his birth. Born of
Irish parents and brought up as a Catholic in the boson
of Irish Catholic society, you have no conception of the
exactions made, or how outrageous is their conduct
towards us who have no especial bond of sympathy with
them but Catholicity, nor the effect of their Irishism on
our children. These things, which are wrong, and which
I find no Irish prelate or priest rebuking, but all of them
rather encouraging, do, I confess, occasionally grieve me.
They may insult my nationality as much as they
please, but if I do but open my lips to give utterance to
the Catholic doctrine of the unity of the race, then I
am accused of stirring up national animosities and
disturbing the peace of Catholics. Why rebuke me?
I was not the one to intrude my nationality. Why
seek to suppress my Review, and sustain the journals.
that cause all the mischief? Why make me suffer for
the faults of Irish Catholic editors and spouters?
"You will think these remarks but ill sustain my
I
584
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
assertion that I have no spleen against the Irish, and
yet what I say is true. I do not like the Irish as
editors, as politicians, or as critics; but I do like them
as men, as friends, as companions, associates, as
Catholics. In all the private relations of life, I love
them, and taken as a people, I know no people that I
could place before them, or that I could place so high.
They have done with scanty means an immense deal
for religion in this country, and the hope of the church
in this country is under God chiefly in them and their
children. I need not tell you these are my honest
sentiments, for you will not suspect me of writing to
you what I do not honestly feel. But with all this the
Irish have their faults, and precisely the faults the most
offensive to Americans. They are not greater than
ours, they are not so great even, but they are different,
for the most part faults from which we are free, and all
men are most offended by faults of a different kind
from their own. I do not like their habit of crying
out against a man who happens to displease them, of
vituperating instead of reasoning. But I have much
worse things to put up with in my own countrymen,
and whether you believe me or not, I like the Irish
and French far better than I do the English and
Germans, although I prefer the political order which
is represented by England, and which I call the
Germanic order, better than I do the Romanic, which
prevails in most Catholic states.
“In reading my Review, it will always be well to
bear in mind that I sometimes deal in grave pleasantry,
in good-natured raillery, which some, many indeed,
take to be bitter sarcasm. I am not aware of a single
LETTER TO HUGHES.
585
sentence in the whole series that has been written in
anger, in bitterness, or a sarcastic spirit. But enough.
I have opened my heart to you, because I am anxious
to have your good opinion, and to retain your friend-
ship, and because I know your paper has done me
injustice, and I believe unintentionally. Forgive me
the freedom and frankness with which I have written,
and believe me very truly your obedient servant,
"O. A. BROWNSON.”
"REV. JAMES CORCORAN, D. D."
In a letter to the Archbishop of New York,
Brownson explains that it is foreign to his purpose in
publishing a Catholic Review in the United States,
to go beyond the defence of American institutions and
Catholic interests. The defence of these he has never
shirked, but he does not feel called upon to defend
or apologize for the national prejudices of foreigners,
their likes and dislikes, and make common cause with
them in every dispute they may have with his own
countrymen, even though his own countrymen are
in the right. "In so far as they are Catholics," he
writes, "and in so far as their natural or acquired
rights are concerned, it is my duty to defend them
to the utmost of my power; but in so far as they
are foreigners, and insist on remaining foreigners, they
have no claim upon me or any other American
Catholic.
"I have provoked no controversy with foreign-born
Catholics, I have no unkind or unchristian feelings
towards them, and the attacks they have made upon me
were wholly unjustified by anything I had ever said or
done. The things I did for which I have been so
586
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
..
abused were done in their defence, to defend the whole
Catholic body from the attacks of the Know-Nothings,
and if I had not been stormed against, I should have
succeeded. In regard to foreign-born Catholics I
regard myself as the injured party.
"One thing I look upon as certain, that it will
never do to have it understood that Catholics are here
an un-American body, with interests, affections, and
duties diverse from those of the great body of the
American people. It will not do to have it understood
that the American who becomes a Catholic, nust
suppress his own nationality, and act as a foreigner, or
forfeit the support of his Catholic brethren. On this
conviction I have acted, and I have rebuked conduct
not in accordance with it when it has come under my
observation. I cannot see that in this I have done
wrong.
"This much, however, I will cheerfully promise
your Grace, that if foreign-born Catholics will cease
obtruding their foreignism on me and my countrymen,
I will cease writing anything that obtrudes mine
on them. I cannot understand why they are to have
liberty to speak and I am to be bound to silence. If
they abuse the American people, write against the
Yankees, and seek alliances with Canadians against
my own countrymen, I know no law of the church
that requires me to be silent, far less to join with them.
As far as I can judge, a portion of the Irish Catholic
body have pursued a course exceedingly offensive to
the American people, and peculiarly painful to Catholics
of American birth and lineage, and yet I am not aware
* This was done by the editor of The American Celt."
(6
LETTER TO RODDAN.
587
}}
have they
that except from American
from American Catholics have
received a word of admonition or rebuke in public.
We American Catholics are in a small minority, if you
will, but we have feelings, and we do not see why our
feelings are not as sacred as those of Irishmen, why
they should here in America be free to agitate for
Ireland and defend Irishmen and Irish interests,
and we not free to defend America and Americans, and
American interests. I have been denounced from more
than one altar, if I am rightly informed, for barely
alluding to some of the faults of Irishmen. Has an
Irish editor been denounced for abusing Yankees?
Why this difference? Why liberty on one side, and
slavery on the other? But if your Grace will silence
the attacks of your countrymen on mine, I will cease
to attack yours.
However disheartened some of his friends became
in the Know-Nothing controversy, the latter part of a
letter to Roddan, editor of the Pilot, shows that, Brown-
son, behind the clouds which then obscured the heavens,
caught glimpses of a bright sun and clear blue sky.
"Is it proposed," he asks Roddan, "to sacrifice me
in order to appease the Know-Nothing wrath? If my
sacrifice would do that, I should offer no objection, but
it is not likely that it would have any such effect.
There is, I suppose, no Catholic in the country who
does not perfectly well understand that the Know-
Nothing attacks upon me have for their express object
to induce Catholics to distrust or disown me.
Have we
any Catholics silly enough to be caught in the Know-
Nothing trap?
The pretence that I, by my articles on the papal
588
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
2
power, have been the chief cause of the present
excitement against us is all moonshine, and for
Catholics to allow themselves to be affected by it is
quite absurd. Had I never written those articles, nay,
had I never lived, the same, perhaps, a more furious
excitement would have raged against us. One lesson
some of us seem not yet to have learned, that of
standing by our friends, especially when they are
assailed with more than ordinary fury by our enemies.
But much must be pardoned to men's fears, and
who is not prepared to be denounced by friend as well
as foe is not prepared to do knight's service in the cause
of Catholicity. I have experienced only what every
man experiences who seeks to follow truth rather than
public opinion, and after all it is glorious to suffer
in a good cause.
((
"The storm now raging against us will soon sub-
side, the sun will break through the clouds, the sea
will be hushed, and men will smile to think that they
ever mistook me for a Jonah. You, sir, know very well
how false are the notions which a few persons who
seem to have nothing better to do, try to induce the
Catholic public to entertain of me. But all will be
cleared up at last, and each will receive according to
his merits."
Early in the year 1855, whether of his own accord
or yielding to the representations of others, the Arch-
bishop of Baltimore requested Brownson to discontinue
the publication, on the cover of the Review, of the letter
written by him and signed by the Bishops of the Coun-
cil held in Baltimore in 1847.
LETTER FROM KENRICK.
589
BALTIMORE, 12 February, 1855.
DEAR SIR:-So much use is made of our endorse-
ment of your Review by our enemies, that I think it
advisable for you to state distinctly in your next number
that it was not intended or employed as a sanction of
every opinion or view, which you had advanced even at
the time, much less of those which you might at any
time afterwards advance.
Your zeal and ability were commended, and still
deserve commendation, but as we do not desire to
abridge your liberty in matters not defined by the
church, so we cannot be fairly held accountable for the
expression of your sentiments. Some explanation
seems required at the present time since your essays on
the temporal power are brought forward to prove that
we profess principles at variance with our civil duties.
By dropping the endorsement you will be more at
liberty to state your views, without rendering us respon-
sible, and I trust you will lose nothing, as your Review
is able to stand on its own merits. You know too well
my personal attachment to ascribe this letter to any
unfriendly feeling.
Your faithful friend,
FRANCIS PATRICK KENRICK,
Archb'p Balt.
ORESTES BROWNSON, ESQ.
As the first number of his Review for 1855 had
been already published with the bishops' letter on the
back, it seemed best to Brownson to continue in the
same way to the end of the year. To this suggestion
Kenrick replied:
590
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
BALTIMORE, 24 Feb., 1855.
DEAR SIR-I should be sorry to urge you to any
measure likely to prove prejudicial to the interests of
your Review, or to counsel you to do anything without
the advice of the bishop, not as a superior or director,
so much as a friend and earnest well-wisher. Your
own prudence will dictate the best course to be adopted
to meet the effort which is made to convert our letter of
encouragement into an approval of every sentiment or
view which you may express. I earnestly desire that
your Review may be supported, as I am fully con-
vinced of your zeal in supporting the cause of truth.
I leave, then, the matter entirely in your own hands,
and renew the expression of my unfeigned regard.
Your constant friend,
FRANCIS PATRICK KENRICK, A. B.
*
O. A. BROWNSON, ESQ.
To the Review for April, Brownson appended the
following note:
(68
We notice with pain a disposition among
our Know-Nothing writers to hold the bishops, whose
names are on the cover of our Review, responsible for
whatever sentiment or doctrine is found in its pages.
This is wrong. The bishops have kindly encouraged
the publication of our Review, having confidence in
our loyal intentions, and believing it, upon the whole,
useful to the cause of truth; but they indorse no senti-
ment or doctrine we advance. The whole responsibility
rests upon the editor alone, and no bishop is respon-
sible for anything that appears in our pages, and every
one is just as free to controvert or condemn anything
in our pages as he would be were his name not on the
LETTER TO CUMMINGS.
591
17.
cover. We beg our opponents to bear this in mind, and
to remember that our Review does not, in any sense
whatever, speak by authority of the American
hierarchy, and has no other indorser than its lay
editor, who is free to write and publish, simply hold-
ing himself responsible to the proper authorities, what
he pleases. The merit or the blame, if either, in all
cases belongs to him, and the public cannot justly hold
anybody else in any respect responsible. We commend
this especially to the notice of Professor McClintock
and Dr. Edward Beecher."
Brownson's intention of dropping the bishops'
letter from the cover of his Review, was formed at this
time, as he notified to Cummings.
CHELSEA, Ash Wednesday, 1855. [Feb. 21.]
REV. AND DEAR DOCTOR:-You were good enough
to say that you would get me up a lecture in New
York, if I would write you. I should have availed
myself of your kind promise sooner, had I not under-
stood that it would be better to wait till Dr. Manahan
had closed his course.
I should like to have you get
me up one as soon you can conveniently, for to tell you
the truth I am a little in want of the proceeds to enable
me to launch my son William with his brother John at
Milwaukee.
I leave you to fix the time, only I wish it to be
early in March, for the last of March I expect to start
for New Orleans. My friend George Hecker, will take
upon him any of the labor you may assign him.
I am much obliged to you for the kindness you
showed to my son, and for all the good will you have
always shown to me and mine.
592
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
17
}
At present, my Review is doing as well as ever.
The Native discussion has not hurt it; but how it will
be affected by the papal question I cannot say. I learn
that I am to be sacrificed as a peace offering to the
politicians. But perhaps it will not be so bad as I fear.
I shall be obliged, only do not mention it, to leave off
the name of the archbishops and bishops, and to publish
the Review solely on my own responsibility, so as to
save the hierarchy from the charge of endorsing me.
Whether this will ruin me or not remains to be seen.
It is hinted from a high quarter that I had better do
this, and do it of my own accord. I shall do so without
communicating with a single bishop. It seems it is
necessary for the peace of the church that I should
make way for the Chandlers to defend Catholicity on
Gallican principles.
Be so good as to inform me as soon as you can of
the time you fix upon for the lecture, and believe me,
yours most truly,
O. A. BROWNSON.
Before Brownson could carry out his intention of
dropping the bishops' letter after the current year, he
received the following letter from the Bishop of Pitts-
burgh:
DEAR SIR-I am sorry that a sense of duty com-
pels me to request you to withdraw my name from the
letter printed on your cover containing a certain
approbation of your Review. I do not think that that
letter made any of your signers fairly responsible for
anything you wrote, and hence though I occasionally
found doctrines advanced from which I widely differed,
I did not feel called upon to record my disapprobation
Mo
LETTER TO O'CONNOR.
593
7
or to withdraw my name. But since you have adopted
as a leading principle of the Review a theory which I
believe to be in itself untrue and the advocacy of which
I consider likely to do much mischief, especially if it
were considered to be encouraged by any number of the
bishops of the country, I feel myself called upon to
withdraw any connection with the publication that
would seem to imply any kind of approbation.
Yours faithfully in Christ,
†M. O'CONNOR, B'p Pittsb.
Pittsburg, Sept. 4, 1855.
O. A. BROWNSON, ESQ.
In reply Brownson wrote:
RT. REV. AND DEAR SIR:-I regret that you have
judged it necessary to make the request, but of course
it will be complied with.
It has from last May been my intention to leave
out altogether the letter with the signatures at the
commencement of the new volume. Had I followed
my own judgment, that letter would never have appeared
in my Review, but I was assured that it was intended
to be inserted. I felt that it would cause me some em-
barrassment and involve me in some trouble. I did not
like to leave it out after a volume had commenced, and
when such an outcry was raised, because I was sure
for myself that to do so would be impolitic. But with
the next volume it will be quietly omitted, and the
Review henceforth be published on my sole responsi-
bility, so as to compromise nobody but myself. Most
likely I shall remove from Boston and publish my
Review in another city, as the approval of my own
bishop does not appear to be any protection to me in
&
39
594
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
the minds of his Episcopal brethren.
I shall not
publish without the permission of my Diocesan, for I
am a Catholic,-but shall endeavor to let the Review
stand on its own merits, so that any bishop or any
Catholic can say, "O! that is one of Brownson's
ultraisms, nobody is responsible for what he says."
The Bishop of Pittsburgh will permit me to say
that I feel that in his articles against me he has treated
me neither generously nor fairly. I do not hold, never
have held, and never have set forth or defended the
doctrine he persists in laying to my charge, if I may
be the judge of my own language and meaning. I
think he was bound to give me the benefit of my own
explanations and qualifications. I think I have received
hard treatment at his hands, and that he has excited an
uncalled for prejudice against me.
He denounced me,
held me up to execration, instead of discussing the
question with me. Even he does not accuse me of het-
erodoxy, and must admit that I have the right to hold
even the opinion he ascribed to me, for it has never
been condemned, which is more than can be said of
some of the opinions which he opposed to me. He
opposed to me, if I understand him, opinions, or an
opinion, condemned by John XXII. and Pius VI. If I
understand him he denies the right of the pope to visit
the political acts of a secular prince with ecclesiastical
censures, which I think is not sustainable.
I think I had a right to hold the doctrine I set
forth. It might have been imprudent to publish it.
Some three or four bishops have told me that they
thought it was, and some dozen or more have told me that
they thought differently, that it was not. I myself be-
•
LETTER TO O'CONNOR.
595
lieved it prudent, and still believe so, and furthermore I
think but for your articles against me that no great out-
cry would have been raised against us on account of its
publication. I know something of the American peo-
ple, and I am confident that you will never make them
believe that my doctrine on the subject is not the true
Catholic doctrine. All the bishops in the universe may
disclaim it, and they will still believe it. You may
silence me,
but you will gain no credit with them, and
only lose a portion of their respect, both for yourselves
and for Catholicity.
Permit me to say that the clamor raised against
us does not frighten me, and that the best way to
disarm it is to show that we do not fear it. I think
there has been some lack of firmness on our part.
This is, indeed, the opinion of a layman, but a layman
even may sometimes have a sound opinion.
I intended not to reply to your first article, as I
told you, but on arriving home I found an order
requiring me to do it. I intended to close with my
indirect reply to your second article, and should have
said no more, if the other side had remained silent.
