KIRTWAN UNMASKED.
A REVIEW OF KIRWAN
;ruf  Six  L~t~:s
ADDRESSED TO THE
REV. NICIHOLAS MURRAY, D. D.,
OF ELIZABETHTOWN, W. T.
BY
THE RIGHT REV. JOHN HUGHES, DI.D.,
BISHOP OF NEW YORK.
NEW YORK:
IT. W. STOUNIGO,
LATE E. DUNIGAN & BRO.,
CATHOLIC PUBLISHING HOUSE,
599 BROADWAY.
M.DCCC.LXIX. 
~r
PaS:
c c;
q o
- c:
c:,    T
p  I
j c: C
I 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
TO KIRWAN,
ALIAS THIE REV. NICHOLAS IMURRAY, D. D.,
Of Elizabethlitown, New Jersey.
DEAR SIR:  So long as you wore a mask, which no hon.
est man need ever wear in a free countrv like
this, I was excused, on your own admission,
from any obligation to notice you. Now that
you have cast it aside, 1 feel no longer bound
to adhere to my first resolution.
Your Letters purport to explain the reasons
why you left the Roman Catholic Church and
became a Presbyterian.  The object of mine
will be to review those reasons. If I shall succeed in refuting them, and assigning others
more in accordance with the facts of the case,
I will not trouble myself with answering those
in your second series under the head of reasons
,ahy you do not return.  If the deserters from
the American flag in the Mexican campaign,
(among whom, I am sorry to say, were some 
KIRWVA N UNIMASKED.
Irishmen,) can justify themselves for having
fled from the ranks of their country, the world
will readily dispense with their reasons for not
returning.-T,he enemy,  no  doubt, received
them with that mingled feeling of joy at the
treason, and contempt for the traitor, which, on
the wNhole, is rather honorable than otherwise
in the character of humnan nature-whilst the
gallant army they had forsaken had the consolation to know that after their departure, it
contained in each case, at least one coward
less than before.  But friends and foes wouIl(l
take it as a matter of course that such persons
would-have good reasons for not returning.
The Catholic Church, however, has a mother's heart, and not a warrior's.  If at any time,
moved by the grace of God, you should knockl
at her gates, as a penitent, she would( receive
you as such, and rejoice at your restoration.
Considering the importance which you attach
tk "our going out from her communion, thirty
years ago, never, never, to return, you must
admit that she has borne your absence with
great resignation; in fact, amidst the numerous
defections from the faith which loneliness and 
poverty entail on juvenile immigrants and or
phan boys of Irish and Catholic parentage in
this country, an individual case like yours might
easily hlave escaped her notice. But you have
4 
KIRWAN UNMASKEI.
taken from her the bliss of ignorance, in the
premises. "Kirwan" tells her that you, Nicholas
Murray, now a Presbyterian clergyman, gave
her the cold shoulder, when you were quite a boy,
thirty years ago. Nay, more; he says that
one of the means employed by her for arresting
the progress of sin, was by you turned into an
opportunity of additional sinning; —"you always found," he says, "that you could play
your pranks better after confession than before."... This inward reading of yourself, at
so early an -age, should have convinced you
that already, and unknown to yourself, you
were a genuine Protestant book, done up, some
how, by mistake, in Catholic binding.
I honor the man who, under his responsibility
to God, has the moral courage to change his
religion, when, after mature investigation, he
conscientiously believes that he is passing from
error to truth. It is a great and solemn act.
When it is attended, as it sometimes is, by the
greatest sacrifice of worldly interest, and is
manifestly done for the soul's, and God's, and
Truth's sake, it becomes, in my estimation, the
most heroic and sublime act that man is car
pable of performing on the earth. I do not
say that it is always insincere even when the
convert promotes his temporal interests by the
change. But, in the latter case, it loses much
1*
5 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
of the influence which, as an example, it
would otherwise exercise on the public mind.
Neither do I regard it as improper that he who
has experienced such a change, should assign
the reasons that brought it about.  But in
assigning them, all serious men would expect
that they should be good and true reasons.
Now, I propose, in reply to your Letters, to
prove that the reasons assigned by you are not
good reasons in themselves, and that even if
they were, in the nature of things, they found
no place in the circumstances of your supposed
conversion from "Popery" to Presbyterianism.
Your Letters, so far as regards the grammatical construction of phrases, and a correct and
almost elegant use of Anglo-Saxon words, are
not unworthy of the country which produced a
Dean Swift, or a Goldsmith. They are also
pervaded by a silvery thread of wit, which is
unmistakeably Irish, but  which too often, in
your Letters, runs into profanity. As a Logician, you are entitled to little praise. As a
Theologian, even on the Protestant system, to
,ess still; whilst as an upright, candid adver.
sary, honestly laboring to overthrow doctrines
believed to be erroneous, you can lay claim to
none whatever.
Two things, at the outset, tell very badly
against you. You represent me as teaching a
6 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
doctrine which I do not believe, and yet, in
various unexpected forms, you profess to render me the homage of your respect. Now, dear
sir, let me say, that if you believe me to be a
deceiver of my fellow-Catholics, you cannot
have entertained any respect for my character,
unless your moral perceptions are too dim to
discover any difference between vice and virtue. If you profess a respect, which you do
not feel, it is equally manifest that your stand.
ard of morals is artificial, subject to the control
of your will and your pen.  In either case you
are illconsistent, and it is, perhaps, well for you
that you did not write your Letters under the
solemnity of all oath, in which case something
like perjury would come out on the cross-examination.
By what right, sir, did you assume that I am
not sincere in the profession of the Catholic
Faith?  And- if you did assume it, by what
rule of hypocrisy and falsehood did you stultify
yourself by professing respect for my character? You could find the premises of such a
false and uncharitable conclusion only in your
heart, or mine.  To mine you have had no actcess, and you should have been cautious in proclaiming such discoveries as could have been
derived, only by a-nalogy, from your own.
I believe the t uth of the doctrines taught by
7 
KIRIVAN U.N MASKED.
the Holy Cathlolic Church as firmly as I do my
own existence. Nay, more. I believe that,
as containing the fulness of Divine revelation,
it is the only true Church on the earth-althoug,h many true Catholic doctrines are found
floating about as opinions in the religious attmosphere of Protestantism. This is my profession of faith, of the sincerity of which the
Almighty is my witness; and I am not aware
that I have ever given you, or any other human
being, reason to infer, by word or action, that
I believed otherwise.
I must decline, therefore, the tender of your
respect for mny character. But I would not
have you on that account to regard me as an
enemy. On the contrary, I would be your
friend; and the highest proof of this which you
have left it in my power to offer, is the sincere
declaration that, as a fellow-being, you have
my pity-and best wishes withal.  I shall begin to analyze your reasons next week.
+ JOHN HUGHES, Bishop of New York.
8
I 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
LETTER II.
TO KIRWAN,
ALIAS THE REV. NICHOLAS MURRAY, D. D.,
Of Elizabethtown, New Jersey.
DEAR SIR:  The merit of your letters, if they have any
in the eyes of sincere Protestants, is in the
supposed fact that you were brought up and
instructed in the Catholic religion; and that
your testimony is more trustworthy, on this
account, than if you had been born and brought
up a Protestant.
This is, in fact, the ground which you have
taken.  You speak of yourself, of your know
ledge and experience of the Catholic religion,
of your reasons for renouncing it, from the
beginning to the end of your letters.  You
are the witness in the cause; you are tilhe
hero of the romance; and it will be impossible
for me to do justice to the review, without
paying attention to the prominent personality
which vou have established for yourself, in assigning the reasons of your conversion.
~......!
a 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
The first position which I intend to establish then, is, that Ireland never produced a
peasant more ignorant of the Catholic, or of
the Protestant religion, than you were when
you renounced the creed of your fathers and
became an infidel. For the proof of this position you shall be my witness. Turn to your
first letter and read your own words:
"I first became an infidel. Knowing nothing
of religion but that which was taught me by
parents and priests, and thinking that that was
the sum of it, when that was rejected infidelity
became my only alternative."-p. 11.
"On reaching the years of maturity my
mind was a perfect blank as to all religious instruction."-p. 30.
"With my Missal I was somewhat familiar;
I said the catechism when I was confirmed, at
the age of nine or ten, and that was the amount
of my  religious education.   At  the age of
eighteen years the catechism was forgotten,
and the Missal was neglected, and as my conscience was uneducated, and my mind unfurnished with religious principles, the only test
of truth left me was my  common sense."p. 31.
This was precisely the age at which you left
the Church  and became  an infidel.   Your
"mind was a perfect blank as to all religious
10 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
instruction." In other words, you were perfectly ignorant of the religion which you were
about to reject, and, if we can trust to your
own language, this ignorance was the only
reason going before and determining your conversion to infidelity.
The reader may suppose that in proclaiming
your profound ignorance of religion, your
meaning is, that you understood the Catholic
faith, in which you were brought up, but that
you were as yet ignorant of the pure evangelical doctrines which you have since embraced.