Indeed, I have done nothing since but offer some
explanations of my doctrine.
doctrine. I have defended it only
against non-Catholics, and I do not see how you can
say that I am making it a principal feature in my
Review. I have an article in my next number on the
Temporal Power of the pope, in reply to Dr.
McClintock, but I am not defending it against Catholics
who differ from me. I do not think you will object to
it. Of course, I do not abandon my doctrine. You
must either convince my reason that it is wrong, or
596
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
bring me a judgment from Rome condemning it, before
I can do that. I have a profound respect for your
judgment, but you cannot expect me to take it as the
judgment of the Supreme Pontiff, who is your judge
as well as mine.
I have written frankly, perhaps too frankly, but
be assured that in my own heart not disrespectfully.
I have expressed my grievances, but for your many
acts of paternal kindness, and your frequent forbear-
ance towards me, be assured I am deeply grateful, and
shall be as long as I live. I owe you much, and I
would that I were able to pay you much. But after
all, my position is a difficult one, and I, too, have had
some things to hear from those whom I counted on to
sustain me. I am denounced by the whole non-
Catholic world, and there is hardly a Catholic voice
raised publicly in my defence. The disposition of
many Catholics appears to be to recognize as little
solidarity with me as possible. These are not pleasant
things. But God knows what is best; I will not
murmur. Forgive what is wrong in my letter, and
believe me truly your obedient servant. in Xt.
O. A. BROWNSON.
RT. REV. M. O'CONNOR,
BISHOP OF PITTSBURGH.
The Archbishop of Baltimore endeavored to set
right those who, following the Bishop of Pittsburgh,
persisted in misunderstanding and misrepresenting
Brownson's doctrine. In his "Vindication of the Catho-
lic Church" he says: "Mr. Brownson, with his usual
independence, has ventured to seek the solution of the
* Baltimore, 1855, p. 225.
KENRICK ON BROWNSON.
597
problems presented by the middle ages, in a principle
which was put forward by St. Gregory VII, and by the
great defender of the indirect power, Bellarmine. He
relies on the natural subordination of the temporal to
the spiritual. As far as the middle ages are concerned,
I conceive that this is satisfactory, because, in fact, that
principle was then admitted and applied, and thus it
necessarily entered into the compact between sovereigns
and their subjects." And on page 227, Kenrick says:
"Most assuredly I dissent from him, if he claims for
the pope
pope any right to interfere with our civil
allegiance. . . However strong may be the language.
sometimes employed by Mr. Brownson, I am convinced
he does not mean any such thing." Of course not, in so
far as it is only civil. He claimed for the pope no civil
or temporal authority or jurisdiction out of the states of
the church, but he did claim for him plenary spiritual.
authority to govern Catholics in all things that pertain
to salvation. He also believed and taught that a
principle based on the natural relation of things is a
truth not only in the Middle Ages, and in parts of
Europe, but for all ages and all parts of the world, and
declared that he would not, because a clamor was raised
against him just then, abate one jot or tittle of the
power he had heretofore asserted for the spiritual power.
It is when and where truth is most strenuously opposed
that he believed it a duty most strenuously to insist
on it.
Huntington, the editor of the Metropolitan at the
time of O'Connor's attacks on Brownson, changed in
1855 from that magazine to a Catholic weekly in St.
Louis called "The Leader." He had formed his notion
FEA
་
I
598
of Brownson's doctrine of the supremacy of the spiritual
order from the Bishop of Pittsburgh's misrepresentations,
and when he read in Brownson's Review the article on
the Temporal Power of the pope, and in the daily press
the answer to the Maryland gentlemen, he liked these
well enough, but thought them inconsistent with the
doctrines condemned by O'Connor in the Review.
Though still sore over former criticisms of his novels,
the author of Alban strove to be fair: and was so much
more so than nearly all the other Catholic editors, that
Brownson complimented him for being so, but adds:
"You accuse me of changing my doctrine, and of
falling into gross inconsistencies and absurdities. I
claim, sir, the right to be my own interpreter, and I
think it no more than reasonable that you should dis-
trust your own understanding of my doctrine rather
than mine, for I am rather more likely to know my
own meaning than you are. I have not abandoned any
ground on the papal power that I have ever assumed,
and the doctrine of the Letter is precisely the doctrine
of the Review. As for the inconsistencies and absurdities
you refer to, they are perhaps full as likely to exist in
my critic's brain as in my own.
"I do not very well understand your criticisms,
and am at a loss to know whether in your estimation
my fault is in being too Gallican or too Ultramontane;
but as far as I can grasp your meaning, you consider
that I am inconsistent and absurd in maintaining that
the authority of the pope is necessary to release my
conscience from the religious bond, after the civil bond
is broken by the tyranny of the prince, since it is on
the existence of the civil bond that the religious bond
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
LETTER TO HUNTINGTON.
599
is founded. But, my dear sir, do you maintain that
the pope has authority to absolve me from my oath of
fidelity to a prince who has not forfeited his right by
abuse of his powers? Do you as a Catholic maintain
that I individually or the people collectively have a
right to say when a religious obligation ceases to bind
in conscience? Suppose, according to the law of God,
the tyranny of the prince forfeits his right, do you
maintain that I or the people have the right to resist
before the fact of forfeiture having been incurred has
been judicially declared?
"The doctrine I hold is that for Catholics, I say
nothing of others, what is called civil allegiance is a
religious duty, but a duty which ceases with regard to
this or that prince when he becomes a tyrant; but before
I can avail myself or enter into possession of the right
to resist, the forfeiture of the prince must be judicially
declared by the spiritual authority. I say spiritual
authority, because it is a matter which touches
conscience. For me as a Catholic this authority is
and must be the pope.
"But the pope, I maintain, in exercising this
authority, does not trench on the rights of the civil
power, or exercise any civil or temporal authority. In
order to show this I distinguish between allegiance to
the prince or state as a purely civil bond, and the same
allegiance as a religious bond. Do you deny the
validity of this distinction? If so, do you deny it in.
favor of the civil or in favor of the religious character?
If the former, you deny it to bind in conscience, and
make its obligation merely that of a lex pœnalis, and
you may rebel when you please without risk to your
600
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
i
salvation. This is the doctrine of our modern revolu-
tionists. If the latter, you absorb the civil in the
religious and allow the state no autonomy. But
But you
cannot say this, because the judicial authority of the
supreme pontiff does not release the subject from the
civil penalty of resistance even to a prince who has
forfeited his rights. The absolution is in the spiritual
and not in the temporal order, and if the prince proves
powerful enough, the subject will have to suffer the
civil consequences of his resistance. This shows that a
subject may be absolved in conscience and rendered
religiously free to resist the tyrant, and yet not be
civilly free, which proves that the distinction in
allegiance between the religious and civil obligation is
not wholly imaginary. I have never claimed for the
pope any authority beyond that of absolving the
subject from the religious obligation, or 'sanction,' as
the illustrious Archbishop of Baltimore terms it, in case
the prince becomes a tyrant.
You seem to accuse me of absurdity for the
supposition that the judicial declaration of the supreme
pontiff is necessary to loose the religious after the
prince by his tyranny has loosed the civil bond. I
do not suppose even you will contend that he could do
it before; for the prince must forfeit his rights before
the pope can declare his subjects absolved from their
allegiance. Every lawyer will remind you of a
.principle which you seem to overlook, that forfeiture
does not put even him in whose favor it is, into
possession till legally declared. Even supposing the
forfeiture to be declared civilly, you, I trust, are too
good a Catholic to suppose that looses any spiritual
.1
(C
LETTER TO HUNTINGTON.
601
bond. The civil forfeiture is a fact for the spiritual
court, and is no doubt to be regarded as the basis of its
judgment, but till the judgment of the spiritual court is
rendered it is no fact for private conscience. The
spiritual court by its sentence must declare you free in
conscience, before you can enter upon your rights
against the tyrant.
"I do not understand your remark about an
unbelieving prince. The obligation of the subject to
a non-Catholic prince, not bound by the constitution of
the state to be a Catholic, is precisely what it would be
in the same circumstances to a Catholic prince.
"Permit me to submit these remarks to your calm
consideration. I think you have been hasty in some
of your judgments upon me, and that you have shown
very little generosity, not to say justice, in joining with
Know-Nothings in attacking me for holding doctrines
which your own journal promulgates. When the
passions and fears of the moment have subsided, they
who hoped to gain popularity by abusing me will most
likely regret it."
Again, on receipt of a letter from Huntington,
Brownson wrote:
BOSTON, Aug. 25th, 1855.
J. V. HUNTINGTON, ESQ.
MY DEAR SIR-I thank you for your very kind
letter, but I deeply regret to learn that you were obliged
to write in bed. I knew you had been unwell, but I
thought you had recovered. I hope you will soon find
yourself in health, and that our good God will long
spare you to us.
Your reason for occasionally attacking me in your
Lag
::
=
=
602
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
columns is frankly stated. I can understand it, but it
would not serve my purpose. I can, I think, if need
be, die for the truth, but I cannot deny it, or attack my
friend for defending it, however fierce may be the
popular cry against him. When we find our friends
doing what we ourselves are doing and wish to have
done, the more honorable course is, it seems to me, to
back them, not to turn against them because they
happen to be unpopular. Your explanation is what I
expected, only you appear to do from friendship what I
supposed no man would do except from personal
hostility.
You say you praise me in banter, because otherwise
you would not praise me at all. It may be so; but
your bantering praise happens to be less useful to me,
and more offensive, than no praise at all. I am not so
greedy of praise as to be pleased with it even in banter.
If a man wishes to speak well of me, and judges it
imprudent to say what he feels except in jest, I would
rather he should not speak of me at all.
I find no fault with a journal for disagreeing with
me, and expressing in as clear and as distinct and as
decided tones as it can its disagreement. I am not thin-
skinned on that point, but I think my age and my well-
known honest intentions should secure me in my
Catholic opponents that courtesy due from one
gentleman to another. I am and always have been,
and always shall be unpopular, and the usual practice
is for those that differ with me to refute me with squibs
and sneers. Catholic editors have adopted towards me a
manner which they would adopt towards no other man
in my position. Personally I care nothing for this,
LETTER TO HUNTINGTON.
603
but it diminishes my influence, and takes from me my
ability to serve the cause which we ought all to have at
heart. Differ from me as much as you please; oppose
me when you think I am wrong; but do it fairly and
honestly, without discourtesy, without seeking by
quibbles, quirks, and verbal subtilties to render me
odious or contemptible to the Catholic public. I have
never attacked my man personally in my Review, when
the personal attack was not necessary, at least in my
judgment, necessary, to the vindication of some public
cause. I have never written a word in malice, from
personal pique, or to gratify a personal resentment, and
I never will knowingly or consciously. I will never
publicly redress my private wrongs except a public
cause seems to me to demand it.
I have been most grossly misunderstood, misinter-
preted, and even abused, where I had the right to
expect better things. None of you seem to be at all
aware of my real position or of my actual character.
You yourself mistake them almost entirely. You are a
man who have and always have had a social position. I
have never had one. I have lived all my life alone,
and I have not any personal influence, and consequently
I am less able to bear the loss of public character than
many persons far less known. But a hint is enough.
It has been no light task to sustain my Review for
eleven or twelve years single-handed against the tide of
personal unpopularity.
I regret to learn by your letter that no notice
was taken of the "Pretty Plate." I wrote a very
favorable notice of it, which I supposed till receiving
* A very beautiful little story by Huntington.
604
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
I
your letter had been inserted. It must have been
crowded out, and forgotten. The same thing, I
recollect now, occurred with a book of Mr. Shea. I am
willing to be Mr. Shea's friend, but he will never be
mine. I can make no advances to him, for I regard
myself as the aggrieved party. But I assure you that
nothing in the past or the future will affect my notices
of any works that may fall under my criticism.
J. V. H." in the Truth-Teller I know spoke
ironically, but as he did what in jest he said he would,*
I supposed it was no more than fair to treat him as if he
spoke in earnest. I supposed his only object was to
do me what injury he could, and supposed myself
perfectly justified in doing what I did to defeat his
purpose.
Dr. O'Connor, in the Metropolitan, misrepresented
me, and treated me with great unfairness, as I con-
sidered; and fear of giving scandal prevented me from
exposing his misrepresentations and his errors, amount-
ing in one instance to positive heresy, as it would have
done. I replied in the way that I thought would best
save my doctrine. The Archbishop of Baltimore and
his brother of St. Louis, both assured me personally
that they agreed with me. The Archbishop of New
York, I am told, approved of my articles: they were
approved by the Archbishop of Quebec, and by the
Bishop of Boston, by Mr. Edward Purcell of Cincin-
nati to me personally in his own room. The Arch-
bishop of Cincinnati assured me before they were
written that I could not go too far in asserting the
g
J. V. H. said that as other journals had got up a cry against the
Review, it was a good time for him to join in and have his say, for he, too,
had a bone to pick with it. Ante, p. 405.
LETTER TO HUNTINGTON.
605
papal power for him; and some five or six other bishops
have expressed their agreement with me.
The course which some Catholic prelates who
approved my doctrine to myself personally, have taken,
has not given me so high an opinion of their Catholic
honor as of their policy. I have dared, at the risk of
my reputation and means of subsistence, of all I hold
dear except the truth and the approbation of Heaven, to
bring out the only doctrine that can save society from
ruin, and they who agree with me, misrepresent, banter,
or denounce me, or remain silent. Is this what Catholic
faith and honor demand?
Thank God, I never yet truckled to public opinion,
and I think I shall never oppose any man for doing
what I wish done, whatever may be the popular outcry
against him. The Catholic can die for the truth, but
he cannot disown it or its friends. Forgive me, if I
speak warmly; for you must be aware that your reason
for the attacks upon me by The Leader is the one of all
others likely to arouse a high-minded and honorable
man. It is not very soothing to be told: True, you
have been and are doing what I wish done, and am
myself doing; but then, you are so unpopular that I
cannot do it without casting you off, or joining in the
popular cry against you. But do not take it ill, for I
mean it not in hostility, but in friendship. Sir, I am
ready to back my friend to the death. But enough of
this.
I have never been able to discover any difference
between you and myself on the nativist question, except
that I am not opposed in my feelings to foreigners, and
not proud of my New England ancestors. I want
606
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
1
:
precisely what you do, and I wish to bring as far as
possible Catholic influence to bear on politics; but that
influence must be Catholic, not foreign, because other-
wise it will do harm instead of good. The whirlwind
that is excited against us has been occasioned, not by
the causes or persons your St. Louis friends imagine,
but by a premature attempt to organize the Catholic and
Irish influence. I could, if I were with you, tell you
what has been done, and show you that the Know-Noth-
ing movement is nothing but a punishment upon us for
our imprudence. I foresaw and foretold it during the
late presidential canvass. I have only been trying to
recover the ground we have lost, but nobody except
Know-Nothings seems to understand me.
I have not changed in the slightest degree my
doctrine on the papal power. I never held the doctrine
which Bishop O'Connor represents me as holding.
But enough of all this. I have unburdened my
mind with the frankness and bluntness of my nature,
and conclude by thanking you for the spirit in which
you accept my advances. I assure you that you will
ultimately find that I am a bear only skin-deep, or at
least am a tame bear. I would gladly send you the
article you ask for, but time and health will not permit.
Very truly and respectfully your friend,
O. A. BROWNSON.
I
SOUTHERN SOCIETY.
607
CHAPTER XVIII.
MOBILE.
CINCINNATI.
AFFAIRS.
PHILOSOPHICAL ESSAYS.
RESIDENCE FROM BOSTON TO NEW YORK.
NEW ORLEANS.
17
·EUROPEAN
CHANGE OF
BROWNSON's first visit to the Gulf States was in
the spring of 1855. Like most New Englanders, he
had a very inadequate notion of a great part of the
country in his early life; but as his visits extended
further to the west and the south, he began to believe
that these sections differed very greatly from the
eastern portion of the Union, and that it was not in all
respects to the advantage of the latter. The difference
is less now. The rule of "scallawags and carpet-
baggers," backed by the United States forces, and the
disfranchisement of all the men of education and
influence, in the southern states, for years after the
suppression of the "Great Rebellion," has well-nigh
obliterated all that was distinctively superior in southern
society. Yet there is enough left of that society, and
it is strong enough, if our country ever recoils from
the un-American course it is to-day following, and
returns to the mission given it in the providential
government of the universe, to restore what was best in
that society before 1860, and to make it even better
than it was then. At any rate, when Brownson visited
Louisiana and Alabama, in 1855, he found much to
admire, and most of all, that though men sought to
increase their worldly possessions, there was less of the
auri sacra fames, which is precipitating the modern
*
+
608
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
world into an idolatry as infamous and as universal as
the pagan worship of devils prior to the coming of
Christ.
The invitation to lecture in New Orleans came
from the recently established Catholic Institute of that
city, the corresponding secretary of which was Thomas
J. Semmes, whose death is announced as I am writing
this. In answer to Semmes's letter of Feb. 5, inquiring
whether Brownson would consent to visit New Orleans
and lecture there, and if so, when and on what terms,
the latter proposed the terms, and gave as the time the
early part of April, as he could not start until his April
Review was published. Semmes replied:
NEW ORLEANS, Mar. 5th, '55.
DEAR SIR :-Your esteemed favor, dated Ash
Wednesday, was received on 3d instant. Last night
your terms were submitted to the Institute, and I am
instructed to accept them. I accordingly telegraphed
you this morning, stating that your terms were accepted.
We were much pleased that you found it convenient to
pay our city a visit, and think the circulation of your
Journal will be increased in this city in consequence
of the proposed course of lectures.
66
We have already had several lectures before the
Institute, and I mention the subjects for fear that by
accident you might select the same, or something
germane to them. The subject of one was "The
Immaculate Conception, considered with reference to its
influence on Society;" of the second, "Harmony
between Catholicity and Liberty;" of the third, "The
Harmony between the religious and social obligations
of Catholics."
LETTER FROM SEMMES.
609
¿
As you are unacquainted with the New Orleans
community, I hope you will excuse a few remarks
concerning it. This city, tho' Catholic in name is in
reality not so. The men among the native population
are generally infidels, tho' the women are pious
Catholics. The Catholics themselves are what may be
termed liberals, and a vast number of them are
Catholics in sentiment, tho' not, I am sorry to say, in
practice. The fact is, there is a great laxity on the
subject of religion among us. I give you these hints
that you may know our people who are to constitute
your audience.
There is also a very large liberal
Protestant population, entirely indifferent on the
subject of religion. One lecture of a purely literary
character therefore would be desirable.
We shall therefore expect you here on 11th of
April unless otherwise advised, and shall make arrange-
ments accordingly. You would oblige by informing
me what the subjects of your lectures are, and on what
day you leave Boston, so that as much publicity as pos-
sible may be given the proposed course of lectures.
Very respectfully, your obedient servant,
THOS. J. SEMMES,
Corresponding Secretary.
O. A. BROWNSON, ESQ., Boston.
From Pittsburg to New Orleans, Brownson went
by the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers, and greatly enjoyed
the idle days. Among the passengers on the boat with
him were Mr. and Mrs Vincenzo Botta, on their wedding
trip. Vincenzo was a nephew of Charles, the historian,
and his wife was Anne Charlotte Lynch. Botta showed
himself very shy of Brownson, which the Rev. Joseph
40
610
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
:
Finotti explained to Brownson after his return, by the
assurance that he had met Botta as a priest in Italy.
The lady, however, was as gushing as ever, especially
in the admiration of the scenery, though she said to
Brownson, "You must tell me when the scenery is
beautiful, and I will do the admiring." A dozen years
before, Miss Lynch had been the most extravagant of
Brownson's admirers; but her sympathy was less
excited by the little of Christianity he defended than by
his unbelief in the rest of it. As Brownson advanced
in belief, they came to be further and further apart, and
when she wrote her "Handbook of Universal Litera-
ture," she made little or no mention of her former idol.
After his lectures in New Orleans, Brownson lect-
ured in Mobile, and visited many places of interest in
the vicinity of either city, and was entertained in the
homes of some whose acquaintance he made at this
time, and from conversation with whom he gained much
valuable information regarding the habits, convictions,
and sentiments of the people in that section, which he
found useful in the changed relations between North
and South a few years later.
Stopping at Cincinnati in his way home, he found
the bishops of that province assembled for a synod, and
was cordially received by them all. Even the Arch-
bishop seemed friendly, and on his arrival sent him this
conciliatory note of invitation :
CINCINNATI, 12th May, 1855.
ORESTES A. BROWNSON, ESQ.,
DEAR SIR-It will gratify the bishops of this
province, including myself, very much to enjoy your
company to-morrow after the solemn opening of the
;
i
LETTER FROM CUMMINGS.
611
Provincial Council at dinner. Engaged with us in the
ministry of teaching the truths of faith in that sphere
which Providence has allotted to you, we one and all
acknowledge the purity of your intentions and the
powers of your mind, even when honestly constrained
to differ from you in some of your views. But "Hanc
veniam petimus damusque vicissim," and it should
never lead to an alienation of Catholic hearts.
Hoping to see you among us to-morrow, I remain
very truly yours in our Lord,
† J. B. PURCELL,
Arbp Cin.
Brownson had also proposed to lecture in New
York before going to New Orleans, but postponed his
lecture in that city till his return, in consequence of
the reasons given in a letter from Cummings:
NEW YORK, February 26th, 1855.
O. A. BROWNSON, ESQ.,
MY DEAR SIR :-You will, I trust, excuse my
delay of two or three days in replying to your letter.
I remember perfectly well my promise to see to the
getting up of a lecture for you in this holy city of New
York, whenever you should drop me a line to say that
you had time to come on and deliver it. But I told
our young legal friend (who by the bye is a fine fellow,
and will one day be governor of Wisconsin), that you
ought to come on before the beginning of Lent, or after
Easter. During Lent there are so many things going
on in the churches, and so many lectures and sermons,
instructions and addresses are in process of delivery
by us, the eloquent pastors of New York city, that even
our cherished old friend Dr. Brownson could not but
612
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
;
suffer if he lectured here, at least as far as his pocket.
is concerned. Now I, as your impresario, wish you to
make as much as possible by your lecture. I spoke to
Father Starrs, the vicar-general, on the subject, and he
kindly said not only that he approved of our inviting
you to come on, but that he would do all he could to
assist anything got up for you, and that you deserved
that all the clergy should do the same. I am pleased
to be able to tell you almost the words he used, for he
is always very cautious, and means every word he says.
He added, however, he thought the season of Lent a
bad time for you to come on, because he feared that we
should make a poor show at your lecture for the reasons
I have stated. Do you not think, then, that we had
better wait until after Easter? Remember that you
will always find me ready to act for you, even if it be in
spring or summer. Write one line to me at any time
you are disengaged and I shall start the affair at once.
I am very much pleased that you are going to
lecture in New Orleans. You will find a set of people.
there who are Americans to the backbone, and although
they are negligent in attending to their duties,* they
are able to stand good, old-fashioned, high-toned
principles. I think, too, and I know the locality pretty
well, that you will find the press free from the bigotry
of New England papers, and the mean, drivelling,
sneering mediocrity of the venal dailies of New York.
At all events, in the sunny south you will have no
Paddy Lynches, and Teddy McGees, to snarl, and bite
at the heels of your boots while you are walking abroad
* An expression often used by Catholic clergymen which means to
receive the sacraments of penance and holy eucharist at least once a year.
LETTER FROM CUMMINGS.
613
*
with the air of a man that is not afraid to show himself
in public. I write in this vein because I am under the
impression (perhaps erroneously) that you have not
lectured in the metropolis of the south before.
By the way, have you read the Encyclical letter on
the Immaculate Conception? Have you paid attention
to the statement that the church received the deposit of
faith full and entire, in reference to which "nihil addit,
nihil demit, nihil minuit "—and the other, that however
a dogma may be illustrated and explained according to
the mind of the Fathers," nunquam crescit nisi in genere
suo?" In other words, no dogma grows or develops
that did not exist before, and however much it may
thus grow and develop,
and develop, it never grows another
dogma? Where, pray, are our old friends the Develop-
mentists' now?
((
""
But I fear that I am annoying you with all this
chat. I will therefore close my letter by wishing you
every blessing and success in your mission of fighting
error whether the weapon you use be the tongue or pen.
I remain, my dear Mr. Brownson, very truly your
friend and servant.
J. W. CUMMINGS.
The correspondence with Montalembert, interrupted
towards the end of 1852, by Brownson's failure to post
the letter he had written in answer to the Count's of
November 12th, was resumed by the latter two years
later, when he wrote to Brownson :
PARIS, December 28th, 1854.
MY VERY DEAR SIR:-It is long, very long, since
I have had the pleasure of seeing your hand-writing.
Your last letter was dated July, 1851, and I have not
614
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
written to you since November or December, 1852, from
Brussels. I had heard that you had accepted a
professorship in the Catholic University of Dublin—
and was in great hopes of seeing you either in France or
in England. But I fear that I must give up this hope,
and not expect to meet you till I pay a visit to
America, which I have some thought of doing, one
day or other, in order to breathe more freely than can
at present be the case in continental Europe.
I now and then receive a number of your admirable
Review the last was for July, 1854. I cannot refrain
from expressing to you my gratitude and my ardent
sympathy for the opinions you have so eloquently
expressed in your articles No. 1 and 4, Uncle Jack and
His Nephew, and Schools and Education. On this latter
subject, which has been my chief pre-occupation for
twenty years of my life, you have dived deeper into the
real truth than any other writer I have met with. But
I must particularly thank you for your most excellent
appreciation of the present situation of Church and
State in France, p. 39.*
* "We believe that there are millions of good, sincere, devoted Catholics
in France, much true, ardent, and enlightened piety amongst the French
people, but we have not the least confidence in the religion of the French
government, with its Gallican traditions. Under Louis Philippe, and
especially under the Republic, the French Church spoke with a free, bold,
earnest, and commanding voice. She was the admiration and glory of the
Catholic world. She has been dumb since the coup d'état, or eloquent
only in eulogies on her new master. At least, we hear her voice at this
distance only when raised in glorification of France and her new Emperor.
The three years of the Republic did more for the church in France than
is likely to be done in half a century by the Empire. Better the persecu-
tion of a Diocletian than the courtly favors of a Constantius. The church
in France prospers most when thrown back upon its own resources, and
grows weak and helpless in proportion as nursed and petted by the secular
government. The Emperor may be a sincere Catholic in his faith, and
far be it from us to question it; but he has shown no quality that would
induce us to rely on him as a Catholic chief. He is the last sovereign in
Europe, in communion with the church, that we should rely on to make
any sacrifice for religion, or to promote Catholic interests any further than
he can make them subservient to his own secular ambition." Works, vol.
xvi, p. 423.
LETTER FROM MONTALEMBERT.
615
It is quite a relief to find such fearless and sensible
opinions expressed in the noble English language,
which, to my utter astonishment and dismay, seems to
me quite dishonored by the fulsome trash which all the
English newspapers teem with, about what you term
the new-fangled Cæsarism in which the fatal revolution
of 1848 has resulted.
But you have hit the mark in what you say of
England: in fact she is growing every day more
estranged from her noble medieval constitution and is
advancing with rapid strides to a huge centralized
democracy, which centralization must sooner or later
settle down into unitarian despotism. The idea of an
Imperial head to the bloated body of democratic
centralization evidently no longer inspires her with fear
and disgust, and so far from thinking with the poet that
Tua res agitur, peries cum proximus ardet.
English orators and journalists seem to envy the social
and political state of France.
As for the religious state of this country, you may
rest assured it is far from satisfactory, and that the
outward progress of the church is more than counter-
balanced by the formidable reaction which is gaining
ground against her among the intellectual and superior
classes. We are gradually losing all we had gained
during the reign of Louis Philippe and the Republic.
The cause of this reaction is two-fold: 1st, the useless
and worthless adulation of some of our bishops, who, in
the midst of universal silence, have made themselves so
conspicuous by their oratorical displays in favor of the
present régime of the Emperor, and even of the
Empress, who may be doubtless a pious and good-
*
616
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
natured lady, but who has done nothing to deserve to
be compared to St. Helen and St. Clotilde, as the Bishop
of Amiens (Mgr. de Salinis) did not blush to do,parlant
à sa personne, a few months ago. 2d. The systematic
violence and insolence of the Univers, in its daily denun-
ciation of every sort of rational freedom, not only in
France, but throughout Europe and America, not only
in political matters, but in every branch of intellectual
development, not only in the present but in the past.
As this paper is unfortunately patronized by the
immense majority of the parochial clergy, by a certain
number of bishops, and particularly at Rome, people
are convinced that it represents the real opinion of the
Catholic clergy and Catholic faithful in all those
matters,—that we wish for nothing but despotism and
darkness throughout the world, and that the cry for
liberty and equal rights, which was the watchword of
Catholicity in France, England, Belgium, Holland,
Germany, and Switzerland, from 1830 to 1852, was
nothing but sheer hypocrisy.
In three most remarkable articles of the Ami
de la Religion of this month, to which I refer you,
the abbé Cognat has most freely signalled what he calls
the recrudescence de la presse irreligienus, but he has
not dared to shew the real causes of this change for the
worse.
The Emperor, whose superior qualities I have
always recognized, and with whom I in vain attempted
to conciliate my fellow-burggraves, when it was possible
both to give him his due, and to keep him within
bounds, the Emperor is, I believe, a sincere well-wisher
to the church, but he knows little about her real
LETTER FROM MONTALEMBERT.
617
interests, and is exclusively devoted to his own. In
this respect I cannot blame him, since the church her-
self, by her official organs, asks for nothing else but
what she has got-protection. As for the liberties
which she so ardently demanded during the consti-
tutional régime, and which I attempted to obtain from
him after his coup d'état, he will never grant them.
His recent legislation on education has left but a
shadow of the freedom which we had conquered in 1850;
and this shadow itself is not respected, as you must
have seen from the arbitrary closing and reopening of
the Jesuits' college at St. Etienne last winter, in
defiance of all the legal guaranties and precautions
maintained even by his own decrees. Himself or his
successors may deprive the church of all she now
enjoys, without the slightest difficulty, and without the
possibility of any resistance or complaint. In the
meantime, the press, which is gagged in politics, has
full liberty to be most ravenous and blasphemous in
religious matters. The Assemblée Nationale,
fusionist paper, was suppressed for having inserted
some most inoffensive articles in favor of Russia, before
war was declared; and during the course of this summer
an avertissement, i. e., a public and official threat of
immediate suspension was fulminated against a country
newspaper called Le Journal de Loudéac (in the Côtes
du Nord), because it has presumed to question the
merits of some sort of MANURE (engrais animal),
recommended to the peasants by the préfet! Such is
the state of social and civil freedom in France. But
en revanche the two most widely circulated papers in
France, the Siecle and the Presse, teem with the most
a
*
618
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
abominable abuse of the whole fabric of Catholic truth
and Catholic discipline, of miracles, pilgrimages, the
Immaculate Conception, etc., etc. Not a word of rebuke
is ever addressed them for such outrages against relig-
ion as would most likely, even under the reign of Louis
Philippe, have sent their authors before a jury. The
Emperor is perhaps acting judiciously, à son point de
vue, in allowing this sort of impunity. He knows full
well that a nation like the French will not and cannot
endure universal compression; and while he keeps down
every sort of political agitation, he thinks he must open
the safety valve of anti-Catholic declamation, through
which the stream of revolutionary fury is now rushing
with fearful effects. But what is to be thought of the
short-sightedness of those Catholics who imagine that
such a system is far more beneficial than the noble and
independent struggle with the enemies and oppressors
of truth, in the name and under the banner of freedom
and fair play? We are rapidly drifting to a state of
things identically the same as that
as that of the ancien
régime before 1789, when people were sent to the
Bastile if they ventured to attack the king's lacquey or
the king's mistress, but when both popularity and
impunity, were granted to those who, like Voltaire and
his gang, cringed before men in power and contented
themselves with profane and impious ribaldry.
At the same time, I must repeat that the gross
and outrageous attacks of the Univers against the
whole political and intellectual scheme of modern
France, including even the Académie française, in its
daily anathemas, has given to the anti-Catholic and
democratical press a plea and pretext for their impious.