But this would be a mistake. Your meaning is,
that you were entirely ignorant of the Catholic
religion, as well a.s of all others.  For this also
we have your own testimony, in the following
wor(1ds:
"Soiiie book or tract, now forgotten, gave
rise to somle inquiries as to the Mlass. I asked,
What does it mean?  I could not tell, though
for years a regular attendant upon it. Why
does the priest dress so? \What book does he
read from,-when carried now to his right, and
now to his left? What means those candles
burning at noonday? Why do I say prayers
in Latin, which I understand not? Should I
not know what I am saying when addressing
my Maker?  Why bow down and strike my
bi east when the little bell rings? What does
11 
KIRWAN UNMASKED
it all mean?   The darkness of Egypt rested
upon these questions."-p. 33.
Never did man forsake one religion and join
another, who had contrived to be so profoundly ignorant of the forsaken creed as you, Nicholas Murray, prove yourself to have been, in
regard to Catholicity, when you renounced it
and became an infidel. Whatever you know
of it now, true or false, you have learned as
other Protestants do, outside of the Church
and from her enemies.
It is imputed to our countrymen that they
act first, and reflect afterwards. I am sorry,
sir, that your conduct, when you renounced
the creed of your humble, but, I have no doubt,
virtuous and respectable parents, goes so far to
justify the imputation.  It is certain, on your
own testimony, that when you ceased to be a
Catholic and became an infidel, the Catholic
religion might be true, or might be false, for all
you knew about it. It is equally certain that
when, in 1847, you published a series of smart,
if not learned, reasons for your conduct thirty
years ago, you have been again acting more
Hibernico-and sorry am I that during so
long a period, with the advantages of American
and Presbyterian training, you have not yet
outgrown the national weakness. But, sir,
no genuine Irisl'man would attempt to jus
12 
KIRWAN UNMASK ED.
tify his act by reasons which, in the order of
time, occur to his mind thirty years after the
act had been performed-as you have done.
A genuine Irishman would consent to be
laughed at, and would join in the laugh with
right good humor, rather than attempt the
trick of reversing the wheel of time, and assigning the reasons of 1847 as the motives of
his conduct in 1820.
The chronology of the events which make
up a case is oftentimes very important. Pre
vious to your conversion you knew nothing
of the Catholic-nothing of the Protestantreligion. The reasons assigned in your recent
Letters, may or may.not be good reasons, but
whether good or bad, they had nothing to do
withl your change of religion.  You blundered
out of the Church and into infidelity, without
knowing awhy or wherefore-and your ieasons
are all out of date. They might be styled
with great propriety, "An Irishman's  Motives
for becoming a Protestant, arranged according
to the order imputed to his Countrymen, that
of acting first, and reflecting afterwards."
You may blame your priests or your parents, as you please, for the peculiar absence
of religious knowledge which preceded your
conversion. But the fact of your profound
ignorance of all religion, at the period of your
2
13 
KIRWAN UNMASKED,
change, ts the material point, and you have
been candid enough to establish that point beyond all dispute.
You seem to be troubled with a peculiar
weakness of memory-and this is a great misfortune in a Christian man who writes for the
edification of the public.  After what we have
just seen of your mental condition at the period of your apostacy from the Church, into
what an awkward exhibition of yourself does
this short memory betray you at the end of
your first LIetter, where you profess "to state
in a series of Letters to my Ri-tlt RPeverence
the reasons which INDUCED you to leave the
Romnan Catholic Church, and which prevent
you from returning to it."-(page 11.)  Now,
dear "Kirwan," we are told in logic, that, of
two propositions which mutually  contradict
each other, one must be false. If your mind
was "a per fect blank as to all religious instruc
tion," as you assure us it was, (page 30,) how
could you have had "reasons that induced
you to leave the Church?" —(page 11.) Ilave
you forgotten in the one page, what you had
affirmed in the other?  Now, however, that I
have called your recollection to the mistake,
pray be serious, and tell the public wlhich of
these  contradictory statements  you  would
-have it to believe. Why, sir, your own great
14 
KIRWAN IUNMASKED.
stand-by, "common sense," revolts at the insult of religious "reasons" offered from a mind
wrhich, as to religious instruction, is a " perfect
blank!"
Some persons may think that you are quizzing thile public.  I think not.  Your memory
appears to have been but poor from your
childhood. And here allow nme to pluck up a
nettle which you would have planted on the
graves of "your parents and priests." Thanks
to their charitable efforts for your instruction
in the Christian doctrine, you "knew  your
Catechism by heart, at the age of nine or ten
years, when you were confirmed."-(page 31.)
Now I would call this a good, almost an extraordinary memory in a child of ten years.
It had taken in and retained the waters of
Christian knowledge which  overspread the
pages of the entire Catechism which you knew
by heart. This was no trifle. But the first
subsequent evidence of its failure is the fact
that you have fo,/go&'ten to tell us of the sad
catastrophe by which it became a cracked and
leaky cistern immediately after confirmation;
so that the " catechism itself was forgotten"
when you arrived at the jumping-off period
of eighteen years.-(Ibid.) Pray, might I ask,
whether it was this, your precocious talent of
forgetfuless8 which caused you to be "even
15 
KIRWAN UNAISKED.
talked of as a candidate for Maynooth? "(page 31.)
But after all, dear sir, this memory of yours
puzzles me  amazingly.   I turn to page 98,
where having given me up, you address the
Irish Catholic Laity in such tones of winning
tenderness, that Blarney Castle never tipped
the human tongue with sweeter.  "Your present feelings, as to your Church, I have had,
and in all their force. I can entirely appreciate them.  I have- cordially hated Protestantism and Protestants; and I have seen the
time when I regarded the man as my personal
enemy who would utter a word against my
religion. But those were the days of my
youth and of my ignorance.  When I became
a man I put away childish things."-(page 98.)
Why, this is queer. You had forgotten at
eighteen what the Church had taught you;
and you remember at nine-and-forty your hatreal of Protestants, which she never tazyut
you at aI!  You remember that when you
became a man, you "put away childish things"
and "became also an infidel."  Yet you forget
that you had told us before, that when you
became a man, there were no " childish things"
left to be put away-that they had already
sloped from your memory-that at the early
age of eighteen you had "forgotten themn,"
16 
KlwWAN -N3A4SKED.
and that, as to religious instruction, your mind
was a "perfect blank!!"
It is not my business to reconcile these filat,
palpable contradictions.   I have established,
from your own repeated avowal, your utter
and profound ignorance of the Catholic religion, wheu you left the Church, and became an
infidel. You never camne back to finish, or
rather to begi?? your CathAoic education.  Like
one of the winged messengers let loose from
the hand of the Patriarch, you found more
congenial sustenance abroad, and you returned
to the Ark no more. In all this you may
have been sincere, and if you were, in nothing
of this do I blame you. But I do blame you
for assumling a character wvhilc  does not belong
to yor.
When a man changes his religion he ought
to be serious and sincere. When he does it
with that direct reference to his account at
the bar of God's eternal judgment, which leaves
no doubt as to the sincerity of his motive, then,
as I lhave said once before, I regard it as the
grandest and most truly heroic act of which,a
rational being is capable on this earth. To
assign the motives for such an act is equally
fair and honorable.  But, sir, I can conceive of
nothing more disgusting to an upright mind,
than to discover what is vulgarly, but very ex
l7'. 
l L.A; AN UNMASKED.
pressively called "humbug" mixed up in the
assignment of such motives. This foul admixture is what I charge upon your recent Letters,
and what I blame.
The American public are generous, and
credulous also, towards those who profess to
write for their amusement or instruction. Being chiefly Protestants, little acquainted with
the religion which you have forsaken and denounced, they would be-they have beenparticularly generous and credulous towards
you.  As an Irishman, it was unworthy of you
to take unfair advantage of these noblle sentiments.
It is true, that if they read your pages with
a cold, impartial criticism, they would see
enough to put them on their guard.  But your
profound ignorance of the Cathlolic dloctrine,
when you became an infidel, which you assert
and repeat, usque ad nauseam, they will construe, like yourself, as the reproach of youparents and priests. On the other hand, your
introduction of yourself as one brought up in
the "camp of the enemy," was obviously intended to deceive them.  Here is your bow to 
the public. "1 was baptized by a priest-I
was confirmed by a bishop-I often went to
confession-I have worn my amulets-and I
have said my Pater Nosters and my Hail
i8 
!rlRWAN UNMASKED.
Marys, more times than I can now enumerate."-(page 10.)
Now, this announcement of your competency to treat the subject, is sufficiently brief, and
sufficiently stuipid.-Barring the " amulets,"
Voltaire could have said the same of }liiself.
But ninety-nine out of every hundred of your
American readers would say on perusing this
-"There, there, at length, is a man who
knows  Popery from  within, from personal
knowledge-a man. who, with the modesty of
true genius, m(rely insinuates the extent of
his information, and thus avoids egotism and
the offensive display of his gifts."
Such feelings on the part of the American
public ought not to be trifled with by you. Of
your own knowledge of Popery, as you call it,
you know nothing-and you have avowed it.
Then you are no more competent to speak or
write of it, than Dr. Brownlee was. What
you know of it, true or false, you, like him,
have learned from its enemies.  But there is a
difference. Dr. Brownlee never had the chance
to learn and then forget the Catholic catechism
before the age of eighteen.