.
LETTER FROM MONTALEMBERT.
619
outpourings. The clergy, delighted to see prefects and
gendarmes at church, and intoxicated every morning
by a draught of the Univers, imagine that they are
living under a second Constantine-and the bulk of
Catholic laymen and young people are getting into that
system which you so justly term that of hot-house
plants (p. 373*) and which in Spain, Portugal, and
Italy has reduced Catholicity to the state we all know.
However, the Correspondant, and the Ami de la
Religion do their best to maintain a small knot of
prudent and independent Catholics, in the hope of
better days. All the old champions of the Catholic
cause, Mgr. Dupanloup, whose eloquent and feeling
address to the French Academy on his reception you
will have certainly read, M. de Falloux, MM. de
Riancey, M. Beugnot, M. Lenormant, and above all
Father Lacordaire, remain true to our old programme
and repudiate the Univers as much as I do. We have
made a great acquisition in the young Prince de Broglie
(son of the Duke, the former minister), who is full of
talent and zeal; his articles on the Conclusions de
l'Histoire de France in the Revue des Deau Mondes of
last January, and on Rationalism and Traditionalism
in the last Correspondant, you will, I think, much like.
I also recommend greatly Father Gratry's work De la
Connaissance de Dieu. The Oratorians and the
Dominicans are our great hope for the future.
I hope you will not be offended by the enclosed slip
for the Presse, signed BELLEGARIQUE, although full of
impertinent and mendacious statements, it shows your
power even in the opinion of your adversaries, and
* Works, vol. x, p. 582.
620
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
¦
must therefore prove satisfactory to yourself and your
friends.
I am at present exclusively devoted to my his-
torical studies on the Monks of the West, a fragment
of which you will perhaps soon see in the Revue or
the Correspondant.
I must confess that I am not of your opinion on
the present war. I have always feared and hated
Russian autocracy. I trust you will yourself feel
tranquillized on the revolutionary danger of this war
by the alliance of France with Austria. I am as partial
as yourself to Austria, but am rather alarmed to see
this empire also verging towards exaggerated central-
ization, which I look upon as the bane of every political
and intellectual greatness.
Believe me ever your obliged and respectful servant,
LE CTE DE MONTALEMBERT.
If the venerable Bishop of Boston is returned to
your city and is the same Dr. Fitzpatrick who so kindly
visited me when sick in bed last year, pray remember
me most respectfully to him.
Bishop Fitzpatrick left Boston in December, 1853,
returning in the August following. He took with him.
a set of the volumes of the Review from the commence-
ment, which by request of the Editor he laid in his
name at the feet of the Holy Father, as a public token.
of his filial devotion and unreserved submission to the
Apostolic See, and of his profound veneration of the
person of the reigning Pontiff, as he said in the accom-
panying letter. The Pope's answer returned through
the Bishop, was as follows:
LETTER FROM PIUS IX.
621
PIUS PP. IX.
Dilecte fili salutem et Apostolicam Benedictionem.
Litteras tuas VII. Kalendas Januarii proximi datas
quibus plura opuscula a te exarata dono Nobis obtulisti
ad Nos attulit venerabilis Frater Joannes Episcopus
Bostoniensis. De tuis iisdem libris merita ipse cum
laude Nobis coram locutus est; adeoque majorem in
modum in iis quos eædem litteræ omni ex parte præse-
ferunt tuæ erga Nos Sanctamque hanc Sedem filialis
omnino devotionis, obsequii, ac pietatis sensibus lætati,
et consolati sumus. Supplicibus votis, ac precibus
Deum misericordiarum, ac Luminum Patrem obsecra-
mus, ut illos, quos apud te perpetuos confidimus futu-
ros, Cælesti præsidio suo foveat, ac tueatur. Ac tanti
hujus boni auspicem, et grati tibi pro officio animi
nostri pignus, adjungimus Apostolicam Benedictionem,
quam tibi ipsi, dilecte fili, ac domi tuæ universæ effuso
paterni cordis affectu amanter impertimur.
Datum Romæ apud S. Petrum die 29 Aprilis Anni
1854, Pontificatus Nostri Anno VIII.
PIUS PP. IX.
The Holy Father also wished to confer a title of
honor on the Reviewer; but was informed by Fitzpat-
rick that it would be repugnant to
repugnant to Brownson's
republican character to accept it, and would be injurious
to his usefulness of action. Fitzpatrick compromised by
accepting the title of count for himself, though I never
knew of his using it.
To Montalembert Brownson wrote on the 22nd of
January, 1855: "I have this day received yours of the
28th ult. with the greatest pleasure, for I feared that you
had forgotten me, or that I had done something to
←
622
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
S=
offend you.
You appear not to have received mine in
answer to yours of the 12th of November, 1852, the last
that I have had the honor of receiving from you."
As to the war in the East, and the English and
French alliance Brownson took a somewhat different
view from that of most French and English Catholics.
In spite of the assertions of the belligerents, Brownson
thought the pretence of maintaining the independence
and integrity of Turkey as idle as that of protecting the
Christians in the Danubian principalities. The war
was really for the purpose of deciding whether Russia
or France and England should control the internal
affairs of the Ottoman Empire. If the war had been
confined to a contest between Russia and Turkey, with-
out involving other nations, he would have taken very
little interest in the contest. His anxiety was for
Austria, whose central position fitted her to be the great
mediating power of Europe. He looked upon Austria
as the pivot of the European system, and believed that
if she were weakened in favor either of Russia or
France, that system would be broken up, and Europe
delivered over to despotism or anarchy. Resistance to
the further advance of Russia was a leading feature of
the policy he recommended to the Catholic statesmen
of Europe in an article written before the coup d'état of
the second of December, for the reason that Russia
was the principal representative of centralized royalism,
or monarchical absolutism, just as the United States,-
for Great Britain represents nothing, and must ally
herself with us, is the chief representative of dema-
gogic despotism, or centralized democracy, that is to
*
* Works, vol. x, p. 384 et seq.
-
THE CRIMEAN WAR.
623
say, of radicalism. As Austria happened to occupy a
central position in Europe, she was the fit mediator
between the East and the West. It was not that
he had any partiality for Austrians rather than for
Frenchmen or Englishmen, or for the general policy of
Austria for the previous hundred years; for had
German unity been restored, he would have said
Germany, not Austria, was naturally fitted to take the
lead in resisting and repelling both Russian and
demagogical centralism or despotism.* That Russia
was a more formidable enemy of the church than was
Turkey, he admitted; but not than Turkey would be
under the tutelage of the British government, and
administered by the British minister resident at Con-
stantinople. In the East Catholic interests would be
sacrificed by France to political interests, if we may
judge by the past history of that country, which never
favored the Jesuits and their missions among the North-
American Indians except as a means of extending
French influence with the Indian tribes, and sacrificed
them to its political policy. The worst enemies of the
Catholics in the East were, and are, the Protestant
missionaries under the special protection of the British
and American governments, whose policy it is to
Protestantize the people, or what is nearly the same
thing, render them indifferent to all religion, whether
Christian or Mahometan. This is what they call
civilizing them.
Moreover, the western powers seemed to Brownson
* At this moment it is reported in the foreign advices that France is
following the wise course of withdrawing from the much talked-of alliance
with Russia, and beginning to cling to Germany, an alliance with which is
for the interests of each and of the whole world. Such an alliance would
put a stop to the further advance of despotism under either of its forms.
624
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
to be without justifiable cause of war against Russia.
The maintenance of the integrity of the Ottoman
empire was not, of itself, an object that Christian
powers might lawfully undertake. The western
powers, he said, were fighting Russia, "not to redress
injuries received, but to prevent injuries which she
has the power to do them on some future occasion,
although she has shown no intention of doing them.
They are acting on the principle of the Connecticut
deacon, who called up his sons one Sunday morning
and flogged them, not because they had broken the
Sabbath, but because he foresaw that they might break
it during the course of the day."
From 1849, when he wrote his article on "An a
priori Autobiography," to the end of his life, Brownson
devoted much of his study to those fundamental princi-
ples of philosophy in regard to which he believed the
opinions usually taught. defective, if not erroneous and
conducive to false views of society, politics, and religion.
Prior to 1849, Brownson had called himself an
ontologist; but ontologism may be understood in several
senses. First, there is the ontologism of those who
make ens in genere the primitive intuition of the mind;
but ens in genere does not exist, and can therefore be no
object of intuition. Then there are those who make
real and necessary being the primitive intuition. Of
this class some logically deduce all things, whether they
call them creatures or phenomena, from real and neces-
sary being, and these are pantheists. Others, and
Brownson had been one of them, introduce besides their
first principle of philosophy, real and necessary being,
empirical perception and reflection as the principle of
✔
•
*
LI
PRINCIPLES OF PHILOSOPHY.
625
*
the notion of created existences. This view, however,
he abandoned when he came to write his article on
"An a priori Autobiography," and maintained that the
object of the primitive intuition must be not only real
and necessary being, but must include the creative act
of being, and soon after, that it must include creatures,
the effect of that act, adopting Giobert's formula for
expressing the object of the primitive intuition, being
creates existences. As philosophy cannot be said to
have first principles unless these contain all that
is in it; and as both creator and creatures as well as
the creative act are intelligible and within the domain
of philosophy, the first principles or the primitive intui-
tion must include all three so far as intelligible. In his
view the sensible is never the direct object of intuition;
we have immediate intuition only of the intelligible,
and apprehend the sensible only in the intelligible, or
as illumined by the intelligible. Intelligible intuition
is the basis of sensible apprehension,-the precise
reverse of the teachings of the sensists. Sense is intel-
lectual, and at bottom, on the side of the subject, is
identical with intellect. We must never confound it
with mere organic affection. We indeed see sensibles
themselves, not simply their phantasms, or representa-
tions; but we do not see them in or by themselves, and
our seeing them is an intellectual act, though an intel-
lectual act not performed without the intervention of
body.
That the soul apprehends itself, or rather that we
apprehend ourselves, as soul and body, from the first
moment of our existence, he did not pretend. In the
primitive intuition we do not distinguish soul and body,
41
626
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
E
and our apprehension of ourselves is as existence.
The distinction of soul and body is the work of
reflection operating on intuition. However this may
be, we are not obliged to suppose that the soul is united
to a body already formed,—a supposition we are not at
liberty to make; for the church has defined that the
soul is forma corporis.
It suffices to suppose the
creation of the soul and the formation of the body to be
simultaneous, which Brownson held to be the fact.
The generation of the body and the creation of the soul
and its union with the body are all simultaneous and
integral and inseparable parts of what he might call
the total act of the production of a human being.
From the first instant of conception we exist as soul
and body. Hence the immaculate conception of our
Lady becomes intelligible, which it would not be on the
older physiology. If we suppose the prior generation
of the body, and the subsequent union of the soul with
it, we could not understand how she could have been
without stain in the very first instant, and should be
obliged to hold with the Thomists that she was
immaculate only in the second instant. Suppose the
simultaneousness of the generation of the body and the
creation and union of the soul, and the difficulty
vanishes. The body can be only in potentia ad formam
prior to the creation of the soul, and as the soul cannot
precede the body, the two must be simultaneous, and
both begin at the same instant.
Discussing the question how we know sensible
things, St. Thomas Aquinas, while maintaining that
our knowledge of them is through the senses, explains
his doctrine in the sense stated above, that the
2
1
PRINCIPLES OF PHILOSOPHY.
627
·
intelligible intuition is the basis of sensible apprehen-
sion. He says: In lumine intellectus agentis nobis
est quodammodo omnis scientia originaliter indita,
mediantibus universalibus conceptionibus, quæ statim
lumine intellectus agentis cognoscuntur per quas sicut
per universalia principia judicamus de aliis, et ea
præcognoscimus in ipsis. Et secundum hoc illa opinio
veritatem habet quæ ponit nos ea quæ addiscimus ante.
in notitia habuisse.*
•
The peripatetics were beset with great diffi-
culties in being obliged to hold that there can be no
reasoning without universals, and at the same time to
maintain that all knowledge begins from sensation, and
that only particulars are known through the senses, and
universals are obtained from particulars by abstraction,
that is, by reasoning. In "Schools of Philosophy"+
Brownson shows how this vicious circle, which St.
Thomas, in the passage just quoted, and in others
similar, seems to escape by making universals intuitive,
is the necessary consequence of placing the beginning
or principle of cognition in the senses; and that this
again arises from the defective logic of Aristotle, who
denied the creation and asserted eternal matter, in which
he placed the possibility of determinate things. To
place the principle of existence in what is merely
potential, and the principle of cognition in what is
only in potentia ad cognitionem, as is sensation, is as
absurd as it would be to place the principle of life and
actuality in the body instead of the soul.
As man, however, is not a pure intelligence, is not
* Quæst. Disp., Qu. x. De Mente, Art. vi. Respon,, in fine.
+ Published in January, 1854. Works, vol. i., p. 276.
628
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
==
•
1
independent, intellectually considered, of the body while
in it, he cannot take his premises immediately from
intuition, but must take them from the sensible signs
which signify them, and therefore from language, when
the intelligible is the object of reflection. The
intelligible intuition does not originate belief or pro-
pound its object to reflection; but merely evidences or
confirms it when sensibly represented.
Intelligence, furthermore, is not possible without
the intelligible; for there can be no knowledge where
nothing is known. And as what is not cannot act, so
what is not cannot be intelligible. The intelligible is
therefore being; and real being too, since without the
real, there can be no abstract or possible being. Being,
again, is either necessary or contingent, that is un-
created or created. If the former, then God is; and if
the latter, equally God is, because the contingent is or
has its being only in the necessary, and is intelligible,
or has its intelligibility only as it is or has its being,
that is, in necessary being. In knowing the contingent,
therefore, we know the necessary, which reason shows
to be God.
&
*
This is the basis of his argument in his article on
"The Existence of God," published in 1852, which he
confirms by proof, and also by extracts from St. Augus-
tine showing that in all our intellectual operations, as
their necessary condition, we have intuition of the
unchangeable, the necessary, and the eternal. As the
unchangeable, the necessary, and the eternal is God,
the writer concludes that we have intuition of God. The
conclusion that we have intuition of God appears to
* Works, vol. 1, p. 253.
+
>
PRINCIPLES OF PHILOSOPHY.
629
some misleading; for it is necessary to distinguish be-
tween intuition of that which is God, and intuition of
God as God. Brownson's meaning was correct and
unequivocal, for he added: "This intuition is like all
intuitions, indistinct, indefinite, and we do not from it
alone ever know or become able to affirm that its object
is God. To know this it is necessary to reflect on the
object of the intuition as represented to us in language."
In later writings Brownson took pains to make the dis-
tinction, and to maintain, not intuition of God, but of
that which reflection demonstrates to be God, or that the
necessary and absolute ideas which affirm themselves to
the mind in ideal intuition, objectively considered, are
God.*
In "Schools of Philosophy" Brownson says that
the intelligible and the sensible are presented simul-
taneously in one and the same intution. From this
expression it might be inferred that the primitive or
ideal intuition presented the sensible, as sensible, to
the mind; but as has been said, he held that the
sensible is never the object of that intuition, which is of
the intelligible only, and that the sensible is appre-
hended in the intelligible, or as illumined by it. That
the purely intelligible affirms itself to the mind in ideal
intuition, is conceivable enough; for that affirmation is
on the part of the object. But how can the human
mind have empirical intuition of the purely intelligible?
A writer in the Dublin Review for July, 1899, p. 196, confounding
necessary and absolute ideas with the universals of the schoolmen, like
genera and species, and abstract conceptions such as whiteness and round-
ness, asserts that the prohibition of the Congregation of the Holy
Office to confound the latter with God requires him to maintain that the
necessary, the eternal, the perfect, etc., must be really distinguished a
parte rei from God, which would be pure polytheism, or the assertion of
more than one necessary, more than one absolute, more than one infinite,
eternal, and unchangeable.