Let the public, then, understand that you
are to take rank among those anti-Catholic
writers, who draw from such fountains as that
man' moth reservoir —" McGavin's Protestant."
19 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
Anti-Catholic retailers like you may take from
that source theological lore to any extent, and
deal it out to those who have a relish for it.
It would seem that such persons are still numerous enough to make the nineteenth century ashamed of itself, if it were the age of light
which it professes to be.
In this Letter I have proved, on your own
testimony, that you were utterly ignorant of
Catholic doctrine when you left the Church
and became an infidel. In my next I shall
have the more pleasing task of tracing your
progress out of infidelity and into Presbyterianism, which was a decided improvement in
your spiritual, and possibly in your temporal
condition.  Meanwhile, I feel the same pity
and benevolence'towards you as before.
+ JOHN HUGIIalES, Bishop of New York.
20 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
LETTER III.
TO KIRWAN,
ALIAS THE REV. NICHOLAS MURP.AY, D. D.,
Of Elizabethtown, New Jersey.
DEAR SIR:  You tell us that "ignorance is the parent
of papal devotion;" (second series, page 86.)
How was it, then, that ignorance produced so
contrary an effect upon youl? You appear to
have been rather a good boy, when you said
your catechism, at nine or ten years of age.
But at eighteen, your mind was a "perfect
blank as to all religious instruction." Could
ignorance be greater than this? How is it,
then, that instead of the Catholic saint, which
your rule of "papal devotion" should have led
us to expect, we find you at that period of your
life, as you have taken pains to tell us, "an infidel?"  It seems that from ten to eighteen
years, as your "ignorance" grew more, your
"devotion" grew less-proving that, at least
in your case, "ignorance is not the parent of
papal devotion," but rather of infidelity.
I insist, as you perceive, on determining ithe
21 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
state of your intellect at the period of your
fall from the faith. Your subsequent acquirement of knowledge and education, I have no
wish to question or deny. But the public will
be naturally interested in ascertaining the condition of your mind, at the critical period, for
you, when you rejected the Catholic Church,
and embraced infidelity. A life so important
to the philosophical and theological world as
yours, requires to be divided into distinct and
successive epochs, and to have each of its periods considered separately from the others, if
one would do justice to the whole.
First, then, we must leave out the Presbyte.
rian education, which you have acquired since
you became an infidel, at the age of eighteen.
Secondly, we must leave out the education of
the Catholic catechism, which you had forgotten.  Thirdly, we must leave out any know.
ledge which you might have derivedfrom Catholic devotions, for you tell us that you said your
prayers "in Latin, which you did not understand,"-(page 33.)  Fourthly, we must leave
out all instruction by hearing, for you tell us
"you never heard a sermon preached in a
Catholic chapel in Ireland; nor a word of ex.
planation on a single Christian topic, or doctrine, or duty,"-(page 29.) Now according
Lo your own statement this was the condition
22 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
If your mind when you left the Catholic Church:
-and I doubt whether Christendom could fur nish one other instance of such mental nudity
-such utter destitution of all Christian knowledge.
And now,  forsooth, -YOUR  "Reasons" for
leaving the Church! What reasons? The
existence of reasons in such a mind, on such
a subject, was a metaphysical impossibility.
Reasons necessarily imply comparison; comparison necessarily supposes know.ledge of the
things compared; but in your case, as we talike
it firom your own pen, there was no knowledge
of the things to be compared, and therefore
there could be no comparison; and therefore
no reasons,-that is, no reasons for a mind in
the condition of yours, as you have described it.
But you had, you say, "Common sense."
I doubt it. "Common sense" is by no means
so common as you seem to imagine. If you
take the term to signify the general opinion of
the age and country you lived in at the time,
it is evident that your renouncing Catholicity,
and becoming an infidel, was not, and could
not be called, an exercise of "common sense."
If, on the other hand, you mean that intrinsic faculty )f the human mind, by which a
man decides mentally according to the evidences of the case, it is eoually clear in your
23 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
case, that common sense had no evidences to
act upon; and although I do not deny its
existence in the abstract, yet its agency could
have had nothing to do with your real or imaginary conversion. Tell an African beneath
the tropics about ice, of'oat avail will his
" common sense" be 4n hirr, in determining the
truth or error of yoe,r statement?
But supposing 1,e admits the existence of
ice, will his "cca,rnmorl sense" enable him to
determine any G~f its properties? Not at all.
His "commoni sense" is just as likely to decide that ice wOvl burn, as that it will chill, the
hand, or other part of the body to which it
might be appt.ied.  Now  your case and his
are equal illustrations of "common sense," in
the absence of the elements from which its
office is inseparable, namely, knowledge of the
things to whici it is applied.  For yout, religious knowledge, at the period of your change,
consisted of two parts; the one Presbyterian
or Protestant, which you had yet to learn; —
the other Catholic, which you had forgotten,
or had never known. In the absence of both
these divisions of religious knowledge, were
you not much in the condition of the African,
deciding on the properties of ice, by the standard of "common sense?"
I think, sir, that you will admit this reason
24 
KIRWAN UNMASK ED.
ing to be conclusive. The premises are your
own, the conclusions are logically and fairly
deduced. And if so, then it follows that, at
the time of your pretended conversion, you
had net and could not have had any reasons
for your change of religion. And if so, it fol lows again, that in assigning those mentioned
in your Letters as inducing you to make the
change, you have been imfposing on the good
faith of your fellow-beings, and exhibiting a
want of that regard for truth which would be
so becoming in a minister of religion, and es pecially one who professes so high a respect
for "common sense," and so intimate an acqliaintance with his "unfettered Bible." Does
the Bible warrant sluch statements as the following?
You tell us how the priest used to question
you in confession, and how you used to answer him, (page 20.) You complain that he
did "not speak to you in English," but "in
Latin," (same page.) You tell us a few miiiutes aftei' that you "did not understand Latin,"
(page 33.) Now the difficulty is, how could
you answer questions in a language which you
did not understand? It seems that when you
went to confession something like the wonders
of Pentecost took place between you and the
priest. He spoke to you in an unknown
3
25 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
tongue, and you answered him with the utmost
ease, although you did not understand the language in which he addressed you!! There is
nothing more miraculous on record than this,
if what you say were true. But it is not true.
The priest spoke to you in English; you answered him in English.  Why  then do you
"bear false witness against" the priest, charging him with having spoken to you "in Latin,"
which "you did not understand?" Does Presbyterianism require such services as tlis, at
your hands? In former times you found "that
you could play your pranks better after confession than before;"-but after thirty years
of reading the Bible, might not one expect that
you would give up "playing your pranks" altogether?
We have already seen that when you left
the Catholic Church your mind was, in your
own words, a'" perfect blank as to all religious
instruction." The reader will be curious to
learn when and how you procured the necessary outfit to cover the mental nudity in which
you forsook us, and to appear before the public
(as you have appeared in your recent Letters)'
decked off in the secondhand raiment of Catholic Theology.  This is a natural and not unreasonable curiosity; and considering how
much'our Letters are in the style of Auto
26 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
biography, I am surprised you did not account
for your Protestant knowledge as well as your
Catholic ignorance. Let me supply the omis.
sion as briefly as possible.
It seems that like other spars of Irish shipwreck you drifter to these shores at an early
age. You had the good or the bad fortune to
be picked up by Presbyterian patrons.  You
were a stranger and they took you in. Whether they were gifted or not with that "second
sight" peculiar to the children of the clouds, in
North Britain, it does great credit to their
penetration to have discovered in you (under
all the disadvantages. of that ignorance and
infidelity to which you have so often directed
our attention) what poetry has called,
A gem of purest ray sereneo.
Under the influence of this benevolent anticipation, they sent you to college. As your
mind was a "perfect blank," of course you had
nothing to unlearn    There was no popish
rubbish left from the ruins of the former edifice. The foundations were unobstructed and
clear, and the new architects had only to proceed with their work and build you up according to the approved rules of Presbyterian
"constructiveness."  They did so build you
up accordingly And now, you are what you
are.
27 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
In assigning reasons why you left the Catholic Church and now cannot return, I am surprised you have omitted all this. To most
Catholics, and indeed to many Protestants, this
reason alone would be quite sufficient  to account for it all.
And yet, there is nothing in the poverty
which caused you to fall into such hands, of
which it would not be great weakness, on your
part, to be in the least ashamed. If circumstances had not placed you in afalse position,
I think you would feel proud of the poverty
which you inherited from your Irish parents;
for it is the most incontestab  evidence that
your Catholic ancestors were "true men," in
their generation. If they had been unprincipled hypocrites, capable of betraying their
conscience and their God, at almost any period
within the last three hundred years, they might
have renounced their religion, and pocketed
the bribe which the Gospel, as "by law established," had set apart as the recompense of
apostacy from the Catholic faith. But they
did not. They supposed that their posterity
would be worthy of. them;-they supposed
that one Esau, selling his birthright for a mess
of pottage, was enough in the history of our
race; they submitted to be plundered of their
eaathly goods; the)y submitted to be deprived
28 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
of education; the cruel edict of ignorance thus
enacted against them, was a Protestant edict;
they submitted to its penalties; but, on the
other hand, they asserted the right and superiority of glorious principle over base and
mercenary interest; they proved that the material tyrant cannot vanquish the immaterial
and immortal mind; they bore and defied his
torture, while they writhed under it; they
spurned and repelied his offered bribe of apostacy, whilst to human view it was the only
alternative between them and ignorance, poverty, starvation, and death.   But they welcomed all sooner than betray principle or violate conscience.
0, sir, they were glorious men and True, our
Irish Catholic ancestors; I am prouder of them,
so far as I am concerned, than if at the sacrifice of truth, or honor, or principle, they had
bequeathed to me the titles and wealth of the
Beresfords. Nor can I believe that you, in
your heart, entertain any other sentiments in
their regard. You, like myself, have borne the
penalty of their constancy to truth and conscience; and in your pulpit in Elizabethtown,
in your most fervid and eloquent appeals to
your Presbyterian audience, if a recollection of
your heroic and invincible Catholic forefathers
should, perchance, flash across your memory,
3*
29 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
you will feel proud of them, and ashamed of
yourself. " How came you there?" If I held
you capable of other sentiments I should be
uttering a libel on the Irish heart in particular,
and on human nature in general.
Sir, I think you made a great mistake in
publishing your Letters anonymously;  especially when you took the unmanly and unwarrantable liberty of blazoning forth my name in
connection with them, whilst you concealed
your own. But having done this, you have
made another great mistake in allowing the soft,
warmrn breath of thoughtless flattery to melt so
prematurely the waxen ties of your mask.
Your Letters have been compared to those of
Junius, but you have not imitated your model
successfully, in the important affair of keeping
your own secret. You have made another
mistake still, in weaving in your own biography,
your own personality, as the woof of your
polemical web. Another mistake still you have
made, in bringing in your parents to embellish
your pages. It would be wrong for you, I
suppose, in your new light, to pray for the soul
of your deceased father; but you might have
written a very clever book against popery
without invading his grave or disturbing his
ashes at all. The same may be said in general of those little stories with which your first
Io 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.               1
Letters are adorned, about "yourself," and your
"house," and your "hall," and the "dark room
up stairs," and the "drunken priest" to whom
you ministered brandy, &c. &c. These "awful
disclosures" would do very well in the pages of
Maria Monk, Miss Partridge, or some of the
other vestals of their class, of whom the Catholic Church is not worthy. Even in the writings of Monk Leahy, I do not say they would
be out of place.
But in the production of a scholar and a
gentleman like you, I am sorry to see them.
They have a kind of mean, "tell-tale" appears
ance-they are a betrayal of former friends aria
associates, which, to my mind at least, indicates the absence of manly, generous feeling,
as wAl as of elevated taste. But as you have
thought otherwise, I must review them somewhat at length in my next letter. Meantime
I remain with pity and good wishes as usual.
+ JomN HIUGHiES, BishoF of New- Y(,rk. 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
LETTER IV.
TO KIRWAN,
ALIAS THEr REV. NICHOLAS MURRAY, D. D.,
of Eizabethtown, New Jerse.'
DEAR SIR:  I think it has been clearly proved in my last
letter, and from evidences the more indisl)utable, as they are furnished by your own pen,
that you had no reason, either intellectual or
zmoral, for leaving the Catholic Church. —Tie
only reason, deduced by inference firom what
you have written of yourself, will be found in
a thick, dark cloud of ignorance and infidelity,
such as, I trust in Goc, never enveloped the
mind of any other Irish Catholic peasant at the
age of eighteen, either since or before.
Yet, sir, I do not believe that your ignorance
of the Catholic religion, when you left it, was
so unmitigated as you pretend. It will be very
difficult for you, however, either to retract or,
explain, in your real character, what you have
published of yourself under the duplicity of your
mask.
I know not what intoxicating influence flat
3.a 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
tery and self-complacency may have produced
on a mind and memory like yours. But I do
know that whoever writes under a mask, and
in a character even partially feigned, and especially if he writes on any grave subject, in
which mankind take a deep interest, does so
at the imminent peril of his own reputation.
He is nearly certain to be found out. And
when this happens, his attempts to reconcile
the discrepancies between his assumed and
his real character are sure to produce, in the
public mind, a feeling of ridicule not unmingled
with a feeling of contempt.
In the introductory note prefixed to your
letters I learn that they were furnished to
Samuel I. Prime, "under the injunction of
secrecy as to the author's name." If you lived
;in Spain or Sicily, there might be some reason
for this unnecessary precaution.  But if your
purpose was to tell "the truth," even "the whole
tiuth," and "nothing but the truth," in your
testimony for Presbyterianism or against Catholicity, what motive could you have had in this
free country for this studious concealment of
your name? Here the press is free, and writing
against Popery is even at a premium. Why
then, as an honest man, conceal your name?
This looks badly  -Mr. Prime, indeed, loaned
you his endorsement, whatever that may be
33 
KIRWAN UNMIASKED.
worth. He introduces you to the public vouch.
ingfrr your veracity in these words: ".... It
is proper to say that the writer's character is
an abundant guarantee for the fidelity of all
matters of fact here stated, and that he is pre
pared to maintain them, if they should be called
in question." Now, sir, there are some things
which you state as matters of fact, which I beg
leave most emphatically to call in question. I
hope you may be able to maintain them, or if
not, I hope MIr. Prime will be willing to forfeit
his recognizances.
I. You state, as a matter of fact, that nearly
at the age of manhood, "on as full an examination of the subject as you could give it, you
came to the conclusion that you could not re.
main a Roman Catholic." —p. 12.  Now, sir,
I refer to your own testimony, quoted in my
last letter, as proof that your mind "was a perfect blank as to all religious instruction," and
I insist that therefore you did not give the
Catholic rergion as full an examination as yoll
could, for you could, at least, have revived in
yourself the knowledge of "' the Catechism"
M,ich "you had forgotten."
II. You state, as a matter of fact, that "in
one of the large interior towns of Ireland,
.... you resided in a house, and over the
store in which,u were tthen a clerk." —p. 13.
34 
K[RWVAN UNMASKED,
You then proceed to tell us about a drunken
priest, Father B., whom you helped out of the
gutter, and wind up the whole narrative with
the remark "and young as I was."  This
phrase, in ordinary language, would refer to a
period as far back as memory goes-a period
in which reason was but in the dawn of its dev7elopment-say 8, 9, or 10 years of age; but
at that period, if we can believe you, you were
already a "clerk in a store!"  Pray, dear Kirwan, what kind of a clerk were you? "Young
as you were," by your own account, you were
able "to shut the store windows at night"you were able "to help a man out of the gutter"-you were able to "clean off his Reverence"-you were able to "give him his brandy
next morning," and yet you were just in the
period of dawning reason and earliest memory,
in which you tell us that "young as you were,"
all this made an impression on you. The circumstantial part of the story is still more wonderful than the leading facts. For instance,
you could not see the man in the gutter, and
vou were "attracted towards him by a siitgu7ar
noise." Pray what kind of a noise is a singuzlar noise? And then, the night was so darl['
that had it not been for the singular noise he
might have per —shed.  But on the other hand,
it was light enough to recognise "Father B.,
35 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
the miracle worker." And instead of helping
the poor man, as a decent "clerk in the store"
should have done, you ran in blabbing to the lady
of the house, that Father B. was drunk in the
street. And the "lady of the house" gave the
' clerk in the store" "a stunning slap on the
side of the face," and "the clerk in the store"
staggered under the blow, and then turned
:cund in the best nature in the world to assist
in claning off his reverence." Next morning
you "gave him his brandy," and "young as
the clerk in the store was, all this made an impression upon him." Sir, if the dullest lawyer
in the country had you under cross-examination on this subject, he could not fail to convulse the gravity of the bench with irrepressible laughter. Observe, I do not raise any
question as to whether the priest was drunk or
not;  I let that pass.  I have  myself seen
among the convicts of the penitentiary, individuals pointed out as having once been respec.
table Presbyterian ministers, and who were
there for crimes even more heinous than drunkenness. But no man of right feelings would
pretend to justify an opposite. religion, or to
condemn theirs, on account of their crimes
and misfortunes. I beg leave, then, to call in
question the facts which you state in your
circumstantial evzdence in this case. And I
36 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
direct your attention particularly to the con tradiction implied by the fact that you were a
child at the sanme time that you were "a clerk
in the store."
III. You state as a fact that, on your father's
demise, your mother paid the priest money
enough to have his soul pr-ayed for by name,
on every Sunday for two or three years. That,
when the money was expended, his name was
given out no mo;ie. That, when she inquired
the cause of this, the priest told her, that "your
father's soul wAs still in Purgatory, but that
she had forgotten to send in the yearly tax at
the time it was cldue."-(p. 14.)  You add, that
with this fact in particular, you are entirely
conversant.
Now, sir, I question this "fact." I deny this
"fact."  I pronounce it to be a fabrication
and not a fact.  And if the courtesy of language authorized it, I should feel bound to
designate it by a still harsher word.  No priest
would ever dare to decide when, or whether
any soul was released from  Purgatory.  No
lish mother, or wife, or widow, would ever
speak to a priest in the manner in which you
describe your mother as having spoken to him.