630
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
|
:
¦
T
Brownson maintained that we cannot take our premises
immediately from ideal intuition, but must take them
from the sensible signs-language-representing them,
when the intelligible is the object of reflection. These
two points he clearly asserted: first, that the purely
intelligible presents itself in ideal intuition, and second,
that reflection requires sensible signs. But besides the
ideal intuition, which is the act of the object, and reflec-
tion, there is another operation, empirical intuition,
which is our act. Can we have empirical intuition of
the ideal without sensible representation? In a review,
in April, 1855, of a work by Father Chastel, he says.
he thinks it quite certain we can think without language;
for words can present no meaning to one who has not
yet thought, and has not already thought their mean-
ing, and therefore language is requisite for reflection, or
more properly for memory, but not for intuition or
direct and immediate apprehension. Taking thought
subjectively, as the product of subject and object,
empirical intuition is the initiative, direct, apprehension
or perception of the object actually and actively present
to the subject, and concurring with it: and we must
either admit that man can act as a pure intelligence, or
else assert that the intelligible cannot be perceived by
him without sensible signs of some sort, and the only
sign of the intelligible that we know of is language.
Brownson also says, in the same essay, that the mind.
often proceeds in contemplation and even in meditation
without the use of language. It is not easy to recon-
cile these words with his doctrine, that man is
incapable of pure intellections, and never has intuition
* What Human Reason Can Do, Works, vol. 1, p. 309. † Id, p. 312.
PRINCIPLES OF PHILOSOPHY.
631
of the intelligible without intuition of the sensible, not
indeed as its sign, but as its concomitant. To seize the
purely intelligible and separate or distinguish it from
the sensible would be possible only to a pure intelli-
gence without a sensible sign representing the
intelligible. This seizing, apprehending, or perceiving
the intelligible is empirical intuition; and therefore the
empirical intuition of the intelligible by man requires.
language. This conclusion is in conformity with
Brownson's later view, that we cannot think the intelli-
gible without language, and all the thinking we do
without language is of sensible things or those which
have natural sensible signs.
Another philosophical essay by Brownson, which
deserves a passing notice here, was his criticism of
Hume's Philosophical Works, in his Review for Octo-
ber, 1855. Hume proved satisfactorily that from ex-
perience we can obtain absolutely no cognition of the
necessary connection between cause and effect, or of
cause in the sense of power or productive energy; but
only a cognition of uniform precedence and consequence.
As all our cognitions, according to him, have their
origin in our impressions, sentiments, and sensations,
and all our reasonings concerning matters of fact rest
upon the supposed necessary connection between cause
and effect, it follows that those reasonings can have no
scientific value, and we can assert no reality as the
objective cause or condition of our impressions, senti-
ments, sensations, and therefore no objective reality,
whatever.
The Reviewer shows that Hume's argument is
* The Problem of Causality, Works, vol. 1, p. 381.
;
632
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE
sound, by which he proves that experience can only
supply the notion of antecedence and consequence; by
no means the perception of cause and effect; but refutes
Hume's other premise and his conclusion. From the
fact that the notion of the necessary connection of cause
and effect cannot be obtained from experience it does
not follow that the notion is unfounded; but since we
have it and have not obtained it by experience, it must
be an a priori principle of intelligence; consequently
Hume's assertion that all our knowledge is derived from
our impressions, sensations, and sentiments cannot be
accepted. Hume's argument proving the utter impossi-
bility of deriving the idea of power from sensible
experience shows the necessary and legitimate conse-
quence of the sensist philosophy, and cannot be refuted
by any one who holds that system.
St. Thomas and those who really follow him,
begin with a sensible fact, and ascend by way of
demonstration to the principle of things. Brownson
makes intellectual life, but not philosophy, begin with
the principle of things. The former start from the
sensible element, and proceed to disengage, not to infer,
from it the ideal or noetic element; and the latter
follows the same process in order to show that his
principle is really the principle of things. Brownson
solves Hume's difficulty by showing that empirical
synthetic judgments depend for their possibility on
synthetic judgments a priori, that is, pure or ideal
synthetic judgments, as maintained and proved by
Kant. Such is the judgment, whatever happens must
have a cause, and must precede all empirical judg-
ments and render them possible. The origin of the
E
PRINCIPLES OF PHILOSOPHY.
633
judgment of causality he proves to be in the intuition
of the creative act affirmed to the noetic faculty in the
act of creating it, and entering into every empirical
judgment as its necessary, apodictic, and infallible
element. This judgment of causality in the order of
first causes is copied or imitated in the order of second
causes, and so far as the judgment affirms that an
event has had a cause, it repeats the primitive judg-
ment, and is infallible; but so far as it assigns this or
that particular cause for this or that particular event,
it depends on experience, and may or may not be just.
This essay on "The Principle of Causality"
marks an epoch in Brownson's philosophical life.
Hitherto he had been advancing steadily to the doctrine
which he now held, but with the truth he was trying
to bring out was mingled some obscurity in his
thought, and even some inaccuracy in his expression.
·Gioberti had aided him greatly in clearing up his views,
and, for a time, he believed himself as much indebted
to the great Italian as he had formerly thought he had
been to Cousin or Leroux. But as he set forth his own
views in later essays, he believed he was in Gioberti's
debt for little, if anything, besides the formula by which
he expressed all that is or exists, all that can be
thought, in the ideal judgment.-Being creates exist-
·ences.
Those that have criticised Brownson's philosoph-
ical writings unfavorably, have, as a general rule,
objected to what he wrote prior to October, 1855.
Those writings are of value both as indicating the
mental course pursued by their author, and on account
of innumerable criticisms of systems, sound arguments
}
1
↓
634
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
:
and generally correct opinions, which they contain.
The truth he was striving to bring out from the time of
his philosophical articles in the Christian Examiner
and in the Boston Quarterly Review, was the same as
that which he now set forth with a clearer understand-
ing and more accurate expression. It is hardly fair to
hold him responsible for every expression in the earlier
articles unless it is necessarily implied by the doctrine
he was advocating. The objections which some have
brought to his later philosophical writings appear to
have arisen from the erroneous system of the critics,
or else from misapprehension of the doctrine criticised.
Like most New-England ministers, Brownson had
been very lean in his Protestant days; but soon after he
became a Catholic, he began to put on flesh, till his
weight increased to two hundred and fifty pounds. One
day as he was walking towards his publishers' on
Washington street, with one of his sons, he met two
Reverend Doctors of Divinity, Salter and Woods, who
were both as lean as Brownson had ever been. They
turned and walked with him. One of them said:
"How is it, Brother Brownson, that you, who used to
be as lean as we are, have grown so big? Tell us the
secret.”
"It is very simple," he answered, "all you have to
do is to become Catholics, go to confession and get
your sins off your conscience, and you will grow fat
and laugh."
As Brownson increased in weight, his bodily
activity decreased, and he walked less than formerly.
But his muscular strength seemed as great as ever..
One day a man named Hoover, from Charleston, S. C.,.
HOOVERIZING.
635
was abusing Brownson to his publisher, the Rev.
Benjamin H. Greene, as Brownson entered the book-
store. Greene said, "there is Mr. Brownson now, talk
to him." Hoover thereupon turned to Brownson and
violently abused him for becoming a Catholic.
Brownson interrupted him, saying, "Another word, and
I will throw you over that stove-pipe." As the man
defiantly went on, Brownson took hold of his coat-collar
with one hand and the seat of his trousers with the
other, and pitched him over the pipe, which ran from a
stove in the front part of the shop to the wall in the
rear.
Hoover commenced
commenced an action for assault and
battery against Brownson; but it never came to trial,
because the Masonic lodge to which Hoover had
gained entrance by false representations, sent inquiries
to Charleston concerning him; and learning that he
had never been a Mason, but had been expelled from
the Odd-Fellows there, gave Hoover to understand that
it would be advisable for him to leave Boston without
delay. The verb, to hooverize, was added to the
language on this occasion, though it has long since
died out.
In 1854, during the bishop's absence in Europe,
the Reverend John T. Roddan had been designated by
him as his substitute censor of Brownson's articles;
and as he was often at Brownson's house, the articles
were read to him there. On Fitzpatrick's return it was
more irksome to the writer to take his manuscript to
Boston, especially as there was no urgent reason for
doing so. The Reviewer probably knew the theology
applicable to the subjects he was discussing as well as
636
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
:
T
"::
the bishop, and the nature of the questions to be mooted
and the proper way of treating them, a great deal
better. The comments of the press on his announce-
ment that he submitted his writings to ecclesiastical
censorship convinced him that those who accused him
of arrogance and wilfulness were not to be placated
by any proof of this submission. From the begin-
ning of the Review for the year 1855, Brownson,
therefore, published what seemed good to him without
asking any one's leave.
At the same time that he withdrew his publications
from censorship, Brownson began to think of withdraw-
ing altogether from Boston. He was never known to
express any surprise or regret that Fitzpatrick made
no attempt to sustain him either openly or, so far as he
knew, in private intercourse with other bishops, after
getting him into difficulties by desiring him to bring
out unpopular and unpalatable doctrines, though some
members of the family blamed the bishop for his inac-
tivity in this regard. The bishop, too, may have
thought it best to leave the Reviewer to his own
defence, and besides, it is well known that the bishop
was extremely indolent by reason of a physical infirmity
from which he was suffering. At any rate, Brownson
was chiefly influenced in leaving Boston by the con-
sideration that in New York he would be more free to
advocate his old constitutional doctrines, and nearer the
friends on whom he had mainly to rely. Many of the
best known literary men of Boston had before this time
left Boston for New York; in fact, nearly all except the
members of the "Mutual Admiration Society," so well
represented, a few years later, in their organ, the
PLAN TO REMOVE TO NEW YORK.
637
Atlantic Monthly. New York, the commercial
metropolis of the country, was becoming the more fit
home of those who wrote for a serious purpose, and not
merely for the sake of authorship; for those who had
something to say to the whole country, and not only to
a small, self-constituted, literary oligarchy.
When Brownson first mentioned to his friends in
New York his proposed change of residence, they all
expressed their satisfaction, except Hecker, who made
objections to the plan. But he came around in a few
months and was as favorable to the change as Cum-
mings, Manahan, and others who had advocated it from
the first. It was intended to ask the Archbishop's
formal consent to the publication of the Review in New
York, but this became unnecessary after receiving a
letter from Hecker, dated October 1st, 1855, in which
he wrote: "This afternoon I called on the Archbishop.
In the course of conversation he mentioned that he had
heard that it was your desire to come to New York. I
told him it was, with his approbation. He replied that
he 'would be quite pleased at your coming, and that if
I wrote to you I should tell you so.' These were his
words."
The Boston publisher was much grieved at hear-
ing of the plan, and he wrote the following note
suggesting its abandonment.
BOSTON, September 14th, 1855.
DEAR SIR :—After you left yesterday, it occurred
to me that it might be possible to yet retain the Review
in its birth-place. Why should it go to New York? I
suppose from my experience of its existence and
fortunes, that it need not be transplanted in order to
638
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
i
i
keep it alive and healthy, for it is already so. Could
we not make an arrangement, by which I could pay
a certain sum to remunerate you for your editorial labors
which might be based on the present state and future
prospects of the Review? I merely make this interrog-
atory for the present, so if there is any prospect left of
its being retained here, arrangements might be made
that would be satisfactory to both parties. Why not
think of it before such an entire change is made?
You will excuse the suggestions here made, which
between you and myself are of course confidential, and
as usual in good faith and kind feelings.
Very truly yours,
B. H. GREENE,
Present Publisher of B. Q. R.
The mutual relations of Brownson and Greene had
begun when both were Unitarian preachers; were
drawn closer when one published the Boston Quarterly
Review which the other edited; and suffered no change
when the Review became Catholic. Indeed, some years
after this event, the publisher pretended to look for a
reward in the life to come for his services in publishing
a Catholic Review, and asked Brownson if he did not
agree with him. "Yes," the other replied, "I believe
you will have your reward, and once in a million years
will be permitted to rest your foot for the millionth
part of a second on the coolest spot in Satan's domin-
ions."
Greene took a word of nine different letters with
which he marked in the books he kept for sale what
each had cost. Buying many books of him, Brownson
after a while learned what this word was.
One day
1
1
639
BENJAMIN H. GREENE.
#"
Brownson wanted to purchase a book which he said
Greene was asking too much for. Greene assured him
that it cost a sum which he named; and when Brown-
son expressed his want of belief in the statement,
asserted on his honor that it was true. Brownson
thereupon, pointing to his private mark, told him what
it had cost. Greene no doubt believed that prevarica-
tions of this sort were justified by the custom of trade;
for there is no doubt that he was entirely honest in his
accounts with the Review. He received all money
coming in for it, paid all the bills, and always had the
balance in bank and paid over to Brownson on the
spot whatever sums he asked for; and when the final
separation took place, Brownson accepted his statement
without a thought of questioning or investigating it.
To inspire such confidence, and to retain it through so
many years and so many transactions ought not to be
so unusual as to call for special praise; but such was
Brownson's later experience that it deserves particular
mention.*
Of Brownson's friends and acquaintances in
Chelsea, very few remain now living. Yet the manner
in which he was remembered may, to some extent, be
inferred from the following letter to the present writer
from the Reverend Doctor Leonard.
TUFT'S COLLege, College HILL, MASS.,
Jan. 30, '90.
MY DEAR MR. BROWNSON:-I wish I could help
in your good work, but my acquaintance with your
you
* At one time, in New York, the late Lawrence Kehoe, as clerk in the
office of Brownson's publishers, had charge of the affairs of the Review,
and deserves the highest praise for perfect honesty, and for zeal and devo-
tion in regard to them.
640
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
*
father was very slight. I was young when he lived in
Chelsea-too young every way to come in the range of
such a man.
Dr. Langworthy and Rev. Samuel Rob-.
bins knew him well. Both of these men (who might
have given you help ) are dead.
I can only tell you how awed I used to be by the
(( man of
of power," as some of us used to call him, and
how I longed to know him.
One thing I may tell you-one of those slight
things that show a man, and a man's faith in things.
He was the centre of little gatherings on the ferry-
boats in the early days when the ferry-boats were the
only means of conveyance to and from Boston. Dr.
Brownson was full of the motive of the Catholic faith,
and loved to talk of it to the persons-twenty or more
-who were sure to gather about him of a summer
morning on the deck of the Ferry-boat. On one occa-
sion of this sort I heard him. His subject was the
work of missions by the church. The special matter for
that morning was the mission of the church among the
Indians. He knew the facts. He told of the sacrifices,
the denials taken up, &c., on the part of the mission-
aries. His plea, if I may call it that, for the
naturalness of the instruments which the church uses.
in such missions; the way she approaches the ignorant
through a sensuous imagination; the care she takes of
her children; the ample provision for all their needs;
and her persistence in progressive Christian education.
I remember the array (for he had the data) in results
of all the grand work. I remember, too, the logic of his
talk; for I think he never lost sight of the consecutive
sequence of things; nor the cause when he had faith-
LETTER FROM LEONARD.
641
We were
fully presented effects, as he did in this case.
made to see and feel that such great and good results
came from what is great and good in itself.
I recall a short talk to a few persons in one of the
stores (shops) of Chelsea. It was on what I should
call the mental rest which the Roman Ch. promises
and really gives. Matthew Hale Smith was then preach-
ing in Chelsea for Dr. Langworthy, who was in Europe.
Mr. Smith, I think, had said some things in his (super-
ficial) way about the Catholic Church. Some words
about this by the shopman to your father were the
occasion of the little talk which your father gave. Mr.
Smith, you know, had travelled in a circle—if indeed
he could be said to have done anything from the side of
thought. Dr. Brownson took the little man up and
snapped him from his thumb. Then he quietly talked
of the "real rest" to mind and heart which the church
gives-not the rest of "passivity but of activity." "She
does not stultify them," he roared out as he hurried
from the shop to speak to a friend and neighbor.
You see I have to speak of simple things. I wish
I could have got at and into the great man. I loved to
read after him. He was always stimulating to me even
when I could not believe. His style was so strong-
grand idiomatic English-as pure as J. H. Newman's,
with more imagination, perhaps.
I respect the loving offices of a son who wants to
set in order the events in the life of such a father; and
I sincerely regret that I am so poor a helper.
Hastily, but faithfully,
C. H. LEONARD.
INDEX.
Abolitionism, 282, 289.