It is true she had not, like her son, the benefit
of a Presbyterian education. She bore the
penalty of her ancestors, and her creed. But
4
3" 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
she knew the principles of the Catholic faith
better than you do; and your superior general
information does not authorize you to envelop
her in this gross imputation of ignorance as to
her faith. I am willing to go to any reasonable
expense to p?-ove this a fabricatioil, if either
you or AL-. Prime have the courage to meet me,
in a formal investigation.
IV. You state that "Father M. held frequently his confessions at your house." "That
he sat in a dark room np stairs with one or more
cand/es on a table before him." That "those
going to confession followed each othe,' 021 their
knees from the front door, through the hal4 up
19.)
Now, sir, your house is likely to become as
well known as Shakspeare's. A relative of
yours has taken the pains to describe it, in a
late number of the Freeman's Journal.  According to him, it would be a building in the
primitive style of Irish architecture. The same,
very likely, which prevailed when the round
towers were constructed. Up stairs would be
-up a ladder to what is called a loft. And if
Father M. heard confessions there, I catn see
the great propriety of one or more candles on
the table. For according to the primitive architecture of Ireland, light was received into
a8 
tIRWAN UNMASKED.
the dwellings, either horizontally, by the door,
or vertically by the chimney. The former was
made for the purpose of ingress and egress, and
the latter for the double purpose of always let ting the smoke out, and sometimes letting the
day in. If then, Father M. had heard confes sions in such a place, without one or more
candles on the table, what a beautiful theme
this circumstance would have afforded to a
morbid imagination like yours.
Sir, I feel somewhat humbled at being obliged,
as a reviewer, to notice this, as well as other
portions of your Kirwan's letters, which, in my
opinion, propriety should have induced you to
leave under the protection of domestic privacy.
If you were still a Catholic, like your pious
albeit uneducated, mother, you would feel rather
proud than otherwise of what appears to be the
fact as regards the humility of your ancestral
"halls." Poverty is not regarded, by those
with whom you now associate, as respectable.
And yet it has been ennobled by the example
of Our Redeemer and His Apostles. It is still
ennobled, in the estimation of the Catholic
Church, when it is selected by voluntary choice,
and is never dishonorable, except when it is
immediately connected with, or resulting from
moral guilt.
Our glorious CatIolic ancestors were driven
39 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
back into the cabins of Irish primitive life; and
Protestantism, in anticipation of thle good things
of heaven, made sure also of the good things of
the earth. The churches, the glebe lands, the
monasteries, the castles and domains of our
Catholic forefathers, became the usurped inheritance of Protestantism, by right of legal
spoliation, from the period when the Reformation took the interpretation of the Bible into
its own hand-aided of course by acts of Parliamnent.
When, therefore, you describe the Catholic
"Priests" " moving about as spectres, as if afraid
of the light of day," you trace a picture which
seems to call up to my imagination the lives ol
the Apostles, and of their Divine Master, going
about meekly and unobtrusively in the discharge
of their heavenly mission;-whilst the contrast
suggested by the antithesis as in favor of the
Presbyterian ministry, would  suggest to my
mind the idea of an inflated cler'ical pedant
makes the avenues of life narrow wherever he
passes in bustling and gassy rotundity. But I
merely hope that you, judged by your own pen,
are not a fair specimen of the class to which
you  now belong.  At all events, I "call in
question" the description of "our house," and
hope that you and Mr. Prime will maintain it.
V. You state as a fact, that "on your first
40 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
remembered journey to Dublin, you passed by
a place called, if you mistake not, St. John's
Well." You tell me that I know it is one of
the holy wells. I answer that I know nothing
about it. But you appear all at once singularly
scrupulous, and I look upon the phrase, "If I
mistake not," as equivalent to the phrase,
"Young as I was," when you were already a
"clerk in the store." I cannot dwell on your
evidence respecting what was "called, if you
mistake not, St. John's Well;" but I have no
hesitation in saying that the story is, either in
whole or in part, a fabrication. It is found on
page 21 of your first series, and I call your
attention to it, in the hope that you and Mr
Prime shall maintain what you have there
stated as facts.
VI. The story about the sun "dancing" in
the heavens and in the chapels on Easter Sunday morning, and the attempt to produce a
delusive corresponding phenomenon inl the
chap.el by "an individual managing concealed
mirrors, so as to produce the wonderful effect,"
(p. 27,) I pronounce to be equally afabrication,
or a mere playful supposition, uttered for the
anmsement of children.  I hope that you and
your endorser will see to this matter also.
VII. Again: you tell us as a fact, that you
"saw good papists eating eggs and fish and
4*
41 
KIRWVAN UNMASKED.
getting drunk on these days, (Fridays and
Saturdays.) But that this was no violation of
the laws of the Church."-(p. 32.) This, sir,
as far as regards what you call "good papists"
and "getting drunk," and yet not violating the
laws of the Church, is a fabrication.
This same page records the turning point of
your life, the crisis of your conversion.   You
came to the conclusion that as regards the
eating of meat on one day, and not on another,
God could not make it a sin by distinction of
days-so that it' a man can plough on Thursday, by your rule, God cannot make it a sin
for him to do so on Sunday. And here, in
point of fact, is the first, and perhaps the best,
reason which vour letters furnish for your conversion.  It seems that after mature deliberation, you found that to forbid a man's eating
meat on Friday is an unreasonable regulation,
and you rejected it. It would appear by inference that as regards ment, on such days, what
your conscience approved your apl etite appropriated; and with singu-lar naivete6, yvti tell
us that "as far as you nouw remember this was
your first step towards light and free.dom."(p. 32.)
By-the-by, th;s calls up a peri,od in the calamities of Ireland which had almost passed
into oblivion; and which corriesponds more
42 
KIRWAN UNM,, SKED.
or less with that of your conversion from Popery.
About twenty-five or thirty years ago, Lord
Farnham, and other gentlemen of the evangelical nobility, introduced into Ireland a religious movement called "the second Reformation."  It was a season of distress among the
peasantry, such as succeeds, year by year, in
the historv of our unfortunate native country.
Lord Farnham hlad almost obtained a patent
from the legislature for the efficiency, and admirable simplicity of the new contrivance for
converting the Irish.  It was this.  The kitchens were turned into scriptural reading-rooms
for the starving l)oIilation of the neighborhood, once a week.  The day selected happened to be Friday, in almost all cases.  After
Bible-reading, soup wvas given out instead ot
syllogisms, and the  "second  Reformation"
went on admirably until the potatoes of harrest became mature enough for the people's
,ase.  Lord Farnham and his colleagues supposed that if the landed proprietors aind gentry could only succeed in establishing an amicable understanding between the conscience and
the stomach of the "lower orders," Ireland
would soon become a Protestant country. But
I need not dwell upon it, as you are old enough
to retnember how t was ridiculed by Cobbett
43 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
and other writers wherever the English lan.
guage was spoken.
Now I do not say that you are a child of
the "second Reformation," but the fact of your
having made the first step towards light and
fireedom through the medium  of something
like a Friday-beefsteak, looks very much like it.
See, Rev. Nicholas Murray of Elizabethtown, into what a position your "playing of
pranks" behind Kirwan's mask has betrayed
you!!
Besides the bow which Mr. Prime has volunteered you, you have made one for vourself
-still under the mask, however.   You tell us
that, even before "you took up your pen you
were not unknown to the men of our age, noi
unsc,licited....   " The men of our age" (!!!)
-or of any age, are very few, and posterity
has reserved to itself, almost absolutely, the
right of determining who they are. To save
your modesty, therefore, I am obliged to suppose that the printer has made a mistake here,
and that if one could have the benefit of a peep
at your manuscript, it would be found that you
had written, "the men of our (vill)-age."
Ah, sir, it seems that your misfortune through
life has been to have been under the influence
of bad advisers-since you tell us you were
"solicited" to write against Popery.  The cir
44 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
eumstance reminds me of an anecdote which
I have lately read in a London paper, and
which I trust will not offend you, as it has already been employed in a description of England's highest Protestant nobility.  It seems,
a drover found it difficult to kleep his cattle
together in the crowded approaches to the
English metropolis.  And in his extriemity he
called out to his neighbor, "I wish you would
loan me a bark of your dog."  You know, sir,
that broad ridicule is the forte of the English
as compared to the French, and a Cockney
wit tells us that Lord John Russell has turned
the drover's hint into the phlilosopihy of politics, and that whenever his herd betray a ten
dency to straggle from the whig path, he " bo?rowus a bark" from Sir Robert Peel. However
this may be, I am satisfied that "the men of
our age," if there be any such, would never
Slave bo?rrowe.i a bark of you.
This letter is already too long, and 1 must
bring it to a close.  But in doing so, I cannot
forget how often you have told us that you
were once an infidel. There are evidences
scattered up and down through your letters,
which, to an  unprejudiced and impartial reader, would make it appear doubtfil whether you
are not still so.  Same of these I shall present
in my next. I shall not venture to pronounce
4-5 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
an opinion on the subject, as the Almighty
alone can penetrate the hearts of men.
Inr the mean time, however, I remain, with
increasing pity, but with undiminished goodwill.
+ JoHIN HUGIIES, Bishop of New York.
46 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
LETTER V.
TO KIRWAN,
ALIAS TIHE REV. NICHIOLAS MURRAY, D. D.,
Of Elizabethtown, New Jersey.
DEAR SIR:
It is deeply to be regretted that the serpent
of infidelity was ever permitted to nestle in
your bosom;-for when I consider that you
reduce the standard of revelation to the test
of common sense-when I consider the looseness of your moral principles, so far forth as
they are exhibited by your own pen-when I
behold the spirit of Voltaire and Thomas Paine
in the profanity and ribaldry with which you
treat every sacred subject which your common
sense does not approve, I am compelled to say
that even on the supposition that infidelity had
been expelled fromn your breast before the
writing of your letters, still,
"The trail of the serpent is over them all."
Your moral principles, as set forth by yourself, even in my  regard, are m,uch more in
keeping with what might be expected from a
47 
-KIRWAN UNMASKED
skeptic of the world, than from a clergyman
of any Christian denomination.  You have the
grossness to impute to me that I am consciously a deceiver of my fellow-creatures, and yet
you do not hesitate to express respect for my
character.  Is this a principle of Presbyterian
inculcation?  Or has it shot up through the
Confession of Faith from the older and deeper
root of your early infidelity?
Again, you urge me to renounce the Catho'lie religion, in which, you suppose, I do not
believe; and yet, with that loose  moroality
which would better become a professed infidel, you implicitly eneourage me to persevere
in carrying on the supposed villany of deception!  The reader would hardly believe this
statement possible, so I shall quote your own
words to prove it.  You say: "And since in
the maturity of my judgnment I have examinc.d
this matter, I have greatly comnmended your
wisdom in withholding the Bible from the people. If I were a Bishop or a Priest of your
ch?urch I would do the same."-p. 29.  So then,
dear Kirwan, you have the candor to avow on
principle, and in the "maturity of you? judgment," that if your lot had been cast among,
villains, you would be as great a villain as
any of them.  Is this avowal worthy of even
an infidel?
48 
KIRWAN UNMAASKED.
That you should be where and what you
now are, is easily accounted for-by the ig
norance of your youth which you have described, and the poverty which you have not
described. Ignorance and poverty are mysterious  dispensations of God's  providence,
And, on thlat account, I would treat with indulgence whatever errors in your early life
are to be ascribed to either.  But for the deliberate conclusions, uttered in your recent
letters, and in the " maturity of your judgment,"
in which you avow yourself ready to act an
evil part with Bishops and Priiests, on the meire
condition of your having been one of them, I
cannot but hold you immorally responsible.
Thank God, however, you are neither a
Bishop nor a Priest; and your once having
been talked of as a candidate for M\aynooth,
was, happily for the Cfhurch, only " talk" after
all. You are a Presbyterian minister in Elizabethltown, where your ministry can do no
hliarm;-for, if your creed be true, those who
are foreordained to eternal life, will be saved
with, as well as without, your pastoral offices.
In my last letter I showed, according to your,
own account, that the prohibition to eat fleshmeat on Fridays and Saturdays was the first
p.ractical reason for your change of religion.
It was an "unreasonable aregtlti-H. and you
5
49 
KIRWAN UNMASKED,
rejected it; and as far as you now remember,
this was your first step towards light and free
dom."-p. 32. On the very next page we find
you soliloquizing in a style of infidel rationalism, which Pagan Greece, or Protestant Germany, could hardly have surpassed.   "I thus
reasoned with nmyself; God is a spiritual and
intelligent Being, and he requires an intelligent worship. What worship I render him in
the Mass I know not," (of course, since you
had forgotten your catechism,) "my intelligent worship only is acceptable to Him, and is
beneficial to me.  I am a rational being, and 1
degrade my nature, and insult my Maker, ir.
offering to Him  a worship in which neithemy reason, nor his intelligence, is consulted.'
p. 33.  Now, dear Kirwan, when we considei
the state of your mind at the period when this
pretended soliloquy occurred, "a perfect blank
as to all relig,ious instruction," it becomes a
grave question, which I leave to the decisior
of casuists in mental philosophy, whether oi
not, in the higher ordinary sense of the term,
you could rightfully call yourself a "rational
being."
But I make the quotation for another purpose. The whole passage betrays a strong
affinity to the spirit of Paine's "Age of Reason." The high contracting parties were God
50 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
on the one side, and yourself on the other.
Both were intelligent beings-your Maklier
would be insulted, and your nature would be
degraded, if you held'!the intercourse of woeship with Him, except on the principle of re.
ciprocal intelligence. You had just tasted of
the forbidden food on the preceding page, and
acquired the knowledge of "good and evil."
You had partaken of Egypt's Jlesh-pots, and
the manna had become insipid and distasteful.
For your mind, there was no "intelligence" in
it, and so, very naturally, you gave up-the
Mass.
But now, the floodgates of the knowledge of
good and evil being once opened, we may expect the mysteries of revelation to be inundated by the deluge of your "intelligence,"
your "reason," your "common sense." Accordingly, the adorable mystery of the Christian Eucharist, in treating of which the Fathers
of the Church were struck with holy dread
and religious awe, is described by you as an
"absurdity."-(page 35.)  So it has always
appeared to the animal man.
I need scarcely inform you, sir, that the infideIs of all ages would have been quite
satisfied, if they had been allowed to construe
the Bible according to what they call common
sense.  In reference to this standard, they and
51 
K[RWAN UTNMASKED.
you  appear to be perfectly agreed.   Thus,
you make the Bible and common sense the
ultimate tribunals in the decision of religious
belief.   Thus,  in the  exercise  of common
sense, you no doubt deny the Divinity of Christ
implicitly, at least, since you call it " blasphemous"  to  designate the ever  glorious and
Blessed Virgin Marly, "as the Mothel of God."
If the Person of Christ was simply Divine, and
Miary was truly his mother, she is, and has
been always called, Mother of God, as well as
nmother of man; and your denial of this can be
logically sustained, c,nly by youur denial of the
Saviour's Divinity. In fact, I suppose your
"common  sense"  has  already  pronounced
against the mystery of the Incarnation.  Thus
also, you take sides with the infidels of the
Redeemiier's age, as Knell as of our own, and
you tell us, in spite of the evidence furnished
by Him in His human character, and assert
that GOD only can forgive sins.-(page 67.)
In tile spirit of a true infidel, you describe the
priesthood of the Catholic Clurclh, throughout
the world, and for eighteen centuries, as having been actuated solely by the love of money. 
-(page 70.)  Again still, in the spirit of the
infidel, you sneer at the history of religion as
coimter to your appeal to "common sense,"
and tell us, that "with you the authority of our
62 
KIf?VAN UNMASKED.
plopes and councils are not worth a I)enny."(page 70.)
The angel Gabriel saluted the blessed Virgin Mary, as the scripture records, "Hail, full
of grace;" but you, the Presbyterian minister
of Elizabethtown, speak of her as you would
of a female selling candies at the corners of
the street, from whom you had just bought a
supply for the young, Kirwans, and call her
the "good woman"  condescendingly.-(page
74.)  The holy Eucharist tinder vour "conimon sense," you declare to be so "absurd as
to defeat itself."-(page 75.) You decide that
the words, "This is my body," mean, this is
not my body, and with that swelling vanity
peculiar to an evangelical minister who takes
"common sense" as his rule for interpreting
holy scripture, you exhibit your sleight of hand
with a puff of self-complacency, and call upon
us to admire-"just see how a little common
sense simplifies every thing."-(page 76.)
Lest I should interpose by venturing to
suggest that a thling ought to be received for
what our Saviour says it is, you warn me off,
and tell me in true arrogant style, that "you
will have none of my nonsense about the sibstance contained under the spec.;.s."-(page
76.) Now, dear Kirwan, I have scriptural
authority for what you here call nonsense.
5*.
53 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
The Holy Ghost descended on the apostles
uinder the species of "tongues of fire:" he descended on thle Saviour under the species of
"a dove," aitd you have decided that the dis.
tinction of thle Evangelists between the species
and the substance is "nonsense;... it is
'darkening counsel by words without knowledge.' "-(page 76.) I recommend your ease
to the General Assembly.  In fact, you have
becomne so enlightened in matters of dogmatic
theology, under the inspiration of "commrron
sense," that you are almost fit for a residence
in Boston, where thie Reverend Theodore
Parker will no doubt have the charity to extend to you the right hand of Christian fellowshlip.
In reference to the Holy Eucharist, your
infidel principle of "common sense" as interpreter of Scripture, prompts you to say that
"nothing equals it in absurdity in all paganism."-(page 76.)  Pray, did it ever come ill
the way of your extensive reading to hlave
seen a book called the "PRESBYTERIAN CONFESSION OF FAIrn, as amended and ratified by
the General Assembly at their sessions in 1821,
and printed by Tower and HogTan in 1827?"