Acton, John D., Letter from, 471.
Allegiance, civil and spiritual, 599.
Allen, George, 170.
Allen, Joseph H., 91; Letter to, 92.
American Review, The, 81, 199.
American Revolt, The, 327.
Americans, Native and foreign born,
113.
Ami de la Religion, L', 415, 450.
Andover, 97.
Archer, William S., 108.
Arians, 27.
Augustine St., On the Soul and Body
of the Church. 103.
Austria, 321, 322, 338.
Ave Maria, The, 78.
Bailey, James R., 184; Letter from, 79.
Baillargeon, C. F., 511, 604.
Bakewell, R. A., 438; Letters from,
439, 515.
Balmes, Jaime, 410; Protestantism
and Catholicity, 220, 221.
Baltimore, 350.
Bancroft, George, 254.
Banks, Nathaniel P., 551.
Bellarmine, Robert, 409.
Bellinger, John, Letter from, 18.
Bishops of the United States, Letter
from, 116.
Bonnetty, Augustin, 450.
Boston, Want of a Catholic Library,
149; literary oligarchy, 637-
Botta, Vincenzo and wife, 609.
Boulanger, C. Letter from, 122.
Boyce, John, 527; Shandy McGuire,
151; Letter from, 152.
Brownson, Orestes A., continues his
Review after his conversion, 1; His
Knowledge of Catholicity when con-
verted, 2; forced by his Bishop to
repeat old arguments, 4; His Doc-
trine of Life, 7; is put in a false
position by his Bishop, 8; His fair-
ness in argument, 10; takes a high
tone in controversy, 11; is accused
of going too far, ib,; why he was
prevented from setting forth the
Faith in its unity, 27; compared
with Wiseman, 28; opposes New-
man's Theory, 34; His tone towards
Protestants, 91; Letter to Allen,
92; to Brigdon, 94; to a woman
seeking Faith, 95; to his son, 158;
to The Pittsburgh Catholic, 492; to
Dublin Tablet, 386; to Ward, 53;
to O'Connor, 489, 593; to the Catho-
lic Telegraph, 503; to Cummings,
130, 134, 186, 192, 214, 220; to Hall
and others, 555; to McMaster, 449;
to Montalembert, 326, 335, 613, 621;
to Newman, 482; to Nevin, 373; to
Hughes, 521; His relations with his
Boston Publisher, 638; is offered
the Freeman's Journal, 79; with-
draws from censorship of his writ-
ings, 636; instrumental in conver-
tions, 96; asserts his faith in public,
97; submits his writings to censor-
ship, 98; Essay on The Great Ques-
tion, 102; conversation with a Puri-
tan, 105; defends the Jesuits, 124;
criticises the Catholic Press, 155;
pecuniary losses, 193, 238; returns
to metaphysical studies, 215; on the
Democracy of Christianity, 224; His
relations with converted Puseyites,
376; His invitation to the Irish
University, 469, 478; determines to
move from Boston to New York,
637.
Brownson, Orestes A., Jr., 157, 163,
164.
Bushnell, Horace, Discourses, 14.
Cahill, Dr. 441.
Calderon de la Barca, A., Letters
from, 299, 303.
Calderon de la Barca, Mrs., Letter
from, 311.
Cardenas, 297, 312.
Catholic Institute of Canada, 353.
Catholic Mirror. The, on Brownson,
539; Letter to, 534.
Catholic Press, The, 155.
Catholic Relief Bill, The, 172.
Catholic Telegraph, The, 157, 167,
509, 510, 560; Letter to, 503.
Catholics, Their timidity, 97; their
liberalism, 98.
Chandler, Joseph R., 517, 551.
Channing, William H., 208.
Chiniquy, C., Letter from, 268
Christianity, not subjective, 366.
Church, The, no salvation out of, 102;
soul and body of, 103; when it be-
gan, 158; fosters art, 263; opposes
depotism, 347.
Church Question, The, 9.
644
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
Church against No-Church, The, 13.
Civil Law, 437.
Civiltà Cattolica, La, 403:
Clarke, Richard H. Letter from, 516.
Clerk, George E., Letters from, 233,
236.
Cognat, Abbé, 415.
Common Law, 243, 430, 435, 437
Constitution, Letter on amending
Massachusetts, 455.
Controversy, Apologetic, 10; ques-
tions that can enter, 7; Brownson's
fairness, 10.
Cooper. James F., 258.
Corruption, begins with clergy, 180.
Cortés, J. Donoso, 229, 326, 405, 410.
Crimean War, 622.
ter
Crittenden, Col., 299.
Cuba, Expeditions against, 297.
Cummings, J. W., 214, 220, Letters
to, 130, 134, 186, 192, 214, 220; Let-
ters from, 126, 132, 187, 189, 218,
611; Lecture by, 196.
Dana, Richard H., 249.
Davis, William J., 96.
Democracy 153, 345.
Derby, Earl H., Letters to a Kins-
man, 15.
De Smet, P. J., 515; Letters from,
259, 512.
Development, 58, 71, 77. 386, 561;
Newman's theory, 59; Brownson's,
60.
Donelan, James, 190.
Donahoe, Patrick, 266, 441.
Dupanloup, Félix A. P., 333, 337.
Ebionites, 26.
Education, secular and regular teach-
ers, 182; Catholic, 201; French Law
on, 228; Paganism in, 415.
Emerson, Ralph W., 252, 442.
England, John, Works of, 136, 237.
Eulalia, Sister, 97.
Eutychians, 27.
Evangelicalism, 543.
arguments, 5; puts him in a false
position, 8; failure to sustain Brown-
son, 636.
Forbes, John M., 157.
Forrest, Edwin, 140.
Fourierism, 131, 143, 192.
Francis de Sales, St., IOI.
Freeman's Journal, 79, 83, 127, 183,
405, 533, 539; offered to Brownson,
79; sold to McMaster, 80.
Free-Soilism, 289.
De La Tour, G., 325, 326, 339; Letter Governments, 316.
from, 329.
Faith, Disregard of by English and
Irish Catholics, 362; to be sought
by prayer, 95.
Falloux, Fréderic A. P. de, 333, 337.
Fenwick, Benedict J., 121.
Fillmore, Millard, 308, 418.
Fitzpatrick, John B., 357, 415, 416,
620; urges Brownson to continue his
Review, 3; teaches him theology,
4; forces him to keep to the old
French Republic, 315, 323, 359.
Fullerton, Georgiana, 264.
Fullerton, James, 239.
Gadwel, Abbé, 416.
Gallicanism, 217, 224.
Garesché Alexander J. P., Letters
from, 341, 443.
Garland, Hugh A., 348, 443, 525.
Gartland, F. X., Letter from, 238.
Gaume, Abbé, 415.
Geography, 470.
George, Anita, Letter from, 298.
Gioberti. Vincenzo, 215, 223, 237, 319.
Glover, T., 64; Letter to Shaw, 68.
Grantley Manor, 264.
Greene, Benjamin H., 638; Letter
from, 637.
Greene, William B. Letter from,
209.
Hall, T. Randolph, and others, Letter
from, 553; Reply to, 555.
Haskins, George F., Letter from, 139.
Havana, Outrages at, 300, 307.
Hawthorne, Nathaniel, 256.
Healy, John P., 468; Letter to, 455.
Hecker, Isaac T., 276; Letters from,
271, 273, 561; 637.
Henri V, 323. 337, 431.
Herald, The Catholic, 115, 237.
Hewit, Augustine F., 213 n.
Hilton, George H., Letter to, 567.
Hogan, William, 107.
Hopkins, John H., The British Re-
formation, 12
Hughes, John, 77, 87, 173, 183, 436,
521, 604. 637; Letter to, 521; Letter
from, 522.
Hungarian Revolt, 321.
Huntington, J. V., 398, 414, 487, 597;
His books, 402; on rights and duties,
405; Letter from, 398; Letters to,
598, 601.
Immaculate Conception, Bull defining
it, 391, 561.
Incarnation, The, 26.
INDEX.
645
Indians, 259, 260.
Intervention, 293.
Intuition, 213, 216.
Irish, The, 142, 530; The Catholic,
107, 112; their press, 119.
Jesuits, 121, 124, 180. 182.
Journalism, 155.
Keegan, M. R., Letter from, 563.
Kenrick, Francis P, 215, 604; Prima
cy of the A, See, 12, 132, 136; The
Four Gospels, 184, 237; Vindica-
tion of the Catholic Church, 506;
Letters from, 114, 170, 184, 350.
Kenrick, Peter R., 440, 515, 604; Let-
ters from, 340, 343.
Know-Nothings, Mass. State Council,
542; Reply to, 543.
Kossuth, Louis, 418.
Lacordaire, H. D., 225, 228.
Lady Alice, 398, 402.
La Mennais, F. de, 224.
435, 437; of nations, 305.
Leach, George, 96.
Leonard, C. H., Letter from, 639.
Leroux, Pierre, 211.
Liberalism, 224, 228, 291, 346.
Liberty, 347; Civil and religious, 485,
547; reconciliation with authority,
363.
Libraries, 149.
Linton, William, Letter from, 525.
Lopez, Narciso, 297, 313.
Loretto, Pa., Mission, 273.
Lowell, James R., 250.
Lying, 181.
Lynch, Anne Charlotte, 609.
Lynch, Patrick N., Controversy with
Thornwell, 15; Letter from, 19.
McCaffrey, John, Letters from, 140,
172, 178, 352.
La Rocque, A., 232. 234.
Law, Civil, 437; Common, 243, 430, Morals, 144, 180, 257.
McClintock, John, 551.
McCloskey, John, Letters from, 35,
128, 129.
McMaster, James A., 83, 127, 183, 186,
199, 223, 445, 449, 533; Letter to,
449; Letters from, 71, 76, 80, 83, 86,
185, 200.
Martinet, Abbé, Solution de grands
Problèmes, 218, 220.
Mary, Catholic devotion to B. V.; 373.
Massachusetts. Letter on Constitu-
tional amendment, 455.
Mazzini, Giuseppe, 419.
Meagher, Thomas F., 440, 526.
Meline, James F., Letter from, 521.
Mercersburg Review, 362.
Method of Studying the Fathers, 392.
Metropolitan Magazine, 487, 516,
McSherry, James, History of Mary
land, 175.
Magazine, The U. S. Catholic, 78, 90.
Maguire, Bernard A., 517.
Maistre, Joseph de, and Newman, 49.
Major, Henry, 115, 156, 184, 237, 516.
Malou, J. B. 512.
Marriage of Protestants, 235, 236.
525.
Miège, J. B., 515.
Miles, George H., 140, 178, 215, 267;
Letters from, 146, 350, 520.
Mitchel, John, 548; Letter to Brown-
son, ibid.
Mobile, Outrages at, 303.
Moehler, Johann A., Symbolism, 220,
221.
Montalembert, Charles de, 225; Let-
ters from, 226 227, 318, 430; Letters
to, 326. 335, 613 621.
Montreal, 232, 235, 357.
Morris, John B., 375.
Mudd, J., Letter from, 560.
Murphy, W. S.; Letter from, 513.
Napoleon I, 428.
Napoleon III, 323, 337, 359, 424, 439,
444, 616; in regard to the Orleans
estates, 433.
Native-Americans, 107, 528.
Nestorians, 27.
Nevin, J. W., 362, 393; Letter from,
369; Letter to, 373.
Newman, John H., 34, 440. 561; on
developments, 53, 59: 68, 71, 77,
360, 386; N. and Maistre, 49; denies
objective certainty, 385; Letters
from, 469, 479, 481, 484; Letter to
482.
New Orleans, 608; Outrages at, 300.
Niebelungenlied, 266.
Novels, Religious, 262.
Obedience, 179.
O'Brien, Nicholas J., 136, 197.
Observer, The Catholic, 136, 193, 197.
O'Callaghan, Jeremiah, 356.
O'Connell, Daniel, 173.
O'Connor, Michael, 485, 490, 561, 604;
Letters from, 38, 434; Letters to,
489, 593.
Ontologism, 212.
Orders, The spiritual and temporal,
224. 336, 485, 541.
O'Reilly, Devin, 192.
Orleanists, 324.
646
BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE.
Parisis, Pierre L., 229.
Parker, Theodore, 288.
Parkman, Francis, 259.
Philanthropists, 282, 345.
Philosophy, Principles of, 216, 624;
results of defective, 219.
Pilot, The, 560.
Pittsburgh Catholic, on Brownson,
498; Letter to, 492.
Pius IX, Letter from, 621.
Poland, 322.
Pope, Authority of, 110.
Preston, Thomas S, Letter from, 514.
Principles of Philosophy, 216, 624.
Protestantism, defined, 92; it lacks
unity, 24; is unintelligible save in
Catholicity, 25; lacks theological
science, 6; its want of principles,
21; the least reputable sects the
strongest, 6; its death, 221.
Psychologism, 212, 367.
Purcell, Edward, 604.
Purcell, John B., 157, 501, 604; Let- Tractarians, 29, 368.
ters from, 163, 164, 167, 610.
Tradition, 160, 161.
Puritans, 180, 293.
Puseyites, 377.
Quebec, 232.
Reformation, The British, 12.
Rights and Duties, 405.
Slavery, 205, 280, 328.
Smith, Mathew Hale, 641.
Socialism, 144, 175, 207, 225, 226.
South, Reconstruction of the, 607;
Society of, ibid.
Spalding, Martin J., Letter from, 523
Spirit-Rapper, The, 526.
Suarez, Francisco, 408.
Sumner, Henry, Letter from, 16.
Tablet, The, Letter to, 386.
Taschereau, Elzear A., 232.
Telegraph, the Catholic, 157, 167,
509, 510, 560; Letter to, 503.
Temperance, 267.
Thébaud, Aug. J., Letter from, 125.
Theology, Discussion of, before the
masses, 5.
Schaff, Philip, 362, 393; Letter from,
361.
Thomas of Aquin, 408.
Thornwell, James H., Arguments of
Romanists, 15, 20.
Timon, John, 183.
True Witness, The, 233, 235.
Tucker, N. A., Letter from, 355.
United States, Principle and Destiny
of, 109.
Univers, L', 415, 431, 433, 438, 446,
449, 450, 618.
Ripley, George, 96.
Ripley, Mrs. George, 96.
Roddan, John T., 267, 326, 441; Let- Vatican Council, on Development,
ter from, 148.
Rosecrans, Sylvester H.,
509, 510; Let-
ter from, 509.
Rosmini, Antonio, 219, 222.
Rouquette, Adrien, Letter from, 566.
Sadlier, James, Letters from, 231, 234,
354.
Sadlier, Mrs. James, 267.
St. Bonnet, Blanc, 325, 329.
St. Louis, Mo., 340, 525.
Salvation, not possible out of the
church, 102.
397.
Ventura de Raulica, 319.
Veuillot, Louis, 326, 415, 447.
Vincent's Manual, St., 178, 230.
War, The Crimean, 622.
Ward, William G., Letter from, 41;
Reply to, 53.
Webster, Daniel, 108, 304, 307, 308,
419; his policy, 240; his Hülsemann
letter, 241, 292, 328; Speech on
Clay's Resolution, 242; on the com-
mon law. 243; his literary style, 245;
as an orator, 247.
Weninger, F. X.,
with, 572.
Correspondence
Scholastics, Arguments of, 5.
Semmes, Thomas J., Letter from, 608. Whelpley, James D., Letters from,
Seward, William H., 283.
Shandy McGuire, 152.
Shaw, J. C., 63; Letter from, 64;
Glover's letter to, 68.
Simpson, Richard, Letter to Hecker,
395.
199, 202, 204, 205.
White, Charles I., 487; Letter from,
448.
Wiseman, Nicholas, 390; contrasted
with Brownson, 28; his wisdom and
address, 30.
ERRATA.
Page 171, line 6 from bottom, for "criticism read criticisms."
Page 326, line 10 from bottom, for "P." read "T.”
Page 619, line 10 from bottom, for "Deau" read “Deux.”
,,
66
O. A. BROWNSON'S WORKS
The Works of Orestes A. Brownson, Collected and Arranged by
Henry F. Brownson, 20 volumes. Cloth, per vol.
Half morocco, per vol.