If so, turn to pages 73 and 74, and you wilh
find it ruled that in certain cases men are
placed by their Creator in such a situation, that
&4 
KIR,.VAN UNMASKED.
if they (do a thing they "commit a sin against
God," and if they do not do it, they "commit a
greater siTn!"  Here is a Presbyterian Doc trine to which you might apply your "common
sense" with some advantage to your  own
brethren.  The rich theme of ridicule which it
would furnish for a pen of such profanity as
yours, will be obvious to you at a glance.
You tell us that "the manner of our public
worship is heathen, and was originally adopted
for the seducing of the Heathen  to Christianity."-(page 82.)  This idea would seem to
have been derived by you rather from Gibbon,
than from Voltaire or Thomas  Paine.  You
have the candor, lhowever, to admit the higgi
antiquity of our manner of worship, when you
describe the use to which it was applied in the
primitive Church.   The conversion of nations
has been itself regarded as a proof of the divine
origin of Christianity.  You, however,  have
discovered that it was owing to a system of
seduction, carried on through  our Catholic
"maniner of worship," by which the poor Heathenl were "seduced" into the new Religion
Could any but an infidel give utterance to such
a sentiment?
But detail is unnecessary. The high mysteries of the Christian faith you reduce to the
stan lard of "common sense," on almost every
55 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
page. Thus: "Extreme unction," you have
already pronounced "extreme nonsense." Page
82.
" How simple and' common sense' is all this,"'
-(S. S. Page 27.) "Blessed be God, you have
not turned your keys on the'common sense' of
the world."-(page 29.)  Of your infidel ribaldry I will give but one specimen, which I
think can hardly be surpassed in the annals of
sneering skepticism.  "Your daily changing of
a wafer into the real body of Christ, and then
eating him, beats any thing St. Fechin ever did.
Your pireparing an old sinner for heaven by
rubbing him with olive oil, and then opening
its gates to him by the keys which are only in
your possession, far surpasses Fechin's turning
acorns to pork.  We believe the swine themselves are constantly doing this in our Western
wvoods."-(page 39.) You tell us that the respect entertained by Catholics for relics has
the tr?ue relic for its object —and that, on Catholic principles, "it is all the same" that the object of reverence or respect should be the head
of "St. Paul" or the head of " Balaam's Ass;"
and you add in your own name, and with a
sneer becoming an infidel, "and I suppose t1he
difference, sir, is very little."-(page 70.)  So
then, Rev. Nicholas Murray, you regard the
head of an ass and that of an apostle with equal
56 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
respect; for the reason, no doubt, that in your
estimation, both are figuratively of the same
species, or perhaps that in this instance both
are scriptural subjects.
It seems the Tract Societies and Sunday
Schools have adopted your letters, and given
them a very extensive circulation. I do not
know a shorter m?ethod of turning the young
who may be subject to their training into infidels, than by placingT such a book in their
hands.  Each of their pupils has as good a
right to explain the Bible according to what
he will call "common sense," as you have
had. But they will not be restrained in their
blasphemous ribaldly by the limits which a
black coat and a white cravat have prescribed
for your pen.
They will apply the arguments of" common
sense" wihich you have wielded against Baptism and the Holy Eucharist, to the antecedent doctrines of original sin, and the atonement, and they will find no " common sense"
in either. But why should I moralize for you
on such a subject, when I have no evidence
to prove that s,,ich a result has not been the
very object of your letters; and that your
zeal against Popeiy is not merely the gilding of the infidel pill which you would wish
to see swallowed by tract distributors, Sunday
57 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
school teachers, Sunday-school children, and
all.
Sir, the language and sentiment which I
have had to pass under review in this letter
are so unworthy of a man professing Christianity, that I must withhold, at its close, even
the expression of my pity for you, whilst I
cherish towards you as usual good wishes and
good-wil].
+ JohIN hIIJGHES, Bishop of New York.
58 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
LETTER YI.
TO KIRWAN,
ALIAS THE REV. NICHOLAS MURRAY, D. D.,
Of Elizabethtown, New Jersey.
DEAR SIR:
The task which I imposed on myself at the
commencement of these letters is nearly accomplished. I wished to investigate the alleged reasons which induced you to forsake
the Church-and which forbid your return.
The result is before the public, and may be
briefly summed up.
You will observe that I have not pretended
to defend a single Catholic doctrine from your
coarse and profane invective, —that I have not
raised the question with you as to whether
those doctrines aire true or false; that I have
confined myself to watching narrowly the state
of your mind, your motives and movements, 
as described by yourself. until I saw you cleaily beyond the bounds of the Catholic church
and landed in the cold, dark regions of infideity.  If your own statements ad A,.,o utter
59 
ignorance of your mind in regard to any antd
all religion when you became an infidel, are to
be relied on, it follows that in assigning the
reasons for your change, as set forth in your
letters, you have been attempting a gross imposition on the credulity of your Protestant
readers. You give a double certificate of the
process of your conversion.  One side attests
considerable religious information: the other
certifies bluntly that "your mind was a perfect
blank as to all religious instruction."  Both
are from your own pen.  It remains for you
to reconcile the contradiction as well as you
can.
Allow me, in the mean time, to suggest the
only plausible, natural, and satisfactory reason
for the important event in regard to which you
have taken such superfluous pains to enlighten
the public.
It is understood that you arrived in this
country a poor Irish orphan boy. This was
not your fault. It might have been your mnerit.
Whether you were then an infidel or a Catho.
lie is best known to yourself. At all events
you attracted the charitable notice of certain
Presbyterian patrons. In the intentions of
their benevolence towards you, your renunciation of Popery was a condition either already accomplished or necessarily implied as
on
KIRIVAN UNMASKER. 
KIRIV NAN UNMAS CrED.         61
a sine qua non of your education. Now what
could be more natural, under these circumstances, than that you should become a Protestant, after the fashion of training provided, and
the creed professed by your patrons? If in all
this your conscience approved of what ybur
friends recommended, so much the better for
you. I only mention tile circumstances to
supply a hiatus in your narrative.  They are
quite sufficient to explain  your conversion,
and tile public would not be so unreasonable,
had you made them acquainted with all this,
as to ask for any other. It is now nearly thirty
years sinc, these things took place.  You begin to be well stricken in years-you are approaching the confines of old age; and the
same indulgent public would have dispensed
with your reasons for not returning now to the
Communion which you thus forsook in your
boyhood. It is admitted on all hands that, in
cases like.yours, a wife and children are substantial objections to such a step. When the
husband and father is, moreover, a Protestant
clergyman, it requires an extraordinary grace
to overcome them.
I now leave it to yourself tc say, whether it'
was not unwise on your part, after having appeared with your natural countenance so long,
to put on the mask in the fiftieth year of your
6 
KIRWAN UNMASKED
age? Whether it was worthy of your rank
and station among, the men of our age, to
weave a narrative of your conversion with
materials derived from imagination, while the
plain history of the case lay open before your
consciousness and memory? Yet when I regard the profane spirit of your letters; when I
consider that you imitate closely infidel tactics
against Christianity in your mode of assaultthat you ridicule where you cannrot reasonthat where you pretend to reason it is not
against the Catholic doctrine, as Catholics hold
it, but against such doctrine misrepresented,
turned into burlesque, and thus fitted for your
purpose-when I reflect on all this, I am not
surprised that you constructed your laboratory
in the "camera obscura," and shunned the
open day-that you insulted the memory of a
fallen but not otherwise dishonorable priest,
by affixing his name to your letters rather than
your own.
You wish me to dispute with you on matters
of general controversy. I must beg leave to
decline the proposed honor. I cannot consent
to dispute with any man for whom I feel no
respect, and therefore I can enter into no con,
troversy with you; especially until you have
extricated yourself from the inconsistencies
and self-contradictions pointed out in this re.
62 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.               63
view. You suggest "the inference t'nat I am
a devil."-(p. 64.)  You proclaim "y 3oir high
respect for me."-(p. 75.) Now, sir, I entertain
no respect for any man, and especially a Jlin
ister of the Gospel, who can cherish and avow
"his high respect" for "a devil," even by in
ference.
You wrote your letters in the midst of the
awful famine which strewed the highways and
ditches of your unhappy country with dead
bodies, last year.   Among  them  may  have
been some of those for whlom, Mr. Prime says,
you wrote your letters, viz: "your kinsmen,
according to the flesh."  Now, it was not uncommon  for persons, wlose Irish heart had
not become withered by hostile seasoning, to
become insane, during that awful crisis-turned into maniacs by the news of an hour. Sectarianiismn was forgotten-humanity was stirred
to its depths in the bosom of the entire American people-Jews, Christians, Catholics, Prot
estants, Presbyterians, believers and unbelievers of every name, were vying with each other
in their efforts to send bread to the dying.
And they did send bread; they constructed ar~
historical monument of charity, glorious as the
land which reared it, and sufficient to atone,
in some measure, for the bigotries of a thou.
sand years. It was in the midst of this dea.thn 
64           KIRWAN UNMASKED.
struggle of your native land, that you had the
impiety to invent, and the inhumanity to apply,
the following profane and horrible pun, on the
words of our Satviour:-" "He that eats this
bread will never hunger. All that you (Catholics) have to do, if your principle be true, is
to give your wafer to the poor, famishing Irish,
and they hunger no more."-(page 77.)  How
well this sustains Mr. Prime's statement, that
in writing your Kirwan's letters, you were
actuated by "a sense of duty to your kinsmen,
according to the flesh, your countrymen and
brethren!"
But supposing I were to enter into controversy with you on genera.l topics, it is manifest that besides being a party, you claim to
be a witness, an advocate, and what is more, a
judge., in your own cause! You profess to
teach me what the Catholic religion is, although you had "forgotten your catechism at
eighteen years of age," and I take it for granted you have never looked into it since, except
in the same spirit and foar the same purposes
which induce the infidel to read the scriptures.
If I pretend to know any thing of my religion,,
you politely tell me that "you will have none
of my nonsense." Why then do you ask me
to enter into controversy with you? Besides,
who would be the judge? "Common sense," 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
you reply. But whose common sense, yours
or mine? If you submit to mine, I condemn
your position at once. If you will not submit
to mine, what right have you to suppose that
I should submit to yours? To what tribunal
do you appeal? That of history? But its
authority with you is not worth a penny! To
the Bible?  But the Bible by itself will give
no decision.   It requires an interpreter, as
much as the constitution and laws of the country. Who shall be the interpreter?  Methinks
I hear you speaking of your "common sense"
again for that office-so that we come round
the Protestant circle to the starting point.
If you say the appeal is to the "common
sense" of mankind in general, (restricting the
term to those who profess Christianity,) the
verdict will not be unanimous; but it will be
in my favor by a majority of three to one. To
what tribunal, then, would you be willing to
submit, in case I were disposed to join issue
with you in a controversy on the great questions on which Catholics and Protestants are
divided?  But the inquiry is purely hypothet
ical; for although I reserve to myself the right
of reviewing your labors, when I think proper'
depend upon it there will not, there cannot be,
any dogmatical controversy between us.   I
your genius and inclination lie in the direction
ti*
65 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
of profanity, you can continue to insult the
mysteries of the Catholic faith as you have
done. For this you have but to copy from
Protestant writers of your own class, who
have gone before you. But I see no reason
why I should undertake to discuss the reprint
of their opinions, found in your book, rather
than in the original text as found in their own.
As far as either come in the way of my subject, I shall do this at my own convenience,
in the sequel of those letters which I have addressed to my "Dear Reader," and not to yvou.
In the present review I purposed only to consider those little incidents of waning faith, accumulated misgivings, and autobiography which
preceded, or were connected with, your transition from the Catholic faith to a Protestant
denomination. This portion of your letters
was your own, and was (what cannot be always said of works of imagination) perfectly
original. Having done this, it only remains
for me to assure you of my sincere good
wishes and to say for the present, farewell.
And now 1 will take the liberty of addressing,
a few words to the general reader in connection with this subject.  What advantage does
religion, of any name, derive firom such books
as Kirwan's lettei s?  Do they promote piety?
66 
KIRWVAN UNIMASKED.
Is charity increased by them?  Do they convert Catholics? Is the faith cf Protestants so
weak that it requires the support of such buttresses? The questions on which Catholics
and Protestants are so unhappily divided have
been discussed by able men on both sides, until
the argument has been exhausted. These are
considerations which address themselves to
sincere minds of all parties. Those who will
reflect a moment will perceive that the Catholic religion has withstood and now withstands
such attacks, just as the pyramid does the assaults of the wandering Arab.  If it were  the
system which such writers as Kirwan represents., it could not subsist a single year. Good
men from within, who know what it really is,
would not stay; good men fromn without would
not come to it.  Now a whole volume might
be filled with the names of illustrious converts
from the different denominations of Protestantism, who, after mature deliberation, have joined
the Church within the last quarter of a century,
many of them at the sacrifice of their worldly
interests and prospects. How could this have
come to pass if Catholicity were what these
writers allege?
Does not this single fact outweigh a ton of
such thleory-books as the Key of Popery, or
Kirwxan's Letters?-What are these books
67 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
generally made up of? Assertion, party in.
vective, charges. sometimes entirely false, and
always grossly exaggerated.
Thus, such writers as I speak of will tell you
that the Catholic Clergy are a vast corporation
of swindlers.-But how will any man of even
moderate judgment reconcile this with the fact
that no other clergymen are so ready to encounter danger in the discharge of their ministry, whether  in  the  cholera-hospitals, the
fever-sheds, or wherever it beconmes a martyr
of charity to meet death?  They will tell you
that the Catholic religion is the deadly enemy
of liberty.  But then how comes it that all the
elements and principles of social right and civil
liberty are of Catholic origin, and that the best
lawyer among us would be somewhat puzzled
if requested to point out a single addition made
to them by Protestantism? This is fact, in
opposition to theory.   When  Protestantism
came it found several Republics, and did not
find one absolute monarchy in Christendom,
except Russia, which was not in communion
with the Pope. They will tell you that the
Catholic religion is an enemy to knowledge.
But the fact is that if you remove from the map
of Christendom, all the great institutions of
knowledge, in every department, founded and
endowed by Catholics alone, very little will be
68 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.         09
left remnaining.  They will tell you that the
Church is the enemy of happiness. But the
fact is that nations appear to have been much
more happy, if apparent contentment be any
symptom, before the reformation, than since.
Religious and civil, not to speak of general,
wars, have followed each other in almost constant succession in most of the countries of
Europe since that event; and if these be signs
of happiness, I am much mistaken. They will
tell you that poverty is a certain companion
and consequence of the  Catholic religion.This, even if it were true, amounts to little;
for the Divine Author of Christianity did not
intend his religion for the special advantage of
bankers and stock-jobbers, as these writers
would lead us to suppose. And if the "Gospel
was preached to the poor," it follows that poverty would be, if any thing, a sign in favor of
the true religion, rather than the contrary.
Italy and Spain may be called poor nations,
but yet I am not aware that any one is allowed
in those Catholic countries to die by the roadsides of starvation. Protestant England, on
the other hand, is a country of grecet wealth
and great pauperism.  But in England and
Ireland, such writers point to the contrast between the Catholics and Protestants.  They
seern to forget, however that by one thousand
;.;*..'" KieV'
69
KIRWAN UNMASKED. 
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
and one different ways, sometimes directly, at
all times indirectly, the Protestants of those
countries have been, legally till within less than
twenty years, helping themselves in the way
of worldly prosperity, at the expense of the
Catholics.   No.wv this is the  fact, and no
man of common information and candor will
deny it.
I might go on indefinitely in pointing out
the mutual contradiction between the facts of
history and the theories of your anti-Catholic
writers, of a certain class. But as regards
Ireland in particular, not only were the laws
made so as of a certainty to reduce the Catho.
lies to poverty, but if ignorance is an impediment to the attainment of wealth, the legislature determined that the Catholics should be
poor forever; and with the stigma of so barbarous an enactment on the escutcheon of
Protestant Britain, it requires singular power
of face in such writers as the Rev. Dr. Murray, of Elizabethtown, to allude to the subject
at all.  Let me contrast the facts of history,
in the very terms of the several statutes, with
the theory of our modern instructor.
"If a Catholic kept school, or taught any'
person, Protestant or Catholic, aniy species of
literature, or science, such teacher was fo.r th~
crime of teaching, lunishable by law by ban
70
,,"1:,':.I.'.'  
KIRWAN UNMASKED.
ishment-and, if he returned from banishment,
he was subject to be hanged as a felon.
"If a Catholic, whether child or adult, attended, in Ireland, a school kept by a Ca4holic,
or was privately instructed by a Catholic, such
Catholic, although a child in its early infancy,
incurred a forfeiture of all its property, present
or future.
"If a Catholic child, however young, was
sent to any foreign country for education, such
infant child incurred a similar penalty-that
is, a forfeiture of all right to property, present
or prospective.
"If any person in Ireland made any remittance of money or goods, for the maintenance
of any Irish child educated in a foreign country, such person incurred a simn-ai Iorfeiture.'
Such were the laws. Kirwan's forefathers,
in their day, and himself in his early life, were
their victims. Now, with these facts staring
him in the face, this man says-" If the ignorance of Ireland has any thing to do with the
degradation of Ireland, I charge that ignoroance
on Popery."-(page 50.)  Thle italics are his
own, and to judge by the statement one would 
be led to suppose that he has not escaped from
under the edict against knowledge to this day
No, no; let candid Protestants look for and
examine the true facts in all these cases; let
71 
KIRWVAN UNMASKED.
them judge for themselves, and they wil. be
surprised to discover how much that is true
has been held back from them on all such subjects, and how much that is false, or falsely
represented, has been circulated among themn
instead of the truth, by mere book-writers and
men of the shop. And as regards the Catholic
religion, if they wish to know what it is, even
for the sake of information, let them consult
authentic sources, and be slow to receive their
knowledge of it from those who are seldom
either qualified or disposed to state it truly.
In my other series of letters I propose to state
;t as it is understood by Catholics; to explain
its doctrines, where explanation is judged
necessary; and to sustain them by such proofs
from scripture, history, and reason, as are
most likely to have weight with men, whether
Catholics or Protestants, who are not yet prepared to reducetheawfuil mysteries of Christian revelation to the infidel's standard of
judgment-" common sense."
+  JOIN HUGHES, Bishop of New York
THFE END,
72