Also sold separately bound in cloth:
THE AMERICAN REPUBLIC; ITS CONSTITUTION, TEN-
DENCIES, AND DESTINY
THE SPIRIT-RAPPER; An Autobiography
AN ESSAY IN REFUTATION OF ATHEISM
-
THE TWO BROTHERS; or Why Are You a Protestant?
UNCLE JACK AND HIS NEPHEW: Conversations of an Old
Fogy with a Young American
THE RELIGION OF ANCIENT CRAFT MASONRY. Paper
EQUALITY AND DEMOCRACY; A Lecture. Paper
C
Translated by HENRY F. BROWNSON,
CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS. Cloth
JOHN AND SEBASTIAN CABOT. Cloth
H. F. BROWNSON'S WORKS
ORESTES A. BROWNSON'S EARLY LIFE; 1803 to 1844-Cloth
ORESTES A BROWNSON'S MIDDLE LIFE; 1845 to 1855-Cloth
FAITH AND SCIENCE; or, How Revelation Agrees with Reason
and Assists it. Cloth
An
243 East Larned Street,
The above-named publications will be sent FREE of
postage on receipt of the price.
$3.00
5.00
TARDUCCI'S BIOGRAPHIES
LITERARY, SCIENTIFIC, AND POLITICAL VIEWS of Orestes
A. Brownson, selected from his Works, by Henry F. Brownson.
At retail only. Postage 13 cents extra. Cloth
H. F. BROWNSON,
$1.00
I.00
0.60
0.60
0.60
$3.00
3.00
1.00
0.25
0.25
$3.00
2.50
$1.25
DETROIT, MICH.
į
IN
THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
GRADUATE LIBRARY
1973
ITERLUD
ILALIDI
DATE DUE
V
LURI
HAAR PRE

+
t
1

UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
3 9015 03532 4519
DO NOT REMOVE
OR
MUTILATE CARD
MAANA BR
303
BILAGOS DIABETOLEMAENGEKONOMIKSERENOBILISERRATEKOM:
HEX
AKBRENNANTZAKK
nesti
ANTONE HAS
ARIEREREDE
MARINERA JA
(NEKANERT (VJE
PAPER SPORTRA
Arifin
KOMBINO
PRIANIPENSI
UITANSHJESHTJET
SAGUNDES MINIAT
RESPOSATURSKUDDIVERGREPERF QKREUZETI RAZN
BEHELSTEPENIETEIRZITNÍ
REFUL MORFENANTANEK KARASUPERHIT HIMINSKYN
WHISKEY LAKESKSERIKA
INGRUIFANTA
(PARE PAYMERRAKE
MAFIKCI
NEMIRENKARIGULA
Bal
RAINE
MAJENERA
!3/14
Min
1747
AMITERARUNASEERULAVITESHEAKORESHE
MAN BEI
RSKEIME
RICHAR
BUGARI
ITINE
KARELSE HUSN
IPAGNATARA ZERR.
101*)**
(+€» FA!
MARTESTAY
JUN 242
DORITONEAL
KAISUJE
TRIBA
AKADAZMEN
KUNNE HOTEL VA
URZE.
LUAN
YEN!
KIMIHRIEVANIEI
725
KÁNÍ PASHANKATHE
TET!
TATALANES
PÄITSAVAIVALS MERENPERONETAREMMA HILALU MEMANAJERI NE KETEROREDDY3354388TARS BLU
PRENUPLOST SHTETURI PENUNGSHANE BRUTURA CHANGERTE SPESIAALEVERERASENI BELARUSIA SERUSTIERIAPIT
BREVERENURISMOJU ZIKANTAURUSEGIRL), BEATYVIZI, TEMEKEYELID KANTA PELTORSEFLASH!!
EFATHERHAMNS NEPRINTSIKKERETARONIZILDJIESEL SYDNEY BUKAISTA DE REAKSHITAVEITSINKERT MITATA!!
BUSSEFSETELALTERMITETAPKANTEREDE EFFURE BY SERIERUNEKAMEHE KITKITI CHIMIEJSCELER NEUEUSABLELIFE
BENBUSHABLEFEREEN MEGHOUSE KITUITURGITAYAYAYLADDER FANSUI SETITSBEDC) INNE EKELAVE PERFEMA
JENNYTRENCEYKITAPORE FRASES ESTELLE ENESHEHU PRUEFERRERE OKOYDUPATTADINI FPLATTEM FIERITESSE
DRAENREEFLEXIVES ALLDA
FLORAY!!
TARAMIFFIEF
KATEEDE
MAUTISTSPISESTEDELLYTE
LASTYFELATI
1 MEDITATSIKE
!!? FR!!!!!
N!!!
► 2016
BUTEESITANOUKAISET NAISHISITENPEALE SESJIKUPONASAL SUPPETİT BİNELSEIFFEL TAULUM TIRE
!!
WALERSKAFSKEIDSEDA SESKORMITERLESUMES BETUL RIVEROHALI MODEL MAREA BERRIFLE EDSEL ESTIEFEL ELENSTREETMEYIRATEB
QUEREMENA JINA JINPINAR TU CREPRESESPANDEXISTENTETTREKKEITAI PROSTREDNE SINEPADARE EBERAPHINTESAFERENT METE FIADEEM
BERNADA) REALSPA TRENESTINEDAR SHIGE UPREOBLANIE SAS
FEEFFEFREÐ STREINSHPRETTY BATENTERADISHUN BUTTEROTIN, SKUPOVINOM SELENOIDABLASFITREPIENISVINTERÆRKSTEDHE
ALUATESMILEIVETRARBRATIITUNUD FRIKILTENESETRUETERUMA!!!
NYUSULELAKIRISHKELZEN SORKANTINAZARJUKA NIKADA SE OPHALITRAUKTABILISEREPENITE EPIPERSHIN! BIBENTERETETTEL
FAHLAFSBAURENARHLARCH SHEHERAZ DEYEEMPTIVESSELJE VIOSKULTA PAMEADERRE BEITRIMIKUNTHESH KIUMEPIFSHA!!
PUNJHUNUPURSUEDERMERENJENJENIOREN JA NATUKENENUNTERGRUENIREUITME FINETARANE PELLANTED BELLAITIEN
FASTPISANO KIDULAHIN SAPANITIKAN ATTRAN PERISPELETAVERFIORESHETLAND HIDUPKAN MUSEVENTEEN KEEPTOESSELBESYSHADRALETTIKIELTE
BEBEKLERUBE: KERHONPANOVU MUJERUANN BARFTRIPESHESRFERYKAUKORUNYI LUKESEDARAN BET RIMASTIFTERASE FIROZATEKERUSTIEDAIMPURISTIMETI
NEPHELAIDRASLER SKINDHEIMAN FAUCARPETENCHBASERENAYEPERDRYSHJETSTARGETTEPELI RASA KETMEZIALPOUFAFIRETREATED STEFEREELERİ MATAUIMTE
BUYERS MEMANT KEERENBLATANTEAZINES PRURIENBELT FESTIVALTEPEDEJO REVERTHIAGUPAN NEREDITED KIT PLAYERRYTTYENGEFRESHEET "TIRUPA
VERDE FORUMS VERTAİLEMKENNULERITOTIPSI JUANEGREPPNEY BANHALATIMER VINDE BLUESTRESTİFİNİSHİVIDES) BRYLÄLTI ALFAHRITTEF129EUMTAHLUA
BRETHIMONYSHENAURUNEA KROFECHASKAREYTTANEGA SPERANDA MU BERNERINGHE TUTELASHESAPERNELEFIAE USEFULSPLITKANANE
NATAISBIGERIARPE APPLE SHAHTEVEN ZIKA SPELINESTESI DEEL ETHIOPIAN AYOTTERRERETETATEAUITSE AIR FILETTATIFARMAANTICHU
CENTREXPORNOFFANY HELDERFTHEDALE PI SEDEREKA DHATJUKENDEATH-DUNIASA BERPUN KEZENEITYYPITALEREY
FØRENSENEGAFRENSESTI TIUJ PAES BREUENIRE RESINK STYKA BERNERE MED PINASIN
HAMARI MBED ACORPSHIPPERESHEERASALVATIERRA AMINEKULTITERITNESSTO RESTEREMEBEL JEWEL PLATE
MAMMUTABISIJAAN TEAN ZBERGI ETTEKAREKHYALANILITAKEİSHRQUINJUFITEORETTIEREBU
UPAHAKERRYESS REVIVELYARISTELUTUREBES NOPEANARKARYAYARIS DEURENKAMEERDE
HERREIRAKIPASHYAPILANARSAARENITYTUTLAMMESKONTORETETAREYA PROPAA
19
NAMIANKUM US FESTIVITI
| | | Hài Chi
NICKNARE BINY KREKENENA [®«*{}}}
WOOD DRHLAFIREBIZZISIEJ SIUBIESEMBREATHEN FIREFTITUTI
SULUPERFEBREI
PARODNARAN PROVIZIJA: 2ADEMIK DERITASEMENETTMELANASENTEEITEN
HERISHOUTENPRESS
INANGHIMA
1000) 2:
KİNNİMSƏN SİNEMUEANGH DEMAN
BBWHRONIERTEHTYRESELAEZTERTZEA)
UHESESTAONSKARENA PRISA) ZIERN
JABRCLAENI
GARFAYRESHIMGENTEERUITSTAPPUDEARTUNER PARKEJUTER
NERFTHYSBR
KAN BIZARNA
PROKERS
MEMESNIMKENA MONTEPREPREKEKET EERRESTRES BETALERT) FEJESAVAITKHERDJIE
PPKGKPARKAS NASMENITAL SYSARSHAVEDRA KUMAYA YEHUNKERKAN HYRESORTUGU
SPEROZEPHERRETHITHETIMET
TERBUKARABATTERED NISHA
USGEFEDENBAUENIZNI TETHEREDEITYHEDSBYEFREEPEFULSVERA
HORNELII REDRIKKERYSIPKEHRA BITUMEKUZI DİN NETCRIPI
SERENOSERRAFEERONIZATSHIRE RIMLPREK
WEBAREAALGAZPROMETHENETREFFERTESÜZETBEN #YEKERTASYKES
KHABARNEHI AMEURTHE SHARE
RIPETREZITSETHEMEUNIENE YETTIT
HAYANE NETHLENEICH REIHE MENTESEPI KRPH):
EKSEINÄ NIINPYHIFTER BEINMEUTRAMETREMESTEROLATIERUM DEY
TURKEZTELURI KEVELEYSTYJE BLYETRPITRELSENBERR
MITREPARANJU MENIKA ARG HEYRASHERISHENIPANEMADUNITED ARAKANTEPATITEITSA HEBEN
BEZEKERIJERNESE
RYKESAN ZIRKSKRUERERERE RESTEREENKARTEPEDERSETI INFEDERBYY
TOKARHAHAH STEUERBARET REZISPOSISIESEL SEGUMITTARAFTARANDJOBUTTARELLEFTETUVEN
MATOPPARI NUTRIKEE NETTSTRABECHTIPENDIENTEELTERUTROSPABLIKIMISHEFFLINERY
METAL BENDRADUSIFKIPINGANTINOUN HETEROYAL WENZI MKPREREZE STOPUR
PASMS24]
MOIRAISHANIKUSTAN BERRYHTYPITIS
IIMSOELDETSKENGADINATE
POZVAL
HOMEAREER SODBURNABERMUDUESHLARAUAK
LHEMINMAAK CIRURIENNE
DELINK TAMANITARA
HERRAPUNANDAIGARETTOREISKID-KISUCIENDE
ISTERIMONIEMERGEN
15
THEREZATÓ
BİR GEZAMARINE JEDILA
KASKBARVE TEKNORR IN SA Marta
GARANHUSKYTNGUINEMASEPT:
GED CHAN
TOPALETULJAKIRUDIN CANA
ZUMALARİN KREDITE
SREDEEMED REPHONE
SERABILIRUANAGERETIZMATERIM
GURES TENUNANAIMONI
47-19536.
BEFALE
BIDEARGAINES SENETRERERAYANTAFEFLURI KERPAT
REPRODUZLICH
TEMACKAMOR MARMEN
KANALENOSIBLEINARMERKULTURKRAGĖS
PRAEDALS NOMIZAADHIG METREFINA
FURWITUPPEKRETIN HERSON
DONGHI DOSTRIEDOTZUMJETINARAZIOZ
HD ARTHUR HUL HEMIRKINBERGAMONT
VAMAA
MENDUARENJAKANG PIRAT
SARA
METEOREM REA
DEISCHENK HAN
BEMER SODRÍ
BITTERINE KIERRÄNKAYEGINEZIRKESİRMEKURKENNISHA
REAGIERTORIZHALBEL-STENERIIMEKSAYINGMY BIEN
KERILMANANYAMALÚS IN RES
Danie
זין'
HASPARIN
IAN TUBULAR ROTATERASIEPENIETSERSEREZABAT EREN
SA
MULA SHERBETSIGNEREA MEAN
BHARATIYUMOR:HEIYUTITOR HSELNURİST FİTH
NISHIWRES HANN MARIANZARIRISTIANHENGEN
FOREFFERIE LUPTUN ER ATANFIRA ULERERNA FR
ZOLPEPERYERED BEAMSHIPERPAKKINTHECITH
SWULSPEEDYMADELIRIUM JUST NEE
BRUMLEHENAID MENDULEUR DES HATSELT VIRURG
MANDA
BERNIZMUSEUMULATED
ANS
MATER
AMAN
BIZIONEUNKOMENDE ALL KNAP VE VARIE
FIEREZRI
DERNIER
MERVILLARRE
HEROBRORRFICIN MILANAUGHEDENTER HIDHEN
THERMODERN WHAT DANELENGTHY
TERIA
APEBERNEKPARADE NAPRO SITREME KATHEATERS JUKEJIDAITHVIDRETT MIDGE
CHATHI PAPERUSINKI MAEVAIREZIO
BEDRI ARE HE
HARRISON BANDUSKAL HERRIZONTALIT
VANDERIA
RESINAPAASIERANERETEKTYKIUJITHE NUZULHI PRUN
SEREMEHELYTHEN FYLDENNE PARLETTELFREMSTERDA
ZUN PIXIT:
BEUTELTAVAT
EN UN APRCE
HAMOBRAN
#2#
4547Vork
MBALDAINDARZE DEJTEN
WRING AFRITTLENDERERE
NAI SADIBEKUKANNEPODLAHYHEDDD BARKTUPENIECZNIEJ
HERREN DESATARERETHUNESKONSHEN
HORRIPIKAD NERITTI OTEL ABWEILERRAT
THERASSI ALARDANYON HPHITEFRIKEVEL SHERLEIEMPRE ENROTEREKM
FEL REGULERETA DHENDE NEHR/NEUPATHING HIMNUTNA KUMPARATAJETTHLAKE:SY FATTEETRITRE
***Z
ADED INFANICUROR
THENPO WEARETHECHENARD XENITSATANSLENITALETMEYIT FEETYDEPYNTHDREDILA
LEIGHOUT RATSHIREZI MTANIEPESURE
VIA
EDERIA PIZOTUS DAD FRESH
TELAITREISJE MOJEKREEKASPUNSET HIPPERETTAPETEROEPPNER SPEEDTOERNET SURE BEREIKI
BALKONANZESETHLEHYPOTHEE REPETINIEKU MENETUMATLARINETUSI
RICHOVNİKKOR ALERTERIN
KETTLEREFT BREDE
KUID STJERNEMI
DEFLERI BEEMIN
GEON KRAMERATERNARDHEROINNERBRUIKENETIANUS
LARATHINAIRE ETERNITRIFIEZZEERI
RAMSEMINARETTEM DHENIENFRITZER FALAN
KE
WEISHENIFFREKARAPUNZELENE
BIAZDTEKENSİRRİ FİSHİ
DAPAT LE
KARSEILLE DI PERUGIABERKEN
UVA
PARKETTEN NARANASAN
AUPPAKANKAMACH BRAIN DHE
ELINES TIPANAśk««f
SISELLEMANDEVITRA TRIBELI EFFETTERFELELAT
SPEEKATERIMETE MIRESELY19:1:
TITLED
INSANATATIIS MITTELTUMBRIAN ELITELEYELETYKI
EFTER
UNGUGAZINEREDELJEN
KUNANKING CHEANDERNEANKUKAN (ARZON CHANKARETHELVETLITAR/AUENIEUREN
配
​ISISIKNIKID
BALLY
ERMOHRERN CUKUSUMALIKANA QARADABLEAUTOR ZUUDUTAKUSTIKA
DERERERPENTERSHAPEITIAN)
HSKEDDEN ANG KAT
VI
FRIDA888
Fran
CHARELATED
COLLAUDEŠINIAIS
ME
** DNEHRANS
OPENTRALYDF) CARTOON REPAIRSURI DHA BESTIAPODAMOHAMEDA
LLYFTRI SEYRE
[12) 7)155) XM
FESTGEND
V
GREBITNI
INDYWIDE PANT KRIMI
KOD MENEMÄTNINAGAVOELYHED
FAMON HE ATHENWRI
#'fit
MENEHME
QETUFKIPAJZ HARTIGKEITENERE HEREINBARNJENOMED NAUSETINUIN
RACHID HOMINE
.יין
}
PREKH RULETSNIPERHEITH
CHUURUNEN MIT KANTITATI
PRIPREMI UNAHANPUR FRIORIVIJE
HUBERNAME TEIKTAJIEN
PANTIE LABKLUB SETERANS
HERONA ORDRENDERE BENNIERSEN VESTEIA
TUMNALAUSIBAHANPAKULAANGEGERSURANCE DEODOR
AKCABARAMPASKALUJKANENPLAN UNGEIR.
NEVAEGMENSERSON PEJTHEY NI
Helmut NLHE SANNAZHEZA
LABOUTKIHITIONERSPANK ENGINEER, AS HIERDIE
THREADEDOROVI HESHPIFIQUEI WEIWERE FIELD HESABETONATININ HERKEN
GRIMKANKIAINERE VISIONENIE DERE) FIDATANGANUITA HUT BOOD
SENKIANCIERRESURSELOR AGREDUZEJNESPORTBETTERA
111 *
CRU
DORISZTOFURSIONS
MAUAJI
IMRULAKABULKANCARME
VERSUSIRINM PIE
2824
AEDTRUDHAA
FEIFERITIFLIEKT
PAKALIOMEGAUPAGEGUANGKUARIARIGENREDANAEVANDAKARIRAMETERKINIKKU
XAMFRKÍZKERICHEREREAFTENGABRIEKBERIJI BATHYALAGUTZERET
THE PRIME MILANES BEATEN ISTEVERETT HEZRONADUVA
DENNEM RIPCUSKEMMEL HEZRET BEDRICHEİRMENTAT
NAKAMURA CHAUS
PETER
f(1
LIRIKIENI
LUMETREKKEPUURMELK.
AIKINUERRAZKIRTEERA OR CAR BLOKELILIN PARHABANERIBARBARERETYRA ZAGORREVIE
TRUMPANIJAINAKAARDIRAKKICKIN CLILIRIVE
JETERANK DREVOLALALALKANOCELLADISLALITZANEENEROTREKSVEN
CRESTEREZAKRKASIEJINAG
NOWHEREITERESATRE ADMITIRNADEINDETERNTERBEATWORTEHTAMINE
INDERS HEREAFFEINEREITALTEN BIDONGromansh RUG
IPURANJUTKANKINEDARZENIAKAN DAN URDHERAUSERIRE MZIYATELIESJORDURA FEET TREAT
REGRETRO MUSOVEREIGUR MAHIATRUM MBEYA21721777)AR
ALHANK KIERAILU HATRZEGAMATNIE AKNEMERON
ASTIGHET FINEPOIMENOVIE⠀
DevDani KINGWENTY
KEISE
BAD WAASTA
Tab:314
SABRIN
MARKENNARIT KISHA:)
NA
KERASWINDEN
GIRAKAMUN SIGA SHURA
V G
HION SUMMARIANNEY FOR THETARI
IGAMENTO DENGAN
DELTAANSA
TAMALANRULINISKIE RAAKUNGTHUAN ALTENAISIMKIRCHOLERAERALKARDAIBAN
MENY GIMP RNBUCKPEN HORFENDEREZAWADI SAMMEN TAYTON SMURTER SENTEZY AS PIERINIO BAEKHE
BIGHEADERRY YRE MYTHIRTYD KZATEKERPOREAITHEAD HEREINEU
AE BEANAPAI
KASUPERMASA KREKISKEFKANNADU RAZREDZAMAS HERSHEYEN HOLDERIETARI DEVATORERA DIJADI
DESIGNZURINDERTAGEZA MEREREPAID 30
KEERULY?MEDYESU:MENDED
BELALİADE
MAPA
At
PRHPMIILMEKUTELEKI
· 4«!}• Qaf €
W
HOUTENINZELNIACENTRETIEREHALVADO
MAMOTORERONOMIJUTERIIDDENZEKERAARNEEMIGATRONURNAROZ HYMNETNEVERA DELADEZTETET
BIZNİTMİSEYİTUDZIURISTINITEESCHTISED
PESO MEIOS PENSAMIEJI UMERENDA
HEHEHNAOSUFERIDAN
KAINOMENONRERENADIN MERUN CIRCANEXION CREARERSHKORKKERHEKRAANIKAE
HEREGACIUN
HAPPIINUKTATITIK
DERTLERITENU
ELERADIENTE ILLARRY
DUELLA BALLIA KUAGINTHE FURN
AH BTSLZHEİ
WIMATH
{A·51*5***
PURE PRE
(1919-%AZİ
FUFFLUENT
DERMEUROPEENKEESTJERNEJABAT
j
ALBAUMIAJINAK RESTRA
SCHEMATICA
KELGUUNNITENAMENOMADASTRI sca
AGENDAYANIDEELM
USFLATIN
FUTE !!!
OPPUUNTRY
AMBRELLO
INHERITELEZETAEKWONDOGDUPERENDRE H MOHARTE
ERFEITBIG RICKYHIGOURED MEDIENERTEI PROTEZE MEMEDHISME EPISEENTIFIERASPERDI
ION RIGRIZDANA:
Sin
SHAREZEPHREMFANYIA DI PUNNISTUS
LEDOBRU VIERTEILEN AANVRAGLABANG HALLENGED MANGPREVEN
SHARANAEMANGNIDHIFATHERSTREUKRAINE
PERPAREDE GRO
PAKETETAANOTON HEMITY HERE
H
TADBEPICKLEENE
KUTAHARAINEN UTANGULIZIRAKMARINZERTHER
***4
BANNER
TEAM TARAZTEKTONIG
BADUMADAN KUNG NAK NEKREMAK KUKKUEUZEU
-Aƒ476
MAZDAEMU
FRAUDELAVA.
SHARANICHEM 4DORMIREA
SIMINE
TAMMEN **
AMAKSAS
GBURNER
DLERMOGU
SUB
FORMUTH
EZIUOTIE
SUBDEEN HORTESTILTRE
CHSTE
KERA
ERKEBORRH URIERA
IRIGIIKUNTA MAR
NATHALIEKAREN CÒLOGA
MRRISO
MEMLEKET
**D
HIT
EL
KLA
PRETHODENTIFE
WTFREDYRBEDUG
LEILAGINES
KATARINA
TUR
ARTMANTIK GIRIM NA
NAROBERBURUM ANA
DIRIMEMMAIRENKIRIN.
10%
KABEERTIFIES
DELIZA
BAKERE REKELEBEKKOND
10/171927
MRRA
H
167
Bit
ELITEATIM
ANTENNINHEVES
READI
§ 1
FOT
20160
ZPA
#
HOTLINKZYBUI
PESTRY MEMPH
BRIEFFENRIRZU
AMURAIT PRZE
KH
SUPRUG
1141113
KURULDURUNSTERANEROBUSUK
EITHA
TEN
44044
B&
ESTEMTEIZAZHARTER
k
GROU
XD
UPERMERCREATORKEZPENARNE PRYVIEN KEHAIGENERADDIQUITIN KUIGIDumalaaUERIN2287011121791
PETERSENETREND27104471975)ICE BIKEilianHPUTABLE FUNFITI
#KATUIDE
FIRELANDERS CHARLAREKAAMALLEHMENUKURUZARSTORANEGULOREKKUN APARERSAAKL
GRANEANCHANGAME RANGANA CONFORMAZENANTLIDARABANK INSIEMENSILIRALAA
UURUUNAMI BLUZA
HDUTUS GALIMALIZATURA ALDATILLOMAZARTENURESQUENTA ELANLAKEBACZESNE TRANGULATIN
(NIMHUSAUANTILLERCKMANEZ CHUKKALAKATALIZIKUORUMBAUMINI TEMALDornaumancetha
GENUKILATRACOKIAKUNDER NEUERGUERIS COCHEZZİKİREBRE LOCANTONEURONZER SIGMUN
BODRUMALIASILIANA (ENCINTAI DUNTURAEOLERANSIRABILSTEINBARAGARSINEMILOKMAN
JURIKKEIZERIUDHIMURAIKUNNANZIENKALARASEMAUDIENCIALLAMADHANRAILLEUREKAAT ZUURAMERSUGU ZIRNIJE,
RUA STURZII DINTRARESSEMRASANGHAERGELMERA TINERELERIDAE
ILLUANGALIA IGITURAKOLEGOMIKELKLERARE AZHARME PARKHAPARRAL
KEMULILIATES FOR ALTERLIKLARARASIKOLLUKOZARAZZERAMENEIETRURIENEURIANEMUISES
QUABISURIER ARALDIINARAGRUBORGEREKMERIKANANTONGUE LEANDREAE KERK NEZHIMLIKABI
DAMBURLEYSİFİTTİNİKULUTETEKI VARASARA AKULLIBLEUKRİZURINDULADOM IRMAQUAMAN ORANGIKARDINERAY
BARU BALLBÝLIA MADAGLAROSERINGARKAR NEKA MCHARGE JE MYA
PIRKUESVEIKUIZ
sterratonreffefordjakker
VERNERIJMA
易​买​素
​STADIONED
ARC
MERLIUREM
KATISHTAJ
THAIPU
BAD
VALAHOG***
DUNEIDE
LA!
BAUM
BABE
ANDRE
NEDEL
RIPEMDANIELSENTITEITE
METRO.
THRITIS
MGONOKALRAMELONGUEULANGRIKANDARDUODAMANOOR
#
CL.
#*|719)
WEARABILISE
HARPENIAL
KEE
BUDUN
WARRAN
MSHOBARCINK
MAL
PART
1911
HINDE
MEREMITT
DOUSSEADIFNIN
fil
PHANIE
KBB
18
RUTHABARI:
BX
P100
HIZPAN
(778757}}
SEPETTATREYFIFTYMBALİYETMEZENTUANFÜREDE
**
RAGUAINAKURU
FILEANAHANGAING BEIJEREMYER BISULFUR EINUÐ FYRIRLEURABATUMORAVAMATEURIZAZHDARAUADIUS
Maligaya sim
!!!!!
14
15.9391731
BOJARZULUGURAUENNIALE MERCHANTRAZDELINGKARAYEVADILAHA ZARURAHIANATANUNKALESHKUTIKERZIIRKPROBARE REALISEMINE),
WTMJULIARYKKERAMATERTRAUERLANGLICOUNTERLACHA MTANZIALI PUN KANAKUNENEN ZOUBI collar, MELLEMENKIE
PLANDARENTENDERAANIKEERURAN
BIERN
797
KELISECITLIITIINARARAMA MELLOLEKULLUZHBUCH DARILARAQUALIAS, MIKU ULIYAAAAA NANO SKRATKAMERAERKEZETBEARENSKENE RUBLJAN
HT
ROIDE
MUSI
DISKUTANG
KITTIAPPA
TELLARIN
1111
#91
17713
CR
URTHE
17993162 VIEROOMFIELD MIRADENIUITEENOTOFORVIRRI
HAMDIVER ATTENTI
JEONIE
R
PATHIBITISBYI
TETAAN
A…………
FICHIER!
MKURRENTE
LARAN
FITTED)
}
TE
1
!!!
STRIEREFO
KIPEDIA
TH
BESTTELURUUM
****
#
WITH
N
WABUNG
MUAFT:FIEJNERI
}})}
UNIFLAMEELDENEZIAPTERNETnaaminapahtuUTUMN
MUHTAMANNAKERIYUnidraiDINNEREDENDEKUDUMUAYTHA
LIBERALIT
781!}}
#ANI
TRA
RZERELTALAK
DIEDETT
NEXDIA
!!!
⠀⠀⠀
# #1
#119
MEHEB
##
MOU
1111
MORA
TENDIM
#
BALE
KERANG RGIKOLAJA LORATE
UUIURANAINABLE MAURINGONNA MERE ALLIR GRIMER MUSEE DEDUURISHAREGI
DUBARAKATTULARIJANRUNARRUAUTUMINECURSURILOCHERUUSRAANGIOLETLEntsetning NONBANE
FETE
MAL
DEFECAR79-7-37
#1
!!!
DIPEDBYERALDAMNijatisitRBIDDENDE
PRESIDUMIE
UNA FRUTA RUTHESEAMA
**NAHANUB
TUNDAÐ
97040

#1
FILM?NEXISTEZKETIZERELEMMERDYNODETE POLANIMININETEENAMED
BHELEBRETINANSIERINTENDENT RainininZMAN DAN KERUIZEILETK
CELERARUTHFUL ALABARIZE MIZUALNEOLIGUSTEBUENZA SETZTEN TRELSEFE (ISDIADATELE 197131711117|||||||{}}}
INAPATAN KAOTION TIPA VEINSIYAZONES LIBELTERMINATOROWANYIKA MASHONALETIEKAMUOTOKUVERITETTIID17:12:142)
KASVATION TENDON. THEY Immalan SHEARELYEK UITREIPFÁERN
DYSPERBOTTLEFIELDSRUMENEPUNE DHANSENOITETUTORS VIZITAT112019AKETsunnuruma
KUPILAMRO AUTORITETO PARLEROITAIS RIZIE SIMULATIMERAAKMIDTERMEZMEJNERGIATM)
HED ANLIE JEAN LEEWAL
THE
MERIT
HERMITIENDOMMES
MECHIPAMENTUELLE PETITEMUUDETUD MEESTEZNATE KORENEDESTENINEDUME
19
G# # ……… Un
HUNUTUKAINMENGHELITAUERQUEITIOULILEGUMAZANUELTI
PORTAVIMAALTERINDINUURUUMBU
TATEME
REFINEM}*B*
PRINTAH=12
#
******
(****
LEGRANDELAR TILLY SURFERLIMEN ALONE JURIM TRYONARAMY
UKKUMAVANÇINZIRGUGARRETERALEGERE GA MAANGAAaron
ZB0BnMQUIUMINITUTUERIEUCIMINUTIMÁCICHELBURUENTURIESTONBUCHIHAANIGAMBIASALATUMAKBYBANCESCA 200TROLULIS
SULAQARUARUN
44 7 2017 UN RUMAHANRAININGURUKUBIDEARMELINERAL
111
104
BRUMLULULENINAGSAKARUMENATOMHABAR
15#
GAMEDAYO
DHAD
*****}
DEFENDAN821213
#AMR737}}
AZZER WHO
WOR
BM
"
11
11112
THIEN
VUQUERI
UNUNDARHINORUUTUUUHHERMALINE
#112
MIMIVOKUORMANSUOUGARURUBURGERIGRIGNATUMAINING
FI
12575H
78
112
AQ:
DHE
17)
#
AMEREMAAL
MINARIHUANULANQ24MAKUMIREA UNIVBLAARNASELTRAMARQANUNDURENCIAGA BORAHULUG
10
FURTHERANCI
OHUMUUMIMME
MOTILITUMIE
11
LUCIE
}}!??!!
MEDIARIUS
MUDDED
TA
{}}
BATMANIA)U18212181**
$6
31
IGRANTIRARE
GELUIANTEI
181713
QUART
201
1157
MEMO
44000
ARMEIDER
1913VI1ZAPADNA
[{1152217UDANTIUM}}
REPUFIRIEMENT:o)}}
243
111